Code.org Discloses Top Donors
theodp (442580) writes "Under the leadership of Code.org, explained the ACM, it joined CSTA, NCWIT, NSF, Microsoft and Google in an effort "to reshape the U.S. education system," including passing a federal law making Computer Science a "core subject" in schools. If you're curious about whose money helped fuel the effort, Code.org's Donors page now lists those who gave $25,000+ to $3,000,000+ to the K-12 CS cause (the nonprofit plans to raise $20-30 million for 2015-16 operations). Microsoft is at the top of the list as a Platinum Supporter ($3,000,000+), while Bill Gates is Gold ($1,000,000+), and Steve Ballmer is Silver ($500,000+). Interestingly, six of Code.org's ten biggest donors are also Founders of Mark Zuckerberg's FWD.us tech immigration reform PAC."
A cynic might say that some of the donors are not exactly disinterested parties here. I, in think in common with a lot of people on Slashdot, learned to code for the love of it and then found myself in an industry where programmers are, how should be put it gently, treated like scum? If it made good economic and social sense for parents to push their kids towards a career in coding, initiatives like this would be an irrelevance.
my blog of work misery - http://beastofbaystreet.com
You need a new job. As long as you are a reasonable person yourself, there unquestionably are jobs where you will not be treated as scum. I've never worked for long at such a place and I've been steadily employed for more than twenty years.
Companies dont like to pay $100k+ for top talent so if they can get every high schooler to take CS classes, at least a percentage of them will become coders and will gladly take jobs at a fraction of the price and drive the prices down for salaries. The code will be crap but that wont matter because who needs it to be efficient when we can just toss a couple more CPUs at the problem...
Want to improve the k-12 education? stop building near NFL like football stadiums and bring back music, art and other creative type classes. Stop forcing everyone to be either a Jock or a STEM student.
All these parties want to make coding an "unskilled" job - not as in making it require any less skill, but as in not requiring any higher education. This will make one of the few jobs that still pays decently (coding work in a select few US cities) dirt cheap, and that means more money running up the tech billionaires' scoreboards.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Your wish has been granted.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Interestingly, six of Code.org's ten biggest donors are also Founders of Mark Zuckerberg's FWD.us tech immigration reform PAC.
Why is this interesting?
If Microsoft and Bill Gates are interested in Programmer education, why not add a simple programming environment to Windows? Once upon a time DOS came with Basic. I believe a lot of kids and adults for first introduced to programming with Basic.
Why not include a more modern newbie-friendly language, such as Python (insert your favorite language here). They are already shipping all those Window OSes, why not do some good with them :)
Have we solved that big problem of graduation rates and grade level literacy yet?
"Under the leadership of Code.org, explained the ACM, it joined CSTA, NCWIT, NSF, Microsoft and Google in an effort "to reshape the U.S. education system," including passing a federal law making Computer Science a "core subject" in schools.
There are lots of comments here that show concern about mass producing coders and driving wages down. It is important to distinguish between Computer Science and Coding. "Coding", being the act of taking a specification or design and translating it into the syntax of a given computer language, likely is or could be a commodity skill or vocational level activity. "Computer Science", formally being the study and theory of how computers and software work, and informally the development of algorithms and solutions using computers (architecture and design of a specific solution) is a different animal. Computer Science is unlikely to be a commodity skill as it requires advanced skills, training/experience, and level of insight or art that not everyone has or can achieve.
you made money, thats great. That doesn't mean you know anything about education
The market is filled with a glut of CS grads that are 4 years behind the market, have no practical experience, and are asking for huge salaries to offset their student loan debt.
Hiring managers are very frustrated with the lack of value for what they're paying. If you want make sure that coding is still a highly paid job in the future, start treating it as a trade skill with a 2 year degree and apprenticeship so that the people coming into the job market have skills relevant to what actually needs to get done at work.
All these parties want to make coding an "unskilled" job - not as in making it require any less skill, but as in not requiring any higher education.
I think you may not comprehend what "unskilled labor" really means. I run a company that does assembly work. I hire unskilled labor all the time. These are people who have essentially no marketable talents aside from their ability to follow very basic instructions. This does not remotely describe anyone who writes code for a living. Unskilled labor is essentially a meat robot and they do not get to use their brain much at all.
Unless they find some way to greatly automate coding far beyond what is currently possible, coding will remain skilled labor for the foreseeable future and you'll be able to make a reasonable living at it in some form or fashion. Yeah you'll have to compete like the rest of us but I suspect most good programmers can handle that. The market for code is becoming global so you have to provide value for money for what it is you do. If some guy in India can replicate what you do for $10/hour then what you do probably was of questionable value to begin with. Most programmers I've seen provide considerably more value than that.
