Codecademy closes $10M round(blogs.wsj.com)
blogs.wsj.com
Codecademy closes $10M round
http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2012/06/19/codecademy-closes-10-million-round/
20 comments
We had exactly this at Bloc (formerly Trybloc.com).
There's definitely space for this, but what we've discovered is that it has the same problems as Codecademy-esque services. You can do various things to attempt to keep users engaged, but at the end of the day nobody is paying for anything and therefore has very little invested in the process.
That's not to say it can't work -- perhaps it can. But it's been tried and the variables need to be tweaked just right, and it's a hard combination to find.
I agree, I'd love this too. I learned in a similar manner as what you've described.
There's definitely space for this, but what we've discovered is that it has the same problems as Codecademy-esque services. You can do various things to attempt to keep users engaged, but at the end of the day nobody is paying for anything and therefore has very little invested in the process.
That's not to say it can't work -- perhaps it can. But it's been tried and the variables need to be tweaked just right, and it's a hard combination to find.
I agree, I'd love this too. I learned in a similar manner as what you've described.
The hard part is finding something that people might actually want to do. Geocities worked for this because you actually wanted a Geocities website. It would be difficult to start a company with the assumption that you were going to create some new "thing" that people are going to actually want just for the side-effect of their learning to code.
On the other hand, arguably Wordpress, Scratch[1] and even the Chrome, Apple, etc. app stores have already filled this niche in different domains (PHP, kids, browser plugins, apps).
[1] http://scratch.mit.edu/
On the other hand, arguably Wordpress, Scratch[1] and even the Chrome, Apple, etc. app stores have already filled this niche in different domains (PHP, kids, browser plugins, apps).
[1] http://scratch.mit.edu/
We have this now with services like heroku and Google App engine.
Heroku is probably the easiest to get started with and is generously free (you can run actual sites from that free instance). At work when we were mentoring a boss's nephew we had him going to Michael Hartl's Rails tutorial and he had a site up on heroku in about an hour and was really have a great time seeing things iterate as he pushed up changes.
You don't get newapp32.codeacademymeetsgeocities.com but you do get something like rushing-waterfall-2311.heroku.com and you can customize that rushing-waterfall-2311 should you care too (still for free).
Heroku is probably the easiest to get started with and is generously free (you can run actual sites from that free instance). At work when we were mentoring a boss's nephew we had him going to Michael Hartl's Rails tutorial and he had a site up on heroku in about an hour and was really have a great time seeing things iterate as he pushed up changes.
You don't get newapp32.codeacademymeetsgeocities.com but you do get something like rushing-waterfall-2311.heroku.com and you can customize that rushing-waterfall-2311 should you care too (still for free).
I wonder if a revenue stream would be partnerships with hosting services. I guess it would just be plain old affiliates, something like how Facebook recommends Heroku when creating an application via developers.facebook.com. "You've finished our tutorials and your website is ready! Want to take the next step? Check out Heroku and Dreamhost!"
I learned the same way as you, using free website hosting (with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanadoo) in my local library in 2003. While my friends played Runescape I harnessed the power of <marquee>
I learned the same way as you, using free website hosting (with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanadoo) in my local library in 2003. While my friends played Runescape I harnessed the power of <marquee>
Udacity + Google App Engine. Conveniently free, completely awesome.
Is there a course on udacity that teaches you how to build apps on Google App Engine? They do have one on building web apps but it does not specify which platform they use (if any).
The web application course is taught by Steve Huffman (creator of Reddit) and the first lesson is actually to write a "Hello World" script and publish it on App Engine.
For anyone new to Python, I highly recommend Udacity. It's still a little unbelievable to me that it's free.
*edit: I should have mentioned that this course uses app engine throughout it's entirety. Not just the first lesson :)
For anyone new to Python, I highly recommend Udacity. It's still a little unbelievable to me that it's free.
*edit: I should have mentioned that this course uses app engine throughout it's entirety. Not just the first lesson :)
thanks, smelter. keep your eye on codecademy soon :)
I'm surprised they are looking to translate the site, considering I think their English version is of mediocre quality. I have been programming for 10+ years and had a chance to go through a lot of the exercises with my girlfriend. It looks like the exercises are crowdsourced from several different authors and therefore lack flow. Additionally, I felt the exercises did not explain enough, or were downright confusing, especially to a novice. For example, one solution required the use of "&&" despite it not being taught in any other previous lesson.
I still recommend books for anyone that is serious about learning to code.
I still recommend books for anyone that is serious about learning to code.
"I felt the exercises did not explain enough, or were downright confusing"
"I still recommend books for anyone that is serious about learning to code."
Agree although I haven't tried the site since January.
"looking to translate the site, considering I think their English version is of mediocre quality"
Expand expand expand before getting your own house in order. It sounds impressive to investors and future investors if you've got a large footprint and as many users as possible. The experience and utility of codecademy is of course of less importance and that info certainly isn't going to be released. Other than we will most likely have some carefully placed stories about someone who was able to give up pole dancing because they learned to code in order to support their 4 children and go to medical school.
"I still recommend books for anyone that is serious about learning to code."
Agree although I haven't tried the site since January.
"looking to translate the site, considering I think their English version is of mediocre quality"
Expand expand expand before getting your own house in order. It sounds impressive to investors and future investors if you've got a large footprint and as many users as possible. The experience and utility of codecademy is of course of less importance and that info certainly isn't going to be released. Other than we will most likely have some carefully placed stories about someone who was able to give up pole dancing because they learned to code in order to support their 4 children and go to medical school.
If you're looking for free books, I'm a big fan of Chris Pine's Learn to Program and Eloquent Javascript. Both have online versions and EJ's online version is far better than a paper book, due to its console.
As far as sites teaching coding, I'm a fan of http://www.codeschool.com/
Most of its content requires a $25/month membership, but last I checked just its free content is more and higher quality than what you can get at codecademy
As far as sites teaching coding, I'm a fan of http://www.codeschool.com/
Most of its content requires a $25/month membership, but last I checked just its free content is more and higher quality than what you can get at codecademy
really appreciate your comments here - i'm the cofounder of codecademy.
we're working on fixing a lot of these problems. much of our content is community generated and moderated/rated by the community. we're getting better at course quality and won't stop until you'd recommend us over books. thanks again - feel free to email me if you have any further questions!
we're working on fixing a lot of these problems. much of our content is community generated and moderated/rated by the community. we're getting better at course quality and won't stop until you'd recommend us over books. thanks again - feel free to email me if you have any further questions!
"we're working on fixing a lot of these problems"
If you are working on fixing and improving your site that is what you should be spending your time on.
Not doing this:
"“We will launch foreign-language sites in German, Spanish, Japanese, Russian and Chinese,” he said. The translation is being done by the site’s users."
Regardless of whether the translation is done by the site's users my feeling is that that is a distraction to you right now in coming up with the best product you can for your initial market.
If you are working on fixing and improving your site that is what you should be spending your time on.
Not doing this:
"“We will launch foreign-language sites in German, Spanish, Japanese, Russian and Chinese,” he said. The translation is being done by the site’s users."
