Slashdot Mirror
Most IT Workers Don't Have STEM (Science, Tech, Engineering, Math) Degrees
McGruber writes "The Wall Street Journal's Michael Totty shares some stereotype-shattering statistics about IT workers: Most of them don't have college degrees in computer science, technology, engineering or math. About a third come to IT with degrees in business, social sciences or other nontechnical fields, while more than 40% of computer support specialists and a third of computer systems administrators don't have a college degree at all! The analysis is based upon two job categories as defined by the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics: network and computer systems administrator, and computer support specialist."
I prefer education over schooling.
Signature intentionally left blank.
Our best techs don't have degrees. Most of the people who can become skilled techs without having it force-fed down their throat at college can teach themselves, and easily grasp new technology as it becomes available. Most of the people we've hired from college were the "I-can't-do-it-unless-you-show-it-to-me-first" type, which suck to have work for you.
I graduated Grade 12 in the early 80's. Was going to go for a CS degree but put it off for a year while I worked. Then another year went by, and so on.
Back then, the vast bulk of "nerds" loved this stuff as a hobby and could slide into a work role easy enough. Then people started going to school to 'learn teh computerz' as it seemed like an easy way to make cash. Those are the folks who were dumped during the dot-bomb.
Fact is many of the best IT folks I know who also have excellent technical skill were self-taught.
Trolling is a art,
I hold two CompSci degrees (BA, MA) from two reputable universities, and I can tell you this: some of best developers I've ever met have come from non-CompSci fields: geology, physics, and (building) architecture.
The keys to being a good developer are much the same as in any other field: being able to learn, and being able to apply what you've learned, and giving a crap about what you do.
Koans and fables for the software engineer
It isn't...exactly... news, is it, that neither 'computer support specialists' nor 'network and computer systems administrators' are jobs that are particularly close to what a 'STEM' curriculum might teach you. You can't be afraid of computers, and the ability to bodge out some scripts when the occasion demands it is always handy; but it isn't as though you are expected (or even permitted) to break out the CS-fu and build some custom management system, or put your EE skills to work by diagnosing that malfunctioning motherboard properly rather than just shipping it back to the vendor for a replacement...
I'm self taught and far better for it, institutional learning is too rigid and doesn't foster creative individuality.
know what "IT" stands for?
You don't need a college degree to read a phone script.
Just because there's a lot of 'em doesn't mean they're all good.
This doesn't surprise me at all. Especially when they mention "computer support specialists and a third of computer systems administrators". These aren't fields that even require a STEM degree in the first place. I'm sure if you just looked at programmers, you'd probably see a much higher percentage with a STEM degree. If I had a stem degree, and was working as a computer support specialist, I'd probably wonder what the purpose of my degree really was. Also, if you have a degree in chemistry, you technically have a STEM degree, but you're probably no more prepared for a career in IT than somebody with a business or fine arts degree
Personally, I've always hated the fact that they even refer to certain jobs as being in the IT sector. It's so large and all encompassing, that it basically fits anybody from a minimum wage support person to a hardware engineer designing cutting edge processors, or people writing financial systems on wall street.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
For many of the older people in this field college was not an option. Some of them "fell into" the job because they "knew computers".
I have a AAS degree from a two year school because IT related studies were not offered at the 4 year schools. In fact, I was bluntly told by a department head of a four year school: if you want to learn networking then go to a two year school. So I did. Best decision ever. No college debt and got a job right out of school.
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
I'm not particularly fond of statistics like these -- because the people who put them together usually insist on qualifying "college degree" as only meaning four year degrees or greater. I have an Associates degree, (and yes: it's in the IT field) but nobody seems to really care about that so-called "minimal" level of effort.
Not that it matters to me anymore at this point... I've been in the workforce for long enough now that a Bachelor's degree would not by itself get me anywhere close to my current salary... nor would it even get me any meaningful bump in income alongside my current work experience. If you wait long enough, such things pretty much become moot.
...whatever you learned in school is already out of date, when you consider what they teach in University is 5 years old when they teach it.
