Slashdot Mirror


How To Get Into an Elite Comp-Sci Program

alphadogg writes "With early applications to elite colleges at an all-time high, the nation's highest-rated undergraduate computer science programs are bracing for an uptick in applications between now and January. High school seniors are facing stiffer-than-ever competition when applying to the nation's top computer science programs this fall. But admissions officers and professors at elite tech schools can offer tips aimed at helping your child get accepted come spring."

297 comments

  1. Missing the point. by masternerdguy · · Score: 5, Informative

    In the end your own talent matters more than where you go.

    --
    To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
    1. Re:Missing the point. by magsol · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where you go sure can help, though.

      --
      "I'd just like to emphasise that taking a million years isn't a metaphor here..." -Rich Bradshaw
    2. Re:Missing the point. by AuMatar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes and no. Yes, your talent is the most important long term factor. But the elite universities take a very different approach to teaching, especially for sciences and engineering. Compare the CS curriculum at MIT to that at your state college. MIT's is far more hardcore, and with much greater emphasis theory. Same for other fields. There is a qualitative difference between a top tier school and the rest of the pack.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    3. Re:Missing the point. by somersault · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It might help on applying for your first job, but after that I presume that your experience will matter a lot more. I wouldn't actually know since I'm still technically on my first job.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:Missing the point. by larry+bagina · · Score: 2

      Penn State is pretty hardcore.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    5. Re:Missing the point. by blackicye · · Score: 1

      Where you go sure can help, though.

      True, assuming you can do it without incurring huge student loan debt.

    6. Re:Missing the point. by LordNacho · · Score: 5, Funny

      IMO the main point of going to a big-name school is it buys you a good rep, rightfully or not. You get one good glance at your CV if it has a name on it. Also, people simply think that I'm smarter than I really am, because they see where I studied. Working hard at proving them wrong.

    7. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the end it is not where you went to school. But more of what you have learned and can you apply it.
      I have seen people, from notable schools, that just did not have a clue of what was asked of them on the job.

    8. Re:Missing the point. by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not so sure that a place like MIT is any more theoretical than some land grant college. It's certainly more stressful though. It's also a lot more expensive. You will likely be saddled with a much larger debt when your done.

      What advantage you get might not be worth the cost.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re:Missing the point. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      In the end your own talent matters more than where you go.

      True, but having a degree from a prestigious university will open doors that talent won't always open.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    10. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's more hardcore then state pen!

    11. Re:Missing the point. by mehrotra.akash · · Score: 1

      But their job would be paying much more than someone who knew what they were doing, but from a less notable school (atleast for the 1st few years)

    12. Re:Missing the point. by johnlcallaway · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I take it you didn't take statistics from an elite school. Since 'elite' schools have tougher acceptance criteria, it only makes sense their students would perform better. To my knowledge, there has never been a true 'double blind' study, where students with similar grades and performance levels in high school were compared between community colleges and 'elite' schools. Please post one if there is one.

      I will admit that there are a few companies that specifically seek out and recruit from elite schools, but they will see through anyone that doesn't have talent. So, at best, going to an elite school really only provides someone a slight edge. And they will only take 'the best of the best', so unless someone is sure they are in the top 10% already, good luck with that degree really amounting to more than from a community college.

      As long as someone can click on the box 'I have a degree', that's all HR will care about. The manager might be impressed by an elite degree, he might be intimidated by it, or he might turn it away because of expected salary costs. These things can work against you also.

      I remember talking with a VP of programming about 10 years ago, wondering why someone with a masters in marine biology would want to be a computer programer. He didn't even interview the kid. But then again, the VP had his PhD in neural networks, and was working for a financial company and was fired after two years because he had terrible people skills. A lot of good his degree did him, he was one of the worst managers I'd ever seen. The company I worked with hired a financial wizard from some elite school with a very impressive background, and just fired him 6 months ago for the his lack of people skills and terrible work ethic.

      If someone has the money to blow, there is nothing wrong with an elite school. But I sure as hell wouldn't spend a lot of money I didn't have in the hopes of making up for it later.

      --
      I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
    13. Re:Missing the point. by Missing.Matter · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not so sure that a place like MIT is any more theoretical than some land grant college.

      Not always. Some places, especially smaller colleges, treat CS as IT/Software Engineering, when we all know they are very different. The result is you come out of school with a degree in "computer science", but you lack foundational knowledge like calculus. All you really did was get a degree in programming.

      It's also a lot more expensive.

      Also not necessarily. Stanford is free for lower income families. I went to CMU and they gave me a grant (aka never have to pay it back) that covered half of tuition. In the end it cost me less than going to state school.

    14. Re:Missing the point. by kiwimate · · Score: 3, Informative

      And the contacts you make. Networking is as important as anything else. The old axiom of "it's not what you know, it's who you know" certainly comes in for a lot of abuse and cynicism with people making the connection of "jobs for the lads", but it's more than that.

      If you went to school with someone whose family connections got them an interview at a prestigious company, you now have a connection. With so many applications to weed through, and high competition for any kind of position in a poor economy, it can be immensely helpful just to have a foot in the door. And that foot in the door often is someone who already works there who (a) will get a bonus if they refer someone who ends up getting hired for a position, and (b) thinks "hey, Steven would be good for this job, and I know he was a hard worker at school so I may as well recommend him".

    15. Re:Missing the point. by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2

      Where you go for your undergraduate work is largely meaningless. If you're concerned about wasting money then just don't. Save it for your graduate work at such a university.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    16. Re:Missing the point. by vlm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Where you go sure can help, though.

      True, assuming you can do it without incurring huge student loan debt.

      Which means you have to get an elite level job to pay for the elite level loan. This can have some severe issues WRT quality of life, if you take a "small" pool of jobs and make it even smaller by only being able to survive with the most elite of that already small pool. So you'll be the last STEM guy who's job is exported to India, who cares, you'll only be a couple years behind me, in the long run it won't matter to either of us... If you want to work 80 hour weeks and not recognize spouse/kids, go to MIT, if you want 40 hrs/wk like I have, then... don't. I caught a lot of flack 25 years ago telling my HS guidance counselor that I appreciate that he insists I should apply to more elite schools because of grades / scores whatever, but I don't want to go and want to attend state U instead (because I was obsessed with the then new-ish movie "Animal House", and I later re-enacted most of those scenes as a freshman, except for the motor cycle up the front stairs, but that's a whole 'nother (fun) story)

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    17. Re:Missing the point. by j-beda · · Score: 3, Informative

      And for "talent" one should generally read "drive/motivation/work". But to continue on this idea of "it's not the school" that can lay claim to success, here are some thoughts.

      Graduates of "elite" schools do go on to have more "successful" careers in terms of money and other measurements compared to other less "elite" institutions. However those graduates did not necessarily have that success because of the school - they might have had similar success had they gone elsewhere. The elite schools might be "creating" winners, or they might be "picking" winners.

      How could we find out? Well, we could examine the "success" of people who were accepted to an elite school but went elsewhere and see how the compare to those who did attend the elite school. Fortunately, people have done such studies:

      http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/revisiting-the-value-of-elite-colleges/

      "A decade ago, two economists — Stacy Dale and Alan Krueger — published a research paper arguing that elite colleges did not seem to give most graduates an earnings boost. As you might expect, the paper received a ton of attention. Ms. Dale and Mr. Krueger have just finished a new version of the study — with vastly more and better data, covering people into their 40s and 50s, as well as looking at a set of more recent college graduates — and the new version comes to the same conclusion."

      Basically, if you've got the chops to apply to these elite schools, you're very likely to be successful no matter where you go.

    18. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went to a school with similar reputation and price tag to MIT. $160,000 well spent. I do not regret a penny of those loans; they'll be gone in a few more years. I'd have been successful no matter where I went, but the top-tier program boosted me to a whole different level, both in the curriculum and in the tremendous amount you learn from your fellow students. You can get an interview anywhere just by waving your school name. All this with a 3.3 GPA.

      I chose to optimize for interesting work, not high salary, and as a result my income is not jaw-dropping, but I absolutely love what I do and it is large enough to deal with the loans quickly while allowing me to live comfortably and save some away.

      Should your child go to an elite school? That I cannot answer. You can get a great education anywhere, but you'll be more likely to at the top.

    19. Re:Missing the point. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      yes and no.

      my college years were in the early 80's. I planned on graduating but after transferring a few times (life sometimes happens..) I found I was missing some credits and after my 4 or 5 yrs (co-op schools had an extra year) I just wanted to be done. I accepted my first computer job (after 'finishing' college) and for most of my career, the lack of an actual degree was not a show-stopper. been at a few boston companies and now in the bay area. until recently, it has not been a problem finding a job and the lack of degree would be something I'd have to explain but my experience (25+ yrs) would be why they would hire me.

      problem is, now, extra experience means you expect higher pay and they don't WANT to pay high anymore. there's 100 younger guys willing to be abused, work longer hours and be on call 7x24 for their bosses and there's little reason for companies to hire folks like me. even if I did have a degree, it would not matter much at my age. my age is what works against me, not my 'lack' of education or experience.

      when you are fresh out of school, school is all they can look at to evaluate you. if you don't go to a co-op school, where you get assigned (or nearly assigned) a company to work for for 3-6mos then having the degree will matter a lot. but if you are able to fit in some work experience, the degree matters less and less.

      what does matter is that you present yourself as willing to be abused and used by the company. THAT, they love. they just love that shit. they'll take a yes-man over a smarter guy most of the time, these days.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    20. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sweet Jesus, do not go to grad school in comp sci if wasting money is your concern. (In other disciplines, I agree that the undergrad institution doesn't matter if you plan to go on.)

      However, if you plan to work as a developer immediately after college, there are three important things to consider in an undergraduate institution: networking, networking, networking. Alums who are hiring will always read the resumes of fellow alums more carefully, fair or not.

    21. Re:Missing the point. by sribe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It might help on applying for your first job, but after that I presume that your experience will matter a lot more.

      Ah yes, cue the endless stream of /. folk saying it doesn't matter... I graduated from one of those schools and 30 years later it still helps ;-) Experience counts very much of course, but some degrees confer instant credibility before anyone starts the process of examining your experience.

      Or, to put it another way, I start with the assumption that all MIT CS graduates are "fizz-buzz capable", and I've never been disappointed...

    22. Re:Missing the point. by kirillian · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've been out of school for about 4 years now and already see that attitude. My company highly values the work I do (probably because I come very cheap compared to what it would cost to replace me) because I've adapted to the bullshit that has gone on here for four years. I'm already working an average of 50-60 hours a week, but my last review from my boss was "I need you to be available more". My jaw pretty much dropped to the floor. I'm salaried at way under my paygrade and have been a workhorse for the past few years just making the things that others break work and spending my evenings for the company. All the company has to say is "You're not doing enough". Damned companies.

    23. Re:Missing the point. by Missing.Matter · · Score: 0

      All this with a 3.3 GPA.

      People know that a 3.3 at a place like MIT is a 4.3 anywhere else. I know a kid who has a 4.0 from a local state school. Impressive I guess until you look at the classes he took and realize none are really that hard.

    24. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Cough Obama Cough.

      Or replace just about any politician you wish.

    25. Re:Missing the point. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not always. Some places, especially smaller colleges, treat CS as IT/Software Engineering, when we all know they are very different.

      This. I went to a college-style Ivy, so I didn't have to declare a major until sophomore year, so getting in was just a matter of applying early decision.

      But... after taking CS there and then talking to a friend who was going (a decade later) to a small school in Boston, I was shocked at what they were teaching for 'computer science'. They got none of the fundamentals, just run-at-the-wall programming.

      There were kids having trouble in those classes /because/ they lacked the fundamentals. It wasn't their fault, but I wonder how this group of professors managed to come up with such a hair-brained curriculum (or how they got to be CS professors in the first place). Even in IT, CS fundamentals are essential for proper understanding.

      It wasn't a college with a poor reputation, either. There's no reason a community college couldn't have an excellent CS program either - they cost next to nothing to implement (heck, a fundamentals CS program could be taught on anything with an MMU).

      I suppose an independent rating system of some sort would be helpful here.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    26. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Tell that to Bush and the other boarderline retards who get into and "pass" at institutions like Yale.

    27. Re:Missing the point. by NoSleepDemon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why the fuck do you still work for them? You have four year's work experience, time to move on!

    28. Re:Missing the point. by DrgnDancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As someone who's done some hiring, and who's competed against others in being hired, I'd say it depends. If you went to a third tier school and I went to a fifth tier school, it probably doesn't matter once we both have five years or so under our belts. If you went to MIT or Stanford... That's a whole other ballgame. Names like that matter well into your career, possibly for your entire career. In the end a guy from MIT might not always get the job: interviews matter, experience matters, even advanced degrees might matter, but there's definitely a little wow factor added to your resume with that degree even 10 or 15 years down the line (might definitely make a difference in making the cut to get that interview).

      That's what this article is about. Getting into one of those 5 or 10 schools where having the name on your resume matters, and will likely continue to matter for a while.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    29. Re:Missing the point. by chemicaldave · · Score: 1

      At the top schools I can say that this isn't totally true. I was talented enough to get into grad school at CMU but not undergrad. Aside from the obviously more rigorous and higher quality of courses taught here, students get an enormous advantage by having CMU tied to their resume. Even at the job fairs here, employers are practically begging students to visit their booths. Yes, you must be talented to be successful, but being at a big-name CS school will help you immensely.

    30. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more hardcore then state pen!

      We'll be able to interview Sandusky about that soon enough.

    31. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some places, especially smaller colleges, treat CS as IT/Software Engineering, when we all know they are very different.

      To be fair, most people that go into CS really want IT/Software Engineering anyways. How many places offer separate Software Engineering and CS degrees?

    32. Re:Missing the point. by kirillian · · Score: 2

      Oddly enough...I am :) My wife and I recently decided that it was just plain a good time to move on (after the review). I just recently started posting my resume and am looking. Thanks for the affirmation though. I was just posting my personal experience to supplement the parent comment.

    33. Re:Missing the point. by drooling-dog · · Score: 1

      Since 'elite' schools have tougher acceptance criteria, it only makes sense their students would perform better.

      Well, thats kind of the point, and that alone may justify the presumption that a graduate of an "elite" school will be more talented. In general, if you're smart and prepared to work hard, I'd recommend going to the most selective school that you can get into (and afford, after whatever aid may be available). The level that your peers are at will determine the level at which your classes are taught, how much is expected of you, and ultimately where you set the bar for yourself.

    34. Re:Missing the point. by spads · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More important than moving on, he needs to stand his ground, or the situation will just repeat at the next place. Just start going home earlier. Only accept reasonable, SHARED after hours responsibilities. (I will only ever do as much as my co-workers are doing. "What's right for the goose is right for the gander", etc.) Being a "good guy" and trying to accommodate your boss's ("asshole") is just about the slipperiest slope you're ever likely to find anywhere.

      Dip ship MBA (types) are just about the closest work place equivalent of "jocks". The only thing that interests them are bullshit intimidation games like chicken. What's more, they are usually pretty seriously buggered themselves, have no guts, backbone, or substance, and are quick to roll over, "happily" even. Most importantly, even when you beat them, never lose your ability to sneer at the whole thing. You don't want to get sucked in. It's like a bottomless cesspool.

      --
      Bukowski said it. I believe it. That settles it.
    35. Re:Missing the point. by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2

      Whether to go to grad school for comp sci depends largely on what you plan on doing once you get out. If all you want to be is a sweat shop code-monkey then of course not. If you can hack some sh*t PHP/Python and JavaScript together your golden. But on the other side of the pendulum you have the R&D and/or embedded device (particularly DoD contractor) type jobs where you won't even be considered absent 5-6 years of prior or a master's/PhD..

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    36. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the end your own talent matters more than where you go.

