[game_edu] watered down CS programs

[Buchanan, John]

My article is specifically aimed at CS.  There are other areas of
training where vocational training are more appropriate but I will leave
the discussion of these other areas (art, production, game design) to
people better qualified than me.

My article is intended to dissuade the introduction of watered down CS
programs.  It is unfair to teach students how to program current
generation machines without focusing on the underpinnings of the
discipline that they are entering.  We have found that the narrow 'video
game programming for welders'  i.e.  we teach you enough to be
dangerous, programs leave students inadequately prepared for long term
growth in their chosen discipline.  

As educators there is a far deeper issue that we must look at when we
decide to label something a 'game programming' degree.  If we could
guarantee that everyone who entered such a program would be guaranteed
a job in the industry then we are all good.  However we all know that
the game industry is very selective in whom it chooses to hire.  Thus we
are assured that a significant percentage of people with game
programming degrees will not be employed in the industry.  

Now if I were hiring a programmer in a segment of the IT industry that
was not game related what would I think of a game programming degree.  I
am very confident that people outside of the game industry will look
with disdain at these specialty degrees.  However if the degree is a
hard core CS or SE degree with a game course, or a game minor, then the
disdain will not be present.  So universities that are thinking of
labeling some of their graduates game programmers are doing a
dis-service to their students by giving them a degree that limits them
to a small, albeit lucrative, segment of the IT industry.  

The major reason that many academics are jumping on the 'lets train game
people' is that the industry is lucrative.  By that very same metric we
should be instituding specialized Microsoft word programs since that
product is also very lucrative.

juancho

-----Original Message-----
From: game_edu-bounces at igda.org [mailto:game_edu-bounces at igda.org] On
Behalf Of Ian Schreiber
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 9:56 AM
To: IGDA Game Education Listserv
Subject: RE: [game_edu] watered down CS programs

>I must say that I mostly agree with that you are saying. But, is there 
>really no room for vocational oriented training?
>
>What do other's think?

I don't think the article is advocating a complete lack of vocational
training; it admits that senior-level "practicum" classes are acceptable
and even desired. (I would agree; if current technology will be obsolete
two or three years from now, teaching it to a freshman won't help them
at all... But teaching it to a senior would certainly be useful.)

Personally, I'm frustrated by the opposite extreme most universities
seem to take in their core academic programs: teach pure, abstract CS
without giving students any clue as to how this stuff is actually used
in the real world. Every software company I've been at for the last ten
years has used some version of Microsoft Visual Studio; there's no
excuse for sending college CS graduates out into the world without at
least introducing them to the concept of an IDE, or source code control.

I haven't looked closely at any curricula for "game programming"
specific majors, but it's possible that some of them are in danger of
swinging too far the other way, teaching only current skills and none of
the basics. A balance needs to be struck between the two extremes, but I
think that's the case for most academic disciplines (game-related or
not).

Ian
_______________________________________________
game_edu mailing list
game_edu at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu