6 ms·

Sounds like a hacker house. Why call it a university if it doesn't grant degrees?

skizm 11y ago
Honestly it probably makes it more acceptable to the "everyone needs to go to college" crowd. Trade schools have been around for a while, but for some reason people think you need a "university degree" to get anywhere. I assume they are trying to bridge that mental gap by using similar language to that of traditional colleges / universities. Also "trade schools" and / or specialty schools rarely have the same social aspects of a traditional school, which (even if you personally don't value that) is a big selling point for traditional schools. Maybe they are trying to capture some of that and mix it with the specialization of a trade school. All speculation of course, but seems reasonable I think.
- gravypod 11y ago
  Honestly, I wish there were major respected trade schools that taught CS/Software Engineering/IT/IS. The university environment, in my opinion, is adverse to the development of good CS knowledge. Most of us on here, I'd say, have learned through trying and experimentation and that is why we are fairly good at what we proclaim to do. University doesn't foster that kind of understanding. I also hate that currently I need to take 5 physics classes, an accounting class, a social sciences class, and 3 "study" classes to get my major.
  - adrianN 11y ago
    I guess that depends on what you call "good CS knowledge". It's true in my experience that universities are not particularly good at teaching the actual engineering part of software engineering. But I that that is because the major is called "Computer Science", not Software Engineering. In my opinion, universities' main focus should be on educating potential scientists, not churn out workers for the industry. That implies a heavy focus on theory, with the practical parts being mostly self-taught when necessary.
  - brodawg 11y ago
    I think you're missing the point here. Those physics classes will teach you to think about problems abstractly. In my experience, my knowledge of physics has helped me think about algorithmic problems significantly. Even if you don't use the physics itself, it's good to learn. The accounting might not help you so much for CS, but it could be useful. And a few liberal arts classes are always good for breadth of education, and making you realize that you can always pick up a good book and read it, and that not everything you do has to be so math and science oriented. Also, for the record, what you would learn at a trade school would be "programming". What they teach at university is "computer science". There is a pretty serious distinction, and I don't really believe you can learn computer science properly without a formal education (even if that comes from self-studying formal books - but teaching yourself javascript is not computer science).
    - saint_fiasco 11y ago
      >Those physics classes will teach you to think about problems abstractly So do the classes on computer science and algorithms. The reason universities choose to teach those things using physics classes instead of logic class or algorithms class are just historical accidents. >And a few liberal arts classes are always good for breadth of education, and making you realize that you can always pick up a good book and read it You can get that for almost free at a bookstore or a library.
      - brodawg 11y ago
        Yes, the traditional courses do teach you that as well - to some extent - but the point is it's important to see how different fields do it. I think my classes in algorithms are as useful to my research in physics as my classes in physics are to my research in algorithms.
    - MattSteelblade 11y ago
      I disagree. One of the most enjoyable classes I took was Weather and Climatology. Completely irrelevant to my current work and I paid a significant sum of money to take that required science credit.
  - logfromblammo 11y ago
    Standardized tests can get you out of most "breadth requirements". That's how I picked up minors in both chemistry and cognitive science. Had I known then what I know now, I would have skipped even more of the fluff and spent my last two years splitting my time between classes and internships instead of learning additional facts and skills that ultimately had no marketable value. I can count on zero hands the number of times I have profited by taking those university classes not directly relevant to abstract mathematics, computer software, or electronics hardware. The supposed value of "well rounded graduates and alumni" seems very much like self-serving propaganda now. How about instead of spending three hours a week writing literary analyses of famous books, the university sponsors and organizes three mandatory hours of weekly networking events with real workers from relevant industries? That would have been worth the tuition. To this day, I still can't understand why anyone would want to read _Walden Two_ instead of doing something more useful, like separating and categorizing all the marshmallows from a box of Lucky Charms, or removing potential airway blockages in the nasal passages with the fingers.
  - wfo 11y ago
    "Good CS knowledge" isn't 'learning git'. It's mathematics, theory of computation, recursion theory and type theory and PL, compilers, complexity theory and algorithms, advanced data structures, concurrency and distributed systems etc. If you know these, you should be able to pick up more applied subjects on the job quickly. You very much need a university to teach you this. Social sciences will make you a more well-rounded person able to see past just technical concerns. Physics and social sciences will help you understand the world around you. And it sounds like you want university to help you write business logic for accounting software, so an accounting class will do you well. If all you want to do is write simple code for say CRUD applications then you're right University isn't the place to learn that and a trade school would be better. In tech you already have the best trade school in the universe, the internet, and the best resume in the universe, a github. We have learned a long time ago that letting students decide to study exactly what they want when they are 18 gives you lopsided uneducated graduates who know a tiny bit about the things they were good at already; being well-rounded is EXTREMELY valuable, even more valuable than being an excellent programmer even in tech. The hard parts of software in practice are not writing the code, they are understanding what the user/client wants and how to translate that from vague fuzzy human communication to something specific and technical.
