Slashdot Mirror


The Changing Face of Computer Science

For another facet of CS education, HangingChad writes "MSNBC is carrying an interesting article on the changing demographics of IT workers and education. The upshot of the article is that older, working adults are taking IT related courses for advancement while comp sci continues to slide as a career choice in college, which the researchers in the article attribute to perception issues." From the article: "In fact, as the technology-dependent United States struggles to stay ahead of the Bangalores of the world, the Higher Education Institute at the University of California-Los Angeles found significantly fewer students at the college level -- 60 percent fewer -- wanted to study computer science in 2004 as opposed to the year 2000. "

87 of 493 comments (clear)

  1. Trend by fembots · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I thought education and career are like stock exchange, you should always buy low and sell high, but most people tend to buy high and sell low.

    Now that everyone's talking about CS skill shortage, this is the worst time to start studying CS, because everyone will be doing the exact same thing, just like they did on "multimedia" courses in 1998/1999.

    If you started studying CS right after the dot-com bubble burst (around 2000, "worst" time to get into IT), you will be very popular right about now.

    1. Re:Trend by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I thought education and career are like stock exchange, you should always buy low and sell high, but most people tend to buy high and sell low.

      And most people that have been working for a while (I haven't worked that long, so I can't speak for the truth of it) say that you should find a job you enjoy. You are likely to spend 40hrs a week at work, if not more. Not including mundane tasks like commuting, eating, sleeping, housework etc., there's really not enough hours of spare time to make up for a job that sucks. Even if it pays well the best moments of my life were far from the most expensive ones. That (apartment, car, computer, tv etc.) is for the inbetweens. The best moments are made by people.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Trend by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And most people that have been working for a while [...] say that you should find a job you enjoy. You are likely to spend 40hrs a week at work, if not more.

      I confirm this.

      I worked hard during the dotcom bubble and did good on it, both in terms of salary and stock, mostly because a wise person, older than me, told me it wouldn't last and that I should save the money I earned.

      With that money, I started studies in a totally different field. Now, I'm paid a lot less, but I don't have crazy hours, I don't worry about stress and future heart problems, I do a job that I like, and my quality of life is much better.

      So it is true what they say. Money isn't all there is in life. You can be a lot happier with simple things, like starting and quitting work every day at the same hours (instead of working insane overtime), having free weed-ends for the family, and (in my case anyway) having the satisfaction of producing things that people instantly appreciate, instead of hidden code that nobody cares about once it's compiled.

      And the pay cut isn't a problem, it's just a matter of understanding what's important in life, and leaving the world of silly consumerism behind. If the job pays the bills and leaves enough do have disposable income for the usual pleasures in life, and not worry about next month, that's quite enough for me at this point in my life.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:Trend by dnoyeb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think more are not looking to go into CS not because there are not companies wanting to employ CS people, but because said companies want to employ CS people at unamerican wages.

    4. Re:Trend by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Flip side of that is that the best and the brightest... the folks who create innovation... have a tendency to value money pretty highly, particularly in college (when they usually don't have any). They may choose a job -within- a field based on happiness, but a reasonable standard of living will always be a factor in choosing a career path in general.

      More to the point, a career that looks rather dead-end (and with the rise in outsourcing over the past few years, CS might very well be starting to look that way for new graduates) is unlikely to attract anyone with an ounce of sense unless they really, really like it. It's the reason we have so many bad teachers these days. The computer industry in the U.S. will look the same way in twenty years if we continue to see outsourcing, unemployment, and salaries that don't keep up with inflation....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    5. Re:Trend by SeventyBang · · Score: 2, Interesting



      In my undergrad days (early 80s), one of the systems analysis profs asked the class, "How many of you are in here because there will likely be a job for you when you graduate?" Of course, no hands went up. This is when I had my own client list during school breaks, could work any weekend I chose to, etc. And was constantly inundated with offers to drop out of school. It was a 50-50 proposition: job vs. degree. I had a lot of friends drop out of whereever they were going to school because the money was so good they figured they could go back and get the paperwork later.
      "Seriously, I will hold nothing against you. I really want to know: how many of you are here because there will likely be a job for you?" And people got honest. And that's when he said, "Do you realize a sizeable percentage of the workforce is in their mid- to late-40s, waiting for the next 20-25 years to pass so they can retire? They aren't qualified to move up, not talented enough to make lateral moves in a different career, and certainly won't step down to do something more interesting because they are too proud? 20-25 years. That's longer than any of you have even been alive. You're doing this because it will mean a job. You've taken other courses, so you know what you're getting into[1]. You know whether you like this type of work. And you're in it because there will be a job? (that caused a lot of soul-searching.

      [1] I went to a small, private school who found a way to give us real-world experience: we took on jobs from local religious and non-profit groups who couldn't afford to pay for big $$$$ contractors. So we did it. They got their work done and we got experience. So those who hadn't done any of that type of work before college found out pretty fast what they were in for and could make a choice based upon those experiences.


    6. Re:Trend by Deviant+Q · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I pity that you never found the beauty in what you did. Or at least that you didn't enjoy it.

      I'm 17. I've been working summers and Fridays as a coder since I was 14. And it's a wonderful job.

      I'm CREATING things!

      --
      "May the days be aimless. Let the seasons drift. Do not advance the action according to a plan."
    7. Re:Trend by CausticPuppy · · Score: 5, Funny

      You can be a lot happier with simple things, like starting and quitting work every day
      at the same hours (instead of working insane overtime), having free weed...


      Word.

      --
      -CausticPuppy "Of all the people I know, you're certainly one of them." -Somebody I don't know
    8. Re:Trend by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 2

      If you started studying CS right after the dot-com bubble burst (around 2000, "worst" time to get into IT), you will be very popular right about now.


      Not really. I have friends who went in around then and still can't find a job. Yes, hiring is up, but this isn't 1998 again. People who know their shit and have experience are definitely in demand right now. People who have nothing significant to their name other than a newly minted bachelor's degree are not in demand.

    9. Re:Trend by Seumas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah... because enjoyment pays the mortgage bill, health insurance, car payment and puts food on the table.

      I'm so tired of these namby pamby touchy-feely types acting like it's okay to just barely etch out a living as long as you enjoy it. I'm sure it means a hell of a lot to your kids that daddy enjoys what he does for a living while they're wearing down hand-me-down clothes from two decades before and your wife is stealing toilet paper from her work because you have to scrimp and save to "enjoy" your job.

      Find something you're good at and exploit the fuck out of it. Whether you "enjoy" it or not is completely irrelavant.

    10. Re:Trend by daviddennis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Happiness doesn't buy money, and money doesn't buy happiness. They are two separate things.

      I've had the mid-bucks, and not had the mid-bucks, and far as I'm concerned I'm a lot happier when money is available than when it's not.

      But I would not make fun of someone who's happy with his life and who he is. There are all too few people like that nowadays. The unhappy folks I know are just waiting for an explosion.

      I know, because I've seen more than one of them explode.

      Not a pretty sight.

      D

    11. Re:Trend by C0llegeSTUDent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And the pay cut isn't a problem, it's just a matter of understanding what's important in life, and leaving the world of silly consumerism behind.

      As much as I want to agree with you, I can't.

      Sure, you don't need a 10 thousand dollar plasma tv to be happy. You don't even need hot water to be happy. But it helps!

      One of the things I'm looking forward to in the next ten years is travelling. Europe, Hawaii, that kind of thing. Can you do this while working at Burger King? No! What about a $10/hr tech support job? Possibly, if you live frugally (read: cheap).

      Leaving the world of consumerism is definitely an option. However, if would like to see the world and enjoy "luxaries" of iPods, not having to shop at Walmart, etc, Getting a well payed job is probably the way to go, even if it sucks.

    12. Re:Trend by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I left IT and went back into academia.

      My income is a fraction of what it was. When I get to tenure-track, it will only start to get close to early-mid career in IT.

