VB.net for schools

[john andrew]

--
hello

I used to teach VB6 at schools, adult colleges a few years ago. Having seen
a bit of VB.net I am a little shocked to say the least. The idea of teaching
VB.net to beginners is way harder than VB6 and VB6 was a challenge.

The whole look and feel is more difficult...OK for me but I would go broke
as a teacher if I had to teach VB.net. As the most popular programming
language around why has MS made something easy to do now more complicated in
the name of progress? This looks like a university research project being let
out too early. Trying to please everyone in other languages has made VB less
accessable to the public and with faster computers around I cant see how this
is better.
I tried finding help for a simple textbox on the help index and it was
absurdly difficult.

I am speaking from an education pont of view as I myself can pick this up.

[Tim Anderson]

Re: VB.net for schools

"john andrew" <johnandrew@dis cussions.micros oft.com> wrote in message
news:6DC974F4-D102-46E1-BB85-35F44A9A271D@mi crosoft.com...
[color=blue]
> I used to teach VB6 at schools, adult colleges a few years ago. Having
> seen
> a bit of VB.net I am a little shocked to say the least. The idea of
> teaching
> VB.net to beginners is way harder than VB6 and VB6 was a challenge.[/color]

I replied to your other message - but personally I think it is much better
to teach VB.NET than VB6, if only because it is more standard, so makes a
better foundation for programming in general.

Tim
..NET pros and cons

http://www.itwriting.com/phorum/list.php?f=6

[Mark]

Re: VB.net for schools

<snip>

go broke teaching vb.net ? I would of thought it was the opposite...

as far as simple apps go you can write them in almost the same way as you
would in vb6 - sure a few syntax bits and pieces have changed but its not
the end of the world. .net really isn't any more complicated than vb6 and in
the real world its far more useful.

What I'd be doing in your shoes is thinking about offering advanced vb.net
and OO courses that your students to progress to once they have completed
the primary course.

[Cor Ligthert]

Re: VB.net for schools

John,

Because it is possible to use in VBNet OOP (while all Net classes are OOP)
has it much more consistency and is in my opinion easier to learn.

When you know the tricks of OOP you can make everything in that way and in
that style what makes it in my opinion more portable.

VB classic is in my opinion more a language from what was a connection
between the programmer and the enduser, what went with every version more
and more going to the programmer.

VNNet has in my opinion brokken with that, although I understand that
Microsoft trys to bring parts from it in the new version again more back to
that old in between situation. You understand it, I find that a pity.

Just my thought,

Cor

"john andrew" <johnandrew@dis cussions.micros oft.com>[color=blue]
>
> --
> hello
>
> I used to teach VB6 at schools, adult colleges a few years ago. Having
> seen
> a bit of VB.net I am a little shocked to say the least. The idea of
> teaching
> VB.net to beginners is way harder than VB6 and VB6 was a challenge.
>
> The whole look and feel is more difficult...OK for me but I would go broke
> as a teacher if I had to teach VB.net. As the most popular programming
> language around why has MS made something easy to do now more complicated
> in
> the name of progress? This looks like a university research project being
> let
> out too early. Trying to please everyone in other languages has made VB
> less
> accessable to the public and with faster computers around I cant see how
> this
> is better.
> I tried finding help for a simple textbox on the help index and it was
> absurdly difficult.
>
> I am speaking from an education pont of view as I myself can pick this up.
>[/color]

[john andrew]

Re: VB.net for schools



"Cor Ligthert" wrote:
[color=blue]
> John,
>
> Because it is possible to use in VBNet OOP (while all Net classes are OOP)
> has it much more consistency and is in my opinion easier to learn.
>
> When you know the tricks of OOP you can make everything in that way and in
> that style what makes it in my opinion more portable.
>
> VB classic is in my opinion more a language from what was a connection
> between the programmer and the enduser, what went with every version more
> and more going to the programmer.
>
> VNNet has in my opinion brokken with that, although I understand that
> Microsoft trys to bring parts from it in the new version again more back to
> that old in between situation. You understand it, I find that a pity.
>
> Just my thought,
>
> Cor
>
> "john andrew" <johnandrew@dis cussions.micros oft.com>[color=green]
> >
> > --
> > hello
> >
> > I used to teach VB6 at schools, adult colleges a few years ago. Having
> > seen
> > a bit of VB.net I am a little shocked to say the least. The idea of
> > teaching
> > VB.net to beginners is way harder than VB6 and VB6 was a challenge.
> >
> > The whole look and feel is more difficult...OK for me but I would go broke
> > as a teacher if I had to teach VB.net. As the most popular programming
> > language around why has MS made something easy to do now more complicated
> > in
> > the name of progress? This looks like a university research project being
> > let
> > out too early. Trying to please everyone in other languages has made VB
> > less
> > accessable to the public and with faster computers around I cant see how
> > this
> > is better.
> > I tried finding help for a simple textbox on the help index and it was
> > absurdly difficult.
> >
> > I am speaking from an education pont of view as I myself can pick this up.
> >[/color]
>
>
>[/color]

