Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Robert Dewar]

please move discussion of undergraduate curricula to the appropriate
newsgroups. Specific discussion of Ada's place in such a curriculum is
appropriate here, general discussion of issues is not.

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!seas.g]

In article <1993Aug10.180009.8441@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (
fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1993Aug10.020538.14104@seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldma
n) writes:
>
[deleted]

>>You said it was OK to discuss Ada's role in all this. The thread started
>>with a remark that the "leading universities" aren't doing much Ada.
>>I opined that that didn't matter all that much; that it's quite OK
>>for someone to change the definition of "best universities" to 
>>"those that teach good software engineering, in particular with Ada."
>
>>This time, Robert, we are in violent agreement. Whew.
>
>But isn't this the same sort of 'triple-think' that leads people to
>question all the good things that can be said about Ada?  Simply
>redefine 'good' to mean 'Ada'?  How much credibility can praise for
>the language have if people see it as coming from that kind of
>mindset? 
>
Sorry, you didn't see the invisible smiley :-) I meant it ironically.

I hear ALL THE TIME that Ada cannot be any good because the "best"
universities aren't teaching it much. I even heard from a high USAF
official (oh, OK, it was Mosemann, himself) that he was really concerned
about Ada's image because the "best" universities don't teach it much.

I told him I didn't think that was terribly relevant, that if he wanted
to produce lots of good seniors for industry, he should take a look at
the "non-best" schools that _are_ teaching Ada, study their success in
other things like SE, and try to leverage it. He didn't get it.

>I agree that it really doesn't matter what students are being taught
>in, particularly, as long as they are learning principles of good
>software engineering.  I even agree that many of them aren't.
>However, I have to disagree with the idea that you can redefine 'good'
>in this way -- you have to look at what the 'good' schools are without
>regard for language and then look at language.
>
Of course.

Sorry, I misled you into thinking I was serious. I was only half serious.
I teach in a "non-best" (by many of the arbitrary measures) engineering
college, and besides it had been a long day.

Mike Feldman

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!seas.g]

In article <2489qi$2ik@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu> dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wr
ites:
>
>function End_Of_Thread return Boolean is
>begin
>   return Feldman.Opinion = Dewar.Opinion;
>end End_Of_Thread; 
>
>-- :-)
>

:-) :-) :-)

This is fun.

Mike

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[fred j mccall 575-3539]

In <1993Aug10.020538.14104@seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman
) writes:

>In article <244lpj$8t@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu> dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wr
ites:
>>Well spoke John Biedler! In fact I think a lot of the "leading
>>universities" are turning out computer science students who not
>>only do not know anything about software engineering and construction
>>of large programs, but, much worse, they *think* they *do* know
>>something which makes them dangerous rather than useless. This is not
>>surprising given that the majority of the faculty members in such
>>departments know nothing about such things themselves.
>>
>You said it was OK to discuss Ada's role in all this. The thread started
>with a remark that the "leading universities" aren't doing much Ada.
>I opined that that didn't matter all that much; that it's quite OK
>for someone to change the definition of "best universities" to 
>"those that teach good software engineering, in particular with Ada."

>This time, Robert, we are in violent agreement. Whew.

But isn't this the same sort of 'triple-think' that leads people to
question all the good things that can be said about Ada?  Simply
redefine 'good' to mean 'Ada'?  How much credibility can praise for
the language have if people see it as coming from that kind of
mindset? 

I agree that it really doesn't matter what students are being taught
in, particularly, as long as they are learning principles of good
software engineering.  I even agree that many of them aren't.
However, I have to disagree with the idea that you can redefine 'good'
in this way -- you have to look at what the 'good' schools are without
regard for language and then look at language.

On that basis, I think the original statement that the 'best'
universities aren't doing much Ada is quite true.  I am not, however,
convinced that that is meaningful insofar as saying anything about the
language itself or its use (and usefulness) in industry goes.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Robert Dewar]

function End_Of_Thread return Boolean is
begin
   return Feldman.Opinion = Dewar.Opinion;
end End_Of_Thread; 

-- :-)

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!seas.gwu.edu!mfeld]

In article <244lpj$8t@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu> dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wri
tes:
>Well spoke John Biedler! In fact I think a lot of the "leading
>universities" are turning out computer science students who not
>only do not know anything about software engineering and construction
>of large programs, but, much worse, they *think* they *do* know
>something which makes them dangerous rather than useless. This is not
>surprising given that the majority of the faculty members in such
>departments know nothing about such things themselves.
>
You said it was OK to discuss Ada's role in all this. The thread started
with a remark that the "leading universities" aren't doing much Ada.
I opined that that didn't matter all that much; that it's quite OK
for someone to change the definition of "best universities" to 
"those that teach good software engineering, in particular with Ada."