      But guess what? Because I'm happier, and not spending against my dissatisfaction with my career, I'm actually saving more money than I did before. That, and cooking at home instead of going out, result in a net improvement in my standard of living.

      So while it's a big commencement-speech cliche to say "follow your bliss," I'll say: follow your bliss. Better to enjoy a life in the five digits than chafe against one in the 6 digits. I waited about 3 years too long before I made the move. And now - I can futz around with code and systems and stuff for fun (and even still do an occassional contract gig for an extra burst of cash, if I want to.)

    13. Re:Trend by Mister+Incognito · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are still in time. Seriously consider keeping coding as a hobby and pursue a different career path...

    14. Re:Trend by sunhou · · Score: 2, Informative

      After getting my bachelor's degree in CS, I worked for an interesting computer company for almost 2 years. But I simply didn't enjoy the job. Unlike what others are saying here about insane overtime, the hours usually weren't bad at all. My evenings and weekends were usually my own, but the days at work just weren't all that interesting.

      I eventually went back to grad school and got a PhD, and am now on the tenure track. It's totally the opposite. Now I'm always insanely busy, evenings and weekends I'm just trying to keep up with teaching and research, and there's always something new coming up to deal with. But I absolutely love the job. Even though there's plenty of mundane stuff to deal with, in a very fundamental way I am mostly free to work on what I want to work on. I'm earning less money than I could, but I can't imagine switching to any other job. Also, even though I'm always busy, in some ways my schedule is way more flexible. Lots of times, if I feel I need to take an hour off in the afternoon, I can go ahead and do it, unless I have any meetings or office hours or class at that time; I don't need to check with anyone or tell anyone. Just as long as I do a good job with my teaching and research, I dictate my schedule, within some constraints.

      Also, my research often consists of me just thinking/working on my own, in my own little world. But then I get my recommended daily allowance of social contact by teaching (I do really enjoy interacting with the students), and also by talking about my research with my graduate advisees or other faculty or students, etc.

      When I switched from industry/CS to academia/Applied Math, I wasn't sure I'd succeed. I'm still not sure (I haven't reached tenure yet), but so far I don't at all regret the decision to try to do what I really want to do.

      Right now I'm in the final throes of preparing a grant proposal, so just coming out of one of the high-stress periods. Now I move on to work on some papers, while waiting the 6+ months to hear back on the proposal...

      There are some nasty academic politics to deal with, and other crap too (e.g. plagiarizing students, I hate it when they do that). Every job has its ups and downs. You just need to figure out which one has the downs you can tolerate, and the ups which make it all worthwhile. I'm lucky, I managed to find one for me. And fortunately, we're all different, otherwise we'd all be fighting over the same job!

    15. Re:Trend by phyruxus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "An inch of time is worth a foot of jade;
      no day comes back again."

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
      "d'Oh!" ~Homer
  2. Overall? by CypherXero · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At my university, there's The College of Computer Science, and under that, you can major in CS (Computer Science), IT (Information Technology) or IS (Information Systems). So is it all of the included majors affected, or is it just the CS majors that are affected?

  3. it's a shit industry by timmarhy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    thats why no one whats to work in it. low pay, high pressure and no job security.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    1. Re:it's a shit industry by drsquare · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're joking I presume. Computer programming is a very highly paid job. And the job security is good, you have relatively rare skills that can get you a job anywhere in the world. You're at no more risk for outsourcing than anyone else. The more experience you have, the better jobs you can get, you can't say that about a lot of other industries.

  4. Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics by dtolton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So the news in this article is that MIT, Cal-Tech etc don't churn out
    the most CS degrees? Did anyone even think that? Top tier schools
    have never been known for quantity, they are known for quality.
    That's what has always separated them from other schools, not how many
    graduates they produce. High quantity schools generally don't have a
    good reputation, why do you think the MCSE is worth so little, because
    everyone has it. So the fact that DeVry is churning out more
    graduates than MIT is hardly news worthy imo.

    Next they are comparing the number of people entering CS in 2000 to
    the number entering now? That comparison is farcical at best. In the
    year 2000 there were still many people entering the CS field because
    of the boom years, when working in the IT industry was the equivalent
    of the gold rush. Of course there are less people entering now than
    in the year 2000. A more legitimate comparison would have looked at
    the number of people entering CS during the pre-boom years rather than
    during the boom years.

    While I agree that we should encourage more people to enter IT related
    fields, I don't agree that using misguided statistics is the best way
    to go about it.

    --

    Doug Tolton

    "The destruction of a value which is, will not bring value to that which isn't." -John Galt
    1. Re:Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics by HiThere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those who have foresight, and who can see how employers are treating IT jobs, will decline to spend time and effort to become one of the disposable.

      There will continue to be some who are so driven that they MUST study computers, but most will count the costs and count the benefits, and go elsewhere.

      I'm not just talking about those in it for a fast buck (though I never despised earning good money for fun work), but everyone sensible who isn't driven.

      If you need a hi-tech work force, a good way to ensure failure is to show those who haven't yet chosen their career just how insignificant you consider the needs and purposes of those who work in those jobs.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics by Stween · · Score: 2, Informative

      While it's true that the drop in numbers of CS students can be attributed, at least in part, to the whole Web explosion and subsequent collapse, there are fears that the problems are rooted deeper than that.

      I'm aware of some studies done at Glasgow which suggest that the drastic reduction in CS applicants year after year is a side-effect of the increased use of ICT in schools, and the increased teaching of ICT in schools. By the end of their secondary education, many kids think ICT is CS, they see ICT as boring, and as such never even consider CS as a potential career move.

      It's important for the CS departments around the world to try and counter this trend*, as the computers of today aren't the same as yesteryear. Many efforts are ongoing, looking for new and interesting ways to teach Computing Science to schoolchildren, without which the currently fruitful field of CS could find itself drying up. Those with a natural predilection to coding/hardware/hacking/etc might never discover this interest on their parents' modern 3.xGHz P4 Dell with WinXP installed without some of these approaches. Compare kids brought up with modern PCs and parents afraid of what they've heard about viruses and hackers with kids like myself brought up in the 80's with BBC Micros and Atari STs to play with, for example.

      Computing Science taught at a Secondary level, in the UK at least, is a joke, and not representative of modern CS at all. So we have ICT being pushed, and kids calling it Computing, and the ones who actually do take Computing at school not actually being given anything resembling a primer for a University level course. To solve the education problem is but one potential way of improving numbers entering CS programs.

      * Some might argue that they shouldn't try to counter the trend and leave the natural selection of those interested enough in their computer to apply to go on to study CS -- then, only the truly interested and motivated fill a space on a CS program. It's wise point out that if people never get a chance to try, then we're throwing away so many potential great minds. Any good CS program should be good at weeding out the crap students from the good, though the quality of courses offered around the world is a different debate entirely.

    3. Re:Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics by Trepalium · · Score: 2, Insightful
      For those of us that have never gone to a school in the UK, you might want to explain the acronym ICT. Also, the link to the University of Glasgow was particularly useless (a link to a study would've been more useful).

      I'm a Canadian, and joke computer courses in school is nothing new to me. In high school, the computer class was basically a glorified typing class. Your grade was based on the number of words per minute you could type, and basic use of word processors (WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS). The distance learning "Computer Science" course wasn't much better, since it was just basic BASIC programming the first year, and the same except using Pascal the second year.

      On the other hand, I dropped out of comp sci in university because the first year of studies required me to take just about everything BUT the subject I was most interested in (you're allowed to take a total of TWO comp sci classes in first year -- one each semester). Because the university received complaints about the quality (or lack thereof) of the writings of graduates of the comp sci program, all students are required to take two arts courses. One of the courses you take has to fulfil a writing requirement. This wouldn't be so bad if there was a technical writing or business communication course, but there isn't. Writing a book report, and writing a technical proposal might both involve english words connected by proper grammatical constructs, but the similarity doesn't extend much past that.

