Hacker News Reader

> Having completed both a masters in philosophy and an M.S. in computer science, I'll go as far as to say that I don't think college matters at all any more, in tech, and that's fine

I always find interesting that the most vocal proponents of the "school doesn't matter" argument are often the most educated. Why did you get an undergrad and even go as far as to get a masters? Did you come to the realization after you finished your masters?

Would you advise family members to forgo a college education since it doesn't matter? How confident are you of your convictions?

It's easy to say school doesn't matter after you've achieved all the benefits from the signaling effect

School only matters because systematic bias against non-degree holders still exists and is widely prevalent among companies. However, people only like talking about Google and Amazon because they're the biggest ones and, generally, don't hold this bias.

I think it's because a lot of these guys are self-starter learners, so they feel like they didn't learn much they couldn't have googled themselves.

"Education doesnt matter" is a much different argument than "lots of jobs shouldn't require bachelors degrees"

I get the impression that a lot of people saying that school doesn’t matter underestimate not only the signalling but also how much solid foundations make for easy learning later on.

I’ve transitioned to programming in my late 20s. First I tried to learn by doing, without any formal education, and everything was grueling and I barely understood what I was doing. Then I got some formal education, and now I have much clearer mental models of how lots of things work, vastly improving my efficiency and quality.

I’ve practiced a lot on my own too, but my side projects throughout these years would have never taught me certain topics which have actually come up in real life (most recent example I remember is graph traversal).

It’s clear that some people have an outstanding creativity and drive and can explore even remote corners of the discipline on their own. For the rest of us who still love the science, college remains a great solution.

Was reading through these comments; I'm currently planning to transition from an unrelated career in my late twenties to one in software development- wondering if I could email you some questions about your own experience perhaps? Cheers!

Prob a little late but I made this transition in my early thirties. Feel free to email me. Email in my profile

> I always find interesting that the most vocal proponents of the "school doesn't matter" argument are often the most educated.

It would be more accurate to say that those who put themselves in a career trajectory where education generally doesn't matter, unsurprisingly, find out having an education indeed does not matter. It's kind of excusable since such trajectories cover most of the software industry nowadays, but not anywhere near all of it.

Those who want a career where their education is used to its fullest extent are going to have to work at it. Those jobs are harder to find and more demanding.

We can't accept people who never went to college saying college doesn't matter, because how would they know never having experienced it?

And we can't accept people who have been to college saying college doesn't matter, because their revealed preferences are different and/or they're hypocrites.

I personally can't remember anyone that didn't go to college tell me that its not worth it. Either they say its not for them, they don't like sitting in a classroom, or they were faced extraordinary circumstances where they decided to pursue an opportunity.

> And we can't accept people who have been to college saying college doesn't matter, because their revealed preferences are different and/or they're hypocrites

I would accept the argument of a college educated individual if they actively discouraged their children from attending university. Telling strangers on the internet is easy, but with your own children you have skin in the game. To me that's more telling of their true beliefs

> I would accept the argument of a college educated individual if they actively discouraged their children from attending university.

I was pushed into higher education. I'll try to accept or even encourage if my kids prefer vocational education. It's easy for me who live in Norway to say because

- many ordinary jobs now pay extremely well if you put some effort into it.

- moving from carpenter or electrician to engineer etc is way simpler than the other way around && real world experience seems to actually be appreciated if/when you later decide to take higher education.

And yes, I have a bachelor degree and I while it was more interested than I expected I think the vast majority of what I know comes from colleagues as well as reading the Internet.

The only acceptable opinion would be from people who went to college and became successful, and then encouraging their kids to not go to college because it doesn't matter.

School obviously provides signaling benefits, but there is generally an implication that it provides more than just exchanging cash for a certificate.

People who have had a bunch of education are in a position to evaluate how much the education itself rather than the signaling benefitted them, whereas for people who have not, that is an unknown.

I tend to agree, but the fact that saying a degree "doesn't matter" is the exact opposite extreme. Many of the latest advancements in technology still have origins in university programs and the algorithms that one learns are still ever present in every piece of code that you write. They've just been abstracted enough that you don't need to have an immersed understanding of it. It has come to the point where its subconscious in most developers minds when they instantiate a list or dictionary.

However, when you're working on the front lines, you better believe that that stuff becomes incredibly important. Being able to construct good algorithms, explain why they're good or bad, what inputs they require, etc. make all the difference.

Which is why I'm under the impression that if you really want to go to college, you should be trying to get into a PhD, rather than making it into some job prep. For example, if you just want to be a programmer that studies web frameworks, then knowing binary search and tree algorithms won't matter much in the grand scheme of things. Because you're just an end user of the research work at that moment.

