Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cca.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!cca!g-rh
From: g-rh@cca.UUCP (Richard Harter)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: Re: Degrees, grades...
Message-ID: <6623@cca.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 23:27:02 EST
Article-I.D.: cca.6623
Posted: Mon Mar 10 23:27:02 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Mar-86 20:52:46 EST
References: <4514@kestrel.ARPA> <3407@nsc.UUCP> <4588@kestrel.ARPA> <6987@duke.UUCP> <>
Reply-To: g-rh@cca.UUCP (Richard Harter)
Distribution: net
Organization: Computer Corp. of America, Cambridge
Lines: 26
Summary: 

In article <> mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Tom Keller) writes:
>
>   Damn it all to hell!   Let's get something straight:  if you are going to
>talk about Computer Science programs, then you are talking about a course of
>study designed to prepare one to be a Computer Scientist, a theoretician who
>analyzes and does research.
>
>   I find it fascinating and distressing that so many of you want to water this
>down to meet the needs of people who wish to be (or think they wish to be)
>PROGRAMMERS!
>
	Tom is quite correct.  The fundamental problem is that industry,
for the most part, needs software engineers and programmers.  It does not
need many computer scientists per se.  The universities have created
departments of computer science which either (a) producing graduates
who are theoreticians rather than applied people, or (b) short changing
the people who want to be Computer Scientists.

	However there is another factor involved.  You see industry
enthusiastically hiring theorecticians for applied work.  Why?  Because
the person with the theoretical background can work in applications
and bring to them the knowledge of theory, whereas someone with
training in applications only doesn't have the theory when it is
needed.

	Richard Harter, SMDS Inc.