<p>just wondering.. and correct me if anything I say is wrong... but is one reason the CS programs at MIT and Berkeley are superior to others is because they use Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs and teach Scheme as their frist language? (to teach students about how to think about programming first).. is this method better than say UCLA's way of starting out with C++?..... o and btw, what does Stanford teach for its intro course?</p>
<p>They start with Java, pretty basic stuff though..</p>
<p>Rice also starts with Scheme for the 1st CS course before moving into Java, for exactly that reason. Personally, I much prefer curriculum that teaches /why/ over teaching /how/.</p>
<p>After all, the language is just a tool. If you don't know the best tool to use, or how to use it well, it doesn't matter how many tools you have.</p>
<p>UCLA Computer Science teaches C++ for the CS 31/32/33 introductory series because it allows freshmen to immediately "drink from the fire-hose" of object-oriented programming (versus the functional programming of Scheme). I agree with this approach, because it not only weeds out more students, but it helps lower-division Computer Science majors obtain internships earlier, since employers usually require C++/Java experience and rarely ever acknowledge Scheme. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I doubt the quality of the program is dependent on what they teach in 1 introductory level class.
With that said, there is no reason not to start with Java, C, or C++ -- programming at the intro level is not all that difficult that it needs to be dumbed down.</p>