Are IT Degrees being Devalued ?

peter_dublin

Hi.

This is a topic which has been on my mind for some time and I'd like to get some other peoples feelings on it. I have my Honours Degree in IT, a HDip and soon to be my MSc but I can honestly say if someone was to ask me if they should take a four year BSc (Hons) in IT I would tell them no.

More and more I see people with 18 month HDips in Software usually competing for jobs while having undergrads in non IT but usually protected professions such as Engineering, this week alone I've found two CVs left on printers by recent Grad hires from other teams (securly disposed of) one where there primary BSc is in Construction Engineering and another in Arts and noted a HDip in Teaching was been undertaken.

To me, I'm not sure I see the point in people taking a four year degree in IT anymore when I can just throw a 12m - 18m HDip on top and get the same job anyway yet not have the fallback of entering the protected Engineering / Teaching careers afterwards. To me it seems IT has now become the fallback career while you await a recovery in the economy to resume your choosen career especially software engineering.

What do others think, should IT be protected in the same way I cannot become a chartered Engineer, Teacher within having taken an approved degree and HDip/MSc etc, there have been threads on here, one I believe titled "Where are all the jobs" where it was clearly stated they had taken no more than 14 months of classes and that basically there aim was to pass the modules and nothing more, it came across as if they found it funny that their aim to way just pass the modules.

After 72 + months in Education only to find myself technically less qualified than this person is to me quite irritating. Personally when hiring I will hire a BSc (Hons) in IT before an MSc with a non IT BSc as I generally feel they have a more rounded knowledge, more practical experience and I know it is their choosen career and not a stop gap in this current economy but this is not the case generally.

I also believe this lessens the value of the BSc as an employer if you can get a HDip to perform the same role as a BSc (Hons) then it lessens the value of the BSc in Industry as one has spent 2 -3 possible four times more time in Education for the same renumeration yet again given say the Teachers Council I cannot just grab a HDip and become a teacher without the appropriate degree thus limiting entries and protecting renumeration levels to a greater extent.

Raging_Ninja

peter_dublin wrote: »

Hi.

This is a topic which has been on my mind for some time and I'd like to get some other peoples feelings on it. I have my Honours Degree in IT, a HDip and soon to be my MSc but I can honestly say if someone was to ask me if they should take a four year BSc (Hons) in IT I would tell them no.

More and more I see people with 18 month HDips in Software usually competing for jobs while having undergrads in non IT but usually protected professions such as Engineering, this week alone I've found two CVs left on printers by recent Grad hires from other teams (securly disposed of) one where there primary BSc is in Construction Engineering and another in Arts and noted a HDip in Teaching was been undertaken.

To me, I'm not sure I see the point in people taking a four year degree in IT anymore when I can just throw a 12m - 18m HDip on top and get the same job anyway yet not have the fallback of entering the protected Engineering / Teaching careers afterwards. To me it seems IT has now become the fallback career while you await a recovery in the economy to resume your choosen career especially software engineering.

What do others think, should IT be protected in the same way I cannot become a chartered Engineer, Teacher within having taken an approved degree and HDip/MSc etc, there have been threads on here, one I believe titled "Where are all the jobs" where it was clearly stated they had taken no more than 14 months of classes and that basically there aim was to pass the modules and nothing more, it came across as if they found it funny that their aim to way just pass the modules.

After 72 + months in Education only to find myself technically less qualified than this person is to me quite irritating. Personally when hiring I will hire a BSc (Hons) in IT before an MSc with a non IT BSc as I generally feel they have a more rounded knowledge, more practical experience and I know it is their choosen career and not a stop gap in this current economy but this is not the case generally.

I also believe this lessens the value of the BSc as an employer if you can get a HDip to perform the same role as a BSc (Hons) then it lessens the value of the BSc in Industry as one has spent 2 -3 possible four times more time in Education for the same renumeration yet again given say the Teachers Council I cannot just grab a HDip and become a teacher without the appropriate degree thus limiting entries and protecting renumeration levels to a greater extent.

There's a shortage of people with IT qualifications, so of course people are going find it easier to be hired when they do a conversion course. It's basic supply and demand.

If, in your first job, you find yourself on the same wage/remuneration as somebody who did an unrelated degree and then a conversion course, that's your own fault for not bargaining enough.

eorpach

peter_dublin wrote: »

Hi.

This is a topic which has been on my mind for some time and I'd like to get some other peoples feelings on it. I have my Honours Degree in IT, a HDip and soon to be my MSc but I can honestly say if someone was to ask me if they should take a four year BSc (Hons) in IT I would tell them no.

More and more I see people with 18 month HDips in Software usually competing for jobs while having undergrads in non IT but usually protected professions such as Engineering, this week alone I've found two CVs left on printers by recent Grad hires from other teams (securly disposed of) one where there primary BSc is in Construction Engineering and another in Arts and noted a HDip in Teaching was been undertaken.

