To be fair, most of the work environments people are romanticizing are not about the cubicles, but the startups. Smaller teams, kinda scrappy, but mission driven.
In a way, it hasn't changed a ton. Except, the startups now are not so scrappy, and the mission is pretty hotly debated (and for understandable reasons0.
While everyone probably should learn something about their devices, the defaults you provide to users should be good ones.
Drawing a line can be hard, but clearly the basic font should be contrast-y enough so that most people can read it, no? The user can control the defaults of many things on their devices, but we shouldn't require them to change settings to have a good experience. We already customize websites a lot.
I think it depends on the goals of the print version, but people spend a lot of time picking fonts and styles so things look good on a screen. I take this as saying you should supply the same type of attention to your print style sheet.
I teach CS at Berkeley, as a lecturer. i.e., I'm contingent and on a contract. And don't really have grant money—though, y'know I actually try to supplement my income so I can live in the Bay Area. I spent years working in EdTech as well.
Others have already say why TA's (and graders) often do the grading. That's also not the same as the prof not paying attention to the work students do.
But I do want folks to think about the time faculty are actually allocated to teach courses. I have a 2 unit course I teach, ~70 students this term, and 2 hours of class. I'm paid for maybe 8 hours per week for all the prep class time, planning. Doesn't actually leave much time at all for grading. There are definitely qualified students who could be TAs who would give the students much more time and feedback than I am able...
For other courses, I have a bit more time allocated, but hundreds of students and still one of me. The only way students get feedback is when TAs grade.
Anyway, that's just the practical bits...
A lot of faculty are moving to 100% proctored assessment, and I think it sucks. For me, reading at least some of the student responses and seeing the data are helpful. Faculty do want to engage with their students and are similarly demoralized when everything is reduced to a transaction. It's hard not to be nihilist about it. Our own jobs, even at a public University are just capitalistic transactions with fewer profits. Students want the degree because it's the only thing they can hold on to as a token of hope for the next few years. Both students and faculty can fall into patterns of really low trust, and it's hard to be the 'outlier' trying to trust students when most of your colleagues say people don't do the work.
I don't actually have great solutions for building intrinsic motivation in students, except talking to them and minimizing the extent to which everything is a transaction. But I'm required to assign grades, still.
To some extent, that’s not the point. You don’t need to learn all of CS in one tool.
That said, I think you can learn good fundamentals of SWE with tools like Snap!. You can still learn testing, design patterns, working with APIs, modularity etc.
No it’s not a distributed system, and perhaps the biggest pain point is collaboration is tricky. But still you can learn a ton of cool things without going that far into CS. :)
In a way, it hasn't changed a ton. Except, the startups now are not so scrappy, and the mission is pretty hotly debated (and for understandable reasons0.