Regardless of whether the translation is done by the site's users my feeling is that that is a distraction to you right now in coming up with the best product you can for your initial market.
----------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Simms is unapologetic. “Think about it less as coding and more as algorithms,” he said. “Traditionally there are the 3 Rs—reading, writing and arithmetic. We think algorithms should be the fourth. Not everyone has to learn to code, but needs to learn the notions of algorithms, realizing what you can use code for.”
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an odd thing for him say--when I tried Codecademy, the focus was coding and algorithms were given no attention that I could see. Has this changed?
Mr. Simms is unapologetic. “Think about it less as coding and more as algorithms,” he said. “Traditionally there are the 3 Rs—reading, writing and arithmetic. We think algorithms should be the fourth. Not everyone has to learn to code, but needs to learn the notions of algorithms, realizing what you can use code for.”
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an odd thing for him say--when I tried Codecademy, the focus was coding and algorithms were given no attention that I could see. Has this changed?
My girlfriend, a CS double-major who wanted to learn JavaScript, tried Codecademy earlier this year. She spent more time trying to guess the exact output the solution required (i.e. the exact string) than actually programming. The app provided no feedback besides "you're wrong". In a few cases, I actually had to debug their minified JavaScript code to determine what output the program expected. Eventually she became really frustrated and quit.
I'm not sour on Codecademy, but it seems to me they need better ways of evaluating completion of an exercise.
I'm not sour on Codecademy, but it seems to me they need better ways of evaluating completion of an exercise.
Udacity provides the feedback: "Your code passed 7 of 11 tests. It failed on test: input = [0,0,0]."
The tests are arranged in order of normal input to increasingly strange user input, i.e., edge cases.
Should be easy enough for Codecademy to implement that.
The tests are arranged in order of normal input to increasingly strange user input, i.e., edge cases.
Should be easy enough for Codecademy to implement that.
This issue definitely isn't unique to Codecademy. I spent way too much time figuring out the exact combination of whitespace that would satisfy CodeEval. I suppose finding the right set of fine-grain test cases remains a problem. Perhaps they should start using QuickCheck or some other random testing + test case distribution combinator system (if they aren't already). Those can systematically build up from small base cases to odd corner cases.
The arrangement at 4clojure.com seems to work well for this.
appreciate the comments, bentlegen - we're working on our evaluation of answers. we try to be fairly loose, but we're always improving. hope you (and your girlfriend!) will give us another chance.
"The start-up has turned in to something of a zeitgeist and has even signed up the Mayor New York, Michael Bloomberg, who said he would learn code this year. London Mayor Boris Johnson, a man more at ease with Catullus than C++, was reported by the British Broadcasting Corp. to be “in awe” of Mr. Bloomberg."
"signed up the Mayor New York, Michael Bloomberg"
"London Mayor Boris Johnson, a man more at ease with Catullus than C++, was reported by the British Broadcasting Corp. to be “in awe” of Mr. Bloomberg.""
In awe of signing up apparently. Of course I have no personal knowledge of whether Bloomberg has actually done anything on codecademy since signing up. But I suspect he hasn't simply because of his busy schedule and limited utility for learning "to code".
It's amazing how things like this get repeated by the press though. As if signing up really means anything at all which it doesn't. It's like signing your name to a petition at the mall.
"signed up the Mayor New York, Michael Bloomberg"
"London Mayor Boris Johnson, a man more at ease with Catullus than C++, was reported by the British Broadcasting Corp. to be “in awe” of Mr. Bloomberg.""
In awe of signing up apparently. Of course I have no personal knowledge of whether Bloomberg has actually done anything on codecademy since signing up. But I suspect he hasn't simply because of his busy schedule and limited utility for learning "to code".
It's amazing how things like this get repeated by the press though. As if signing up really means anything at all which it doesn't. It's like signing your name to a petition at the mall.
For what it's worth, while I'm not certain if Bloomberg knew how to code, he was a tech company president for many years prior to his post as mayor.
As if signing up really means anything at all which it doesn't. It's like signing your name to a petition at the mall.
Well signing your name to a petition can matter a whole lot when you're the Mayor of New York.
I get what you're saying, and I don't doubt that this is a publicity stunt to an extent. But still- Bloomberg has decided that learning to code is something he ought to promote and make visible to a wider audience. That's notable.
Well signing your name to a petition can matter a whole lot when you're the Mayor of New York.
I get what you're saying, and I don't doubt that this is a publicity stunt to an extent. But still- Bloomberg has decided that learning to code is something he ought to promote and make visible to a wider audience. That's notable.
"Bloomberg has decided that learning to code is something he ought to promote"
Agree that it's notable. Keep in mind though that Bloomberg has ties to Fred Wilson of USV who invested in codecademy and codecademy is located in NYC (so even w/o the Wilson connection that's an axe to gore/grind whatever). Wilson opened http://afsenyc.org/
http://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/mediarelations/NewsandSpeeche...
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-12/tech/30618838...
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2011/06/the-chorus-for-immigration-r...
Disclosure: I've done some consulting for the above mentioned entity.
Agree that it's notable. Keep in mind though that Bloomberg has ties to Fred Wilson of USV who invested in codecademy and codecademy is located in NYC (so even w/o the Wilson connection that's an axe to gore/grind whatever). Wilson opened http://afsenyc.org/
http://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/mediarelations/NewsandSpeeche...
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-12/tech/30618838...
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2011/06/the-chorus-for-immigration-r...
Disclosure: I've done some consulting for the above mentioned entity.
It's also definitely a misuse of 'zeitgeist.'
Congrats to Codecademy. I hope they spend it wisely on fulfilling their promise that "Codecademy is the easiest way to learn how to code."
I'm a bit worried about what might happen to all these young potential coders if the marketing doesn't deliver as promised.
Meanwhile, I'd like to propose a much humbler effort which is not intended to compete by any means with codecademy:
We run a little anti-school from our Brooklyn loft. We call it Kitchen Table Coders [1] because we only allow as many people who can fit around our kitchen table. Every weekend we pick a topic that we're excited about and carve out some time to teach it to others.
(btw - we're not a startup nor do we wish to be. If you'd like to start a Kitchen-Table-Coders session in your town, please do. We'll help you get started.)
[1] http://kitchentablecoders.com
I'm a bit worried about what might happen to all these young potential coders if the marketing doesn't deliver as promised.
Meanwhile, I'd like to propose a much humbler effort which is not intended to compete by any means with codecademy:
We run a little anti-school from our Brooklyn loft. We call it Kitchen Table Coders [1] because we only allow as many people who can fit around our kitchen table. Every weekend we pick a topic that we're excited about and carve out some time to teach it to others.
(btw - we're not a startup nor do we wish to be. If you'd like to start a Kitchen-Table-Coders session in your town, please do. We'll help you get started.)
[1] http://kitchentablecoders.com
hi, apitaru - i'm the cofounder of codecademy. we're incredibly focused on living up to that promise and we will never stop improving course quality and worrying about outcomes for our students.
That's great to hear. Overal I love the concept but worry about your marketing. The Bloomberg stunt was clever and fun, but placing the words 'code' and 'easy' side-by-side can lead to frustration on the back-end of your proposition. Coding is hard. Hard-Fun [1]. And that's OK.
