5 ms·

> A newly minted Phd, is one type of person that I've found myself having trouble hiring. Same with an newly minted Masters. The PhD issue makes some sense, a

by glesica 13y ago

> A newly minted Phd, is one type of person that I've found myself having trouble hiring. Same with an newly minted Masters. The PhD issue makes some sense, a person who just spent two to four years becoming an expert in a narrow area of specialization may want to use that knowledge, and may not be all that much more valuable if you don't need it (especially since his or her other skills may not have "kept up"). However, for masters degrees I wonder if you're considering the fact that the degree (in many fields) can be seen as a "signal" [1]. Many masters programs are highly applied and, assuming a reasonable degree of rigor, more challenging than undergraduate programs. So, looked at in this way, wouldn't it make sense to use a masters degree to help narrow your pool down to people who can handle challenging work? In this case, you would pay more not for the additional knowledge, but for the free screening the degree provided. Disclaimer: I'm getting a masters degree in CS (and already have one in econ, hehe), although from what I've seen, people don't have much trouble finding jobs, so... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)

leobelle 13y ago
A master's degree, assuming no experience, is more like a warning signal for someone who's stayed in academics too long and has no practical skill. It's like you're hiring a really expensive junior developer if they've never built real world software under business constraints that needed to like be bug free, and scalable. It's like the code written in graduate college gave a shit about memory use, file or network i/o performance, a good ui design, or like actually doing the thing it's supposed to. Sorry, ranting due to bad experience in the past. The thing is, more education will enable a good developer to be even better. It's doesn't seem to help a struggling developer in any shape or form. Unfortunately sometimes I get the impression that people stay in school to address a problem that can't be addressed with more classroom time and end up doubling down on a field that maybe isn't right for them. At the very least try to intern early on and or successfully help a popular open source project before graduate school.
- glesica 13y ago
  > The thing is, more education will enable a good developer to be even better. It's doesn't seem to help a struggling developer in any shape or form. In my (limited) experience, the people who struggled in undergrad run screaming away from any possibility of doing grad school (my experience here is consistent across econ and CS). The people who were good at the field consider grad school because the psychic costs of learning more are low. If you find a person with an MS who can't pass a simple programming test, then (and this is very general, I'm sure there are exceptions) take a look at the school her or she attended and stop interviewing people from that school, problem solved.
  - leobelle 13y ago
    > take a look at the school her or she attended and stop interviewing people from that school, problem solved. This is really bad advice, because much about learning programming is about an individual effort. It has little if anything to do with the school. > If you find a person with an MS who can't pass a simple programming test You actually need more than a simple programming test that solves a single problem. You need to see enough code to have some architecture, designed by the candidate. Interviews are too short for this so experience whether at some other company or open source, or just if skilled people can vouch for you goes a long way.
    - digita88 13y ago
      I also agree in doing a black mark against the school however it helps to have a look at (in terms of Masters, PhD) the quality of work within that department / within the graduating year. It's a way to go beyond the marketing fluff in non top-tier schools.
    - sizzle 13y ago
      people have interview/test anxiety, so I agree that one test isn't enough to evaluate
  - glesica 13y ago
    Replying to leobelle here since the thread got too deep. I agree that learning to program is individual, but you don't learn to program in grad school. If a school gave you an MS and you can't do Fizzbuzz, that school isn't serving its signalling purpose (that I mentioned in my first comment). So while that school may be fine, if lax, if the employer is using education as a signal, a school that doesn't fail students doesn't provide a strong signal. Relating to your comment about needing to see more code, education is actually perfect for that. Most companies don't let you take your source code with you, schools do. So provided you took some courses that required significant engineering projects, a student has a big pile of (hopefully) reasonably-designed code to show off to an interviewer. A person who worked for a less-than-progressive company (since some maintain open source libraries and such) does not. They both have their open source contributions.
thelastpizza 13y ago
This isn't always the case in CS. It is often more advantageous to your career to not take time off. Granted, someone can get a masters while working, but it's often for the purpose of a career change or promotion into a specific category of position.
- glesica 13y ago
  Who said anything about taking time off? If the goal is to become a talented software developer, what does a hiring manager care if that was done for-pay or in school, provided the candidate got the experience and did something challenging? I understand that there are "business" concerns (deadlines, tools, testing, and other things that aren't always taught in school) but a candidate could just as easily be deficient in those areas having worked for an employer with crap practices. At some point companies need to stop whining and solve their own problems.
ap22213 13y ago
As someone who occasionally hires, a masters doesn't really show much in terms of talent, but it does sometimes show a level of specialization. And, there are times when I need a specialist (e.g. image processing, feature analysis, statistics, etc.). But, generally, I don't need a lot of specialists. Also, there seem to be two types of people who go for masters. There are those that really love their particular specialty, and are willing to sacrifice significant opportunity costs to master it. I respect that group. And, then there are those that think that a masters will get them more pay, but who also had calculated that they couldn't increase their pay the hard way (e.g. working for it). I'm wary of the that group. Also, when hiring a specialist, I don't want one who has focused on topics that any good developer with a B.S. can research independently: operating systems, languages, data structures, algorithms. I want one with a particular domain specialty - someone who can read recent research papers, and implement it.
- jaynos 13y ago
  Third group. People who already have an Undergrad degree in another field and are using the Masters Degree to switch careers.
  - ap22213 13y ago
    Good point.

