Slashdot Mirror
The M.S. Degree vs. Everything Else?
salad_fingers writes "It has been said that the Bachelor's Degree is the new High School Diploma: everybody has one. It is taking a greater investment of time, money and effort on behalf of the individual to give oneself that needed edge in the professional world. I have noticed that in technical fields, specifically engineering, employees are flocking in droves to MBA programs to capitalize on the upcoming retirement of the Baby Boomers, and have largely considered pursuing a graduate degree in a technical field as a waste of time and effort. What does Slashdot see as the future of the M.S. degree versus other available and somewhat non-traditional degrees? What path should engineers pursue for maximum future employability?"
I ended up with a masters in biology education, with no intention of teaching high school science (my student teaching was that bad). Fortunately having a master's degree provides a nice foot in the door. Later on I got several Microsoft certifications, which helped me move from being a programmer to a SQL Server administrator.
There are some professions that are specific to a job, but any master's degree helps in a competitive field. Once you're in, of course, it's all about what you can do.
If everyone else has a business degree, then a technical degree will be worth more.
1. M.S.
2. Certification (CCNA, MCSE. etc)
3. Actual impressive looking program
4. Bull during the interview on how great you are. That's how I got my job.
The issue here is that degrees are the only way most HR people actually grade prospective employees. And most of them are not even technically inclined. Getting the job is one thing, actually keeping it is another. But still you gotta impress to get the job before you can worry about keeping it
It doesn't matter how good you are, only how good they think you are. In which case all four of the above may be necessary.
started their education by majoring in one of the engineering disciplines. Knowledge of engineering and business are both valuable, and possibly even more valuable together depending on what your long-term goals are job-wise. If you see yourself as managing engineers, then it could easily work in your favor.
The answer entirely depends on deciding what you really want to do and where you want to do it. So many people bumble about thinking that getting just one more degree will bring them their dream job happiness. $50k later, they're working at Burgerville with a Masters in Fine Arts and wondering how they're going to make their student loan payment.
Do some soul searching and try to figure out what kind of job you really want to do and the kinds of industries and businesses you want to do it. If you can't get a good bead on that then you're just trusting your life to fate.
So, once you figure out what you want to do or where you want to do it, do everything you can to learn about it. Contact professionals in the field/business and arrange informational interviews. If you're still in school, try to get some kind of internship or "special project" with that business/industry - your profs are your friends here and probably know someone in industry who can help you.
For example, if you want to be a supply chain analyst for a sportswear company then you should see if any of your profs know someone at a sportswear company and see if you can do some kind of class-related project. Find out who they use for temp staff and get work there when you can.
Check to see if your school has an alumni program where you can find alumni out in the world and see if any of them are working in a field/company you're interested.
Once you get in, make contacts. Ask LOTS of questions. Find out what THEY look for when they are hiring. My current job at a place pretty much requires an MBA. The previous job I did as a temp employee didn't care what my degree was or if I even had one.
If you know you want to be a software developer for IBM, then find out what IBM looks for. They're the ones you need to impress. That answer is totally different than if you want to be a systems administrator at a university.
But, until you can answer "what do you want to do", there's not much point in going for a higher degree unless you feel like you'll be lucky.
When you consider how little I actually learned in high school, yes, my diploma is BS. Fortunately, college is shaping up much better.
What path should engineers pursue for maximum future employability?
Learn agriculture. Seriously, it is looking more and more likely that the post war paradise the baby boomers experienced is an anomaly in the course of human history. Better learn to survive in a post cheap oil world.
As one who is starting an MBA Program. Ill share my insights on this. Getting an M.S. In Computer Science is generally designed for you to enter the PHD program and become more focused in one area of study within Computer Science.
Especially for technology unless your are planning more of a research type job say at Google R&D an M.S. and PHD is a Risky Job venture. Technology changes way to fast what first takes a high level of education to master is soon available as a class library, which you just need to include and it will work out all right or if you are a little more professional about it you see the source, or just see how it work and see in real time the advantages and disadvantages and go "Oh Yea! Why didn't I think of that". Technology based High Level Degrees tend to get out of date faster then say a Physics or Engineering Degree.
The MBA while a Masters level classes are more broad based allowing you to expand your career opportunity vs. limiting your choices. With an MBA it allows you to stay in technology but get higher positions such as management or team leaders, but also it allows you to move away from the technology field if you need or want to.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
If you are willing to bust your ass (or you have an inherent "gift") you don't need a degree.
:)
You mean, like, Bill Gates?
Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.
I tend to agree with you. Degrees are for learning, not making money. I'm in college now and many people that I've met couldn't care less if they learned anything; all they want is the piece of paper at the end. While higher education is certainly an investment with a hope for higher pay in the future, I'm inclined to think that college graduates would do poorly after college if they lack interest in any sort of learning in their field just as someone less educated would do poorly if he had no desire to succeed.
