 |
Post Page Rank |
I am going to do a post-mortem on the syllabus that I studied under CUSAT. This is applicable to almost every university, not just CUSAT. Im calling this a post-mortem, because Im already through with this. Post-mortem is done only on dead bodies. The Word itself means, ‘after death’.
Lets rewind 7 years. There are 60 of us who joined for the Computer Science course. Only a very few had a proper exposure to computers before, but all have come together to learn computer science, trusting the university, its syllabus and the staff. Now this is what we get in semesters 1 and 2.
Engineering Mathematics 1 & 2
People tend to give mathematics an unquestionable authority. “Learning maths is never a waste. Ive heard this sentence many times from many people. Actually learning anything is never a waste. But learning something out of the context on the expense of relevant subjects is stupid. Thats what these 2 papers does in the first year. These mathematics papers are tailor made for the old engineering disciplines, not for computer science students.
Engineering Physics, Engineering Chemistry, Engineering Mechanics
These subjects are relevant to the old branches of engineering. Civil, mechanical, chemical etc can use this. But what are we as computer science engineers going to do with this ? Once in a discussion about this, I got a funny answer. “You computer box is made using mechanics principles and the nuts and screws are prevented from rusting using knowledge derived from learning chemistry”. I dont have any counter arguments.
Engineering Graphics
The same theory is used for computer graphics. But the subject is taught using a gun shaped instrument and all that we learn is some tricks on how to draw various stuff. It has got 3 hours of lab every week, and those 3 hours is a wresting with pencil, the gun and the paper. Why not do it on a computer ?
Fundamentals of Engineering 1 and 2
Fundamentals of engineering includes civil, mechanical, electrical, Electronics. An argument that supports these subjects. “An engineer should learn the basics of all engineering disciplines”. Ya ofcourse, I should know the exact concrete mix needed for a dam, I should know the energy cycle graph of 2 stroke and 4 stroke engines.
Computer Fundamentals
Rain in the Desert. This involves a little bit of C programming.
Humanities.
I have got nothing to say about this subject. Humanities hours were really peaceful times where almost everyone can sleep. The subject had a touch of moral science and no one really cared about it.
Computer programming lab
The only enjoyable and useful subject we learned in the first year.
Workshops.
This substituted for the Gym workouts. Carpentry, sheet metal work, Electrical wiring, filing etc. These required a lot of manual effort. There are subjects that should be taught in schools, not in engineering colleges.
The core of the problem
This is not a computer science syllabus. This is an old civil, mechanical, electrical syllabus, slightly modified. Old engineering disciplines and new engineering disciplines have nothing in common. We are different and we need a different semester 1&2 syllabus. We dont want a common first year. Here are some better alternatives we could have studied, some things that we missed.
- Computer hardware overview, assembling a PC.
- Operating system choices, installation, configuration and maintenance
- Useful software tools, document editor, spreadsheet, presentations
- Proper use of the keyboard (typing)
- Useful internet tools, develop an internet culture
- Computer science history, software licences, philosophies.
The result
Wasted 90% of the s1, s2 time. Caused a lot of frustration and depression. Wasted money, effort and time in other semesters writing supplementary exams. Wasted money on text books, lab equipments and salaries. Over all confusion and lost focus.
|
|
|
|
 |
Related posts
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
21 comments ↓
Thats so true…
but the situation over at Kerala University is even more pathetic.
There’s not even a single ‘rain in d desert’ in d syllabi…
Well Well
I can guarantee you that you will find the same problem with all the Undergraduate graduate degrees in 99.9% of all universities in India. There are only those top 10 Colleges/Universities that really teach you something that is useful.
I also Had the same scenario with my BSc Computer Sc Degree from Madras University. I had to learn Hindi and English literature in my first two years - you can just imagine my frustration.
I beg to disagree on this particular exercise of postmortem of the syllabus though I do believe that engineering is only a good tool to get a suitable bride/groom.
