4 ms·

It all comes down to energy required to make a decision. Degree acts as a quick filter. For example, having a degree in CS does not mean that you are a good pro

by nickb 18y ago

It all comes down to energy required to make a decision. Degree acts as a quick filter. For example, having a degree in CS does not mean that you are a good programmer but what I, as an employer, know about a person with a degree is that they possess a certain level of knowledge and they have also proven themselves and have shown that they can focus and accomplish something. If you think about it, those two things I listed are incredibly important. When you're swamped with 100 resumes and you can interview maybe 10 people, these little markers help employer make a decision. Now, that doesn't mean that a person without a degree doesn't have a chance... it just means that they will have to prove themselves in some other way (being famous coder/blogger/speaker helps there)...

matthewking 18y ago
Agreed, people with a degree have shown a commitment to a goal, and achieved it. That's definitely +1 to them, but as for the basic level of understanding, doesn't that become less effective as a gauge when candidates have 2-3 years of commercial experience?
- dmv 18y ago
  You've mentioned "2-3 years of commercial experience", as if that indicated anything. What most of the interviewers are getting to is that, on paper, almost anyone looks good. Look at the discussions regarding 'The Dead Sea effect' (http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-dead-sea-effect/ http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-d...). To get your degree from a school indicates that you demonstrated some abilities in a selective and competitive environment. The quality of the school tends to imply the level of quality vetting -- to get into MIT is more competitve than ITT. The name on the commercial experience reflects a similar vetting process -- a development job at Apple is more difficult to obtain and maintain than one at a local utility company. Arguably, a job at a notable startup is probably another strong indicator (on the idea that a startup can't waste time on inferior talent); but I wouldn't consider job upgrades at an unknown startup to indicate much (ie, everyone here could be a CTO or lead developer for their own startup... does two years of being a lead developer for a team of one to three, selected by company seniority, tell you anything about technical leadership ability?). It is all just borrowing collective intelligence -- using the wisdom of previous crowds to give off quality indicators.
kashif 18y ago
Actually, I am inclined to believe that work experience is a better filter. If you are hiring freshers, than ask them to build something in a day or a week and use that instead. Now, that doesn't mean that a person without a degree doesn't have a chance... it just means that they will have to prove themselves in some other way (being famous coder/blogger/speaker helps there)... Actually the onus is on the employer. Shouldn't you want to hire the best?
- icey 18y ago
  The onus is not on the employer. The employer's job is to fill the hole with the best that they can easily ascertain. I can tell you from doing hiring in the past that people have gotten very good at filling their resume's with bullshit. The last time I hired someone for a Senior Developer position, I had to filter through almost 500 resume submissions. Of those, I did a telephone technical interview with about 200 applicants. We did face to face interviews with the 6 applicants who passed an incredibly simple technical interview - Things that any programmer who has done any real work would almost be insulted by. Any available filter to help sort the wheat from the chaff is helpful, and a degree is one of those filters. That being said, I do not have a degree in anything, I got into the industry at 17 and haven't had time to go to school. But, I've been able to get far by working harder than everyone else; in the conversation of degrees making a difference, I'd like to have one, sure. But I've never needed one. I think it's come up in one interview once, and it ended up being a nonpoint.
  - kashif 18y ago
    fill the hole with the best that they can easily ascertain. I as an employer and employee of other organizations in the past - I can tell you that filling the hole with what is available lowers standards. While this does happen, it is not something to aspire too. I can tell you from doing hiring in the past that people have gotten very good at filling their resume's with bullshit. I agree. But how is this relevant to our discussion. I have not said that the resume is a criteria. The last time I hired someone for a Senior Developer position, I had to filter through almost 500 resume submissions. Of those, I did a telephone technical interview with about 200 applicants. We did face to face interviews with the 6 applicants who passed an incredibly simple technical interview - Things that any programmer who has done any real work would almost be insulted by. Apparently, your filters arent effective. Any available filter to help sort the wheat from the chaff is helpful, and a degree is one of those filters. A degree may be one of those ineffective filters that you are already using. Perhaps it is just a segmentation factor like gender or age. If all one seeks to do is reduce the number of resumes/candidates one has to meet, then one might as well use gender or age or anything else. That being said, I do not have a degree in anything, I got into the industry at 17 and haven't had time to go to school. But, I've been able to get far by working harder than everyone else; in the conversation of degrees making a difference, I'd like to have one, sure. But I've never needed one. I think it's come up in one interview once, and it ended up being a nonpoint. And see you turned out to be alright :)

by nickb 18y ago

matthewking 18y ago

Agreed, people with a degree have shown a commitment to a goal, and achieved it. That's definitely +1 to them, but as for the basic level of understanding, doesn't that become less effective as a gauge when candidates have 2-3 years of commercial experience?

