4 ms·

Interesting bit on the MS degree. I followed the link, and I'm not quite as surprised that the correlation is poor, or even negative, given the way the data wa

by geebee 10y ago

Interesting bit on the MS degree. I followed the link, and I'm not quite as surprised that the correlation is poor, or even negative, given the way the data was collected and analyzed. Absolutely agree that some MS degrees are pretty much less rigorous cash cows by now, that allow students to skip the fundamentals such as data structures, operating systems, and compilers. However, many CS MS degrees actually do require this as a background, to the point where some programs have emerged to prepare non-CS majors for MS degrees, kind of like those post-bac premed programs. It's hard to believe that those MS degrees, which require a decent GPA in those core courses, along with high GRE scores (sorry, but we are talking about interviewing skill, which may be more related to exam taking ability than job performance), wouldn't result in a similar profile to people with CS degrees from top schools. This is fully acknowledged in the text of the article referenced in a link, but unless people follow it, I do think the message may be a bit misleading. That's an aside, though. The value may very well be in the prep for these degrees (ie., the post-bac CS coursework required for admissions to a reputable MS program). If you can get that through online courses (udacity or coursera) through genuinely rigorous self-study? Yeah, that might do it, for far less money. I've audited a few of them, and they're the real deal, that's the real coursework there.

sporkenfang 10y ago
I'm curious what would happen if they looked at, as separate categories, people who mastered out of a doctoral program, people who did the 5-year BS/MS, and people who obtained a doctoral degree as well as a master's.
- adjkant 10y ago
  Agreed completely. I would suspect that BS/MS and Ph.D. interviewees would be very distinct from a straight MS, but this was a missed opportunity to look at that, even if it is just interview performance.
- geebee 10y ago
  That could be useful. The article mentioned rhat there was no distinction made between CS masters degrees and Info Systems degrees. My guess is that pure MS would correlate positively from CS programs that require a background in more advanced math and algorithms. Info sys degrees typically don't. I'm not knocking those degrees, keep in mind we're measuring performance on a technical interview, which often leans very heavily toward algorithms, trees, sometimes graphs, and occasionally numerical analysis or computing. If the MS degree data includes a lot of programs that dont include this background, then this woukd not be a surprising result.
JamesBarney 10y ago
What about the way she collected and analyzed the data caused the correlation to falsely be poor or negative?
- geebee 10y ago
  Nothing! The author explicitely states that the data and analysis was not granular enough tp make distinction between the different kinds of MS degrees. This leaves open the possibility rhat some categories of MS degrees might correlate positively, even though MS degrees overall correlate negatively.
  - eanzenberg 10y ago
    This >>>No surprises here. I’ve ranted quite a bit about the disutility of master’s degrees, so I won’t belabor the point. is literally all she says about MS degrees. Wow the bias of this site is incredible..
  - eanzenberg 10y ago
    This http://blog.alinelerner.com/how-different-is-a-b-s-in-computer-science-from-a-m-s-in-computer-science-when-it-comes-to-recruiting/ http://blog.alinelerner.com/how-different-is-a-b-s-in-comput... Is what she says about MS degrees in another post. No data or analysis is shown, just opinion.
matt_wulfeck 10y ago
> Absolutely agree that some MS degrees are pretty much less rigorous cash cows by now, that allow students to skip the fundamentals such as data structures, operating systems, and compilers. At what point do we not consider operating systems and compilers "fundamental"? What percentage of CS/programming jobs require deep knowledge in these arenas?
- hackcrafter 10y ago
  Absolutely I think they still should be considered fundamental. By definition, these are the subjects that allow you to keep going when your abstractions leak[0]. To say a job "requires" them is pedantic, but what's the point of calling something a CS degree if it is not at least signaling an understanding of these fundamentals. [0] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/11/11/the-law-of-leaky-abstractions/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/11/11/the-law-of-leaky-a...
