Is Computer Science Dying?
informit.com
informit.com
Regardless, computer science would never actually die. It would just deadlock or attempt to solve the halting problem.
Renaming doesn't create visions but it should be noted that this is the usual term in French, German, Italian, Norwegian etc.
In my view, computer scientists are wrong. They have limited the scope of the field to exclude application-level creativity. And in so doing, they have severely restricted the potential of the greatest invention of all time.
And note that such studies do not normally involve learning about the chemicals used in the paint, the electronics used in sound equipment, or the software architecture of the word processor.
At the very least, students should be taught how to be social scientists so that they could figure what sorts of apps are likely to succeed in a particular environment.
This is the undergraduate informatics curriculum which, as you'll notice, strictly includes social science courses throughout the first two years.
Formal studies in computer science teach the accumulated knowledge of building systems with algorithms. Its like learning the language, the grammar and vocabulary, a great writer needs. You're right, it is like learning about the chemicals in the paint, or more importantly the properties of your paint, your canvases and the brushes and techniques other artists have used. My point is that that is the useful knowledge.
Don't confuse universities offering a socially acceptable outlet for aspiring artists as a model for study and learning. You can probably build a great application without being a great computer scientist, but why would computer science want to be one of these sham fields of study when their are real tools and knowledge to be discovered.
See for example:
Your criticism of computer science, that they should eschew algorithms and theory in favour of applications, is entirely at odds with the media lab.
I don't understand why you want academia to steal your thunder so to speak, and take on the job of creating applications.
Anyone learning a sport has to master basic things before they go on to the advanced (eg in volleyball, you learn how to bump/set/spike before you learn how to run offensive plays). I think the same applies to CS.
Personally speaking, in my 5 years of college (Drexel University from 1996-2001), most classes were 80-100% theory and 0-20% programming. None of it was application-level programming until the Software Engineering track in senior year. And you didn't have to have a full working program to pass either; it was enough to just show you made an effort.
I'd rather see a university that promoted the idea of letting self-motivated students do their own thing instead of just turning education into a checklist of required classes and credits.