8/26 \_ of course, i was actually there when 60abc was created.
and one of the stated goals was cs50/55 was too difficult,
and there was too much material to be covered in 2 semesters.
i was even there when they decided that teach both scheme
and c in 1 semester was too difficult, and they watered
that down also.
\_ Who are you? Email me, I'm quite curious to hear some
concrete details of what happenned with the 50->60 switch,
if you're indeed for real. -alexf
\_ you could ask clancy or bh for details. anyway, once
you've got the details, could you post a summary in
/csua/tmp?
\_ a ugrad perspective is likely to differ substantially
from that of clancy and bh. -alexf
\_ not sure what else there is to say. the
unofficial reason for going from the 50/55
sequence to the 60abc sequence was too many
people was failing out of 50. so they
essentially took the original 50 and split it
into 2 classes, 60a and 60c. 60b was largely
the same as 55. of course, after the 1st
semester, it was obvious students still
couldn't handle both c and scheme in one
semester. so by the 2nd semester of the class
(sp87 i think), they further reduced 60a to
scheme only and saved c for 60c. scuttlebutt
was guys who took the original 60a breezed
through the watered down 60c, and guys who
took the later watered down 60a had more
problems. -tse |