The concept presented in this article that surprised me the most was that "the demand for computer scientists capable of building games is high, with large companies like Electronic Arts reporting that 65% of their hiring demand is for programmers skilled in building games."
Two points: first, I agree that the traditional CS graduating student is not best equipped for a career in the game industry. Second, I'm not really sure Electronic Arts is the best company to use as an example of anything these days. Weren't they the focus of a coalition put together by wives of employees to tout about the horrible working conditions? They also announced a pretty large round of layoffs last year. Check out google for lots of interesting stories on them.
Despite the example used, I agree with the point that today's CS curriculum does not prep students for jobs in game development. We focus on prepping students with the skills that are required for the majority (and also most lucrative) of careers in CS. Of all of the possible jobs one can obtain with a CS degree, game development is not anywhere near the top of the list. I think we would be doing a large disservice to the majority of firms that hire computer scientists if we start incorporating game development into the curriculum.
But, I can easily take the other side of the argument. Consider how many more students would be interested in a degree in CS today if we could talk about our opportunities to develop games! Attracting student interest and dealing with retention are two hot topics in CS academia. I think there can be a balance, where some aspects of game development are used in some earlier courses, perhaps up to the point where data structures are taught.
First post from my motorola droid
Yup, i finally entered some sort of recent era in mobile devices. For a brief moment, i was actually the owner of brand new technology -- the motorola droid! It was fantastic! I think that lasted for two days... then google announced their Nexus One phone. I just can't win.
Testing posting from my droid...
Labels: None
The new video Kodu game will teach you (or your kid) about programming. - By Chris Wilson - Slate Magazine
Interesting... I wonder how this compares to Alice as a possible (very) introductory teaching language for CS newbies in high school and college? Alice continues to get rave reviews, though (as with every language) there are critics. At first glace, Kodu seems to be too elementary to be a platform to use in a "programming for non-majors" CS class. We want a class that can be used as a way to open the eyes of students that never thought about CS as their major. Our plan was to adopt Alice for this purpose.
As if we didn't have enough choices for programming languages to teach...
The Scala Programming Language
I like everything I've seen with the language so far. In particular, I like that it plays well with Java.
Yet, seriously, the number of languages out there is truly astounding (and ridiculous.) Forget the trials of the professor considering what languages to teach. Let's look beyond my responsibilities. What about the student? And, consider the challenges of the IT sector looking to adopt development strategies, including selection of a language or two for development. Which do they choose?
It is absolutely impossible for one language to satisfy all needs. But, it seems that the number of choices available for each need in software development today is much more of a hindrance than an asset to both the developer and the software development industry. As a CS professor, I strive to keep abreast of the latest trends and technologies, in order to incorporate aspects of them in my advanced classes. (i.e., I want my students to get jobs!) So, should I teach a wide range of languages at a very introductory level so they can put hugh lists of "technologies" on their resume? The problem with this approach is that the student does not learn the depth in any language required to complete a large-scale project that they will be given when they get a job. I think that perhaps 2, maybe 3 languages should be taught in depth to CS undergraduates, with essential focus on constructs common to all programming languages. I don't think many will disagree with this. The disagreement among CS faculty is in regard to what languages to teach! If a couple of languages are taught in depth, the student will most likely be able to adapt what they've learned to other languages with relative ease.
Do you think I'm being ridiculous? Check out this list:
So, who is to blame? Some of the blame is on industry (e.g. Microsoft's unwillingness to embrace Java, and therefore create C#), some is on academia (e.g., Scheme), and some is simply the work of CS gurus and zealots (e.g., Ruby). Dozens of languages could have been names in each category! Of course, all of these players have created some nice languages, but they all claim to adapt aspects of some prior language, and incorporate something that is supposedly new. And unfortunately, some of these lesser known languages thrive because there are groups of zealots that thrive on adapting and going against any technology that is mainstream. They often take a certain pride in being able reject any mainstream industry, and/or say they know something that nobody else in IT does. Sigh... can't we all just get along?!?!?
Whatever the case may be, it is my opinion that the number of develppment languages available today is a hindrance to all of us!
Yup, I've dealt with this already. Numerous times.
Is computer science dead? - Technology - theage.com.auThis report talks about the declining interest in CS. The reporter is not clear on what the problem is, nor are any solutions presented. Instead, the view seems to be one of acceptance, acknowledging that enrollments in CS are at unprecedented lows because of lack of jobs... or, is it reporting that there are a lack of jobs because IT has settled on using minimal software solutions because they can't find the people they need? Draw your own conclusions after you read it. The biggest problem I have with the article is that many parents will skim through it, and simply say, "
, you are not going to enroll as a CS major, do you hear me?!?!"
I don't believe the reporter properly evaluated the current state of CS and IT related job availability. She also alludes to the fact that we, as software engineers, are perhaps to blame for not having jobs available. To paraphrase in IT lingo, we have developed excellent 3G and 4G languages and development tools. These tools are so good that the computer scientist is no longer necessary to develop and deploy large-scale, enterprise-wide software. Yeah, that's true, I have no arguments with that point. But, in my opinion, this article is severely short-sighted regarding the possible careers in CS. It does make some important points. But, perhaps I'm blind, and the numerous reports and research papers that claim that there is a severe need for CS students in the very near future are just blowing hot air. Perhaps our hero, Mr. Bill Gates (super-genius :-), and other big-name CEOs are wasting time traveling across the country to boost CS enrollments. Or, maybe Australia (where the article was written) has differing problems in IT than the US? Hardly.
Here's my final thought, and one which the article does not address at all. It has been becoming clear to me that the traditional computer science education needs a massive overhaul to become relevant in the 21st century. Perhaps the real problem is that CS education is not adjusting its focus and is not evolving in tandem with current industry IT needs. Therefore, we are not educating today's students with the background and knowledge and tools to enable them to continue to develop relevant software. They are not gaining the foresight and preparation to know what the current and coming needs of the industry are. If that's true, then that is a real reason to have concern about sending little Johnny or Janey to college to be a CS major.
The Ithaca Journal - www.theithacajournal.com - Ithaca, NYI've been away for a while, focusing on finishing my PhD. Anyway, I thought I'd check ACM and see if there are any signs of turnaround in Computer Science education. Well, we have yet another article about the low student enrollments in Computer Science. (Click
here.) It seems that some schools have entered into panic mode. Either colleges and universities are going to step out on limbs and try novel and sometimes drastic measures to recruit and retain student enrollments, or you are going to see the quantity (and quality) of available computer science programs in this country fall, continuing in the negative feedback loop that has been progressing for years now.
Faculty, administrative leaders, and other so-called pedagogic gurus can complain all they want about their perception of the decline in the quality of the incoming student. I fail to agree or disagree, as it is a waste of time. Its time to do something about the problem, before its too late.
Shortly, I'm going to be looking for a faculty position in some college or university somewhere in this great nation of ours. I desperately want to find an institution that believes in the value and importance of education, and puts their money where their mouth is. I am so incredibly sick and tired of words without action to back it up. Our educational system and our governmental system -- the two entities in this country that are at the helm of change -- have done anything but implement change, continuing to spew forth words solely for their own political agenda, without any action to back it up.
Wake UP!