If its about computers and engineering in it, you shud be learning a lot about other subjects too. Like you as a programmer, can you create a accounting package?
At the same time, if you are wanted to create a engineering drawing program, you will have a base to build upon since you know basics from S1 or S2.
Its the system thats in fault here, not the syllabus as such.. . . . . . . .please do disagree
Very well said…
well the faculty says its necessary to learn all this in first yr to get a base…and the workshops are “supposd” to turn u into engineers”…hmm well i really duno wht ece or cse guys had to do with ths..nyway we in cusat r lucky..though we have much larger syllabi than othr univrsities…and more labs….we just had to do a bit f wht the people in mg or kerala does
There are 60 of us who joined for the Computer Science course. Only a very few had a proper exposure to computers before, but all have come together to learn computer science, trusting the university, its syllabus and the staff.
u don’t expect the under privileged to be stuffed wit all computers but nthing else in first year itself.. do u???
n not to mention everything learnt is useful.. jst u don’t c how u can use it..
There were many who were not privilaged enough to have a proper intro to computers. Im speaking for them. Its the responsibility of the university to see that the gap is bridged. And the first year is the perfect time for that. Instead they force.. all other crap on us.
Anand,
There are many areas where programmers develop software. Its not possible for us to learn all those in college. We will learn, such business requirements when a need arises. Not in college.
Very Very True!!!!!!
I myself am a First year computer Sc. engg. under the syllabi of cusat currently. Whatever you said here applies to my case as well, why on earth should u study these subjects to become a comp. sc. engineer???
The current engg. maths syllabi is poor crap, easily it could’ve been replaced with relevant math sub.s like discrete maths, probability & logic and a lot of other relevant stuff related to comp. Sc. maths could’ve been a lot more interesting if the stress was given to its appln. side.
there is nothing done to instill passion for the subject in the pupil, a great subject like comp. sc. is ruined by this syllabus. i have friends who doesn’t even know how to install a program studying comp. sci., loads and loads of crap is what we study, the arena of comp. sci. is quite broad and there’s a lot of subjects which could be taught instead of these mind numbing subjects. I agree with you compltly in the matter of graphics, they cud’ve easily taught us graphics in a cad prgrm.
The Tech.Comm.&S.S(humanities) sub. can be replaced by a comp. ethics &philosophy paper( atleast we could build a new generation which completely believes in opensource&are strong in nettiquettes - think about a generation which believes in stallman &ERS)
Electronics&comp. sc. are inseperable and what we have to study is just the bare basics of electro. we don’t even have much electro. lab work to do. Instead you’ve to wrestle with all the stupid things in mech. work shops (but the overweight kiddos do get a litl workout here[;)])
Just as u said, there are a lot of basics related to comp.sci. which can be taught in the ist year itself, why wait for another year??
I joined an engg. colllg. for CSE out of passion for comp. sci. and now i know i may well have joined any other collg. for that matter or i may have even chose not to study at all.!!!
Well Said !!
Computer Science is not handled the way it should be.
How many staff know there is something called Linux ?
How many of those great teachers know what is the full form of FOSS ?
Well the Simple reply from me is… I cannot fully agree with this topic..
I feel:
“This is what is the difference between an MCA/BCA student and a Btech/BE student…Since we are learning these EXTRA DESSERT we are so called Software Enginners other wise we are just programmers or designers”
I may be wrong but still i feel its correct….
Do you think studying 4 years is giving you an advantage , Then think again. 1.5 years is totally wasted, and the rest is debatable.
Dont think that you are superior to an MCA guy, jut because you learned B-tech. Its not the degree, but the quality of your education that matters.
I agree to the fact that some extra subjects makes us different. You can be more different by intoroducing some literature also into the syllabus. But does it help you become a better computer guy ? No way……
All you have is 3 or 4 years and you have joined to learn computer science. So thats exactly what you should be taught.
Syllabus is not created to provide jobs or sell text books. Education and syllabus should be student oriented.