- kowdermeister 10y ago
  It should be optional or advanced level. If you are a web developer for example OS and compilers are totally not important to get along and have a healthy career.
  - guntars 10y ago
    I disagree, compilers are relevant to web development because of all the compiling and transpiling that a single source file goes through in large application development.
    - kowdermeister 10y ago
      If you are interested in _writing_ compilers then sure. If I just want to use those compilers, then I don't really need to understand them just use them as specified. Now you'll say that I'll make a mess if I don't know what the compiler does. That's what best practices are for if say I pick TypeScript. Also, optimization is the compilers responsibility.
- 10y ago
okreallywtf 10y ago
I got a CS masters and even though it was a worthwhile experience to me but I never expected to necessarily make more or be chosen over another candidate purely based on education (assuming all other things being equal. I felt like my knowledge definitely cured during the process with graduate level data structures, architecture, operating systems and networking. The 2nd pass on some of these areas (despite getting mostly A's from a generally-considered challenging but now well known program). I took the opportunity to craft my program of study more than I would have been able to as an undergrad (both due to lack of knowledge and how undergraduates are given a lot less leeway) to include electronics and automation courses. It also gave me the opportunity to work with and mentor other students which was rewarding and I think has benefited me in and out of the workplace. I wouldn't argue for doing it purely for career reasons and its not something to do just because you've been in school so long you don't know how to do anything else, but I found it worthwhile and you just need to consider what you want out of it.
ohwello 10y ago
In my experience almost all candidates applying recently with an MS in CS have been H1B visa seekers. Presumably, many of them obtained the MS specifically because it increases the odds of winning the H1B lottery. The Bay Area had several shady MSCS-granting institutions. Some of them have gotten in trouble with ICE. Even at programs run by major public research universities, the same economic incentives apply. It's always hard to tell the value-add of a degree apart from selection bias. This case is no different.
eanzenberg 10y ago
Um, did you actually look at the article? There was no data shown between interview performance and MS degree status. The graph you saw was interview performance vs. years of experience. This isn't surprising since a person with 20 years experience will generally interview for a much more challenging job than someone with 0 years.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- geebee 10y ago
  Yes, I read the article. Under the section "Master’s degree & years of experience", the author writes: "No surprises here. I’ve ranted quite a bit about the disutility of master’s degrees, so I won’t belabor the point." And provides a link to another post the author has written. Look for ("disutility of masters degrees"). That page will contain more of the content we are discussing. This is what I was referring to when I wrote: "This is fully acknowledged in the text of the article referenced in a link, but unless people follow it, I do think the message may be a bit misleading." I would agree that no data is provided here, the author simply states MS degrees are an indicator of poor technical performance "in my experience" and goes on to list reasons why this might be the case. I'm sure there's a reasonable case to be made that an MS in CS isn't worth the time, effort, and money, even from a top school. But I don't think that grouping these degrees with MS degrees in Info Sys (among others) and then reporting experiences without that distinction provides much useful insight into the topic.
eanzenberg 10y ago
Um, did you actually look at the article? There was no data shown between interview performance and MS degree status. The graph you saw was interview performance vs. years of experience. This isn't surprising since a person with 20 years experience will generally interview for a much more challenging job than someone with 0 years.

