5 ms·

The snark is uncalled for, especially because Harvard does have a (fairly decent) engineering program at the undergrad level, as well as the fact that the 2 mos

The snark is uncalled for, especially because Harvard does have a (fairly decent) engineering program at the undergrad level, as well as the fact that the 2 most popular concentrations are Econ and CS. Nor does this kind of snark actually add any value to the discussion in HN and clearly breaks multiple rules of HN [0] [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

uoaei 2y ago
Do you disagree? I understand the scolding and you may consider it irrelevant to answer my question but I am curious about the intentions of those who push back in this way.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- eganist 2y ago
  > Do you disagree? I understand the scolding and you may consider it irrelevant to answer my question but I am curious about the intentions of those who push back in this way. Meta-question on the emphasis above: are you (uoaei) and bell-cot the same user?
  - stevenae 2y ago
    I think this was a confusing use of "this".
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- alephnerd 2y ago
  > Do you disagree Read the first paragraph > about the intentions of those who push back in this way Follow the HN guidelines (I myself have fallen foul of them on occasion). Low quality snark is not the kind of discourse that has value on this forum. And eaganist brings up a good point.
  - _zoltan_ 2y ago
    And of course you feel like it's your job to tell others what has value and what not? Why do you feel the entitlement to this?
    - eganist 2y ago
      It's probably coming from frustration with non-contributive commentary, of which the topmost comment unquestionably qualifies. It's in poor form to do citizen-policing pretty much anywhere let alone an internet forum, but I won't begrudge the user their frustrations over something that's undeniably a problem. Heh.
      - _zoltan_ 2y ago
        The comment you've replied is not wrong. The submission shows real world knowledge vs a lot of folks coming out today without any practical knowledge, just theoretical. This is what OP talked about.
        eganist 2y ago
        > The submission shows real world knowledge Compared to what specifically? It helps to find relevant, comparable examples of electives in major areas of economic impact and demonstrating how these modern electives fail to do what you described. > vs a lot of folks coming out today without any practical knowledge, just theoretical. This isn't a direct comparison. But if we were to make this comparison more direct (e.g "more people were prepared in 1907 for application of practical knowledge than today), it's also in need of substance. How much is "a lot"? What is practical knowledge, and how can you be sure that the knowledge taught isn't practical? From the modern curricula linked elsewhere in the thread, it looks like quite a few courses are directly relevant to operationalization in their domains.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
bell-cot 2y ago
"Like previous graduates, most seniors plan to hold jobs in the finance, consulting, and technology sectors..." - https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/senior-survey/after-harvard/ https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/senior-survey/after-har... "The majority — 58 percent — of Harvard’s graduating class will immediately enter the workforce, and more than half will take jobs in finance, tech, or consulting..." - https://features.thecrimson.com/2024/senior-survey/after-harvard/ https://features.thecrimson.com/2024/senior-survey/after-har... And look at their current Economics electives - https://economics.harvard.edu/sites/hwpi.harvard.edu/files/econ/files/2024-2025_writing_and_theory_courses_all_electives_v2.pdf?m=1712589572 https://economics.harvard.edu/sites/hwpi.harvard.edu/files/e... - which, if you're going into finance, consulting, public policy, or political ideology, look great. But if you want to understand or manage a real-physical-world company? Maybe Econ 1745 - "Corporate Finance" would be useful? And Harvard's own numbers here - https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2022/05/harvard-awards-8870-degrees-over-2021-22-academic-year/ https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2022/05/harvard-award... - suggest that that "fairly decent" engineering program is a puny fraction of the undergraduate population. And maybe has a pretty poor RoI on its Harvard-sized tuition, given that Harvard feels the need to argue that prospective applicants shouldn't just ignore it, in favor of well-known engineering programs, because "community and location": https://college.harvard.edu/student-life/student-stories/why-i-chose-harvard-engineering https://college.harvard.edu/student-life/student-stories/why...
- eganist 2y ago
  > https://economics.harvard.edu/sites/hwpi.harvard.edu/files/econ/files/2024-2025_writing_and_theory_courses_all_electives_v2.pdf?m=1712589572 https://economics.harvard.edu/sites/hwpi.harvard.edu/files/e... > which, if you're going into finance, consulting, public policy, or political ideology, look great. But if you want to understand or manage a real-physical-world company? Maybe Econ 1745 - "Corporate Finance" would be useful? Are you saying that the "Railroad Practice" elective is directly comparable to the "Corporate Finance" elective of today? If anything, I'd say that Railroad Practice is best compared to "Using Big Data to Solve Economic and Social Problems" in that they're both focused on some of the biggest economic facilitators of their respective days, rail and data science. And Harvard's other electives seem similarly tailored, allowing people to get a grasp of fields of practice that can yield them a substantial advantage in practice, e.g in leveraging globalization or serving underserved markets. Your other points aren't comparative to the Harvard of the day but rather speculative ("a puny fraction" and its suggested impact), so there's not much I can do to speak to them. --- Tangent: it'd be an interesting analytic exercise to compare courses and curricula year by year and see what percentage of electives have generalized, what percentage have specialized, and to get a better grasp of how a school's programs are both adapting to and anticipating current and future economics landscapes.

uoaei 2y ago

Do you disagree? I understand the scolding and you may consider it irrelevant to answer my question but I am curious about the intentions of those who push back in this way.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
eganist 2y ago
> Do you disagree? I understand the scolding and you may consider it irrelevant to answer my question but I am curious about the intentions of those who push back in this way. Meta-question on the emphasis above: are you (uoaei) and bell-cot the same user?
- stevenae 2y ago
  I think this was a confusing use of "this".
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
alephnerd 2y ago
> Do you disagree Read the first paragraph > about the intentions of those who push back in this way Follow the HN guidelines (I myself have fallen foul of them on occasion). Low quality snark is not the kind of discourse that has value on this forum. And eaganist brings up a good point.
- _zoltan_ 2y ago
  And of course you feel like it's your job to tell others what has value and what not? Why do you feel the entitlement to this?
  - eganist 2y ago
    It's probably coming from frustration with non-contributive commentary, of which the topmost comment unquestionably qualifies. It's in poor form to do citizen-policing pretty much anywhere let alone an internet forum, but I won't begrudge the user their frustrations over something that's undeniably a problem. Heh.
    - _zoltan_ 2y ago
      The comment you've replied is not wrong. The submission shows real world knowledge vs a lot of folks coming out today without any practical knowledge, just theoretical. This is what OP talked about.
      - eganist 2y ago
        > The submission shows real world knowledge Compared to what specifically? It helps to find relevant, comparable examples of electives in major areas of economic impact and demonstrating how these modern electives fail to do what you described. > vs a lot of folks coming out today without any practical knowledge, just theoretical. This isn't a direct comparison. But if we were to make this comparison more direct (e.g "more people were prepared in 1907 for application of practical knowledge than today), it's also in need of substance. How much is "a lot"? What is practical knowledge, and how can you be sure that the knowledge taught isn't practical? From the modern curricula linked elsewhere in the thread, it looks like quite a few courses are directly relevant to operationalization in their domains.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

bell-cot 2y ago

"Like previous graduates, most seniors plan to hold jobs in the finance, consulting, and technology sectors..." - https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/senior-survey/after-harvard/ https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/senior-survey/after-har... "The majority — 58 percent — of Harvard’s graduating class will immediately enter the workforce, and more than half will take jobs in finance, tech, or consulting..." - https://features.thecrimson.com/2024/senior-survey/after-harvard/ https://features.thecrimson.com/2024/senior-survey/after-har... And look at their current Economics electives - https://economics.harvard.edu/sites/hwpi.harvard.edu/files/econ/files/2024-2025_writing_and_theory_courses_all_electives_v2.pdf?m=1712589572 https://economics.harvard.edu/sites/hwpi.harvard.edu/files/e... - which, if you're going into finance, consulting, public policy, or political ideology, look great. But if you want to understand or manage a real-physical-world company? Maybe Econ 1745 - "Corporate Finance" would be useful? And Harvard's own numbers here - https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2022/05/harvard-awards-8870-degrees-over-2021-22-academic-year/ https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2022/05/harvard-award... - suggest that that "fairly decent" engineering program is a puny fraction of the undergraduate population. And maybe has a pretty poor RoI on its Harvard-sized tuition, given that Harvard feels the need to argue that prospective applicants shouldn't just ignore it, in favor of well-known engineering programs, because "community and location": https://college.harvard.edu/student-life/student-stories/why-i-chose-harvard-engineering https://college.harvard.edu/student-life/student-stories/why...

eganist 2y ago
> https://economics.harvard.edu/sites/hwpi.harvard.edu/files/econ/files/2024-2025_writing_and_theory_courses_all_electives_v2.pdf?m=1712589572 https://economics.harvard.edu/sites/hwpi.harvard.edu/files/e... > which, if you're going into finance, consulting, public policy, or political ideology, look great. But if you want to understand or manage a real-physical-world company? Maybe Econ 1745 - "Corporate Finance" would be useful? Are you saying that the "Railroad Practice" elective is directly comparable to the "Corporate Finance" elective of today? If anything, I'd say that Railroad Practice is best compared to "Using Big Data to Solve Economic and Social Problems" in that they're both focused on some of the biggest economic facilitators of their respective days, rail and data science. And Harvard's other electives seem similarly tailored, allowing people to get a grasp of fields of practice that can yield them a substantial advantage in practice, e.g in leveraging globalization or serving underserved markets. Your other points aren't comparative to the Harvard of the day but rather speculative ("a puny fraction" and its suggested impact), so there's not much I can do to speak to them. --- Tangent: it'd be an interesting analytic exercise to compare courses and curricula year by year and see what percentage of electives have generalized, what percentage have specialized, and to get a better grasp of how a school's programs are both adapting to and anticipating current and future economics landscapes.