Compulsory coding in education: liberal-humanism, Baudrillard and the ‘problem’ of abstraction

Abstract

Internationally, coding is increasingly introduced into primary and junior high schools (children generally aged between 5 and 15) on a compulsory basis, though not all stakeholders support this 'initiative'. In response to the public reception, discussion highlights popular argument around compulsory coding in school education. This is an argument between those supportive (hereafter referred to as the Yes case) and those unsupportive of compulsory coding (hereafter referred to as the No case). But more than simply produce a list of arguments, this discussion contributes to our understanding of this reception by identifying the 'discourses' deployed by both cases (namely, digital ubiquity, disadvantage, and habits of mind discourses) and by providing theoretical framings through which these discourses and their potential implications might be differently understood. Using critical discourse analysis to unpack these discourses shows that while both cases hold to key tenets of liberal-humanism, a commitment to the individual subject, liberty and full participation in the social, it is the Yes case with its stronger commitment to children engaging in abstraction that seems to challenge these. Discussion of this difference is framed by the work of Baudrillard around abstraction, not to 'prove' the validity of Baudrillard's thesis concerning the consequences of humanity's deepening engagement with abstraction, but to provide a broader understanding of this debate, in relation to a trajectory of engagement with abstraction that seems set to intensify.

What We Talk About When We Talk About Programs

“…Finally, Tamatea's analysis [144] focuses on the deepening engagement with digital "abstraction, " meant in Baudrillard's terms [9], which is implied in coding tasks and can challenge "the tradition of liberal-humanism in education." For Baudrillard, indeed, the present-day overexposition to abstract ways to access the real carries the risk of deconstructing the notions of self, society and liberty.…”

Learning the Code

“…Becoming Digitally Literate: "Coding Literacy" "Computational Thinking" and "Computational Languages" Asmentionedandreferencedintheintroduction,overthepastdecade,andparticularlyafternational and international campaigns and initiatives began attempting to inaugurate compulsory coding andcomputerscienceprogramsacrosspubliceducationcurricula(movementssuchasCode.org; CodeAmerica; Code4All; Hour of Code; Call for Code; #YESWECODE; Computer Science for All;CoderDojo;CodeSpeak;CodewithGoogle;CodingfromScratch(Jr),andmanymore)major corporations,organizations,institutions,andgovernmentsarestrivingtoaddressissuesofdigital language illiteracy;employmentandoccupationalgapsandneeds;globalethicsandsecurities;citizen equityandopportunity;andaremakingattemptstoremedytheglobaldominationofthe~3%currently capableofdeterminingandcontrollingtheubiquitouscomputabilityofsocieties (CASLondon& ComputerScienceforFun(CS4FN),n.d.;CoalitionofBlackExcellence,2020;CodeClub,2021;Code.org,2021bCode.org, ,2021cCode.org, ,2021aCoderDojo,2021;CodeSpeakLabs,2020;Cruz,2018;CSforALL, 2021;Delacruz,2020;DreamCorps,2021;Google,n.d.-a,n.d.-b,n.d.-c;Lafee,2017;Lockwood& Mooney,2017Microsoft,2021;OfficeofthePressSecretary,2014;Smith,2016;Tamatea, 2019;Trucano,2015;Vee,2017;Xing&Zhang,2020).…”