"Learn To Code, Get a Job" According To CNN 688
An anonymous reader writes "CNN is running an opinion article that talks about Michael Bloomberg's taking part in CodeAdacemy's CodeYear program, which aims to teach average people to learn enough to work as a Software Developer by year end. I'm trying to not be elitist in judging this article and those involved, but I'm curious as to what /. thinks of this questionable plan."
Whats the big deal? (Score:5, Interesting)
How does Code Academy make it any easier to learn to code, Than say documentation or a book? This is hardly a big deal, and they're making silly promises.
seems feasible to me (Score:5, Interesting)
In a year? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sorry, but I've been at it for about that long (learning Java) and I'm nowhere near qualified to do it professionally. Sure, I know the syntax and I have a good understanding of OOP but there's a LOT more for me to learn before I can write software people will actually find useful.
I love programming and I love learning about it. The discouraging part is that there is almost ZERO entry-level work in programming. All the ads I see demand "3-5 years experience", but that's another story.
Smells like $$$ for the more experienced ... (Score:4, Interesting)
If in the meantime a half million bad ideas get killed off by Krappy Koders badly executing them, how is that a "Bad Thing"?
Anything that hastens the day when we have real standards is a good thing.
Re:Whats the big deal? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why did they do it? Because there was gold in the hills. Proper coding takes a special kind of structured thinking. You've got a goal, you've got requirements and you need to break it down into subproblems of subproblems while not forgetting the overall goal. Not everybody is cut out to be a lawyer. Not everybody is cut out to be an artisan. Not everybody is cut out to be a business owner. Not everybody is cut out to be a coder.
And coders are not all the same. Some thrive in the front end and are very very good anticipating how users willl use the system(which is never how they told you). Others are very good in layers that involve logic. Others are optimization wizards. Others are very good when it comes to communicating with interface owners. And so on.
I really, really hate it when news outlets publish that there is gold in the hills when there isn't. Everybody rushes out and most of those that rush out will never make it.
Re:Smells like $$$ for the more experienced ... (Score:1, Interesting)
If you get a bunch of new guys learning to code, then they can do things in the open source and gain experience. Then you can hire them. Without any student loans to pay, they'll be much less expensive. A masters grad who did something useful in the open source is worth $85k, without the open source is worth $70k, just the open source $55k, just and online course like this $40k. Notice I don't even mention the bachelors degree... this is because in computer science a bachelors degree is little more than a high school diploma with advanced math. Unless they do a really great open source project which shows how they can apply that math (like a well written codec), then I wouldn't treat them any differently than with no degree at all.
Oh... the main reason a university degree REALLY matters is that it proves to guys like me that the guy who was in the university was forced to finish projects no matter how stupid, boring or mundane they were. I don't actually expect them to have any useful skills other than learning how to get the job done using the tools they were told to use.
They might not get jobs, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Elitism (Score:5, Interesting)
While I like what Code Academy is doing, I do not like their terms of service ("we own everything you do, including the software you write in these lessons and can exploit this mercilessly at our discretion without even giving you attribution. If you design a lesson for us, we own it and you automatically give us copyright and intellectual property rights without renumeration or even acknowledgement.") They also plan on charging visitors to their site eventually, so expect a "bait and switch" if you get into it.
On top of that, what they have is useful for about the equivalent of the first week or so in an introductory computer science class. It is useful to get started and to "wet your feet", but by the time you are through all you can do is roughly the equivalent of writing a "Hello World" in Javascript.
It looks like they are planning on taking it much further, so I do reserve judgement on the rest of what they are going to do, and apparently they have several series of lessons in the wings that they are planning on releasing about one each week through the rest of the year, at least if I can read between the lines. It could be useful though.
Re:Whats the big deal? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm a science nerd, and I've learned a little bit of computer programming over the years.
Learn to code, get a job? Ridiculous.
I programmed some scientific formulas in FORTRAN in college.
I wrote a program in Business BASIC to replace my bookkeeping system. (It was more trouble than paper. I went back to paper.)
During the DOS days, I programmed elaborate batch files to zip and save my backup files on floppy disks. I wrote elaborate macros for XyWrite and WordPerfect, which worked pretty well. I wrote Lotus 123 macros to finally automate my bookkeeping system.
When the Internet came, I created my own web site in HTML.
Even during the hottest computer bubbles, I've never heard anybody say, "We're desperate! We need somebody who knows a little bit of HTML!" Or any other program you could pick up in a week of all-nighters.
I looked into computer programming because it would have been fun (and some people were getting really rich). But I couldn't get a job with my introductory skills.
I figure that it would have taken me at least six months to a year to learn some programming-related skills well enough to earn my keep as you trained me.
If you paid my expenses for a year, gave me the hardware I needed, gave me access to people who knew how to teach computer concepts and guide me in self-instruction, surrounded me with people who were obsessed with doing the same thing, and we spent all our time working on computers, talking about computers, meeting smart computer people, and helping each other with our problems (with an occasional break for a party) -- I think I would have been a competent programmer at the end. I might even have been good. Maybe very good.
That sounds a lot like what a college is supposed to do. The main difference is that in the U.S., you pay your own (exhorbitant) college expenses, and your own living expenses besides. If you want to make a mid-career transition, you have to spend your retirement fund. That's in contrast to many other countries. Maybe that's why Linus Torvalds came from Finland. Maybe that's why German workers are making twice as much as U.S. workers.
(NYC Mayor Bloomberg is really hypocritical. He's talking up these low-budget old-fashioned online textbooks at the same time that he's raising tuition and cutting staff salaries at the City University of New York, which is NYC's real engine of innovation, science, technology, engineering, high-tech industry, economic development, all that good stuff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_affiliated_with_the_City_University_of_New_York [wikipedia.org] . His MBA-style educational fads are also destroying the public education system. He's destroying the neighborhood public library. Lesson for Bloomberg: When you've got something working very well, don't destroy it.)
Fortunately I have science skills in other areas (biomedical) that were also fun, where I could advance my skills and make a living. Unfortunately, I'll never have the satisfaction of writing a really good computer program. But I did learn how the cell works, and the cell nucleus, the cell membrane,
DNA, and what causes cancer. I've met Nobel laureates and cancer researchers. That's a good life too.
And there are more girls in biology.
Re:Story time (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree with you that practice and broader understanding are far more important than just knowing the basics.
I work in IT, but I'm not a developer. I "know" code- in that I can look at a piece of code written in one of the more common languages and read what it's doing, and I can hold meaningful conversations with developers, and I can write amateurish little programmes for my own pleasure. But I am definitely not a developer; you ask me to write something of even moderate complexity and you're going to be dissapointed. It's not my job, and it's not a skill I've mastered to a professional level.
If this CodeAccademy thing can get large number of people to just understand coding, understand what can and can't be done, understand the consequences of certain requests or decisions, and able to write BASIC macros for Excel, then it's no bad thing. But there's no short cut to training up a proper developer.
Re:Story time (Score:4, Interesting)
There are significant differences between language, but that doesn't mean in any way that you're starting from nothing each times.
When you learned your first programming language, you learn some programming practices that aren't language dependent. When you learned you're second one, you learned a bit about the difference between syntax and logic, and so on...
Also, most of the programming challenge isn't the language anyway. (well, can be... I'm looking at you, Perl!)
It's true it does have an influence, but for exemple, you can think your programs pretty much the same way in all Object Oriented language.