Bad news, we voted out the evolutionist school board. We're not stupid, we're just not ever vigilant at the ballot box. But you might try moving to Las Vegas: "God's Blind Spot."
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin
Based on your spelling and grammar, I'd have to agree.
A man who can't pronouce "nuclear arsenal" shouldn't have one -sig ends here.
If you're in some little start up, neither an MS or MBA will make any difference (unless you're working AND getting the degree). As you move out into your thirties and forties, you'll probably find that the MS in what ever will provide more oportunity (than a BS) on the programmer, engineer, tech lead, scientist, senior scientist track, while the MBA will set you up for the section head, department head, site lead, etc track.
If you want to work on and create technology, go MS. If you want to manage it, go MBA.
If you wnat to know what program to do NOW, before your life responsibilities stack up, and you can hack the program, go MS. Frankly, the vast majority of MBA programs can easily be completed in your spare time, even if you've got a working spouse and a couple of kids, so you can safely put that off until you turn 30 or 35. Then, with both an MS and MBA, you'll be head and shoulders over many of your peers no matter what direction you decide to go (including doing your own thing).
Luke, help me take this mask off
Unless you get a job in the same area you do your thesis, the main selling point you will get from the MS is just that piece of paper. However, it is a very valuable piece of paper when combined with some actual experience, even just internships. And by spending another 2-3 years in school you get to make some connections and maybe spend some more summers interning. This is more likely what will get you the job, not the junk you learn in class.
Follow your #1 interest, the thing you are best at.
At the end of the day; to ensure employment you have to be exceptionally good at what you do... Average performers will struggle getting employed, in almost any field. Exceptional performers will easily find work.
You're looking at it entirely wrong if you think certain educations will give you an easy employment.
If you get an MBA, and you graduate as an average student at an average institution, you WILL stuggle to find employment. Work with something you love and are exceptional at. If you suffer from an extreme fascinations with earth-quakes and rocks, and you get a superb graduation from a top-notch university with a M.S. in geology, you can pick from many hundred jobs within your field. Almost just as importantly, if you get an education within a field that interestes you very much, you will ENJOY your student-life. As opposed to wrestling with a boring and (to you) uninteresting education for 3-7 years, just because of 'employability'!
What does Slashdot see as the future of the M.S. degree versus other available and somewhat non-traditional degrees? What path should engineers pursue for maximum future employability?
On an international scale, in order to stay competitive economically the US has to be the worlds largest consumer. In order to consume individuals must have enough education that their jobs aren't easily outsourced. So the US encourages higher education.
The generic "here's a spec, design it" engineering can be accomplished by a bachelor's degree holder, as well as most outsourcing companies. The research that is done at the master's and PhD levels is important for new technologies, but that has largely been watered down (fewer skunk works, menlo parks, etc)
If you want to stay competitive in today's industry, you'll have to settle for a bachelor's degree or higher, coupled with management experience. Many companies move engineers into a position to act as liasons to outsourced workers, and still keep a smaller engineering group around for fixing designs, quick proof of concept, and developing new technology.
But in the end you'll be fine and happy with a bachelors degree once you have experience. All a masters does for you is move you up the pay bracket 10-15%, and the reality is that after the two years of real world experience rather than going for a masters, most bachelors are at that level by the time you get your masters.
I did a lot of work while in school, developed a passion for my field, and graduated with a bachelors. I may want more schooling down the road. I'm not certain, however, that a masters of engineering will serve me as well as a masters in business, so I decided to work for a few years to get an idea of the industry and find out where the opportunities that look interesting lie.
What you should do to ensure maximum future employability is do what you love, and love what you do. That is what will shine through - too many people do engineering because they want money, but don't want to be doctors. They make OK engineers, but until they find the passion they end up being lukewarm for 1/3 of their life while at work, asleep 1/3, and bored the other 1/3. Don't do that.
-Adam
Back in the USSR, people talked about "getting your Party Card." It was a validation that showed you had jumped a particular barrier to entry into the elite - didn't matter what you knew, it showed you had the Right Stuff to be allowed entry into that small group that actually got to set the agenda.
Getting an M.B.A. in our culture is like "getting your Party Card." I know, I've got one. People who only have technical degrees are journeymen and tradesmen, they know how to do something but not why. Having your M.B.A. means you've got what it takes to understand The Business, and that trumps anything technical, any time. Having an M.B.A. means that after great effort - it ain't easy - you've learned the language, you've learned the secret handshake, so you can be counted on to understand The Business - be an operator at the level where money is created and decisions are made about investing in all those engineers, operators, plumbers, and carpenters below you.