      It would be more accurate to say that no matter where you go, your talent is going to be your largest limiting factor.

      The big name schools have their reputation for a reason.

    37. Re:Missing the point. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I went to a school with similar reputation and price tag to MIT[...]I'd have been successful no matter where I went

      Translation: I'm fabulously rich and well-connected.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    38. Re:Missing the point. by NoSleepDemon · · Score: 1

      Good on you, the last place I worked at inflicted similar work hours on one of the senior devs who was just too damned nice to tell them no, so they walked all over him. When they lost the client he was most often scheduled to do work for, they simply let him go. The poster below sums MBA types up pretty nicely, and I'm pretty sure that the company's resident MBA played a role in cutting the senior dev loose.

    39. Re:Missing the point. by somersault · · Score: 1

      Well, for those who actually enjoy computing, they'd all be capable before going into Computer Science. I couldn't believe how many fellow students in 3rd and 4th year just didn't understand programming. When anyone asked for help I tried to give them hints without giving the answers to our assignments, but some clearly didn't care about learning for themselves. They should have been doing liberal arts degrees, or working at McDonalds.. well, they probably are doing that now, but with a nice student loan debt on their shoulders.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    40. Re:Missing the point. by v(*_*)vvvv · · Score: 1

      but but but... it's the people you meet.

    41. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not either-or; going to a good school with good teachers helps develop your talent into real skill, where otherwise it might remain untapped.

    42. Re:Missing the point. by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      You'll have to be patient though, since a lot of those kids will spend years in grad school and/or traveling.

    43. Re:Missing the point. by dubbreak · · Score: 1

      I had a similar experience to yours. I was under my pay grade and under-appreciated for the value I provided. I knew their legacy codebase well enough that I could save other developers days of work with a quick conversation. Since management wasn't willing to put in the time to refactor/rewrite the issues (MOAR FEETURES!!) you had to know the ins and outs of all the crazy interactions the system made (very high coupling.. not uncommon when when procedural programmers decide to do OOP for the first time). Bugs were time consuming for experienced and damn ridiculous for the uninitiated. For new feature dev we called the trepidation of introducing new code "the fear". If your code had to connect at more than one point you had better have "the fear" or you were going to introduce new bugs. Definitely a frustrating environment to work in, but reality for many (most?) with inherited systems.

      I did some searching locally to verify my worth in the local market and I was at least 14% under what I should be making. Then a contracting gig fell on my lap worth > 30% more than I was making. I was open about the offer with my bosses and they dragged their feet and finally gave me a counter as I had one foot out the door. The offer didn't meet local competitive rates and was basically a case of "too little, too late".

      So long story short: I'm now a contractor.

      It's a story I hear over and over. The way to get a raise in software/tech is to take a new job. I only know one company in town that pays their devs top of their range. They made an initiative to keep talent and they realize that in their specialized field none of their key workers are fungible. You can't just hire another developer to do the work they are doing. It'd take months to find someone suitable and even more months to get them up to speed. That's $$$ and big risk. So why not spend money keeping the talent that is making you money right now.

      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
    44. Re:Missing the point. by lakeland · · Score: 1

      Yes - this is very true.

      Every company will push you as far as they can. If you can't stand up to your boss and say 'no, this is not ok' then I can almost bet your next company will do the same thing to you. Of course if you're going to do that then you had better be prepared to leave straight away, because some bosses will be unwilling to work with anyone that is willing to stand up to them.

      Get your resume polished up, start looking and then try it. You never know, you might find you get to keep your current job and pick up a couple expectation management skills.

    45. Re:Missing the point. by v(*_*)vvvv · · Score: 1

      Well, as long as you stick to compsci and seek a compsci job, then you can't really lose with an MIT degree. It's like a Harvard law degree or a UNC basketball scholarship. They will want you, until you mess it up, not the other way around.

    46. Re:Missing the point. by shentino · · Score: 1

      Bosses have something that developers don't.

      The power to hire and fire as they damn well please, and corporate contact with the clients.

      And also the power to give you an ugly reference if you don't kiss their ass.

      Sometimes an insane captain would rather sink his own ship rather than let one rat escape undrowned.

    47. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But their job would be paying much more than someone who knew what they were doing, but from a less notable school (atleast for the 1st few years)

      It would have to, as they would also have a bigger student loan debt to deal with.

    48. Re:Missing the point. by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      So pick a number that you'd be willing to work for and ask for a raise. Don't make a big deal if they don't give you one, just start sending your resume around and see if you can pick up some interviews. If you get a job at the number you want and then your current company makes a counter-offer, your response should be "you had your chance."

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    49. Re:Missing the point. by timeOday · · Score: 1

      I think that's it right there - if you are admitted to an elite school but only on the basis you pay full fare, they don't really want you, and you likely don't really belong there. Go to a cheaper school. But if you not only get admitted but they want you enough to give you a deal, well, what are you waiting for?

    50. Re:Missing the point. by shentino · · Score: 1

      It could also be someone who was just plain chummy with the contact or who paid him off with a favor to make him look good.

      Negative references work both ways as well. The boss might not be in a position to know if Eve's torpedo on Alice's being hired was because Eve genuinely thinks Alice sucked at her last job or because Eve is pissed that Bob slept with her instead of Eve.

    51. Re:Missing the point. by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      I used to interview college students for a big company. And while we didn't care about the degree or the college you attended, it does matter.

      There is only so much resources the company can spend on trying to hire people. They tend to spend those resources looking at some of the more elite companies. Some schools they may only visit every other year. So from that perspective it does matter.

      For the actual hiring process it doesn't matter. I found more "fizz-buzz capable" students at some of the more elite universities. But I NEVER started with the assumption that the students at an elite university were "fizz-buzz capable" I think that is a very bad assumption.

    52. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It might help on applying for your first job, but after that I presume that your experience will matter a lot more.

      Ah yes, cue the endless stream of /. folk saying it doesn't matter... I graduated from one of those schools and 30 years later it still helps ;-) Experience counts very much of course, but some degrees confer instant credibility before anyone starts the process of examining your experience.

      Or, to put it another way, I start with the assumption that all MIT CS graduates are "fizz-buzz capable", and I've never been disappointed...

      Let me guess - your sample size is "lots" ...

      I work with a few Ivy League and other elite school people ... they're great at school, but the workforce .... nuh'uh. They knew how to game the admissions process.

      And yes, my sample size is "lots" too.

      It's not really a problem for me, it's when whole groups of people are basically unemployable because of these prejudices and "standards".

    53. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, calculus, the foundation of.. oh wait, it doesn't apply to CS at all.

    54. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "higher quality of courses" ... that assumes that learning things in college actually matters. Here's a hint, it doesn't. College is a massive waste of time, especially now with the Internet. If you are smart enough to use Google, then you are smart enough to avoid wasting your time and money on college.

    55. Re:Missing the point. by kirillian · · Score: 1

      I'm actually considered the most stubborn of all the developers here. As the 2nd most senior and 2nd highest paid, i still am expected to take as much bullshit as my more senior counterpart (who is technically my boss, but since this is a small company, the CEO loves micromanaging). Thanks for the advice however lol. I am working on getting a job where I'm treated a little less like trash.

    56. Re:Missing the point. by Christian+Henry · · Score: 2

      I'm already working an average of 50-60 hours a week, but my last review from my boss was "I need you to be available more". My jaw pretty much dropped to the floor. I'm salaried at way under my paygrade and have been a workhorse for the past few years just making the things that others break work and spending my evenings for the company. All the company has to say is "You're not doing enough". Damned companies.

      Was that the only bad thing your boss said?

      In some organizations, if your boss can't find anything wrong with you, HR rules will state they have to find a nit to pick, no matter how minor; otherwise, you end up being perceived as having no growth potential, and (oddly enough) are more expendable than the employee who is just coasting by.

    57. Re:Missing the point. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      People join companies. They leave bosses.
      --
      G.V. Catullus

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    58. Re:Missing the point. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Not if you drop the soap.

      Ummm, so I heard.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    59. Re:Missing the point. by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      No one gives or ask for references now.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    60. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't forget internships. Paid or unpaid, they help in getting a foothold established. I've seen people not really "hired", but more of "handed a formal employee badge" by this method. Barring that, internships are a good way to network... and networking is crucial these days.

      Whatever you do, don't do like some people and not care about where you are going until you graduate. You might find yourself with a diploma in hand, but starting from scratch in the job market and trying to claw your way past people who can afford to work at far lower wages due to no student loan overhead.

    61. Re:Missing the point. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I will admit that there are a few companies that specifically seek out and recruit from elite schools, but they will see through anyone that doesn't have talent.

      Are these the same companies that see through people who claim to have 45 trillion years experience in java 37?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    62. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hit the road, my friend. they're highly valuing you because you're a sucker.

    63. Re:Missing the point. by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Not completely true. I've had quite a few jobs where they checked my references. However, it's not that hard to get some decent references, and they don't need to be your supervisors. After you've moved around a little, you should be able to find one or two supervisors that'll give you a good reference, and several coworkers too. Don't worry about pleasing every single supervisor; after all, if you're changing jobs, you're going to piss some off just by leaving them instead of staying their underpaid lackey until they're tired of you.

      It does help doing at least one stint at a large corporation, where you have the ability to move between departments every year or two: this gives you varied experience, different supervisors, and no one mad at you for quitting your job (i.e., it's seen as perfectly normal in many big companies to transfer to a different position within the company after a year or two, as this is part of your career growth that they're always harping on; by contrast, at a lot of smaller companies, they immediately get pissed at anyone who leaves of their own volition).

    64. Re:Missing the point. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No, why do you think that? There's tons of software development jobs all over the US right now; just check Monster or Dice. I'm happily employed and even so, I can't get recruiters to stop calling me about contract jobs every single day.

    65. Re:Missing the point. by Smallpond · · Score: 1

      CS isn't supposed to teach programming just as EE is not supposed to teach wiring.

    66. Re:Missing the point. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      There is a well known paradigm in emerging business wisdom, the rule of crappy systems over crappy people. It has been found that amazing results can be accomplished by average people who exist in great systems. The inverse is also true, great people fail under bad systems.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    67. Re:Missing the point. by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1

      They should have been doing liberal arts degrees

      The liberal arts includes sciences like physics and biology. I think you mean "humanities."

    68. Re:Missing the point. by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      And how many "elite level" jobs are out there for software developers and engineers anyway, that can afford you to pay off the gigantic loans you'd need for a place like MIT? Heck, can you even get a loan large enough to cover that kind of tuition? I doubt it; you'd need a lot of extra money from your parents most likely. If your parents don't have that kind of money, or worse, have plenty of money but are bastards and refuse to help you with your tuition (which effectively keeps you out of college because you can't get any significant grants and loans when your parents have lots of money, as your parents' income is factored into your financial aid package so if they don't pay the share the school says they should, you're totally screwed; you need to go to court when you're still in high school and have yourself declared an "emancipated minor" and leave your parents so you can be independent and be allowed to sign up for financial aid), then these elite schools will not be an option for you.

      Even if you do go to all the trouble and financial hardship for these places, what kind of salary are you going to ever get? Not enough to make it all worth it.

      Bottom line: if you're really that smart, don't go into engineering or computer science. Go into medicine. A software job paying $150k is never going to make it worth it to get such expensive degrees. However, a job as a surgeon making $800k - $1 million/year definitely will pay for your medical school bills and a lot more.

    69. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've done some interviewing in CS. The comment that hit the nail on the head about MIT grads was that it takes about two years to civilize them so that they can work with other people. New grads come in and start to tell everyone how to do their jobs. As for themselves, if there wasn't a stock option attached they weren't interested in doing it. I never had candidates from any other school blow off the interview without even calling to cancel. There's a mural in a hallway at MIT which is a giant dollar bill; that pretty much sums them up.

    70. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. They're not working at McDonald's. They work with me :(

    71. Re:Missing the point. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1, Troll

      I love how the comment about GWB gets no mods, but the comment about Obama gets a Flamebait mod. Typical idiot liberals on Slashdot; as if there's really any difference between GWB and Obama.

      http://americanextremists.thecomicseries.com/comics/151
      http://americanextremists.thecomicseries.com/comics/148

    72. Re:Missing the point. by fliptout · · Score: 1

      I don't dispute your main point, but what software engineering program does not require calculus? All engineering students have to take calculus.

      --
      A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
    73. Re:Missing the point. by fliptout · · Score: 1

      Perhaps so, but there is a reason for that.

      --
      A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
    74. Re:Missing the point. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Those pieces of paper can be pretty important sometimes.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    75. Re:Missing the point. by leadfoot · · Score: 1

      Ditto on the recruiters calling. I recently submitted for a promotion to management at my former job. Since I had to updated my resume, I decided to post it on monster.com. I said I was looking for full time, non-contract work, but that sure didn't stop the recruiters from trying to contact me.

      --
      "We're gonna need a bigger boat"
    76. Re:Missing the point. by LanMan04 · · Score: 2

      The result is you come out of school with a degree in "computer science", but you lack foundational knowledge like calculus.

      I'm sorry, what part of "computer science" requires calculus?

      Automata/FSM theory? No calc
      Computability theory? No calc
      Computational complexity theory? No calc
      Cryptography? No calc
      Grammars? No calc

      The maths most important to CompSci, *by far*, are discrete/finite math and combinatorics. Maybe some linear algebra.

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    77. Re:Missing the point. by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      "the fear" that is funny as hell. I've had that feeling working on my own code and eventually couldn't take the chain reaction of breakage that befell after adding new features or fixing other bugs. In short, I learned the hard way how to build reliable OO Java code that is a joy to extend and also learned the value of *over* documenting. Still dealing with a some choppy legacy hacks of mine but I have stopped occasionally to rewrite and it has paid off big time. When things are done right it amazes me how simple it is to build feature rich software that continually comes up bug free.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    78. Re:Missing the point. by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1
      Calculus may not be foundational in CS, but it is certainly foundational knowledge... and if you actually want to apply any of that CS knowledge you better know calculus. Here is a short list of areas where I've needed knowledge of calculus:
      • Robotics
      • Artificial Intelligence
      • Machine Learning
      • Computer Graphics
      • Numerical Methods
      • Networking
      • Simulations

      I'm sure there are more I don't know of, but that's where I've personally had experience

    79. Re:Missing the point. by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      True, at community college all I had to do was show up for A's. Pretty pathetic. What's more, their "CS" program was all programming, no computer science (unless you took engineering classes), and they still graduate people with programming degrees who are not ready for entry level programming jobs. They are making the paper they issue worthless.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    80. Re:Missing the point. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Yes. Legacy. He had it beforehand.

      An Ivy League school is certainly useful for the whole networking thing. You have to have the right personality type to take advantage of it though. Otherwise it's just wasted money.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    81. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the end your own talent matters more than where you go.

      Opinion? Or fact based on something?

    82. Re:Missing the point. by jedidiah · · Score: 0

      Bush II is a legacy moron. Obama is the "poor kid scholarship student".

      Both examples are a demonstration of the principle and how it works out in practice.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    83. Re:Missing the point. by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1

      The particular program I'm thinking of offers a B.S. in Computer Science with your choice of two tracks: software development or information technology. For both tracks, the only required math is probability and statistics. So on your resume you put "B.S. Computer Science" but really what you have is "B.S. Software Development" or "B.S. Information Technology"

    84. Re:Missing the point. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      There's no reason a community college couldn't have an excellent CS program either - they cost next to nothing to implement (heck, a fundamentals CS program could be taught on anything with an MMU).

      Unfortunately, there's a public perception that CS == programming, while reality is that programming is a means to an end at worst, and working examples at best. Most people don't want to deal with the fundamentals. They want to write games or iPod apps or other applications, and want to do it as quickly as possible.

      So what happens is most people who sign up will drop the class mid-way, or sometimes within the first week. By the end of the first semester, there wouldn't be any students left in the department besides the hardcore ones.

      The problem stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what CS entails. Unfortunately, there's no fixing it, because most "CS" jobs are programming jobs. The difference between a real computer scientist and some random programmer is that the computer scientist will be able to do anything computer and programming related with a high degree of proficiency, whereas the programmer will largely be restricted to certain languages, paradigms, fields, etc. that they were trained in.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    85. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMHO it is 50/50. I've been to a number of schools both average (undergrad) and top tier (undergrad and a couple Masters). Instruction at top tier schools is generally superior. The profs are high power, create better classes, set higher standards, and have deeper reserves of cutting edge experience and knowledge. Bottom-line, students have better opportunities to explore things that they hadn't considered before. See for yourself. Watch/take online Compsci classes at Stanford and/or MIT.

    86. Re:Missing the point. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      For the past decade, while the tech industry was still in its infancy, and venture capital was being tossed around like toilet paper on Halloween, networking was by and large irrelevant. Sure, you needed to cozy up to some smart people, and sure, you needed the occasional business-type person, but it wasn't that important when the venture capital sought you. So I suspect this particular aspect of a fancy school with a fancy name isn't going to be very convincing here, where most of us grew up in and entered the industry during the boom.

      And the industry is still fairly young enough that networking isn't nearly as an important factor. This is changing slowly as the industry matures. It will be a factor perhaps not now (though with the economic downturn, one may argue that it is more important than not), but in four, eight, even ten years into the future, when the big players have established themselves.

      Of course, networking creates opportunities to jump right into the IT departments of big companies of other industries. But I'd hardly think that it's someone's dream job to come out of a big-name school just to work in some place where the IT department is just another cost center. Don't get me wrong; it's not necessarily a terrible thing, just not what someone passionate enough to go through the grind of a real theoretical CS curriculum is seeking to do.

      The networking will pay off in the long run, maybe ten or fifteen years down the line--if that even happens, considering how introverted CS people tend to be. But there's plenty of time to develop contacts in that ten-, fifteen-year span.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    87. Re:Missing the point. by byteherder · · Score: 1

      This post is so far from reality that it has left the planet.

      A fresh grad from an elite level school even MIT is not going to be making $150K right out the door. Let's say it is the average salary for the first 20 years of work, $75K starting salary, $150K after 10 yrs, $225K after 20 yrs working. Now wouldn't taking on an extra $100K of student loans be worth it. How many "no-name" colleges or even "second tier" schools offer that kind of career trajectory.

      To another point, yes, if you are smart and want to go into medicine and want to specialize in surgery, you can make a really good living. But do you think all surgeons make $800K-$1 million a year. If you do, I have a lot of swamp land to sell you.

    88. Re:Missing the point. by polarsd · · Score: 2

      I agree. I went to a really good school, whose reputation may have now somewhat subsided. I did CS security research for many years, authored world wide standards, finished a PhD, and grant funding got cut, and out I went. I can program Java, Android, develop back end systems, develop languages, do very good security analysis PhD in Security, but I can't get by a 20 something recruiter who thinks I'm overqualified and/or too old (in my 50s). I get stuck teaching CS at an Adjunct level (read $8/hr) at a local college. My students. who are upperclassmen, are horrible. It's not that they just know anything, they can't think their way out of a wet paper bag if their life depended on it. They have to be tutored in everything. Is this the stuff coming out of high schools?

      I keep thinking I have to move to California, Boston, or DC, and/or work for some government contractor making bombs. But, I'm not so sure it's going to be different.

      Yeah, I know, the only way to go is to start your own business, but I don't want to run it. That's boring. I just want to build interesting stuff.

    89. Re:Missing the point. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I never said the MIT grad would be making $150k; in fact, that's what I consider the "top out" salary (it might be slightly higher in Silicon Valley), the most that software engineers can hope to make in this country, without going into management. $225k? I don't think so.

      And yes, I do think surgeons average far better than engineers. $500k is probably pretty normal.

    90. Re:Missing the point. by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      If your career stays in pure CompSci, maybe you'll never need calculus. But business, finance, and the physical sciences are all about calculus. So if you ever want to actually apply CompSci to a real problem, you're going to need to know at least a bit of calc.

    91. Re:Missing the point. by byteherder · · Score: 1

      I never said the MIT grad would be making $150k; in fact, that's what I consider the "top out" salary (it might be slightly higher in Silicon Valley), the most that software engineers can hope to make in this country, without going into management. $225k? I don't think so.

      Top out salary for programmers is about $300K and yes, some of them went to MIT. I have seen a few who earn more but I can count them on one hand. To get that kind of salary, you have specialize (think SAP or the like) or become a programming consultant or work on wall street. These are not the jobs that are going to be advertised on Dice but they are out there.

    92. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I went to CMU and they gave me a grant (aka never have to pay it back) that covered half of tuition. In the end it cost me less than going to state school.

      If your "state school" was also in PA, that was part of your problem. I've got multiple students at my graduate program at a state school here in NC that chose our program because our out-of-state tuition was cheaper than PA's in-state.

    93. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Replying anonymously for obvious reasons.

      While I do not make the final decision when it comes to hiring a new person to our team, I'm consulted for the technical side of things. I've interviewed about 20 or 30 people and I've had a range of educational backgrounds from high-school graduate to MIT CS degree. One of our best level 1 technicians doesn't have a degree, and the only thing that's holding him back from being even more advanced is just that. Similarly, I interviewed a guy from MIT who I absolutely refused to let on board due to his lack of knowledge and his attitude. Still, one of the first things I noticed when I looked at his resume for the first time was the school he graduated from.

      So, yes, going to a heavy-hitter like MIT, CalTech or what have you certainly helps, but it doesn't guarantee that you'll get the job.

    94. Re:Missing the point. by j-beda · · Score: 1

      I take it you didn't take statistics from an elite school. Since 'elite' schools have tougher acceptance criteria, it only makes sense their students would perform better. To my knowledge, there has never been a true 'double blind' study, where students with similar grades and performance levels in high school were compared between community colleges and 'elite' schools. Please post one if there is one.

      it seems as though you don't even have to be accepted - just being the type who would apply is a pretty good indicator of future performance:

      Graduates of "elite" schools do go on to have more "successful" careers in terms of money and other measurements compared to other less "elite" institutions. However those graduates did not necessarily have that success because of the school - they might have had similar success had they gone elsewhere. The elite schools might be "creating" winners, or they might be "picking" winners.

      How could we find out? Well, we could examine the "success" of people who were accepted to an elite school but went elsewhere and see how the compare to those who did attend the elite school. Fortunately, people have done such studies:

      http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/revisiting-the-value-of-elite-colleges/ [nytimes.com]

      "A decade ago, two economists — Stacy Dale and Alan Krueger — published a research paper arguing that elite colleges did not seem to give most graduates an earnings boost. As you might expect, the paper received a ton of attention. Ms. Dale and Mr. Krueger have just finished a new version of the study — with vastly more and better data, covering people into their 40s and 50s, as well as looking at a set of more recent college graduates — and the new version comes to the same conclusion."

      Basically, if you've got the chops to apply to these elite schools, you're very likely to be successful no matter where you go.

    95. Re:Missing the point. by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      This is the value I realized I am getting out of my master's degree. It's not the classes that are worth the $5K a semester tuition price, but the networking. Every other class has a guest lecture from someone in the industry, CEOs of companies to specialists to CIOs to everything under the sun... the movers and shakers of the IT world in Atlanta. I could have learned as much or more in online only classes, but my linked in contact list would be a hell of a lot shorter.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    96. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that you work at IBM. Seriously, you should quit.

    97. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, I'd think knowledge is knowledge. It's not like merge sort changes from one school to the next, or a Red/Black tree. Granted some topics are harder to understand than others and having a good instructor can help. But every school has a few bad eggs and some of them have tenure, and can keep teaching because of it without risk of being fired. And those with tenure tend to be found more frequently at "Top" schools.
      In computer sciences where you go doesn't matter unless you are being hired by an idiot. That is why many CS positions have a test to ensure that their hires at least meet a minim amount of required ability. Heck some of the best in the CS world never even attended a day of formal education on the subject. (many of them are hackers. Why do you think they hand out jobs at hacker conventions?)

    98. Re:Missing the point. by recharged95 · · Score: 1

      That's in a idea world.
      ase:
      And we don't live in that world. We live in a world of cronism, favorism, racism, etc...

      Talent is something that is judged, which is social and subjective. Otherwise, I would refer to the phrase: "if a tree falls in a forest....".

      Then again, there is LUCK, which is due to timing and being at the right place/time. Just ask Steve Jobs.

    99. Re:Missing the point. by sauge · · Score: 1

      Depends on what one is trying to solve I suppose... simulations based on real world actions - police simulations, earth science simulations, game programming - calculus might be somewhat beneficial. Perhaps even a foundation for other mathematics (tensors for example)...

    100. Re:Missing the point. by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Having taken courses from quiet a few different schools I can only assume you never have done such.

      Community college standards are non-existent with a curriculum catering to students who shouldn't have ever graduated high school and a bureaucracy that doesn't care (skip pre-reqs you can do in your sleep? Hahahaha). So you learn basically nothing in five times as much time as a good university would spend on that material. At my top university they didn't teach you programming languages after the basic classes, if a class needed Python then you better learn it by the time the first assignment is due.

      Let me put it this way, at the local third tier school I was top of the class. In 8th grade. Without trying. At the university I worked harder and never did that well.

      I remember talking with a VP of programming about 10 years ago, wondering why someone with a masters in marine biology would want to be a computer programer. He didn't even interview the kid. But then again, the VP had his PhD in neural networks, and was working for a financial company and was fired after two years because he had terrible people skills. A lot of good his degree did him, he was one of the worst managers I'd ever seen. The company I worked with hired a financial wizard from some elite school with a very impressive background, and just fired him 6 months ago for the his lack of people skills and terrible work ethic.

      Any of this matters how exactly? How would either of these do anywhere close to as well by going to a community college? It seems they got quiet a bit of mileage out of their elite educations. Are you jealous? In fact your two examples very much show just how important going to such schools can be and how it can let you succeed despite otherwise crippling flaws.

    101. Re:Missing the point. by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      You live in a world of delusions, that's all I can say. Plus tech has been around for a long time. Microsoft was the Google of it's day.

      I've known more than one person who got jobs at hot startups due to networking. They were vouched for which makes the perceived hiring risk much lower. I know Google considers internal referrals more highly than random outside applications (and you can have your contacts check up on it!). More generally, you do much better sending your resume to a specific person (especially if they are a VP, for example) instead of the black hole of HR.

      So I suspect this particular aspect of a fancy school with a fancy name isn't going to be very convincing here, where most of us grew up in and entered the industry during the boom.

      So Google doesn't have a hilariously large percentage of people with "Stanford" somewhere in their education record? Versus, for example, San Jose State?

      Trust me, all the large tech companies go for top schools. Especially for positions that are more CS than programming.

    102. Re:Missing the point. by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Yes and no,

      My Ivy League diploma is useful on it's own irrespective of the networking or education. It's much easier to project "magnificent reliable genius" when you have one.

    103. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Functional Programming - Lambda Calc

      Maybe you should get back to studying CS possibly at a Elite Comp-Sci school :P

    104. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MIT student here. I'm a firm believer in talent matters, but if you go to a school like MIT, your school matters a lot, even more than ability. I see tons of people getting internships (and job offers) from places like facebook, google, and microsoft; jobs that some talented people work towards getting their entire lives. These people are all smart, but I think their actual ability in that field is less important to the recruiters than the degree.

    105. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "hair-brained curriculum"

      its 'hare-brained', as in a rabbit... lit major, ho!!!

    106. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talent + surrounding yourself with great people will surely help you on your way! Of course going to an elite college will help!

    107. Re:Missing the point. by Alex+Belits · · Score: 0

      Recruiters call everyone with a phone number. And email everyone with email address.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    108. Re:Missing the point. by thehodapp · · Score: 1

      I agree. I'm in school right now as a CS student and I'm finding the upper level math courses to be more an exercise in useless theorems better suited for a grad course..especially since you would need to be planning to go into a scientific programming field for any of it to be of any use.

    109. Re:Missing the point. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      That whole thought of working extra hours for free is weird. I was always careful to manage my time, if I worked extra hours I felt I was failing in allocating my work time or not being productive enough. If it was obvious that it was excessive then I simply stated it as such and sought the excess to be shifted to additional staff. Either you are a professional and manage yourself as such or you fail.

      Reality is working those extra hours continually in a professional status, just kills your productivity and reduces the quality of your work. It is absolutely pointless. You spent so much time 'fixing stuff', because of idiotic company practices. You ever heard about the woodsman who was so busy cutting down trees he never had time to stop and sharpen his axe, doing less often means doing much more.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    110. Re:Missing the point. by wanzeo · · Score: 1

      Did you mean an 31337 comp-sci program?

    111. Re:Missing the point. by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      you seem to not know how these few elite schools work with financial aid. If your parents attest to not giving you anything, you have 0 assets and 0 income which means most of these schools come almost free outside of spending money. Hell, if your parents make 100,000 as a family income (pretty damn good frankly), harvard expects them to contribute something like 7k dollars, unless you haev siblings, etc at which point it can be 0.

      so no, you don't need massive loans or parental help to enter the most elite schools. But if you want to go to a substandard private college "for the experience of a small calssroom", then yeah, you'll need to pay up big and probably will never get comp'ed.

      anyways, for the elite programmers, pay is far, far beyond 150k/year. in my firm, top tier programmers command 7 figures easily and even middle of the road programmers(5-10 years) can command 300-400k. This comes with much easier hours than a surgeon, no malpractice insurance to pay (which can be horrendous), and a lot of other perks like ease of moving around.

      the problem is what you consider elite and what is elite are far different things.

    112. Re:Missing the point. by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      for an elite grad from MIT? they are getting hired in droves to start around 110k in the first year and can expect pay of 300k by year 6. Our top guys (who have some grad school at times) are at the 7 figure range easily though they are quite senior and while they do some programming, they end up doing a lot of project management.

      the vast majority of surgeons come no where close to 1mm a year. But if you want that money, you only have to work 80-100 hour weeks for years to build up the strong practice.

    113. Re:Missing the point. by Evets · · Score: 1

      90% of the useful knowledge gained in college is not gained in an actual classroom. Your chances of early success in your field have more to do with that external knowledge, your desire, and your work ethic, than where you attended school or what your major was.

      Getting into MIT will impress your family, and graduating might even score you an interview at a company with an impressive name and no idea how to keep you interested in work.

      The guy who went to a JC, learned C before he took the class because he didn't want to wait until his prereqs were complete, attended OSCon and DefCon, committed updates to 8 open source projects, and took an extension class on how to interview before he even applied to a 4 year college will have a lot more doors open for him.

    114. Re:Missing the point. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      In the end your own talent matters more than where you go.

      Sure, and having rich, interested parents with good connections never got anyone a job.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    115. Re:Missing the point. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      No one gives or ask for references now.

      That is factually incorrect for most jobs, maybe you work in a niche where everyone knows each other anyway?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    116. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop dreaming, salaries are not about your merits/work efforts. They are about negotiations/leverage and offer/demand.

      Stop working your ass for nothing, go out there and start selling yourself. And get a top 10% pay for doing 40 hours a week (with maybe 10 hours EFFECTIVE work done). I did and it worked fine for me.

    117. Re:Missing the point. by wye43 · · Score: 1

      The power to hire and fire as they damn well please

      Scenarios were an open positions stays open for 6-12+ months are quite the norm is the last 5 companies I've worked for. No, they can't really hire and fire as they damn well please, its pretty hard to find a good guy.

    118. Re:Missing the point. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      CS isn't supposed to teach programming just as EE is not supposed to teach wiring.