Ask BSCS grads who graduated in 2008 or earlier how much of what they learned in school is still relevant.
Getting into management without a degree is much tougher. Common knowledge is that you are a "better person" if you spent 6 years of your life getting an MBA, rather than actually doing the job.
For this profile, we mainly focused on two job categories as defined by the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics: network and computer systems administrator, and computer support specialist.
So they looked at the two lowest-paying job categories out of the 8 defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and drew conclusions about the education levels of other six. Hmmm, maybe that's not the best approach...
Have you read my blog lately?
Because in all those professions you can kill people (directly or indirectly) if you screw up because you don't know jack about your profession.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
i have a four-year degree (CPEE) and decided long ago to focus on software instead of hardware, and thru my 30 year professional journey I have seen *drastic* changes in the personal make-up of the shops I've worked at.
Back in "the day" (hate that euphemism but used it anyway), programming in C, there was little room for error, as bad code could easily crash systems and cause very expensive issues. I took probably a year of working with them to *really* understand pointers. Companies simply couldn't allow just anyone to code...the potential and real costs were way too high.
Interpreted languages like PHP, Ruby, and Python make it so that pretty much anyone can start hacking away on some code and see results that make them think "damn, I can do this a make a decent living". If they can find someone looking for inexpensive development they can get a job, for awhile at least until either they reach a level where there incompetence shows (the tech "Peter Principle" of course)
Those with the determination and/or genetic blessing to understand coding can do even better and make a very very good living. Overall, I think this is a good thing.
Due to very poor life choices I currently work in a low-end web shop, and the people I code with don't even *like* programming, and are almost totally clueless about OO principles, design patterns and the like...they just want to collect a decent paycheck and don't want to work at McDonalds.
I can't say I blame them.
never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
Computer support specialist thats a first line helldesk role which normally doesn't require a degree
Bell Labs used to like to hire teachers and re-train them for programmer and system test jobs. Re-treads was what some HR recruiters called them.
Honestly, even most IT majors can barely handle most technology since they spend years basically learning to hack around until something works. I meet hundreds of IT people every year and many function entirely based on hacking, misconception and rumor. Want an example? Ask IT pros which OS is best. Instead of choosing based on educated reasoning, research or better yet explaining that each has a purpose and you'd have to choose based on the task at hand, many will choose based on religion and mostly hearsay.
The best IT professionals I know have studied computer science inside or out of a school. Algorithms and operating system design are core components of their knowledge. They understand how to research and study technology before choosing tools because of pretty boxes and articles on their favorite blog.
I am glad these people exist. If it weren't for them, I'd have to install antivirus software and reinstall Windows for everyone I know.
In my not so humble opinion as an engineer surrounded by non-engineers in an IT division...
These people you speak of are customer support/power users/project managers/etc. Most of them do very little "IT" work.
This a perfect example of an article that makes a statement but does not make a conclusion. I guess the conclusion -- perhaps that we should be concerned that our IT professionals don't have scientific or technical degrees -- is implied?
> About a third come to IT with degrees in business, social sciences or other nontechnical fields, while more than 40% of computer support specialists and a third of computer systems administrators don't have a college degree at all!
Panic!
I have an engineering degree, got a job making war toys for a military contractor, needed the computer to do my work, and found that nobody was administrating the computer. In self-defense, I learned how to administer Unix, how to do backups and housecleaning and diagnose problems, all so I could get my primary job done. After several years, when I got burned out on my primary job, (designing stuff for the military is less fun than it sounds) I found that I had learned enough to carry on with systems administration full time.
I strongly suspect that this happened to a lot of people, especially during the rise of the dot coms, and I also suspect that many of them were not originally in engineering. It happens -- people rise to the occasion, and find new career opportunities.
Why is this a problem? Is the admin going to see a countdown someday that says "answer this question that was on the 3rd trimester final in year two of an EE curriculum in 30 seconds or the computer melts into slag"? What you learn in college, other than techniques like ways to attack and solve a problem, are going to be horribly out of date anyway. What you accomplish in the workforce is more up to your commitment and talents, (and training you've sought post-college) than the letters after your name.