[1] http://www.papert.org/articles/HardFun.html
[1] http://www.papert.org/articles/HardFun.html
I am not a fan of Codeacademy. I don't see how one can learn from typing in a field box. It would be better if they had you build out a functional project kind of like Learn Rails by Example.
In Codeacademy you do learn by building a functional project: a Blackjack game in Javascript.
It may not be taking a CS 101 course at an Ivy league school, but it's a great game to get people to start using if statements, loops, conditionals, classes, and objects.
Also, there's nothing like putting a bunch of Card objects into a Hand object to quickly realize: "Oh, THIS is why we do object-oriented programming."
Of course, the "final version" of that functional program is in the Javascript console at the moment. But they are adding jQuery classes in addition to their CSS and HTML offerings. The intent is clear: at the end you will have a complete website.
Even now, if you pick up a book on jQuery and know a bit of HTML already, you can bridge the gap between just the Javascript final project and a website in an afternoon. As I did a few days ago: http://www.highwaterlabs.com/apps/blackjack.html
As the cirriculum develops the final will go way beyond just blackjack.
Here's hoping this money enables Codeacademy to ignore funding for awhile and just build!
It may not be taking a CS 101 course at an Ivy league school, but it's a great game to get people to start using if statements, loops, conditionals, classes, and objects.
Also, there's nothing like putting a bunch of Card objects into a Hand object to quickly realize: "Oh, THIS is why we do object-oriented programming."
Of course, the "final version" of that functional program is in the Javascript console at the moment. But they are adding jQuery classes in addition to their CSS and HTML offerings. The intent is clear: at the end you will have a complete website.
Even now, if you pick up a book on jQuery and know a bit of HTML already, you can bridge the gap between just the Javascript final project and a website in an afternoon. As I did a few days ago: http://www.highwaterlabs.com/apps/blackjack.html
As the cirriculum develops the final will go way beyond just blackjack.
Here's hoping this money enables Codeacademy to ignore funding for awhile and just build!
that's the plan :) thanks!
If they put as much effort into the courses as they do to marketing themselves they might have a decent product.
Yes, "If you build it, they will come" works.
But:
"If they come, especially if 450,000 users come in six months, you will get $10 million dollars. Then you will build it."
This could also work ;)
But:
"If they come, especially if 450,000 users come in six months, you will get $10 million dollars. Then you will build it."
This could also work ;)
I've spent the better part of the last 2 months learning how to code with Codecademy, and though there are some issues that need working out (yes, answer feedback can be erroneous and the crowd sourced tutorials can lack flow) I've found it a phenomenal resource. I didn't want to read a book. I didn't want to be deterred by configuring and downloading new software. I wanted to learn basic syntax and be able to go to my browser, pick up where I left off, and feel like I was building something, and toward these ends (oh... and it's free) I've found it extremely helpful.
In short, I am the ideal user of Codecademy and have really enjoyed the experience relative to other resources available.
In short, I am the ideal user of Codecademy and have really enjoyed the experience relative to other resources available.
Congrats!
I have to pry...what is the most useful thing you've been able to do with what you've learned so far? I've taught Ruby to beginners and though it hate the configuration process, at least I can show how to do useful things pretty quickly, like writing a loop to pull down a set of webpages. I want to teach JS to beginners but can't think of useful things to do...there are neat things, of course (such as JQuery animations)...but I'm looking for practical tasks.
I have to pry...what is the most useful thing you've been able to do with what you've learned so far? I've taught Ruby to beginners and though it hate the configuration process, at least I can show how to do useful things pretty quickly, like writing a loop to pull down a set of webpages. I want to teach JS to beginners but can't think of useful things to do...there are neat things, of course (such as JQuery animations)...but I'm looking for practical tasks.
How about using parse.com's new javascript database layer to abstract the requisite server-side dependencies. (disclaimer, I've never used it myself). Then you'll be able to teach a user how to setup a simple one page web app, maybe a todo list, that used jquery's xhr requests to set and get data from the database.
Alternatively you can do this entirely with localStorage, problem there is that you need to provide an extra lesson about why localStorage doesn't work "online" (across the network).
I definitely think javascript is at a state where it's actually easier to understand the underlying principles of programming, i.e. why design decisions are made and how each component is integrated with the next component. Contrast this with rails where everything is magic, and I would much rather learn from a bottom-up kind of approach. When the front-end logic is all taken care of, Your next lesson will be to build "the part that parse.com is taking care of". So you throw up a sinatra app maybe, provide 2 REST endpoints etc. Thinking about applications as a composition of integrated services (database, database api, UI, application logic, etc) proves a lot more understandable and also has the benefit that it's a very mature way to look at things actually!
Just writing this get's me excited to start teaching my friends again. The problem is it's very hard and very exhausting (in a good way but I only have so many hours in the day!)
The biggest problem for me keeping the iceberg manageable. I should let them know just how many TONS of stuff they will eventually need to know, but ideally I want to do that in a procedural fashion so that it makes elegant sense.
Alternatively you can do this entirely with localStorage, problem there is that you need to provide an extra lesson about why localStorage doesn't work "online" (across the network).
I definitely think javascript is at a state where it's actually easier to understand the underlying principles of programming, i.e. why design decisions are made and how each component is integrated with the next component. Contrast this with rails where everything is magic, and I would much rather learn from a bottom-up kind of approach. When the front-end logic is all taken care of, Your next lesson will be to build "the part that parse.com is taking care of". So you throw up a sinatra app maybe, provide 2 REST endpoints etc. Thinking about applications as a composition of integrated services (database, database api, UI, application logic, etc) proves a lot more understandable and also has the benefit that it's a very mature way to look at things actually!
Just writing this get's me excited to start teaching my friends again. The problem is it's very hard and very exhausting (in a good way but I only have so many hours in the day!)
The biggest problem for me keeping the iceberg manageable. I should let them know just how many TONS of stuff they will eventually need to know, but ideally I want to do that in a procedural fashion so that it makes elegant sense.
That's a cool idea but I wonder if this is too complicated for the average beginner? I did COmsci in school but I did not easily understand how the DOM and xmlhttp API related...I was a perfect example of the programmer who Crockford says is wrong for hating JS because all we did was run to jQuery (and he's right)
I can't imagine how frustrating it is for a total beginner to understand the mechanisms, even if they are web desires with some experience with the DOM.
The good thing about teaching a language like Ruby or Python is that you don't have to build a webpage. In fact, most people are very content with not publishing on the web...and so they are reluctant to study JS because they think it's only for web development.
But with Ruby, you could write something that sucks in Craigslist results and reformat it so that you don't have to click through to see the pics...and then store it as a local file that is written to every 5 hours...I did this plenty of time when doing a furniture search...
I know you can hack Google tables/fusion to do some of this, but that's a whole new layer of things to learn...whereas everyone gets basic text files existing on the HD
I can't imagine how frustrating it is for a total beginner to understand the mechanisms, even if they are web desires with some experience with the DOM.
The good thing about teaching a language like Ruby or Python is that you don't have to build a webpage. In fact, most people are very content with not publishing on the web...and so they are reluctant to study JS because they think it's only for web development.
