Live data from Hacker News

Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

codemanship.co.uk

51–60 of 87 posts

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#51

So the solution to increased cost of education is apprenticeship? Is this part of the current trend at bashing higher education to make sure that we become obedient but efficient drones? There is a lot of things broken in higher education, but saying that hiring a CS/SE graduate for a developer position is like hiring a theoretical physicist to repair a car is disingenuous at best. Guess what, graduate students who w…

A graduate student is a bit different from a student just getting a bachelor's degree, which is where this article is focusing.

Well, here are a few quotes from the article that seem to target students who have more than a bachelor degree:

"So much so that, for some subjects, employers now require at least a Master's degree."

"I think CS and SE lecturers could learn a thing or two from me about writing good software."

"Many of the CS graduates I know suck as software developers, too."

"Hiring a computer science graduate for a programming role is, to me at least, like hiring a theoretical physicist to fix your car. "

"Just as there are countless CS graduates who have a theoretical grasp of compiler design but have never design a language or implemented a compiler."

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#52

Posing Apprenticeships as a significant alternative to higher education is delusional. First because a true apprenticeship requires a contractual relationship between the apprentice and the master. That sort of contract is extremely problematic to modern business entities because it does not allow flexibility in staffing levels, requires a significant investment in training (several years), and because indentured ser…

This isn't just a hypothetical approach. In the Software Craftsmanship community, consultancies have run apprenticeship programs for years with very good results. Scaling to large businesses might not be easy, but they certainly aren't the only game in town.

I'm proud of my CS background and I wouldn't trade it, but it's interesting to work next to terrifyingly bright guys in their 20s with deeper grasp of design and modern technology than most CS grads.

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#53

Here's my rough criteria when selecting applicants for technology roles: 1) What have you done lately that is like what I want you to do? 2) What is your attitude like? (past references very important here) 3) Have you taken some test or certification (or can we give you one) that demonstrates skills in areas we might be concerned about? From there, perhaps you can start learning , that is, it might be worthwhile to…

I freely admit that we apprenticeship supporters wave our hands around a lot while yelling "apprenticeships! apprenticeships!" without providing necessary detail. A lot of those details could be worked out along the way. I'd be more excited to see the supporters provide actual apprentice programs than details on how everyone should operate such a program.

I disagree. Knowing the details of an apprenticeship program upfront are critical to attract and retain both the "apprentices" and the "masters" necessary to make a program work. It would be unfair to both groups to have divergent programs and skill levels being passed off as apprenticeships.

There are plenty of successful models that a program could be based on. In the US, electricians require 5 years of work with a journeyman + classroom instruction. Professional Engineers require a degree in their discipline, 2 examinations, and 4 years of relevant experience, usually under a licensed engineer before they can get their PE license (its not called an apprenticeship, but an EIT - Engineer-in-Training. You are expected to learn from a more experienced engineer who is responsible for overseeing your work and providing a recommendation before you are licensed).

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#54
'Education', K-12, college, and later, is pushed and shoved by several large influences.

As in this thread, two of the influences are (1) employers want some 'criteria', maybe even 'credentials', that will simplify selecting promising employees and (2) students seeking jobs want to keep down the costs in time, money, and effort to meet such 'criteria' or to get such 'credentials'.

Broadly there should be some 'market forces' that provide answers: (1) If the education employers want is expensive, then employers will have to pay employees enough to pay for the education; (2) if the education costs more than it is worth to the employers, then students and employers will make do with less such education; (3) if students don't come for the education, then some educational institutions will have to make some changes to offer the students more value for the costs.

Such 'market force' influences are easy to see, but there are some other large influences less easy to see:

In the US, the 900 pound gorilla is the interest of Congress and the US DoD in technology for US national security.

Such was not always the case: Indeed, during the rapid rise of engineering in the decades before WWII, schools of engineering actually concentrated on teaching engineering for students seeking careers in engineering! Amazing! Radical! Astounding!

Then we had WWII and radar, sonar, and the bomb, right, the atomic bomb, and Ike and other influentials concluded that "Never again will US academics be permitted to operate independently of the US military" or some such. Congress went along, that is, pulled out the US national checkbook, and started signing.

Then the top three dozen US research universities got an offer they couldn't refuse: Take the US Federal money for research in math, physical science, and engineering, with a tilt toward what might be useful for US national security, or cease to be a leading research university. They took the money!

Now, for such a university, for the money, the most important activity on campus is research, research, and research as in "How do I get a grant?", especially, now, from the NSF, DoE (that is, energy, not education!), or DARPA. Since then Congress has also provided money to the NIH and its grants -- you see, there are a lot of old people in Congress eager to see progress on some of the serious diseases of old age and ..., well you can see the connection!

Now for this 'research', there are some examples and, now, a 'model': The most influential example, for both science and US national security, is physics, especially as for the bomb, right, the atomic bomb and now, too, the hydrogen bomb. So, 'research' has a really severe case of 'physics envy', especially theoretical and mathematical physics envy. So, good 'research' is supposed to 'mathematize' a field.