Conversely, having letters after your name does not mean you get a free ride (in most companies). You still have to show competency.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I hire/fire I.T. workers. I can tell you...the education vs lack of education is the wrong argument. The best I.T. guys I get are those who love technology and care about what they do. This holds true whether they are a C.S. grad, or someone who spent the last few years hacking away on the side. When I interview, the only weight I give to their degrees/certifications is whether they learned non-technical skills. I've worked with great I.T. guys who had degrees in completely unrelated areas, but turned out fantastic because they love the profession. I've had guys with no degrees who still were worth holding in to. And I've had guys with C.S. degrees who were successful. It all comes down to liking what you do.
IT does not involve [...] Technology [...]
Really?
... were former physicists. Granted, we're mainly a NASA/NOAA contractor so the domain knowledge is very useful.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Because, you don't really need one to do the job.. Duhhh!
There is more truth in that statement than many would want to believe. While I was employed at a large government agency that was involved with collecting government taxes from individuals and corporations, instead of hiring programmers, we would take individuals who were familiar with the various tax systems and train them to program. It was our experience that it was easier to train those who were experienced in their field and had an aptitude for development to be programmers than it was to train programmers in all of the intricacies tax laws. I imagine there are a lot of other business and corporate areas where that would be applicable, too.
While many people learn a lot in college (I hope), the first thing that an employer learns when they find that you have a college degree is that you are likely to be able to finish something complex. There are lots of people without college degrees who can see complex and difficult things through to completion, but that is much harder to glean from glancing at a resume for two seconds. And that's all the time you get, because they go through massive numbers of resumes. And the fact is, most companies are less interested in employees who are smart than those who can follow instructions and work (however inefficiently) until they finish something.
Back in the late 90's a friend of mine worked for a "data services" arm of a well-known communications company. They had a very successful process for developing large applications on time, on-spec, and on-budget, and it was designed around having morons do the work. A handful of people at the top did the design work, which trickled down through layers of less and less skilled worker until you go to the bottom. At the bottom, the code monkey (not necessarily their terminology) would have a stack of sheets of paper, each describing one function or procedure to write. It would describe the function name, the inputs, the outputs, and the algorithm to be coded. The algorithm was described in such detail that even the least skilled coders could do the job. And then it would be reviewed by someone else to make sure it did the job, integrated with the growing application, etc. Now, while a handful of scrappy coders could often complete projects in less time, what this big company had was predictability, so they could enter into a contract where they could be precise about the time and cost from the outset.
Unless you understood their business model, you could find their hiring criteria to be to be counter-intuitive. But what they wanted was cheap college graduates willing to do drudge work. If you could play dumb and do the job, then you could gradually work your way up the chain. But in general, a smart 'rebel' type would never get hired there, nor would they generally want to. Linux geeks are used to thinking about computer programmers as being smart, but that's not how the business world sees them. Coders are a commodity to be bought and sold like corn (and just as lacking in useful content).
The best development groups I have worked in had some people that were focused on the technology, others that knew the business, and everyone having an understanding that it is all important with a willingness to share. I have seen a lot of projects fail because someone highly technical does not respect the less technical team members who bring the business knowledge to the table.
Exactly! While not to diminish the importance of technical skills, it is also just as important not to diminish soft skills. I've lost track of the number of times that a non-technical person asked a question that led to a line of discussion that ultimately led to a much better solution.
It is common to hear "think outside the box" but often, team members from different backgrounds have an advantage because they were never "in the box" to begin with! When we hire, our primary focus is for team players. We can always provide training to improve technical skills, but the greatest technical skills are worthless (to us, anyway), if that person can't work with the team.
...missing several points.
Ask not for degrees, but whether or not they studied. The dot-com era was worst, but companies looking for IT talent have never stopped hiring people straight from university, and when you're a starving student and you're offered a really cool job for what at that time appears to be outrageously generous money, dropping out and taking the job is a serious alternative.
I know a lot of people who dropped out, some less than a year away from their degree.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org