Why would a school want to weed out programers?
-
I have went back to school, now after a few decades and decided to start at the bottom so to speak with the college entry level programming class. I have had several conversations with the instructor and his statement "I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers". Am I so far behind the times that this makes no sense to me at all. Has anyone else seen this attitude out there? :-D
-
Here's an excerpt from the 6.001 page you linked to:
Warning! This term we are trying an experiment, in which we use the DrSuse version of the Suse programming language as the framework for completing programming projects.:-D ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ -
I have went back to school, now after a few decades and decided to start at the bottom so to speak with the college entry level programming class. I have had several conversations with the instructor and his statement "I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers". Am I so far behind the times that this makes no sense to me at all. Has anyone else seen this attitude out there? :-D
machman1 wrote:
"I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers". Am I so far behind the times that this makes no sense to me at all.
See, he's just sore about how the Real Programmers weeded him out, and now that he's stuck teaching he's taking it out on his students... :rolleyes:
Now taking suggestions for the next release of CPhog...
-
machman1 wrote:
"I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers". Am I so far behind the times that this makes no sense to me at all.
See, he's just sore about how the Real Programmers weeded him out, and now that he's stuck teaching he's taking it out on his students... :rolleyes:
Now taking suggestions for the next release of CPhog...
Score: 1.0 (1 vote) Wonder who else didn't notice smiley :) Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
I have went back to school, now after a few decades and decided to start at the bottom so to speak with the college entry level programming class. I have had several conversations with the instructor and his statement "I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers". Am I so far behind the times that this makes no sense to me at all. Has anyone else seen this attitude out there? :-D
Instead of schools teaching you that you're an uneducatable dumb f*** and will never succeed at your dreams, maybe they ought to actually try teaching kids to be successful. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
-
Any good technical college will have a number of weed-out courses. People hate them, but they're entirely necessary. "If you can't do this work well, and understand how to do it well, this shouldn't be your profession." Think about having the folks that design bridges, planes, and buildings - they damn well better be the best of the best! The stakes are certainly less risky for programming, but the point nevertheless stands.
Russell Morris wrote:
damn well better be the best of the best!
But are they? My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches. That doesn't mean that they aren't going to be brilliant programmers, engineers, whatever. It simply means that the educational system has failed them, not that they have failed. (OK, yes, barring the obvious slackers and bozos). The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests, which isn't necessarily the same thing at developing an expertise in ones subject. I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
-
machman1 wrote:
I have went back to school, now after a few decades and decided to start at the bottom so to speak with the college entry level programming class. I have had several conversations with the instructor and his statement "I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers". Am I so far behind the times that this makes no sense to me at all. Has anyone else seen this attitude out there?
Perhaps, they do so now because VB6 is now obsolete. So there's no similar alternative for not-so-talented programmer-wannabes. Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
The Ultimate Grid - The #1 MFC grid out there!Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
VB6 is now obsolete. So there's no similar alternative for not-so-talented programmer-wannabes
You are a cruel, cruel man. :-D
-
Russell Morris wrote:
damn well better be the best of the best!
But are they? My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches. That doesn't mean that they aren't going to be brilliant programmers, engineers, whatever. It simply means that the educational system has failed them, not that they have failed. (OK, yes, barring the obvious slackers and bozos). The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests, which isn't necessarily the same thing at developing an expertise in ones subject. I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
Marc Clifton wrote:
That doesn't mean that they aren't going to be brilliant programmers, engineers, whatever.
Worse yet, it means that (for instance) most of the brilliant botanists who are also good-enough programmers to write quality botany software are gonna be those who've taught themselves. :sigh:
Now taking suggestions for the next release of CPhog...
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
That doesn't mean that they aren't going to be brilliant programmers, engineers, whatever.
Worse yet, it means that (for instance) most of the brilliant botanists who are also good-enough programmers to write quality botany software are gonna be those who've taught themselves. :sigh:
Now taking suggestions for the next release of CPhog...
Shog9 wrote:
Worse yet, it means that (for instance) most of the brilliant botanists who are also good-enough programmers to write quality botany software are gonna be those who've taught themselves
That's a good point--being skilled in multiple disciplines is becoming harder. I wonder if there's a limit to specialization and being effective at whatever you've specialized in. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
-
I have went back to school, now after a few decades and decided to start at the bottom so to speak with the college entry level programming class. I have had several conversations with the instructor and his statement "I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers". Am I so far behind the times that this makes no sense to me at all. Has anyone else seen this attitude out there? :-D
machman1 wrote:
"I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers".
