4 ms·
There's a difference between the prospects of an okay school vs elite school for CS. The gap just happens to be much smaller. In our industry there are many pe
by sotojuan 11y ago
There's a difference between the prospects of an okay school vs elite school for CS. The gap just happens to be much smaller.
In our industry there are many people who do just fine with no CS degree, CS degree from obscure schools, or degree at all. Almost no other industry can say that. However, in general, elite school means better opportunities, better classmates that motivate you, better companies recruiting, etc. The difference exists, it's just "smaller" and evens out with time.
Remember that in our industry you can move to $100k+ after 3-5 years of experience (of course, if you put in work, network and get better, but the demand for "mid/senior" devs is big). I've found that your background rarely matters at that point.
- geebee 11y agoI agree with you about salary. You can move up in salary and title, and the data here seems to suggest that it won't make a huge difference whether you majored in CS at MIT or San Jose State - you need to go to a proper program, sure, but prestige isn't nearly as big a factor as it is in many other fields. That said, I'm not sure you're responding to my question, which is whether there is a hidden difference in kind rather than in salary. For instance, your background may not matter if you're moving up to what I cynically describe as "mid/senior crud big fixer", and it may be that those jobs pay as well as "mid/senior data scientist" who works in an R&Dish role without looking deadlines or scrum tickets. Even if both earn the same salary, I consider one role to be much more desirable than the other (though I actually do kind of enjoy chasing down bugs sometimes). Does the MIT grad have a better crack at the more interesting, R&Dish job with greater autonomy, less micromanagement, fewer deadlines? It's a question, not a conclusion (I suspect it's true, but I acknowledge that I don't have the data to support it). If so, I wouldn't say background rarely matters - it does matter, but it won't show up in the numbers if all you're looking at is salary.
- JoeAltmaier 11y agoI went to Stanford. It doesn't get me promotion. But it does get me interviews. So indirectly yeah I earn more because of it, since I'm in the short list for many job applications.
- geebee 11y agoI agree with you about salary. You can move up in salary and title, and the data here seems to suggest that it won't make a huge difference whether you majored in CS at MIT or San Jose State - you need to go to a proper program, sure, but prestige isn't nearly as big a factor as it is in many other fields. That said, I'm not sure you're responding to my question, which is whether there is a hidden difference in kind rather than in salary. For instance, your background may not matter if you're moving up to what I cynically describe as "mid/senior crud big fixer", and it may be that those jobs pay as well as "mid/senior data scientist" who works in an R&Dish role without looking deadlines or scrum tickets. Even if both earn the same salary, I consider one role to be much more desirable than the other (though I actually do kind of enjoy chasing down bugs sometimes). Does the MIT grad have a better crack at the more interesting, R&Dish job with greater autonomy, less micromanagement, fewer deadlines? It's a question, not a conclusion (I suspect it's true, but I acknowledge that I don't have the data to support it). If so, I wouldn't say background rarely matters - it does matter, but it won't show up in the numbers if all you're looking at is salary.