Live data from Hacker News

Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

wired.com

31–40 of 152 posts

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#31
post #20
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public education should not be about making good workforce for capitalists. It has a higher purpose.

Sure, but where does math and science fit into that higher purpose? I think the focus on those is actually driven by the (futile) desire to please capitalists--because good paying jobs often require those skills. If we're talking about educating citizens, I think it'd be way more valuable to replace chemistry and physics with courses in the philosophy of science and algebra and geometry with courses in logic and stat…

So it's not in a child's interest to prepare them for jobs that pay well?

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#32

People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. 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…

> People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science.

Isn't the same true of math, which we already teach in schools extensively?

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#33
post #3

If you're going to inspire students you're going to need a lot of teachers who are experts in CS. Unfortunately, our current education system doesn't allow experts to teach so now someone who knows CS is going to have to go get an education degree as well, just to take a massive pay cut.

This is true of all subjects, though. The purpose isn't to train world class engineers out of high school, it is to expose more people to the subject and the thought processes that go into it.

> This is true of all subjects, though.

No, it's not. You're not going to do better with your English degree than English teacher so there's no disincentive to becoming one. Hence, students get reasonably competent English teachers.

High School CS teachers, on the other hand, have to be completely incompetent or insane to choose to teach for $40k when they could be writing CRUD apps for $100k.

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#34
post #24
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but where does math and science fit into that higher purpose? I think the focus on those is actually driven by the (futile) desire to please capitalists--because good paying jobs often require those skills. If we're talking about educating citizens, I think it'd be way more valuable to replace chemistry and physics with courses in the philosophy of science and algebra and geometry with courses in logic and stat…

Uhh, I don't know what planet you're living on where people don't need to use algebra. Almost everybody I know uses algebra regularly. How do you suggest we do statistics or any kind of science or teach kids anything about the world without first teaching algebra? Formal logic is essentially a more abstract and complicated algebra which isn't useful in real life. And understanding the world around you (science) and l…

> Uhh, I don't know what planet you're living on where people don't need to use algebra. Almost everybody I know uses algebra regularly.

Yet, only 20% of those surveyed reported using even basic algebra at work, and a lot of those were tradespeople who could have easily been taught the necessary math post-K-10. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/heres-ho....

> And understanding the world around you (science) and learning the language that the world works in (math) are worthwhile in and of themselves for every student just as general human knowledge.

This is an ideological statement more than anything else. I can just as easily say it's much more important for educated citizens to learn history and philosophy, so they can understand how the social structures around them work.

> You can't say that since sometimes teaching science to kids doesn't work we should just delete it from our entire educational program and not try.

It's not clear to me that science education even works often or that adults retain anything meaningful.

> Academic studies in logic (well, formal logic) are I think overrated as far as their ability to train students to think rigorously and carefully is concerned.

I think it's a lot more useful to teach a kid that here are fallacious ways of trying to prove a point--something they can use in real life--than teaching them about the periodic table or cell division (especially since you're largely going to teach them a very dumbed down version of the latter anyway).

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#35
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but where does math and science fit into that higher purpose? I think the focus on those is actually driven by the (futile) desire to please capitalists--because good paying jobs often require those skills. If we're talking about educating citizens, I think it'd be way more valuable to replace chemistry and physics with courses in the philosophy of science and algebra and geometry with courses in logic and stat…

So it's not in a child's interest to prepare them for jobs that pay well?

But the dumbed-down version of science and math you get in K-12 doesn't prepare kids for those jobs anyway. Those people actually going into science and math jobs will learn "real science" and "real math" in college.

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#36

People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. 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…

> People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. Isn't the same true of math, which we already teach in schools extensively?

The majority of people flail away and struggle to get through the three years of high-school level math they are typically required to take, which usually tops out at some kind of trig/pre-calculus level - which is just about what you'd need to know to be a carpenter who could figure angles and lengths without relying solely on rules-of-thumb. Maybe they take a softball stats class their senior year.

Evidence would suggest that most people don't really have the abstract thinking skills necessary to do math either.

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#37
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public education should not be about making good workforce for capitalists. It has a higher purpose.

> workforce for capitalists Regardless of the reality of capitalism, work must be done in order for people to eat. That work could be actually plowing fields and picking fruit. Preferably, it is building and configuring machines to plow and pick. Public education should be about enriching lives. A large part of that is teaching people the skills they can use to satisfy material needs. All of this remained true under…

Public education is little more than a dumping ground for children, to get them out of the way so their parents can go to work.

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#38
post #13

Only a tiny fraction of the population needs to understand computer science. Most people will struggle through it, learn to hate it, and immediately forget it after they graduate, just as they do with math and science. Meanwhile, college professors will have to spend inordinate amounts of time unteaching all the stupid things kids learned in K-12, because there is no way to structure these curricula in a way that ser…

At a certain level, I do agree with you. However, the reason why we have such drastic differences in how people perceive and solve problems between different domains is because of specializations. They affect our abilities to communicate with each other and share ideas. True, we get stuff done and we are making progress but I don't think this is the ideal situation to be in. I don't believe any of the skills that we learn in the school are so ridiculously hard that some people cannot learn at all. I think with better teaching methodologies and more game oriented learning, we can do much better. We will be able to teach kids much faster and improve their understanding. As we push forward with our understanding of this world, having more people share a much broader base of ideas is good for the society. It's affects on the functioning of society are imperceptible but they are there, and they matter.

Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools

#39

People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. 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…

> People are intelligent in many different ways and I don't believe that most people have the abstract thinking skills necessary to really thrive in computer science. Isn't the same true of math, which we already teach in schools extensively?

That's a very small, unambitious value of the word "extensively".
Post reply on HN