<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Dave -<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:81fb60cd-ea51-471e-a2ce-e73143af9d62@www.fastmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">First some elaboration:
In 25 BC, Vitruvius (considered the founder of the discipline of architecture) stated:
"The ideal architect should be a man of letters, a skillful draftsman, a mathematician, familiar with historical studies, a diligent student of philosophy, acquainted with music; not ignorant of medicine, learned in the responses of jurisconsults, familiar with astronomy, and astronomical calculations."
</pre>
</blockquote>
Reminds me of the (in)famous Robert Heinlein quote so (s?)favored by
Libertarians and other strong Individualists: <br>
<blockquote>“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan
an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write
a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the
dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve
equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a
computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects.” </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:81fb60cd-ea51-471e-a2ce-e73143af9d62@www.fastmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
In 2004(5?) Christopher Alexander (architect) spoke to an audience of 1000 or so software developers; noting that professional architects are responsible for 10 percent of the built environment while software developers would be responsible for, essentially, 100% of the environment within which we all live, work, and play.
Is it unreasonable to expect software developers to have an equivalent, in terms of modern knowledge, educational foundation?</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I do think Alexander's point here is acutely relevant to this
discussion. Having the experience/background to consider *what*
is worth doing is as (more?) important than merely knowing *how*
to do it efficiently. This brings me back to the thread(s) with
Glen/Marcus on the question of the role/value of "culture". I
think I want my fellow citizens/travelers in this world to be
broadly aware of a range of cultural/social/historical issues if
they are to help me make fundamental/important decisions about the
world we live in. Those decisions can take the form of high-level
policy formation, of voting (or not), or of everyday decisions
about our "built" environment. Alexander was a proponent of
Vernacular Architecture which seemed to put off many Architects
who did not like the idea that each culture and every individual
in it had a lot to offer regarding the understanding of built
environments. It threatened their elevated status as priest-like
experts. But that is not to say he did not value a rich
understanding of the context for which someone was going to design
a building, a room, a garden, or a neighborhood. He was a
proponent for allowing the embedded knowledge of the people living
in those places to guide the design process. <br>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:81fb60cd-ea51-471e-a2ce-e73143af9d62@www.fastmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">The term "modern polymath" has gained significant traction in the business and the design press. Business attention comes from an awareness that in order to thrive, to innovate, in a highly dynamic and complex context, decentralization of analysis and decision making is essential. But, this requires a qualitatively different kind of employee — one with both breadth and depth of knowledge. Moreover, both in business and design, work is done by teams — multi-disciplinary teams; teams that must transcend individual silos of expertise. A modern polymath is someone with significant, integrated, breadth of understanding with multiple (albeit to different degrees) instances of depth. The visual metaphor is a "broken comb."
Much more could be offered in terms of identifying and arguing for the need of broadly educated individuals and extension of that need into almost any discipline.
Now the jumping up and down with a bit of YELLING.
AS THEY HAVE EVOLVED, CONTEMPORARY UNIVERSITIES CANNOT GRADUATE INDIVIDUALS THAT EVEN APPROXIMATE MODERN POLYMATHS.</pre>
</blockquote>
My own experience as a "hiring manager" from time to time during my
career at LANL reinforces that *beyond* college. I looked at
interns (mostly undergrads) to begin grooming as potential full
hires later and was disappointed with A) how few were actually
studying a rich set of topics, not just following a fairly narrow
line. and B) how the institution (LANL) made it hard for me to
consider them even as *student interns* if their grades were not
top-notch. I would MUCH rather have a B-student who was *trying*
to be a polymath, taking a wide range of classes (and sometimes
biffing them) and even more importantly, getting some kind of work
experience (even fast-food service) than an A+ student who only took
classes they *knew* they could ace, didn't bother with things they
might be *interested in* outside their core curriculum, and weren't
risk-taking enough to have outside interests.
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:81fb60cd-ea51-471e-a2ce-e73143af9d62@www.fastmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I could list numerous reasons for this assertion, but will, instead, offer a single illustration.
The program that I delivered at Highlands (co-taught with Pam Rostal) was designed to graduate software developers who were modern polymaths. We devised a set of 321 "competencies" and students had to demonstrate their mastery of each at up to five different levels ranging from "rote application under supervision" to "making a contribution to understanding." Competencies ranged in subject matter from Anthropology to Zooloqy. We also utilized 'just in time learning' and tinversion of the teaching approach: graduate level first, fundamentals later.
It worked. The first year we had half the students (Freshmen to Graduate level) presenting refereed papers at two conferences with the highest rejection rate of all conferences at that time. All of our students were offered mid-level positions in industry - very notably at a national, not just local level) in software development — not entry level.</pre>
</blockquote>
I was not aware of your approach at Highlands and applaud what you
were up to there. You must have a few significant "success stories"
out there in the wild by now? Do you stay in touch with any? I
don't know your tenure at Highlands, but I suspect your heyday with
this program was after I quit seeking newhires (about 2004). In any
case, it reflects my own blinders, assuming HIghlands *couldn't* be
doing anything so aggressive/successful!<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:81fb60cd-ea51-471e-a2ce-e73143af9d62@www.fastmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">[An article for the Cutter Journal on this subject should appear in the next few weeks. I will share with anyone interested when it is published.]</pre>
</blockquote>
I look forward to reading about it.<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:81fb60cd-ea51-471e-a2ce-e73143af9d62@www.fastmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">The point of this reminiscence: As an experiment we put the knowledge base expected of our students in the form of traditional 3-4 credit courses. The number of courses and credits required was the equivalent of 4 undergraduate degrees and 3 Masters Degree programs.</pre>
</blockquote>
Reminds me a tiny bit of what I believe to be the case of my
grandparent's generations 8th-grade educations. Best I could tell,
reading some of the textbooks and curricula required in those days
for graduating 8th grade, most of the material exceeded what the
average grade 12 student is expected to master. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:81fb60cd-ea51-471e-a2ce-e73143af9d62@www.fastmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Our program could not be replicated at any other university as it violated EVERY precept of university teaching and organization.</pre>
</blockquote>
Seems like the advantage of working at a fringe/lesser-known 4 year
college where you were (apparently) allowed to be very aggressive in
developing your program. Was this a consequence of enlightened
management or (benign?) neglect on their part? Jenny Q. has
reported to me her own experience there somewhat more aligned with
the latter assertion than the former.<br>
<p>- Steve<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>