This time, Robert, we are in violent agreement. Whew.

Mike

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!seas.gwu.edu!mfeld]

In article <244lpj$8t@schonberg.cs.nyu.edu> dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wri
tes:
>Well spoke John Biedler! In fact I think a lot of the "leading
>universities" are turning out computer science students who not
>only do not know anything about software engineering and construction
>of large programs, but, much worse, they *think* they *do* know
>something which makes them dangerous rather than useless. This is not
>surprising given that the majority of the faculty members in such
>departments know nothing about such things themselves.
>

Well put, Robert Dewar. Now let's take it to comp.edu, as you suggested :-)

Mike

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Robert Dewar]

Well spoke John Biedler! In fact I think a lot of the "leading
universities" are turning out computer science students who not
only do not know anything about software engineering and construction
of large programs, but, much worse, they *think* they *do* know
something which makes them dangerous rather than useless. This is not
surprising given that the majority of the faculty members in such
departments know nothing about such things themselves.

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Michael Feldman]

In article <SRCTRAN.93Aug5102729@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com (Gregory 
Aharonian) writes:
>
>	If you read what I originally posted, I prefaced the posting
>with a comment on the meaningless of "best" rankings of universities.
>I made it quite clear that it was Barron's list, and that such lists
>should be taken with a grain of salt.  So calling me a snob is kind
>of a stretch (unless you know my feelings on non-physicists and 
>non-mathematicians :-)

See below.
>
>	I do believe that there exists utility-function rankings of
>universities (in terms of what they offer to their students, and
>the country).  I don't know what these functions are, but I do
>believe they exist, given that endless numbers of published rankings
>of universities do show strong correlations.

I don't think you can find any serious rankings that really report in
terms of what they offer to their country. Rankings like US News, Barron's,
etc., are journalistic exercises that probably have a grain of truth in 
them, but they tend to create self-fulfilling prophecies. If US News
declares a college "hot" (never mind whether it really is), that college
becomes hot, at least till the fad wears off.

One could argue that the typical _graduate_ rankings, which are usually
in terms of the size of the government-funded research coming in, measure
the importance of the universities to government sponsors. Whether this is
a good measure of utility to the nation is debatable, as I think you'd
be the first to admit! ("Pork" enters into the equation, too, as you know.)

>	And I believe that there will be little correlation between
>those universites with high rankings in terms of the influence their
>students and faculty will have on the software industry, and those
>universities receiving Ada9X money.

Not clear. Where do you get your statistics on universities and their
influence on industry? I am not aware of any? Are they just "feelings"?

>	Now that may be a good strategy or not.  I do not know.  But
>seeing as how the Ada9X people seem to be counting on this strategy
>as a major component in making Ada more widely used (a strategy I find
>very questionable), I do believe the strategy should be reexamined and
>and some data collected on the university process.  I do not think the
>Ada9X office has a deep enough understanding of the interactions
>between industry and academia to rely solely on their current academic
>strategy to see Ada succeed.

Actually, the Ada9X curriculum program is a competitive award program.
I think they have funded about 50% of the proposals, though I'm not sure
of this. They can only fund proposals that arrive over their wall; they
cannot fund proposals that are not submitted. You're not far from MIT -
go ask them why they haven't (as far as I know) submitted proposals.

MIT gets a lot of money from ARPA. Perhaps they wouldn't waste their time
writing proposals for $50k chunks of money. Who knows? Go ask 'em.

The schools that are getting the funding, overall, can use the money,
and as far as I can see, most of them are giving the government its 
money's worth. How can you be against this? It's something for the
little guy, who's delivering the goods. Hey, you can't have it both ways.

