3 ms·

I feel like it's only in the past few years people have been talking about "junior" vs "senior" except as literal job titles. It's a weird binary distinction wh

by TillE 3y ago

I feel like it's only in the past few years people have been talking about "junior" vs "senior" except as literal job titles. It's a weird binary distinction when of course gaining experience is a gradient.

dexwiz 3y ago
Because they are two different jobs usually. Juniors are more focused on code while senior trends towards planning, reviewing, and leading. In my experience a senior is just as likely to spec out some work and pass it on as do it themselves.
kelseyfrog 3y ago
It is of course a gradient, however, on that gradient there exists an important threshold: can this person, under their own direction, produce positive net value? Juniors require your active guidance. Seniors require your availability.
- blowski 3y ago
  I consider the size of relevant “horizons” - time, number of features, number of people. A junior should be able to have a positive impact working independently within very narrow horizons (a single function, 1 other person, 1 hour), and is showing growth as those horizons increase.
- kqr 3y ago
  There is no such universally accepted definition of these terms. The one you propose is useful and how the literature on expertise defines a journeyman but the word "senior" is highly ambiguous.
  - kelseyfrog 3y ago
    There's no universally accepted definition of any term so I'm not sure how that's relevant. That's how I describe my own perspective, others are free to differ. Language can be vague and useful.
    - munch117 3y ago
      When it comes to being ambiguously defined, "senior" is not just any old term. A senior can be someone who's two years out of school, or it can someone of retirement age (senior citizen), or anything in-between. Given context, an otherwise ambiguous word can be useful. "Senior" needs a lot of context, though.
- PeterisP 3y ago
  I'd assume at least a three-layer distinction for this - juniors require guidance, seniors can provide it, but there's a lot of middle grounds and many years of work where you're not junior (at least according to this criterua) anymore but not yet senior.
kqr 3y ago
Especially since the research on expertise already has a useful and operationally defined scale! https://two-wrongs.com/stop-using-junior-and-senior.html https://two-wrongs.com/stop-using-junior-and-senior.html
- 082349872349872 3y ago
  TIL a "journeyman" is a "journée-man" (for thoughts on how to progress beyond "master", see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39494801 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39494801 )
  - CRConrad 3y ago
    > TIL a "journeyman" is a "journée-man" By that guy's "executing a day’s work" definition. Usually it's used in the same sense as medieval - early modern guild terminology: After having apprenticed with your first master you set out on a journey to learn further from other masters of the craft in other towns. (Hopefully to graduate to master yourself after a while. No intermediary "expert" step in those days.) But maybe that's what you meant. Sarcasm is sometimes hard to detect online.

by TillE 3y ago

dexwiz 3y ago

Because they are two different jobs usually. Juniors are more focused on code while senior trends towards planning, reviewing, and leading. In my experience a senior is just as likely to spec out some work and pass it on as do it themselves.

kelseyfrog 3y ago

It is of course a gradient, however, on that gradient there exists an important threshold: can this person, under their own direction, produce positive net value? Juniors require your active guidance. Seniors require your availability.

blowski 3y ago
I consider the size of relevant “horizons” - time, number of features, number of people. A junior should be able to have a positive impact working independently within very narrow horizons (a single function, 1 other person, 1 hour), and is showing growth as those horizons increase.
kqr 3y ago
There is no such universally accepted definition of these terms. The one you propose is useful and how the literature on expertise defines a journeyman but the word "senior" is highly ambiguous.
- kelseyfrog 3y ago
  There's no universally accepted definition of any term so I'm not sure how that's relevant. That's how I describe my own perspective, others are free to differ. Language can be vague and useful.
  - munch117 3y ago
    When it comes to being ambiguously defined, "senior" is not just any old term. A senior can be someone who's two years out of school, or it can someone of retirement age (senior citizen), or anything in-between. Given context, an otherwise ambiguous word can be useful. "Senior" needs a lot of context, though.
PeterisP 3y ago
I'd assume at least a three-layer distinction for this - juniors require guidance, seniors can provide it, but there's a lot of middle grounds and many years of work where you're not junior (at least according to this criterua) anymore but not yet senior.

kqr 3y ago

Especially since the research on expertise already has a useful and operationally defined scale! https://two-wrongs.com/stop-using-junior-and-senior.html https://two-wrongs.com/stop-using-junior-and-senior.html

082349872349872 3y ago
TIL a "journeyman" is a "journée-man" (for thoughts on how to progress beyond "master", see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39494801 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39494801 )
- CRConrad 3y ago
  > TIL a "journeyman" is a "journée-man" By that guy's "executing a day’s work" definition. Usually it's used in the same sense as medieval - early modern guild terminology: After having apprenticed with your first master you set out on a journey to learn further from other masters of the craft in other towns. (Hopefully to graduate to master yourself after a while. No intermediary "expert" step in those days.) But maybe that's what you meant. Sarcasm is sometimes hard to detect online.