I'm all for teaching CS in high school, but am irked by the claim that "learning to code is just as important as learning how to read and write." This is obviously not true if you think about it for two seconds. There isn't a job in the world that doesn't involve communication. Reading and writing is the basis of forming arguments and understanding things -- quantitative or not. The best programmers I've encountered have great mastery of their native language. Educators need to be careful about how they suggest CS should be implemented in HS, and just how much is essential. It could be very effective to integrate CS into a mathematics track, since they reinforce each other so nicely. Computer literacy is so important and is becoming more important -- no argument there -- but even computation itself requires a good grasp of language. Computers can't answer the question of "why" for us.
They also suggest that computing skills will be required for "any" job, which raises some important questions. First of all the claim itself is bs: Yeah, computers will become more and more ubiquitous, but many vocations just don't and shouldn't require computational skill. In many cases it could be a distraction from the core issues of the vocation. I don't care if my therapist, dance instructor, baker, farmer, mother, coach, musician, ... (ad infinitum) knows how to reverse a linked list. Sure, computer literacy would help all of them achieve certain things, but let's be honest about what level of CS education is _essential_. Secondly, a world where EVERYONE has a job where computing is of central importance is one I personally would never strive towards. We should ask ourselves if we really want to stick all of society behind a computer.
> Reading and writing is the basis of forming arguments and understanding things -- quantitative or not.
Similarly, having an exposure to coding and computational thinking also fosters those sorts of critical problem solving skills that are helpful whether or not you're a programmer.
> I don't care if my therapist, dance instructor, baker, farmer, mother, coach, musician, ... (ad infinitum) knows how to reverse a linked list.
That is not the argument we are making. We are not advocating that a baker must also be a professional programmer, but we are saying that a certain level of computer literacy is important no matter what field you are in.
Similarly, we wouldn't expect your dance instructor to be well versed in Hemingway, but you would still value a basic level of reading and writing skills.
Your first point is certainly true, but I still think that "as important as.." is an overstatement. Problem solving skills are taught in innumerable ways, so what makes programming the most important?
I agree with your second point too, but "computer literacy is important" belies "any job requires computational thinking". I think it's a great cause and I'm happy to chip in, but the hyperbolic text makes me crave a more nuanced discussion of it all.
I basically agree, but it depends on the definition of programming. For example, I consider "using Excel" programming above a certain level of proficiency. Assuming your therapist, dance instructor, baker, farmer, mother, coach, and musician are actually small business owners, they would certainly benefit from mastering spreadsheets.
Many mothers probably regularly use a calculator for household budgeting. Excel can do that better. However for most mothers it is not worth the effort to learn it, because their calculator is good enough. Providing future mothers with good excel skills would improve their lifes in my opinion.
> Secondly, a world where EVERYONE has a job where computing is of central importance is one I personally would never strive towards. We should ask ourselves if we really want to stick all of society behind a computer.
This is not really what we are advocating. Our claim with "Read Write Code" is that these are now essential skills, even if that is not what you spend all of your time doing. Few become professional readers or writers, but many find reading and writing useful skills. Computers are used in many parts of daily life--even if you don't become a programmer, a knowledge of problem solving with computers will be useful.
Actually almost everyone is a professional reader/writer. Even programmers read and write as part of their professional practice, and I can't really think of any job where at least verbal communication plays a vital role. The way I see it, computers should be a vital and practical part of teaching quantitative reasoning, and quantitative reasoning should be given the same attention as language skills. It wasn't in my high school, where less math was required.
They also suggest that computing skills will be required for "any" job, which raises some important questions. First of all the claim itself is bs: Yeah, computers will become more and more ubiquitous, but many vocations just don't and shouldn't require computational skill. In many cases it could be a distraction from the core issues of the vocation. I don't care if my therapist, dance instructor, baker, farmer, mother, coach, musician, ... (ad infinitum) knows how to reverse a linked list. Sure, computer literacy would help all of them achieve certain things, but let's be honest about what level of CS education is _essential_. Secondly, a world where EVERYONE has a job where computing is of central importance is one I personally would never strive towards. We should ask ourselves if we really want to stick all of society behind a computer.