      Any degree course is there to make you learn how to think. It's irrelevant whether you study CS, philosophy or Sanskrit.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    119. Re:Missing the point. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Bottom line: if you're really that smart, don't go into engineering or computer science. Go into medicine. A software job paying $150k is never going to make it worth it to get such expensive degrees. However, a job as a surgeon making $800k - $1 million/year definitely will pay for your medical school bills and a lot more.

      Assuming you equate intelligence with earnings, then the best bet is to get a job in banking/finance. Just qualifying as a doctor is very hard work and takes a long time, and working as a doctor only becomes easy once you're at a very senior level indeed.

      Anyone bright and hard working enough to make it as a surgeon earning $1 million/year (really?) would have been earning that twenty years earlier in finance.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    120. Re:Missing the point. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      in my firm, top tier programmers command 7 figures easily

      Yes, and I know several lawyers and accountants. As the top professionals can earn tens of millions a year, surely my acquaintances must as well? Yet oddly, they don't drive around in Lamborghinis and live in vast country estates.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    121. Re:Missing the point. by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      your friends aren't the top tier, no matter how much knowing you makes them special.

      everyone wants to believe they are in the top tier, just as the majority of people believe they are above average in intelligence. it turns out, though, that almost everyone is not, including your friends.

      granted, I've never met anyone doing accounting who earns 10s of millions, not while actually engaging in accounting. whereas the best paid programmers I've ever seen are actually programming.

    122. Re:Missing the point. by TheTyrannyOfForcedRe · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, cue the endless stream of /. folk saying it doesn't matter... I graduated from one of those schools and 30 years later it still helps ;-) Experience counts very much of course, but some degrees confer instant credibility before anyone starts the process of examining your experience.

      Or, to put it another way, I start with the assumption that all MIT CS graduates are "fizz-buzz capable", and I've never been disappointed...

      Same here. I've been out of school about 16 years now and it still helps a LOT. Other guys I went to school with are seeing the same thing 16 years out. I regularly receive emails saying $FOO_CO is looking to hire a bunch of $MY_UNI alums with 10+ years experience.

      When I was involved in hiring at my previous jobs, candidates from the top CS/EE programs were always given preference no matter how long ago they graduated.

      It's not as though you can slack off after graduation though. You need to be very good at you work. The prestigious university degree is a life-long leg up on top of that.

      --
      "Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
    123. Re:Missing the point. by TheTyrannyOfForcedRe · · Score: 1

      In the end it is not where you went to school. But more of what you have learned and can you apply it. I have seen people, from notable schools, that just did not have a clue of what was asked of them on the job.

      If these "notable schools" are ones like MIT, Stanford, CMU then I would assert that you have seen management failures. Sometimes organizations don't give employees the information or tools needed to fully understand what is expected of them.

      It's impossible to graduate from a top 5 CS school if you are clueless and/or unmotivated.

      --
      "Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
    124. Re:Missing the point. by fussy_radical · · Score: 1

      On top of that, you will also make contacts. This is something I didn't realize after getting out of the school most probably never heard from. You may very well be going to the school with the guy that will be recruited to Google or IBM. I went to school with the guy that was hired to the local code monkey factory.

      Who you rub elbows with makes a big difference.

    125. Re:Missing the point. by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      Just imagine this:

      -- Hi, Sony? It's Toshiba. Your former employee tehcyder just applied here, what do you think about him?
      -- Oh, he is a great engineer, the only reason why we still produce laptops!

      Or:

      -- Hi, Sony? It's Toshiba. Your former employee tehcyder just applied here, what do you think about him?
      -- We managed to stuff him into a big layoff, but really we got rid of him because his incompetence caused the Lulzsec fiasco!

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    126. Re:Missing the point. by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      "The difference between a real computer scientist and some random programmer is that the computer scientist will be able to do anything computer and programming related with a high degree of proficiency..."

      What a load of crap. I've worked with tons of people who were supposedly "computer scientists" but their code was shit. I have found zero correlation between the quality of the coder and the sheet of paper they graduated with. You either have it or you don't. I know a guy who graduated from DeVry who will run circles around 90% of people with CS degrees and he will even admit DeVry is a completely worthless school.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    127. Re:Missing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the end your own talent matters more than where you go.

      BULL !!!

      Join the Freemasons IF YOU CAN and if you have no conscious !!!!!!

  2. Computer science != IT jobs by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

    My brother is an IT consultant, he says the contract job opening has been consistently high and the unemployment is quite low in that field. However his skill set is mainly in coding on the PeopleSoft API. Comp Sci degree is not required for that job. Wonder how many high school students flock comp sci thinking of coding jobs? How many are going to confronted with concepts like P and NP problem sets and equivalences and find that harder than calculus?

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by sandytaru · · Score: 2

      The issue is that IT is such a broad field that specialists in CS find themselves confronted with jobs that aren't really that related to what they learned how to do. My graduate program deliberately went after folks who DIDN'T have their undergraduate degrees in CS, because different backgrounds will bring in more well rounded perspectives to teams. Since most IT projects are done in groups (no one codes in a vacuum) you also need people who can think creatively, who can write English well, or who can think in terms of customer interactions. "Elite" CS programs at colleges crank out excellent coders and engineers, but that doesn't always mean they'll be good project members later on later on.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    2. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by THE_WELL_HUNG_OYSTER · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have no idea what you're talking about. Get a CS degree and work as a programmer for 15 years -- like me -- before you comment.

      Ditto. CS degrees teach about algorithms and data structures, file systems design, operating system design, parallel programming, software engineering, compiler, grammar and language design, and many other concepts that make CS graduates excellent coders. Non-CS graduates are permanently handicapped and they don't even know it.

    3. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 2

      However his skill set is mainly in coding on the PeopleSoft API. Comp Sci degree is not required for that job.

      Agreed. However, many HR departments use automated scanners to filter resumes and if you don't have CS or and Engineering degree, you won't be interviewed for the position. Some companies have made it difficult or impossible for managers to find their own people without the HR department.

      --
      All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
    4. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wow, you really think that someone can't learn those thing alone ??

    5. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      Out of the dozens of successful coders I know, two have CS degree. Many others have degrees in engineering and science, but computers were tools not the focus of their education. History majors seem to be common also.

    6. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by THE_WELL_HUNG_OYSTER · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wow, you really think that someone can't learn those thing alone ??

      You can learn anything alone. You can teach yourself quantum physics if you want. But do you think self-education is going to be as good being taught by professors? If you do, I suspect you don't have a college degree at all; you haven't gone through that experience. Having Yoda teach you to be a Jedi is more effective than becoming a Jedi by yourself.

    7. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I suspect that if you're poking around in the innards of an ERP system like the great uncle does then a CS degree would be a handicap. You'd be going "OMG, what is this shit?" so much you'd go mad.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by Kenja · · Score: 1

      How about I DONTget a degree, and still work as a programmer for 15+ years? Cause thats what I did. Took one day of CS classes before I realized that they where teaching me how to not think.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    9. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by xero314 · · Score: 2

      do you think self-education is going to be as good being taught by professors?

      He would be a fool to think such a things, since self-education shows a dedication that a college graduate will rarely ever have. The self educated is more likely to be up on recent technologies. In fields like programming, the education system wastes a large portion of the person time on information that is at best not applicable, and at worst detrimental (If you've ever had to deal with a custom implementation of a sort algorithm in a business software project, then you'll understand what I mean).

      Having Yoda teach you to be a Jedi is more effective than becoming a Jedi by yourself.

      Yet both the most powerful Jedi's in the series never completed their training. But I guess self-education is your equivalent to the dark side.

    10. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      But do you think self-education is going to be as good being taught by professors?

      Sometimes. If you work it out yourself rather than being spoon-fed it can sink in better.

      If you do, I suspect you don't have a college degree at all; you haven't gone through that experience.

      Up yourself much?

      Dennis Ritchie didn't learn C in college.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      But do you think self-education is going to be as good being taught by professors?

      Yes, absolutely, if the person is sufficiently motivated. There are two problems with being self taught. The first is in knowing what to learn - this is much easier now that places like MIT put their curriculum and lectures online. The second is being sufficiently motivated to do the required work without someone telling you that you'll fail if you don't. This is no easier now than it was 100 years ago, but if you can find the motivation then you can learn as well by yourself as with a professor - often better because you can easily set the pace of learning.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    12. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by AtomicJake · · Score: 1

      Dennis Ritchie didn't learn C in college.

      No, he created it.

    13. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by vbraga · · Score: 1

      Posting to undo wrong moderation.

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    14. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by mrzaph0d · · Score: 1

      yep, this is part of the problem. so many jobs are lumped together as "IT". I get umpteen million offers for network engineering, when i've never configured a router (other than my wireless one). but because my resume has something about understanding networking, i get those requests to apply.

      --
      this is just a placeholder till i send back my real sig from the future.
    15. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      Very few of his fellow consultants have CS degrees. They still manage to find contracts and the unemployment is quite low. Many of them run their own tiny companies, more like a group of doctors coming together to set up a practice. The best course for someone looking for plain programming jobs on APIs of these databases is to find these tiny companies, join as an intern and get trained on the API and get some practical training under these consultants. Then get a contract job and eventually make partner or get out and hang a shingle on your own name. To get contract jobs you should have good English skills and good interviewing skills. Any basic degree is enough, but the "programmer/coder/hacker" mind set is a must. It would probably take about 3 months of training and 3 more months of practical work before you start billing clients.

      My point is, if someone is just looking for a way to get decent well paid job, CS degree is a hard way to get it.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    16. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      Meh, yes and no. Luke never "completed the training", but it was more like he took all the classes and never showed up for the final. He was pretty much lost and very amateur until he got the initial guidance and training from Yoda. Like a lot of the very best and smartest people he was able to take what he learned run with it, to improve on his own once he had the basics; but he never could have faced Vadar at the end of Empire, let alone become the Jedi Knight of Return without the training he received.

      Formal education isn't a panacea, a person who shows up to class everyday and manages the bare minimum comprehension to pass is not going to be better than a really talented and motivated self taught person; but it is usually a big help. Nine times out of ten a person of reasonably equal talent and motivation with an education is going to be better than that same person without. It provides structure, gives you a firm basis on which to build your knowledge. People who haven't studied something formally often have holes in their knowledge, they have pieces that just weren't interesting to them so they never learned.

      Very occasionally a truly exceptional person can become a true expert in a field with no formal education, but those people have typically worked much harder than they would have had to otherwise. To some it may seem like a mark of pride to spend twice as long to achieve the same result, but it seems inefficient to me.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    17. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by ksd1337 · · Score: 1

      WHOOOOSH....

    18. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Wow, you really think that someone can't learn those thing alone ??
      Absolutely they can. And the way you learn yourself is by making mistakes. However, there is already plenty of room for people to learn the best way of doing things without having to also learn the best way of doing the fundamentals.
      You could also learn for yourself that fire is hot, or you could take someone elses word for it.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    19. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How about I DONTget a degree, and still work as a programmer for 15+ years? Cause thats what I did. Took one day of CS classes before I realized that they where teaching me how to not think.

      No, they where (sic) teaching you what others have already thought of.

    20. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      many HR departments use automated scanners to filter resumes and if you don't have CS or and Engineering degree, you won't be interviewed for the position.
      Mod parent up. Further, at least in the area where I live, they filter resumes for MIS majors, and filter out CS and Engineering majors.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    21. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure why you're using Star Wars for analogies, Star Trek would be far better... In any case there are pros and cons to both. The biggest problem with self-study resides in the problem of not knowing what you don't know. The biggest problem with being taught by a professor is that you don't know what the professor doesn't know. Both self-study as well as academic study are essential together. It is rare individual that would choke down the advanced mathematics and theoretical subjects on their own. It is also equally rare for your course work to polish off the rough edges and fill in the missing gaps between theory and practical implementation that self-study will bring. However, I would assert that it would be better still if you were to bring someone from the professional field you intend to go into into the mix and sit at their feet in addition to the other two.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    22. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by shentino · · Score: 1

      Just being smart isn't good enough.

      You have to be able to prove it, and most bosses don't have time in an interview to give you a comprehensive aptitude test. So they trust the school to make that decision for them, and they take a look at your diploma or degree to decide if you've got the goods up in your head.

      Since bosses are too busy to check for themselves most of the time, colleges in turn may have no practical incentive to make sure that the students they graduate actually have the skills the bosses want but don't have time to personally verify.

    23. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by qpqp · · Score: 1

      Having Yoda teach you to be a Jedi is more effective than becoming a Jedi by yourself.

      The thing is, there's not an awful lot of Yodas around these days, more like a bunch of C3POs teaching how to move around gracefully and unnoticed...

    24. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by mikael · · Score: 1

      Did the college teach hardware theory, engineering, compiler theory (assembly language, tokenisers, parsers, code optimization, operating systems)?

      If so, then that gave him background knowledge.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    25. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      But do you think self-education is going to be as good being taught by professors?

      Depends on the person.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    26. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      No he just happened to graduate from Harvard with degrees in physics and applied mathematics. You folks do realize that there is a huge difference between a code monkey and an engineer or research scientist right?.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    27. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      You are doing it wrong, if you apply for companies that are big enough to have HR departments.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    28. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by AtomicJake · · Score: 1

      Did the college teach hardware theory, engineering, compiler theory (assembly language, tokenisers, parsers, code optimization, operating systems)?

      He made his Ph.D. in the design of programming languages. I think the point is: Richie was a real computer scientist and had a very solid background from his studies and work in one of the best laboratories. And this is completely different from learning a programming language in school.

    29. Re:Computer science != IT jobs by cpghost · · Score: 1

      It's not really the professors that make the difference (to self education), it is the motivation. At least at the undergrad/bachelor level. Unless you have some very strong and persistent self-motivation drive, you won't do the exercises and problems yourself, or you won't do them nearly so intensely and with at least so much dedication than if you were required to by the learning context that colleges provide. And you haven't learned something if you didn't become proficient at solving problems in that domain. The main point of classical teaching is not so much providing content, it is providing context and discipline.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  3. Not Elite... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'd much rather be Leet.

    Same thing, but with Mad Skillzzzzzz!!!!!

  4. Wish it was not "Your Child" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The world is as it is, but, it is my desire that these tips were directed at (and people expected them to be directed at) the "children" (adults) applying and not the parents.

    1. Re:Wish it was not "Your Child" by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Well, if the advice is aimed at the parents, it should say, "Be alumni of that school. Be wealthy. Better yet, be both".

      If it's aimed at the children, you can't do better than, "Choose your parents wisely".

      The seafood platter is excellent.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  5. Here's a tip by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    If you don't get in on your SAT scores alone, you're probably not smart enough, so don't bother.

    1. Re:Here's a tip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't be such an asshole.
      College rewards those who have the ambition to do the work, not those who are just good at passing tests.

    2. Re:Here's a tip by ThorGod · · Score: 2

      Don't be such an asshole.
      College rewards those who have the ambition to do the work, not those who are just good at passing tests.

      Yep, though I still think test grades are weighted too much in college courses. I don't care what the discipline is, a one hour test over all the material does NOT approximate "a day in the life" of someone who's mastered that material.

      PS I hate tests, standardized crap tests infinitely more than other tests.

      --
      PS: I don't reply to ACs.
    3. Re:Here's a tip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      College rewards those who have the ambition to do the work, not those who are just good at passing tests.

      In theory, maybe. In practice we don't know, because they don't get in.

      Which was the frikking point, y'moran.

    4. Re:Here's a tip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A 3 hours exam can only cover so much a long time ago, so I only studied 3 -10 hours for it depending on the multiplier factor of the subject.

      I did pretty well for Science course because I studied the basics and can derive the rest and not waste time doing "example" like the rest. They would not be able to answer question they have not seen before.

