poloktim
\(^o^)/
By now we'd all be aware of the split of the School of Information Technology and Computer Science to become the School of Computer Science and Software Engineering (SCSSE) and the School of Information Systems and Technology (SISAT). This split represented the major differences between the disciplines and the students studying these disciplines.
Also, previously we've discussed poor lecturing staff at UoW, and while that thread is the place to bitch about horrible lecturers/tutors, one can't help but think that they can't take the whole blame for a problem that seems to have developed in SCSSE/SISAT: students who know virtually nothing.
Students have been taking subjects that have been dumbed down from what they once were. They continue on after passing to take subjects for which they're not equipped to handle. They've spent their time at uni only completing the minimum work required and many many computing students have no clue about the industry outside of uni. As mentioned before, lecturers can't bear the blame wholly for this problem. University is about taking the initiative for yourself. What good are we if we rely on the subjects we're taught at uni? At the end of first year uni now students are taught C++ up until classes - but not classes. Why teach C++ in first year if you're going to use it as if it is C?
Students find problems with simple exercises in laboratories, tutorials and assignments. I also am really surprised when I find students past their first semester at uni have never played with Linux - even on a virtual machine.
I suppose I'm ranting because I always saw uni as a place to learn, a place where students were required to pick up things that had relevance to their studies/chosen industry, even if they weren't explicitly taught that in class. A place where further reading/testing/research into an area by a student was something that was commonplace, to give that student a broader understanding of his/her chosen study field and ultimately his/her chosen profession.
A common response to this is "oh, but that's more of a CSCI thing, and I'm studying IACT." That is no excuse. This year I have had the fortune of job hunting, and while many jobs that were aimed at IT graduates had lots of requirements for things studied in IACT subjects, there was still a requirement that the individual know how to run an Exchange Server or how to configure sendmail on OpenBSD or on Solaris or on Debian. Employees are still required to configure routers/networks and systems of all architectures and operating systems. Plenty of IT professional jobs (as compared to Computer Science) require students to have a good understanding of programming - something it seems increasingly that students don't have a grasp of, especially IACT students.
On the other side of the SITACS split, we have a group of CSCI students. Students who spend the minimum amount of time required on their subjects. They seem more interested in having a beer at the unibar, or daily going drinking at the cost of their studies. Students who meet less than the minimum recommended amount of hours in study - who really shouldn't because from the impression that I get, many of these students have absolutely no interest in the field. They seem to think that the words BCompSc next to their name will guarantee them a job. In many cases it does, but if you're not interested and you're a dropkick, you'll be sacked before probation ends.
Sometimes I think students choose IACT/CSCI because they've got no clue what they want to study, no real interest in computers, and just want to go to uni. Others start it as a transfer point between that and something else like Law.
I spent this rant placing a lot of blame on students, but the uni does deserve some of the blame. To meet the demand of dropkick students, the curriculum has been reformed - it's much easier than it should be and still large numbers of students fail.
If that was too long and you couldn't be bothered reading it please take note down here:
STUDENTS: Don't assume you'll learn everything you need to know for each subject at uni. University is about self learning, pick up the pace, experiment with technologies, break things and learn from it.
IF YOU'RE NOT PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN COMPUTER SCIENCE OR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY THEN DROP OUT. IT'S THAT SIMPLE.
STAFF: DON'T ATTEMPT TO APPEASE THE STUDENTS STRUGGLING WITH MAKING THE SUBJECT EASIER. APPEASE THEM BY OFFERING HELP IN THE FORM OF ONLINE TUTORIALS AND EXTRA EXERCISES THEY CAN DO AT HOME.
BY DROPPING THE STANDARDS OF YOUR SUBJECTS, YOU'RE DROPPING THE STANDARDS OF THE DEGREE, THUS DEVALUING IT FOR YOURSELVES. WOLLONGONG IS A FIVE STAR INSTITUTION, KEEP IT THAT WAY.
Also, previously we've discussed poor lecturing staff at UoW, and while that thread is the place to bitch about horrible lecturers/tutors, one can't help but think that they can't take the whole blame for a problem that seems to have developed in SCSSE/SISAT: students who know virtually nothing.
Students have been taking subjects that have been dumbed down from what they once were. They continue on after passing to take subjects for which they're not equipped to handle. They've spent their time at uni only completing the minimum work required and many many computing students have no clue about the industry outside of uni. As mentioned before, lecturers can't bear the blame wholly for this problem. University is about taking the initiative for yourself. What good are we if we rely on the subjects we're taught at uni? At the end of first year uni now students are taught C++ up until classes - but not classes. Why teach C++ in first year if you're going to use it as if it is C?
Students find problems with simple exercises in laboratories, tutorials and assignments. I also am really surprised when I find students past their first semester at uni have never played with Linux - even on a virtual machine.
I suppose I'm ranting because I always saw uni as a place to learn, a place where students were required to pick up things that had relevance to their studies/chosen industry, even if they weren't explicitly taught that in class. A place where further reading/testing/research into an area by a student was something that was commonplace, to give that student a broader understanding of his/her chosen study field and ultimately his/her chosen profession.
A common response to this is "oh, but that's more of a CSCI thing, and I'm studying IACT." That is no excuse. This year I have had the fortune of job hunting, and while many jobs that were aimed at IT graduates had lots of requirements for things studied in IACT subjects, there was still a requirement that the individual know how to run an Exchange Server or how to configure sendmail on OpenBSD or on Solaris or on Debian. Employees are still required to configure routers/networks and systems of all architectures and operating systems. Plenty of IT professional jobs (as compared to Computer Science) require students to have a good understanding of programming - something it seems increasingly that students don't have a grasp of, especially IACT students.
On the other side of the SITACS split, we have a group of CSCI students. Students who spend the minimum amount of time required on their subjects. They seem more interested in having a beer at the unibar, or daily going drinking at the cost of their studies. Students who meet less than the minimum recommended amount of hours in study - who really shouldn't because from the impression that I get, many of these students have absolutely no interest in the field. They seem to think that the words BCompSc next to their name will guarantee them a job. In many cases it does, but if you're not interested and you're a dropkick, you'll be sacked before probation ends.
Sometimes I think students choose IACT/CSCI because they've got no clue what they want to study, no real interest in computers, and just want to go to uni. Others start it as a transfer point between that and something else like Law.
I spent this rant placing a lot of blame on students, but the uni does deserve some of the blame. To meet the demand of dropkick students, the curriculum has been reformed - it's much easier than it should be and still large numbers of students fail.
If that was too long and you couldn't be bothered reading it please take note down here:
STUDENTS: Don't assume you'll learn everything you need to know for each subject at uni. University is about self learning, pick up the pace, experiment with technologies, break things and learn from it.
IF YOU'RE NOT PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN COMPUTER SCIENCE OR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY THEN DROP OUT. IT'S THAT SIMPLE.
STAFF: DON'T ATTEMPT TO APPEASE THE STUDENTS STRUGGLING WITH MAKING THE SUBJECT EASIER. APPEASE THEM BY OFFERING HELP IN THE FORM OF ONLINE TUTORIALS AND EXTRA EXERCISES THEY CAN DO AT HOME.
BY DROPPING THE STANDARDS OF YOUR SUBJECTS, YOU'RE DROPPING THE STANDARDS OF THE DEGREE, THUS DEVALUING IT FOR YOURSELVES. WOLLONGONG IS A FIVE STAR INSTITUTION, KEEP IT THAT WAY.
Last edited:
