Grants for vocational programs are nice and all, but the damage has already been done. The huge expectation in the United States for every student to attend college - that has to be overcome for these things to be successful.
The college-for-all model isn't working
41–50 of 125 posts
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#42It's hard for me to take this article seriously with so many falsehoods. Shortage of STEM workers? Debunked: http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-crisis-i... College costs out of control? Only because states are cutting subsidies for higher education and forcing students to pay more. That said, towards the end there are some good points. It could be argued that there's a public interest in promoting hi…
> College costs out of control? Only because states are cutting subsidies for higher education and forcing students to pay more. "Oh it's true, but because of this stupid reason" != "falsehood".
Cost is not the same as price.
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure why companies ever got away from the idea that they could avoid training employees? In Silicon Valley you see the same pool of startups competing for the same pool of Rails/Backbone.js developers all because they'd rather perceive to get a complete package up front. The apprenticeship model should be re-embraced.
Fixed costs, overhead, etc, etc. Training people is super expensive when you don't even know if your company will exist in 5 years. Generally, you don't want your DBA discovering the 3rd normal form halfway through a project.
With the apprenticeship model you have a junior DBA working with a senior DBA who knows 3rd normal.
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have skilled labor shortages at the prices they're willing to pay. Every time you hear an employer claim they can't find someone for a position, inquire about the salary they're offering.
This type of bullshit seems to be widely believed on HN. I work in the engineering department of a software company and I'm closely involved with recruitment and interviews. I'll tell you this: the vast majority of people (over 95%) we turn down are unqualified, period. Meaning, we wouldn't hire them even at half the salary level advertised for the position. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what we're willing to…
In that case, it's your pre-interview screening process.
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#45It's a joke among engineers that you need to graduate from college so that you can start learning. My college experience (non-technical bachelors) was just a joke, period - high school 2.0. Still, I wouldn't have the good job I do now if I hadn't completed my degree. We keep running into this problem where employers think college degrees are more valuable than they probably are. Part of that is impressed culturally,…
I wonder if algorithmic hiring would improve this. That is companies using statistics to sort job applicants instead of just a human. Even on HN there has been discussion against this and people are scared of it but I think it would be an improvement over human biases.
The statistics would quickly show that people with minimal or no education do almost as good, and are willing to work for less, and so they just hire them instead. Or maybe see that people from "lesser" universities are just as good as those from more prestigious ones. Maybe certification agencies would compete on the basis of how well their certification actually correlates with employee performance. Schools or training agencies could compete on a similar basis.
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have skilled labor shortages at the prices they're willing to pay. Every time you hear an employer claim they can't find someone for a position, inquire about the salary they're offering.
This type of bullshit seems to be widely believed on HN. I work in the engineering department of a software company and I'm closely involved with recruitment and interviews. I'll tell you this: the vast majority of people (over 95%) we turn down are unqualified, period. Meaning, we wouldn't hire them even at half the salary level advertised for the position. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what we're willing to…
In the presence of a shortage, the value of an employee approaches infinity. I expect that you are really constrained by the amount of money your company can afford, else you'd just walk over to Google/Facebook/Microsoft/whoever and walk out with their best employees in hand. Almost nobody is going to turn down a multi-million dollar offer, if it even takes that much.
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#47It's a joke among engineers that you need to graduate from college so that you can start learning. My college experience (non-technical bachelors) was just a joke, period - high school 2.0. Still, I wouldn't have the good job I do now if I hadn't completed my degree. We keep running into this problem where employers think college degrees are more valuable than they probably are. Part of that is impressed culturally,…
A major benefit of college is a baseline of domain knowledge that will serve you in your professional career, but indeed, that’s also a major benefit of a technical program. The real disconnect is that college is also (or at least is supposed to be, or has traditionally been) a schooling in the liberal arts. Four years spent learning to think critically about society and culture as well as one's area of specialization, and to express oneself in the marketplace of ideas.
Which is just something many people don’t really care to do. And that’s fine. The problem is trying to get everyone interested in it, denying the fact that many lack interest and aptitude, and then diluting the experience for everyone while saddling the next generation with decades’ worth of debt.
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#48For those who aren't aware, this is an op-ed (meaning the newspaper doesn't stand behind any of the facts claimed) from a right-wing Koch brothers organization. Several commenters have already noted that the fundamental "fact" here, that certain vocations are experiencing major shortages (the "skills mismatch" claim) is completely false, which it is. The Great Recession stretches across all job fields and locations i…
Great that you noticed it's an op-ed by the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, but, is the college for all model working?
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#49"Meanwhile, companies in a range of sectors — manufacturing, construction, healthcare and other STEM fields — report severe skilled labor shortages." Construction and manufacturing have severe labor shortages? I'd love to see a source for that claim. In my neck of the woods, they still haven't recovered from the recession.
Master tradesmen are impossible to find. Skilled plumbers, electricians, HVAC people, welders, and some machinists make more than the average programmer and are always employed.
Also, the unemployment system is basically designed for them. If you work for someone and get laid off between projects, you still get paid. The other path is going out on your own.
Re: The college-for-all model isn't working
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
This type of bullshit seems to be widely believed on HN. I work in the engineering department of a software company and I'm closely involved with recruitment and interviews. I'll tell you this: the vast majority of people (over 95%) we turn down are unqualified, period. Meaning, we wouldn't hire them even at half the salary level advertised for the position. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what we're willing to…
"Unqualified" by what standard? What makes you think your standards are appropriate for the positions you're offering? And what makes you think your salaries are "very generous?" Lot's of companies think their salary/benefits packages are "very generous" when they're anything but. Without context your post is a giant meaningless assertion. Software developers aren't (typically) stupid. They have a reasonable idea of…
>>"Unqualified" by what standard? What makes you think your standards are appropriate for the positions you're offering?
Because we do very rigorous analysis of why successful employees are actually successful. We know what it takes to perform well at each job function.
>>And what makes you think your salaries are "very generous?" Lot's of companies think their salary/benefits packages are "very generous" when they're anything but. Without context your post is a giant meaningless assertion.
Lots of websites aggregate salaries by position and geographic region, so we know the numbers. We also have very good benefits. For instance, our 401k program is a dollar-for-dollar match up to 15% of salary, which is extremely rare.