Slashdot Mirror
Fewer Computer Science Majors
skrysakj writes "USA today reports that there are fewer undergraduate students choosing computer science related majors in the USA. What really woke me up was their statement that only 6% of the worlds engineers are educated in the USA. Before there was a dot-com bubble to burst, I knew lots of *amazing* programmers and IT professionals who had non-IT degrees, so how is this new trend any different than before?"
Basically this post can be summed up in a few sentences:
I knew lots of *amazing* programmers and IT professionals who had non-IT degrees
You need to BS boots rather than a BS degree. It sucks but you have to play the game play - say things like sir, thank you, and yes I can develop 2.57 billion lines of code this month all with zero defects fully tested delivered signed and sealed. Let me say that if you don't have a degree today, you have closed a lot of doors yourself. Very few will hire you without a degree - why should someone unless there is nepotism. Get a degree where you work closer to the money and make tech a secondary skill.
43% of computer science and engineering recipients are non-resident aliens
Our government is making it a little harder to float into the country. Now the schools are whining about loosing revenue - tuition must be cheaper here than overseas (hard to imagine)?
computer science and computer engineering majors in the USA and Canada fell 23% vs. the year before
Students of today are not stupid. Would you choose the tech field today? You would be better off getting a MBA and if you like the tech stuff than you can still assist with it but you have to be closer to the money or your at risk of someone else making your life decisions.
I just graduated in May from University of Connecticut with a Computer Science and Engineering degree. I found a job by the begining of August... but I'm the rareity. Most of my friends have had a real hell of a time finding jobs, and even the job I took didn't pay as much as I was hoping. Finding a CS job right now is not so easy. Is the market saturated with computer people... Are employers taking experience over education? Is it really worth it to get a CS degree, or would it be more valible (and a couple factors of 10 less expensive) to get a bunch of certifications?
Your mammas flamebait.
My advice to protential computer scientists, is major in Math and take a couple programming classes. Math is far more useful and prepares people more completely for the problem solving skills needed for a career in programming. Computer Science is far too cobbled together from other disciplines right now, it honestly lacks identity. The formula now is, (some)Math + (a tiny bit of)Engineering + (a lot of)Programming = CS. CS should be a concentration under a Math degree.
I think it's pretty clear that CS undergrad degrees are out there to improve one's income. They are generic, marginally useful, and are basically an exchange of a piece of paper for time and money. Having a CS degree tells nothing of a person's ability with computers. There were countless people who went to school with me and by their time of graduation knew less about computers than some english and history majors I knew.
I do find it very disappointing though that the promise of a payoff isn't in fact paying off. Just last week I contacted my agent to try to negotiate a better rate with my current employer and one of the reasons was that I am graduating in two weeks with a Math and Comp. Sci. degree. She basically told me that it isn't worth a cent in terms of my rate of pay!
As a University engineering student in Canada's likely best known engineering school, we got to learn about the licensing process and what it is to be an engineer.
I think part of the problem is the constant abuse of the word "engineer" in the United States. In this country (Canada) you cannot designate yourself an "engineer" without being licensed by your provincial body (at least here in Ontario). The word is protected to protect the public from people who don't have the necessary license and/or training to perform engineering tasks. The best example of this is the MSCE designation, which Microsoft had agreed to not use MSCE (Microsoft Certified Engineer) in 2001 and now reversed their decision.
The provincial bodies are now considering enforcement, and they are well within their right to do so. I went to a Microsoft presentation recently here and in their software development jobs, and 3/4 of their "college" (University here) full-time positions had the word "engineer" in them . (For those who don't want to RTFA, there is Program Manager, Software design engineer, Software design engineer in test, and software test engineer). Choice quote from the article:
I'm sure there are more examples of this at other companies, for example the term "network engineer" and other such titles given without certification or engineering licenses.
There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
I think the 5% is accurate.
There are about 6 billion people in the world. There are about 300 million Americans.
Therefore 5% of the world population are Americans.
But I will have to interject that there is a difference between software engineers and programmers/IT professionals. We talk about how "software engineering" doesn't get the same respect as "real" engineering, yet we call everyone software engineers. People want to take a few programming classes and call themselves an engineer. People rant and rave when things like ISO and CMM are talked about, and how they don't ensure good software. (anyone who knows these certifications would agree, and would know that they aren't INTENDED for that.) If you want to be an engineer, then behave like an engineer. If you want to be a programmer, then behave like a programmer. The two might even cross, but they are not the same thing. There are software engineers who don't write code at all.
And I have met more anti-social programmers than PhDs.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
I ended up taking only 1 CS course and it was very bad, and not useful. This was mostly due to a really bad prof that ended up losing his job.
So, I am currently the Lead Developer for a small software company and have only taken 1 computer course. And I know of at least 1 time where I got hired over another person because I had a Math degree as opposed to his CS degree. Their reasoning was interesting..
The hiring people had done a lot of CS and to them.. it was easy. But they had also taken a few high level math coures found them hard (well.. duh). When they found out I had taken many difficult higher level math courses, they just assumed that the CS stuff would come real easy to me.
Kind of neat story I think, just my 2 cents.
Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise - William Shakespeare
People who like computers should NOT go into CS. They should instead go into Comp. Eng. and play with all the stuff that they like about computers.
CS is for people who like computation. (Some of us like hardware or networking but not necessarily constraints, finite automata, etc.) I learned it the hard way, but Computer Science doesn't actually mean Computer Tinkering, it means Science of Computation done with the help of computers.
