Universities play a crucial role in developing the next generation of computing professionals. However, by adopting a short-sighted approach to test tools, academic institutions are missing a crucial aspect from their computing and information systems degree courses.
With an overwhelming skew towards open-source tools for software testing, today’s universities potentially leave graduates ill-prepared for the professional environments they will encounter.
Last year, I wrote an article asking if test tool vendors are causing their own demise. In this, I discussed whether tool vendors could help protect their futures by providing educational licenses to universities.
In today’s article, I want to return the focus onto the universities themselves and highlight how, by relying on open-source software, they are failing to prepare students for the real world of enterprise IT.
The Open-Source Predicament
It’s become apparent that many who have completed IT or information systems degrees in the past decade only have exposure to open-source tools.
This indoctrination creates a comfort zone, leading graduates to gravitate towards these familiar tools when they enter the workplace. However, this poses a significant problem: the misconception that open-source tools are equivalent to or “good enough” when compared to professional, paid tools.
In addition, the graduates of 10-15 years ago are now the team leads and managers, and are potentially making poor tools decisions based on their experience of open-source.
The Reality of Open-Source Tools
While beneficial in some contexts, open-source tools often have a narrower scope compared to their professional counterparts. For instance, web focus rather than the broader range of applications and technologies businesses use (ERP, CRM, PLM, etc). They can be valuable for learning and experimentation but are not professional solutions.
I guess Unis chose these tools primarily because of cost, however, this does not translate to the workplace, where open-source tools often carry a higher total cost of ownership and require additional time and resources for script development and maintenance.
In addition, multiple open-source tools are frequently required where one professional tool would do the job.
They also often lack the robust support and advanced features offered by enterprise-grade software. This gap becomes particularly evident when graduates transition from academic projects to complex, real-world applications where reliability, scalability, and security are paramount.
The Impact on Career Readiness
Educational years are formative, shaping our skills and perspectives significantly. What people learn up to age 25 lays the foundation for the rest of their personal and professional lives.
By predominantly focusing on open-source tools, universities may inadvertently limit their students’ exposure to the broader array of tools used in leading enterprises.
This focus can also instil a belief that free tools are the only option (I have heard this said many times) and that there will never be a budget for professional tools, discouraging students from even considering them as viable options. Neither is true. I always encourage reviewing the pros/cons of both approaches and looking at the Total Cost of Ownership.
Consequently, when these graduates enter the workforce, they might not fully appreciate the value and advantages of professional tools, potentially hindering their performance and growth.
It can be like giving an apprentice a toolbox with a hand-drill, screwdrivers, and a handsaw. Never telling them about the power-drills, electric screwdrivers and power-saws that professionals use in the real world. Sure these tools can get small jobs done, but they won’t scale to industrial manufacturing projects.
The Need for Balance
Given this scenario, I suggest universities strive for a more balanced curriculum approach.
Introducing students to professional, enterprise-grade software test tools, could bridge this gap.
These tools will come with robust support, advanced features, and higher security standards, equipping students with the skills and knowledge that align more closely with industry demands.
By incorporating professional test tools into their teaching, universities can better prepare students for the realities of the workplace, fostering a more well-rounded and adaptable skill set.
This approach would enhance their career readiness and broaden their perspectives on the tools and technologies available to them.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while open-source tools have their place in education, ignoring professional tools is not doing the best to prepare students for their future careers. A more balanced curriculum that includes professional tools is essential to produce future generations of graduates well-versed in model tools and techniques.
This balance would ensure that graduates are familiar with the tools they are likely to encounter in the workplace and appreciate the advantages and necessities of professional tools.
By doing so, universities can play a pivotal role in shaping more competent and versatile computing professionals ready to hit the ground running when they start their careers.
