Discussion:
Mature student admission - a complete lottery?
(too old to reply)
wooks
2005-07-28 20:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Thats what it seems like.

I made a late application to a total of 9 universities (I changed 3.
Before I relate my experience I should give some background. I am 40
and have 20 years experience working in IT. I have 7 O' levels,
including an O level in Statistics but I do not have an O level in
Maths (for reasons which I will not go into here). In addition I have
some professional qualifications from the Institute of Management
Information Systems Parts 1 - 3 and 2 papers in part 4 (each part
consists of 3 papers). My application was supported by a partner in one
of the big 5 consulting firms.

I applied to study Computer Science and my plan was to study in London.

First the 3 schools I replaced.

Greenwich very promptly invited me for an interview which in the end I
did not attend because they wanted to see the evidence of my
qualifications and I did not have them to hand (of course I informed
them of this).

East London - asked me to sit for an assessment exam because I did not
have a Maths qualification. I declined.

Goldsmiths - very tardy response - then they asked me for an academic
referee - how can I provide one when I have been working for the last
20 years.

I replaced these 3 schools with Kings UCL and York.

City - made me unconditional offer - bless 'em.

Kings - rejection - I have no idea why and didn't ask.

QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.

Imperial - Didn't bother responding to my application. I called them
and was told my application was ineligible.

York - Rejection on grounds of no qualification in Maths. I do find it
laughable that an A level in Maths is regarded as better preparation
for a computer science degree that 20 years of programming and software
testing on top of a professional qualification. AAMOF one of the papers
I passed in my IMIS exam was quantitative methods (linear programming,
operations research, queueing theory etc). I took the time out to write
back to York and tell them this.

UCL - Unconditional offer.

I know that some admissions tutors read this NG.

Wondering what they make of it.
geletine
2005-07-28 22:44:07 UTC
Permalink
You could apply to do a access course to IT or computers , same thing
as far as i know, its just diffrent college's use diffrent names.

The access course are usually 3/4 maths, and the rest covers
programming, databases , hardware , all very briefly, this is
equivalent to 2 A levels, as long as you have good points in the maths
side , 6 points , level 3, if i am correct, you should have a few
universities to choose from.

Every college has diffrent access courses, its worth phoning them to
find out.

Being good at Maths, the ability to think logical helps you be in
theory a better programmer.

Graphics and encryption can use a lot of maths as you proberly know.
When studying pure maths it can be confusing as your not applying it
to any real situation as it were, so i can see why your a little
afraid, don't be , it will improve your understanding of programming
theory.

Its worth picking up a Descrete maths book, it will give you a heard
start.

UCL is a good university according to what ive heard, you should just
enroll with them.
wooks
2005-07-29 03:55:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by geletine
You could apply to do a access course to IT or computers , same thing
as far as i know, its just diffrent college's use diffrent names.
The access course are usually 3/4 maths, and the rest covers
programming, databases , hardware , all very briefly, this is
equivalent to 2 A levels, as long as you have good points in the maths
side , 6 points , level 3, if i am correct, you should have a few
universities to choose from.
Every college has diffrent access courses, its worth phoning them to
find out.
Being good at Maths, the ability to think logical helps you be in
theory a better programmer.
Graphics and encryption can use a lot of maths as you proberly know.
When studying pure maths it can be confusing as your not applying it
to any real situation as it were, so i can see why your a little
afraid, don't be , it will improve your understanding of programming
theory.
Its worth picking up a Descrete maths book, it will give you a heard
start.
UCL is a good university according to what ive heard, you should just
enroll with them.
I think you are missing the point of my post because I never said I was
bad at maths and I never said I was afraid of maths.
John Porcella
2005-07-28 23:46:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Thats what it seems like.
I made a late application to a total of 9 universities (I changed 3.
Before I relate my experience I should give some background. I am 40
and have 20 years experience working in IT. I have 7 O' levels,
including an O level in Statistics but I do not have an O level in
Maths (for reasons which I will not go into here).
Surely stats is a branch of maths? It must count for the same thing, no?
Post by wooks
Greenwich very promptly invited me for an interview which in the end I
did not attend because they wanted to see the evidence of my
qualifications and I did not have them to hand (of course I informed
them of this).
You should have gone along, and told them that you could not get hold of
them at that time, but would shortly.
Post by wooks
East London - asked me to sit for an assessment exam because I did not
have a Maths qualification. I declined.
!!

Are they mad?
Post by wooks
Goldsmiths - very tardy response - then they asked me for an academic
referee - how can I provide one when I have been working for the last
20 years.
You could have told them this and asked them if a senior manager from your
workplace was enough.
Post by wooks
I replaced these 3 schools with Kings UCL and York.
City - made me unconditional offer - bless 'em.
Kings - rejection - I have no idea why and didn't ask.
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
Imperial - Didn't bother responding to my application. I called them
and was told my application was ineligible.
Why?
Post by wooks
York - Rejection on grounds of no qualification in Maths.
So what on earth is statistics then?

I do find it
Post by wooks
laughable that an A level in Maths is regarded as better preparation
for a computer science degree that 20 years of programming and software
testing on top of a professional qualification. AAMOF one of the papers
I passed in my IMIS exam was quantitative methods (linear programming,
operations research, queueing theory etc). I took the time out to write
back to York and tell them this.
Did they change their views?
Post by wooks
UCL - Unconditional offer.
I suppose that you could have taken an 'A' level or two, which you would
find easier than yesteryear...
--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella
wooks
2005-07-29 04:12:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
Thats what it seems like.
I made a late application to a total of 9 universities (I changed 3.
Before I relate my experience I should give some background. I am 40
and have 20 years experience working in IT. I have 7 O' levels,
including an O level in Statistics but I do not have an O level in
Maths (for reasons which I will not go into here).
Surely stats is a branch of maths? It must count for the same thing, no?
I would have thought so. I got a C (but we are talking old GCE's) maybe
they weren't impressed with the grade, but then I didn't mentioned that
I achieved it entirely through self study because my school did not
offer that subject.
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
Greenwich very promptly invited me for an interview which in the end I
did not attend because they wanted to see the evidence of my
qualifications and I did not have them to hand (of course I informed
them of this).
You should have gone along, and told them that you could not get hold of
them at that time, but would shortly.
well I was specifically asked to bring them.
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
East London - asked me to sit for an assessment exam because I did not
have a Maths qualification. I declined.
!!
Are they mad?
Maybe ...they actually said I didn't have a qualification in English
and Maths. My form stated that I had an A in English and an A in Oral
English.
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
Goldsmiths - very tardy response - then they asked me for an academic
referee - how can I provide one when I have been working for the last
20 years.
You could have told them this and asked them if a senior manager from your
workplace was enough.
I felt my referee addressed the issue of my suitability for academic
study. She is used to writing references for people applying to do
MBA's.
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
I replaced these 3 schools with Kings UCL and York.
City - made me unconditional offer - bless 'em.
Kings - rejection - I have no idea why and didn't ask.
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
Imperial - Didn't bother responding to my application. I called them
and was told my application was ineligible.
Why?
Dunno. Probably the Maths thing then.
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
York - Rejection on grounds of no qualification in Maths.
So what on earth is statistics then?
A qualification in Maths. As is my pass in the Quantitative Methods of
Part 3 of the IMIS exams. Perhaps on the latter part I should have
spelt out what the constituent papers were, but as a mature student
with plenty of industry experience and i blue chip reference I thought
a different criteria would apply.
Post by John Porcella
I do find it
Post by wooks
laughable that an A level in Maths is regarded as better preparation
for a computer science degree that 20 years of programming and software
testing on top of a professional qualification. AAMOF one of the papers
I passed in my IMIS exam was quantitative methods (linear programming,
operations research, queueing theory etc). I took the time out to write
back to York and tell them this.
Did they change their views?
I've not had a response back. I'm told the admissions tutor is away.
The point I made to them was that there was nothing in their averred
reasons that could not have been clarified over a brief conversation. I
just got the impression that they couldn't be bothered to properly
evaluate my application and were trotting out the lack of Maths as an
excuse.
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
UCL - Unconditional offer.
I suppose that you could have taken an 'A' level or two, which you would
find easier than yesteryear...
Well thankfully I don't need to because UCL and City saw merit in my
application and both offered me a place.
geletine
2005-07-29 07:18:15 UTC
Permalink
sorry, my misunderstanding
Universities sometimes have strange ideas of enrtries or qualifcations,
for many diffrent reasons, perhaps they were full, the tutor was
younger than you and felt intimatated, did not recognise your
qualification , which is odd.
I would not worry
as you have been offered two places.
John Porcella
2005-07-30 00:26:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
Thats what it seems like.
I made a late application to a total of 9 universities (I changed 3.
Before I relate my experience I should give some background. I am 40
and have 20 years experience working in IT. I have 7 O' levels,
including an O level in Statistics but I do not have an O level in
Maths (for reasons which I will not go into here).
Surely stats is a branch of maths? It must count for the same thing, no?
I would have thought so. I got a C (but we are talking old GCE's) maybe
they weren't impressed with the grade, but then I didn't mentioned that
I achieved it entirely through self study because my school did not
offer that subject.
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
Greenwich very promptly invited me for an interview which in the end I
did not attend because they wanted to see the evidence of my
qualifications and I did not have them to hand (of course I informed
them of this).
You should have gone along, and told them that you could not get hold of
them at that time, but would shortly.
well I was specifically asked to bring them.
This is an ideal. If you do not have them to hand, then they will jolly
well have to wait until you can get them!
Post by wooks
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
East London - asked me to sit for an assessment exam because I did not
have a Maths qualification. I declined.
!!
Are they mad?
Maybe ...they actually said I didn't have a qualification in English
and Maths. My form stated that I had an A in English and an A in Oral
English.
Clearly something has gone wrong!
Post by wooks
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
Goldsmiths - very tardy response - then they asked me for an academic
referee - how can I provide one when I have been working for the last
20 years.
You could have told them this and asked them if a senior manager from your
workplace was enough.
I felt my referee addressed the issue of my suitability for academic
study. She is used to writing references for people applying to do
MBA's.
MBAs.
Post by wooks
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
I replaced these 3 schools with Kings UCL and York.
City - made me unconditional offer - bless 'em.
Kings - rejection - I have no idea why and didn't ask.
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
Imperial - Didn't bother responding to my application. I called them
and was told my application was ineligible.
Why?
Dunno. Probably the Maths thing then.
Hmm, seems to be a recurring problem!
Post by wooks
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
York - Rejection on grounds of no qualification in Maths.
So what on earth is statistics then?
A qualification in Maths. As is my pass in the Quantitative Methods of
Part 3 of the IMIS exams. Perhaps on the latter part I should have
spelt out what the constituent papers were, but as a mature student
with plenty of industry experience and i blue chip reference I thought
a different criteria would apply.
They should, but maybe not!
Post by wooks
Post by John Porcella
I do find it
Post by wooks
laughable that an A level in Maths is regarded as better preparation
for a computer science degree that 20 years of programming and software
testing on top of a professional qualification. AAMOF one of the papers
I passed in my IMIS exam was quantitative methods (linear programming,
operations research, queueing theory etc). I took the time out to write
back to York and tell them this.
Did they change their views?
I've not had a response back. I'm told the admissions tutor is away.
The point I made to them was that there was nothing in their averred
reasons that could not have been clarified over a brief conversation. I
just got the impression that they couldn't be bothered to properly
evaluate my application and were trotting out the lack of Maths as an
excuse.
Post by John Porcella
Post by wooks
UCL - Unconditional offer.
I suppose that you could have taken an 'A' level or two, which you would
find easier than yesteryear...
Well thankfully I don't need to because UCL and City saw merit in my
application and both offered me a place.
Good luck then!
--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella
Dr A. N. Walker
2005-07-29 14:03:11 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
wooks <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
[A lottery:]
Post by wooks
Thats what it seems like.
You are very probably right. Basically, what happened is
that an unusual application went to a handful of individuals each
of whom took a view. Some of those views were no doubt wrong,
but the trouble is that we have to make our minds up based solely
[at least in the first instance] on one A4 sheet of paper -- and
basically on two boxes [well under one side] on that sheet.

[...]
Post by wooks
Greenwich very promptly invited me for an interview which in the end I
did not attend [...]
Probably a pity. Unless you are a total disaster, once you
talk to them they are almost bound to make you an offer.
Post by wooks
East London - asked me to sit for an assessment exam because I did not
have a Maths qualification. I declined.
An exam would be going a bit far, in my view, but I can see
their point. They want to know whether you would cope with the maths
element [which varies a lot from univ to univ] of the course. We
would do that with English for an applicant who was not a native
speaker and who was not already offering a TOEFL/IELTS or similar
qualification. Do you know what were they planning if you "failed"?
A remedial course? Or outright rejection?
Post by wooks
Goldsmiths [...]
City [...]
Kings [...]
UCL [...]
No comment!
Post by wooks
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
OK, but I find your comments a bit worrying. You have not
told us what your motivation is in wanting to embark on a degree
programme, but applicants are not normally worried about details
like these of what will be in the course. QMUL don't do these
things just to annoy you! So your attitude suggests, perhaps
unfairly, a closed mind -- "*they* think CS is like *this*, but
*I* think it should be like *that*, and *that* is what I want to
be taught" [possibly also because "that" is what you already know]
-- which is not a good way to start on the course.
Post by wooks
Imperial - Didn't bother responding to my application. I called them
and was told my application was ineligible.
"Didn't respond" shouldn't happen. "Ineligible" sounds
like a wrong choice of words by some admin bod. Your application
was not ineligible, but perhaps it may have received a somewhat
automated rejection, esp if IC are moving over [as many univs are,
inc this one] towards centralised admissions. In such systems,
"routine" cases are handled by central staff according to criteria
set up by depts, and only "difficult" [interesting, marginal] cases
are passed on to real, live ATs. So it's possible that your lack
of maths triggered an routine rejection, when it probably should
have triggered "mature -- pass to AT for decision".
Post by wooks
York - Rejection on grounds of no qualification in Maths. I do find it
laughable that an A level in Maths is regarded as better preparation
for a computer science degree that 20 years of [... experience ...].
Your lack was O-level, not A-level! Anyway, it's up to York,
but I'm not surprised. You seem a little confused about what is
meant by "preparation". In order to embark on any degree programme,
there are things you need to know in advance, and things that they
will teach you. If there is mathematics that they need you to know,
that they are not going to teach, and that you have not done, then
you are ill-prepared. They do not care what your software experience
is because they are going to teach that stuff from scratch. You will
often read articles from MMH in this group where he expounds his view
[with which I concur] that maths is a better indicator for CS than
A-levels in more-directly CS/IT-related areas.

Something else. I don't really like the term "rejection"
[though I can't think of a better], esp for mature students. It
suggests that we think you are an unworthy person, someone with
no right to be in the education system. "Not on *my* course, anyway,
wouldn't touch you with a barge-pole." It's not really like that.
We're trying to match people with places. We all want our students
to thrive, to be "happy bunnies" on our courses, to come in with
bright-eyed enthusiasms and ambitions, and to go out with a piece
of paper that shows how much we've managed to teach them and with
a feeling that we've helped them to develop as people into mature,
well-qualified and useful members of society. It is absolutely no
kindness on my part to admit to our courses someone who is going
to struggle, to be unhappy, perhaps to drop out, to wish they were
doing something else, to feel that they have wasted their time here.
It's not an exact science, especially with mature students [which is
why you feel, and I agree, that it's a lottery], but we have to make
that judgement, usually based on completely inadequate information.

In that case, you will perhaps say, why do all these places
not interview you, talk to you, and make a better judgement? Some
of them wanted to! Others obviously didn't. For my part, I gave up
interviewing several years back after deciding that we *never* really
managed to get useful information from it.

If we fired maths questions at applicants, they were nervous,
clammed up, never showed to any advantage, and had generally a dismal
experience for everyone. Otherwise, we could chat about families,
the weather, blah, but in the end we were making judgements not about
whether applicants would benefit from our course but about whether
they were articulate and middle-class, and all the academic stuff was
either on the UCAS form or could easily be obtained by e-mail.
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
***@maths.nott.ac.uk
wooks
2005-07-29 16:13:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
[A lottery:]
Post by wooks
Thats what it seems like.
You are very probably right. Basically, what happened is
that an unusual application went to a handful of individuals each
of whom took a view. Some of those views were no doubt wrong,
but the trouble is that we have to make our minds up based solely
[at least in the first instance] on one A4 sheet of paper -- and
basically on two boxes [well under one side] on that sheet.
[...]
Post by wooks
Greenwich very promptly invited me for an interview which in the end I
did not attend [...]
Probably a pity. Unless you are a total disaster, once you
talk to them they are almost bound to make you an offer.
I would have liked to go and talk to them for the experience but I
doubt that I would have gone there if I had another option as I didn't
like their programme.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
East London - asked me to sit for an assessment exam because I did not
have a Maths qualification. I declined.
An exam would be going a bit far, in my view, but I can see
their point.
I don't. My application stated that I had an A in English and a C at
Statistics at O level. They said "because you don't have a
qualification in English and Maths.

It seems you also disregard my professional qualifications which at the
time I took them were equivalent to an HNC.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
They want to know whether you would cope with the maths
element [which varies a lot from univ to univ] of the course.
would do that with English for an applicant who was not a native
speaker and who was not already offering a TOEFL/IELTS or similar
qualification. Do you know what were they planning if you "failed"?
A remedial course? Or outright rejection?
No Idea.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Goldsmiths [...]
City [...]
Kings [...]
UCL [...]
No comment!
Post by wooks
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
OK, but I find your comments a bit worrying. You have not
told us what your motivation is in wanting to embark on a degree
programme, but applicants are not normally worried about details
like these of what will be in the course. QMUL don't do these
things just to annoy you! So your attitude suggests, perhaps
unfairly, a closed mind -- "*they* think CS is like *this*, but
*I* think it should be like *that*, and *that* is what I want to
be taught" [possibly also because "that" is what you already know]
-- which is not a good way to start on the course.
I did make my objectives very clear in my application. I said I had
spent 20 years observing industry practices come to the conclusion that
it was at best benign hacking and that I wanted to learn a more
epistemological approach to software development which I saw centred
around logic and functional programming techniques and formal methods.

All that was clearly stated in my application.

I have built applications in Visual Basic and imperative programming
languages and didn't particularly want to be taught stuff that I had
already had plenty experiece of or could get experience of by staying
in industry.
I especially don't want to get into C++.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Imperial - Didn't bother responding to my application. I called them
and was told my application was ineligible.
"Didn't respond" shouldn't happen. "Ineligible" sounds
like a wrong choice of words by some admin bod. Your application
was not ineligible, but perhaps it may have received a somewhat
automated rejection, esp if IC are moving over [as many univs are,
inc this one] towards centralised admissions. In such systems,
"routine" cases are handled by central staff according to criteria
set up by depts, and only "difficult" [interesting, marginal] cases
are passed on to real, live ATs. So it's possible that your lack
of maths triggered an routine rejection, when it probably should
have triggered "mature -- pass to AT for decision".
When I called up they told me that it had been passed to the AT they
even mentioned his name.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
York - Rejection on grounds of no qualification in Maths. I do find it
laughable that an A level in Maths is regarded as better preparation
for a computer science degree that 20 years of [... experience ...].
Your lack was O-level, not A-level!
I have an O'level in Statistics and professional qualifications. Is the
system that rigid.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Anyway, it's up to York,
but I'm not surprised. You seem a little confused about what is
meant by "preparation". In order to embark on any degree programme,
there are things you need to know in advance, and things that they
will teach you.
My application was especially relevant to York because I stated that I
had been learning Scheme and wished to study SICP and subsequently
discovered that York use this language and this book - in fact they
describe it as the greatest computer science book ever written - hence
why I applied there.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
If there is mathematics that they need you to know,
that they are not going to teach, and that you have not done, then
you are ill-prepared. They do not care what your software experience
is because they are going to teach that stuff from scratch. You will
often read articles from MMH in this group where he expounds his view
[with which I concur] that maths is a better indicator for CS than
A-levels in more-directly CS/IT-related areas.
But the comparison is not with A'levels in ICT or computer studies. The
comparison is with a professional qualification in Information systems
and 20 years experience in programming and software testing.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Something else. I don't really like the term "rejection"
[though I can't think of a better], esp for mature students. It
suggests that we think you are an unworthy person, someone with
no right to be in the education system. "Not on *my* course, anyway,
wouldn't touch you with a barge-pole." It's not really like that.
We're trying to match people with places. We all want our students
to thrive, to be "happy bunnies" on our courses, to come in with
bright-eyed enthusiasms and ambitions, and to go out with a piece
of paper that shows how much we've managed to teach them and with
a feeling that we've helped them to develop as people into mature,
well-qualified and useful members of society. It is absolutely no
kindness on my part to admit to our courses someone who is going
to struggle, to be unhappy, perhaps to drop out, to wish they were
doing something else, to feel that they have wasted their time here.
It's not an exact science, especially with mature students [which is
why you feel, and I agree, that it's a lottery], but we have to make
that judgement, usually based on completely inadequate information.
The only extra information I could have put was to explain why I did
not have an O'level in Maths and to provide a break down of what papers
I sat for in my professional exams.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
In that case, you will perhaps say, why do all these places
not interview you, talk to you, and make a better judgement? Some
of them wanted to! Others obviously didn't. For my part, I gave up
interviewing several years back after deciding that we *never* really
managed to get useful information from it.
Are AT's unaware of the IMIS www.imis.org.uk. If the concern was
evidence of my mathematical aptitude they could have asked if needed me
to give more info about the exams. Are O and A levels the only currency
AT's deal in?

Do professional qualifications acquired through home study (and include
mathematical papers) not count.

ATEOTD the fact that City and UCL made me unconditional offers does
indicate that there was plenty enough information on my application for
those AT's who wanted to consider it.
Samsonknight
2005-07-29 16:38:13 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by wooks
ATEOTD the fact that City and UCL made me unconditional offers does
indicate that there was plenty enough information on my application for
those AT's who wanted to consider it.
Indeed the above two are good offers, so why don't you accept UCL's offer?
they are afterall a very good university.
Dr A. N. Walker
2005-07-29 18:26:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
East London - asked me to sit for an assessment exam because I did not
have a Maths qualification. I declined.
An exam would be going a bit far, in my view, but I can see
their point.
I don't. My application stated that I had an A in English and a C at
Statistics at O level. They said "because you don't have a
qualification in English and Maths.
Maths and Statistics were different O-levels. ...
Post by wooks
It seems you also disregard my professional qualifications which at the
time I took them were equivalent to an HNC.
... and perhaps you missed the significance of "assessment".
They wanted, apparently, to find out what maths you know and to what
level. A qualification that you obtained nearly a quarter of a
century ago is not, of itself, proof that you *still* know that
stuff. *You* know what maths you know, *they* don't, and they
wanted to find out more directly than by just asking for a list
of qualifications.

[...]
Post by wooks
I have built applications in Visual Basic and imperative programming
languages and didn't particularly want to be taught stuff that I had
already had plenty experiece of or could get experience of by staying
in industry.
OK; but *any* CS degree is going to start programming
from scratch.

[IC:]
Post by wooks
When I called up they told me that it had been passed to the AT they
even mentioned his name.
OK, in that case "no response" and "ineligible" are simply
Bad. Wouldn't happen "here". The AT may have thought "ineligible"
kinder than whatever else he was going to say.
Post by wooks
But the comparison is not with A'levels in ICT or computer studies. The
comparison is with a professional qualification in Information systems
and 20 years experience in programming and software testing.
Not the point. They are not interested in qualifications
you may have that correspond to material they are going to teach
you anyway -- not unless, very unusually, it gets to the point where
you can claim "APEL" [accreditation of prior experiential learning]
sufficient for direct entry into their second year. They are
interested in qualifications that (a) correspond to material that
you need but they are *not* going to teach, or (b) show them how
bright you are. Programming experience is neither. It is merely
"interesting", in that it shows where you are coming from and
perhaps what you want from the degree.
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
It's not an exact science, especially with mature students [which is
why you feel, and I agree, that it's a lottery], but we have to make
that judgement, usually based on completely inadequate information.
The only extra information I could have put was to explain why I did
not have an O'level in Maths and to provide a break down of what papers
I sat for in my professional exams.
That's not really the information that is "inadequate".
We can't get "into your head", so the judgement we make is based
instead on comparisons with other mature students who *have* been
admitted to our courses. That is an extremely mixed bag, for all
sorts of reasons. Some courses [English, for example] take on lots
of mature students, and tell us that they usually do well; you
would probably get a much more consistent picture if you had
applied for an English degree. Maths gets relatively few, and my
experience of them is extremely varied. Perhaps half do quite well
or very well; the other half struggle and drop out. I don't know
how to tell the difference before they arrive; but it does make
me very cautious about accepting them. I've no idea what the
situation is in CS; perhaps Matthew will be able to tell us.
Post by wooks
Are AT's unaware of the IMIS www.imis.org.uk.
Probably. I don't suppose it's something they come across
every day.
Post by wooks
If the concern was
evidence of my mathematical aptitude they could have asked if needed me
to give more info about the exams. Are O and A levels the only currency
AT's deal in?
No; but I wouldn't expect *CS* ATs to be very conversant
with maths qualifications in general. Note that Greenwich asked
you for interview, and ELondon wanted to assess your maths. We
don't know how far maths was the only or principal problem with
your unsuccessful applications -- it may have been just a simple
peg on which they hung lots of other disquiets.
Post by wooks
Do professional qualifications acquired through home study (and include
mathematical papers) not count.
Yes; but possibly not in the way you seem to expect;
see above.
Post by wooks
ATEOTD the fact that City and UCL made me unconditional offers does
indicate that there was plenty enough information on my application for
those AT's who wanted to consider it.
No. It indicates that, rightly or wrongly, they took a
different view of your application. It could mean anything from
(a) they are much more clued up on what IMIS means and were able
to be reasonably sure that you are a good prospect, through (b)
"we really don't have much idea about this bloke, but let's give
him a chance", to (c) "we are desperate for students, we will
make offers to anything that breathes". My *expectation* is that
it is somewhere between (a) and (b).