Mike Feldman

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Gregory Aharonian]

In response to my posting a list of "best" universities, Mike Feldman
writes

>Greg started this. He is many things (most of which I like, by the
>way), but I never thought I'd end up calling him an academic snob...

Mike,
	If you read what I originally posted, I prefaced the posting
with a comment on the meaningless of "best" rankings of universities.
I made it quite clear that it was Barron's list, and that such lists
should be taken with a grain of salt.  So calling me a snob is kind
of a stretch (unless you know my feelings on non-physicists and 
non-mathematicians :-)

	I do believe that there exists utility-function rankings of
universities (in terms of what they offer to their students, and
the country).  I don't know what these functions are, but I do
believe they exist, given that endless numbers of published rankings
of universities do show strong correlations.
	And I believe that there will be little correlation between
those universites with high rankings in terms of the influence their
students and faculty will have on the software industry, and those
universities receiving Ada9X money.
	Now that may be a good strategy or not.  I do not know.  But
seeing as how the Ada9X people seem to be counting on this strategy
as a major component in making Ada more widely used (a strategy I find
very questionable), I do believe the strategy should be reexamined and
and some data collected on the university process.  I do not think the
Ada9X office has a deep enough understanding of the interactions
between industry and academia to rely solely on their current academic
strategy to see Ada succeed.
-- 
**************************************************************************
 Greg Aharonian
 Source Translation & Optimization
 P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Michael Feldman]

In article <23m9eo$src@gopher.cs.uofs.edu> beidler@guinness.cs.uofs.edu (Jack B
eidler) writes:
>
[stuff deleted]

>Suppose we use accreditation of the undergraduate program by CSAB
>as a criterion for "the best".  How many of Greg's best qualify?
>Not many.  Oh, I forgot, some of them feel they are too good, too
>superior to be evaluated by others.  That sounds too much to me
>like pork barrel, the very thing that is creating our national debt.

Yeah, that was one of the points in my interminable post about CSAB.
The other point was that less than 25% - FAR less, if you neglect
IBM's 11 participants - of program evaluators are non-academic.
The last thing I want to do is start a religious war over what's
a "best" school; one should simply use the relevant criteria for
the purpose. Your school and mine are among an elite, Jack; our
faculties recognize that fads should not drive our curricula or
our choice of teaching language.
>
>The fact is there is no such thing as "the best" in this case.  The
>best we can do is submit proposals and have them reviewed by
>unbiased reviewers, people who don't have a preconceived notion 
>that funding should only go to an elite few.  People who evaluate
>a proposal on its merits, the quality of the proposal, not the
>school where the proposer teaches.

Thank you, Jack, for saying this much more eloquently than I could.
>From the perspective of the Ada industry, the 100 or so schools where
Ada is heavily involved should be seen as the pace setters. The
curriculum program is one way - quite effective, I think - in which
the number of pace setters is increased.

Greg started this. He is many things (most of which I like, by the
way), but I never thought I'd end up calling him an academic snob...

Mike Feldman

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Jack Beidler]

In a number of posting, including the original posting, as one who
is not at one of "the best universities", I was wondering what
makes a school "the best".  Over the years as a computer scientist/
software engineer I have found that I can rarely use the term 
"the best".

Greg's list of "the best" contains at least two universities that
do not have undergraduate computer science programs and at least
one university that only recently started offerring an undergraduate
degree in computer science!  Surely Greg doesn't want to
automatically give money for Software Engineering and Ada Education
to schools who don't have undergraduate programs in the discipline,
or do not have a track record at the undergraduate level.

Suppose we use accreditation of the undergraduate program by CSAB
as a criterion for "the best".  How many of Greg's best qualify?
Not many.  Oh, I forgot, some of them feel they are too good, too
superior to be evaluated by others.  That sounds too much to me
like pork barrel, the very thing that is creating our national debt.