    5. Re:Here's a tip by Missing.Matter · · Score: 3, Informative

      SATs are a filter. They don't get you in. If you get a 1600 (or whatever the max is these days) you're now on par with 10,000 other kids who also got a 1600.

      The valedictorian at my highschool, 5.0 GPA (AP scale), 1600 SAT, smartest guy I know, got rejected from MIT. He ended up going to U Penn, now works at Google. Another girl got into MIT with lower GPA and SAT, but she had like 400 extracurriculars and was involved in everything. Just goes to show it's not all grades that count.

    6. Re:Here's a tip by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

      No, college rewards those who learn quickly and pass the tests.

      Do you think "working harder" will teach you how to program? I remember the people who worked harder at my supposedly "elite" CS school - they frequently stayed up all night on assignments, struggled to get by. Most failed out in the first year, but it was the ones who barely made it that saddened me. Why were they doing this? How could they possibly love to do something they found so difficult?

      You've either got he knack for it or you don't. And if there is one field that resembles the stupid logic puzzles of standardized tests, it is this one.

    7. Re:Here's a tip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Another girl got into MIT with lower GPA and SAT, but she ...

      ... was a girl.

      fixed that for you.

    8. Re:Here's a tip by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

      Yeah, everyone I know at Google got perfect or near perfect scores on the SAT, and none of them went to MIT. They all went to other supposedly "elite" schools, had no trouble getting in, and excelled without difficultly.

      So what did we learn? Don't apply to MIT if you're not an application-padding suck-up, a lesson not much different than mine. Everything is a filter.

      (And her SAT scores were still above the threshold, don't deny it.)

      > Just goes to show it's not all grades that count.

      I said nothing about grades. Grades are so inflated and non-standard they're practically worthless.

      I said SAT, because it is a predictor of intelligence, particularly for systematic thinking. I'm not saying the tests are great, but if you can't beat the average for one of these schools, you have no business applying to its CS program.

    9. Re:Here's a tip by slew · · Score: 3, Interesting

      SATs are a filter. They don't get you in. If you get a 1600 (or whatever the max is these days) you're now on par with 10,000 other kids who also got a 1600.

      Yes 2400 is the max these days... I've been involved with admissions with my school (one of the top-10 depending on the list) and certainly SAT is used as a coarse filter (once above a certain level, the actual score is mostly irrelevant)... Also note that 2400 doesn't necessarily mean "perfect", every year the test is scaled so it may be that missing 1 question is still 2400. Also with the "free-form" math, and essay, it isn't they same test as in the old days... Also, most selective schools also require the "subject" SAT tests (used to be called SAT II, and if compsci, probably at least math 2 and one of the science tests).

      Schools are generally more interested in grades/GPA than SAT scores, but even those are conditional (e.g., what courses you took vs GPA is more important than actual numerical GPA, say IB, Honors, or AP classes vs standard classes or underwater basket weaving).

      The valedictorian at my highschool, 5.0 GPA (AP scale), 1600 SAT, smartest guy I know, got rejected from MIT. He ended up going to U Penn, now works at Google. Another girl got into MIT with lower GPA and SAT, but she had like 400 extracurriculars and was involved in everything. Just goes to show it's not all grades that count.

      It's a little more subtle than just 400 extracurriculars. Typical "selective" schools tend to look for long-running extracurriculars, not just bulk (which tend to either be "fake" because nobody can spend 100 hours a day on extracurriculars, or if not actually fake, not representative of actual participation). Just pick a few extracurriculars and do them for > 3-4 years (starting in middle school), and show some commitment (lead developer for an open source project, lead chair in a band instrument, president of the chess team, even treasurer of NHS, attending math olympics, physics bowl, programming competition events or whatever).

      Getting someone letter of recommendation from someone involved in the extracurricular is a really good idea so that they don't know it was some sort of "trophy" extracurricular (where you are a member to list it on your application, but don't really do anything). The generic guidance counselor "this is a smart kid" recommendation isn't really that impressive to a selective school because almost everyone gets one of those. Of course if your counselor knows you really well or can compare you to some other folks that ended up going to the school you are applying to, perhaps the counselor can write a better recommendation.

      Just saying...

      FWIW, there appears to be a better correlation to ultimate success on the schools that you apply to (not get in), than the school you acutally end up graduating from. So if you are the type that is ambitious enough to apply to a selective school, and you actually do it (rather than treat this whole admissions thing as a "thought experiment"), you might be enough of a do-er (or at least enough self esteem) that will make your more likely to be successful in the future, regardless of the school you attend (or drop out of).

      And as a total aside, you have the best chance of getting into any program as a so-called "legacy" admit. Just make it past the filter levels and go to the same school as a parent, uncle, aunt or sibling. A "legacy" admit can get you into nearly any school you have the "pedigree" for... :^(

    10. Re:Here's a tip by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1

      if you can't beat the average for one of these schools, you have no business applying to its CS program.

      That's not even close to what you said, but it's much more reasonable.

    11. Re:Here's a tip by pmgarvey · · Score: 1

      Maybe that's how it works in the USA but not over here. I go to one of the best universities here, and it's a "well known fact" that everyone has to do loads of extracurriculars to get in. I did barely any (or at least any that were recognisable enough to put on the application), and still got in ahead of those who were attempting to game the system. I later asked my tutor about it, he just said what I'd suspected, they don't care about all that stuff, they didn't bring you in to chat with you about your hobbies, all they care about is aptitude and passion for the course (notable exceptions things like medicine where you can't just be overly obsessed with biology and have no personal skills). Lots of people here now had lots of extracurriculars yes, but in reality its largely because a) they got them because they thought they needed them or more often b) they're just people who like doing lots of interesting things, and have the time-management to do so.

  6. thoughts by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    Assuming your kid is capable of getting into an "elite" Computer Science program, how about instead he:

    1. Goes to a upper-tier state school (helps if there's one in your home state, but not necessarily a deal-killer),
    2. Does a paid internship (or two) before graduating,
    3. Graduates with the albatross of huge debt around his/her neck (and with some work experience).

    For an undergraduate Computer Science degree, I'm not convinced it's "worth it" to pay the big bucks.

    1. Re:thoughts by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      why the "upper tier"? Why not save some money and send them to a local good two-year school, then go to state or good (not premium) university? Yes, do some interships. Tens of thousands of dollars not spent are a great thing.

    2. Re:thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why waste the first two years when you can be taking upper level classes then? I couldn't have done complexity theory and topology etc at the local 2 year sophomore year...

    3. Re:thoughts by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Upper tier because you can get a degree from an upper-tier state school without breaking the bank, and a degree from an upper-tier state school is more marketable than a degree from a non-upper-tier state school. It feels like the sweet spot.

    4. Re:thoughts by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      You have no idea what you're talking about, please shut up before you fuck over some kid's life.

      State schools can cost more than top private schools.

      Top private schools provide absurdly good financial aid packages, we're talking free ride if a kid's parent's make under $100k. With billions in endowments you can do that. State schools are increasing tuition every year as education funding get's cut.

    5. Re:thoughts by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Depends on the kid and how much his parents make. I attended an upper-tier state school (University of Texas) on a national merit scholarship and ended up paying very little. I would have paid even less if I'd opted to attend a less reputable state school (Lousiana State University, University of Oklahoma, Texas A&M University). I applied to two private schools: Wash U. (St. Louis) and Rice. Both of them would have ended up costing significantly more than U.T.

  7. all wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    step 1: pay cash for tuition. preferably in well-worn, small denomination bills.
    step 2: donate an additional, equivalent amount to the school's football team.
    step 3: make sure to include the words "hadoop" and "cloud" at least five times each in your admissions essay

    done.

  8. It helps being a girl... by olau · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the article:

    It also helps to be a girl. At Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, for example, only 14% of the computer science majors are women, so it's easier for female applicants to stand out from the pack. [...]

    What kind of advice does that lead to?

    "MISC NOTES FROM APPLICANT: He walks like a girl, swims like a girl and talks like a girl! Also he likes being called Ada!"

    1. Re:It helps being a girl... by rcuhljr · · Score: 1

      Rose is more of the exception then the rule (at least I hope so) in that it only went co-ed in 1995? When I attended our gender ratio regardless of major was only 18-20%

    2. Re:It helps being a girl... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      What kind of advice does that lead to?

      It leads to advising women who might otherwise fall into a more conventionally female field to also consider computer science.

  9. Want the truth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Find a world class programmer and setup a mentoring relationship with them. They'll likely do it for free or low cost and your kid will learn for more about both theory/application as well as how to work...hard. I'm not anti MIT or any other formal education institution...I'm against the obscene cost involved and the debt accumulated. Education is an investment. Like any other investment, you must do a cost benefit analysis and be completely objective in your analysis.

  10. Not Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I completed my BS in Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University ( consistently ranked #2 or #3 in CS), and I'm currently in the master's program there. How did I get in? I'm not sure. I've never felt like I was smart enough to be at this school, and I think this is a common conception among students here. We all feel like the admissions staff made some kind of mistake. I think it all comes down to showing that you are really passionate about computers, and have taken initiative to do stuff on your own. What did I do in high school? Mostly, I just screwed around, but I did do a lot of programming projects on my own: video games, web apps, robots. That's what we talked about most during my interview. Not my grades, or my SAT scores (though they were pretty good.)

    1. Re:Not Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same poster as parent here. By the way, I should mention that my education was DEFINITELY worth it. Not really so much the classes I took, but the connections I made were most important. I got in on a hugely important robotics research program simply by accident, and overnight I became a name in the industry. After I published my results in senior year of undergrad, I got job offers from Google, Microsoft, Palantir, IRobot, SpaceX, and Willow Garage. I think Palantir was offering me a starting salary of 84K. I chose to go to grad school instead.

    2. Re:Not Sure by lexman098 · · Score: 1

      So your grades and SAT scores were pretty good even though you "just screwed around", and you did a lot of extracurricular programming projects on your own time. Still, you claim that you don't really see how you were qualified to get in.

      Being overly humble is just as annoying as not being humble enough

    3. Re:Not Sure by BranMan · · Score: 1
      "Mostly, I just screwed around, but I did do a lot of programming projects on my own: video games, web apps, robots."

      Duh. They accepted you because you already ARE a Comp Sci student. You are already doing it because you love it. Now all they have to do at CM is give you the right tools to do it better and get out of the way. No brainer.

    4. Re:Not Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the GP, I too went to CMU. Again similar to the GP, I did extracurricular programming, I had very good SAT scores (1450) and I got along great with my interviewer. Plenty of AP credits in physics, CS and calculus. That said, I couldn't hack it at CMU. For one, not enough good study habits - I think I basically skated by on natural intelligence during my Montessori (up through 8th grade) and high-school days. Also, it was a math/cs program, not just programming. Modern math was fun, but I barely made it through calculus in 3D and totally failed linear algebra II. Looking at the degree requirements now, it looks like they've dialed back the math courses a lot. A lot of the subject matter was very interesting, like the computer language compiling and design course, but actually getting passing grades on homework and tests was difficult. Still, despite being unable to, you know, write a lisp compiler from scratch, I have an understanding and appreciation of the core theoretical computer-science concepts (not just programming.) Just don't EVER ask me about eigenvectors.

      I spent two years at CMU. During my junior and senior years, at a state university, I was on dean's list and feel like I didn't learn a single new concept. Kinda sad, but I'm glad I have a BS degree.

      FWIW, I also applied to Cornell but didn't get in - had a very bad interview. So in my mind, the way to get into a top CS program is to a) show a prior aptitude/interest in programming, b) do well in HS, and c) get along with whoever interviews you. Actually succeeding in a top CS program is a different matter.

    5. Re:Not Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I completed my BS in Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University ( consistently ranked #2 or #3 in CS),

      Not the undergrad program though. That is a grad school ranking only.

    6. Re:Not Sure by Thugthrasher · · Score: 1

      Probably not being overly humble. It's probably the "imposter syndrome" effect. It happens to a loooooooot of students in good schools or in graduate school.

  11. At 17, how are you supposed to know? by ironjaw33 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Looking back to when I was in high school, I had no idea what I wanted out of college or what I really wanted to do with my life. By my last year in high school, I had been an unpaid summer intern at a software company and taken AP Computer Science, but even then, I really wasn't sure. I _thought_ I wanted to study Computer Science, but I had no idea how hard the theory courses would be or if I had any hope of becoming a competent programmer. When I was in high school, I thought that after a semester or two of college CS courses, I might change my major after deciding it wasn't what I had hoped for. In the end, everything turned out well and I did get a CS degree, but that doesn't happen to everyone.

    As a highschooler, I also was misinformed about the quality of education I would receive at different schools. The misconception is that only at an ivy league school or other similarly ranked private school will I get a solid education. I applied to several top-level CS schools but ultimately went to an in-state highly ranked public school since it was much cheaper. There are plenty of good public schools that offer strong CS programs -- MIT, Stanford, et. al. are good, but there are many others that also meet a high quality threshold. I came out of undergrad as a strong programmer with a solid understanding of the theory of computation, in part because of my schooling, but also because I was willing to learn. Internships also helped -- these were especially helpful in gaining employment.

    1. Re:At 17, how are you supposed to know? by alen · · Score: 1

      any elite program in any field is geared towards people who have a passion in that field by their teen years. not for someone who doesn't know what they want to do. all the elite CS programs are geared to people who make the jailbreaks and roots for mobile phones. not the people who download them and think they are cool.

  12. Start your essay like this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mark Zuckerberg doesn't know what he's doing, I mean I'm sure he's a good businessman and all but technically speaking, Facebook should've been way better.

  13. It's not what you'll learn, it's who you'll meet! by Squeebee · · Score: 2

    Look at Mark Zuckerberg, do you think he managed Facebook because of the superior comp-sci education he got at Harvard? No, it was because of the connections he made and the people he collaborated with. It's the same with any of the 'elite' schools, the real value is that you will either get to know some very smart people, or some people with access to a lot of money or ideally both that is the real payoff for going to such schools.

    The other comments are correct that talent and a good mentor can give you what you need to build skill, and that the degree itself really just gets you into your first job with experience getting you your next job, but it's the connections these schools provide that help make the difference between getting a good job and building a world-class career or company.

  14. It's a sham by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Being good at something is more important than being trained at something.

    I've been using computers since I was a child, I started programming in Basic at 8, PHP at 13 and moved to C# and Obj-C at 18 as part of my first job. I only got enough credits from a local community college for an associates degree, which I didn't even get as I was offered work before I completed it. I was able to pay for college out of pocket and any debt I incurred while I was there I was able to pay off with my first three months of paychecks.

    I may only be a 'lowly web developer' but outside of the big-wigs of Microsoft, Google and Yahoo, I'm highly sought-after and paid well (Market rate is about $50-$60/hour). I greatly enjoy what I do and the field is (for the moment) ever growing. I may not be doing hardcore comp-sci work, and I may not work for the biggest names in the industry, but neither of those things are important to me. Of my friends who obtained college degrees, I make the most money and have the least debt, never struggle to find work and have no complaints other than those pesky client requirements.

    Have I thought about going back? Sure, I took a semester at my local university of Physics. I found not only was it too time consuming for full time work, but the cost (over $7,000 semester, about what I spent in total on my CC education) but almost no one else there took it as seriously as I did (they wanted to party, and f*ck, and make lots and lots and lots of money with their philosophy degrees.) I feel like I came out on top without kidding myself or digging a hole of debt I can never repay.

    People should really consider their options and not just follow the status quo. Not that there's no room for a proper college education; there's a LOT I don't know because I didn't get a degree. However, I can look up what I care about by reading books, the internet and wikipedia (and I do all of the above). Those same text books the students buy can be bought be anyone, and in fact there are much cheaper alternatives when you're not required to be a specific print/edition.

    1. Re:It's a sham by THE_WELL_HUNG_OYSTER · · Score: 1

      You'll never have the respect of people who have put in the time & work & rigor of earning a degree. Never.

