Re: Computer Science is NOT Engineering (in Canada, at least)
Originally posted by Baseline
This has actually been a HUGE issue here in Canada.
In Canada, Engineering is a licensed profession (like doctors and lawyers), and you can only be an "Engineer" if you have graduated from a government accredited instituition.
At my school (McMaster University) we have become the first in the country to offer an accredited Software Engineering program (which I have just finished my third year of). There has been an insanely huge fight over the term "Software Engineer" though.
You see, all the Computer Science people want to be able to call themselves "Software Engineers" because it sounds better. However, if you haven't graduated from an Engineering program, it's not allowed.
The reason is because of our commitment to the public (as defined by our legal status). All accredited Engineering programs in Canada have a certain minimum requirements on courses that must be taken. We must all take physics (electrical AND statics) courses, chemistry courses, ethics courses, design courses, materials courses, mechanical courses, thermodynamics, etc. In general, we have to have at least a basic understanding of all fields of Engineering.
The reason this is important to Software people is because of the increased use of software in physical environments (controlling nuclear reactors, planes, etc.). How can we say that the software we design for such a physical device is safe if we don't understand the physical properties behind it?
Computer Science people (in Canada at least) are not required to take any of those courses. Also, they have no professional legal status, so they don't have to worry about the repercussions if their designs fail. Engineers have a code of conduct they are legally obliged to follow.
My program is headed by Dr. David Parnas, a hugely important name in computing, a name that is familiar to most people who have been involved in the computer world for at least 20 years. He is the brain behind some of the most important concepts in computing today (i.e. information hiding, grandfather of object-oriented design, etc.).
If anyone is interested, more information on my faculty's view of Software Engineering can be found at the two following links:
http://www.cas.mcmaster.ca/cas/undergraduate/SEoverview1.html
[url]http://www.cas.mcmaster.ca/cas/undergraduate/SEbrochure.pdf
[/URL]
Sorry for going all ranty, but it's an issue very near to my heart. We have to work MUCH harder than the Comp Sci people to get our degree (by definition of Engineering in Canada alone) and it bugs me when they try to take credit for being an Engineer. It's illegal in Canada to call yourself an Engineer if you haven't graduated from an accredited program (and it's not easy to get accreditation).
I've really just scratched the surface of the issue here. There are a whole lot of other things, most in the field of math, that I haven't covered. For instance, did any of you know that it's actually possible to MATHEMATICALLY prove the correctness of your software?
Just like can be done in other Engineering fields, math can be used to prove that your software design is correct. Comp Sci people are not taught how to do that. The only people up to this point that have been learning to do it have PhD's. In Software Engineering, we begin to learn it in the second year of our undergraduate degree.
I hope I haven't offended any Comp Sci people out there. In general they're much better coders than we are. However, when it comes to safety critical software, I'd rather have a licensed Engineer who has sworn an oath of ethical behaviour and has the necessary mathematical background needed, designing the software.
Many of my professors worked together on the software-based safety shutdown sequence of the Darlington Nuclear station for Ontario Power Generation. And frankly, I wouldn't want it any other way.
wow, great rant...he he
i am a computer teacher and a techie (network engineer) - there is no such term as network technician in the USA (or silicon valley) since CompTIA universally uses the term for its designations for their A+ technicians and CompTIA is a conglomeration of thousands of IT companies so no way to fight that, so in politically correct terms, i am a facilitator (teacher) in the world's largest pc organization and i am a consultant (techie)...he he
being a teacher, i do hold some traditions true to my heart and i had a big rant against mcrain who likes to call lawyers with a JD degree the same as a person with a PhD...this is simply not true...it was a huge move by the legal profession in the 1970s to change the basic legal degree, the bachelor's degree in law, to a full fledged status of a PhD simply thru legal manuevering and no change in the course work
sure, a law degree often follows a bachelor's degree but it does not have to...any ABA law school has its exceptions and there is this test called the LSAT which can waiver not having completed a BA/BS degree
also, following the basic law degree is the master's in law and a doctorate in law after that
the academic world was forced to accept a bachelor's degree turning into a doctorate degree thru legislation...i found it terribly unfair to those who were in other fields who had to, in every case, achieve a bachelor's degree first to be admitted into graduate school
now if the accredited law school where i live insisted on having a BA/BS degree first, i would have absolutely no problem with their degree holders being called "doctor" or "juris doctor"
i am much older than mcrain, the young lawyer who recently finished law school, so i doubt he remembers any lawyers who were practicing with their bachelor's in law...some of those lawyers went on to get their master's and doctorates only to find that the new crop of freshly minted lwayers in their 20s (23-26) are now considered doctorates of law...what about the three hundred or more years of lawyers who had to earn their doctorate of law the hard way?
i live in a retirement community so the balance of lawyers here have the bachelor's of law called the llb and they also had to pass the california bar not to mention many of these lawyers have their own small firms and offices which they have to pay for out of their own pocket...in other words they worked their tails off...but their kids who follow them in the profession, which is common in a small town, get a juris "doctorate" the day they pass just three years of law school and somehow have a degree that sounds twice as powerful as the one their parents have...go figure
i have my BA degree and maybe i can legislate that into a PhD...he he
mcrain, the very intelligent macrumors poster and lawyer, has a proper 4 year engineering degree and i am sure he had to work harder at that than his 3 year law degree...so i don't understand why he thinks that the law degree was built on top of his engineering BS degree or that the 3 year law degree is a doctorate and his 4 year engineering degree, with no connection, is just one that should be considered a bachelor's degree...and i will state this again, one does not have to have a bachelor's degree to be in law school and all one has to do is ask to find out...however, the majority of law students do have a BA degree
i am not saying that law students don't study...people with IT certifications also have to work very hard and also have the added headache of having their designation stripped from them every 18 months due to "changes in the industry"
the certification thing is another interesting field...imagine having a CCIE certification which takes no less than 4 years to achieve, and that hard work is not even considered an AA/AS degree but the certification could now be used towards some AA/AS programs
in silicon valley, the non-degreed CCIE has a starting salary of 100-120k so in that effect, someone who is a CCIE could care less if they have a degree...the only CCIE i know made 2 million dollars in the last year i know he filed for taxes
there are hangups about designations and i think it is stupid, but being a teacher and techie i have only two
1) the llb being turned into a JD degree thru legislation
older lawyers i know detest new JD this since they worked hard to get where they are today with their mere llb degree
2) having newly certified network engineers call themselves the much more important title of network administrator even though they are in a support role as a mere network engineer...in my book, the chief network engineer...da one with da passwords and permissions...is the only true network administrator
btw - i have two real WASC accredited degrees and one real IT certification so i am not talking out of my butt...but i won't mention which company sponsors that certifications since i don't want to be deemed a traitor here...he he
hatman rant over (mcrain, you are my favorite poster here despite the opposite views on education, but please chime in)
