Recent ASU grad here, in CS. It pains me to say this, but the standards are completely non-existent. Professors use lectures and assignments that have been recycled for the past decade and a half (maybe more). I had a database class where we learned relational algebra (ok) and ... MS access, which frankly felt like an insult for a 400-level (3rd or 4th year) class. I compared assignments with friends who went to schools like UIUC, UT Austin, Georgia Tech, CMU, and those were all LEAGUES beyond anything we did at ASU (I can write more about what I've seen if anyone is interested)

The number of lecturers in the CS department that disregard pedagogy for research is astonishing, and makes the undergrad experience horrible.

I still think ASU is doing good with the New American University model and I have benefitted from it immensely. I just don't want anyone to get the idea that it's even in the same ballpark for CS as more popular CS programs.

I think the distinction that gets missed in this conversation is undergrad vs post-grad. The undergrad model is more about access. On the other hand post-grad programs and research is about quality.

What was actually on the syllabus for your database course? If it spent a lot of time teaching MS Access technical skills then that would be a waste. But there's nothing wrong with using Access as a convenient tool to teach fundamental concepts of relational databases.

We had to develop a form in MS access for some mock business use case. It was something that you _might_ have done 15 years ago? FFS though, just teach sqlite. It's infinitely more convenient to run sqlite than MS access (windows-only). Not to mention that MS access only supports a subset of SQL (IIRC, some joins don't work), so much for learning the fundamentals. Absolutely infuriating.

I think I had to use Access in the databases class too back in 2003; they taught SQL but also had a practical project that involved building something in Access.

I could see it as a legitimate use case-- in a real business environment, even in a software-centric organization, you might have a need for light-duty database stuff where the UI is 90% of the value, and Access could give you that while trying to tape together an interface atop SQLite or MySQL is a lot of extra effort.

I had a master's level class that did things w/ MS Access.

The prof even had an appendix for "if you want to do this on a CLI or with MariaDB..." and had links to other DBMS alternatives. I used DBeaver with Maria and got an A in the class.

But to the parent poster's point -- as someone who has done a lot of hiring on the entry-to-mid level there is a NOTABLE difference in quality from the brick-and-mortar schools vs. online, even if they didn't have a STEM degree (e.g. an English major who turned Network Engineer). I suspect it's more about selection bias and some limited competing with peers.

Interesting perspective.

It is funny to hear that they are still using MS Access. I took that same class, nearly a decade ago though. We thought that it was weird even back then. But, if my memory serves my correctly most of the class was about theory, it's not like the goal was to learn how to use MS Access beyond projects trying to apply theory.

I found the assignments to be pretty comparable to other schools, but it very likely depends on which professors you ended up getting. I know for a fact that certain classes had very different content/projects based on your professor.