4 Clarified based on comment feedback: relaxed the tone, better address the question.
source | link

If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys. I* It would fire thembe difficult for not meetingthem to meet the minimum job requirements, which for most normal jobs, means delivery of code. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

TheA few answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." MaybePossibly in academia, most of the time, not in the "real worldworld" jobs." Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. Not. Gonna. WorkIt's not going to work most of the time, except for a few outliers that have master-level hunt and peck typing skills.

So yes, I would say "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. I think it's a safe bet that the majority of CS students are looking to enter the professional work force and as such, the ability to type quickly and effectively is a skill that will only benefit them. For the majority of people that skill is going to be standard touch typing. There are obviously subsets of CS jobs where there is less typing involved, but I don't think this is the majority. Even so, adding a skill to their skillset is hardly detrimental whereas not having it could be career limiting.

If youone simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't best preparing them to enter the work force, for the majority of jobs. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, or more architectural roles, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

In summary, the skill can only benefit them. Therefore, I believe motivating your students to learn touch typing puts them in the best position to succeed. I believe the students will be more effective, more efficient, will spend less time typing and more time doing, and will be in a better position to succeed in their future careers.

Footnotes

* Barring some disability or master-level, non-conventional typing abilities.

If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys. I would fire them for not meeting the minimum job requirements. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

The answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." Maybe in academia, not in the "real world." Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. Not. Gonna. Work.

So yes, "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. If you simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't preparing them to enter the work force. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys.* It would be difficult for them to meet the minimum job requirements, which for most normal jobs, means delivery of code. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

A few answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." Possibly in academia, most of the time, not in "real world" jobs. Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. It's not going to work most of the time, except for a few outliers that have master-level hunt and peck typing skills.

So yes, I would say "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. I think it's a safe bet that the majority of CS students are looking to enter the professional work force and as such, the ability to type quickly and effectively is a skill that will only benefit them. For the majority of people that skill is going to be standard touch typing. There are obviously subsets of CS jobs where there is less typing involved, but I don't think this is the majority. Even so, adding a skill to their skillset is hardly detrimental whereas not having it could be career limiting.

If one simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't best preparing them to enter the work force, for the majority of jobs. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, or more architectural roles, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

In summary, the skill can only benefit them. Therefore, I believe motivating your students to learn touch typing puts them in the best position to succeed. I believe the students will be more effective, more efficient, will spend less time typing and more time doing, and will be in a better position to succeed in their future careers.

Footnotes

* Barring some disability or master-level, non-conventional typing abilities.

3 Removed unnessary insults to the other answers. They have feelings too
source | link

The upvoted answers here are so bad that I could not in good conscience not join this community to give a correct answer. (My intention is not to be rude or disparaging here, it is to prevent people from being led astray by incorrect answers.) If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys. I would fire them for not meeting the minimum job requirements. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

The answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." Maybe in academia, not in the "real world." Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. Not. Gonna. Work.

So yes, "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. If you simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't preparing them to enter the work force. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

The upvoted answers here are so bad that I could not in good conscience not join this community to give a correct answer. (My intention is not to be rude or disparaging here, it is to prevent people from being led astray by incorrect answers.) If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys. I would fire them for not meeting the minimum job requirements. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

The answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." Maybe in academia, not in the "real world." Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. Not. Gonna. Work.

So yes, "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. If you simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't preparing them to enter the work force. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys. I would fire them for not meeting the minimum job requirements. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

The answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." Maybe in academia, not in the "real world." Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. Not. Gonna. Work.

So yes, "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. If you simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't preparing them to enter the work force. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

    Mod Moved Comments To Chat
2 added 124 characters in body
source | link

The upvoted answers here are so bad that I could not in good conscience not join this community to give a correct answer. (My intention is not to be rude or disparaging here, it is to prevent people from being led astray by incorrect answers.) If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys. I would fire them for not meeting the minimum job requirements. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

The answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." Maybe in academia, not in the "real world." Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. Not. Gonna. Work.

So yes, "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. If you simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't preparing them to enter the work force. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

The upvoted answers here are so bad that I could not in good conscience not join this community to give a correct answer. If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys. I would fire them for not meeting the minimum job requirements. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

The answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." Maybe in academia, not in the "real world." Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. Not. Gonna. Work.

So yes, "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. If you simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't preparing them to enter the work force. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

The upvoted answers here are so bad that I could not in good conscience not join this community to give a correct answer. (My intention is not to be rude or disparaging here, it is to prevent people from being led astray by incorrect answers.) If the goal is to prepare students for "the real world," aka "real jobs" then:

Touch typing is required to be an effective programmer. Full stop.

The answers here seem to highlight the difference between theory (academia) and professional work. Under no circumstance would I hire or tolerate a programmer that couldn't code without looking at the keys. I would fire them for not meeting the minimum job requirements. They would be so horribly inefficient as to be detrimental to the organization and code delivery deadlines.

The answers here that say "coding is more thinking than typing." Maybe in academia, not in the "real world." Not only do you have to write 1000s of lines of code, you have to write 1000s of lines of unit tests. And you have a deadline you have to meet. You also have to interact with the systems which more often than not are command line oriented (Linux, Windows Powershell, Mac Terminal). Then you have to google to find helpful answers to common programming problems, usually found on some random community oriented Q & A site.

To answer your question with an analogy, it would be like hiring a secretary that typed up your emails and letters using hunt and peck. Not. Gonna. Work.

So yes, "touch typing" is a job requirement to be a software engineer. If you simply want to teach students theory, and they do not intend to work as a programmer, then sure, just whiteboard, study algorithm textbooks, solve induction problems, but then you aren't preparing them to enter the work force. Maybe they can succeed in academia, teaching, but even then I'd wonder how they would type up their dissertation.

1
source | link