The tech school I went to in Oklahoma took great pride in having acceptance of only 10% of applicants based on weeding-out criteria, and that they had a 50% drop out rate beyond that. It comes down to the idea "the strong will survive" as a concept. The more you weed out, the stronger the remaining group is. Your GPA in 2nd and 3rd year classes are higher, and classes smaller with the remaining students learning more. I took great pride in breaking every programming record in the school. While they tried to figure out why I was able to do what I do in order to weed out students not like me. Which is generally how it is done, either the instructors pattern their weeding based on known "successes" or simply on themselves, the goal is to remove those they think will waste the time of the school, and the money of the individual. Bryan Institute gave a full refund if you dropped out in the first cull, it keeps their graduation GPA very high if you cull as many as possible which in turn earns the school a better reputation, which in turn brings in more money and more applicants to replace those lost. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Russell Morris wrote:
damn well better be the best of the best!
But are they? My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches. That doesn't mean that they aren't going to be brilliant programmers, engineers, whatever. It simply means that the educational system has failed them, not that they have failed. (OK, yes, barring the obvious slackers and bozos). The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests, which isn't necessarily the same thing at developing an expertise in ones subject. I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
Marc Clifton wrote:
But are they?
When taught well, yes.
Marc Clifton wrote:
My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches.
Then they're not doing themselves or anyone else any good in that system, right? ;)
Marc Clifton wrote:
The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests, which isn't necessarily the same thing at developing an expertise in ones subject.
Primarily? I'd argue that is most certainly not the case in a well taught weeder class (well-taught being a prerequisite). There is something to be said for 'learning how to take tests' in penny-ante classes with scantron tests, but none of the weeders I had were like that. The tests in the one weeder I had that actually had a test worth mentioning (i.e. one that would take up an entire class period) required almost no coding, and had to multiple choice. It was mostly the explanation of various algorithms and the thought and purpose behind them. The other two weeders I took had no 'tests', but instead had semiweekly programming assignments (implementations of various algorithms in one case, and building up various components for the command shell that would eventually be put together using them at the end of the class in the other). The only thing approaching a 'test' in these two weeders were the weekly quizes, which lasted no more than 15 minutes, and were not of the 'fill in the blank' variety.
Marc Clifton wrote:
I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes.
Fair enough. But for any one of them, I'll show you 50 that either failed or dropped out of the weeder class, or heard about the weeder class and got out ahead of time. Of course, there will always be false positives and false negatives. But that in and of itself does not indicate the uselessness of weeder classes. -- Russell Morris Morbo: "WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!"
-
Here's an excerpt from the 6.001 page you linked to:
Warning! This term we are trying an experiment, in which we use the DrSuse version of the Suse programming language as the framework for completing programming projects.:-D ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸You mean DrScheme. Scheme is a programming language. Suse is a Linux distro. ;P
They dress you up in white satin, And give you your very own pair of wings In August and Everything After
I'm after everything
-
Russell Morris wrote:
damn well better be the best of the best!
But are they? My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches. That doesn't mean that they aren't going to be brilliant programmers, engineers, whatever. It simply means that the educational system has failed them, not that they have failed. (OK, yes, barring the obvious slackers and bozos). The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests, which isn't necessarily the same thing at developing an expertise in ones subject. I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
Marc Clifton wrote:
I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes.
Hey, you don't have to tell me. I know those kids. I mean seriously, I'll be down in the CSE labs the day that the homework is due...working on the next assignment, and there'll be students down there asking me the most basic things about why their assignment isn't compiling or how, exactly, the AVL tree is supposed to maintain its structure. Or why a binomial queue's operations mirror binary math and why we need to use bit operations for that. UCSD hasn't taught me anything about programming. It has taught me how to jump through hoops. Most of everything I've learned about programming, I've learned from here or from reading really good books/articles/blogs etc. (You know, stuff on Agile development, TDD, Design Patterns, etc.) And it's hilarious to me when, in my CSE 100[^] class (the first upper division CSE class), these kids are given an opportunity to work in Java again after a lot of C and SPARC assembly (BTW, I'm renewing my hatred for Java this quarter), and they don't even know what JUnit is...or how they would use it. Or that generics are a Good Thing (even though Java's implementation of them sucks). I look at them and think, "Don't you know how to write software?" or "Don't you read things outside of the books that our professors tell us to read?" But then I realize that they really don't. Outside the scope of the assignment handout, they don't know anything about real software development. And I suppose I'd be one of them if it wasn't for the fact that my mom taught me how to learn for myself and that you guys showed me how great programmers think.
