Is the dichotomy at the end of the Might's article content accurate? It seems too black-and-white to me, but I didn't go through a CS curriculum. Do MS/CS students not have to do original research or read research papers?
I also got a PhD in science education at UCB, and that required writing a research proposal, carrying out a six-month classroom intervention, and a lot of other work on both sides of the research (design and framing the work, analyzing the data). The amount of work was very different. The number of classes was not too different - I had about the same number of credits.
All that said, my experience in academia (and out) has taught me that a degree is only one indicator among many. I've had doors open to me because of my degree, advisors' connections, and where my degree was granted, some doors I did not particularly deserve, but the degree itself only shows that I can do a certain kind of work when I want to. I've met plenty of other people who can do the same kind of work who don't have the same kind of (or any) degree.
So, it feels like one of those 'neither necessary nor sufficient' sorts of things.
Good students often manage to get some original research done during their master's years, but many (most?) don't.
I still find it odd that some people do coursework during their PhD. Seriously, put on your big girl panties and teach yourself. That's what your degree is all about, discovering things without someone holding your hand.