What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Code.org co-founder and CEO Hadi Partovi criticized The New York Times’ coverage of computer-science graduates struggling to find tech jobs, arguing that it fuels fears about the value of studying computer science and the effect of AI. His response does not settle whether recent graduates can find work: the competing accounts describe a tighter entry-level market, but the available reporting does not provide comparable labor-market data to verify either side’s broadest claims.
What Partovi criticized
GeekWire reported on September 30, 2025, that Partovi objected to The New York Times’ coverage and its September 29 episode of The Daily, titled “Big Tech Told Kids to Code. The Jobs Didn’t Follow.” The episode featured Times technology reporter Natasha Singer and described graduates who had been encouraged to learn coding and earn computer-science degrees but were finding the expected jobs harder to obtain. GeekWire’s report and the episode listing establish the dispute’s framing, not a definitive account of graduate employment outcomes.
The episode listing names a related Times background story, “Goodbye, $165,000 tech jobs. Student coders seek work at Chipotle.” That headline gives context for the episode, but it should not be treated as a verified wage benchmark or a representative account of all computer-science graduates.
What Partovi says about computer-science degrees
Partovi argued that the Times selected stories in a way that could intensify concern about tech companies, AI, and the value of coding education. GeekWire quoted him saying, “We shouldn’t be confused by the short-term shifts of some employers in some industries.” He also contended that simplified coding has made computer science more valuable, not less, and predicted demand for computer science would grow over time.
#1 Best Overall
GeekWire reported Partovi’s claim that computer science had the “highest median wage” and “fifth-lowest underemployment” among majors. The report excerpt does not identify the underlying dataset, measurement year, or exact figures, so those comparisons remain attributed claims rather than independently verified statistics. A field’s median wage or underemployment rate also does not, by itself, show how easily a new graduate can secure a first job.
How the Times episode framed the job problem
The episode’s listing presents the graduates’ difficulties as a challenge to the idea that studying computer science reliably leads to a high-paying job. Its synopsis describes a promise of a six-figure salary as having proved empty for thousands of students. That is the episode’s characterization; the available material does not independently verify the count or establish the broader outcomes behind it.
Individual accounts can show what a difficult job search looks like, but they cannot alone establish how common that experience is. Conversely, a favorable aggregate wage comparison would not erase the difficulty some recent graduates face in landing entry-level roles. These are related but distinct questions.
What University of Washington leaders said
Two leaders at the University of Washington’s Allen School offered a more qualified view in GeekWire’s report. Vice director and professor Dan Grossman said, “While the job market is tighter now than it was a few years ago, the sky is not falling.” Director and professor Magdalena Balazinska said the industry would continue to need “smart, creative software engineers who understand how to build and harness the latest tools — including AI.”
Their comments acknowledge tighter conditions while arguing that skilled engineers remain important. They do not quantify the current hiring market or establish how quickly demand will grow.
Does this show AI is making computer-science degrees obsolete?
No. The coverage and responses described here do not demonstrate that AI alone caused graduates’ hiring difficulties, nor do they establish that computer-science degrees have become obsolete. They capture a disagreement about current entry-level conditions, the long-term value of the field, and how confidently schools and technology companies should connect coding education with job prospects.
Code.org’s mission helps explain Partovi’s response: GeekWire reports that Hadi and Ali Partovi launched the nonprofit in 2013 to spread computer-science knowledge. That context is relevant to his perspective, but it does not independently verify his labor-market claims.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What prospective students and families can take from the dispute
- Separate a degree’s possible long-run value from the first-job hurdle. The claims about median wages and underemployment do not answer how difficult it is for a new graduate to get hired.
- Distinguish a reported experience from a measured trend. Graduate stories illustrate real job-search challenges, but broad conclusions require data about a clearly defined population and period.
- Treat forecasts as opinions unless supported by evidence. Partovi’s expectation of growing demand and the UW leaders’ view of continuing need are predictions, not guarantees for an individual student.
- Do not infer that AI caused a hiring shift from timing alone. The accounts discussed here do not isolate AI’s effect from other changes in employers’ hiring or the broader job market.
The available reporting does not supply a harmonized set of primary figures for recent graduates’ unemployment, wages, and underemployment. As a result, it supports describing the disagreement, not a numerical verdict on whether a computer-science degree still pays off or how often graduates find work.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
