4 ms·

I liken "Everyone should learn to code" with "Everyone should learn to write." Neither of these statements claims that by learning the skill you are suddenly a

I liken "Everyone should learn to code" with "Everyone should learn to write." Neither of these statements claims that by learning the skill you are suddenly a qualified industry professional. It's about having a basic working knowledge. Simply put, knowing how to write (in, say, English) won't make you a published author in the same way that knowing how to code (in, say, Javascript) won't make you a software engineer. Or, another way of looking at it, by knowing the basics of a programming language you unlock the same kinds of jobs that were historically available to people proficient with Excel. Sure, you're no programmer, but at least you can hack an analysis together with a few basic tools and pass your findings around via email. These skills are not the focus of your job, but they do help you get your job done.

parennoob 11y ago
In your initial analysis, you say this: > I liken "Everyone should learn to code" with "Everyone should learn to write." And later on: > Or, another way of looking at it, by knowing the basics of a programming language you unlock the same kinds of jobs that were historically available to people proficient with Excel. I posit that these are two very different statements, and the latter comes much closer to the reality than the former. There is no reason, say, chefs or plumbers or doctors need to learn how to code. Proficiency at using computer tools need not equate to building those tools, and people who build those tools should definitely not be expected to pass on that knowledge for free. Given your second example, aren't the "Learn to Code" movements today equivalent to (nonexistent) "Everyone should learn the basics of Excel macros" movements in the 90s?
- hire_charts 11y ago
  Fair point. That said, I'd argue that chefs, plumbers and doctors do benefit from the ability to solve their own problems with whatever tools available to them, and I'd still include the basics of programming in that list. It's a narrow view of the world to assume that the only problems you can solve with code are the problems you'd hire a software engineer to solve. Much like the ability to communicate with words, or the ability to manipulate spreadsheets, coding is just another skill in a long list of skills that help individuals approach problems in new ways. Do you need to know calculus in order to be a chef? Probably not. Does that mean we should stop teaching calculus in schools?
  - parennoob 11y ago
    > That said, I'd argue that chefs, plumbers and doctors do benefit from the ability to solve their own problems with whatever tools available to them, and I'd still include the basics of programming in that list. Oh, absolutely. And I'd love to learn anatomy and basic medical diagnosis in order to evaluate my posture, bloodwork and vitals every quarter, but you won't find many doctors willing to participate in movements that are going to teach me that. My point is that we should be more like them if we want to obtain ideal compensation and respect from society. > Do you need to know calculus in order to be a chef? Probably not. Does that mean we should stop teaching calculus in schools? Not at all. And I'd even encourage the teaching of code in schools, if qualified teachers willing to teach code at the salaries commonly offered in schools can be found. My opposition is to volunteer-based "Teach Everyone to Code" movements that often expect programmers to shoulder the vast amount of unpaid labor that goes into these events in order to pass on their in-demand skillset. In my opinion, the more we participate in these events, the more normalized that participation will become, until programmers are ultimately being paid the same as teachers are today (which is not very much, in the US anyway).
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]

parennoob 11y ago

In your initial analysis, you say this: > I liken "Everyone should learn to code" with "Everyone should learn to write." And later on: > Or, another way of looking at it, by knowing the basics of a programming language you unlock the same kinds of jobs that were historically available to people proficient with Excel. I posit that these are two very different statements, and the latter comes much closer to the reality than the former. There is no reason, say, chefs or plumbers or doctors need to learn how to code. Proficiency at using computer tools need not equate to building those tools, and people who build those tools should definitely not be expected to pass on that knowledge for free. Given your second example, aren't the "Learn to Code" movements today equivalent to (nonexistent) "Everyone should learn the basics of Excel macros" movements in the 90s?

hire_charts 11y ago
Fair point. That said, I'd argue that chefs, plumbers and doctors do benefit from the ability to solve their own problems with whatever tools available to them, and I'd still include the basics of programming in that list. It's a narrow view of the world to assume that the only problems you can solve with code are the problems you'd hire a software engineer to solve. Much like the ability to communicate with words, or the ability to manipulate spreadsheets, coding is just another skill in a long list of skills that help individuals approach problems in new ways. Do you need to know calculus in order to be a chef? Probably not. Does that mean we should stop teaching calculus in schools?
- parennoob 11y ago
  > That said, I'd argue that chefs, plumbers and doctors do benefit from the ability to solve their own problems with whatever tools available to them, and I'd still include the basics of programming in that list. Oh, absolutely. And I'd love to learn anatomy and basic medical diagnosis in order to evaluate my posture, bloodwork and vitals every quarter, but you won't find many doctors willing to participate in movements that are going to teach me that. My point is that we should be more like them if we want to obtain ideal compensation and respect from society. > Do you need to know calculus in order to be a chef? Probably not. Does that mean we should stop teaching calculus in schools? Not at all. And I'd even encourage the teaching of code in schools, if qualified teachers willing to teach code at the salaries commonly offered in schools can be found. My opposition is to volunteer-based "Teach Everyone to Code" movements that often expect programmers to shoulder the vast amount of unpaid labor that goes into these events in order to pass on their in-demand skillset. In my opinion, the more we participate in these events, the more normalized that participation will become, until programmers are ultimately being paid the same as teachers are today (which is not very much, in the US anyway).
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]