But with Ruby, you could write something that sucks in Craigslist results and reformat it so that you don't have to click through to see the pics...and then store it as a local file that is written to every 5 hours...I did this plenty of time when doing a furniture search...
I know you can hack Google tables/fusion to do some of this, but that's a whole new layer of things to learn...whereas everyone gets basic text files existing on the HD
It's funny you say that actually because I would fall into the category of being all about the web. I'm self taught and learned 100% in a web environment. I actually didn't have any experience with pure scripting (data-mining and processing) until my job required it a couple years back.
I think it probably just comes down to preference. I'm positive that a large portion of people that "want to learn to program" really mean "make a web application", but that's not to say that scripting isn't equally rewarding/fun. HN is filled with cool posts about how to make little command-line utilities that do xyz -- yes very nice indeed!
Lastly, FWIW, I sure am glad you say "ruby" as opposed to "rails" because I can't imagine the DOM being harder to learn than everything that rails is taking care of for you under the hood.
I think it probably just comes down to preference. I'm positive that a large portion of people that "want to learn to program" really mean "make a web application", but that's not to say that scripting isn't equally rewarding/fun. HN is filled with cool posts about how to make little command-line utilities that do xyz -- yes very nice indeed!
Lastly, FWIW, I sure am glad you say "ruby" as opposed to "rails" because I can't imagine the DOM being harder to learn than everything that rails is taking care of for you under the hood.
Yeah...I'm not saying they shouldn't be about the web...as I fit in that boat too. But when I think of most of the web creations I've produced, virtually all of them have come from being able to crunch/gather data (even if it's just spitting out HTML for every row in a dataset) at an efficient speed...when you have that much info, the incentive to publish is greater :)
But yeah, ruby != rails. That is most definitely something I clear the air about right away.
But yeah, ruby != rails. That is most definitely something I clear the air about right away.
http://live.wsj.com/video/83CA8241-F6C4-462A-B236-7F7759005F...
Interesting video to watch. Serious question here. When do you think starting most sentences with "so" is going to stop?
Interesting video to watch. Serious question here. When do you think starting most sentences with "so" is going to stop?
It's so amusing to watch someone report on a topic they have no clue about. "It teaches you... how do you get this shape to form??"
For me, Codecademy was less engaging than Treehouse and Code School. They all offer different approaches to teaching different aspects of development through the browser, and I have thus far spent the least amount of time at Codecademy because I have felt that it doesn't offer as efficient of a learning experience.
That being said, it's still a good tool with potential, and they might just be worth whatever valuation this round was brought in at (I didn't see mention of it in the article). Best of luck to the team!
That being said, it's still a good tool with potential, and they might just be worth whatever valuation this round was brought in at (I didn't see mention of it in the article). Best of luck to the team!
thanks, eric -- we're working every day on achieving that potential!
Learning about algorithms is far more difficult and far more important than the mechanics of writing code, which is the focus of sites like Codecademy. I believe that there are certain people whom have minds that can naturally pick up algorithms and break down problems into the different steps needed to solve them. Codecademy will give these individuals most of what they need in order to develop proficiency in writing code.
However, these people are not the majority. When I TA'd for an introduction to Computer Science course, most of student's difficulty, especially on more difficult assignments, was not syntactic and getting a program to compile or run but rather conceptualizing and implementing the intermediate tasks that the program needed to accomplish in order to produce the final result. In my opinion, this is the most difficult part of writing anything beyond the most basic piece of software and the area which online programming courses are the least helpful.
That being said, I think that Codecademy and similar sites are very helpful of learning the syntax of a particular language which, of course, is the first step to being able to write code.
However, these people are not the majority. When I TA'd for an introduction to Computer Science course, most of student's difficulty, especially on more difficult assignments, was not syntactic and getting a program to compile or run but rather conceptualizing and implementing the intermediate tasks that the program needed to accomplish in order to produce the final result. In my opinion, this is the most difficult part of writing anything beyond the most basic piece of software and the area which online programming courses are the least helpful.
That being said, I think that Codecademy and similar sites are very helpful of learning the syntax of a particular language which, of course, is the first step to being able to write code.
Richard Branson tweeted this earlier:
"Learning by doing: doesn't that sound fantastic? That’s why I’m investing in @Codecademy http://t.co/V62rcoWK
"Learning by doing: doesn't that sound fantastic? That’s why I’m investing in @Codecademy http://t.co/V62rcoWK
"Learning by doing"
Except that learning by codecademy is not doing it's learning
Learning by doing might be learning while working as an apprentice for a master plumber, carpenter etc.
Except that learning by codecademy is not doing it's learning
Learning by doing might be learning while working as an apprentice for a master plumber, carpenter etc.
I think the point is that it's not videos and lectures followed by a multiple choice or something, it's fully interactive. You learn coding by coding on their website. Learning by doing.
It's not the usual or appropriate notion of learning by doing. It's more analogous to going through math drill exercises in a book, or following step by step instructions in a lab (doing without understanding). Research on those techniques shows that students learn less than in more higher-order activities (simulations, games, projects, etc., see e.g. Wenglinsky, 1998, Does It Compute?).
I think better introductions to programming for complete novices would include things like visual programming environments (Scratch, Blockly), or editing/tweaking levels in a game, or making alterations to an existing simple game or animation, like the Processing.js ones on jsdo.it and other sites.
I think better introductions to programming for complete novices would include things like visual programming environments (Scratch, Blockly), or editing/tweaking levels in a game, or making alterations to an existing simple game or animation, like the Processing.js ones on jsdo.it and other sites.
thats the thing though...people that know how to program know that programming is not about typing words on a screen.
patio11 brought up a good point in that in order to read one must learn the alphabet. I think this is very true but lets apply that here and realize codecademy teaches the alphabet -- not how to read.
patio11 brought up a good point in that in order to read one must learn the alphabet. I think this is very true but lets apply that here and realize codecademy teaches the alphabet -- not how to read.
"people that know how to program know that programming is not about typing words on a screen"
Agree. While I am not a programmer, I can certainly do enough to have made money with programs that I have written that have allowed me to achieve some goal that I had. Starting with editing shell scripts with ed and awk (a crude estimating system). To me it's fun. What can I do to automate something? How can I tweak this or that? I'm sure this is quite common. Fun. You want to do it. You like doing it. It's not work.
I've been doing this for quite some time now and found it fun right from the start and never get bored and it's always a challenge.
The bottom line though with all my learning has been making mistakes and figuring things out. In order to do this you need to actually make something and use it in order to think and come up with ideas on how to make it better and to solve the problems you run into.
Agree. While I am not a programmer, I can certainly do enough to have made money with programs that I have written that have allowed me to achieve some goal that I had. Starting with editing shell scripts with ed and awk (a crude estimating system). To me it's fun. What can I do to automate something? How can I tweak this or that? I'm sure this is quite common. Fun. You want to do it. You like doing it. It's not work.
I've been doing this for quite some time now and found it fun right from the start and never get bored and it's always a challenge.
The bottom line though with all my learning has been making mistakes and figuring things out. In order to do this you need to actually make something and use it in order to think and come up with ideas on how to make it better and to solve the problems you run into.