      Suffering through two years of stuff I wasn't particulary interested that I have to pay for, just to get to the stuff I would find facinating, didn't work for me.

      --
      I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
    4. Re:Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics by the_ed_dawg · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I agree completely. Quality makes the MITs, CalTechs, and Stanfords go-round. I think the most ridiculous statement in the entire article is:

      Experts such as Malcom and Babco think some colleges should "take a page" off the for-profit, client-based institutions such as Strayer and DeVry, and make computer science more accessible, practical and less intimidating, to get more 18 year-olds to major in computer science.
      Now I'm for accessability and all that, but there is a serious problem when you start telling universities to water down the sciences in the name of accessability. I can only imagine what prospects had been open to me if my EE undergrad consisted of routing wires and the National Electric Code instead of communication theory, analog IC design, etc. I'm sure that would have improved my chances of succeeding in grad school and getting an engineering design job after graduation.

      I just think that people need to stop thinking about the sciences as being easy. The sciences are hard because we don't know all the answers. For that matter, we don't even know if we're asking the right questions. If you don't get into details, it is impossible to realize that.

      --
      There are two types of people: those prepared for the zombie apocalypse and those who will be eaten.
  5. Personal experiance by Umbral+Blot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As an ex-CS major let me tell you one reason people are leaving. Even though I plan on going into a CS related field the courses offered by my college (UCI) were very poor. Also there was no way to test out of redundant courses. Many of my classmates left for similiar reasons, and some even abandoned CS altogether as they weren't sure they would be able to compete with outsourcing and get a job

    1. Re:Personal experiance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't speak to the specifics of what you found lacking in UCI's curriculum, but I was a CS major at UCI for about a year and a half, and I can say I found the CS curriculum more than adequate, even having done my first 3 years at UC Berkeley.

      However, I frequently heard my classmates complaining about the curriculum, because there weren't enough classes on hot new (at the time) technologies like Java or .NET.

      IMO, that's a sadly misguided way to evaluate a school's CS program. A good CS program should teach you CS fundamentals, which will enable you to adapt to any "hot new technology" that emerges. Sure, it's nice to leave school with some specific skills that will be readily applied in the workplace. But it will be a sad day indeed if/when solid universities like UCI cave under pressure and water down their CS programs to the level of a trade school education.

      If you seriously think a 4-year university program is inferior to a 3-year DeVry-style program, just wait until you have to work with a DeVry graduate in the workplace.

    2. Re:Personal experiance by TheSkyIsPurple · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do basic classes, drop out for 5-10 years, then come back. It's an entirely different experience. Classes I know I would have skimmed through actually kept my interest, and I began to see connections that would never have sunk in. You ever use semaphores to synchronize events across frames on a web-site? You need to track sessions bidirectionally? There are alot of lessons learned in TCP/IPs history. Need to prove the scalability of your design? betcha those good ol' O notations are coming in handy... Why does Ethernet get wonky after a certain distance? no, I mean really, why? Good things to know if you are seeling your services. Any training is as useful as you can make it, whereever you can make it.

    3. Re:Personal experiance by Hobobo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't necessarilly agree--I dropped my CS major at UCLA in favor of "Mathematics of Computation" because I felt the curriculum was inadequate. If you care enough, compare a mid-tier CS program (like UCLA or UCI) to a top-tier CS program, like the one at Stanford. There are significant differences. For example, consider the way assembly language is taught. At UCLA, freshmen must spend an entire quarter learning assembly, and much of the time is actually spent learning simple but tedious concepts, like, how to create a while loop in assembly. Compare this to Stanford--they spend just a few weeks on assembly, and focus on the way several levels of pointers work out in assembly. Learning this is more challenging than the UCLA class, and wastes less time too.

      This might sound like a trite example, but there many more instances where a mid-tier CS program wastes students time. Often, the professors seem to think that assigning lots of work translates to a high quality program. What they ignore is that the type of work students are doing also matters.

  6. Like that is a shock..... by Nagatzhul · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With all the jobs being shipped out of the United States and reports of massive lay offs in the IT sector. The recent announcment by HP is a perfect example of this.

    Why invest in a career where you have little confidence of supporting yourself?

    --
    "All I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power." - Ashleigh Brilliant
    1. Re:Like that is a shock..... by Spicerun · · Score: 3, Informative
      "but actual engineers (as opposed to people who are just tangentially hitched to the IT bandwagon) are all but immune."
      Heh...Dream on. I have been an electronics firmware/engineer always working in an R&D Departments, and I've got to tell you, I've seen whole R&D Departments laid off in the past 4 years (especially the engineers) while seeing the sales staff actually increase. In fact, some of my R&D engineer coworkers have been out of a job for the past 4 years. I was lucky though, I only spent 2003 without a job.

      So I wonder what companies where you've been where the engineers were 'immune', because, quite frankly, I've never seen 'immune' engineers. In fact, I've seen a lot of new 'contracting' engineers who would love to have been 'immune'.
    2. Re:Like that is a shock..... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Funny how successful people have a chronic case of good luck.

      Funny how you rewrite history to suit the outcome. OF COURSE SUCCESSFULL PEOPLE SEEM TO HAVE A CHRONIC CASE OF GOOD LUCK- because the people who have bad luck aren't successfull.

      In reality- when people have actually done studies on this- what you really have is two main things going on. Successfull children of successfull parents are usually successfull because of networking- a birthright. Successfull children of unsuccessfull parents are gamblers- risk takers who lose on about 2/3rds of what they try- but they keep trying and never quit, and thus become successfull because they raise the number of times they try. Unsuccessfull children of successfull parents are idiots for the most part- skilless wonders who never learned to fend for themselves to begin with. Unsuccessfull children of unsuccessfull parents have risk adversion tendencies- they want to be "safe" rather than "rich", and since they don't have the opportunities of the upper class.

      But I've also seen successfull people make mistakes- and end up bankrupt- so don't get to cocky.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  7. Good riddance! by mixmasterjake · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Goodbye to all those who just wanted to get rich quick. I look forward to working with you brave students who are chosing your career based on a love of technology.

    --
    TODO: come up with a clever sig
    1. Re:Good riddance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not me. I'm in it for the chicks!

    2. Re:Good riddance! by stor · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not me. I'm in it for the chicks!

      Indeed! I can download them all day long...

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
  8. I agree! by ShaniaTwain · · Score: 4, Funny

    Obviously there is a much better career choice.

    Choose wisely for maximum income!

  9. It's not perception, it's real. by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 4, Informative

    attribute to perception issues

    It's not a perception issue. It's a real issue.

    90% of the people I know in the tech field have been laid off once in the last 4 years. I only know of one mid-sized technical company that hasn't laid off employees, and everyone there hates their job. I quit after 6 months.

    Granted, this is just from my own perspective. But look, the tech job world is slowly creeping out of a multi-year massacre, now the tech world is being run by business people who don't know what an IP address is, but spend a million bucks because IBM said it was good (and promised a trip to Hawaii!)

    Sure, there's opportunity here, but students are going to have a hard time competing with we techies with 6+ years experience.

    1. Re:It's not perception, it's real. by Humorously_Inept · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can corroborate this.

      I work in Telecom and every few years one of the various companies that employ engineers, programmers, etc. in the area flushes its staff in a major downsizing or closes up shop entirely and the newly unemployed disperse and wind up in the same role elsewhere, if they manage to find work at all. A few years down the line the new employer will fire a chunk of its staff or close up entirely and the cycle continues. People may even be fired by and subsequently hired by the same company as its fortunes change. It creates a pretty wide network of nomadic professionals who all know each other, assemble in familiar patterns and relative positions at various companies and thus never seem to advance in job roles.