IT Masters & Charles Sturt University together offer Masters Degrees with industry certification included. Everything from MSCE, to CCNE & even Novell certified Linux Administrator (or something). It is all via correspondance and takes between 2-4 years. There are students from the USA taking part in some of my classes. http://www.itmasters.com.au/
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds -- Albert Einstein
Network administration is too narrow of a definition for a Bachelor's degree. What you want is a degree in computer science. CS doesn't teach you about Microsoft products or how to plug in an ethernet cable. What it does do is tell you how to make all of that stuff on your own, and in so doing let you gain a greater understanding of how existing tools work. A degree focusing on how to do a job will go out of style and the education will be worthless in a few years. Education in a broad field that is largely static brings useful theory that will allow you to teach yourself the things that will make you the money at a job you want...I think.
First off - I don't think it's possible to effectively manage
tech people without having strong technical skills yourself.
Your knowledge will be too superficial to make informed decisions,
and in the end you just won't be respected.
In my experience it definitely pays off in the long run to get
a graduate degree in CS, and it's easier to do it the first time you
are at school. I'm in my early 30s and am working as a
development director in a startup. I find that most of the people
i deal with, other senior tech people, CTOs, senior architects,
generally have a very strong formal education, Honours in BSc,
M.S or Phd. There are some exceptions of course, there are
many IT middle managers out there with no technology skils - but
these are the people who tend to get ignored in meetings when
the real decisions are being made. There are also a lot of people
out there with little formal education but with the smarts to
make up for it.
I see an MBA as something that makes sense to do later perhaps in
your late 20s/early 30s when you have already have some management
experience and are ready to move into a executive level.
seriously
High prices for crude oil are going to stick around for a while. Oil companies litterally can not hire enough people to work. I'm not just talking about push hands and drill pigs. They need engineers, welders, geologists, software developers. Every company out here is starving for employees. If you have a pulse you're hired. Don't have a resume? No problem. Completed a University or Technical program. . . great you're hired. No education? Companies out here will pay for courses.
The economy here in Alberta is so hot that the word "booming" doesn't seem to describe it well enough. Of course there are downsides. Line ups everywhere are huge. If you walk into a coffe shop expect a minimum of 15 minutes to get your latte. Labour shortages have affected every industry.Of course every boom will have a bust. But I don't see that happening in the next couple years and I would hire somebody with two years good experience over somebody with two years more general education.
I struggled with the same questions, both when I was in school getting my Bachelor's and later while working (I'm 26 now, and still haven't come to a conclusion). I was doing my Bachelors in CS at Stanford, and having a great time of it. I didn't see a reason to stop, so I applied for the coterminal Masters program, in which you just keep right on taking classes. I started being a TA for CS classes, and enjoyed teaching. During the summers, I did internships all over the place, and had a good time doing it.
After a couple of years, though, I started thinking about what the goal was. I didn't actually have a reason to want the Masters: it was just a way to keep taking classes. So after five years I had my Bachelors and was partway to the Masters, but I'd had enough. I took a job at Microsoft as a developer, and have been having a great time at that, too.
But lately I've started to think again about what the goal is. Do I want to be a dev forever? I have friends here where that is absolutely their goal. Do I want to run the company? If so, I can either get an MBA, or try to start working my way up through the management chain (there are a bunch of VPs at Microsoft without MBAs). Do I want to do something completely different? I've thought about joining a start-up or working for a consulting house. Maybe I could swing working in another country for a while. The good news is that there's no deadline... I don't need to have this all decided by the time I'm 30.
So look around and figure out where you want to be in five years, and then figure out where that points you for twenty years out. If you're unhappy with that, start thinking with longer horizons in mind. I'll be honest: I've never missed my CS Masters. If I go back to school, it'll be for an MBA.
If your only goal is employability, you're barking up the wrong tree anyway: lawyers are basically always employed, and make more than I do as well. So start figuring out what's important to you besides being employed... I'm guessing it's a longer list than that.
You just come along with me and have a good time. The Galaxy's a fun place. You'll need to have this fish in your ear.
First of all, many MS programs are only one year. These are preferable. I'm in biotech, which is sort of a clearing house for all the technical professions. At this time, breadth is more valuable than depth. An MS is a great way to learn another craft, provided you learned good engineering fundamentals in college. I got a BS in chemical eng, and am now getting an MS in bioeng. Getting an MS in a field different from your undergrad major is more realizable than you may think, since you don't need to retake calculus and organic chemistry and all those basic courses. Just hop in and start with some advanced undergrad and grad courses. Also, the MBA - while required by many companies - seems to be little more than hopping through hoops. I have a hard time staying motivated in school when I question the practical value of what I learn. I don't think I could handle the MBA bullshit.
I work for a university engineering department and we have a real problem with grad students, particularly foriegn grads, doing that. They get in the masters program without any clear idea why. They aren't interested in research, they jsut want a master's degree. They see it as just another hoop to jump through to get more money. The upshit of this is that they tend to have very fragile knowledge. They are all book smarts. You ask them a question in terms of a formula they learned and you get an answer. You ask them the very same question in terms of the real world you get a blank stare. I mean there's a lab full of peopel that do networking that can't properly work out the subnet their computer is supposed to be in, when you give them the subnet (they kept putting it as a /16 since we are in the class B part of the IP space).
