Rosio Pavoris

You can pretend to be teaching OO principles all you want, if you really were you’d be using a pure OO language to do it, and you’d realise just teaching OOP creates crippled programmers at best.
The way you wank on over design patterns reveals what you’re really doing; you aren’t teaching about programming. You aren’t even (for those who think higher education and vocational schooling should have anything to do with each other) training programmers. You’re training typists who happen to know enough programming idioms to wing it some of the time, as long as they’re never asked to create software more complicated than a typical accounting application, or to explain the reasoning behind said idioms.
You aren’t even giving them the tools to pick up languages besides Java and its bastard children, because they’ve never heard of most of the important concepts in computer science.

No wonder there are so many job openings for programmers even a decade after the dot-com bust: colleges and universities just aren’t producing them anymore.

(That is all.)