Slashdot Mirror
CollegeBoard: Analyses of CS Study Benefits Shouldn't Be Interpreted As Causal
theodp writes: Code.org, backed by some of tech's wealthiest individuals and their companies, is this close to getting computer science declared a 'core subject' in K-12 public schools. So, when the non-profit recently asked CollegeBoard for more evidence that learning computer science is linked to improved learning in other subjects, it must have been disheartened by the study results. "The purpose of this brief note," wrote the CollegeBoard, "is to document some exploratory analyses linking participation in AP Computer Science to subsequent performance in SAT Mathematics and AP Calculus and Statistics. None of these analyses should be interpreted as causal. Although there appears to be a relationship between AP CS participation and subsequent outcomes, it is highly likely that this is the result of one or more omitted and confounding characteristics of students that are not able to be controlled for given this research design."
Learning doesn't happen in a vacuum. Every subject, addressed properly, will have spillover - even if it's just as an expansion of the curriculum to create a feeling of value to a student concerning the learning environment.
But, of course, when they're all considered "Core" subjects, none of them are core subjects - they're just curriculum. Pixar said it best - when everybody is special, nobody is special. And then we're back to where we started.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I would not expect computers and/or computer science to improve the performance of students in SAT Mathematics, AP Calculus, and AP Statistics.
We use computers so we dont have to remember all that crap. The computer does the math.
I would expect it to improve reading, reading comprehension, written language skills, and logical thinking. That is what the student is learning!
CS is more of an art than a science . Because most of it is "human facing " Not just the GUI but the way it solves problems for humans. Encouraging students to think of innovative "solutions" to human problems will be more fruitful than churning out an army java programmers
In this day and age, everybody should have a basic understand of how computers work and how to use them. Know what a file is, network etc. Same with social media.
But I get the feeling what theses clowns are aiming to do is get people to learn basic coding in order to flood the market with code monkeys that know how to write an if-then-else statement in order to deflate CS salaries......Make it so that anybody with a high school diploma can apply for entry-level coding jobs.
I've written about this at some length in my book Beyond Technology. The argument depends upon assumptions about learning transfer -- the idea that learning in one context will automatically transfer across to others. This is to conceive of the brain as a kind of muscle: a good workout in the coding gym will have payoffs when we need our logical thinking skills to solve problems elsewhere. Similar claims are often made for learning the game of chess, or Latin. Yet there is no convincing evidence that learning computer programming enables children to develop more general problem-solving skills, let alone that it will 'teach you how to think', as its advocates claim.
While it seems intuitive that programming develops logical thinking, it may be the case that people who program already possessed that skill and programming merely reinforces it.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
Anyone else read this and feel slightly disappointed that someone saying "hey, wait, don't take that study we did out of context and start implying causalities" is considered news instead of the norm?
Although I cut my teeth on Commodore 64 BASIC and 6502 assembly language for eight years as a kid, I wasn't a good programmer and took only the required Introduction to Computers course in college. Surprisingly, I got an A in that class and every guidance counselor since that class insisted that I study computers. I took a lot of English lit and mathematics instead.
Through a twist of fate, I got a six-month internship in black box software testing and enjoyed the work. Became a video game tester and lead tester for six years after that. I went back to school to learn computer programming after the dot com bust. I made the president's list for maintaining a 4.0 GPA in my major upon graduation.
Although learning computers is important, the literature and mathematics courses provided a solid foundation for learning multiple computer languages and solving problems. Going back to school as an adult also made a huge difference.
However, a LOT of them had very poor spelling, reading and grammar skills.
This is why they're going to a community college and not a university. Community colleges do a better job at remedial education for both high school graduates and dropouts. Most universities avoid remedial education like the plague.
I'm glad the College Board is showing a little academic objectivity here, considering the fact that they have the potential to make lots of money off AP exams, increased SAT usage if more students are herded into college, etc. There are several things that AP CS students most likely have going for them that explain any causation:
- They're probably at least halfway decent at math and science courses already, or they wouldn't be on the AP track.
- They go to a good high school, as lousy high schools have lower AP course attendance / exam administration levels.
- They probably have semi-involved parents, or at the very least aren't having insurmountable home front problems preventing them from benefiting fully from school.
