[PLUG] Article in Linux Today about M$ kill UNIX at Universities..

[Benjamin A. Kuperman]

Quoting Josh Guffin (guffin@purdue.edu):
<snip>
> As was stated before, CS 158 students do it, and they aren't even CS
> majors. We're CS students, we take pride in geekery.  If you want a
> watered down CS degree, go to IU.

What, in your opinion, constitutes a "watered-down" CS degree?  Many of
the graduate students that are here went to institutions other than
the bastions of "geekery" that you feel Purdue is among.  What is it
that we are lacking that Purdue can provide that our prior
institutions couldn't?  I'm going to argue that at best you might be
able to quibble over the quality and fame of the researchers and the
equipment that is available for student use.  In the case of an
undergraduate education, the quality of the instructors is far more
important, IMHO.

> A little work would just weed out the people who don't really want
> to do CS, who are just in it because they heard you can make a load
> of cash with a CS degree.

CS 180 should not be a weed-out course.  I don't think any course
should be.  I think that standards should be set, and those that meet
the standards continue on.   People that are looking for job training
should not be pursuing a degree in CS -- it's just not worth their
time when Purdue offers other less theoretical programs.  If someone
decides they want to take the program for the money they will
eventually get, rather than an underlying enjoyment of the area, then
so be it.  It's their time and money.

<snip>
> I did take the course, and i thought it was downright stupid.  Both
> CS180 and 181.  I think i would have gotten more from 180 if i'd
> learned COBOL. I personally learned to program this summer, writing
> real code every day.

Now we are starting to get at the root of what I believe the problem
to be.  Both students and industry want college to be more of a
trade-school where students get exposure and experience with whatever
the industry uses.  In this case, VisualJ++ and Windows happen to fit
the bill.  MS is willing to pay for the systems and provide software,
and the department hears that this is what industry folks want.
Sounds like what we have should be perfect for both of those groups.

I think the root of the problem is that we get tied up in the
specifics of a particular language and platform, and do not spend
enough time dealing with the actual concepts that are needed for
programming in general.  A simple language like Pascal seems better
for teaching programming because it lacks the intricacies of Objects
(C++ and Java) and the wealth of libraries and calls that go along
with C.

But everyone is clamoring for "real world" skills, so this sort of
suggestion goes quickly by the wayside.  I'd rather a student spend
hours figuring out how to parse a string to read out commands than
spend hours trying to figure out how to get java.lang.StringTokenizer
to do it for them.

Anyhow I've ranted enough, and need to do something more productive
today.  My comments are not intended to be directed at anyone in
particular.  I've been hearing these things for a long time from
different people, Josh just happened to be the one writing the current
email.

-ben.