Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

lazowska.cs.washington.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 201 posts

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#181

Post by shanusmagnus »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #165
hsitz wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"In short, a trade school approach is exactly what we need, as it most accurately reflects the realities of the new job market." Not sure who that "we" you're referring to is. Certainly the trade-school mentality helps the economy grow. Helping populate our country with thoughtful, well-informed citizens leading desirable lives, not so much.

> Certainly the trade-school mentality helps the economy grow. It helps people to eat. > Helping populate our country with thoughtful, well-informed citizens leading desirable lives, not so much. Is a college education at an average cost of $19K/year ($33K for private colleges) and rising the only way to become a "thoughtful, well-informed citizen"? Is it even an efficient way to achieve that goal? And it's difficult…

"Let's unbundle them and give people a choice."

They're already unbundled, and people already have a choice -- for the trade school thing you want, there are trade schools, 2 year colleges, etc, that require no (or far fewer) of those useless classes for creating an informed citizenry; and a burgeoning explosion of online offerings that are quite good, especially for the price. And there's nothing stopping you from getting into a small liberal arts school and majoring in feminist theory, if you don't want to be tainted by practical skills of any kind. And you can find any position along that gradient, for any dollar figure.

I'd say the issue isn't lack of choice; the issue is that people want contradictory things, and that the 'ambiguous message' is less a message universities are sending than a misunderstanding of what universities are really providing, which is the signaling power of their credential. The practical, no-fat skills acquisition you describe is there for the taking, if that's really what you want. If you're willing to spend the money you can have the best of both worlds at the cost of more time, which is the same as everything else in life.

I don't feel that bad for people who buy a Honda Civic and wish it were a Tesla, or vice-versa. There are certainly plenty of options to get either one, and plenty of information to know which one you're getting. But if you want the Tesla, but only want to pay for the Honda? Too bad.

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#182

Post by hershel »

kimdouglasmason wrote: post #114
hershel wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a lot of badly-written toy programs. That's not necessarily true. On some panel about python, one of the participants who teaches python to science students said that after their relatively short amount of training, scientists can do useful stuff with python and that resonated well within the panel.

This is another example of a field where coding is relevant to the job. Many current scientific methods involve heavy use of computers for things like simulation, complex calculation, or control of custom built equipment. I still maintain there are many professions where coding is almost completely irrelevant. Some scientists use general purpose programming languages as part of their work. No (for example) physical t…

I agree , but those same claims are true for many subjects learned at school, for example math.

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#183

Post by cunac »

hga wrote: post #62
gohrt wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It sucks that a conventional programming career generally ends at age 35-40, That's an illusion, created by two factors: * Many people choose to leave the "coder" job as they age, and mentally it's a difficult field to enter if you never coded befo reage 35. * The explosion of the size industry means that the number of young novices dwarfs the number of older veterans. You can see this now, as the young novices of…

So you've not heard of, or do not believe, the claims of rampant age discrimination? I have my own telling experience there, based on being able to hide my age in my resume and my looks, and doing the former in the middle of a job search as well as subsequent ones.

Not sure that age discrimination is rampant but I do believe (and witnessed in interviews) that lot of people don't keep up with technology and then later use age discrimination as excuse. Experience in relevant technologies trumps almost everything else. Disclaimer: I am in my late 40s

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#184

Post by nlawalker »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #154
nlawalker wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he's saying that "it's unlikely that Princeton will ever have 10% of its faculty dedicated to computer science". Despite the demand, universities want to remain balanced and avoid becoming trade schools. "Ditto" means "same for UW"; Ed Lazowska is the department chair at UW.

> Ed Lazowska is the department chair at UW. He was the department chair at UW when I was a CSE student in 1995 (and through when I graduated in 1998). He definitely isn't anymore (I hope!). He does have the Bill and Melinda chair of computer science, but this is something else entirely. The current chair of the department seems to be Hank Levy.

Thanks, you are absolutely correct.