So, at top three dozen US research universities, math, physical science, and engineering pursue research, research, and research with physics envy.

Yes, there was that report, yes, the David Report, that said that some of math was, well, not so applicable so soon and should, then, maybe get less money. That's why now at some of the research universities the math department has trouble keeping the lights on but is still working on the analytic-algebraic topology of the locally Euclidean metrization of infinitely differentiable Riemannian manifolds (extra credit for the source!). Math is still the most respected field, but for some decades more applicable topics in math -- e.g., probability, stochastic processes, optimization, statistics, control theory, signal processing, numerical analysis, computational fluid dynamics, computational complexity, math for finance, math for theoretical physics -- has been done outside the 'pure' math departments.

Now it turns out that somehow some huge fraction of good students are really eager to get their bachelor's degrees from such research universities. So, the universities can be very 'selective' so that employers can get some of the 'criteria' they want just by a student being admitted to such a university!

But the students are being taught mostly just by professors interested mostly just in narrow, leading edge research to get grants. So, the education is not really about, say, engineering for engineering students who want jobs in engineering! Instead, in, say, computer science, the education might be closer to background for research in 'the fundamentals of computing', not that we really know what they are but some people would like to!

How to work through the security model of SQL Server for SQL Server installation, administration, and management? Professors can't get grants for mud wrestling with the messed up SQL Server security model or its just awful documentation and terrible problems with installation, management, and administration and, thus, mostly DON'T! So if someone actually wants actually to actually work with an actual, real installation of SQL Server for a real, actual, important, practical database application, in the real world, outside of academics, as part of a career, that can pay enough to buy a house and support a family, then the professors in a research university are not a very direct sources of such information!

Still good students like to go to research universities.

Then there is the money, that is, what the universities charge. So, tuition has gone up, way up, over the last few decades, up faster than even health care! Why? Well, there's a dirty little secret! What has gone up is the published, 'list price'! But there are also 'discounts', especially for good students, called 'scholarships'! So, if the student's father is wealthy and the student only so-so as a student, then go ahead and charge list price! While this student pays list price, they can also do well in their studies in beer and bed! But for a really good student, especially with poor parents, there are scholarships.

In the US, there are also many colleges and universities that don't try to be top research universities and concentrate on teaching.

And there are many community colleges where 'job training' is the goal and not a dirty word and where there are courses in auto repair, auto body repair, framing carpentry, finish carpentry, masonry, cosmetology, plumbing, electricity, HVAC, and, yes, computer programming and network management. Tuition is low; the courses are fully intended to be practical; the teachers are not researchers and are often practitioners.

For computer science, there is a secret: The more advanced parts of computer science have been heavily 'mathematized'. So, net, the best background for such material actually is not even in the computer science department but in the math department, especially a course in, say, abstract algebra.

Next, for a career, e.g., in computing, there is now a big, dark, ugly secret: 'Jobs' are no longer such a good idea! E.g., the Stanford AI course got interest from 50,000 students in 175 countries! So, generally, if take some material in college and look for a job, then here in the US, both you and your employer will be competing with thousands of eager people in 175 foreign countries!

Meanwhile here in the US the people buying houses and getting their children through college will, may I have the envelope, please? Yes, here it is: Often they will own their own Main Street business where they have a geographical barrier to entry and, thus, no competition more than, say, 100 miles away. In particular they will have no competition from anyone in any of those 175 foreign countries.

So, what future for computing in the US? Broadly, gotta do something new, out there, on the leading edge in at least some respect, something entrepreneurial, something you can't get hired for because the guy hiring doesn't understand that new thing yet. So, have to be an entrepreneur. For that, something in advanced computing might help. Then, just getting 'skills' with, say, Linux, C++, Java, Python, MySQL, SQL Server, Flash, HTML5, etc. is 'routine', maybe at some point necessary but not sufficient.

Just what should such new stuff be and just how to get help from a research university? No one really knows! Welcome to the challenge of the future!

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#55

Posing Apprenticeships as a significant alternative to higher education is delusional. First because a true apprenticeship requires a contractual relationship between the apprentice and the master. That sort of contract is extremely problematic to modern business entities because it does not allow flexibility in staffing levels, requires a significant investment in training (several years), and because indentured ser…

The difficulty in differentiating between individuals and in determining each person's unique skill set before they are on the job is the reason all soldiers go through the same basic training and then are assigned to their specialties

At least in the US, that's definitely not how it works. Enlisted folk take the ASVAB before even joining. Based on those scores, they select what job they want to do before even signing on the dotted line. Recruiters are infamous for lying to enlistees about what jobs are actually like, or about whether enlistees will be able to change rates after/during bootcamp. In my experience (as an officer), most enlistees feel cheated by the system, but must "suck it up" because it's the military and they've signed away their life.

Officers join either via ROTC/Service Academy or OCS. With OCS, all officers are assigned their specialties before signing on the dotted lines. (Imagine if a doctor had to join without being guaranteed a spot as a doctor!) In ROTC or a Service Acacademy, officers have 4 years of training before they select which community to join. About 1/2 the officer corps joins this way, so about 5% of the overall military.

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#56
I'm an self taught programmer from Germany and since leaving school I have been working as a free lancer.

Some time ago I decided that doing the free lance is a little to stressful for me (you know, customer acquisition, taxes, business overhaed) so I talked to some friends of mine who work as "normal" office developers. They all said something like "yeah, any company should be happy to have you working for them" and so I started so send out applications.

Guess what: The HR guys won't even look at my CV without any sort of official paper. Be it a CS diploma or a finished apprenticeship (yes, in Germany we have programmer apprenticeships) - without that not even an interview.

So what I'm thinking now about is doing the 3 year apprenticeships. Only to get a paper that says "yeah, that guy knows how to spell Java and knows what ISO norm 23542 is" (programmer apprenticeships isn't more than that in Germany). Oh happy time - where I will spend the next 3 years and "learn" nonsense I already know or I don't want to know. And my classmates will be ~17 years old.

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#57

Posing Apprenticeships as a significant alternative to higher education is delusional. First because a true apprenticeship requires a contractual relationship between the apprentice and the master. That sort of contract is extremely problematic to modern business entities because it does not allow flexibility in staffing levels, requires a significant investment in training (several years), and because indentured ser…

To your point about military specialties, the range of military occupation specialties that an enlistment candidate is qualified for is determined by the enlistee's ASVAB score at the time of enlistment, not their performance during training. It is true that during training, enlistees undergo further testing (DLAB, etc...) to identify candidates for specialized and rare positions like linguists and such. And some lucky, high-scoring enlistees are given their choice of jobs prior to enlisting as an incentive for signing on the dotted line. But the bulk of enlistees are already pre-destined for an assignment, based on the needs of the service -based on body-count, not test scores-, the day they step off the bus for basic training.

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A graduate student is a bit different from a student just getting a bachelor's degree, which is where this article is focusing.

Well, here are a few quotes from the article that seem to target students who have more than a bachelor degree: "So much so that, for some subjects, employers now require at least a Master's degree." "I think CS and SE lecturers could learn a thing or two from me about writing good software." "Many of the CS graduates I know suck as software developers, too." "Hiring a computer science graduate for a programming role…

Not sure if you're American, but "graduates" typically means "one who graduates from a Bachelor's program", at least in this context.

Most of your selected quotes are (probably) referring to programmers who only have a Bachelor's in CS.

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A graduate student is a bit different from a student just getting a bachelor's degree, which is where this article is focusing.

Well, here are a few quotes from the article that seem to target students who have more than a bachelor degree: "So much so that, for some subjects, employers now require at least a Master's degree." "I think CS and SE lecturers could learn a thing or two from me about writing good software." "Many of the CS graduates I know suck as software developers, too." "Hiring a computer science graduate for a programming role…

[deleted]

Re: Apprenticeships - Employers Must Get Past Degree Snobbery

#60
post #34
post #18

Imagine you offered a job position of "software apprentice" and say you got a thousand responses. How would you identify the ones that would be worth gambling on ? - there would be little to nothing to differentiate candidates. By and large you'll have candidates who didn't do well at school (because those who do well at school tend to go to university), have never done anything to show that they're capable of long t…

How is that different from any other job application? The job will clearly go to the boss's nephew, who is totally great at computer stuff because he plays so much WoW. (Though it is a well known fact that the best middle management comes from Eve Online). Seriously, you will generally want to look for people who are intelligent and good at abstract thinking. In my biased opinion, you should be shooting for the best…

When you're hiring someone who's completed an undergraduate degree in CS you have lots more information

At the CV level:

1) A university which has filtered out bad candidates for you, which university/degree you got is a good quality filter

2) An undergraduate thesis which has been chosen by the individual, both the topic and the complexity are good indicators of the candidate (did they build a website or did they implement a new GC algorithm)

3) Internships (did they spend the summer work at McDs or Google)

4) Open source / spare time projects

At the interview level:

1) An ability to write code, you can directly test if they're capable of taking a problem and turning it into a solution (aka fizzbuzz). This is a very distinct skills and no-ones come up with a good way of predicting ability in it despite numerous attempts.

2) An understanding of abstract data structures, again it's very hard to test if someone can understand concepts like call stacks and hashtables without being able to test those things directly.

That's a hell of a lot more information than you'll have with 18 year olds or even with humanities majors (incidentally I assume you classifying math as a humanity was in error).

Of those firms I know who hire non-CS grads to do programming most of them require some experience with programming (which tends to cover most maths, physics and engineering students). Very very few companies try to hire completely unexperienced programmers.

Post reply on HN