To me, I'm not sure I see the point in people taking a four year degree in IT anymore when I can just throw a 12m - 18m HDip on top and get the same job anyway yet not have the fallback of entering the protected Engineering / Teaching careers afterwards. To me it seems IT has now become the fallback career while you await a recovery in the economy to resume your choosen career especially software engineering.

What do others think, should IT be protected in the same way I cannot become a chartered Engineer, Teacher within having taken an approved degree and HDip/MSc etc, there have been threads on here, one I believe titled "Where are all the jobs" where it was clearly stated they had taken no more than 14 months of classes and that basically there aim was to pass the modules and nothing more, it came across as if they found it funny that their aim to way just pass the modules.

After 72 + months in Education only to find myself technically less qualified than this person is to me quite irritating. Personally when hiring I will hire a BSc (Hons) in IT before an MSc with a non IT BSc as I generally feel they have a more rounded knowledge, more practical experience and I know it is their choosen career and not a stop gap in this current economy but this is not the case generally.

I also believe this lessens the value of the BSc as an employer if you can get a HDip to perform the same role as a BSc (Hons) then it lessens the value of the BSc in Industry as one has spent 2 -3 possible four times more time in Education for the same renumeration yet again given say the Teachers Council I cannot just grab a HDip and become a teacher without the appropriate degree thus limiting entries and protecting renumeration levels to a greater extent.

Many undergraduate degrees are a waste and unnecessary for a career in that profession. Law being one (I speak from personal experience).

For employers, the value of somebody who has done a H.Dip in IT and who has a background in something different, is that they have the interpersonal skill set to succeed immediately in IT. There are far too many people in the profession who have a BSc in Computer Science but who lack social-skills (the "geeks"). Its unfortunate and it may be unpopular to say, but its a fact. That, coupled with the massive shortage of IT skills in Ireland, means that those with good CVs and HDips in IT (financed by the Government) are going to meet with immediate success if they can get their foot in the door somewhere.

Knowledge is not simply about book learning over a number of years in a BSc; especially in IT, where things move along very fast, where things become outdated quickly, and where burgeoning areas - like Data Analytics - are not actually even taught at undergrad level in Ireland (only at H.Dip and MSc).

It may be unfortunate for somebody with a BSc that they're seeing those with HDips succeed as quickly as themselves, but you ought not to be bemoaning and begrudging!

Consider instead that a (IT or otherwise) career is as much about confidence as it is about competence, and accept the fact that there are plenty of jobs in the IT field to go around at the moment (we're importing most of our IT professionals). The poster above is right - if you have additional academic training (deeper knowledge of programming languages etc) then shout it from the rooftops - but don't underestimate the importance to IT employers of those who have developed their interpersonal skill-sets in other fields first and gone down the H.Dip road -- which, you do a massive injustice to with your attitude -- a H.Dip is in fact an 18-month intensive and focussed qualification, and to those who can hack it, it is at least as detailed as any lesser-focused 3-year undergrad! The last H.Dip in Computing run by DIT (and funded by Govt) started with a class of 50 and ended with a class of 27, which more than proves that its a qualification that is not for the "opportunistic" or faint-hearted.

And by the way, one doesn't need a primary law degree to become a Solicitor/Barrister! Or a B.Ed to become a secondary teacher - feel free to try your hand at one of those professions!!

beauf

Do you have to quote the whole post everytime. Painful on a mobile.

There's no mention of skillsets here or the roles. There's lots of roles in IT that require a wider skillset than just IT qualifications. If its a pure development role then the IT graduate should have a superior skillset and depth of experience with revelent projects. So that wouldn't really be competition there.

peter_dublin

Please don't make this personal, it's peoples opinions I'm looking for in general, I have a good position earning just under a six figure sum, this is not about myself but about what I percieve at times to be the devaluation of 3rd level BSc (Hons). As I said I hire BSc (Hons) obviously with appropraite social skills as these are customer facing consulting roles in large multi nationals globally which is not hard as generally the geeks are few and far between.

Raging_Ninja

peter_dublin wrote: »

Please don't make this personal, it's peoples opinions I'm looking for in general, I have a good position earning just under a six figure sum, this is not about myself but about what I percieve at times to be the devaluation of 3rd level BSc (Hons). As I said I hire BSc (Hons) obviously with appropraite social skills as these are customer facing consulting roles in large multi nationals globally which is not hard as generally the geeks are few and far between.

Are you talking about graduate roles? What roles do you do the hiring for?

If you are talking about non-graduate roles, I think the further along you are from college, the less important the words on the piece of paper are.

professore

If you're talking about say engineering software then someone with a B.Sc. in IT would be worth a lot less to a company than an engineer with a post grad in IT, as they wouldn't understand the engineering. So it depends.

