Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    Your next assignment is to discuss, in 500 words or less, why this
    topic belongs in the MENNOTES conference and not in SOAPBOX.  If you
    do not satisfy the moderators feeling that this topic does not belong
    here, it and all replies will be removed.  Begin.
    
    				Herr Doktor Professor Vick, PhD
    

I'm glad you feel better, Steve.

I disagree with some of your points, and agree with some, too.

DougO

>
>    Your next assignment is to discuss, in 500 words or less, why this
>    topic belongs in the MENNOTES conference and not in SOAPBOX.  If you
>    do not satisfy the moderators feeling that this topic does not belong
>    here, it and all replies will be removed.  Begin.
>    
>    				Herr Doktor Professor Vick, PhD
>

	Jawohl, Mein Herr !

	Vee didn't know dat vee musst heff der politikally korrekt
	entries only in here.

	Delete it iff you must.

	Heff a nize day,

	Steve H    

    
    	can we also throw in the `job title bigots' as well????

    Vick's point is valid -- why is this note here?  Why not SOAPBOX, or
    DIGITAL -- this note surely isn't a man's issue only, and these two
    conferences would give it a wider audience.
    
    					andrew

    And if we throw out bigots, where is Archie gonna work? 
    
    Boy the way Glenn Miller played,
    Songs that made the Hit Parade,
    Man did we have it made,
    Those were the days!
    :)

    You get an F- for your phony German accent.
    
    							- Vick

    
    	bury me on the lone prairie....
    
    	`scuse me....but what about my query, huh?
    	or was i swept under the carpet, eh ::VENISON?

    .8 Nope. Got it wrong again. its rope and pony time!:) A piece of
    rope, a tall tree, and a skittish pony. Better call the Marshal. 
    MARSHAL DILLON!! MARSHAL DILLON!! Where is that guy when yha need
    him!:)

    But this time I am taking a vote for Vick. Sorry pal. 

    re vick
    
            <<< QUARK::NOTES_DISK:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MENNOTES.NOTE;2 >>>
                         -< Topics Pertaining to Men >-
================================================================================
Note 1.1                        Format and rules.                        1 of 24
LSTARK::THOMPSON "Noter of the LoST ARK"            109 lines  11-NOV-1986 14:56
                           -< Conference Guidelines >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Welcome to the MENNOTES conference.  Topics discussed here cover
just about anything related to men. SOME POPULAR SUBJECTS ARE 
RELATIONS WITH WOMEN, FAMILY, THE ROLE OF MEN IN SOCIETY, AND CAREERS
BUT FEEL FREE TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING YOU LIKE WITHIN THE BROAD CONFINES 
OF "MEN'S ISSUES".

    If nothing else I think Steve's entry would fall under the heading
    of "careers", or "the role of men in society".   Would certainly
    fall under a Men's issue.  Unless you're restricting the issues
    to "men only" nowdays.
    
    fred();

    Welp..... Guess I'll retract that last one I made. Sorry Vick!:)

    Okay, Fred wins.  I was only half serious anyway.  
    
    					- Vick

    re .8, I always read his name as Venison, too.
    
    Lorna
    

    I stopped reading .0 when I discovered the author didn't have a degree.
    
    :-)
    
    Now, seriously, I agree.
    
    And I'm not telling...

My feeling is that the topic should at least in some way "pertain to men"
more than it does to women to be appropriate for this conference.  But I
would rather not spend a lot of time arguing about it.

					Steve

P.S.  I can understand where Mr. Hall is coming from, though I think he has
overstated his position just a bit.  And I don't think that the lack of
a degree prevents advancement, or else I'd be in big trouble. 

P.P.S.  I think this would be a fine topic for HUMAN_RELATIONS.

    A "benison" is a blessing.  "Venison" is deer meat.
    
    				Bless you,
    				Vick

    P.S.  I'm not a degree bigot.  Why, some of my best friends don't have
    degrees.
    					- Vick

>overstated his position just a bit.  And I don't think that the lack of
>a degree prevents advancement, or else I'd be in big trouble. 


	Hi there, Steve !

	DEC is an anomaly.  Very few hi-tech companies that I've 
	heard of have a system set up like DEC's -- where a degree
	is not as important as a review board, or patronage.

	More are like the company my wife used to work for:

		Do not apply until you have your degree.

		Earn an additional degree, and you get a raise.

		Get your MBA if you expect to reach consultant level.

	Note:  This same company sends new-hires to an internal
		school to teach them how to program !

	Steve H

	P.S.  As regards the appropriateness of this topic:

		What about the one on damn car wax ? !   Sheesh !

    Some of my best friends don't have degrees either. But its kinda sad
    when some folks who do have them. Who have paid a serious price for
    them are not reconized in Digital. More degrees than a thermomitor,
    more sheep skins than a Wyoming sheep rancher. And cannot get on first
    base with some of the non-degree bigots. 

    
    	i always read him as bick venison....mebbe i'm dyslexic.

  Oh well, so much for that idea eh Vick? (';

  Well Steve, the topic you brought up *certainly* IMHO deserves discussing,
  although, I too, wonder why you didn't enter it in HR or Digital (or did you?
  (-: ). It is, after all a topic which affects both men and womyn alike.

  Anyway, on to the topic... I've had similar discussions with others around
  DEC and elsewhere, and from what I've heard, is, 'A Bachelor's degree
  guarantees a specific level of knowledge which can be otherwise tough to
  determine'.

  Also, the IEEE has been pushing for years to restrict engineering jobs to
  degreed individuals and consulting engineering jobs to those who hold
  masters. One of their motives for this is to provide competitive salaries,
  similar to lawyers/doctors, which engineers, in general, have yet to achieve.

  I, personally, like the idea of the degreed programs because they provide
  some level of structure for whatever learning I may be persuing at the time.

  As far as employment, I feel that once a person has had the professional
  experience, the degree should not be the only thing that would keep a person
  from being offered a position, raise, etc...

  �ks, �ī

    re: .16
    > ... I don't think that the lack of a degree ..."
    
    I have to disagree.  I just finished undergoing a PA, and the _lack_
    of any degree COST me a notch on the point scale.  Never mind that
    i've accumulated more than a hundred semester credits (scattered 
    among too many disciplines to yield a degree in any.)  Never mind 
    that a substantial number of the recent credits are relevant to the
    industry *and* my job function.  If i don't have a degree, i'm only 
    "3" performer.
    
    Yes, that last statement is an over-simplification.  I could have
    boosted the point count somewhere else.  Nevertheless, what relevence
    is a college degree to a Field Engineer's job description?  

    I sorta agree with you, a little...  But, I do think that a degree
    should give you an extra boost in the workplace. It shows, beside the
    fact the you are "educated", you have ambition, drive, motivation, can
    set a goal, and reach it.  
    
    I always felt that here at DEC, a  degree meant little or nothing.  It
    has been my experience that management here couldn;t care less if you
    have a degree or not.  It also seems to me that the majority of mgmt
    here does not have a degree, and their attitude, is I made it this far
    without that piece of paper, why should I give you extra credit if you
    have it?  
    
    In my group, I am the  MOST educated person, here, and make the lowest
    pay, and have the lowest job, and get the least amount of respect. 
    This does not sit well with me, to say the least.  I really do not
    think that a secretary should be more educated than her boss.  
    
    P.S. I have a Bachelors of Science degree, and am about 2/3 of the way
    thru my Masters degree - MBA with an emphasis on Acquisition and
    Contract Management.  NO ONE else in my group has a college degree! 
    So, my conclusion: It basically is a waste of my time to remain here. 
    right or wrong, I don't know.  But I think I could do better, pay-wise
    and career-wise in a company that respects degrees.  (?)
    
    Becky

    Re .25, and a degree giving you a little extra boost... It depends. For
    one thing, I know quite a few people whose degrees mean absolutely
    nothing; in some cases, the people coasted through school, and their
    degrees are mere pieces of paper, and in others, the people have
    abilities far beyond what is indicated by, say, a B.A. from a state
    university. Should the first group get an extra boost over the more
    talented folks who don't happen to have a degree? Should the second
    group be pushed aside in favor of less-talented folks who happen to
    have "better" degrees?
    
    For some occupations, degrees do (or should!) indicate at least the
    minimum level of competence in the field. For others, experience or
    personal ability can be immeasurably more important than a degree. 
    In both cases, I'd hope that anyone doing the hiring would take more
    into consideration than the letters and numbers...
    
