Your Perfect Code Might Be Terrible for Teaching

When I post tutorial videos people often make suggestions on how to improve my computer code. Thank you for your code suggestions! However, we may have a problem.

I often find that code suggestions are not teaching suggestions. Almost all computer programmers are not experienced educators, so this is understandable. However consider that the best designed software might be terrible for teaching. Your perfect code might be terrible for teaching.

These are some of the things I consider when choosing what computer code to put in my videos.

Simple Code
If you think that the clearest and simplest lesson is the best way to teach a challenging concept, you're making a big claim. These claims can be tested. They have been tested. The claim is often wrong. Clear and simple lessons convince the learner they know the material, even if they don't know it. Confusing lessons are annoying but they make you think.

I'm not arguing people should make confusing lessons. However if your core argument for a code suggestion is that it's simpler, then your code belongs in the workplace and not necessarily in an educational video. Simplicity is not always the best approach.

Programming is Not Education
I recall someone once asked an online algorithms group "what are the first algorithms I should learn?". There were many responses.

Nobody asked the poster why they wanted to learn about algorithms. Nobody asked what the poster's math background was, or whether they were interested in biology or physics or economics. How could anyone make recommendations without knowing this? These are the first questions any decent educator would ask. Well, there weren't any decent educators in this discussion because it wasn't an education group. I suggested the poster should ask a "computer science teachers" group instead of a technical algorithms group.

Programming is not education. When making a code suggestion don't make computer programming arguments in support of it. Make education arguments.

Schemas and Accommodation
When people learn, they don't start at zero and jump to a complete understanding. In psychology this is the theory of schemas and accommodation. From this website:

Consider, for example, how small children learn about different types of animals. A young child may have an existing schema for dogs. She knows that dogs have four legs, so she might automatically believe that all animals with four legs are dogs. When she later learns that cats also have four legs, she will undergo a process of accommodation in which her existing schema for dogs will change and she will also develop a new schema for cats. Schemas become more refined, detailed, and nuanced as new information is gathered and accommodated into our current ideas and beliefs about how the world works.

When you make a computer code suggestion, please consider how big a leap is required from the learner. Code that is shorter and simpler among programmers may actually be enormously more complicated for a learner.

Ego
I constantly struggle to keep my ego in check when making technology instruction videos. If I can think of ten ways to code a lesson and I choose the "dumbest" looking one, I know that people will think I'm dumb too.

If you are able to make computer code suggestions, consider the possibility that you are not my target audience. That means that the code you wished had been in my video is code for you. It might not be good code for my audience.

How You Can Help
If you want to help improve the code in my videos, thanks! But first, please consider some of the things I value and don't value about code improvements for educational videos.

Things I value less:

• Execution speed
• Coding standards
• Concepts and features that only apply to specific software.
• Code length
• Memory use
• Number of variables

Things I value more:

• Teaching the core concept better
• Fewer prerequisite concepts
• Concepts that are powerful and can be used for later learning.

I love high quality software too, but that's a different conversation.

Movie Review: Hidden Figures

Hidden Figures is a 2016 movie about the 1960s space race, the early days of computation, and segregation. It's an uplifting movie - described by some as "cheesy". However the cheese serves to distinguish it from other films in its genre which are typically very dark and gritty. It's an underdog trio movie about science and achievement. I highly recommend it!

Who should see this movie?

People interested in space exploration, geniuses, achievement, or computers. Also, people who scoff when a movie says "based on a true story" because they wish directors were honest about history.

The Good

Imagine this cliché scene: A police cruiser pulls up to a car on the side of the road. Car troubles. The police officer steps out of his cruiser - a large white man. The passengers of the car are minorities or women or both, now concerned. In film I've seen many variations on this scene. Sometimes the police officer smashes headlights, arrests someone pointlessly, assaults someone, rapes someone, or maybe he's just an asshole.

That's not how Hidden Figures handles this cliché scene. The cop's antagonism reverses when he realizes the three women are involved in defeating the Russians. In Hidden Figures it's amusing to see all the different ways people can confuse themselves with their conflicting value systems. Even racists would rather defeat the Russians than be racist.

Most of the characters in this movie are genuinely and unapologetically passionate about science, computation, and space exploration. Nobody jokes about how they hated math in high school, nobody apologizes for being smart, and there isn't a hint of anti-intellectualism. I can't think of a single other movie with these themes that does this.

Finally, I think a lot of love went into this film. There's a lot of creativity, nuance, accuracy, and variety in the production.

The Bad

I don't have much criticism, although I wish that somehow, maybe, they could have spent more time on the themes of computation and mathematics. But frankly I'm just thrilled to see a book on Fortran (a computer programming language) have so much screen time. It was in three scenes for a total of maybe fifteen seconds. That's got to be some kind of Hollywood record!

Attempts were made to blur movie footage and historical footage. This involved adding graininess to footage filmed in 2016, or retouching real footage from the 1960s. However the effects were inconsistent and unconvincing.

I think the movie shied away from better developing Dorothy Vaughan's story because computer programming is too technical for a large audience. This is easily forgiveable. But it's a simple reminder that even movies that feel like they were made just for me, were not made just for me.

Conclusion

With movies like The Imitation Game coming out and the success of Hidden Figures, I hope to see more movies like this soon. Maybe something about Grace Hopper or Richard Feynman? If you're interested in history, space exploration, geniuses, achievement, or computers, you should see this movie!