[mpbm]

Is it just me, or was the entire "question" in the article irrelevant? Like, yes just "learning to code" doesn't make you a good programmer. But just "learning to write" doesn't make you a good author either. You have to get an introduction and basic skills somewhere, even if most people will never go on to develop or profit from those skills.

[tanker]

This is the only part I saw that directly addressed the question of "Will the Push for Coding Lead to ‘Technical Ghettos’?"

>...for students of color in particular, whether the emphasis on knowing Java and JavaScript only puts them on the bottom rung of the tech workforce.

The obvious follow-up question is, "Are there significant differences in the way coding is being introduced in schools based on the average income level of the area?"

Yes --> Is there some reason for this? Does one method require more resources? Is one way actually better than the other?

No --> Then, "Technical Ghettos" are not likely to result from the program.

[true_religion]

I'm not understanding how Java---famed in Enterprise applications, and Javascript---famed in frontend development and now SPAs is going to put anyone on the bottom rung of the tech workforce in general.

Ofcourse once you graduate whether it be a bachelors degree or a boot camp, you're at the bottom rung by default. Yet what's unexpected about new graduates doing entry level work?

[blisterpeanuts]

A computer programming class in K-12, or at least 9-12 high school curriculum, should be thought of as an introduction and not an end unto itself, i.e. this is a little taste of computer programming to whet kids' appetites and possibly lure in some who otherwise would never be exposed to the topic.

Similarly, art and music, science and mathematics. Everyone should get some of this, though not all of us will become artists or musicians or scientists or mathematicians.

I think it's generally a good idea, though I wish they'd leave off the "of color" qualifier; there are plenty of white children from rural areas or working class communities who could also benefit from introductory coding.

[armitron]

I agree with this, but that's not the gist of the linked article.

In fact, it's quite obvious that the way it's being presented (by president Obama among others) is exactly the opposite. They also mention the MONEY angle FFS both in terms of government spending but also expected ROI in terms of future careers !!!

On the other hand, not a word has been written on the points I brought up in my previous comment (checks and balances, inherent difficulty of the domain, requirements that have nothing to do with training).

[armitron]

This also assumes that everyone can become a good programmer, which is IMO far from being the case.

Programming is an ART, not everyone can be Bach or Picasso even though most can slap paint on canvas or hit keys on a piano. It's actually a lot worse with software engineering because the end result doesn't only have aesthetic value but is an interconnected system that in many cases subsumes many facets of our everyday lives.

Software engineering is hard and requires intelligence, creativity and experience. Pretending that everyone can be a good/effective software engineer through training alone is supremely naive, actively encouraging this sort of society is extremely dangerous.

TL;DR There is no room for egalitarianism in software, it should be a meritocracy first and foremost, where the best are encouraged and those not cut out for it swiftly dropped from further participation. We have experienced what bad software engineers can do and the cost to society at large that they are directly responsible for. Let's not pretend that this new populist push will improve matters.

[mfoy_]

Because if you can't be the best, don't even try. Right?

Btw, ponus points for (in the context of this article) implying that Black and Hispanic children aren't smart enough to be software engineers.

[armitron]

You can try all you want, and in fact I encourage everyone to do so.

Let's not have populists plant the seeds that all it takes is government handouts (and also wave the carrot of future career ROI in front of people who don't know better) though.

This is at best misdirection and manipulation by corrupt demagogues who know nothing about software or engineering. Unless of course there are others, besides hack job politicians, who are putting forth the same views?

[mfoy_]

All this program is doing is attempting to give exposure to programming to young students who may not otherwise have an opportunity to do so. No matter how naturally gifted a student may be, the tools to learn and grow have to be put within their reach in the first place.

The criticism this article is levying is how it is threatening to produce code monkeys instead of well-rounded software engineers. But that is because (I believe) that they are suggesting "programming" credits could be used in lieu of math/science credits to graduate. Which would create high school graduate who can program tolerably but have little to no skill doing anything else... aka a vocational training.

The criticisms aren't "Well they won't be any good at it anyways."

You're also making a very strong elitist stance on the matter. The tone of your comments strongly imply "software engineers are better than other people, only the chosen few may join our illustrious ranks!"

[armitron]

Disregarding your elitist stance comment (and your other race assertions -- SERIOUSLY?), which I thought were poor and totally mischaracterized what I wrote, I think that you are choosing to discard a lot of what past years have taught us about the American education system.

Where you see "attempting to give exposure to programming" I see students being PUSHED by the environment (parents, teachers, peers) into doing something that they may very well not enjoy or be good at, simply because it's been reduced to a good CAREER. Is that something that we need to further encourage?

Moreover, re: exposure to programming, I dare say that we don't need it _at all_ these days since it's everywhere.

Knowing what we know about the American education system (ranked as among one of the worst in the world, every year) I think my interpretation is a lot more realistic than yours.

[mfoy_]

School is generally about pushing students to learn more about things they may or may not be good at or interested in. Surely you've heard people complain about math / chem / bio / physics and how it's hard and they don't care. Programming will just join that list of "things you should generally be aware of and have the opportunity to learn more about in high school".

As for exposure to programming: You say it's everywhere and we don't need it in school at all? Would you say that to some poor kid who doesn't have the environment at home that fosters self-teaching, or maybe even a computer at all? You do realize that some of these kids literally struggle to have breakfast each morning and here you are hand waving access to computing resources and educational material as trivial...

[rileymat2]

My CRUD apps are super artful.

[armitron]

Hopefully we don't end up relying on them for anything serious!

All jokes aside, there is also the diluting factor to take into account. A lot of the mechanical/boring/repetitive software engineering type tasks (e.g. javascript/php/java code monkeys that spend half of their working hours looking up answers at stackoverflow.com and the other half trying to implement said answers by clumsily glueing together 3rd party code) can be expected to go away by automation in the not-too-distant future.

Thus we end up with extreme dilution of the prime domain by substandard/incompetent coders.