I think there should be a common ground where degrees in computer science should be geared toward a research or job path with distinct goals. Say, the job path teaches you how to use frameworks and build things where the research path puts you into algorithms and heavy math.

> Which is why I'm under the impression that if you really want to go to college, you should be trying to get into a PhD

This indicates that you do agree with the original article. It's just that you've accepted lowering the standards a full level across the board. A PhD today becomes equivalent to the masters degree from a few years ago, masters now equates to old bachelors, bachelors now equates to old HS diploma. But with continued lowering of standards at each level, what inevitably happens is that the next higher level becomes a job qualification as companies look for high quality candidates. So in your system, it will only take a few years before it will require everyone to go to school for a masters to even get a job. This system is broken.

I don't. The article wants to make college hard for the sake of it in order to make some barrier that only the "truly intellectual" can meet.

I proposed two different paths with different focus areas.

Bachelors absolutely do not equate to a HS diploma because it depends largely on where you go. My HS school was a standard, public school that only taught the basic subjects. There was no programming course, computation theory course, discrete math course, web development course, compiler course, etc.

So in your system, it will only take a few years before it will require everyone to go to school for a masters to even get a job. This system is broken.

This is assuming your premise holds and it really doesn't. There's companies that still do non-web work to this day and still survive perfectly well.

What does web work have to do with it? What percent of jobs require a college degree for no discernible reason (as evidenced by the fact that any college degree is acceptable)?

It used to be that a HS diploma was required to demonstrate that you could work hard. Now they are easy, so we require a bachelors to prove the same thing.

It has always been a requirement for a bachelors. In fact, there was more of a requirement for a bachelors than there was now. I don't know what the percentage is, but I've been fired from one job as an intern for not completing mine and was told I wouldn't be hired without one when I contracted for another. Nearly all positions I've seen request a bachelors or equivalent experience, especially in engineering positions. Currently 35% of jobs require a degree, with nearly all STEM positions requiring post-secondary education according to findings posted here: https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/recovery-job-growth-a...

> Many of the latest advancements in technology still have origins in university programs and the algorithms that one learns are still ever present in every piece of code that you write.

Were these advancements done by degree-seeking students? Probably not. These advancements are coming from psuedo-employees of the university. Instead of receiving payment, they're receiving a piece of letterhead.

> Say, the job path teaches you how to use frameworks and build things where the research path puts you into algorithms and heavy math.

Technical colleges do exist. Many institutions now have 'applied sciences' degrees for the associates level.

Yes the advances are coming from degree seeking students. That's kind of the point of a PhD program. Its to write an original work.

PhD students often receive a stipend. So they do get paid to do their work.

Thinking colleges don't matter at all in tech is another extreme. It's like saying one should not go to college at all because Carmack didn't and was very successful. Not everyone is autodidactic. Many people do need structured and well paced training. It is ordinary people who suffer in their career when schools lower their standard. See Mark Tarver's article on this: http://www.marktarver.com/professor.html

And speaking of personal experience, mine is exactly opposite to yours. My university made me. If it were not for my university's rigorous training, I would squander my four years, and I would not be able to do what I enjoy today. I owe a great deal to my university, to say the least.

> de-emphasizing coursework in favor of making or doing things in the world of research/business/politics/etc. seems preferable to me.

Yes but schools are de-emphasizing coursework in favor of nothing at all, mostly because in K-12 it makes stats look better (yay! graduation!) and in college butts in seats are $$$.

And make no mistake that school is getting shamefully easy. I wrote back in 2017 with examples from NY and CA but it certainly has not gotten better: https://medium.com/@simon.sarris/higher-education-erodes-a7c...

I don't know why more articles like this don't point to the glaring examples of non-rigor. It would support their case more I think.

I was terrified when I saw what someone in my family had done for a thesis project for a "professional bachelor" in CS.

A website.

No backend.

No js.

Single page, but not a single functionality. Just one page.

What is the point of having a degree like this ?

Not all fields are "tech" (really, software), and in "real" engineering fields, it appears you just get paid less and seen as a vocational/applied science guy without a master degree.

Same thing with biology. A bs in bio is the most awarded degree in the US, no thanks to all the people gunning for pre med. You can get a job of course, but you have an uphill battle to get promoted much farther than entry level unless you start straddling multiple fields with your job description (business-y roles are a good option for a BS holder). An MS gets you up a title from the get go, but even then, for research jobs you need a PhD unless you want to hit a ceiling and make the same salary from 30 years old until you finally retire. Companies see a PhD as necessary proof of work for good r&d jobs. At least a PhD is free though!

I agree, people who argue for this approach are good at it and often feel that they are exceptional because of it -- though the real world hardly cares, and therefore it's a self-serving bias imo. You build institutions like these with this sort of bias for a purpose and that is to select a certain type of people to be privileged.