Xref: utzoo comp.software-eng:436 misc.jobs.misc:1594
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!sfmag!sfsup!peking
From: peking@sfsup.UUCP (L.Perkins)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,misc.jobs.misc
Subject: Re: American Programmer (What's a Ph.D. worth?)
Message-ID: <3042@sfsup.UUCP>
Date: 11 Apr 88 12:49:51 GMT
References: <555@psu-cs.UUCP> <1434@ur-tut.UUCP> <3415@bunker.UUCP> <3326@zeus.TEK.COM> <461@vsi.UUCP> <5775@bunny.UUCP> <2218@ttidca.TTI.COM> <5388@utah-cs.UUCP> <8295@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <3763@dasys1.UUCP>
Reply-To: peking@/doc/dmg/pekingUUCP (xt1124-AUG881-L.Perkins)
Organization: AT&T Information Systems
Lines: 26

In article <3763@dasys1.UUCP> pepper@dasys1.UUCP (Angelique Wahlstedt) writes:
>Some of the courses that I think should be required in college are Software
>Engineering and Technical Writing (some colleges such as Rochester Institute
>
>-- 

Yes, Yes, Yes.
However, the real world has great difficulty communicating the
necessity for good writing to faculty in Computer Science departments.
While employed at a company whose managerial problems (including LACK
of documentation of its products) was sending it down the drain, I was
simultaneously taking courses from two different instructors, both with
backgrounds in government and military systems, who said, in effect, that
documentation was unimportant and merely something that junior people
would have to put up with. Implication: as briefly as possible. Yet both
individuals were members of professional associations that identified
bad documentation as a key factor in the failure of HW and SW products
"making it" in the marketplace.



-- 

________________________________________________________________
attunix!peking 		    "The few, the proud, the red-haired"
---------------------------------------------------------------