      It seems like every single person at my place of employment has had at least three jobs in the past ten years and that many have been unemployed for more than a year during that time period. I've been at the same place for around three years now and have managed to survive several "scares," which leaves me wondering whether I'm playing the role of Damocles. I guess you could qualify the past ten-odd years as anomalous and make a good argument for your case, but I'm not entirely sure.

      --

      ~Someday, I hope to be an aspiring author.
  10. We don't need as many computer scientists by vijayiyer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Back in the day when code needed to be efficient at a theoretical level, when compilers and related research was at the forefront of technology itself, and when the computer was the target of research, there was a need for a lot of computer science. Nowadays, there is not as much of a need for true computer science as there used to be. Instead, there is a greater need for people who know other types of science/engineering and have the programming skills to use a computer to solve non-computer problems.

    1. Re:We don't need as many computer scientists by ciroknight · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I feel this post being greatly disturbing.

      That's like saying "We don't need to teach the kids art in kindergarden anymore, because we already have had plenty of great artists in all of the different art forms, and now we need applied artists, like archetects". (excuse the downcast).

      Computer and Software Engineers THRIVE off the sciences created by Computer Scientists. Too many people think CS is all about writing source code, but really, it's just like any other science; it's research, research, research.

      Breakthroughs are still left to be found in all the fields, and new fields are just now being created (bioinformatics anyone?), and if we just give up on the science now, we won't have engineers implementing it later.

      Don't believe I don't see your part about needing other sciences to migrate to using computers, but who do you think design the algorithms for integrating other sciences into Computer Science, the Engineers who build solutions, or the scientists in other fields who haven't had the training in mathematics or the algorithms to make things more efficient. And before you give me that crap about "computers being fast enough and having enough memory these days to deal with shitty programming", think about this; the *simplist* of protein folding implementations requires hundreds and hundreds of CPU hours, even cutting a dozen off of it means massive cost cutting for the organizations using it.

      Face it; telling people to stop moving to CS is like telling people to stop moving towards Physics, or any other discrete science; it's stupid, short sighted, and just plain wrong.

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    2. Re:We don't need as many computer scientists by et764 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In my precalculus class in high school, my teacher said "The more you know the more you learn." Most of the kids in the class didn't get it, but it's definitely true. As you learn more, it seems like you learn at a much faster rate how much for there is to left to learn. While a lot of us will be happy with learning enough to do our job, like a lot of it kids in that class who didn't see the need to continue in math, for those of us who want to keep pursuing it, there will always be plenty more. In computer science, we still haven't figured out P vs NP. We still haven't managed to build a quantum computer, which is right now probably more in the realm of physicists, but there's a need for algorithms to run on a Quantum computer as well. As we keep trying to organize more and more information, we're going to have to figure our some way to make it accessible. There's more to Google than their giant server farm, someone has to figure out a way to make it work efficiently. As much better as Google is than anything that came before it, it still gives pretty bad search results. We haven't managed to build a machine that can pass the Turing test yet. There is definitely plenty more to be working on, and plenty of work for the scientists to do.

    3. Re:We don't need as many computer scientists by lkeagle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a problem with your argument. Speaking as a physicist (who is now studying CS at the graduate level) every single physicist I know is working steadily and happily and is usually the most appreciated individual in their respective workplace.

      The problem stems from the assumption that there is a 'physics' industry out there that physicists move into when they graduate from college. I believe I speak for most physicists when I say that very few actually move on to performing high level physics research. Most move from physics directly into the engineering or scientific field that they most enjoy.

      This works out rather well in most cases, because intelligent employers understand that a physicist won't be able to perform at 100% of the level of a mechanical engineer, or 100% the level of a chemical engineer, or computer scientist, etc. However, physicists generally have the ability to perform at say, 75% ACROSS all of those fields, making them very versatile in the workplace, and therefore, very appreciated.

      So what does your theory say about those of us who are moving from physics to a more serious role in CS?

  11. A possible answer? by fuchsiawonder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At the career fairs I went to as a computer science major, everyone was interested in web development, flash, java, etc. The CS department at my university doesn't teach these things; a person can learn these through the Information Technology department, however. If all of the money is going to people that don't mind building websites and putting cute flash animations on them, why pursue a degree in computer science?

  12. The brutal truth is, by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "significantly fewer students at the college level -- 60 percent fewer -- wanted to study computer science in 2004 as opposed to the year 2000. "

    most of these younger folks think they were born gifted hotshots. Most of them think they don't need no steenkin education because they already know it all..

    There is a large number of young people that grew up with computers, someone 20 years old now has probably had a home computer all his life. Someone old enough to be his parent did not have a home computer when they were his age.

    1. Re:The brutal truth is, by catalupus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am an electronic engineer, not a CS guy, and I can tell you that in the last 3 companies I have worked, the manager of the Software team has said that he'd hire an EE over a CS degree to do software any day of the week. Might sound like a flame, but in my experience CS degrees are looked at as lower than EE.

  13. REAL ANSWER by kenp2002 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    WHY THE FUCK WOULD ANY STUDENT IN THE US EVEN CONSIDER SPENDING 4 FUCKING YEARS, $40,000+ DOLLARS, 1.5 YEARS OF JOB SEARCHING TO EARN $10.50 AND HOUR ON A LEVEL 1 HELP DESK!? THAT'S THE REASON YOU FUCKING ROCKET SCIENTISTS TURNED REPORTS!!!

    I've been in this shit for over a decade and I tell you this in very simple terms:

    Computer Science as an industry is following that of the TV and VCR repair men. When TVs and VCRs are expensive they get em fixed. When they're cheap, they replace them. Computers are less and less a science as the hardware and software gets easier to install and maintain. Even computer programming is becoming more and more accessable to people as the higher level languages become more user-friendly.

    Early on there was Computer Science. Now they have splintered into various factions like various specialized sciences following certain areas, (MIS,IT,DBAs,Programming, etc.) Because they is less and less need for the broad generalized Computer Science types enrollment would obviously go down. Just because TVs got cheap doesn't mean that electrical engineers demand went down or that scientists that research phosphates and optics are losing pay and prestige, but how many people in the last 20 years have a SMALL ELECTRONICS degree? Hell do they even offer that anymore?

    --
    -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    1. Re:REAL ANSWER by Coryoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Computer Science as an industry is following that of the TV and VCR repair men. When TVs and VCRs are expensive they get em fixed....Early on there was Computer Science. Now they have splintered into various factions like various specialized sciences following certain areas, (MIS,IT,DBAs,Programming, etc.)

      And then there are people who still do real Computer Science as opposed to programming or "Computer Related Work". There's a nice quote by Dijkstra to the effect that Computer Science is as much about computers as Astronomy is about telescopes. Computer Science is still going quite strong, and there is active and intersting research into a variety of fields.

      I am a mathematcian, so I am not really all that up on all the various interesting areas of CS are these days except for the odd bits that cross my path. One of those is Algebraic Specification, which is an effort to formalise the design and specification of systems (software) using algebraic techniques. In practice this could mean vastly more reliable software down the line. For now it means a lot of hard slog involving a lot of pure math (universal algebras, category theory, etc.) which doesn't involve a computer in any way shape or form. You can get some idea of the sort of thing they're doing here, or here, or just google Algebraic Specification. It's pretty exciting stuff from the mathematician's point of view (some very lovely mathematics finding practical application).

      Don't misinterpret what CS is, and what it offers.

      Jedidiah.

  14. Re:Too many IT workers by Zemplar · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Why would you pursue IT at this point in time?"

    Especially when it's so easy a nine year old can do it!

  15. Why? by Bellum+Aeternus · · Score: 2, Informative
    Why would I get a degree in IT or CS?

    So I can see my career go to India or China?

