Those jobs are gone forever. Let’s gear up for what’s next.
Quincy Larson

This was a great read, but the end left me slightly disappointed. Yes, we do need more people learning to code; however, there is no need to use the expensive route of universities to teach it. Coding instruction itself is also succumbing to the tidal wave of automation in the ever-expanding sea of MOOCs (massively open online courses) that are out there. Many of these courses are free or very cheap to take and can teach those adequately motivated how to code.

I understand the desire to preserve the usefulness of teachers and professors, but if we let it do so, technology can replace them or at least drastically reduce the needed quantities of these roles. Most schools are much like factories that are designed to shape children into something resembling robots (at least in behavior). It is an antiquated institution based on the ideals of the industrial age, which desired cooperative, compliant workers with a modicum of useful skills before hire.

Our economy, however, has changed to the point where many employers seek workers who have already developed either significant breadth or depth of skills relevant to the role. A one-size-fits-all approach to education no longer works optimally. With automated learning, we could deliver instruction tailored to the individual student at scale. Teachers could still tutor those falling behind during the transition, but soon enough tech will be able to do this on its own as well.

Like what you read? Give Jeremy Jameson a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.