This will make one of the few jobs that still pays decently (coding work in a select few US cities) dirt cheap,
"One of the few jobs that still pays decently"? There are lots of jobs that pay decently. Just because you don't know how to do them doesn't mean they don't exist. Without even getting out of engineering you'll find that engineering in general pays rather well and most engineering does not involve writing code. That's without even bringing accounting, finance, sales, etc into the mix. The average and median wages in the US are among the highest in the world and you think there are no decent paying jobs out there? Hell, even poor people in the US are comparatively well off compared with many places. The number of people making decent wages from programming is a tiny fraction of the good paying jobs out there. The notion that there are only a few jobs that pay decently left is not supported by the evidence.
This will make one of the few jobs that still pays decently
The median household income in the US is $51,000. 15% of Americans living in poverty
The median annual wage for computer programmers [is] $74,000. Computer Programmers
Companies dont like to pay $100k+ for top talent
Companies will pay $100K for top talent if they cannot get it elsewhere for less. Companies care about the productivity in relation to the cost. Companies want value for money. If they can get the most value for money by paying one guy very handsomely then they will do that. The question is what you are doing to bring value to the table?
Want to improve the k-12 education? stop building near NFL like football stadiums and bring back music, art and other creative type classes. Stop forcing everyone to be either a Jock or a STEM student.
I coach a high school team so I get to see the budget allocated to athletics. Athletic budgets in virtually all high schools account for somewhere between 0.7% and 1.6% of the school budget depending on the particular school. There are some outliers but those numbers account for something like 98%+ of schools. Nobody is forced to play sports and very few play after high school. It's an extracurricular activity just like the marching band. There certainly are no "NFL like" stadiums in any high school I am aware of. Most athletic budgets are heavily supplemented by fundraising by booster clubs because the budgets are so low. Some colleges have a nice little side business in sports but art budgets aren't being slashed to pay for them.
Furthermore relatively few students go into STEM fields out of the total population. The entire market for STEM jobs in the US is generally held to be something like 7-14 million depending on who you believe. Clearly nobody is forcing anyone to go into STEM fields though there certainly are good reasons to encourage students to consider careers in those fields. Nothing wrong with art and other creative classes but if you want to maximize economic output you're going to find that STEM results in a vastly bigger payback. Why would you discourage that? Emphasizing STEM can in the long run result in more money for art classes.
Want to improve k-12 education? It's a lot more challenging than cutting athletic budgets and stopping encouraging people to go into STEM in favor of finger painting class.
These people are pumping money into revamping education into a for-profit enterprise. They want charter schools, they want to force technology into classrooms ensuring expensive contracts to maintain and upgrade equipment, they want testing systems adopted that *require* computers and Internet access even for poor students without it, and they want testing systems that are unfairly biased towards people who are tech literate.
Everyone suffers when monied interests want to reshape education.
Can you imagine how much education would improve if they pumped that money into just running schools correctly? Bring back vocational training, woodshop, metalshop, art, music. Keep the library open before and after school. Fund breakfast and lunch programs. Pay for classes to have complete sets of books for reading, pay the teachers, keep class sizes down, actually fund ESL and special-ed education programs. All of these things will make a real, tangible, long-lasting difference.
Trying to shoehorn students into STEM careers won't, and reshaping education into a source of endless revenue from taxpayers won't help anybody. Other than making these contributors even more filthy rich than they already are.
Education works, when properly funded and when administrators and the government are hands-off so the teachers can teach. It really is that simple.
Here's a basic economics lesson for you: Supply and demand. If you increase the supply of something, its price goes down.
Increase the pool of laborers, then the price of labor goes down.
In this case, YOU are the laborer. Do you really want the price of your work to go down?
This makes perfects sense, if you are a corp like Facebook, you want to say "we've tried everything, it's no use, please raise the H1b quota" It's a lot like Microsoft cynically concluding that paying large anti-trust fines was a rational business decision, the revenues outweighed the penalties.
Why the U.S. lets this happen is a mystery to me.
My last company was a well-known, major defense contractor. HR sent CS grads, with credible paper GPA's from well regarded universities, who claimed to know C, and could not explain the source code for "cat". I'm no C programmer and it took me about thirty seconds to puzzle through it. It does no good to produce legions of CS grads whose diplomas are valueless. Coding, even with modern tools, is not easy and never will be. The way to attract more ***QUALIFIED*** people to CS is to allow the market to price their services accordingly.
Friends with H1B hungry commercial companies report similar experiences. A few imports are very good, most range from barely Ok to competent and the rest are dead weight.
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers."
-- Pablo Picasso