At the Future of Education Technology Conference (FETC) in Orlando this week, educators from vastly different school environments — a private school in Westchester and a Title I charter school in the South Bronx — framed computer science as a foundation for computational thinking, rather than a narrow pathway to coding proficiency.
According to Kelly Powers, a middle school computer science teacher in New York, coding inherently demands brain power.
“Success in computer science, for me, it’s not much on preparing [students] for computer science degrees. I’m preparing them for how to think,” Powers said. “In the act of coding, you have to do a lot of thinking. There's a lot of cognitive load, but that's why you need your methods of teaching computer science so that you don't turn a kid off to problem solving in general."
The conversation at FETC underscored a persistent, growing tension in K-12 education: balancing core academic requirements with the skills students need to thrive in the modern workforce. Thus, rather than positioning computer science as an elective or enrichment opportunity, the panelists emphasized its role in developing skills that cut across disciplines and careers, like logic, perseverance, collaboration and creative problem-solving.
“We need to make students marketable. And that's what schools need to understand,” said Stephanie Lugo, director of robotics at South Bronx Charter School for International Cultures & the Arts. “It shouldn't be an option, because yes, core classes are important, but once they graduate, then what happens?”
Moreover, both Powers and Lugo cautioned against reducing computer science to “learning to code,” instead encouraging districts to prioritize computational thinking — including logic, algorithms and evaluation — through activities like creating, debugging and tinkering incorporated into all subjects.
Dora Palfi, co-founder of the coding-education company Imagi, for which Powers and Lugo are classroom ambassadors, said current U.S. education systems often promote courses that are tested at the state level, rather than those that could prepare students for life after school. She noted that while some educators are deeply committed to innovative, forward-thinking computer science instruction, scaling it remains a challenge.
“The system is built in a way where things that are tested and very straightforward get prioritized, but then maybe that’s not necessarily the most important thing to prepare students for their lives after school,” Palfi noted. "I think it’s harder to get the standard across a district or state. It makes it all dependent on the educator.”
This reliance on individual educators to implement effective computer science curricula, the speakers said, highlights a need for leadership buy-in and structural support. Lugo, for example, highlighted how grateful she is that the executive director of her school encourages and implements innovative solutions.
“If your administrator is really motivated, the teachers will be. And if the teachers are, then the kids are," Lugo added. "It really is top-down."
Beyond leadership challenges, Powers pointed to inequities in access to devices, programming opportunities and role models as ongoing barriers to effective computer science education. She said embedding computer science into the school day, rather than relegating it to extracurriculars, is critical to addressing those gaps.
“For kids who have the monies and the means, they can go to [coding] camps. They can go to after-school programs," she said. "But when you do have it baked into the curriculum during the school day, that’s a big part for me. Then at least you're starting to make some progress in solving some of the inequity issues.”
Speakers also emphasized that while classroom teachers can drive change, state governments and local education agencies play a key role in sustaining it. Districts mostly receive funding based on traditional outcomes, like standardized testing and average daily attendance. But funding could incentivize schools to align their academic priorities with workforce needs and ensure computational thinking remains paramount in student learning. If funding were tied to evidence of computational thinking and engagement, Powers said, targeted initiatives would be more sustainable and likely to grow over time.