IT isn't like relatively static fields like law or engineering, really it's a form of applied maths, abstract thinking and the ability to think generally rather than solving one specific use case is what you need to be really good at it.

Sparks

peter_dublin wrote: »

To me, I'm not sure I see the point in people taking a four year degree in IT anymore when I can just throw a 12m - 18m HDip on top and get the same job anyway yet not have the fallback of entering the protected Engineering / Teaching careers afterwards. To me it seems IT has now become the fallback career while you await a recovery in the economy to resume your choosen career especially software engineering.

What do others think, should IT be protected in the same way I cannot become a chartered Engineer, Teacher within having taken an approved degree and HDip/MSc etc, there have been threads on here, one I believe titled "Where are all the jobs" where it was clearly stated they had taken no more than 14 months of classes and that basically there aim was to pass the modules and nothing more, it came across as if they found it funny that their aim to way just pass the modules.

Okay, so a few things:

• Your degree in IT is equivalent to your degree in engineering when applying for chartered status in engineering. You don't see many CS grads going for CEng status for the same reason you don't see many computer engineering grads going for it; in the IT industry in Ireland, the CEng just isn't a known thing (there's no anti-CEng bias I've seen, it's literally that people don't know what it is and it's not really pushed; whether that's someone's fault or the inevitable outcome of a small starting point needing time to snowball, I don't know).
• The protected title idea is nice, but quick, name an effective and well-known body that looks over the profession and isn't the IEEE or ACM? And if you did think of the ICS, congrats, but why are you still asking if CITP exists?
• "Where are all the jobs" often translates into "Hang on, IT employers were talking about a skills shortage, but now it looks like they just wanted a glut of people in the marketplace so they could drive down salaries, what gives?" which is a whole other issue where higher education to transfer into the IT field isn't the cause of the problem, but the source of its victims.
• Have we really gotten to the stage where passing the modules of a course isn't seen as enough to really "make the grade" and if so: (a) how? (b) why don't we just add more modules? (c) is this just the "Do What You Love" and "Code In Your Spare Time For Free" memes having a lovechild?

peter_dublin

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

Are you talking about graduate roles? What roles do you do the hiring for?

If you are talking about non-graduate roles, I think the further along you are from college, the less important the words on the piece of paper are.

Of course I fully agree with this and there are also plenty of non IT roles where you may need Engineering Skills. I hire for ERP specialists, all of whom work at code level (Java amoung multiple other languages) and some are performing performance optimisation (SQL optimisation / Java) through to Life Cycle Tasks such as Unicode Conversion specialists.

In general I find the BSc (Hons) are a better quality than the conversion students, not only do they have programming experience they have more experience and a wider knowledge set such as knowledge of Networks, Memory structures and General IT knowledge that a HDip just doesn't get. I raised this here because most HDips conversion courses are in programming. Of course there are "exceptions" such as a HDip whom really should have gone in IT in the first place so this is speaking in general terms. I know of a BSc Eng whom became a nurse, he didn't achieve it in 14 months.

Of course there is exceptions but I raised this because I've often had to battle with Global HR as their perception is that the HDip or MSC is better qualified. I argue this is not the case, 4 years of Arts and 16 months of IT with an MSc project does not in my opinion.

I'm of course excluding them being "Geeks" or any other social perceptions that exist of people working in IT, my point was that given the points based scale of 3rd level education they often find themselves at a disadvantage.

Sparks

to Life Cycle Tasks such as Unicode Conversion specialists.

Is there anything that makes you look like a blowhard faster than using Camel Case when writing plain ordinary English? Seriously. I know it's a tiny niggling point on a par with spelling mistakes, but please, stop it. It's like showing up for work wearing assless chaps.

peter_dublin

Sparks wrote: »

Is there anything that makes you look like a blowhard faster than using Camel Case when writing plain ordinary English? Seriously. I know it's a tiny niggling point on a par with spelling mistakes, but please, stop it. It's like showing up for work wearing assless chaps.

Sorry, force of habit really. After years of Camel Casing :-) this for customer projects you forget that their is a lower case letter on those words.

Sparks

peter_dublin wrote: »

Sorry, force of habit really.

Wouldn't jump down your throat about it normally, it's just that one really is a teeth-grater of a thing and recruiters seem to do it all the time (and free hint, it's something that gets a lot of recruiters added to the spam filter instantly).

Plus, you mentioned unicode which is my pet hate of the month along with C++ template metaprogramming.

The Corinthian

peter_dublin wrote: »

To me, I'm not sure I see the point in people taking a four year degree in IT anymore when I can just throw a 12m - 18m HDip on top and get the same job anyway yet not have the fallback of entering the protected Engineering / Teaching careers afterwards. To me it seems IT has now become the fallback career while you await a recovery in the economy to resume your choosen career especially software engineering.