They dress you up in white satin, And give you your very own pair of wings In August and Everything After
I'm after everything
-
machman1 wrote:
"I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers".
The tech school I went to in Oklahoma took great pride in having acceptance of only 10% of applicants based on weeding-out criteria, and that they had a 50% drop out rate beyond that. It comes down to the idea "the strong will survive" as a concept. The more you weed out, the stronger the remaining group is. Your GPA in 2nd and 3rd year classes are higher, and classes smaller with the remaining students learning more. I took great pride in breaking every programming record in the school. While they tried to figure out why I was able to do what I do in order to weed out students not like me. Which is generally how it is done, either the instructors pattern their weeding based on known "successes" or simply on themselves, the goal is to remove those they think will waste the time of the school, and the money of the individual. Bryan Institute gave a full refund if you dropped out in the first cull, it keeps their graduation GPA very high if you cull as many as possible which in turn earns the school a better reputation, which in turn brings in more money and more applicants to replace those lost. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes.
Hey, you don't have to tell me. I know those kids. I mean seriously, I'll be down in the CSE labs the day that the homework is due...working on the next assignment, and there'll be students down there asking me the most basic things about why their assignment isn't compiling or how, exactly, the AVL tree is supposed to maintain its structure. Or why a binomial queue's operations mirror binary math and why we need to use bit operations for that. UCSD hasn't taught me anything about programming. It has taught me how to jump through hoops. Most of everything I've learned about programming, I've learned from here or from reading really good books/articles/blogs etc. (You know, stuff on Agile development, TDD, Design Patterns, etc.) And it's hilarious to me when, in my CSE 100[^] class (the first upper division CSE class), these kids are given an opportunity to work in Java again after a lot of C and SPARC assembly (BTW, I'm renewing my hatred for Java this quarter), and they don't even know what JUnit is...or how they would use it. Or that generics are a Good Thing (even though Java's implementation of them sucks). I look at them and think, "Don't you know how to write software?" or "Don't you read things outside of the books that our professors tell us to read?" But then I realize that they really don't. Outside the scope of the assignment handout, they don't know anything about real software development. And I suppose I'd be one of them if it wasn't for the fact that my mom taught me how to learn for myself and that you guys showed me how great programmers think.
They dress you up in white satin, And give you your very own pair of wings In August and Everything After
I'm after everything
David Stone wrote:
And I suppose I'd be one of them if it wasn't for the fact that my mom taught me how to learn for myself and that you guys showed me how great programmers think.
Well said (all of it, not just the quote above). I'm a firm believer that real education starts with the parents. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
-
Russell Morris wrote:
damn well better be the best of the best!
But are they? My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches. That doesn't mean that they aren't going to be brilliant programmers, engineers, whatever. It simply means that the educational system has failed them, not that they have failed. (OK, yes, barring the obvious slackers and bozos). The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests, which isn't necessarily the same thing at developing an expertise in ones subject. I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
Marc Clifton wrote:
But are they?
To a large percent, I think so.
Marc Clifton wrote:
My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches.
I will agree to a limited extent, but also say then they are in the wrong system and time for a change. For everyones benefit.
Marc Clifton wrote:
It simply means that the educational system has failed them,
When I hear that, I just have to say, Yep everything is always the systems fault and no one ever has any responsibility. Sorry I do not buy it, at the college level. Students have the responsibility to learn and work. If they were stuck in a pitiful excuse for primary education, then relise it and take extra time to catch up.
