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

Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

sloanreview.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 467 posts

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#211

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

JakeTheAndroid wrote: post #202
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you try to study some of those broader topics, you're a sucker - don't study philosophy when an extra accounting or STEM course would be a "better" use of your time. So you super specialize and then after 4 years of college and 5 years in industry you're burnt out you have few other skills, so the only option is to get back onto the education treadmill to bet on another highly specific vocation where you once…

I think this is really dependent on your choice of field to enter into. In the tech space, so many engineers didn't major or necessarily even take CS courses in college. I have interviewed and hired plenty of people with diverse colligate focuses. Sure, CS or STEM courses are probably really solid to pair with a non-CS major because it teaches you stuff that helps extend your abilities in your own field. So I can see…

CS, being still a bit of a wild west, still has flexibility, but you definitely couldn't take some nursing courses (which, let's be honest, aren't even offered) and switch to that after burning out in comp sci.

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#212

Post by AcerbicZero »

Maybe I just had a different career path, but so far it seems that my job is learning, and the work is a byproduct of that.

I spent a bunch of years in the USAR doing basic computer stuff, both in training, and then learning from others as I went along. I was the US Army version of a general purpose "IT" fellow. Once I got out of the military and I interviewed at a few private sector jobs I realized I was not overly well equipped for IT, but if I could show I wanted to learn they would usually bring me on-board. I did desktop support for ~2 years before I landed a veryyyy basic SysAdmin job. I did that for a year, and rolled it into a real SysAdmin job. Did that for a year and turned it into a Server Engineer job (Super sysadmin?) I did that for ~2 years....you can kind of see where this is going.

I've been out of the military for ~10 years now, and every job I've had has been about learning, (and then learning that my current job wasn't going to pay me what I was actually worth) while trying something new. I got paid to "learn" every step of the way. It just wasn't a direct "learn X and you get Y" process, but even then, most companies offered some level of college reimbursement (I never really did that college thing) or will pay for certifications/training, and really, IT is one of the few fields I can think of where all of the knowledge needed to do it is open, accessible, and available to everyone.

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#213

Post by cfqycwz »

Braggadocious wrote: post #82
Bootwizard wrote: post #9

I'm currently a frontend engineer. I told my team lead a while back that I'd like to transition to the server side, especially since our server team is woefully understaffed and our frontend team is overstaffed. He told me "Sure but you'll need to learn all that stuff on your own time". So I never did it because I'm interested in doing other things at home.

You ever think about how much we subsidize businesses by paying for college ourselves? The older I get the more I think the university to corporation pipeline is a fucking racket. It also sucks for employees because here comes these kids who were allowed to learn about all the new technologies you wish you knew with zero distractions and other obligations, now comin' in hot on your heels to take yer jobs en masse, an…

The state de-funding of the university is great for corporations in a lot of ways. First, as you note, it's a way of getting you to pay for your own job training.

It's also a clever way for tech companies to externalize a lot of their R&D costs—because academic labs often rely on private grant funding more than the state, corporations can determine research priorities by extending grants, and then have the costs of that research partially subsidized by tuition-paying students!

This is an interesting talk on the subject. Haven't listened to it in a while but it really shaped my thinking about the university while I was a student: https://wearemany.org/a/2014/06/fall-of-faculty

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#214

Post by thrav »

downerending wrote: post #192
rectang wrote: post #76

I'm currently negotiating with two potential employers, one of them one of the bigs. It would be great if they would pay me to learn at work, but I don't feel like I'm in a position to ask for that — that's an industry=wide problem. So I'm trying to hack the system to get fewer hours: 30-32 per week. That gives me enough time to self-study, handle some of my own training and overdeliver, yet still have a life. I have…

Voice of experience: Companies are incapable of thinking this way. Instead, take the 40 and simply siphon off 8-10 for your personal education. As long as you're not actually working for a different company during this time, it's all good. If company doesn't like it, move on.

Yep. Prove that you can do your job in less time, and use the slack for learning. Dip out early on days you need to speak at things. Work from home on days you know will be slow and do learning while no one is around.

It’s not difficult to pull that off at a big company.

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#215

Post by JakeTheAndroid »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #211
JakeTheAndroid wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is really dependent on your choice of field to enter into. In the tech space, so many engineers didn't major or necessarily even take CS courses in college. I have interviewed and hired plenty of people with diverse colligate focuses. Sure, CS or STEM courses are probably really solid to pair with a non-CS major because it teaches you stuff that helps extend your abilities in your own field. So I can see…

CS, being still a bit of a wild west, still has flexibility, but you definitely couldn't take some nursing courses (which, let's be honest, aren't even offered) and switch to that after burning out in comp sci.

fair point.

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#216

Post by randomidiot666 »

whateveracct wrote: post #196
ken wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m amazed to hear this from programmers. You can learn this for free, anywhere, at any time. I’m no longer in software and when I want to upgrade my skills, I’m doing it on my own time and my own dime. Often doubly so if I have to take time off work (hourly) for training.

I don't want to spend my time outside work hours developing skills needed for my job. That's effectively the job stealing my time and money.

And those who do, have a competitive edge over you. It's an investment in yourself that qualifies you to leave and find a better paying job.

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#217

Post by hstreet »

adamsea wrote: post #180
leshow wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very pessimistic world view. I found in the engineering faculty that the subjects we were taught were very broad. However, I continued to learn on my own in my free time after I got my degree. I've been doing this consistently for the last 8 years or so. I now have completely new skills and much more depth on knowledge on CS topics than I had coming out of university.

The point is that while for you it is your choice and pleasure to spend your free time doing something with a direct career benefit, for others, there are often other valid and important uses of their free time and so there is a cost to that. The question is if that cost an individual occurs if they choose not to spend their free time on career-related skills is ethical or good for society.

I believe this is the crux of the problem - it favours people with minimal external life factors or responsibility, and they’re quite often the ones to rise to power, therefore creating a “well it was good enough for me” sentiment lacking empathy.

While by contrast, there are some people who want to kick back and simply collect a pay check, there is a whole segment of people in the middle ground who are hungry to learn, but are stretched so thin that they can’t outside of work — a whole segment that isn’t being catered for, and therefore an opportunity exists to tap into this.

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#218

Post by yters »

hueving wrote: post #206
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you try to study some of those broader topics, you're a sucker - don't study philosophy when an extra accounting or STEM course would be a "better" use of your time. So you super specialize and then after 4 years of college and 5 years in industry you're burnt out you have few other skills, so the only option is to get back onto the education treadmill to bet on another highly specific vocation where you once…

Most STEM courses aren't vocational training and aren't super specialized. I think you might have a biased negative view for what STEM courses are? Edit: Let me state it a different way that might shed more light on my point. A CS major can pass all of his/her classes with a perfect GPA and still be incapable of writing software ready for a production system (even at small scale). The STEM degrees emphasize fundament…

For some value of 'super specialized' you are correct. For a value that includes the bigger perspective on our culture and what it means to live a good life, an exclusive focus on STEM is indeed 'super specialized'.

Re: Learning at work is work, and we must make space for it

#219

Post by hinkley »

knightofmars wrote: post #126
rvense wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your lead made a mistake there. Someone with understanding of both FE and BE is worth as much as one of each, especially when they have intimate knowledge of your actual code.

>Someone with understanding of both FE and BE is worth as much as one of each... Someone with understanding of both FE and BE is valuable in certain situations. Companies love the idea of a "full stack engineer" because they believe they are getting two for the price of one. But in practice, and accounting for exceptions, that's not necessarily the case. A full-time FE with equal experience will be better at the fron…

It's often the case that a company decides to filter down the infinite possibilities of the programming world to a strict subset. What's left can often be a little boring, and that's on purpose.

So in a world where your choices are 1) learn other tech within our toolbox or 2) learn stuff in your domain but outside of the scope of your current work... only one of those is okay to do much of on work time.

All those ES2018 features and CSS variables may be cool things a front-end engineer should be learning, but if we have to support older browsers then I don't get to use any of it.

Post reply on HN