It *is* a lottery. We are individuals dealing with
individual cases, and in this case a relatively unusual one.
I have no idea what decision I would have reached on you, based
purely on the information you have revealed here, so I'm not at
all surprised that nine other ATs came to a variety of decisions.
Plainly you think that two were right and some of the rest were
wrong; you'll have your chance to prove it.

I should also say that it's not much use protesting about
things that you expect ATs to know. We're human, there are things
we don't know, life is too short to chase them all up. Some ATs
are dealing with several thousand UCAS forms, with perhaps hundreds
of "special cases" of one sort or another; you will inevitably
get somewhat of a "snap" judgement from them. The ones that deal
with rather few applications may have been able to give more time
to you in particular -- but they will equally be the ones that
have little experience of the awkward nooks and crannies that can
arise in applications.

I know, and appreciate, that to *you* it's all a very
personal process, and you are directly concerned about what view
ATs have taken of you and your qualifications. But to the AT,
it *isn't* personal. You are one sheet of paper, and in the end
probably two or three paragraphs on that one sheet. It's not a
perfect system, mistakes can and do happen [and accepting someone
onto a course for which they are unsuitable is, if anything, a
bigger mistake than rejecting someone suitable], and some ATs are
sometimes stupid, arrogant, half-blind, .... But most of us are
doing the best we can, and broadly it works. Which is not much
consolation if you are one of the exceptions that falls down a
crack.
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
***@maths.nott.ac.uk
geletine
2005-07-29 22:27:17 UTC
Permalink
UCL was the first university in England to except students regardless
of race, religion or political opinion.

Thats one of the reasons i think you were offered a unconditional
place, and i would accept it.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-07-29 23:55:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by geletine
UCL was the first university in England to except students regardless
of race, religion or political opinion.
Thats one of the reasons i think you were offered a unconditional
place, and i would accept it.
Right, so are you insinuating that other universities rejected this
applicant on account of his/her race, religion or politics? That is an
extremely offensive remark to make. As an admissions tutor, I most
certainly would not discriminate on the grounds of race, religion or
politics.

Matthew Huntbach
geletine
2005-07-30 11:38:44 UTC
Permalink
sorry i don't mean that.
What i meant was that UCL had and from this thread a broader outlook,
it does not have the typical university approach that centers around
students getting 3 A's at A-level to be acceptable.

I may be wrong on this assumption,i'll mention it neverless.
If a student does not want to work in the big finanical sector, or work
for a blue chip company, he could study maths at any university and
find work in another area.
This could be said for computer science students too.
prestigious universities lead to big financial positions, otherwise a
student could goto any other university

I would like some corrections, as i bound to inaccuracies.
Gaz
2005-08-22 00:03:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by geletine
UCL was the first university in England to except students regardless
of race, religion or political opinion.
Thats one of the reasons i think you were offered a unconditional
place, and i would accept it.
Right, so are you insinuating that other universities rejected this
applicant on account of his/her race, religion or politics? That is an
extremely offensive remark to make. As an admissions tutor, I most
certainly would not discriminate on the grounds of race, religion or
politics.
Some colleges do, in the spirit of 'cultural diversity'.

Gaz
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-07-29 23:02:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
East London - asked me to sit for an assessment exam because I did not
have a Maths qualification. I declined.
An exam would be going a bit far, in my view, but I can see
their point.
I don't. My application stated that I had an A in English and a C at
Statistics at O level. They said "because you don't have a
qualification in English and Maths.
Maths and Statistics were different O-levels. ...
If you want evidence of mathematical aptitude statistics should be good
enough. Anyway the point is the AT missed the fact that I had an A in
English and an A in Oral Engish.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
It seems you also disregard my professional qualifications which at the
time I took them were equivalent to an HNC.
... and perhaps you missed the significance of "assessment".
They wanted, apparently, to find out what maths you know and to what
level. A qualification that you obtained nearly a quarter of a
century ago is not, of itself, proof that you *still* know that
stuff. *You* know what maths you know, *they* don't, and they
wanted to find out more directly than by just asking for a list
of qualifications.
[...]
We don't know that they wanted to assess my Maths because they were
under the mistaken impression that I didn't have a qualification in
English.

The AT did not read my application properly otherwise he wouldn't have
missed it.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
I have built applications in Visual Basic and imperative programming
languages and didn't particularly want to be taught stuff that I had
already had plenty experiece of or could get experience of by staying
in industry.
OK; but *any* CS degree is going to start programming
from scratch.
Yes that suits me fine and thats what I want to do that with functional
and logic programming. I recognise that I won't be able to avoid
imperative programming classes but as long as I am doing a hefty amount
of the stuff I want to do I am willing to accept that. Thats why I was
particularly attracted to the programmes at IC and York and to a lesser
extent City. On the other hand Greenwich teach using IDE's as part of
their course - I use IDE's all the time in my work place don't want to
do that stuff at Uni. I am there to acquire knowledge not to get a
degree to validate the knowledge that I already know.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
[IC:]
Post by wooks
When I called up they told me that it had been passed to the AT they
even mentioned his name.
OK, in that case "no response" and "ineligible" are simply
Bad. Wouldn't happen "here". The AT may have thought "ineligible"
kinder than whatever else he was going to say.
Post by wooks
But the comparison is not with A'levels in ICT or computer studies. The
comparison is with a professional qualification in Information systems
and 20 years experience in programming and software testing.
Not the point. They are not interested in qualifications
you may have that correspond to material they are going to teach
you anyway -- not unless, very unusually, it gets to the point where
you can claim "APEL" [accreditation of prior experiential learning]
sufficient for direct entry into their second year.
No but it indicates that I am going to be able to cope with the
material which is what I am told is the point of seeking A level Maths.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
They are
interested in qualifications that (a) correspond to material that
you need but they are *not* going to teach, or (b) show them how
bright you are. Programming experience is neither.
If that is the case why do so many universities advocate students spend
a year doing exactly what I have been doing - working in industry - as
part of their degree program.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
It is merely
"interesting", in that it shows where you are coming from and
perhaps what you want from the degree.
I explained very clearly in my personal statement what I wanted from
the degree.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
It's not an exact science, especially with mature students [which is
why you feel, and I agree, that it's a lottery], but we have to make
that judgement, usually based on completely inadequate information.
The only extra information I could have put was to explain why I did
not have an O'level in Maths and to provide a break down of what papers
I sat for in my professional exams.
That's not really the information that is "inadequate".
Well it was the excuse given by York.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
We can't get "into your head", so the judgement we make is based
instead on comparisons with other mature students who *have* been
admitted to our courses.
Maybe thats the case generally but it was not the case with me. My
point is that some of the tutors didn't bother getting into my head
never mind that they didn't have to because I wanted from the degree
and why I wanted it was very clearly laid out in my personal statement.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
That is an extremely mixed bag, for all
sorts of reasons. Some courses [English, for example] take on lots
of mature students, and tell us that they usually do well; you
would probably get a much more consistent picture if you had
applied for an English degree. Maths gets relatively few, and my
experience of them is extremely varied. Perhaps half do quite well
or very well; the other half struggle and drop out. I don't know
how to tell the difference before they arrive; but it does make
me very cautious about accepting them. I've no idea what the
situation is in CS; perhaps Matthew will be able to tell us.
Post by wooks
Are AT's unaware of the IMIS www.imis.org.uk.
Probably. I don't suppose it's something they come across
every day.
I am trying to think of a diplomatic way of constructing a sentence
with the words ivory tower and academic. They used to be known as the
Institute of Data Processing Management - they have been around for
years - I got my qualifications in the early - mid 80's.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
If the concern was
evidence of my mathematical aptitude they could have asked if needed me
to give more info about the exams. Are O and A levels the only currency
AT's deal in?
No; but I wouldn't expect *CS* ATs to be very conversant
with maths qualifications in general.
Well they ought to be if that is what they base suitability for a CS
degree on.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Note that Greenwich asked
you for interview, and ELondon wanted to assess your maths.
E London issue was English and Maths the former because they didn't
read the application properly and missed my A's in English and Oral
English the latter because apparently they can not or would not
analogize from an O'level in statistics.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
We
don't know how far maths was the only or principal problem with
your unsuccessful applications -- it may have been just a simple
peg on which they hung lots of other disquiets.
Or maybe it was just too much effort to assess it.

Don't forget, I had a very strong reference from a partner in a big 5
consulting firm - you know - the kind of person that hires the people
that graduate from university.

QMUL I can understand because their syllabus seems light on the things
I was keen on learning and I shouldn't have applied to them (I know
their AT reads this NG).
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Do professional qualifications acquired through home study (and include
mathematical papers) not count.
Yes; but possibly not in the way you seem to expect;
see above.
Post by wooks
ATEOTD the fact that City and UCL made me unconditional offers does
indicate that there was plenty enough information on my application for
those AT's who wanted to consider it.
No. It indicates that, rightly or wrongly, they took a
different view of your application.
Because they read it and considered it properly.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
It could mean anything from
(a) they are much more clued up on what IMIS means and were able
to be reasonably sure that you are a good prospect, through (b)
"we really don't have much idea about this bloke, but let's give
him a chance", to (c) "we are desperate for students, we will
make offers to anything that breathes". My *expectation* is that
it is somewhere between (a) and (b).
I put in a very clearly articulated application supported with a very
strong reference from a reputable source and thankfully for me someone
in one of the finest universities in the world saw that.

I do not believe for a second that UCL are desperate for students.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
It *is* a lottery. We are individuals dealing with
individual cases, and in this case a relatively unusual one.
Yes and for some of you it is too much effort or too much risk.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
I have no idea what decision I would have reached on you, based
purely on the information you have revealed here, so I'm not at
all surprised that nine other ATs came to a variety of decisions.
Plainly you think that two were right and some of the rest were
wrong; you'll have your chance to prove it.
Well it's not that. I respect Greenwich and they did show they were
keen to speak to me. Imperial were downright rude and UEL sloppy.
Goldsmiths couldn't have looked at the application properly either. I
wouldn't have gone to QMUL so the AT there probably made the right
call.

I didn't post to have a go at those who turned me down - after all I
have got into a wonderful school - I have nothing to be bitter about.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
I should also say that it's not much use protesting about
things that you expect ATs to know.
I'm not protesting.
It's your job and the wide variety of results indicate some of you
aren't doing it properly.

The lowest ranked university that I applied to wanted me to sit an
aptitude test to demonstrate my skills in English and Maths. Whereas
one of the premier institutions in the world made me an unconditional
offer without interviewing me even though their literature states that
they interview all their student. Naturally of course I believe that
UCL got it right :)
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
We're human, there are things
we don't know, life is too short to chase them all up. Some ATs
are dealing with several thousand UCAS forms, with perhaps hundreds
of "special cases" of one sort or another; you will inevitably
get somewhat of a "snap" judgement from them. The ones that deal
with rather few applications may have been able to give more time
to you in particular -- but they will equally be the ones that
have little experience of the awkward nooks and crannies that can
arise in applications.
Well I applied at the end of June at a time (I was told) when there
weren't many applications to sift. That said you seem to be saying the
same thing here as me albeit in a different way.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
I know, and appreciate, that to *you* it's all a very
personal process, and you are directly concerned about what view
ATs have taken of you and your qualifications.
No. I got offers from 2 excellent schools I am one happy chappie. I
wanted to get a perspective from the "other side". I have read this NG
alot which means I have read alot of you and alot of Matthew.

The moral for mature students is - don't believe what the universities
say about their attitude towards you in their literature.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
But to the AT,
it *isn't* personal.
I know that.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
You are one sheet of paper, and in the end
probably two or three paragraphs on that one sheet. It's not a
perfect system, mistakes can and do happen [and accepting someone
onto a course for which they are unsuitable is, if anything, a
bigger mistake than rejecting someone suitable], and some ATs are
sometimes stupid, arrogant, half-blind, .... But most of us are
doing the best we can, and broadly it works. Which is not much
consolation if you are one of the exceptions that falls down a
crack.
thankfully for me I didn't. maybe my experience will help someone else.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
I am obliged.
jrg
2005-07-29 23:17:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
If you want evidence of mathematical aptitude statistics should be good
enough. Anyway the point is the AT missed the fact that I had an A in
English and an A in Oral Engish.
If I could have switched to Computer Science whilst at York (I studied
Politics), quite possibly I would have done. I understand that grade
inflation has been huge since you did your O-levels, however I did get
lots of As in my GCSEs (including Maths) as well as multiple As at
A-level including an A is AS-level Maths (half an A-level). I think you
underestimate what is meant by "mathematical aptitude". Computer
Science at York/Imperial is very competitive.

James
wooks
2005-07-30 05:56:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
If you want evidence of mathematical aptitude statistics should be good
enough. Anyway the point is the AT missed the fact that I had an A in
English and an A in Oral Engish.
If I could have switched to Computer Science whilst at York (I studied
Politics), quite possibly I would have done. I understand that grade
inflation has been huge since you did your O-levels, however I did get
lots of As in my GCSEs (including Maths) as well as multiple As at
A-level including an A is AS-level Maths (half an A-level).
My point is that with my 20 years experience and a reference from a
partner in a big 5 consulting firm my application should not solely be
considered on the basis of how my educational qualifications map to A
level maths.
Post by jrg
I think you
underestimate what is meant by "mathematical aptitude". Computer
Science at York/Imperial is very competitive.
James
Please don't patronise me like that.
jrg
2005-07-30 12:04:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
My point is that with my 20 years experience and a reference from a
partner in a big 5 consulting firm my application should not solely be
considered on the basis of how my educational qualifications map to A
level maths.
Well first I have to reiterate I don't represent any organisation, I
can only hypothesise. You would have to speak to the relevant
university admissions department to find out for sure.

But your original post was titled "Mature student admission - a
complete lottery?". Personally, from what I know, I am not at all
surprised that commerical experience and a reference from a partner in
a big 5 consulting firm aren't on their own enough when not combined
with evidence of relevant academic ability, and therefore I don't see
the lottery point.

To reiterate from York's own website again: "We do not admit applicants
on the basis of work experience alone."

You can complain all you like about how that shouldn't be the case, but
as far as I'm aware, it is the case.

James
wooks
2005-07-30 12:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
My point is that with my 20 years experience and a reference from a
partner in a big 5 consulting firm my application should not solely be
considered on the basis of how my educational qualifications map to A
level maths.
Well first I have to reiterate I don't represent any organisation, I
can only hypothesise. You would have to speak to the relevant
university admissions department to find out for sure.
But your original post was titled "Mature student admission - a
complete lottery?". Personally, from what I know, I am not at all
surprised that commerical experience and a reference from a partner in
a big 5 consulting firm aren't on their own enough when not combined
with evidence of relevant academic ability, and therefore I don't see
the lottery point.
To reiterate from York's own website again: "We do not admit applicants
on the basis of work experience alone."
You can complain all you like about how that shouldn't be the case, but
as far as I'm aware, it is the case.
James
I'm not complaining because and I don't really care what York think
because I have been admitted to one of the finest schools in the world.
jrg
2005-07-30 13:04:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
I'm not complaining because and I don't really care what York think
because I have been admitted to one of the finest schools in the world.
Then the system works as it has correctly matched you up with the right
university?

James
wooks
2005-07-30 16:36:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
I'm not complaining because and I don't really care what York think
because I have been admitted to one of the finest schools in the world.
Then the system works as it has correctly matched you up with the right
university?
James
One wonders then what the system at York would have done with George
Boole who never had any formal education beyond the 3rd grade.
wooks
2005-07-31 15:04:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
I'm not complaining because and I don't really care what York think
because I have been admitted to one of the finest schools in the world.
Then the system works as it has correctly matched you up with the right
university?
James
You know maybe you are right.
Post by jrg
From the UCL website.
Admissions Policy:

Our admissions policy is to select students on the basis of their
aspirations and potential as well as examination performance. Entrance
requirements are high but may be varied for those who show the
motivation and ability to cope with our programmes.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-07-29 23:52:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Are AT's unaware of the IMIS www.imis.org.uk.
Probably. I don't suppose it's something they come across
every day.
I am trying to think of a diplomatic way of constructing a sentence
with the words ivory tower and academic. They used to be known as the
Institute of Data Processing Management - they have been around for
years - I got my qualifications in the early - mid 80's.
Hey - you're the one wanting to do functional and logic programming,
which many would dismiss as typical academic ivory tower stuff, remote
from the sort of computing that's done in the "real world".

I took a look at the IMIS web site just now, and at what their
qualifications involved, and I find it typical of the sort of
commercial training that says little about the sort of abstract
abilities that are at the heart of Computer Science. It all seems to be
about learning definitions and computer paraphernalia, with nothing
about abstract problem-solving and reasoning. As has already been said,
it's not a qualification we come across often if at all.

However, since it's a qualification you took 20 years ago, we wouldn't
make a big thing about it for your application now.

One possibility is that we felt your professional programming
experience meant you'd be bored stiff in a lot of our first year, such
as the introductory programming and computer architecture stuff. Our
degree programme isn't really geared up to retraining skilled
programmers who missed out on an academic Computer Science education.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-07-30 06:10:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Are AT's unaware of the IMIS www.imis.org.uk.
Probably. I don't suppose it's something they come across
every day.
I am trying to think of a diplomatic way of constructing a sentence
with the words ivory tower and academic. They used to be known as the
Institute of Data Processing Management - they have been around for
years - I got my qualifications in the early - mid 80's.
Hey - you're the one wanting to do functional and logic programming,
which many would dismiss as typical academic ivory tower stuff, remote
from the sort of computing that's done in the "real world".
I took a look at the IMIS web site just now, and at what their
qualifications involved, and I find it typical of the sort of
commercial training that says little about the sort of abstract
abilities that are at the heart of Computer Science. It all seems to be
about learning definitions and computer paraphernalia, with nothing
about abstract problem-solving and reasoning. As has already been said,
it's not a qualification we come across often if at all.
I did not base my application on the IMIS exams. I was asked to state
my qualifications and so I mentioned it. If you look here

http://www.interlinktech.co.uk/idpm.htm

You will see the structure of the exams when I took them. I passed 11
of the 12 papers - I think I failed SAD 2 and never bothered to resit.

I can't remember what was in the Quantitative Methods paper but I do
remember studying Operations Research, Queueing Theory and Linear
Programming in the Management techniques paper in Part 3.

My point as it relates to the universities that said you have no
qualifications in maths is that those exams evince some post secondary
maths qualification.

I did not base my application on my IMIS qualification - I just
mentioned it (maybe if I had made more of it I wouldn't have run into
the u haven't got maths thing). The whole thrust of my application was
a very strong personal statement and my reference.

I am sure thats what convinced UCL and City to make me offers.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
However, since it's a qualification you took 20 years ago, we wouldn't
make a big thing about it for your application now.
As I said neither did I.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
One possibility is that we felt your professional programming
experience meant you'd be bored stiff in a lot of our first year, such
as the introductory programming and computer architecture stuff. Our
degree programme isn't really geared up to retraining skilled
programmers who missed out on an academic Computer Science education.
Matthew Huntbach
maybe so.
wooks
2005-07-30 10:42:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Are AT's unaware of the IMIS www.imis.org.uk.
Probably. I don't suppose it's something they come across
every day.
I am trying to think of a diplomatic way of constructing a sentence
with the words ivory tower and academic. They used to be known as the
Institute of Data Processing Management - they have been around for
years - I got my qualifications in the early - mid 80's.
Hey - you're the one wanting to do functional and logic programming,
which many would dismiss as typical academic ivory tower stuff, remote
from the sort of computing that's done in the "real world".
Then that makes me an aspiring ivory academic as opposed to a fully
paid up member :).
Post by Matthew Huntbach
I took a look at the IMIS web site just now, and at what their
qualifications involved, and I find it typical of the sort of
commercial training that says little about the sort of abstract
abilities that are at the heart of Computer Science. It all seems to be
about learning definitions and computer paraphernalia, with nothing
about abstract problem-solving and reasoning. As has already been said,
it's not a qualification we come across often if at all.
I don't particularly want to defend the IMIS because again that was not
the basis of my application but I do think that Systems Analysis and
Design which features heavily in the syllabus is all about abstracting
and reasoning albeit not necessarily in the formal/mathematical context
that you may be thinking of.

I think you are wrong to be so dismissive about it.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
However, since it's a qualification you took 20 years ago, we wouldn't
make a big thing about it for your application now.
neither did I.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
One possibility is that we felt your professional programming
experience meant you'd be bored stiff in a lot of our first year, such
as the introductory programming and computer architecture stuff. Our
degree programme isn't really geared up to retraining skilled
programmers who missed out on an academic Computer Science education.
Matthew Huntbach
If that were the case then I would say fair enough because that would
obviously reveal that the application had been considered properly.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-07-30 00:05:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Well I applied at the end of June at a time (I was told) when there
weren't many applications to sift. That said you seem to be saying the
same thing here as me albeit in a different way.
This means had I handled your application it would have been in the
past few weeks. If that was so, I would have remembered it clearly.
Some of the details you have put here would certainly have stuck in my
mind. Yet I don't recall handling it. Please forward me your real name
and I'll check.

Matthew Huntbach
Dr A. N. Walker
2005-08-02 18:33:47 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
wooks <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
[Quite a lot. Other people have picked up on plenty of points, I
just want to pick up a handful and comment further:]
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Maths and Statistics were different O-levels. ...
If you want evidence of mathematical aptitude statistics should be good
enough.
Something I forgot to mention. Some [many?] univs still
have a "general matriculation" requirement, which, if so, usually
says something like "2x A-level + GCSE Maths and English or the
equivalent". A Stats O-level, however "interesting", is not the
equivalent of a Maths GCSE, so it's at least possible in some
cases that a central "jobsworth" simply ruled you out. I don't
in any way defend this, if indeed it happened.
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
They are
interested in qualifications that (a) correspond to material that
you need but they are *not* going to teach, or (b) show them how
bright you are. Programming experience is neither.
If that is the case why do so many universities advocate students spend
a year doing exactly what I have been doing - working in industry - as
part of their degree program.
Because it's a Good Thing for CS students [and engineers] to
do. It is still neither (a) nor (b). [Of course, you might have been
able to adduce evidence from that experience that *would* be (b) --
"I wrote a compiler/OS for ..., found 27 bugs in Linux and managed to
invent a new and faster version of Quicksort that was published in ...."
-- but if so, you haven't told us yet.]
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
We can't get "into your head", so the judgement we make is based
instead on comparisons with other mature students who *have* been
admitted to our courses.
Maybe thats the case generally but it was not the case with me. My
point is that some of the tutors didn't bother getting into my head
never mind that they didn't have to because I wanted from the degree
and why I wanted it was very clearly laid out in my personal statement.
Not the point. It is, of course, very possible that some ATs
were negligent. But it remains the case that a few paras in your PS
does not get me into your head. At best it gives me a glimpse into
what you may think is in your head. You have written *far* more in
this thread than you can possibly have written in your PS, even if
we add in the reference, and although we now know something about
your experience, and your motivations, there is still a lot missing.
If you were to apply to me, then at best you have managed to tick or
cross a few boxes in *my* mind; I am still going to have to think,
roughly, "OK, this applicant is a bit like X and a bit like Y, with
a dash of Z, and my experience was that X did very well, but Y found
it difficult to mix with school-leavers and his finances/family were
a bit of a worry too, etc., etc." and come to a judgement. As I
keep telling you, it is not an exact science.
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
[IMIS] used to be known as the
Institute of Data Processing Management - they have been around for
years - I got my qualifications in the early - mid 80's.
Sure. But DP, and by extension the IDPM, is not of great
interest to most top CS depts. As you know, there is a massive
gulf between what schools think computing is about, what industry
thinks it is about, and what univs think it is about. This is not
a comment on right/wrong, just on a fact of life.
Post by wooks
I do not believe for a second that UCL are desperate for students.
Matthew would probably know more, but you might be surprised.
Desperation is relative, of course, but the number of good applicants
for top CS courses has declined alarmingly [to the benefit of top maths
depts, which have been picking up some of these people]. London has
tended to suffer also because of cost issues, esp for "home" students
["overseas" students still tend to see London as a magnet]. I'm not
really up with CS courses, but for maths, the gap between Nott'm and
Warwick [3rd=, give or take] and IC [4th] and UCL [5th] in terms of
quality of intake and of quality and numbers of applicants has been
widening in recent years, while places like Bath and Birmingham have
been closing that gap. [This is not a comment on the quality of the
institutions, nor of their teaching or research.]
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
***@maths.nott.ac.uk
wooks
2005-08-02 20:34:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
[Quite a lot. Other people have picked up on plenty of points, I
just want to pick up a handful and comment further:]
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Maths and Statistics were different O-levels. ...
If you want evidence of mathematical aptitude statistics should be good
enough.
Something I forgot to mention. Some [many?] univs still
have a "general matriculation" requirement, which, if so, usually
says something like "2x A-level + GCSE Maths and English or the
equivalent". A Stats O-level, however "interesting", is not the
equivalent of a Maths GCSE, so it's at least possible in some
cases that a central "jobsworth" simply ruled you out. I don't
in any way defend this, if indeed it happened.
Ok.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
They are
interested in qualifications that (a) correspond to material that
you need but they are *not* going to teach, or (b) show them how
bright you are. Programming experience is neither.
If that is the case why do so many universities advocate students spend
a year doing exactly what I have been doing - working in industry - as
part of their degree program.
Because it's a Good Thing for CS students [and engineers] to
do. It is still neither (a) nor (b). [Of course, you might have been
able to adduce evidence from that experience that *would* be (b) --
"I wrote a compiler/OS for ..., found 27 bugs in Linux and managed to
invent a new and faster version of Quicksort that was published in ...."
-- but if so, you haven't told us yet.]
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
We can't get "into your head", so the judgement we make is based
instead on comparisons with other mature students who *have* been
admitted to our courses.
Maybe thats the case generally but it was not the case with me. My
point is that some of the tutors didn't bother getting into my head
never mind that they didn't have to because I wanted from the degree
and why I wanted it was very clearly laid out in my personal statement.
Not the point. It is, of course, very possible that some ATs
were negligent. But it remains the case that a few paras in your PS
does not get me into your head. At best it gives me a glimpse into
what you may think is in your head. You have written *far* more in
this thread than you can possibly have written in your PS, even if
we add in the reference, and although we now know something about
your experience, and your motivations, there is still a lot missing.
If you were to apply to me, then at best you have managed to tick or
cross a few boxes in *my* mind; I am still going to have to think,
roughly, "OK, this applicant is a bit like X and a bit like Y, with
a dash of Z, and my experience was that X did very well, but Y found
it difficult to mix with school-leavers and his finances/family were
a bit of a worry too, etc., etc." and come to a judgement. As I
keep telling you, it is not an exact science.
I covered some of that stuff too though. Still play a young mans sport
(rugby) and have the support of my partner. But interesting to know.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
[IMIS] used to be known as the
Institute of Data Processing Management - they have been around for
years - I got my qualifications in the early - mid 80's.
Sure. But DP, and by extension the IDPM, is not of great
interest to most top CS depts. As you know, there is a massive
gulf between what schools think computing is about, what industry
thinks it is about, and what univs think it is about. This is not
a comment on right/wrong, just on a fact of life.
Yes I know you are right.