    'course, my views on all this are (if you'll pardon the expression)
    academic. I went to college because I wasn't ready to set out on my own
    yet but didn't want to hang around the house, and because I like to
    learn new things. It served to introduce me to a different social
    setting, to a world outside my home town, to life on my own - and,
    coincidentally, to computers. I wound up getting a degree, but I don't
    know that that proved anything about my ability to set a goal and reach
    it; a bachelor's degree was the default goal of college, and everything
    was set up to facilitate reaching that goal. Heck, I'd have had a
    harder time if I'd wanted to drop out halfway through to pursue a
    career as a painter or something - now, *that* would have demonstrated
    *drive*. [But I don't have any, so I stayed in college and got my
    degree. ;-)]
    
    -b

    Re .25:
    
    p.s. You _do_ seem just a tad overqualified for a typical secretarial
    position [although having a master's degree doesn't necessarily say
    anything about one's secretarial skills ;-)]. In any case, if you don't
    have the option to step up to something more challenging within your
    group, it sounds as if you should be looking elsewhere. I ran into this
    a little with my first job - I was definitely overqualified, but there
    wasn't anywhere to go short of trying to replace my manager, and the
    thought of going into management scared me so badly that I quit and
    bolted to the east coast... [Well, it _could_ have happened like that!]
    
    -b

    RE: .25
    
    Becky,
    
        just some encouragement for you ...
    
        Camron Cooper (MBA) is treasuer and Sr VP of Atlantic Richfield
        (ARCO)
    
        Nina Dinell (MBA) is treasuer of Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea (A&P)
    
        Ellen Marram (MBA) is President (probably CEO today) of RJR Nabisco
        Ellen Monahan (MBA) is RJRs VP of corporate planning
    
        Judy Lewent (MBA) is VP and treasuer of Merck, and was also
        once at Bankers Trust and Pfizer as controller
    
        Shirley Young (MBA) is VP Consumer Market Development at GMC
    
        Karol Emmerich (MBA) is VP and treasuer at Dayton-Hudson
    
        Linda Wachner (MBA) was the first woman to succed in a leveraged
       buyout on wall-street! She sold Max-Factor and used that to
       takeover Warnaco
    
        Judith Monson (MBA) is VP finace at Seagrams, also at Seagrams
        is Jacque McCurdy (MBA) VP of industry relations once in
        the Maryland state legislature
    
        Kay Kopolvitz (MBA) is president and CEO of the USA Networks
    
    want more ???
    
    chris

    re-.1
    Yeah, (Yawn) I'm impressed but can they dance?
    
    
    -j (who believes degrees are best used as an indication of how warmly
    to dress)
    

re: .0, Steve

You have agreement from me on all of your points.

re: .23, 

> 'A Bachelor's degree guarantees a specific level of knowledge which can
>  be otherwise tough to determine'.

I've never seen any evidence of this. All I've been able to determine is that
a Bachelor's degree guarantees that the holder completed the requisite number
of credit hours successfully. I've seen many instances of degreed individuals
having been hired as engineers by managers who believed the above, and yet the
"engineers" didn't have a clue as to what engineering was all about.

>  Also, the IEEE has been pushing for years to restrict engineering jobs to
>  degreed individuals and consulting engineering jobs to those who hold
>  masters. One of their motives for this is to provide competitive salaries,
>  similar to lawyers/doctors, which engineers, in general, have yet to achieve.

I'm opposed to this as well. I plan people's promotions and salary increases
based on their value to the group/corporation - on what they are capable of
contributing - on what they have proven they can do. Planning such things
based on people's credentials loses sight of one's managerial responsibilities.
The parallel with lawyers and doctors is unwarranted given the other differences
in the professions (e.g. salaried engineers don't have the expenses of private
practitioners - neither do minor (or non-) partners in large law firms or
physicians without private practices, each of whom earn quite competitively
with engineers.)

-Jack

    RE: .30
    Jack
    
        What if all Mechanical/Electrical/Chemical engineers were 
        required to be 'EIT' or 'PE' licensed? would the gap close
        or even narrow?
    
        Ours (computer hw/sw engineering) may be a noble pursuit
        but there are no requirements..hell, a computer science degree
        isn't even a requirement for working in the field
    
        I've not known of Hardware/Software engineers having to be licensed
        to start a company or practice their profession; here in MASS
        only Civil Engineering (surveyors),  and Architects need to
        be registered
    
    
    chris

  re .30

  Jack,

  I am in agreement with you on all points ('; I've worked with some pretty
  awesome Engineers who didn't have degrees. I've also worked with some *REAL*
  losers who had degrees. and were we to be as rigid as *some* (eg., IEEE)
  people propose, then it would be our (DEC's) loss.

