[geeks] Education [was: [rescue] Mainframe on eBay]

[Sridhar Ayengar]

velociraptor wrote:
> On 9/26/05, William Enestvedt <William.Enestvedt at jwu.edu> wrote:
> 
>>Nadine wrote:
>>
>>>As an example, why do architecture degrees still teach drafting on
>>
>>paper?
>>
>>>Why don't they go directly to Autocad, TurboCad, etc?  No one actually
>>>uses manual drafting anymore in the "real world".  They do so because
>>>there are things architects need to know how to do themselves--and
>>>computer programs allow the students to "cheat" on the basics.
>>>
>>
>>   Yes yes YES. My last job was at America's oldest
>>continually-operating architectural firm, and one of The Twelve Mighty
>>Principal architects didn't use his computer. At _all_. (Well, maybe for
>>email, but not that I could tell, judging from the size of his mail
>>spool...)
>>   A very technical, egg-heady friend just started Yale's architectural
>>Master's program, and she showed up on campus in later summer in order
>>to take a basic drawing class. And instead of resenting it, she's
>>already written that it helped her.
>>   This is a narrow sampling from within a single profession, but it's
>>still valid.
> 
> 
> There's also the point that an architect with a pencil and paper can
> whip out a half-dozen different ideas for his clients in 15-20 minutes
> vs. the tedious stuff required to do the same with a CAD program.
> Or that, CAD programs, as with all software can have bugs and be
> wrong.  A good drafter will catch these issues.
> 
> 
>>>Jobs change, careers change, tools change.  Technology is a moving
>>>target.  Students need to be taught to be flexible and
>>>adaptable.
>>>
>>
>>   "Teach principles, not practices" perhaps? :7) One senses a whiff of
>>manifesto from the liberal arts students!
> 
> 
> Yes.  And teaching principles also means teaching those necessary
> for developing the practices.  As an example of that, a good IT security
> curriculum would give a foundation in general host security (e.g. what
> things make a host secure) and while a lab might address these on a
> given OS, the focus of the curriculum would be the broad principles of
> host security, not "how to secure OS du jour 2025."
> 
> I am a Heinleinian after all: "Specialization is for insects."  By teaching
> tools you are teaching specialization; and specialization, in the worst
> case, can result in extinction.

If you're saying that the theory that should be taught is that which is 
required in practice, I agree wholeheartedly.

My issue is that much of the theory being taught can only be taken as 
theory.  I'm not saying all of it falls under this category, nor am I 
saying that most of it does.  I'm just saying that there's way too much 
impractical, even useless information being taught to students for whom 
theory will never be a primary concern.

Peace...  Sridhar