I can handle VB.net personally because of my background. From a business
perspective VB.net is a hard sell and you can argue that point. The problem
with VB.net is that people want to do jobs...no one cares about OO. C++ and
Java are OO.....why arent they as popular as VB. I expect to see a
streamlining of VB.net in future editions.The university I went to ...which
is very credible didnt like VB.net and still teach vb6. Also why is there
busy VB6 msgboards....be cause people like to do tasks not OO. Another school
I was at today told me they didnt like VB.net either.

Reading about the .net ambition as I understand was that MS was scared of
Linux or any other competing OS. I like Linux but it is so user-unfriendly it
isnt worth losing sleep over and I cant see the world buying Mac's either. I
was a teacher and I reckon I have a good grasp of peoles tastes in OS. MS
tried to please everyone with portable code (like Java.....and that didnt
really take off) and incorporate every language. Why so desperate a move? too
many young programmers need to prove themselves too quickly?OO has been
around a while.

As for someone who used to teach VB6 and found students struggled
enough....VB.ne t is something I cant take seriously as a business proposition
and the online help is really Awful, I just want a basic example of how to
use some code not a library of OO theory . No way could I feel confident in
pointing a student to use it and understand it.

I will get into it and do VB.net over time and I am sure I will enjoy it.
Sorry if I offended anyone as this is such a great resource with a load of
great replies.

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

Re: VB.net for schools

"Tim Anderson" <timjand@hotmai l.com> schrieb:[color=blue][color=green]
>> I used to teach VB6 at schools, adult colleges a few years ago. Having
>> seen
>> a bit of VB.net I am a little shocked to say the least. The idea of
>> teaching
>> VB.net to beginners is way harder than VB6 and VB6 was a challenge.[/color]
>
> I replied to your other message - but personally I think it is much better
> to teach VB.NET than VB6, if only because it is more standard, so makes a
> better foundation for programming in general.[/color]

I think the primary goal of teaching a certain programming language is not
to make the student a professional programmer in this language. It's more
about teaching concepts on a sample programming language. These concepts
can be applied to many other programming languages. From this perspective,
VB had certain advantages over VB.NET: In VB6 it was very easy to write
procedural code, learn recursion and iteration and simple data structures
without touching OOP. This reduced the complexity for the student and
helped to put the focus on the the things learned in school. Take Java as a
bad example for a programming language used to teach programming: When
writing a /simple/ "Hello World" application you will have to know OO
knowledge. You have to understand keywords like 'class' and 'static'. That
makes learning programming languages like VB.NET, C#, and Java harder than
learning VB Classic.

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/dotnet/faqs/>

[Tim Anderson]

Re: VB.net for schools


"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hirf-spam-me-here@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:O6lIOwh0EH A.1264@TK2MSFTN GP12.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
> "Tim Anderson" <timjand@hotmai l.com> schrieb:[/color]
[color=blue]
> I think the primary goal of teaching a certain programming language is not
> to make the student a professional programmer in this language. It's more
> about teaching concepts on a sample programming language.[/color]

However you don't know which of your students may go on to become
professionals. So a good foundation is important.
[color=blue]
> VB had certain advantages over VB.NET: In VB6 it was very easy to write
> procedural code, learn recursion and iteration and simple data structures
> without touching OOP. This reduced the complexity for the student and
> helped to put the focus on the the things learned in school.[/color]

I'm not convinced that VB.NET is much different. Let's say you want to teach
the if statement. In VB6 you have to work through the IDE, so you say, OK,
start a new app with a form, put a button on the form, double-click the
button and now you can write some code that executes when the button is
clicked. Just write the code where the IDE tells you, and it will run.
There's no need to learn about event handlers for this simple task. In
VB.NET you can do exactly the same.

Tim

IE share declining - does it make a difference?

http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?postid=106

[Cor Ligthert]

Re: VB.net for schools

John,

There is are advantage to VBNet in my opinion above the classic OO
languages.

