Slashdot Mirror
Code.org Is Crowdsourcing Database of US K-12 Schools That Teach, Or Don't Teach CS
Longtime reader theodp writes: Nonprofit Code.org, which is bankrolled by the likes of Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Google, and Infosys, has teamed up with the Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA) and is "calling on all educators and parents" to "help us build a database of all schools that teach (or don't teach) computer science" (via direct responses and email advocacy tools). Called the K-12 Computer Science Access Report, Code.org says "the database will be a resource that everyone in the CS community can use." For what purposes, however, is not entirely clear, although the Code.org Medium post indicates the database will be used by the nonprofit and the CS community to "make our shared vision [for every school to teach computer science] a reality." The post cites a 2016 study conducted by Google and Gallup -- which took principals to task for being clueless about what constituted "computer science" and misgauging parental and student demand for CS -- and goes on to add that the new database will allow the organization to "be able to report more precisely which schools do or don't offer this opportunity to their students." As far as a timeframe for the naughty-or-nice K-12 CS school database goes, Code.org reports, "our goal is to gather data for 100% of US schools by the end of 2018." In earlier posts, Code.org has thanked its partners for their help in "changing [K-12 CS] education policies in forty states" (make that 43 states!) and claimed credit for "pressing lawmakers" into unlocking Federal funding for K-12 CS with the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act.
I'm not sure how well this will work. If there's already a belief that administrators and parents don't have a good understanding of what constitutes computer science, then what indication is there that they'll be able to reliably report it. I suppose it's better than no data, but I'm uncertain how accurate it will actually be, or how well it will be maintained. There may even be misreporting of information if this database is somehow tied to funding opportunities.
Like the idea of shaming schools/districts into offering CS classes. And I say that as someone who opposes making CS a required elective and/or graduation requirement. While not everybody should take CS in high school, it seems criminal that some kids are attending schools that don't even offer it.
I think it's better to not teach coding in K-12 at all rather than have it taught by the likes of Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, and Google. These companies have shown that they are willing to destroy privacy, wage psychological warfare, and condition/control large groups of people if they think it will make them a dollar.
Has anyone started a crowd sourced list for teaching plumbing or welding yet?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
In related news, "Forty-seven percent of the school leaders surveyed by Education Week said they feel mild or strong pressure to expand computer science from vendors and the technology industry. That's compared with 28 percent who said they feel such pressure from parents and 23 percent from teachers."
We don't need more computer scientists and software engineers. We need more people capable of doing trades like electricity, plumbing, and auto and truck repair. Let's shame the schools into bringing back shop classes.
When I RFTA, I have to wonder if the only result of this is going to primarily highlight schools in areas that cannot afford sufficient computers for training students or teachers with the skills in order to teach programming.
Even if the money is allocated, who's going to benefit the most? Microsoft and Google will probably be the biggest beneficiaries of monies allocated out to "rectify" the problem as well as give CS teachers priorities over other teacher classifications.
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
You don't need to understand a lick of programming to know how to use a computer anymore, much like you don't need to be an engineer or mechanic to operate an automobile and in another decade or so you won't even need to know how to drive one as that will have been abstracted away.
What you're proposing is just basic computer literacy, which is a wholly different animal than computer science. I'd argue that such a class is probably more beneficial than trying to teach everyone to program. Perhaps people might take better steps to protect their privacy online, be better at finding information, or be less vulnerable to phishing scams.
You don't need to understand a lick of programming to know how to use a computer anymore, much like you don't need to be an engineer or mechanic to operate an automobile and in another decade or so you won't even need to know how to drive one as that will have been abstracted away. What you're proposing is just basic computer literacy, which is a wholly different animal than computer science. I'd argue that such a class is probably more beneficial than trying to teach everyone to program. Perhaps people might take better steps to protect their privacy online, be better at finding information, or be less vulnerable to phishing scams.
Exactly. Years ago, I took a course called "Chemistry, Society and Man" which looked at the impact, positive and negative, of chemistry on history. It showed how chemistry enables us to feed more people economically while simultaneously making it easier to manufacturer more and more powerful weapons to kill them (the Haber - Bosch process). Science is neutral, it's how it is used that matters. Courses that challenge students to consider the possibilities, and limitations, of computers on society would be more valuable than learning how to define a variable or pipe operations so as to save lines of code.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
That has been tried and is still the model in some nations. It fails as education of any sort becomes something only the wealthy can afford as that is how the private sector works, no profits no services. Having free government funded education is the best way forward.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
zero.