I think your advice is very good: Decide what you want to do, and see if a degree (I'm talking undergrad here) really matters. For some jobs, it's manditory and it has to be in the correct field. For others, it's highly beneficial, but doens't really mater what it is. Still otehrs it helps a little bit, but no more than a year of experience and a good refrence.
For master's, unless it's something that the place you want to work for really wants, you need a personal reason to get it. A master's degree SHOULD be because you enjoy learning about something, and want to work on some orignal research for it. A master's thesis is supposed to be you going out and exploring something. Unfortunately many places (like where I work) will instead let you take a comprehensive exam which is just a hoop to jump though. If that's all you want to do, you shoudln't be getting a master's.
While an undergrad is, for the most part, just a continued somewhat specialized education, a master's is supposed to be mroe research oriented. It should be the kind of thing you do out of personal love, not professional intrest. Because, when you get down to it, what employers REALLY care about is if you can do the job they want. Having a master's degree that is backed by no skills to apply it isn't useful and even if they don't know when interviewing you, they'll figure it out.
You'll get far more jobs through experience and personal references than with a peice of paper. I can't emphasize the personal reference thing enough. Find someone who knows someone who works where you want to. Meet that person, have them give you a reference. It goes a looooong way. Really, I've only ever gotten one job cold, all the rest were because I knew someone who knew someone. Sometimes, there was no interview at all just a "This the guy? Good, you're hired." People trust the opinions of those close to them more than the trust the paper from your alma matter usually.
There is no shortage of tech jobs. Walking out of college with a 4 year bachelors degree, a head full of knowledge, and the motivation to work hard and improve yourself will make you extremely marketable. Sure, having a masters in a technical field would make you more knowledgeable, but you're going to need the work experience to go with it. I would take a new hire with a bach degree and 2 years experience over a new hire with a masters degree any day.
I say this as I'm wrapping up my second bachelors and planning out the rest of my education. I've spent 8+ years now as a software developer, I have military CS training, a comp sci assoc degree, and a BS Information Technology degree. All of which have helped make me a very successful programmer and software developer. The degree I'm current working on is a BS Technology Management. And once I finish it (in 2 weeks!!!) I'll probably look to PMI for Project Management certification (CAPM). With those notches on my resume I'll start shopping for an IT Project Management position, IT Coordinator, or some other mid level IT Management position. Eventually I do want to earn a Masters, but I will likely aim for a full Management program. With my goal then becoming an IT Director or CIO.
I love coding, I love working on computers, but I have been dragged through so many half assed projects that I feel the need to take control of my destiny and drive the damn short bus instead of riding in the back row.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
I've interviewed a few technical people with Masters degrees in CS who couldn't even tell me the difference between an array, a hash table and a linked list.Go for the degree if it's what you want to do (You enjoy learning, you enjoy hitting on the cute freshman girls, or whatever) but don't count on it to be the distinguishing factor between you and someone else. Though a cool thesis paper would go a long way toward convincing me that I might want to hire you (Apparently neither of the folks I interviewed went through programs that required them.)
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
If you want to get an entry level job, leave out the part about the masters and say you were in jail for 2 years. It would work better than you think. But seriously, I'm very surprised that EVERY company you talked to took such a negative view of your situation. Sure, its only the last few years that matter in the tech industry, but it sounds to me like you're pretty well qualified, especially if you can get a good reference from the last company you worked for.
Programming isn't learning languages - it's learning how to give instructions to a machine.
There's some differences between languages, yes, but if you know C, learning Pascal is just picking up the syntax. Most everything else is the same. Java/C++/Python are all object oriented - learning one will step you right into any of the others. ML and Haskell are functional languages that use similar concepts, and if you're proficient in one functional language, you've done most of the work for programming in any of them.
The biggest thing is to learn how to program. A programmer from the 1960s can use those same skills today for many purposes (although picking up OO would be necessary for some things).
In any event, what you're probably looking at is an MIS degree instead of CS. They deal with things like networking, database operation, systems admin, and the like. There isn't much emphasis on programming beyond the small scripting level.
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
My career path has been fairly simple. I put more weight to "pick slowly and wisely" than "it's never too late to change".
...." All the best Senior Team crews I ever worked for were the *best* in the office at the line position, and then grafted the managerial stuff on top of it.
Some high schools have a Mood. Ours was Pro Science, and somewhat disparaging to business. I did passably well in Freshman year in college, took one glance at the upcoming "only sophomore" Organic Chemistry book, and wilted. I learned I'd rather *read* Scientific American articles in a day than take a year to write one.
