Disclaimer: I haven't been exposed to the 'learn to code' movement in great detail; seen headlines but not read the content. That being said...
I think the article misses the point (it's possible that the much rhetoric of the 'movement' does too). The benefit of many more people being exposed to coding isn't to turn everyone into professional software engineers or computer scientists, but to teach people the basics of a tool that can aid in productivity even when used peripherally, and maybe understand computers a bit better than being magic boxes that are incredibly frustrating when they don't comply.
There are many, many workers at all levels who could benefit from some basic scripting abilities. This means using computers to compute things, to automate small tasks, produce good visualizations, etc. Increasingly, it is useful to write simple scripts to automate machines (such as in a factory).
I'm a scientist, so coding is obviously quite useful to me, but it's also useful to my dad, who is a lawyer and writes VBA macros to automate modification of legal contracts and so forth. My mother, a journalist and teacher, would have benefited a lot from being able to use Excel more powerfully, to batch process photographs, etc. The benefit for students to be able to check their arithmetic when learning higher-level math, or to be able to plot things when learning geometry or statistics or whatever is also great.
None of this means knowing computer science (beyond extreme basics like data types), just like the vast majority of math usage in the world doesn't require knowledge of proofs. And it may provide early exposure to those self-motivated autodidacts who will dig in, given half a chance.
My view on the "Learn to Code" movement is similar to music or other arts. Not everyone has to get good at it, but it is worth exposing everyone in school. If you're not exposed, you may not know that you have a talent for it. And even if you never have a talent, you'll learn to appreciate it later.
"Non-profit organizations like Code.org, backed by large corporations and small firms alike, are rallying for “computer science” to become a core subject..."
"The movement envisions to produce 9-to-5 code monkeys who can write loops and conditionals, but who do not have any passion or true understanding of their craft."
I think those are the only two points you need to draw a line to the conclusion that this movement aims to reduce the cost to businesses of employing coders. It's a marketing campaign stemming from companies' frustration at having to pay programmers well above the minimum wage.
6 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 23.8 ms ] thread* for those of us that don't work in the startup scene
I think the article misses the point (it's possible that the much rhetoric of the 'movement' does too). The benefit of many more people being exposed to coding isn't to turn everyone into professional software engineers or computer scientists, but to teach people the basics of a tool that can aid in productivity even when used peripherally, and maybe understand computers a bit better than being magic boxes that are incredibly frustrating when they don't comply.
There are many, many workers at all levels who could benefit from some basic scripting abilities. This means using computers to compute things, to automate small tasks, produce good visualizations, etc. Increasingly, it is useful to write simple scripts to automate machines (such as in a factory).
I'm a scientist, so coding is obviously quite useful to me, but it's also useful to my dad, who is a lawyer and writes VBA macros to automate modification of legal contracts and so forth. My mother, a journalist and teacher, would have benefited a lot from being able to use Excel more powerfully, to batch process photographs, etc. The benefit for students to be able to check their arithmetic when learning higher-level math, or to be able to plot things when learning geometry or statistics or whatever is also great.
None of this means knowing computer science (beyond extreme basics like data types), just like the vast majority of math usage in the world doesn't require knowledge of proofs. And it may provide early exposure to those self-motivated autodidacts who will dig in, given half a chance.
Annnnnd then the conspiratorially-shaded bit about "Chicago" starts. FFS, dog-whistle much?
Also: "Like all great crafts, if you try to force it upon people, you only end up diluting it and its culture along with that."
Given what we saw of "its culture" in 2013, I'd say "diluting" the toxic waste would be a damn good start.
"The movement envisions to produce 9-to-5 code monkeys who can write loops and conditionals, but who do not have any passion or true understanding of their craft."
I think those are the only two points you need to draw a line to the conclusion that this movement aims to reduce the cost to businesses of employing coders. It's a marketing campaign stemming from companies' frustration at having to pay programmers well above the minimum wage.