by zds on 1/30/16, 1:25 PM with 146 comments
by sandworm101 on 1/30/16, 9:07 PM
You don't need much equipment to teach CS. Basic machines will do. And there is no need to spend any money on software these days (f/oss). I worry that this money is less an educational initiative and more a handout to those companies who sell services to schools. Which organizations are behind this pledge?
by throwaway420 on 1/30/16, 3:54 PM
Forcing everybody to take part in computer science education is probably going to frustrate the hell out of most people (make them feel stupid and annoyed at having to do this stuff) and dumb down the curriculum for the small percentage of kids who would naturally thrive at this stuff.
Also, given the insanity in the education field, I don't see too many actually good computer science teachers wanting to be there even if more money is being thrown around. If I had to guess, a lot more career minded Machiavellian types are going to be trying to grab onto the gravy train and get some of these gigs and the side effect of this will be that the kids get even crappier teachers.
Like most government programs, on the surface this sounds good. I could very well be wrong, but like most government programs it will probably end up costing more money than planned and have the opposite of its intended effect.
by subpixel on 1/30/16, 5:13 PM
Unfortunately, the problem isn't "US public schools lack {{important thing}}". The problem is that US public education is deeply broken.
It's interesting to see the momentum living wage/minimum income campaigns are getting. But education equality, for which there must be a better term, isn't often brought up.
At the school I'm in, when a kid with any potential comes in, the only course of action is to to help her transfer out to a school where she will actually learn something. Sadly, this is not the exception - there are literally millions of kids around the country in similar schools.
by rayiner on 1/30/16, 4:39 PM
Public education should serve some practical purpose: teaching kids the basic skills everyone needs to be productive in the workforce and to contribute as citizens. To that end, I'd advocate taking courses away instead of adding them. Math and science education in K-12 is a disaster and a waste of time for all but a small fraction of kids. We'd be better off taking those out, shortening mandatory education to K-10, and letting kids who actually want to go into particular fields study the relevant coursework when they're old enough to actually learn it properly.
by Kephael on 1/30/16, 9:01 PM
by wrong_variable on 1/30/16, 4:30 PM
Everyone in the United States cannot be a programmer - its going to lead to the same problem we have with law, business, etc. Too many graduates leading to labour oversupply.
Government will always be slower to respond then markets.
So even though right now there is a shortage of programmers - it might not be the case once these student's graduate.
So Govt is always one step behind the movements in markets.
What is more important is helping students understand how important learning is. Even though my skills in programming helps me get paid - I use the knowledge I have in biology ( learnt in school ) to make informed decisions as a consumer. My knowledge in writing helps when I need to explain a difficult concept to my bosses. My skills in mathematics helps me model problems in much more efficient ways.
Being a programmer in a society with no doctors, or chemists is no fun.
Its understanding that the economy is extremely complex - and rather than create bursts of inefficiency in one area - the best thing to do is facilitate the system to perform better - maybe make it easier for labour ( students ) to choose what they want to do with their lives - rather than burden them with student debt ?
by ghufran_syed on 1/30/16, 10:43 PM
"One of the best ways to stifle the growth of an idea is to enshrine it in an educational curriculum." - Hal Abelson[2]
[1] https://www.maa.org/external_archive/devlin/LockhartsLament.... [2] https://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~bh/ssch0/foreword.html
by rdlecler1 on 1/30/16, 3:01 PM
by sakopov on 1/31/16, 1:26 AM
This will ultimately end up with unqualified teachers teaching computer science while kids are fucking around and playing computer games. What an atrocious waste of money. Why not spend $4B to fix piss-poor American education system so that we can produce graduates who are ready for college and not trying to catch up taking Algebra I or basic reading /English.
by protomyth on 1/30/16, 7:11 PM
by ori_b on 1/31/16, 6:06 AM
Starting salaries for a teacher -- after additional years in school -- are something like a half to a third of a salary for a programmer in the USA, as far as I can tell. The upper bound for salary also seems much higher in industry. So, salarywise, it's a bad choice.
The job is seen as socially important, but not to the degree that enough for amazingly talented people to flock to it in the numbers that are needed. So, prestigewise, its' also a bad choice.
As a result, the bulk of teaching positions are not held by the best and brightest. They're often not even held by the good and bright. There aren't enough people who would prioritize children over their own futures. And as long as teaching suffers from a lack of respectability or a lack of salary, teaching is going to suffer. And before you blame the institutions -- institutions are run by the people who went into this system.
by dubcanada on 1/30/16, 5:29 PM
by wfo on 1/30/16, 5:27 PM
Though I wouldn't say this is malicious I think it may have the same effect. We will get many, many more bad programmers. We still have no good way to tell a good programmer apart from a bad one. We have no licensing, we have no professional organization, we have no standards.
Right now the barrier for entry is really, really low for an upper or middle class person who wants to learn about programming and CS. For the poor, what good is CS if you don't have regular access to a computer? How many graduating seniors in poor communities own their own laptops? Have consistent internet access? I think a pledge like this needs to focus all of its attention on low-income students for it to be worthwhile.
by facepalm on 1/30/16, 9:54 PM
For a while I was enthusiastic about things like Greasemonkey which would have allowed people to modify the software they use on a daily base. But it doesn't seem to have taken off, and presumably web clients are increasingly more complex so that "greasemonkeying" become too complex, too.
Long story short - I'd be happy to hear about examples for ways that non-IT-people could improve their lives with programming.
I have even considered to donate part of my time to solving such problems, choosing from user-submitted problems.
by nikdaheratik on 2/1/16, 6:31 AM
I also had a mediocre programming class in 10th grade at the Sr. High school taught by a part time business teacher. We spent a semester programming in Basic on a decade old IBM box. You can guess which class was the better influence on my decision to go into CS full-time.
The frustrating thing was that there was an entire lab full of 5-6 year old Macs that we were not allowed to touch outside of typing classes, so the decision to use the crappy 10 year old non-GUI machines was basically curriculum related.
The point being, teachers are important (and this initiative won't help with that), but even getting some good tech into the hands of students would help more than you realize. There are still schools with not enough resources to teach a decent CS course or more than a vague idea of what kind of curriculum would cut it in the real world.
by puppetmaster3 on 1/31/16, 3:44 AM
Your money. Not his money.
by littletimmy on 1/31/16, 5:35 AM
by bronz on 1/31/16, 12:42 AM
by cms07 on 1/30/16, 8:03 PM
by waylandsmithers on 1/31/16, 4:18 AM
by nso95 on 1/30/16, 11:40 PM
by samfisher83 on 1/30/16, 5:50 PM
by its2complicated on 1/30/16, 10:34 PM
by chris_wot on 1/30/16, 3:21 PM