To me - the problem is not enough programmers willing to come into teaching. Programmers just want to be in startups right now.
Its not really surprising, considering that programmers can make significantly more (even before considering the lure of the potential upside of equity) in the private sector (startup or not) -- or even as programmers in the public sector -- than they could hope to teaching, and without paying for the additional required certification and credentialing requirements to get into teaching.
Without going into the debate about the programming gender disparity and lighting that fire, if you've got very few teachers from the subset of the population that for whatever reason correlates with computer programming, you're likely to end up with very few school teachers that are interested enough or qualified to teach it.
I thank my stars that my high-school chemistry teacher had sons that grew up in the Apple II era to be computer programmers and that she thought it was important enough to teach an elective in it.
[1]http://www.aaeteachers.org/index.php/blog/757-the-teacher-ge... [2]http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/software-engineer/it-gender...
But I'm not sure I would want to teach a real class either. Computer Science is very hit-or-miss. Seems bad to force a kid to complete a class when they have no aptitude for it.
Final side note: I help run Boise Code Camp, which is held once a year around spring break. As part of that we devote one room just to kid topics (grade school-middle-school). That room accounts for over 10% of our attendance.
(Would we still have shop classes if students had a chance to try it out first?)
ETA: On reflection I suspect many here won't see it that way. It's worth pointing out that, even in the public system, there are different schools, and different subjects, for kids whom the system identifies as "smart", than for those whom it does not.
The former will generally have ample opportunities to learn about computers and programming whether it's officially sanctioned or not, and indeed will probably do so more successfully if it isn't, because being required to do it makes it feel less like fun.
The latter will have to learn that kind of thing on their own, if they're inclined to it, because the system isn't going to trouble itself, the attitude being that anything more complicated than making change and operating a point-of-sale system is almost certain to be wasted on them anyway, and trying to impart complexities to them will only leave them bored and frustrated anyway. (This is in fact true, in a superficial sense, but it has nothing to do with their ability to cope with complexity, and everything to do with the way it'd be put to them. See also: the utter, abject incompetence with which almost all high-school-level mathematics is taught.)
It works this way because it was explicitly designed to work this way by people who genuinely believed in the progressive utopia, where in exchange for there being a specific and fitting place for everyone, everyone was trimmed and pared down to fit a specific place. (See also: Aldous Huxley. Why do you think he went to the trouble of writing a book-length satire of this kind of thinking? Just for the hell of it?) Unfortunately, their design was fundamentally flawed, and they therefore bequeathed to us a system which cannot possibly bear up under its own weight. Fortunately, their design was fundamentally flawed, so the system they inflicted upon us will inevitably collapse and make way for something new which might turn out to be better, not least because it could hardly be worse.
But actually - the opposite is also true. In general, communities want men participating in kids' lives. You do have to build a little trust - but IMHO time well spent. And (elementary age) kids are also the best kind of people - usually they're not shouting, yelling and bawling - most of the time they are genuinely lovely people. Now this is a generalization - and it varies from place to place - and my school is only half comprised of lower-income kids - but yeah - kids this age are at an age of wonder and discovery.
Teaching is just programming a child's mind. I wish more programmers had an appreciation for that. I would venture to say that computers are MORE stubborn than children. :)