I set about good sharp DeepRead of the future, and picked Accounting as a base. Right out of school in 1999 the quick way to some basic experience was in temporary positions. I started well, got a couple basic years down, and ran afoul of the slow economy of 2002-2004. After a bumpy couple of years, my current position is half Accounting blended with half Entry-IT unsquirreling the silly glitches in the accounting software.Sure, I COULD have whipped through some masters classes straight out, but I now feel there are several problems with that approach.
First, Dilbert made famous the Manager Without a Clue. I think that's an easy trap for newly minted MBA's to fall into, because it's easy for that course material to drift into generalities, and wither away at the center. "Look, he thinks he's a hotshot, but he doesn't even know
Second, it will probably take some time just to grind your way to a solid position in a company somewhere. "6 months to pay off some bills, 6 months to try some stuff, 1 year of bad luck, 2 years getting the foot in the door, 2 years to start to rise."
I graduated with my B.S. in Accounting. My bad luck was a little extended; it's now 2006 and I'm nearing my 2 years of Foot-In-Door. Say a year to plan... Wouldn't a Masters Started in 2008 be worth so much more than one finished in 1999? Accounting is pretty stable, but CS... oh, the horrors of knowing More Than the Universe about Windows 98...
I picked well; I can and do read ravenously for recreation. But my Degree has to pay the rent. My B.S. in Accounting is plenty. I do not wish to be a CPA, or the CFO. Since my interest is slowly veering towards the Comp side of my duties, the ten years quiet delay means that when I finally pin down the perfect course set for a Masters of something, it will be FRESH.
--TaoPhoenix
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
If what you care about is $$$ then don't bother working as a run of the mill engineer. Consider real estate and other forms of investment.
-Tim Louden
Seriously... if you love school and are interested in the classes, then go for it. Me, well I dropped out of college to work full time back in '99 and never looked back. Best thing I ever did. Obviously not everyone can be sucessful in technology w/o a college degree (I've done IT, software development and security) but it worked for me. FWIW, there are a number of other people at my current job (a small security startup) w/o college degrees too and they're just as good as the people with B.S.'s and M.S.'s.
If you want to move into upper management, then yeah, I can see how advanced degrees can really help you- especially in larger companies since they seem to care about things like that. But if you're not actually interested in upper management roles, then you're just wasting your time.
... is that the education level is almost equivlent at some schools.
The high school basic/standard curriculum that we still use today in the USA is wholly inadequate for the job market in the country. It is entirely based around strict adherence to institutional instruction. We still spend too much time teaching basics that should have been taught in grade school (grammar school/middle school/junior high). Part of the problem is in passing students along up to the next level when they are not ready to move to the next level.
What is the purpose of teaching a curriculum that was designed to produce factor workers in a nation that has so little actual manufacturing infrastructure still operational? We continue to cut the arts in school more and more, but those skills are becomming more and more important in this nation due to the fact that they teach you "how to think outside the box" which leads directly to "innovation" and "invention". We are a country dependent on our creating of "intellectual property". Following directions will not create new technologys, becuase there are no directions for making improvements. Improvements are generated by analizing and creative thinking.
The high school diploma is very close to being a useless document other then its ability to let you start taking classes in a college to start learning the skills that will allow you to get a job. We no longer need 30 million factory workers, foundry workers, miners, metal workers, and carpenters in this nation (we still need some and need highly skilled ones at that). But now what we need are 30 million inventors, scientists, researchers, engineers, programmers, designers, artists (visual, musical, and performance), and story tellers. These are what we need to be prepairing our students to become.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Technical skills and expertise are certainly important, but anyone can acquire those skills and certifications. The key to making yourself valuable is to also have the "fuzzier" skills in problem solving, research, and writing* that others ignore.
*You would not believe how bad some business writing is.
That's programming. But it isn't what you learn when you do a B.Sc. in Computer Science. What you will learn is how to represent, abstract, organize and manipulate information. You will learn what information actually means, and what the limits are (e.g. P vs. NP).
Programming is the tool to manipulate information, but it's not what a B.Sc. is about. When I interview somebody I assume they can program, and that if they need to pick up a new language they will figure it out, as needed. What I want to know is if they understand the concepts. One question that always gets interesting results is "Tell me an application of binary trees." Follow on question: "Other than searching and sorting."
I did my Masters for the hell of it. So there.
...laura, B.Sc., M.A.Sc.
Here are a few clues for you:
1. Many hiring managers are not very good at determining an applicant's technical skills. Especially if HR gets involved.
2. Networking is more about finding out about positions than anything. A large number of jobs are never posted. And it's better to have a several people looking for you, than looking just on your own.
3. A person vouching for a prospective hire's skills gives the hiring manager warm fuzzies. It adds another data point that the person has the right skills, and it also pushes some of the blame on the person recommending the hire, in case things goes wrong.
4. One very important part of hiring a new person is how they will fit in the culture or the group. If they're already friends with one employee, they're likely to fit in in a similar manner.
