Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Changes in technology education

This article discusses why the proportion of college students majoring in computer science changes over time. I think the explanation quoted below is interesting -- that "computer literacy" has replaced efforts to teach "computer programming". I see that in the curriculum of the elementary and middle schools attended by my children. For one of the middle school grades, the technology curriculum is centered on using multimedia to create a public service announcement. I understand that many more people will use word processing, spreadsheet, video editing, and other software than will write code to create such software. But many gifted children (and "normal" children with a relative strength in algorithmic thinking) are capable of learning to program in elementary school and middle school, and the schools are not doing much to support them. Part of the problem is that many elementary school middle school children do not have the mental maturity to program, and teaching advanced subjects to some students but not others is anathema to many educators.

http://chronicle.com/blogs/data/2014/06/23/is-there-a-crisis-in-computer-science-education/
Is There a Crisis in Computer-Science Education?
Chronicle of Higher Education
June 23, 2014

The article concludes with the same point of view I have, which is that thinking like a computer or having an awareness of heuristical thinking and other metacognitive skills should be more of the goal. Learning programming early on is of coin-toss value. Of more value:
1) Being able to systematically determine why something isn't working
2) Designing an agile repeatable process to implement
3) Translating desired outcomes into inarguable and commonly agreed solutions and definitions
4) Mapping out the abstraction layer behind a process
5) Presenting logically consistent data and thinking

Perhaps programming is the best path to these skills, but one-trick "trained" programmers are often missing these skills.

IOW, the classical scientific method. I submit that this is missing from science education, too. And likely from math education, as well, with the demise of the rigorous proof-heavy geometry class.

One of the reasons many school tried to teach computer programing was because they got these computers. My H.S. was one of the first with a lab of personal Apple Computers. (Before the Mac) But there wasn't much to do with them. There weren't really any good word processing programs yet. AKA teach everyone programing.

Problem was qualified teachers were thin on the ground. A took one such programing class that was the old typing teacher teaching Basic "by the book" and 3 of us coding circles around the teacher in the back.

(I haven't read the article yet.)

Computer literacy is a fundamental vocational skill these days, required by a majority of professions that would otherwise have little or nothing to do with computer programming. You don't have to write code to be in the finance industry, for instance, but you'd better be able to write spreadsheets and documents, or you won't have a job.

Computer programming is an entirely different skill set, so I don't know why the author would conflate the two, except for maybe that he's an education blogger and not a technology expert, who is quoting source whose expertise is also education, not technology.

Ok, but for the vast majority of white-collar jobs in the finance industry, you will never have to factor a quadratic polynomial or use a trigonometric function, but almost every 4-year college graduate is expected to have studied algebra and trigonometry. Furthermore, the people who do use "advanced math", for example engineers, physical scientists, and financial quants, also need to know how to program. So I don't see why far more people should be expected to learn advanced math than to program, except that advanced math is well-entrenched as a filtering mechanism for entering high-paid professions.

I am a professional scientist who uses advanced math (in the corporate world, not in academia). I also know how to program, but I don't *need* to know how to program in my profession - there are people who are professional scientific programmers who do the actual programming that I use in my work. Most of the scientists I work with would rather not touch programming with a 10-foot poll - they see it as very boring and also very frustrating compared to scientific analysis

Re teaching actual programming (rather than the scientific method or programming-think concepts) in elementary and middle school, I'm not sure it's terribly important compared to other basics that need to be taught. Programming platforms/languages/etc change very rapidly - I think my kids will be a-ok learning to program after they've decided what they want to do for a career, and choosing something that is relevant to their career or fun for them as a hobby, rather than worrying about learning programming before they go to university. (Unless of course my ds wants to program an app that will make his mother fabulously wealthy ).

polarbear

Agreed. I have learned many things, even in my field, that do not pertain to my job on a day to day basis. For me, it comes down to these principles...

- There is value in the learning process, especially if it involves critical thinking.
- If you know MORE that what you need to know - then you know what you need to know.
- The only way to make sure you never use knowledge, is to never learn it.

Bingo.

A lot of time, money, and wasted effort could be saved by doing that ONE thing well. It's not the facts or even particular micro-skills that are important. After all, it's not often that I've been asked to dissect a bovine eye in my adult life, after all, or to identify a precipitate based upon color alone, but actually teaching students the rigorous mental discipline necessary, and the logic inherent in the scientific method-- and in mathematical proofs-- now that is education I'd like to see. For everyone.

Teach people that, and IMO you have given them the TOOLS to be true autodidacts through their lives-- and to learn anything in STEM. At will.

I too agree with teaching the scientific method, and that it is lacking in many places. The other issue you find is that many administrators don't see the need to hire teachers who can teach computer programming because "kids are born knowing how to use computers, we have nothing to teach them" - even though all they know how to do is presentations and the very basics of word processing and of course, playing games.