    - gravypod 11y ago
      > theory of computation, recursion theory and type theory and PL, compilers, complexity theory and algorithms, advanced data structures, concurrency and distributed systems etc All of those are fairly basic topics that most people can pick up in an afternoon or two. These are all things that anyone who has been programming, reading, and interacting in the field of computer science understand. I could understand someone requesting that knowledge be provided to them in a college environment. What I object to is universities charging for the "well-rounded"-ness that you speak of. Can you please define for me what it means to be well rounded? From what I have seen is that no, no one can define what it means to be well rounded. What do you have to do to be well rounded? No, no one can tell me that either. Some how having gone through a university you are proscribed this trait of being in the "know". You automatically are transformed into a scholar, a person who is now magically "well rounded". Don't get me wrong, I think that there needs to be a structured curriculum, but only of things you need to understand make it in your respective specialization. For me, I'd love to get into building compilers, operating systems, digital signal processing, and general software development. For me, I'd say this is the perfect regiment for me: * Full understanding of the computer booting process, understanding of modern processor features. - Write a self hosting operating system, bootloader, and learn to write a BIOS for an example computer * Software maintenance and revision control - Following the current industry best-standard practices * High level math with a focus in signal processing * Familiarization with X top programming languages at the time of graduation - This should include standard formatting for each language, understanding implementation details, and full familiarization with X top used libraries and standard library * Understand logic and problem solving You may notice that I have annotated some of the things I feel I should learn, others I have not. If I have annotated it, it is because I have learned to do this on my own time and I want to expand that knowledge and I know it will help me professionally. The things I have not annotated are things that I have a basic understanding of, but I need someone to teach me although I am not getting that at a university. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong about this. I think these are fairly rational claims that I am making. Maybe I'm completely wrong and being able to quote shake-spear will help me when I need to learn the documentation for int 0x13 when I need to load a file on a 30 year old IBM PC when fixing a kernel level bug at some company, or when I need to write software to process data coming from sensors at 100GHz. Edit: Updated formatting.
  - sologoub 11y ago
    The accounting and other non-concentration classes are meant to give you a broader base of knowledge and better prepare you for adult life/career. Understanding basic principles of account is pretty important, if less fun. While this not realistic, if people were better educated about finance and understood that there really is no free lunch, the 2008 financial crisis wouldn't be as bad. Unfortunately, human nature is to say that this time it's different...
  - eli_gottlieb 11y ago
    Five physics classes? Really? So... what subjects are those? Because you should definitely be taking at least a little physics and quite a lot of math.
    - gravypod 11y ago
      I can opt out of the physics, but I'd have to take something like chemistry or biology. I'm taking the physics route because I feel that will benefit me specifically based on the carries that I'd like. I just rechecked, I think I need to take Biophysics, Astronomy, and nuclear physics with 1 bridge class between the three. Why? Because. I'd love to take the nuclear physics because that sounds fun, but and biophysics will make me claw my eyes out. Also, for my university I for some reason need to take 3 random 300 level classes and three electives as well as 3 PE classes, 8 social science classes. I can't for the life of me justify these in my situation. To be honest, I'd trade the time I would waste on this with CS classes branching into different fields. Maybe it's just me and that I know exactly what I would like to do with my career but this seems useless to me.
      - selimthegrim 11y ago
        I'd pass on the nuclear physics, biophysics is where it's at these days. (Now if you meant particle physics you might have a point). But nuclear physics itself is kind of considered as a field whose heyday is past.
        gravypod 11y ago
        Or I can take thermodynamics hate my life. I have a few options, I just don't like many of them.
        eli_gottlieb 11y ago
        Spoilers: if you learn statistical thermodynamics, machine learning is easy.
- MisterBastahrd 11y ago
  This isn't even a trade school. Trade schools definitely have classes and lectures.
dragonwriter 11y ago
Because "universities" are primarily about research -- which is why that's the main criteria in hiring faculty -- and secondarily about credentialing students by granting degrees, and this new experiment is jettisoning the secondary function (leaving project completion -- including, e.g., research publications) as, apparently, the main concrete résumé-applicable output.

