Confessions of a CS492 Student

By: Jerry Han

I have a confession to make. I wasn't quite truthful when I said I decided to take CS492 because of my encounters with RISKS digest. I am interested in social issues, and I did find the calendar description intriguing, but the main reason why I took CS492 was because of the instructor, Prof. Prabhakar Ragde.

I first encountered Prabhakar Ragde in CS134, when he guest lectured for two lectures at the end of term, (F92). I especially remembered his History lecture, when he stated to the class something to the effect of "I haven't lectured to you regularly, so I haven't had the proper opportunity to build the trust that I would normally have with you." (It was in reference to Turing.)

This comment caught me off-guard. Trust? What did trust have to do with education? It was something that I had never thought about. Now, five years later, I see that trust has a lot to do with education; but at the time, youthful ignorance was my crutch and my handicap.

I encountered Prabhakar Ragde again at the CSC forum concerning the banning of certain newsgroups. I was impressed by his intelligence, logic and prespective on the whole issue. Indeed, to this day I believe he was the only one who said anything worthwhile during that entire experience, pro or con.

What does this have to do with CS492? Everything. CS492 goes in the category of good experiences; I had a lot of fun, with a good dose of humour prevelant at almost every class. I learned a fair bit, having suspicions confirmed, and paranoia reassured. I also developed a rapport with the other members of the class. (Well, at least, Chris doesn't kick me in the face when we go 15 rounds. (8-) ).

But, most of all, I think the reason why I had such a good experience with CS492 was that I had a good instructor. The personality I glimpsed briefly in the past, with its rationality and strength of belief, helped shaped the course. It makes sense, of course; each course is shaped by the instructor.

This, unfortunately, also forms the biggest problem with CS492; it takes a certain type of individual to run a course in the format CS492 is currently run in, and I'm not sure if there are enough individuals around to keep CS492 from degenerating back to a "typical" lecture format. It is still possible to learn in such a format, but, I feel the impact would be reduced considerably.

The course structure was well defined for its purpose of exposing students to the social and ethical problems in computerization. In order to truly get a feel for something, you have to wrestle with it, play with it, and then see what you got out of it afterwards. The essays, the RPEs, they are all geared in that direction.

There were some rough spots, of course. (Is anything perfect?) I'm not too sure of the validity of the final communique as presented in the RPE, as that provides a strong temptation to state things that are obvious "sacrifical cows" to the communique. Maybe change the format of the communique so that there are two communiques, each side summarizing what it thought was the point of view of the discussion, what new features or ideas they heard, etc.

The assignments also seemed forced at times. Some of the early ones were beautiful in setup, leaving a lot of room for expansion. Other ones seemed focused along a single bearing, and God help you if you got hammered with writer's block along that focus. For example, maybe assignment 9 should have allowed us to question the "I was following orders" assumption being made, or maybe a more concrete example to help get the brain processes going.

I would also like to see the "Joker" brought back into group discussions i.e. if a bunch of cards are to be handed out, just do a random draw of the five or so, with the one break-in card. This would help develop the ability to think on one's feet, always an important asset.

All in all, I think this was a good course in terms of the time investment. The assignments were long, but I think reasonable, and everybody should develop good communication skills anyways. I also felt that the peer evaluations were well done, using the WWW as a medium.

My only major concern is where this goes next year. CS492, as it stands, is a great course, highly recommended to 4th year students, in a CS Major program. But, this is also under the instruction of an above average instructor. I've got this nasty feeling that CS492 can only shine under the instruction of an above average instructor; because it is so easy to let things get out of control in the debate.

Is there a way around this? I'm not sure. Quality of instruction has always affected the quality of a course. The greatest course in the world will fail under an inept instructor. Two terms of offering also isn't enough to establish a course precedent. But, I guess we'll see.

In any event though, I'm glad for the opportunity I had. To Prabhakar, Tara, and all the class; I hope to meet you again.

Thanks for everything.

Evaluation Form for this essay.