  .et .al,

  I've always wondered just how useful that piece of paper *really* is. I mean
  after all, I know engineers who got their degrees back when paper tape and
  cards were still being used, or when transistors were vacuum tubes... I guess
  what I'm saying (speculating out loud here) doesn't the degree become irrel-
  evant at this point, or do managers automatically subract 5 years (which is
  what I've heard as degree equivalency) off of experience for those who don't
  have degrees?

  IMHO, bachelor degrees serve two purposes; 1) a tool for getting your foot in
  the door and 2) meeting necessary requirements for persuing higher degrees.
  AND, IMHO, degrees *definitely* are not a determining factor of/and for int-
  elligence, although I have met degreed people in my day who have suffered
  such delusions *JUST* because they have that piece of paper.

  �ks, �ī

	 "20 years a schoolin' and they'll put you on the day shift..."
	 
	 "You don't need to be a Weatherman to know which way the wind
	 blows..."

		Bob Dylan
		Subterranean Homsick Blues

	 While it's true that a Degree doesn't mean that you are more
	 intelligent than the next guy or that you'll be assured of the job
	 of your choice, it is a criteria for many companies or positions.
	 If you want that company or position you're going to have to meet
	 their criteria.

	 My father is one of the most brilliant minds I have ever known.
	 He has been asked hundreds of times which college he attended.  He
	 never finished Grade School.

	 patrick

    [more of my personal feelings on this]
    
    I think it is unfortunate that anyone would view the completion
    of a College Degree program as a mere "piece of paper"
    First, because many do not get the opportunity to go to College
    second, it's one of the best life experiences available
    
    As for the Degrees value, it's a matter of indivdual orientation
    if one is motivated and driven to command their career continuing
    Education is very important
    
    The woman I listed in .28 are extremely astutue and can present
    strategy in brillant detail. They have proven that gender is of
    little consequence, but a strong financial/marketing background
    and a proven track record are important. They each have the
    propensity for rigorous quantatative analysis, that can be obtained
    via MBA programs
    
    I'm almost shocked that this topic has supporters, I believe that
    education opens a whole new set of opportunities, maybe without a
    BA/BS/MBA/MS one can take advantage of opportunities and the media
    would lead some to believe that many can, but it is indeed rare
    
    but working here at DEC is pretty clear that there are 100,000
    different definitions of 'success'
    
    chris
    

    Re .34: There are also a large number of definitions of "education". I
    don't think the "degrees aren't that important" crowd denigrates
    education per se, just the concept that a degree necessarily proves
    that one has had any...
    
    -b

    Beth, There are many ways to measure life experience
    and a good many Colleges/Universities have the means 
    to do so, and in turn grant equivalent credit
    
    so I still don't understand the argument
    
    chris

	As regards a college degree being an indicator of
	attainment of some level of technical knowledge:

	One of the biggest technical bobos I've ever worked with
	is a couple of courses away from a degree in computer
	science from a private college.  This guy is a walking
	disaster, and still cannot code a simple program.

	Sorry, but a degree does not a professional make.

	As regards professional certification efforts by programmers'	
	groups and engineers' groups:

	This is just another way to limit entry into a profession,
	similar to the artificial limits on hairdressers,
	electricians, pharmacists, nurses, and on and on.

	Keep in mind that even outfits with stringent "professional"
	requirements create disaster applications, are sued and
	cost their clients big bucks.   All that an artificial
	certification requirement would do is raise the price of
	software, make entry into the profession harder and more
	expensive, and introduce corruption into the software
	business.

	The funny thing about software development and other
	types of engineering is that BS ( the droppings kind ! )
	doesn't work:  Bridges won't stand that are improperly
	engineered.  Software won't work that is produced by
	idiots.  Airplanes won't fly if sound engineering principles
	aren't applied.

	But this has nothing to do with professional certification.

	Professionally certified pharmacists give out the wrong
	medicines, and sometimes sell drugs illegally.  Highly
	certified doctors are found guilty of malpractice, 	
	incompetence and drunkenness.  Hairdressers, despite
	thousands of dollars worth of mandatory school and
	board certification, botch hairstyles every day.

	The point is, certification means nothing.  The individual's
	ability means everything, sheepskin or not....Guild approval
	or not.

