useless degrees

[nakatago]

Besides, and what also stroke me only some time after reading JR8's post... to say 3 years useless studies and wasting time... It's sounds like a lame excuse for lazy primary or secondary school students you could find in hundred of memes all over the Internet. Because Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and whoever he or she is including JR8 have been successful in achieving their goals without a degree it does not mean everybody is going to be. It requires a set of skills or better a character independent on any degree related courses. You can be a wealthy person (I guess this is the criteria) barely finishing primary school. Unfortunately majority of the useless education thinkers for some reason do not end up wealthy and it looks like those who wasted 3 or more years are as per average more successful.

Talent.

JR8 may be talented in making money (millionaire by 30? holy cremoley) but those blokes who'd spam the forum about a business opportunity thinking recruiting people to directly sell expensive soap...not so much.

[x9200]

What would a degree in Ancient Aztec literature bring to the economy.

Why should it always bring something (significant I assume) to the economy? Where would you draw the line of something being useful and something else not? By hard cash value?

Some people take degrees without knowing what they'll do after they graduate. Will they teach? Will they go to other countries for research? Will they write books? Hard cash isn't always the line; knowledge will always bring something to the economy but the point I was trying to make is that some people don't think things through. It's the classic joke about English literature majors only able to get jobs as fast food crew if they will not teach.

Same I guess for any native speaker philology majors but then so what? If they can sustain themselves, are not parasites with the entitlement complex blaming everybody for their faith (none of thes has anything to do with the education) this is their way and nobody's business. Some of them will also contribute directly or indirectly to the economy making other people more happy and not necessary by serving them hamburgers.
Career planning is not a panacea. I planned something different for myself and ended up in a very different place and I am not really unhappy for that reason.
I must admit had this kind unconditional quasi-pragmatic thinking for long time but managed to outgrow it a bit. What a useless person is a professional golf player? No skills of any kind that may positively contribute to every day REAL problems of humanity.

[Aragorn2000]

I don't know, wouldn't you hire somebody who had actually studied IT? That makes no sense, my husband is an engineer and that does indeed show that he is capable of 4 years of rigorous study and passing exams at a high level but it doesn't mean he can program or be a doctor or teach history. It means he can be an engineer. If engineering degrees in India simply prove somebody is capable of study then they have no merit in the real world because you could raise that bar and state only neurosurgeons should apply for IT. Your engineering degree should get you a top notch job in engineering otherwise it could be viewed as a bit of a fail and a waste of your parent's money.

The thing about IT is it is very dynamic and even colleges in India that teach CS are not always uptodate with technology.

You can ask any IT guy and he will tell you that is a continuous learning process. So its not just learn something once and it will be with you forever. In fact in IT, more often than not, what you actually learn in college, even if it is IT specific is useless. Hence the ability to learn new, analytic capability etc are important to IT. Engineers have these qualities.

In case of classic engineering jobs, its different I guess, a civil engineer for example learns most of fundamental and essential stuff in college and he cant do without it. Thats simply not the case with IT.

Heck, the previous UK based specialist IT consulting company that I worked, didnt even conduct any technical tests for recruitment.
There had something called as assessment centre where you spend a whole day in office and they test your analytical skills, presentation skills, group discussion etc.

sorry Wd40, I must say this is totally BS.
In every interview that I was involved in as an interviewer, the first thing I gave a candidate is a laptop and say "Please, code your solution right here, right now".
More often than not, non CS candidates would say "No, I would not do it. You have no right to ask me this. My exp is beyond a mere coder. Ask me about presentation skills, soft skills, blah blah".
And I would show this candidate the door..

[ecureilx]

.... You can ask any IT guy and he will tell you that is a continuous learning process. So its not just learn something once and it will be with you forever. In fact in IT, more often than not, what you actually learn in college, even if it is IT specific is useless. Hence the ability to learn new, analytic capability etc are important to IT. Engineers have these qualities.
...

