The idea of teaching coding to children is not new. Back in the late 1960s, my mentor at MIT, Seymour Papert, developed the first programming language for children, called LOGO. Although computers were big, expensive machines that occupied full rooms, Seymour anticipated that the technology would get smaller and the thinking bigger. That is to say, children could learn how to think in new ways by programming these devices. At the time, this was a novel idea. Today, few people would disagree with this statement.
In the recent years, coding has made a comeback. However, according to the nonprofit Code.org, when compared with other countries, the United States lags behind. This is troublesome given the demands of the new automated economy. The workforce needs coders. Thus, initiatives are on the rise to engage students in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). While I applaud the push for STEM, I find it problematic.
There is no problem with STEM education per se, but it restricts the power of coding to a limited group of disciplines, to a limited group of students and teachers, and to the particular demands of the workforce. It limits coding’s power as a true literacy.
What is literacy? It is the ability to use a symbol system (a programming language or a natural written language) and a technological tool (paper and pencil, or a tablet and computer) to comprehend, generate, communicate, and express ideas or thoughts by making a sharable product (a text, an animation, a robot) that others can interpret. This definition applies to both textual and coding literacy.
- : http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/education_futures/2018/01/coding_as_a_literacy_for_the_21st_century.html
- : Marina Umaschi Bers
- : Education Week