	Steve H

    Here's what happens in the real world:
    
    A position has to be filled and you have to select someone to fill it. 
    You get thirty resum�s and have to select some for interviewing and
    finally end up with a single person.  Now, as the person making the
    selection you have to balance the time it will take you to make the
    best choice, (which could take months of interviews and re-interviews
    and calling references) with the risk of selecting a loser by rushing
    through the process.
    
    You see people who have degrees associated with the position being
    filled.  You see people with experience in the field.  You see people
    with both.  Assuming that your time is precious, how are you going to
    set-up the interviews?  I would suggest that, if you're not trying to
    make a point of hiring a non-degreed person, you'd select those with
    both for the first round of interviews.  If they go well, you need not
    go further.
    
    Now, if you happen to end up with two candidates, one has a degree, the
    other does not, but in all other respects they are equal, which do you
    select.  Keep in mind that your selection will affect your
    group/company's productivity and hence its profit margin.  You've
    already spent three weeks on this process and you have to select today. 
    The person with the degree has a piece of paper which proclaims the
    bearers ability to think at a level deemed acceptable to an institution
    of higher learning.  They've also conformed to the authority of that
    institution, demonstrating a level of discipline.  They've also put up
    with the beaurocracy of the university system demonstrating a high
    level of patience. :-)
    
    This is not to say that the non-degreed person doesn't also bear these
    qualities but it would take alot of work for you, the hiring person, to
    get the same level of confidence that comes (although not universally)
    with a degree.
    
    In certain cases it would be difficult to justify hiring a non-degreed
    person.  In some cases (eg. professional engineers) it would be
    impossible  to hire a non-degreed person because of restraints placed
    on the employer by such factors as insureability of work and customer
    expectation.
    
    If it appears unfair, you have to look at the extension of the
    underlying mindset - how many desireable positions get filled by people
    who dropped out of school at 16?  A case can be made that people who
    don't hire these people are exercising diploma bigotry.

    I have found in my own experience that I could probably be a lot better
    off financially had I taken a degree - this because a degree often gets
    you in the door for that first high-paying job.  I hasten to disclaim
    such benefit in today's economy; there are presently just about as many
    degreed burger flippers as non-degreed.
    
    This financial gain, for me, would have come at a great expense to me
    as a well-rounded - and, quite seriously, contented - human being.  I
    would be, to some degree, snowed into the field in which I took the
    degree.  Sure, I could have crossed fields, but the tendency is to stay
    in or near the field where one has made such a significant investment. 
    Not having a degree, I have been able to work as an architectural and
    mechanical draftsman, mechanical designer, tool designer, metal-shop
    roustabout, technical illustrator, commercial artist, computer hardware
    engineer, software engineer, photographer, professional music critic,
    and software technical writer.  This diverse background makes me far
    more valuable to the company than a sheepskin could have done.
    
    Having a degree would not have proven that I had learned anything.  I
    know people who went through a baccalaureate degree in computer
    science, graduating with hign honors, but were nevertheless unable to
    program in any of the languages they studied or even to think logically
    enough to design a program for someone else to code.  I used to
    interview people like that for engineering positions occasionally...
    
    -dick

From .38
    > The person with the degree has a piece of paper which proclaims the
    > bearers ability to think at a level deemed acceptable to an institution
    > of higher learning.  

	You have here captured the essence of higher education - it has
	nothing to do with learning specific facts or knowledge. A degree
	program is (or at least should be) geared toward learning to
	think, or if you like, learning to learn. That's why many
	disciplines have little or no direct relation to any particular
	means of earning a living. It also means that the subject in which
	you major doesn't tie you down to one particular career. This
	is not to say that employers either should or should not reject
	non-degreed candidates, but it does point up the fact that 
	knowledge, per se, is not what they are looking for. They're
	looking for someone with the ability to learn and advance in
	their job, and the possession of a degree is one indication
	of that ability.

	...Robert

    Here is a piece of data relative to the importance of degrees I learned
    about a few years back.  ATT conducted a study of 120,000 managers from
    first level to executive level to learn what degree categories resulted
    in.
    
    From their study:
    
    Technical degrees will get a person to first level mgmt.
    Business degress   "    "  "   "     " middle  "    "
    Liberal Arts degrees "  "  "   "     " executive level mgmt.
    
    Why LIberal Arts, it was their conclusion that at higher levels of mgmt
    one is doing more conceptualizing and external communications with the
    media, government and special interest groups. Liberal Arts graduates
    primarily focus on these areas (concepts and communicating) during their 
    studies.
    
