Many, including myself, have been given the impression that information security is a hot field right now in CS. This article suggests the same, but that you have to know how to look for the jobs in the field. (Contrary to popular opinion among security experts, not all positions in information security are at the National Security Agency! But, if you're interested, see http://www.nsa.gov/careers/.)
She also talks about certifications vs. degrees. I completely agree with her assertion that if you are in the middle of your degree, but are considering certifications, finish your 4-year degree first. But, as I've mentioned to many students in my class, the time has been coming (for a while now) where a 4-year degree alone is not enough you set yourself above the rest in the job market. It is certainly a must, but to get the best jobs, it's not enough. You want to supplement your 4-year degree with experience through internship opportunities if at all possible. If you can't do that, then at least consider finding an independent study project to do with a professor that is doing research in a field you are interested. You do not want to graduate without having worked on some significant project! Finally, consider a certification! If you join the ACM or IEEE Computer Society (both of which I highly recommend for advanced CS students), they have courses for professional development that can prepare you for several certifications in the field that are free with your membership.
If you can afford it, and you have a little more stamina to study for a couple more years, I strongly consider an Master's degree, particularly for those students that want to land a career in fields beyond just basic IT fields.
Your best bet is to start scanning all of the career web sites a couple years before you graduate, and continue to do so on a regular basis. Include the career information at ACM and IEEE Computer Society. Figure out what employers are looking for in your field of interest.
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Most desired IT skills
If you are an up and coming graduate in an IT field (particularly CS), you should read this document. A few professors got together and analyzed the most sought after IT skills by analyzing job listings on Monster.com and CareerBuilder.com over the past few years. It appears that Web programming has "jumped into a commanding lead" in the total number of jobs requiring programming skills, being mentioned in 42.6% of all job ads. In addition, Unix, C++, Java, SQL Programming and Oracle database are the other top five skills in the current job market, with each of these mentioned in close to 20% of advertised IT jobs. Java is now demanded in more than 20% of all job openings, making it a "mainstream programming language." The percentage of jobs requiring .NET has grown more than 250% over the three-year period represented by the study. Regardless, you should keep in mind that skills in demand change over time. Keep abreast of the latest skills being sought after. (The professors point this out as well.)
Read this article, and take it into consideration when maximizing your potential for landing a job come graduation time.
Read this article, and take it into consideration when maximizing your potential for landing a job come graduation time.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
Confessions of an Engineering Washout (from Tech Central Station)
This is a really good article. The writer reflects on his terrible experience as a chemical engineering major. This ex-engineer student has basically stated some of the biggest reasons why I think CS, IT and many of the sciences in general are losing student enrollments. Click here for the writeup.
This IRKS me to no end! As an instructor, I can make a difference, but as a PhD student, the differences I can make are very minor. (The irony in all of this is that I need to keep my research as a priority so I can graduate and be a professor someday. I hate irony.) As I've mentioned months (if not years) ago in older blogs, the lack of pedagogic skills at colleges and universities is taking a toll. The grim reality is that when a department considers potential candidates to fill an opening as a professor, most colleges and universities care about one thing -- how much money can this person bring to this department? That's it! I'm sorry to say that this is the way it is here at numerous other colleges and universities around the country.
Douglas (the writer) clearly came into college as an extremely talented individual, graduated with honors, took all accelerated classes, etc. He was well prepared for what he was about to embark upon. But, he lost his vision. Why? BECAUSE OF POOR TEACHERS! His experiences with both professors and their TAs were absolutely terrible. It's one thing to be in a class, know your lost, and not do anything about it. It's another thing to be lost, and try to do something about your situation, and get no support whatsoever.
So, you must ask yourself, "Why do these terrible professors stay on board?" In state schools, there are two reasons -- money and tenure. Otherwise, in all other colleges, it just comes down to money. Many of these professors bring in some good research dollars. Many departments are required to meet quotas in terms of research dollars, and if they fail, the talented faculty that care about teaching more than their research are the first ones to go. Even if they get the best student evaluations, they get rave reviews from students in their courses, and their courses have the highest enrollments over all courses in the department, the college doesn't care. Ex-professor X isn't doing their part in bring in research dollars.
I had a professor back when I was doing my MS in CS that had a profound impact on me as a computer scientist. He shaped my thinking and gave me a platform to stretch my abilities to new levels. I ended up doing my master's thesis under his advisement. I used many of his methods throughout my years in industry. I completed my MS back in 1992. I found out a couple years ago that he didn't get tenure, and that's why he left academia. Why didn't he get tenure? Because he wasn't bringing in enough research money. Can anyone see anything wrong with this picture? This is reality, folks! This is what really happens in colleges and universities nationwide. The faculty that have the highest ability to bring out the biggest potential with students are the least respected in the departments.