Number of trades programs in IT and Software, all of the rest of them.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
I've been a professional software developer for 30 years, and while there certainly are many cases where I've worked with or interviewed people who were lacking in computer-science skills, very little of that was because they weren't getting enough CS teaching in primary and secondary school. I mean, if you've spent 4 years in college getting a CS degree and a few years in industry working and you STILL can't keep up, adding a semester in 11th grade isn't going to help.
On the other hand, raising English communications proficiency across the board by a single grade level would have HUGE benefits for the industry. Communicating better would likely result in better technical results, too.
In this age, surely it would be trivial to have a national database of all schools, the subjects they teach, and the results they get, (normalised for factors such as budget, intake literacy level etc. If desired), but hey I guess both the teachers unions and the management would be in rare agreement about how that would somehow not in parent and student interest, right?
schools in areas that cannot afford sufficient computers for training students
A Raspberry Pi Zero costs $5.
For a poor school, a Raspberry Pi Zero is a bookmark that cost $5.
For it to be usable, you have to add:
- Power Supply
- SD Card for File System
- Keyboard
- Display
- Network infrastructure for school to support a classroom of Raspberry Pis
- Network and programmingTechnical support
- Trained teacher that has curriculum
When you have a poor school, the suggestion of a $5 processor card isn't all that helpful when they see the investments that must be made to be able to actually get it to first power up and then set up a class and then find somebody who can teacher with it.
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
First, ensure there is a solid foundation like basic logic, algebra (great for problem-solving), and basic English skills (so they can read/understand technical references). Until you've mastered those basic skills, any CS class is simply wasted...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Strongly disagree with this. Learning to program will be a complete waste of time for many/most people. If it's one or the other, there are a great many classes I'd prioritize over C.S.
Power Supply - $2 each in bulk. Or the students can use their cell phone chargers.
SD Card for File System - $2 each in bulk for 2GB SD cards.
Keyboard - $2 each at Goodwill
Display - $5 at Goodwill, or free from Craigslist if you carry them away
Network infrastructure - How many schools don't have Wifi?
curriculum - Free from Khan Academy
When you have a poor school ...
This is mostly a myth. School spending in America is far more progressive than you think. There are state and federal programs to level funding disparities, and in most states poorer students get more funding than richer students. Schools in poor communities have big problems, but money isn't the root cause.
This was, literally, my first thought too. I am a teacher and a CSTA member. With that being said, I can not say that we teach computer science at a level that I am willing to call computer science.
I teach Computer apps and my extension activity is Hour of Code. I also teach Robotics using the Lego EV-3. I am trying to get the school to add Arduino programming to a Robotics 2 class.
I really don't think we teach computer science, as in "how it works" in the apps class at all.
As a teacher I have about a dozen Arduino learning kits. The trouble is in getting the curriculum committee to agree to allow me to add them into my robotics course (the only class I teach that they slide into).
I would really like to add them into computer II (I teach one semester courses of Computer i and Computer II, each being a full semester). However, the curriculum committee. Requires that I teach the same topics in both classes, "so that if a student is only able to take one of the classes, they won't miss much." It should be no surprise that computer II is not a popular class; after all, the student does, essentially, the same things. Adding Arduinos' would be great. . . of course, adding pretty much anything would be great.
I think more good could be done by instituting common testing for computer classes. Yes, I am a teacher and I said more standardized testing, not less. The reason is that it would establish a common expectation and force the districts to actually allow the teachers to teach. Really the best that it would do is that it would tell the districts what to teach. As it is, even after all these years of teaching "computers" there is little real guidance given, to the districts, of what should be taught in a "computer" class.
I'm all for computer literacy. But most kids figure that out by themselves. Parents seem to be the ones having trouble adapting to newer technology, perhaps fearing that the children will be equally inept unless they take special classes. But nevertheless, computer literacy classes are fine. But teaching CS goes a bit far, make sure that they have the appropriate levels of mathematics and science first, and writing of course, too many programmers out there who can't write or communicate effectively.