In relation to college coding and CS degrees

Question

As some of the most talented sololearners (and professionals in computer/software engineering) pointed out, the causual form of teaching CS courses worldwide has a limited alignment with what is met by CS students in real world applications of CS concepts, they referred to the case that CS curricula as they structured can't cope with the rapid development of technology outside, as this maybe the case for the most educational institutions worldwide, i can't help but wonder, does this applies for institutions we usually hear how it's changing the technology, and our world?, is the same thing goes for MIT-standford, Cambridge .. etc.?, what really distinguishs these institutions? is it the intellect of it's students as they produce a heavy body of research annualy?, is it the budget where these institutions can market for themselves?, or is there something special about their curricula and ways of teaching? .. and for someone who may not have the experience can the same skills be gained by self-teaching?

Answer 1

[Part 2 of 2]
These schools are also well known for incubating new startups and graduates who secure venture capital investments. This happens a lot for a few reasons.

1. Proximity: Stanford is in the heart of Silicon Valley, MIT in Boston, GA Tech in Atlanta - very strong tech centers and locations rich in wealth.

2. Connections: These universities are well connected to tech businesses, successful alumni, and their connections to wealthy investors.

3. Proven Successes: Let's face it... by recruiting the top pedigree of talented students, these schools are bound to produce some very successful alumni.

Now to the crux of my response...

None of these resources or programs matter. The successes of those who graduate from these programs would have been successful if they didn't go to those schools. I believe it's a matter of correlation more than causation as it relates to the strengths of these programs and the successes of their students.

But again, this is all just my anecdotal assessment. 😉

Answer 2

Universities have the approach to provide the widest possible knowledge in many fields and not deep knowledge in one field.
It would not be possible to prepare that many students for working life if they'd concentrate on in-depth knowledge. It takes a lifetime to master one language, no university can produce full-stack developers.

A good university will teach you how to learn new topics in a short amount of time and will give impetus so that you can develop yourself personally later on.

During my carreer I have met people who graduated from good universities and barely could produce more than hello world. And I have seen colleagues who have not graduated and could develop the most creative and clean solutions.
Graduation matters for salary, but does not necessarily stand for what you can do practically if you rest on your laurels.

Answer 3

[Part 1 of 2]
Mohab Khaled Here's my anecdotal take on Ivy Leagues and other prestigious universities as it relates to CS programs.

Regarding the 8 Ivy League schools (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Brown, Cornell, Univ of PA, Columbia, and Dartmouth), while these are excellent academic institutions, I don't associate them with computer science programs.

These are known as liberal arts schools where students focus on a broad range of studies spanning the arts, history, philosophy, social and natural sciences, mathematics, and humanities. I actually went to a liberal arts undergraduate school and was planning to go to Harvard for law school. Discovering my love for programming changed all that. 😉

When I think of elite computer science programs, I think of schools like MIT, Stanford, Georgia Tech, Cal Tech, and others.

These schools have a lot of money for top salaries, research programs, technology, etc and they are the most selective in recruiting the best of the best in both students and faculty.

Answer 4

I think it’s important to remember that the study of Computer Science and rapidly evolving Technologies are inherently different.

At its core Computer Science is still about abstracting problem solving. It’s conceptual and can be widely applied OUTSIDE of technology and programming. When studying it you’re learning and practicing problem solving. Recognizing this and indulging in this is something these universities often strive for.

It’s cliche, I know, but I think the relevancy of Computer Science programs is more about learning “how to learn” rather than learning “how to”.

Answer 5

[Part 2]
Self-Teaching this all is a possible but very difficult task, In Institutes you get to learn this all in a sequence we can call it as a flow of learning. but when you go for self-teaching you need to figure out the flow of your study (mostly like a mentor).

the very first thing that pops in mind is doing some sort of certifications, but this shows only work in that particular area, not knowledge.
Self-Teaching is even done by the CS students as well, in order to get in touch with new technologies in the industry.

Institutes help you see others' mistakes so that you can make your new mistakes and learn from them...

for example, I have seen many people from a non-CS background but they become experts with the time and experience they gained...
it is something that they have earned with their efforts and dedication.👍

Answer 6

I think schools like MIT and Caltech may be beneficial for engineering fields that deal with some form of specialized hardware in areas such as jet propulsion, space technology etc. When it comes to Computer Science that is no longer tied to expensive and exclusive hardware and labs, I don't think the institution matters so much apart from the people networks in these institutions.

