February 2, 2020

Recommended Programming Languages for High School Students

10 minute read

Disclaimer: All opinions expressed herein are my own and don’t necessarily reflect that of my employer. Caveat: I hold these opinions and make these recommendations specifically with respect to high school students (or casual hobbyists).

I have a friend in my neighborhood who teaches high school computer science. When she happened to mention that she was trying a new curriculum for one of her classes, I asked her which programming language she was planning to use in her class. She said that she hadn’t quite decided yet, but was leaning towards JavaScript, because it’s ubiquitous and (importantly!) runs well on her school’s Chromebook machines. Upon hearing that she was favoring JavaScript, I ran my mouth and recommend that she instead consider Python. Based on my professional experience with both JavaScript and Python, I feel comfortable stating that JavaScript has quite a few pitfalls in terms of learning, and has a non-trivial path to writing high-quality code. I also feel comfortable stating that Python has a number of educational virtues, and has a fairly strong path for students to learn to write high-quality code.

What makes JavaScript a difficult first language?

I’ve worked with JavaScript professionally for the past year-and-a-half (backend, read on). JavaScript can be a productive programming language when a code base is set up with best practices and developers know what to avoid. My team uses TypeScript, an optional superset of JavaScript which adds type checking and warnings about many common JavaScript errors. Without TypeScript, we would definitely make more mistakes, have more bugs, and have a harder time ramping up inexperienced developers.

I believe JavaScript’s anemic types and perilous operators are liable to be a poor and possibly even painful introduction to computer science. There’s a famous (infamous?) meme about the paucity of good parts in historical JavaScript. Newer versions of JavaScript since ES6 (a.k.a. ECMAScript 2015) have mercifully provided sane implementations of many common JavaScript idioms (classes, arrow functions, const/let, templates, and more goodies)… provided that instructors know to avoid pre-ES6 idioms and can somehow steer students clear of them too.

One of the more infamous examples is the confusion of auto-promoting in comparison operators, such as Which equals operator… should be used in JavaScript comparisons?

'' == '0'           // false
0 == ''             // true
0 == '0'            // true

false == 'false'    // false
false == '0'        // true

false == undefined  // false
false == null       // false
null == undefined   // true

' \t\r\n ' == 0     // true

The fact that JavaScript has two comparison flavors, ==/!= and ===/!==, is guaranteed to be a source of confusion and error for students. Few other programming languages have this “dynamic” meaning of equality.

JavaScript is also the only language, to my knowledge, with both an undefined and a null entity. JavaScript tends to use undefined in ways that other languages use null, but JavaScript also sometimes uses null for the same purpose. There’s not much consistency to when JavaScript uses null and when it uses undefined, either. So, the upshot is that undefined confuses JavaScript students, while having no redeeming qualities (because null can be used for 100% of what undefined is used for). Tony Hoare, founder of Algol, famously called inventing null his “billion-dollar mistake”. I’d argue a language with both undefined and null took a one-billion dollar-mistake and made it a two-billion-dollar mistake.

I believe that a good general-purpose programming language should include native data structures for resizeable arrays (sometimes known as vectors or lists) and for hashtables (sometimes known as maps or dictionaries). The good news is that JavaScript includes both resizeable arrays and hashtables; in JavaScript, they’re called Array and Object, respectively. The bad news is, in the case of Array, the behavior is an awkward hybrid of an actual array type, and Object, so it’s easy to make mistakes and hard to spot them.

var arr = [];
arr[1] = 1; // Automatically extends the array to be as long as needed.
arr; // [ undefined, 1 ]
arr.length; // 2
arr.key = 'value'; 
arr; // [ undefined, 1 ]
for (var value of arr) {
    console.info(value); // Prints undefined, undefined, 1
for (var key of arr) {
    console.info(key); // Prints undefined, 1, key

Arrays with object-like properties is not a feature, and it’s arguably a mistake to have been put there in the first place. It creates room for all sorts of bugs that students are unlikely to be able to spot on their own.

There are a few other warts that I’m going to skip over, such as global this (which are ameliorated with array functions) and some gotchas around prototypical inheritance (which are ameliorated with the new class syntax).

What makes Python a great first language?

Python was one of my first programming languages, and it was actually my first “love” language. I’ve moved on for a number of years, but it still holds a fond place in my heart. I think that Python has a perfect learning curve for students, is even more valuable because it includes “batteries”, and students should appreciate that it has a friendly path towards more advanced uses (such as scripting, automation, web development, data science).

First, let’s start with code style. Style is both learned by experience (reading and writing), but also innate and unique to an individual. Everyone agrees, however, that a neophyte developer has to learn their own style from scratch, because they have no experience in writing or reading code. That’s where Python comes in. Because Python strongly resembles pseudocode, neophytes can learn to read and write Python while having a lower cognitive burden. And because Python treats whitespace as significant, new developers are subtly encouraged to make their own code more legible.

