9 ms·

Kudos to E&Y for taking a radical approach to hiring. However, as a concerned parent, I hope impressionable youngsters don't mistake this for 'Yay, I don't hav

• mkaziz 11y ago
  Does getting that graduate degree help? I stuck it out for the degree (Computer Science), and I don't think it helped much with my job prospects. I get paid the same as my peers who only did undergrad.
  • blazespin 11y ago
    I don't think a Masters helps that much, but a PHD does, especially in AI.
  • gjkood 11y ago
    In certain parts of the country (the Bay Area), that need people with specialized/advanced knowledge in CS (which a Masters would definitely provide), I would expect that your graduate CS degree will definitely give you a leg up on those without one. If you have an undergraduate degree in a non-CS subject but you get a graduate degree in CS, your will have about the same or better knowledge than a person with a graduate degree in CS. Of course, there is a great amount of subjectivity given to the School that you attended and your work experience after that.
  • jfim 11y ago
    It increases your worldwide mobility. For example, someone getting a green card (US) gets onto the EB-2 track rather than EB-3, they get 25 points instead of 20 in the education category for Canada, etc.
  • chrisseaton 11y ago
    Something that people often miss in these conversations is that there is a very strong networking effect from a graduate degree. Doing a graduate degree will mean that via your supervisor you will meet and probably work with some of the top people in your field. I think you would find it hard to cold-email them to ask for a job if you hadn't been introduced to that network via graduate education.
  • Fede_V 11y ago
    I think from a strictly economic point of view, a graduate degree is a terrible investment. Look at it this way - you could spend the 4+ years you spend in grad school working in a high paying job, investing all the difference between grad school stipend and your pay. Once you add all the career progression you can make in the time you spend in grad school - it's obvious that grad school is a net loser, monetarily speaking. The upside is that, if you pick something that you love, in grad school you get to spend time dedicated to learning and studying something fascinating - and with a good professor, you'll have a pretty fantastic time. In short - do grad school if you are interested in your project, don't do it as a sort of career investment.
    • hdctambien 11y ago
      If you're doing grad school full time then it should only take 2 years for a Masters. You can get a Masters in 4 years while also working at your high paying job. That just costs you a night or two a week (and not that much money, depending on the school)
      • poikniok 11y ago
        He is talking about a phd, a masters is an absolutely terrible investment, and strong negative hiring signal whenever I see it, unless it was done strictly to immigrate to the US.
        • RogerL 11y ago
          I've worked with so many people that were amazing, and had Masters, and others who were nearly useless to destructive. I don't believe it is a signal at all.
          • stuxnet79 11y ago
            Precisely why I did not do a Masters. I found out I learned a lot more (relevant skills in the 'real' world) in my summer internships than I did during the semesters in school.
  • dagw 11y ago
    My Masters in applied math seems to at least somewhat impress people and I feel it has opened up many a door that would have been much harder to get through without it. While I don't know if I get paid more or not, I certainly feel it has let me get involved with far more interesting work.
    • arsenide 11y ago
      I'm in my first year getting my Master's in math -- can you email me (in my profile)? I have some questions for you.
  • Myrmornis 11y ago
    Yes, especially if your graduate degree involves skills such as programming and statistics and certain scientific areas which are likely to translate well into industry. One thing that a PhD (and Masters to a lesser extent I guess) tends to give is an appreciation for the depth and volume of work that is out there in the research literature; another thing is the important skill of knowing when you don't understand something. Another thing is math and statistics: rather than being just abstract areas of knowledge in which you can do the homework exercises, after a quantitative graduate degree these become tools you actually have experience of using.
• deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
• josu 11y ago
  >The lifetime earnings for a college degree holder[1] is probably a lot more than for those without a degree. The problem with these kind of studies is that they take the average, and income only has a lower bound. From my personal observation, many of my university classmates (Spain, '12) would have been better off if they had opted for a technical degree.