by glesica 13y ago

leobelle 13y ago

A master's degree, assuming no experience, is more like a warning signal for someone who's stayed in academics too long and has no practical skill. It's like you're hiring a really expensive junior developer if they've never built real world software under business constraints that needed to like be bug free, and scalable. It's like the code written in graduate college gave a shit about memory use, file or network i/o performance, a good ui design, or like actually doing the thing it's supposed to. Sorry, ranting due to bad experience in the past. The thing is, more education will enable a good developer to be even better. It's doesn't seem to help a struggling developer in any shape or form. Unfortunately sometimes I get the impression that people stay in school to address a problem that can't be addressed with more classroom time and end up doubling down on a field that maybe isn't right for them. At the very least try to intern early on and or successfully help a popular open source project before graduate school.

glesica 13y ago
> The thing is, more education will enable a good developer to be even better. It's doesn't seem to help a struggling developer in any shape or form. In my (limited) experience, the people who struggled in undergrad run screaming away from any possibility of doing grad school (my experience here is consistent across econ and CS). The people who were good at the field consider grad school because the psychic costs of learning more are low. If you find a person with an MS who can't pass a simple programming test, then (and this is very general, I'm sure there are exceptions) take a look at the school her or she attended and stop interviewing people from that school, problem solved.
- leobelle 13y ago
  > take a look at the school her or she attended and stop interviewing people from that school, problem solved. This is really bad advice, because much about learning programming is about an individual effort. It has little if anything to do with the school. > If you find a person with an MS who can't pass a simple programming test You actually need more than a simple programming test that solves a single problem. You need to see enough code to have some architecture, designed by the candidate. Interviews are too short for this so experience whether at some other company or open source, or just if skilled people can vouch for you goes a long way.
  - digita88 13y ago
    I also agree in doing a black mark against the school however it helps to have a look at (in terms of Masters, PhD) the quality of work within that department / within the graduating year. It's a way to go beyond the marketing fluff in non top-tier schools.
  - sizzle 13y ago
    people have interview/test anxiety, so I agree that one test isn't enough to evaluate
- glesica 13y ago
  Replying to leobelle here since the thread got too deep. I agree that learning to program is individual, but you don't learn to program in grad school. If a school gave you an MS and you can't do Fizzbuzz, that school isn't serving its signalling purpose (that I mentioned in my first comment). So while that school may be fine, if lax, if the employer is using education as a signal, a school that doesn't fail students doesn't provide a strong signal. Relating to your comment about needing to see more code, education is actually perfect for that. Most companies don't let you take your source code with you, schools do. So provided you took some courses that required significant engineering projects, a student has a big pile of (hopefully) reasonably-designed code to show off to an interviewer. A person who worked for a less-than-progressive company (since some maintain open source libraries and such) does not. They both have their open source contributions.

thelastpizza 13y ago

This isn't always the case in CS. It is often more advantageous to your career to not take time off. Granted, someone can get a masters while working, but it's often for the purpose of a career change or promotion into a specific category of position.

glesica 13y ago
Who said anything about taking time off? If the goal is to become a talented software developer, what does a hiring manager care if that was done for-pay or in school, provided the candidate got the experience and did something challenging? I understand that there are "business" concerns (deadlines, tools, testing, and other things that aren't always taught in school) but a candidate could just as easily be deficient in those areas having worked for an employer with crap practices. At some point companies need to stop whining and solve their own problems.

ap22213 13y ago

As someone who occasionally hires, a masters doesn't really show much in terms of talent, but it does sometimes show a level of specialization. And, there are times when I need a specialist (e.g. image processing, feature analysis, statistics, etc.). But, generally, I don't need a lot of specialists. Also, there seem to be two types of people who go for masters. There are those that really love their particular specialty, and are willing to sacrifice significant opportunity costs to master it. I respect that group. And, then there are those that think that a masters will get them more pay, but who also had calculated that they couldn't increase their pay the hard way (e.g. working for it). I'm wary of the that group. Also, when hiring a specialist, I don't want one who has focused on topics that any good developer with a B.S. can research independently: operating systems, languages, data structures, algorithms. I want one with a particular domain specialty - someone who can read recent research papers, and implement it.

jaynos 13y ago
Third group. People who already have an Undergrad degree in another field and are using the Masters Degree to switch careers.
- ap22213 13y ago
  Good point.