🚀 go-pugleaf

aro@aber.ac.uk (Andrew Ormsby) writes:

>J.W.Harley@newcastle.ac.uk (Jon Harley) writes:
>
>> But the BCS _doesn't_ value scientists as much as *.Engineers. I've recently
>> discovered that when evaluating computing experience, research only counts
>> for half as much as routine software development.

>But why should the BCS value science as much as engineering
>experience? After all, the PhD is the reward for the research. The
>C.Eng (or whatever) is supposed to indicate something else. 

It's not obvious from the name that "Member of the British Computer
Society" is an engineering rather than scientific designation...

>Building research systems, whether you make a genine contribution to
>the field or not, is frequently (though not always) significantly
>different to building industrial strength systems, and should be.

That's certainly true. For one thing research is creative, and seems to
be much harder work (PhDs take long hours, and you have much more
responsibility and less help available than a junior programmer does).

If the BCS is just going to be for engineers, it should rename itself the
Institute of Information Systems Engineers or something and make it explicit.
If it's going to be for everyone in computing, as the current name implies,
it should value us all equally.


/Jon
   ___________________ ____ ________________________________________
  / -- Jonathan Harley \  /_    And they covered up the sun        //    //  //
 / J.W.Harley@ncl.ac.uk \/ /   until the birds had flown away...  // // //////
/_Phone:UK 091 222 8504__\/___________________________________///////////  //