The fact is there is no such thing as "the best" in this case.  The
best we can do is submit proposals and have them reviewed by
unbiased reviewers, people who don't have a preconceived notion 
that funding should only go to an elite few.  People who evaluate
a proposal on its merits, the quality of the proposal, not the
school where the proposer teaches.
-- 
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  John (Jack) Beidler				                   |
|  Prof. of Computing Sciences   Internet: beidler@cs.uofs.edu     |
|  University of Scranton                  BEIDLER@JAGUAR.UOFS.EDU |
|  Scranton, PA 18510	                                           |
|                                                                  |
|          Phone: (717) 941-7446	 FAX:   (717) 941-4250     |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Richard Conn]

In article <PAT.93Jul30080947@crl-sc2.nmsu.edu>, pat@nmsu.edu (Pat Gioannini) w
rites:
|> 
|> I would like to see a class in which CS students are teamed with
|> EE students to build a peripheral for a computer, such as a uart.
|> The EE student wuold be resposible for the hardward design and fab;
|> the CS student would be responsible for the software design and 
|> implementation to make the hardware do something useful.  This
|> would give the student a feeling for how their decisions affect
|> each other.
|> 
|> 
|> Additionally the CS student should implement the software to use
|> this hardware in several languages.  I would pick assembly, C, Ada,
|> assembly mixed with C, and assembly mixed with Ada.  This would 
|> demonstrate the strength and weeknesses of each enviornment. 
|> 
|> 
|> pat gioannini
I taught an interesting lab at AFIT when I was a professor there.
Taking a simple microcomputer (this was circa 1980-82), the lab led
up to a final project where the students had to design the software for
the boot sector of a floppy disk that would be read by the microcomputer
on start up and load an "operating system" from another part of the disk.
Speaking of learning a LOT about floppy disk controllers, low-level
devices, etc.  The students found it to be a real challenge, and I was
very pleased at how much they learned from the experience.

Today, how about doing the same thing, but writing the boot program
(one sector in size or as needed by your target microcomputer's boot
ROM) in Ada?  As a professor, be sure to do it first yourself before
giving it to the students.  Also, you need a real-time Ada compiler
(i.e., targets for real-time, embedded, no-operating-system targets).

Rick Conn

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[agate!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!source.asset.com!shilling]

In article <SRCTRAN.93Jul30225101@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com (Gregory
 Aharonian) writes:
>
>Why make students do something the DoD refuses to do?  ...
> ...
>So don't ask students to do what the DoD doesn't want to do.

Greg! You're so ramped up on the DoD being bad and evil (which it may
well be) you've neglected the segment of industry that has a ghost of a
chance of actually making a difference (read progress) in the world of
software.  You know full well that NOTHING the DoD does is optimized for
cost or profitability, as that is not their driving motivation; so
writing "good" software is not in their immediate interest (hence the
'Mandate').  If our favorite language (Ada in case anyone got lost in
the newsgroups) is to be a long lived success is it up to the
Honeywells, Boeings, CAE-Links and bless their blue hide, IBMs (and
dozens of other organizations whom I do not mean to snub) to develop
process, and ultimately reusable (Ada) software.  It is up to us
educators to build the structure of thinking in the next wave of
creators.  So Greg, please either take your tongue out of your cheek, or
chomp down, hard.

Yours most respectfully:

-- 
  Keith Shillington               /---------\   "No matter where you go,
email: shilling@source.ASSET.com   /=======\     There you are."
voice: (619) 944-5134               /_____\          -- Buckaroo Banzaii
fax  : (619) 944-7089                 | |         office: (301) 924-0050

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Alex Blakemore]

In article <1993Jul29.163417.17018@schbbs.mot.com> tannen@tigger.geg.mot.com wr
ites:
> I would like to see the a CS program require the following areas:

> 	Calc I & II (maybe III) 
I would insist on
  discrete math,
  probability (should be required IMHO)
and symbolic logic as well (not calc III)

> 	A minor in Science or Business
encouraged, not required.
if someone wants to minor in History or English, let them

> 	Language comparison class
> 	Data Structures
> 	OS Theory
> 	Algorithms
of course

> 	2 Intro EE classes taught by & out of the EE dept. where
> 	3 Digital Design classes where you have to build some 
too much hardware, one or two is fine

> 	Systems programming (Lots of Assembler/C)
OK once

> 	Systems Analysis & Design 
> 		(SA/SD and OOA/OOD, plus all projects should be team projects)
easy to say, hard to do well in a semester, should try though
I wouldnt insist on SA/SD or OOA/OOD in particular 

> 	Real-Time
a good special topic

now what I'ld really like to see is a good MSSE program along the lines
of alot of MBA programs
  require a CS or related undergrad degree and
  a couple of years in industry before entering the program
  then an intense 2 year program half divided among technical engineering topic
s
  and managing the complexity of a large project topics (including some busines
s/accounting stuff)

  lots of group projects, study large systems of different ilks,grilling in cla
ss like law school
  "so Mr. Smith, what did you think of the design decision to combine
  the foos with the bars in project XXX and what were the pros/cons and
  eventual results of that decision?"



