I don't understand this. It seems to be encouraging the misconception that programming = computer science that lay people and politicians have. If computer science is a branch of mathematics, it seems very odd to me to say everyone should learn it.
The bar is so low for math and science literacy compared to the humanities that surely there are many elementary things which should come before computer science.
If programming is increasingly important for everybody (I don't doubt), then in my opinion the first thing to do is to go and research (or look up the research on) how professionals who aren't CS majors but write programs do it. I imagine there isn't going to be much overlap with a typical B.S. in C.S. curriculum.
This quote seems relevant and timely, if exaggerated:
"A handful of people, having no relation to the will of society, having no communication with the rest of society, will be taking decisions in secret which are going to affect our lives in the deepest sense."
But it's beyond me how some sort of computer science for everyone improves their ability to deal with problems in algorithms developed by the FAANGs and other companies working with the government. Ok, I know what a DFA is, now what?
During part of my elementary school years, they were having students all learn Logo. But I don't recall it opening any vistas of experimentation. It seemed like a fad where everyone checked boxes, did some exercises, and moved on. Despite learning about other kinds of programming outside school, I never realized there was anything more to Logo than the most basic turtle commands.
Whenever people talk about general computer literacy, I imagine more of the same.
I hate the term “computer science”. It not only conceals the true nature of the field (one that is deductive and mathematical rather than inductive and empirical) but it has been excessively conflated with programming and IT literacy.
Forget computer science or programming; IT literacy itself is manifold in nature. We need to analyze the goals of computer and IT literacy before we even begin teaching it.
> then in my opinion the first thing to do is to go and research (or look up the research on) how professionals who aren't CS majors but write programs do it.
Look at a recipe book. That's how non-CS majors do it.
And then look at the number of people who can't follow basic recipes.
This is actually being done in a few countries. For example in Austria there is the "Digitale Grundbildung" (Digital basic education) which is currently taught to all secondary school children and next year will be expanded to all high-school classes
I saw the curriculum and it's really great but still have doubts of we have enough qualified teachers to really bring it across
The problem as I see it is that systems today are so complex that there is a great disparity between learning how to use a system (being "tech savvy") and understanding a system.
Many schools teach the first. Kids are taught how to use computers, how to make websites etc.
The second type is the focus of those Logo/turtle type curricula I keep hearing anecdotally.
But in both cases the gap remains and true understanding of the systems our lives depend on today remain out of reach.
I'm not saying that everyone needs to fully understand operating systems or graphics pipelines. But there's a huge gap from for loops and if conditions to a desktop environment. And so the things we use on a daily basis still feel like magic to most
It's clear from the high pay in the software industry that not enough people are learning comp sci.
Think about the explosion of productivity growth/societal wealth, if there were 2-10x the current number of trained people in programming/comp sci (following same skill distribution). Many great ideas are likely not pursued due to high cost of talent... It's pretty much necessary to use VC these days for anything big.
It's very odd to me that academia seems mostly divorced from optimizing towards societally beneficial outcomes. E.g. there should be obvious incentives to push people towards economically productive degrees.
Or even better, vocational bootcamps should become the norm. But perhaps longer like a year or two.
Schools should really have skin in the game in terms of financial success of the students afterwards. Otherwise there's a large disalignment of incentives.
I reject the idea that school is about becoming educated rather than getting a job. You think all these kids are taking tens to hundreds of thousands in debt for enlightenment? We have the internet now, come on.
I think what they teach is good. I think someone after 4 weeks of bootcamp knows more git commands then I did after 6-7 years of college.
But it still takes bootcamp + X (2-3?) years of experience to equal a fresh college grad. Who is paying for this training, the place that hires the person? Why do this over hire someone who already has experience?
So yah, maybe 2-3 year bootcamps would be a happy middle ground. There’s a reason the trades have a vocation program. Could you imagine giving electricians a 4 week bootcamp and sending them loose on client sites alone? But we try that with developers.
