I can't wait for the labor surplus to drive down my wages.
Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
51–60 of 152 posts
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Learning a programming language is also about as difficult (and probably easier for some) than learning a foreign language (Spanish, French, etc) for 1-2 years which most states require.
I would just like to point out that students in the US do not actually learn languages in school. The "1-2 years" is hardly sufficient and US students do not graduate with the ability to read/write/speak another language besides English, as kids in countries like Taiwan, Netherlands, etc. do
I never suggested 1-2 years was sufficient or effective. In fact, the 2 years of the required Spanish I was taught was quickly forgotten by the time I graduated.
At least by learning programming, students can learn concepts and ways of thinking about problems that they can reuse later in life.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#53I can't wait for the labor surplus to drive down my wages.
Does teaching algebra drive down the salaries of engineers?
I think that the learning curve between "able to automate simple things in Excel" and "doing software development as a career" is high enough that it's not going to do much to wages.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#54People 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…
I pretty much agree with this sentiment. The way Math is taught in school made me hate it.
It's just like you said. Math frustrates the hell out of most people, and probably makes them feels stupid.
The education system in North America is just not ready for this.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#55I can't wait for the labor surplus to drive down my wages.
That's not how it works.
First of all, teaching everyone computer science will not create more programmers. I doubt that's even the intent.
Second, if there were more programmers, there would eventually be more jobs.
More business people would realize the amount of surplus (assuming it ever happens) and they will find ways to utilize it.
or, more technology startups could spring up.
There are still a lot of problems in this world that technology can solve.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
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. Why aren't they learning anything in your school? What should the school be doing that they are not doing now?
Inner city school. First of all they often have basic infrastructure issues: leaky roofs, poorly- or non-working heat, rodent and insect infestations. OK those things are in theory correctable. Secondly is the demographics. Inner city kids are often from low-income single-parent homes, living with foster parents or extended relatives, moving a couple of times a year, one or both parents may be incarcerated. Being aro…
Would you say that once (a part of a) society is broken, it's broken for good? And that we would have to "transfer" people out of it if they are to have a future?
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#57People 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…
So long as this doesn't translate into a grant that confuses CS with Programming I'm all for it. Students already have to learn mathematics. Learning about computation is just as important these days.
Except there are limited hours in the school day. Every new thing you add to the required curriculum dilutes the time you can spend on any of it.
It's OK to have computer programming/computer science available as an elective, but with the way we seem to struggle just to get kids to be able to read, write, and think competently we don't need to be piling on.
Kids need to know what they've always needed to know: how to read, write, express ideas, think logically, and have a decent grasp of math, science, history, and their responsibilities as adult citizens.
I have never seen a kid who had any trouble picking up an iPad, a video game, or sitting down at a computer and working out how to do what they need to do. You don't a need computer science education to use technology. K-12 required subjects should stay focused on the essentials. Keep stuff like Computer Science as electives for those who find it interesting.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a very small, unambitious value of the word "extensively".
More than music, foreign languages, chemistry, physics.... "English" and "math" are the two things you'll be taking constantly in middle school and high school.
Have they finally gotten rid of "American History"? Thank Goodness.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#59The real problem is not computer science. 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…
Makes me wonder if education maybe should not be about satisfying markets.
The trouble is, things are always about satisfying markets, whether we like the market it satisfies or not.
For example, in the early days of the university in England and France, higher education served to satisfy the market of younger-child aristocracy who needed something to do to make them valuable to their family. It's no coincidence that monastaries, reading, and higher education were very often neighbors, and sometimes part of the same organization- they served chunks of the same market. That the universities started opening themselves to lower scions of aristocracy was a side-effect of how profitable that market could be, and the value that graduates could provide. [0]
In a more modern example, the disciplines of higher education that have less-certain ROI, but are still judged to be valuable, or serve education for education's sake: I would say that those serve the market of people who are either idealistic, or believe they understand some long-term feature of humanity that the 1-year, 5-year, or generational time-scale markets ignore. They pay the price, but they still do hope for ROI of some sort- even if not in cash.
Even more nebulous things, such as very low-overhead charities, serve a market- the market for people to feel generous, to avoid guilt, or to serve causes that the traditional free market overlooks. That so many charities are very high-overhead, or so bad at satisfying the ends they ostensibly aim for, seems to be a symptom that people don't care so much about the assuaging, as the fact that they have attempted to assuage.
So, are there ways to remove education from the capricious, short-term, short-sited nature of the modern free-market? Of course. State action, benevolent organizations, and other more attempts at far-sitedness are a good way to adjust the externalities of education. However, you simply cannot remove education from the market.
Re: Obama Pledges $4B to Computer Science in US Schools
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Inner city school. First of all they often have basic infrastructure issues: leaky roofs, poorly- or non-working heat, rodent and insect infestations. OK those things are in theory correctable. Secondly is the demographics. Inner city kids are often from low-income single-parent homes, living with foster parents or extended relatives, moving a couple of times a year, one or both parents may be incarcerated. Being aro…
Would you say that once (a part of a) society is broken, it's broken for good? And that we would have to "transfer" people out of it if they are to have a future?
I hope it's not broken for good, but I do maintain that in this example it's not something that teachers or schools are going to be able to rectify. And I agree that pragmatically, when you have one bright kid among 100 heathens, the best thing you can do for that kid is get her someplace where she can learn something.