I wanted to follow up on my earlier post on why teaching CS still matters.

In that post, I cited a couple of former students. Not only former students but particularly high achieving ones. One friend commented on that - the idea that my thesis may makes sense for those high achievers but not everyone.

I maintain that CS, if taught right is still important for all students.

It's about thinking and problem solving and that exploring programming can help build those thinking and problem solving skills.

Let's look at a couple of other situations to illustrate the point.

A number of years ago I was talking to yet another student - yes, another super high achiever. This one was a math whiz. We're talking IMO level. Some time after working with a number of other top young math minds from other countries we were talking about his experiences.

He noted, that in his experience, in the USA, the primary prolem solving appraoch that was taught was algebra based. This was his and his friend's experience in New York and also what he saw from other top young American mathematicians. In contrast, he noticed that the mathematicians he got to know from other countries were more likely to take other approaches to solving problems - a geometrical one for example.

Kids across the world learn math but aparently, in different locations, with different foci, the kids end up approaching problems differently - thinking differently.

A number of years later, my chairman - math chair, went to an Eastern European country for a few weeks to learn about how they taught high school math. Her takeaways was that they don't do nearly as much as we do in terms of topics but they dive much deeper into what they do and not as much of a focus on Algebra, which we treast as a major piece pretty much every high school class.

This supports my student's experience.

Now, I'm not arguing that one way is better than the other, though my gut says that doing less to more depth is probably better than our current high school math progression, it's that, yes, we're trying to teach math, but we're really trying to teach them to think.

The calculator didn't make math education obsolete but people are quick to note that the calculator to math isn't the same as generative AI to CS. It isn't but there have been computer tools available to do everything through high school math and well beyond and none of those made high school math obsolete.

I'll finish this post with one more thought. Generative AI won't make CS Education any less important but it should force us to re-examine what we do and how we're doing it.

We want to focus on building thinkers but we can look at the past for an example of just that done wrong.

High school geometry.

It's called geometry but, at least in my opinion, it really isn't about geometry at all. It's a course in deductive reasoning, problem solvin and logic using Euclidean Geometry as the platform to explore said reasoning.

Unfortuantely, in most implementations that part is lost. It first became a course in the basics of Euclidean Geometry and then, in many cases devolved into a course in algebraic aspects of Euclidean Geometry.

Missed opportunity.

I know that in some pockets, CS teachers will do better. I'm confident that the home grown classes at Stuy will stand the test of time and I know some other teachers at other schools who, if given the opportunity will create great experiences for their students.

The question is, what will the gorillas in the room do - the College Board, code.org and the outher outsized influencers.