U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education > Colleges and Universities
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-10-2017, 02:54 AM
 
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
9,871 posts, read 8,019,083 times
Reputation: 11232

Advertisements

Academic success is only partly measured by income. An awakening of "the life of the mind" (Perry Miller) brings great rewards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-10-2017, 03:03 AM
 
6,272 posts, read 6,109,353 times
Reputation: 2229
Quote:
Originally Posted by compSciGuy View Post
Granted, I didn't go to MIT, but I don't think they have a "Computer Science" major, I believe it was/is "EECS".

I don't think any of these reports can really take into account all situations and the situations that apply to your case (or your friend's case, etc.). Obviously, if the hiring manager is a Telugu from Andra Pradesh and you're Chinese, you're not getting the job even if you have a Ph.D. in EECS from MIT.

Silicon Valley seems to be filled with plenty of people in tech with "soft" majors from schools like Berkeley and Stanford who would get preference in many instances over "Computer Science" majors from flyover universities like UIUC, Texas, Georgia Tech, Wisconsin-Madison, etc.

The situation seems to be worse amongst Asians than Whites, but "tech" definitely seems to be getting less "technical". The old school nerds who had a passion for science and engineering have been overtaken by the white hipsters and brogrammers, and the status-conscious name-focused Asians.

An individual who likes science and engineering, and did they own work, in general, is going to care more about somebody having a rigorous related major from a respectable school/program; They typically are more likely to like the work and not want to fix the problems of what many of they deem as "stupid or lazy people". Somebody that cut corners is more focused on pedigree, "cultural fit", "name", and doesn't like what they're doing is going to care more about hiring for similar traits.
Major is not the same as department. I used to study in an eecs department too, but my major was computer science. They have different requirements for EE, CE and CS, which are in the same department at that particular university.

When companies hire programmers, there is an inevitable coding interview, which is not very easy. So some solid technical skills are guaranteed to be tested. However soft skills are evaluated too. For example I know Amazon likes to ask a lot of behavioral questions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 08:16 AM
 
Location: Miami,FL
654 posts, read 562,707 times
Reputation: 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frihed89 View Post
Academic success is only partly measured by income. An awakening of "the life of the mind" (Perry Miller) brings great rewards.
The awakening of the life mind, doesn't pay the bills
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 11:47 AM
 
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
8,293 posts, read 5,847,318 times
Reputation: 5275
Quote:
Originally Posted by compSciGuy View Post
Granted, I didn't go to MIT, but I don't think they have a "Computer Science" major, I believe it was/is "EECS".

I don't think any of these reports can really take into account all situations and the situations that apply to your case (or your friend's case, etc.). Obviously, if the hiring manager is a Telugu from Andra Pradesh and you're Chinese, you're not getting the job even if you have a Ph.D. in EECS from MIT.

Silicon Valley seems to be filled with plenty of people in tech with "soft" majors from schools like Berkeley and Stanford who would get preference in many instances over "Computer Science" majors from flyover universities like UIUC, Texas, Georgia Tech, Wisconsin-Madison, etc.

The situation seems to be worse amongst Asians than Whites, but "tech" definitely seems to be getting less "technical". The old school nerds who had a passion for science and engineering have been overtaken by the white hipsters and brogrammers, and the status-conscious name-focused Asians.

An individual who likes science and engineering, and did they own work, in general, is going to care more about somebody having a rigorous related major from a respectable school/program; They typically are more likely to like the work and not want to fix the problems of what many of they deem as "stupid or lazy people". Somebody that cut corners is more focused on pedigree, "cultural fit", "name", and doesn't like what they're doing is going to care more about hiring for similar traits.
I live in Silicon Valley - and IME, if a person doesn't have the skills, drive and desire to problem solve and collaborate with others, they won't last in their field. Regardless of their degree or pedigree.

It boils down to "What can you do? How can you contribute? Do you get along and work well with others?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 02:37 PM
 
1,481 posts, read 595,024 times
Reputation: 3769
In terms of picking a major, the article is totally useless. Averages are meaningless. The only thing that counts is how an individual does, and that is an unknown until their working days are over.

The one subject that I learned in school that really mattered in my life was statistics. What I learned is that statistical averages can not predict how any member of the group will do. Statistics only tell you what the average of all the members of a group will do, and what the highest and lowest performers will do. But no one knows where they will fit in the group.

If you look at the graph presented in the article, you can see there is enough overlapping for all the majors earnings, that a member of any group can do better or worse than a member of any other group.

The same would hold true for universities. There are many graduates of lower prestige public colleges that do better in life than those coming out of the top schools. There are failures and successes and everything in between from all schools and all majors.

And success in life is way more than life time earnings anyway. Making their living in a field that matches their aptitudes and interests is way more important in creating a successful life than what college they went to or what their major was.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 03:00 PM
 
1,481 posts, read 595,024 times
Reputation: 3769
Very true for a technical field where you either get it right or you don't. In other areas you can do well with politics and BS. For most people without a silver spoon or a connection, they have to learn how to manage their bosses, work well with others, adapt to the work culture, and have the willingess and drive to develop the expertise needed to excel in their field. What college you came from or what your major was often doesn't matter once you are on the job. Very few subjects learned in college are actually applicable to work. Almost all of it is learned on the job.

