Both you and the author of the article seem to assume that "critical thinking" is a synonym for "problem solving".
I cannot speak for the previous poster, but I can tell you that I do not equate these two terms. They are not synonyms. However, Critical Thinking is a necessary component of successful Problem Solving.
So instead of using some stupid confusing psychobabble to say "IT people are bad at critical thinking", just say what you mean: "IT people are bad at problem solving".
Sure. IT people are bad at problem solving. Happy?:-)
But that's not enough. We need to recognize why IT people are bad at problem solving, and I believe a significant part of that condition is the inability to engage in critical thinking.
and my favorite dirty phrase "best practices"... Meaning "tell me what to do, I have no clue what the theory of operation is"
I don't really buy into that definition of "best practices". For me, "best practices" are real-world operations that come out of proven techniques and methodologies that apply to most, but not all scenarios, without much controversy at all.
But I will concede that there is a critical problem with the attitude you describe.. "Tell me what to do [because I don't have a clue why I'm doing it or else I could figure it out on my own].", which pretty much makes my point about the deficiencies in critical thinking skills within the profession.
Right now, people only think IT needs a lot of critical thinking because it is so poorly run. Things constantly changing with no benefit, a skilled and trained workforce is not maintained, architecture and planning not done. Standard tools not there...
Fair enough; possibly true.
Let me ask you this question: Why do all of these issues that represent "poorly run" IT exist in the first place?
As a result, asking someone how to do something is more likely to work than reading up on an interface and expecting it to work as documented.
Asking the correct person how to do something is exceptionally efficient. Researching the fundamentals before asking somebody else is just considerate; also, you'll find that mentors are much more likely to provide assistance when there's evidence that the mentee has actually made an effort to find the answer before resorting to the 'ask somebody else' approach. But, "asking somebody else", also requires a nominal capacity for critical thinking to actually identify the difference between a qualified information source, and somebody else who doesn't know either. Asking the person who doesn't know, but is likely to give you the same B.S. answer they got from somebody else who didn't know, just results in a lot of people who don't know crap. And yes, this is an actual real-world problem. I see it every day!
And yet the process most of today's IT pros use to learn a skill amounts to asking somebody else how to do something.
Well, that's progress. Progress involves not having to know how the layers underneath work. This allows operating at a higher level of abstraction. How many drivers can change a spark plug today?
I think the better analogy is "How many drivers even know what a spark plug is?" And the point of that is this: If the person is a driver, maybe that's okay if that person is happy with paying a mechanic upwards of $70/hour to diagnose why the car won't start. If the person is a computer USER, it's probably okay if that person doesn't understand what goes on between the keyboard and the server. But if that person is the mechanic and doesn't understand that the Ford SuperDuty Diesel sitting in front of them doesn't even have spark plugs, now everybody has a problem! If the person is a Help Desk Operator trying to help a user figure out why they can't get their document from the server, and that person doesn't understand the fundamentals of a computer network, the HDO is useless to that computer user.
However, to be fair, the quote you used is somewhat out of context, because in the first sentence of the very next paragraph I described exactly what the fundamental problem is with "asking somebody else". Most of these very same IT pros I'm concerned about aren't even capable of seeking out a qualified resource to ask. If you ask the wrong person, the only thing you'll get is bad information, and I see real-world examples of this on a daily basis!
He talks about college and trade schools, but says nothing about on-the-job training.
Not in the original article, as the original article was really scoped to the methodologies designed to develop pre-employment training. But there was further discussion in the commentary to the post, and I offered this point with respect to my thoughts about on-the-job training:
If it's the intent of the employer to hire a green candidate, that's great! Everybody needs someplace to start, and I applaud those employers willing to take the risk. But taking the risk also means committing to the investment in developing that staff member.
Businesses no longer seem willing to invest any capital in directly educating the worker they want.
The closest we get is coordination between a college and business, where the business helps design the school's curriculum to provide the kind of skills the business wants.
I absolutely agree, and that's also significant contributing factor to this problem. If employers continue to refuse to invest in their own staff, then at some point they'll be faced with staff who are not able to meet the needs of the business, and an unnecessary dependency on external resources to meet those needs. Which, in the end, only serves to destroy the morale of the existing staff even more, as almost certainly that staff would have been preferred to be involved, to have preferred to been given the opportunity to develop those skills. On the other hand, while it would be nice for employers to encourage that sort of thing, an IT professional should not cop-out on the employer's failure to facilitate; that IT professional should go develop those skills anyway. Even if not used for the employer's benefit, it'll be a lot easier finding a new job if the technical skills are current.
Slashdot Mirror
Both you and the author of the article seem to assume that "critical thinking" is a synonym for "problem solving".
