That narrative is neither what I say nor believe. Our web page on our diversity outcomes (http://code.org/diversity ) makes this pretty clear. The recent article by reshma and ayah explains the mistakes in the narrative super well.https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/reshmasaujani/tech-gender-gap-pipeline-myth?bftw=&utm_term=4ldqpfp#4ldqpfp …
Lastly, I don't think our funding is why we have scale, I think it's the other way around. We weren't the best-funded to start. 10M girls tried @codeorg the first #HourOfCode. We were 13 people, 1 year in, total lifetime spend of $3.2M.
-
-
But... there's a different point you make which is true: my personal access and connections helped. No amount of money can buy some of the help we received early on to promote computer science.
-
I decided to give up my tech career, my salary, savings, and used every bit of access and connections I had to promote CS. My ask was "promote computer science, not
@codeorg" which is why you never see bill gates or celebs etc saying our name, they say coding or CS - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Negative. Any founder (for profit or non-profit) will tell you that hyper growth/scale is a derivative of resources. You’re being disingenuous to claim otherwise. And I say this as a founder whose org has had more demand than we could meet since day one.
-
Our story may be an exception. Our launch video (which was personally funded by me and my brother on a shoestring budget) had 10M views, ~1M petition signatures, ~20,000 teacher signups, before we had a single employee or outside funding.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
so there’s that...