Coding

A Healthy Education Puts Literacy First

For all the quibbling done about teaching more relevant skills (STEM is the go-to for this rhetoric) and better preparing students for productive careers and to compete on a global scale, America’s schools have done a disservice to the kinds of knowledge and skills whose value is unconditional, insulated from technological disruption, and intrinsic to success in all areas.

We talk about education as being critical to our economy, from filling the jobs of the future, supporting innovation, and even helping workers to pivot in their careers to keep up with change and keep the country competitive. Well, education is also important to the health of our country, and healthcare happens to be one of the biggest single drains on our national economy, in terms of both productivity and absolute cost.

If we are going to look to education for jobs, skills, and economic strength, it stands to reason that we’d also look to education for tackling the health challenges in our country as well.

Health literacy

One of the best predictors of academic success, is whether a student is encouraged to read–or, better yet, read to as a child–by his or her parents outside of school. Basically, this amounts to whether parents support literacy.  In a sense, then, literacy can become cyclical: parents of active readers are, or become, active readers themselves; children of active readers are more likely to become active readers themselves, and to, in turn, encourage reading in their own children.

But basic literacy is no longer limited to reading and writing. Depending on who you talk to, everything from digital literacy to basic coding should be treated as equally essential–usually because of the economic impact such fundamental skills can make over time.

Health literacy needs a similar imperative, because as it turns out, health literacy correlates strongly with better health behaviors, more effective health treatment (when you understand your doctor’s orders, you are both more able and more likely to comply). Health, of course, underpins success elsewhere in life: careers, relationships, creativity, academics–all of the things, in short, we hope to gain from education.

Bad Medicine

Diet is but one component of this, but it is perhaps the easiest to blend practice with theory, considering the need for students to eat at least one meal over the course of their primary school day.

Hospitals and schools face a similar challenge: feeding students (or patients) well, and teaching them to feed themselves better at the same time. The cafeteria model that has gained such widespread adoption over the last century produces some serious externalities that, long-term, undermine any claims about the efficiency of such food service systems. Namely, prioritizing volume over value, and thereby reinforcing negative habits and attitudes about food: convenience first, fried and packaged rather than fresh, salt and sugar rather than balanced.

Putting health literacy on the menu, as well as in the classroom (or the examination room, where hospitals are concerned) can help undo these damaging trends. More than that, though, health literacy balances the role of authority–like doctors and nurses–with the role of individuals (take care of yourself proactively, rather than looking to get fixed reactively; don’t wait for government restrictions to improve your grocery list). Literacy itself teaches personal accountability: you learn to read and write for yourself, and to think and interpret critically.

Health literacy promises something similar, applied to the life skills of self-care and taking responsibility for each individual’s role in supporting population health.

Getting Physical

Balance is missing from our population, as well as from our schools. P.E. classes, like lunchrooms, could stand to reintegrate some balance to help repair our culture starting with the youth.

In other academic models, gamification is the latest buzzword to gain traction with its premise, essentially, of making learning engaging and fun. Physical education–training students to exercise, be active, and care for their bodies–seems a lot like the original model of gamification, but we’ve let the games overwhelm the lessons, and the competition dissolve the core value. We have a cultural problem when it comes to staying active.

Sports anchored to schools have more than their share of problems, and the association has grown beyond unhealthy. It is entirely possible that the professionalization of sports at all ages, and the pressure on children to specialize athletically at younger and younger ages, is partially responsible for the failure of physical education programs in the U.S. The intensity of the competition, and the emphasis on talent and relative skill over the intrinsic value of participation may well put kids off of sports, and by extension, exercise. It encourages kids of all ages to take unnecessary risks, “play through the pain” and even take drugs to gain a competitive edge.

Adopting the “everybody gets a trophy” approach is not helping. Physical fitness–and physical education–are the counterparts to the sort of health literacy training that can take place in the cafeteria. Again, the model of parents reading at home may be instructive. When participation in exercise of any form is reflected at home and at school, the focus can return to where it belongs: personal health and wellness.

Reading together promotes learning as well as fostering community. So, too, does eating together. There is no reason why athletics cannot provide a similar model for behavior as an individual as well as a group member.

 

Literacy underpins communication and helps us advance as individuals and collectively. Health literacy can do the same for our collective health and cultural approach to wellness by means of what we eat and how we care for ourselves.

An education for the 21st century means teaching coding in schools

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

Leon Sterling, Swinburne University of Technology

Bill Shorten’s recent announcement that, if elected, a Labor Government would “ensure that computer coding is taught in every primary and secondary school in Australia” has brought attention to an increasing world trend.