    Better off getting a degree in something useful and just knowing IT and CS. That's what I did, and I do development for a living (while it lasts); and I have a real degree to fall back on when my job gets outsourced.

    --
    - I voted for Nintendo and against Bush
  16. Woo! I'm popular! Yay me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Eh, who cares, I'm going to grad school.

  17. IT != CS by kidaxess · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think it is important to be accurate with with our language. IT is not CS. The terms are related, not interchangeable. A graduate of Devry does serve the same function as a graduate of MIT. Sometimes it is useful to talk about fruit, and sometimes we need to differentiate between apples and oranges in order to have an intelligent conversation.

  18. Not Just CompSci! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    These articles keep focusing on computer science but the problem is much bigger than that. Here is a good article on China's rising R&D. Basically, enrollment in technical fields and funding in R&D are going down in the US, while at the same time increasing in China. This should be alarming to any American. The article I linked claimed China is already on par with the US in fields like nanotechnology. We're entering US' twilight. It won't be catastrophic, but the US won't be #1 for much longer

    It's interesting, people say adapt or die, and that's true. But the choices facing my generation in the US are pretty poor. The technical fields are going overseas. What's left for the nerds out there?

  19. 4 Years of No Girls Just to Hear... by Lord+Marlborough · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is Rajesh. He's just replaced you.

    1. Re:4 Years of No Girls Just to Hear... by quarkscat · · Score: 2, Funny

      "This is Rajesh. He's just replaced you."

      Apparently, this hasn't actually happened to you.

      The real downer is hearing: "You are being layed off. This is Rajesh.
      You are expected to train him before you exit the company.
      He will be replacing you."

  20. PR moves by MasterOfUniverse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is complete bullshit. Look at how all the CEOs are complaining about lack of CS graduates here in US. Its quite simple. When they move the jobs to india/china they can say that they we dont have enough people here. Just look at the layoffs. This is a delibrate attempt by these people to keep putting out these kinds of reports.

    --
    "There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people."--Howard Zinn
  21. Comparing it to 2000!?! by B11 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A lot of people were taking CS majors in 2000 because the perception (somewhat true) was that being a CS major alone was enough to get recruited, then you could quit school and make a load of cash.

    Now of course you have actually finish your course work, and even then there's no overpaying job waiting for you, even though I'm sure you'll find a job.

    A lot of guys at my school picked CS because they figured they'd get rich quick, they didn't love it. I've always thought that if you love what you do and you're good at it, you'll do alright in life.

    --
    insert inflammatory anti-microsoft comment here
  22. What is computer science? by flabbergast · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is it the computer science I learned, ie how to turn an undergraduate into a graduate student? Where everything is theoretical because that's how they like their graduate students?

    Or are we talking about a DBA? Or someone to make sure your Exchange Server is up and running?

    Computer Science at MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Stanford, Berkeley etc isn't about learning how to be a DBA, its about acquiring the tools necessary to do research at a higher level. Who needs an algorithms class when you can just use the sort functions available in VC++? Or who needs to read a research paper about ISAM or BSTs when its already implemented and ready to use in SQL Server?

    I'm reminded of "Profession" by Asimov. Is the purpose of higher education simply to show people tools and how they work so they can have a skill or to teach people why the tools are they way they are and (hopefully) help them to make the tools better? To me CS has always been the latter.

    Note, this is not a put down to DBAs, sysadmins, etc. They have their own creativity and processes that I admire and respect.

  23. Want more CS students? PAY FOR THEM by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find it silly that multi-billion dollar corporations think that there's a shortage of creative people out there willing to work in Computer Science. I would think the answer would be obvious. CUT PROFITS, FUND SCHOLORSHIPS AND RESEARCH GRANTS YOURSELF. Don't wait for a government that you're already avoiding paying taxes to to spend taxes taken from poorer people on R&D. Don't expect that just because you can get a coder in Bangalore for $2.50/hr that you can hire somebody in Seattle for the same price. And if you want loyalty from your employees, you need to show loyalty to your employees- by banking their salary several years in advance so that you don't have to lay people off when you hit a rough patch. THAT is the cost of having good people- so don't come whining to us that you can't hire people if you're not willing to pay for the cost of educating them.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  24. Misconception. by stelmach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think the biggest problem is that the average high school senior actually beleives that going into computer science means that he is going to learn how to make web pages.

  25. Re:Of course by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Funny

    Who wants to study CS when their jobs are being outsourced to India anyway?

    It's a chance to travel and get to know other cultures :-)

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  26. A little anecdotal evidence of why by ShatteredDream · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In one of my senior CS courses, the professor asked what the department could do that would make things better for the educational experience. He was expecting things like more course offerings, more focus on newer languages and approaches, stuff like that. The response that resounded with too many of the students was that the professors should do a better job at helping the students learn how to translate a project specification into code.

    Basically he wanted the professors to hold his hand through the process of learning how to code. Not just do a better job at explaining Java, C++, etc., but rather teach time and again the basics of actually reading instructions and writing a program that implements them.

    About half of our classes that use Java have a week of remedial Java. There is no "you ought to know it by now" in them. Consequently, I just skip the first week of my CS classes that aren't purely theory classes like ones on operating systems and algorithm design. We're talking junior level classes and people still sometimes struggle with basic Java and C++. It was a mind fuck for many of them to reach the operating systems class and have to *drum roll* LEARN C ALL BY THEIRSELVES except with a basic overview of the differences between it and C++ - which most of them never really learned at all in their sophomore year.

    Needless to say, my response was "we need a mandatory design patterns class for the sophomores" which caused several of the better coders in the class to agree with. People can make the excuse that CS is about a lot more than coding, but it really isn't. If you can't code worth a damn, you have no business being in Computer Science because you're either cut out for engineering, networking or nothing related to IT altogether.

    Seriously, I'm not a prodigy or anything, but I can code pretty well. It's disturbing when I see people with 3.9 major GPAs in CS who can't find less than a dozen ANSI C file I/O functions within 5 minutes of a Google search. I had to listen to one of our "uber-elite" female coders complain about how hard C is to learn for the first time, even though she had a 3.9 GPA and had taken probably 15-21 credits of classes that revolved around derivatives of C. Then I get called an elitist because my attitude is that since C is a subset of C++, and you have to take a class that uses C++ exclusively, that you shouldn't be spending hours learning the basics of C. It shouldn't be hard for anyone who reachs their senior year in CS, it's not like the projects were kernel level stuff. The most complicated project we did was write a "shell" that did little more than fork a process.

    The problem, I think, is that so many American kids want to have it all spoonfed to them. They don't want to learn stuff outside of class. Most of them don't even really like what they're doing for that matter! Let the numbers slow down, maybe it'll be good for those of us who, regardless of skill level, care about it and enjoy it. Mark my words, eventually India will have the same problem and the types of cheap Indian coders, who are not inherently any better than Americans, will resemble the US. There will be the legions of certificate holders who have no natural inclination or skill toward the field except their pay check and there will be those who do care. In the end, things will balance out... or American business will choose tons of cheap, shitty coders, get thrashed like they deserve and we'll get to say "I told you so."

    1. Re:A little anecdotal evidence of why by hackstraw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In one of my senior CS courses, the professor asked what the department could do that would make things better for the educational experience. He was expecting things like more course offerings, more focus on newer languages and approaches, stuff like that. The response that resounded with too many of the students was that the professors should do a better job at helping the students learn how to translate a project specification into code.

      Sorry, but translating a project spec into code is not CS. Hell, its not even science, its an art that comes with experience.

      I've worked with few CS majors in my career. Well, maybe about 50% of the people were CS, the other 45% had _insert random degree here_ and another 5% had none.

      I would imagine that CS majors are in decline because graduating from a CS degree does not teach you much about most of the IT jobs out there. System administration, programming, DBA, etc, has little to nothing to do with computer science. Granted there are some programming jobs that utilize a CS person, but that is in the minority. Most programmers are code monkeys that, err, translate project specs into code for non-commercial (custom or inhouse) applications like for another company, government agency, or what have you.

