

Principals at Poor Schools Grossly Underestimate the Demand for Computer Science - ajmurmann
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/principals-at-poor-schools-grossly-underestimate-the-demand-for-computer-science

======
dalke
The ability of principals to estimate the demand for computer science [1] is
not the main issue. As the report concludes:

> ... amid pressure to focus on testing requirements and the limitations they
> face regarding qualified teachers, most school and district leaders have yet
> to make computer science a top priority. Inequitable access to computer
> technology and computer science learning opportunities prevents some
> students from building a computer science foundation needed for the future.

Even if the principals were perfectly aligned with the parents, and with the
corporate interests of Google, it would have only a secondary or perhaps even
tertiary effect on what goes on in schools.

Take away this pointless high-stakes testing, increase teacher funding, and
provide more resources, and things may change. It will certainly change more
than pointing out that there's a difference of opinion between the principals
and the parents.

[1] And now for a detail-oriented complaint. The Google report says the BLS
"estimates that jobs in computer and mathematical occupations will increase by
18% in the 10 years leading up to 2022, creating more than 1.3 million job
openings by 2022." This essay at vice.com says "computer science related
occupations will grow 18 percent by 2020" and links to an entry for 'computer
programmers'. (The vice.com article has a typo by using '2020' instead of
2022'.)

But "computer and mathematical occupations" is different than "computer
science related", so these aren't talking about the same occupations. Plus, if
you follow the vice.com link to the BLS page at
[http://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-
technology/c...](http://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-
technology/computer-programmers.htm#tab-6) you'll see that the BLS expects
that the expected growth of 'computer programmers' is actually _less_ than
"total, all occupations."

The BLS estimates that the _broader area of_ 'Computer occupations' which will
have the 18% growth. And looking at the breakdown by job category, they expect
20% growth in "Computer user support specialists" with 111K new jobs; 25%
growth in "Computer Systems Analysts" with 127K new jobs; 37% growth in
"Information Security Analysts" with 27K new jobs; and 22% growth in "Software
Developers", with 222,600 jobs.

(Note that 'Although writing code is not their first priority, developers must
have a strong background in computer programming'. Instead, software
developers 'Create a variety of models and diagrams (such as flowcharts) that
instruct programmers how to write the software code'. Not my definition of a
Software Developer. Nor Ballmer's, I believe.)

The BLS also says that user support specialists often don't need a CS degree,
and that Computer Systems Analysts often come via a Business/MIS degree, so at
least 10% of the growth in computer occupations is not due to a demand for
people with specifically computer science training.

Anyway, I point this out because the essay title says "Demand for Computer
Science" when the BLS numbers aren't all about 'Computer Science' but are more
generically "computer occupations", and include jobs which don't require
knowing how to program.

