..."Enrollments are down at the best computer science schools, where the potential stars of technology's future are groomed. Professors say there is less enthusiasm for the discipline among students, and they worry it may be more than a lingering disenchantment after the dot-com bubble burst.

In an effort to counter the trend, Mr. Gates, who personifies technological optimism and the potential payoff, sought to reassure students that their futures were no less bright in an era of outsourcing. The effect of computer technology, he told them, is just beginning and opportunity abounds. Computing, he added, is an ideal field for fine minds to make a difference in society.

"We need your excitement," he told students at Harvard. "Most of these jobs are very interesting and very social - you work with lots of smart people. I'm excited about the future of computing, and I'm excited to see how each of you can contribute to it"...

As Admissions Selector for my department I can confirm that applications are down on this side of the pond too. UCAS stats show a 20% drop nationwide in computer science applications with, it would appear, a disproportionate drop, in applications to the good universities - those with 'traditional' CS degree programmes. Given that this disproportionality must be balanced out somewhere, I conjecture that the 'fashionable' degrees such as computer games technology and the like are seeing less of a drop and may, indeed, be seeing a rise in their applications.

I'll need to keep an eye open for evidence to support this conjecture.

Talking of outsourcing the Ask Joel - Offshoring thread is an illuminating read. Not forgetting David Anderson's contribution to the Outsourcing Debate which is a follow-on from his RE: Computing Curricula 2001 (CC-2001) post here. I've just checked and, as expected, David has picked up the Ask Joel thread and has just posted his own comments in his Embrace Transparency - the Antidote to Offshoring post:

"A good thread at Joel Spolsky's Ask Joel forum, is discussing, offshoring. What's really interesting about this is the amount of opinion without much in the way of objective data. The guys who mention cost as the motive are on the right track. The real problem is that the industry isn't measuring the right things and making an objective assessment of offshoring is difficult when there is a lack of information in the (software development) economy. What's missing is data on lead time and client-valued functionality produced.

Quoting from the 3rd sentence in my book, "Senior executives, perplexed by the spiraling costs of software development and depressed by poor results, poor quality, poor service, and a lack of transparency are simply shrugging their shoulders and saying, 'if the only way this can be done is badly, then let me do it badly at a fraction of the cost.'"...

Disclaimer: I'm proud of David's achievements as he's an old student of mine - as regular readers will know!

"Microsoft Corp. Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates lectured computer science students Thursday about using computing technology to combat scourges of the present and create new opportunities in the future, while painting a vision of a more interconnected, integrated technology world."...

..."The combination of blogs, RSS and intelligent searching--and future generations of those technologies and concepts-may not be the 21st century equivalent of the Gutenburg printing press, but they will play an increasing important role in forming the opinions that lead to decisions big and small across personal and professional spheres."

"If you do regular unpaid overtime, then exercise your right to work only your contractual hours, and remind your boss just how much modern workplaces depend on unpaid overtime.

Take a proper lunchbreak, not just a sandwich at your desk, and leave on time, to enjoy your own time on Friday evening. Why not get together with friends working nearby, and go for a coffee, a pint, or take in a show? You deserve it! This is one day in the year for your boss to appreciate your efforts, and for you to appreciate yourself."...

The link to the above was included in an e-mail from the President of the local AUT branch to keep us informed of developments with the strike action.

Now I'm not that militant a person but I am pissed off at the my University's stance about docking our pay for the days we are absent on strike. Many other universities are recognising that academic staff work much longer hours than the notional 9 to 5 day and, in recognition of this fact, are deducting just 1/365th (or 1/366th as it's a leap year) of annual salary for each day that a member of staff is absent due to industrial action. Strathclyde on the other hand is deducting 1/260th (5 days per week, 52 weeks per year) of our salaries! In other words, almost 1% of our salary lost due to 2 days of action!! IMHO, my employers have shot themselves in the foot by adopting this approach. It's certainly not an incentive to work the long hours that myself and my colleagues put in over and above the normal working week. More often than not I work 12 hour days during the week and very often put more work in over the weekends - such is the pressure to support/assess hundreds of students and balance the conflicting demands of teaching, administration, and research. I know for a fact that it has hardened the attitude of many staff and has helped to create an upsurge in AUT membership applications:

..."Anger at the employers’ current proposals on pay for academic and related staff is so great that the AUT’s membership has increased by at least 1,000 in the last week alone.

AUT members last conducted a national strike in 1999. Such is the anger felt that this time round the number of activists on picket lines has quadrupled."...

The only upside of this draconian pay docking strategy is that the local Student Hardship Fund gets more money as the members of the local AUT have agreed to donate their docked salaries to this charitable cause.