If you want my opinion (which you didn't ask for, but if you got this far, hey... it's just a couple more paragraphs), changing the priority from research to teaching has to be the first significant change to happen nationwide. This should not be interpreted as me saying that research must be put on hold. On the contrary, research must clearly continue or else we will lose our lead in tech as a nation. Ideally, teaching and research should coincide. Professors should strive to bring aspects of their research into the classroom. I believe that if you sink resources into your teaching right from the first year that students start courses in their major, and those standards continue throughout their academic career, then you will have molded a student research staff which would allow a department to get even more done in research than the current strategy of simply ignoring pedagogy. If these students are truly inspired and are involved in research, if they can see the fruits of what they learned being manifested in their projects, then there is a very good chance they will stay for grad school, at which point they will be well-prepared to perform significant research projects. It's a win-win situation. The department gets more resources from which to perform research, and the student is rewarded with experience to place on their resume, as well as sheer satisfaction from being a part of doing some significant research project. There are long-term effects as well. If the department reputation shines, a larger pool of students will be interested in applying to the major, and the average level of the student that gets to the point of being able to do research increases.
My idealistic side believes that this is just a simple application of the principle of reaping what you sow. As an instructor, I can inspire young, energetic, talented, creative students from the beginning. I can encourage them to push themselves further than they thought they could go. They can continue to get that inspiration from other faculty as they complete their foundational courses. Then, by the time they get to their senior year, you now have a pool of students craving cutting-edge research projects and opportunities that will be eager to do much of the research under direction of the faculty. I (as well as the entire department) will have reaped what we have all sown.
On the other hand, the nation as a whole is reaping what its sown already.
In my experience, it is an impossible job for any professor to perform high quality research that is solid enough to receive grants, AND spend the time needed to teach in such a way that inspires and molds up-and-coming scientists, researchers, etc.
Perhaps I'm just being too idealistic again.
This IRKS me to no end! As an instructor, I can make a difference, but as a PhD student, the differences I can make are very minor. (The irony in all of this is that I need to keep my research as a priority so I can graduate and be a professor someday. I hate irony.) As I've mentioned months (if not years) ago in older blogs, the lack of pedagogic skills at colleges and universities is taking a toll. The grim reality is that when a department considers potential candidates to fill an opening as a professor, most colleges and universities care about one thing -- how much money can this person bring to this department? That's it! I'm sorry to say that this is the way it is here at numerous other colleges and universities around the country.
Douglas (the writer) clearly came into college as an extremely talented individual, graduated with honors, took all accelerated classes, etc. He was well prepared for what he was about to embark upon. But, he lost his vision. Why? BECAUSE OF POOR TEACHERS! His experiences with both professors and their TAs were absolutely terrible. It's one thing to be in a class, know your lost, and not do anything about it. It's another thing to be lost, and try to do something about your situation, and get no support whatsoever.
So, you must ask yourself, "Why do these terrible professors stay on board?" In state schools, there are two reasons -- money and tenure. Otherwise, in all other colleges, it just comes down to money. Many of these professors bring in some good research dollars. Many departments are required to meet quotas in terms of research dollars, and if they fail, the talented faculty that care about teaching more than their research are the first ones to go. Even if they get the best student evaluations, they get rave reviews from students in their courses, and their courses have the highest enrollments over all courses in the department, the college doesn't care. Ex-professor X isn't doing their part in bring in research dollars.
I had a professor back when I was doing my MS in CS that had a profound impact on me as a computer scientist. He shaped my thinking and gave me a platform to stretch my abilities to new levels. I ended up doing my master's thesis under his advisement. I used many of his methods throughout my years in industry. I completed my MS back in 1992. I found out a couple years ago that he didn't get tenure, and that's why he left academia. Why didn't he get tenure? Because he wasn't bringing in enough research money. Can anyone see anything wrong with this picture? This is reality, folks! This is what really happens in colleges and universities nationwide. The faculty that have the highest ability to bring out the biggest potential with students are the least respected in the departments.
If you want my opinion (which you didn't ask for, but if you got this far, hey... it's just a couple more paragraphs), changing the priority from research to teaching has to be the first significant change to happen nationwide. This should not be interpreted as me saying that research must be put on hold. On the contrary, research must clearly continue or else we will lose our lead in tech as a nation. Ideally, teaching and research should coincide. Professors should strive to bring aspects of their research into the classroom. I believe that if you sink resources into your teaching right from the first year that students start courses in their major, and those standards continue throughout their academic career, then you will have molded a student research staff which would allow a department to get even more done in research than the current strategy of simply ignoring pedagogy. If these students are truly inspired and are involved in research, if they can see the fruits of what they learned being manifested in their projects, then there is a very good chance they will stay for grad school, at which point they will be well-prepared to perform significant research projects. It's a win-win situation. The department gets more resources from which to perform research, and the student is rewarded with experience to place on their resume, as well as sheer satisfaction from being a part of doing some significant research project. There are long-term effects as well. If the department reputation shines, a larger pool of students will be interested in applying to the major, and the average level of the student that gets to the point of being able to do research increases.
My idealistic side believes that this is just a simple application of the principle of reaping what you sow. As an instructor, I can inspire young, energetic, talented, creative students from the beginning. I can encourage them to push themselves further than they thought they could go. They can continue to get that inspiration from other faculty as they complete their foundational courses. Then, by the time they get to their senior year, you now have a pool of students craving cutting-edge research projects and opportunities that will be eager to do much of the research under direction of the faculty. I (as well as the entire department) will have reaped what we have all sown.