Fine, Codeacademy teaches Reading (for beginners) instead of Reading (intermediate). But to imply that learning the alphabet is not the first step of learning to read, and instead is a separate thing, is totally disingenuous.
If you want to learn to read: you learn the alphabet first.
If you want to learn to code: you learn the basics first.
Codeacademy targets nonliterate coders, AKA people who don't know the alphabet.
It's pedantic to say that people aren't learning coding, just like it's pedantic to watch someone learning the alphabet and saying "You're not learning to read". Yes, they are, that's the entire reason they're learning the alphabet.
If you want to learn to read: you learn the alphabet first.
If you want to learn to code: you learn the basics first.
Codeacademy targets nonliterate coders, AKA people who don't know the alphabet.
It's pedantic to say that people aren't learning coding, just like it's pedantic to watch someone learning the alphabet and saying "You're not learning to read". Yes, they are, that's the entire reason they're learning the alphabet.
I'd be extremely interested to see what their engagement over time looks like. I tried signing up initially but fell off after a few weeks. I realize my behavior isn't necessarily indicative of the behavior of the majority of their userbase, but I feel like it must be a big problem they're dealing with.
I have attempted to go through it numerous times, normally when I feel super motivated for a few days, but then I get busy with other things.
I don't know what they could do differently to keep me more engaged, because I feel like it's my own fault, not theirs.
I don't know what they could do differently to keep me more engaged, because I feel like it's my own fault, not theirs.
So I'm an actively paying user of CodeSchool and Treehouse and tried out CodeAcademy a few weeks ago after being unfulfilled by it a few months prior.
I'm a designer by trade and a visual learner by heart and none of these services have helped me further my grasp on JavaScript as a whole.
CodeAcademy's error prompts are too vague to help those of us who don't know what is fundamentally going on. In one click I can find the answer, learn nothing from it and move on to the next challenge. Being able to cheat so easily is a huge turn-off to me and should be an equally big turn-off to employers/teachers who hope to utilize the badge systems these sites tout to gauge the student's abilities.
CodeSchool is apparently for people who already have a background in programming. Both my boyfriend and I attempted to take jQuery Air (a front-page testimonial says that someone without any JS knowledge could do it) and both of us got stuck at the same part. After doing some reading into the issue I found someone else that was having a similar problem in another course. The answer from CodeSchool was that they just assume students have the knowledge going into a course to tie up any loose ends and that it was intended that they'd have to do some research on their own. Yeah, no thanks. Furthermore, the way they handle "hints" is terrible and detrimental to the experience (I shouldn't have to waste 3 hints and get my score lowered in order to get to the one that's actually relevant to my problem). Another issue I had with CodeSchool is that going through the quizzes of things I already knew to get the badges, the way their app handles your input is really delicate. I wasn't able to use any shorthand CSS (for borders, CSS3 properties, etc.) without it telling me I was doing it wrong (note: Treehouse actually impressed me here). An additional gripe I have with CodeSchool is the quizzes (at least in the case of jQuery Air) feel clunky. It should be possible, if not standard, to have the video framed above the quizzes. I found myself going back and forth trying to find where the instructor mentioned a certain item that was relevant to the scenario, whereas with Treehouse, I was writing the code along with them.
Treehouse is, so far, the best. I liked not having to deal with the lessons associated with what I already knew and I felt the questions within those quizzes were well-rounded enough to make me feel like I wasn't cheating my way to a badge. That being said, the guy that teaches the JavaScript courses is all over the place; his variables and functions are often named "varX" and "funcX" which confuse the user, he waits until 3-5 minutes into a lesson to tell the user to comment out the last lesson (whereas sometimes he actually utilizes the previous code or variables). Where the JS fundamentals courses really fail though is in creating a story, a scenario in which we'd really have to use that code. The worst way for me to learn is to build something that has zero meaning. Writing 10 functions that do nothing but spit true and false at me isn't going to help me understand how and where I'd use such a thing. I need relevance and context.
Overall I've been really unhappy with the online/interactive tools available right now and have really only kept my subscriptions active in hopes that that money is going towards bettering not only the lessons themselves, but the in-browser engagements as well.
There are a few smaller ones I've tried out (and I'm currently registered for a few Coursera courses in case that is better suited to me), but if anyone has any suggestions about other sites I can try, please let me know!
I'm a designer by trade and a visual learner by heart and none of these services have helped me further my grasp on JavaScript as a whole.
CodeAcademy's error prompts are too vague to help those of us who don't know what is fundamentally going on. In one click I can find the answer, learn nothing from it and move on to the next challenge. Being able to cheat so easily is a huge turn-off to me and should be an equally big turn-off to employers/teachers who hope to utilize the badge systems these sites tout to gauge the student's abilities.
CodeSchool is apparently for people who already have a background in programming. Both my boyfriend and I attempted to take jQuery Air (a front-page testimonial says that someone without any JS knowledge could do it) and both of us got stuck at the same part. After doing some reading into the issue I found someone else that was having a similar problem in another course. The answer from CodeSchool was that they just assume students have the knowledge going into a course to tie up any loose ends and that it was intended that they'd have to do some research on their own. Yeah, no thanks. Furthermore, the way they handle "hints" is terrible and detrimental to the experience (I shouldn't have to waste 3 hints and get my score lowered in order to get to the one that's actually relevant to my problem). Another issue I had with CodeSchool is that going through the quizzes of things I already knew to get the badges, the way their app handles your input is really delicate. I wasn't able to use any shorthand CSS (for borders, CSS3 properties, etc.) without it telling me I was doing it wrong (note: Treehouse actually impressed me here). An additional gripe I have with CodeSchool is the quizzes (at least in the case of jQuery Air) feel clunky. It should be possible, if not standard, to have the video framed above the quizzes. I found myself going back and forth trying to find where the instructor mentioned a certain item that was relevant to the scenario, whereas with Treehouse, I was writing the code along with them.
Treehouse is, so far, the best. I liked not having to deal with the lessons associated with what I already knew and I felt the questions within those quizzes were well-rounded enough to make me feel like I wasn't cheating my way to a badge. That being said, the guy that teaches the JavaScript courses is all over the place; his variables and functions are often named "varX" and "funcX" which confuse the user, he waits until 3-5 minutes into a lesson to tell the user to comment out the last lesson (whereas sometimes he actually utilizes the previous code or variables). Where the JS fundamentals courses really fail though is in creating a story, a scenario in which we'd really have to use that code. The worst way for me to learn is to build something that has zero meaning. Writing 10 functions that do nothing but spit true and false at me isn't going to help me understand how and where I'd use such a thing. I need relevance and context.
Overall I've been really unhappy with the online/interactive tools available right now and have really only kept my subscriptions active in hopes that that money is going towards bettering not only the lessons themselves, but the in-browser engagements as well.
There are a few smaller ones I've tried out (and I'm currently registered for a few Coursera courses in case that is better suited to me), but if anyone has any suggestions about other sites I can try, please let me know!
"The answer from CodeSchool was that they just assume students have the knowledge going into a course to tie up any loose ends and that it was intended that they'd have to do some research on their own. Yeah, no thanks."
