Code.org: More Money For CS Instructors Who Teach More Girls 381
theodp writes "The same cast of billionaire characters — Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Eric Schmidt — is backing FWD.us, which is lobbying Congress for more visas to 'meet our workforce needs,' as well as Code.org, which aims to popularize Computer Science education in the U.S. to address a projected CS job shortfall. In laying out the two-pronged strategy for the Senate, Microsoft General Counsel and Code.org Board member Brad Smith argued that providing more kids with a STEM education — particularly CS — was 'an issue of critical importance to our country.' But with its K-8 learn-to-code program which calls for teachers to receive 25% less money if fewer than 40% of their CS students are girls, Smith's Code.org is sending the message that training too many boys isn't an acceptable solution to the nation's CS crisis. 'When 10 or more students complete the course,' explains Code.org, "you will receive a $750 DonorsChoose.org gift code. If 40% or more of your participating students are female, you'll receive an additional $250, for a total gift of $1,000 in DonorsChoose.org funding!" The $1+ million Code.org-DonorsChoose CS education partnership appears to draw inspiration from a $5 million Google-DoonorsChoose STEM education partnership which includes nebulous conditions that disqualify schools from AP STEM funding if projected participation by female students in AP STEM programs is deemed insufficient. So, are Zuckerberg, Gates, Ballmer, and Schmidt walking-the-gender-diversity-talk at their own companies? Not according to the NY Times, which just reported that women still account for only about 25% of all employees at Code.org supporters Apple, Google, Facebook, and Microsoft. By the way, while not mentioning these specific programs, CNET reports that Slashdot owner Dice supports the STEM efforts of Code.org and Donors Choose."
Businesses can't hire people who don't exist. (Score:3, Informative)
"women still account for only about 25% of all employees at Code.org supporters "
And how many unemployed female software engineers do we have who can't find work?
Businesses can't hire people who don't exist.
Re:How can those incentives help? (Score:4, Informative)
I used that term because I didn't want to imply only grownup women. "Females" to me implies, well females of all ages... just as I would use the term male to refer to males of all ages. Since you are so wise, what is a better term? "Women" implies only adults, and the only way the problem is solved is if teenage (and younger) girls also become serious coders...
Re:Teaching programmer? (Score:5, Informative)
You don't know a single competent programmer who just started programming just because they wanted to. They started programming because they had the opportunity to, and the support.
Bullshit, I self taught myself. I had no teacher and my parents were computer illiterate, and many of the greatest programmers I know followed the exact same pattern.
And keep in mind that there wasn't the internet then, I had to learn from the few books on the subject I could acquire or borrow in the public library. Today all you need is access to a computer and to an Internet connection.
probably unconscious, but nevertheless well-researched and documented
Sorry to pop your bubble, but the only documented bias that exist these days is against male students, and in every field of knowledge, not only in CS, and it is a bias reinforced by initiatives like this.
because it matters? (Score:5, Informative)
Really?
The politically-correct bullshit has to stop - do people REALLY believe there's a concerted effort to keep women out of coding? It must be so, because that's the only situation in which this sort of thing would matter.
What you've just told CS instructors is to MAKE SURE every last woman in their course passes, and there's a financial reward for it.
Why does it matter what chromosomes your coder bears?
This is not the solution (Score:1, Informative)
Well that, and there's the sexual harassment issue, but the same thing applies. Don't try to force girls into computer science; make the environment more comfortable and welcoming, and they will come on their own.
Re:There is no "shortfall". (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Why are you posting as anonymous? (Score:5, Informative)
50% of people are below average. No more, no less.
If you consider average people, and slightly above average people to be mediocre or worthless perhaps the problem is your own expectations of what constitutes baseline average?
My experience:
Employers want Rockstar talent for intern prices
Consumers want high quality products/services for Walmart/McDonalds prices
Employees want easy jobs that pay like the work is hard
It's called self-interest. It's a predictable human behavior. The innovative companies are the ones who manage to take an adversarial zero-sum game and find ways to align these conflicting objectives as much as possible(or are just so profitable & cutting edge they don't have to care yet).
The easiest ways for an employer to align these conflicting objectives is to find something other than money to incentivize employees to work more for less. This can be basic things such as flexible hours, relaxed dress code, the option to work from home one day a week(or more), or providing a "campus" like environment where they can receive personal mail & eat at their desk without any need to leave.
The managers who demand strict conformality, pay shit, and then are surprised that creativity suffers shouldn't be despised so much as looked at with amusement. Talented people have talented friends and if your employees are all so miserable that they would not recommend their employer to their peers it doesn't really surprise me you're having a hard time filling positions. Find some of the demands that do not offer a significant direct profit to you but pose a hardship on your employees which your managers are asking for because the consider them to be basic expectations. Relax them. Keep doing this until your employees are happy enough they would recommend working there to friends. "The pay isn't great but the benefits make it worth it."
The other option is to lower the barriers to entry until you can hire people that are disadvantaged yet capable enough to be grateful for peanut wages.
Great examples of this:
-smart people without degrees who are grateful for a job title(that normally requires a degree) even if they are only getting paid their education level.
-creating entry level positions and training average employees until they are great employees.
Good employees(at a fair price) are not hard to find or make, but most people want a free lunch without doing anything beyond posting an ad to monster.com
No sympathy here.
Re:What does this do? (Score:4, Informative)
Real classy. Sexism and a genetic fallacy in a single three-word phrase. Bravo.