Dont' want to get dragged into the rest of the points, but recently in our Staff Seminar, a question brought up was those who are joining he work force in IT area start off with a pay of 3,000 or more, as per some statistics .. when there was a vibrant conversation going on, whether is true or not .. I just mentioned that today's IT graduates or even any Engineering discipline graduates come out with more than Basic stuff- more institutions include CCNA/MCSE and the like into the base course, so you come out with more than the fundamentals .. and more often than not, most engineering discipline forces you to be not just computer literate but a few end up developing applications and programs, even thought the course is not IT .. (except maybe chemical ? Apologies to X9200)

that's vs somebody who came out from Uni like say 10 years ago, with only the very basis stuff and had to get into the work force to get 'real world experience' and was offered a lower pay since the candidate had to 'learn'

Pardon me if that's out of context ..

[Wd40]

I don't know, wouldn't you hire somebody who had actually studied IT? That makes no sense, my husband is an engineer and that does indeed show that he is capable of 4 years of rigorous study and passing exams at a high level but it doesn't mean he can program or be a doctor or teach history. It means he can be an engineer. If engineering degrees in India simply prove somebody is capable of study then they have no merit in the real world because you could raise that bar and state only neurosurgeons should apply for IT. Your engineering degree should get you a top notch job in engineering otherwise it could be viewed as a bit of a fail and a waste of your parent's money.

The thing about IT is it is very dynamic and even colleges in India that teach CS are not always uptodate with technology.

You can ask any IT guy and he will tell you that is a continuous learning process. So its not just learn something once and it will be with you forever. In fact in IT, more often than not, what you actually learn in college, even if it is IT specific is useless. Hence the ability to learn new, analytic capability etc are important to IT. Engineers have these qualities.

In case of classic engineering jobs, its different I guess, a civil engineer for example learns most of fundamental and essential stuff in college and he cant do without it. Thats simply not the case with IT.

Heck, the previous UK based specialist IT consulting company that I worked, didnt even conduct any technical tests for recruitment.
There had something called as assessment centre where you spend a whole day in office and they test your analytical skills, presentation skills, group discussion etc.

sorry Wd40, I must say this is totally BS.
In every interview that I was involved in as an interviewer, the first thing I gave a candidate is a laptop and say "Please, code your solution right here, right now".
More often than not, non CS candidates would say "No, I would not do it. You have no right to ask me this. My exp is beyond a mere coder. Ask me about presentation skills, soft skills, blah blah".
And I would show this candidate the door..

The example I gave was about a specific IT consulting firm. The consultants there are top notch earning over 1000 pounds a day for 5 years experience, they are way above your average coder. They go to the clients place and work on all aspects of the problem, not just coding using someone else's specification.

BTW, what salary were you offering? you throw peanuts you get monkeys.Considering how poor the salaries are in Singapore, you have more monkeys here. Top talent go to better countries.

[nakatago]

Why should it always bring something (significant I assume) to the economy? Where would you draw the line of something being useful and something else not? By hard cash value?

Some people take degrees without knowing what they'll do after they graduate. Will they teach? Will they go to other countries for research? Will they write books? Hard cash isn't always the line; knowledge will always bring something to the economy but the point I was trying to make is that some people don't think things through. It's the classic joke about English literature majors only able to get jobs as fast food crew if they will not teach.

Same I guess for any native speaker philology majors but then so what? If they can sustain themselves, are not parasites with the entitlement complex blaming everybody for their faith (none of thes has anything to do with the education) this is their way and nobody's business. Some of them will also contribute directly or indirectly to the economy making other people more happy and not necessary by serving them hamburgers.
Career planning is not a panacea. I planned something different for myself and ended up in a very different place and I am not really unhappy for that reason.
I must admit had this kind unconditional quasi-pragmatic thinking for long time but managed to outgrow it a bit. What a useless person is a professional golf player? No skills of any kind that may positively contribute to every day REAL problems of humanity.

That's touches upon what I said. If they can sustain themselves, good for them. Not a lot can, unfortunately and end up painting themselves into a corner. That's what I said about not thinking things through. It doesn't have to be a very concrete plan.

Going back to my earlier point, one may have a "useless" degree and still have "useful" skills, most likely obtained through different means. One example I could think of is Jamie Hyneman of Mythbusters fame. His degree is a BA in Russian literature. He however, ended up becoming a fishing boat captain, scuba diver, special effects maker, businessman, TV celebrity, inventor. I doubt he was waving around his Russian lit degree to get jobs. Maybe he got stuck in a crappy job and one point and decided to learn other things. That's just it--there's more than one path to an education.

