I'm surprised about this statistic as well as happy. I was pretty much sure CS and other science work was completely written off by US students as nonviable. After all, it's easier to go into investment banking or management consulting, and the course load is much easier for a bigger payoff.
Some people have posted sentiments along the lines of -- "is this actual CS being studied, or a checkbox for an IT job?" Being in IT, I can say that having a background in a science or engineering discipline (doesn't matter which one) is a huge asset. The abiltiy to logically break down a system or problem, analyze dependencies and troubleshoot separates a really good IT guru from the guy who just got out of a certification class. (If you have this ability naturally, then great...but most people need to actually practice on something to get good at it, hence the degree.) This also can lead to more job satisfaction -- I enjoy my job because my company gives me interesting problems to solve, partially because they know I'll be able to deal with the "interesting" stuff better than someone who can just follow directions. I have a non-CS background (chemistry,) but the same scientific, logical reasoning applies. For example, when ýou're trying to figure out a poorly documented application with no access to the developers or support, and something goes wrong, this kicks in. Someone who just took a certification class will (may!) know how to drive the product's GUI or CLI, and often changes six things at a time in the vague hope that something will work. A science-trained individual is much more likely to methodically approach troubleshooting, and understand how what they do possibly affects connected systems. There are huge exceptions in both cases, and I've seen them, but it's a good rule of thumb that someone with a science/engineering background is going to be a better candidate for a job. Maybe my judgement is a little clouded since I'm in systems integration, where this skillset is even more important to have. Anything outside of a formulaic procedure, or a situation where you actually have to come up with the procedure is better staffed by someone who can deal with the higher-level work.
One interesting side effect of this is that if enrollment in good CS programs gets high enough, employers will no longer be able to sell the "we can't find qualified Americans to do our jobs." Like I said, I only agree with them to a point -- there's a lot of bozos in our field that don't belong and are better suited to other professions. However, there are a lot of good, qualified people out there...they just don't work cheap and are usually employed unless a major layoff/restructuring leaves you without a seat.
One interesting side effect of this is that if enrollment in good CS programs gets high enough, employers will no longer be able to sell the "we can't find qualified Americans to do our jobs.
I don't follow the logic here. There are already plenty of unemployed people in IT. The complaint has always been about getting more visas for foreign IT workers and getting favorable laws passed to outsource. Now, if graduation rates reach the point that wages approach those in outsourcing target nations...
Work without a vision is slavery, Vision without work is a pipe dream,
But vision with work is the hope of the world.
Actual science degree or vocational training? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm surprised about this statistic as well as happy. I was pretty much sure CS and other science work was completely written off by US students as nonviable. After all, it's easier to go into investment banking or management consulting, and the course load is much easier for a bigger payoff.
Some people have posted sentiments along the lines of -- "is this actual CS being studied, or a checkbox for an IT job?" Being in IT, I can say that having a background in a science or engineering discipline (doesn't matter which one) is a huge asset. The abiltiy to logically break down a system or problem, analyze dependencies and troubleshoot separates a really good IT guru from the guy who just got out of a certification class. (If you have this ability naturally, then great...but most people need to actually practice on something to get good at it, hence the degree.) This also can lead to more job satisfaction -- I enjoy my job because my company gives me interesting problems to solve, partially because they know I'll be able to deal with the "interesting" stuff better than someone who can just follow directions. I have a non-CS background (chemistry,) but the same scientific, logical reasoning applies. For example, when ýou're trying to figure out a poorly documented application with no access to the developers or support, and something goes wrong, this kicks in. Someone who just took a certification class will (may!) know how to drive the product's GUI or CLI, and often changes six things at a time in the vague hope that something will work. A science-trained individual is much more likely to methodically approach troubleshooting, and understand how what they do possibly affects connected systems. There are huge exceptions in both cases, and I've seen them, but it's a good rule of thumb that someone with a science/engineering background is going to be a better candidate for a job. Maybe my judgement is a little clouded since I'm in systems integration, where this skillset is even more important to have. Anything outside of a formulaic procedure, or a situation where you actually have to come up with the procedure is better staffed by someone who can deal with the higher-level work.
One interesting side effect of this is that if enrollment in good CS programs gets high enough, employers will no longer be able to sell the "we can't find qualified Americans to do our jobs." Like I said, I only agree with them to a point -- there's a lot of bozos in our field that don't belong and are better suited to other professions. However, there are a lot of good, qualified people out there...they just don't work cheap and are usually employed unless a major layoff/restructuring leaves you without a seat.
Re:Actual science degree or vocational training? (Score:4, Insightful)
> "we can't find qualified Americans to do our jobs."
Of course they will continue saying this. The qualification they are talking about is accepting being paid in the equivalent of 10 Rupies a day.
Re: (Score:2)
One interesting side effect of this is that if enrollment in good CS programs gets high enough, employers will no longer be able to sell the "we can't find qualified Americans to do our jobs.
I don't follow the logic here. There are already plenty of unemployed people in IT. The complaint has always been about getting more visas for foreign IT workers and getting favorable laws passed to outsource. Now, if graduation rates reach the point that wages approach those in outsourcing target nations...