I think there is a very good point that the author makes in this paper, and this point comes in the conclusion. That is, that professors should strive to know the level at which their students operate on. That they should be aware of the problems that their students have.

While at first this seems really important I also find that it seems pretty obvious. I mean, isn't that part of what being a teacher is all about? It seems to me that a teacher is much more than someone who is a passer on of knowledge. This person plays an interactive role in the education of another human being.

But perhaps since the field of Computer Science is so new that the understanding of a teacher's role in Computer Science is underdeveloped in proportion to other fields. Perhaps instructors are not really in touch with what they need to teach, how their students need to learn (as evidenced by last weeks readings), or the level of understanding of the students. Results from tests and programs can only tell so much.

But in light of this all it is good to read that people are starting to realize what can be done to better facilitate some of this. Yes indeed there are common mistakes people often make in many areas. And yes indeed I think it is useful to the student to be aware of these problem areas. I find it particularly useful to see where other people have stumbled and to study why it is that they stumble in particular places. Understanding this the student is given some intuition to their own learning capabilities and processes which may, in turn, result in a better learning process for them.

There is one thing I would like to disagree with, and that is that understanding bugs in a program isn't necessarily a high importance to the Computer Science field as I understand it. Fixing bugs I liken to grammar errors when writing a paper. Sure they are extremely necessary to creating a successful project, but they are merely tools. A paper is much more than the sum of its grammar just as a program is more than the sum of its syntax.

Ask Dan Gould, he knows some guy who said that debugging is most of what he spends his time on. But maybe that's because he writes bad code. Who's to say?

Well, I think your analogy with grammar is a good one, but I don't think that dismisses the importance of understanding bugs at all. In a paper, or a conversation, or whenever communicating with language, having a good grasp of the grammar is of vital importance. It is impossible to get across the ideas which are the "meat" of your paper if you cannot construct language that is capable of conveying that sentiment. Almost any program a person will write will have bugs in it, just like the first time someone writes a paper, it is possible for them to write it better. So, bug hunting is an important skill for anyone who programs.