> Schools should really have skin in the game in terms of financial success of the students afterwards.
Some of them do, and this manifests as admitting lower-performing rich kids and maintaining an active alumni network for placing graduates into jobs. (The 'skin' here is making sure the donation and endowment stream remains robust over time).
[+] [-] perl4ever|4 years ago|reply
The bar is so low for math and science literacy compared to the humanities that surely there are many elementary things which should come before computer science.
If programming is increasingly important for everybody (I don't doubt), then in my opinion the first thing to do is to go and research (or look up the research on) how professionals who aren't CS majors but write programs do it. I imagine there isn't going to be much overlap with a typical B.S. in C.S. curriculum.
This quote seems relevant and timely, if exaggerated:
"A handful of people, having no relation to the will of society, having no communication with the rest of society, will be taking decisions in secret which are going to affect our lives in the deepest sense."
But it's beyond me how some sort of computer science for everyone improves their ability to deal with problems in algorithms developed by the FAANGs and other companies working with the government. Ok, I know what a DFA is, now what?
During part of my elementary school years, they were having students all learn Logo. But I don't recall it opening any vistas of experimentation. It seemed like a fad where everyone checked boxes, did some exercises, and moved on. Despite learning about other kinds of programming outside school, I never realized there was anything more to Logo than the most basic turtle commands.
Whenever people talk about general computer literacy, I imagine more of the same.
[+] [-] gh0std3v|4 years ago|reply
Forget computer science or programming; IT literacy itself is manifold in nature. We need to analyze the goals of computer and IT literacy before we even begin teaching it.
[+] [-] bsder|4 years ago|reply
Look at a recipe book. That's how non-CS majors do it.
And then look at the number of people who can't follow basic recipes.
[+] [-] geek_at|4 years ago|reply
I saw the curriculum and it's really great but still have doubts of we have enough qualified teachers to really bring it across
[+] [-] CornCobs|4 years ago|reply
Many schools teach the first. Kids are taught how to use computers, how to make websites etc.
The second type is the focus of those Logo/turtle type curricula I keep hearing anecdotally.
But in both cases the gap remains and true understanding of the systems our lives depend on today remain out of reach.
I'm not saying that everyone needs to fully understand operating systems or graphics pipelines. But there's a huge gap from for loops and if conditions to a desktop environment. And so the things we use on a daily basis still feel like magic to most
[+] [-] adam_arthur|4 years ago|reply
Think about the explosion of productivity growth/societal wealth, if there were 2-10x the current number of trained people in programming/comp sci (following same skill distribution). Many great ideas are likely not pursued due to high cost of talent... It's pretty much necessary to use VC these days for anything big.
It's very odd to me that academia seems mostly divorced from optimizing towards societally beneficial outcomes. E.g. there should be obvious incentives to push people towards economically productive degrees.
Or even better, vocational bootcamps should become the norm. But perhaps longer like a year or two.
Schools should really have skin in the game in terms of financial success of the students afterwards. Otherwise there's a large disalignment of incentives.
I reject the idea that school is about becoming educated rather than getting a job. You think all these kids are taking tens to hundreds of thousands in debt for enlightenment? We have the internet now, come on.
[+] [-] brianwawok|4 years ago|reply
I think what they teach is good. I think someone after 4 weeks of bootcamp knows more git commands then I did after 6-7 years of college.
But it still takes bootcamp + X (2-3?) years of experience to equal a fresh college grad. Who is paying for this training, the place that hires the person? Why do this over hire someone who already has experience?
So yah, maybe 2-3 year bootcamps would be a happy middle ground. There’s a reason the trades have a vocation program. Could you imagine giving electricians a 4 week bootcamp and sending them loose on client sites alone? But we try that with developers.
[+] [-] bigbillheck|4 years ago|reply
Some of them do, and this manifests as admitting lower-performing rich kids and maintaining an active alumni network for placing graduates into jobs. (The 'skin' here is making sure the donation and endowment stream remains robust over time).
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]