Comments on: Computing education and underrepresentation: the data from England

By: Jason Rogers

Jason Rogers — Sat, 23 Jan 2021 10:09:55 +0000

I think that there is some confusion about some of the outcomes being inferred here.The article starts by setting out the laudable aim of attempting to improve access to CS for everyone. Sadly, we then see an inference of CS being “elitist” – yet the proportion of children in selective grammar or public schools is omitted to attempt to make the point. If we take account of this proportion, the point is not made.
Further down the article we read that the academics are more interested in driving up female participation and have gained funding to work on this. This makes their views somewhat conflicted. I would point out that many have walked the road to increase female participation in CS before – I graduated from my CS course in the mid 1980’s following a drive to increase female participation. The course was around 90% male. It was over-represented by what we now call BAME students. Nothing much has changed since then.
It is important to realise that, following years of rigging the system to benefit females, we now know that the most underperforming group in England are while males. What is being done to drive up their access and participation in CS?
I would venture that the right outcome is fair access for all and driving up overall numbers participating, not an outcome where equality of participation was ranked higher than equality of access. By driving up participation and awareness we should expect more balanced participation across our younger people. Equally by adopting some “politically correct” focus on some groups, we might well discourage those who are already disadvantaged.
It is right that participation in CS should be driven up – but not by way of using left-leaning policital view.
I hope that this comment is taken seriously – I’m happy to participate if you wish for input.

By: Anders

Anders — Sat, 23 Jan 2021 10:07:28 +0000

Computing along with STEM subjects is still suffering from an image problem, not only does it have an “uncool” stigma for many people, but it is also perceived as a harder path than some other choices.

By: Harry Hardjono

Harry Hardjono — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 03:54:22 +0000

In reply to Stuart Andrew Jones. Have you got any examples of those "effective teaching" programs? There are so many different kinds of "individualised" programs as to make the comparison meaningless.

By: Stuart Andrew Jones

Stuart Andrew Jones — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 23:07:22 +0000

I have followed the evolution of computing education in the UK with great interest and now with great dismay. The ‘new curriculum’ has clearly failed to advance the acquisition of useful knowledge of computing for the great majority of students, and has apparently worsened access to such knowledge for those socially disadvantaged students who could greatly benefit therefrom. I note, sadly, that the education system here in the USA is, in all likelihood (not having been studied here) even worse. I have been teaching computing for over 50 years now, and have probably made every possible mistake in doing so at least once. From my perspective, effective teaching of computing technology must be individualized, and also based primarily on activities involving study and use of open source software, hardware and culture. Though it is not fully open, the Raspberry Pi appears to me the most cost effective platform, in terms of low cost, high reliability, outstanding documentation, adequate security (if properly provisioned) and close similarity of operation to hardware and software of most of the commercial (e.g. Wintel and Apple computers and Android phones) platforms. No single curriculum will succeed in educating students who enter IT classes with wide differences in prior knowledge and experience. A family of curricula must be developed so that students living in IT deserts can be served as well as students who enter class with expertise that often exceeds that of the teacher. An excellent way to engage advanced students is to press them into service as co-instructors, but under careful supervision. As for the best age to start–Kindergarten! Pre-literate kids can learn how to use a computer, and having computer access can enhance acquisition of knowledge at all levels of education.

By: Eric Olson

Eric Olson — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 17:24:15 +0000

I find the positive correlation for girls but not for boys between poverty and desire to learn computer science to be very interesting. Based on anecdotal evidence in India, where computer IT skills have long been portrayed as a road out of poverty for everyone, I would have thought the interest boys have in computer science would also correlate positively with poverty.

Having grown up when there was no such thing, tracking students into computer science at age 14 seems early to me. At the same time, I would argue that it is more important to fully integrate the real benefits of computer literacy–the ability to automate repetitive tasks using a computer–throughout the curriculum. In particular, people who are not planning to be computer scientists are likely to benefit much more by learning how to automate routine tasks with a computer in secondary school, as that may be their only opportunity.