I notice you used the phrase "top CS depts"...... so I take it you mean
that City and Greenwich, both of whom have been involved with the IMIS
are excluded from that echelon.
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
I do not believe for a second that UCL are desperate for students.
Matthew would probably know more, but you might be surprised.
Desperation is relative, of course, but the number of good applicants
for top CS courses has declined alarmingly [to the benefit of top maths
depts, which have been picking up some of these people]. London has
tended to suffer also because of cost issues, esp for "home" students
["overseas" students still tend to see London as a magnet]. I'm not
really up with CS courses, but for maths, the gap between Nott'm and
Warwick [3rd=, give or take] and IC [4th] and UCL [5th] in terms of
quality of intake and of quality and numbers of applicants has been
widening in recent years, while places like Bath and Birmingham have
been closing that gap. [This is not a comment on the quality of the
institutions, nor of their teaching or research.]
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-08-03 08:14:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Sure. But DP, and by extension the IDPM, is not of great
interest to most top CS depts. As you know, there is a massive
gulf between what schools think computing is about, what industry
thinks it is about, and what univs think it is about. This is not
a comment on right/wrong, just on a fact of life.
I notice you used the phrase "top CS depts"...... so I take it you mean
that City and Greenwich, both of whom have been involved with the IMIS
are excluded from that echelon.
The Guardian's league table for Computer Science
http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityguide2005/table/0,,-5183112,00.html
currently puts City 23rd and Greenwich 62nd for Computer Science.
While, as I've always said. league tables should be treated with
caution, I think most people who are familair with academic
Computer Science in the UK would think this about the right positioning.
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
I do not believe for a second that UCL are desperate for students.
Matthew would probably know more, but you might be surprised.
Desperation is relative, of course, but the number of good applicants
for top CS courses has declined alarmingly [to the benefit of top maths
depts, which have been picking up some of these people]. London has
tended to suffer also because of cost issues, esp for "home" students
["overseas" students still tend to see London as a magnet].
Yes, applications for Computer Science at Queen Mary have dropped to
half what they were five years ago, and it's almost impossible to
get home students from outside London to come to London to study, we
have only three or four UK non-London students in most year groups.
There have been similar drops in applications in other Computer
Science departments, and while UCL and Imperial have a higher national
profile, I know they're not immune to the London factor. Judging from
the applicants we don't get because they got itno UCL, UCL certainly aren't
in the position to be able to turn away applicants on a whim.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-08-03 10:34:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Sure. But DP, and by extension the IDPM, is not of great
interest to most top CS depts. As you know, there is a massive
gulf between what schools think computing is about, what industry
thinks it is about, and what univs think it is about. This is not
a comment on right/wrong, just on a fact of life.
I notice you used the phrase "top CS depts"...... so I take it you mean
that City and Greenwich, both of whom have been involved with the IMIS
are excluded from that echelon.
The Guardian's league table for Computer Science
http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityguide2005/table/0,,-5183112,00.html
currently puts City 23rd and Greenwich 62nd for Computer Science.
While, as I've always said. league tables should be treated with
caution, I think most people who are familair with academic
Computer Science in the UK would think this about the right positioning.
Ahhhh look at Yorks inclusiveness rating vs UCL.

A staff score: based on the teaching staff in each subject
Entry qualification : What it takes to get in
Spend per student: How much they pay out on teaching you
Student:staff ratio : How many there are of them to each of you
Value added score: How well they convert your middling A-levels into a
splendid degree
Student destinations : Will you get a job?
Inclusiveness: How well do they recruit ethnic, disabled and mature
students?
Matthew Huntbach
2005-08-03 11:13:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
The Guardian's league table for Computer Science
http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityguide2005/table/0,,-5183112,00.html
currently puts City 23rd and Greenwich 62nd for Computer Science.
While, as I've always said. league tables should be treated with
caution, I think most people who are familair with academic
Computer Science in the UK would think this about the right positioning.
Ahhhh look at Yorks inclusiveness rating vs UCL.
A good example of why league tables shouldn't be regarded as an
absolute guide. The "exclusiveness" rating gives points for the number
of ethnic minority students. Ethnic minority students are more likely
to stay at home, and a higher proportion of London's youth is of an ethnic
minority than any other part of the UK. So it's entirely unsurprising that
a department at UCL has more ethnic minority students than the same department
at York, and this says nothing whatsoever about whether UCL is "better"
at the subject than York, even though it influences their position in the
league table.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-08-03 11:41:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
The Guardian's league table for Computer Science
http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityguide2005/table/0,,-5183112,00.html
currently puts City 23rd and Greenwich 62nd for Computer Science.
While, as I've always said. league tables should be treated with
caution, I think most people who are familair with academic
Computer Science in the UK would think this about the right positioning.
Ahhhh look at Yorks inclusiveness rating vs UCL.
A good example of why league tables shouldn't be regarded as an
absolute guide. The "exclusiveness" rating gives points for the number
of ethnic minority students. Ethnic minority students are more likely
to stay at home, and a higher proportion of London's youth is of an ethnic
minority than any other part of the UK. So it's entirely unsurprising that
a department at UCL has more ethnic minority students than the same department
at York, and this says nothing whatsoever about whether UCL is "better"
at the subject than York, even though it influences their position in the
league table.
Matthew Huntbach
True... but York St Johns College at 29 managed a 3 as for that matter
did Surrey. It's not unreasonablen to presume the mature student policy
is a contributory factor to Yorks low score.
jrg
2005-08-03 11:56:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
True... but York St Johns College at 29 managed a 3 as for that matter
did Surrey. It's not unreasonablen to presume the mature student policy
is a contributory factor to Yorks low score.
York St Johns College undoubtedly has far more mature students than
York, the question is not "do many universities have more mature
students than York?" but "Does UCL?". The league table says nothing
either way.

James
Matthew Huntbach
2005-08-03 12:14:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
True... but York St Johns College at 29 managed a 3 as for that matter
did Surrey. It's not unreasonablen to presume the mature student policy
is a contributory factor to Yorks low score.
York St Johns College undoubtedly has far more mature students than
York, the question is not "do many universities have more mature
students than York?" but "Does UCL?". The league table says nothing
either way.
The Guardian's "exclusiveness" score gives points both for mature students
and for ethnic minority students. For various reasons, Computer Science
at London university institutions is dominated by ethnic minority students.
At QMUL, and I think similar applies to UCL, white students are a small
minority in Computer Science. This, rather than mature students, will be
the dominating factor in the Guardian's "exclusiveness" score for Computer
Science at UCL.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-08-03 08:18:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
We can't get "into your head", so the judgement we make is based
instead on comparisons with other mature students who *have* been
admitted to our courses.
Maybe thats the case generally but it was not the case with me. My
point is that some of the tutors didn't bother getting into my head
never mind that they didn't have to because I wanted from the degree
and why I wanted it was very clearly laid out in my personal statement.
Not the point. It is, of course, very possible that some ATs
were negligent. But it remains the case that a few paras in your PS
does not get me into your head. At best it gives me a glimpse into
what you may think is in your head. You have written *far* more in
this thread than you can possibly have written in your PS, even if
we add in the reference, and although we now know something about
your experience, and your motivations, there is still a lot missing.
If you were to apply to me, then at best you have managed to tick or
cross a few boxes in *my* mind; I am still going to have to think,
roughly, "OK, this applicant is a bit like X and a bit like Y, with
a dash of Z, and my experience was that X did very well, but Y found
it difficult to mix with school-leavers and his finances/family were
a bit of a worry too, etc., etc." and come to a judgement. As I
keep telling you, it is not an exact science.
So one would then ask why UCAS constrain the length of the personal
statement to so few paras...... lemme guess... it's all they expect
from a school leaver... which works to the disadvantage of the mature
student.
jrg
2005-08-03 08:54:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
So one would then ask why UCAS constrain the length of the personal
statement to so few paras...... lemme guess... it's all they expect
from a school leaver... which works to the disadvantage of the mature
student.
Or maybe it is because admissions tutors have to read thousands of
personal statements and if everyone wrote everything that could
possibly be relevant, however old they are, admissions tutors would not
have time to do anything else?

James
wooks
2005-08-03 10:08:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
So one would then ask why UCAS constrain the length of the personal
statement to so few paras...... lemme guess... it's all they expect
from a school leaver... which works to the disadvantage of the mature
student.
Or maybe it is because admissions tutors have to read thousands of
personal statements and if everyone wrote everything that could
possibly be relevant, however old they are, admissions tutors would not
have time to do anything else?
James
Well it's a bit like Gareth Gates coming out with an autobiography.
What has the average teenager done that is going to be relevant enough
to write reams and reams.

If you are seeking A'level admission then the personal statement is
probably a only a supplement to the A level grades. If you are not
relying on A'levels it's a different story.
jrg
2005-08-03 11:25:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
So one would then ask why UCAS constrain the length of the personal
statement to so few paras...... lemme guess... it's all they expect
from a school leaver... which works to the disadvantage of the mature
student.
Or maybe it is because admissions tutors have to read thousands of
personal statements and if everyone wrote everything that could
possibly be relevant, however old they are, admissions tutors would not
have time to do anything else?
James
Well it's a bit like Gareth Gates coming out with an autobiography.
What has the average teenager done that is going to be relevant enough
to write reams and reams.
You could describe in detail why in you are interested in the course,
what books you have read, and why you found those books interesting.

You could describe in detail your hobbies or what you intend to do with
a year out to show how you are a well rounded person.

Or if you do not have any out-of-the-ordinary hobbies, or are not
taking a year out, you could describe in detail how your family is not
very well off and you are having to do a part time job to support
yourself alongside your A-levels and yet despite these problems you are
still determined to go to university.

You might have a bad examination result, and you could in detail
explain how it wasn't really your fault - perhaps you were having
problems in your personal life at the time or your teacher left and you
had several very bad supply teachers.

I'm sure there are others.

James
Dr A. N. Walker
2005-08-03 11:50:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
So one would then ask why UCAS constrain the length of the personal
statement to so few paras...... lemme guess... it's all they expect
from a school leaver... which works to the disadvantage of the mature
student.
UCAS is a paper-shuffling exercise. If you want the PS to
be bigger, then something else has to be smaller. [And it is already
photo-reduced to the point where I quite frequently have physical
difficulty in reading it.] IMNSHO, it should be made smaller; it
is not, in 99% of applications, a cost-effective part of the form,
and the remaining 1% could be dealt with in a different way.

Yours may well have been part of that 1%. If so, then
getting you and your referee to write essays is not the answer.
We need a sensible way to conduct a considered Q&A session with
you. Neither interview nor telephone really fits that bill;
perhaps, now that it is almost universal, e-mail does. [OTOH,
I already get far too many e-mails, even after some 98% are
filtered out and binned unread as spam; I certainly don't want
a significant fraction of applications to involve any action on
my part beyond scribbling a few comments on the form.]

AAMOF, if I see a PS that occupies only half the space and
a reference that also is very sparse, it is almost always from a
mature applicant. If, unusually, it is from a trad school leaver,
it is almost always an excellent application from someone with a
wide range of interests, etc., but who has acquired the skill of
writing succinctly at a school that also believes in brevity.
A large majority of 18yos and their schools feel the need to fill
out the entire spaces with turgid formulaics.
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
***@maths.nott.ac.uk
wooks
2005-08-16 17:15:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
[Quite a lot. Other people have picked up on plenty of points, I
just want to pick up a handful and comment further:]
Post by wooks
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
Maths and Statistics were different O-levels. ...
If you want evidence of mathematical aptitude statistics should be good
enough.
Something I forgot to mention. Some [many?] univs still
have a "general matriculation" requirement, which, if so, usually
says something like "2x A-level + GCSE Maths and English or the
equivalent". A Stats O-level, however "interesting", is not the
equivalent of a Maths GCSE, so it's at least possible in some
cases that a central "jobsworth" simply ruled you out. I don't
in any way defend this, if indeed it happened.
That would explain this reply from Kings which I received today 2 weeks
after asking why I wasn't successful.

*****************************************************
Unfortunately you did not meet the entry requirements.

Thank you.
*****************************************************
Matthew Huntbach
2005-07-29 23:25:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
My application was especially relevant to York because I stated that I
had been learning Scheme and wished to study SICP and subsequently
discovered that York use this language and this book - in fact they
describe it as the greatest computer science book ever written - hence
why I applied there.
From what you have said, I'm surprised to learn that I (as the
admissions tutor for Computer Science at Queen Mary) have rejected you.
I do rather feel that if you had stated that you were learning Scheme
and wished to study SICP, this would very much have encouraged me to
make you an offer, or at least to interview you. But I don't remember
your case at all. Are you *sure* you didn't in fact apply for one of
the degrees run by the Electronic Engineering department? We do quite
often get people who apply to "Information Technology" or "Computer
Engineering" and then phone us to discuss their application.

I'm not at work at present, and won't be until Tuesday, but if you give
me your full name, I'll check our records. I don't think it would be
right for me to discuss your case in public without you explicit
permission, however.
Post by wooks
Are AT's unaware of the IMIS www.imis.org.uk. If the concern was
evidence of my mathematical aptitude they could have asked if needed me
to give more info about the exams. Are O and A levels the only currency
AT's deal in?
I'm not aware of it. Why should I be, since I never recall any
applicants offering its qualifications for entrance? Why do you suppose
I should be familiar with a qualification I might only see in an
applicants once in five years or so? I looked at its website just now,
and don't recall seeing it previously. Had I received an application
from someone offering IMIS qualifications, I most likely would have
looked at its website to find out about them.
Post by wooks
Do professional qualifications acquired through home study (and include
mathematical papers) not count.
The problem is there are large numbers of organisations offering
qualifications which are meaningless, the organisations are just a
money-making scam. It's also the case that many people suppose that a
diploma showing proficiency in some particular computer application is
going to be valued by a Computer Science admissions tutor - it isn't,
because Computer Science is more about abstract conceopts than the use
of particular applications. That is why qualifications showing general
academic ability, particularly in subjects which require the mastery of
some abstraction, are much more valuable than "professional" diplomas.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-07-30 10:30:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
My application was especially relevant to York because I stated that I
had been learning Scheme and wished to study SICP and subsequently
discovered that York use this language and this book - in fact they
describe it as the greatest computer science book ever written - hence
why I applied there.
From what you have said, I'm surprised to learn that I (as the
admissions tutor for Computer Science at Queen Mary) have rejected you.
I do rather feel that if you had stated that you were learning Scheme
and wished to study SICP, this would very much have encouraged me to
make you an offer, or at least to interview you. But I don't remember
your case at all. Are you *sure* you didn't in fact apply for one of
the degrees run by the Electronic Engineering department? We do quite
often get people who apply to "Information Technology" or "Computer
Engineering" and then phone us to discuss their application.
Positive. G400 Computer Science.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
I'm not at work at present, and won't be until Tuesday, but if you give
me your full name, I'll check our records. I don't think it would be
right for me to discuss your case in public without you explicit
permission, however.
Post by wooks
Are AT's unaware of the IMIS www.imis.org.uk. If the concern was
evidence of my mathematical aptitude they could have asked if needed me
to give more info about the exams. Are O and A levels the only currency
AT's deal in?
I'm not aware of it. Why should I be, since I never recall any
applicants offering its qualifications for entrance?
Let me emphasise again. My application was not based on my IMIS
qualification. There is a section on the UCAS form for qualifications,
it is a qualification that I have and I stated it. I did not mention it
at all in my personal statement.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Why do you suppose
I should be familiar with a qualification I might only see in an
applicants once in five years or so? I looked at its website just now,
and don't recall seeing it previously. Had I received an application
from someone offering IMIS qualifications, I most likely would have
looked at its website to find out about them.
I was offering far more than an IMIS qualification which seems to be
lost on some of the readers of this thread. But if you were minded to
assess my application from the point of view academic (as opposed to
professional) achievement then thats what I would have expected you to
do so I am glad to hear that you would have done so.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Do professional qualifications acquired through home study (and include
mathematical papers) not count.
The problem is there are large numbers of organisations offering
qualifications which are meaningless, the organisations are just a
money-making scam. It's also the case that many people suppose that a
diploma showing proficiency in some particular computer application is
going to be valued by a Computer Science admissions tutor - it isn't,
because Computer Science is more about abstract conceopts than the use
of particular applications. That is why qualifications showing general
academic ability, particularly in subjects which require the mastery of
some abstraction, are much more valuable than "professional" diplomas.
Matthew Huntbach
Well lets nail down that piece of speculation.

Please see para 45 onwards (and it may explain the positive reactions
from City and Greenwich.)

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/reviews/reports/overseas/greenwich_malaysia03.asp

When I took these exams the IDPM as they were then known were the next
best thing to the BCS but it was not possible to sit the BCS exams in
the country i was in at the time.

As I have made clear some schools were emphasising on what they
perceived to be my educational achievement or lack of. I don't think
there is much point or credibility in stating as almost all
universities do that they welcome applications for mature students who
do not have a'levels if all they are going to do is trawl through the
application for what they would recognise as an A level equivalent
qualification in some subject.
jrg
2005-07-29 22:52:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
I know that some admissions tutors read this NG.
Wondering what they make of it.
From:

http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/EntryPolicy.php

- The most common reason for our being unable to proceed with an
application is lack of information - in particular, lack of specific
information about your abilities in mathematical and scientific
subjects.
<snip>
- We do not admit applicants on the basis of work experience alone.

I'm no admissions tutor or computer science graduate, but:

a) I recently graduated from York
b) I had lots of computer science friends at York
b) I currently work in IT
c) My Dad studied for a degree in computer science (through the Open
University) whilst working in IT
c) I have been posting on this group for about 7 years (bloody hell)

Therefore I know the following:

a) Computer Science admissions tutors are obsessed about Maths
b) Computer Science admissions tutors don't care at all how much you
know about "IT" and Visual Basic

If you can convince York (or somewhere else, if you want to go
somewhere else) that you have studied a lot of maths, they might well
offer you a place, if you can't, they won't, and no amount of "I've
worked in IT for years!" will make any difference.

I know nothing about what IMIS is. Is the Maths equivalent in
difficulty to A-level Maths/Further Maths? If so, maybe they don't know
that and explaining that in detail would help. Maybe the fact that it
was a late application didn't help here, because maybe they already had
plenty of applicants and so didn't feel the need to spend their time
researching IMIS for themselves.

If the maths content of IMIS is not very high, maybe you should ask
York or wherever else what they would take consider acceptable evidence
of requisite mathematical knowledge and ability, and perhaps take an
exam or whatever.

If you want to take this further you should talk to the universities
involved rather than this group, people here can only hypothesize. Who
knows, maybe I'm entirely wrong. But you probably do need to be
thinking along the lines of "how can I prove to you you that I am
prepared for this course?" rather than "how dare you reject me!".

James
wooks
2005-07-30 13:00:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
I know that some admissions tutors read this NG.
Wondering what they make of it.
http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/EntryPolicy.php
- The most common reason for our being unable to proceed with an
application is lack of information - in particular, lack of specific
information about your abilities in mathematical and scientific
subjects.
The ability to distill the relevant information from a specification is
pretty fundamental prequisite for a computer scientist. I don't know
whether it's something u learn from A' level maths but it is something
you learn from industry. Don't they teach it at York? So what you
should have done is posted this link.

http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/EntryPolicy.php#mature

I have worked for a big 5 consulting firm, for NM Rothschilds the
investment bank, for a major UK clearing bank, for BT (on repeated
occasions) I have also work for a consulting company in New Zealand and
on both the east and west coast of the United states. No shortage of
work experience. Most of that was on my application form.

If anything Yorks policy is academically less restrictive than UCL's
for Comp Sci.

http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/admissions.html

The IMIS qualification I got was roughly equivalent to an HNC which UCL
says they do not accept. So clearly then, UCL looked at my application
from beyond a purely academic perspective.

What York did was look for something they could recognise as being the
equivalent of an A'level in Maths and tossed my application when they
couldn't find it. Their statement near as damnit says whether or not
you are a mature student we are looking for recent A'levels or their
equivalent and that is what seems to happen in practice.

So really their mature student admissions policy is a sham which is the
essence of my thread (and which for all your York education you seem to
have some difficulty distilling). Some universities or AT's put
considerable effort into assessing applications from mature students -
others don't.
Post by jrg
<snip>
- We do not admit applicants on the basis of work experience alone.
Another important ability you learn from industry is to pay attention
to the detail in the specification.

I didn't apply on the basis of work experience alone.
Post by jrg
a) I recently graduated from York
b) I had lots of computer science friends at York
b) I currently work in IT
c) My Dad studied for a degree in computer science (through the Open
University) whilst working in IT
So you haven't got a computing degree , you have about 20 years less
experience in the industry than I do and you are reliant on the
experience of your dad and your friends experience for your
information. All of which seems to make you spectacularly unqualified
to offer informed perspective.
Post by jrg
c) I have been posting on this group for about 7 years (bloody hell)
a) Computer Science admissions tutors are obsessed about Maths
Well maybe they should be doing admissions for the Maths dept then.

Now I am not saying that Maths isn't relevant but
the last client that stipulated mathematical abilities in a job that I
applied for ended up paying me 2 grand a week for 6 months to work on
the development of Risk management software for a banking package. BTW
the guy who interviewed me there was a maths graduate.
Post by jrg
b) Computer Science admissions tutors don't care at all how much you
know about "IT" and Visual Basic
Another thing you will learn from working in industry is not to make
assumptions. Don't they teach that at York.
I never mentioned on my application that I knew anything about IT and I
did not mention that I had programmed in Visual Basic (I mentioned it
in this thread not on my application). OK.

I did mention that I had been programming in Scheme (which is something
else you would have picked up from a careful reading of my "spec" and
something else that you'll need to learn if you are going to prosper in
this industry).

Scheme happens to be the language that York use in their first year to
teach. That meant that I wouldn't be asking lecturers at York how I was
going to benefit from using this poxy obscure language that nobody
uses in industry - because I already knew.
Post by jrg
If you can convince York (or somewhere else, if you want to go
somewhere else) that you have studied a lot of maths, they might well
offer you a place, if you can't, they won't, and no amount of "I've
worked in IT for years!" will make any difference.
I know nothing about what IMIS is.
Then you should have taken care to find out before deciding to comment.
Thats another skill that goes down well in industry.
Post by jrg
Is the Maths equivalent in
difficulty to A-level Maths/Further Maths?
The equivalences are posted on the IMIS website. Doesn't the university
experience at York cultivate an enquiring mind.

Putting on my extrapolating and reasoning head. The desire to have an
A'level in maths or the like isn't some slavish requirement (thats
something else you learn from working in industry - when to break
rules). I know AT's rely on it as the best indicator of the suitability
of a candidate for a degree course in CS but they say that because for
the majority of people they assess that is the best information
available.

Clearly I am an exception to that category. Towards the end of my
degree course they will be recommending to students that they do
something that I have already done - get some industry experience. In
the final year of my degree program I will be asked to do something
that I have been doing for the past 20 years - a group project. I
have already had an international flavour to my career and have
probably written, designed, tested and implemented more
programs/systems than any undergraduate could dream of doing in the 4
years they spend at their university.

In industry there is a phrase or people who stick to the same formula
even in the face of a clear exception - jobsworth.
Post by jrg
If so, maybe they don't know
that and explaining that in detail would help. Maybe the fact that it
was a late application didn't help here, because maybe they already had
plenty of applicants and so didn't feel the need to spend their time
researching IMIS for themselves.
Again this is something addressed earlier in the thread. I actually
spoke to York about this and was told it wasn't a problem because there
was a lighter workload on the AT's desk (not so many other competing
applications).
Post by jrg
If the maths content of IMIS is not very high, maybe you should ask
York or wherever else what they would take consider acceptable evidence
of requisite mathematical knowledge and ability, and perhaps take an
exam or whatever.
Why would I want to do that when I already have a place at UCL.
Post by jrg
If you want to take this further you should talk to the universities
involved rather than this group, people here can only hypothesize.
Once again - you've not been reading the spec. I have already had a
written response from York which I summarised in my convo with Dr
Walker. The York refusal was the only one I followed up for specific
reasons that I stated in my conversation with Dr Walker.
Post by jrg
Who
knows, maybe I'm entirely wrong. But you probably do need to be
thinking along the lines of "how can I prove to you you that I am
prepared for this course?" rather than "how dare you reject me!".
James
I have already written and told York Comp Sci where I think they went
wrong. It's not a case of them being wrong to reject me it's a case of
their attitude to mature student applications in general.
jrg
2005-07-30 17:27:28 UTC
Permalink
wooks wrote:

<snip>

OK I started off trying to write a sensible reply to this paragraph by
paragraph but it was too difficult, as you mostly alternate between
personal attacks on me and explaining how great you are and how much
experience you have and how much money you earn.

a) I don't want to lower myself to that level and
b) I am sure in such a competition I would lose in any case, I was
never trying to argue I was better than you or something, which seems
to be how you have taken my post.

