People have been complaining about the lack of students in science and tech degrees here in North America for some time now. The fewer students studying these topics, the fewer people going into the work force in those fields, the more our position in those fields is weakened relative to other countries. I haven't come to a conclusion on whether that's necessarily a bad thing, but I suspect most people will assume it is. Or that there are plenty of other reasons that it's good to have a decent proportion of our students studying these fields.
Regardless, the slipping enrolment numbers for science and tech degrees is being treated as a problem by universities. Not surprising - they're in the business of selling degree programs. And I don't really have a problem with this - it's in their interest to decry the numbers going down in what is basically their revenue stream. And it's probably in our interest to have more students studying those things. So it's likely a win-win, if it works.
What I find a little disturbing, though, is the possible dilution of the field of Computer Science, as hinted at in this article in the New York Times.
On the surface, the changes the article talks about seem like a good idea - tinker with the curricula to draw potential students in with a focus on the applications they use every day. Want to know how your iPhone works? Come study Comp. Sci. and we'll show you! On the way, you'll learn the fundamentals, and off you go to make your fortune.
The problem, though, is that the assumption seems to be that the theories of computer science, and the focus on those theories, is what is driving students away. Therefore the way to fix the numbers problem is to ... adjust ... the balance of the curriculum to not hit the theory so hard.
What worries me is that my personal experience on the interviewer-side of the table these last few years has been disheartening. Too many recent grads with C.S. degrees just don't seem to have a solid understanding of the underlying theories of computation or the mental tools used in solving computational problems.
Curricula are already too light on the theory!
Talking about tinkering with them to make them less overbearing, with all their talk of Theory... it makes me worry that they're re-branding Computer Science. It sounds like they're shifting it to be what was called Computer Information Systems at my university. Basically - application programming, with only enough theory to make it so you could ask something resembling an intelligent question of a Comp. Sci. person when you run up against the edges of your knowledge.
Don't get me wrong - I think there is plenty of room for that kind of a degree. The software field has more than enough work to go around, and the vast majority of it really doesn't need a deep understanding of formal languages or set theory to be done.
Just don't call it Computer Science! It's dishonest and confuses the matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment