Xref: utzoo comp.edu:2744 comp.software-eng:2597 Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!think!mintaka!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!manis From: manis@cs.ubc.ca (Vincent Manis) Newsgroups: comp.edu,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Re^2: CS education Message-ID: <5866@ubc-cs.UUCP> Date: 4 Dec 89 20:55:37 GMT References: <472bd511.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> <7291@hubcap.clemson.edu> Sender: news@cs.ubc.ca Reply-To: manis@faculty.cs.ubc.ca (Vincent Manis) Organization: The Invisible City of Kitezh Lines: 45 In article <7291@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes: > The problem is that the system dictates that everyone *must* > be a generalist, and does not permit sufficient specialization > (within an economically reasonable amount of time and money). But that's what a university is supposed to be. We aren't supposed to be training people for careers (even ones as software engineers); rather we're supposed to be producing intelligent, educated people whose major strengths are problem-solving and disciplined creativity. It might be argued that professional faculties (notably medicine, law, and engineering) *are* for career preparation. However, if one looks at the many complaints about engineering education in particular, the overriding complaint which comes from practitioners is precisely the fact that graduates don't have any sort of overriding sense of what their field is really about, and that they secretly expect an answer in the back of the book to the problems they confront on the job. Given that engineering practitioners and academics are trying to get students away from cut-and-try techniques, I see no reason why the sciences should choose to move toward these techniques. As for CS vs SE: well, I teach a course labelled `Software Engineering'. I try, as best as I can, to cover engineering practice. However, I know (or at least hope!) that the problems my students will deal with in their professional lives will be ones that neither I nor anybody else so far has thought about; in other words, what I'm trying to do is to teach my students not the principles according to some mythical cookbook, but rather the ways in which they can become innovators. I trust to their employers to give them the detailed techniques they'll need for their particular areas of specialisation. What it comes down to, basically, is that it really doesn't matter, from a professional point of view, what one studies in an undergraduate program. A good CS program is one which has breadth and rigour, and which inculcates in the student a respect for methodical design on the one hand, and innovation on the other. Whether the focus is operating systems, artificial intelligence, or algorithmic complexity is of no importance. -- Vincent Manis "There is no law that vulgarity and Department of Computer Science literary excellence cannot coexist." University of British Columbia -- A. Trevor Hodge Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1W5 (604) 228-2394 Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com