As a couple of my older kids are now of college age, and this is making me confront the issues with college ... particularly with regard to computer science (which is the field I am in) ... namely ...

1) danger to faith & morals
2) college is a scam ... 3/4 of your coursework is not in your major, a way to make money and employ otherwise unemployable liberal arts professors
3) college computer science degrees are garbage (not enough hands on, too much theory, languages that are no longer widely used, etc.) ... so that graduates are not competent to actually program in the real world for years

Some alternatives are being self-taught or taking online classes ... BUT

1) these rarely have enough of the rigor required to become proficient and
2) it's hard to get a job this way
3) don't allow meaningful interaction with teachers
4) there's no way to establish proficiency (like you would be getting a degree)

So the thought has occurred to me to create a non-traditional non-accredited Institute of Technology, which would offer a thorough, rigorous, hands-on computer science curriculum focused entirely on one development platform (Microsoft .NET / C#) ... which is what I know and is one of the most popular out there.

This Institute would offer a Bachelor of Science.  I've interviewed for many jobs and NOT ONCE has an employer asked me if my "Bachelor" was from an "accredited" institution.  If they WERE to ask, one would provide a link that would detail the benefits and rigors of the program and the qualifications of the student.

It would be a total of 3 (approximately 4-credit-hour) terms per year for TWO YEARS.  So Winter/Spring 4 credit hours, Spring-Summer, 4 credit hours, Fall-Winter 4 credit hours.  Over 2 years it would be the equivalent of 24 credit hours.  And some final project (which colleges call "seminar" classes) completed over the last 6 months would round it out to 30 credit hours.

So ...

1) classes would be conducted entirely online to reduce costs
2) first class would always be free ... it's not right taking money from someone who decides that they either don't have the aptitude for computer science or else decide they don't like it
3) if someone doesn't pass a class, they can repeat it for free
4) class sizes would be limited to no more than 20, so it could be a legitimate interactive educational experience, rather than just streaming content.  EXCEPT that the first free intro class would not have the same limit, since there might be many wanting to do it (given that it's for free and just introductory and 50% or more of the students may not go on any further or might not take it seriously or just stop showing up out of laziness, etc.).  Perhaps I should make it a $100 refundable deposit ... refundable if you complete the class, to prevent 50 people from casually signing up and then being too lazy to show up, taking away seats from others who might have seriously wanted to do it).
5) for members of Traditional Catholic families, I would offer an honor-system total tuition deferment.  IF, after completing the degree, you get a job in the field making at least $30K per year, you would promise to pay back the tuition $100 per month so long as you're employed in the field.  I anticipate that it would cost $3600 per year, a total of $7,200 for the degree.  So it would take about 72 months (6 years) to pay it back at $100.  No interest/usury.  Again, based on the honor system.  If you were laid off or in financial difficulties and couldn't pay, that would be between the student and God.  I would do this for everyone, but I wouldn't necessarily trust people off the street to keep their word in an honor system, but would generally consider Traditional Catholics reliable.  One problem I might have to address with this paradigm is the potential for students to go, say, halfway through and then just disappear ... potentially taking seats away from others and ruining the ability to maintain viable class sizes)

Would there be any interest here?  I began developing a highly-effective curriculum for my oldest son, but he decided that he really didn't like it.  And that's the kindof thing that the free first class allows for ... determining whether it's even for you at all.

If there's enough interested (feel free to PM me offline) ... I would work to start this up ASAP.

I agree with your points ("well rounded" education often a waste of money, especially considering the quality of today's liberal arts classes -- we're not talking about a class with Bp. Williamson!)

I don't think lack of degree is as big of a deal as you think it is -- what's of PRIMARY importance is to come in to the interview with the ACTUAL SKILLS to do the work -- and the confidence that comes with that. Also a portfolio and enthusiasm. If you have those things, you should be fine.

The bigger issue is the fact that a huge chunk of the industry is super liberal. Even if you squeeze into the organization (survive the interviews), you will quickly be found out as a conservative. You can only hide it so long, especially when it's Devils vs. Angels like it is today. This isn't the 1990's where Democrats and Republicans both wanted to live a normal life, loved America, etc.

No, today you have the Left wanting full-fledged Communism, hatred of America, strong religious belief in Evolution, abortion as a sacrament, and "outcome based" bringing everyone down to the same level. Equality on earth. And everything is racist. Political correctness gone insane. How can you get along with such people? You can't. And you can't hide the fact you are fundamentally not part of their cult. All it takes is, "Do you have any kids?" and it's all over. You can be as low-key as possible, and try to downplay it. But you can't really downplay your answer, when it's in the high single digits or even double-digits. They will KNOW you're not on board the Green New Deal, know what I mean?