I cannot speak for the previous poster, but I can tell you that I do not equate these two terms. They are not synonyms. However, Critical Thinking is a necessary component of successful Problem Solving.
So instead of using some stupid confusing psychobabble to say "IT people are bad at critical thinking", just say what you mean: "IT people are bad at problem solving".
Sure. IT people are bad at problem solving. Happy? :-)
But that's not enough. We need to recognize why IT people are bad at problem solving, and I believe a significant part of that condition is the inability to engage in critical thinking.
and my favorite dirty phrase "best practices"... Meaning "tell me what to do, I have no clue what the theory of operation is"
I don't really buy into that definition of "best practices". For me, "best practices" are real-world operations that come out of proven techniques and methodologies that apply to most, but not all scenarios, without much controversy at all.
But I will concede that there is a critical problem with the attitude you describe.. "Tell me what to do [because I don't have a clue why I'm doing it or else I could figure it out on my own].", which pretty much makes my point about the deficiencies in critical thinking skills within the profession.
Right now, people only think IT needs a lot of critical thinking because it is so poorly run. Things constantly changing with no benefit, a skilled and trained workforce is not maintained, architecture and planning not done. Standard tools not there...
Fair enough; possibly true.
Let me ask you this question: Why do all of these issues that represent "poorly run" IT exist in the first place?
Maybe we should put more effort into hiring IT workers who can solve problems
Ergo, IT workers with critical thinking skills.
As a result, asking someone how to do something is more likely to work than reading up on an interface and expecting it to work as documented.
Asking the correct person how to do something is exceptionally efficient. Researching the fundamentals before asking somebody else is just considerate; also, you'll find that mentors are much more likely to provide assistance when there's evidence that the mentee has actually made an effort to find the answer before resorting to the 'ask somebody else' approach. But, "asking somebody else", also requires a nominal capacity for critical thinking to actually identify the difference between a qualified information source, and somebody else who doesn't know either. Asking the person who doesn't know, but is likely to give you the same B.S. answer they got from somebody else who didn't know, just results in a lot of people who don't know crap. And yes, this is an actual real-world problem. I see it every day!
And yet the process most of today's IT pros use to learn a skill amounts to asking somebody else how to do something.
Well, that's progress. Progress involves not having to know how the layers underneath work. This allows operating at a higher level of abstraction. How many drivers can change a spark plug today?
I think the better analogy is "How many drivers even know what a spark plug is?" And the point of that is this: If the person is a driver, maybe that's okay if that person is happy with paying a mechanic upwards of $70/hour to diagnose why the car won't start. If the person is a computer USER, it's probably okay if that person doesn't understand what goes on between the keyboard and the server. But if that person is the mechanic and doesn't understand that the Ford SuperDuty Diesel sitting in front of them doesn't even have spark plugs, now everybody has a problem! If the person is a Help Desk Operator trying to help a user figure out why they can't get their document from the server, and that person doesn't understand the fundamentals of a computer network, the HDO is useless to that computer user.
However, to be fair, the quote you used is somewhat out of context, because in the first sentence of the very next paragraph I described exactly what the fundamental problem is with "asking somebody else". Most of these very same IT pros I'm concerned about aren't even capable of seeking out a qualified resource to ask. If you ask the wrong person, the only thing you'll get is bad information, and I see real-world examples of this on a daily basis!
He talks about college and trade schools, but says nothing about on-the-job training.
Not in the original article, as the original article was really scoped to the methodologies designed to develop pre-employment training. But there was further discussion in the commentary to the post, and I offered this point with respect to my thoughts about on-the-job training:
If it's the intent of the employer to hire a green candidate, that's great! Everybody needs someplace to start, and I applaud those employers willing to take the risk. But taking the risk also means committing to the investment in developing that staff member.
Businesses no longer seem willing to invest any capital in directly educating the worker they want.
The closest we get is coordination between a college and business, where the business helps design the school's curriculum to provide the kind of skills the business wants.
I absolutely agree, and that's also significant contributing factor to this problem. If employers continue to refuse to invest in their own staff, then at some point they'll be faced with staff who are not able to meet the needs of the business, and an unnecessary dependency on external resources to meet those needs. Which, in the end, only serves to destroy the morale of the existing staff even more, as almost certainly that staff would have been preferred to be involved, to have preferred to been given the opportunity to develop those skills. On the other hand, while it would be nice for employers to encourage that sort of thing, an IT professional should not cop-out on the employer's failure to facilitate; that IT professional should go develop those skills anyway. Even if not used for the employer's benefit, it'll be a lot easier finding a new job if the technical skills are current.