Off Topic: Colleges don't understand Cisco

Ciscopimpenator

Yesterday I talked to a professor of computer science/IT. I told him I work with Cisco networking equipment and he says maybe I should go for a Telecom degree. ????

This respone prompted me to think: Do the professors of computer science/IT/engineering even know what being a Cisco professional entails? I know that if I was a CompSci professor I would have some understanding of this field so I could help students.

I don't think the Telecom degree idea was bad, I just think it shows a lack of knowledge(and IMO a lack of respect) for Cisco networking applications. In my mind the Computer Science is very beneficial to being a Cisco engineer and most professors wouldn't understand why.

Bottomline: Do your homework :P


-Ciscopimpenator

KGhaleon

This is only based off what you've seen?

At my college my teacher was called the "Cisco kid" and could easily pass the CCIE from what I saw. He lived and breathed Cisco, he was awesome...though his lectures were not.

KG

ajs1976

For a lot of schools it seems that Computer Science = programming.

Slowhand

ajs1976 wrote:

For a lot of schools it seems that Computer Science = programming.

Yup. Most schools see Computer Science as programming, and CIS/MIS as networking and systems engineering. And, actually, a telecom degree probably wouldn't hurt a Cisco engineer, (no more than a CS degree that focuses mainly on software engineering). Of course, if you want to be hard-core, get yourself into electrical engineering. . .

Ciscopimpenator

I'm talking about university level professors.

I can imagine Gary at Renton Technical college might understand Cisco networking.

Most university CS departments don't cater to this field. It's kind of sad IMO.

Ciscopimpenator

KGhaleon wrote:

This is only based off what you've seen?

At my college my teacher was called the "Cisco kid" and could easily pass the CCIE from what I saw. He lived and breathed Cisco, he was awesome...though his lectures were not.

KG

I doubt your teacher could easily pass the CCIE exam. Even if you leave and breathe Cisco the CCIE is a different animal. You have to prepare for this test explicitly. Unless you prepare for this test, no matter the knowledge, you will most likely fail.

Slowhand

Ciscopimpenator wrote:

I'm talking about university level professors.

I can imagine Gary at Renton Technical college might understand Cisco networking.

Most university CS departments don't cater to this field. It's kind of sad IMO.

That's very true, they don't. Then again, it's not up to CS professors to cater to it, it's up to the Information Systems professors (CIS/MIS) to teach networking, systems administration, etc. . . The sad part, though, is that a lot of universities don't have CIS departments, and if they do, they're rarely as well-developed and well-funded as the CS departments. I think that one problem is that a lot of schools see Information Systems as more of a vocational or Associate's degree. I don't agree with this, myself, because there's far more to IT than what you could learn in two years' time, but that's the response I've gotten from school officials at both the university and community-college levels. (Damn uneducated educators.)

malweth

IMO... Comp Sci / Engineering College

1) Is USEFUL for learning how to think and learn...
2) Is NECESSARY to get a job in engineering (there continue to be exceptions, but they are continually fewer). And beneficial for SALARY.
3) Is TOTALLY (95%) impractical unless you're going into the hard sciences (Engineering technology research) (Excepting point #1 above)

Essentially, you're buying #1 above... and #2 is pretty darned nice.
(I'm an Electrical Engineer by degree and a Systems Networking Engineer in practice).

ajs1976

Slowhand wrote:

That's very true, they don't. Then again, it's not up to CS professors to cater to it, it's up to the Information Systems professors (CIS/MIS) to teach networking, systems administration, etc. . . The sad part, though, is that a lot of universities don't have CIS departments, and if they do, they're rarely as well-developed and well-funded as the CS departments.

The school were I started out had a CIS program that was basically some CS (programing) plus business courses.

whenever someone is asking about a degree I tell them to look at the required courses for the program and make sure it is what they are interested in.

Stotic

Luckily my college has an IT major with various cisco-geared courses. (and its a liberal arts school also)

Slowhand

I agree with ajs1976 that you should always check out the school you're attending to see if they offer the program you want. That's true for any major, not just CS and CIS. Probably the most important factor when choosing a school, is the classes and academic programs they offer.

DW [banned]

Thanks

Slowhand

I don't know about money being the sole reason why a university couldn't find good instructors, even for CCIE-level material. Looking at it that way, a PhD in Electrical Engineering & Computer Science could probably rake in plenty of money in a place like Google, Microsoft, Cisco, etc. Still, that's what the universities tend to hire, PhD's, to teach their high-level classes. I'm fairly sure that there are plenty of CCIE's out there that wouldn't mind being university professors, if there were colleges that offered the classes. I'd make it a safe bet that those various CCIE's that teach bootcamps, Cisco-sponsored classes, and special sessions aren't in that solely for the money, since they could probably be making much more doing other types of networking work. Hell, if teachers were only in it for the money, classrooms everywhere would be vacant.

