“The CanCode program will invest $50 million over two years, starting in 2017-18, to support initiatives providing educational opportunities for coding and digital skills development to Canadian youth from kindergarten to grade 12 (K-12).
The program aims to equip youth, including traditionally underrepresented groups, with the skills and study incentives they need to be prepared for the jobs of today and the future. Canada’s success in the digital economy depends on leveraging our diverse talent and providing opportunity for all to participate—investing in digital skills development will help to achieve this.”
The CanCode program is a new funding opportunity in Canada. Similar initiatives have occurred globally. The investment in coding to prepare youth and adults for the jobs of the future is an interesting phenomenon. In a past project for example, we worked with over fifty high schools and developed a dual enrolment course focused on computational thinking and the presence of computing in daily life. The ability to read, write, and tinker with code is one aspect of this course. Our course was about introducing students to computer science – and though coding is an aspect of it, computer science is not coding.
But, coding is a central feature of an ever-expanding market of emerging credentials. Badges. Nanodegrees. Certs. And so on. Providers offer these in many different ways, both in terms of modality (e.g., online courses vs. face-to-face coding bootcamps) and pacing (e.g., self-paced vs. cohort-based). Some highlight experiential components (e.g., industry partnerships) while others highlight the flexibility of adjusting to learner’s life circumstances.
In short, providers make a case that their credentials promise employment opportunities in a rapidly changing global economy where coding is in demand. This space seems to be an example of what certain aspects of unbundling may look like. The space configures alternative credentials, digital learning, for-profit education, skills training, and re-training in unique ways. I have a lot of questions around this space
- What are learners’ experiences with coding bootcamps and nanodegrees?
- Who enrols? Who succeeds?
- To what extent do these programs broaden participation in computing?
- To what degree and in what ways do these programs democratize learning and participation? Do they?
- What do learners expect from these offerings and how do they judge the quality of their experience and credential?
- What are the dominant pedagogical practices (within and across providers) in teaching people how to code?
- What is the role of technology in these programs?
- What do outcomes look like, and how do those align with providers’ promises? For instance, what proportion of participants find gainful employment and what does that employment look like?
- What are instructors’ roles in these offerings? Who are they? What is their pedagogical background? Is this their main employment? Are there connections to the gig economy and precarious employment here?
- How diverse are these offerings in terms of gender and race with respect to students (who enrols?), instructors (who teaches?) and content (are minorities represented in curricular materials? in what ways?)
I’ve been looking for some answers to my questions, but I’m not finding much.
Additional reading
http://hackeducation.com/2015/11/23/bootcamps-the-new-for-profit-higher-ed
https://www.wired.com/2017/02/programming-is-the-new-blue-collar-job
http://www.chronicle.com/article/Coding-Boot-Camps-Come-Into/239673?cid=cp21
http://hackeducation.com/2011/10/28/codecademy-and-the-future-of-not-learning-to-code
Industry report: https://www.coursereport.com/reports/2016-coding-bootcamp-job-placement-demographics-report