Marc Clifton wrote:
The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests
I do not bye that line either. I passed the weeder class and I definitly never was one to learn how to pass tests. yes some are in the group you point out. The plus here is most of them quickly become golden people and are managers. Not the ones whose work your life depends on. "Every new day begins with possibilities. It's up to us to fill it with things that move us toward progress and peace.” (Ronald Reagan)
-
I have went back to school, now after a few decades and decided to start at the bottom so to speak with the college entry level programming class. I have had several conversations with the instructor and his statement "I am hear to weed out wantabe programmers". Am I so far behind the times that this makes no sense to me at all. Has anyone else seen this attitude out there? :-D
The instructor/school wants to make sure that only the toughest survive the course. The attitude is quite common in Engineering departments too. You have to understand that they are not interested in those who should really be studying English Literature, Sociology or Psychology but who want to be programmers. They are checking out the aptitude AND the attitude of the students by making the course very very difficult.
-
David Stone wrote:
And I suppose I'd be one of them if it wasn't for the fact that my mom taught me how to learn for myself and that you guys showed me how great programmers think.
Well said (all of it, not just the quote above). I'm a firm believer that real education starts with the parents. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
Marc Clifton wrote:
I'm a firm believer that real education starts with the parents.
We agree on that! "Every new day begins with possibilities. It's up to us to fill it with things that move us toward progress and peace.” (Ronald Reagan)
-
Russell Morris wrote:
damn well better be the best of the best!
But are they? My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches. That doesn't mean that they aren't going to be brilliant programmers, engineers, whatever. It simply means that the educational system has failed them, not that they have failed. (OK, yes, barring the obvious slackers and bozos). The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests, which isn't necessarily the same thing at developing an expertise in ones subject. I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes. Marc Pensieve Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
Marc Clifton wrote:
The people that do succeed at passing the weeder classes primarily succeed at learning how to pass the tests, which isn't necessarily the same thing at developing an expertise in ones subject.
Not necessarily so. My friend's daughter studied EE at Ohio State. The homework assignment for one week consisted of determining current flow through circuits. One could say that a single problem, solved by reduction of the circuit, by Thevenin's theorem and by Norton's theorem would suffice to show the student how to solve electrical circuits. But the instructor assigned every single exercise at the end of the chapter as the week's homework. One would have to spend 20+ hours just for that one course that week. The idea is to make the course so tough that only the determined student who WANTS to be an engineer would stay in the program. By the way, Ohio State, being a state school, has to let in all those who qualify into their program of choice. So someone with decent grades from some small high school could conceivably get into the EE/CS program. The weeder course injects a dose of reality into the student's brain.
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
I have only to recall the programmers I've interviewed and worked with, fresh out of college (including UCSD, David), who couldn't write "Hello World" if their life depended on it. And obviously, THEY passed the weeder classes.
Hey, you don't have to tell me. I know those kids. I mean seriously, I'll be down in the CSE labs the day that the homework is due...working on the next assignment, and there'll be students down there asking me the most basic things about why their assignment isn't compiling or how, exactly, the AVL tree is supposed to maintain its structure. Or why a binomial queue's operations mirror binary math and why we need to use bit operations for that. UCSD hasn't taught me anything about programming. It has taught me how to jump through hoops. Most of everything I've learned about programming, I've learned from here or from reading really good books/articles/blogs etc. (You know, stuff on Agile development, TDD, Design Patterns, etc.) And it's hilarious to me when, in my CSE 100[^] class (the first upper division CSE class), these kids are given an opportunity to work in Java again after a lot of C and SPARC assembly (BTW, I'm renewing my hatred for Java this quarter), and they don't even know what JUnit is...or how they would use it. Or that generics are a Good Thing (even though Java's implementation of them sucks). I look at them and think, "Don't you know how to write software?" or "Don't you read things outside of the books that our professors tell us to read?" But then I realize that they really don't. Outside the scope of the assignment handout, they don't know anything about real software development. And I suppose I'd be one of them if it wasn't for the fact that my mom taught me how to learn for myself and that you guys showed me how great programmers think.
They dress you up in white satin, And give you your very own pair of wings In August and Everything After
I'm after everything
David Stone wrote:
And I suppose I'd be one of them if it wasn't for the fact that my mom taught me how to learn for myself and that you guys showed me how great programmers think.
Amazing, isn't it? That the most fundamental aspect of learning, the ability to sit down and [read a book|listen to a professor|observe a demonstration|internalize available knowledge] is so often allowed to take a backseat to something so typically worthless as taking a test. :sigh:
Now taking suggestions for the next release of CPhog...