5. So-called "soft skills" are more important in most jobs than the hard technical skills. Soft skills are all about working with and communicating with others. This is another thing that a reference can show that you are good at. (This is even harder to discern during an interview.)
6. Networking works. I didn't believe it when I was younger, either.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
The reason the reason is that, if the hiring person is any good, they want to know if you have a certain unmeasurable quality. One of my friends calls it being a "bithead". Basically to me it's do you have both the ability and the drive to be able to learn about and solve novel problems in regards to technology. That's all I really want to know ability wise. If you've knowledge in the area we need you to work, great, if not that's fine, we can train you provided you have that unmeasurable quality. If you don't, I don't give a fuck what you know because it's not useful.
To put it another way I need to know if your knowledge and learning process are fragile or not. You may have a master's and certificates up the ass, that means only that you know how to pass tests. Sure you might have a shitload of facts stored in you, but if they can't be applied to the real world, I don't need you.
There's no good way to test for that, either, other than having someone do work. I can try and design tests to see but they don;t necessarily show me anything. If it happens to be something you read in a book, you can pass, even though you lack that so-called bithead quality.
The parent's point about fitting in is highly valid as well. Some people just don't work. I remember at one of my student jobs they hired a new guy that I just didn't like. Now at first I thought it was just my being an introvert, you know a new guy intruding on a familiar space. I told myself that I was being petty and needed to just wait and it'd change....
Never did. That guy creeped me out the whole time he was there until they let him go (incidentally he never did any fucking work). He just didn't fit. Later, we hired another guy who was a friend of one of the employees. I liked him almost immediately and he worked out really well.
So you really get to trust references not only because we are inclined to listen to personal anecdotes more than empirical evidence, even though they are less valid, but also because it does seem to work. Where I work now, we hire student workers pretty often. That's the problem with students: They keep graduating. Well if we can, we get them by having our current students refer them, or people we meet since some of us take classes. If not we go to ads on campus. Of the referrals, all that I can remember have worked out. They have had varying skill and knowledge levels, but they were all bitheads, and they all got along. Of the cold hires, I'd say it's less than 50%. Many are not bitheads, many simply don't get along well in the work environment, some both.
For example, we hired a grad student not too long ago. Nice enough guy, but didn't work out. For one his problem solving skills were abysmal. He could only do a task if it was very precisely defined, at which point the amount of time needed to explain it usually made it faster to just do yourself. He had no initiative to try and find things to do, he'd just sit at his computer fiddling with Linux unless given a task. He also fit in poorly, he didn't socialize almost at all with the rest of us, despite our efforts. To top it all off, he never intended to keep the job. He wanted a research assistant position. As soon as he got one, he skipped (1.5 months roughly).
That kind of thing doesn't happen with people referred to us. Maybe it's just luck, but I think it's more that you don't want to ruin your reputation. Sure maybe you talk a friend up a bit, but you aren't going to go and say he's a great reliable guy if you know he's going to bail at the first opportunity. If you give bad references, pretty soon your credibility is shot to hell and people won't listen to you.
The parent is also dead on about jobs that aren't posted. I mean you'll get situations as so:
A technical group is down a person, someone good just left. However they are a large group, he's one in twenty, so they don't go and open a posting right away. His work is absorbed by the team, nobody really wants to go through the trouble of a hiring process right now.
Maybe things are different in the US but in the UK getting a Masters degree when you already have a bathelors degree is a one year full time course and makes little or no difference to your job prospects. It basically says i did 4 years at degree level and not three. Are things different over there?
What path should engineers pursue for maximum future employability?"
As an engineer who's about to turn 50, I would suggest you pursue a different career. Opportunities for engineers are dwindling. Today, most product manufacturing and design is done in countries outside the USA. If you plan on remaining in the USA, prospects for continued engineering employment are bleak.
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
When I finished up undergrad, I didn't want to spend 4-6 years of my life on a PhD, but I also wanted to take more classes in some specific topics, and those classes weren't available at the (really good) small engineering college I'd gone to. I ended up doing a 1 year M.Eng. program at a large university. This gave me the opportunity to take graduate-level courses from very good professors in the areas I was interested in, and I was exposed to a lot of topics which had only been mentioned in passing in undergrad. I found a job with someone one of the professors I'd taken a class from put me in touch with, and having the M.Eng. degree has let me start with a higher position, and work on more interesting projects. So I'd say that a M.Eng./M.S. is worth it if there's a specific area you'd like to learn more in. It will also give you a chance to get to know professors who can help you find a good job, and give your resume a boost over someone who only has a B.S.
You're right: programming is programming. But computer science is not programming! You're much too focused on learning the "how" of doing something, as in your Microsoft-centric vocational "Network Administration" program. But what's actually valuable is to understand the "why" of doing something, which is what a real computer science program will teach you.
