USC has once again Revamped Computer Science Curriculum

psydent
Thu, 17 Jul 2014 08:18:41 +0000

This is the revision I warned against previously. It seems they’ve scaled some things back and made it optional for current students (previously it was going to be mandatory). Reaction seems positive for CS, but there’s still most of the issues I have with it for CS (Games).

The optional part is good for students, and this release from Schrader is really helpful. They didn’t use to distribute clear info when they revamped the curriculum when I was an undergrad. Looking over the new course plan for CSGM I’d say stick with the old one if it can be fulfilled just in case a class you’ve taken now doesn’t count, but they seem largely compatible outside of 400-levels: http://www.viterbi.usc.edu/assets/179/91193.pdf

I’ve dubbed this revision Ivory Towers v2.0. The kind of people revising this come up with course titles like CSCI 353: Introduction to Internetworking

First year issues:

No programming in the first semester is ridiculous. It’s not fair to students that they might dislike programming enough to switch majors but won’t know until end of freshmen year. CS 101 used to always be a first semester class and now what it is (103) should be too.

Removing ITP 280 is a stupid move. I know several people who have gotten jobs/internships due in part to it. It is a really valuable class to give industry overview and get actual simple game dev experience.

The professor of CTIN 190 has a huge impact on the usefulness (and enjoyment) of the class. It has yet to be done right (this in including CS 180).

Without an overhaul CS 281 is still a crappy class. ITP 280 has been an order of magnitude better.

ENGR 102 is a filler class that could be made a little more useful w/some tweaks.

Remaining issues:

Always take EE 241. Always. I’m disappointed a Mathematics for Games class hasn’t been created yet. Among some AAA studios USC grads have a rep for not being good at the necessary math for engine dev.

Also disappointed CS 200 was crammed into CS 201 and now it’s a hard and crappy class. Luckily the professor who taught it (and was bad) quit. However, CS has trouble finding good teachers so it will probably be rocky for multiple semesters. They could mitigate this compressed class by having a 2 unit software engineering course. Many seniors still don’t have a good grasp on this important area.

The new 400 level games classes have a lot of potential, but I think it an incredibly bad decision to replace good classes with classes that have never been taught before and could turn out poorly. I trust the instructor (AK) will eventually do well, but think they should’ve been 499’ed so they could be tested and revised before being made mandatory.

Having no tech electives is ridiculous because students can’t explore a specific niche. Students with no speciality won’t be as competitive as students from other schools w/specialities.

Positives and misc:

I’m glad to see more theory classes because USC has been weak on theory for many years. More theory is better for students in the long run.

To all entering CSGM students: Skip out of MATH 125 (AP Calc credit) if you can. It’s one of the only ways to be able to have units to take fun classes.

Still not convinced CS 109 is worthwhile, but need to get more opinions. Would like to hear anyone’s experience.