Perhaps if you can't cope with an opinion that is anything but totally
agreeable to you, you shouldn't post to a public newsgroup.

James
wooks
2005-07-30 19:09:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Samsonknight
<snip>
OK I started off trying to write a sensible reply to this paragraph by
paragraph but it was too difficult, as you mostly alternate between
personal attacks on me and explaining how great you are and how much
experience you have and how much money you earn.
I attacked what you said not you.
Post by Samsonknight
a) I don't want to lower myself to that level and
b) I am sure in such a competition I would lose in any case, I was
never trying to argue I was better than you or something,
which seems
to be how you have taken my post.
I know you weren't suggesting that you were better than me. Neither was
I suggesting that I was better than you. You didn't seem to appreciate
the irony that you are your comp sci graduate friends are probably
aspiring to do things that I have already achieved. I pointed them out
to you because it does seem to suggest that A' level maths is not the
only way to demonstrate aptitude for a computing career and for that
matter a computing education.

I am criticising the mindset that York displayed to my application. You
are supporting it.
You gave me an opportunity to demonstrate some things one gains from
having an industry background that evidently you don't get from A
levels or from 4 years at York but are essential for the good computer
scientist.
I took it (admittedly with some relish) because of your patronising
post.
Post by Samsonknight
Perhaps if you can't cope with an opinion that is anything but totally
agreeable to you, you shouldn't post to a public newsgroup.
The problem with your opinion was not that it was different but it was
based on assumptions (which were wrong), you quite evidently had not
grasped the facts and for a large part what you had to say was not
relevant to the issue that I was presenting.

AAMOF there were some parts of the York CompSci curriculum that
troubled me - not the maths but the hardware/electronic engineering
related bits. They would have given me a real problem and as much as I
wanted to be taught SICP an offer from York would have put me in a real
dilemma because of the difficulties I would have had with the hardware
bits of their programme. Additionally I didn't really want to leave
London, so my 1st reaction when I found out I had been rejected was one
of relief at not having to make those difficult choices. It was only
when I found out the reasons why that my attitude changed.
geletine
2005-07-30 20:02:43 UTC
Permalink
I am quite suprised york comp Sci programme has hardware/electronic
element.

Recently there is a computer engineer discipline and before that just
electronic engineering.

Usually one is good at software or hardware , generally not both.
jrg
2005-07-30 21:02:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
<snip>
OK I started off trying to write a sensible reply to this paragraph by
paragraph but it was too difficult, as you mostly alternate between
personal attacks on me and explaining how great you are and how much
experience you have and how much money you earn.
I attacked what you said not you.
5 of the 11 sections of your post started with a snide remark about my
being unable to comprehend what you were saying before you actually
made any sort of point. I could have explained in detail how I am
perfectly able to read and understand information presented to me, but
it struck me as petty.
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
a) I don't want to lower myself to that level and
b) I am sure in such a competition I would lose in any case, I was
never trying to argue I was better than you or something,
which seems
to be how you have taken my post.
I know you weren't suggesting that you were better than me. Neither was
I suggesting that I was better than you.
OK, it is good to know you are not taking this personally, as it
appeared that way to me.
Post by wooks
You didn't seem to appreciate
the irony that you are your comp sci graduate friends are probably
aspiring to do things that I have already achieved. I pointed them out
to you because it does seem to suggest that A' level maths is not the
only way to demonstrate aptitude for a computing career and for that
matter a computing education.
As it happens, I am not particularly ambitious with regard to industry
and money, and largely I made friends with people with a similar
attitude, and therefore you are wrong to state that my friends aspire
to what you have achieved. In fact, despite the fact that I really
don't earn very much, I think I still currently earn as much or more
than half of the computer scientists I knew at York, simply because
most of the people I knew aren't that concerned about money. I
definitely earn more than those who went into academia, and they know
many times more about computery things than I do.

Aptitude for success in industry != aptitude for success in academia.
Obviously there is correlation, but it would not seem unlikely to me
that mathematic/scientific academic success shows even greater
correlation.

The C++ism was actually out of habit, to make up for it I used google
to provide an alternative that might offend you less:
(/= aptitude-for-success-in-industry aptitude-for-success-in-academia).
Post by wooks
I am criticising the mindset that York displayed to my application. You
are supporting it.
Yes, that is true. You see their concern about academic acheivement as
evidence of snobbery, I on the contrary am impressed that they assess
applicants soley on the basis of academic merit, and are not swayed by
"a reference from a partner in one of the big 5 consulting firms",
which to me would be far worse. It is much easier for a George
Boole to take a foundation course or a couple of A-levels than it is
for them to get a reference from someone with an impressive sounding
job title.
Post by wooks
You gave me an opportunity to demonstrate some things one gains from
having an industry background that evidently you don't get from A
levels or from 4 years at York but are essential for the good computer
scientist.
I took it (admittedly with some relish) because of your patronising
post.
Post by Samsonknight
Perhaps if you can't cope with an opinion that is anything but totally
agreeable to you, you shouldn't post to a public newsgroup.
The problem with your opinion was not that it was different but it was
based on assumptions (which were wrong), you quite evidently had not
grasped the facts and for a large part what you had to say was not
relevant to the issue that I was presenting.
You automatically assume that because I disagree with you I failed to
understand what you wrote (which is wrong), and then launched into a
tirade of sarcy comments about what they supposedly don't teach you at
university.

James
jrg
2005-07-30 21:06:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
The C++ism was actually out of habit, to make up for it I used google
(/= aptitude-for-success-in-industry aptitude-for-success-in-academia).
Actually they are unlikely to be numbers so it should probably be "not
eq" or something, or I don't know, I probably shouldn't have tried.

James
wooks
2005-07-30 21:53:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
<snip>
OK I started off trying to write a sensible reply to this paragraph by
paragraph but it was too difficult, as you mostly alternate between
personal attacks on me and explaining how great you are and how much
experience you have and how much money you earn.
I attacked what you said not you.
5 of the 11 sections of your post started with a snide remark about my
being unable to comprehend what you were saying before you actually
made any sort of point. I could have explained in detail how I am
perfectly able to read and understand information presented to me, but
it struck me as petty.
I wasn't suggesting you were stupid, and I don't for one minute think
you are - but you clearly hadn't paid attention to the detail and I
used it to demonstrate a point and I have explained and will not repeat
why I did so.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
a) I don't want to lower myself to that level and
b) I am sure in such a competition I would lose in any case, I was
never trying to argue I was better than you or something,
which seems
to be how you have taken my post.
I know you weren't suggesting that you were better than me. Neither was
I suggesting that I was better than you.
OK, it is good to know you are not taking this personally, as it
appeared that way to me.
Post by wooks
You didn't seem to appreciate
the irony that you are your comp sci graduate friends are probably
aspiring to do things that I have already achieved. I pointed them out
to you because it does seem to suggest that A' level maths is not the
only way to demonstrate aptitude for a computing career and for that
matter a computing education.
As it happens, I am not particularly ambitious with regard to industry
and money, and largely I made friends with people with a similar
attitude, and therefore you are wrong to state that my friends aspire
to what you have achieved. In fact, despite the fact that I really
don't earn very much, I think I still currently earn as much or more
than half of the computer scientists I knew at York, simply because
most of the people I knew aren't that concerned about money. I
definitely earn more than those who went into academia, and they know
many times more about computery things than I do.
Well I mentioned a number of things the least important of which was
money. The type of companies I worked for, the industries I have worked
in, the locations ( both the East and West Coast of the US and in NZ).
While I agree with your attitude to money and wife and kids might
change that.
Post by jrg
Aptitude for success in industry != aptitude for success in academia.
that over simplifies what I said.
Post by jrg
Obviously there is correlation,
we are agreed.
Post by jrg
but it would not seem unlikely to me
that mathematic/scientific academic success shows even greater
correlation.
the double negative leaves me unclear as to exactly what you are
saying.
Post by jrg
The C++ism was actually out of habit, to make up for it I used google
(/= aptitude-for-success-in-industry aptitude-for-success-in-academia).
Post by wooks
I am criticising the mindset that York displayed to my application. You
are supporting it.
Yes, that is true. You see their concern about academic acheivement as
evidence of snobbery, I on the contrary am impressed that they assess
applicants soley on the basis of academic merit, and are not swayed by
"a reference from a partner in one of the big 5 consulting firms",
which to me would be far worse. It is much easier for a George
Boole to take a foundation course or a couple of A-levels than it is
for them to get a reference from someone with an impressive sounding
job title.
Then we have a completely different idea of what a university education
should be about. A university should be able to recognise the talent in
a George Boole not tell him to go and do a foundation course and get A
levels.

A levels aren't an academic achievement. They are just one barometer
via which a persons suitability to embark on a course that leads to
academic achievement can be assessed and as I have mentioned before
they are pretty much the only indicator available for majority of that
apply to uni straight from school.

There are other barometers for different types of people from different
backgrounds. Your attitude seems to perceive that as a lowering of
standards (I won't get into the argument as to whether that would be
the case with an HNC equivalent qualification ). What you seem to be
saying is that the only type of person that should get into university
is one who has A levels.

I'm pretty sure you are wrong and you should bear in mind that there
are a whole variety of reasons why people apply to university and what
they want to achieve.

As for York Computer Science dept. If they are going to assess mature
students by the same criteria that they assess an immature student
(and at 18 you are) then they may as well not have a mature student
policy which would be fine by me as I simply would not have wasted time
applying there.

I think it's wrong and it displays a lazy one dimensional attitude
which is not what one would expect from a university but I'd rather
they upfront about it and not pretend that they are going to consider
your work experience if they are really going to focus on your academic
results.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
You gave me an opportunity to demonstrate some things one gains from
having an industry background that evidently you don't get from A
levels or from 4 years at York but are essential for the good computer
scientist.
I took it (admittedly with some relish) because of your patronising
post.
Post by Samsonknight
Perhaps if you can't cope with an opinion that is anything but totally
agreeable to you, you shouldn't post to a public newsgroup.
The problem with your opinion was not that it was different but it was
based on assumptions (which were wrong), you quite evidently had not
grasped the facts and for a large part what you had to say was not
relevant to the issue that I was presenting.
You automatically assume that because I disagree with you I failed to
understand what you wrote (which is wrong),
I repeatedly demonstrated to you where u made wrong assumptions and
where you had failed to verify what you were saying or to inform
yourself properly on what you were talking about. That has nothing to
do with whether you agreed with me or not. What you did is regurgitate
to me the kind of stuff that AT's have written on this NG in response
to people saying "I have done a bit of programming here, or studied ICT
or Computer Studies at A'level will that help me get admission into
computer science". You did this without knowing or paying attention to
what I said I had stated in my application.
Post by jrg
and then launched into a
tirade of sarcy comments about what they supposedly don't teach you at
university.
James
I was sarcastic. You were patronising.

Your post was not a great advert for the quality of education offered
by York University.
jrg
2005-07-30 23:26:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
I wasn't suggesting you were stupid, and I don't for one minute think
you are - but you clearly hadn't paid attention to the detail and I
used it to demonstrate a point and I have explained and will not repeat
why I did so.
OK, for whatever reason, I just responding point by point explaining
how actually I was paying full attention.
Post by wooks
Well I mentioned a number of things the least important of which was
money. The type of companies I worked for, the industries I have worked
in, the locations ( both the East and West Coast of the US and in NZ).
OK, I'm just genuinely confused here, is there something particularly
special about people who have worked in those locations that is
relevant to university applications?
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
but it would not seem unlikely to me
that mathematic/scientific academic success shows even greater
correlation.
the double negative leaves me unclear as to exactly what you are
saying.
It is true that double negatives are a bad habit when trying to explain
something, but there is a quick rule of thumb to deal with them - just
remove both negatives. Which gives:

"but it would seem [possible] to me that mathematic/scientific academic
success shows even greater correlation"
Post by wooks
Then we have a completely different idea of what a university education
should be about. A university should be able to recognise the talent in
a George Boole not tell him to go and do a foundation course and get A
levels.
A levels aren't an academic achievement. They are just one barometer
via which a persons suitability to embark on a course that leads to
academic achievement can be assessed and as I have mentioned before
they are pretty much the only indicator available for majority of that
apply to uni straight from school.
Well I would have to disagree, A-levels are an academic achievement,
you learn things when you do them, and then you do not need to learn
those things again at university because you have already learnt them.
And please don't respond with another sarcy comment about all the life
skills or whatever you learn by not doing A-levels, this isn't some
competition. I'm talking about (in Maths) things like matrices and
trigonomtery, as well as the more general skill of dealing with
difficult abstract concepts. George Boole studied extensively in his
spare time, and would have learnt the same sorts of things that one
learns when studying A-levels. They are things you do not learn in the
world of work.
Post by wooks
There are other barometers for different types of people from different
backgrounds. Your attitude seems to perceive that as a lowering of
standards (I won't get into the argument as to whether that would be
the case with an HNC equivalent qualification ). What you seem to be
saying is that the only type of person that should get into university
is one who has A levels.
Or other explicitly academic qualifications, yes, as university study
is academic study. A-levels just happen to be the most common
pre-university academic qualification in the UK.
Post by wooks
I'm pretty sure you are wrong and you should bear in mind that there
are a whole variety of reasons why people apply to university and what
they want to achieve.
As for York Computer Science dept. If they are going to assess mature
students by the same criteria that they assess an immature student
(and at 18 you are) then they may as well not have a mature student
policy which would be fine by me as I simply would not have wasted time
applying there.
The policy for 18 year olds is (paraphrasing a little) "AAB or
equivalent in A-levels". The policy for mature students is
(paraphrasing heavily) "Evidence of motivation to study and evidence of
academic ability". They are not the same.
Post by wooks
What you did is regurgitate
to me the kind of stuff that AT's have written on this NG in response
to people saying "I have done a bit of programming here, or studied ICT
or Computer Studies at A'level will that help me get admission into
computer science".
The Visual Basic comment was lazy, but the rest was not simple
regurgitation.
Post by wooks
I was sarcastic. You were patronising.
The one thing that I said that you took as patronising was that places
are competitive. I can see how that might be taken as slightly
patronizing, but you reacted out of all proportion.
Post by wooks
Your post was not a great advert for the quality of education offered
by York University.
Still not finished with the sarcy comments?

James
wooks
2005-07-31 07:08:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
I wasn't suggesting you were stupid, and I don't for one minute think
you are - but you clearly hadn't paid attention to the detail and I
used it to demonstrate a point and I have explained and will not repeat
why I did so.
OK, for whatever reason, I just responding point by point explaining
how actually I was paying full attention.
Post by wooks
Well I mentioned a number of things the least important of which was
money. The type of companies I worked for, the industries I have worked
in, the locations ( both the East and West Coast of the US and in NZ).
OK, I'm just genuinely confused here, is there something particularly
special about people who have worked in those locations that is
relevant to university applications?
Yes. Not those specific locations but

http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/teaching/ug/MSci_CS_International_Programme.htm

and at York students can take placements abroad

http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/Sandwich.php

I am highlighting in my application that I have already done those
things (I had my secondary schooling abroad as well).
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
but it would not seem unlikely to me
that mathematic/scientific academic success shows even greater
correlation.
the double negative leaves me unclear as to exactly what you are
saying.
It is true that double negatives are a bad habit when trying to explain
something, but there is a quick rule of thumb to deal with them - just
"but it would seem [possible] to me that mathematic/scientific academic
success shows even greater correlation"
Yes I know that but because it is bad form I didn't know whether it was
intentional or not.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Then we have a completely different idea of what a university education
should be about. A university should be able to recognise the talent in
a George Boole not tell him to go and do a foundation course and get A
levels.
A levels aren't an academic achievement. They are just one barometer
via which a persons suitability to embark on a course that leads to
academic achievement can be assessed and as I have mentioned before
they are pretty much the only indicator available for majority of that
apply to uni straight from school.
Well I would have to disagree, A-levels are an academic achievement,
you learn things when you do them, and then you do not need to learn
those things again at university because you have already learnt them.
In the overall scheme of academic achievement A levels aren't jack
shit. If outside of the context of university entrance you tell people
that the most you have to offer is A levels you aren't going to impress
anybody.
Post by jrg
And please don't respond with another sarcy comment about all the life
skills or whatever you learn by not doing A-levels,
Assumptive and patronising.

My school principal used to have a saying. "Don't pass through the
school without letting the school pass through you".

A university education was supposed to broaden your horizons, but you
seem to managed to have come out with a very one dimensional view.
Post by jrg
this isn't some
competition. I'm talking about (in Maths) things like matrices and
trigonomtery, as well as the more general skill of dealing with
difficult abstract concepts.
AAMOF you are making an excellent job of showing a inability to
abstract.
Post by jrg
George Boole studied extensively in his
spare time,
assumptive and patronising. You know nothing about what i study in my
spare time. btw do you know what he studide
Post by jrg
and would have learnt the same sorts of things that one
learns when studying A-levels. They are things you do not learn in the
world of work.
Assumptive, patronising and naive and reveals that yet again you
haven't bothered to do your basic research which in this case would
have not put you to much more effort than typing the mans name into a
search engine. Seriously I am wondering how you managed to get a degree
with this type of approach.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
There are other barometers for different types of people from different
backgrounds. Your attitude seems to perceive that as a lowering of
standards (I won't get into the argument as to whether that would be
the case with an HNC equivalent qualification ). What you seem to be
saying is that the only type of person that should get into university
is one who has A levels.
Or other explicitly academic qualifications, yes, as university study
is academic study. A-levels just happen to be the most common
pre-university academic qualification in the UK.
What do you mean by explicitly academic qualifications (because
obviously thats the term you apply to my IMIS qualification - have you
made it to the website yet?).

Are you suggesting that people who have done AAT should not be allowed
to do accountancy degrees if they have no A levels.

Are you suggesting that people who have done ILEX shouldn't progress to
law degrees if they have no A levels.

Are you suggesting that people who have done the Institute of Bankers
exams shouldn't be admitted to do a finance degree if they have no A
levels.

Forget the IMIS what about people who have done BCS exams and what to
study Computing.

You have this rigid one dimensional view which exemplifies why I think
it is a mistake to allow an 18 year old to go straight to university
from A'levels. At that age too many people are simply not mature
enough to fully appreciate the experience and the opportunity being
afforded to them. Left to me there would be a minimum 1 or 2 year
sojourn spent working before you got into university that way you would
gain an understanding of the applicability of at least some of what you
learn.

You trip words like abstraction off your tongue whilst simultaneously
displaying a distinct lack of ability to abstract. You talk about
matrices and trigonometry as though they are an end it itself. Pray
tell me the relevance of trig to a computing degree. Give me a
practical application of matrices.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
I'm pretty sure you are wrong and you should bear in mind that there
are a whole variety of reasons why people apply to university and what
they want to achieve.
As for York Computer Science dept. If they are going to assess mature
students by the same criteria that they assess an immature student
(and at 18 you are) then they may as well not have a mature student
policy which would be fine by me as I simply would not have wasted time
applying there.
The policy for 18 year olds is (paraphrasing a little) "AAB or
equivalent in A-levels". The policy for mature students is
(paraphrasing heavily) "Evidence of motivation to study and evidence of
academic ability". They are not the same.
You don't know what was in my personal statement.
You don't know what was in my reference and you have made it clear that
you have a one dimensional view of what academic ability is.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
What you did is regurgitate
to me the kind of stuff that AT's have written on this NG in response
to people saying "I have done a bit of programming here, or studied ICT
or Computer Studies at A'level will that help me get admission into
computer science".
The Visual Basic comment was lazy, but the rest was not simple
regurgitation.
Post by wooks
I was sarcastic. You were patronising.
The one thing that I said that you took as patronising was that places
are competitive. I can see how that might be taken as slightly
patronizing, but you reacted out of all proportion.
Assumptive. You presume you can tell me what I felt was patronising.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Your post was not a great advert for the quality of education offered
by York University.
Still not finished with the sarcy comments?
James
Nope. I'm wondering how you managed to get a degree and whether the
failings you are displaying here are your own or that of the
institution you attended.
Mark Thakkar
2005-07-31 08:29:52 UTC
Permalink
Wooks,

It may be unwise for me to wade in here, but James is taking an awful
lot of stick here for very little reason, so I feel obliged to. I'll
stick to the important points.
You know nothing about what i study in my spare time.
This could well be one crux of the matter. You're absolutely right -
James doesn't know anything about what you study in your spare time, and
neither do I. Obviously it's possible that you've explained in your
personal statement that recreational maths is one of your hobbies, but
no one reading this group has any reason to think that you have.
You talk about matrices and trigonometry as though they are an end it
itself. Pray tell me the relevance of trig to a computing degree. Give
me a practical application of matrices.
This could well be the other crux. One point is that Computer Science,
as she is studied at the sort of institutions you've applied to, is not
always geared directly towards the practical. Another, on which our
resident CompScis are more qualified to judge, is that trigonometry and
matrices might well be relevant to a computing degree. As a semi-maths
graduate, I'd be willing to bet that matrices are an absolutely standard
part of Computer Science - not just matrices as found in A-level maths,
but matrices as found in undergraduate-level linear algebra. There may
be more advanced maths too, like computability and the lambda calculus.

All of which means that it's vital for admissions tutors to be able to
see that you wouldn't be struggling unnecessarily simply because you had
not recently studied (or used) the maths that they take for granted when
teaching you. It's not just a question of mathematical aptitude - it's
a question of working mathematical knowledge.

I'll give an illustration of the importance of *working* mathematical
knowledge from my own experience. As I said, I'm a semi-maths graduate,
and I finished the mathematical half of my degree in 2002. In 2003 I
applied to GCHQ, because code-breaking sounds ever so exciting. Having
got through the paper sift of applications, I was invited to sit a maths
test. It turned out to be the most humiliating exam experience of my
entire life. The questions all related to first-year maths, some of
which I hadn't seen or used for all of *three years*.

That is why ATs are unlikely to treat your Stats O Level as indicative
of sufficient mathematical knowledge (not innate aptitude) to embark on
an academic course in Computer Science. You might find it more useful
than you'd think to spend some quality time with pure maths textbooks
before starting at UCL or City, if you do take up one of those offers.
The CompScis here might have more specific topics to recommend.

Mark.
wooks
2005-07-31 13:37:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Thakkar
Wooks,
It may be unwise for me to wade in here, but James is taking an awful
lot of stick here for very little reason, so I feel obliged to. I'll
stick to the important points.
You know nothing about what i study in my spare time.
This could well be one crux of the matter. You're absolutely right -
James doesn't know anything about what you study in your spare time, and
neither do I.
Well then he shouldn't assume.
Post by Mark Thakkar
Obviously it's possible that you've explained in your
personal statement that recreational maths is one of your hobbies, but
no one reading this group has any reason to think that you have.
I stated very clearly in my post to Dr Walker the basis of my
application. A very strong personal statement and a very strong
reference from a highly reputable source.

So the reasonable assumption to be made or inference to draw is that
these things were taken care of in my personal statement/reference.
Which they were.
Post by Mark Thakkar
You talk about matrices and trigonometry as though they are an end it
itself. Pray tell me the relevance of trig to a computing degree. Give
me a practical application of matrices.
This could well be the other crux. One point is that Computer Science,
as she is studied at the sort of institutions you've applied to, is not
always geared directly towards the practical.
Which is another reason I feel patronised. The assumption that I don't
know this. AAMOF I addressed this in my personal statement.
Post by Mark Thakkar
Another, on which our
resident CompScis are more qualified to judge, is that trigonometry and
matrices might well be relevant to a computing degree. As a semi-maths
graduate, I'd be willing to bet that matrices are an absolutely standard
part of Computer Science - not just matrices as found in A-level maths,
but matrices as found in undergraduate-level linear algebra.
I don't doubt that you are right about matrices, but the fact that he
chucked in trig indicated to me that he was just throwing in sub topics
without considering or knowing the relevance of them himself. The
import of my statement was not - these things aren't relevant but to
challenge him to demonstrate to me that he knew the relevance. If he
had used things like set theory, predicate calculus or even discrete
mathematics then I would have known that he knew what he was talking
about. As he didn't it was a challenge.
Post by Mark Thakkar
There may
be more advanced maths too, like computability and the lambda calculus.
The AT reading my application would have noted that I had been learning
scheme
(which I did state here) and may well have inferred (if he was familiar
with the language himself) that I had a familiarity with lambda
calculus based on that.

Anyway never fear I took care of it 2 days ago.

Items not yet dispatched:
Delivery estimate: 12 Aug 2005 - 16 Aug 2005

* 1 of: Purely Functional Data Structures
* 1 of: An Introduction to Lambda Calculi for Computer Scientists
Post by Mark Thakkar
All of which means that it's vital for admissions tutors to be able to
see that you wouldn't be struggling unnecessarily simply because you had
not recently studied (or used) the maths that they take for granted when
teaching you. It's not just a question of mathematical aptitude - it's
a question of working mathematical knowledge.
addressed above.
Post by Mark Thakkar
I'll give an illustration of the importance of *working* mathematical
knowledge from my own experience. As I said, I'm a semi-maths graduate,
and I finished the mathematical half of my degree in 2002. In 2003 I
applied to GCHQ, because code-breaking sounds ever so exciting. Having
got through the paper sift of applications, I was invited to sit a maths
test. It turned out to be the most humiliating exam experience of my
entire life. The questions all related to first-year maths, some of
which I hadn't seen or used for all of *three years*.
I actually made it clear that my application to York (which is the sole
aspect he has focused on) was predicated on my scrutinising their
syllabus and discovering that they use SICP and scheme in the 1st year.
I've mentioned the efforts I went to to get a syllabus from QMUL and I
have also mentioned very early in the thread that I wasn't that keen on
Greenwich because content of their programme contained a reasonable
degree of stuff I already knew.

Now a reasonable inference to draw from all that is that this guy HAS
been looking at CompSci syllabi and HAS got an appreciation for the
mathematical content of a CompSci degree programme.

Now I don't know what stage you came into this thread, but James has
been in on it from an early stage. Maybe now you will understand why I
find his approach lazy and patronising.
Post by Mark Thakkar
That is why ATs are unlikely to treat your Stats O Level as indicative
of sufficient mathematical knowledge (not innate aptitude) to embark on
an academic course in Computer Science.
This again is what I find patronising.

