Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

news.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 77 posts

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#51

Post by dikdik »

Nrsolis wrote: post #41
dikdik wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I just finished my MS in Bioinformatics at Johns Hopkins University and completed it 100% online. The program is meant for working professionals and there were also students taking classes both on-campus and online, and students taking all classes on-campus. I'm on the job hunt now, really hoping people do not frown on the degree. However, I would still look curiously at someone who received a doctorate online.

How did you like the JHU program? I'm genuinely curious about the rigor and experience with the school.

I enjoyed the program for the most part. I come from a life sciences background and found the biology based courses to be slightly boring/review. The CS courses were definitely challenging for me, I only had minor programming experience in Python going in.

However, I would avoid doing it 100% online if possible. Courses that were review for me and/or did not require detailed discussion I would not mind taking online again. The harder courses are a different story, as well as courses that require extensive discussion. It is really difficult to troubleshoot complex problems over blackboard.

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#52

Post by [deleted] »

Nrsolis wrote: post #41
dikdik wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I just finished my MS in Bioinformatics at Johns Hopkins University and completed it 100% online. The program is meant for working professionals and there were also students taking classes both on-campus and online, and students taking all classes on-campus. I'm on the job hunt now, really hoping people do not frown on the degree. However, I would still look curiously at someone who received a doctorate online.

How did you like the JHU program? I'm genuinely curious about the rigor and experience with the school.

[deleted]

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#54

Post by Nelson69 »

p4bl0 wrote: post #39
gruez wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the reason behind the rise of "business admin & mgmt"?

My guess would be that it is easier to bullshit a diploma in "business admin & mgmt" than in law, literature, or sciences for examples.

There is another axis that would be pretty interesting. I suspect that these "national security" types get a sizable and relatively automatic boost in pay for a PhD and it's likely not correlated to any performance or value.

Top Secret America by Dana Priest (http://www.amazon.com/Top-Secret-America-American-Security/d...) is a somewhat interesting read on it. There are some politically angled results you can take from it but one of the most obvious non-political results is that the national security apparatus employs people that tend to be better paid, live in better areas and have all those benefits (better schools for their kids, less crime, etc..) They also seem to be disproportionately white men. If you squint your eyes just right, it looks an awful lot like a jobs program for white men. The book is a few years old but as I remember it I want to say the average pay for a top secret cleared generic 'analyst' was in the $150k+ range, more if you're in a valuable specialty. Then the real kicker, most of them justify their own jobs and contracts, oversight consists of reading that justification, which I guess isn't totally unusual for government work but since they're contractors it's a little odd.. It's not performance based.

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#55

Post by dcposch »

ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #3
cafard wrote: post #2

To summarize: contractors can bill the federal government at higher rates for PhDs, without respect to the origin or meaning of that degree, and pass on some of it to the employee, so these employees are getting PhDs in the most expedient way. The main difference between now and the 20th Century is the explosion of on-line schools and the expansion of the "national security community."

So (and I'm guessing here because I really can't stand to click on a Vice link) that a lot of those PhDs are in bullshit fields like "national security studies" or similar?

Vice runs vacuous clickbait sometimes, but they've gotten a LOT better in the last few years and they also do some excellent journalism now.

In particular, their feature-length documentaries are consistently amazing, as is Vice on HBO. Shane Smith and Thomas Morton both have balls of titanium. They go places ordinary journalists would never go, figuratively and literally.

Give them a second chance.

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#56

Post by pc86 »

wfo wrote: post #46
pc86 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we're all familiar with the guy who acts like his University of Phoenix degree has launched him into the academic elite, and certain programs that are notoriously bad are and perhaps should remain a large negative signal. But to that end I've heard multiple people in hiring positions whose opinion of Georgia Tech's CS program has diminished greatly because they now view them as "that school with the online Ma…

Ask around at any university. Some classes can be taken online. These are the classes the students throw on top of an already full schedule for free credits because they know they are complete bullshit and will take zero time and effort. If I had a M.S. from Georgia Tech and actually did a degree program with other students in a class and spoke with a professor many times a week and dedicated 1-2 years of full-time s…

I think the implication that you can get an online Master's from a reputable school (Johns Hopkins, Georgia Tech, MIT, etc) by "copy paste answers off the Internet" is pretty baseless. The posts on /r/OMSCS seem to point directly to the contrary at least.

The idea that being in a physical room and speaking to a professor in person makes you more worthy of a degree is simply not accurate. A degree should be a measure of academic ability, not a measure of physical proximity and willingness to put ones life on hold for a predetermined amount of time.

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#57

Post by devonkim »

tedks wrote: post #22
mtberatwork wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has been a significant rise in advertising around the DC metro area for online schools. Usually the premise is the same: "get a degree|certification quickly in cyber- |management". Degrees (not just PhDs), certifications, etc all equate to higher billable rates for the contractor. The contractor world is probably single-handedly keeping the certification industry afloat.

To be fair, when I travel outside the DC area I still see as many ads for for-profit schools. They're certainly a huge share of metro advertisements, probably the next down from weapons systems advertisements.

A lot of these schools have historically targeted US military personnel all around the US and even abroad due to the perception of 1. Ignorance 2. funding per Montgomery GI Bill or other entitlements for service members. It's part of why the University of Phoenix was recently banned from trying to recruit US Army (or another service branch) near bases / camps I suspect.

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#58

Post by sedachv »

dcposch wrote: post #55
ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So (and I'm guessing here because I really can't stand to click on a Vice link) that a lot of those PhDs are in bullshit fields like "national security studies" or similar?

Vice runs vacuous clickbait sometimes, but they've gotten a LOT better in the last few years and they also do some excellent journalism now. In particular, their feature-length documentaries are consistently amazing, as is Vice on HBO. Shane Smith and Thomas Morton both have balls of titanium. They go places ordinary journalists would never go, figuratively and literally. Give them a second chance.

> Give them a second chance.

That is exactly what compulsive liars/sociopaths like Shane Smith want: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/03/vice-founder-famous-for-tr...

The documentaries and reporting produced by Vice are entertaining, but their standards of reporting basically make them a hipster tabloid.

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#59

Post by stonogo »

daveloyall wrote: post #53

> VICE News accessed information about the educational backgrounds of more than 90,000 people who work in the national security domain and possess a Top Secret clearance. That's the data from the OPM breach. Interesting.

That's a pretty bold unsubstantiated claim you're making there.

Re: What a PhD Really Means in the US National Security Community

#60

Post by daveloyall »

stonogo wrote: post #59
daveloyall wrote: post #53

> VICE News accessed information about the educational backgrounds of more than 90,000 people who work in the national security domain and possess a Top Secret clearance. That's the data from the OPM breach. Interesting.

That's a pretty bold unsubstantiated claim you're making there.

It's purposefully exactly as bold and unsubstantiated as the claim vice makes.

Ah, crap. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Personnel_Management... says 18-21.5 million. I was way off. :(

Post reply on HN