On the other hand, the nation as a whole is reaping what its sown already.
In my experience, it is an impossible job for any professor to perform high quality research that is solid enough to receive grants, AND spend the time needed to teach in such a way that inspires and molds up-and-coming scientists, researchers, etc.
Perhaps I'm just being too idealistic again.
Tech talent shortage on way - ajc.com
Yet more indications of a need for CS majors. See the article. (You may need to register to view it.) There was a recent symposium held by the Society of Information Management that discussed some of the challenges that employers are currently facing in recruiting and retaining highly-skilled tech workers. They noted that a lot of baby-boomer techies are starting to retire, and many of these slots are opening for new talent.
Here's an eye-opening quote from the conference -- they stated that finding and keeping workers "hasn't been this high on the agenda for most businesses since the boom days of the 1990s."
The conference also took some time to analyze why recent college grads are not pursuing IT-related careers.
Here's an eye-opening quote from the conference -- they stated that finding and keeping workers "hasn't been this high on the agenda for most businesses since the boom days of the 1990s."
The conference also took some time to analyze why recent college grads are not pursuing IT-related careers.
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Fewer CS Majors Not a Big Concern - Computerworld
What? You must be kidding me. Ok... so this article is an opinion. Therefore, I suppose I shouldn't get worked up over it. A wonderful thing about being an American is that we have a right to express our opinions in print. Foruntately, that also includes the right to disagree. I completely disagree with Ms. Robbins assertion that the decline of CS degrees should not be a problem. Fortunately, out of the dozens of articles I've read about the declining enrollments in CS, this is the first writer that seems to indicate that this is not a problem. I believe this writer is sorely misled regarding what careers that CS degrees are intended to prepare the student for. She seems to think that the main reason that students enter CS is for computer gaming. I'm sorry to inform you, but a CS degree hardly does anything to prepare a person for a career in the gaming industry. Just as web development careers rarely have any need for CS degrees anymore due to the excellent tools available, the gaming industry has numerous toolkits and software packages that allow the game developer to stay clear of any CS-related issues, allowing them to focus solely on issues such as playability, design, storyline, plot, 3D scenery and related graphics, music score, user interface, etc. The gifted storywriter, graphics artist, animator and score composers get jobs in the gaming industry. The CS major does not.
Her ignorance regarding CS and related careers really shines when she claims that it is not a problem that there are fewer CS degrees, and then in the paragraph immediately following that statement she talks about the effect of video-game violence on children. What conclusions does she want the reader to draw? Let's follow her logic. She states that there has been a study of the effect of video-game violence on children. Earlier, she leads us to believe that CS degrees are for people that want to develop computer games. Therefore, is the reason she believes that it is not a problem that there are fewer CS majors because there will be fewer violent computer games developed, and thus our children will become healthier?
Furthermore, she then allows the reader to believe that students and professionals in CS lead less than active lifestyles. Later, she indicates that "corporations need accountants, marketers, and operations and manufacturing staffers who are infused with computer skills." Are you telling me that these roles are more "active, interactive and tactile" than CS-related careers? Give me a break! The sedentary CS student will be quick to IM a "LMAO" message to you, Ms. Robbins!
It is one thing for incoming freshmen to have uneducated biases regarding what the CS discipline is all about. I don't expect them to know what CS entails. It's our job as instructors and professors in the field to educate them so they have a clear understanding of the potentials of the field, and if they choose it, to inspire and enable them to excel in the field, regardless of whether they join industry or continue in academia and research beyond their degree. Regardless, I don't expect this type of ignorance from a writer in a well-known industry trade magazine in CS.
The only part of this article I agree with is that every student needs to find a career path that is right for them. I can't agree more.
Argh!
Her ignorance regarding CS and related careers really shines when she claims that it is not a problem that there are fewer CS degrees, and then in the paragraph immediately following that statement she talks about the effect of video-game violence on children. What conclusions does she want the reader to draw? Let's follow her logic. She states that there has been a study of the effect of video-game violence on children. Earlier, she leads us to believe that CS degrees are for people that want to develop computer games. Therefore, is the reason she believes that it is not a problem that there are fewer CS majors because there will be fewer violent computer games developed, and thus our children will become healthier?
Furthermore, she then allows the reader to believe that students and professionals in CS lead less than active lifestyles. Later, she indicates that "corporations need accountants, marketers, and operations and manufacturing staffers who are infused with computer skills." Are you telling me that these roles are more "active, interactive and tactile" than CS-related careers? Give me a break! The sedentary CS student will be quick to IM a "LMAO" message to you, Ms. Robbins!
It is one thing for incoming freshmen to have uneducated biases regarding what the CS discipline is all about. I don't expect them to know what CS entails. It's our job as instructors and professors in the field to educate them so they have a clear understanding of the potentials of the field, and if they choose it, to inspire and enable them to excel in the field, regardless of whether they join industry or continue in academia and research beyond their degree. Regardless, I don't expect this type of ignorance from a writer in a well-known industry trade magazine in CS.