      They don't want to learn stuff outside of class.

      I don't know where these poor puppies work. Oh, maybe thats the tech support people that still live in the US.

  27. Re:Explain the math: mostly unnecessary by bobalu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For the most part, the math part of CS is completely useless unless you're doing something in a field which specifically requires it, i.e. fluid dynamics. I started out as a engineering tech and can do circuit analysis and whatnot, but when I went back for CS the math requirements kicked my ass. I left for a cool job in NYC doing video editing, which I knew a lot about and required only timecode math and hex. So it depends on where you want to work. For some things you really need that math, but you're doing a database? No.

    So go back and take all the programming courses you can, and other intersting things, and then go get a job. Do not let it stop you if you're interested in programming.

    --
    The revolution will NOT be televised.
  28. Look at the job market by Launch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a recent graduate (okay, I graduated over a year ago) and as someone who works at a software company, I have to say that if I could do it all over again I'd do anything but CS. Most universities offer MIS programs, etc, that will put you into the tech field without nessicarly being a programmer, etc. But, heck, if I had skipped the four years of college I'd probably be a junior manager at walmart by now.

    With jobs going overseas, and the supply of programmers heavily outweighing the demand, I don't see any reason for anyone to be intrested in CS at all.

    When I hear Gates talk about lack of tallent within the US, I really have to say "who cares". The bottom line is that less than 1% of CS majors are going to be of the caliber of programmer that Gates is talking about, but what about the rest of us 99%ers? We have the joy of fighting tooth and nail for a job, then we have the joy of not getting the dream salaries that were touted in the 90s, and then to top it off we get to fight off competition for overseas that can do our work at a third of the cost because of living expenses overseas.

    Back in the day it use to be cool to be a programmer. Now when someone says that I have to feel a little bit sorry for me.

    --
    Your mammas flamebait.
  29. I'm confused... by ath0mic · · Score: 2

    Is the article talking about IT or CS degrees?

    As Dijkstra said, "Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."

    I, for one, love working on computer science, but am only somewhat interested in working on computers.

  30. Tell that to the University of Washington by Com2Kid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Their Computer Science department acts like a bunch of elitest pricks when it comes to acceptence.

    (The following is true of when I was applying a year ago)

    Their applications form is SECRET and only available online for two weeks, during which you have to fill it out, answering all of their questions, and turn it back in.

    How selective are they? Stories of students with a 4.0 GPA not being accepted into the school (transfering from Community College) abound. I knew students with a 3.4/3.5 GPA who were not accepted. Insane.

    To have a snowballs chance in hell of getting into the department you had best have all of your math and science courses completed, the department apparently did NOT want anyone who would take any more than the minimum amount of time coming in there.

    Still with all of these rules and regulations in place the department "has to" turn down dozens of students (if not hundreds...) every year.

    Fuck, how do you EXPECT students to go into CS with that type of a bull-shit attitutude?

    Compare this to Western Washington University, go up there, hey look, the head of the department met with me, teaches a transition course for students over the summer (and offers to, for free, go over material online with students as well who are not yet enrolled but plan on doing so) so that they can suceed in the department, and all in all, the entire department treats their students like actual people rather than machines.

    1. Re:Tell that to the University of Washington by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How selective are they? Stories of students with a 4.0 GPA not being accepted into the school (transfering from Community College) abound. I knew students with a 3.4/3.5 GPA who were not accepted. Insane.

      I think you need a GPA of about 3.49 to get in to the UW now for Grad School and of 15,000 applications to just be admitted to the UW (Bachelors) on 4,833 offers were made and 2,600 were enrolled last year. But the state increased the number of slots quite a bit, so you might want to reapply.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  31. Where does a CS degree get you? by Launch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What I find amazing is how little a CS degree gets you on it's own.

    Do a little search on monster.com or the liking, pick any tech related job. Look at the requirements. None of them are fufilled by a CS degree.

    The ammount of therory in CS is what is killing these programs. What is needed is job training. You can graduate from a school like WPI with a degree in CS without knowing how to write a VB app. It's pretty sickening.

    While I sure did enjoy Big O notation, learning how to write perl scripts would have been 3 trillion times more valuible.

    I'll be the first to agree that a solid education has it's roots in therory, a solid job in computers has it's roots in application.

    Why are we falling behind the Indias, etc? Because a bachelors in CS gives you no solid ground to become a good canidate for the types of programmers that are in demand these days.

    --
    Your mammas flamebait.
    1. Re:Where does a CS degree get you? by Brian+Stretch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The ammount of therory in CS is what is killing these programs. What is needed is job training.

      I used to think that too, but I eventually figured out my professors' point. University is for learning things you aren't likely to teach yourself. Applied stuff is relatively easy to learn on your own or on the job. Theory isn't.

      Now, using a broad definition of the word theory, courses do need to do a better job of keeping up with current CompSci practices. Design patterns, testing, etc.

    2. Re:Where does a CS degree get you? by Xugumad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      After a 4 year CS degree, plus 4 years industry experience, I still don't know how to write a VB app.

      But I can learn by Thursday.

      And that is why I'm worth hiring. I actually turned up to my first job with a book on the language the application was working on, was written in (Tcl/Tk). If having to learn the language as I went along slowed me down, certainly no-one noticed.

      Now, my degree did cover quite a bit of practical stuff (including programming in C, assembly and Java, database commands, etc), but also covered a lot of theory (big-O, algorithms in general, data structures, graph theory, social aspects of computing, etc.). I don't know how many CS degrees stick too much to the theory?

  32. Re:Of course by clem · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's nice for the jobs, but they never send you postcards after they leave.

    --
    Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
  33. Do they really mean "computer science"? by Pheersome · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having recently graduated from a rather rigorous undergraduate institution with a degree in CS, and planing on going into the Ph.D. program at another well-respected school this fall, I find myself taking the "science" part of "computer science" pretty seriously. Somebody more famous than me once said, "Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes, biology is about microscopes, or chemistry is about beakers and test tubes." That might not be strictly true, but it's the right idea. In my mind, being a computer scientist implies that one is engaged in real scientific research. A degree in computer science should come with an understanding of the history and theory behind the actual systems we use every day, an awareness of the open issues in the field, etc.

    Somehow I get the idea (and feel free to correct me if you know better) that a "CS" degree from DeVry might not match my understanding of the term. That's not to say that there isn't a place for this sort of education -- I'm all in favor of competent entry-level programmers, web designers, DBAs, whatever it is that DeVry actually trains one to be. But to use a (probably flawed) analogy to other disciplines, this sort of education is to CS as auto repair is to engineering. It takes a not insignificant amount of skill and knowledge to be a decent auto mechanic; I'm not trying to knock DeVry graduates. But I wouldn't expect a mechanic to be able to do fundamentally new things in the space of automotive design any more than I would expect a DeVry CS major to do real computer science.

    (Yeah, I have some idea of how pretentious and condescending that sounds. Go ahead and mod me down.)

    --
    Better to light a candle than to curse the darkness.
  34. CS doesn't teach programming by Mingco · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I work in the games industry as a programmer, and am generally leery of people with CS degrees.

    On our programming test, we have simple question: implement char *strcpy(char *dest, char *src). Physicists, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, and various other engineering majors seem to have no problem with this... which leads to various followup questions about optimization, memory use, pointers, etc.

    One applicant with a 4-year CS degree asked us if he could use C++. "Sure... I guess," I replied.

    So, after considerable time, he proceeded to write:
    char *strcpy(char *dest, char *src)
    {
    char *dest;
    dest = new char[strlen(src)];
    strcpy(dest, src);
    return;
    }

    When I asked him if he saw any mistakes that he would like to correct (as I do with all applicants regardless of errors), he added the following line at the top and then said "done".