dmv 18y ago
You've mentioned "2-3 years of commercial experience", as if that indicated anything. What most of the interviewers are getting to is that, on paper, almost anyone looks good. Look at the discussions regarding 'The Dead Sea effect' (http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-dead-sea-effect/ http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-d...). To get your degree from a school indicates that you demonstrated some abilities in a selective and competitive environment. The quality of the school tends to imply the level of quality vetting -- to get into MIT is more competitve than ITT. The name on the commercial experience reflects a similar vetting process -- a development job at Apple is more difficult to obtain and maintain than one at a local utility company. Arguably, a job at a notable startup is probably another strong indicator (on the idea that a startup can't waste time on inferior talent); but I wouldn't consider job upgrades at an unknown startup to indicate much (ie, everyone here could be a CTO or lead developer for their own startup... does two years of being a lead developer for a team of one to three, selected by company seniority, tell you anything about technical leadership ability?). It is all just borrowing collective intelligence -- using the wisdom of previous crowds to give off quality indicators.

kashif 18y ago

Actually, I am inclined to believe that work experience is a better filter. If you are hiring freshers, than ask them to build something in a day or a week and use that instead. Now, that doesn't mean that a person without a degree doesn't have a chance... it just means that they will have to prove themselves in some other way (being famous coder/blogger/speaker helps there)... Actually the onus is on the employer. Shouldn't you want to hire the best?

icey 18y ago
The onus is not on the employer. The employer's job is to fill the hole with the best that they can easily ascertain. I can tell you from doing hiring in the past that people have gotten very good at filling their resume's with bullshit. The last time I hired someone for a Senior Developer position, I had to filter through almost 500 resume submissions. Of those, I did a telephone technical interview with about 200 applicants. We did face to face interviews with the 6 applicants who passed an incredibly simple technical interview - Things that any programmer who has done any real work would almost be insulted by. Any available filter to help sort the wheat from the chaff is helpful, and a degree is one of those filters. That being said, I do not have a degree in anything, I got into the industry at 17 and haven't had time to go to school. But, I've been able to get far by working harder than everyone else; in the conversation of degrees making a difference, I'd like to have one, sure. But I've never needed one. I think it's come up in one interview once, and it ended up being a nonpoint.
- kashif 18y ago
  fill the hole with the best that they can easily ascertain. I as an employer and employee of other organizations in the past - I can tell you that filling the hole with what is available lowers standards. While this does happen, it is not something to aspire too. I can tell you from doing hiring in the past that people have gotten very good at filling their resume's with bullshit. I agree. But how is this relevant to our discussion. I have not said that the resume is a criteria. The last time I hired someone for a Senior Developer position, I had to filter through almost 500 resume submissions. Of those, I did a telephone technical interview with about 200 applicants. We did face to face interviews with the 6 applicants who passed an incredibly simple technical interview - Things that any programmer who has done any real work would almost be insulted by. Apparently, your filters arent effective. Any available filter to help sort the wheat from the chaff is helpful, and a degree is one of those filters. A degree may be one of those ineffective filters that you are already using. Perhaps it is just a segmentation factor like gender or age. If all one seeks to do is reduce the number of resumes/candidates one has to meet, then one might as well use gender or age or anything else. That being said, I do not have a degree in anything, I got into the industry at 17 and haven't had time to go to school. But, I've been able to get far by working harder than everyone else; in the conversation of degrees making a difference, I'd like to have one, sure. But I've never needed one. I think it's come up in one interview once, and it ended up being a nonpoint. And see you turned out to be alright :)