The only part of this article I agree with is that every student needs to find a career path that is right for them. I can't agree more.
Argh!
Thursday, August 25, 2005
UVA Computer Science: How to be a New UVa CS grad student
This article is a very good read for the prospective CS PhD student. A little old, but completely relevant.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Brain Drain in The Tech World?
Brain Drain in The Tech World?
Yup, another article on the dwindling enrollment of IT/CS majors and graduates, though this title was more eye-catching for me -- Brain Drain. Ok, so we're realizing that the US is continuing to lag behind other countries in computer science. We're now realizing that enrollments in related programs in colleges across the country have been continuing to suffer. This certainly does not bode well in turning the country around to become a leader in the computer sciences again. How can we regain our technical prowess and be a leader in this field when the enrollment of incoming students interested in this field continues to deterioriate?
What needs to be done to attract students back into this field? What is scaring them off? This article seems to point at the fear of outsourcing as one possibility. I agree in part, but there more going on than that.
Yup, another article on the dwindling enrollment of IT/CS majors and graduates, though this title was more eye-catching for me -- Brain Drain. Ok, so we're realizing that the US is continuing to lag behind other countries in computer science. We're now realizing that enrollments in related programs in colleges across the country have been continuing to suffer. This certainly does not bode well in turning the country around to become a leader in the computer sciences again. How can we regain our technical prowess and be a leader in this field when the enrollment of incoming students interested in this field continues to deterioriate?
What needs to be done to attract students back into this field? What is scaring them off? This article seems to point at the fear of outsourcing as one possibility. I agree in part, but there more going on than that.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Gates worried over decline in U.S. computer scientists - Computerworld
See? Even Bill Gates himself can see the impending effects of dwindling enrollment of incoming students interested in CS. See the article for more information. I have no idea what someone of my stature can do to get people to wake up! I have no political clout, authori-tay or commanding respect in the field to be able to turn heads. (Brian who? Huh?) Bill on the other hand...
Friday, May 13, 2005
Thursday, May 12, 2005
Can Johnny still program? - CNET.com
This is a good follow-up article that discusses some of the possible issues going on behind why America is continuing it's decline in the ACM programming competition. See the article.
Cisco CEO on U.S. Education: 'We're Losing the Battle'
This is what I have been saying for years now. I'm glad some people that actually have some weight are seeing this now. See the article for more info... though, you need a subscription for the entire read. Here's the jist of it that I recieved from a writeup from the ACM.
According to Cisco CEO John Chambers, the U.S. needs to launch a comprehensive overhaul of its educational system if it hopes to remain competitive with global competitors like India and China. To improve the math and science ability of its youth, Chambers argues, the U.S. needs to revamp the entire educational system from kindergarten through college and place a renewed emphasis on preparing students for careers in engineering and other technical disciplines. It's not just tech executives like Chambers who are sounding the alarm bell: the TechNet coalition is also advocating a new "innovation initiative" to increase funding and support for key educational and research initiatives and to improve the technological infrastructure within the U.S.Chambers makes the point that "we've got to get back to what made this country great -- our education system." Chambers argues that education should be more rigorous, focus greater attention on math and science, and concentrate as much on girls as on boys. If the U.S. fails to change its educational system, it could soon find itself eclipsed by China and India, both of which are focusing their efforts on improving the math and science skills of their top students. In the longer-term, of course, the U.S. could even lose its lead in innovation, resulting in the loss of the most innovative start-ups to places like Shanghai or Bangalore.Other executives and organizations are also picking up on these ideas. For example, TechNet, a national coalition of high-tech executives, recently unveiled the TechNet Innovation Initiative and Innovation Policy Agenda. Cisco, with the collaboration of other tech companies like Sun, Adobe and Hewlett-Packard has also created Network Academies, a web-based technical program. Overall, these two initiatives are part of a growing realization that "America's ability to create jobs is dependent on the educational system."
According to Cisco CEO John Chambers, the U.S. needs to launch a comprehensive overhaul of its educational system if it hopes to remain competitive with global competitors like India and China. To improve the math and science ability of its youth, Chambers argues, the U.S. needs to revamp the entire educational system from kindergarten through college and place a renewed emphasis on preparing students for careers in engineering and other technical disciplines. It's not just tech executives like Chambers who are sounding the alarm bell: the TechNet coalition is also advocating a new "innovation initiative" to increase funding and support for key educational and research initiatives and to improve the technological infrastructure within the U.S.Chambers makes the point that "we've got to get back to what made this country great -- our education system." Chambers argues that education should be more rigorous, focus greater attention on math and science, and concentrate as much on girls as on boys. If the U.S. fails to change its educational system, it could soon find itself eclipsed by China and India, both of which are focusing their efforts on improving the math and science skills of their top students. In the longer-term, of course, the U.S. could even lose its lead in innovation, resulting in the loss of the most innovative start-ups to places like Shanghai or Bangalore.Other executives and organizations are also picking up on these ideas. For example, TechNet, a national coalition of high-tech executives, recently unveiled the TechNet Innovation Initiative and Innovation Policy Agenda. Cisco, with the collaboration of other tech companies like Sun, Adobe and Hewlett-Packard has also created Network Academies, a web-based technical program. Overall, these two initiatives are part of a growing realization that "America's ability to create jobs is dependent on the educational system."