    #include "string.h"

    He didn't win the job, but he did win the award for highest density of errors in 3 lines of code.

  35. Rather liberal mix of terms. by SA+Stevens · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm a little uncomfortable that even here on Slashdot, the terms 'IT' and 'computer science' get liberally mixed together as if they are interchangable terms.

    'IT' is about people who shuffle around business information. And maintain printers and networks and mundane tasks. Data janitors, basically.

    'Computer science' is about algorithms, the theory of data structures, etc (and 'paradigms' of objected oriented what-not and fad trends, of course).

    They aren't interchangable terms.

  36. Best people and the value of money by phliar · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ... the best and the brightest... the folks who create innovation... have a tendency to value money pretty highly
    Colour me extremely skeptical. "Value money highly" is not the same as "want the highest paying occupation". It's been my experience that the best and brightest [won't say "innovative" since that seems to be a Micros**t trademark these days] don't just follow the money. As an example (warning: anecdotal evidence coming up!) what do you think the median salary is for Nobel Laureates? Compare that to the median salary and brightness of, say, lawyers.

    It may be that "the best people" form a bi-modal distribution: those who feel the road to happiness lies in having more money (money == equipment [toys] for cool things), and those who feel it lies in having more time (time == freedom for cool things).

    I feel working in software is the best of both worlds: being paid lots of money to do the things I want to do anyway, i.e. tinker and hack. I still recommend CS as an undergraduate major to smart people who like to tinker.

    --
    Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    1. Re:Best people and the value of money by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Agreed. The general consensus is that once your basic needs are met, changes in salary don't mean as much as more free time. Right now, I'd definitely choose more free time, given a choice. On the other hand, I'm not a new college grad, and therefore my opinion is irrelevant. :-)

      I'm not saying that money is the primary concern for the best and brightest. I'm saying that it isn't hard to imagine a lot of very bright college students seeing news of layoffs, outsourcing, unemployment, and high housing costs in the Bay Area and saying "life's too short".

      The problem is that the numbers I've seen in the news for starting salaries in the industry would be... really tight, even without saving money for retirement, starting a family, etc. I lived on a similar salary six years ago working at a start-up. Money was a little tight, but I wasn't paying electrical bills, lived in (relatively cheap) campus housing, and already owned a vehicle that my parents were paying off and insuring for me. For most folks, it would have been more than just a little tight. That's why I got my Master's degree. It paid for itself in the first year. Had I not done that, I'd probably still be seriously struggling. (Hint to CS students... count on six years.)

      Since I was a new college grad, though, the cost of living has gone up by about 19.4% (3% annually, six years, compounded annually), but the starting salary has increased by only a fraction of that. Now maybe those numbers are wrong, but if I were in school right now and seeing those numbers and looking at the cost of living in the SF Bay Area (or even apartment rentals), I'd be seriously thinking twice about whether it was the direction I wanted to go.

      In fact, I did exactly that six years ago. I had a choice between choosing TV production as a career and choosing CS (double major). I even won some pretty significant scholarships (including one national scholarship) in the TV side of things. Money didn't choose my career arbitrarily, but I looked at average starting salaries of $16k a year in the TV industry, and it did sway me to an alternative that I also enjoyed.

      The thought of possibly having to spend ten years at near minimum wage working myself up to a wage that would pay the bills just didn't appeal to me. CS was -so- much better financially that it made the decision between those two career paths rather easy.

      I see CS starting down that path. It's early enough in the decline (unlike the TV industry) that it can be turned around. It's just a question of deciding which is more important: continuing to be an innovative industry that brings in the best and the brightest... or a temporary boost in a company's bottom line. Right now, the smart companies are investing in the future, but the industry as a whole must follow in their example or we'll continue to see news stories about the decline in the quantity and quality of CS grads.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:Best people and the value of money by Bill+Dog · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The general consensus is that once your basic needs are met, changes in salary don't mean as much as more free time.

      Except for one thing: retirement. I live fairly basically, in a 1030 sq ft condo, don't take expensive vacations, don't drive fancy new cars, don't have a big plasma tv, etc. But I do want to retire some day. And I don't believe social security will be there, I don't think the market will go anywhere (a lot of Baby Boomers are going to be gradually pulling money out to live off of), and we can't even begin to fathom how much health insurance will cost then. I make way more than I spend, not because I make a lot, but because I don't spend a lot. But I need every penny of it and more to put away so that I can avoid the Alpo when I'm too old to work (or unemployable).

      We have an interesting set of pressures. Not only will the Boomers pretty much wipe out the social services for old people, but with outsourcing I don't even know how long I'll be working to save. It's a strange thought, but I'm completely operating under the assumption that I won't be the one picking my retirement date. It'll be when I wake up one morning and look in the mirror and realize that I've been out of work for 2 years, and that I'm old, and that I'm just not going to be hired by anyone ever again. I don't feel like I have time to worry about free time right now, I have to save for that day.

      --
      Attention zealots and haters: 00100 00100
  37. Re:Explain the math: mostly unnecessary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, bad monkey! No banana for you.

    The math (among other things) is what separates the Engineers from the Code Monkeys. Writing a simple program rarely requires a good mathematical basis. Your average java-xml-buzzword compliant web app doesn't need them. Welcome to blue-collar coding.

    Queueing theory, filtering and FFTs, algorithms and complexity, physics simulation (think games), priority scheduling, error detection and correction, high availability, and so on, these things require you to understand more than code. It requires you to be an engineer, not a typist. To design things properly, to understand the implications of complex interactions, runtimes, hash collision probabilities, statistical breakdowns,... y'know, real math.

    Barbie: Math class is hard.
    Engineering is hard too, baby.

  38. Re:Explain the math: mostly unnecessary by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I left for a cool job in NYC doing video editing
    On the other hand, the people who wrote the video editing software probably used lots of mathematics: bezier curves for interpolating time varying parameters, digital signal processing for both video and audio filtering , resampling and processing, matrices for applying 2D transforms to video streams, some basic stuff for mapping between color spaces, discrete wavelet/fourier/cosine transforms for image compression, lots of geometry if your editing package supports 3D...the list goes on.

    I'm always amazed by the people who think math is unnecessary. It must seem that way if you're so poor at it that you can't even recognize its uses. And I'm not necessarily talking about you - I'm just picking up on your example to point out that mathematics is ubiquitous if you just open your eyes. And ironically, it's often the fun software (eg. games, video/movie visual effects) that uses it the most.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  39. Who needs a degree in CS? by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 2, Interesting
    "When I can make oodles of bucks speculating on the stock market and flipping houses on the insane real estate bubble?

    All that edjacation crap is for the birds - Ellison bailed, sodid Gates. Y should any 1 bother with collitch?

    Now I'll just fire up my laptop running speculation software I bought on an infomercial, short a bunch of penny stocks I've been pumping for weeks on my spam bots and roll up North in my SUV and take a long weekend where it's k3wl... and some CS grad can ask me about Fries or something like that."

    The above is not a troll - just illustrating the mentality of the good old USA, where corporations only exist to benefit stockholders, and people work for wealth, neither providing any goods and/or services to the public commonweal.

    RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  40. Misguided, computer science, it is... by Pollux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So the fact that DeVry is churning out more
    graduates than MIT is hardly news worthy imo.


    I think the better point to make is the type of grad that DeVry is churning out. I don't think the authors of this article grasp what "computer science" is. I mean, take a look at the article for a second...

    Adults, many of them women and minorities, are realizing they have to go out and obtain degrees in computer science to advance or just keep up at the workplace.

    Wait a second, is the workplace suddenly requiring that their workers need to know the inefficiencies of a Bubble-Sorting algorithm? Are they expecting their employees to understand that it's a bad idea to short a +5V with a ground without putting at least some kind of load on the circuit? These are some of the things I learned in Computer Science, and I really don't see someone needing to study data structures and how to implement them in C++ or Java in order to succeed in the workplace.

