Well to play devil's advocate:
creative, qusetioning students with computer science skills are valued by the industrialists nowadays. They actually seek out people who are a little rebellious.
I read that some of the more innovative Chinese high schools are ditching standardized tests, encuraging more creative education, as they see it as their only ticket to becoming an economy on the high end of the value chain (more creative, more design-focused)
What if the evil capitalists support a more intelliectual, creative education free of rote education?
>>>>>>>>>>
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:23:34 -0800
From: Anthony Di Franco <di.franco@gmail.com>
To: GtwoG PublicOhOne <g2g-public01@att.net>
Cc: sudo-discuss <sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org>
Subject: Re: [sudo-discuss] "learn to code" events subject to full-WTF
scale crackdown...any ideas?
Message-ID:
<CAOJkv1pDK2k_oPcbssg42MHZOkSzfqANQPxfoTNmx7wWF4wLSw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Outside of the narrow regulatory question, this reminds me of another
relating to the vocationalization of programming to supply commoditized
labor to large corporations, which is something I am uneasy around and
which I think reflects a shifting power balance that deserves to be
opposed. Here is a line of criticism that I think is right on, running from
Seymour Papert to Bret Victor to
this<http://programmingisterrible.com/post/73056840109/paperts-dreams-and-our-grim-meathook-reality>
:
*"In ?Meanwhile, at code.org <http://worrydream.com/MeanwhileAtCodeOrg/>?,
Bret juxtaposes the ideals of Seymour Papert and the dreams of
entrepreneurs and venture capitalists. Papert wanted to use programming as
a way to let children explore powerful ideas and let their imagination run
wild. The agenda of the political, wealthy, and powerful is to build a new
generation of worker bees to fuel their startups. One sees code as a
liberation, and the other as a vocation..."*
=============================
Romy Ilano