>>> mylist = [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ]
>>> for v in mylist:
      if v % 2 == 0:
        print(v)  # Prints 0, 2, 4

In my experience as a programming tutor and mentor, tooling can work hand-in-hand with the teacher to guide students to better habits and better understanding. In the example below, Python gives detailed error messages indicating the form and method behind errors, giving feedback to students about where they may have gone wrong:

>>> mylist[1] = 1
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
IndexError: list assignment index out of range
>>> mylist['foo'] = 1
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: list indices must be integers or slices, not str

Second, Python is (primarily) a back-end programming language; its “native” environment is analogous (if higher level) than that of C and Java. Not only does it have native integer and floating-point types, it can work with files, bytes, unicode, and sockets. Continuity of learning is important, and I believe it’s helpful that a language a student uses in one course (to learn the basics) can be used in a more advanced class (to study, for example, networking, or files, or byte serialization). This is less a knock on JavaScript in particular than promoting a “fully-fledged” programming environment like Python. (I first taught myself Python in university to be able to write my own scripts which run as well on Windows as they do on Linux. I realized I could also use it in my high-level university classes, and even used it in the final project of my Network Programming class to implement a video game “matchmaking server”.)

Third, Python is a “batteries included” runtime, which is to say, it ships with a wide variety of helpful (and often production-grade) libraries out of the box. I have personally used its included libraries to SQLite, JSON, CSV, sending emails, create command-line applications, and logging before I ever learned how to obtain third-party code for Python. This is easy to take for granted, but in practice, none of the other common “first” languages (JavaScript, Java, C, C++) include first-class support for CSV, email, advanced command-lines, or leveled logging. (JavaScript has JSON, Java and C/C++ do not.) This is another boon to students, who can dip their toes into more advanced functionality without having to grok dependency management and installation.

For students of math, science, or engineering, Python has the additional boon of gaining a robust and fairly comprehensive open-source ecosystem of math/science/engineering libraries. You used to need to turn to something like Matlab or Mathematica to have industry-class math/statistics/engineering libraries. Those software suites are very nice, especially their collection of engineering routines; but those platforms are expensive, and their programming languages are nothing to write home about. These days, Python can do large subsets of what Matlab and Mathematica can do, through projects like numpy and scipy and matplotlib and sympy. Students can take the knowledge they already have about their programming environment, apply it to these specialized libraries to be able to do advanced modeling, without paying a dime. (I first learned Matlab, which is not a general-purpose programming language, and later had to teach myself Python so that I could do useful things.)

What about Java?

I have a love-hate relationship with Java and the Java Virtual Machine (JVM). I think that the JVM is brilliant technology, which manages to squeeze amazing performance out of some fairly mediocre code. And I love that it can run code written in Clojure or Scala or Kotlin alongside native Java. But I think that Java has a number of warts and those other programming languages can largely do what Java does, better.

This isn’t the fault of Java per se; it’s a product of its time. It was competing with C++, which is an even lower-level language. It goes out of its way to try and be explicit about when a piece of code is going to be computationally expensive, and when a piece of code is liable to be very fast. It also solved a major annoyance with C/C++ code, by namespacing all data, whether global or local.

But one of the major pain points of Java, in my opinion, is that it foists its rather poorly defined “object-oriented programming” concept into a beginner’s face. Beginners are told rules-of-thumb such as, “object-oriented programming is good,” “data hiding is good,” “objects and classes are easier to refactor,” and so on. While these rules of thumb are all true, they don’t usually apply to introductory programs written by beginners. For example, I’ve seen code like this from beginners fairly often:

class Adder {
  private int x;
  private int y;
  private int result;

  public Adder(int x, int y) {
    this.x = x;
    this.y = y;

  public void add() {
    this.result = this.x + this.y;  

  public int getResult() {
    return this.result;

My assumption about Java students is twofold:

  1. They are given sample programs to write, like adding two numbers.
  2. They are told objects make programs “better”.

If students take their instructors at face value (and why shouldn’t they?!), they may end up writing over-engineered and nonsensical programs like the one above, instead of the simpler and more correct:

class Adder {
  public static int add(int x, int y) {
    return x + y;

In my opinion, students studying basic algorithms (like sorting or n-queens or recursion) don’t need object-oriented programming at all. Objects only really become useful when students get to classes like data structures, operating systems, application development, and software engineering. Therefore, I prefer when students can gradually ramp into object-oriented programming, through the normal course of their studies.


A high school class in programming can serve two different purposes at the same time. For some students, provides a taste of computer science, even if they take it no further. And for others, it can be the beginning of an academic or professional career. A good programming language should cater to both groups; it should facilitate computer science fundamentals in a friendly and approachable manner, while being deep enough to be taken further. I believe that Python is that programming language; it is the best of both worlds.

© Jeff Rabinowitz, 2023