Yes and no. Should it be taught? Yes. There are clear economic advantages to having people who have an understanding of the subject, and it makes sense to suppo

Yes and no. Should it be taught? Yes. There are clear economic advantages to having people who have an understanding of the subject, and it makes sense to support people who are interested in it. Should it be a significant, mandatory part of the curriculum? No. The point of an early education is to provide you with a broad basis of understanding in a wide range of subjects. And while it is important for people to have some idea of some of the things that computers can do, it is not necessary for them to become programmers (in the sense someone would pay them for their skill) to do that. Very simple programs will give someone somewhat of an understanding of what's at play. It makes no more sense to say that everyone should have to learn programming than it does to say that everyone should have to understand calculus, or everyone should have to understand mitosis. That's knowledge they're probably never going to use. Forcing it down their throats to be thrown up in an exam and then forgotten is a ridiculous waste of time and good will on behalf of everyone involved. Quite aside from the fact that if you can get those who aren't interested to self-select out you can focus resources on those who are interested and help them get further ahead in that subject. People should probably get enough exposure in primary school to be able to write toy programs when they leave. That will be sufficient to give them a few general concepts and let them get their feet wet, so to speak. After that, the mandatory criteria should be dropped.