It is does not look as build on theories however on practise. When you are
using VBNet you can make of course something wrong as you can do with almost
every program language.

However being busy with it you automaticly goes to OOP because it is usefull
and saves you time. Something what is in my opinion the same for C# by the
way before this is misunderstood.

You are not busy making a lot of classes. Most are already there, and going
on in the route is very easy. As well is inheriting from the most standard
Net classes very easy to do, and therefore you are not building from scratch
everytime. And than as last the documentation is overwhelming.

Just a little addition trying to make what I think more clear

Cor

"john andrew" <johnandrew@dis cussions.micros oft.com>
[color=blue]
>
>
> "Cor Ligthert" wrote:
>[color=green]
>> John,
>>
>> Because it is possible to use in VBNet OOP (while all Net classes are
>> OOP)
>> has it much more consistency and is in my opinion easier to learn.
>>
>> When you know the tricks of OOP you can make everything in that way and
>> in
>> that style what makes it in my opinion more portable.
>>
>> VB classic is in my opinion more a language from what was a connection
>> between the programmer and the enduser, what went with every version
>> more
>> and more going to the programmer.
>>
>> VNNet has in my opinion brokken with that, although I understand that
>> Microsoft trys to bring parts from it in the new version again more back
>> to
>> that old in between situation. You understand it, I find that a pity.
>>
>> Just my thought,
>>
>> Cor
>>
>> "john andrew" <johnandrew@dis cussions.micros oft.com>[color=darkred]
>> >
>> > --
>> > hello
>> >
>> > I used to teach VB6 at schools, adult colleges a few years ago. Having
>> > seen
>> > a bit of VB.net I am a little shocked to say the least. The idea of
>> > teaching
>> > VB.net to beginners is way harder than VB6 and VB6 was a challenge.
>> >
>> > The whole look and feel is more difficult...OK for me but I would go
>> > broke
>> > as a teacher if I had to teach VB.net. As the most popular programming
>> > language around why has MS made something easy to do now more
>> > complicated
>> > in
>> > the name of progress? This looks like a university research project
>> > being
>> > let
>> > out too early. Trying to please everyone in other languages has made VB
>> > less
>> > accessable to the public and with faster computers around I cant see
>> > how
>> > this
>> > is better.
>> > I tried finding help for a simple textbox on the help index and it was
>> > absurdly difficult.
>> >
>> > I am speaking from an education pont of view as I myself can pick this
>> > up.
>> >[/color]
>>
>>
>>[/color]
>
> I can handle VB.net personally because of my background. From a business
> perspective VB.net is a hard sell and you can argue that point. The
> problem
> with VB.net is that people want to do jobs...no one cares about OO. C++
> and
> Java are OO.....why arent they as popular as VB. I expect to see a
> streamlining of VB.net in future editions.The university I went to
> ...which
> is very credible didnt like VB.net and still teach vb6. Also why is there
> busy VB6 msgboards....be cause people like to do tasks not OO. Another
> school
> I was at today told me they didnt like VB.net either.
>
> Reading about the .net ambition as I understand was that MS was scared of
> Linux or any other competing OS. I like Linux but it is so user-unfriendly
> it
> isnt worth losing sleep over and I cant see the world buying Mac's either.
> I
> was a teacher and I reckon I have a good grasp of peoles tastes in OS. MS
> tried to please everyone with portable code (like Java.....and that didnt
> really take off) and incorporate every language. Why so desperate a move?
> too
> many young programmers need to prove themselves too quickly?OO has been
> around a while.
>
> As for someone who used to teach VB6 and found students struggled
> enough....VB.ne t is something I cant take seriously as a business
> proposition
> and the online help is really Awful, I just want a basic example of how to
> use some code not a library of OO theory . No way could I feel confident
> in
> pointing a student to use it and understand it.
>
> I will get into it and do VB.net over time and I am sure I will enjoy it.
> Sorry if I offended anyone as this is such a great resource with a load of
> great replies.[/color]

[Peter van der Goes]