Monday, April 18, 2005
American universities fall way behind in programming / Weakest result for U.S. in 29-year history of international technology competition
American universities fall way behind in programming. This is VERY disturbing. The colleges and universities in America need to WAKE UP! It's not about losing an ACM programming contest. It's about America continuing to lose its edge in the technical/scientific fields. Once a great leader, we are now struggling to keep up with other countries worldwide, and this is not just in Computer Science related fields. I think priorities in universities in this country are severely out of balance. We're paying the price for this lack of balance. I see it in the university I'm in now. The university puts their focus on research. Certainly, research is very important, not to mention that it is what "looks good" for a university. That's fine, except, how are universities going to continue current research when they are clearly not putting resources into teaching the up-and-coming researchers? Does anyone see a problem here? This problem certainly extends into the quality of the K-12 education as well.
This just continues to drive me toward excelling at teaching. But, as I've stated before, I know I need to focus on research in the short term if I ever want to obtain my PhD. Only then will I be in a position to attempt to make a difference...
This just continues to drive me toward excelling at teaching. But, as I've stated before, I know I need to focus on research in the short term if I ever want to obtain my PhD. Only then will I be in a position to attempt to make a difference...
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Feeling unreasonable...
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable."
- George Bernard Shaw
I'm tired. I know in my soul what I must set myself out to accomplish in order to get through this. But, sometimes I don't feel I have the strength. I get tired of the hurdles. The atmosphere around here leaves a lot to be desired. But, this is something that I really want. I've taken many unreasonable steps to get to the place where I am now, but I have so far to go. I have so much to understand. The more I read and learn, the more I struggle with the realization of knowing that there is so much more out there that I don't have a clue about.
On a side note, but slightly related, a professor in the department talked to me today about the quality of PhD students that were in the program years ago. Back then, it was a fluid, dynamic atmosphere, where students and faculty communicated and inspired each other. The atmosphere fostered an energy and a spirit of excitement among everyone in the department. That was around the time that I was doing my Masters, way back in the early 90's. I remember it well. It was that kind of atmosphere that I was hoping to come back to. Unfortunately, it didn't take long to realize that excitement was dead in the department. This professor was telling me that he missed it, and was basically telling me that he wished it would return. Now, the faculty pretty much keep to themselves. Everyone has their own research. Even the grad students mostly keep to themselves. They pretty much break up into their own cliques (usually divided by ethnic origin). That is a shame. We should all be working together, sharing knowledge, regardless of our ethnic and gender differences. Think about how much more we could be learning from each other! Fortunately, not all are like that. There are a few grad students who make a point to communicate with other grad students outside of their normal clique. At least the faculty that are doing active research seem to regularly meet with their own students they are advising for their dissertation.
I know I must play a part in changing the atmosphere... but it's hard to know where to begin, and what I can do without stepping on toes. This is a public university, and politics play an important part here. I'll watch for a while and look for opportunities. We'll see what happens...
- George Bernard Shaw
I'm tired. I know in my soul what I must set myself out to accomplish in order to get through this. But, sometimes I don't feel I have the strength. I get tired of the hurdles. The atmosphere around here leaves a lot to be desired. But, this is something that I really want. I've taken many unreasonable steps to get to the place where I am now, but I have so far to go. I have so much to understand. The more I read and learn, the more I struggle with the realization of knowing that there is so much more out there that I don't have a clue about.
On a side note, but slightly related, a professor in the department talked to me today about the quality of PhD students that were in the program years ago. Back then, it was a fluid, dynamic atmosphere, where students and faculty communicated and inspired each other. The atmosphere fostered an energy and a spirit of excitement among everyone in the department. That was around the time that I was doing my Masters, way back in the early 90's. I remember it well. It was that kind of atmosphere that I was hoping to come back to. Unfortunately, it didn't take long to realize that excitement was dead in the department. This professor was telling me that he missed it, and was basically telling me that he wished it would return. Now, the faculty pretty much keep to themselves. Everyone has their own research. Even the grad students mostly keep to themselves. They pretty much break up into their own cliques (usually divided by ethnic origin). That is a shame. We should all be working together, sharing knowledge, regardless of our ethnic and gender differences. Think about how much more we could be learning from each other! Fortunately, not all are like that. There are a few grad students who make a point to communicate with other grad students outside of their normal clique. At least the faculty that are doing active research seem to regularly meet with their own students they are advising for their dissertation.
I know I must play a part in changing the atmosphere... but it's hard to know where to begin, and what I can do without stepping on toes. This is a public university, and politics play an important part here. I'll watch for a while and look for opportunities. We'll see what happens...