  • marincounty 11y ago
    ">The lifetime earnings for a college degree holder[1] is probably a lot more than for those without a degree." I'm assuming this statement is true. I, as an American, have heard it forever. If it's true, I don't think it's true just because of the degree. While I get clobbered for this next statement, I'm tired of dancing around it. A lot of college graduates come from rich families. I have yet to find one rich family who didn't help out their kids in one way, or another. Some pay for Everything. Some, especially, the father, knows first hand just how difficult it is to make real money in America. They help out their kids get through expensive graduate programs, finance that business, co-sign for that first house, the perks can be tiny, like access to the family lawyer--who actually gives honest advice, etc. The poor and middle class kids usually have caring parents, but no one is helping them out. There's not much guidance growing up--not because the parents don't care; they just don't know. And as to money, most just can't help out. In my high school, the kids who "made it" had rich parents. Even the ones who went to UC Santa Cruz, and came home with different brains, are doing well right now. I know so many average, below average rich kids, who with family money, just seem to do well. Most don't talk about it, because it's embarrassing, but I've just seen too often to be anything other than external factors(money), and the right guidance. A perfect example is our California Luitentant governor. He was a few years ahead of me in high school. I watched his family help him out everytime he failed, and he failed a lot. Whether it was his learning disorder, his no direction college/baseball? career, his failed bars, his failed businesses, his legal problems, etc.; his family always helped him out. This dude would have been homeless if not for that powerful family. It's more common than people think. Yes, I used an extreme example because I just watched this guy on some tech channel abusing all the tech lingo, and he's fresh on my mind. I know HN doesn't like it when we talk about family privilege; why? (Yes--I know their are rich kids who get no help, and made it by way of Horatio Alger's path. You're the exception though. That's why I have always been for helping out the poor and middle class kids. The help is not enough, but take advantage of what's available. And I know--it's not fair that you have to finance that business through the credit card mafia. Yes, you will watch some of your friends get these cushy positions in life. Don't beat yourself up over it--you probally didn't have much/any help? If you do make it, try to help the ones who really didn't have the support. No, they won't ask out of , but just give them a shot? They are grateful? If anything don't take advantage of them? I'm not sure some colleges/businesses/professionals don't take advantage of them? Remember--rich kids don't go to schools that advertise? (Went to rant pretty quick. Sorry--It just seems like we get this college debate too often. If I was to do it over again; Yes, I would go to college. I had a great time, on so many levels. I just might, with these tuition levels, after graduation, build up my credit. I might then start to pay off student loans with cc debt. I would then file chapter 7, and start fresh. It's a glitch that's there, but is hard to pull off. These cc companies still redline, so your access to cash, will vary by county. And there's the morality clause the poor, and middle class are spoon feed--which will prevent this tactic from becomming popular? Think of it as a strategic bankruptcy? Yea, that one the rich do all the time? Do it my the book--don't do anything illegial.)
• rcurry 11y ago
  Oh, I don't know - it just depends on what your kids want to do. I think it's sad that we've reached a point where you're expected to have a four year degree, and $80k of debt in order to get a job as a receptionist or a barista.
  • Myrmornis 11y ago
    > I think it's sad that we've reached a point where you're expected to have a four year degree, and $80k of debt in order to get a job as a receptionist or a barista. (a) They can become a receptionist or barista once they've definitively proved to themselves that they can't get a degree and do something more fulfilling, intellectually stimulating and ultimately likely to lead them to lives with more freedom and time to devote to their own projects. (b) The 80k debt is a problem with the USA, not nearly so much with developed countries elsewhere. I expect you'd agree with this but it shouldn't be a reason not to go to university; the USA just needs to get away from making people pay so much for their education and healthcare. (The article was about the UK). I work in the USA and I've just got back from traveling in Indonesia for a couple of weeks. It was really sad to see that all the people we met traveling were from Europe and none from the USA: I think a large part of this is that young Americans go into debt for college and think that they can't afford to travel, and thus don't become as familiar with other cultures.
