Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sdcsvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!jvz
From: jvz@sdcsvax.UUCP (John Van Zandt)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: More on what should be taught
Message-ID: <405@sdcsvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 21-Oct-84 23:52:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcsvax.405
Posted: Sun Oct 21 23:52:30 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Oct-84 01:06:47 EDT
Organization: EECS Dept. U.C. San Diego
Lines: 32


I agree with John Bass that it is important for students to have
hands-on experience to reinforce book-learning.  And I do believe that
schools should have the best, most up-to-date tools on which the
students should be able to practice.  What I object to
is the selection of any one specific example as a MUST to be
taught.  From an educational point of view we do not know what
are the best examples to use, or even how/when the examples should
be presented (a friend of mine once told me that his understanding
of mathematics came from a childhood interest in how to use 
gears to do mechanical work).  Also, I have found that
students who have an extremely detailed understanding of any one
system, from the hardware up to the system software
tend to grasp book-learning much better than
students who have just an acquaintance with a state-of-the-art system.
It might turn out that detailed knowledge of a system is the most
important aspect, and that the type of system is not the relevant
factor.

As far as employers seeking newly graduating students, 
I especially find it annoying when employers rank students
based on a very specific set of training.
Usually what this means is that the employer does not have a good
set of criteria by which to judge the qualifications of a candidate
and so settles for a checklist approach (I realize the flames
this might cause).


John Van Zandt
University of California, San Diego

...!ucbvax!sdcsvax!jvz