    FWIW
    
    Paul

    	I tend to disagree with .40.  My observation is that many formally
    educated people consider that to be the only way to learn. 
    Consequentally when they are confronted with a problem that is outside
    of the field in which they were educated, they refuse to even consider
    trying to learn enough to solve it on their own.  It is common for
    people to say "I'm a hardware person", "I'm a software person", "I'm
    mechanical".  It seems less common for dropouts to characterise
    themselves in this way.  It's more like "I'm equally unqualified (or
    qualified) at many things.  There is also the attitude that if one can
    learn one set of skills independently then one can learn many sets of
    skills.  The formally educated person usually wants to be formally
    educated to learn any new concept.  
    	It may be that formal education tends to create specialists, while
    generalists create themselves.  It is clear that big organisations tend
    to prefer specialists.  Whether this is a result of peoples desire to
    categorize things in general, or just a reflection of the large
    organisation's inability to recognise the value of generalists, I
    dunno.
    	In a way formal education teaches people where the boundaries to
    their field are.  Unless people are shown the boundaries they aren't
    likely to recognize them.  Dropouts are painfully aware of one
    boundary.  That is the one created by a personnel being who says no one
    without a degree need apply.
    	
    	In a recent situation I was hired at the same time as and worked
    side by side with a person who had a masters in EE.  (I am a HSG with
    almost no formal training after.)  The only difference in the two of us
    as far as management was concerned:  $5/hour.
    						John
      

>    	I tend to disagree with .40.  My observation is that many formally
>    educated people consider that to be the only way to learn. 
>    ...
>    The formally educated person usually wants to be formally
>    educated to learn any new concept.  

    There are bound to be exceptions, based on different colleges and
    different personalities. I was just stating what I understand to
    be the intent of a college education, and trying not to argue
    either side of this discussion. Your point about the self-motivation
    of many non-graduates is a good one.

    ...Robert

    Re: .41
    
    This assumes you want to get into management.  I don't, not even a
    little bit.
    
    -dick

    re:.1
    
    I'm a man.
    
    This topic pertains to me.
    
    It belongs here according to the conference title.

    Well......
    
    I used to be one of those who was Degree-less.  Actually, it was for 19
    years.  I graduated from High School in '71, and fooled around with
    college on and off.
    
    Once I got a call from Los Alamos National Labs, asking me to come up
    and interview for a position coding on an RT-11 system.  They needed
    someone desperately.  About half way through the conversation, the guy
    asked what my degree was in.  I said I didn't have one "yet".  He said
    "Well, then I couldn't hire you as a 'staff member', only as an hourly
    employee." 
    
    I said "well, what if I had a degree in music?"  "Then you could be a
    staff member", he replied.
    
    Years later I went to school and finished up a bachelors in management
    because I was tired of sitting in an office surrounded by degrees, (one
    software specialist I know has a PhD! believe it or not....)
    
    So I finished up a bachelors in management. And when people ask "What's
    your degree in ...?" I can proudly say ...
    
    
    
    "That top left drawer over there."

    re:.0
    
    I can see the need for formal training and a degree.
    
    I can also see how a degree can be superfluous.
    
    But, almost always, the degreed individual knows MORE about the subject
    that the non-degreed people.  And that's a good reason to hire based
    on a diploma.
    
    You could always start a degree program and take equivalency tests
    for those courses which you think you know well enough to pass. You
    might find out that there's much that you don't know.

    re .45 (?)
    
    Did you ever take the job in Los Alamos?

    	You can sometimes be surprised by what you can find it useful to
    know.
    
    	I did a Maths. degree, with electronics as a subsidiary course, and
    the Maths. department thought that with that combination we should be
    taught things like the mathematics of quantum mechanics and relativity
    theory so we could calculate the path of an electron in a CRT. None of
    that has ever been any use.
    
    	Group theory and number theory are often regarded as being among
    the less practical branches of mathematics, yet they have been
    consistently useful, from my first job, designing modems, where we were
    converting binary digits to ternary to reduce the baud rate, to my
    present job where I have to explain to customers why our security
    architecture uses RSA public key encryption.

    re .48  (Did I take the Job at Los Alamos....?)
    