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#185

Post by unclebucknasty »

shanusmagnus wrote: post #181
unclebucknasty wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Certainly the trade-school mentality helps the economy grow. It helps people to eat. > Helping populate our country with thoughtful, well-informed citizens leading desirable lives, not so much. Is a college education at an average cost of $19K/year ($33K for private colleges) and rising the only way to become a "thoughtful, well-informed citizen"? Is it even an efficient way to achieve that goal? And it's difficult…

"Let's unbundle them and give people a choice." They're already unbundled, and people already have a choice -- for the trade school thing you want, there are trade schools, 2 year colleges, etc, that require no (or far fewer) of those useless classes for creating an informed citizenry; and a burgeoning explosion of online offerings that are quite good, especially for the price. And there's nothing stopping you from g…

I had a feeling someone would key on that "unbundle" phrase!

Two year schools and a few online courses aren't yet respected with regard to training in certain fields. In such fields (including software dev, for the most part), employers are generally looking for a bachelor's and, frequently, one in a related field. So, it's not just the university name, but the actual degree.

>the issue is that people want contradictory things

Not really. College is increasingly almost purely an economic choice, and that's the change that people looking from the outside fail to recognize. There was once a time when a person could obtain a bachelor's degree--in virtually any field--and be employable. Any additional personal growth or well-roundedness gained during their stint was a bonus that came at little-to-no cost. They'd get a job with their Women's Studies degree and thus recoup their investment. Not so much now. The wrong degree hurts and can sideline a prospect indefinitely. Likewise, even with the right degree, paying money for ancillary courses that prolong one's tenure hurts. There is, of course, the opportunity cost of an additional 1.5 years or so studying ancillary topics vs. being employed, as well as the actual cost of spending additonal time at ever more expensive universities. Meantime, employers increasingly just don't care.

So, if there is any contradiction, it's between universities and employers. Universities continue to require significant amounts of irrelevant coursework to obtain the coveted bachelor's degree, over which they have a "cornered market". Meanwhile, employers just want the core skills for which they are hiring. Stuck in the middle are the students, who ultimately need to take their place in the economy, irrespective of whatever other personal growth they may desire.

Edit: It's also possible (likely?) that employers will eventually look to other sources (beyond a bachelor's) at some point. This might include 2-year schools that you mentioned and other innovative (yet to be popularized) models. However, what I am describing above is the current reality.

But, if and when this happens, you can bet your last money that universities will "adapt" fast enough to make your head spin, as they will recognize it as the existential threat to them that it is. Offerings of 2.5 year bachelor's degrees may then become commonplace.

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#186

Post by hga »

cunac wrote: post #183
hga wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you've not heard of, or do not believe, the claims of rampant age discrimination? I have my own telling experience there, based on being able to hide my age in my resume and my looks, and doing the former in the middle of a job search as well as subsequent ones.

Not sure that age discrimination is rampant but I do believe (and witnessed in interviews) that lot of people don't keep up with technology and then later use age discrimination as excuse. Experience in relevant technologies trumps almost everything else. Disclaimer: I am in my late 40s

Does "keep up" require experience that can be cited on a resume?

"Experience in relevant technologies trumps almost everything else."

Hmmm, in my experience, unless it involves a big paradigm shift, such as moving to OO or functional programming, new "relevant technologies" can be quickly learned on the job, unlike being able to design systems, write good code, debug quickly if that's possible, build and debug systems, etc. The sort of stuff that takes more than a few years to learn how to do well.

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#187

Post by hga »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #185
shanusmagnus wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Let's unbundle them and give people a choice." They're already unbundled, and people already have a choice -- for the trade school thing you want, there are trade schools, 2 year colleges, etc, that require no (or far fewer) of those useless classes for creating an informed citizenry; and a burgeoning explosion of online offerings that are quite good, especially for the price. And there's nothing stopping you from g…

I had a feeling someone would key on that "unbundle" phrase! Two year schools and a few online courses aren't yet respected with regard to training in certain fields. In such fields (including software dev, for the most part), employers are generally looking for a bachelor's and, frequently, one in a related field. So, it's not just the university name, but the actual degree. > the issue is that people want contradic…

"There was once a time when a person could obtain a bachelor's degree--in virtually any field--and be employable."