I actually find that doing some research on your own encourages an active learning model, which really pays off in the form of better retention/understanding of the material.
It seems that the younger generation's culture of passively consuming large amounts of content has really hampered the ability for meaningful learning.
I actually find that doing some research on your own encourages an active learning model, which really pays off in the form of better retention/understanding of the material.
It seems that the younger generation's culture of passively consuming large amounts of content has really hampered the ability for meaningful learning.
Well, to be fair – debugging is really, really frustrating when you don't know any programming and therefore have no idea how to even describe your problem in searchable terms, let alone solve it using stackoverflow anecdotes (if you know that stackoverflow exists). IMHO debugging techniques is worthy of separate course in itself.
I had a reply written out yesterday about what's generational decay vs. the evolution of learning (complete with everyone's second-favorite Einstein quote) but at the end of the day, how someone wants to learn is going to resonate with them more than how someone else thinks they should learn. We have a public school system that is dealing with the repercussions of teaching students the same way they did 20, 30, 40 years ago. We can't blame the kids when the results are all the same.
I'm not looking for a one-size-fits-all solution. Web development motivates the hell out of me but that passion alone doesn't help me get over pre-existing barriers and how my brain comprehends things. I assume once I have my first ah-ha! moment the pieces will start falling into place, but I'm just looking for a peg on the wall to grasp onto at this point.
I'm surprised this post got as many upvotes as it did because admittedly I feel out of place here in a sea full of people who are naturally inclined, incredibly determined and/or had some great teachers, so I wasn't sure if my problems would translate.
Learning this stuff isn't as essential to my job as it would be just incredibly useful to me personally, otherwise I wouldn't be so flexible in using these services and would probably be hitting the books instead of making multiple monthly payments. I know if I find a site that I can learn from that any of my friends can learn from it too. There are hundreds and thousands of those people out there who want to learn this stuff in a way that is easy to swallow, which will in turn spur the rate at which we see new services and tools. It's a cash cow if someone does it right, and I want to see them succeed and help them in the process.
Additionally, it also doesn't help me feel better about the quality of the research I'm doing when the top result for any web development question is still W3Schools.
I'm not looking for a one-size-fits-all solution. Web development motivates the hell out of me but that passion alone doesn't help me get over pre-existing barriers and how my brain comprehends things. I assume once I have my first ah-ha! moment the pieces will start falling into place, but I'm just looking for a peg on the wall to grasp onto at this point.
I'm surprised this post got as many upvotes as it did because admittedly I feel out of place here in a sea full of people who are naturally inclined, incredibly determined and/or had some great teachers, so I wasn't sure if my problems would translate.
Learning this stuff isn't as essential to my job as it would be just incredibly useful to me personally, otherwise I wouldn't be so flexible in using these services and would probably be hitting the books instead of making multiple monthly payments. I know if I find a site that I can learn from that any of my friends can learn from it too. There are hundreds and thousands of those people out there who want to learn this stuff in a way that is easy to swallow, which will in turn spur the rate at which we see new services and tools. It's a cash cow if someone does it right, and I want to see them succeed and help them in the process.
Additionally, it also doesn't help me feel better about the quality of the research I'm doing when the top result for any web development question is still W3Schools.
There is definitely a class of customers who expect a product to simply inject knowledge into their brain. No effort required.
I have no idea where this expectation came from, because it's not possible. You have to work to learn.
I have no idea where this expectation came from, because it's not possible. You have to work to learn.
If a service does it right, it is work. No one's asking for a free pass, they're just asking that the content is manageable for the audience they're trying to cater to.
I'm saying that some people ARE asking for a free pass. They want knowledge in exchange for money.
Yes, they exist. I agree with everything else you've said and indeed that's the challenge.
Yes, they exist. I agree with everything else you've said and indeed that's the challenge.
I'm not sure that what I said justifies a downvote. Please explain.
What you said deserves four downvotes.
A) If your message is "You're learning it the wrong way. You need to actively work to understand and do research on your own." then that is mildly rude and also not really very germane to the discussion. The whole point of the service is to do the best possible job guiding you through learning programming; having to fire up Google to complete its exercises is a failure mode. The parent is offering specific, valuable feedback as to where and how it fails.
B) But you didn't just say that. Instead, you signed it off with a baseless, bullshit line insulting the poster and half of the userbase, and that's all it is, an insult; unless you have some very interesting studies in your back pocket, you have absolutely no idea whether "passively consuming large amounts of content has really hampered [our] ability for meaningful learning." That is pure flamebait. Leave it in your keyboard.
A) If your message is "You're learning it the wrong way. You need to actively work to understand and do research on your own." then that is mildly rude and also not really very germane to the discussion. The whole point of the service is to do the best possible job guiding you through learning programming; having to fire up Google to complete its exercises is a failure mode. The parent is offering specific, valuable feedback as to where and how it fails.
B) But you didn't just say that. Instead, you signed it off with a baseless, bullshit line insulting the poster and half of the userbase, and that's all it is, an insult; unless you have some very interesting studies in your back pocket, you have absolutely no idea whether "passively consuming large amounts of content has really hampered [our] ability for meaningful learning." That is pure flamebait. Leave it in your keyboard.
Not to mention the younger generation's culture of.. cheap shot that always gets under my skin (though I'm not that young).
It's so ridiculous how people can appear insightful with some useless and completely untrue complaint about "young people today," "today's materialist society" or whatever.
Young people today do far far more self learning, actively pursuing stuff that interests them than any previous generation, in my opinion. They have much better tools. My younger brother (in his teens) has for several years been in a mode where he gets into little obsessions about learning this or that. Video special effects. Lock picking. Fishing. Whatever. A lot (maybe most) kids his age are like that. The topic can be whatever: diet, exercise, skin care, sex. Not necessarily the stuff that HN gets escited about but it is the stuff that interest them. I wouldn't surprised to learn that the mean skill level for application of make up has skyrocketed among teenage girls in the last ten years. Their starting point acquiring knowledge knowledge (who is the president of X?) is Youtube but that doesn't make it "passively consuming large amounts of content".
Want to test this? Try giving a group of 35-45 year olds and a group of teenagers photoshop lessons at work or school. Then give them a project. See how many of them are reading online tutorials and watching youtube videos to get things done vs how many are just using the prescribed material with the notion that they can't be expected to know anything outside of it.
This whole thread by the way is amazing. It's all about new ways that people are acquiring knowledge & skills. Full of anecdotes and opinions about what approach or tool for learning stuff is good or bad. What the problems are. Underlying it all is a sense that the best possible learning tools are incredible and coming soon.
Lets give credit where credit is due. Lets look at this as what it is: a discussion about how to make the awesome awesomer.
Thanks for calling the OP up on pure curmudgeonry.
It's so ridiculous how people can appear insightful with some useless and completely untrue complaint about "young people today," "today's materialist society" or whatever.
