Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!att!cbnewsm!lfd From: lfd@cbnewsm.ATT.COM (leland.f.derbenwick) Newsgroups: comp.edu Subject: Re: CS education Summary: problem-solving is a "basic engineering discipline" Message-ID: <6431@cbnewsm.ATT.COM> Date: 10 Nov 89 22:34:17 GMT References: <9734@june.cs.washington.edu> <34705@regenmeister.uucp> <1593@ultb.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 44 In article <1593@ultb.UUCP>, jrj1047@ultb.UUCP (J.R. Jarrett) writes: > In article <34705@regenmeister.uucp> chrisp@regenmeister.uucp (Chris Prael) writes: > >There is a basic set of disciplines to engineering. This set seems to > >be well taught in civil and mechanical engineering curricula and less > >well in electronic engineering curricula. The set seems to be taught > >little or not at all in the typical computer science curriculum. > > Yes, I agree there is a basic set of disciplines to engineering. > However, they are based on *physical* laws (How much force can a piece The portions based on physical laws tend to be specific to each discipline. EEs don't care whether you push on a rope or not! :-) > [ ... ] > operating systems :-}. But, in math, I learned how to attack problems, > systematically solve them and show how they were solved. With that kind > [ ... ] Problem-solving, including presentation of the solutions so that any reasonably competent fellow engineer can understand them, is part of the "basic set of disciplines to engineering." Problem-solving tends to be taught primarily in the first couple undergraduate years, in the common courses that all engineering majors must take. These may be officially Civil Engineering or other "traditional" majors: I had a couple (in the early 70's) in a virtual department titled simply "Engineering", taught by professors from the regular departments. If taught badly, such courses are an almost total waste, but if taught well, which includes distinguishing the general principles from the specific problems being used to illustrate them, they are invaluable. I was lucky: I had excellent professors for all 4 semesters of "common" engineering courses. My understanding is that most schools now use only one or two common engineering courses, some not even that. The justification is to avoid the "waste" of an EE major's time learning some Civil Engineering, etc. But that might make it very hard to teach the intro courses well, leading to them being even more of a perceived waste... Anyone currently (or recently) in school care to comment? -- Lee Derbenwick, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Warren, NJ -- lfd@cbnewsm.ATT.COM or !att!cbnewsm!lfd