by geebee 10y ago

sporkenfang 10y ago

I'm curious what would happen if they looked at, as separate categories, people who mastered out of a doctoral program, people who did the 5-year BS/MS, and people who obtained a doctoral degree as well as a master's.

adjkant 10y ago
Agreed completely. I would suspect that BS/MS and Ph.D. interviewees would be very distinct from a straight MS, but this was a missed opportunity to look at that, even if it is just interview performance.
geebee 10y ago
That could be useful. The article mentioned rhat there was no distinction made between CS masters degrees and Info Systems degrees. My guess is that pure MS would correlate positively from CS programs that require a background in more advanced math and algorithms. Info sys degrees typically don't. I'm not knocking those degrees, keep in mind we're measuring performance on a technical interview, which often leans very heavily toward algorithms, trees, sometimes graphs, and occasionally numerical analysis or computing. If the MS degree data includes a lot of programs that dont include this background, then this woukd not be a surprising result.

JamesBarney 10y ago

What about the way she collected and analyzed the data caused the correlation to falsely be poor or negative?

geebee 10y ago
Nothing! The author explicitely states that the data and analysis was not granular enough tp make distinction between the different kinds of MS degrees. This leaves open the possibility rhat some categories of MS degrees might correlate positively, even though MS degrees overall correlate negatively.
- eanzenberg 10y ago
  This >>>No surprises here. I’ve ranted quite a bit about the disutility of master’s degrees, so I won’t belabor the point. is literally all she says about MS degrees. Wow the bias of this site is incredible..
- eanzenberg 10y ago
  This http://blog.alinelerner.com/how-different-is-a-b-s-in-computer-science-from-a-m-s-in-computer-science-when-it-comes-to-recruiting/ http://blog.alinelerner.com/how-different-is-a-b-s-in-comput... Is what she says about MS degrees in another post. No data or analysis is shown, just opinion.

matt_wulfeck 10y ago

> Absolutely agree that some MS degrees are pretty much less rigorous cash cows by now, that allow students to skip the fundamentals such as data structures, operating systems, and compilers. At what point do we not consider operating systems and compilers "fundamental"? What percentage of CS/programming jobs require deep knowledge in these arenas?

hackcrafter 10y ago
Absolutely I think they still should be considered fundamental. By definition, these are the subjects that allow you to keep going when your abstractions leak[0]. To say a job "requires" them is pedantic, but what's the point of calling something a CS degree if it is not at least signaling an understanding of these fundamentals. [0] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/11/11/the-law-of-leaky-abstractions/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/11/11/the-law-of-leaky-a...
kowdermeister 10y ago
It should be optional or advanced level. If you are a web developer for example OS and compilers are totally not important to get along and have a healthy career.
- guntars 10y ago
  I disagree, compilers are relevant to web development because of all the compiling and transpiling that a single source file goes through in large application development.
  - kowdermeister 10y ago
    If you are interested in _writing_ compilers then sure. If I just want to use those compilers, then I don't really need to understand them just use them as specified. Now you'll say that I'll make a mess if I don't know what the compiler does. That's what best practices are for if say I pick TypeScript. Also, optimization is the compilers responsibility.
10y ago

okreallywtf 10y ago

I got a CS masters and even though it was a worthwhile experience to me but I never expected to necessarily make more or be chosen over another candidate purely based on education (assuming all other things being equal. I felt like my knowledge definitely cured during the process with graduate level data structures, architecture, operating systems and networking. The 2nd pass on some of these areas (despite getting mostly A's from a generally-considered challenging but now well known program). I took the opportunity to craft my program of study more than I would have been able to as an undergrad (both due to lack of knowledge and how undergraduates are given a lot less leeway) to include electronics and automation courses. It also gave me the opportunity to work with and mentor other students which was rewarding and I think has benefited me in and out of the workplace. I wouldn't argue for doing it purely for career reasons and its not something to do just because you've been in school so long you don't know how to do anything else, but I found it worthwhile and you just need to consider what you want out of it.

ohwello 10y ago

In my experience almost all candidates applying recently with an MS in CS have been H1B visa seekers. Presumably, many of them obtained the MS specifically because it increases the odds of winning the H1B lottery. The Bay Area had several shady MSCS-granting institutions. Some of them have gotten in trouble with ICE. Even at programs run by major public research universities, the same economic incentives apply. It's always hard to tell the value-add of a degree apart from selection bias. This case is no different.

eanzenberg 10y ago

Um, did you actually look at the article? There was no data shown between interview performance and MS degree status. The graph you saw was interview performance vs. years of experience. This isn't surprising since a person with 20 years experience will generally interview for a much more challenging job than someone with 0 years.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
geebee 10y ago
Yes, I read the article. Under the section "Master’s degree & years of experience", the author writes: "No surprises here. I’ve ranted quite a bit about the disutility of master’s degrees, so I won’t belabor the point." And provides a link to another post the author has written. Look for ("disutility of masters degrees"). That page will contain more of the content we are discussing. This is what I was referring to when I wrote: "This is fully acknowledged in the text of the article referenced in a link, but unless people follow it, I do think the message may be a bit misleading." I would agree that no data is provided here, the author simply states MS degrees are an indicator of poor technical performance "in my experience" and goes on to list reasons why this might be the case. I'm sure there's a reasonable case to be made that an MS in CS isn't worth the time, effort, and money, even from a top school. But I don't think that grouping these degrees with MS degrees in Info Sys (among others) and then reporting experiences without that distinction provides much useful insight into the topic.

eanzenberg 10y ago