Facebook is Equipping K-8 Classrooms With Robot Sets To Boost Tech Diversity 63
Long time reader theodp writes: Facebook last week announced the launch of CodeFWD, "a free online education program created in partnership with [robotic toy maker] Sphero to increase the amount of underrepresented and female students interested in studying computer science." Sphero and CodeFWD are offering a free Sphero BOLT Power Pack (a classroom set of 15 robots valued at $2,499) for a select number of accepted applicants through the program. So, what do you need to begin CodeFWD by Facebook? "No experience necessary. No experience preferred ," explains the website. However, that's not to say CodeFWD is for all. "CodeFWD is intended for educators who are credentialed K-12 teachers or 501(c)(3) non-profit staff members in the United States," the website makes clear, adding that "given the limited supply of robots, we will evaluate the information you've provided and prioritize those applications that help us achieve the goal of expanding access to computer programming opportunities." And Facebook, being Facebook, adds that it wants some data out of the deal: "Please note that Facebook will have access to aggregate, anonymous usage data from Sphero, but will not have access to user-identifiable data collected by Sphero."
Not sure I like (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not sure I like Facebook having ANY presence in the classroom even if it's trying to help.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not sure I like Facebook having ANY presence in the classroom even if it's trying to help.
Sure, but it is unfair to blame Facebook for this. They are being pressured to "do something" about diversity, and this is "something".
Re: (Score:2)
Are they supplying robots with spatula attachments?
Otherwise, just toys for the boys.
Not necessarily (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm picturing something more like this:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/update-kindergarten-teacher-denies-legos-to-boys-in-name-of-gender-equity
Re: (Score:2)
They are trying to make coding more fun, so more people will participate. Only one problem with that, what happens when they go to work, get shoved in a cubicle and code all day every day and not a toy robot to play with in kilometres.
So diversity, stop people doing what they are naturally inclined to do as a result of genetics and get other people to do it regardless of their lack of inclination.
So generally force people into careers they will hate, why because the people doing the forcing are a pack of
Re: (Score:2)
You know the kind, you remember them from school, they knew how to do everything better than everyone else but when they actually tried to do it, they routinely failed but they never ever slowed them down from telling everyone how to do it properly.
At my school, we called them "teacher".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's Facebook's money. They can do with it what they want.
So you are saying that school boards have no say in this?
Re: Not sure I like (Score:2)
And if Facebook is serious about targeting poorer communities, I doubt the school boards will complain about the extra opportunity whether it is truly beneficial or not.
Re: (Score:2)
School boards are filled with people who have too much time on their hands. That typically means religious folk trying to shove more Jesus into the lessons or the new religious sort trying to shove more wokeness into lessons. And if Facebook is serious about targeting poorer communities, I doubt the school boards will complain about the extra opportunity whether it is truly beneficial or not.
Knowing what I know about facebook, letting them around your children is about as safe as letting Jerry Sandusky babysit yout 10 year old son. Not for the same reason, but just imagine what Disney would pay for children's data.
I'd pull my kid and put him in a different school.
Re:Not sure I like (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sure Facebook wants kids from all ages, genders and races to become mindless drones that give away their privacy for precious little in return.
Soon, we'll be hearing stiff like this, "Teacher, your pupils have not been actively engaging with Facebook sufficiently to ensure timely deliveries of educational supplies. Please encourage your children to not be left behind."
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not sure I like Facebook having ANY presence in the classroom even if it's trying to help.
The Cambridge Analytica/Facebook conglomerate knows you have to get their data early and often.
Re: (Score:2)
Men need to take the hint (Score:1)
Delete your Facebook accounts. Facebook doesn't want your kind.
Holy hell (Score:2, Insightful)
I would be happy if I could live the rest of my life and never hear or read the word "diversity" ever again.
Re: (Score:1)
perpetual victim detected
Re:Holy hell (Score:5, Insightful)
I once worked for a very well-intentioned liberal white man who once gleefully toted up all the minorities he had hired; I was his Asian. The thing was, except for me every one there came out of the same graduate school program he founded, and I think every last one of them, even his black females, had wealthy lawyers as parents; his latino's father was some kind of government minister in Mexico. I was the only one there with a working class, inner city background, and believe me, I felt it. Certainly having him identify me as a his token Asian didn't make me feel valued, as an Asian or anything else.
Actually diversity *is* valuable to organizations as a counterpoint to another thing organizations need: cohesion. Cohesion without diversity equals group think; it leads to blind spots. That's how you get some outrageously tone-deaf PR campaigns, like Nivea's "White is Purity" campaign, or Pepsi's infamous Kendall Jenner campaign.
Now my coworkers at this place were smart, cultured, and genuinely good people, but they were just *outrageously* condescending, and they couldn't see it because they were constantly reinforcing their own shared world views. Now I'm very liberal myself, but when some wealthy white woman talks about "privilege" it can set my teeth on edge. I understand the point she's trying to make, and it's not that she's wrong, but that's just a horribly tone deaf piece of jargon. Can you imagine how that sounds to a middle aged man who just lost his job at the mill? Lack of economic diversity means you can use that kind of jargon and never see the downside, like Nivea's "White is Purity" campaign.
I think my take away from that job is that a spot check of skin color, gender, and ethnicity can tell you if you *lack* diversity. But it can't tell you that you *have* diversity. The whole point of diversity in an organization is to provide situational awareness and flexibility in thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
I think my take away from that job is that a spot check of skin color, gender, and ethnicity can tell you if you *lack* diversity.
I suppose it can if you think diversity is skin deep. However, I don't believe that your assumption is true.
The same group that insists that women are no different than men can't also argue that a lack of women would indicate a lack of diversity. If women are truly no different than men, why would you ever need any women (or for that matter men if you want to look at it from the other side) to be diverse since they are no different from men.
