Right. A common problem is not so much about what is taught but how it's taught.

It causes a lot of resentment when the teaching of, say, UML, CMM, patterns, or what have you, is done independent of what the programmers are currently working on, instead of complementing it. (A programmer is pressed for deadline; it makes no sense to him to be told and taken away to attend a lecture that didn't help him make the deadline.)

It happens frequently when the instructor (especially the outside one) teaches based on whatever preestablished syllabus. It annoyed the hell out of some database programmers when a consultant told them they could apply OOP even to SQL.

The teaching process seems to work better if a "lead" consciously introduces some new concept or pattern (just one or two at a time) during a project, say, the design phase. That is, integrate the teaching into a project, instead of making it an independent event. People learn and use a pattern right away without their precious time taken away.


In reply to Re: Re: Re: Design Patterns Still Aren't by chunlou
in thread Design Patterns Still Aren't by simonm

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":