Slashdot Mirror
Why Learning To Code Won't Save Your Job (fastcompany.com)
Over the years, several governments and organizations have become increasingly focused on teaching kids how to code. It has given rise to startups such as Codecademy, KhanAcademy and Code.org that are making it easier and more affordable for many to learn how to program. Many believe that becoming literate in code is as essential as being educated in language, science, and math. But can this guarantee you a job? And can coding help you save that job? An anonymous reader cites an interesting article on Fast Company which sheds more light into this: Looking for job security in the knowledge economy? Just learn to code. At least, that's what we've been telling young professionals and mid-career workers alike who want to hack it in the modern workforce. Unfortunately, many have already learned the hard way that even the best coding chops have their limits. More and more, 'learn to code' is looking like bad advice. Anyone competent in languages such as Python, Java, or even Web coding like HTML and CSS, is currently in high demand by businesses that are still just gearing up for the digital marketplace. However, as coding becomes more commonplace, particularly in developing nations like India, we find a lot of that work is being assigned piecemeal by computerized services such as Upwork to low-paid workers in digital sweatshops. This trend is bound to increase.
Bad! Bad logic! No conclusion for you! The point of learning to code isn't to get a job coding. The point of learning to code is to be able to fluently speak the language of the workers of tomorrow. Those workers will be decidedly more metallic, simplistic, rational, and deterministic than today's workers. The person who can speak their language will be in the proper position to make the best use of their efforts.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
And by engineers you mean two years of tech school that they call a Institute or a University and they write horrible code they doesn't do what is needed. I'm not saying that there are not incredibly talented Indian engineers, but they are not anymore common than what you in other countries.
There is a very simple formula for getting and/or keeping a job:
problems_you_solve > problems_you_create
Keep this equation in balance by minimizing the right-hand-side (RHS) and maximizing the left-hand-side (LHS).
As an employee, you will inevitably create problems for your employer. Most notably you will expect to be paid. Other unavoidable problems include the onerous government paperwork that is required for each employee and the legal liability of keeping you as an employee. These problems are unavoidable. To help minimize the RHS, however, you should avoid creating unnecessary problems. This means being reliable, honest, and getting along with other employees and with customers.
There is only so much you can do to minimize the RHS of the formula. But there is no bound on maximizing the LHS.
These days, many employers think (rightly or wrongly) that they have programming problems that need solving. So if you are able to write code, then that might help increase the LHS of the equation. Note, however, that this only works if you are good enough of a programmer to actually solve real problems. Having completed a coding bootcamp, or having a diploma in computer-science, helps but does not guarantee that you can solve real problems. And that is the crux of the issue. Employers want problems to be solved. They don't really care about your credentials, they care about capabilities and your willingness to apply those capabilities to productive ends.
So, yes, the article is correct in pointing out that learning to code is not a magic recipe for making you more employable. To the extent that learning to code can help you become a better problem solver, then it is valuable. But if you emerge from boot-camp with no new problem solving skills then you have indeed wasted your time.
On the flip side, learning to code usually involves doing lots of problem-solving exercises. And the best way to become a better problem-solver is to practice solving problems. So learning to code may well make you more employable even if you never touch a computer again.
It comes down to focus: If your reason for learning to code just so that you can say that you have learned to code, then that is probably not going to help you are anybody else. But if you are learning to code as an exercise in improving your problem-solving skills, then that are likely to benefit both you and society.
It's generally more efficient for design and execution to happen close together. If coding moves to India, watch the design work follow shortly afterward.
On the other hand, most code is written to be used, not sold. We're a smallish financial institution, and we have an in-house software development group the gives us a key competitive advantage over the industry's behemoths. Putting developers in the same office as business users shortens development times, improves the quality of deliverables and increases flexibility.
If programmer productivity doubled, we'd probably hire more developers, not fewer, as the cost-benefit of various projects would improve.
Whatever the Twitterati say, we will continue to need a steady supply of high quality, intelligent, adaptable, proactive IT professionals for the foreseeable future.