I have never suggested and didn't expect that my Stats O level would be
considered evidence of sufficient mathematical knowledge. For one thing
it does not represent the pinnacle of my mathematical qualifications as
stated on my form.

UEL said. You don't have an O'level in Maths which conveys to me they
are concerned about evidence of numeracy skills. I say I have an
O'level in Statistics can't you analogoize from that.

I am pretty sure that if my application had said I have an HNC in
Management Information Systems (which is what my IMIS qualification is
equivalent to) , I wouldn't be hearing all the nonsense about not
having a qualification in Maths (ironically and I repeat York state
that they do consider HNC's. UCL state that they do not).

To complete disregard maths papers sat as part of professional exams or
HNC's is simply misguided academic snobbery.
Post by Mark Thakkar
You might find it more useful
than you'd think to spend some quality time with pure maths textbooks
before starting at UCL or City, if you do take up one of those offers.
The CompScis here might have more specific topics to recommend.
Mark.
Ok I know you are trying to be helpful but why do you presume I need
that advice.

There are a number of ways of looking at my experience.

1. This guy failed to get into York or Kings (maybe I will ring them up
and ask) and wasn't able to satisfy UEL that he could handle Maths.
His application was probably deficient. He probably assumed that he
could just waltz in to university based on his IT work experience.

2. This guy interested Greenwich and was offered a place by City.
Greenwich are involved (and City had been involved) in the IMIS
curriculum and instantly recognised the worth of that qualified.
Greenwich are interesting because if you look at their programme it is
very practical-oriented

http://www.cms.gre.ac.uk/web/undergraduate/CS.asp

not much Maths there. I stated on this thread was that I wasn't
attracted to study there because I wasn't looking for a degree to
validate what I already knew.

City are also a very industry oriented institution, although they do
have a strong theoretical element to their programme. I would have been
quite happy to go there.

3. UCL broke their rules

a) we interview everybody
b) We do not usually admit candidates with Higher National Diplomas,
Certificates or GNVQ qualifications. (talk less of HNC equivalents)
c) Mature students are expected to have refreshed their Mathematics
skills by successfully completing a Access to Computing course with at
least 6 credits at level 3 in Mathematics and a total of 24 credits.

to offer this guy a place.

He must have put in a very strong application. (I don't think Dr Walker
really meant it when he said they may have been desperate or felt sorry
for me).

James focused exclusively on option 1 and repeatedly patronised me in
the process so I dealt with his issues and as I admit it influence the
manner in which I addressed them.

Dr Walker has had some interesting things to say and I expect that
after Matthew unconvinces himself that I am a pixie from never never
land with some made up story and figures out what happened to my
application at QMUL he will have some more interesting things to say.

BTW here is the IMIS website www.imis.org.uk. They adminster their
exams worldwide - 70 countries. I would have thought that a uni that
processes a reasonable number of overseas applications would have come
across them.
jrg
2005-07-31 14:32:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Yes. Not those specific locations but
http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/teaching/ug/MSci_CS_International_Programme.htm
and at York students can take placements abroad
http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/Sandwich.php
I am highlighting in my application that I have already done those
things (I had my secondary schooling abroad as well).
But though this may have been interesting/good life experience, I don't
see how it is at all relevant to how good you are at studying
computing.
Post by wooks
In the overall scheme of academic achievement A levels aren't jack
shit. If outside of the context of university entrance you tell people
that the most you have to offer is A levels you aren't going to impress
anybody.
Post by jrg
And please don't respond with another sarcy comment about all the life
skills or whatever you learn by not doing A-levels,
Assumptive and patronising.
My school principal used to have a saying. "Don't pass through the
school without letting the school pass through you".
But look, I assumed 100% correctly! What's the point with all these
aspertions as to my supposed lack of wisdom and education? To try to
damage my confidence to the extent that I stop arguing back? To try to
provoke me into launching into personal attacks myself to make myself
look bad? Or maybe you just have a serious chip on your shoulder and I
make a good target to take it out on?
Post by wooks
assumptive and patronising. You know nothing about what i study in my
spare time. btw do you know what he studide
Yes because I looked it up on google before answering. Though exactly
what he studied isn't particularly relevant in any case, the reason you
mentioned a 19th century mathematician was to illustrate the point that
not everyone with scientific/mathemetical ability started with normal
academic qualifictions. Einstein is a more commonly used example.
Post by wooks
Are you suggesting that people who have done AAT should not be allowed
to do accountancy degrees if they have no A levels.
Are you suggesting that people who have done ILEX shouldn't progress to
law degrees if they have no A levels.
Are you suggesting that people who have done the Institute of Bankers
exams shouldn't be admitted to do a finance degree if they have no A
levels.
Forget the IMIS what about people who have done BCS exams and what to
study Computing.
I don't know the details of each of those qualifications to comment.
Additionally, degrees in accountancy and finance are considerably more
vocational than what you study than Computer Science at many
univesities (and various other subjects, too).
Post by wooks
You trip words like abstraction off your tongue whilst simultaneously
displaying a distinct lack of ability to abstract.
Boole, Einstein.
Post by wooks
You talk about
matrices and trigonometry as though they are an end it itself. Pray
tell me the relevance of trig to a computing degree. Give me a
practical application of matrices.
Firstly, I have briefly played with computer graphics, and though I am
no expert I do know they are of key importance. This is a dinstinctly
direct and practical application. Second, I distinctly remember a
friend describing their fourth year project as "basically just a lot of
matrices". I could say what their project was actually about, but I
don't want to say things that could explicitly identify other people.
Nonetheless, referencing an earlier point in this thread, it turns out
the experience of friends can be directly useful.

Trigonomotery was thrown in as the first advanced maths topic that came
into my head, but I do know that my computer science (and in fact also
Chemisty and Engineering) friends at York were studying and using maths
other than just matrices.
Post by wooks
Assumptive. You presume you can tell me what I felt was patronising.
You were replying to a post I made section by section, and after the
section where I said "I think you underestimate what is meant by
"mathematical aptitude". Computer Science at York/Imperial is very
competitive.", you said "Please don't patronise me like that.". So it
is not assumptive, I am merely looking at what you actually wrote.

James
wooks
2005-07-31 15:02:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Yes. Not those specific locations but
http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/teaching/ug/MSci_CS_International_Programme.htm
and at York students can take placements abroad
http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/Sandwich.php
I am highlighting in my application that I have already done those
things (I had my secondary schooling abroad as well).
But though this may have been interesting/good life experience, I don't
see how it is at all relevant to how good you are at studying
computing.
If doing part of your studies or the work experience element of a
sandwich degree abroad wasn't relevant to a CS course then I am sure
universities wouldn't offer the option.

Secondly a university education is more than just about academic study
and frankly I am shocked that (and I really don't mean to be nasty) I
am having to say that to a university graduate.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
In the overall scheme of academic achievement A levels aren't jack
shit. If outside of the context of university entrance you tell people
that the most you have to offer is A levels you aren't going to impress
anybody.
Post by jrg
And please don't respond with another sarcy comment about all the life
skills or whatever you learn by not doing A-levels,
Assumptive and patronising.
My school principal used to have a saying. "Don't pass through the
school without letting the school pass through you".
But look, I assumed 100% correctly! What's the point with all these
aspertions as to my supposed lack of wisdom and education?
I don't think you are lack wisdom and you are obviously educated.
Post by jrg
To try to
damage my confidence to the extent that I stop arguing back?
I am not trying to damage your confidence. I am sorry if my words have
had that effect.
Post by jrg
To try to
provoke me into launching into personal attacks myself to make myself
look bad? Or maybe you just have a serious chip on your shoulder and I
make a good target to take it out on?
I'm not trying to do any of that. I'm pointing out what I see as flaws
in the way you reach conclusions. I don't have a chip of my shoulder
either. You have a one dimensional view of the route to university and
I am telling you why I think you are wrong.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
assumptive and patronising. You know nothing about what i study in my
spare time. btw do you know what he studide
Yes because I looked it up on google before answering.
I couldn't discern that from what u were saying here's why.
Post by jrg
Though exactly
what he studied isn't particularly relevant in any case,
Oh yes it is
What would be the result if today George Boole had said to York look I
have taught my self Latin, French and German, I have also studied at a
commercial academy and I am currently working as a teacher. Will you
admit me to study Comp Sci.
Post by jrg
the reason you
mentioned a 19th century mathematician was to illustrate the point that
not everyone with scientific/mathemetical ability started with normal
academic qualifictions. Einstein is a more commonly used example.
Boole is more relevant to CompSci.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Are you suggesting that people who have done AAT should not be allowed
to do accountancy degrees if they have no A levels.
Are you suggesting that people who have done ILEX shouldn't progress to
law degrees if they have no A levels.
Are you suggesting that people who have done the Institute of Bankers
exams shouldn't be admitted to do a finance degree if they have no A
levels.
Forget the IMIS what about people who have done BCS exams and what to
study Computing.
I don't know the details of each of those qualifications to comment.
Additionally, degrees in accountancy and finance are considerably more
vocational than what you study than Computer Science at many
univesities (and various other subjects, too).
I think you should understand that not everybodys circumstances permit
them to go to university and that if they choose a different route it
is not necessarily inferior and certainly not to be compared
unfavourably with A levels.

Of course the standard of excellence in subjects like accountancy is
the professional qualification and not the degree. The degree gets you
admission into studying for the professional qualification - not the
other way round.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
You trip words like abstraction off your tongue whilst simultaneously
displaying a distinct lack of ability to abstract.
Boole, Einstein.
Post by wooks
You talk about
matrices and trigonometry as though they are an end it itself. Pray
tell me the relevance of trig to a computing degree. Give me a
practical application of matrices.
Firstly, I have briefly played with computer graphics, and though I am
no expert I do know they are of key importance. This is a dinstinctly
direct and practical application. Second, I distinctly remember a
friend describing their fourth year project as "basically just a lot of
matrices". I could say what their project was actually about, but I
don't want to say things that could explicitly identify other people.
Nonetheless, referencing an earlier point in this thread, it turns out
the experience of friends can be directly useful.
Trigonomotery was thrown in as the first advanced maths topic that came
into my head, but I do know that my computer science (and in fact also
Chemisty and Engineering) friends at York were studying and using maths
other than just matrices.
See my reply to Mark.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Assumptive. You presume you can tell me what I felt was patronising.
You were replying to a post I made section by section, and after the
section where I said "I think you underestimate what is meant by
"mathematical aptitude".
Thats patronising.
Post by jrg
Computer Science at York/Imperial is very
competitive.", you said "Please don't patronise me like that.". So it
is not assumptive, I am merely looking at what you actually wrote.
James
Is CompSci any less competitive at UCL.
jrg
2005-07-31 17:14:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
If doing part of your studies or the work experience element of a
sandwich degree abroad wasn't relevant to a CS course then I am sure
universities wouldn't offer the option.
Doing a sandwich degree abroad is useful because it gives you knowledge
about industry, and even the "real world" in general, that you do not
gain through academic study. However, you are making a move in the
opposite direction, and in the same way that those in academia need
non-academic experience to get a job, it seems not unreasonable that
people with jobs may need to gain some extra academic experience before
moving into academia.
Post by wooks
Secondly a university education is more than just about academic study
and frankly I am shocked that (and I really don't mean to be nasty) I
am having to say that to a university graduate.
I assure you I am already aware of this.
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
Though exactly
what he studied isn't particularly relevant in any case,
Oh yes it is
What would be the result if today George Boole had said to York look I
have taught my self Latin, French and German, I have also studied at a
commercial academy and I am currently working as a teacher. Will you
admit me to study Comp Sci.
It is quite possible they would say "could you please study some
mathematics as well, after you have done that we will offer you a
place". And George Boole did precisely that.
Post by wooks
I think you should understand that not everybodys circumstances permit
them to go to university and that if they choose a different route it
is not necessarily inferior and certainly not to be compared
unfavourably with A levels.
I entirely agree, however that doesn't mean you can automatically
expect to start a university course wherever you like without first
doing some form of academic study specifically relevant to the sort of
academic study you will be doing at that university. "Not via A-levels"
doesn't have to mean "No formal mathematical/scientific academic
background at all".
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
You were replying to a post I made section by section, and after the
section where I said "I think you underestimate what is meant by
"mathematical aptitude".
Thats patronising.
If you didn't constantly tell me that I fail to understand what you are
saying, I wouldn't need to constantly explain myself in patronising
detail.
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
Computer Science at York/Imperial is very
competitive.", you said "Please don't patronise me like that.". So it
is not assumptive, I am merely looking at what you actually wrote.
James
Is CompSci any less competitive at UCL.
Different universities and different courses have different criteria
via which they judge candidates, and in that they are independent
institutions they are allowed to do so. There is no universal standard
by which to judge which universities are most competitive.

UCL evidently place more weight on enthusiasm and industry connections
whilst York evidently place more weight on evidence of mathematical
study/ability. You believe that the former approach is better, hence my
earlier comment "the system works" - you have been matched up with
somewhere which has similar ideas of judging ability to your own.

James
wooks
2005-07-31 17:50:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
If doing part of your studies or the work experience element of a
sandwich degree abroad wasn't relevant to a CS course then I am sure
universities wouldn't offer the option.
Doing a sandwich degree abroad is useful because it gives you knowledge
about industry, and even the "real world" in general, that you do not
gain through academic study. However, you are making a move in the
opposite direction, and in the same way that those in academia need
non-academic experience to get a job, it seems not unreasonable that
people with jobs may need to gain some extra academic experience before
moving into academia.
It depends what you mean by academic experience.

Programmers study all the time.
20 years ago they dealing with structured programming hierarchical
databases and 4GL's, 15 years ago relational databases and open
systems, 10 years ago client server technology, 5 years ago eCommerce
and the web. Today web services, .net, extreme programming.

There are plenty of other professions where you need to keep your
knowledge up to date - accredited police station reps working in law
firms need to keep abreast with criminal law. Accountants need to keep
abreast with changes to new tax laws.

On the other hand if you have been a plumber and want to study
engineering then quite possibly you may benefit from a foundation
course.

So if you are saying some people may need a refresher then yes. But
your use of the term academic experience inclines me to believe you are
reverting to your one-dimensional view of the route to university
entrance.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Secondly a university education is more than just about academic study
and frankly I am shocked that (and I really don't mean to be nasty) I
am having to say that to a university graduate.
I assure you I am already aware of this.
Well if you are I am suprised at having to convince you of the
relevance of my experience working and schooling abroad.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
Though exactly
what he studied isn't particularly relevant in any case,
Oh yes it is
What would be the result if today George Boole had said to York look I
have taught my self Latin, French and German, I have also studied at a
commercial academy and I am currently working as a teacher. Will you
admit me to study Comp Sci.
It is quite possible they would say "could you please study some
mathematics as well, after you have done that we will offer you a
place". And George Boole did precisely that.
Which proves my point. The far sighted open minded university would
have recognized his potential and snapped him up there and then.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
I think you should understand that not everybodys circumstances permit
them to go to university and that if they choose a different route it
is not necessarily inferior and certainly not to be compared
unfavourably with A levels.
I entirely agree, however that doesn't mean you can automatically
expect to start a university course wherever you like without first
doing some form of academic study specifically relevant to the sort of
academic study you will be doing at that university. "Not via A-levels"
doesn't have to mean "No formal mathematical/scientific academic
background at all".
In other words you don't recognise the validity of professional
qualifications.
Well we disagree and luckily for me and thousands of others there are
AT's that don't think the way u do.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
You were replying to a post I made section by section, and after the
section where I said "I think you underestimate what is meant by
"mathematical aptitude".
Thats patronising.
If you didn't constantly tell me that I fail to understand what you are
saying, I wouldn't need to constantly explain myself in patronising
detail.
Ok let me make it clearer to you.

You've got this stuck up idea that because a person hasn't been to
university or hasn't done A'levels then either they don't understand
what mathematical aptitude is or tht you (who studied what - politics)
are qualified to tell them.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
Computer Science at York/Imperial is very
competitive.", you said "Please don't patronise me like that.". So it
is not assumptive, I am merely looking at what you actually wrote.
James
Is CompSci any less competitive at UCL.
Different universities and different courses have different criteria
via which they judge candidates, and in that they are independent
institutions they are allowed to do so. There is no universal standard
by which to judge which universities are most competitive.
Right then. So you have no basis to be telling me that CompSci at
York/Imperial are competitive. You've just pulled the rug from under
your own argument.
Post by jrg
UCL evidently place more weight on enthusiasm and industry connections
whilst York evidently place more weight on evidence of mathematical
study/ability. You believe that the former approach is better, hence my
earlier comment "the system works" - you have been matched up with
somewhere which has similar ideas of judging ability to your own.
James
Bollocks.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8403-1246759,00.html
jrg
2005-07-31 19:20:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Which proves my point. The far sighted open minded university would
have recognized his potential and snapped him up there and then.
If you apply for a computer science course at any good university in
the UK - including UCL - on the basis of amazing ability at Latin,
French and German you would be turned down. That is simply a fact.
Post by wooks
You've got this stuck up idea that because a person hasn't been to
university or hasn't done A'levels then either they don't understand
what mathematical aptitude is or tht you (who studied what - politics)
are qualified to tell them.
I never said "don't understand what apititude is", I said "don't have
proof of aptitude". The former would be snobbish, the latter is not,
and applies as equally to me as it does to you. At no point have I ever
said that because I have a university degree I know anything you don't,
yet you constantly attack me and defend yourself as those that is what
I am saying. I think you have the ignorant and prejudiced view, shared
by many, that anyone with a university degree looks down on those who
don't. Yet I don't hold that opinion, and have said nothing that could
imply as such.
Post by wooks
Bollocks.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8403-1246759,00.html
I should probably just leave you happy in your assured belief that UCL
is by far superior to anywhere that may have turned you down. But I'm
not.

Arguing about the supposed superiority of one university or another on
the basis of various conflicting newspaper news articles and league
tables is one of the stock-in-trades of this group, to such an extent
that one member of the group even made this web parody:

http://www.axeuk.com/onebollock/league/league.cgi

James
wooks
2005-07-31 21:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Which proves my point. The far sighted open minded university would
have recognized his potential and snapped him up there and then.
If you apply for a computer science course at any good university in
the UK - including UCL - on the basis of amazing ability at Latin,
French and German you would be turned down. That is simply a fact.
The sad thing is that u don't realise how dumb it is to say that.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
You've got this stuck up idea that because a person hasn't been to
university or hasn't done A'levels then either they don't understand
what mathematical aptitude is or tht you (who studied what - politics)
are qualified to tell them.
I never said "don't understand what apititude is", I said "don't have
proof of aptitude". The former would be snobbish, the latter is not,
and applies as equally to me as it does to you. At no point have I ever
said that because I have a university degree I know anything you don't,
yet you constantly attack me and defend yourself as those that is what
I am saying. I think you have the ignorant and prejudiced view, shared
by many, that anyone with a university degree looks down on those who
don't. Yet I don't hold that opinion, and have said nothing that could
imply as such.
Some time ago the law of diminishing return set in on our conversation.
That just about represents it's nadir.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Bollocks.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8403-1246759,00.html
I should probably just leave you happy in your assured belief that UCL
is by far superior to anywhere that may have turned you down. But I'm
not.
Arguing about the supposed superiority of one university or another on
the basis of various conflicting newspaper news articles and league
tables is one of the stock-in-trades of this group, to such an extent
http://www.axeuk.com/onebollock/league/league.cgi
James
So that represents what you managed to parse from the article, which by
the way was posted in response to something you said about the type of
people that UCL admits.

I have spent considerable time now observing how you reason, how you
parse arguments and how you respond to things. You don't seem to have
much awareness of the import of the things you say. You regularly come
up with things that prove the opposing point without realising it (your
view on how you think a university should react to a George Boole is a
case in point. Needless to say in your world Einstein would should have
been dealt with in the same way). You also don't show an awareness of
when the things you say defeat your own arguments.

Whether you believe me or not what I am going to say to you now is not
because you and I disagree or because I dislike you or because you went
to York and I won't be. I can see you are quite an amiable and well
meaning guy and you have some likeable qualities. However this is
usenet, I don't know you from Adam, I don't owe you any favours and I
am not the responsible for the state of your self esteem, so here goes.

You are the last person who should be pontificating about how
universities should go about selecting who to admit because everything
I have observed about how you reason since we started this
conversation leads me to believe that sending you to University was a
complete waste of taxpayers money.
jrg
2005-07-31 21:59:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
You are the last person who should be pontificating about how
universities should go about selecting who to admit because everything
I have observed about how you reason since we started this
conversation leads me to believe that sending you to University was a
complete waste of taxpayers money.
You believe I am unable to understand your point, you believe I am
unable to understand yours. You believe anyone reading this thread will
be saying to themselves "Wow, wooks is having to deal with a real idiot
here", I am firmly of the belief that anyone still reading this thread
will think "wow, James is having to deal with a real idiot here".
Probably luckily for us, even if anyone still is reading this thread, I
doubt very much that they will comment either way. And even if they
did, it wouldn't neccessarily prove anything.

There are a multitude of subjects where I am lacking self esteem and
can be upset by people telling me I suck, but luckily for me in this
particular situation, my ability at reading, understanding and rational
debate is not such a subject.

James
jrg
2005-07-31 22:23:35 UTC
Permalink
OK, I imagine your going to reply to that some time later, and whatever
it is you say I'll let you have the last word this time.

But before that happens, I feel moved to say this to the audience: was
this or was this not a great thread? A mean, for months, maybe even
years, aua has consisted of people agreeing with each other or
otherwise arguing over the minutiae of the importance or not of proper
grammar and punctuation in a usenet post.

A debate as heated as this harks back to the great days of 1999/2000.

James
Ginnie Redston
2005-08-11 15:00:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
OK, I imagine your going to reply to that some time later, and whatever
it is you say I'll let you have the last word this time.
But before that happens, I feel moved to say this to the audience: was
this or was this not a great thread? A mean, for months, maybe even
years, aua has consisted of people agreeing with each other or
otherwise arguing over the minutiae of the importance or not of proper
grammar and punctuation in a usenet post.
A debate as heated as this harks back to the great days of 1999/2000.
James
<cackle>

That was fun. Shucks, got back from holiday just too late to join in.

Still in Scandinavia, James?


Ginnie
wooks
2005-08-01 06:35:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Which proves my point. The far sighted open minded university would
have recognized his potential and snapped him up there and then.
If you apply for a computer science course at any good university in
the UK - including UCL - on the basis of amazing ability at Latin,
French and German you would be turned down. That is simply a fact.
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/L/La/Larry_Wall.htm
jrg
2005-08-01 09:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Which proves my point. The far sighted open minded university would
have recognized his potential and snapped him up there and then.
If you apply for a computer science course at any good university in
the UK - including UCL - on the basis of amazing ability at Latin,
French and German you would be turned down. That is simply a fact.
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/L/La/Larry_Wall.htm
I was already aware that Larry Wall had a degree in something
non-scientific, though I had forgotten what, and I was already aware
that there is held to be a connection towards ability to analyse
computer programming languages and ability analyse natural languages.

However, there are more connections between Maths and the sort of
Computer Science you study in an undergraduate degree than there are
between Linguistics and the sort of Computer Science you study in an
undergraduate degree, and hence without evidence of
mathematical/scientific ability you won't get a place (I am talking
about a hypothetical modern day George Boole here who does not have
other things to offer like industry experience and connections).
Similarly, you cannot get a place at one of the more competitive
universities to study Chemistry on the basis of excellence in Physics,
or a place to study English on the basis of excellence in History, even
though there are undoubtedly strong connections between them.

James
wooks
2005-08-02 03:38:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Which proves my point. The far sighted open minded university would
have recognized his potential and snapped him up there and then.
If you apply for a computer science course at any good university in
the UK - including UCL - on the basis of amazing ability at Latin,
French and German you would be turned down. That is simply a fact.
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/L/La/Larry_Wall.htm
I was already aware that Larry Wall had a degree in something
non-scientific, though I had forgotten what, and I was already aware
that there is held to be a connection towards ability to analyse
computer programming languages and ability analyse natural languages.
However, there are more connections between Maths and the sort of
Computer Science you study in an undergraduate degree than there are
between Linguistics and the sort of Computer Science you study in an
undergraduate degree, and hence without evidence of
mathematical/scientific ability you won't get a place (I am talking
about a hypothetical modern day George Boole here who does not have
other things to offer like industry experience and connections).
Similarly, you cannot get a place at one of the more competitive
universities to study Chemistry on the basis of excellence in Physics,
or a place to study English on the basis of excellence in History, even
though there are undoubtedly strong connections between them.
James
http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/undergraduate/programmes/languages.html
jrg
2005-08-02 09:02:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/undergraduate/programmes/languages.html
I have already said I know that there are connections between computer
science and linguistics, and between plenty of other subjects too, and
I am also aware that there are many dual-subject (and indeed some
tri-subject) degree programmes, often consisting of considerably more
loosely related subjects.

It is possible that our disagreement stems from my being unable to read
and comprehend information, or to engage in abstract reasoning. However
I think it more likely that our disagreement is because you believe
A-levels are no more than a SAT-like university entrance test, whereas
I believe that you do actually learn something in them.

James
wooks
2005-08-02 10:18:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/undergraduate/programmes/languages.html
I have already said I know that there are connections between computer
science and linguistics, and between plenty of other subjects too, and
I am also aware that there are many dual-subject (and indeed some
tri-subject) degree programmes, often consisting of considerably more
loosely related subjects.
It is possible that our disagreement stems from my being unable to read
and comprehend information, or to engage in abstract reasoning. However
I think it more likely that our disagreement is because you believe
A-levels are no more than a SAT-like university entrance test, whereas
I believe that you do actually learn something in them.
James
Our disagreement stems from the fact that you think that A'levels or
some demonstrably equivalent exam are the ONLY way of assessing
suitably for entrance to university and I am telling you that they are
not.
jrg
2005-08-02 11:04:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/undergraduate/programmes/languages.html
I have already said I know that there are connections between computer
science and linguistics, and between plenty of other subjects too, and
I am also aware that there are many dual-subject (and indeed some
tri-subject) degree programmes, often consisting of considerably more
loosely related subjects.
It is possible that our disagreement stems from my being unable to read
and comprehend information, or to engage in abstract reasoning. However
I think it more likely that our disagreement is because you believe
A-levels are no more than a SAT-like university entrance test, whereas
I believe that you do actually learn something in them.
James
Our disagreement stems from the fact that you think that A'levels or
some demonstrably equivalent exam are the ONLY way of assessing
suitably for entrance to university and I am telling you that they are
not.
Just so.

