This insane obsession with making programming the "everyman" skill boggles the mind.
"Programming", better described as applied mathematics, is not and has never been an accessible profession.
Just because you have no trouble taking medication, doesn't mean you are qualified to be a doctor. Just because you use a smartphone, doesn't mean you are qualified to commit to the Linux kernel. I am constantly fascinated by attempts to frame computer science as a trade similar to bricklaying or plumbing. It really could not be further from such work.
Computer science is the application of mathematical logic, which by definition, is out of the reach of the majority of students. One look at mathematical aptitude test scores for the general public will disabuse you of the notion that everyone can program. At best, you need to be at least one standard deviation above the mean in mathematical ability to be a competent computer scientist. At worst, factoring in global competition in an unregulated profession, you need to be two to three standard deviations above the mean. Assuming a normal distribution, that's about 2.5% of the population.
So, why are we lying to kids with promises of Google jobs? If they're that good at math, they'll know it. They'll be autodidacts, and will use the plethora of resources already available to reach their potential.
I'm all for easy to use graphical programming languages, as they truly help to visualize algorithms in a tangible way. But selling it along with an "everyone can program and make money doing it!" promise is absurd.
Less than a millennium ago, the idea of making reading (let along writing) an "everyman" skill boggled the minds of people like yourself - the already literate who had pretty comfortable jobs because they had a skill that maybe 2.5% had. Fast forward about 400 years and more people can read than those who can't (at least in developed countries)
Perhaps the reason you're stuck in this old mindset is because you see programming only as a means of employment, and not a basic skill that nearly every will have in a couple of centuries. Not being able to program will be akin to not being able to read, and we'll have developed a wealth of special needs programs to help those who can't hack it.
> "Programming", better described as applied mathematics, is not and has never been an accessible profession.
Not all people who use programming in their work are professional programmers, just like not all people who use writing in their work are professional writers.
> Computer science is the application of mathematical logic, which by definition, is out of the reach of the majority of students.
No, the application of mathematic logic is not, by definition, out of the reach of the majority of students.
(And programming and computer science are different things, anyway.)
This is silly. Learning to program is learning a new language, learning to make something. It's being creative, persistent, and paying strong attention to detail. It takes time, energy, passion, blood, sweat, and tears, but is a skill that can be acquired and honed.
"Programming", better described as applied mathematics, is not and has never been an accessible profession.
Just because you have no trouble taking medication, doesn't mean you are qualified to be a doctor. Just because you use a smartphone, doesn't mean you are qualified to commit to the Linux kernel. I am constantly fascinated by attempts to frame computer science as a trade similar to bricklaying or plumbing. It really could not be further from such work.
Computer science is the application of mathematical logic, which by definition, is out of the reach of the majority of students. One look at mathematical aptitude test scores for the general public will disabuse you of the notion that everyone can program. At best, you need to be at least one standard deviation above the mean in mathematical ability to be a competent computer scientist. At worst, factoring in global competition in an unregulated profession, you need to be two to three standard deviations above the mean. Assuming a normal distribution, that's about 2.5% of the population.
So, why are we lying to kids with promises of Google jobs? If they're that good at math, they'll know it. They'll be autodidacts, and will use the plethora of resources already available to reach their potential.
I'm all for easy to use graphical programming languages, as they truly help to visualize algorithms in a tangible way. But selling it along with an "everyone can program and make money doing it!" promise is absurd.