That assumes a proper programming course is possible. The only technical definition is that a program is a formal mathematical proof that a particular computation is possible. Programming involves relatively few specific concepts: even boolean algebra, which is used to govern flow control in a program, is not required for all computations. Someone who is trained to program perfectly will still be unable to express a particular computation because they will not have the fundamental knowledge necessary to do so.

What I'm suggesting is that we're approaching Computation Science, programming and education incorrectly at all levels. A programmer who took few science classes would be ill-prepared to write a physics simulation, but he would be excellently able to compose an efficient broadphase algorithm (which is NP-complete). The rest of the work should be done by a physicist or mathematician - someone who is specifically trained in mechanics and linear algebra.

What I mean by spending my time on a computer alot anyway means..

That I am proficient and literate with all forms of windows and some forms of mac, know more about how to fix, diagnose, set up, etc, types of services involving PC's. Also because I am more literate then the average user, I would have the advantage in the internal training class if I did transfer.

I pretty much already take care of all the other sales reps problems in my office because they don't want to go through the hassle of priority tickets, so in turn they call me over to fix their computers. I just figure that in-company transfering is highly reccomended by my company AND I'm already taking care of most of the crap I'd be dealing with as an IT for the said company regardless. The only thing I am not too sure about is dealing with company servers and such since I am not authorized to get anywhere near them, but I'm sure that internal training would more then cover that.

What I'm trying to say is that for those who are "well I know -this- but it doesn't mean I can do -this-" is that I know my way around computer systems more then just point and click users. I don't feel the transition would be that hard. Although I am only considering it if they will compensate my pay upon transferring.

This is really true. Most state schools have terrible CS programs that are little more than math degrees. There are schools with excellent CS and SE programs, but they are far from the majority.

Jon, what do you know about ABET accreditation? I know my program is ABET accredited but I never really bothered to see how much it means.

I'm not sure how I feel about this attitude. It seems true, but I have a hard time accepting it. I think it may be more appropriate to say that it's a creative process with an analytical influence.

Definitely agree that the size makes a huge difference (go ahead, make jokes). The company I work for (about 6.5 years now) has around 90 computers that are in use, probably about 50 employees that use them (servers, some people have two PCs, etc). I'm the only person whose job is just IT. There is a guy who works in CAM that has been with the company for over 15 years or something, he was the main IT guy before I started there. He has no training, he just got stuck with the job because he had been around the longest. He and another guy from CAM handle the day to day stuff because they're full time employees, I work around school during the school year and full time during the summer. The three of us are the IT staff, as it were. This means we handle every possible computer problem that comes up, hardware, software, and pretty much anything that runs on electricity as requested. It can be stressful, but it's pretty easy work most of the time. We also contract work out to other companies for big stuff that none of us can handle, like when we get new servers and such. This isn't a career for me, I'm a CS student.

Our IT "department" is pretty atypical (or maybe back-asswards set-ups like this are common in businesses of this size, I have no idea). People are pretty annoying but everyone seems to like me (because I fix things for them), for the most part. There are job aspects that make me less popular, like having to take stuff from people (software they shouldn't have on their system, hardware, etc) but they mostly know I'm just the messenger.

I don't know if you got anything out of that since I pretty much just rambled for two paragraphs, but if you have any questions feel free to ask.

Yeah I've got a family member who works for a company which uses lots of Microsoft applications--they're coincidentally mainly focused on sharepoint as well. He suggested I learn it because of the small # of developers.
He also explained that many companies want things done that sharepoint doesn't do, like you said, that requires more time, money, and customization to accomplish/build.

Problem is, I don't know didly squat about most of it, and I only took 1.5 semesters of C++ programming (which isn't really used in sharepoint)

It looks like I'll need to know XML and C#, amongst other things. Anyway, I'm testing the waters for now. Just understanding how it works.

Yeah, you'll definitely need to have a good understanding of XML (because SharePoint relies heavily on CAML, which is XML-based) and a good understanding of C# or VB. It helps to know both though, because a lot of times you'll run into something that was written in the language you're not using and need to translate it. That really applies to most all areas of .NET programming though.

You have it backwards. A quality Computational Science education is supposed to involve pure mathematics. The people who excel in the field are self-starters and self-taught. I don't care what anybody says: you cannot teach a person how to program, because it's a way of thinking and implementing problems you already understand in other forms. There is zero difference between describing the process of calculating the volume of a cone and writing a program to do it.

A 4 year electrical apprenticeship will teach you how to do anything you'll be called upon to do. There is absolutely no way a 4 year degree program can cover enough specific knowledge to prepare you for employment at any arbitrary software development job. Computer programming is not a trade and the academic world needs to stop treating it like one. University is not supposed to teach to a job, that's what technical school is for.

Universities have basically spent the last 30 years telling employers that a CS degree implies programming ability already so I don't think they're going to care. It's SOP to assume that applicants can't actually write any code (and they're right about 50% of the time).

This.

Coleman, ITT Tech, DeVry, University of Phoenix. Avoid candidates from them. We interviewed a couple "Coleman" guys. Yeah not good. Also, don't beg and plead to the guy who is hiring. It really looks pathetic.

Yes, but the poor ones don't have anything else. So I guess what I mean is that they're computer science programs and not software engineering programs.


Maybe, but you can teach them techniques to make that possible.