4 ms·

"A CompSci grad is supposed to be able to do difficult things that arts grads simply can’t understand." /rant/ The majority of CS education that I've had so f

by ohyes 16y ago

"A CompSci grad is supposed to be able to do difficult things that arts grads simply can’t understand." /rant/ The majority of CS education that I've had so far has been theoretical. There has been a lot of math and pseudo code, and logic. Programming rarely comes into it, and when it does, it is (generally) trivial (and it is OK if you get it partially wrong). Compare this to my undergraduate in philosophy, where I was generally writing at minimum 30 pages per class per semester in term papers, regular writing assignments, and thousands of pages of reading. There is no question to me that the undergraduate philosophy degree was more challenging. (this is solely based on my experience, I do not mean to indicate it reflects all experiences with all MS CS/ BA PHIL experiences.) In the philosophy degree, I learned theory and wrote (and I wrote a lot). And sometimes my papers came back with lots of red ink. I took my lumps and rewrote them. In the CS degree I regurgitate facts, and write the occasional Java program. (Normally from a 'starter' program). There is no question to me that an ideal CS degree would be as programming intensive as an arts degree is writing intensive. Programming assignments for each class, and producing a substantial piece of work by the end of the class. You know, demonstrating knowledge.

city41 16y ago
> The majority of CS education that I've had so far has been theoretical. There has been a lot of math and pseudo code, and logic. Programming rarely comes into it, and when it does, it is (generally) trivial (and it is OK if you get it partially wrong). Here's my beef with this. It's programming. It involves a computer and perhaps an internet connection. Anyone, for essentially no money at all, can sit in the comfort of their own room and start writing programs. There's simply no excuse for students to not be doing this. It's not like a photography student who needs access to a dark room, or a chemistry student that needs an expensive lab, or whatever other types of careers out there that involve lots of expensive equipment. We're talking $1000 that just about every single college student has already spent. When I was in college I read SICP for the heck of it and in my discrete math class where the professor declared we could do our assignments in any language we wanted, I did them in Scheme. I also wrote a Sega Master System emulator, a game engine, a paint program and countless other things. I'm not trying to brag because when it comes down to it I consider myself a pretty average programmer. But it's not at all hard for a student to do this. When I am interviewing college grads I can smell the ones who just scraped by on their classes and didn't explore the field on their own at all a mile away. They always have and always will get a firm "no" from me, there's just no excuse in this field to not take the initiative to learn on your own.
- ohyes 16y ago
  Sure, I totally agree. I was mostly self taught in programming before starting the advanced degree. There isn't any teaching instruction with regard to the actual 'doing' of programming. The article states that CS majors should be able to 'do' things that arts majors can't do. Mostly, they can think about things that arts majors haven't learned about. But imagine if you are an English major. You want to be a great writer. Sure, you will be writing outside of class. But also, you will be writing a inside of class. Maybe an art major painting would be a better example, but the analogy stands; you should have rigorous practice in addition to the stuff that you do for the major, which should be fairly intensive in and of itself. I don't see programming being treated seriously as a craft in CS. It seems like something that Professors get research assistants to do for them. (In fact, I'm pretty sure a lot of professors wouldn't know a good program if it smacked them in the face). It is in this way much different from other college level disciplines, where the graduates are supposed to have gained some sort of skill. (liberal arts majors should know how to write, painters should paint, physicists and chemists, etc).
JustinSeriously 16y ago
I think this says more about your college/university than CS education in general. I have a BS in comp sci, and I had to write functioning code in almost every computer class I took. (The only exception being one A.I. course that was cross-listed with philosophy, and even there I used automata in my final paper.)

by ohyes 16y ago

city41 16y ago

> The majority of CS education that I've had so far has been theoretical. There has been a lot of math and pseudo code, and logic. Programming rarely comes into it, and when it does, it is (generally) trivial (and it is OK if you get it partially wrong). Here's my beef with this. It's programming. It involves a computer and perhaps an internet connection. Anyone, for essentially no money at all, can sit in the comfort of their own room and start writing programs. There's simply no excuse for students to not be doing this. It's not like a photography student who needs access to a dark room, or a chemistry student that needs an expensive lab, or whatever other types of careers out there that involve lots of expensive equipment. We're talking $1000 that just about every single college student has already spent. When I was in college I read SICP for the heck of it and in my discrete math class where the professor declared we could do our assignments in any language we wanted, I did them in Scheme. I also wrote a Sega Master System emulator, a game engine, a paint program and countless other things. I'm not trying to brag because when it comes down to it I consider myself a pretty average programmer. But it's not at all hard for a student to do this. When I am interviewing college grads I can smell the ones who just scraped by on their classes and didn't explore the field on their own at all a mile away. They always have and always will get a firm "no" from me, there's just no excuse in this field to not take the initiative to learn on your own.

ohyes 16y ago
Sure, I totally agree. I was mostly self taught in programming before starting the advanced degree. There isn't any teaching instruction with regard to the actual 'doing' of programming. The article states that CS majors should be able to 'do' things that arts majors can't do. Mostly, they can think about things that arts majors haven't learned about. But imagine if you are an English major. You want to be a great writer. Sure, you will be writing outside of class. But also, you will be writing a inside of class. Maybe an art major painting would be a better example, but the analogy stands; you should have rigorous practice in addition to the stuff that you do for the major, which should be fairly intensive in and of itself. I don't see programming being treated seriously as a craft in CS. It seems like something that Professors get research assistants to do for them. (In fact, I'm pretty sure a lot of professors wouldn't know a good program if it smacked them in the face). It is in this way much different from other college level disciplines, where the graduates are supposed to have gained some sort of skill. (liberal arts majors should know how to write, painters should paint, physicists and chemists, etc).

JustinSeriously 16y ago

I think this says more about your college/university than CS education in general. I have a BS in comp sci, and I had to write functioning code in almost every computer class I took. (The only exception being one A.I. course that was cross-listed with philosophy, and even there I used automata in my final paper.)