Too much of what's called computer science in the public education system involves basic IT skills. That's one of the complaints about precollege education lodged by the Association for Computing Machinery in a statement on computer science in the K-12 education system. The ACM has listened to president-elect Obama discuss plans for improving and expanding education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), and wants to make sure computer science isn't left out. But integrating computer science into earlier phases of education may be a longer-term challenge than the ACM's statement indicates.

The ACM's document lays things out right at the start, stating, "We believe that computer science education should be an integral part of our education system." Bobby Schnabel of Indiana University, who chairs the ACM's Education Policy Committee, elaborated on that theme in a statement announcing its release. "Computing education benefits all students, not just those interested in pursuing computer science or information technology careers," said Schnabel. "But students often do not have many opportunities to engage in rigorous computer science study at the K-12 level."

The ACM points out that people with computing skills remain in demand on the job market, even as the number of students focusing on computer science has plunged in recent years. Computer science is also doing very poorly at attracting participation from women and minorities. Part of this may arise from problems with the public education system. At the high school level, computer science courses are generally treated as optional or electives, rather than a college preparatory course. Those who teach these classes have typically had a broad range of educational experience, and the certification programs are spotty, meaning that the course material and quality of instruction can be all over the map.

Partly as a result of this lack of standards, and partly as a result of a lack of public understanding of computer science, the ACM suggests that many classes bearing the label computer science simply aren't. "The distinctions have blurred," the report suggests, "between what is called computer science and what is, in fact, information technology literacy and the use of technology to support learning."

The solution, according to the ACM, is to treat computer science as a core part of a modern education. Detailed instruction should start at the junior high school level, as that's where long-term interests are frequently fostered. Studies should determine how students wind up engaging with the field, and the education and certification of teachers, as well as the course design, should be revamped in accordance with the results of these studies.

In general, I support efforts to improve STEM education, and I'm certain the ACM is right in suggesting that there is plenty of room for improvement in CS education. Nevertheless, it seems that the ACM is running the risk of overstating its case.

"Computer science also provides an important skill set for students entering any career area," the statement reads. This is true to the extent that basic math and logic skills, as well as an organized approach to problem solving, should be part of any general education. But a lot of actual computer science involves the development of skills that are significantly abstracted from, and far more specialized than, these basic skills. Teaching skills like logic and problem solving are only generally useful if the instruction includes some way of relating those skills to issues outside the field; any revamp of computer science instruction would need to ensure that it does that.

This isn't an insurmountable problem, but it does suggest that the restructuring of the CS education process may be more challenging and take longer than the ACM might like. But the group also neglected to make the case for one of its major claims. The document correctly draws a distinction between basic, IT-level computing skills and actual computer science education, but neglects to discuss the relative value of the two. Education has often focused on the former, because it's perceived by many in the public as being the more important skill. If the ACM really wants an emphasis on the latter, it's going to have to try harder to convince the public of that perspective.