All it takes is, "Do you have any kids?" and it's all over. You can be as low-key as possible, and try to downplay it. But you can't really downplay your answer, when it's in the high single digits or even double-digits.

A supervisor once asked me that. I said "is that relevant to my work here?"

Anti discrimination rules can sometimes be used to your advantage.

Programs like this do exist, but they are often called certificate programs. 

Right, I am acquainted with the cert programs, but they are usually just a few classes and don't have the same rigor as an actual Major would.

What I'd be trying to weed out is the nonsense being forced to take 120 credit hours at college with only 30 in your actual major field of study.

And most comp sci curricula are scattershot and don't focus on a specific platform.

So this would be addressing some of the negatives of a Traditional college program while giving you more than the typical cert.

I agree that the liberal arts curriculum required for computer science degrees is a ripoff.  However, I disagree that math and theoretical topics are useless. 

I can see math and other topics being applicable to a degree to computer science, but I've never found a need to use math beyond Algebra (which is covered in High School) during my entire programming career.  And even the Algebra that was once required was of a very basic level.  And, you know, if someone wanted to take an extra course or two to top if off and balance some stuff out, they could do so and it would be a competitive advantage.  But I don't find that it would be absolutely necessary.  90% of the so-called "core curriculum" is a ripoff, a shameless money-making scheme.

Really the biggest quality for a developer is the ability to THINK in terms of logical algorithms.  And, either one has it, or one doesn't.  That would be the intent of offering a free/exploratory class, where people (together with their teacher) could mutually decide whether they "had it", so to speak, or didn't.

Really the biggest quality for a developer is the ability to THINK in terms of logical algorithms.  And, either one has it, or one doesn't.  That would be the intent of offering a free/exploratory class, where people (together with their teacher) could mutually decide whether they "had it", so to speak, or didn't.

Some are more adept than others in a first programming class, but the ability to "think algorithmically" can be taught.

I think a trade school approach to programming would be good thing (I said it would be good for CAD as well), but a regular bachelors curriculum also has a place, and some of the views about it are not quite accurate.

- 30/120 credits in the major? The program I'm most familiar with has 60+ credits in the major. The rest are mostly basic science: physics, chem and math. You may not use calculus but much of my own programming work involves it. What's left is a) business writing (not english comp), b) a freshmen programming class for students to see how they like it, c) 3 non-tech electives.

- humanities are garbage? Sure, the women's studies department is a waste of time, but there are still good instructors and classes out there; they don't have to be wasted. How about an art history class covering illuminated manuscripts where a project option is OCR for latin texts?

- humanities are garbage? Sure, the women's studies department is a waste of time, but there are still good instructors and classes out there; they don't have to be wasted. How about an art history class covering illuminated manuscripts where a project option is OCR for latin texts?

You're missing the point.  As taught by modern universities, the humanities are garbage.  I would pay NOT to have to take those classes; they're poison to the mind and the soul.

AND, as far as career development goes, it's unnecessary past High School.  If I intend to become a computer programmer, I do not NEED more than the few years of English and history, etc. that I would get in High School.

Of course, part of the problem is that there's a recent study which shows that the average High School curriculum was, in the past, more rigorous than today's average college one.  But I'm sure it depends on the High School to.  I went to a Jesuit High School, and I can tell you for a fact that the High School classes in the same subject areas were much more demanding and intense in High School than they were by the time I went to University.

But, in the end, you're missing the point.  I'm not making a judgment regarding humanities IN THE ABSTRACT.  I am making a judgment with regard to their relevance to computer science.  I absolutely hold that sociology and psychology are of no more relevance to a computer programmer than they would be to a plumber, electrician, or car mechanic.  THAT is the point.  If someone can become a good plumber without taking college sociology, then someone could likewise become a proficient computer programmer without college sociology.

No, most Universities are money-making scams.  Students idiotically go into $200K of student loan debt for degrees in Art History.  Oh, and you also miss the point, that these humanities can be self taught ... and in fact, given today's liberal climate, are BETTER if self-taught from good reliable sources rather than from some BLM-activist professor.

So you basically missed, oh, about 5 of the 6 points that I was making here.

Not everyone has the ______ (talent? brains? aptitude? fill in the blank) to be a brain surgeon.

I use the term "aptitude" to mean simply potential ... in the sense that no matter how hard you work or how hard you try or how long you study, you'll simply never be very good at it.  So, for instance, I have ZERO artistic aptitude.  I tried and tried and tried as a boy and young man to work on art, but I could never do it.  At the same time, I sat down and was writing my own computer programs within 3 days of cracking open a book.  Everyone is different.

I have in mind someone like my dad or my sister, or someone, signing up for a C# programming class and not having even a fighting chance at succeeding.  Those people I would not want to take money from.