You're going to have to be a bit more specific when you talk about 'IT', as it is a wide area and even in this paragraph you muddy the waters my seemingly defining it as something almost separate to software engineering.

peter_dublin wrote: »

Of course there is exceptions but I raised this because I've often had to battle with Global HR as their perception is that the HDip or MSC is better qualified. I argue this is not the case, 4 years of Arts and 16 months of IT with an MSc project does not in my opinion.

Depends on what you mean by 'qualified'. A four-year bachelors degree in CS will afford one an excellent foundation on the field; the theory and a much broader knowledge than you'll find from people who have more vocational qualifications, but ultimately if I'm hiring for someone to work in a particular area, someone with a six month Fas course specifically targeting that area will often be more qualified for the actual job upon graduation.

Indeed, were I to think of the best developers I've ever worked with over the years, not a single one did a BSc. In one role, I had two working under me; an 18-year old with a LC and some Fas cert and a 24-year old with a BSc, both hired at the same time. The latter earned literally double what the former earned, yet would lean over to him ten times a day looking for help.

So, you have to ask what really is the value of a 'qualification' - any qualification, not just in CS, but in practically any field or discipline. And in this regard it comes down to the following:

• The person with the qualification has been taught a certain level within the field or discipline. What they've been taught is not necessarily directly applicable to any future employment, however.
• The person with the qualification was smart enough to qualify for and pass exams to get the qualification.
• The person with the qualification was able to apply themselves and stick out months, if not years, to get the qualification.

That we may view some qualifications as better than others is largely because we trust that universities, given that the awarding of degrees is controlled, are able to keep things to a certain minimum standard and are better funded, even without knowing the actual details of their course. We also trust that post graduate qualifications are somehow 'better' or more advanced.

In short, in society, we have prejudices about qualifications and presume these things. It's why the above 24-year old commanded double the salary of the 18-year old (that and ageism).

So your guy with a BA in history and PGDip/HDip in SC has shown himself to be smart enough to qualify for not one, but two courses and to work and stick both out. And has (more advanced) learning from the postgraduate course than someone with an undergraduate course. And that's why we view them as 'better qualified', for good or for ill - even though someone with no qualifications, but experience and talent may be more qualified than either of them in reality - how many graduates are really 'qualified' to do their first job, after all?

This is how the system works, for good or for ill.

To add a further spin to this, someone with a bachelors degree in finance, will also have an additional 'qualification' to someone who did CS if they're going to be developing financial software - another factor to consider.

TBH, to me it sounds like you're coming from the point of view that you wish that CS was a 'protected' profession, but it's not. Either it's too young to be one, or it rose after the age where professions could be 'protected' - indeed, how many solicitors or barristers did a BL anymore? That they retain their professional status means they all need to do a professional postgraduate qualification, but even there the bachelors degree is of limited advantage (it just gets you a few exceptions so you can get that professional postgraduate qualification faster).

'IT' is not a 'protected' profession, I'm afraid. It's not even a unionised one. And the very prejudices we find in how we view education, that will make people believe that a BSc is better than a vocational certificate are the ones that will act against it when someone else as that extra couple of letters after their name.

beauf

This doesn't seem like IT degrees being devalued. But there's square pegs being put in round holes. These are not simply IT roles but very technical IT roles. Even if they are not doing much if, any coding. There's a simple solution to that which is to insist on a wide ranging technical test as part of the recruitment process to the role.

Maybe because my own experience hasn't been in pure development companies. But I don't really understand the narrow focus on academic qualifications here though. In my experience a swathe of higher level IT qualifications, including a BSc isn't a good indication of general IT knowledge or interest. To many its just a job, and they've little interest in it outside of that. Its just a career path they picked, because they thought it was a sensible choice. You do get some who live and breath IT especially coding. But they are the exception rather than the rule. Some of them have not come from a BSc either.

Perhaps if you are in a global organisation you'd have a different experience though. As you have a bigger pool of the top people to recruit from.

c_man

Are IT Degrees being Devalued ?

Meh, not sure I'm bothered about the distinction between the two. All grads we recruit are equal in my eyes, they're rubbish! Just kidding But they're all a drain initially from being overwhealmed, not up to basic things, being unsure and due to even the inexperience of a proper workplace.

I couldn't tell you what degree most of my team would have, it never comes up. A few years of experience and university stuff is all but irrelevant (bar the need to have some sort of qualification).

Sparks

beauf wrote: »

I don't really understand the narrow focus on academic qualifications here though. In my experience a swathe of higher level IT qualifications, including a BSc isn't a good indication of general IT knowledge or interest.

Because you (and most other people) are forgetting that the person a BA-level degree is for, is the person taking it, not the employer.

By which I mean, if you take a BA level course in computer science or computer engineering, you get a good grounding in the fundamentals and learn the basic underlying stuff you need to know to go on to learn new tools/techniques faster later on. This does not make you a perfect fit for a Google Developer role, or an Apple Developer role or an <Insert Company-de-jour name here> Developer role. And it is not supposed to and you are being cheated out of your tuition fee and your time if it tries to do so.

The end product of a BA course should be a graduate who can take on any of a wide range of roles, meaning that their four years of their life, their tens of thousands of euro in tuition and so forth, are an investment in their future earning potential. You do those degrees for your own personal long-term benefit, not so some other random stranger who happens to be an employer doesn't have to spend much money to get an employee who knows how to use the company's exact, individual mix of tools and traditions. Employers would love it if - say - TCD started to offer a "Google* Developer BA" course, where only the tools and techniques Google use were taught and any graduate could be slotted into a Google team with a minimum of onboarding, because that would lower their costs. Thing is, when you produce 200 grads a year and there are only four Google developer roles going, and no other company uses Google's exact mix of tools and traditions, well, you've just taken several years and several thousand euros off 196 people who get squat out of it.

There's a lot of words for that kind of thing and to be fair to the boards developers, the boards.ie swear filter does catch most of them...





*Google, Apple, Samsung, Phillips, Ericcsson, IBM, Accenture, Boards.ie ltd, Facebook, eBay, substitute whatever company name you want...

beauf

I take your point and agree with it, but that's not what I was talking about..

Sparks wrote: »

Because you (and most other people) are forgetting that the person a BA-level degree is for, is the person taking it, not the employer. ...

I was talking about people who have a BSc computing and a higher qualification, a master or two in a IT related field. Which is what the OP was talking about

Sparks wrote: »

...The end product of a BA course should be a graduate who can take on any of a wide range of roles,...

I was broadly speaking of the "should" you put in italics. I'm quite shocked that some with such qualifications (its like 6~7yrs of IT related courses) will then struggle with getting basic IT things like fixing their PC, recognising a sata port. Or see relationships in data, data they are familar with.

That said some with the same qualifications are coding rock-stars and pretty can do anything. So I'm not sure why there such a difference, for people with similar qualifications. I suspect some course/qualifications are more academic than others.

Sparks

beauf wrote: »

I'm quite shocked that some with such qualifications (its like 6~7yrs of IT related courses) will then struggle with getting basic IT things like fixing their PC, recognising a sata port.

Those are not basic IT things, those are basic skills in building PCs.
You or I might have no worries doing that, because we built our own PCs to save money or get a custom system; but it's not taught in college because the amount by which things change in a year would render the course useless before it was finished and you'd have to prepare a new course every 6-12 months which would mean the course would be one every lecturer would flee from because their job performance reviews would take it in the shorts (lecturers - in an example of why academia is broken - are hired to lecture but their performance review is based on their research and publication records and generally everything but their teaching).

Or see relationships in data, data they are familar with.

Now that would be surprising, but it might just be that the person you're talking to rather than the course they did...

That said some with the same qualifications are coding rock-stars and pretty can do anything. So I'm not sure why there such a difference, for people with similar qualifications. I suspect some course/qualifications are more academic than others.

Or maybe it's the people and not the course? Or, more controversially still, your expectations are miscalibrated?
You have to admit, it's at least logically possible...

beauf

logically everything is possible. Even the unlikely scenarios.

ToxicPaddy

Just my 2c on this.

A degree in anything is seen as a measure of learning. Can you apply yourself for 3-4 years to a particular area of study without a teacher or your parents breathing down your neck to get it done? It's your choice to do it and succeed at it as you are an adult and time to start acting like one.

A degree/masters in the relevant area gives you the basics to get onto the first step of the career ladder in your chosen profession. It may get you in the door of a company but nothing more. HR are usually tasked with getting in suitable candidates for a certain dept who are hiring to interview etc. They rarely know the specifics for the job, they get a wish list from the dept head and usually at the top of the list is a degree or relevant qualification.

So those who apply and check these boxes naturally move to the top of the list. Experience would be next on the list (or these may be reversed), but this depends on the type of role and of course if its a senior or junior role as some companies prefer to train people their own way with no bad habits from previous experience, so graduates are preferred.

Once in the door, the probationary period is then the real test to see if you have what it takes to do the job. During this you will be trained up to a certain level, assigned tasks and your progress measured. If you pass, you're made full-time and go from there

If you come into a job with previous experience from another similar role, then that's a plus in some situations as less training should be required, you also have worked in a structured work environment and know what's what when it comes to working on projects, meeting time lines, reporting etc. Real life stuff that isn't thought in college/university.

After that it's up to the person to prove themselves.

Degrees aren't the be all and end all, but they are a definite advantage when applying for a job. If 100 candidates apply for a job, 40 have no degrees, 30 have general degrees and 30 have relevant area degrees, the chances are that a big chunk of those with the relevant area degrees will get through to interview stages.

