Xref: utzoo comp.edu:2180 comp.software-eng:1341 comp.lang.c++:2916
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!tinman.Berkeley.EDU!matloff
From: matloff@tinman.Berkeley.EDU (Norman Matloff)
Newsgroups: comp.edu,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: "Expertise"
Message-ID: <22630@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 5 Apr 89 00:38:52 GMT
References: <354@cbnewsc.ATT.COM> <WINDLEY.89Mar30143846@Self.cheetah.ucdavis.edu> <7531@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <4972@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: matloff@heather.ucdavis.edu (Norm Matloff)
Distribution: usa
Organization: EECS, UC Davis
Lines: 41

In article <4972@hubcap.clemson.edu> mark@hubcap.clemson.edu (Mark Smotherman) writes:

>I think the misuse and presumptuous use of computer science has many
>similarities to the misuse and presumptuous use of statistics.  Since
>both fields are so useful, many users of our respective "tools" think
>that they know better than the "toolmakers".  Witness the (watered down)
>stat courses that appear in many college departments and the (watered
>down) computer introduction courses that many college departments want
>to teach themselves.  

As someone who belongs to both professions, I'd like to agree with your
statement, but for somewhat different reasons, and in somewhat different
contexts.

First of all, without sounding snide, I'd like to say that I think that
a large number of people in both professions are of very low competence.
I feel this is a consequence of the fact that both fields are "practical," 
job-oriented majors in college, which attracts some people who don't have 
much intellectual curiosity in these subjects.  Of course that leads to the
watering down you mentioned.

However, there is a BIG difference, in terms of feedback.  In the computer
profession, one's mistakes are usually obvious:  The program doesn't work
(or in some cases it works, but far too slowly).  But in the statistics 
profession, this kind of feedback usually doesn't exist, and people can 
keep on making questionable or downright wrong analyses.

Another interesting thing about these two professions is that they both
come historically from the math world, and thus in academic departments,
mathematically-oriented research is given much higher respect than other
kinds of research.  This leads, again in both fields, to a schism of the
math-oriented faculty and the "practice-oriented" faculty.  The former
group looks down on the latter as being very shallow, while the latter
group looks down on the former as being ignorant about the relations of
the subject to the real world.  And, in my opinion, both groups tend
to be correct in these views!

Sorry for the flames.  I don't intend them that way.  They were serious
comments, which I'd like to hear comments on.

   Norm