More Students Prefer Interdisciplinary to CS

prostoalex writes "With increased offshore outsourcing and continuing simplification of such tasks as writing a trivial application, Computer Science degrees are not as attractive for college students anymore, NYT finds. Students prefer interdisciplinary majors, where the programming skills are combined with solid scientific backgrounds in biotech, chemistry or business." From the article: "For students like Ms. Burge, expanding their expertise beyond computer programming is crucial to future job security as advances in the Internet and low-cost computers make it easier to shift some technology jobs to nations with well-educated engineers and lower wages, like India and China."

this is bullshit

[pHatidic]

expanding their expertise beyond computer programming

CS isn't computer programming. CS is computer science.

Re:CS != Programming

[Umbral Blot]

Well no wonder these people aren't getting hired. When my boss tells me to go write a component I don't reply to him with a study about the most efficient way of implementing it, nor a report on the "paradigm" it belongs to. No, I just write it and debug it, which lets the whole project move forwards. In fact sometimes the most effficient implementation isn't desireable for a small task simply for clarity, and to speed up the time it takes to write the code.

Re:CS Programming w/ professions

[Animats]

Computer science is really about the understanding and development of algorithms. And there really aren't that many people who do that any more.

I'm one of the few. I've done proof of correctness systems, image analysis algorithms, operating system design, game physics algorithms, robotic control algorithms, and network congestion algorithms. I've been lucky enough to be able to do this without having to work in academia. I do have an MSCS from Stanford, which is a great credential, although the education wasn't really that good.

But in most areas of computing, the basic algorithms already exist. (Some of them keep being reinvented; watching the XML fans reinvent LISP is amusing.) Not that many employers really need algorithm development people. I have no idea where you'd go as a computer scientist today. All the old labs (DEC, HP, IBM, PARC) are dead or shadows of their former selves. It's almost down to Microsoft, Google, or academia.

Actually, I'd recommend getting a strong background in numerical analysis and statistics. It's useful to know number-crunching cold. Engineering, financial, database, search, and game work all need number-crunching. It's more useful than, say, combinatorics.

If you're really into theory, you might want to take a new look at proof of correctness. I headed a team to build a proof of correctness system in 1980-82, and it worked, but it was just too slow on a 1 MIPS VAX. 45-minute proof runs for 500 lines of code. Today, that would take one second. It's time to work in that area again. There's some good proof of correctness work going on the hardware area, but not much for software.

(Incidentally, if you think proof of correctness is impossible for undecidability reasons, you're wrong.)

Re:My personal suggested change for CS undergrad

[wuie]

However, I think that this degree should ONLY be allowed if the student majors in something other than CS as well, ie business, chemistry, even a foriegn language. They could then take their CS knowledge and apply it in new and interesting ways in their chosen field.

To an extent, they do this at the college that I graduated from. When I chose CS as a major, I was required to pick an area of special interest (ASI) that correlated to another department at the school. In this ASI, we're required to take at least 4 specific junior and senior-level classes (and their prerequisites) in order to discover and explore another discipline in which to use our expertise.

Re:In other words

[ejito]

My school currently has computer architecture/engineering as required learning for the CS program (like every other University of California and California State school). Even my California community college had x86 architecture (assembly), along with pretty much all the other community college.

The whole idea that CS students aren't learning fundamentals seems like a great big lie to me. Where exactly are these students learning?

Re:Once again, US schools trail behind...

[Anonymous Coward]

On the contrary, CS students here have NO problem getting jobs. Its probably becuase we're an academically rigorous school (despite not being well known). We still emphasize theory.

Being able to master lots of mathematical courses with lots of CS theory (plus here, we are required to take two semesters of Calculus based Physics plus one "science major" science elective (no "Fun With Physics" courses here)) shows that you have the capability to learn and handle technical concepts of some depth (I see a rather large number of people on Slashdot who whine and complain when they have to take a CS profiency exam during a job interview, which is indicitaive of the anti CS attitude here). CS majors who took their work seriously should have no problem applying their skills to learn any new programming langauge, software package, etc. on their own time very quickly.

The jobs that get outsourced are the crappy "code monkey" ones. These were the jobs that used to be populated by the "dot bombers" who went into CS with the idea of getting these overpaid jobs with little actual ability (and hence, when the economy tanked, they were the ones to go!).

There are benefits to different types of degrees. If you want to be an IT project manager, then a business oriented degree would be advantageous. If you wanted to go into Bio Tech, then there are probably several options you could take that would be more advantageous than just a CS degree itself.

At my school, the tech crunch is pretty much unheard of. We all work our asses off, we made a good name for ourselves, and the companies knock our doors down wanting to hire our CS grads.

There is no shortage of CS majors. There is a shortage of good CS majors. The jobs that are populated by the former are being shipped to India, while the latter stay in the US.

Re:Depends on the country I guess

[BVis]

Americans are a mixed bag also, there are quite a few folks who are good, but if an American sucks, he/she sucks real hard, because Americans are ridiculously difficult to fire for non-performance.

Why do people have this impression? It's just as easy to say "You're fired, get out" to a US citizen as it is to anyone else, as employment law (such as it is) is biased in favor of the employer in nearly every state. In some states, when an employer is asked for the reason for the termination, the ex-employee is told "We don't have to give a reason", a statement which is true and accurate, since the employee is considered to be an employee "at will", and employment contracts are unenforceable.

Why do people think it's harder to fire Americans?

Re:Immigration

[dptalia]

Um, companies actually have to post the "going rate" in their location before hiring an H1-B. And H1-B employees legally have to be paid withing the "going rate" average. Sure some companies are manipulating the system, but legally, and H1-B employee should be making about what an American worker would be making.