Unfortunately, many smaller colleges don't make the distinction either, so they mash up Computer Engineering, Software Engineering, MIS, and Computer Science into one Allmighty CS degree; which in many cases doesn't prepare one for the real world.
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
I'm sure you do know lots of amazing IT people without CS degrees, but that's because CS has very little to do with being a Helpdesk or Cisco monkey. Think of it this way, real CS folks are like the people designing cars. IT folks are the UAW workers building them, or more likely Bob, from Bob's Towing and Autobody.
Depending on the state, it's nearly impossible to "work your way up".
In order to be called a Licensed Professional Engineer (PE), you need to have x years of experience, be an Engineer in Training and pass an exam on a single subject.
In order to be an Engineer in Training (EIT), you must have either a college degree (or be near one in some states) or have y years of experience. The you need to pass a test whose subjects include: Mathematics (Algebra, TRIG, geometry, Calculus), Physics (Statics & Dynamics), Mechanics of Materials, Fluid Mechanics, Electricity/Electronics, Chemistry, Thermodynamics, Materials Science, and Economics. Of course, some of those aren't covered as much as others, but still.
The numbers of years to fill in for x and y above vary for every state. Oregon, for example, has a 3 year x and a 8 year y. Washington (IIRC) has a 3 year x and a 4 year y. Texas doesn't allow anyone without a degree to get an EIT, but they give PE licenses to PHD's of Engineering automatically (big mistake, in my opinion).
Right now I have 5 years of structural design experience under my belt and I'd be surprised if I could get hired by 80% of the companies out there, because I don't have an EIT. Sucks.
Computer Science is not the same as Information Technology (professional I.T.). You can do I.T. without knowing one lick of Computer Science -- lots of people do. Also, you can do Computer Science knowing surprisingly little I.T. (I help Senior Engineers do basic IT stuff all the time, because they just couldn't figure it out/don't have the patience/focusing on something else/etc.)
stuff |
I am not trolling or being a hater. I am being a player when I say this. Since this guy has a CS masters it could be a percieved perception that he is worthless especially if all 3 of you don't have a degree. I don't have a CS degree either. Back when I was starting out (im in my early 30's) - They hired this guy at my company that had a CS degree, he was working the same position as me and I felt real threatened by him and made similar claims. Now 10 years later I only will only hire people that I feel have the potential and desire to be better tham me. With a CS degree you know that they should understand all of the innerworkings of a program and have a decent grasp of design. A person off the street with limited background experience may be a great hacker, however thier disipline and design may be lacking.
A title of nobility is something that is usually given without much earning. A degree is something that a person must work for. It requires time, and effort. In addition to that, a lot of education is publically funded. Public universities are funded by the government so as to make higher education available to the masses. Where nobility was very exclusive, rarely gifted to new people and was almost exclusively passed down through the family lines, degrees can be attained by most anyone who tries. I know people who's parents never went to college and yet, somehow, they are working towards getting degrees right now. Degrees lack the exclusivity of noble titles, as well as their distrobution method. So, going by your logic, I could successfully equate the way that the US government subsidizes farmers to the fuedal serf system of old Europe (in keeping with your old world theme).
-Doug
The key part of "Title of nobility" is the nobility part.
"Nobility" can have two characteristics - heredity of title and/or possession and/or rights and obligations to land. I.e. the Duke of Compton would own Illinois and/or be the King of the USA's representative (in war and peace) in Illinois and/or his son would also become Duke of Compton.
If you can't rell the difference between nobility and certification of academic qualifications, then you've certainly got something against formal education.
The founders may have hated artistocrats but they didn't hate men of learning. If you think so, see how many of them had academic qualifications they were proud of.
2. The press reports that there are not enough workers in a particular industry...Both of those items imply a higher salary.
If that were true, Biotech would pay much higher than it does now. Instead, a Ph.D. and 4 years of Post-Doc experience fetches maybe the same if not less than a BSEE.
Much of it has to do with how close to the market the particular industry really is. Chem gets a lot of stocks (and good pay) to work at pharmas but much less so in Academia.
So why is it a surprise that the US has 6% of the engineers in the world? That seems about right...
Want more than anicdotal evidence? Check out any number of salary surveys that are out there, or go to Salary.com. I just checked my zip code & job title and I should be making:
Client/Server Programmer IV (6 - 8 Years XP)
25th%ile Median 75th%ile
$77,461 $85,763 $95,411
Dude, it sounds like you might want to look at getting a raise if you think this is over the top.
Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein
Why is it surprising? The US population is more productive. They achieve more with less.
Congratulations. You've just discovered that computer science has nothing to do with administrating computer systems.
Now if only you could spread the message to everyone else in your company...
You *can* get and do the job without a degree.
If you're good.
You *will* be paid about 20% less without a degree.
Whether you're good or not.
You *will* be at or near the top of the "list" come layoff-time.
Even if you're good.
(your manager who knows you do good work does not make this decision. Some bean-counter in HR who never met you makes this decision).
Your resume *will* be at or near the bottom of the "list" when you look for a new job.
No matter how good you are.
This is what my 14 years of experience and no degree has taught me.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Ernest MacDougal Campbell III
geek ramblings
The calc I was required to take to get my BS included some subject material that wasn't even covered except in advanced grad student classes back in the '60s.
Yes a degree meant more then, less percentage of the people had one. However they were not better. For that matter many of the "party colleges" back then are much harder today, because back then you had to let people in (unless you were a Harvard class school) just to fill classes. Now schools generally get more applications than they can accept, so they have tougher standards.