It's a curriculum, not a compulsory work load. Also, the curriculum would be updateable. I think it's often the case that somebody wants to go farther into a subject and would like to know what the standard knowledgebase is for that subject.
I completely agree with you that Curriculum is an interesting, useful, and underutilized feature. However that is completely unrelated to what I said.
Again, why do you make a submission with a title that you openly admit is link-baity, unless you are trying to artificially increase your karma? I don't know how long you have read HN but your account is less than a month old and intentionally submitting link-bait (especially by a relativity new user) reeks of karma whoring and really pisses me (and I assume/hope a number of other users) off.
How much material have the profs digested in order to make this huge curriculums? Because they're not just listing "anything they've read about the subject", are they?
Not so sure about mandatory. A system like this is pretty useless unless you’re motivated to use it. How much benefit would the students taking the module only because it’s required really see?
Studying it at a university means moving and having a certain background. While i agree that these resources are hard to break down into a curriculum, theres nothing stopping you from copying a university curriculum at home and doing work on your own...
I don't know that every unit of an undergraduate CS curriculum needs to be an HN submission.
It's a bit silly to hear people way that college curriculum is irrelevant and then spend a drawn out period of time cobbling together a college curriculum.
The goal is to make the materials as accessible as possible. So we're definitely not limited to the structure of a typical university course and are happy to iterate on it.
I appreciate you elaborating on your feedback. Thank you.
This reasoning doesn't hold up because all of the information is already available through course descriptions and syllabi on course webpages. You don't even need to attend a school to get at that information.
I shouldn't have used the word curriculum. I went to a top university and I know how frequently those prerequisite courses can be totally off base (my degree is chemical/biomolecular engineering). I used the term 'pre-requisite knowledge' because I would prefer a list of what ideas/concepts are needed to be fully understood before taking the course (ex/ instead of saying linear algebra is a prerequisite, say you need an understanding of solving linear equations using matrices but you don't need to understand linear spaces. Then you can focus your effort better and not take a 40 hour pre-req that you only need 4 hours from)
Interesting, thanks. I suppose it isn't necessarily part of a core curriculum (though I did not make it through the curriculum, which is why I was curious).
Absolutely you need both. We agree there. And any reasonable curriculum - in practice - will be a combination. But the curriculum will still be organized in some fashion, it's a very high-level document after all. And that's where one or the other flavor will come through.
It isn't currently a requirement, but I assume that this is largely because there isn't a significant supply of potential students who know the fundamentals at the moment.
Increase the supply, and some courses/universities have the option of making it a requirement.
reply