Re: VB.net for schools


"john andrew" <johnandrew@dis cussions.micros oft.com> wrote in message
news:6DC974F4-D102-46E1-BB85-35F44A9A271D@mi crosoft.com...[color=blue]
>
> --
> hello
>
> I used to teach VB6 at schools, adult colleges a few years ago. Having[/color]
seen[color=blue]
> a bit of VB.net I am a little shocked to say the least. The idea of[/color]
teaching[color=blue]
> VB.net to beginners is way harder than VB6 and VB6 was a challenge.
>
> The whole look and feel is more difficult...OK for me but I would go broke
> as a teacher if I had to teach VB.net. As the most popular programming
> language around why has MS made something easy to do now more complicated[/color]
in[color=blue]
> the name of progress? This looks like a university research project being[/color]
let[color=blue]
> out too early. Trying to please everyone in other languages has made VB[/color]
less[color=blue]
> accessable to the public and with faster computers around I cant see how[/color]
this[color=blue]
> is better.
> I tried finding help for a simple textbox on the help index and it was
> absurdly difficult.
>
> I am speaking from an education pont of view as I myself can pick this up.
>[/color]
You may want to look at one or several of the many textbooks available for
beginning Visual Basic .NET before you conclude that it's a disaster for
beginners. One that has proven successful for us is: "Simply Visual Basic
..NET 2003" by Deitel (Prentice Hall).

http://vig.prenhall.com/catalog/academic/product/0,1144,0131426400,00.html

Prior to that, we used a similar book from Course Technology by Zak. We
switched to .NET in January 2003.
Our students seem to have no more difficulty with VB.NET using a tutorial
approach than they did with VB 6 in the past. The students who do seem to
struggle are the adults with prior VB 6 experience. They have to unlearn as
well as learn.

--
Peter [MVP Visual Developer]
Jack of all trades, master of none.

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

Re: VB.net for schools

"Tim Anderson" <timjand@hotmai l.com> schrieb:[color=blue]
> I'm not convinced that VB.NET is much different. Let's say you want to
> teach the if statement. In VB6 you have to work through the IDE, so you
> say, OK, start a new app with a form, put a button on the form,
> double-click the button and now you can write some code that executes when
> the button is clicked. Just write the code where the IDE tells you, and it
> will run. There's no need to learn about event handlers for this simple
> task. In VB.NET you can do exactly the same.[/color]

I tend to agree. But the chance to "make something wrong" as a beginner is
higher in VB.NET. Even when placing the code in a button's 'Click' event
handler, there are so many distracting things in the code, for example
'Handles...', the 'sender' and 'e' parameters of the handler, the designer
generated code, ... These are all things beginners are swamped with... ;-).

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/dotnet/faqs/>

[Dennis]

Re: VB.net for schools

I was a VB3 hobbiest but did write some applications that were used in
industry such as graphical Directional Drilling (for oil) and a
restaurant/Payroll application for our restaurant. I skipped VB4,5,6 and
went straight to VB.Net. I, like you hated it at first as it was somewhat of
a steep learning curve. However, now after 6 months of playing around with
it, I love it. One reason it's so hard is that there are usually many ways
to do something. Just my thoughts.

"Peter van der Goes" wrote:
[color=blue]
>
> "john andrew" <johnandrew@dis cussions.micros oft.com> wrote in message
> news:6DC974F4-D102-46E1-BB85-35F44A9A271D@mi crosoft.com...[color=green]
> >
> > --
> > hello
> >
> > I used to teach VB6 at schools, adult colleges a few years ago. Having[/color]
> seen[color=green]
> > a bit of VB.net I am a little shocked to say the least. The idea of[/color]
> teaching[color=green]
> > VB.net to beginners is way harder than VB6 and VB6 was a challenge.
> >
> > The whole look and feel is more difficult...OK for me but I would go broke
> > as a teacher if I had to teach VB.net. As the most popular programming
> > language around why has MS made something easy to do now more complicated[/color]
> in[color=green]
> > the name of progress? This looks like a university research project being[/color]
> let[color=green]
> > out too early. Trying to please everyone in other languages has made VB[/color]
> less[color=green]
> > accessable to the public and with faster computers around I cant see how[/color]
> this[color=green]
> > is better.
> > I tried finding help for a simple textbox on the help index and it was
> > absurdly difficult.
> >
> > I am speaking from an education pont of view as I myself can pick this up.
> >[/color]
> You may want to look at one or several of the many textbooks available for
> beginning Visual Basic .NET before you conclude that it's a disaster for
> beginners. One that has proven successful for us is: "Simply Visual Basic
> ..NET 2003" by Deitel (Prentice Hall).
> http://vig.prenhall.com/catalog/acad...426400,00.html
> Prior to that, we used a similar book from Course Technology by Zak. We
> switched to .NET in January 2003.
> Our students seem to have no more difficulty with VB.NET using a tutorial
> approach than they did with VB 6 in the past. The students who do seem to
> struggle are the adults with prior VB 6 experience. They have to unlearn as
> well as learn.
>
> --
> Peter [MVP Visual Developer]
> Jack of all trades, master of none.
>
>
>[/color]