James
jrg
2005-07-30 23:03:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
The ability to distill the relevant information from a specification is
pretty fundamental prequisite for a computer scientist. I don't know
whether it's something u learn from A' level maths but it is something
you learn from industry. Don't they teach it at York? So what you
should have done is posted this link.
http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/EntryPolicy.php#mature
OK maybe I'm being childish here but I've got time on my hands right
now so I'm going to respond point by point here, in detail. I doubt
anyone will even bother reading this, which is why I didn't reply in
the first place, but you refuse to accept that I read and understood
what you wrote.

So, here, point 1, did I correctly understand that web page? Yes. The
first of my two quotes was from a section entitled "Information - from
you to us". There is nothing to indicate that at least some of this
section might not apply to mature applicants. The second of my two
quotations was from the section you indicate "Mature applicants", as I
felt it particularly relevant. I specifically chose to post the general
link rather than the anchor link you offered because half of my
quotations were not beneath said anchor link.

- I quoted
Post by wooks
I have worked for a big 5 consulting firm, for NM Rothschilds the
investment bank, for a major UK clearing bank, for BT (on repeated
occasions) I have also work for a consulting company in New Zealand and
on both the east and west coast of the United states. No shortage of
work experience. Most of that was on my application form.
I have read this multiple times now. At no point have I argued this
isn't the case. Maybe it would help if I repeated for myself what you
have said. You have lots of industry experience in multiple countries,
working for big firms for big money and your employers were impressed
with you.
Post by wooks
If anything Yorks policy is acad
Post by Samsonknight
<snip>
- We do not admit applicants on the basis of work experience alone.
Another important ability you learn from industry is to pay attention
to the detail in the specification.
I didn't apply on the basis of work experience alone.
Nonetheless, along with your reference and enthusiasm for the course
(which almost all applicants will have), your work experience did seem
to be your main point, and it is the point you keep reiterating.
Post by wooks
So you haven't got a computing degree , you have about 20 years less
experience in the industry than I do and you are reliant on the
experience of your dad and your friends experience for your
information. All of which seems to make you spectacularly unqualified
to offer informed perspective.
Spectacularly unqualified to comment on e.g. trends in the IT industry,
programming paradigms, etc. However, on the issue of university
admissions, particularly to the University of York, I am actually
really very well qualified to offer a perspective.
Post by wooks
Another thing you will learn from working in industry is not to make
assumptions. Don't they teach that at York.
I never mentioned on my application that I knew anything about IT and I
did not mention that I had programmed in Visual Basic (I mentioned it
in this thread not on my application). OK.
OK, the Visual Basic comment was very lazy, sorry, but nonetheless, you
did for some reason specifically mention it in this thread. My point
was, industry experience does not equal academic experience. They are
different.
Post by wooks
I did mention that I had been programming in Scheme (which is something
else you would have picked up from a careful reading of my "spec" and
something else that you'll need to learn if you are going to prosper in
this industry).
I read that, yes.
Post by wooks
Scheme happens to be the language that York use in their first year to
teach. That meant that I wouldn't be asking lecturers at York how I was
going to benefit from using this poxy obscure language that nobody
uses in industry - because I already knew.
Certainly, I don't think anyone would doubt that you were not serious
and motivated in your application.
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
If you can convince York (or somewhere else, if you want to go
somewhere else) that you have studied a lot of maths, they might well
offer you a place, if you can't, they won't, and no amount of "I've
worked in IT for years!" will make any difference.
I know nothing about what IMIS is.
Then you should have taken care to find out before deciding to comment.
Thats another skill that goes down well in industry.
It's not like you just made one or two sarcy comments to amuse
yourself, you make them in practically every paragraph. If I responded
in the same way you do this would degenerate into nothing but putdowns.
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
Is the Maths equivalent in
difficulty to A-level Maths/Further Maths?
The equivalences are posted on the IMIS website. Doesn't the university
experience at York cultivate an enquiring mind.
I assume because you have not said "yes" the answer is therefore "no".
Sometimes assumptions are a valid way of saving one's time.
Post by wooks
Clearly I am an exception to that category. Towards the end of my
degree course they will be recommending to students that they do
something that I have already done - get some industry experience. In
the final year of my degree program I will be asked to do something
that I have been doing for the past 20 years - a group project. I
have already had an international flavour to my career and have
probably written, designed, tested and implemented more
programs/systems than any undergraduate could dream of doing in the 4
years they spend at their university.
In industry there is a phrase or people who stick to the same formula
even in the face of a clear exception - jobsworth.
Is anyone arguing that you were turned down because they thought you
might have trouble with the things you mention? No. Is experience of
systems design a particularly good indicator of ability at other
aspects of the course, e.g. abstract mathematics, hardware, functional
programming? Quite possibly not.
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
If so, maybe they don't know
that and explaining that in detail would help. Maybe the fact that it
was a late application didn't help here, because maybe they already had
plenty of applicants and so didn't feel the need to spend their time
researching IMIS for themselves.
Again this is something addressed earlier in the thread. I actually
spoke to York about this and was told it wasn't a problem because there
was a lighter workload on the AT's desk (not so many other competing
applications).
OK, I admit I missed you saying that, it wasn't in the original post.
Post by wooks
Why would I want to do that when I already have a place at UCL.
Your original post was unclear as to your intentions. But "you" can
still refer to the general case of "someone who wishes to go to York
but is turned down on the basis of lack of evidence of mathematical
ability".
Post by wooks
Once again - you've not been reading the spec. I have already had a
written response from York which I summarised in my convo with Dr
Walker. The York refusal was the only one I followed up for specific
reasons that I stated in my conversation with Dr Walker.
I assure you I did read that. I was merely providing a disclaimer to
make sure noone mistook me for getting an overinflated opinion of
myself and believing I speak for the University of York, where in fact
I obviously only speak for myself. Given the propensity of people on
usenet to take things the wrong way, it seemed a sensible precaution.

James
wooks
2005-07-31 06:06:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
The ability to distill the relevant information from a specification is
pretty fundamental prequisite for a computer scientist. I don't know
whether it's something u learn from A' level maths but it is something
you learn from industry. Don't they teach it at York? So what you
should have done is posted this link.
http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/EntryPolicy.php#mature
OK maybe I'm being childish here but I've got time on my hands right
now so I'm going to respond point by point here, in detail. I doubt
anyone will even bother reading this, which is why I didn't reply in
the first place, but you refuse to accept that I read and understood
what you wrote.
So, here, point 1, did I correctly understand that web page? Yes. The
first of my two quotes was from a section entitled "Information - from
you to us". There is nothing to indicate that at least some of this
section might not apply to mature applicants.
The extract that you provided came slap band in the middle of a
section that was clearly and specifically targeted at candidates
seeking admission on the basis of their examination results.
Post by jrg
The second of my two
quotations was from the section you indicate "Mature applicants", as I
felt it particularly relevant. I specifically chose to post the general
link rather than the anchor link you offered because half of my
quotations were not beneath said anchor link.
The information expected and required from mature students (including
educational qualifications) was quite distinctly stated in this
section.
Post by jrg
- I quoted
Post by wooks
I have worked for a big 5 consulting firm, for NM Rothschilds the
investment bank, for a major UK clearing bank, for BT (on repeated
occasions) I have also work for a consulting company in New Zealand and
on both the east and west coast of the United states. No shortage of
work experience. Most of that was on my application form.
I have read this multiple times now. At no point have I argued this
isn't the case.
You extracted a link stating that the most common reason for
applications failing is a lack of information and I responded giving a
flavour of the amount of information that was on my application. There
was enough information on there for UCL and City.

<snip>
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
If anything Yorks policy is acad
Post by Samsonknight
<snip>
- We do not admit applicants on the basis of work experience alone.
Another important ability you learn from industry is to pay attention
to the detail in the specification.
I didn't apply on the basis of work experience alone.
Nonetheless, along with your reference and enthusiasm for the course
(which almost all applicants will have), your work experience did seem
to be your main point, and it is the point you keep reiterating.
You're a patronising sod aren't you.

You want to come and argue a point but won't make the effort to get
your facts right and are so ready to substitute with assumption and
speculation.

Let me demonstrate

<quote>*****I did make my objectives very clear in my application. I
said I had
spent 20 years observing industry practices come to the conclusion that
it was at best benign hacking and that I wanted to learn a more
epistemological approach to software development which I saw centred
around logic and functional programming techniques and formal methods.

All that was clearly stated in my application. *****</quote>

Now I know you read that because the next line of that post was where I
mentioned that I had programmed in Visual Basic. You reffered to that
and wrongly assumed that it was in my application. AAMOF it is quite
illustrative of your patronising attitude to see what I did actually
say about Visual Basic in that next paragraph and how you responded.

<quote>***** I have built applications in Visual Basic and imperative
programming languages and didn't particularly want to be taught stuff
that I had already had plenty experiece of or could get experience of
by staying
in industry ****** </quote>

Now you read that and came up with this

<yourQuote>***** b) Computer Science admissions tutors don't care at
all how much you know about "IT" and Visual Basic ******</yourQuote>
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
So you haven't got a computing degree , you have about 20 years less
experience in the industry than I do and you are reliant on the
experience of your dad and your friends experience for your
information. All of which seems to make you spectacularly unqualified
to offer informed perspective.
Spectacularly unqualified to comment on e.g. trends in the IT industry,
programming paradigms, etc. However, on the issue of university
admissions, particularly to the University of York, I am actually
really very well qualified to offer a perspective.
Why did you think you needed to do that. I had already stated here that
I had had an explanation from York about their decision.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Another thing you will learn from working in industry is not to make
assumptions. Don't they teach that at York.
I never mentioned on my application that I knew anything about IT and I
did not mention that I had programmed in Visual Basic (I mentioned it
in this thread not on my application). OK.
OK, the Visual Basic comment was very lazy, sorry, but nonetheless, you
did for some reason specifically mention it in this thread. My point
was, industry experience does not equal academic experience. They are
different.
Apology accepted.

My point to you is that an A'level ain't jack shit as academic
experience but it's what AT's have come to rely on for the majority of
their applicants who come straight from school.

CS AT's are looking to admit people who have the potential to be
successful in a CS degree course. They say and I have no reason to
doubt that Maths A'levels have been a reliable indicator for this but
the unstated qualification to that statement should be pardon my caps
FOR THOSE COMING STRAIGHT FROM SCHOOL.

On the other hand you may get an application from a person who left
school at 16 and has been commercially successful writing games
software or developing some sort of mobile phone technology.

Clearly you should be assessing their potential on criteria other than
A levels. It may not result in an offer - maybe as Matthew has said an
AT may feel that the person would be bored or not happy on the course,
but the thrust of what I am saying is that it is that A levels are not
the only indicator of the potential that AT's should be looking for.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
I did mention that I had been programming in Scheme (which is something
else you would have picked up from a careful reading of my "spec" and
something else that you'll need to learn if you are going to prosper in
this industry).
I read that, yes.
Post by wooks
Scheme happens to be the language that York use in their first year to
teach. That meant that I wouldn't be asking lecturers at York how I was
going to benefit from using this poxy obscure language that nobody
uses in industry - because I already knew.
Certainly, I don't think anyone would doubt that you were not serious
and motivated in your application.
You're patronising me again.

Look here's an excerpt from my personal statement.

<quote>******* My leisure time is spent learning languages like Scheme
and Lisp and numbered amongst my ambitions is a desire to join the
ranks of people who can say they have read and understood the Structure
and Interpretations of Computer Programs. The speed at which new
languages and technologies are foisted upon us outstrips my ability to
assimilate without a solid
foundation. *****</quote>

Now a week after I wrote that I found this in Yorks syllabus at
http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/admit/Modules/pop.html

<YorkQuote>****The language we shall use, scheme, is ideal for the
purposes of the module since it is very simple notationally (you don't
have to learn lots of rules), but very powerful conceptually (all
styles of programming can be clearly represented). In fact, it is so
simple that we shall spend less than 10% of the time teaching scheme
explicitly - you will learn it by using it to think about the
Principles of Programming. The module is strongly based on what has
been described as ``the best computer science book, ever'' - Abelson
and Sussman's Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (see
book-list, below). This is a book that you absolutely must buy, read,
and study carefully. Although it is not used explicitly in other
modules in your course, you will be able to use it to gain deeper
insight into Computer Science as you study further topics.

The module structure is based on the Teach-Consolidate-Assess cycle.
Each week's lectures will normally consist of two lectures introducing
new material followed by a third deepening your understanding by
looking at the material in new ways. There will be supervised
practicals each week, and consolidation exercises for you to do in your
own time. The module covers the first half of Abelson and Sussman's
book (see below). You should expect to spend a high proportion of your
"private study" time reading the text, and trying the (many) problems
and exercises that are presented there. ******</YorkQuote>

The text of SICP is on the web, 3 of the 4 other books recommended for
that course were already in my personal library. That is why I felt
that my application was especially relevant to York and I specifically
took time to look. Their reply to me was and I quote

<Yorkquote>***** We have now reviewed your UCAS application and whilst
we were
impressed with your computing background and Scheme experience, it
really was the absence of a strong Mathematics qualification that stood
against you. Mathematics is one of the most important aspects of our
entry requirements and experience has shown that students without
A-level
Maths or equivalent competency will struggle with our course.
</Yorkquote>
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
If you can convince York (or somewhere else, if you want to go
somewhere else) that you have studied a lot of maths, they might well
offer you a place, if you can't, they won't, and no amount of "I've
worked in IT for years!" will make any difference.
I know nothing about what IMIS is.
Then you should have taken care to find out before deciding to comment.
Thats another skill that goes down well in industry.
It's not like you just made one or two sarcy comments to amuse
yourself, you make them in practically every paragraph. If I responded
in the same way you do this would degenerate into nothing but putdowns.
In every instance what I gave you was good advice. It was laced in
sarcasm in response to your patronising tone of your post. I've already
explained this.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
Is the Maths equivalent in
difficulty to A-level Maths/Further Maths?
The equivalences are posted on the IMIS website. Doesn't the university
experience at York cultivate an enquiring mind.
I assume because you have not said "yes" the answer is therefore "no".
Sometimes assumptions are a valid way of saving one's time.
Post by wooks
Clearly I am an exception to that category. Towards the end of my
degree course they will be recommending to students that they do
something that I have already done - get some industry experience. In
the final year of my degree program I will be asked to do something
that I have been doing for the past 20 years - a group project. I
have already had an international flavour to my career and have
probably written, designed, tested and implemented more
programs/systems than any undergraduate could dream of doing in the 4
years they spend at their university.
In industry there is a phrase or people who stick to the same formula
even in the face of a clear exception - jobsworth.
Is anyone arguing that you were turned down because they thought you
might have trouble with the things you mention? No.
You seem to be a very difficult person to get through to and pretty
soon I will stop trying.

My point is that the university of York didn't think at all.

The sum total of their assessment of my applicatio was to look for what
they would recognise as an A'level Maths equivalent qualification, not
find one and that was that.
Post by jrg
Is experience of
systems design a particularly good indicator of ability at other
aspects of the course, e.g. abstract mathematics, hardware, functional
programming? Quite possibly not.
That subliminally patronising attitude surfaces again. Now my
application has now been condensed into experience of system design.

Lets deal with these issues.

FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMMING

Earlier you acknowledged that I had said I had programmed in scheme.
Right look at entry 5.19 here

http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~gmh/faq.html

Are you beginning to see why I get annoyed with you.

The main language that I program in at present is XSLT something that
would probably have been mentioned if I had been offered the
opportunity to speak to somebody at York before their decision.

http://www.topxml.com/xsl/articles/fp/

HARDWARE

I would excel at Boolean algebra but struggle with everything else.
If you were raising this within the context of my lack of a discernible
background in Physics/Electronics then I would absolutely agree but

a) You are not so you don't have a point.
b) You probably slipped that in because I raised myself it in my last
post.

ABSTRACT MATHEMATICS

Abstraction is all about analysing a problem/concept and formulating a
representation that distills the essential features. That is what
problem solving with computers is all about. The output of an
abstractive process manifests at various stages in the development
cycle - schema diagrams, entity relationship models, database designs,
but ultimately the objective is a working system that solves the
problem it is modelled on or effectively communicates an idea/concept.

The correlation of computing with mathematics arises partly because
mathematics offers an alternative and in some cases more effective
means of communicating our ideas and solutions. If a person is adept at
distilling the essence of a problem idea and communicating it
mathematically (assuming that such problem lends itself to that mode of
communication) then that skill will translate to a computersied
solution. Now the corollary of that is that a person who has
demonstrable system design skills has demonstrated an aptitude that
translates into abstract mathematics. What seems to have gone over your
head is that abstract mathematics within the context of a CS degree is
not an end in itself - but offers techniques via which we can solve
problems with computers. So in essence you have got it arse about
face.

Whilst we are on the subject of abstraction, it is a concept whose
relevance to computing is not confined to mathematics. It applies to
art - when you choose to represent a concept visually does your
representation encapsulate the essence which in turn circularises back
to computing. What and how do u choose to present your diagrams and
user interfaces. It also applies to the written word. When a journalist
chooses to file an account of an event what how does he approach it.
What does he choose for a headline which events does he include and
which does he leave out. Again that circularises into computing - when
you are writing a paper, proposal or spec what goes in and what is left
out - how is it presented.

The last point is the reason why if I were your boss I'd fire your ass.
Not because you disagreed with me, not because you graduated from a
school that turned me down. No. The reason is because throughout this
discussion you have shown yourself to be spectacularly incapable of
distilling the essence of what I have said and what is at issue so as
to permit yourself to put in a reasoned and cogent response. Therefore
I wouldn't want you writing proposals talking to customers or dealing
with management and I wouldn't let you near any programming. If I
couldn't do those things what use would you be to the department.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Post by Samsonknight
If so, maybe they don't know
that and explaining that in detail would help. Maybe the fact that it
was a late application didn't help here, because maybe they already had
plenty of applicants and so didn't feel the need to spend their time
researching IMIS for themselves.
Again this is something addressed earlier in the thread. I actually
spoke to York about this and was told it wasn't a problem because there
was a lighter workload on the AT's desk (not so many other competing
applications).
OK, I admit I missed you saying that, it wasn't in the original post.
Post by wooks
Why would I want to do that when I already have a place at UCL.
Your original post was unclear as to your intentions. But "you" can
still refer to the general case of "someone who wishes to go to York
but is turned down on the basis of lack of evidence of mathematical
ability".
Let me repeat for the umpteenth time. My application did not lack
evidence of mathematical ability - I refer you to my various posts to
Matthew. York did what u did, they didn't know and couldn't be assed to
find out what the IMIS wa
s or to discern what the mathematical element of their program was. Now
you could say that may have been my fault but my IMIS qualifications
were not the bedrock of my application and given that at various times
the IMIS curriculum has been accredited by City and Greenwich
Universities I thought that other universities would be conversant with
them.

My original post and this thread was about the mature student
admissions process being a complete lottery. I narrated my experience
in applying to 9 different universities. 4 including York turned me
down. You've chosen to talk about only York. York happens to be the
least interesting case of the lot to me because I know why they did
what they did. You're the one who wants to about York and justify their
approach. I've indulged you. Having decided to do what you did you did
not and still haven't gone about it very well.
Post by jrg
Post by wooks
Once again - you've not been reading the spec. I have already had a
written response from York which I summarised in my convo with Dr
Walker. The York refusal was the only one I followed up for specific
reasons that I stated in my conversation with Dr Walker.
I assure you I did read that. I was merely providing a disclaimer to
make sure noone mistook me for getting an overinflated opinion of
myself and believing I speak for the University of York, where in fact
I obviously only speak for myself. Given the propensity of people on
usenet to take things the wrong way, it seemed a sensible precaution.
James
So basically the motive of your intervention was to tell me that York
have very high standards which should not be lowered and which they and
you felt I did not meet.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-07-30 00:25:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
The only undergraduate course unit in Computer Science at Queen Mary
which uses C++ is a third year unit called "C++ for Image Processing"
where the main aim is "to provide an introduction to basic concepts and
methodologies for digital image processing". C++ is used in this course
because its low-level nature makes it suited to the sort of algorithms
used in image processing. Otherwise, it is false to state that "QMUL
uses C++ to teach".

We have not had a course unit in functional programming for four years
now. I think there's value in having such a thing, and if it was up to
me I'd reintroduce it. Some of the abstract structuring stuff that
course unit was intended to cover now goes on in the Discrete Maths
course unit. Our teaching of programming uses Java, but it is intended
to be about programming in general which just happens to use Java, and
is not centred on the more intricate details of Java. Personally, as
someone whose background is in functional and logic programming, I
think the object-oriented paradigm is important, and it's the way
programming ought to be introduced. Java is the best language which is
easily available for doing so. A lot of the conceptual ideas that used
to be introduced through functional programming, such as recursion and
list manipulation, are now done using Java. The dropping of an explicit
functional programming course unit did not mean any fundamental change
in our philosophy, which is very much towards introducing computer
science in terms of abstraction and problem-solving.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-07-30 05:51:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
The only undergraduate course unit in Computer Science at Queen Mary
which uses C++ is a third year unit called "C++ for Image Processing"
where the main aim is "to provide an introduction to basic concepts and
methodologies for digital image processing". C++ is used in this course
because its low-level nature makes it suited to the sort of algorithms
used in image processing. Otherwise, it is false to state that "QMUL
uses C++ to teach".
I merely quoted what I was told by your admissions dept. I asked what
languages do you use to teach they said Java and C++. Perhaps you
should speak to them about it.

I have to say on the whole I found them rather unhelpful. I actually
turned up at the university and asked for a CompSci syllabus and they
fobbed me off with a prospectus I went back and pointed this out and I
was told to wait an hour whilst somebody got back from lunch.

I had other things to do that day and left. The staff seemed
disinterested.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
We have not had a course unit in functional programming for four years
now. I think there's value in having such a thing, and if it was up to
me I'd reintroduce it. Some of the abstract structuring stuff that
course unit was intended to cover now goes on in the Discrete Maths
course unit. Our teaching of programming uses Java, but it is intended
to be about programming in general which just happens to use Java, and
is not centred on the more intricate details of Java. Personally, as
someone whose background is in functional and logic programming, I
think the object-oriented paradigm is important, and it's the way
programming ought to be introduced. Java is the best language which is
easily available for doing so. A lot of the conceptual ideas that used
to be introduced through functional programming, such as recursion and
list manipulation, are now done using Java. The dropping of an explicit
functional programming course unit did not mean any fundamental change
in our philosophy, which is very much towards introducing computer
science in terms of abstraction and problem-solving.
well that's it from the horses mouth. I got my information from whoever
answered the phone in the admissions dept.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-07-30 09:13:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
The only undergraduate course unit in Computer Science at Queen Mary
which uses C++ is a third year unit called "C++ for Image Processing"
where the main aim is "to provide an introduction to basic concepts and
methodologies for digital image processing". C++ is used in this course
because its low-level nature makes it suited to the sort of algorithms
used in image processing. Otherwise, it is false to state that "QMUL
uses C++ to teach".
I merely quoted what I was told by your admissions dept. I asked what
languages do you use to teach they said Java and C++. Perhaps you
should speak to them about it.
I have to say on the whole I found them rather unhelpful. I actually
turned up at the university and asked for a CompSci syllabus and they
fobbed me off with a prospectus I went back and pointed this out and I
was told to wait an hour whilst somebody got back from lunch.
What do you mean by "your admissions department"? If you mean the
college admissions office, they ought to have directed you to the
Computer Science department for further information. This is standard
practice, I get plenty of people turning up at the department office
asking for information, and I'm usually happy to talk to them myself.
General admissions staff in the college are quite clearly not going to
be knowledgeable about the details of every individual degree course in
the college. You could also have found everything you wanted just by
looking at the department's web site.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-07-30 10:33:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
QMUL - rejection - I have no idea why but by then I had found out they
had dropped functional programming from their syllabus and use Java and
C++ to teach and I lost interest in going there so didn't ask.
The only undergraduate course unit in Computer Science at Queen Mary
which uses C++ is a third year unit called "C++ for Image Processing"
where the main aim is "to provide an introduction to basic concepts and
methodologies for digital image processing". C++ is used in this course
because its low-level nature makes it suited to the sort of algorithms
used in image processing. Otherwise, it is false to state that "QMUL
uses C++ to teach".
I merely quoted what I was told by your admissions dept. I asked what
languages do you use to teach they said Java and C++. Perhaps you
should speak to them about it.
I have to say on the whole I found them rather unhelpful. I actually
turned up at the university and asked for a CompSci syllabus and they
fobbed me off with a prospectus I went back and pointed this out and I
was told to wait an hour whilst somebody got back from lunch.
What do you mean by "your admissions department"? If you mean the
college admissions office, they ought to have directed you to the
Computer Science department for further information.
I mean your Comp Sci department.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
This is standard
practice, I get plenty of people turning up at the department office
asking for information, and I'm usually happy to talk to them myself.
General admissions staff in the college are quite clearly not going to
be knowledgeable about the details of every individual degree course in
the college. You could also have found everything you wanted just by
looking at the department's web site.
Matthew Huntbach
I turned up at the Comp Sci Dept. I had already looked at the web site
and didn't find it in sufficient detail for my purposes.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-07-30 21:55:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
I merely quoted what I was told by your admissions dept. I asked what
languages do you use to teach they said Java and C++. Perhaps you
should speak to them about it.
I have to say on the whole I found them rather unhelpful. I actually
turned up at the university and asked for a CompSci syllabus and they
fobbed me off with a prospectus I went back and pointed this out and I
was told to wait an hour whilst somebody got back from lunch.
What do you mean by "your admissions department"? If you mean the
college admissions office, they ought to have directed you to the
Computer Science department for further information.
I mean your Comp Sci department.
There is not an "admissions department" in Computer Science at Queen
Mary. There is me. I do the admissions. If you turn up at the reception
at the Department of Computer Science and ask to see the admissions
tutor, you will be shown to me. I have not taken any holiday since late
July when you claim to have submitted your application. I eat my lunch
in my office, therefore I am there all the time.

