Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Getting a Tech Job With Skills But No Formal Degree?
fmatthew5876 writes "I have a friend who graduated with a degree in philosophy and sociology. He has been spending a lot of his spare time for the last couple years learning system administration and web development. He has set up web servers, database servers, web proxies and more. He has taught himself PHP, MySQL, and how to use Linux and openBSD without any formal education. I believe that if given the chance with an entry level position somewhere and a good mentor he could really be a great Unix admin, but the problem is that he doesn't have a degree in computer science or any related field. He is doing stuff now that a lot of people I graduated with (I was a CS major) could not do when they had a bachelor's degree. Does Slashdot have any advice on what my friend could do to build up his resume and find a job? I know a lot of people think certifications are pretty useless or even harmful, but in his case do you think it would be a good idea?"
I barely graduated high school and I hold a high level IT position.
Key plan: don't lie about your college degree!
I have had friends do this (and myself to a degree) and it can open doors you didn't know you had. Also join some local user groups (like I joined my local VMware User Group) and made a lot of good contacts, one even got me a job when I just got RIF.
Certs are good for non-IT degree folks. Heck, certs are good for everyone. Yes, there are people running around with certs that cannot problem solve their way out of a cardboard box while holding a knife. But mostly, they make you look better. Definitely go for them.
Hoist Number One and Number Six.
I wouldn't recommend getting a Cert, probably more trouble and cost than its worth. Not as negative to have on your resume for a SysAdmin than a programmer, but still, it doesn't exactly shine, so it doesn't feel worth it. Its going to be hard, no doubt. There's just so many people who apply for IT jobs that have NO idea what they're doing at all, hiring is a nightmare. So much of the "interview process" is just to weed out people who should never be applying in the first place. You mentioned, "He is doing stuff now that a lot of people I graduated with (I was a CS major) could not do when they had a bachelor's degree" There's the answer. That's how you get a job without a degree, you do really impressive stuff that shows you know what you're doing and you care about it. Tell him to do as many personal projects as he can, and try to find everything he can do to show evidence of having done them. Set up a personal website, and make it as in-depth as possible. Write extensive notes on all the stuff he's doing that graduates couldn't even do, and include that with your resume. Take pictures, include links to live things on the web if you can, everything and anything to show that while you don't have a formal education, you still have experience. That's what counts. Other than that, I'd just say apply everywhere imaginable. Getting your foot in the door is the hard part, once he's got a job on his resume or two, people won't care about his education at all.
GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-
make friends and contacts.
And if you already have a degree:
Go to user groups,
make friends and contacts.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
because CS is about science and doing actual science. Developing new hash functions if you want a relevant example for todays news. Being a programmer is one thing in the toolkit of being a scientist, it's not the entirety of it.
Different schools have different emphasis though, but some places, where CS grew out of math departments it's much more about things like complexity theory, formal theory of languages and theory of computation sort of stuff than learning to write code.
For places where CS grew out of physics departments it can be much more hardware based, (Wilfred Laurier, the closest school to waterloo is a mostly hardware based CS programme, where waterloo is much more theoretical), or software, depending on what sorts of problems the people who created the department wanted solved, and how much money they could get to start the department.
Lots of CS grads, probably most of them, are not coders. They're scientists, some of whom can write code, and some of whom are much more about problems that can be solved with computers, and how efficiently that can be solved. Teaching people to code in a particular language is relatively easy if they have the math skills. Teaching them the maths skills is hard. Lots of them can't even replace a video card on their own, which seems kind of sad, but that's the same as an electrical engineer is not an electrician. They are related fields, but one is not entirely inclusive of the other.
CS *is not IT*. As part of doing CS you may have to learn to do some IT, but IT isn't programming necessarily either. A 5 year old can get a LAMP or Windows IIS php mysql setup going. IT is about being familiar with how to use particular software packages someone else has written to support whatever your business is. Being a network programmer, and sometimes that's part of being a sys admin, is about writing tools to solve your own unique problems, but not at the level of the packages you can download usually. The CS students who wandered over to your information systems or information science or... whatever programme did so because they want to know how to write code, but they don't have to be hardcore coders to be computer scientists. It's certainly useful for some people, and at some schools being able to code well is definitely required, but that's not universal.
99% of software jobs involve taking database column x and putting it in text field y. I hate to burst the bubble of any CS students reading this and dreaming about "expert system, an openGL based implicit 3dregrees of freedom equations solver", but reality is not that exciting. We all sit in the same cubicles churning through millions of lines of legacy Java code, filling in our change requests and putting cover sheets on TPS reports.
You're right. I did NOT do the same things you did in your CS classes. I'm STILL not doing any of that, and neither are many other people.
:wq
If that's the case then the CS programme was doing a bad job. A bachelors in any science should prepare you to be a competent scientist with expertise in that field. In the same way an engineering degree should prepare you to be an engineer.
It's true that for someone who is a full time research scientist directing research you pretty much have to have a PhD these days. But that doesn't mean the work the BSc and MSc level people do isn't science. Coming out of a BSc you should be able to pick up a journal in an area you know something about and make sense of it enough to know how you could use that information and re-implement it if you have the resources.
Being able to create new material for the journal....not necessarily BSc level. That's more the defining features of an MSc or PhD (and there it's about rate, novelty, and quality).
Sure, for 3 years after a B.Eng you aren't technically a professional engineer, but you're doing engineering under supervision of someone who is. But that should be the same with a science degreee. You start out life as a junior scientist under the heavy supervision of someone else.
After a BSc there isn't very far to go up that is actually anything new. An MSc and PhD take a few (4-8) more courses than in a BSc, but all of that course work is something a BSc level person can step into. Doing 'research' is a very specific type of problem that needs to be solved, where you're trying to solve a problem that fits in a publication. That's what MSc and PhD people specifically (myself included) have to do, but we are very marginally better trained than a BSc level person. After the BSc it's more about what sort of problem you're trying to solve, and just how much time you are willing to allocate to the problem and how much risk you're willing to take on it.
I grant you that lots of CS programmes are bad at making scientists though. But that doesn't mean they have to be.