Monday, March 28, 2005
U.S. losing tech lead, lobby warns
Click here for the article. I've been saying this for quite a number of years now. The USA is severely lagging in the math and sciences at the K-12 level when compared to other countries. We are all going to pay the price if something doesn't change soon. Occasionally, I contemplate joining some task force that is dedicated to working on CS curriculum for high schools, but ACM and IEEE both have some pretty good initiatives out there. Regardless, in my opinion, this is a bigger issue than outsourcing tech jobs. I've been wondering over the past year or so whether outsourcing is just a symptom. Perhaps some would consider this to be one of the root causes of outsourcing. Then again, perhaps not, but this should certainly be considered as one of the cures.
Saturday, February 19, 2005
The finiteness of PI
This is interesting. They ran the calculation three times on their supercomputer, and came up with the same answer -- the calculation of the wonderful number PI ended at 1.3511 trillion places! This is actually old news, from June 2004. I'll have to figure out what's become of this, since I would think that this would really upset some people, especially those in the "Ancient and Honorable Society of Pi Watchers."
A.I. matches human intelligence (only in California!)
This article in the Watley Review is pretty entertaining. What's up with the educational system in CA? Then again, you should probably criticize the researchers methods of validation. Regardless, it again shows that when doing research, choose your "control" subject carefully!
Thursday, February 17, 2005
Senate Passes Ban on Genetic Discrimination
Who wants to wager a bet on how many years it will take before this ban is repealed? Will it be in my lifetime? I would bet on it.
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Inventor preserves self to witness immortality - Feb 15, 2005
Check out this article from CNN.com.
Hmmm... I actually don't have much to say. I mean, don't get me wrong -- the logical, analytical side of me says, "BWHAAAHAHAHA! Yeah, right!" But, Ray Kurzweil is a real visionary. I know technology has come a long way, but we have a long way to go, particularly in the nanosciences. But, regardless... 20 years? Immortality?
With just the right mixture of green tea and other dietary supplements, in combination with nanobots that work through your system to maintain your living state, you'll live forever, or so Dr. Kurzweil says. A heart?!?!? Bahhh! Who needs a stinkin' heart!
Do you have any idea how many books he's going to sell to people that know nothing about what he's talking about? I wonder how much money he's going to make from this claim. That's probably the part that bothers me the most.
I don't know. I think he may have gone too far this time. I do not doubt that small parts of his claim will prove true. I suspect that much of his dietary information he provides in the book are probably based on known facts that have come out over the years. (e.g. green tea, wine, whole grains, olive oil, fish, etc...) But, I just hope that those that spend the money on this book will read it with a grain of salt, or... some other preservative. :-)
Hmmm... I actually don't have much to say. I mean, don't get me wrong -- the logical, analytical side of me says, "BWHAAAHAHAHA! Yeah, right!" But, Ray Kurzweil is a real visionary. I know technology has come a long way, but we have a long way to go, particularly in the nanosciences. But, regardless... 20 years? Immortality?
With just the right mixture of green tea and other dietary supplements, in combination with nanobots that work through your system to maintain your living state, you'll live forever, or so Dr. Kurzweil says. A heart?!?!? Bahhh! Who needs a stinkin' heart!
Do you have any idea how many books he's going to sell to people that know nothing about what he's talking about? I wonder how much money he's going to make from this claim. That's probably the part that bothers me the most.
I don't know. I think he may have gone too far this time. I do not doubt that small parts of his claim will prove true. I suspect that much of his dietary information he provides in the book are probably based on known facts that have come out over the years. (e.g. green tea, wine, whole grains, olive oil, fish, etc...) But, I just hope that those that spend the money on this book will read it with a grain of salt, or... some other preservative. :-)
Blogging is all fun and games, until the boss finds out - Feb. 14, 2005
Check out this article posted on CNN. Blogging can cost you your job, unless you write nice things about your place of employment. But, seriously, why was he blogging from his workplace? Do you mean to tell me that people use the internet from their work computers?!?! NO!!! Tell me it isn't so! :-)
Seriously, controlling internet use at the workplace is becoming a bigger and bigger problem throughout corporate America. You better think twice before you type that e-mail to your friend from your work account telling him/her about how your boss sucks. Take my word for it. I know people personally that have been fired for such things. Resist the urge! Don't be fooled -- there is no privacy on the internet, particularly from your work computer. If there is something you would not say with your boss standing next to you, then don't say it in an e-mail. If you wouldn't go to that web site with your boss standing over you, then don't go to that web site while you're at work.
Seriously, controlling internet use at the workplace is becoming a bigger and bigger problem throughout corporate America. You better think twice before you type that e-mail to your friend from your work account telling him/her about how your boss sucks. Take my word for it. I know people personally that have been fired for such things. Resist the urge! Don't be fooled -- there is no privacy on the internet, particularly from your work computer. If there is something you would not say with your boss standing next to you, then don't say it in an e-mail. If you wouldn't go to that web site with your boss standing over you, then don't go to that web site while you're at work.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
Big pants, no shoes?