We have an information booklet which we give enquirers who turn up,
which lists the course units for our degrees. We do not give out the
college prospectus. I would have been happy to provide you with further
details on the syllabus.

Since what you say does not ring true, I don't remember seeing an
applications anything like your in recent weeks, and I invited you to
email me your real name, but you haven't, it looks to me like your post
is all a pack of lies.

Matthew Huntbach
jrg
2005-07-30 23:47:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Since what you say does not ring true, I don't remember seeing an
applications anything like your in recent weeks, and I invited you to
email me your real name, but you haven't, it looks to me like your post
is all a pack of lies.
Possibly, but I would think a misunderstanding is more likely. Why
would someone make up a story like this? The story is not particularly
fantastical, and he has nothing to gain by making it up.

Also, you have previously expressed doubt as to the reality of the
lives of both flexiblegoat and Jess as described here in the past, yet
I personally knew "flexiblegoat" in real life for a time and Jess
posted a link a newspaper article and picture of herself.

Sure people on the internet could just be making everything up, but I
think it is useful to assume that in general people are telling the
truth.

James
wooks
2005-07-31 02:26:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
I merely quoted what I was told by your admissions dept. I asked what
languages do you use to teach they said Java and C++. Perhaps you
should speak to them about it.
I have to say on the whole I found them rather unhelpful. I actually
turned up at the university and asked for a CompSci syllabus and they
fobbed me off with a prospectus I went back and pointed this out and I
was told to wait an hour whilst somebody got back from lunch.
What do you mean by "your admissions department"? If you mean the
college admissions office, they ought to have directed you to the
Computer Science department for further information.
I mean your Comp Sci department.
There is not an "admissions department" in Computer Science at Queen
Mary. There is me. I do the admissions.
The information I got was from a lady in the Computer Science dept. I
rang up and asked what languages do you use to teach she said Java and
C++. I also asked whether you included functional programming on the
curriculum, she said you didn't. I think but can't be sure that I asked
the same question about formal methods and got the same negative
answer.

You've confirmed here that a seperate functional programming module is
no longer on your curriculum/syllabus/whatever you call it.

So do you think I'm lying about that.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
If you turn up at the reception
at the Department of Computer Science and ask to see the admissions
tutor, you will be shown to me. I have not taken any holiday since late
July when you claim to have submitted your application. I eat my lunch
in my office, therefore I am there all the time.
Right lets get this clear.

I got off the tube at Stepney Green station turned left and walked past
a building which IIRC is called Half Moon theatre. Qmul is a multi
storeyed cream coloured building. I walked through a quadrangle and I
remember on the day there was water gushing out of a whole in the
ground in the centre of it... might have been some sort of leak. I
entered a building and went up a number of flights of steps... can't
remember what floor now but I entered a room with a large counter.
There was a lady sitting close to the counter facing it. To her left
were a number of pigeon holes. There was another lady sat on the other
side of the room further back with her desk facing the side of the wall
that housed the pigeon holes (i.e she was not facing the counter).

I asked the lady whose desk was nearest the counter (she was younger,
the other one was middle aged) for a syllabus for computer sci. She
reached into the pigeon hole and gave me a booklet. I tooked it away
got halfway down the stairs and realised I had been given a prospectus.
I went back and repeated my request for a syllabus. The middle aged
lady intervened said the syllabus was on the internet. I said I had
looked all over the website and not found it which was why I came in.
She then called some number and told me the person I needed to speak to
in that case was at lunch and wouldn't be back till 2 (this happened at
around 1) and carried on with whatever it was she was doing. The pair
of them looked decidedly uninterested so I said thank you and left.

I don't know who she called. I didn't ask to speak to the Admissions
tutor ( I just wanted a syllabus there was no need). The person she
called may have been you I have no idea. So given that I wasn't
interested in waiting around for another hour and the ladies clearly
weren't interested in helping further. At the time I already had an
offer from City in the bag. I decided on the basis of that experience
that this was not an institution that I wanted to go to.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
We have an information booklet which we give enquirers who turn up,
which lists the course units for our degrees. We do not give out the
college prospectus. I would have been happy to provide you with further
details on the syllabus.
I have no reason to doubt this.
Well you or whoever it was that the lady called to service my request
was not there.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Since what you say does not ring true,
Well I think I have pretty accurately described the location and layout
of your offices. Do you still doubt me?
Post by Matthew Huntbach
I don't remember seeing an
applications anything like your in recent weeks, and I invited you to
email me your real name, but you haven't, it looks to me like your post
is all a pack of lies.
Matthew Huntbach
Matthew that is an extraordinary unwise accusation to make.

Whilst I didn't email you my real name (thats my prerogative and I am
entitled to my privacy), I did cut and paste my personal statement and
reference and replied to you (and not the group) via the Google web
interface. I did so this afternoon - have you checked your hotmail
account.

In the meantime I have cut and pasted my details from UCAS track and I
look forward to an appropriate response from you.

university / college course starting decision your reply updated

City University G400 Sep 05 Unconditional offer Decline 23 Jul
campus: entry point:
King's College London (University of London) G400 Sep
05 Unsuccessful 18 Jul
campus: entry point:
The University of York G400 Oct 05 Unsuccessful 15 Jul
campus: entry point:
University College London (University of London) G401 Sep
05 Accepted Firm 29 Jul
campus: entry point:
Imperial College London (University of London) G400 Oct
05 Unsuccessful:
Decision not received from institution 20 Jul
campus: entry point:
Queen Mary, University of London G400 Sep 05 Unsuccessful 19 Jul
Matthew Huntbach
2005-08-01 21:36:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
If you turn up at the reception
at the Department of Computer Science and ask to see the admissions
tutor, you will be shown to me. I have not taken any holiday since late
July when you claim to have submitted your application. I eat my lunch
in my office, therefore I am there all the time.
Right lets get this clear.
I got off the tube at Stepney Green station turned left and walked past
a building which IIRC is called Half Moon theatre. Qmul is a multi
storeyed cream coloured building. I walked through a quadrangle and I
remember on the day there was water gushing out of a whole in the
ground in the centre of it... might have been some sort of leak. I
entered a building and went up a number of flights of steps... can't
remember what floor now but I entered a room with a large counter.
There was a lady sitting close to the counter facing it. To her left
were a number of pigeon holes. There was another lady sat on the other
side of the room further back with her desk facing the side of the wall
that housed the pigeon holes (i.e she was not facing the counter).
Well, ok, this sounds realistic, so I shall withdraw my suggestion you
were making it up. The water gushing out of a hole is meant to be a
fountain, it has been criticised for its rather strange design.
However, where you arrived at is the reception to the Computer Science
department, not the "admissions department". QMUL consists of many
buildings, the "multi-storeyed cream coloured building" you describe is
just one of the buildings, not the whole of QMUL. However, it looks
like you managed to hit on the Computer Science department.
Post by wooks
I asked the lady whose desk was nearest the counter (she was younger,
the other one was middle aged) for a syllabus for computer sci. She
reached into the pigeon hole and gave me a booklet. I tooked it away
got halfway down the stairs and realised I had been given a prospectus.
I went back and repeated my request for a syllabus. The middle aged
lady intervened said the syllabus was on the internet. I said I had
looked all over the website and not found it which was why I came in.
She then called some number and told me the person I needed to speak to
in that case was at lunch and wouldn't be back till 2 (this happened at
around 1) and carried on with whatever it was she was doing. The pair
of them looked decidedly uninterested so I said thank you and left.
I don't know who she called. I didn't ask to speak to the Admissions
tutor ( I just wanted a syllabus there was no need). The person she
called may have been you I have no idea. So given that I wasn't
interested in waiting around for another hour and the ladies clearly
weren't interested in helping further. At the time I already had an
offer from City in the bag. I decided on the basis of that experience
that this was not an institution that I wanted to go to.
Well, I am not quite sure what you mean by "prospectus", since I'm
pretty sure they don't keep college prospectuses there. Do you mean a
Computer Science department prospectus?

The department's public web site is www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk. If you click on
the link "undergraduate" then click on the link "curriculum" you will
find a detailed description of the degree programme.

The person the secretary called would have been me. I had maybe just
gone out to the toilet or something. If you turn up unannounced, you
can't expect everyone to be in their office at that instant. I would
have been more than happy, had you shown a bit more patience, to answer
any questions you had on our degree programme. The secretaries in the
department office are not academics, and so can't be expected to be
familiar with the academic details of our degree programme.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-08-02 05:21:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
If you turn up at the reception
at the Department of Computer Science and ask to see the admissions
tutor, you will be shown to me. I have not taken any holiday since late
July when you claim to have submitted your application. I eat my lunch
in my office, therefore I am there all the time.
Right lets get this clear.
I got off the tube at Stepney Green station turned left and walked past
a building which IIRC is called Half Moon theatre. Qmul is a multi
storeyed cream coloured building. I walked through a quadrangle and I
remember on the day there was water gushing out of a whole in the
ground in the centre of it... might have been some sort of leak. I
entered a building and went up a number of flights of steps... can't
remember what floor now but I entered a room with a large counter.
There was a lady sitting close to the counter facing it. To her left
were a number of pigeon holes. There was another lady sat on the other
side of the room further back with her desk facing the side of the wall
that housed the pigeon holes (i.e she was not facing the counter).
Well, ok, this sounds realistic, so I shall withdraw my suggestion you
were making it up. The water gushing out of a hole is meant to be a
fountain, it has been criticised for its rather strange design.
I thought it was a leak and was worried about the criminal waste of
water.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
However, where you arrived at is the reception to the Computer Science
department, not the "admissions department". QMUL consists of many
buildings, the "multi-storeyed cream coloured building" you describe is
just one of the buildings, not the whole of QMUL. However, it looks
like you managed to hit on the Computer Science department.
I definitely did.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
I asked the lady whose desk was nearest the counter (she was younger,
the other one was middle aged) for a syllabus for computer sci. She
reached into the pigeon hole and gave me a booklet. I tooked it away
got halfway down the stairs and realised I had been given a prospectus.
I went back and repeated my request for a syllabus. The middle aged
lady intervened said the syllabus was on the internet. I said I had
looked all over the website and not found it which was why I came in.
She then called some number and told me the person I needed to speak to
in that case was at lunch and wouldn't be back till 2 (this happened at
around 1) and carried on with whatever it was she was doing. The pair
of them looked decidedly uninterested so I said thank you and left.
I don't know who she called. I didn't ask to speak to the Admissions
tutor ( I just wanted a syllabus there was no need). The person she
called may have been you I have no idea. So given that I wasn't
interested in waiting around for another hour and the ladies clearly
weren't interested in helping further. At the time I already had an
offer from City in the bag. I decided on the basis of that experience
that this was not an institution that I wanted to go to.
Well, I am not quite sure what you mean by "prospectus", since I'm
pretty sure they don't keep college prospectuses there. Do you mean a
Computer Science department prospectus?
Yes.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
The department's public web site is www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk. If you click on
the link "undergraduate" then click on the link "curriculum" you will
find a detailed description of the degree programme.
I looked. All the other universities I applied to (well my final 6)
provide more detailed information. I was looking for a number of things


a) the functional/logic programming/formal methods element of your
programme which I really wanted to do.

b) the extent of the imperative programming element - things that I
don't want to do because I feel I already know (well I'm sure there is
much more that I could learn). I don't believe in the imperative
paradigm because I don't see how it supports reasoning about the
correctness of a program (which is something else I want to learn). I
touched on this issue as it relates to software testing (which I think
is pretty much what u have to rely on if you are going down the
imperative route) in my personal statement.

Hope and Field in their book on Functional Programming make the point
using a small Pascal routine. You can't figure out whether it works
without knowing how it works - and even then you have to rely on
software testing. Software testing cannot prove the absence of bugs or
that something works - all it can do is instil confidence that things
are as we would like them to be i.e it is an exercise in risk
management. A favourite analogy of mine is between software testing and
the job of a weapons inspector searching for WMD.

They are both setting out to prove something thats impossible. One that
bugs don't exist - the other that WMD don't exist.

They both have to devise strategies that instil confidence that things
are as they should be because you cannot look in every nook and cranny
for WMD and you cannot test exhaustively.

In both cases the strategy ends up being risk driven - we'll check all
the likely places -- the intersection of modules/Saddams palaces etc
and extrapolate from our findings.

In both cases you should end up with something saying, this is how we
went about our task, these on our findings, based on this we conclude
that the system can go live (might still have bugs) or that this man is
not a threat to the West.

Anyway I've digressed but I am looking to learn more rigorous methods
that are not so subjective to the bent of the person applying them. An
assertion from 2 different imperative programmers that - this program
works - can mean 2 completely different things which is an
unsatisfactory state of affairs.

Anyway I've digressed.

c) How much hardware/Electronic engineering is in the programme
(because this is the bit that I want to avoid). For instance I was able
to discern that York have a very strong EE component to their programme
just from their website. I am not interested in that side of computing
and I am not good at it either - I doubt that I could have coped with
that aspect of Yorks programme and I was only motivated to apply there
because I felt it obligatory to apply to the only school I could find
that uses SICP. I was a bit concerned about that aspect of Imperials
programme to. My eyes glaze over with the architecture related stuff .

Anyway my point is that I could find all this out by looking at the
respective websites of all the schools except yours hence why I went
into your dept.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
The person the secretary called would have been me. I had maybe just
gone out to the toilet or something. If you turn up unannounced, you
can't expect everyone to be in their office at that instant.
I would
have been more than happy, had you shown a bit more patience, to answer
any questions you had on our degree programme. The secretaries in the
department office are not academics, and so can't be expected to be
familiar with the academic details of our degree programme.
Matthew Huntbach
I didn't turn up expecting to see anybody. I just wanted a syllabus
with more detailed info than what was on the website. I expected to be
given a booklet - nothing more.

I was not told they had tried to contact an Admissions Tutor - I was
just told someone would be available in about an hour. I already had my
doubts about the program - I've already read Meillir Page-Jones (do I
want to spend a 1st year being taught the rudiments of OO). I had been
told you no longer gave an FP class (ok you say it's subsumed into your
Java classes but I didn't know that). I had already read a number of
your postings expressing doubts about logic programming and your faith
in the OO paradigm. Now I know you've studied these things and are
better placed to have a view, but I specifically wanted to study the
"ivory tower" stuff. I would not apply to university to learn OO and if
you look at things from the the software testing perspective which is
what i have had to do for more or less 10 years (I was a reluctant
software tester) you might see where I am coming from.

Given my misgivings the lackadasical disinterested attitude I
encountered on the day merely helped to confirm my gut feel that I
would rather go to City (who have formal methods and Haskell in year 2
and Java and Prolog in year 1 and relatively minimal
architecture/hardware stuff). I was very comfortable with their
programme and already had an offer at that time (I hadn't heard from
any of the other universities).

In the end it all became moot as I was not successful with my
application to QMUL. Having seen your various lamentations - (I
started tracking you from your contributions to the SICP and the
Dumbing down of CompSci thread which I read in comp.lang.scheme) about
the standard of applicants you were having to accept, I was a bit
surprised but as I didn't see a really good fit between my stated
aspirations and your programme I was not that concerned.

As to the standard of applicants - I will restate my view that it is a
mistake to admit people straight from school. I can tell from what I
have read in these archives and from the presumptions that were made
about why my application was not successful in some schools, that an
average 18 year old with a clutch of A levels is not properly equipped
to know what to expect or properly appreciate what they will get or
should be seeking to get from a university education.
I have seen many examples of mutterings from people who came out of a
CS degree cursing that they were made to learn Scheme/ML etc. If people
do not understand why they are being taught what they are being taught
they will not derive as much from the experience. If a person had spent
a couple of years in industry, even if only as a bank clerk, they would
be able to place what they are learning into some sought of context and
understand for later life, why certain industries are interested in
graduates in general and graduates in certain disciplines in
particular. They would have a better framework for appreciating what
they are being taught and what skills they should be acquiring.

A more extreme example is myself. Look at me now at this age buying
books on something I was first taught at age 11 but did not have the
wherwithal to appreciate - set theory. In fact I learnt number bases in
primary school, thought it was fun, never had a clue as to its
relevance.

As a competent secondary school student my objective was to pass
exams.
So what did I do - I chose the subjects that I would find easiest to
pass instead of making sure those that would have given me a foundation
for life -French - everybody should learn a foreign language, Accounts
- everybody should know how to keep financial records. I would even go
as far as to say typing and shorthand (or at least touchtyping and
teeline). These are things that you can learn at all skills you will
find useful for the rest of your life - at 18 you do not have the
wherewithal to appreciate that).

Looking at your curriculum (and especially that of Greenwich uni),
there are definitely temptations. I have had already made a pretty good
fist of writing a commercial software product (test oracle/test case
generator/application prototyping tool). I am already relatively expert
in structured information/XML technologies which is what I would
encounter the final year of your MSci degree. I will try and resist the
easy path - it's not what I am there for.

AAMOF UCL seem to be very big on Java - I have bought (but not yet
read) Felleisens - A little Java (have read the Little Schemer). I
wonder what my tutor is going to make of my code - probably "functional
Java". Interesting times. Can't wait to find out.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-08-02 11:47:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Well, I am not quite sure what you mean by "prospectus", since I'm
pretty sure they don't keep college prospectuses there. Do you mean a
Computer Science department prospectus?
Yes.
I have a copy in front of me as I speak. It lists each of the course
units that form part of the degree and has a paragraph describing
the contents of each. You could have been provided with the course
information sheets, which the department keeps in printed form, and
which are on the internal web site only. However, they wouldn't give you
much more information that is in the department prospectus. We don't
necessarily *have* a hugely detailed syllabus for each course unit,
since it's up to each lecturer who they teach it, and the details
may change each year.
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
The department's public web site is www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk. If you click on
the link "undergraduate" then click on the link "curriculum" you will
find a detailed description of the degree programme.
I looked. All the other universities I applied to (well my final 6)
provide more detailed information. I was looking for a number of things
a) the functional/logic programming/formal methods element of your
programme which I really wanted to do.
We do a bit of logic programming in the Artificial Intelligence
course unit - as is clearly explained in the department prospectus.
We don't, at present, have a course which is taught using functional
programming. Some university Computer Science departments have one
or two of their introductory programming courses taught using a
functional language. There are advantages to this, but I wouldn't treat
it as the big thing you are making of it. The same principles can be
taught using an imperative language. A good part of the course on
algorithms and data structures that I teach is functional-style
programming in Java.
Post by wooks
b) the extent of the imperative programming element - things that I
don't want to do because I feel I already know (well I'm sure there is
much more that I could learn). I don't believe in the imperative
paradigm because I don't see how it supports reasoning about the
correctness of a program (which is something else I want to learn). I
touched on this issue as it relates to software testing (which I think
is pretty much what u have to rely on if you are going down the
imperative route) in my personal statement.
Hope and Field in their book on Functional Programming make the point
using a small Pascal routine. You can't figure out whether it works
without knowing how it works - and even then you have to rely on
software testing. Software testing cannot prove the absence of bugs or
that something works - all it can do is instil confidence that things
are as we would like them to be i.e it is an exercise in risk
management. A favourite analogy of mine is between software testing and
the job of a weapons inspector searching for WMD.
As it happens, the Department of Computer Science at Queen Mary has an
internationally renowned team doing research on reasoning about the
correctness of programs. You can get to its web page from the main website,
but here it is directly:

http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/researchgp/logic/homepage.html

Look up Peter O'Hearn's work in particular.

However, at the moment we don't have anyone, apart from myself, interested
in doing work on declarative programming languages. O'Hearn's research
group is interested in formal proof of imperative programming languages,
and are recognised as having made big strides in that direction.

Functional and logic programming languages just aren't fashionable in
the Computer Science world at the moment. They were through a period when
they were a big thing, but these days few people are doing active research
in them, it's difficult to get grants to do research in them, and difficult
to get papers on them published. People like myself, who are interested
in this area still, seem to be getting loaded with lots of admin and teaching
work because our research isn't much valued any more.
Post by wooks
c) How much hardware/Electronic engineering is in the programme
(because this is the bit that I want to avoid). For instance I was able
to discern that York have a very strong EE component to their programme
just from their website. I am not interested in that side of computing
and I am not good at it either - I doubt that I could have coped with
that aspect of Yorks programme and I was only motivated to apply there
because I felt it obligatory to apply to the only school I could find
that uses SICP. I was a bit concerned about that aspect of Imperials
programme to. My eyes glaze over with the architecture related stuff .
This is very easily answered from QMUL's Computer Science department
prospectus. You can see from the course listings and descriptions there
that there is very little hardware/EE content in our degree programme.
QMUL has a separate Electronic Engineering department which teaches
degree programmes which have a CS/EE mix.
Post by wooks
I didn't turn up expecting to see anybody. I just wanted a syllabus
with more detailed info than what was on the website. I expected to be
given a booklet - nothing more.
You were given a booklet, with a description of the course units
appropriate for anyone starting the degree.
Post by wooks
Given my misgivings the lackadasical disinterested attitude I
encountered on the day merely helped to confirm my gut feel that I
would rather go to City (who have formal methods and Haskell in year 2
and Java and Prolog in year 1 and relatively minimal
architecture/hardware stuff). I was very comfortable with their
programme and already had an offer at that time (I hadn't heard from
any of the other universities).
You spoke to a young secretary, who has actually only been working with
us for a few months, and to an older one who I know would always refer
queries of your sort to me.
Post by wooks
In the end it all became moot as I was not successful with my
application to QMUL. Having seen your various lamentations - (I
started tracking you from your contributions to the SICP and the
Dumbing down of CompSci thread which I read in comp.lang.scheme) about
the standard of applicants you were having to accept, I was a bit
surprised but as I didn't see a really good fit between my stated
aspirations and your programme I was not that concerned.
You will find that our degree programme in Computer Science is very
similar to that in other universities of similar standing. The
impression you have given in your postings that it has little in
the way of formal methods is quite simply wrong. Yes, we concentrate
on teaching programming in an object-oriented style, but so does
everyone else. I'm not aware of any university CS department in
the UK which turns our students who have only encountered functional
and logic languages, which seems to be what you were looking for.
Post by wooks
As to the standard of applicants - I will restate my view that it is a
mistake to admit people straight from school. I can tell from what I
have read in these archives and from the presumptions that were made
about why my application was not successful in some schools, that an
average 18 year old with a clutch of A levels is not properly equipped
to know what to expect or properly appreciate what they will get or
should be seeking to get from a university education.
We have to admit those students who apply. If we were to admit only
mature students we would be well below the quota we have to fill.
In any case, mature students who lack the traditional A-level background
are a risky prospect. Some do well, but many others don't.
Post by wooks
Looking at your curriculum (and especially that of Greenwich uni),
there are definitely temptations. I have had already made a pretty good
fist of writing a commercial software product (test oracle/test case
generator/application prototyping tool). I am already relatively expert
in structured information/XML technologies which is what I would
encounter the final year of your MSci degree. I will try and resist the
easy path - it's not what I am there for.
Try looking at the research record of the people who teach this stuff
at QMUL

http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/researchgp/ir/index.html

OK, it's not my area of CS, and it doesn't look like it's what you
want to do, but if you think all we do is bog-standard commercial
programmingm, you are completely wrong.

I teach a course unit in the final year of the MSci based on Liskov
and Guttag's text. Are you familiar with Liskov's work?
Post by wooks
AAMOF UCL seem to be very big on Java - I have bought (but not yet
read) Felleisens - A little Java (have read the Little Schemer). I
wonder what my tutor is going to make of my code - probably "functional
Java". Interesting times. Can't wait to find out.
Most university CS departments are "big on Java". It's a good compromise
language.

Well, I think you have completely misinterpeted Computer Science at
QMUL. But never mind, you have your place at UCL and UCL has a good
CS department as well.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-08-02 14:07:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Well, I am not quite sure what you mean by "prospectus", since I'm
pretty sure they don't keep college prospectuses there. Do you mean a
Computer Science department prospectus?
Yes.
I have a copy in front of me as I speak. It lists each of the course
units that form part of the degree and has a paragraph describing
the contents of each. You could have been provided with the course
information sheets, which the department keeps in printed form, and
which are on the internal web site only. However, they wouldn't give you
much more information that is in the department prospectus. We don't
necessarily *have* a hugely detailed syllabus for each course unit,
since it's up to each lecturer who they teach it, and the details
may change each year.
Ok thats fine. I saw it and I wanted more info. All the other unis I
applied to give a much more detailed outline of their course content. I
thought something similar would exist for QMUL.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
The department's public web site is www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk. If you click on
the link "undergraduate" then click on the link "curriculum" you will
find a detailed description of the degree programme.
I looked. All the other universities I applied to (well my final 6)
provide more detailed information. I was looking for a number of things
a) the functional/logic programming/formal methods element of your
programme which I really wanted to do.
We do a bit of logic programming in the Artificial Intelligence
course unit - as is clearly explained in the department prospectus.
We don't, at present, have a course which is taught using functional
programming. Some university Computer Science departments have one
or two of their introductory programming courses taught using a
functional language. There are advantages to this, but I wouldn't treat
it as the big thing you are making of it. The same principles can be
taught using an imperative language. A good part of the course on
algorithms and data structures that I teach is functional-style
programming in Java.
I have a particular interest in taking forward what I have learnt in
Scheme. I am interested in moving on to Lisp and with the possible
exception of A Little Java your average Java book (well A Little Java
isn't your average Java book is it) is not going to adopt a functional
paradigm. So personally I would prefer to use a functional language as
I think that would ease the path to dealing with functinal literature.