So, I think I'll lay this one out for the CCIE candidates out there on the forum: would you want to teach networking at a university, (like UC Berkeley, MIT, Harvey Mudd, or any one of the other state universities, tech-universities, or Ivy-Leagues,) even if it meant that you weren't getting as much money as being a Sr. Network Engineer or a network architect for an IT company or large corporation?

Aquabat [banned]

yea i think CS degrees are a waste of time IMO. This kid i know got a cs degree from university of pitt. He is indian anad can barely even speak english; and is a complete idiot. It seems like CS degrees are like 40% GenEd and like 60% programming or intro to computer basics. I have found cooler degrees online like Strayer University; they have a BS in Internetwork Technologies; kinda like a 4 year degree in Cisco. Pretty neat .

also, i tihnk the telcom idea is cool. i get a rise out of cisco and internetworking, and i get the same intrigue out of telcom. I find that the types of people that are into cisco, are also into engineering fields such as electronics. If i had to choice between CS or Telecom, i would choose telecom in a second

Darthn3ss

i'm doing a telecommunications associates degree and i'm mostly focusing on cisco.

Webmaster

Slowhand wrote:

So, I think I'll lay this one out for the CCIE candidates out there on the forum: would you want to teach networking at a university, (like UC Berkeley, MIT, Harvey Mudd, or any one of the other state universities, tech-universities, or Ivy-Leagues,) even if it meant that you weren't getting as much money as being a Sr. Network Engineer or a network architect for an IT company or large corporation?

Although I'm not amongst the ones you addressed, I'll answer anyway: heck yeah. If I ever do become one of those CCIE candidates (Plan C) it would be solely to teach. Although for other Cisco certs like the CCNA/P, but regardless, if I could do it at one of those universities I'd consider that a great honor. I had the fast car/suit/tie/notebook and higher than average salaries, which by itself were great but in the end I found how I spent by day much more important. I think it's fair to say that most CCIE's who teach 'teach the exam'. There's no negative tone there, the nature of the CCIE exams make that 'ok', but my point is that you can only teach CCIE 'topics' on a 2-week bootcamp. A multiple-semester master class would definitely be much more interesting from a teacher's perspective. You could actually mold students into CCIEs rather than giving them CCIE characteristics. Another side benifit is that it would make scholarships available for CCIE training.


As for the telecom degree suggestion. Many telcos are implementing Cisco devices for VOIP applications, some even luring to incorporate IT companies to buy the knowledge. By the time you finish your degree the difference between telecommunications and 'networking as we know it' will be smaller already.

blackmage439

I am enrolled in a community college (College of DuPage in Glen Ellyn, IL). It seems to me that the staff involved in my degree program know what they're doing, for the most part. As I have said in a previous posting here, the A+ courses didn't have the best selection of instructors, and the Net+ prep course was absolutely deplorable. However, the CCNA courses had the BEST teachers I have seen at this school. They knew the material by heart, and were fantastic individuals.

Most of these teachers were only part time. Some had other jobs (for example, my CCNA 4 instructor worked as a LAN admin for a local school district) and others taught elsewhere (like my CCNA 3 teacher). Therefore, they do not earn "university-level" wages. Yet, they were awesome instructors. (FYI I'm not bashing anything anyone said, just explaining facts)

The problem I see in different instructors and schools is their own bias toward "Internetworking technologies". An instructor in a "programming" department most likely won't have the same respect for networking that an instructor in the networking dept. has. Unfortunately, if the big-wigs who sign the checks don't have respect for a department, it won't recieve the attention it deserves...

As far as programming goes. Ironically, in my experience, it seems that networking students often know more about how to operate and repair a computer than programmers do. I think this is just due to the fact that networking students often go for certs and classes geared towards the material in A+. So, that's just a coincidence, I think. (Again, I don't mean disrespect) Also, it seems that programming degrees are more geared towards R&D. Coding is the basis of R&D in IT, so those skills definately come in handy.

In the end, I don't believe that either avenue of education (programing vs. networking) deserves more respect than the other. The world needs both kind of people, and often times a person who focuses on one area rather than being a jack-of-all-trades is better in that area than others who choose to learn both sides of the IT world. As I and others have said, choose the area that caters to you the most.

DW [banned]

Thanks

Webmaster

DarbyWeaver wrote:

See my point...

Yes, I think so. No offense really, but your points still seem to come down back to $. Obviously a very valid reason for wanting to become a CCIE and also work as a CCIE. But it does make me think you're missing my points, regardless, let me eleborate on my post.