    2. Re:It's a sham by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I realize your post is pretty much just trolling, but I'll address it anyway.

      I have the respect of my coworkers because I have demonstrable knowledge and ability in my field, and in many cases more than someone who has a degree. Passion and skill will take you further than that degree you earned years ago. My passion keeps me fresh, keeps me learning new things. Many developers who got a degree, especially those who did it for the title/money are stuck in their position because they had the motivation to "put in the time & work & rigor" to earn a degree, but not to move ahead in their career.

      My motivation is not career driven, but the passion I have for doing it. The career is just a side reward for having this interest. I'm considered a senior developer in my field and that's not a title I simply asked for. I don't hold people's degrees against them and I respect them for obtaining one, if they can show that they don't rely solely on that degree to have their job. If someone wants to hold their degree against me, let them, I'll hold my paycheck against them.

    3. Re:It's a sham by THE_WELL_HUNG_OYSTER · · Score: 0

      I'll hold my paycheck against them.

      And it'll be less than the guy who has your passion and motivation AND a degree.

  15. Money talks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get your parents to donate a few thousand dollars, or better yet a building.

    1. Re:Money talks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A few thousand dollars will get you a thank you form letter you can use as a tax receipt.

  16. don't go big for undergrad by ThorGod · · Score: 2

    Unless you're planning on getting one degree (bachelor's) and trucking out of academia for life, don't go to a big name university for undergrad. They're expensive and the material and lessons do not change enough to warrant the cost.

    If you *are* planning on getting one degree and trucking out of academia for life...still don't go to a big name U. You probably know exactly what you want to study, so apply to a program that's well known for that degree. There's still no need to hit a top 10 college in that case because undergrad material really isn't ground breaking stuff. (It can be, in the later classes, and in those cases you're walking the line toward further academia.)

    --
    PS: I don't reply to ACs.
    1. Re:don't go big for undergrad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terrible advice. Especially if you are planning on academia for life, you should aim as high as possible with your undergraduate. If you are into it for academia, you will want to get as much research experience as humanly possible and these schools will have amazing opportunities. You don't go to a top school because you think their instruction will be better, you go because of the opportunities on campus and those offered to you off-campus because you've already shown that you are smart enough to get in.

      Also, top 10 colleges mostly offer a free ride for low-income students so that's not an excuse either for not picking them.

    2. Re:don't go big for undergrad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in the process of applying to MIT and Cornell (and two other decent schools) for an aero degree and when I talked to somebody at SpaceX I was told they hire a lot from MIT and Cornell. They look for high grades and lots of hands on experience and even out of those kids they are extremely selective. I was never given the impression that if I go to RPI I have no chance working there, as long as I join a team and do a co-op (which are great no matter where I go); but MIT and Cornell are highly ranked for a reason and if I get in I should probably go because the education is solid, I'll be surrounded by really smart and passionate people, and it helps get your foot in the door.

  17. Unorthodox approach... by nerdyalien · · Score: 1

    Just my 2 cents....

    1. Enter to a top college in either Electrical Engineering or Physics... or some other technical major
    2. Do as many as possible CS courses while there
    3. Do few internships in CS related field
    4. Self-learn whenever you can, whatever you can find in CS field

    I did Electrical Engineering in college. But half way through I realized that only thing I liked about that major was, digital logic and programming. So I enrolled into as many as possible CS related courses; did my senior year thesis something close to CS (communication protocol simulation using distributed network); and read/learned as many as possible CS related topics (mainly programming theory and parallel computing). Then I did my PhD in Electrical Engineering too. I managed to make my thesis much more CS related (machine learning + pattern recognition) and used much of my knowledge in algorithm, optimizations and distributed computing.

    Just 2 weeks ago, I secured a web developer position at a software firm (somewhere in far east). Still I had to go through a written + oral technical examinations on programming, algorithm and puzzle solving. But the knowledge and experience came in handy. One added advantage I have, coming from Engineering background, is knowing everything from how the microprocessor, cache, memory works up to the level of how protocols at WWW level works. And when you start programming with "so-called ancient" multi-paradigm languages like C++ and some assembly in college (most microcontrollers still use C/C++ and/or ASM), it gives you a good foundation on whatever language you need to learn later on. Over the years, I've learned MATLAB, Python, JavaScript, SQL, C#... and now Ruby... but still, fundamentals concepts I understood while learning C/C++ was critical in most cases.

  18. One Way by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just crack their admissions system and approve your application. While you're at it, give yourself a scholarship.

    1. Re:One Way by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Heeey, now we're talkin' :D

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  19. How to get in? by Dyinobal · · Score: 1

    Here is how to get in. Insure your parents have made sizable donations in the past, then apply and insure that the next donation comes in only after you've been accepted.

  20. If admissions are at an all time high... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2

    If admissions are at an all time high, then why is Microsoft and Google still pushing for exceptions for more visas for foreign workers? Corporate officials keep complaining that there aren't enough CS grads and yet, the schools say otherwise.

    1. Re:If admissions are at an all time high... by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1

      Guess why admissions are at an all time high? Students are coming in droves from China and India. Then they either go back to their home country or they return here from jobs at Microsoft and Google.

    2. Re:If admissions are at an all time high... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different countries, different work ethics. It's obvious those corporations have some very strict needs, like high quality, loyalty and low salary. First world countries lose a lot on the salary point because CS is classed by in popular mentality somewhere slightly above a mechanic. As in, anyone can do it, but for the "slightly" more advanced stuff you need some certification, a few dozen hours to become BMW qualified or a few years in college, in most people's minds is pretty much the same thing.

    3. Re:If admissions are at an all time high... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really think Microsoft and Google aren't hiring college students? Just because lots of people are applying doesn't mean there is a surplus of actually qualified graduates.

    4. Re:If admissions are at an all time high... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When they say there isn't enough good talent, what they really mean is the market isn't flooded enough to make the talent cheap.

    5. Re:If admissions are at an all time high... by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Because there are a LOT of bad programmers out there. I used to interview the cream of the crop at some top notch schools. I brought back about 10-15% of the people I interviewed. We hired about 25% of those students. Unfortunately the students we didn't hire, went on to work at other programming companies. And that is why there is a lot of bad software out there.

    6. Re:If admissions are at an all time high... by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Admissions may be at an all-time high, but there's no mention of graduation rates. Just because people want to go into computer science or some other computer-related field out of high school doesn't mean they'll stick to it for four years. Or, for that matter, be any good at it afterwards.

      Of course, the visa issues is likely one of cost when all is said and done. But I'd still like to know the graduation rates.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    7. Re:If admissions are at an all time high... by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      It's actually a real problem at my former university (a State university, but with one of the top CS programs in the nation anyhow). The place I first heard about it was the exchange program. The Computer Science and Engineering department is one of many there - probably less than 2% of the undergraduates are in the program - and therefore only a small number of exchange students from that program are away at any given time. However, a huge number of the foreign exhange students who come to my university are in CS, and as a result the program has a problem where they end up with more students than they actually admit through the normal admissions process.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    8. Re:If admissions are at an all time high... by hb253 · · Score: 1

      More likely, US workers are unwilling to accept the lowball wages being offered. So the companies get 2 or more foreign workers for the price of one US worker. It's all part of the race to the bottom.

      --
      Self awareness - try it!
  21. "helping your child get accepted come spring" by poity · · Score: 1

    You mean "come spring 2016 or later." If you're applying to schools now or in the next year or so, picking up anything new isn't going to matter, it might even hurt your chances at the top schools. Not only do schools care about what you do but they also care about how long you stick with it -- they want motivated people who can slog through the tough times, rather than dilettantes who join in a popular season. Freshman year of high school is probably the last chance you have of boosting your extracurriculars in a meaningful way, unless you're really outstanding (state level recognition or higher).

    Advice articles like these should be for parents with middle school aged students.

    --
    your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
  22. Does it matter? by ErichTheRed · · Score: 2

    I've managed to carve out a pretty successful IT career graduating from a big state university, in a completely unrelated field (chemistry.) The thing that seemed to help most was the practical experience I got during school (tech support was my student job), and graduating in the late 90s helped. That said, recruiters weren't falling all over themselves to hire me like they might a grad from CMU, UIUC, Stanford, etc. It took work to get my first job, it was a crappy one, but every job thereafter has been won based on skill (and decent interview skills.) I do systems integration work rather than software development, and a good part of my job falls back on critical thinking skills and the ability to creatively solve a problem without infinite money, hardware or compute time. You gain that experience IMO, by doing what I did -- riding out the dotcom boom in a "boring" field where I could learn as much as possible about a wide array of systems and concepts. I wasn't an HTML millionaire, but I managed to get through 2000-2001 with marketable skills that kept me employed.

    So, is a big-name school worth it for a CS degree? I think not, and here's why:
    - If you believe the IT field is shrinking, and you'll probably have to take a lower wage to do what you want, then you shouldn't blow all your money on an expensive school. Especially if you need loans, you'll be paying for that education for a very long time.
    - "Reputation enhancement" that you get from the big name probably isn't the same as what you get in other degrees/fields. If you graduate with an MBA from an Ivy-league school, you are almost guaranteed to make a few high level connections that will get you ahead faster than your peers. Some jobs like investment banking or management consulting are very difficult to get into without big-name school recognition, simply because they're a ticket to instant riches and kind of a closed club. Some "elite" tech companies like Google might place a premium on your educational pedigree, but unless you have your heart set on working there, it's probably not going to matter much.
    - Recruitment is easier at big name schools, because large corporations seem to just send people to collect a few new grads based on the fact that they went to that school...at all levels of work. So, the difference might be "hand in your resume and watch the offers pour in" versus "hustle and pound the pavement yourself." If you can handle that for your first job, you don't have to do that for the second if you've managed to gain any marketable skills in the first.

    Here's something else to consider -- I didn't do CS, but knew a lot of people who did. Very few people end up working as "computer scientists" doing the low level theoretical stuff. In fact, the secret is that business IT is full of contractors/consultants who make huge amounts of money doing work in some obscure niche. SAP implementations, Oracle DBAs (good ones,) and guru level network guys come to mind here. Think about the places you've worked where they parachuted some consultant in to work on fixing some problem. That guy probably makes $150+ an hour, and works 8 months out of the year.simply because he fills an immediate need for some weird combination of skills. You certainly don't need to be a computer scientist to figure out Oracle's garbage dump of a documentation collection [1], or solve a thorny OS problem. You just need to have a head for problem solving and the ability to travel anywhere at a moment's notice (perfect for a recent grad.)

    Also, as noted in many other places, the cost of a college education keeps going up every year. Big name schools can charge more. You have to think of it as an investment, in terms of future payback. Do you pay, let's say, $50K at a state school or $200K at a name brand school? Are you reasonably guaranteed to make back to $150K difference and way more? If not, then don't do it!

    [1] Oracle's a perfect example of what I'm talking about. First rule is that you can't properly install or tune an Oracle system without

    1. Re:Does it matter? by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2

      Do you pay, let's say, $50K at a state school or $200K at a name brand school? Are you reasonably guaranteed to make back to $150K difference and way more?

      It's important to note that the $200k at a brand name school is a volatile number. If your parents don't have a ton of income and chose not to save money in a college fund, that might become $0 at the name brand school while the $50k remains $50k at the state school. Ivy League schools are giving loan-free financial aid to students with family incomes below about $70k, with some variation from school to school. I didn't quite meet those requirements and I ended up with loans, but $30k in tuition plus loans for 4 years in an Ivy League school wasn't bad. It's sort of like shooting the moon, though: if you don't get into one of the Ivies you're going to have to pay far, far more.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    2. Re:Does it matter? by ThorGod · · Score: 1

      that might become $0 at the name brand school while the $50k remains $50k at the state school.

      In my experience, that's wrong. My state school moved very aggressively to help me with tuition. My tuition actually became negative...let's see a big name school do that for an average student. (And I was academically average.)

      --
      PS: I don't reply to ACs.
    3. Re:Does it matter? by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      The Ivy league funding only applies to people who are graduating from top public schools at the top of their class. The valedictorian at my high school got a "free ride" at Harvard - $60K a year in tuition assistance plus a few other bonuses. Why? She had a 1600 on the SAT, spoke three languages, played the violin at the professional level at 18, and her dad was merely a sergeant in the Army. Unfortunately, we don't pay our soldiers quite enough to afford Ivy League educations for their kids...

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  23. If you want to be elite.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you gotta do a righteous hack.

    --Hackers

  24. View from the top by NEDHead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The advantage of going to a more elite school is that your peers, on average, are going to be smarter and generally more accomplished. This ripples down in many ways, including a faster paced, more in depth curriculum, better resources, better professors, and, perhaps most importantly, connections & relationships for networking that can last a lifetime.

    Not saying there aren't smart, capable people at the less elite schools, but generally those who claim it doesn't matter where you go are those who really didn't have a choice.

    1. Re:View from the top by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Networks and relationships come and go. People die or move away. You forget your course material after 25 years or so, or end up working in a different field.

      What really matters is the elite college name gets you interviews. And yes over a lifetime it's worth the $100K or so. I know from personal experience.

    2. Re:View from the top by zolltron · · Score: 1

      This is the often-overlooked benefit of top schools. The most talented students tend to learn a lot from one another, and so you want to surround yourself with the smartest peers you can. If all the smart people were going to North-South Nowhere State University at Tinyville, that's where you should go. But they're not. They're all going to the "top" programs. So, if your smart, you should go there too.

    3. Re:View from the top by Timewasted · · Score: 1

      Not saying there aren't smart, capable people at the less elite schools, but generally those who claim it doesn't matter where you go are those who really didn't have a choice.

      I would disagree. Some of us had a choice, but we chose to only go in debt 50K, rather than 300K. As a white male who's parent's income was over 250K at the time, I had to choose how much debt I wanted for the rest of my life. I chose the less expensive university over the elite one. I was able to get more scholarships and financial aid at the less elite college, brining my total debt down to 30K. This was 1/10th the cost of the prestigious school that I had an option to attend. If you ask me, the person who choses the 30K university is the *smart* one.

      The advantage of going to a more elite school is that your peers, on average, are going to be smarter and generally more accomplished. This ripples down in many ways, including a faster paced, more in depth curriculum, better resources, better professors, and, perhaps most importantly, connections & relationships for networking that can last a lifetime.

      This is simply untrue. I have been in academia all my life and have worked with many people who went to these elite schools, and I would *not* say they are smarter. Did they have a higher GPA? Yes. Higher SAT? Yes. Are they smart? No.

      The truth of the matter is, intelligence is not increased by association and intelligence is impossible to measure. I would argue that my peers at the less elite school were much smarter than my current colleagues from elite schools (these are people with PhDs from these elite schools).
      In fact, these "elite" scholars typically over-think many simple problems. This truth certainly exists in the data mining community. Researchers in this community typically over-complicate their problems, over-looking simple solutions that outperform their methods. These are researchers are essentially wasting their time using really complex math, where a simple Euclidean distance measure or nearest neighbor algorithm makes their methods look silly.
      Furthermore, I have noticed that people who went to "elite" schools tend to lack common sense and have a sense of self-entitlement. The last conference I was at, a guy from MIT (an American) came up to me (with a map of the hotel in his hand), and asked me where a certain room was. I grabbed the map out of his hand and showed him... I was baffled! How can you attend MIT and lack the ability to read a map?

      The bottom line is "elite" schools are only worth it if they are free. Otherwise you are wasting your money (give me 300K and I'll turn it into a million before you graduate).

    4. Re:View from the top by byteherder · · Score: 1

      Networking + relationships + Ivy League name = $1 million more over your working lifetime.