    • gjkood 11y ago
      I was really surprised when Congress decided to make it very hard or almost impossible to discharge Student Loan debt through bankruptcy while forgiving other types of debt. This fact in addition to the fleecing of the nation's youth by the For-Profit Colleges has given a really bad impression about going to college. The best thing a nation can do for its future is to encourage (and make it easy) for students to get the best education that they can. You can bet that India and China are investing heavily in their nation's youth and encouraging STEM based higher education. They understand that this is of strategic importance.
      • lsc 11y ago
• nailer 11y ago
  > Those six years staying in school getting your undergraduate and graduate degrees, will make a huge difference in the rest of your life Conversely, six years of actual experience mean you'll be able to apply for senior jobs that pay well, and you'll have a fun, debt-free 20s.
  • jedberg 11y ago
    This is very true of graduate school vs not, but I'm not so sure about undergrad. A few points: I stopped going to school after undergrad and started working, while most of my friends went and did grad school. When they graduated I was already ahead of the salaries they were being offered and had 5 years of experience. I'd also been earning twice as much as them for those five years and had considerable savings. Also, I've hired people who never went to college. They were fairly qualified but what I found was odd gaps in their knowledge. They could write good code but then didn't know anything about say bayesian probability, so I would have to design the software for them which they could then code. They could certainly learn about bayesian probability, but the problem was they didn't even know it existed so they were pursuing a terrible solution to the problem that had a well known and simpler solution, until someone who went to college came and informed them. Perhaps the same applies to those who went to grad school, but I've never found that to be the case in practice.
    • something123 11y ago
      5 years of grad school implies a PhD - in which case they should be hyper specialize in some field. Sounds like your friends just chose the wrong subject to pursue a PhD in. Normally you're supposed to end up being one of the top 20 experts in a very narrow field of study. In generally this doesn't bear out in computer science (which I still think is barely qualified to be a department)
      • jedberg 11y ago
        They are in fact top experts in their fields (1/2 were computer science and the other 1/2 were chemistry). But even being the top in your field doesn't outweigh 5 years of experience.
• mahyarm 11y ago
  Degrees are the most useful for immigration purposes I've found. It lets you have an ability to work in many places in the world. But that is bureaucratic requirements more than any specific merit about the degree, where you get your degree or how much you spend on your degree, time or money.
• markdown 11y ago
  Interestingly, just yesterday this video blew up on Reddit: A 34yr old man with a PhD who can't even get a job stacking shelves and who was better off 17 years ago after high school. As a child/teen, he was told: > The lifetime earnings for a college degree holder[1] is probably a lot more than for those without a degree. > Those six years staying in school getting your undergraduate and graduate degrees, will make a huge difference in the rest of your life https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pglv6VrA8ro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pglv6VrA8ro
• protomyth 11y ago
  'Yay, I don't have to go to college to get a decent job anymore' That's always been true. Vocational careers earn pretty good money (quite a lot more than a lot of degrees) and have good career prospects, particularly with parents looking down on vocational training for a career.
• aianus 11y ago
  > The lifetime earnings for a college degree holder[1] is probably a lot more than for those without a degree. > Even a Thiel Fellow probably needs to be admitted to a very competitive school to drop out and get the Thiel Fellowship. You pointed out the flaw in that sort of thinking yourself. Absolutely you should strive be the type of person who can get into and graduate from an elite school. The value of then actually doing it is what's suspect. I don't think there have been any statistically significant studies done on such people (who were accepted to elite schools and declined to go in favor of starting a company), but I would love to read them if anyone has seen one.
  • tomp 11y ago
    > Absolutely you should strive be the type of person who can get into and graduate from an elite school. The value of then actually doing it is what's suspect. What's more, it might pay off even more to actually be accepted into an elite school, but never start it, and instead carry the letter of acceptance to an employer and get a job.
    • candu 11y ago
      Much of the real value of degrees to the prospective employee is in added leverage. As long as "enough" employers in field X require degrees, and as long as either a) the unemployment rate in X is low enough or b) your demonstrable skill is high enough, your value is increased by having that degree in X simply because now (non-competes, collusion pacts, and similar practices aside) there is competition for you. Conversely, if you don't have the degree, your choices for employment are (perhaps unfairly) limited - not just by the employers themselves, but also by immigration policies that limit visas for skilled work to degree-holders. (Of course, if either of those limits were to disappear overnight, universities that have implicitly bet on rising value by rapidly increasing their tuition fees would be in deep, deep trouble, save perhaps those with virtually bottomless endowments. Sort of a speculative bubble, in a way.)
