jona@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Jon Alperin) (06/13/91)
You know.... When I was a student, I felt this exact same way. If in the business world we are so often called upon to work in a group setting, and many large scale computer applications require the interactions and teamwork of many people (which includes the liberal re-use of code written by others) what makes the eductaional system continually work at the opposite goals. Is the real goal of the educational system to prepare students for PhD's in research, or to prepare them with the skills necessary to life a comfortable life? Yeah, I know...this probably doesn't belong in the group. But I wanted to say it anyway. -- Jon Alperin Bell Communications Research ---> Internet: jona@iscp.bellcore.com ---> Voicenet: (908) 699-8674 ---> UUNET: uunet!bcr!jona * All opinions and stupid questions are my own *
tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Tim Chown) (06/14/91)
In <1991Jun12.214805.13737@bellcore.bellcore.com> jona@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Jon Alperin) writes: >You know.... > When I was a student, I felt this exact same way. If in the business world we >are so often called upon to work in a group setting, and many large scale >computer applications require the interactions and teamwork of many people >(which includes the liberal re-use of code written by others) what makes >the eductaional system continually work at the opposite goals. Is the real goal >of the educational system to prepare students for PhD's in research, or to >prepare them with the skills necessary to life a comfortable life? But a degree is awarded on the basis of *your* skills at design/coding and on *your* ability to interact in a group project, not somebody else's! A good CS degree has management/teamwork skills built in (ours does, quick plug ;-), but should still demand individual performance. Tim --
mike@bria.UUCP (mike.stefanik) (06/16/91)
In an article, tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Tim Chown) writes: >But a degree is awarded on the basis of *your* skills at design/coding >and on *your* ability to interact in a group project, not somebody else's! >A good CS degree has management/teamwork skills built in (ours does, >quick plug ;-), but should still demand individual performance. Hardly. A degree is awarded on the basis of yours skills at taking tests, and conforming to the norm. If the goals of universities in the U.S. are to produce thinking, well-rounded human beings, they are failing miserably. Regardless of their objective, they *are* producing sponges who equivocate learning with letting someone else do their thinking for them. Intentional or not, the end results of four years of "higher education" is rather Orwellian, methinks. By and large, the best programmers I have met have no papers. Personally, I got rather disgusted with the entire fiasco years ago. I walked into a class, and here was one of the most repected CS professors talking about the value of goto's in programming languages, and that structured coding was a passing fad. It still makes me ill to think about it ... -- Mike Stefanik, MGI Inc., Los Angeles -- Opinions stated are never realistic! "To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards out of men." -Lincoln
jona@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Jon Alperin) (06/17/91)
tim, Yes a good CS degree is based on MY individual skills. But a good educational system is based on by ability to interact, react, and be proactive in the "real world". How many administrators out there learned everything they needed to know through their degree? How many were prepared for the politics which are an integral part of administering large user systems? Does learning COBOL prepare one to assume the role of network administrator? Or prepare one to deal with the moral and privacy issues which pop up on related threads all across the net? I may have had an accounting class as part of my CS undergrad degree, but it sure didn't prepare me for the detailed budgeting which I must do in my job. Before I get flamed, I do realize that there are basic skills which are needed....my comments were more along the lines of what kinds of basic skills should be provided, and the direction our educational system is taking us. How many people get an education of "system administrator"? How many people out there really consider themselves "computer scientists" (or for that matter, just a "scientist")? There are many areas of specialization in our field, and we must learn to be adaptable to the latest and greatest, as well as knowledgeable about the "tried and true" in order to be effective. I found that my masters degree taught me no new information which I had not already received as an undergrad; it only refined certain topics to such a low level that my expertise would have been very narrow. My original posting tried to point out the large breadth of knowledge I am expected to have by the persons who pay me $$$$ every week. 'nuff said. -- Jon Alperin Bell Communications Research ---> Internet: jona@iscp.bellcore.com ---> Voicenet: (908) 699-8674 ---> UUNET: uunet!bcr!jona * All opinions and stupid questions are my own *
tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Tim Chown) (06/17/91)
In <287@bria.UUCP> mike@bria.UUCP (mike.stefanik) writes: >In an article, tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Tim Chown) writes: >>But a degree is awarded on the basis of *your* skills at design/coding >>and on *your* ability to interact in a group project, not somebody else's! >>A good CS degree has management/teamwork skills built in (ours does, >>quick plug ;-), but should still demand individual performance. >Hardly. A degree is awarded on the basis of yours skills at taking tests, >and conforming to the norm. If the goals of universities in the U.S. are >to produce thinking, well-rounded human beings, they are failing miserably. That, then, is a fault of that degree course. A challenging course combines the essentials of design, teamwork, management, programming, and so on and bases a large proportion of the degree on individual and team assignments, and less on sweating out exams. >By and large, the best programmers I have met have no papers. Personally, >I got rather disgusted with the entire fiasco years ago. I walked into a >class, and here was one of the most repected CS professors talking about the >value of goto's in programming languages, and that structured coding was >a passing fad. It still makes me ill to think about it ... Respected amongst who? A good programmer doesn't necessarily make a good manager, and vice versa. A programmer just sits down and implements the spec (whether formal or not) given by the boss; rather like sitting on a producion line. I suspect your experiences are from one bad apple, or at least I hope they are. Computer science as a discipline is still not that well formed. Anyway, which group should this discussion be in ??? Perhaps we need a comp.courses.content ;-) Tim --
scotts@qsp.COM (Scott Simpers) (06/19/91)
Sorry, Tim, I have to agree with Mike. Degrees are given on the basis of how well you take tests, not whether you really know anything. I once had a well respected professor for a course in Assembly Language. Grading: 5 points per program, 25 points for each of three exams (giving a convenient total of 100). Each exam consisted of 5 questions, worth 5 points each. So, the fact that I got all 5 programs nailed meant no more than whether or not I got a good score on one exam. To top if off, some of the exam questions were trick questions. IMHO, the way College degrees are given out has become as f---ed up as our elementary schools. But that's a topic for another newsgroup. Scott Simpers Quality Software Products voice: (213)410-0303 5711 W Slauson Avenue Suite 240 fax: (213)410-0124 Culver City, CA 90230 scotts@qsp.com
tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Tim Chown) (06/20/91)
In <2604@maserati.qsp.UUCP> scotts@qsp.COM (Scott Simpers) writes: >Sorry, Tim, I have to agree with Mike. Degrees are given on the basis of >how well you take tests, not whether you really know anything. I once had >a well respected professor for a course in Assembly Language. Grading: >5 points per program, 25 points for each of three exams (giving a convenient >total of 100). Each exam consisted of 5 questions, worth 5 points each. >So, the fact that I got all 5 programs nailed meant no more than whether or >not I got a good score on one exam. To top if off, some of the >exam questions were trick questions. >IMHO, the way College degrees are given out has become as f---ed up as our >elementary schools. But that's a topic for another newsgroup. Oh dear. I think I'm glad I took my degree and PhD over this side of the pond ;-) Clearly it depends were you do your degree, and generaliastions can't easily be made (or are US degrees more exam oriented??). Of my degree a very favourable 71.5% of the marks came from courseworks. The 2nd year group project, the 3rd year individual project and the management course were all 100% coursework. Our course puts emphasis on your own skills and doesn't intimidate you with exams. In fact our two semester system turned out so that my "finals" consisted of one exam in document preparation systems which contributed to 3.75% of my degree! I would not say this made the degree easier, but you were more likely to get out what you put in. And yes we do have well respected professors, very well respected. I believe a US professor is the equivalent of a lecturer over here - is this true? A visiting professor from California gave me this impression. Cheers! Tim PS. Where *should* we discuss this! --
alderson@Alderson.Stanford.EDU (Rich Alderson) (06/25/91)
In article <8231@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, tjc@ecs (Tim Chown) writes: >In <2604@maserati.qsp.UUCP> scotts@qsp.COM (Scott Simpers) writes: >>IMHO, the way College degrees are given out has become as f---ed up as our >>elementary schools. But that's a topic for another newsgroup. > >PS. Where *should* we discuss this! How about misc.education? I've directed followups accordingly. -- Rich Alderson 'I wish life was not so short,' he thought. 'Languages take Tops-20 Mgr. such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about.' AIR, Stanford --J. R. R. Tolkien, alderson@alderson.stanford.edu _The Lost Road_