Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!qantel!lll-lcc!lll-crg!seismo!nbires!isis!udenva!skajihar
From: skajihar@udenva.UUCP ("Lord of Sith" Kajihara)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: Re: Topics for a Computer Science degree
Message-ID: <1941@udenva.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Sep-86 10:30:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: udenva.1941
Posted: Thu Sep 11 10:30:34 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Sep-86 05:56:07 EDT
References: <13500008@uiucdcsb> <65@alberta.UUCP> <1642@mcc-pp.UUCP>
Reply-To: skajihar@udenva.UUCP ("Lord of Sith" Kajihara)
Organization: U of Denver
Lines: 19

In article <1642@mcc-pp.UUCP> patrick@mcc-pp.UUCP (Patrick McGehearty) writes:
>I suggest that a 4 yr program should cover a large variety of topics
>so that when the student later specializes he/she is aware of the
>range of the subject matter (i.e. knows how to start learning more)

Following this discussion of late, I agree with this idea.  From some people
here in the math and computer science department, I have gotten the idea that
they think that a computer scientist is anyone from a data processor to a
systems analyst and that a broad range of subjects is the worst thing to do.
However, these people are of the idea that an undergraduate will necessarily
go into industry right away.  They do not seem to anticipate their people
going to graduate school.  (These ideas are my own and not the department's).
I, as a physics major, believe that I would have difficulty choosing a field
of study as an undergraduate if all I knew was mechanics.  I advocate the 
broader range of subject matter so that the student knows what the general
field encompasses.  Later on, it would be good to specialize, but those
who do not know how to learn broadly will not know how to do this.

          Scott Kajihara