      That is one of the reasons people go to Ivy League schools. That is why those student take on $100K of loans. You don't hear many people here who went to Ivy League school saying that they regretted it. "I went to MIT and now 20 years later I and stuck at this crappy dead-end job" is not something you hear.

    5. Re:View from the top by NEDHead · · Score: 1

      Such unsubstantiated anecdotal arguments remind me of the global warming/climate change deniers who point to a cold day and a heavy snow as proof positive of their position. Perhaps if you had been able to attend an elite school you would have learned how to apply proper statistical analysis techniques and not condemn all who did on the basis of a single (likely made up) story.

    6. Re:View from the top by Timewasted · · Score: 1

      Perhaps if you had been able to attend an elite school you would have learned how to apply proper statistical analysis techniques and not condemn all who did on the basis of a single (likely made up) story.

      Q.E.D.

      This is the exactly what I was alluding to in my post.

    7. Re:View from the top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

      You're spending 4 years of your life with these people, so, in many ways, they are far more important than the pedigree, program, etc. (though they're obviously closely related)

      Would you rather spend 4 years of your life with whoever, or would you rather spend 4 years with 5,000-10,000 people who are smart, educated, driven, experienced, diversified, and interesting? (and, yes, if you're thinking curriculium, I'm sorry, but the more elite schools are much better simply because the audience is better... what passes for an A in advanced classes in a lower-tier school is what passes for a C (there are no Ds. C or higher or you fail) in a basic class in the better schools)

    8. Re:View from the top by russotto · · Score: 1

      This is the often-overlooked benefit of top schools. The most talented students tend to learn a lot from one another, and so you want to surround yourself with the smartest peers you can. If all the smart people were going to North-South Nowhere State University at Tinyville, that's where you should go. But they're not. They're all going to the "top" programs. So, if your smart, you should go there too.

      But they're not all going to the top programs, for various reasons. And sometimes quantity has a quality all of its own. I went to the University of Maryland for my BSCS (a decent program, but not typically mentioned in the same breath as MIT, Cornell, Stanford, etc), and while there were certainly any number of people in the program who just didn't get it, there were still quite a few really smart (at least in CS) people there... usually hanging out in the computer labs.

      However, I think the worth of a top-tier school is much more today than it was 2 decades ago. Mostly because the economy is so terrible that top companies can be so selective as to ignore second-tier graduates for entry-level positions.

  25. Dont' waste your money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't have a full ride, don't waste your money going to an elite program. You aren't going to make 100k plus out of college, and you'll just end up making yourself broke/poor.

    If you are truly intelligent, your innate ability to read books and develop an understanding will be enough, you don't need a professor to read the book to you.

    My advice? Find a local community college with a computer science program (most have them) and then transfer to a state school afterwards. If you play it right, your entire college education (4 years bachelors) will cost you around 11k.

  26. Elitism - not good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's a shame that many who want to learn are denied because there's no short term profit in it for the already affluent

    the current education system is about salaries, not education

  27. This article should be named: by AtomicDevice · · Score: 1

    "How to get into big college debt for no good reason"

    I suspect almost every state in the country has an in-state college or university with a perfectly good comp sci program that costs 10's or even 100's of $k less than an 'elite' school. The notion that the name on your undergrad degree could possibly be worth as much as a house is ridiculous. Worry about where you go to grad school, what classes you take, what grades you get, not where your undergrad is.

    If you get a scholarship that makes going to MIT super cheap, the more power to you. All you need to consider when going to an undergrad program as far as I'm concerned is education quality/cost. Undergrad isn't about getting a big name, or having famous professors, or any of that. In grad school, those things can really matter (doing cutting edge research? need cutting edge professor. Learning how to code assembly for the first time? Probably any nice professor will do.). In undergrad, usually you pay more for those things and don't really learn much more. Probably a lot of programming teachers at community college do a better job than a lot of college professors. And they certainly run a lot cheaper.

    Really, the best thing to do would be, in my mind:
    1) pick a school you're interested in and think you can probably get into (maybe pick two or three)
    2) Figure out how many credits they will let you transfer in, and then go to a community college for every last one.
    3) Save thousands of dollars, by a car or save for a downpayment on a house
    4) Transfer into Big University and get your degree
    5) Get the same job as the chumps who went to Elite University
    6) Look at your $0 debt in the bank, then look at Mr. Elite University's $100k debt and have a good chuckle.

    --
    Ze Atomic Device! It iz Ztolen!
    1. Re:This article should be named: by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1

      look at Mr. Elite University's $100k debt and have a good chuckle.

      Except schools like Stanford and MIT offer free tuition for families making less than $100k and $75k respectively. My university took 50% off my tuition for all 4 years. It ended up costing less than state school and I graduated with $15k debt for an "elite" degree.

    2. Re:This article should be named: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It ended up costing less than state school and I graduated with $15k debt for an "elite" degree.

      I graduated with $0 in debt from a state college, with a very solid degree in a difficult field (math).

      I even enjoyed NEGATIVE rent while I went there!!!

    3. Re:This article should be named: by Timewasted · · Score: 1

      Worry about where you go to grad school, what classes you take, what grades you get, not where your undergrad is.

      This is bad advice IMO. For grad school, there are 3 things that matter: Publications (most applications won't have). GPA/GRE scores. Undergrad university.

      At my university, those are the 3 things we are concerned with for graduate school applications.

      Furthermore, for faculty applications we look only at one metric: Publications during their PhD. We don't care if they are from Stanford or ITT Tech. If they have publications to back up their research skills, we want them!

    4. Re:This article should be named: by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Community colleges cater to essentially idiots. You know how every smart kids complained about having to deal with idiots and idiot teachers in High School? Multiply that by ten fold. Then add five layers of bureaucracy.

      There's also no comparison between CS classes at a top university and at a community college. What the community college spends a year on, the university does in a few weeks. Also, good luck ever skipping a worthless unnecessary pre-req at a community college (they lose money that way). My university only cared if I thought I could handle the class and they offered various accelerated classes to fill in the gap.

      Not that any of this matters too much, the fastest way to success is connections and networking. Who you know and not what you know.

      As for graduate school. As someone else mentioned, what undergrad school you went to matters and what you learned there matters. You think Stanford will take you or the kid who was taking graduate AI classes his junior year while working on a DARPA challenge vehicle? You know how NSF Fellowships are decided? They first take all the applications and divide them into two pile, one for top schools and one for everything else.

  28. Make sure the school hasn't gone nuts by Animats · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I had the unfortunate experience of going through Stanford for a MSCS just before the "AI Winter". The "expert systems" (remember "expert systems"? ) profs were running the department. It was becoming clear that expert systems weren't going anywhere, and the faculty was in denial about that. They'd set up a 5-year "knowledge engineer" program, with a combination of computer science theory, philosophy, and psychological interviewing technique to write rules for expert systems (Where are those people now?) I had one exam where a question was "Does a rock have intentions"?

    It took over a decade for the CS department to recover. After I graduated, the CS department was moved from Arts and Sciences, where it had been mostly autonomous, to Engineering, where it had adult supervision. It wasn't until the DARPA Grand Challenge forced Stanford to bring in machine learning people from CMU that the department really started moving forward again. Now they're making real progress.

    (This is not well known, but Tony Tether, the director of DARPA, used the Grand Challenge to kick some ass in academic AI. The schools receiving funding from DARPA were told that if the private sector did better than they did, DARPA was turning off their grant money in AI. That's why the big schools put entire CS departments on the Grand Challenge.)

  29. Intriguing concept, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I went to Carnegie Mellon. That's right, donkeys. I WENT! Pittsburgh rocks!

    Booyeah!

  30. Not from what I have seen by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    You'll never have the respect of people who have put in the time & work & rigor of earning a degree. Never.

    I have a CS degree from a school with a good CS rep.

    Yet I have a lot more respect for a clever and talented programmer regardless of path they have taken, than the MANY people I met at college who had no passion at all for CS or programming.

    Just because you can make it through college means nothing to anyone who has seen how the system works.

    I can use absolutes too. You are simply the exception that proves my rule.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  31. Prioritize value over prestige by spads · · Score: 1

    A. Find the cheapest quality program you can (determining quality itself a challenge in its own right and more elusive than prestige). B. Apply yourself diligently. Make debt avoidance your first priority.

    --
    Bukowski said it. I believe it. That settles it.
  32. Free education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suddenly, living in socialist Sweden with free university education doesn't sound all too bad.

  33. Skip Computer Science... by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

    ...do Computer Engineering instead. You'll have a far better degree with more opportunities and a better understanding of computers, both practical and theoretical.

    --
    Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    1. Re:Skip Computer Science... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even better, skip both, and get your J. D.

      CS and engineering are great degrees, but you will be in the same tent by the OWS when you can't find a job other than a buck private (well PFC due to college education) in the Army. Or you can fight the illegals for the job loading apples onto the truck.

      A law degree means you will be employable for the rest of your life, far more than a CCIE, CISSP, RHCA, or any certs. You may not be at Ben Dover & C. Howlett Fields law firm, but you will always have a job and can feed your family at a standard of income adjusted for inflation and the region.

      Forget about CS. Get through college on a pre-law track, hit law school, pass the bar, and save the CS stuff for a hobby which you will have plenty of disposable income to spend on.

    2. Re:Skip Computer Science... by fliptout · · Score: 1

      Don't think so. We're experiencing a glut of mediocre lawyers right now in this country due to the decimation of other professions. They've driven down the starting salary for lawyers, so, as with other careers, it's best to only go that route if it actually interests you.

      --
      A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
    3. Re:Skip Computer Science... by TheTyrannyOfForcedRe · · Score: 1

      ...do Computer Engineering instead. You'll have a far better degree with more opportunities and a better understanding of computers, both practical and theoretical.

      That's good advice. It also helps to pick a school that allows the student a lot of flexibility in choosing non-degree coursework. For example, at CMU it used to be possible to to major in Electrical and Computer Engineering and take CS classes in the huge number of free elective slots. There was already considerable course overlap between CS and ECE so it was possible to get the full ECE experience and also take every CS class that matters. Things missed were Numerical Methods, Calc in 3D, and Compiler Design. Anyone who makes it through a combined ECE/CS course load can pick those things up on their own using one of the open courseware resources. It makes for a massively flexible degree. In the end you have all the knowledge need to design a CPU, design a computer around the CPU, write an OS for it, and write apps on top of it. You know computers from silicon to application level

      A lot of straight EE and ECE embedded people are very bad at the software side. A guy who has top notch software skills plus the EE knowledge needed to do embedded work is a rare jewel in the job market.

      --
      "Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
    4. Re:Skip Computer Science... by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      Even better, skip both, and get your J. D.

      CS and engineering are great degrees, but you will be in the same tent by the OWS when you can't find a job other than a buck private (well PFC due to college education) in the Army. Or you can fight the illegals for the job loading apples onto the truck.

      A law degree means you will be employable for the rest of your life, far more than a CCIE, CISSP, RHCA, or any certs. You may not be at Ben Dover & C. Howlett Fields law firm, but you will always have a job and can feed your family at a standard of income adjusted for inflation and the region.

      Forget about CS. Get through college on a pre-law track, hit law school, pass the bar, and save the CS stuff for a hobby which you will have plenty of disposable income to spend on.

      Don't know your background AC, but with a CE degree, you're pretty much open ended as to what to do. If you want to do software, your qualified and can get a job in most any software firm, etc. If you want to do hardware, you can do that too. If you want to do OS, embedded software, or device drivers - well, a CE degree is pretty much required - and most everyone you'll be competing with for the position will have some combination of CE and CS - either CE BS and MS, or a CS BS and CE MS; occasionally you'll run into some with a CE BS and a CS MS, but that's rarer.

      So a job will not be an issue - especially since CE graduates are harder to come by. And if all else fails, you can fall back on the EE side of the CE and do anything an general EE can do as well.

      So, as I said - lots of possibilities.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
  34. Re:Missing the point - speaking of which... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why the fuck do you still work for them? You have four year's work experience, time to move on!

    You haven't been out of work or haven't been out of work for long recently, have you?

  35. College by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's also always the option of directly entering the workforce. For example, one company, Onshore Technology Services, runs a boot-camp style programming class. It lasts 2 months, costs $500, and teaches you the skills you need to succeed with the company. The concept of the company is rural outsourcing, bringing previously off-shored jobs back to the (rural) U.S. The employees at Onshore make a very good amount of money for the area, well above livable for the area, with a ton of room for advancement. I would encourage anyone interested in starting a career in IT to check it out.
    www.onshoretechnology.com
    www.otscareers.com

    1. Re:College by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      SOunds like you'd expect the same level of quality here as you would from an offshore hire. .

      I would hope that companies doing this are "doing it right" -- providing a cut *above* the mindless capabilities that most offshore firms can provide. Unfortunately, based on your company site (for I assume this to be spam), you're following the same flawed model. Offer enticing pay (but below average for most of the country), provide the minimum training necessary to read some code occasionally, and sell that as "programming".

      But hey - I'm sure it works to make money for the owner(s), if not maintainable code for your clients ;)

  36. How About by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    How about you actually decide what you want to do with your life first?

    Though if any of those things involve "eating" or "not being homeless", might I suggest avoiding the Art Degree?

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  37. After reading the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I understand why people make bad decisions and get into such huge debt. Why school tuition has risen so much faster than inflation. And why the taxpayers are going to be funding the bill.

    You are fooling yourself if you think going to an expensive "elite" university is going to get you a better education. It may impress someone and it may get you connections, but I assure you that you're not better educated. Take it from 40 years of managing electrical engineers. Some of the best went to public colleges.

  38. easy by Magius_AR · · Score: 2
    Step 1) Do exceptionally well academically
    Step 2) Don't be white
    Step 3) Don't be male
    Step 4) Don't have rich parents

    Welcome to the program.

    1. Re:easy by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's easy about it? Statistics show that combining #1 with #2, #3, and #4 is not easy at all. Not just my opinion, but statistics.

    2. Re:easy by eatvegetables · · Score: 1

      Step 5) Don't be whiny. Be tough.

    3. Re:easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Step 1) Do exceptionally well academically

      Step 2) Don't be white

      Step 3) Don't be male

      Step 4) Don't have rich parents

      Welcome to the program.

      But remember its "who" you know not "what" you know that get you the job.

  39. Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It only really matters if you want to fuck the hot secretary instead of the ugly one.

    Most interviewers don't know which school is "elite". You're more likely to get a question like this:

    INTERVIEWER: I see you went to Carnegie Mellon.
    YOU: Yes, it was a great privilege, I learned from the best of them.
    INTERVIEWER: Yea, I like mellons, too.
    YOU: ?
    INTERVIEWER: So, are you OK with having ambiguous standards. working with managers that don't use or care about diagrams, use cases or standard SDLC practices, need everything done yesterday, working weekends, being on call nights, and having a database structure designed by a scientist with no database experience and you can't change it because it's owned by the corporate group and their in Korea and we don't have a translator.
    YOU: Do you use OO? MVC?
    INTERVIEWR: Yea, we're like completely MS compliant. We even offer to pay for additional certifications and stuff. So, we're have a pretty lax environment around here I'm cool your cool. Come in whenever you like in the morning but ya know I like to get here early and get a head start so I'll be in by 6:30 am everyday and hopefully you can kind of be on my schedule most of the time. That cool?
    YOU: I think I'm gonna go apply for grad school.

    1. Re:Reality by russotto · · Score: 1

      It only really matters if you want to fuck the hot secretary instead of the ugly one.

      So, basically, it always matters?

  40. Re:It's not what you'll learn, it's who you'll mee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at Mark Zuckerberg, do you think he managed Facebook because of the superior comp-sci education he got at Harvard? No, it was because of the connections he made and the people he collaborated with. It's the same with any of the 'elite' schools, the real value is that you will either get to know some very smart people, or some people with access to a lot of money or ideally both that is the real payoff for going to such schools.