Diversity is only valuable to an organization when it moves p
Re: (Score:2)
As long as skin color is important to society, then skin color is going to be one genuine axis of diversity, among many.
Race is scientifically speaking bullshit, but that doesn't mean that the race you're perceived to have makes no difference in your life.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
What? SJW and climate stories get more eyeballs than some lame, on-topic, tech-related story.
The editors know who their masters are and sing their songs, the system works.
Is it underreprented or female or both? (Score:2)
I only read the summary.
Because it should be an OR, unless bookface wants to glean data from both and doesn't care about non-female underrepresented students.
Also, what does underrepresented actually mean? Amish kids?
Re: (Score:3)
Also, what does underrepresented actually mean?
It means under represented in tech compared to their presence in the general population.
So anything except a white or Asian male.
Black, Hispanic, Native American, or female of any race is under represented.
I spent several years working in after school programs for robots, coding, and GATE (Gifted And Talented Education). I can see some sense in "girl-only" instruction, since boys can get overly enthusiastic about tech, so the girls often pull back and just sit and watch. But this can be addressed by allow
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, what does underrepresented actually mean?
It means under represented in tech compared to their presence in the general population.
So anything except a white or Asian male.
Black, Hispanic, Native American, or female of any race is under represented.
I spent several years working in after school programs for robots, coding, and GATE (Gifted And Talented Education). I can see some sense in "girl-only" instruction, since boys can get overly enthusiastic about tech, so the girls often pull back and just sit and watch. But this can be addressed by allowing girls to self-segregate into girl-only workgroups.
For race it make NO SENSE. Black kids do better when intermixed, and kids learn a lot from their peers.
What about Black girls only classes, or transgender only.
Gender apartheid is rapidly becomeing a liberal touchstone.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, what does underrepresented actually mean?
It means under represented in tech compared to their presence in the general population.
So anything except a white or Asian male.
Black, Hispanic, Native American, or female of any race is under represented.
I spent several years working in after school programs for robots, coding, and GATE (Gifted And Talented Education). I can see some sense in "girl-only" instruction, since boys can get overly enthusiastic about tech, so the girls often pull back and just sit and watch. But this can be addressed by allowing girls to self-segregate into girl-only workgroups.
For race it make NO SENSE. Black kids do better when intermixed, and kids learn a lot from their peers.
What about Black girls only classes, or transgender only.
Gender apartheid is rapidly becomeing a liberal touchstone.
Asking questions is not flame bait slash dotters. Asking questions is looking for answers.
And modding my post flamebait is merely showing that you know that you don't want to answer the question. Why not?
Re: (Score:2)
Asking questions is not flame bait ... modding my post flamebait is merely showing that you know that you don't want to answer the question.
Given that your "question" in response to the statement: "I can see some sense in "girl-only" instruction ... For race it make NO SENSE" ran "[w]hat about Black (sic) girls only classes ..." what would you prefer the reasonable reader take away? That your reading comprehension or reasoning ability is impaired, or that your "question" was never meant honestly to engage with the previous comment (and therefore demanded no answer)?
Personally, I would rather be taken to be flaming than to pose publicly as being intellectually challenged. YMMV.
More questions you ask? Why sure! Uncle Olsoc loves that you ask!
The question of utmost importance is to ask : Is the goal to have all (career X) to represent the racial and sexual and gender characteristics of society at large?
Now if the answer is yes, then you must ask "How do I bring this about? If it is decided that girls are intimidated by males and will ofherwise drop out of a career that they had a passion to go into, then yes - you must have girls only classes where they are not discouraged by ma
FWD? (Score:2)
For World Domination?
Yup, that's Facebook alright.
Meanwhile in Appalachia... (Score:4, Insightful)
Some poor little white boy, who lives with his methhead parents in a run-down trailer with no running water, is asking his teacher if he can have a robot too.
"Sorry kid. These are just for the under-privileged."
Re: (Score:1)
Some poor little white boy, who lives with his methhead parents in a run-down trailer with no running water, is asking his teacher if he can have a robot too.
"Sorry kid. These are just for the under-privileged."
Funny thing is if a teacher is even close to worth there salt they will let any student have access to said robot, not to mention the legal ramifications if this were to be challenged in court under "Equal access to education" "Over represented" or "underrepresented" who gives a .... thee interests of any child should be fostered. Funny how people who scream about racism and sexism are the first to apply it, than try to change the definition of the word.
Re: (Score:2)
...then he forces that robot onto some hapless girl who doesn't give a shit about it and could well become the next Nobel prize laureate in medicine because that's what she'd actually be interested in, but she MUST be pushed into STEM.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you want to look up the meaning of the word "including" before making assumptions like that.
Let's get real (Score:1)
What Facebook really means is they want to make sure that the robots don't help any white boys. Not unless they can prove their gay that is. People fail to see how this is itself blatantly sexist and racist. How about we focus on things that aren't identity politics?
Good, I suppose... (Score:2)
I don't really understand how this specifically will target girls and other underrepresenteds? Will white boys not be able to use these? I wouldn't imagine so. It seems like the target should probably be class rather than race or gender. While I give FB kudos for helping spread technology skills around the youth, it feels like they're using race and gender as the "look what we're doing!" since that seems to generate more emotion than poor people.
So...sure, cool on them for doing this, but the wording is cr
huh (Score:2)
"No experience necessary. No experience preferred ,"
So, you're an adult, you have the resources and culture to be a certified teacher, you have an aptitude and interest for tech, but you have NO tech experience? Really?
This is really code for saying we'd prefer you have no aptitude for this. Bizarre.
"First, we have to make sure you have no aptitude for this."
Oh brave new world, that has such people in it!