Quote:
Originally Posted by silverkris View Post
I live in Silicon Valley - and IME, if a person doesn't have the skills, drive and desire to problem solve and collaborate with others, they won't last in their field. Regardless of their degree or pedigree.

It boils down to "What can you do? How can you contribute? Do you get along and work well with others?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 03:35 PM
 
5,770 posts, read 3,047,758 times
Reputation: 15125
Quote:
Originally Posted by compSciGuy View Post
..., but "tech" definitely seems to be getting less "technical". The old school nerds who had a passion for science and engineering have been overtaken by the white hipsters and brogrammers, and the status-conscious name-focused Asians.

An individual who likes science and engineering, and did they own work, in general, is going to care more about somebody having a rigorous related major from a respectable school/program; They typically are more likely to like the work and not want to fix the problems of what many of they deem as "stupid or lazy people". Somebody that cut corners is more focused on pedigree, "cultural fit", "name", and doesn't like what they're doing is going to care more about hiring for similar traits.
I was privileged to start my career in aerospace when some of the initial pioneers of the space age were still active and working. The had incredible engineering minds and attention to detail. Tough and competent, to borrow a phrase, they did not suffer fools gladly. It was an honor and a privilege to work with them. The new generation of engineers and managers are not as technically focused where engineering decisions are more driven by PowerPoint than detailed calculations. I'm not sure how I came to the Youtube link below, but compare it to the 50 page PowerPoint full of mealy words and unintelligible drawings of arrows and boxes you would see today.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihAEyZ25qfU
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 06:31 PM
 
6,764 posts, read 9,755,278 times
Reputation: 5069
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez View Post
In terms of picking a major, the article is totally useless. Averages are meaningless. The only thing that counts is how an individual does, and that is an unknown until their working days are over.

The one subject that I learned in school that really mattered in my life was statistics. What I learned is that statistical averages can not predict how any member of the group will do. Statistics only tell you what the average of all the members of a group will do, and what the highest and lowest performers will do. But no one knows where they will fit in the group.

If you look at the graph presented in the article, you can see there is enough overlapping for all the majors earnings, that a member of any group can do better or worse than a member of any other group.

The same would hold true for universities. There are many graduates of lower prestige public colleges that do better in life than those coming out of the top schools. There are failures and successes and everything in between from all schools and all majors.

And success in life is way more than life time earnings anyway. Making their living in a field that matches their aptitudes and interests is way more important in creating a successful life than what college they went to or what their major was.
The only issue with averages is that they can be skewed by outliers; that's why medians are often preferred. Regardless, these stats are not meaningless.

Measures of central tendency (mean, median, and mode) are there to to help predict chances. They can't tell you exactly what will happen with an individual, but they can often predict an individual's chances of falling within a particular category. For example, anyone's chance of making $100k per year with a degree in early childhood education is extremely low. If you study that with the expectation of making six figures, then you would be a fool. On the other hand, the chance of making six figures as an MD or DO are extremely high.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2017, 11:51 PM
 
Location: California
604 posts, read 439,200 times
Reputation: 744
Quote:
Originally Posted by compSciGuy View Post

Silicon Valley seems to be filled with plenty of people in tech with "soft" majors from schools like Berkeley and Stanford who would get preference in many instances over "Computer Science" majors from flyover universities like UIUC, Texas, Georgia Tech, Wisconsin-Madison, etc.

The situation seems to be worse amongst Asians than Whites, but "tech" definitely seems to be getting less "technical". The old school nerds who had a passion for science and engineering have been overtaken by the white hipsters and brogrammers, and the status-conscious name-focused Asians.
Utterly absurd. Engineers from those schools will do fine around here. Not only that but there arent that many white people in many areas. My work is mostly asian. And not a single person in the IT division of my work is white. My mother had a liberal arts degree from NYU and said employers didnt care in the slightest, and her job offers were really mediocre. She did better on the East Coast.

Comp sci is becoming more popular though due to high wages. So its a field thats attracting people just for the money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2017, 11:23 AM
 
5,230 posts, read 2,383,065 times
Reputation: 5119
Quote:
Originally Posted by compSciGuy View Post
Granted, I didn't go to MIT, but I don't think they have a "Computer Science" major, I believe it was/is "EECS".

I don't think any of these reports can really take into account all situations and the situations that apply to your case (or your friend's case, etc.). Obviously, if the hiring manager is a Telugu from Andra Pradesh and you're Chinese, you're not getting the job even if you have a Ph.D. in EECS from MIT.

Silicon Valley seems to be filled with plenty of people in tech with "soft" majors from schools like Berkeley and Stanford who would get preference in many instances over "Computer Science" majors from flyover universities like UIUC, Texas, Georgia Tech, Wisconsin-Madison, etc.

The situation seems to be worse amongst Asians than Whites, but "tech" definitely seems to be getting less "technical". The old school nerds who had a passion for science and engineering have been overtaken by the white hipsters and brogrammers, and the status-conscious name-focused Asians.

An individual who likes science and engineering, and did they own work, in general, is going to care more about somebody having a rigorous related major from a respectable school/program; They typically are more likely to like the work and not want to fix the problems of what many of they deem as "stupid or lazy people". Somebody that cut corners is more focused on pedigree, "cultural fit", "name", and doesn't like what they're doing is going to care more about hiring for similar traits.
GA Tech's graduate comp sci program is rated 9th in the country. Hardly "flyover" status.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education > Colleges and Universities
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top