-- 
Alex Blakemore       alex@cs.umd.edu        NeXT mail accepted
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Without an engaged and motivated human being at the keyboard,
the computer is just another dumb box."      William Raspberry

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Gregory Aharonian]

>I would like to see a class in which CS students are teamed with
>EE students to build a peripheral for a computer, such as a uart.
>The EE student wuold be resposible for the hardward design and fab;
>the CS student would be responsible for the software design and 
>implementation to make the hardware do something useful.

Why make students do something the DoD refuses to do?  What you should
have requested is for two DoD programmers to build a peripheral for a 
computer, such as a UART.  One programmer would use VHDL to design,
layout and build the hardware, and one programmer would use Ada to design,
code and test the software, both using the same core sets of tools.

It is criminal that the massively blown opportunity (and one measure of the
lack of vision of the STARS effort) of Ada/VHDL synergy, which would have
lead to hardware/software development synergy, was totally ignored.  Once
again a benefit given to the C/C++ community.  Imagine this, Tri-Ada 93
and not one mention of VHDL anywhere.  Criminal. Incredible. Obnoxious.

So don't ask students to do what the DoD doesn't want to do.

-- 
**************************************************************************
 Greg Aharonian
 Source Translation & Optimization
 P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Robert Dewar]

In discussing computer science at the "best universities" [whatever that may
mean], I think it is important to understand that very little of computer
science is concerned with programming per se, or software at all for that
matter. Consequently the number of CS faculty who know much about programming
is typically quite small, they are experts in their fields, and programming
does not have much to do with many fields in CS. The number of faculty members
who know anything about software engineering is even smaller.

I recall one instance at a large university in the CS department where there
was energetic debate and breast-beating over the fact that some undergraduate
had interviewed for a job and not known what a finite state machine was. Now
actually I suspect the student had probably been taught this several times
[faculty membes will persist in confusing curriculum with student knowledge!]
but my reaction was something like:

  "well, sure it's disappointing that a student doesn't know what an FSM is,
   but in some respects I am more disturbed by the fact that are undergrads
   are much more unlikely to know what CASE is all about."

The reaction from most of the faculty was "what the heck is CASE?" :-)

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[agate!library.ucla.edu!news.mic.ucla.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.s]

In article <1993Jul30.123607.5083@relay.nswc.navy.mil> bwallet@apssgi.nswc.navy
.mil (Brad Wallet) writes:
>In article <1993Jul29.163417.17018@schbbs.mot.com>, tannen@tigger.geg.mot.com 
(David Tannen) writes:
>|> [Recommended BSCS Curriculum]
>
>seems to me, that to prepare kids for the real world, u should give
>them classes like:
>
>Software Specification
>Software Project Management
>Software Creation
>Software Maintenance
>Software Testing, Verification, and Validation
>Software Reliability
>Software Reuse
>

Perhaps I'm a little underenthusiastic, but this looks more like
coursework for a graduate degree in S/W Eng.  In fact, it looks
a great deal like the MS S/W Eng curriculum at Univ. of Houston
at Clear Lake.

Considering the way we've traditionally treated our junior
engineers, perhaps a course in Software Maintenance is all 
that would need to be added to a BSCS :-)

-- 
type My_Disclaimer is new Standard.Disclaimer with record
	AJPO, SEI : Cognizance := Disavow_All_Knowledge;
end record;--)

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.ed]

I would like to see a class in which CS students are teamed with
EE students to build a peripheral for a computer, such as a uart.
The EE student wuold be resposible for the hardward design and fab;
the CS student would be responsible for the software design and 
implementation to make the hardware do something useful.  This
would give the student a feeling for how their decisions affect
each other.