skizm 11y ago

Honestly it probably makes it more acceptable to the "everyone needs to go to college" crowd. Trade schools have been around for a while, but for some reason people think you need a "university degree" to get anywhere. I assume they are trying to bridge that mental gap by using similar language to that of traditional colleges / universities. Also "trade schools" and / or specialty schools rarely have the same social aspects of a traditional school, which (even if you personally don't value that) is a big selling point for traditional schools. Maybe they are trying to capture some of that and mix it with the specialization of a trade school. All speculation of course, but seems reasonable I think.

gravypod 11y ago
Honestly, I wish there were major respected trade schools that taught CS/Software Engineering/IT/IS. The university environment, in my opinion, is adverse to the development of good CS knowledge. Most of us on here, I'd say, have learned through trying and experimentation and that is why we are fairly good at what we proclaim to do. University doesn't foster that kind of understanding. I also hate that currently I need to take 5 physics classes, an accounting class, a social sciences class, and 3 "study" classes to get my major.
- adrianN 11y ago
  I guess that depends on what you call "good CS knowledge". It's true in my experience that universities are not particularly good at teaching the actual engineering part of software engineering. But I that that is because the major is called "Computer Science", not Software Engineering. In my opinion, universities' main focus should be on educating potential scientists, not churn out workers for the industry. That implies a heavy focus on theory, with the practical parts being mostly self-taught when necessary.
- brodawg 11y ago
  I think you're missing the point here. Those physics classes will teach you to think about problems abstractly. In my experience, my knowledge of physics has helped me think about algorithmic problems significantly. Even if you don't use the physics itself, it's good to learn. The accounting might not help you so much for CS, but it could be useful. And a few liberal arts classes are always good for breadth of education, and making you realize that you can always pick up a good book and read it, and that not everything you do has to be so math and science oriented. Also, for the record, what you would learn at a trade school would be "programming". What they teach at university is "computer science". There is a pretty serious distinction, and I don't really believe you can learn computer science properly without a formal education (even if that comes from self-studying formal books - but teaching yourself javascript is not computer science).
  - saint_fiasco 11y ago
    >Those physics classes will teach you to think about problems abstractly So do the classes on computer science and algorithms. The reason universities choose to teach those things using physics classes instead of logic class or algorithms class are just historical accidents. >And a few liberal arts classes are always good for breadth of education, and making you realize that you can always pick up a good book and read it You can get that for almost free at a bookstore or a library.
    - brodawg 11y ago
      Yes, the traditional courses do teach you that as well - to some extent - but the point is it's important to see how different fields do it. I think my classes in algorithms are as useful to my research in physics as my classes in physics are to my research in algorithms.
  - MattSteelblade 11y ago
    I disagree. One of the most enjoyable classes I took was Weather and Climatology. Completely irrelevant to my current work and I paid a significant sum of money to take that required science credit.
- logfromblammo 11y ago
  Standardized tests can get you out of most "breadth requirements". That's how I picked up minors in both chemistry and cognitive science. Had I known then what I know now, I would have skipped even more of the fluff and spent my last two years splitting my time between classes and internships instead of learning additional facts and skills that ultimately had no marketable value. I can count on zero hands the number of times I have profited by taking those university classes not directly relevant to abstract mathematics, computer software, or electronics hardware. The supposed value of "well rounded graduates and alumni" seems very much like self-serving propaganda now. How about instead of spending three hours a week writing literary analyses of famous books, the university sponsors and organizes three mandatory hours of weekly networking events with real workers from relevant industries? That would have been worth the tuition. To this day, I still can't understand why anyone would want to read _Walden Two_ instead of doing something more useful, like separating and categorizing all the marshmallows from a box of Lucky Charms, or removing potential airway blockages in the nasal passages with the fingers.
- wfo 11y ago
  "Good CS knowledge" isn't 'learning git'. It's mathematics, theory of computation, recursion theory and type theory and PL, compilers, complexity theory and algorithms, advanced data structures, concurrency and distributed systems etc. If you know these, you should be able to pick up more applied subjects on the job quickly. You very much need a university to teach you this. Social sciences will make you a more well-rounded person able to see past just technical concerns. Physics and social sciences will help you understand the world around you. And it sounds like you want university to help you write business logic for accounting software, so an accounting class will do you well. If all you want to do is write simple code for say CRUD applications then you're right University isn't the place to learn that and a trade school would be better. In tech you already have the best trade school in the universe, the internet, and the best resume in the universe, a github. We have learned a long time ago that letting students decide to study exactly what they want when they are 18 gives you lopsided uneducated graduates who know a tiny bit about the things they were good at already; being well-rounded is EXTREMELY valuable, even more valuable than being an excellent programmer even in tech. The hard parts of software in practice are not writing the code, they are understanding what the user/client wants and how to translate that from vague fuzzy human communication to something specific and technical.