In other words, here's an analogy: the school you're in now is teaching you to be the equivalent of an auto mechanic. Unless you want to be changing oil the rest of your life, you want to be an engineer.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
By allowing every tom, dick and idgit to pursue and obtain degrees with our lax admittance standards at modern day colleges and universities, the advanced degree, while being probably required, will soon be no indication of ability, knowledge, or added value of an employee to an enterprise. To maximize the perceived value you might carry as an employee, you will probably need to maximize your presentable portfolio of demostrated expertise. In fact, only in specific limited areas of study, where degrees are required for certification, licensure, and funding (engineers, architects, physicians, research sciences), are degrees going to retain their value. For information tach jobs, I think demonstrated skills will be more valued than degrees. And proven success will be more valuable for business related jobs than an MBA, I expect.
Now, if Universities return to the tighter admissions standards of yesteryear, and return to accepting only the top 30% of applicants, as they once did, degrees will become more valuable in the future.
There's a reason why D.C. is the hottest job market in the country. If you're a U.S. citizen, a great way to ensure future employability is to get a job that requires a security clearance. The government isn't going out of business any time soon (if it does, we're ALL S.O.L.) and most of those jobs can't be outsourced.
I have one. It puts me ahead im my field, and has opened up oppertunities that I would not otherwise have. If you can stick it out and get the degree from a decent univerisity then it will pay for itself. If you go full time the degree will cost less since you can usually get a teaching position (TA), and where I went they waived tuition for TAs. In addition, when you have one people care less about certifications, they assume you'll get up to speed on your own. Hey they know your capable, after all you have an MS.
Not everything is an earnings analysis, you need to look beyond the pure balance sheet. The finances of it make it look like you won't break even for a long time. In my opinion, what the earnings analysis leaves out is the other jobs you become qualified for. So when oppertunities dry up, you still have skill sets that are applicable. This causes more continued employment. I've had situations, where if I didn't have the skills I learned in grad school I would have been quickly downsized. So factor in continous employment to the earnings equation. Think about it, only 10-15% of people get advanced degrees. If you come to the interview with one, it almost instantly puts you in the top 85-90% of candidates in terms of skill in the interviewer's mind.
Don't leave home without one.
BOFH, My model for being a sysadmin :)
If I were interviewing you and I held up 3 pencils and asked you how many pencils I was holding up, would you be able to stammer out the word, "three"? Or would your jaw have dropped too far through the floor at the prospect of getting asked that?
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
My observance:
;-)?). But this is a whole other discussion right there.
If you watch TV or listen to the Radio or look at the banner ads on slashdot or websites you visit you keep hearing these advertisements for online schools like Phoenix, Devry, ITT and where they are all offering BS/BA degrees in some technical field. This slashdot article is really talking about these types of BS degrees and how there is a huge increase in the number of BA degrees being offered by these schools. All it is, basically, is a marketing tool. These institutions cater to people who are not traditional-college material because the schools offer something specific to the career they are wanting to have. THe BS degrees being offered by these schools are career specific and reflect the current job market/demand that is out there now. For example, if you like computers: you like putting them together, setting them up, and setting up networking, then ITT, Devry and Phoenix offer specific degrees that offer the courses neccesary for that area of expertise.
The reason this is article brings up the question if MS is the new BS is because 10years ago all you needed was a diploma to get most technical jobs that have advancement to go up the corporate ladder, etc. and get a decent salary. Diploma, nowadays, put you in the bottom of the corporate ladder or in a position with very limited pay growth. Fast foward 10 years later and nowadays most employers are looking for some form of certification/degree other than a diploma. Most of jobs out there that require this are good career jobs that pay at the most upper-middle class salary, but a good salary nonetheless. Nowadays a diploma hardly gets you anything and that is just how it is. Then there are those people who have Masters (or gotten them more than 5 years ago) and are working jobs that someone fresh out of Devry with a BS degree with no work experience can get hired for immediately. That is just how it is currently.
You also have to realize that nowadays a lot of classes are being offered online. THis is great for busy people currently working jobs and need that job to pay for the roof over the head. So this makes it easier for people to earn BS/BA degrees and that is why you are seeing more people have BA/BS degrees and why you are seeing employers require BA/BS degrees rather than AS/Certification degrees.
I'm also seeing highschools, especially the one I used to go to, offer classes such as Cisco Networking. Basically they are prepping students for the job market that is currently out there. You will have students in highschool taking the standard classes like physics algebra 2, etc. and these students will most likely go to a regular college. But you also have students who are not that college material but instead they now ahve the option to try something in highschool that they can be successful in. It is not all about SAT scores or what college you got accepted. What matters in real life is if you are mildly happy with the job you have and if you are making enough money to support yourself, a house, and family. That is the testament of life right that proves if you're successful or not. It is not the degree you have or what school you went to. I'm guessing in a way this attributes to why USA is falling behind on traditional test scores the rest of the world is excelling at, however, if that is the case than why is America still the richest and highest paying country than other countries where they have kids who can be as smart as Einstein (but can they apply those skills successfully
My experience:
Looking at this article I'm glad that I switched career paths from the computer industry to the Architecture/Construction industry (about to work on a master in Architecture). Originally I was going for a BS in computer science and get a job in the gaming industry with that degree but I realized that programming or a career heavily involved with computers is not for me. When I was originally in the CS path I was very unwary about my futur
Previewing comments are for sissies!