Answer 7

[Part 1]
I will answer your questions from my point of view,
as I am a Computer Engineering Student from India, I can tell you about academics here, Institutions tries to cope up with rapidly changing technologies by modifying the syllabus and making it close to the industry level. But it depends on students if a student is a complete beginner (having no Idea about computer Science), then there is no point in teaching them directly about industry standards instead they should work on basics of Computer Science like 1)Computer architecture
2)Data Structures (Very Important)
3)Basic Algorithms (searching-sorting)
4)C programming
5)Object-Oriented Programming

and once it's done they move for little higher (in 2nd Year)
1)Networking
2)Database and their management
3)Theory of computations
4)Design and analysis of algorithms
5)System Design and Architecture of Applications
6)C++ and Java programming

and in last year of academics, focus on latest trends like,
1)Machine Learning
2)Data Analytics
3)Cryptocurrency
4)Cyber Security
5)Artificial Intelligence
6)IoT and applications, etc

and projects made by you by implementing any of these technologies.

But one important thing here you need to understand is, Institutes will make you jack of all but master of none...
you become master by identifying your choice and applying efforts for that particular domain.
this is true for mostly all Tech Institutes,

for Institutes like MIT or Stanford, it depends,
you get in that environment where ideas flow not only a syllabus.
because all other people present in there have already invested their efforts and time in their respective fields, which creates an innovative environment. its very simple, you get to connect with those who have discovered those ideas and eventually get to work with them (in projects). that will surely induce some new ideas in you, or one can improvise the existing.

Answer 8

Tashi N, pointed out from her experience, even when it comes to good universities, it is not a 'guarantee' to be good at this field, so it boils down to a sense of individuality as you said.

Answer 9

Mirielle🐶 [Inactive] but again can i ask you, why do we always hear some repeated names, even repeated patterns -> go to standford, make a startup ...,
what are your thoughts about this, is it the mere focus of media, or these institutions provide something else..?

Answer 10

Devon Wells thanks, as Tashi N, pointed out it's practically hard to provide deep knowledge on one field, rather universities tend to have another approach of providing knowledge on many fields with the widest extent possible, and boost up the ability to learn quickly on individual basis, do you think this approach of learning the basics of a lot of things has a significant impact on the overall skills obtained by a student compared to self-teaching individuals? as some problems may have different dimensions? can the same range of skills be obtained individually?

Answer 11

Tashi N .. want to hear your thoughts on this as someone who runs his own bussiness, did you notice some variations of skills between different people graduated from different institutions?

Answer 12

Mirielle🐶 [Inactive] now you are clearly pointing out that even in formal education it is - to a wide extent - a self-reliance behaviour..

Answer 13

David Carroll Thanks, it is the nature of the question forcing the answer to have an anecdotal shape, but again a reflection from an expert acually worth attention, i didn't know you were planning for harvard, no wonder you touches some other fields while answering beside cs, it must be something very strong caught your attention to change plans, it's HARVARD LAW SCHOOL... so you've pointed out it's a concentration of capital, connections, even the geographic location here matters .. but at the core of it is not a special thing about the curricula or what/how people learn there (except in tems of faculty) , rather it's related mainly to individuals...👍.. as i'am from a country (not doing very well) in education i have a great focus on these matters as there is a presistent question about the quality of what you are learning and even what you are producing.
again thanks for the detailed answer.

Answer 14

This is a nice question.Helps me a lot as I am applying to these Universities and I kinda like have a bias to the Ivys but I guess it's because many people talk about and they like have created a name for themselves by molding many American and World figures that's why everyone thinks they are so good but I feel it's really the student who makes it happen.

Answer 15

David Carroll

Answer 16

HonFu , Aaditya Deshpande

Answer 17

Mirielle🐶 [Inactive] .. as i think how the educational process works, thinking that the guidance + well structured curriculum is what differs the formal education from self-teaching, David Carroll pointed out previously that he tested some curricula and found some 'outdated materials' ,

Answer 18

Sonic good point, i think even when it comes to computers/computer-software not far from now, hands-on experience wasn't that avialable outside institutes in some special fields, as AI, Embedded systems.

Answer 19

Aaditya Deshpande very thankful for the detailed answer, it became clear that it reflects a sense of individuality as you pointed out the variations among CS students, i think unlike physics, pure mathematics .. cs is more about application, syllabus can -must- be changed to cope with industry, answers aligned with yours about the approach of institutes "jack of all but master of none", i think the main advantage of institutes is the sequence, it is really difficult to decide which level you currently in and which path you should follow, but the current approach of most institutes sometimes don't help much on that, as Mirielle pointed out .. again very thankful for the detailed answer.