If any of that 100 have work relevant experience, they will automatically be ahead of the pack no matter what their degree is or what qualifications they have in most circumstances.

Two former managers of mine were of the opinion that a person who can work in a team and has a certain personality type is 70% of the way into a job. Skills can be taught, personality can't.

You can have a genius in a particular area but if that person is unable to communicate with a team around them, regularly causes tensions and problems within a team due to ego, attitude or some superiority complex or is unable work to and meet deadlines when working under pressure, they are essentially useless to most teams of people. So no one will want to hire them no matter how much they know.

I have 15 years experience in IT yet I have no degree. My route was a FAS course, some technical qualifications and experience just like most of the team I currently work with and a lot of people I have worked with and some are now senior managers in large firms.

However, now I am just finishing my first year of a BSc degree and I am hoping to go the whole way to a Masters, why? Because it will definitely stand to me in the future if I wish to change jobs and move up the career ladder.

People need to remember that IT is a relatively new industry.

• 20 years ago, anyone who knew PCs, Servers and hardware walked into a job.
• 15 years ago, anyone who knew web development walked into a job.
• 10 years ago, anyone who knew development walked into a job.
• 5 years ago, anyone who knew mobile app development walked into a job.

Yes I am making massive generalisations, but you get a the gist. It's only now becoming established and standard structures being put in place. Especially with the larger IT companies, such as Google, FB, LinkedIn etc setting the standards that other companies are starting to follow for recruiting.

It's still going through its growing stages and with every new advance in technology requires new skill sets. So this trend will continue for the foreseeable future but will eventually settle into more established routines like in finance, accountancy, sales etc.

As for people with degrees in different areas getting in ahead of those with area specific degrees, well you need to remember that there are very few areas that technology hasn't made its way into, so people from those backgrounds may have been upskilled and now have IT experience in these areas but it's transferable into other areas.

I know of Maths/Physics/Engineering grads and workers who have great development experience and knowledge, other guys who work in telecoms who can configure switches, firewalls and know network security.

Why? Cause it helped them do their job more effectively, they wanted to know more about it and had a genuine interest in it so they worked at it and improved and expanded their knowledge and skills in that area.

If I decided to change job now, even with my experience, I wouldn't be confident of getting past the HR filtering stage in most large multinationals as I don't have a degree yet I may be able to do the advertised job with my eyes closed. So in that sense, a degree is definitely worth the paper it's written on however it all depends on the guy who is doing the recruiting.

IT degrees aren't being devalued as such, they are just becoming more common and the pool of those out there with them is growing on an annual basis along with those who have IT experience but not an IT specific degree so just waving an IT degree in front of HR won't guarantee you anything anymore but it definitely gets you noticed.

The days of IT grads swanning around the office thinking they are gods gift because they had a degree (and I've experienced this first hand) are now gone and thank goodness for that.

If you want to stand out from the crowd, by all means get a degree and get some work experience, but also:

• learn interviewing skills showing your personality and communication as well as your technical skills
• show some initiative in the jobs your apply for, not just going because of a pay packet but because of the career they offer you.
• go into a job with an open mind
• and be willing to learn from those around you.

As your experience and knowledge grows the degree becomes less and less relevant but it's still a factor when changing jobs.

Finally, don't look down your nose at those who got a job in an area different from their degree and ahead of those that did have one in that area.

It's possible that:

• they wanted a change of career from what they originally studied
• did a better interview during the application process
• gained experience in that area through some initiative
• and were the better person for the job that anyone else

It's never as black and white as you think and unless you have all the details, don't automatically assume that its because your IT degree is not worth having or that people are better off doing something else.

beauf

I don't think you could ever walk into a job. You always needed a skillset and experience and/or a qualification. Now however a qualification has a higher importance than it used to. As a filter by agencies etc.

The Corinthian

beauf wrote: »

I don't think you could ever walk into a job. You always needed a skillset and experience and/or a qualification.

Nah, late nineties, during the dotcom, you could walk into a job - you had to have serious problems not to even accidentally walk into one. 2001 - 2003 saw a devastating recession in the IT sector (I know many who let it altogether) as the silly money vanished, and by the end of this the market largely stabilized.

ToxicPaddy

The Corinthian wrote: »

Nah, late nineties, during the dotcom, you could walk into a job - you had to have serious problems not to even accidentally walk into one. 2001 - 2003 saw a devastating recession in the IT sector (I know many who let it altogether) as the silly money vanished, and by the end of this the market largely stabilized.

Yup, it had to happen though, there were guys walking into companies with a basic knowledge of whatever and demanding €60k+ and getting it. It was pure madness.