Estonia introduced coding in primary schools in 2012 and the UK followed suit last year. US-led initiatives such as Code.org and the “Hour of Code”, supported by organisations such as Google and Microsoft, advocate that every school student should have the opportunity to learn computer coding.

There is merit in school students learning coding. We live in a digital world where computer programs underlie everything from business, marketing, aviation, science and medicine, to name several disciplines. During a recent presentation at a radio station, one of our hosts said that IT would have been better background for his career in radio than journalism.

There is also a strong case to be made that Australia’s future prosperity will depend on delivering advanced services and digital technology, and that programming will be essential to this end. Computer programs and software are known to be a strong driver of productivity improvements in many fields.

Being introduced to coding gives students an appreciation of what can be built with technology. We are surrounded by devices controlled by computers. Understanding how they work, and imagining new devices and services, are enhanced by understanding coding.

Of course, not everyone taught coding will become a coder or have a career in information technology. Art is taught in schools with no expectation that the students should become artists.

Drag and drop

A computer program is effectively a means of automating processes. Programs systematically and reliably follow processes and can be used to exhaustively try all the possibilities.

The languages used to program computers have evolved in the 70 years we have been building computers. Interfaces and programming environments have become more natural and intuitive. Language features reflect the applications they’re used for.

What is needed to easily express a business process, scientific equation, or data analysis technique is not necessarily the same as what is needed to rapidly develop a video game.

However, throughout the evolution of programming languages, the fundamental principles have remained the same. Computer programming languages express three essential things:

  1. The order in which a sequence of instructions is performed
  2. A means of repeating a sequence of instructions a prescribed number of times
  3. And tests as to whether or not a sequence of instructions is performed.

While personal preference influences which computer language a programmer uses, there is a greater understanding of which languages work well for teaching introductory programming. For example, Scratch is popular for primary school students and is quick to learn. Alice has been used to help students quickly build computer animations. Python is increasingly used for scientific applications. Visual programming languages – where students can drag-and-drop icons rather than type code – allow for rapid development of simple programs.

At Swinburne University of Technology we run workshops to introduce school students to program NAO robots. Students use the Choregraphe environment to link robot actions from a library.

Students previously unused to programming can develop interesting robot projects in a couple of days. More sophisticated development of the robot requires students to use a more detail-oriented language, such as Python or C++. The simpler options lead to positive student experience.

The Nao robot can be programmed easily to perform a range of tasks.
Brett Davis/Flickr, CC BY-NC

Computational thinking

Writing and then executing a program gives immediate feedback as to whether you have correctly expressed instructions for the computer. Ultimately, the understanding of how to express concepts so that a computer can perform tasks accurately and efficiently is far more important than the details of the programming language.

Underlying all computer programs are algorithms, which specify in a more abstract way how a task is to be done. Algorithmic thinking – also called computational thinking – underlies computer science, and there has been a growing movement on algorithmic thinking in schools.

The new national curriculum reflects algorithmic processes, and materials are being developed to help teachers with the new curriculum. Victoria has recently developed a new subject for the Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) entitled Algorithmics.
There are even materials for teaching algorithmic thinking without computers. The Computer Science Unplugged movement, led by Tim Bell and colleagues at the University of Canterbury, has developed resources that teach students concepts through movement and fun activities.

Teaching for the this century

Teaching computer coding in schools is very different from initiatives that advocate for computers in the classroom. I was not, and am still not, supportive of compulsory laptop programs in schools.

The idea is not necessarily to expose students to the technology itself, which is almost inevitable these days with the wide penetration of mobile phones. Rather, students are exposed to the skills needed to develop computer applications.

While IT skill shortages is a contentious topic, there is no doubt that not enough of the best and brightest are studying computer science at university. A significant factor is insufficient exposure to the topic at schools. Teaching coding at schools is aimed at addressing the lack.

It might be said that whatever programming language is taught will be obsolete by the time the students enter the workforce. My experience is that, if taught properly, students can rapidly transfer the principles of one language to another.

In the 19th and 20th centuries, the challenge was to understand the physical world, and harness force and energy. This understanding percolated into the school curriculum. In the 21st century, the challenge is to understand and harness data, information and knowledge. Computer programming is a necessary way of introducing students to these concepts.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 


The ConversationLeon Sterling is Pro Vice Chancellor Digital Frontiers at Swinburne University of Technology.

This article was originally published on The Conversation.

Read the original article.