Share This Page

Sen. Casey pushes for more technology graduates

The U.S. Senate soon could take up a bill to push states and schools to make computer science courses part of their core curricula.

The bill that Sen. Bob Casey Jr., D-Scranton, introduced would offer competitive grants to states and schools to beef up their high school computer science offerings. More than 140,000 computer science jobs become available each year, but fewer than 40,000 people graduate each year with bachelor's degrees in the subject, according to the Joint Economic Committee, a House-Senate committee.

"We're not getting enough young people involved in this course of study," Casey said during a rollout of the Computer Science Education Act at the Pittsburgh Science and Technology Academy, a public magnet school in Oakland. The Senate likely will debate the bill in coming weeks as lawmakers take up a rewrite of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Casey said.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl and Google Inc. Vice President of Engineering Andrew Moore joined Casey at the event. Moore said the gap between job openings and qualified people to fill them "keeps me up at night."

Part of the problem is high schools aren't preparing graduates to move into computer science majors in college, Casey said. Many states don't have a certification process for high school computer science teachers, and the courses are treated as electives rather than core curriculum. He said the Pittsburgh school at which he spoke -- which focuses on high-tech computing and robotics courses -- could serve as a national model.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.