Additionally the CS student should implement the software to use
this hardware in several languages.  I would pick assembly, C, Ada,
assembly mixed with C, and assembly mixed with Ada.  This would 
demonstrate the strength and weeknesses of each enviornment. 


pat gioannini

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Brad Wallet]

In article <1993Jul29.163417.17018@schbbs.mot.com>, tannen@tigger.geg.mot.com (
David Tannen) writes:
|> IMHO (honest, I haven't been humble for a long time):
|> 
|> My best professors in college were the ones who had a decade or two
|> working on big systems.  The best professor spent the entire semester
|> telling us about the systems that had failed and how they had failed.
|> Quite a few of the students (and profs) were very uncomfortable w/
|> this approach.  Many wondered if she had ever worked on a successful
|> project.  I came to realize that she was teaching us a truism about
|> software - All systems fail.  Good systems can recover from failure.
|> 
|> Some of the worst professors I had never worked outside of the 
|> university environment.  If I followed their ideas out here where I
|> have worked the last 9yrs, I might have been fired.
|> 
|> I would like to see the a CS program require the following areas:
|> 	Calc I & II (maybe III) 
|> 	A minor in Science or Business
|> 	Data Structures
|> 	OS Theory
|> 	2 Intro EE classes taught by & out of the EE dept. where
|> 		you build some circuits in the labs. (I found them 
|> 		very useful)
|> 	3 Digital Design classes where you have to build some 
|> 		fairly complex digital circuits.
|> 	Systems programming (Lots of Assembler/C)
|> 	Language comparison class
|> 	Systems Analysis & Design 
|> 		(SA/SD and OOA/OOD, plus all projects should be team
|> 		 projects)
|> 	Algorithms
|> 	Real-Time
|> 
|> What would I eliminate from undergrad studies:
|> 	AI
|> 	Language classes for credit (maybe 1 credit)
|> 		The dept. would need to pick a standard language
|> 		for all core classes.  Ada teaches discipline,
|> 		and core software engineering ideas.
|> 
|> Just my $0.02.  Any others that should be +/- from my lists?


Disclaimer:  i am not a software engineer or a computer scientist,
but i do deal extensively with them...

seems to me, that to prepare kids for the real world, u should give
them classes like:

Software Specification
Software Project Management
Software Creation
Software Maintenance
Software Testing, Verification, and Validation
Software Reliability
Software Reuse

Why not split the Systems Analysis and Design into a System Analysis
course and a Software Design course?

Once again, too many computer scientist, not enough software engineers.
That's why Ada is catching on as fast as it should.

Brad

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[pipex!uknet!rsre!trout.rsre.mod.uk!trout!rigotti]

So far as Software Engineering courses go, take a look at the BEng and
MEng courses available at Imperial College, London ... not that I'm
biased at all :)

Getting back to the original thread, I would like to think that Ada9X
might become the first choice for teaching imperative style
programming. Hopefully, the availability of GNAT may do for Ada9X what
the availability of source code did for the original Unix in
universities. I presume NYU will be using GNAT (or parts of it) as an
example in its compiler writing courses and I shall be surprised if
other colleges don't do the same.

Kevin
--
Email : rigotti@hermes.mod.uk   (MIME & ATK)
Fax   : +44 (0)684 894109.
Post  : ATC Systems Division, DRA Malvern, Malvern WR14 3PS, England

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Robert Kitzberger]

kmathias@afit.af.mil (Karl S Mathias) writes:

>tannen@tigger.geg.mot.com (David Tannen) writes:
>
>>I would like to see the a CS program require the following areas:
>>	Calc I & II (maybe III) 
>>	A minor in Science or Business
>>	Data Structures
>>	OS Theory
>>	2 Intro EE classes taught by & out of the EE dept. where
>>		you build some circuits in the labs. (I found them 
>>		very useful)
>>	3 Digital Design classes where you have to build some 
>>		fairly complex digital circuits.
>>	Systems programming (Lots of Assembler/C)
>>	Language comparison class
>>	Systems Analysis & Design 
>>		(SA/SD and OOA/OOD, plus all projects should be team
>>		 projects)
>>	Algorithms
>>	Real-Time

I'd de-emphasize the EE aspect, add a class on SW Process, and
increase time spent on software design significantly, both in "Systems
Analysis and Design" courses _and_ in other courses such as compiler
construction.  Too often, design is a course that is (a) optional, (b)
disassociated from all of the rest of the software development/hacking
done in school, and (c) theoretical, concentrating on specification
languages (& etc.) rather than on developing a product and getting it
out the door.  All courses that involve development of functioning
software (even 100-line hacks) should at least mention the "D" word
;-)

>This sounds like the perfect course structure for a Computer Engineering
>degree (lots of hardware/assembly).  It hardly seems appropriate for
>general software development where hardware platforms should NOT be
>the issue.  This type of study would influence CS students to code for
>specific platforms, rather than writing code that would work on any
>platform.  IMHO, one or two hardware courses are sufficient.