    The other comments are correct that talent and a good mentor can give you what you need to build skill, and that the degree itself really just gets you into your first job with experience getting you your next job, but it's the connections these schools provide that help make the difference between getting a good job and building a world-class career or company.

    Amen. I have Ivy league degrees (B, M, PhD) from three different schools, wandered around academia for a while, and can state: You can get a perfectly fine CS education at Wisconsin and Michigan, or at small good teaching colleges like Swarthmore, Colby and Wellesley (not lower, not enough fundamentals, too much CS-is-coding, you need to be grounded in some theory to be a computer scientist and have professors who actually know what they are talking about - not a given). But what you will never get is access to the elite and offspring, connections and opportunities and a system to use those resources

    The rational choice is: Either get into an Ivy (or fine, CMU, CalTech, MIT) and major in engineering or computer science but take classes in art, philosophy, history etc for the connections and incur the 200k cost. Or go two years to a CC, do well, then transfer to a in-state university and do well. That will cost you 20k all in all. To pay Ivy prices and not to get privileged Ivy access is nuts, IMHO.

  41. Another strategy by lecoupdejarnac · · Score: 1

    Another reason not to get too hung up on your university: if you don't get into a top-20 CS school for undergrad, you can always work hard wherever you end up, and then either transfer or get a graduate degree somewhere with a stronger reputation. There are also plenty of solid programs where you can get a Masters in a year (albeit a hellish year), and in my experience it pays itself off in a few years because of the higher starting pay.

  42. IT needs more apprenticeships and less CS for most by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IT needs more apprenticeships and less CS for most IT jobs you do not need a 4 year CS or even 4 years at a tech school.

    Now with a good apprenticeships that will free up space for people who want the big time theory based CS.

  43. Terrific. by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

    Just what we need.

    Another influx of people who get into programming for the money, and who are able to adequately pass the book learning requirements -- while lacking the fundamental critical thinking skills required to actually construct useful programs without massive amounts of direction and oversight.

    For further information as to what this results in, see the vast majority of programmers who jumped on the 90s tech boom bandwagon, as well as the last decade of the programmers produced in India and other nations where it's seen as a cash ticket.

    Yes, I've known skilled programmers who came out of the tech boom, and skilled programmers who have come from India as well -- but these are the exception and not the norm. There is a certain drive and a nearly natural ability to *think* in certain ways that allows one to be a talented programmer -- the ability to envision and hold complex solutions in your brain, to an extent running your programs with your brain as the CPU.

      The vast majority of people who get into this profession for the money lack this ability -- and are suitable for heads down copy-paste programming, or at best programming while very closely monitored and supervised.

      Ah well... it gives middle management a reason for existing, I suppose.

  44. Apply? by datavirtue · · Score: 1

    Why apply when you can live in your mom's basement and make better contributions the sciences? You are probably not doing yourself any favors chasing the erudite or elite programs of the sciences in academic institutions, but I could be wrong. Seriously though, your mom's basement is probably a better environment for learning these days.

    --
    I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  45. Here is how by Timewasted · · Score: 1

    Prove P=NP or P!=NP in your essay. You are sure to get in.

  46. A better question is why? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    How Gods good name is a CS Major suppose to compete with India & China? If you're that smart, why not just get a nice Math Major (they're practically the same thing anyway) and go off and do your own thing w/o the added stress?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:A better question is why? by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 2

      How Gods good name is a CS Major suppose to compete with India & China? If you're that smart, why not just get a nice Math Major (they're practically the same thing anyway) and go off and do your own thing w/o the added stress?

      By not being a replaceable code monkey? By not getting a CS degree and then, of all things, specialize in replaceable work like entry-level PHP development or Apache HTTP server admin (yeah, I've seen that title/role)?

      The problem of off-shoring software work is present, of course. But it is not the boogeyman retards paint it to be. Never has been.

  47. Get out! by turgid · · Score: 1

    I used to work for a company like that. They went bust 18 months after I left for a much better paid job with sensible hours, training and benefits including private health and free gym membership.

  48. Stop calling them children by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

    But admissions officers and professors at elite tech schools can offer tips aimed at helping your child get accepted come spring

    Seriously, these are 17-18 year old people going to college. Stop calling them children. That is how you begin setting high expectations for them.

    1. Re:Stop calling them children by mx+b · · Score: 1

      No kidding. Though the parents are quite guilty of this. I can't tell you how many times my old university got calls from parents, "my son/daughter wants to enroll in such and such, what does she need to do?". From both sides they are treated like children, so no wonder so many treat college like a blow-off and playground. They do not have the expectation of growing up yet.

    2. Re:Stop calling them children by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      Hah! The only help I got from my parents for college applications was a signature verifying I lived where I claimed (along with a copy of the power bill.) My mother's view on it was that if I couldn't handle a simple ten page form on my own, I wasn't going to be able to handle college either.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    3. Re:Stop calling them children by mx+b · · Score: 1

      Same here, my parents were supportive but refused to do anything for me, I had to learn. But I had no idea how common the "helicopter parent" was until I started working in the office.

  49. Not every company... by raehl · · Score: 1

    The company I worked for would definitely try and get as much out of you as they could, but you were also compensated appropriately. Extended-hours heroics were always rewarded.

    But, the corollary to rewarding for contribution is the apparent age discrimination. The young guys just out of college who were single and were willing (and even enjoyed, I know I did, I got paid to work on some of the most advanced tech out there) working 60 hours a week had something over the 35-55 year old guy who always wanted to leave at 5 PM to get home for dinner with his family.

    Not that there's anything wrong with that. Those kinds of people certainly brought experience to the equation, so that mitigated the mere difference in hours, but over the long term, only being willing to go 9-5 definitely impacted their growth potential at the company.

    And to be fair, the people compensated more as high-level managers were the people who were willing to spend extended time away from family for business travel etc.

    Point of the matter is, you can want to be compensated according to contribution, but the consequence of that is when you morph from 60-80-hour-a-week single college grad who loves doing the work to 40-hour-a-week married guy, that's going to have an effect on your compensation.

    It's actually one of the reasons I got out of the engineering gig - now I do something that a fresh college kid isn't capable of. Although, even the 40-hour-a-week married with kids engineers, while not moving up like the 60-hour-a-week kids, had been there done that, got good salaries, and had very comfortable living standards.

  50. Phooey. by raehl · · Score: 1

    The worker has the ability to quit whenever they want.

    I don't know where you worked, but where I worked, everyone knew who the "good people" and the "not so good people" were (fortunately for me, all the not-so-good people were in a different geography, and were (mostly) the first on the chopping block when people got let go). When one of the good people did decide to go somewhere else, they just added another company any of the other good people could go work for if they wanted. Happened all the time - somebody would move to a different company, and then a couple of the other good guys would get offers, and either up their current compensation or move to the new company. I know I personally at least once got a very dramatic raise that I can only attribute to making sure I wasn't motivated to look for work somewhere else.

    Now, the economy is different now, and there may be way more engineers than there are jobs for engineers, which is going to depress wages, but I still suspect that if you can't find a job, it's probably because you're not actually one of the "good people".

    But seriously, if you don't like where you are working, GO WORK SOMEWHERE ELSE.

  51. Err, no. by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

    Bosses have something that developers don't.

    The power to hire and fire as they damn well please, and corporate contact with the clients.

    And also the power to give you an ugly reference if you don't kiss their ass.

    Sometimes an insane captain would rather sink his own ship rather than let one rat escape undrowned.

    I'm not sure in what planet you are, but no company takes an ugly reference without a grain of salt, if ever. For quite some time companies only care to get a reference indicating whether 1) you indeed worked where you claimed to have worked, and 2) that you worked on the things you claimed. High marks from a past employer are just added bonuses.

    Also, it cuts both ways unless you are fresh out of school (or you are a sucker.) Employers can hire and fire as they please, specially the bad ones. Do you want to work with that kind of an employer. No. Not unless you have to. And the frequency in which you have to is directly proportional on how you actively control your career and professional life.

    Don't wait for shit to get bad. Look ahead for your career. If all you know are shitty bosses and employers, you have to ask yourself what exactly you have been doing with your career development. One bad employer here and there is inevitable. But enough of them to make one believe that is the status quo, that's on you.

  52. Are you sure about that? by raehl · · Score: 1

    A surgeon has a minimum of 11 years and up to 16 years education training between 4 years undergrad, 4 years grad, 3-8 years residency. And average salaries for surgeons are still only $250-$350k.

    So, I get an undergrad degree in a CS/Engineering field, I'm pulling down $50k+ first year out of school. For the next 4 years, the med student is dropping $30-$40k/year on their education, so I'm "ahead" of them by $320k after 4 years. Then residency hits, and I'm probably up to $80k while the resident is $50k, so throw on another $90k-$240k.

    So doctors "break-even" with engineers after maybe 5 years out of residency. In the meantime, who do you think was having more fun?

    But the reality of the situation is this is a bad question. If you're the kind of person who would do well with engineering/CS as your career, you are almost certainly the kind of person who would be a horrible doctor. The two professions are the antitheses of each other in terms of one key component: Amount of time spent dealing with people. (Exception: Radiologists.)

    1. Re:Are you sure about that? by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I honestly don't see how surgeons and engineers have much difference between them when it comes to dealing with people. Remember, surgeons aren't general practitioners; they don't spend all their time meeting with patients, chit-chatting with them about their lives and health problems, how their kids are, etc. Surgeons are specialists, and get paid when they're in an operating room working on an unconscious patient; the only people they have to "deal with" are the surgical staff they work with: a few nurses, an anesthesiologist, etc. Engineers don't spend all their time by themselves, they have to talk with other engineers, talk with their manager, sit in meetings with the other engineers, etc. Granted, they have a lot of individual working time, but there's a certain amount of teamwork there too, plus dealing with management. And unlike the surgeon, who has a nice office with a door where he can have quiet if he needs it, the engineer doesn't have that luxury; he has a shitty "open work area" with half-height cubicle walls that he has to share with a bunch of other workers, including several loud-mouths that love to come by and chit-chat with his coworkers, and the work area is so loud that it's impossible to think unless you wear headphones. But then when you wear headphones, other jerks constantly come up behind you to ask you inane questions and tap you on the shoulder, nearly giving you a heart attack when you're deep in concentration. I'll bet the surgeon doesn't have to worry about that when he's got his hands inside someone's body cavity and is fiercely concentrating on making the incision at exactly the right place so the patient doesn't die; his support staff knows exactly how to talk to him or respond to him to avoid interrupting his concentration.

      If surgeons break even with engineers after only a measly 5 years, how far ahead in earnings do you think the surgeon will be after 30 years of work? The surgeon will have saved millions, while the engineer will have been unemployed for a decade or more because companies can get younger engineers cheaper, or just send the work offshore, so the engineer will have to make do with a retail job.

      As for fun, the surgeon gets to spend his career saving peoples' lives. The engineer gets to spend his short career (before he's too old to work, at 40) working on idiotic projects that some dumbass in upper management dreams up to copy some other, more successful company, but then these projects are shit-canned before they're complete. The engineer will be lucky if any of his projects ever actually get used by end-users.

    2. Re:Are you sure about that? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      But the reality of the situation is this is a bad question. If you're the kind of person who would do well with engineering/CS as your career, you are almost certainly the kind of person who would be a horrible doctor. The two professions are the antitheses of each other in terms of one key component: Amount of time spent dealing with people. (Exception: Radiologists.)

      I agree with the rest of your post, but I think you're wrong about this. Most doctors I have known have pretty poor people skills, but it doesn't matter as the sort of people they have to deal with are either (a) helpless patients or (b) more junior nurses, technicians and so on, neither of whom they have to be pleasant to.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    3. Re:Are you sure about that? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The engineer gets to spend his short career (before he's too old to work, at 40)

      Actual engineers have the same career length as a doctor or lawyer, what are you talking about?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    4. Re:Are you sure about that? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Depends on what you mean by "actual engineers". Mechanical, civil, and aerospace engineers, perhaps (doubtful on the aerospace ones though: that industry has been terrible for decades). Software engineers, no.

    5. Re:Are you sure about that? by raehl · · Score: 1

      I wasn't saying doctors were good at dealing with people, just that doctors were WILLING to deal with people.

      I have no problem writing software. I absolutely would not want to deal with patients. Computers don't get upset when you crash them.

    6. Re:Are you sure about that? by blackicye · · Score: 1

      So doctors "break-even" with engineers after maybe 5 years out of residency. In the meantime, who do you think was having more fun?

      I agree, except that beyond the break even point the doctor's annual income will far outstrip the engineer's until the end of their respective economical lifespans.

  53. It's funny you say this... by raehl · · Score: 1

    ...I learned many of the fundamentals of good computer science in my high school pascal classes.

    Actually, that's not true - I probably learned many of the fundamentals of computer science in my elementary school "gifted learning" class. We learned problem solving.

    The difference between infotech and CS is between how to write code and WHY you're writing the code you're writing.

  54. Re:Missing the point - speaking of which... by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

    Why the fuck do you still work for them? You have four year's work experience, time to move on!

    You haven't been out of work or haven't been out of work for long recently, have you?

    He does have a point. The current software-related job market conditions are not as bad as in 2007-2009 (or worse, during the dot-com bubble burst). Obviously it doesn't mean to throw a turd at your employer's face and leave. But it does mean it is time to be proactive with one's career, and look for alternatives (there always are.).

    Unless you are working with a big engineering/engineering-related firm like Google, Amazon, Microsoft or Lockheed Martin or you are working in a technological dream job, 4-5 years is too much to stay at one place. Staying longer (specially in a place that sucks monkey gonads), that's a good way to become COBOLIZED.

  55. Location, location, location by U96 · · Score: 1

    Step 1. Move to Canada
    Step 2...

    --

    "I thought they were the dominant species..."
  56. I may be out of the loop - by wsanders · · Score: 1

    - but since when have incoming freshmen been required to declare their majors before being accepted at most engineering schools?

    I'm a not-so-recent alum of a fairly decent school (Rice) and as far as I know as recently as 10 years ago it was normal for many students to wait until well into their sophomore years to declare a major as long as the prerequisite courses were passed. And Rice, being a smallish school, has a lot of collaboration between departments. The exceptions were "professional" schools like music and architecture, where worst case, it might take an extra year to make up the entry year prerequisites.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  57. who gives a shit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    computer science is a wonderful field that i got involved in when i was nine years old. for free.

    having said that, i dropped out of the university of waterloo (considered ok for cs, in canada) and work for a search company now.
    school in general is a load of shit. why isn't it publicly funded here in north america yet?

  58. MBA by jawahar · · Score: 1

    Unless you're rich & connected, you need MBA to prevail in globalized economy.

  59. Lucky enough to be in Illinois? by mewyn · · Score: 1

    If you are lucky enough to be in IL or another state with a top-rated uni in CS with an articulation initiative, go to community college, get the requirements there, and get in. That's what I did. Of course, this was about 2.5 years ago, but, hey, it worked for me.

  60. Connections matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have Ivy league degrees (B, M, PhD) from three different schools, wandered around academia for a while, and can state: You can get a perfectly fine CS education at Wisconsin and Michigan, or at small good teaching colleges like Swarthmore, Colby and Wellesley (not lower, not enough fundamentals, too much CS-is-coding, you need to be grounded in some theory to be a computer scientist and have professors who actually know what they are talking about - not a given). But what you will never get is access to the elite and offspring, connections and opportunities and *important* a proven system to leverage those resources

    The rational choice is: Either get into an Ivy (or fine, CMU, CalTech, MIT, UoT) and major in engineering or computer science but take classes in art, philosophy, history etc for the connections and incur the 200k cost. Or go two years to a CC, do well, then transfer to the top tier in-state university and do well. That will cost you 20k all in all. To pay Ivy prices and not to get privileged Ivy access is nuts, IMHO.