4 ms·

> If I have a choice between a hiring a junior developer who has a computer science degree and only knows theory and a junior whose only experience is a boot ca

> If I have a choice between a hiring a junior developer who has a computer science degree and only knows theory and a junior whose only experience is a boot camp where they learned practical skills. I’m going to hire the boot camp graduate first. Google, Faceebok and many others don't seem to agree with that statement. Also, would your answer change if your company's goal was to develop better machine learning algorithms, or network technologies, etc.?

scarface74 8y ago
There is life outside of Silicon Valley. There are 60,000 computer science graduates every year in the US [1] most software developers aren’t working for the FAANG companies or the cool startups trying to change the world. They are working boring corporate jobs writing bespoked internal apps and yet another software as a service offering. Yes I know there are others writing embedded apps, mobile apps, game developers, etc. But most of those companies also are interested in people who can hit the ground running. [1] https://qz.com/929275/you-probably-should-have-majored-in-computer-science/ https://qz.com/929275/you-probably-should-have-majored-in-co...
- kilburn 8y ago
  My point is not that "we should do what SV wants" (I'm not even American). My point is... where would people get the education that bootstraps them to understand the state of the art then? To me that is the University's goal. In CS that means learning lots that may not be practical for a regular job (advanced algebra/calculus, computer architecture, data structure theory, etc.). However, in the long run this should leave you better prepared for the "boring jobs" too. Now, you argue that this kind of education may not be the most efficient training process to regular job excellence? I totally agree. College as devised today is designed as the first step into eventually being able to contribute to the world's knowledge, or at least making good use of it. It is not devised as a way to prepare you for the job world, where immediate applicability trumps everything (in general). I don't know the US system enough, but here in Spain (and at least in France and Germany) there are alternatives to College tuned to that goal. However, most parents (in Spain) still want their children to go the College route. Why? Because College is socially reputable (there are non-college educated leaders, but they are the exception, not the norm), and data shows that college educated people do have a higher expected income throughout their lives. It is percieved as a ladder up the social chain.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    When they graduate from college and don’t have the applicable skills to get a job then what? Sallie Mae (the government agency in the US that oversees the student loan program) is going to come knocking on the students door six months after they graduate looking for them to start paying back their loans. Most students are more concerned with the most practical way of putting food on their table and many parents are concerned with getting their kids out of their basements than they are with “increasing the world’s knowledge.” That’s not a luxury the middle class has.
    - kilburn 8y ago
      If the issue is as clear-cut as you claim, why don't you found a company that provides this kind of education? Why aren't there more students chosing other paths? Why are bootcamps struggling lately? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bootcamps-enterprise/some-u-s-coding-boot-camps-stumble-in-a-crowded-field-idUSKBN1AP2D7 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bootcamps-enterprise/some... College is supposed to give you strong foundations so you can build on that. This means that college grads should be able to pick up "applicable skills" in short time (they certainly should be able to become productive at any company in less than 6 months), and from there they should be able to improve faster than their non-graduate peers, eventually surpassing their skills. If that wasn't your case, sorry mate, you are surrounded by exceptional non-graduate peers, or you are an exceptionally bad graduate (which may be your university's fault or your own). In any case, those parents and students coughing up loads of money for graduate education seem to disagree with you.
      - la_fayette 8y ago
        i don't think you can discuss only one direction (theory > practise). i went back to academia after several years working in the industry. i would conclude practical experience allows you to gain a deeper understanding of theoretical knowledge, also if it comes to teaching. As one can present better and more real world use cases. if you consider statistics, machine learning, etc this is absolutely the case. learning just formulas etc without real use cases is mostly a waste of time for a student. only with good examples this goes to long term memory and deep understanding...

scarface74 8y ago

There is life outside of Silicon Valley. There are 60,000 computer science graduates every year in the US [1] most software developers aren’t working for the FAANG companies or the cool startups trying to change the world. They are working boring corporate jobs writing bespoked internal apps and yet another software as a service offering. Yes I know there are others writing embedded apps, mobile apps, game developers, etc. But most of those companies also are interested in people who can hit the ground running. [1] https://qz.com/929275/you-probably-should-have-majored-in-computer-science/ https://qz.com/929275/you-probably-should-have-majored-in-co...

kilburn 8y ago
My point is not that "we should do what SV wants" (I'm not even American). My point is... where would people get the education that bootstraps them to understand the state of the art then? To me that is the University's goal. In CS that means learning lots that may not be practical for a regular job (advanced algebra/calculus, computer architecture, data structure theory, etc.). However, in the long run this should leave you better prepared for the "boring jobs" too. Now, you argue that this kind of education may not be the most efficient training process to regular job excellence? I totally agree. College as devised today is designed as the first step into eventually being able to contribute to the world's knowledge, or at least making good use of it. It is not devised as a way to prepare you for the job world, where immediate applicability trumps everything (in general). I don't know the US system enough, but here in Spain (and at least in France and Germany) there are alternatives to College tuned to that goal. However, most parents (in Spain) still want their children to go the College route. Why? Because College is socially reputable (there are non-college educated leaders, but they are the exception, not the norm), and data shows that college educated people do have a higher expected income throughout their lives. It is percieved as a ladder up the social chain.
- scarface74 8y ago
  When they graduate from college and don’t have the applicable skills to get a job then what? Sallie Mae (the government agency in the US that oversees the student loan program) is going to come knocking on the students door six months after they graduate looking for them to start paying back their loans. Most students are more concerned with the most practical way of putting food on their table and many parents are concerned with getting their kids out of their basements than they are with “increasing the world’s knowledge.” That’s not a luxury the middle class has.
  - kilburn 8y ago
    If the issue is as clear-cut as you claim, why don't you found a company that provides this kind of education? Why aren't there more students chosing other paths? Why are bootcamps struggling lately? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bootcamps-enterprise/some-u-s-coding-boot-camps-stumble-in-a-crowded-field-idUSKBN1AP2D7 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bootcamps-enterprise/some... College is supposed to give you strong foundations so you can build on that. This means that college grads should be able to pick up "applicable skills" in short time (they certainly should be able to become productive at any company in less than 6 months), and from there they should be able to improve faster than their non-graduate peers, eventually surpassing their skills. If that wasn't your case, sorry mate, you are surrounded by exceptional non-graduate peers, or you are an exceptionally bad graduate (which may be your university's fault or your own). In any case, those parents and students coughing up loads of money for graduate education seem to disagree with you.
    - la_fayette 8y ago
      i don't think you can discuss only one direction (theory > practise). i went back to academia after several years working in the industry. i would conclude practical experience allows you to gain a deeper understanding of theoretical knowledge, also if it comes to teaching. As one can present better and more real world use cases. if you consider statistics, machine learning, etc this is absolutely the case. learning just formulas etc without real use cases is mostly a waste of time for a student. only with good examples this goes to long term memory and deep understanding...