You need to know enough about hardware to properly encapsulate system
dependencies and to identify potential system bottlenecks at an early
stage, especially on embedded systems.  You need to be able to
prototype the difficult, risky, and or performance-sensitive parts
early on, lest your resultant system be a dog that requires a massive
redesign to fix.  Knowing these truths about software development
takes either years of experience or the inculcation and permeation of
SW process and design in the curriculum.  It certainly does not take
more coursework on minimization of Karnaugh maps, nor more coursework
on AVL trees.

IMNSHO,

	.Bob.
--
Bob Kitzberger                          Internet:   rlk@rational.com
Rational, Grass Valley, CA              CompuServe: 70743,1550
"Lincoln was born in a log cabin that he built with his own hands"
   -- Pennsylvania Rep. Dan Flood

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[Ka rl S Mathias]

tannen@tigger.geg.mot.com (David Tannen) writes:

>I would like to see the a CS program require the following areas:
>	Calc I & II (maybe III) 
>	A minor in Science or Business
>	Data Structures
>	OS Theory
>	2 Intro EE classes taught by & out of the EE dept. where
>		you build some circuits in the labs. (I found them 
>		very useful)
>	3 Digital Design classes where you have to build some 
>		fairly complex digital circuits.
>	Systems programming (Lots of Assembler/C)
>	Language comparison class
>	Systems Analysis & Design 
>		(SA/SD and OOA/OOD, plus all projects should be team
>		 projects)
>	Algorithms
>	Real-Time

This sounds like the perfect course structure for a Computer Engineering
degree (lots of hardware/assembly).  It hardly seems appropriate for
general software development where hardware platforms should NOT be
the issue.  This type of study would influence CS students to code for
specific platforms, rather than writing code that would work on any
platform.  IMHO, one or two hardware courses are sufficient.


Capt Karl Mathias                                  kmathias@afit.af.mil
Graduate Student, Air Force Institute of Technology
"Opinions expressed are my own and not those of the U.S. Air Force" 

Re: Are 'best' universities being targeted

[David Tannen]

IMHO (honest, I haven't been humble for a long time):

My best professors in college were the ones who had a decade or two
working on big systems.  The best professor spent the entire semester
telling us about the systems that had failed and how they had failed.
Quite a few of the students (and profs) were very uncomfortable w/
this approach.  Many wondered if she had ever worked on a successful
project.  I came to realize that she was teaching us a truism about
software - All systems fail.  Good systems can recover from failure.

Some of the worst professors I had never worked outside of the 
university environment.  If I followed their ideas out here where I
have worked the last 9yrs, I might have been fired.

I would like to see the a CS program require the following areas:
	Calc I & II (maybe III) 
	A minor in Science or Business
	Data Structures
	OS Theory
	2 Intro EE classes taught by & out of the EE dept. where
		you build some circuits in the labs. (I found them 
		very useful)
	3 Digital Design classes where you have to build some 
		fairly complex digital circuits.
	Systems programming (Lots of Assembler/C)
	Language comparison class
	Systems Analysis & Design 
		(SA/SD and OOA/OOD, plus all projects should be team
		 projects)
	Algorithms
	Real-Time

What would I eliminate from undergrad studies:
	AI
	Language classes for credit (maybe 1 credit)
		The dept. would need to pick a standard language
		for all core classes.  Ada teaches discipline,
		and core software engineering ideas.

Just my $0.02.  Any others that should be +/- from my lists?

---
David Tannen
tannend@source.asset.com
tannen@tigger.geg.mot.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- "Dependance on wizardry to mitigate the fundamental limitations
--  of software is called 'hacking'."  Grady Booch.
--
-- Developing MS-Windows applications often requires 'wizardry'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------