      • pmiller2 11y ago
        Exactly. One employer unilaterally lowering or eliminating its standards with respect to degrees is not going to do anything in a competitive employment market. What's more, if the labor market becomes a buyer's market for employers, filtering by degree will happen, just because it cuts down the number of applicants.
• evanpw 11y ago
  College is not a good idea for everyone. People who struggled in high school are unlikely to finish college, and most of the college premium comes from the degree itself: there's a huge gap in earnings between "some college" and "college graduate" (and less of a gap in student loan balance). [1] http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/09/what_every_high.html http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/09/what_every_high....
• 6d0debc071 11y ago
  > The lifetime earnings for a college degree holder[1] is probably a lot more than for those without a degree. Which degree may matter a lot too. Without coming down either side of the thing, when you have literature and art-history students in the same category as engineering and law students... Well, averages can be highly misleading.
• ryanmarsh 11y ago
  > Kudos to E&Y for taking a radical approach to hiring. Kudos to E&Y for taking a sensible approach to hiring. As I'm sure your aware most colleges and secondary schools share similar patterns for teaching and student evaluation. Those patterns are not optimal for all brain types. Furthermore those patterns are not optimal for all work types. Anecdotally many of use can point to one or more unimpressive individuals holding impressive credentials of post graduate education. Personally speaking, I'm a high school dropout. I work in a niche that did not exist during the time I would have been in college. What degree plan would have served me best? Oddly enough, a degree in philosophy. Obviously that would have been mine (and my parents) last choice. I'm not saying college or secondary education are bad, it's just that when I look ahead for my children, it's a crap shoot. Should I pressure them to attend college? Why? Short of medicine, and certain credentialed professions what essential knowledge about their future profession will they learn in college that they could not possibly learn on their own (ab initio or ad hoc) through various other means?
  • gjkood 11y ago
    I wish I could speak for professions such as Medicine or Law, but I can't. I can however speak for an Engineering degree. The following is an example of what a typical CS undergraduate student would study in the US[1]: ● AL - Algorithms and Complexity ● AR - Architecture and Organization ● CN - Computational Science ● DS - Discrete Structures ● GV - Graphics and Visualization ● HCI - Human-Computer Interaction ● IAS - Information Assurance and Security ● IM - Information Management ● IS - Intelligent Systems ● NC - Networking and Communications ● OS - Operating Systems ● PBD - Platform-based Development ● PD - Parallel and Distributed Computing ● PL - Programming Languages ● SDF - Software Development Fundamentals ● SE - Software Engineering ● SF - Systems Fundamentals ● SP - Social Issues and Professional Practice A typical 4 year undergraduate degree covers 120 credits typically divided among 40 (3 credits each) or more subjects. In addition to the 18 or so above the rest of the subjects include subjects in primary engineering, mathematics, electronics, mechanics, humanities and several others in addition to all the related practical/lab work. Most lay people assume that getting a degree in CS means learning HTML, CSS, one or two programming languages and most possibly some CRUD application development with a database backend. Hence the prevalence of 'boot camps' of various natures that create 'rock stars'. There is no way in heck that a person who is not forced into the degree track is going to be motivated enough to study all of this stuff. A lot of this is very very hard. Now, after studying all of this, do you think you will use even a small fraction of this in the types of jobs a typical IT/software consultant would do in 90% of the run of the mill jobs out there. NO. However the degree exposed you to subjects that you would never be exposed to unless you were in that field. And this is only an undergraduate degree. There is more to a degree that what you can learn by self motivation. At least in the technical space. [1] Computer Science Curricula 2013; ACM/IEEE Computer Society https://www.acm.org/education/CS2013-final-report.pdf https://www.acm.org/education/CS2013-final-report.pdf