Why would a school want to weed out programers?
-
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...
-
Isn't the point of school to prove you have the ability to learn? My point is that anyone coming out of school still needs to learn through experience of developing production systems. Mike Lasseter
mr_12345 wrote:
Isn't the point of school to prove you have the ability to learn? My point is that anyone coming out of school still needs to learn through experience of developing production systems.
A tech school directs instructions specifically at production systems/technologies while ignoring side concepts and backgrounds. So the answer is yes and no both. The intent is to prove you have the ability to learn with that school's methods, the idea that every school is the same, from Cal-Tech to MIT to Devry and Bryan Institute to your local junior college is somewhat silly. Each prepares you for the "real-world" in different ways, and what you learn will be applied to different industries, some better than others. You cannot hope to develop perfect production systems without specific direction to a specific industry. Mine was accounting. I dropped it as soon as I could jump ship. :) _________________________ 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:
you guys showed me how great programmers think
:-> (I've been looking for an excuse to use that icon)
Software Zen:
delete this; -
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
Perhaps a similar reason businesses weed out good programmers in order to save the a--kissers who know politics better than code. Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
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!:omg: Wow, not only do you wound the man, but you grind sea salt into the wound too. Pictures of the menu available at the drive-thru -- modified at 22:41 Monday 24th April, 2006
-
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.
They may have cheated or used Code Project to get their homework assignments completed? Pictures of the menu available at the drive-thru
-
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
-
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:
My contention is that weeder classes simply get rid of the kids that don't learn by the prescribed methods the system teaches.
People who really want to be programmers will find a way to do so. Becoming a good programmer or anything is at least 50% sheer interest and ability to work hard, an educational "system" is not for everyone, it's designed specifically to meet the needs of the mediocre. And as long as it meets those needs it's not failed in it's objective. It's reasonable I think, to weed out those that are not suited for whatever environment they are learning in, it just brings down the rest. Saying an educational system failed someone is more often than not a euphamistic way of saying that person was lazy or un-interested.
-
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
I think the whole point was missed here, the instructor probably meant "wannabe" as in someone who think's it's a "cool" idea but has little real interest in the subject and no work ethic. I knew a guy who really wanted to be a computer repair guy, but he was hopeless at it. He really had convinced himself that it was the career for him, but he kept screwing up the most basic tasks that had been shown to him repeatedly with as much encouragement as possible. I had to sit him down over coffee and say "this really isn't the right career for you" which was a nice way of firing him and giving him the truth. Sometimes the airy fairy happy speak is not really doing a person a favor at all. If you think that a seasoned professor or instructor can't point out the people who really shouldn't even bother being in the class in the first week and will not be right nearly every time I have a nice bridge you might want to buy.
-
Yes. At Cal Poly, the weeding was in the form of Calculus, Quantum Physics (special rel - gah! I don't care about your damn cat!), and Statics, and, for the less fortunate EEs and MEs, Dynamics, and Thermodynamics. :wtf: I suppose it helps them to conserve resources for those students who are both interested and capable, but I have used Calculus exactly once since graduating, and that was to determine how much bark to order for a taco-shaped planter in my parent's yard. :laugh: Jon Sagara Look at him. He runs like a Welshman. Doesn't he run like a Welshman? Doesn't he? I think he runs like a Welshman. My Site | My Blog | My Articles
You can't go wrong getting an education at a University whose initials are CPU (Cal Poly Univ)...although Pomona (my Alma Mater) is a little better that SLO ;)... Roger Wright graduated from Pomona too... Steve
-
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...
