At 09:39 AM 5/06/2015, David Lochrin wrote: >But I just felt embarrassed listening to poor Bill going on about "coding"... >I'm sure any decent interviewer would soon reveal he knew as much about >"coding" as Brandis does (or did) about "metadata".
Most of our politicians read what they're handed, which is why: 1 - they can't answer questions and divert to script 2 - don't understand the "policies"/ stances they are taking 3 - sound like wooden puppets 4 - repeat phrases; they've been rehearsing them so much they do it unconsciously If they really understood their briefs on this one, the point is to make ICT and STEM in general a more deliberate part of the curriculum in order to ramp up participation, regardless of the subbranch a student pursues in future, if at all, as a career. Coding is a sub-component, similar to learning alphabet, words, reading, stringing words together to communicate an idea, then the range of types of reading and writing available, understanding what is being read (analysis), selecting things to write and read (pre-evaluation), and then critiquing (evaluation). If you're going to work in the field, or use its outputs/devices, it's useful to have an understanding of what is going on. One may never become a programmer, just like one may never become a published writer, but we will still select/use/evaluate for purpose a range of technologies. Right now, the uneducated (generalisation warning) public are diving head first without a clue about the risks, how to identify real risks that could get them into trouble (including LOSING their MONEY), how code is manipulated to do that and how to defend themselves. They don't understand the 'code'. I just encountered that myself with a scam email saying I'd ordered $900 of goods from Amazon, which I hadn't. It took me awhile to check if this posed a risk to me at all. And no, I didn't open the attached document in word, but I had the nous to scan it w/ anti-virus, open it in a text editor, and look at the header subcomponents of the email to find where it had come from. Can your Grandmother d! o that? I doubt it. The larger STEM question is as much cultural as educational. We've been discussing in another group why sci-fi/fantasy (specfic) is not held in good stead by some people/parents, and that kids are forbidden from reading it. I proposed a paradoxical two-fold reason: anti-science (sci-fi) and anti-magic (fantasy) from trending conservative cultures. Some of this has to do with the rise of conservative fundamentalist religions in power/policy groups. This is where the paradox comes in. 'Anti-science' is because it challenges the orthodoxy. Think dark ages before the enlightenment. Anti-magic is against creativity and is seen as abhorrent, again because it challenges the orthodoxy of the mythology of the particular guiding 'church' system. That strikes me as paradoxical and ironic. It's like a 'magic civil war' is going on. so IMO while we are in this time of 'religion' rules, conscious or not, (sometimes for pure personal power reasons alone and not any real belief in morality or the teaching of said religion), STEM is going to be facing an uphill battle for funds and minds. So any efforts that provide a glimmer of hope of keeping STEM or ICT alive in schools should not be negated. Jan I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8 Melbourne, Victoria, Australia jw...@janwhitaker.com Twitter: <https://twitter.com/JL_Whitaker>JL_Whitaker Blog: www.janwhitaker.com Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. ~Margaret Atwood, writer _ __________________ _ _______________________________________________ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