[JR8]

If everybody in this world could afford to go to top notch colleges, then the value of the degree becomes lot lesser than it is.

When I was growing up in England, maybe 10% of school leavers went on to tertiary education. Those who went tended to be academic, and they studied what they wished to pursue as a later career.

That largely changed under Tony Blair. He did away with 'free' tertiary education, and introduced student loans. Secondary exams (O and a levels) were dumbed down so everyone barring the village idiot got straight A's. Polytechnics all got rebranded as universities.

Yes, you really could go and spend 3 years studying Surfboard Technology at the university of Stoke Poges.

[sarcasm] Great success!! [/] Tony Blair gets to claim more people than ever before are going to university due to his policies.

The flip-side being most are studying things of no value to them, and are starting their working lives saddled under huge debts. The other offshoot was frustration... 'I'm a graduate, but I can't even afford to buy my own home!!!'

[Sooner8]

Yes, you really could go and spend 3 years studying Surfboard Technology at the university of Stoke Poges.

[sarcasm] Great success!! [/] Tony Blair gets to claim more people than ever before are going to university due to his policies.

I'm afraid the USS of A is on the same track (lefty govts are like that) .. making college a "must" for every one to compete in the 21st century. Yep, plumbers need IT/college (for more lefty propaganda). So, that a vast majority will exit college with huge loans. Of course Govt bailouts are always there, and an entire generation/voting bloc keeps suckling on TPTB. Of course, govt bailouts must be in the Bill of Rights (fine print section), just like universal healthcare.

[Aragorn2000]

BTW, what salary were you offering? you throw peanuts you get monkeys.Considering how poor the salaries are in Singapore, you have more monkeys here. Top talent go to better countries.

I don't know since I wasn't the hiring manager. I guess it was decent though. The candidates who turned up for interview weren't only locals but also from UK and HK.

[Strong Eagle]

I don't know, wouldn't you hire somebody who had actually studied IT? That makes no sense, my husband is an engineer and that does indeed show that he is capable of 4 years of rigorous study and passing exams at a high level but it doesn't mean he can program or be a doctor or teach history. It means he can be an engineer. If engineering degrees in India simply prove somebody is capable of study then they have no merit in the real world because you could raise that bar and state only neurosurgeons should apply for IT. Your engineering degree should get you a top notch job in engineering otherwise it could be viewed as a bit of a fail and a waste of your parent's money.

As an engineer who has also done four years of rigorous study, it definitely means he could program. An engineering degree equips one with many skills transferable to many different disciplines.

a) Engineering is about math, and even undergrads get exposed to a lot of complex math. One learns to think critically and to problem solve, both essential elements of a good programmer.

b) Engineers learn about systems, systems of equations, the relationships between all the moving parts, whether it's civil, mechanical, chemical, or electrical. Engineers can synthesize the big picture, another essential ingredient to being a good programmer.

c) Engineers, at least at the good schools, learn about projects and risk. Engineers design and build stuff. The concepts of project and risk management are very useful in programming, particularly if you are leading the project.

Learning to program is not actually very difficult. Once you get past the basics, a book or two of programming methodologies gives one sufficient tools to write just about anything... things like sorts, linked lists, memory management, object structures... all of this will be very natural to an engineer.

There are so many different careers in information technology that it is totally useless for someone to say, "I'm in IT."

[Wd40]

Excellent post SE,

To add, engineering is also about efficiency. I am an electronics engineer and I will say that if one thing that this degree has given me, is to think of doing stuff with the absolutely least amount of possible resources. I think its the digital electronics and chip design classes, where we are taught to make the most of the limited real estate on the silicon chip.

[Hannieroo]

Possibly. But surely a good engineer is guaranteed to be better at engineering than IT as a whole?

[Sergei82]

Possibly. But surely a good engineer is guaranteed to be better at engineering than IT as a whole?

I guess, saying "I'm an engineer" does not give any more information than saying "I'm in IT". Probably, engineering is even more blurred.

[Hannieroo]

True, the field is large and diverse.

[Sergei82]

True, the field is large and diverse.

So don't you know that there are titles such as Software Engineer, Programming Engineer etc?