  - gravypod 11y ago
    > theory of computation, recursion theory and type theory and PL, compilers, complexity theory and algorithms, advanced data structures, concurrency and distributed systems etc All of those are fairly basic topics that most people can pick up in an afternoon or two. These are all things that anyone who has been programming, reading, and interacting in the field of computer science understand. I could understand someone requesting that knowledge be provided to them in a college environment. What I object to is universities charging for the "well-rounded"-ness that you speak of. Can you please define for me what it means to be well rounded? From what I have seen is that no, no one can define what it means to be well rounded. What do you have to do to be well rounded? No, no one can tell me that either. Some how having gone through a university you are proscribed this trait of being in the "know". You automatically are transformed into a scholar, a person who is now magically "well rounded". Don't get me wrong, I think that there needs to be a structured curriculum, but only of things you need to understand make it in your respective specialization. For me, I'd love to get into building compilers, operating systems, digital signal processing, and general software development. For me, I'd say this is the perfect regiment for me: * Full understanding of the computer booting process, understanding of modern processor features. - Write a self hosting operating system, bootloader, and learn to write a BIOS for an example computer * Software maintenance and revision control - Following the current industry best-standard practices * High level math with a focus in signal processing * Familiarization with X top programming languages at the time of graduation - This should include standard formatting for each language, understanding implementation details, and full familiarization with X top used libraries and standard library * Understand logic and problem solving You may notice that I have annotated some of the things I feel I should learn, others I have not. If I have annotated it, it is because I have learned to do this on my own time and I want to expand that knowledge and I know it will help me professionally. The things I have not annotated are things that I have a basic understanding of, but I need someone to teach me although I am not getting that at a university. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong about this. I think these are fairly rational claims that I am making. Maybe I'm completely wrong and being able to quote shake-spear will help me when I need to learn the documentation for int 0x13 when I need to load a file on a 30 year old IBM PC when fixing a kernel level bug at some company, or when I need to write software to process data coming from sensors at 100GHz. Edit: Updated formatting.
- sologoub 11y ago
  The accounting and other non-concentration classes are meant to give you a broader base of knowledge and better prepare you for adult life/career. Understanding basic principles of account is pretty important, if less fun. While this not realistic, if people were better educated about finance and understood that there really is no free lunch, the 2008 financial crisis wouldn't be as bad. Unfortunately, human nature is to say that this time it's different...
- eli_gottlieb 11y ago
  Five physics classes? Really? So... what subjects are those? Because you should definitely be taking at least a little physics and quite a lot of math.
  - gravypod 11y ago
    I can opt out of the physics, but I'd have to take something like chemistry or biology. I'm taking the physics route because I feel that will benefit me specifically based on the carries that I'd like. I just rechecked, I think I need to take Biophysics, Astronomy, and nuclear physics with 1 bridge class between the three. Why? Because. I'd love to take the nuclear physics because that sounds fun, but and biophysics will make me claw my eyes out. Also, for my university I for some reason need to take 3 random 300 level classes and three electives as well as 3 PE classes, 8 social science classes. I can't for the life of me justify these in my situation. To be honest, I'd trade the time I would waste on this with CS classes branching into different fields. Maybe it's just me and that I know exactly what I would like to do with my career but this seems useless to me.
    - selimthegrim 11y ago
      I'd pass on the nuclear physics, biophysics is where it's at these days. (Now if you meant particle physics you might have a point). But nuclear physics itself is kind of considered as a field whose heyday is past.
      - gravypod 11y ago
        Or I can take thermodynamics hate my life. I have a few options, I just don't like many of them.
        eli_gottlieb 11y ago
        Spoilers: if you learn statistical thermodynamics, machine learning is easy.
MisterBastahrd 11y ago
This isn't even a trade school. Trade schools definitely have classes and lectures.

dragonwriter 11y ago

Because "universities" are primarily about research -- which is why that's the main criteria in hiring faculty -- and secondarily about credentialing students by granting degrees, and this new experiment is jettisoning the secondary function (leaving project completion -- including, e.g., research publications) as, apparently, the main concrete résumé-applicable output.