3 ms·

If we’re using “determined person” as the bar, then someone who commits 4-6 years paying tuition to get a BA or MS CS certainly seems more determined than a sel

If we’re using “determined person” as the bar, then someone who commits 4-6 years paying tuition to get a BA or MS CS certainly seems more determined than a self taught person who spent maybe 3 months at a boot camp? Not saying that it’s fair, college costs too much in the US, and employers overindex on good schools. but I don’t get the argument that a self taught person should be treated equally hiring-wise

hnfong 3y ago
The original context was "advice for young programmers", and although I don't think getting a CS degree is top of the priority list, it's at least a important and good thing to have. But this: > I don’t get the argument that a self taught person should be treated equally hiring-wise .. this is a totally different question. If two candidates performed at the same level in interviews/tests/whatever, and one of them has a CS degree while the other does not, IMHO the proper interpretation is that, assuming that their performance scores in the hiring process reflects candidates' actual abilities, is that the candidate without the CS degree is a better learner (of CS related topics). Put it another way, if a person who only spent a couple months in boot camp performs on a similar level as a CS graduate in interviews, it really means the former learns at a terrifying speed, and has huge potential. It also helps that many people like you would prefer to pass on the candidate without the formal qualifications, so there's even less competition for the candidate even though they at least have the same level of technical ability. This line of reasoning depends heavily on whether your interview process can actually gauge the technical ability of the candidates. If it can't, _then_ assuming the one with a CS degree has better skills is more reasonable. But at that point, you might want to fix your hiring processes instead of arguing this point.
- wonnage 3y ago
  I don’t think you can conclude anything other than the candidate passed your interview.

hnfong 3y ago

The original context was "advice for young programmers", and although I don't think getting a CS degree is top of the priority list, it's at least a important and good thing to have. But this: > I don’t get the argument that a self taught person should be treated equally hiring-wise .. this is a totally different question. If two candidates performed at the same level in interviews/tests/whatever, and one of them has a CS degree while the other does not, IMHO the proper interpretation is that, assuming that their performance scores in the hiring process reflects candidates' actual abilities, is that the candidate without the CS degree is a better learner (of CS related topics). Put it another way, if a person who only spent a couple months in boot camp performs on a similar level as a CS graduate in interviews, it really means the former learns at a terrifying speed, and has huge potential. It also helps that many people like you would prefer to pass on the candidate without the formal qualifications, so there's even less competition for the candidate even though they at least have the same level of technical ability. This line of reasoning depends heavily on whether your interview process can actually gauge the technical ability of the candidates. If it can't, _then_ assuming the one with a CS degree has better skills is more reasonable. But at that point, you might want to fix your hiring processes instead of arguing this point.

wonnage 3y ago
I don’t think you can conclude anything other than the candidate passed your interview.