IBM and Red Hat Offer College Prep

Califa writes "IBM announced Tuesday it will work with Red Hat to bring universities up to speed in teaching college students open source skills." From the article: "The company said its research of technology training at universities around the world have shown a need for more open-standards offerings. About 75 percent of a group of CEOs interviewed by IBM's Business Consulting Services said education and a lack of qualified candidates are the two issues with the greatest impact on their business."

Comments

Which skills?

[Agelmar]

I wonder what exactly will be taught in IBM's ideal, new program. According to the story, "The companies' training will help teach students skills for Linux as well as IBM software and servers." What training for IBM software and servers is appropriate for a University program? For an IT-certification, training on specific IBM programs may be appropriate, but for a true computer science degree, I should think a familiarity with *nix and the ability to learn a new OS would be much better than specific training on "IBM software and servers".

About time...

[glamslam]

This is very welcome as we are looking to hire people with Open Source experience... but everyone we have talked to says, "I've been wanting to try that Linux thingie. I just downloaded Linux 9.0 and I hope to install it someday!"

Making inroads into higher-ed (and I'm not just talking in the server room, but the class room) is critical to Linux's wider adoption.

Spot the difference?

[D-Cypell]

About 75 percent of a group of CEOs interviewed by IBM's Business Consulting Services said education and a lack of qualified candidates are the two issues with the greatest impact on their business

Isnt this just the same issue stated twice?

A question of goals

[ProfaneBaby]

I question these types of programs. What do you want an applicant to have? Familiarity with a specific distribution and a specific skill set, or the ability to learn?

I got passed over for a job or two because I didn't know application 'X'. Sure, I know the theory - I've written a TCP stack from scratch, I understand the core components of operating systems, and I've acted as a sysadmin on 6 UNIX variants for over 10 years, but I didn't know some specific keyword used in a Postgres config, so apparently I'm "not qualified"

Everytime I see something like this - the same type of programs where Microsoft sends out techs to teach people how to pass an MCSE so they can be 'network specialists' without ever explaining what a SYN packet is - I wonder what the goal of the program is. Are they trying to teach people a specific platform, or are they trying to teach people concepts and theory.

From experience, I'm afraid that they're going to train people to be the ReHhat equivalents of an MCSE - and we all know how respected they are in the 'real world.'

Re:A question of goals

[McGiraf]

oh man, your so right, but the problem is to find people that can do the interviews and spot people like you, that is hard.

Re:A question of goals

[Skapare]

They are trying to flood the candidate pool with paper techies to help drive down the salaries so managers will see IBM's and Red Hat's products as lower cost than the others. You might not get some job because of not knowing all the magic keywords or menu layout for application X, but when you do get a job, you can be sure your new boss will tell you, when you try to negotiate the lowball pay up a bit, that he has 50 other fully qualified candidates and that you should consider yourself lucky to be getting the offer (as if he picked your resume out of a hat).

Re:A question of goals

[Anonymous Coward]

"What do you want an applicant to have? Familiarity with a specific distribution and a specific skill set, or the ability to learn?"

Often, in my experience, the applicant fails to make her/his case. If you fail in respect to a requirement speak up, note the deficiency then put forward your case as to why, in spite of the lacuna, you have shown superior abilities and the quickness to acquire new paradigms. There is a loss of face syndrome that causes people to withdraw into themselves when ever they come up short. Business people are risk takers and, as such, fail, but they learn from failure, they don't hide from it.

Re:A question of goals

[kfg]

are they trying to teach people concepts and theory.

They are training NOC monkeys. People who are trained not to think,to perform a specified business task, mechanically and interchangably. Parts is parts.

The above is expressed somewhat cynically, but it is not a troll. It really is what they are up to, and they not only know it, it is a codified business practice. Never stake your business on that which cannot be replaced, since the business fails with the failure of the irreplacable. People are guarunteed to fail. Mediocrity, by definition, can be easily replaced.

Of course this is why a small outfit comprised of a few exceptional people can come out of nowhere and eat the lunch of some big establishment, but in doing to they become a big establishment. . .

Rinse and repeat.

Besides, we both know this is more marketing than anything else, to make sure the future NOC monkeys jabber for IBM and Red Hat kit. Gentoo on a beowulf cluster of old PIIIs need not apply.

KFG

Re:A question of goals

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like a great way to hire salespeople or spokesmodels but a very bad way to hire technical people.

If your job is to hire the best people than you need to draw out the intraverts instead of advising them to change their personality.

Re:A question of goals

[westlake]

I'm afraid that they're going to train people to be the ReHhat equivalents of an MCSE - and we all know how respected they are in the 'real world.'

We also know how employable an MCSE can be in the 'real world.'

Re:A question of goals

[Daniel Dvorkin]

The problem is that most IT managers are techies who get promoted to management instead of good managers who got into tech, so they don't have the management skills and knowledge to realize that giving someone to a week to figure out the ins-and-outs of your particular software choice and it's config files is a lot easier then spending weeks or months looking for that "perfect" candidate.

Are you kidding? You really believe that PHB's are more likely to understand how techies work than techies are? Bullshit. It's people with "management education" who write these absurd "candidate must know how to do task A, B, and C in application X, Y, and Z" job requirements, and HR drones with a slightly lower level (if there is such a thing) of "business education" who pass people over for jobs because they don't have the right buzzwords on their resumes. Every techie I know understands that a competent programmer or sysadmin can figure out the company's way of doing things within a couple of weeks of being hired.