Well I never said we are superiour to MCA or Other Equivalent comuter science degree holder frends…
but we are different.. How we are different is because we know that what we lean in that 1.5 years. We cover up all the basics of almost all major Engineering Domains. As you know, more than me, A software can be made for any domains engineering,Electrical ,Electronics, Banking ..like that anywhere…
By knowing all the basics of these domains makes us to think a step ahead than normal programmers; like the pro’s and con’s by implementing a partcular design in some domains…
E.G.
Its good to know about how logical Gates work, to create a software that simulated PAL configuration and finally it will dump the configuration into any Controllers..this can be in the case of Electronics Domain…
Likewise each domain will have some spec which gives us good basement to think in a way our customer wants.
Other Equivalent comuter science degree holder frends can also do it.. but it may take bit time for them to digust the senario and to implement it….
But what ve to know is TIME TO MARKET is a critical input for all business establishments…
If you are going to learn all the domains in which we are going to make software for, then many life times will be required.
Computer science engineering must make make us capable of making computer systems and that too good ones. Thats is the first duty. Instead of doing that we are being taught useless stuff.
How much of your so called knowledge, have you used in your career. But there were many things that you could have learned, which were of direct use.
Like your example, its good to learn linguistics and english grammer, so that we can make better voice recognitions systems. We could have learned advanced operations research ,so that we can do better artificially intelligent and optimised systems. If you start by picking examples then there are many…. but there is not enough time to learn all these.
“Engineer must know the basics of everything”……. bullshit…… is something ive been hearing ever since ive been talking abou.t this problem. No engineer is required to anything, before he masters his trade.
We have 18 years of general education. Thats enough for general formal education. Engineering colleges are places to specialise.
Wasting time there is like wasting your golden years.
The conclusion is that… knowledge is always good…. but there is something called appropriate knowledge. With out that we are a sailing ship with out a destination.
SOMETHING IS BETTER THAN NOTHING
its a fact : im still fighting with first year maths ;D
its atrue fact what i am learning in ist year is totally useless no continuation with next semesters i am a student intrested in computer and software feild but unfortunately cusat syllabus is formulated in such away that no computer student get any benefit i us e this oppurtunity to request that change the whole syllabus in such away that all student should be equipped with computer knowledge
This post is absolutely correct. There is a huge disconnect between what is taught in colleges and universities and WHAT IS ACTUALLY NEEDED IN THE WORKPLACE. Unfortunately many of the college professors are lifelong academics who haven’t a clue what skills are important for student who want to enter and succeed in the workplace.
There is just a large imbalance between theory and practical application that is taught to students. They need this so they can compentely complete basic tasks when they first are hired. Instead students come out of university not even knowing how to build a simple installer program. The solution is close collaboration between business and universites to build a useful and relevant syllabus that will TRULY benefit students who want to become professionals. Of course there would need to be a third party to oversee the curriculum development so that business interests and greed won’t create yet another useless curriculum useful to only one company.
I appreciate your effort to bring out the short comings of syllabus and the teaching paedagogy .
As a person who was part of the syllabus making and revision process for sometime, i have many experiences to share. I am going thro’ a busy schedule and let me say, for now, that it is high time for a discussion about what we can do to improve the syllabus.
The problem is not the syllabus alone. Non-vailability of efficient teachers is the real hurdle. Think WHY.
Acc. to me the most useful subject we ever had in CS was Software Enggineering. But all staffs ,hod and all has gives this subject a name- ‘kathi’ — encouraging students to write wutever they want for this exam!
Software Engineering can not be taught through chalk and talk sessions. It needs any number of case study sessions which do not happen for at least two reasons: (i) Teachers do not pay time and effort to prepare and present cases; they lack the practical experience needed to make meaningful case studies. (ii) Teachers do not encourage students to prepare case studies and present; in a class of 60+ students, presentations will eat up the entire semester.
The practical solution would be to include sessions by experts from industry.
Leave a Comment