This article comes from the WeChat public account: write a story for you (ID: raistlin2017) , author: Raistlin, title figure from: vision China

Get up in the morning and see Netease boss Ding Lei being sprayed on Hot Search.

The reason is that he suggested:

In the “Proposal on Steady Promotion of Programming Education Incorporated into China’s Basic Teaching System and Focus on Cultivating Digital Talents”, he specifically suggested: speed up regional pilots to form a promotion pattern from high school to elementary school and from the east to the country; innovate teaching models and form Children’s programming curriculum system with Chinese characteristics; teaching enterprises to build a children’s programming learning resource library to provide a practical platform; incorporating children’s programming into the academic level examination as an important content of comprehensive quality evaluation; strengthening the training of children’s programming teachers.

There are so many comments and criticisms. For example, someone said:

Someone said:

Some people feel that they have captured the key to the problem:

Netizens have some truth, but they did not grasp the key to the problem.

In my personal opinion, most of the long strings mentioned by Ding Lei have no problem at all. The only thing worth discussing is the item of “adding children’s programming to the academic level test”.

Speak briefly from several angles.

1. “Ding Lei only considers issues from his own perspective, it’s too bad”

Ding Lei is the founder of NetEase and a senior in the IT industry. He doesn’t mention what he understands from his own point of view, does he mention what he doesn’t understand? We originally needed senior people to make suggestions in areas that we knew and understood.

What’s wrong with this?

In fact, we do n’t need everyone who makes suggestions, we take everyone into account in all industries. After all, they are not the people who decide, and the specific plan will be evaluated by experts from all walks of life from the proposal to the implementation.

From this perspective, it is really too bad to attack everyone who makes suggestions.

2. “Too unfair to poor children”

This is a problem, but I think people who think about it are completely wrong.

Ding Lei ’s plan is to try to solve unfairness, not create unfairness . Because the society now needs to understand programming and computer-savvy talent is a fact. No matter how you educate, the people who come out know programming are far more popular than those who don’t.

Not to mention the big companies in the Bay Area in the United States, which can give an exaggerated starting salary of $ 120,000 a year to newly graduated information technology workers. Even domestic IT companies pay programmers more than 200,000 a year, which is not only much higher than the local average salary level, but also much higher than the non-technical salary income of the same company.

I used to work in Internet companies for a long time. Whenever I heard someone who was under the age of 30, they bought a house in Shanghai, and they did n’t use their parents ’money. They basically made technology. (My work and technology edging, I also bought a house very early.)

There is such a high premium for technology, which means that in the job market in China and the world, programmers are still in short supply -this of course does not mean that as long as you are a computer related major, You can definitely find a high-paying job, because after all, the individual level is high or low, but it is at least much better than other majors with more than 95%. It is important to know that most liberal arts majors, even finding a job with a professional counterpart, is a luxury.

Programming is one of the most important skills in the job market in the future, since this is an established fact. In your opinion of compulsory education, which of the following situations is more unfair?

The first one is: rich children make up for programming knowledge outside of school, they have had programming thinking early, and they can even use scratch to make simple games. And ordinary children do not pay attention to it at all, and do not even know that there is such a thing.

The second is: rich children and ordinary children, learning programming knowledge at the same time in school.

Rich people can find various tutoring classes outside the school to find Daniel to teach, while ordinary people and children can find a lot of relevant knowledge through schools, teachers, and the Internet as long as they work hard. Today, informatics knowledge is becoming more and more important, it is obviously the first and more unfair.

Some people say that many people in China do not have computers, not even mobile phones. They say that children in remote rural areas do not even know what a mobile phone is. I do n’t know who said these words. Have you read the statistics of 2019? The data shows that by the first half of 2019, our mobile Internet population has reached 1.15 billion:

A total of 1.4 billion people in China, or more than 82%, are using mobile phones to access the Internet. This does not include many newborn babies, old men who are about to die. It can be said that there are certainly people who ca n’t use or ca n’t use the Internet, but it ’s already 2020. Although some people in China do n’t think they are as powerful, they are far from some people.Said so backward.

Taking a ten thousand steps back, even if there are really many people, computers and the Internet are not available. That school offered this course to bring them the knowledge and skills needed by modern society. It is precisely because too many children do not have this condition that they need the state to incorporate programming into compulsory education. Isn’t it good for the state to pay for creating conditions?

Therefore, the establishment of various programming courses in the school is not to increase the gap between the rich and the poor, nor to increase the barriers to learning, but rather to the expression of “teaching without class”, but the expression of fairness. Those who feel that others are poor, so they should not be exposed to new technologies, new sciences, or should be behind the starting line, are really lack of consideration.

3. “Programming does not mean everything, some children do not understand, what should children with liberal arts do?”

First of all, I do n’t know how these netizens came to the conclusion above. Supporting science is against liberal arts? This idea is a bit dangerous.

Secondly, we should understand that all the lessons we learn do not represent everything. Look at the school, there are few children who do not understand mathematics? Last time I saw a few adults, I did n’t understand why 4x-x was equal to 3x, let alone the following trigonometric functions, linear algebra, solid geometry, analytical geometry, and calculus.

Are there fewer children who do not understand physics? Not to mention ordinary schools, my middle school is Nanjing Foreign Languages, and it is one of the best schools in Jiangsu. There are also top students who scratch their heads at physics problems that are not difficult, just do n’t understand.

What do you say about the knowledge of mechanics, optics, and electromagnetism, what use is it in our future life-in fact it is really useless, even if you continue to study physics in university, you will be told that the high school Some knowledge has limitations, and we need to learn and recognize again.

But this does not mean that we are going to remove the mathematics, physical chemistry from the textbook. They exercise their thinking skills, train their common sense, and lay the foundation for future physics and chemical workers. It also affects our way of thinking in a subtle way. We are now building a digital world, at the climax of the information revolution. To be practical, computer-related knowledge is now far more useful than matching chemical equations or solving trigonometric functions. At this time, what is wrong with making education match reality?

However, now you will only see what happens when mathematics teachers take computer classes or physics teachers take computer classes. It is because in our basic education, computers are not valued, and there are few computer education talents.

Let ’s look at Ding Lei ’s proposal again:

In fact, every article is meaningful.

I think that Ding Lei’s proposal, in addition to the “add programming to the exam assessment”, is too early, and it will take several years or even ten years to lay the ground. The other is no problem and it is urgent.


4. “Do n’t call the programmer” capitalist “”

There are many arguments against capitalists now, and this is okay. But in this matter, many people think that programmers are rich, and programming is education for the rich, it is not necessary.

You should understand that programmers are the most common way for today ’s poor children to achieve class transitions and “salted fish rollovers”.

I have seen that parents are all laid-off workers, and they are now in Tencent and bought Porsche by self-study program. I have also seen their parents divorce and their family conditions are very poor. Hangzhou bought a house.

I have met ordinary children, because they are good at technology, they are now founders and CTOs of large companies, and have long realized financialFree; I have seen more and more. Through the procedure, the first year’s income exceeds the annual salary of the father’s work for more than 20 years.

If you have worked for a few years and have some knowledge of this world, you should have seen more than one similar case. They have no good conditions since they were young, purely because of the hard work of poor children and choosing the right path.

Many people now like to abuse the “Capital”, and even do not divide it according to the “possession of means of production”, but criticize all people who are better than themselves as capitalists to criticize-his annual salary is 100 Wan, the capitalist, I will scold him.

But it’s actually not good. Don’t keep looking at the world blindfolded and spraying everything online against everything. This is harmful to yourself.


This article comes from WeChat public account: write a story for you (ID: raistlin2017) , author: Breslin