Yeah, but can they donate as expensive software?

[team99parody]

Microsoft's popular with clueless university admins (and politicians for state schools) because they donate zillions of dollars worth of software. If these guys donate Linux can they get as much credit by marking it up to the same huge numbers that clueless admins will be impressed by?

Doubt It

[Vicissidude]

I sincerely doubt there is a lack of qualified candidates considering that IBM itself is currently going through a downsizing that will eliminate 13,000 positions.

This is more posturing for the sake of the politicians. If the industry complains enough, then the newspapers will pick up that complaining, and give the politicians an easy excuse to increase H1-B's in the future.

If there really were a shortage of IT workers, companies would not be downsizing, but rather hiring. They'd be going after everyone with even dubious credentials. Wages would not be stagnant or declining, but instead going through the roof. Considering that NONE of this is happening, I sincerely doubt that there is a shortage of workers. In fact, all this points to an oversupply of workers.

Super villians use it

[Anonymous Coward]

If super villians can use it I'm sure college kids can too.

Where will this be taught?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't a university education supposed to be about subjecting students to classical readings, languages, formal logic, mathematics, and literature? The fact that these programs will not be heard of in the world's leading institutions should give you pause to consider why anyone should want them.

Is it just me...

[Marko DeBeeste]

Or is this another fusillade in the eternal IBM vs M$ war? As far as Big Blue is concerned, Linux is just cannon fodder.

Colleges

[Universal Indicator]

Three years ago I went to a community college for the computer networking program. The program was 100% Microsoft, and 100% certification driven.

By the time I graduated they were just talking about adding a Linux+ course (still cert-driven of course).

There was no mention of Macintosh anywhere. In one of my final courses, Network Integration, I did a presentation on emulation and virtualization, including Mac stuff.

Does anyone think that networking with Mac OS X should be taught in college networking programs?

Re:Colleges

[Anonymous Coward]

if you need a class to learn how to make networks on specific platforms, you have no business in the field.

once you get the basic theory (the basic stuff covered in any networking topology class), you can just buy a damned book to learn how to get a machine on the network

Re:SuSE

[LnxAddct]

Red Hat has all the limelight because they deserve it.
1) Red Hat and Fedora together have over 2 million active servers according to Netcraft, whereas Suse has under half a million.
2)Red Hat does a ton for the community, are experienced, and make a very easy to use distro while retaining the full power of linux.
3) Red Hat's core and only business is Linux. Novell just jumped on the Linux ship because it was failing in other areas, and if Novell sees another oppurtunity to make more money with something else, they'll jump off the linux ship and move on to whatver else they want. Red Hat's whole business is linux.
3) Read this.

Red Hat takes the initiative and keeps the community moving foward. They deserve everything that comes to them.
Regards,
Steve

Unwilling to invest in training

[boner]

When the CEOs of companies complain of lack of education and skills, what they are saying is that they cannot find people that have the right mix of skills for the job. Having worked for a large IT company for nearly ten years I have been involved in many interviews. When you enter an interview with a specific skillset in mind, most of the candidates will not be a good match, however, if you are willing to dig deeper and actually look at the way they think and approach problems, you will find people that could exceed your expectation.
Turning towards universities so that they can provide IT level classes to their graduates is nice for product placement and breeding familiarity. It is however totally useless if you want to teach them the specific skills that are so in demand.
Most companies work under operational constraints that limit the amount of time and money they can invest in training people so they are looking for the dark horse out there that has all the skills and is willing to work for a lower salary. Unfortunately, most all those companies are finding it extremely tough to (a) find the people and (b) keep them.
Once a company has found a person that can do trick A, they will make him do trick A all the time. Whenhe discusses his career development he will be limited to performing trick A over and over again. Not many people I know will stick around.

Having worked with the folks of IBM services, I have seen a large spectrum of people, some very good, some abysmal. Yet, in those projects no college graduate would have been any use with skills advertised in the article.. Why, because real IT problems are caused by real IT needs and are usually the result of decisions made a few years back, therefore an understanding of that type of environment is a requirement to being effective.

If universities really want to train their graduates on IT skills, then they should take all the money RH and IBM are willing to spend but also open a consultancy service for small and medium companies. That will expose students to the realities of IT, not some class. As we say in the group I work for, 'we are looking for the people with the scar tissue in the right places'.
And yes, we do hire out of university, but mostly PhDs

University != Vocational Training

[Anonymous Coward]

College CS programs are supposed to teach theory not how to use the most popular computing platforms.

I know this may sound rather arrogant and that most employers would probably prefer that you have "UNIX", "Advanced Java Programming", and "Software Engineering and Collaboration" on your transcript than "Automata", "Algorithims and Data Structures", and "Discrete Mathematics", but if you seriously are looking for real world experience, places like ITT Tech are designed to give it to you. There is no shame in getting this kind of education, but you are not a computer scientist for doing so.

A real computer scientist tinkers around with technology at home during his (or her)'s free time. Many campuses have "Linux Users Groups" or "Open Source Technology Users Groups" where students play with this stuff in their free time (and the profesors themselves get involved too). If you just want a piece of paper, thats all you're going to get.

The order of Layoffs

[ClosedSource]

1. Layoff people that challenge or otherwise annoy management.
2. Layoff people who are expensive
3. Layoff people who are working on poorly performing projects.
4. Layoff people who are weak performers
5. Layoff people who are good performers but not "buddies" of the founders.
6. Layoff the buddies
7. Close the doors.