    In fact, on DeVry's own list of Undergrad Programs, I don't see Computer Science anywhere. There's "Computer Engineering Technology" (also classified as "Computer Technology"), "Network Administration", and the one that I'm betting the article considers computer science, "Information Technology". The objective's page for IT lists the following concepts taught: "basic foundation in programming, systems analysis and design, database design and management, and networking... Incorporating a strong applications-oriented component...Integrating general education competencies such as applied research, written and oral communication, critical thinking, problem-solving and team skills." I doubt they get any more complex with their studies than what I learned in high school Computer Science class (one sem. VB, one sem. hardware / networking / research).

    The article's really twisting the true definition of computer science. Fear not, nerds of the universe, these "35-year-old African American or Hispanic women" tread not on our turf! I'm more afraid about my job being shipped off to India.

  41. CS-related fields by JNighthawk · · Score: 2, Informative

    Computer Science is bleck. I want to be a programmer, and CS does *not* teach you programming. I'm currently going for my bachelor's in Game Design and Development, which fits perfectly because I want to be a game programmer (not a "software engineer").

    I think that could be part of the reason of declining numbers is there being alternatives out there now that will teach you programming as a base and theory secondary, rather than theory first, followed by programmer. I know 2nd and 3rd year CS majors that I could EASILY out-code and I'm only in my 5th month at Full Sail.

    --
    Wheel in the sky keeps on turnin'.
  42. Here's the Cliff Notes' version... by crazyphilman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the beginning, most programmers had degrees in computer science and were relatively expensive. They worked in computer rooms and were treated with some degree of grudging respect (although companies never liked having to pay them well, they didn't make too much noise about it).

    During the internet boom, several things happened to not just turn over the apple cart, but rather smash it to flinders:

    1. Worldwide infrastructure was built out because companies knew they would be able to globalize the labor pool eventually, and they were willing to invest in this;

    2. Companies like Microsoft, perceiving both a need and a high demand, worked to make programming more "accessible" to lower-skilled individuals (InDUHviduals, as they are called in Dilbert);

    3. The Y2K panic caused all sorts of people who didn't have a strong CS background to jump into the field after totally inadequate training, and this trend virtually exploded when small internet companies started hiring anyone who so much as knew HTML and called them "Developers" and "Webmasters" (this totally devalued the Computer Science degree, as did the wholesale dropping out of school of company founders).

    Cue the tech crash. Then, cue 9/11 and the recession.

    Corporations now have the infrastructure to offshore whatever they want, and they have the H1-Bs and L-1's to replace people here. They go berserk, contracting out everything tech-oriented, and even start contracting out business functions, legal work, medical transcribing, you name it. If it's portable, it goes.

    A few years go by.

    Most people, not being totally fucking retarded, realize that they don't want to study computer science as a major anymore. They study something with better prospects, like art or medieval French poetry. A few students go Comp.Sci knowing they'll be unemployed, because they really dig it, and they'll go on to start the Napsters of the future (good for them, I say).

    Suddenly, corporations have a problem.

    Our colleges don't produce many computer scientists anymore. Those that DO go all the way to the Ph.D aren't Americans -- and they're going back to wherever they came from to start their OWN companies instead of being Good Little Immigrants(tm) and working for a corporation.

    Some suit, deep in his six-martini lunch, wonders aloud, "Hey, wait a minute; if all these guys are going home and starting their own companies, and they have access to a really cheap labor pool, and the infrastructure we built up lets him sell his stuff to everybody worldwide, and we trained him and everybody in his neighborhood back home in OUR core business... Wait, I had a thought... What was that... Oh, yeah, so, if this Indian guy Apu, or whatever, does that, then isn't that competition? Like, with US?"

    All lunch conversation dries up for a minute. The suits all look at each other.

    "Say, old boy" says the Yale Man, "Do you mean that by outsourcing our entire tech staff to India, we trained and prepared this new guy's -- Apu, did you say? -- entire company for him, and at a moment's notice they could all decide to stop working for us and compete with us instead, leaving us gutted without any technical staff at all?"

    "Umm... Maybe?" the first suit is starting to look a little green. Maybe six martinis were a little much. He eats a mint.

    "And," Yale Man continues, "As Bill mentioned, nobody in America is studying computer science anymore because we told them to study business and move up the food chain, so we'll be (as the locals say) shit out of luck?"

    "Uhh..."

    "Oh, dear. Perhaps we should have Fortune write an article, and inspire young people to study computer science and math again?" He looks around at the other suits. "Surely we can appeal to their sense of national pride, and their desire to not see their own country's corporations fall by the wayside?"

    And, here we are. What an interesting time this is...

    --
    Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
  43. IT != CS != software engineering by DrHanser · · Score: 2

    For fuck's sake, stop conflating the two already. CS is the study of computer science, which is a theoretical discipline. IT is management of infrastructure and hardware. And both of these disciplines differ from software engineering, where one is simply a software developer.

    --
    What is humor if not pain tempered by time?
  44. What should a poor boy do? by schleyfox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am a bit young right now (10th grade) but I know that I want to do something with computer science. I have pretty much decided that apps programming is not for me (other than open source endeavors), as I don't feel like losing my job to outsourcing and I prefer complex math things. I am kind of intrigued by theoretical computer science (hypercomputing and the like) but I don't know if my interest in that could coincide with my interest in eating. Would I be able to get a job in theoretical computer science? Or should I just try and get into normal IT (sysadmin, application development, etc)? In any case what sort of education should I look into? Any advice...

  45. This is killing me ! by tototitui · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Wait a second, is the workplace suddenly requiring that their workers need to know the inefficiencies of a Bubble-Sorting algorithm?[...]"
    Damned ! I managed rookies for some time now on java projects... They don't even know what is a computer anymore ! Round tripping to the DB, what is the problem ? Allocating 1GB on the heap, so what ? sorting then filtering a collection, it works no ?
    Learn an assembly language, what is a microkernel, how a compiler works and just forget about it the next day and you'll be way smarter than the average developper that have no clue about what they are doing.

  46. Many, many cities by slyguy135 · · Score: 2, Funny
    the technology-dependent United States struggles to stay ahead of the Bangalores of the world

    How many Bangalores are there in the world? I demand that President Bush tell us the truth!

  47. If There Was a "National Need"... by oldCoder · · Score: 2, Insightful
    They would pay more and hire more. And this quote from the article just makes me laugh:
    After all, who doesn't think the IT folks in their office are the most valuable of the bunch?
    Well, management doesn't think so! And everybody else things management is the most valuable.

    The mass of lower-middle-class wannabees taking computer science courses reminds me of the fad of training people to be keypunch operators in the 1970's. It was popular by the time it was obsolete. So computer science isn't quite obsolete yet. But where keypunching became technically obsolete most programming jobs in the West are becoming economically obsoleted by the Third World.

    Whether the undergrads are right to shy away from CS depends on what else they are doing. If they're smoking dope or studying Critical Theory or Gender Studies they'll be SOL (poop out of luck) in the job market. Go find Norman Matloff's home page and read about the careers available for CS grads: lots of CS grads don't get jobs writing code. While searching for the reference I came across these two articles by Norman I also recommend: see this article or this one in rebuttal to an economist.

    It only makes sense that if you lower the price paid for CS grads with H-1B visas and off-shoring, you are going to discourage knowledgable people (middle class college freshmen) from majoring in CS. That women and people of color are now being conned into working super-long hours for modest pay is just deja vu all over again.

    To quote Norman Matloff:

    the U.S. has more engineers per capita than any other nation in the world except Israel. ... Rather than recognizing these engineers, the industry is laying them off, by the hundreds of thousands--but saying we need MORE of them!
    --

    I18N == Intergalacticization