You were saying there's probably aren't many colleges who can afford to have a CCIE on staff. My point regarding that is that not anyone necessarily wants those high 6-figure salaries in return for a job that gives satisfaction in many other ways. So the matter of 'what a college can afford' is not necessarily an obstacle for teaching CCIE at a uni - I agree with Slowhand the availability may just change mind of some CCIEs. Once you worked as a CCIE for a decade or more, got the house, the car, and everything else money can buy, or stop caring about all that because you won the lottery, a job teaching CCIE for half the salary or less even may not sound so bad at all. Even worth getting your degree.

I clearly see your point about the bootcamps. I realize most CCIE bootcamps aren't of the kind where they pick out just the currently popular exam topics and hand you out the laminated actual labs. My negative-tone-disclaimer was to prevent me from having to say that explicitely.

But regardless of whether they teach a starting point or the whole shabaam, they teach mostly what's relevant to the lab exam. (unless you're on a 'written' bootcamp). So you are only underlining my point regarding a possible difference between CCIE at bootcamps and as traditional education, being that the latter allows you to 'create' professionals who go beyond the large-but-still-limited scope of the lab exam (People skills, sales/consultancy, project management, Visio skills ) and as a result of that could make it a more interesting job for a CCIE trainer than training at bootcamps getting fresh students every 2 weeks and focus on the core technologies for example.

Slowhand

DarbyWeaver wrote:

While there may be PH.d's who would want to teach Cisco in the Ivy league, I'm sure everyone is aware that there do not seem to be a ton of CCIE's who even hold a PH.d.

I think you misunderstood the statement. I was comparing PhD's to CCIE's, in terms of Computer Science (and most other fields) Vs. information systems and networking. In most cases, for most fields of study, you need to hold a Master's or PhD to teach at the university-level, especially if you're teaching the graduate programs, (which I'm pretty sure the CCIE-level courses would be). However, you can also get a job teaching if you have equivalent experience, as is (relatively, compared to other majors) common in English departments. Right now, for example, UC Berkeley has an English professor, whose name escapes me at the moment, that never finished high school. His experience and body of work is what got him the job there. So, I'd think it was very possible for a network engineer with a CCIE to land a university gig, even without the PhD, (but it wouldn't hurt, right?)

DarbyWeaver wrote:

Nevertheless it is going to be hard for any serious college to consider paying 150-200k or more to a CCIE with maybe even without a degree, much less a Doctorate's degree...

They wouldn't get paid that much to teach. Teaching is rarely about how much money you make. If you're only in IT for the money, then you're better off staying out of academics altogether and simply go for the big corporations. When you make the decision to teach, no matter what field you're in, you're generally at a point where you don't live for the sole pursuit of cash. As a matter of fact, from what I've seen, most CCIE's tend to have their standing because they're passionate about their work and their craft. I don't think I've ever seen an article, blog, posting, book, or any other writing down by a CCIE that talks about 'how much money you're going to make', or 'what you're worth'. Most seem more empassioned about technology, about Cisco networking. . . and I'd be willing to bet that most of them wouldn't have had the passion and the drive to become CCIE's if they had been doing it to make a six-figure salary, rather than doing it because they love what they do.

If you're choosing to teach in the field of your expertise, then chances are you have a passion for teaching and want to share that knowledge with the students. Like I said in an earlier post, if teacher were in it for the money, none of us would have gone to school.

Ciscopimpenator

Another word of advice:

If you want to be a CCIE go for it and don't look back!

I was almost a CCNP 4 years ago(one test away), I decided to drop the Cisco stuff and get my BS degree in CS/Math. 4 years later I still haven't finished my BS(work and school takes longer) and I have to relearn all the Cisco stuff over again. Don't get me wrong I learned some really cool stuff like Discrete Math and C programming which will help in the long run.

The good thing is my understanding of Cisco technologies is much deeper this time around. I plan on going full steem ahead for CCIE this time. I actually think the CCIE might be easier to get nowadays because of all the online help. Still it takes time and perseverance and a love of networking. CCIE rocks!

When I retire I will go back to school for my Computer Science degree. I can see myself writing some networking apps when I'm 80 years old. arrrrgh


-Ciscopimpenator$

Slowhand

Ciscopimpenator wrote:

When I retire I will go back to school for my Computer Science degree. I can see myself writing some networking apps when I'm 80 years old. arrrrgh

I'll be doing the same thing. Of course, I'll still be working on the same app that I'll be starting when I'm 35. . .

Ciscopimpenator

Slowhand wrote:

Ciscopimpenator wrote:

When I retire I will go back to school for my Computer Science degree. I can see myself writing some networking apps when I'm 80 years old. arrrrgh

I'll be doing the same thing. Of course, I'll still be working on the same app that I'll be starting when I'm 35. . .

hahaha...who knows what the apps will be like in 40 years? most likely programming languages won't change too much...C has been around for awhile...Java will probably be around for awhile...

I'm waiting for someone to design better IGP's or better utilities. Imagine if you designed your own IGP that kicked EIGRP or OSPF's butt. You would be the man.

