Don't bother with that degree, say IT pros

[Azathoth]

Isn't Java pretty much obsolete these days?

[Pappa]

Isn't Java pretty much obsolete these days?

No, not really. It's still got lots of valid and new applications. Android apps are all written in Java, for example.

[maiforpeace]

Isn't Java pretty much obsolete these days?

No, not really. It's still got lots of valid and new applications. Android apps are all written in Java, for example.

My husband is fluent in Java, but he's had a hard time finding work with that skill, and that in the Silicon Valley.

Good article KLR - I'll have to share it with him, he's always been of the mind that a degree was useless to him as a software engineer.

[Jason]

Perhaps it says a lot about how irrelevant the content of many of the degree courses are too. I've looked into it several times but always felt that learning what I need right now to do the job at hand was more useful than spending a a few years getting a computer science degree, most of which would involve using Java, a language I'll likely never use.

I think the article is correct in so far as it goes (autodidacts are as skilled as educated coders), it does, however, fail to mention the other learning you'd receive at Uni - such as high level maths which are very helpful in developing new algorithms.

So I agree, autodidacts are as skilled as punching in 'standard' code as the guy that went to Oxford. It's a few levels above saying that self-taught typists are just as good at data entry as those who went to career college and got a degree in it.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Perhaps it says a lot about how irrelevant the content of many of the degree courses are too. I've looked into it several times but always felt that learning what I need right now to do the job at hand was more useful than spending a a few years getting a computer science degree, most of which would involve using Java, a language I'll likely never use.

I think the article is correct in so far as it goes (autodidacts are as skilled as educated coders), it does, however, fail to mention the other learning you'd receive at Uni - such as high level maths which are very helpful in developing new algorithms.

So I agree, autodidacts are as skilled as punching in 'standard' code as the guy that went to Oxford. It's a few levels above saying that self-taught typists are just as good at data entry as those who went to career college and got a degree in it.

The other thing that is not mentioned is how graduates often tend to start on higher salaries and, often, in senior positions. That certainly happened at Experian - there were experienced coders with 20 years under their belts on the same money as some wet-nosed kid fresh from his gap year. Bastits!

[hiyymer]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/30 ... it_degree/

Learning to code in your bedroom will prepare you for the IT job market just as well as a three-year degree costing £27,000, professionals said in a survey published today by CWJobs.co.uk.

More than half the IT professionals polled said they would not do an IT-related degree today if they were paying the increased fees, which will come into force next year.

Of the 1,300 questioned, 45 per cent said they feel a degree in computing is no longer valuable for securing a career in IT, and 71 per cent stated that self-taught developers are as skilled as those with formal training or education.

Many in industry were worried about the negative impact of tuition fees on the industry, with 64 per cent of respondents stating that the increased tuition fees will drive UK students abroad.

University tuition fees will rise to up to £9,000 a year from 2012.

Some of the (many) comments - linked to in the article - are worth a read.

In my experience the biggest problem in large IT development groups is getting real work done. People will spend countless hours having meetings to specify the unspecifiable instead of just doing it and changing it when you find out what is really needed (you think the customer actually knows what they want? Ha ha ha ha ha). The self-taught are generally more productive because they have a predisposition to just doing, even though their code may not be as finely structured or immaculately maintainable. I remember when I started working with this particular manager (call him Harry), and I was at first put off by his just-do-it attitude. Coders have this idea that it is really hard to change things later, like once you write it it's in concrete or something. And there is a great human insecurity about getting it wrong. I learned pretty quickly that Harry had the right idea. He sold his company for millions later on, and is now doing consulting projects for banks where he goes in and makes the thing happen that they have throwing money at for years with no result. I can remember being in on one of his brief and very productive meetings when some IT pro would start obfuscating and pushing his power agenda. If Harry couldn't just brush him off he'd look at him and say something like "you've got to be kidding". He also had great people skills, and could spot someone's talents very quickly. There'd be people all over the place doing stuff that had nothing to do with their job title. Productive people loved working for him. When we'd get some project done, he'd say "I love it when a plan comes togedda. Get a knife and fawk". (Yeah he was from the US east coast). I miss working for him.

[klr]

... you think the customer actually knows what they want? Ha ha ha ha ha

I don't just not think this, I know it not to be the case from many years of experience.

...
The self-taught are generally more productive because they have a predisposition to just doing, even though their code may not be as finely structured or immaculately maintainable.

Self-taught = self-motivated. And I'm not convinced that their code isn't as well-written or maintainable either. Sometimes it would be the case, but self-taught programmers tend to be more capable programmers, and (IMHO) write better quality code, all things considered.

I remember when I started working with this particular manager (call him Harry), and I was at first put off by his just-do-it attitude. Coders have this idea that it is really hard to change things later, like once you write it it's in concrete or something.
...

I'm a can-do, will-do person, but I always take a wider perspective: Plan for likely future developments from the outset. It's easier in the long run, even if it might slow down initial development. Third party software suppliers have a nasty habit of not doing this, because it suits them not to, and/or because they don't really care about your organisation as much as internal developers might.

[hiyymer]

I'm a can-do, will-do person, but I always take a wider perspective: Plan for likely future developments from the outset. It's easier in the long run, even if it might slow down initial development. Third party software suppliers have a nasty habit of not doing this, because it suits them not to, and/or because they don't really care about your organisation as much as internal developers might.

I agree in a way and it's worth some time, but I'd say the number of times it really matters in the sense that the code has to be completely torn apart and put back together are pretty minuscule. The trick is knowing when it might matter.

[Jason]

Just ask one of these self-motivated coders to get to work on a little bit of code to say.. oh I don't know perform a fourier transformation.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yeah, but I'm a B.Comm. We luv COBOL.

Hehe, COBOL. I love its brevity.

[klr]

Yeah, but I'm a B.Comm. We luv COBOL.

Hehe, COBOL. I love its brevity.

I still have all my old COBOL programs I wrote as a student.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yeah, but I'm a B.Comm. We luv COBOL.

Hehe, COBOL. I love its brevity.

I still have all my old COBOL programs I wrote as a student.

Last time I saw mine they were under 500 pounds of some really cool go-bang.

[drl2]

Around here, for many job openings, a degree is listed as one of the requirements and you won't even be considered if you don't have one. Granted, most of the places that have those requirements are ones you probably wouldn't want to work anyway if you could avoid it - stodgy banks, big corporate offices, etc. - not to mention government agencies whose pay scales would be competitive if the year was 1989. But a job's a job when work is scarce.

(As an aside, I may be the only person on the planet with a "Bachelor of Arts in Computer Science" - everybody else I know went for the "Bachelor of Science", but I did most of my degree via night courses while working full time, and the physics/chemistry lab courses I would have needed for the "Science" designation were only offered during the day.)