karl@triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) (10/19/88)
A friend of mine was back at his high school for his 5-yr reunion recently, and spent some time with one of his math teachers while there. My friend was one of those folks who got deeply attached to computers while in high school, completely hooked, spent many long hours learning how to do perverse things with the hardware available, the usual sort of thing you expect to find when a teenager gets his paws on the machines for the first time. His teacher made the observation that my friend and a couple of other kids from the following year were the last students who had the `computer bug.' That is, there is still a (growing) pile of hardware available for use at the school, and it gets used. But it seems that there aren't any students who show up early in the morning, nor do they hang out in the computer lab at noon, nor does anyone show any interest in significant after-school activities. There is a Computer Club, but I am given to understand that it looks more like a social club than a technical club. The teacher further observed that this seemed to happen about the time that students started showing up at high school with a reasonably `computer literate' background. They knew how to use PCs of various flavors, can run editors without a second thought, know a spreadsheet, maybe know some programming, one or two understand what's going on via having learned a little assembler and tweaking idly at various weird registers in the machines they've used. But none of them are really hyperactive about computers like such students used to be. So I'm wondering: Is the trend toward making students `literate' causing them not to have any real interest in them after all? Or is this lone data point completely out of the norm? Corroboration or refutation? --Karl
elm@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (ethan miller) (10/20/88)
In article <25018@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> karl@triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) writes:
->His teacher made the observation that my friend and a couple of other
->kids from the following year were the last students who had the
->`computer bug.' That is, there is still a (growing) pile of hardware
->available for use at the school, and it gets used. But it seems that
->there aren't any students who show up early in the morning, nor do
->they hang out in the computer lab at noon, nor does anyone show any
->interest in significant after-school activities.
->
->The teacher further observed that this seemed to happen about the time
->that students started showing up at high school with a reasonably
->`computer literate' background. They knew how to use PCs of various
->flavors, can run editors without a second thought, know a spreadsheet,
->maybe know some programming, one or two understand what's going on via
->having learned a little assembler and tweaking idly at various weird
->registers in the machines they've used.
->
->But none of them are really hyperactive about computers like such
->students used to be.
->
->So I'm wondering: Is the trend toward making students `literate'
->causing them not to have any real interest in them after all? Or is
->this lone data point completely out of the norm? Corroboration or
->refutation?
->
->--Karl
Well, a possible reason is the number of computers in students' homes.
I just had my five year HS reunion last summer, so I was in HS at the
same time as this person. I know that, when my parents got an Apple ][+,
I was much less interested in spending time on the school computers with
their cassette tape drives and long waits to use them. Instead, I worked
at home. Same happened for other friends of mine who got computers. Why
go to school early or stay late when you can use the computer at home.
This argument is supported by the observation that students are computer-
literate. How did they get that way? By using computers they had at home
or at friends' homes. Why, then, go to school to hack?
ethan
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
ethan miller (EECS graduate serf) | "Quod erat demonstrandum, baby."
bandersnatch@ernie.berkeley.edu | "Oooh, you speak French!"
They're my opinions; don't abuse them. | - Thomas Dolby, "Airhead"w-tedt@microsoft.UUCP (Ted Timar) (10/20/88)
My opinion is that interest in computers kept growing because computers were the 'in' thing. Now, as the computer fad is gone, only "geeks" are interested in computers, others only use them when necessary (classwork). The fad ended, because, suddenly computers were a thing that everyone had, they lost their novelty appeal. Without this appeal, and with the ability of everyone to use computers, the feeling that one is able to do more than others is gone. That feeling was, indirectly, one of the germs causing the computer bug. People using computers are no longer considered to be in an elite divine class. This has eliminated the bug, but also made computers much more accepted by the general public. -- Ted Timar These opinions are all my own. They do not represent the opinions of my employer.
brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) (10/20/88)
There's more to it than that. In the old days (good old days already?) you learned on a mainframe, with cards or timesharing. (That's the recent old days.) This forced a community amongst the hacks, and people learned and even had role models. Today you can have your equipment at home easily. Anybody serious does. The problem is that you can only go so far interacting only with the computer. To go further you must bring other people into the picture. This is probably a temporary situation, which will end when the personal machines are all on WorldNet. -- Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473
jsloan@wright.UUCP (John Sloan) (10/20/88)
From article <6617@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, by elm@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (ethan miller): > In article <25018@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> karl@triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) writes: : > ->His teacher made the observation that my friend and a couple of other > ->kids from the following year were the last students who had the > ->`computer bug.' : > Well, a possible reason is the number of computers in students' homes. Perhaps a contributing factor is that the students' _parents_ are now using computers. Maybe computers were a whole lot interesting when they were something mysterious not just to the student, but to his/her principle authority figures as well, so playing with computers was one socially acceptable (or at least tolerated) way to escape parents and assert some kind of advantage over them. Maybe now that Dad comes home and plays with his 286 PC, it's not nearly so interesting. Or, it's possible that obsessive behavior is a common pattern for adolecents hitting the difficult age of puberty (and boy is it difficult... I'm well into my 30's and I haven't forgotten). But if the student is exposed to computers before this stage of life, they're "disqualified" as a fixation later in life, and the student is faced with choosing something else, like girls. Or it could be (and I'd like to think so) that students (like me) got into computers because it was less awkward than other more social situations, and today's children are more socially adept then we were a generation ago. I recall hearing on NPR about a study of children that went to day care that suggested they were much more socially well adjusted. Maybe they just don't _need_ computers the way some of us did. John Sloan +1 513 259 1384 ...!ucsd!ncr-sd!ncrlnk!ncrpcd!wright!jsloan Wright State University Research Center jsloan%wright.edu@csnet-relay 3171 Research Blvd., Kettering, OH 45420 ...!osu-cis!wright!jsloan Logical Disclaimer: belong(opinions,jsloan). belong(opinions,_):-!,fail.
gmat@wuibc.UUCP (Gregory Martin Amaya Tormo) (10/21/88)
In article <25018@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> karl@triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) writes: > >So I'm wondering: Is the trend toward making students `literate' >causing them not to have any real interest in them after all? Or is >this lone data point completely out of the norm? Corroboration or >refutation? > >--Karl Is that what happened. I was one of those like your friend. I first started on my school's DEC PDP-11 system 34. We had a lax computer lab (the lab teacher knew less about the system than I did by my freshman year). I was the third student to prepare for the CS AP test by independent study program. The next year they implemented an AP CS course, and now it is discontinued. The Jr High has a large Apple II lab, and the High School dumped the PDP in favor of a PC clone lab. Now students only use it for class work, the lab proctor is a strict rule-maker, and the room is climate controlled, ect... When I as a Senior, I had the freedom to write a program that would crash the system by filling it up with psuedo devices and opening files. The only way to fix it was to do a cold boot, which would take hours. I never ran the program. It was satisfaction having tested it to the point that I knew it would work. Now students have to check out all software and manuals, and sign a statement that they will not copy software. And I understand they have 2 AP tests now for CS. It's like a loss of innocence. Or do we just look at it differently now that we are older. David Deitch, Computer Connection dwd0238@wucec3.wustl.edu Fido 1:100/22
chroma@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (90210000) (10/23/88)
It doesn't seem too different to me except maybe it has gotten a little stuffier. There were never that many real hackers, and usually when I hacked it was on some large mainframe run by other computer types. These were sympathetic and if you crashed the system they were usually only mildly irritated with you and, perhaps even happy if you secretly discovered some bugs. High School Authorities being the irritating lot that most of them are, according to friends are much more freaky about this type of stuff... In addition lots of people do have their own systems and hack on them. It is a whole lot easier to do what you want and no one is going to ask you to sign anything...So it is much more fun in a way but it doesn't quite give you the closely connected community the mainframe universe did. But there are still places where the connected community of hackers exists but, it usually requires non-fussy non-freaky administation. When the choice is between dealing with the usual admin types and having your own machine, the latter usually wins. In addition the huge amount of BBS systems also funnel off people. For example Santa Cruz 7 or 8 years ago had 2 BBSes, now it has about 30, Santa Cruz is a city of about 50,000 with an urban area about 75,000...They are slews of teenagers here on BBS systems, some even have their own BBS systems. This brings up that often asked question of is it possible to have a fun system or network to hack on where you can do all sorts of neat things and still have it so that "normal users" are happy and it provides a service and doesn't irritate people. Steve ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to: chroma@ucscc.UCSC.edu Disclaimer:What's that? or <vetebral path>ucbvax!ucscc!chroma je ne sais pas.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------