--- type: article identifier: uiuc-cs-education title: Introductory computer science education at UIUC description: A list of grievances regarding the CS program, primarily the introductory course, CS 124, at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. datestring: 2023-03-15 banner_image: /static/images/uiuc_bardeen_quad.jpg links: Email chain, reverse chronology, including letter to HLC: /static/documents/uiuc-cs-complaints.pdf CS 124 syllabus: https://web.archive.org/web/20230221111124/https://www.cs124.org/syllabus/Spring2023 ECE 120, a better CS course than "Intro to CS I": https://ece.illinois.edu/academics/courses/ece120 --- This is a list of grievances regarding the CS program, in particular CS 124, "Intro to Computer Science I", the required introductory CS course, at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Under advisement of several software engineering professionals, I wrote a letter concerning these grievances, sent to: - **Jonathan Makela** (Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs, *The Grainger College of Engineering*) - **Nancy Amato** (Department Head, *Department of Computer Science*) - **Margaret Fleck** (Director of Undergraduate Programs, *Department of Computer Science*) - **Eric Shaffer** (Associate Director of Undergraduate Programs, *Department of Computer Science*) - **Geoffrey Challen** (Professor, *CS 124*) I'm publishing this following decided inaction from the CS department and Grainger College of Engineering regarding these valid grievances. As a student paying exorbitant amounts of money for a high-quality education, it's my responsibility to hold the university accountable for unfairness and low-quality instruction out of line with their purported ideals.
Unfortunately, universities can often get away with shoddy quality like this because students don't know what they don't know. How can someone authoritatively make judgements on course and content quality without extensive prior knowledge and experience with the subject? CS 124 has been like this for several years now, and I'm sure if I weren't forced into CS 124 it probably would've been several more years before anyone made a serious formal complaint.
## Grievances The following is a summary of the grievances outlined in the original letter. ### Grievance 1: Method of delivery, value of the course CS 124, considered "traditional delivery", is entirely online and has no lectures, discussions, or labs, and quizzes are proctored remotely over Zoom. Stripping away in-person interaction between students deprives them of development of real world communication and team building skills. Additionally, the professor exposes the same course materials on the Internet for free. The course is required of CS majors, and there is no deduction in tuition in accordance with the low-quality online-only format. ### Grievance 2: Name-content disparity, validity as a CS course, and status as a program requirement CS 124, "Intro to Computer Science I", is dishonestly named and advertised as a computer science course when it is, in fact, not. It would be more aptly named "Intro to Java Programming" (there is a difference between computer science and computer programming). The course inadequately covers the theory, math, and architecture of computers and computer programs, i.e. real computer science. Students will not fully understand the ramifications of the code they write. There is little justification for explicitly declaring it a computer science course or requiring it of incoming CS majors.
Ironically, ECE 120 and 220 are better CS courses than "Intro to Computer Science I".
### Grievance 3: Choice of programming language CS 124 is taught and tested in Java, a computer programming language unconducive to learning computer science, and is the only course in the UIUC CS sequence that uses Java. A student may have extensive prior programming experience (the case for many CS majors) but may be forced to take the course if they don't know Java—the programming language tested on the proficiency exam—making the course little more than a hindrance to higher education. --- **In essence, beginning the Computer Science main sequence with this course as it is now is nothing but a disservice to students paying tens of thousands for a high-quality education. CS 124 needs to transition to in-person delivery and needs to be turned into an actual CS course that uses C or C++, akin to [128](https://courses.illinois.edu/schedule/2023/fall/CS/128). Otherwise, the course should be redesignated as an explicit intro programming course (e.g. "Java Programming") and made "optional but recommended" of main sequence CS students.** ## Official Response The very long-winded nonresponse I received from Associate Dean Makela and Professor Challen are to the following effect for each grievance: 1. The switch to the all-online delivery method was made during the COVID pandemic and it was kept afterwards for CS 124 because the course coordinators were comfortable with it, and student performance improved by most metrics. There are a variety of course delivery methods utilized within the university and more than enough resources are provided for CS 124. 2. Teaching real computer science in CS 124 would make the course far too difficult for students, and real computer science is outside the scope of an introductory course. 3. C/C++ are too hard for CS students to learn, and Java and Kotlin are provided to students to offer exposure to more programming languages. If a student doesn't want to take the course, they should just learn Java to test out of the course. Also, the course instructor really likes Kotlin. The only real action taken was the opening of booked locations on campus during quiz times, even though the quiz is still proctored over Zoom. Several concerns raised in the first email remain unaddressed. The official response (or lack of response) to these matters is highly unsatisfactory and leads me to question the competency and integrity of the institution. To the official responses, I offer the following rebuttals: 1. Most other courses have returned to in-person delivery without a hitch and there is no reason why the CS department can't do the same. Improvement in student performance is easily attributable to plagiarism, or the lack of academic/institutional integrity. The response does not address the concern regarding professional development, or quality expectations given course pricing. 2. Many students entering the CS program already have a good idea of how computers and computer programs work, or have written code prior. Holding back on exposing students to foundational computer systems knowledge hurts them in the long run as it forces them to internalize facts and methods of computer programming without underlying explanation—akin to having students try to learn calculus without prior knowledge of algebra—and forces them to later readjust their understandings of the subject when they are exposed to those fundamentals. The rationale for teaching "introductory computer science" in this highly abstracted manner is the result of the pervasion of the myth than anyone can or should learn to write code, even though software engineering and computer science are—and should be—highly specialized fields. The justification for teaching the course in the manner of a computer programing course is weak, and the dishonesty of calling it a computer science course remains unaddressed. Even as a computer programming course, the course is pitiful and clearly not worth what is paid in tuition. 3. A lot goes into learning a computer programming language, even if you have already written code and understand computer science concepts. If the course isn't explicitly a programming course, the expectation that a student should learn an entire programming language to take a proficiency exam is completely absurd, especially when no other course in the program requires it. Regardless, Java/Kotlin aren't great choices for teaching computer science because they are not analogs to machine code like C/C++ are; a lot of what the programmer writes is highly abstracted and handled behind the scenes, especially in the case of Kotlin. ## Closing In an attempt to encourage action, these concerns have been forwarded to the Higher Learning Commission, the organization that grants accreditation status to UIUC. You can find a PDF with the email chain (which much of this article is adapted from), in reverse chronological order, including the complaint sent to the HLC, [here](/static/documents/uiuc-cs-complaints.pdf). It contains most of what's detailed here, along with some extra documentation.