Re: Is General Kind the harbinger of doom for the Mandate?

[eachus@mitre-bedford.arpa (Robert I. Eachus)]

In article <733834945.AA00788@f262.n620.z3.fidonet.org> tp923021@fir.canberra.e
du.au (ben elliston) writes:

   >   What I would like to know is .. what classifies a "software
   > engineer"?  I know people with computer science degrees who boldly
   > claim that they are "software engineers".

   > Whatever happened to being a Professional or Chartered
   > Professional Engineer with a degree in engineering!?

   Very good question, but very hard to answer.  I consider myself to
be a software engineer, and I consider myself to be a professional
engineer, but there is yet no such animal as a professional software
engineer.  When some group is willing to stand up and form a
professional society with accreditation standards and a code of
ethics, then there will be such a profession.  (The IEEE has so far
wimped out, and the ACM has run as fast as it can away from the idea.)

   My current opinion is that the problem is the lack of a good model.
Any such organization, to be successful, would have to be more like a
medieval guild than a modern professional organization.  Programming
can be taught in a classroom, software engineering has to be learned
by experience and with a good mentor.

   Several colleges in this area have work/study programs, and many of
those students have graduated as good software engineers.  In fact
I've worked with about a dozen such students, and hired half of them
full time on (or before) graduation.  The successful students in these
programs are head and shoulders above other CS graduates.  (Or should
I say head and shoulders above CS graduates.  Most of the best
students in my experience have majored in EE or Computer Systems
Engineering.)

--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...