421–430 of 668 posts
So her claim is that going to t top tier university is a complete waste of time and money, because boot camp graduates end up being just as capable? What are top tier universities doing to keep being competitive with those low cost boot camps? It seems to me for the additional money, they should be able to provide some additional value?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I said engineering, and I meant engineering. Not computer science. See https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/table-of-the-day-bachelors-de... to verify that in 2016, just under 21% of engineering degrees were given to women. The figures for the mid 1980s were almost the same. But if you can find figures, in the mid-1960s, engineering degrees were almost exclusively given to men. The ratios have been fairly constant in recen…
> For example recursion, pointers, closures, and class hierarchies. > My suspicion is that one or more of these concepts is more of a barrier for women than men. Seems like quite a stretch, given that those are all concepts created by mathematics, which women have long excelled in - after all, women were the original "computers" before we had machines to automate calculations. Add to that that the hard sciences like…
Doing rote arithmetic is nothing like doing mathematics. Doing manual calculations is nothing like being a programmer. The activities have zero resemblance. Also, advanced mathematics degrees (i.e. Masters and above) have the same gender parity as computer science. Undergrad mathematics degrees has a more balanced gender parity, but this is explained by a large proportion of those women going on to become teachers.
So her claim is that going to t top tier university is a complete waste of time and money, because boot camp graduates end up being just as capable? What are top tier universities doing to keep being competitive with those low cost boot camps? It seems to me for the additional money, they should be able to provide some additional value?
Students from top tier universities go on to jobs where their education is actually useful. (Usually; there are always a number that don't quite make it.) Somebody has to write all the system software, database engines, compilers, and frameworks that the boot camp graduates use to do their jobs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I said engineering, and I meant engineering. Not computer science. See https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/table-of-the-day-bachelors-de... to verify that in 2016, just under 21% of engineering degrees were given to women. The figures for the mid 1980s were almost the same. But if you can find figures, in the mid-1960s, engineering degrees were almost exclusively given to men. The ratios have been fairly constant in recen…
My point was that this article is specifically using the term engineering in the sense of computer science. Using engineering as a whole is misleading because as I have demonstrated, software engineering had a historically larger amount of women which faced a decline post-80s. It's burying the lede to make a point about something as a whole rather than the specifics of the article. Also, your point about those langua…
How much resemblance does software engineering pre-80's and post-80's have with each other? Furthermore, how much generalizations can one make when the sample size is small? Presumably when computer programming first became a distinct activity, the pool of players were significantly smaller than it currently is.
Regarding the enrollment chart, as recently as 2015 CS was the most popular undergraduate major among women at Stanford University: https://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/10/12/computer-science-no...
One year later: https://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/11/08/graphic-gender-rati... It would seem declared majors aren't following through to the end of their programs.
It appears to be slightly lower (26% vs. 30%) on the 2016 chart because that chart includes grad students.
However, even if the percentage of undergrad majors had dropped from 2015 to 2016, that by itself wouldn't tell us anything about the retention or graduation rate over time, since we don't know what the breakdown was for 2015 graduates, CS majors declared or dropped in 2016, etc..
With such politically charged issues, it's always a problem of people wanting to believe something is possible (and mandatory to pursue) banging their heads against what is true and actually possible. If the percentage of female computer science graduates (as a strong proxy for the available candidate population) is 18% (Google for the facts and stats), how is every company to hit an idealistic goal of 50% representa…
Perhaps employers can expand the search to those with degrees in statistics, mathematics, physics, econometrics?
What I've seen time and time again is that when people dont want to hire, they come up with excuse after excuse. When they really want to hire [a VP's brother-in-low, or whatever], even the flimsiest of cases suddenly get made for the hire.
I'd say, we should look think bigger.
One thing I've found very interesting is that even though the majority of software developers in an enterprise or organization are male, with the ratio being as high as 80/20, the ratio of male to female managers directly managing software developers is closer to 50/50. I would say this is evidence of bias in favor of women. edited for clarity
I'm curious where you got that measurement from. It's quite common to overestimate small fractions, do see 3/10 and believe it's half, because one stops noticing the multiplicity of the majority.
With such politically charged issues, it's always a problem of people wanting to believe something is possible (and mandatory to pursue) banging their heads against what is true and actually possible. If the percentage of female computer science graduates (as a strong proxy for the available candidate population) is 18% (Google for the facts and stats), how is every company to hit an idealistic goal of 50% representa…
>> If the percentage of female computer science graduates (as a strong proxy for the available candidate population) is 18% Perhaps employers can expand the search to those with degrees in statistics, mathematics, physics, econometrics? What I've seen time and time again is that when people dont want to hire, they come up with excuse after excuse. When they really want to hire [a VP's brother-in-low, or whatever], ev…
With such politically charged issues, it's always a problem of people wanting to believe something is possible (and mandatory to pursue) banging their heads against what is true and actually possible. If the percentage of female computer science graduates (as a strong proxy for the available candidate population) is 18% (Google for the facts and stats), how is every company to hit an idealistic goal of 50% representa…
>> If the percentage of female computer science graduates (as a strong proxy for the available candidate population) is 18% Perhaps employers can expand the search to those with degrees in statistics, mathematics, physics, econometrics? What I've seen time and time again is that when people dont want to hire, they come up with excuse after excuse. When they really want to hire [a VP's brother-in-low, or whatever], ev…
Not only is there a financial incentive (if you get people new to the field, you can pay them less until they get a new job or sufficient raises, and this is a benefit for both parties due to the lessened educational cost), it also creates loyalty out of almost nothing.
If not university classes or a bootcamp-like setup, apprenticeships would probably work amazingly for the purpose.