he does have one programmers attribute...he can't spell worth sh#$ :doh: Steve
-
You can't go wrong getting an education at a University whose initials are CPU (Cal Poly Univ)...although Pomona (my Alma Mater) is a little better that SLO ;)... Roger Wright graduated from Pomona too... Steve
Steve Mayfield wrote (paraphrased):
Cal Poly Pomona (my Alma Mater)
I see your Schwarz is as big as mine... :suss:
Steve Mayfield wrote:
although Pomona (my Alma Mater) is a little better that SLO
:laugh: Oh man. That will always be a point of contention. My sister likes to point out that we are #1 because we are first aphabetically: California Polytechnic State University, SLO vs California State Polytechnic University, Pomona So there. ;P:) Jon Sagara Look at him. He runs like a Welshman. Doesn't he run like a Welshman? Doesn't he? I think he runs like a Welshman. My Site | My Blog | My Articles
-
he does have one programmers attribute...he can't spell worth sh#$ :doh: Steve
-
Yes. At Cal Poly, the weeding was in the form of Calculus, Quantum Physics (special rel - gah! I don't care about your damn cat!), and Statics, and, for the less fortunate EEs and MEs, Dynamics, and Thermodynamics. :wtf: I suppose it helps them to conserve resources for those students who are both interested and capable, but I have used Calculus exactly once since graduating, and that was to determine how much bark to order for a taco-shaped planter in my parent's yard. :laugh: Jon Sagara Look at him. He runs like a Welshman. Doesn't he run like a Welshman? Doesn't he? I think he runs like a Welshman. My Site | My Blog | My Articles
That's funny. I use the math from school frequently and ... it's *NEVER* work-related. One of my clients is a huge quaried stone company and I help the ladies that run the store calculate all sorts of stuff. I've written up their formula sheets so they can approximate volumes for flower beds, waterfall stones, fountain stones all sorts of stuff. I even calculated the axel limit on their new delivery truck because they didn't have a clue and were about to crack the axel if I hadn't stopped them. Then there's all the stuff I do on a daily basis. The other day I was trying to work out world domination. I was going to flood New York and had to use Calculus to approximate how much of the moon's gravitation I'd need. Of course this lead to the explosive charge I'd need to place on the moon to alter it's orbit. Then I had to do some stuff for JPL on the back of a napkin as they were having trouble saving the world from my planned destruction. Oh yeah! Man! If I hadn't learned all that crap in school there's no way I'd be able to take over the world, run linux or water my sod. Thermodynamics was a hoot. That year of physics was just priceless. I think the only thing school taught me was how to cope with stress and the answer to that is the same regardless. Fight stress with exercise, fight fatigue with caffeine, fight bugs with VS 2005 and well... Yeah, school was a lot of weed eating. Compilers and Database Theory were weed eaters at my place of edukashun the math and science weren't really. I think most prof's figured if you couldn't hang with the math and science then you were on a fast track to an art major. But Database Theory and Compilers were two known evils. It was generally believed that datastructures was a satanic rite... I loved datastructures though. I especially loved implementing all those sorts in VB 6 and watching my "Big-O" turn into "Oh-S_ _ t that's taking a while!". I loved school. If I get a chance I'm going back for a masters in mathematics I think math is just *very* cool and I want my kids to be all over the math stuff. - Rex
The enemy's gate is down. :cool: Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog[^] now. People w
-
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
I've seen it, and I agree with it. A lot of people read about the money programmers make and decide to learn programming in order to collect the fees. That's the wrong motivation for a programmer (or any other technocrat), and the market has bred a host of poor programmers motivated by only the level of pay. To be a good programmer you have to love coding, not money. Only then are you deserving of the large paychecks that come with the skill. VB and other scripting-languages-on-steroids encourage the not-so-skilled to attempt tasks they are not really equipped to perform well, and that hurts all of us - programmers and users alike. We get marginal products that are inefficient and costly in resources, lousy support, and high TCO. We all lose when people who are not truly called to the profession enter the job market, and it's a teacher's obligation to help direct his/her students into career paths that are consistent with the student's abilities. Entry level classes are far too easy; they should be designed to cull out the losers early, and redirect them into fields where they stand a better chance of excelling. "...a photo album is like Life, but flat and stuck to pages." - Shog9 -- modified at 2:54 Tuesday 25th April, 2006
-
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
But correct? :rolleyes: The tigress is here :-D
-
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:
The stakes are certainly less risky for programming, but the point nevertheless stands.
I beg to differ, computer programs are FAR more risky than bridge builders, etc. While a bridge may fall down, it will likely only kill a few hundred people max. But imagine if a computer program accidently tagged thousands of innocent americans as terrorists or something. Or if the computer system running all of our airplanes became infected with a virus causing all planes to go haywire. It would be tough for a bridge builder to do that kind of damage if they tried. ;)
-
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...
First of all, there are many excellent programmers who have little to no college whatsoever. A few of the world's most famous and wealthy programmers have no degree. A self-righteous professor may attempt to get rid of people thru a intentionally rigorous course, but that doesn't mean that student will never be a professional programmer. I have worked at consulting companies where the best programmers were not even IT majors, rather English majors, religion majors, and the most common in my experience is art/music majors. Many universities are teaching programming as part of an overall business-based IT program, where the student isn't taught to just code low level stuff, but also to be innovative, entrepreneurial and to understand the big picture. Personally, I'd much rather have an IT major over a traditional CS major, especially in today's business world. So to the person who started this thread, don't worry about that professor. And don't let anybody "weed" you out if you enjoy this line of work and feel you can be productive, innovative and continuously improve yourself. Good luck!
-
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
So what would be served by trying to teach them more difficult material using that same method?
-
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
I'm a game design and development student, which is a VERY popular program. However not everyone in the program has the aptitude to complete it. Having a class or two which weed out the students who should not be there is good for everyone. It saves them LOTS of money first off (my total tuition is somewhere in the area of $82,000 BEFORE intrest) In addition the students who more rightfully (however you say that nicely) should be in the class learn more without the hinderence of bad questions. In addition the reputation of the school is maintained.