I worked for a startup in 2001, the guy who started it was only 24 and within 3 months raised over a €1 million in investments thrown at him by investors and they were queuing up to give him more and boy did he know how to spend it. One of the "senior" techs worked on a building site labouring and decided he wanted to get into IT, so spent 3 months doing the MCSE exams, then walked into the job with the startup on €80k a year with absolutely no experience. He couldn't even install and configure a Windows OS on a server, it was absolutely pathetic.

12 months later the company was gone to the wall and the guy who set it up had disappeared, no one knows where but I reckon a big chunk of the investors money was gone with him.

beauf

Lots of IT places I worked in the 90's required technical tests and qualifications. Having 2 or 3 interviews was normal enough in the places I worked. That said having an IT degree wasn't required, and that wasn't my primary degree. Maybe if you had that and a masters you "walked" into jobs. I didn't see people on these rockstar wages. The companies weren't short of money either, one hired a train to bring the whole company drinking down the country. People made decent money through share schemes though. Well until they crashed.

CruelCoin

I think you're missing another layer here:

I'm doing a computer science h.dip part-time.
I've given up all my free time for 1.5 years, and paid 5k for the privilege.
If you could put a hard value on dedication and commitment, then i'd say we lowly h.dippers are miles ahead of the degree students.

Calina

peter_dublin wrote: »

After 72 + months in Education only to find myself technically less qualified than this person is to me quite irritating. Personally when hiring I will hire a BSc (Hons) in IT before an MSc with a non IT BSc as I generally feel they have a more rounded knowledge, more practical experience and I know it is their choosen career and not a stop gap in this current economy but this is not the case generally.

I actually disagree with the more rounded knowledge argument. I would suggest that someone who has only studied information technology or computer science may have quite an insular view of the world. Your original post seems to demonstrate this quite nicely.

peter_dublin wrote: »

I also believe this lessens the value of the BSc as an employer if you can get a HDip to perform the same role as a BSc (Hons) then it lessens the value of the BSc in Industry as one has spent 2 -3 possible four times more time in Education for the same renumeration yet again given say the Teachers Council I cannot just grab a HDip and become a teacher without the appropriate degree thus limiting entries and protecting renumeration levels to a greater extent.

You are not being particularly clear here. Are you complaining that it's possible to get a job having done a {variable} degree plus HDip in IT but not that it's possible having done a {variable} degree plus HDip in Education? Or are you discussing level 7 qualifications versus level 9 qualifications since the HDip in Education is a postgraduate qualification but your complaints about HDips in IT don't appear to recognise the fact that a degree was done in advance?

I think a key issue relates to how people sell their skills; if you think you're at a disadvantage to people who have spent less time in studying compsci or IT than you have yourself, it may be that the issue is not necessarily related to the compsci or IT skillset required.

The other issue - and this impacts anyone taking some sort of a compsci or IT qualification regardless of the level - is that IT is a big, big sector, and it is unrealistic for any course to be able to cover it comprehensively. The term itself is spread far too thinly.

ChRoMe

CruelCoin wrote: »

I think you're missing another layer here:

I'm doing a computer science h.dip part-time.
I've given up all my free time for 1.5 years, and paid 5k for the privilege.
If you could put a hard value on dedication and commitment, then i'd say we lowly h.dippers are miles ahead of the degree students.

That is a remarkable misuse of logic, its actually quite staggering what you have just done.

Source: I'm a senior software engineer with near 15 years experience with no 3rd level qualifications.

fergalr

Are IT degrees being devalued?

Yes, in my opinion, a bit.

1) There's pressure on colleges to produce IT grads, as well as overall funding pressure. Programming takes hard work which a lot of people don't do. So the colleges graduate substandard grads, rather than fail everyone.

2) Because IT is buoyant, there's pressure to convert grads in other disciplines into IT grads, so you've a lot of conversion courses where people from an unrelated discipline get an MSc in software after 15months, which is silly.


But it doesn't really matter.

- Bad employers don't really care, and just want anyone that has basic coding to start working on the mobile version now now now. Which is fine, gives the employees time to learn.

- Good employers will thoroughly assess you and make their own mind up - your academic qualifications aren't that strong of a signal either way.

So its not really a big problem in practice.



But don't think arguments like the following will cut a huge amount of ice:

CruelCoin wrote: »

I think you're missing another layer here:

I'm doing a computer science h.dip part-time.
I've given up all my free time for 1.5 years, and paid 5k for the privilege.
If you could put a hard value on dedication and commitment, then i'd say we lowly h.dippers are miles ahead of the degree students.

CruelCoin

fergalr wrote: »

But don't think arguments like the following will cut a huge amount of ice:

Employers look for more than just qualifications, as has been stated multiple times in this thread.

I think its entirely reasonable that a recruiter would look for some sort of demonstrable evidence of dedication and hard work.

You don't think that doing a h.dip part time on top of your regular work week shows that?

