Is it Possible to Complete a CS Degree from a Top University and Still Not Know How to Program Well?

Yes, it is unfortunately possible to complete a computer science (CS) degree from a top university without possessing strong programming skills. Despite rigorous educational standards, some students manage to graduate despite significant weaknesses in their coding abilities. Why does this happen, and what are the reasons behind this phenomenon?

Academic Dishonesty: An Unfortunate Reality

The prevalence of academic dishonesty, particularly in CS programs, is a severe issue. While efforts are made to detect and punish cheaters, some slip through the cracks, making cheating seem like a viable alternative to hard work and learning.

As an instructor and teaching assistant, I have witnessed numerous cases of cheating over the years. For example, I spent long hours tracing code copied from the internet, contacting the original authors, and piecing together evidence to build a solid case against a suspected cheater. This process requires a significant investment of time, akin to a CSI investigation. However, dealing with hundreds of students simultaneously leaves little time for such investigations.

Once a case is built, instructors have two options. The first is to confront the student individually and offer a plea deal, often resulting in a light punishment that allows the student to pass the class. The second option involves handing over the case to higher-ups, who may then decide to prosecute the student. The justice system in academia does not guarantee convictions, often leading to lenient penalties or no penalties at all, even for guilty students.

Limitations of Exams in Assessing Coding Skills

Exams, while a crucial part of the assessment process, do not provide an accurate gauge of a student's coding abilities. Proctored exams can prevent some forms of cheating, but they cannot fully evaluate a student's coding proficiency because they differ significantly from real-world coding projects. Exams typically lack the context and resources that students have access to during actual coding tasks.

Even with proctoring, exams are constrained by time and format, making it difficult to assess real coding abilities. A 3-hour exam cannot replace the skills and time required for a 20-hour project. Furthermore, students who perform exceptionally well on projects often exhibit a moderate drop in performance during exams. In my experience, I do not weigh exam scores heavily to avoid discouraging students from focusing on projects, which are essential for building practical coding skills.

While some professors prioritize exam performance, others have given up on detecting cheating in their projects and homework, instead making exams the primary evaluation tool. However, exams alone cannot fully assess a student’s comprehensive coding abilities, including design, debugging, and unit testing.

Pressure to Pass vs. Learning

Professors do not take joy in failing students. While some may enjoy the challenge, most, like me, have a strong sense of empathy towards students who are struggling. Extenuating circumstances, such as personal or academic challenges, can make a significant difference in a student's performance. It can be heart-wrenching to see a student who is genuinely struggling, trying their best, yet still failing to meet the necessary standards.

The pressure to pass, coupled with limited resources for detecting and punishing cheaters, often leads to a compromise where some academic dishonesty goes undetected. The system is designed to help students navigate their studies, but the reality is that not every cheater is caught or punished, leading to students graduating with insufficient coding skills.

To combat this issue, universities must consider hiring more personnel dedicated to investigating academic dishonesty, enhancing proctoring measures, and finding balanced assessment strategies that accurately reflect both theoretical knowledge and practical coding abilities.