On top of that, I'm not sure it's a good idea to force every reasonably logic-minded student to be a "coder." I'm not a coder, I work in IT and use my problem solving/troubleshooting skills to fix things. Yes, I write scripts and automation tools, but it's certainly not Internet-facing stuff. Other people with the gift for logic would make good doctors, traditional engineers (civil, chemical, etc.) or dare I say it, lawyers. Even in a severely changed employment world, I don't see millions of people clustered around cafeteria tables in hipster San Francisco office lofts coding up the next Tinder or Uber. In fact, I'm amazed about how much this latest tech boom is like the dotcom boom...people are running around saying "this time it's different," companies are IPOing with valuations based on the modern equivalent of eyeballs, and no one apparently learned anything from the last boom. There was an article on here last week about how CS enrollment has hit its pre-dotcom crash peak again...hang on tight folks!
I think that if we turn out a whole generation of Java coders who know little about actual computer science, which seems to be the majority now, it'll be the equivalent of the Soviet Union or China trying to rapidly industrialize without having the necessary skills in place. In those cases, it worked but there was a significant skill mismatch, famines, etc. The only reason it worked was because it was forced. I doubt every single smart, talented person in the US is going to want to sit cranking out JavaScript, Ruby or PHP code all day for some phone app...it's just not a sustainable market, especially when wages are headed down and offshoring is constantly being used.
I would offer some kind of intro to programming/C/Python/Pearl as an elective and maybe only in a magnet school.
All students need exposure to a good introduction to computer course, as computers are everywhere these days. Why should only the so called gifted have access to computers and not everyone else?
As someone who returned to a community college in 2009, I was surrounded by kids who had the whole litany of AP classes. Many of them were bragging about their 5.0 GPA in HS. However, a LOT of them had very poor spelling, reading and grammar skills.
These things do not add up. First of all, considering only AP classes get the added 1 weight it is impossible for anyone to get a 5.0. I went to school with several people who aced the math portion of the SAT, one person who taught himself Chinese, and many other very smart individuals: none of them ever got a perfect score in every AP class nor did any of them go to community college-but plenty went to Ivy League schools, top research/engineering schools, we even had one guy go to Juilliard for violin (and who is also now a cop out in Aspen, CO, which shows the prospects for classically trained musicians in the US). And given the amount of writing necessary in many AP courses (especially History and Language/Literature) it is highly doubtful that someone could get a 5.0 in any of those classes with deficiencies in spelling, reading, or grammar. Either you or your classmates are lying their asses off.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
This irks me in general - but there is a difference between having a "Computer Class" in kindergarten and studying "Computer Science". The analogy is that when we sew, we use fabric, but there is a difference between a sewing class and a the study of "Material Science". Learning how to do math on a spreadsheet or report on a word processor is learning how to use and work with computers, but is different than teaching or learning "computer science" - just as learning how to drive is not learning "automotive engineering".
I would not expect computers and/or computer science to improve the performance of students in SAT Mathematics, AP Calculus, and AP Statistics.
We use computers so we dont have to remember all that crap. The computer does the math.
I would expect it to improve reading, reading comprehension, written language skills, and logical thinking. That is what the student is learning!
Logical thinking in particular is the most likely area for improvement. It would also give good foundation skills for editing, but not good enough on their own.
You might see an improvement on LSAT scores. The SAT just doesn't test that stuff well.
Also, keep in mind that intro Comp Sci on its own is very hit-and-miss in college, and there's no reason it wouldn't be in high school.
CS, much like blacksmithing, is a combination of art and science; as such, while anyone can learn the basics, only a minority of people are ever going to be good at it--let alone understand it enough to be good at it from the start. To put it another way, anyone can learn to play a musical instrument, but only a minority of people can be described as being musicians. There are many CS jobs that work this way, programming, database admin, and system and network administration being the obvious examples.
CS courses in elementary and even in middle school are generally a waste of time. The amount of accretive knowledge to be gained at that early an age isn't going to put any student so far along the learning curve that doing it all again in high school would be so repetitive as to be a waste of time. So just do it at the high school level, when kids are actually at the point of making career choices and the corresponding college selections to follow those choices. And don't make every kid take the CS course, when it's obvious far from every kids will be pursuing a CS-type career.
Using computers and building and programming computers are two very different beasts.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I worked the help desk at Google in 2008. A newly hired software engineer from Stanford called to complain that his computer had no power. I asked if he pressed the power button. He was shocked — SHOCKED! — that he had to turn on his own computer. And, surprisingly enough, his computer came to life after he pressed the power button.
Most universities have more than 50% of their freshman taking some sort of remedial coursework.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
+1 for honors, +2 for AP is common.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
And how is that relevant?
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I'm always surprised by how many software engineers know how a computer operates in theory but are clueless when operating a computer outside of the classroom. As you pointed out earlier, operating and programming a computer are different beasts.