ATEOTD though I could not get the information you have just given me
from the material that was available to me... and you can't say I
didn't try.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
b) the extent of the imperative programming element - things that I
don't want to do because I feel I already know (well I'm sure there is
much more that I could learn). I don't believe in the imperative
paradigm because I don't see how it supports reasoning about the
correctness of a program (which is something else I want to learn). I
touched on this issue as it relates to software testing (which I think
is pretty much what u have to rely on if you are going down the
imperative route) in my personal statement.
Hope and Field in their book on Functional Programming make the point
using a small Pascal routine. You can't figure out whether it works
without knowing how it works - and even then you have to rely on
software testing. Software testing cannot prove the absence of bugs or
that something works - all it can do is instil confidence that things
are as we would like them to be i.e it is an exercise in risk
management. A favourite analogy of mine is between software testing and
the job of a weapons inspector searching for WMD.
As it happens, the Department of Computer Science at Queen Mary has an
internationally renowned team doing research on reasoning about the
correctness of programs. You can get to its web page from the main website,
http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/researchgp/logic/homepage.html
Look up Peter O'Hearn's work in particular.
However, at the moment we don't have anyone, apart from myself, interested
in doing work on declarative programming languages. O'Hearn's research
group is interested in formal proof of imperative programming languages,
and are recognised as having made big strides in that direction.
Functional and logic programming languages just aren't fashionable in
the Computer Science world at the moment. They were through a period when
they were a big thing, but these days few people are doing active research
in them, it's difficult to get grants to do research in them, and difficult
to get papers on them published. People like myself, who are interested
in this area still, seem to be getting loaded with lots of admin and teaching
work because our research isn't much valued any more.
Post by wooks
c) How much hardware/Electronic engineering is in the programme
(because this is the bit that I want to avoid). For instance I was able
to discern that York have a very strong EE component to their programme
just from their website. I am not interested in that side of computing
and I am not good at it either - I doubt that I could have coped with
that aspect of Yorks programme and I was only motivated to apply there
because I felt it obligatory to apply to the only school I could find
that uses SICP. I was a bit concerned about that aspect of Imperials
programme to. My eyes glaze over with the architecture related stuff .
This is very easily answered from QMUL's Computer Science department
prospectus.
Yes it was. I was able to gather that from the what I read on the web.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
You can see from the course listings and descriptions there
that there is very little hardware/EE content in our degree programme.
QMUL has a separate Electronic Engineering department which teaches
degree programmes which have a CS/EE mix.
Absolutely.
I think I was making the point that but for SICP I would never have
gone anywhere near York for that reason.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
I didn't turn up expecting to see anybody. I just wanted a syllabus
with more detailed info than what was on the website. I expected to be
given a booklet - nothing more.
You were given a booklet, with a description of the course units
appropriate for anyone starting the degree.
Alright Matthew but it wasn't the booklet that I asked for. I'm not
suggesting that QMUL change the literature they distribute. Just that I
tried and could not get the detail I wanted.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Given my misgivings the lackadasical disinterested attitude I
encountered on the day merely helped to confirm my gut feel that I
would rather go to City (who have formal methods and Haskell in year 2
and Java and Prolog in year 1 and relatively minimal
architecture/hardware stuff). I was very comfortable with their
programme and already had an offer at that time (I hadn't heard from
any of the other universities).
You spoke to a young secretary, who has actually only been working with
us for a few months, and to an older one who I know would always refer
queries of your sort to me.
...and so???... look if she had bothered to tell me she was trying to
arrange for me to speak to the admissions tutor then I would have at
the very least arranged to come back. I'm accurately relating the
attitude I encountered on the day, whether you choose to excuse,
ignore, condone or condemn it is a matter for you.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
In the end it all became moot as I was not successful with my
application to QMUL. Having seen your various lamentations - (I
started tracking you from your contributions to the SICP and the
Dumbing down of CompSci thread which I read in comp.lang.scheme) about
the standard of applicants you were having to accept, I was a bit
surprised but as I didn't see a really good fit between my stated
aspirations and your programme I was not that concerned.
You will find that our degree programme in Computer Science is very
similar to that in other universities of similar standing. The
impression you have given in your postings that it has little in
the way of formal methods is quite simply wrong.
Matthew I am not responsible for information that you publish about
your degree courses. All I have said is that I couldn't find that
information and I searched very hard for it. QMUL happens to be the
nearest uni to where I live, I was genuinely interested in going
there.

I am not suggesting for a 2nd that QMUL's program is deficient. I was
looking for a program that had the best blend of the things that I
wanted to do and I went to alot of effort to get that info.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Yes, we concentrate
on teaching programming in an object-oriented style, but so does
everyone else. I'm not aware of any university CS department in
the UK which turns our students who have only encountered functional
and logic languages, which seems to be what you were looking for.
I never said or even gave the impression that I was looking for that,
because it is totally unrealistic.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
As to the standard of applicants - I will restate my view that it is a
mistake to admit people straight from school. I can tell from what I
have read in these archives and from the presumptions that were made
about why my application was not successful in some schools, that an
average 18 year old with a clutch of A levels is not properly equipped
to know what to expect or properly appreciate what they will get or
should be seeking to get from a university education.
We have to admit those students who apply. If we were to admit only
mature students we would be well below the quota we have to fill.
In any case, mature students who lack the traditional A-level background
are a risky prospect. Some do well, but many others don't.
I wasn't suggesting for a minute that any university admit only mature
students. I was going off on a tangent and inviting you to comment on a
general change to the educational system where you spent a year or two
working after your A'levels before you went to university i.e A levels
1-2 years work experience - university.

You don't want to take up the offer which is fine, but don't
misrepresent what I said.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Looking at your curriculum (and especially that of Greenwich uni),
there are definitely temptations. I have had already made a pretty good
fist of writing a commercial software product (test oracle/test case
generator/application prototyping tool). I am already relatively expert
in structured information/XML technologies which is what I would
encounter the final year of your MSci degree. I will try and resist the
easy path - it's not what I am there for.
Try looking at the research record of the people who teach this stuff
at QMUL
http://www.dcs.qmul.ac.uk/researchgp/ir/index.html
You totally got the wrong end of the stick, but if you were coming from
the standpoint that I was attacking on denigrating QMUL which you seem
to be then I can see how that happened.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
OK, it's not my area of CS, and it doesn't look like it's what you
want to do, but if you think all we do is bog-standard commercial
programmingm, you are completely wrong.
I don't think that. It's very easy to tell even from the prospectus
that that's not the case. You've got the wrong end of the stick.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
I teach a course unit in the final year of the MSci based on Liskov
and Guttag's text. Are you familiar with Liskov's work?
Nope. So the import of what I was saying is that I would choose that
over the structured XML option.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
AAMOF UCL seem to be very big on Java - I have bought (but not yet
read) Felleisens - A little Java (have read the Little Schemer). I
wonder what my tutor is going to make of my code - probably "functional
Java". Interesting times. Can't wait to find out.
Most university CS departments are "big on Java". It's a good compromise
language.
I know. I looked at alot of programmes.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Well, I think you have completely misinterpeted Computer Science at
QMUL. But never mind, you have your place at UCL and UCL has a good
CS department as well.
I did no such thing Matthew. There is information that is in your head
that is not in published curriculum. All the other schools provide more
detailed information. They have their way and you have yours and I am
not going to suggest that you change your way just because of my
experience.

I merely commented on what I looked for but could not find and what I
was told when i called and asked and you cannot say that I did not try.
Matthew Huntbach
2005-08-02 15:26:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
programming. Some university Computer Science departments have one
or two of their introductory programming courses taught using a
functional language. There are advantages to this, but I wouldn't treat
it as the big thing you are making of it. The same principles can be
taught using an imperative language. A good part of the course on
algorithms and data structures that I teach is functional-style
programming in Java.
I have a particular interest in taking forward what I have learnt in
Scheme. I am interested in moving on to Lisp and with the possible
exception of A Little Java your average Java book (well A Little Java
isn't your average Java book is it) is not going to adopt a functional
paradigm. So personally I would prefer to use a functional language as
I think that would ease the path to dealing with functinal literature.
If you are seriously interested in functional programming, I would
suggest you look at Haskell, which is the fruit of recent research
into functional programming (http://www.haskell.org/) rather than
Scheme, which is really just a version of Lisp, which is functional
programming from the time before the theory behind it had been properly
understood. Also, Scheme is a type-free functional language, so you lose
a lot of the point of functional programming, which is to do with types.
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
I didn't turn up expecting to see anybody. I just wanted a syllabus
with more detailed info than what was on the website. I expected to be
given a booklet - nothing more.
You were given a booklet, with a description of the course units
appropriate for anyone starting the degree.
Alright Matthew but it wasn't the booklet that I asked for. I'm not
suggesting that QMUL change the literature they distribute. Just that I
tried and could not get the detail I wanted.
Detail you seemed to want, such as the amount of hardware in the course, and
the amount of formal methods, seems to be in the booklet you were given.
The booklet tells you there is a course unit on "logic and proof", a course
unit on "specification and reasoning", a course unit on "computability",
a course unit on "discrete structures", a course unit on "algorithms and
complexity" and describes each of these, so I don't see how you can claim
it looked to you like there was no formal methods in the course.
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
You spoke to a young secretary, who has actually only been working with
us for a few months, and to an older one who I know would always refer
queries of your sort to me.
...and so???... look if she had bothered to tell me she was trying to
arrange for me to speak to the admissions tutor then I would have at
the very least arranged to come back. I'm accurately relating the
attitude I encountered on the day, whether you choose to excuse,
ignore, condone or condemn it is a matter for you.
You made personal criticism of colleagues I work with who I know to
be good and dedicated staff. Of course I will stand up and defend them.
Post by wooks
Matthew I am not responsible for information that you publish about
your degree courses. All I have said is that I couldn't find that
information and I searched very hard for it. QMUL happens to be the
nearest uni to where I live, I was genuinely interested in going
there.
No, you don't seem to have tried very hard. You gave up after encountering
two secretaries, whose job it is to provide the administration for the
department, they are not academics who would know the details of the academic
programme.
Post by wooks
I am not suggesting for a 2nd that QMUL's program is deficient. I was
looking for a program that had the best blend of the things that I
wanted to do and I went to alot of effort to get that info.
You gave the impression that QMUL's programme was totally unsuitable for
someone like you who wanted an emphasis on the more abstract aspects of
programming, which I found particularly unfortunate because actually
QMUL's programme quite closely fits into what you want, and I would
like to see more students with your interests. The only real reason for
the viewpoint you expressed seems to be that we don't do one of our
introductory course units in a functional programming language, which
isactually a rather trivial reason.
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
As to the standard of applicants - I will restate my view that it is a
mistake to admit people straight from school. I can tell from what I
have read in these archives and from the presumptions that were made
about why my application was not successful in some schools, that an
average 18 year old with a clutch of A levels is not properly equipped
to know what to expect or properly appreciate what they will get or
should be seeking to get from a university education.
We have to admit those students who apply. If we were to admit only
mature students we would be well below the quota we have to fill.
In any case, mature students who lack the traditional A-level background
are a risky prospect. Some do well, but many others don't.
I wasn't suggesting for a minute that any university admit only mature
students. I was going off on a tangent and inviting you to comment on a
general change to the educational system where you spent a year or two
working after your A'levels before you went to university i.e A levels
1-2 years work experience - university.
This would depend on industry being willing to provide 1-2 years of
employment for every school leaver. It would be great if they were
willing to do this, but they are not. One of the reasons we don't
do sandwich degrees, although there's a big demand for them, is that
it's impossible to get industry to provide us with enough placements.
It would be a hugely more difficult problem if *every* student was
supposed to get a year's industrial palcement, anf that before they
even did any degree study.
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
I teach a course unit in the final year of the MSci based on Liskov
and Guttag's text. Are you familiar with Liskov's work?
Nope. So the import of what I was saying is that I would choose that
over the structured XML option.
OK, so your suggestion that you need no more tuition on object oriented
programming may be a bit off the mark.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-08-02 16:08:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
programming. Some university Computer Science departments have one
or two of their introductory programming courses taught using a
functional language. There are advantages to this, but I wouldn't treat
it as the big thing you are making of it. The same principles can be
taught using an imperative language. A good part of the course on
algorithms and data structures that I teach is functional-style
programming in Java.
I have a particular interest in taking forward what I have learnt in
Scheme. I am interested in moving on to Lisp and with the possible
exception of A Little Java your average Java book (well A Little Java
isn't your average Java book is it) is not going to adopt a functional
paradigm. So personally I would prefer to use a functional language as
I think that would ease the path to dealing with functinal literature.
If you are seriously interested in functional programming, I would
suggest you look at Haskell, which is the fruit of recent research
into functional programming (http://www.haskell.org/) rather than
Scheme, which is really just a version of Lisp, which is functional
programming from the time before the theory behind it had been properly
understood. Also, Scheme is a type-free functional language, so you lose
a lot of the point of functional programming, which is to do with types.
Starting with Scheme, HTDP and then SICP.... plan to work my way up to
Haskell.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
I didn't turn up expecting to see anybody. I just wanted a syllabus
with more detailed info than what was on the website. I expected to be
given a booklet - nothing more.
You were given a booklet, with a description of the course units
appropriate for anyone starting the degree.
Alright Matthew but it wasn't the booklet that I asked for. I'm not
suggesting that QMUL change the literature they distribute. Just that I
tried and could not get the detail I wanted.
Detail you seemed to want, such as the amount of hardware in the course, and
the amount of formal methods, seems to be in the booklet you were given.
The booklet tells you there is a course unit on "logic and proof", a course
unit on "specification and reasoning", a course unit on "computability",
a course unit on "discrete structures", a course unit on "algorithms and
complexity" and describes each of these, so I don't see how you can claim
it looked to you like there was no formal methods in the course.
I was specifically looking for something like Z or VDM. Is that the
same thing?
If it is then now you know one of the reasons why I want to go to
university.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
You spoke to a young secretary, who has actually only been working with
us for a few months, and to an older one who I know would always refer
queries of your sort to me.
...and so???... look if she had bothered to tell me she was trying to
arrange for me to speak to the admissions tutor then I would have at
the very least arranged to come back. I'm accurately relating the
attitude I encountered on the day, whether you choose to excuse,
ignore, condone or condemn it is a matter for you.
You made personal criticism of colleagues I work with who I know to
be good and dedicated staff. Of course I will stand up and defend them.
matter for you. not my problem.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Matthew I am not responsible for information that you publish about
your degree courses. All I have said is that I couldn't find that
information and I searched very hard for it. QMUL happens to be the
nearest uni to where I live, I was genuinely interested in going
there.
No, you don't seem to have tried very hard. You gave up after encountering
two secretaries, whose job it is to provide the administration for the
department, they are not academics who would know the details of the academic
programme.
I have already told you that if they had told me they were trying to
contact the admissions tutor or somebody else from the academic dept
then I would have arranged to come back.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
I am not suggesting for a 2nd that QMUL's program is deficient. I was
looking for a program that had the best blend of the things that I
wanted to do and I went to alot of effort to get that info.
You gave the impression that QMUL's programme was totally unsuitable for
someone like you who wanted an emphasis on the more abstract aspects of
programming, which I found particularly unfortunate because actually
QMUL's programme quite closely fits into what you want, and I would
like to see more students with your interests. The only real reason for
the viewpoint you expressed seems to be that we don't do one of our
introductory course units in a functional programming language, which
isactually a rather trivial reason.
No. I was told - we teach with Java and C++ (the latter I especially
want to avoid). I obviously wasn't given the right information but it
wasn't for lack of trying.

The morning I came in to QMUL I spoke to an admissions guy at City (not
an academic). We spent more than half an hour talking and he really
sold the university to me, explained what I would get out of going to
City as opposed to anywhere else, what made their programmes unique. No
question was too much trouble, he was well informed and enthusiastic. I
already had a place there and I was already comfortable with their
program. My treatment at QMUL was quite different.

Finally lets not forget also that I did apply to your school. You, the
AT have sworn that my application never crossed your eyes even though I
have proven to you that QMUL rejected my application.
So there seems to be more than one admin issue in your CompSci dept.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
As to the standard of applicants - I will restate my view that it is a
mistake to admit people straight from school. I can tell from what I
have read in these archives and from the presumptions that were made
about why my application was not successful in some schools, that an
average 18 year old with a clutch of A levels is not properly equipped
to know what to expect or properly appreciate what they will get or
should be seeking to get from a university education.
We have to admit those students who apply. If we were to admit only
mature students we would be well below the quota we have to fill.
In any case, mature students who lack the traditional A-level background
are a risky prospect. Some do well, but many others don't.
I wasn't suggesting for a minute that any university admit only mature
students. I was going off on a tangent and inviting you to comment on a
general change to the educational system where you spent a year or two
working after your A'levels before you went to university i.e A levels
1-2 years work experience - university.
This would depend on industry being willing to provide 1-2 years of
employment for every school leaver. It would be great if they were
willing to do this, but they are not.
Good so you agree it would be a good idea.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
One of the reasons we don't
do sandwich degrees, although there's a big demand for them, is that
it's impossible to get industry to provide us with enough placements.
It would be a hugely more difficult problem if *every* student was
supposed to get a year's industrial palcement, anf that before they
even did any degree study.
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
I teach a course unit in the final year of the MSci based on Liskov
and Guttag's text. Are you familiar with Liskov's work?
Nope. So the import of what I was saying is that I would choose that
over the structured XML option.
OK, so your suggestion that you need no more tuition on object oriented
programming may be a bit off the mark.
I didn't say I didn't need more tuition on OO. I said I wouldn't want
to go to university for it (and I meant I would either do it through
self study or industrial training).
Matthew Huntbach
2005-08-02 16:45:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Detail you seemed to want, such as the amount of hardware in the course, and
the amount of formal methods, seems to be in the booklet you were given.
The booklet tells you there is a course unit on "logic and proof", a course
unit on "specification and reasoning", a course unit on "computability",
a course unit on "discrete structures", a course unit on "algorithms and
complexity" and describes each of these, so I don't see how you can claim
it looked to you like there was no formal methods in the course.
I was specifically looking for something like Z or VDM. Is that the
same thing?
If it is then now you know one of the reasons why I want to go to
university.
Oh, you mean "specification". By "formal methods" I would mean the much
wider field of anything which is to do with formal reasoning about
computation.
Post by wooks
The morning I came in to QMUL I spoke to an admissions guy at City (not
an academic). We spent more than half an hour talking and he really
sold the university to me, explained what I would get out of going to
City as opposed to anywhere else, what made their programmes unique. No
question was too much trouble, he was well informed and enthusiastic. I
already had a place there and I was already comfortable with their
program. My treatment at QMUL was quite different.
But did the admissions guy have any real idea of what the course you were
interested in contained? Could he have answered your very detailed
questions on the syllabus? Looks like he sold you the institution rather
than the degree programme. Fine, but your complaints have been about not
finding detailed information on the degree programme.

Quite likely if you had come to QMUL five minutes earlier or five minutes
later, you would have had a chance to speak to me. Maybe if you had
come to City five minutes earlier or later you would have missed the guy
you spoke to and got someone less helpful.
Post by wooks
Finally lets not forget also that I did apply to your school. You, the
AT have sworn that my application never crossed your eyes even though I
have proven to you that QMUL rejected my application.
So there seems to be more than one admin issue in your CompSci dept.
I have not "sworn". I was just surprised not to remember a recent
application that looked like the sort of application you had put in.
I think I would have remembered. I am sorry you have not emailed me
your real name so I can check. I would like to check, since you have
provided enough information for me to feel a little disappointed if
we did reject you, and I'd like to look again to see why we did.
There is the possibility that somehow you application never reached
me, and was rejected automatically because the deadline for a decision
passed. I'd like to check that didn't happen.

Matthew Huntbach
wooks
2005-08-02 17:52:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Detail you seemed to want, such as the amount of hardware in the course, and
the amount of formal methods, seems to be in the booklet you were given.
The booklet tells you there is a course unit on "logic and proof", a course
unit on "specification and reasoning", a course unit on "computability",
a course unit on "discrete structures", a course unit on "algorithms and
complexity" and describes each of these, so I don't see how you can claim
it looked to you like there was no formal methods in the course.
I was specifically looking for something like Z or VDM. Is that the
same thing?
If it is then now you know one of the reasons why I want to go to
university.
Oh, you mean "specification". By "formal methods" I would mean the much
wider field of anything which is to do with formal reasoning about
computation.
Yep.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
The morning I came in to QMUL I spoke to an admissions guy at City (not
an academic). We spent more than half an hour talking and he really
sold the university to me, explained what I would get out of going to
City as opposed to anywhere else, what made their programmes unique. No
question was too much trouble, he was well informed and enthusiastic. I
already had a place there and I was already comfortable with their
program. My treatment at QMUL was quite different.
But did the admissions guy have any real idea of what the course you were
interested in contained? Could he have answered your very detailed
questions on the syllabus? Looks like he sold you the institution rather
than the degree programme. Fine, but your complaints have been about not
finding detailed information on the degree programme.
Fair comment. I was already sold on the degree programme. He told me
about the advantages of the way they structure their programme (some
academic some not). I wanted to know why they have such good links with
industry and to get a general feel good factor about the institution.
At the time I did not have replies from the other schools but I had
serious misgivings about the hardware oriented content of Imperial and
York and I did not want to leave London anyway. I really liked the City
programme but if a University of London school had come in for me it
would have been very hard to turn down so I wanted to feel good about
going to City instead of one of the a University of London school. He
did a great job.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Quite likely if you had come to QMUL five minutes earlier or five minutes
later, you would have had a chance to speak to me. Maybe if you had
come to City five minutes earlier or later you would have missed the guy
you spoke to and got someone less helpful.
Maybe indeed.
Post by Matthew Huntbach
Post by wooks
Finally lets not forget also that I did apply to your school. You, the
AT have sworn that my application never crossed your eyes even though I
have proven to you that QMUL rejected my application.
So there seems to be more than one admin issue in your CompSci dept.
I have not "sworn". I was just surprised not to remember a recent
application that looked like the sort of application you had put in.
I think I would have remembered. I am sorry you have not emailed me
your real name so I can check. I would like to check, since you have
provided enough information for me to feel a little disappointed if
we did reject you, and I'd like to look again to see why we did.
There is the possibility that somehow you application never reached
me, and was rejected automatically because the deadline for a decision
passed. I'd like to check that didn't happen.
Matthew Huntbach
My UCAS number was 05-490689-1.
Dr A. N. Walker
2005-08-02 17:42:04 UTC
Permalink
[...] I don't believe in the imperative
paradigm because I don't see how it supports reasoning about the
correctness of a program [...]
I don't think the imperative paradigm [which is a stupid
phrase anyway, it just means "computing as it always used to be"]
has much to do with this issue. But anyway, for how to "support
reasoning", I suggest you read "A Discipline of Programming", by
Dijkstra [first version, not the disastrous and boring revision].
Actually, this + "Computation" [Minsky] + "The Mythical Man-Month"
[Brookes] are probably the three books that *everyone* who has
anything at all to do with CS ought to read. Then I suppose you
could go on to "Programming Pearls" [Bentley] and eventually to
"ACP" [Knuth] and other more technical books ....
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
***@maths.nott.ac.uk
wooks
2005-08-02 20:40:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr A. N. Walker
[...] I don't believe in the imperative
paradigm because I don't see how it supports reasoning about the
correctness of a program [...]
I don't think the imperative paradigm [which is a stupid
phrase anyway, it just means "computing as it always used to be"]
has much to do with this issue. But anyway, for how to "support
reasoning", I suggest you read "A Discipline of Programming", by
Dijkstra [first version, not the disastrous and boring revision].
Actually, this + "Computation" [Minsky] + "The Mythical Man-Month"
[Brookes] are probably the three books that *everyone* who has
anything at all to do with CS ought to read. Then I suppose you
could go on to "Programming Pearls" [Bentley] and eventually to
"ACP" [Knuth] and other more technical books ....
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
I have read Brookes and wasn't that impressed. I looked into ACP on
Amazon recently and it is coming under fire for being dated. My copy of
How to Solve it by Computer by Dromey arrived today (supposedly modeled
on Polya's book) and I have discovered that the full text of the Craft
of Programming by John Reynolds is downloadable from the web (that uses
Algol but I'll have a go).

I shall look into Dijkstra Bentley and Minsky (not heard of this one).
Thanks for the tip.
Dr A. N. Walker
2005-08-03 14:28:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by wooks
I have read Brookes and wasn't that impressed.
No, but that is partly [largely?] because (a) it is very
old, and (b) many of its lessons have been learned by industry.
It's still interesting. I suppose it should be supplemented by
compulsory reading of the "comp.risks" newsgroup.
Post by wooks
I looked into ACP on
Amazon recently and it is coming under fire for being dated.
Indeed; "no-one" uses machine code these days. But it is
still rather hard to find ways of searching/sorting/etc that are not
discussed somewhere by Knuth.
Post by wooks
My copy of
How to Solve it by Computer by Dromey arrived today (supposedly modeled
on Polya's book) and I have discovered that the full text of the Craft
of Programming by John Reynolds is downloadable from the web (that uses
Algol but I'll have a go).
Algol W, unfortunately; not [IMO] a very good language. At
that time, Algol 68, S-Algol or Pascal would have been better.
Post by wooks
I shall look into Dijkstra Bentley and Minsky (not heard of this one).
Dijkstra is still sensibly readable. Minsky is very out of
date; a new edition [with stuff on complexity, for example] would
be absolute top of my wish list for "new" books on computing. But
the old version is still absolutely fascinating. It's not so much
that anything in it is wrong or misleading, more that there is a lot
of new material at that sort of level in related areas. Bit like
reading a book on celestial mechanics that pre-dates NASA.

One thing I liked Bentley for is his expose of "binary chop".
I and colleagues have repeatedly confirmed his experiment. If you
ask students to code up "binary chop" [on paper], they "always" get
it wrong; they have "off by one" errors, infinite loops, failure if
the wanted element is first/last/missing, and so on. Explain first
how to use an invariant, and they "always" get it right.
--
Andy Walker, School of MathSci., Univ. of Nott'm, UK.
***@maths.nott.ac.uk
Loading...