Sparks

CruelCoin wrote: »

You don't think that doing a h.dip part time on top of your regular work week shows that?

It does; whether or not that trumps a full-blown fulltime course in computer science is a harder question to answer because the end product in both cases is a person with theoretical knowledge and little experience; and you have to keep in mind that some companies will then look at someone with a BA at age 21 and think "Cheap slave labour" while someone with a BA and HDip at age - say - 29 and think "Ah. Right. Actually knows the score and I can't work them to death for less than minimum wage." I'm not saying that all companies treat employees like "resources" rather than people, mind you -- but there definitely are some out there.

And even the good companies will be thinking that at age 21 you're cheaper to hire because at age 29 you probably have dependents and need more salary but you have the same amount of industry experience as the 21-year-old who basically wants rent and beer money.

In general it's a harder way to get into the industry. One of the few bits of good news is that it's at least a crustal defense - get through it, into your first role and get some time under your belt, and you'll look far better a year later than the new grad looks a year later, because now companies start to look at the pre-HDip experience as something that might be useful (specifically, as domain expertise). In fact, if you can leverage that pre-HDip experience as domain expertise from the start, that might be the easiest approach. Of course, it depends on what that experience was...

DublinWriter

One large consultancy (which I won't name) currently recruits on the milk-round for IT consultants on the basis that candidates will get a first - IN ANY DISCIPLINE!

I know quite a lot of people currently working for them and their primary degrees are in everything from Zoology to History.

...and yes, they're useless.

The Corinthian

ChRoMe wrote: »

That is a remarkable misuse of logic, its actually quite staggering what you have just done.

Well, perhaps he wasn't terribly clear but I do get his point.

As I pointed out earlier one of the theories surrounding education economics is that it's not simply what one learns that sets the graduate apart. Completing a recognised and well-regarded course also:

• Demonstrates they were smart enough to get into it, and;
• that they put in the effort, commitment and discipline to stick it out.

For highly-skilled labour the former of these is an attractive quality in human capital, and the latter is in pretty much any kind of labour.

And of the latter, which shows greater effort, commitment and discipline?

• Someone who did the subject matter straight out of school, at 17 or 18, and probably had mommy and daddy pay for the course.
• Someone who did the subject matter later, after already completing a qualification, probably while holding down a job and putting their own money where their mouth is.

So if you only view education in terms of the pure subject matter, then the OP has a point, but that's not how it works. Add the other economic benefits and the H.dipper starts looking a lot more attractive.

Not saying it's right or wrong, although you'd have to be a fool to ignore such factors, just that this is how the World turns.

fergalr

CruelCoin wrote: »

Employers look for more than just qualifications, as has been stated multiple times in this thread.

I think its entirely reasonable that a recruiter would look for some sort of demonstrable evidence of dedication and hard work.

You don't think that doing a h.dip part time on top of your regular work week shows that?

I basically agree Sparks' reply above.

But to address each of your questions in turn:

CruelCoin wrote: »

Employers look for more than just qualifications, as has been stated multiple times in this thread.

Agreed - I even said that in my post - good employers will make a pretty good assessment of the candidate over and above what degree they do or don't have.

CruelCoin wrote: »

I think its entirely reasonable that a recruiter would look for some sort of demonstrable evidence of dedication and hard work.

You don't think that doing a h.dip part time on top of your regular work week shows that?

I'm sure that doing a H Dip part time, on top of regular work, shows dedication and hard work. And lots of other good qualities, which is great. I'm not trying to be negative here, this is a great time to have a qualification in IT, and IT is a super cool area.

But, you said:

CruelCoin wrote: »

If you could put a hard value on dedication and commitment, i'd say we lowly h.dippers are miles ahead of the degree students.

But, degree students have 4 college years of dedication and commitment to studying IT full time, vs. 1.5years part time for a h.dip.

I'm sure people who do good work on their h.dip will be just fine, but they just won't know as much as the good degree students.


The reality is that employers value knowledge and skills and ability to get stuff done much more than they value previous dedication and hard work - otherwise I'm sure people with PhDs would get a big salary premium, just because of their qualification.


I don't want to be negative - its a great time to have an IT qualification - and programming is hard, hopefully the hard work should pay off whether you do it in a h.dip or an undergrad.
But, if you try and invent some sort of story for why the 1.5year h.dip is better than the 4year undergrad, don't expect people to take it at face value.


(Aside: you seem to use 'recruiter' and 'employer' interchangably in your post. These two things are not interchangable.)

CruelCoin

fergalr wrote: »

(Aside: you seem to use 'recruiter' and 'employer' interchangably in your post. These two things are not interchangable.)

Aye, i know, was tired, apologies.

Was studying for today's programming exam as it happens.

Not my intention to say a h.dip student is better than a degree student, Merely that i can prove dedication. Appologies again.

Bowing out now.