SI of the CS Curriculum

http://www.ccs.neu.edu/scheme/pubs/jfp2004-fffk.pdf
As I see it,
Problems presented: students need to understand industry best practices, students cannot handle learning trivial information about subjects aside from programming without becoming muddled, students cannot be presented with more than basic material without becoming muddled, students need to be taught where certain abstraction techniques can be used.
Why these aren't problems: undergraduate university computer science shouldn't be a trade school, these students are idiots who should be weeded out, these students are idiots who should be weeded out, these students are idiots who should be weeded out (respectively).
My solution: deemphasize b.s. in computer science for mundane programming jobs, make trade schools for programming industry garbage, make sure idiots understand that they will never make it through cs101.
feasibility?
also fig. 1 on page 10 is hilarious.

NO EXCEPTIONS

Don't schools have a separate CS and IT curriculum? CS is for people who like programming, math, algorithms and all that ABSTRACT BULLSHITE, and IT is for people who don't like programming but do like computers and ENTERPRISE BEST PRACTICES.

>>1
PDFWARNING D:

students need to understand industry best practices
Bullshit; best practices are enterprise bullshit.

students cannot handle learning trivial information about subjects aside from programming
Of course, they need to be able to understand what you want to do, i.e. "business logic" (as much as I hate that phrase), but don't send them to do the work a salesperson should do just because salespeople are so worthless they can't even do the easy work. Some employers can be this stupid.

My solution: deemphasize b.s. in computer science for mundane programming jobs, make trade schools for programming industry garbage, make sure idiots understand that they will never make it through cs101.
I agree.

Don't schools have a separate CS and IT curriculum?
Not all, not everywhere.

>>1
I agree with your suggested solutions to the problems you presented, but I'm not sure the latter correctly represent what's being said in the pdf.

>>5
Perhaps you're right.  I think I mainly had in mind the line:
Some said that SICP’s content was too difficult for students outside of MIT.
when posting it.

The whole thing just seemed like "BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SICP IS TOO HARD!!!" and a sort of advertisement for HtDP.

I've tried reading HtDP, it's basically SICP without everything that makes SICP awesome.

>>7
Actually the whole thing is like "BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SICP IS TOO HARD TO BE TAUGHT IN AN INTRODUCTORY COMPUTING COURSE!!!", sort of an advertisement for HtDP and a display of the authors' fixation on Scheme. The BAWing is not without merit, though.

I do agree with some points regarding SICP's focus on awesomeness and HtDP's focus on learning how to structure a program and write it from scratch.

I see no problem in starting some other way (maybe with HtDP, maybe not), then teaching SICP in the second year.

IS ANY OF THIS SHIT RELEVANT TO ANYTHING OR JUST EVERYONES WAY OF SAYING "IVE READ SICP"

Don't change these.

Name:		Email:
Entire Thread Thread List