Young people today do far far more self learning, actively pursuing stuff that interests them than any previous generation, in my opinion. They have much better tools. My younger brother (in his teens) has for several years been in a mode where he gets into little obsessions about learning this or that. Video special effects. Lock picking. Fishing. Whatever. A lot (maybe most) kids his age are like that. The topic can be whatever: diet, exercise, skin care, sex. Not necessarily the stuff that HN gets escited about but it is the stuff that interest them. I wouldn't surprised to learn that the mean skill level for application of make up has skyrocketed among teenage girls in the last ten years. Their starting point acquiring knowledge knowledge (who is the president of X?) is Youtube but that doesn't make it "passively consuming large amounts of content".
Want to test this? Try giving a group of 35-45 year olds and a group of teenagers photoshop lessons at work or school. Then give them a project. See how many of them are reading online tutorials and watching youtube videos to get things done vs how many are just using the prescribed material with the notion that they can't be expected to know anything outside of it.
This whole thread by the way is amazing. It's all about new ways that people are acquiring knowledge & skills. Full of anecdotes and opinions about what approach or tool for learning stuff is good or bad. What the problems are. Underlying it all is a sense that the best possible learning tools are incredible and coming soon.
Lets give credit where credit is due. Lets look at this as what it is: a discussion about how to make the awesome awesomer.
Thanks for calling the OP up on pure curmudgeonry.
so, my startup used to be a Codecademy competitor but we allowed users to build full blown Rails applications in their browser. our customers ran into the same problems you described and we also felt like an online environment was cheating our users because a real developer needs to know how to use the terminal and set up an environment.
we decided that the automated, "interactive" approach just doesn't work -- the feedback systems are just not flexible or responsive enough. So now we do online bootcamps for WebDev, iOS, and Design where we mentor you and a group of peers virtually. You can check it out at http://bloc.io
It's expensive, but people who are serious enough about learning know that it's an investment in themselves and pays itself back 10x.
we decided that the automated, "interactive" approach just doesn't work -- the feedback systems are just not flexible or responsive enough. So now we do online bootcamps for WebDev, iOS, and Design where we mentor you and a group of peers virtually. You can check it out at http://bloc.io
It's expensive, but people who are serious enough about learning know that it's an investment in themselves and pays itself back 10x.
Thank you for your response, Roshan. Bloc.io sounds like what I'm ultimately going to need to do. I'd been considering just taking a course locally but had reservations about finding something that fit my schedule and was taught by someone I felt knew what they were talking about.
no problem! i'm roshan [at] bloc.io if you have any questions
Do you honestly believe that you can teach a person with no programming knowledge Ruby/Rails in 8 weeks? Having strong HTML/CSS skills and basic JS/Ruby/Rails, I don't see this as a realistic goal, and could leave some people disappointed for the amount of money spent. Thoughts?
I'd really love to write up a blog about this, but I'll do my best to summarize my thoughts here:
It's a legitimate question. Empirically, it seems like it is possible since DevBootcamp in SF has been able to do it and 88% of their students were qualified enough to obtain jobs as Rails developers. I think that's a pretty fair metric to go by.
Our bootcamp is not as much of a time commitment as DevBootcamp, but I think more than half of the battle of learning a new domain is minimizing the space of "things you don't know you don't know". I think that's a much more reasonable goal, after which it's a lot easier to direct your own learning because you've gotten through the steepest parts of the learning curve.
For example, if you never had any concept of a database, it'd be really hard to learn more about them. Someone new to web development and programming probably has no concept of databases being separate from code. If they wanted to have "users" in their application, they probably wouldn't even know how to formulate a question to ask Google. Would they ask "how do I store users in an app?" No, because they probably don't have any concept of "storage" in an app. Or maybe they do but they pick the wrong word and ask "how do I save users in an app?". "save" and "store" are almost synonymous in a general context, but Google will give you drastically different results because they have different idiomatic meanings in a web development context. In any case, neither of those queries will get you what you want from Google (which is, to discover what a "database" is).
I guess my point is that the goal for us at Bloc isn't to cram your brain with enough knowledge for you to call yourself a Rails hacker -- it's to get you through the steep part of the learning curve and give you a large enough view of the landscape of web development for you to continue learning afterword.
It's a legitimate question. Empirically, it seems like it is possible since DevBootcamp in SF has been able to do it and 88% of their students were qualified enough to obtain jobs as Rails developers. I think that's a pretty fair metric to go by.
Our bootcamp is not as much of a time commitment as DevBootcamp, but I think more than half of the battle of learning a new domain is minimizing the space of "things you don't know you don't know". I think that's a much more reasonable goal, after which it's a lot easier to direct your own learning because you've gotten through the steepest parts of the learning curve.
For example, if you never had any concept of a database, it'd be really hard to learn more about them. Someone new to web development and programming probably has no concept of databases being separate from code. If they wanted to have "users" in their application, they probably wouldn't even know how to formulate a question to ask Google. Would they ask "how do I store users in an app?" No, because they probably don't have any concept of "storage" in an app. Or maybe they do but they pick the wrong word and ask "how do I save users in an app?". "save" and "store" are almost synonymous in a general context, but Google will give you drastically different results because they have different idiomatic meanings in a web development context. In any case, neither of those queries will get you what you want from Google (which is, to discover what a "database" is).
I guess my point is that the goal for us at Bloc isn't to cram your brain with enough knowledge for you to call yourself a Rails hacker -- it's to get you through the steep part of the learning curve and give you a large enough view of the landscape of web development for you to continue learning afterword.
Well good luck to y'all. I like the idea, and agree with the analogy. I guess it would just be an important point to make clear to the student they won't be a Rails ninja by the end of the course.
I'm currently at livngsocial doing front-end dev and you may have heard of the Hungry Academy program that they have going on right now. The students (some of which had no prior programming experience) are 4 months in now and it's pretty amazing what they can do.
I'm currently at livngsocial doing front-end dev and you may have heard of the Hungry Academy program that they have going on right now. The students (some of which had no prior programming experience) are 4 months in now and it's pretty amazing what they can do.
Yes. It is definitely possible. Remember the 5 minutes blog that Rails used to have on their website?
The timeline can be something like these: - 2 weeks: basic programming knowledge(just Ruby, not Rails) - 2 weeks: basic website knowledge(html/css/js) - 2 weeks: basic rails knowledge(modal/view/controller) - 2 weeks(final): a final project to do whatever you want?
Most importantly, there is a huge difference between learning it yourself and learning it under the guidance of someone else who already knows a lot about teaching others programming.
The timeline can be something like these: - 2 weeks: basic programming knowledge(just Ruby, not Rails) - 2 weeks: basic website knowledge(html/css/js) - 2 weeks: basic rails knowledge(modal/view/controller) - 2 weeks(final): a final project to do whatever you want?
Most importantly, there is a huge difference between learning it yourself and learning it under the guidance of someone else who already knows a lot about teaching others programming.
This comment reminded me to ask something I had been wondering: does anyone know if there have been any conversations (friendly or otherwise) between the guys at the Chicago-based company CodeAcademy and the New York-based Codecademy (of whom this article is about) regarding trademarks and their respective names? Most people in this forum know that the commenter was referring to Codecademy, but it must be frustrating for the CodeAcademy guys to be getting reviews that mistake them for Codecademy. Was just curious if anyone knows the dynamic between the companies.