DW [banned]

Thanks

DW [banned]

Thanks

Slowhand

One thing to remember, as well, is that when you're teaching at the university-level (have a friend who teaches at the community-college level, and is beginning to work with the professors at a larger university as he's going there, for reference), you're not just teaching. When you're in the process of graduate work, you're generally doing more than just learning, you're also working, in a sense. A graduate student in a literary program will generally be encouraged to write books, most universities let you make writing a novel your graduate thesis.

When you're teaching at that level, you're doing research, working with a lot of different things. My school of choice, UC Berkeley, is responsible for the largest share of innovations in open-source software and research in the computer industry today, for example. Much of that work comes from graduate students and a good deal of it comes from professors. Most of those professors work, (using the school's resources, mind you,) and teach side-by-side. Teaching is different in different environments, and I'd be very interested to see what kind of work could be done by CCIE's that have the chance to work with prominent engineers and programmers in the university world. . . things like the cybernetics division at UCLA comes to mind, the biotech research at various private schools, the communications and telecom programs, the newer game and AI development programs being pursued by a lot of schools. . . the possibilities are pretty wide open. It's a shame that our industry, information technology, doesn't get recognized as 'higher learning', the way it should be. Hopefully, with the kinds of discussions like the ones we had today being had, that will begin to change.

Oh, and I finally got my head on straight and asked my friend about the teachers and professors that teach without academic degrees, or without the proper academic degrees to teach at the higher levels. Gary Soto is a professor at UC Berkeley, teaching English, among other things. While he holds a Master's degree in fine arts, the UC system is very strict on their requirements for the graduate-program professors, requiring a PhD or "equivalent experience". (The friend of mine, who's looking to be a teacher, is currently chugging his way towards a PhD, since he doesn't have the same type of work under his belt that Mr. Soto does. ) There were a few others that he mentioned, some who hold no degrees, whatsoever, that teach at various universities around the country, but my brain shut off around noon today, so the one example will have to do.

This has been a very engaging thread, a lot of different ideas and opinions have been shared. I think we even managed to have a critical discussion of differning and empassioned opinions without things deteriorating to flame-wars and nasty comments. I hope we have more threads like this one.

DW [banned]

Slowhand,

Ciscopimpenator

Yeah, learning Cisco networking is it's own area of computer science IMO.

Many computer science students have to take 1 "network course"(usually upper division) to obtain a CS degree. The depth of this course is limited and may focus on many areas.


I have much respect for the CCIE program and feel CS/IT students should understand the value of the CCIE program.

This comes from someone who has taken upper division math/comp sci courses. Cisco networking may not be as hard as some comp sci courses, but it definitely compares in difficulty.


As far as teaching the CCIE at universities I don't expect this to happen. I just want the advisors and professors to understand what the CCIE is and it's importance to networking systems. They can steer students in direction of the CCIE if they feel networking is where they want to be. The CCIE seems to be blanketed and not understood by many college professors at the university level. I guess the CCIE is to vendor specific, which it is!

-Ciscopimpenator

seraphus

Ciscopimpenator wrote:

I guess the CCIE is to vendor specific, which it is!

-Ciscopimpenator

Well it does start with the name "Cisco"....

I agree with many folks here.

I'll say this...

I don't think universities should teach CCIE/CCIE bootcamp courses, ever. There are several resources that meet this need anyway. The goal of the university should be to advance technology in general, not necessarily cater to vendor profits. They should base their time of instruction in internetworking technology covering non-vendor specific technology. Perhaps they should use several vendors to demonstrate these technologies, but by no means should it be limited to one vendor.

Paul Boz

I don't see what your teacher said that was so wrong. If you want access to the biggest and baddest carrier class networks you should go into telecom. there really isn't any other way to get hands on experience with infrastructure on such an epic scale.

Computer Science in the traditional sense is programming. IT is the encapsulating term that I think many of you are trying to use computer science for.I don't know about technical institutions but in the major university world networking falls under the ISDS or equivalent field of study.

I don't feel that there's a reason to teach this stuff on the collegiate level either.

bmauro

I just want to add that some big name professors do pull some serious cash. The big wigs at Carnegie Mellon, MIT, CalTec..


If you publish, are well known, write books, then yes I believe you would earn a pretty penny becuase the amount you would be worth to the university would be even greater.

And Darby "Those who can do - those who can't teach"?

Now thats one statement I don't believe for a second. Of course there will be bad teachers here and there, but there's bad network engineers here and there too.

Without CS we wouldn't have OSPF, IGRP, EIGRP. We design and support network systems. We hardly ever actually design or create something new. I know I'm probably leaving a lot of networking technologies out that were designed by CS alumn, but I'm taking a guess in saying that probably anything that uses an algorithm in it's process was probably design from someone with a CS background.