So, I have this professor this semester. Let's call him Professor P(x). I must say, he is extremely refreshing after some of the ordeals I've been through since I've been back to school. I'd consider him to be the epitomy of eccentricity -- a true genius in every sense of the word. Our class is an 80 minute class. In a recent class, he started by spending about 20 minutes regrouping his thoughts after several meetings he had earlier in the day. He then began teaching. Every 30 seconds, he'd face the blackboard, yank his pants up (which I was very thankful for), and turn around to continue teaching. He periodically hops up on the desk in the room, kicks off his shoes (literally), sits with his legs crossed on the desk, and starts talking as if we were at a campfire. (All together now! "Kum-bah-ya...") Sometimes he gets bored with the material he's teaching, and starts sharing stories of his past experiences while at Harvard, sharing class notes with Bill Gates. (Poor P(x) continued his education, while Mr. Gates dropped out and earned the big bucks.) But, somehow, through all of this, he manages to teach the material, and gets several laughs out of everyone through the process. I'm not sure if this is the best approach for everyone, but I've been learning a lot from him. After considering all of my graduate classes I've been through, this is one that is going to really stick out in my head for years to come.
As I continue down this path, with the goal of becoming a professor myself, one skill that they don't teach professors is how to teach! Many institutions hire you with NO teaching experience. Can you believe it?!?!? I find this to be insane! Every professor has gained their position without any formal training in pedagogic skills. And, frankly, it shows with many professors. I think many of them can teach, but they simply lack interest. They are there for research purposes, and consider teaching to be an inconvenience -- something that gets in the way of their real goals in research. (After all, it's the research that pays the university bills, not teaching. Teaching is overhead.) Other professors that I've encountered over the past 15 years lack skills to properly impart knowledge to students and inspire learning. Believe me, I'm not saying I have it figured out either. I'll be the first to admit that I don't! But, I'm trying my best to learn from professors who do it right, as well as learn from their mistakes. I've had no formal training myself, other than a few teaching seminars here and there that I've attended out of my own will. The main rule I apply is to teach a class the way I would want to be taught. (Now, I have to try to put myself back in the mindset of an undergraduate, and that's not easy.) However, that philosophy is not right for everyone either. So... regardless, I have a lot to learn still. Don't we all?
Thinking about where I'm at right now, the minority of professors with excellent pedagogic skills outweigh the majority in my head. These are the ones that leave you wanting more. P(x) is actually doing that for me. I haven't had a class like this in years.
P(x) is a unique professor, probably the most unique I've ever had. I'm learning the class subject, as well as observing his teaching methodologies. He's showing me I have more things to learn, for sure. I'm far from getting everything right, and unfortunately, I can't really apply his methods. (For starters, most students would run if I started kicking off my shoes every class.) I teach a class of over 100 students. P(x)'s class size is 8 students. You use completely different teaching methods with a class size of 8 vs. 100 students. Furthermore, advanced graduate courses use completely different teaching methods than introductory undergraduate courses (like I'm teaching.) And regardless, as a PhD student, my primary responsibilities revolve around my own research and dissertation work, which is just beginning. Oh, the question constantly begs every morning; "How do I juggle all of this work today? What should I do first? How do I handle these student issues? I really need something sweet. I know I didn't explain call-by-reference as clearly as I could have. Where's the pizza? I could be making 10x the amount of money I'm making now. Again, why am I doing this? Where's the wine?" and so on. So, I can't really put the time into it that I want to. But, it's enjoyable regardless. Yup, I have much to learn.
As I continue down this path, with the goal of becoming a professor myself, one skill that they don't teach professors is how to teach! Many institutions hire you with NO teaching experience. Can you believe it?!?!? I find this to be insane! Every professor has gained their position without any formal training in pedagogic skills. And, frankly, it shows with many professors. I think many of them can teach, but they simply lack interest. They are there for research purposes, and consider teaching to be an inconvenience -- something that gets in the way of their real goals in research. (After all, it's the research that pays the university bills, not teaching. Teaching is overhead.) Other professors that I've encountered over the past 15 years lack skills to properly impart knowledge to students and inspire learning. Believe me, I'm not saying I have it figured out either. I'll be the first to admit that I don't! But, I'm trying my best to learn from professors who do it right, as well as learn from their mistakes. I've had no formal training myself, other than a few teaching seminars here and there that I've attended out of my own will. The main rule I apply is to teach a class the way I would want to be taught. (Now, I have to try to put myself back in the mindset of an undergraduate, and that's not easy.) However, that philosophy is not right for everyone either. So... regardless, I have a lot to learn still. Don't we all?
Thinking about where I'm at right now, the minority of professors with excellent pedagogic skills outweigh the majority in my head. These are the ones that leave you wanting more. P(x) is actually doing that for me. I haven't had a class like this in years.
