Reaction for: Computing Curricula by Andrew H. Schulak

The first thing that came to my mind when I first started reading this paper was that hopefully I would find out why a lot of people in the Computer Science field studied what they do. I was to be disappointed. Instead I got a huge manifesto of the community on how they perceived the subject of computing should be taught to undergraduates.

Which was very interesting to see. One thing which struck me about their layout was how closely Brown's Computer Science dept. seemed to mesh with it. We had many of the same categories here as they had listed and I felt almost privileged to see that I was getting a pretty good computer science education. Now only if that is what I really wanted... But that is outside the scope of this article. :)

Coming from a particularly intellectual background, computer science wise that is, I found it interesting that the committee would stress issues in computer science such as ethical and societal ones. Here we relegate those issues to a course for non-majors which is usually regarded as a joke by "serious" concentrators. What causes our department to miss this notion, what could it do for our undergraduate body? These questions pervaded my mind as I read along.

But as I mentioned, I was really looking for some information regarding precisely why people actually studied computer science. Why people were drawn to it, why they felt computing was important and urgent to study. I think of all things a strong sense of this would help any department, or any student for that matter, in creating a worthy curriculum.

However, perhaps this important aspect is left up the various departments to decide as a "department goal" and doesn't deserve the attention of the masses. If no one knows why the are studying computer science then how useful is it to clearly label and organize the insides of it?


Reactions


Danah:

Regarding the idea of delegating ethical matters to non majors... I think one of the things you need to notice is who studies computer science. Having spent over 40 hours discussing the ethical issue with faculty, I know I have a biased view. Many people are drawn to computer science for power and prestige. They enjoy acquiring money and power for creating small "helpful" toys. Those who are not interested in gaining the same things from computer science find that they are constantly questionning their participation in such a field (SHOE!). For some mathematics and scientific application intrigue them. Others enjoy the societal impacts. Still others find different joys out of computer science. Unfortunately, the first type of people mentionned tend to be the most detrimental to the field. We _need_ to teach computer ethics.


MY NAME: Matthew Amdur

MY COMMENTS: I just had a question about the whole issue of not teaching ethics to concentrators. Have there been any major problems where recent graduates suffer (do something highly unethical) because they were not taught the ethics of CS? Or, is it something that s tudents are assumed to understand, and must work out for themselves? Comments?


Amanda:

I don't think we need to teach computer ethics...that is something that should be picked up and should be a part of anyone's morals...I honestly believe that if we teach it to students then the students that already have the ethics will find it valuable and to the others it will seem extremely stupid. Study psychology, you can't teach morals.


Lucas:

I think that this is one of the places where Brown's open curriculum can get people into trouble. A lot of people are so "gung-ho" CS (or English, or Math, or whatever) that they don't take advantage of the eccelectic opportunities that afford themselves to students here every day. Re: Amanda, I must disagree with you. I think you can teach morals, and while it would be nice if people just picked them up in day-to-day life, it doesn't always happen -- that's why you get so many disrespectful selfish people in the world.


[BACK]