[Lucas Tam]

Re: VB.net for schools

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hirf-spam-me-here@gmx.at> wrote in
news:O1MhHNj0EH A.2180@TK2MSFTN GP10.phx.gbl:
[color=blue]
> I tend to agree. But the chance to "make something wrong" as a
> beginner is higher in VB.NET. Even when placing the code in a
> button's 'Click' event handler, there are so many distracting things
> in the code, for example 'Handles...', the 'sender' and 'e' parameters
> of the handler, the designer generated code, ... These are all things
> beginners are swamped with... ;-).[/color]

The course can always start with command line applications : )

--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rog ers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.

http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

[Lucas Tam]

Re: VB.net for schools

"Mark" <nospam> wrote in news:OsvFUPg0EH A.1860@TK2MSFTN GP15.phx.gbl:
[color=blue]
> What I'd be doing in your shoes is thinking about offering advanced
> vb.net and OO courses that your students to progress to once they have
> completed the primary course.
>[/color]

Shouldn't they start with OO courses... the move up to VB.NET?

I think all too often too many community college students do not have a
strong foundation in OO programming... and just churn out sphagetti code.

--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rog ers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.

http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

[Lucas Tam]

Re: VB.net for schools

"=?Utf-8?B?am9obiBhbmR yZXc=?=" <johnandrew@dis cussions.micros oft.com>
wrote in news:00397A82-B6D1-469C-9C0C-5E56960FD974@mi crosoft.com:
[color=blue]
> I can handle VB.net personally because of my background. From a
> business perspective VB.net is a hard sell and you can argue that
> point. The problem with VB.net is that people want to do jobs...no one
> cares about OO. C++ and Java are OO.....why arent they as popular as
> VB.[/color]

Grasshopper... C/C++ is probably by far the most popular language out
there. Just about every major windows application is written in C++,
from games to windows to microsoft office.

[color=blue]
> I expect to see a streamlining of VB.net in future editions.The
> university I went to ...which is very credible didnt like VB.net and
> still teach vb6.[/color]

I bet the university is teaching concepts rather than the language.
However, I am a bit surprised your univeristy has not upgraded to an
object oriented language... like java of .net.
[color=blue]
> Also why is there busy VB6 msgboards....be cause
> people like to do tasks not OO. Another school I was at today told me
> they didnt like VB.net either.[/color]

It's not that people don't like OO - it's that people don't understand
OO.
[color=blue]
> OO has been around a while.[/color]

And VB6 isn't an OO language. Microsoft could have create OO-VB, but
instead Microsoft took the drastic route of creating .NET.

[color=blue]
> As for someone who used to teach VB6 and found students struggled
> enough....VB.ne t is something I cant take seriously as a business
> proposition and the online help is really Awful, I just want a basic
> example of how to use some code not a library of OO theory .[/color]

Your thinking of wanting only examples is why soooooooo much code out
there is sphagetti. Sure it works, but it's a NIGHTMARE to maintain.

[color=blue]
> No way
> could I feel confident in pointing a student to use it and understand
> it.[/color]

Students need to learn programming paradigms first, then OO, then they
can programing in VB.NET. Without the basics... how can you expect
anyone to succeed?

[color=blue]
> I will get into it and do VB.net over time and I am sure I will enjoy
> it. Sorry if I offended anyone as this is such a great resource with a
> load of great replies.
>[/color]



--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rog ers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.

http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

[Lucas Tam]

Re: VB.net for schools

=?Utf-8?B?RGVubmlz?= <Dennis@discuss ions.microsoft. com> wrote in
news:EFDDC675-0AB9-469F-936C-A67C7797E423@mi crosoft.com:
[color=blue]
> I was a VB3 hobbiest but did write some applications that were used in
> industry such as graphical Directional Drilling (for oil) and a
> restaurant/Payroll application for our restaurant. I skipped VB4,5,6
> and went straight to VB.Net. I, like you hated it at first as it was
> somewhat of a steep learning curve. However, now after 6 months of
> playing around with it, I love it. One reason it's so hard is that
> there are usually many ways to do something. Just my thoughts.[/color]

And probably like the prior poster said... you have to unlearn everything
you learned. VB.NET is OO while VB6 is a procedural event-based language.
So the concepts in .NET can be quite dauting to one who is steeped in the
world of classic VB.



--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rog ers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.

http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/