P(x) is a unique professor, probably the most unique I've ever had. I'm learning the class subject, as well as observing his teaching methodologies. He's showing me I have more things to learn, for sure. I'm far from getting everything right, and unfortunately, I can't really apply his methods. (For starters, most students would run if I started kicking off my shoes every class.) I teach a class of over 100 students. P(x)'s class size is 8 students. You use completely different teaching methods with a class size of 8 vs. 100 students. Furthermore, advanced graduate courses use completely different teaching methods than introductory undergraduate courses (like I'm teaching.) And regardless, as a PhD student, my primary responsibilities revolve around my own research and dissertation work, which is just beginning. Oh, the question constantly begs every morning; "How do I juggle all of this work today? What should I do first? How do I handle these student issues? I really need something sweet. I know I didn't explain call-by-reference as clearly as I could have. Where's the pizza? I could be making 10x the amount of money I'm making now. Again, why am I doing this? Where's the wine?" and so on. So, I can't really put the time into it that I want to. But, it's enjoyable regardless. Yup, I have much to learn.
Monday, January 31, 2005
Hmm..
Well, I guess this makes me a real geek now. :-) Anyways, I moved my blog from my account at the university computers to here. I wanted more freedom to write things that really reflected my current state of mind, so, I finally did it -- I'm an official blogger. I've been fighting the urge for a couple years now, but it was inevitable. I only reposted stuff that others have found interesting.
Grand Challenges in Comp. Sci.
Jan. 26, 2005 -- Here's a real interesting article that appeared in yesterday's edition of InfoWorld. (You can get the actual conference report here.)Essentially, some computer scientists from Britain outline 7 "grand challenges" in the field of IT that will be faced over the next one to two decades. This is VERY interesting, and if you are wondering what areas of research in Computer Science to get into over the next 3-5 years, you should seriously read this document.
Summarized, they are as follows:
- In Vivo-in Silico (iViS): the virtual worm, weed and bug -- They outline the necessity of developing computer systems that behave and simulate living organisms. Their argument is that this would allow us to better understand and comprehend living organisms in ways we have yet to observe.
- Science for global ubiquitous computing -- (Read #4. This should have been included in that section.) Realizing that computers are becoming pervasive and ubiquitous is continuing to open numerous areas of research.
- Memories for life -- The claim is that the number of people digitizing their life is growing exponentially. (e.g. Photos, video, important documents, etc..) This is creating information overload. New areas of research are opening up to allow this enormous amount of data to be easily managed, that will tap into areas such as security, privacy, databases, information retrieval, AI, machine learning, HCI, etc..
- Development of a global, scalable ubiquitous computing infrastructure -- Do any type of current research into ubicomp, and you'll clearly see the need for commonality in this field. The number of computers all around us is exploding. The potential areas of research is again, security, privacy, context awareness, self-configuration, seamless communication, numerous human factors (this stuff must be invisible to us, otherwise we're not going to use it), etc.
- Better understanding of the brain and the mind -- This has more of a philosophical background of interest. We all should realize the most powerful computing machinery on the face of this earth is your brain! Some view the brain as being analogous to computing machinery and the mind as virtual software. Our brain does so much that we barely understand. Perhaps better understand of how our mind works can open opportunities in CSI.
- Dependable systems evolution -- To me, this should have been the number one focus of the conference. Without better methodologies that allow more dependable systems, while still saving on time and money, none of the above will be able to happen. Regardless, they outline the development of a verifying compiler that can prove the correctness of the
program before being run. - Journeys in non-classical computation -- It's time to go well beyond much of the traditional theory of computation as has been research and open doors to new paradigms. Classical computing, which most would agree is the Turing Machine model, is not an adequate model of reality for all notions of computing. Take quantum computing as an example...
Very cool.
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Grad School -- The Board Game!
Check out the comic this out...
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=515
I wasn't sure whether to laugh or not... as this is a little too much truth for my humorous side. In our department, we call the PhD qualifying exams (or quals) "analytical exams" (or analytics, or, as I like to say, "anals"). Don't ask me why they just don't call them quals. Anyways, the chances of passing all of your exams the first time are roughly 1/36, so that's pretty accurate. Let's see, what else? Hmmm... yes, I certainly take part in all opportunities for free food around the campus. I can understand what happens when a department loses funding. It sucks. I can relate to what happens when you generate bad data, or worse yet, you have good data, but you can't reproduce it, which is still bad data. (Been there.) Generally, choosing a research topic is not so different than drawing a card from the Chance deck. This is funny! If you're a PhD student, you must visit the site http://www.phdcomics.com. I assure you that you will be able to relate to most of these clips.
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=515
I wasn't sure whether to laugh or not... as this is a little too much truth for my humorous side. In our department, we call the PhD qualifying exams (or quals) "analytical exams" (or analytics, or, as I like to say, "anals"). Don't ask me why they just don't call them quals. Anyways, the chances of passing all of your exams the first time are roughly 1/36, so that's pretty accurate. Let's see, what else? Hmmm... yes, I certainly take part in all opportunities for free food around the campus. I can understand what happens when a department loses funding. It sucks. I can relate to what happens when you generate bad data, or worse yet, you have good data, but you can't reproduce it, which is still bad data. (Been there.) Generally, choosing a research topic is not so different than drawing a card from the Chance deck. This is funny! If you're a PhD student, you must visit the site http://www.phdcomics.com. I assure you that you will be able to relate to most of these clips.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)