As you make a nod to later, there was also once a time when a student could work their way through a university or college degree (and that includes not piling up significant debt). This was once true of MIT, let alone public schools.

That is now only a nostalgic memory, and with a rate of inflation that comfortably outstrips the CPI, the primacy of economic concerns cannot be avoided.

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#188

Post by aet »

xyzzyz wrote: post #174
bagels wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

30k != 300k Do you get approximately 150k/yr of equity in the 5th year? I think a lot of us are trying to understand the "300k/yr" part. I wouldn't doubt to much that maybe a few people are getting paid that, but I doubt it's the median.

At companies like Google or Facebook, you expect to get 10-15% salary raise every year for the first few years, and around 10-15% annual bonus. Assuming that after 4 years, your equity doubles, the $300k figure seems to be pretty accurate for the fifth-sixth year of working there.

Yes, so $300k puts you in the top 3%, $380k puts you in the top 1% of earners nationwide. The median salary of presidents of private Universities is $400k. If you start at a salary of 150k and get 0.15 raises annually for 5 years, yes your will make 300k a year, but I'd be very surprised if this is the experience of general employees. Google has 50,000 employees. If you paid them all $100k, that would be 5 billion roughly equivalent to Googles costs.

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#189

Post by unclebucknasty »

hga wrote: post #187
unclebucknasty wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a feeling someone would key on that "unbundle" phrase! Two year schools and a few online courses aren't yet respected with regard to training in certain fields. In such fields (including software dev, for the most part), employers are generally looking for a bachelor's and, frequently, one in a related field. So, it's not just the university name, but the actual degree. > the issue is that people want contradic…

" There was once a time when a person could obtain a bachelor's degree--in virtually any field--and be employable. " As you make a nod to later, there was also once a time when a student could work their way through a university or college degree (and that includes not piling up significant debt). This was once true of MIT, let alone public schools. That is now only a nostalgic memory, and with a rate of inflation th…

Exactly. The pressures are dual. On one hand, the costs of a degree are skyrocketing to the point where the value is really being scrutinized by that measure alone.

On the other hand, the increasing disparity between what colleges provide and what employers desire is being factored into that value equation.

So, at a time when universities need to be showing more value for their ballooning price tags, they are actually providing less (in purely economic terms).

Re: Responding to the Explosion of Student Interest in Computer Science [pdf]

#190

Post by leot »

kimdouglasmason wrote: post #114
hershel wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a lot of badly-written toy programs. That's not necessarily true. On some panel about python, one of the participants who teaches python to science students said that after their relatively short amount of training, scientists can do useful stuff with python and that resonated well within the panel.

This is another example of a field where coding is relevant to the job. Many current scientific methods involve heavy use of computers for things like simulation, complex calculation, or control of custom built equipment. I still maintain there are many professions where coding is almost completely irrelevant. Some scientists use general purpose programming languages as part of their work. No (for example) physical t…

Much of your thesis relies on the following:

> If you are illiterate, the number one thing you can generally do to improve your life is learn to read.

I agree that this certainly holds true today, since our culture now uses reading through and through. But in the history of our species, literacy is the weird exception, not the norm.

For your argument to hold, it needs to have been true when only, say, 3% of the population could read and write (basically, a proportion comparable to today's proportion of people who "know how to code"). This graph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Illiteracy_france.png) suggests that the comparable era may be sometime around the medieval period, and it's not at all clear that your thesis would obviously hold true then, when other skills (hunting, barrel making, blacksmithing, etc.) would be far more immediately remunerative. When books are scarce, and few of one's peers are literate, being literate will do far less to improve one's life.

Post reply on HN