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
I can't tell if the above was making a joke.
"Alex, lets try a 'W', and I'd like to solve the puzzle...
"The Whole US school system is messed up."
"When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you." --leonstryker
The problem you have to worry about is, of course, HR (come the Revolution, don't line them up and shoot them, just lay them down and pave the roads with them). Worry about the phrase, "overqualified".
Related to this was someone's post concerning the falling number of programmers, and the H1B visa (instead of higher salaries). I'm not sure it was higher salaries that were needed. Instead, corporate (I almost wrote coprophite, which they are) wanted to cut our salaries. Further, if you're out of the country, they don't have anywhere near the ability to find out what you actually know, as opposed to claiming you know (oh, yes, I know ASPECREsix, I work five years on that...), *and* they're mostly asking for a laundry list of experience that covers everything that the last two or three people to leave knew, so there's no training or ramp up (and so you can do all of their jobs, cutting staff, overworking you, and increasing profits for the CEO).
Picking up skills in COTS is worth at least as much, if not more, esp. if you can claim that you have a year or two, at least, in those skills. (Well, you did it in a job four years ago, and you did it last year, that's three years, right?)
mark
Bzzzt! Sorry, you forgot to phrase it in the form of a question....
(or did you mean Pat?)
-Mike
I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
You can not base your life around the next big career path. What if I were to tell you that I know of a career where you can train for 6 weeks and start earning 6 figures right away? Would you be interested? If so, then you are just out for money. Quit asking "How much can I make?" and start asking "What do I want to do?"
The truth is that every career path will lead to riches. You can get rich by being a janitor; starting out at some small company and then starting your own cleaning service after you have built up some experience. Contract out to a few office buildings, hire you a compent staff, and rake in the money. You can make money at any profession, you just have to work hard. There is no such thing as a magical career path. If you are looking for easy money, then sink all your money in the lottery.
You see, the same amount of education that you used to get with your HS diploma is now only completed when you have a bachelor's degree. The education that you used to be able to claim with a BS or BA is now only there if you've completed a Master's degree. The whole "no child left behind" theory that our goverment is currently espousing completely neglects the fact that some children ought to be left behind. If you simply cannot do the work, you *should* fail the class. If that means failing the grade and being kept back, so what. Consider it motivation to actually do the homework.
One of my friends daughters is starting high school next week. Out of curiousity, we decided to look at the required classes. In order to graduate, she's only required to take Pre-Algebra I. That's only one semester of math and really basic at that. She's only required to take American History I & II. Government, civics, and world history aren't required. Foreign languages aren't required. She does get 8 semesters of English, Compostion, and/or Literature. The only required science class is Earth Science, which I'm sure some of you remember. It's a basic topical discussion of the various branches of science. Everything else is electives, which means that the kids are picking the easiest classes they can find.
Now, I'll admit that I attended a private school (for which I am deeply grateful to my parents). I had 8 semesters of math including Algebra, Geometry, Trig, and Calculus. I had 8 semesters of science including Biology, Chemestry, Physics, and Anatomy. I had 8 semesters of History including World History, Texas History, American History, American Government.
I had 8 semesters of English including Shakespear's Plays, Classical Literature, Original Composition, and Critical Analysis.
I also had 4 semesters of French. In addtion, we were required to take art and music classes.
I list this out to illustrate the difference in the curriculum of the school I attended vs. the public school that my friend's daughter is going to. I will also say, that like many of my classmates, we tested out of our freshman year of college. We started college as sophomores, and even then the kids that that were competing against were not prepared to face us. We blew the top off every curve, which angered no small number of our college classmates. The superior education that we received prepared us to perform well in a demanding environment. I know that from talking to many of my high school class mates that much of the material that we encountered in college, even in our later years (junior & senior), we had already covered in high school. It definitely gave us an edge.
Dumbing down the education system to raise the pass rate is what is really at fault here. Because there are a certain percentage of kids who either can't or won't perform at that level, the standards get dropped. It all comes from the same mentality that gives trophies to everyone at game regardless of the score. Part of the reason that you put your kid in team sports is for them to learn a few important lessons. One of the most important lessons is that you have to compete for what you want. The second most important is that you cannot always win. Handing out trophies like candy takes both of those lessons away from the kids and gives them a false sense of security. It teaches them that complacency and falling on your face are "good enough",which I think is dangerous.
2 cents,
QueenB
HDGary secures my bank