Here is the story from one of the co-founders of Code Academy.
http://howilearnedeverything.com/2011/10/30/clearing-the-air...
I only know his side of the story, but I know Neal and have the highest respect for him. He's a good dude.
http://howilearnedeverything.com/2011/10/30/clearing-the-air...
I only know his side of the story, but I know Neal and have the highest respect for him. He's a good dude.
mnicole, this is some KILLER feedback. I really want to make our hint system better (I'm one of the programmers that work on CodeSchool). A couple of us have been talking about changing the hint system to not deduct points, except for the last "hint" which is really the answer. We also want to make sure that you know when we are about to show you the answer (or something very close to the answer) so as to not spoil it. I'd like to chat more about how we can make CodeSchool better, if you'd like, you can email me at eric [at] envylabs.com.
This is why I love HN. I'll be in touch!
Try http://RubyMonk.com and let us know what you think. In it's current setup, the content is not intended for non-programmers, but we'd love the feedback.
Note: Need to clear up that references to CodeAcademy in this post refer to what is actually Codecademy.
Personally I just do not agree with your codeschool comment. I took the rails for zombies one and it felt excellent. and I specially learnt a lot from it.
My designer friend took the jQuery Air course and found it PERFECT. It gave him a lot of cues that it would not have understood without it.
I'm not quite sure what exactly your problems were with it, but you seems quite bitchy for nothing
My designer friend took the jQuery Air course and found it PERFECT. It gave him a lot of cues that it would not have understood without it.
I'm not quite sure what exactly your problems were with it, but you seems quite bitchy for nothing
Your 'bitchy' remark is inappropriate.
For what it's worth, while I was very impressed by the production value behind 'Rails for Zombies', I felt it was lacking as a learning tool. Coding rails snippets without context in the browser really doesn't translate very well to web app development.
For what it's worth, while I was very impressed by the production value behind 'Rails for Zombies', I felt it was lacking as a learning tool. Coding rails snippets without context in the browser really doesn't translate very well to web app development.
Anecdotes vs. anecdotes. As a paying customer and someone that cares deeply about education and user experience, I'm well within my rights to complain about issues I'm not the only one dealing with.
That you are. If you have any other feedback regarding your experience with Code School, we'd love to hear it at support at codeschool.com
We work every day to improve the educational flow of our courses, and while our weighted hint & point system can be a great motivator for some students it can also be frustrating for others, as we've discovered. We have plans to improve it in the future as Eric mentioned above.
I can't stress enough how valuable honest criticism like this is to us, thanks.
We work every day to improve the educational flow of our courses, and while our weighted hint & point system can be a great motivator for some students it can also be frustrating for others, as we've discovered. We have plans to improve it in the future as Eric mentioned above.
I can't stress enough how valuable honest criticism like this is to us, thanks.
Speaking of 'bitchy for nothing', it's probably gauche to point out, but as I've had to downvote your last few comments for excessive snark and name-calling, I'd encourage you to pause, reflect, and figure out whether or not you really want to be posting the brash comments you have been.
Your comments don't generally seem too ill-informed, but there are standards of conversation that are worth holding to, and your recent remarks are falling short.
Your comments don't generally seem too ill-informed, but there are standards of conversation that are worth holding to, and your recent remarks are falling short.
'He said Codecademy wasn’t just about teaching people to be programmers, but about helping people learn higher skills. “There are definitely people who become programmers through the site, but there are also people using these courses to level up what they are doing anyway, like someone going from being an administrative assistant, to someone who can write HTML and CSS for email campaigns.”'
Love the concept of 'higher' in this quote. Some become programmers, but some learn 'higher skills' - like writing html. The whole idea of higher (and presumably lower) is fascinating. HTML and CSS is higher than administrative assistant. Does anyone here understand how hard it is to be an admin assistant??? A PA, essentially... Much much harder than hacking a bunch of tweaks on top of bootstrap or whatever.
And, incidentally, this whole higher/lower bullshit is what your "founders"/"funders" arses think about you - you are the bitches with the "lower skills" and one day, if you learn, you'll get your own bitches with the "low skills" who will code your marvellously fantastic idea and if it fails it's because they hired muppets, and if it succeeds, it's because they are the next messiah.
Love the concept of 'higher' in this quote. Some become programmers, but some learn 'higher skills' - like writing html. The whole idea of higher (and presumably lower) is fascinating. HTML and CSS is higher than administrative assistant. Does anyone here understand how hard it is to be an admin assistant??? A PA, essentially... Much much harder than hacking a bunch of tweaks on top of bootstrap or whatever.
And, incidentally, this whole higher/lower bullshit is what your "founders"/"funders" arses think about you - you are the bitches with the "lower skills" and one day, if you learn, you'll get your own bitches with the "low skills" who will code your marvellously fantastic idea and if it fails it's because they hired muppets, and if it succeeds, it's because they are the next messiah.
There's CodeCademy and then there's CodeAcademy. The latter was registered in 2002 while the former was registered in 2011.
Frankly, I'm surprised CodeAcademy hasn't complained about this. When you search for CodeAcademy the results default to CodeCademy.
I don't know any of the players, and maybe it doesn't matter, but wouldn't a first-use trademark dispute tend to defer to the 2002 registration?
Frankly, I'm surprised CodeAcademy hasn't complained about this. When you search for CodeAcademy the results default to CodeCademy.
I don't know any of the players, and maybe it doesn't matter, but wouldn't a first-use trademark dispute tend to defer to the 2002 registration?
CodeAcademy.com currently redirects to CodeCademy.com (I suspect CodeCademy bought the domain now that they have investment money).
if you're talking about CodeAcademy.org, they do seem to complain about it all the time.
It looks like CodeAcademy.com redirects to CodeCademy.com.
I did the first 5 weeks of Code Year. But it turned out to take too much of my time with less than optimal results. Honestly, reading "JavaScript: The Good Parts" by Douglas Crockfordm, saves a lot of time and gives you a more enlightening experience relating to understanding JavaScript.
Were you completely new to programming or were you just trying to learn Javascript as a non JS programmer? Because if the latter, then I think you're in the wrong audience for CA?
Congrats guys - met Zach a couple of days ago as a friend went working for them... these guys will do big things!
[deleted]
So let's have some analysis, guys. Does this mean the bubble is still going?
Codecademy meets Geocities
I did my first web programming on Geocities when I was in middle school. I saw an awesome website my friend made with crazy animated gifs and pictures of Shaq. I wanted one for my own.
I went home, and in a week, I banged out my own site with pictures of Stephon Marbury and a pageview counter and more animated gifs. It was glorious.
I've only been able to learn by doing and the best kind of doing is creating something. I'd love to see someone have lessons in an online, interactive programming environment a la Codecademy, but have the result exist and be live on the web, and provide a basic development environment to just build stuff.
In other words, lesson one is "Hello World". When I'm done, my app is available at http://newapp23.codecademymeetsgeocities.com. I'll show my friends. I'll change the text to read "Hello suckas!" I'll move on to the next lesson, or I'll just start playing. I can toggle between viewing my app as a progression of lessons, or as files and folders.
If someone's working on this, do let me know.