    No Way....It's bad enough up at Los Alamos if you only have a
    bachelors...Up there (on the hill, as they say) your stature and
    importance in not only the lab but also the community is predicated on
    what level of degree you hold.  I have heard many stories from friends
    who lived next door to some scientist, got to know them well, and when
    the scientist found out that my friend wasn't a PhD, began to shun him
    socially....happens with spouses too!
    
    

      <<< Note 771.47 by MILKWY::ZARLENGA "Herm, ya scarin' the fish!" >>>

    
>    But, almost always, the degreed individual knows MORE about the subject
>    that the non-degreed people.  And that's a good reason to hire based
>    on a diploma.
    
But that does not mean that they will do a better job.  Just go work at 
Lincoln Labs or LASL and you'll see for yourself.  Many are the degree 
toting wonders that are too full of themselves to get the job done.

    re .50
    
    Yep.... I know, I grew up there.  :-)  It is probably the *strangest*
    town in America.  But, the countryside is beautiful, wouldn't you
    agree.
    
    Karen

    And what I mean by strange is that the people are like the pod people
    from "Invasion of the Body Snatchers".  No emotions, they are like
    robots.  And status *is* very important depending on the degree that you
    have.  I don't miss that town at all!
    
    Karen

    It's also on a mesa in the middle of the desert with nothing but
    nothingness around for miles.  Every other building looks like it
    houses the "Laboratory For Nasty Methods of Killing People" with armed
    guards and strange looking roof gear.
    
    You gotta love your work if it takes you there.

    Kris,
    
    Now wait a minute. 8*)  The scenary is beautiful.  You have the Jemez
    Mountains to the west and the Sangre de Cristo to the east.  
    
    I agree wholeheartedly about the buildings...
    
    Karen

    You're right, Karen.  The scenery is real nice.  But I'd get tired of
    nothing changing.  Same crimson sunset over red-brown desert every day
    of the year.  When I said nothing around for miles, I meant it from an
    urbanite-who-recreates-himself-at-night perspective.  For a naturalite,
    hey - it's naked Earth with no shrubbery.  Sort of reminds me of the
    original Planet of the Apes landscape.
    

    8*)
    
    

    If the Jemez Mtns are to the West, those crimson sunsets should be
    different each and every night, as the sun sets behind a slightly
    different point of those mountains each night....
    
    ed

    Most of you are looking at this from the perspective of a particularly
    technical type of job, in which a base of specific technical skills is
    assumed -- skills most likely to be learned in a formal education. Even
    so, many of you are are able to argue persuasively for the argument
    that formal degrees are overrated.
    
    And in the wider world of entry-level jobs the formal degrees that
    serve as the entry card are even less relevant. They are essentially a
    form of "credentialization", to weed out some people. Where once a
    job required a high school diploma, then a bachelor's degree, applicants
    often now come armed with masters' degrees or special non-degree
    certificates.  Once in the door, they learn the job.
    
    And while it is true that a proper undergraduate education is probably
    the most efficient way quickly to teach a young person to think in a
    sophisticated, coherent, and "transferable" way, far too few
    undergraduates get that chance, while other non-degree students learn
    to do it on their own.
    
    Kit
    

re: .50

>                                    I have heard many stories from friends
>    who lived next door to some scientist, got to know them well, and when
>    the scientist found out that my friend wasn't a PhD, began to shun him
>    socially....happens with spouses too!

Wow! That's hard-core degree bigotry!

-Jack

    re .60
    
    Jack, it may not be bigotry, but it sure is snobbery.  What .50 said is
    very true.  There is a class system in Los Alamos based on what degree
    you do or don't have.  It's everywhere, even in the public school
    system.  Trust me Jack, there is no other town in America where the
    social structure is based on what kind of college degree you have or 
    don't have.  Oh, and god forbid if you decide not to go to college. 
    You are lower than low.  
    
    Karen

    	In situations of under-employment discrimination on the basis of
    academic qualifications is almost inevitable. If you are a manager who
    has advertised a job, and you only have time to interview 10% of the
    candidates who apply, how do you make a selection?
    
    	You tell your secretary to go through the application forms, remove
    all those that don't have characteristic 'X', and let you know how many
    are left. Still too many? You apply characteristic 'Y'.
    
    	Now, what characteristic are you going to use? Rejecting all male
    candidates would probably only reduce the number by 50%, and might be
    illegal. The nice thing about academic qualifications is that the
    threshold can be applied progressively until you have the right number.
    
    	The only other characteristic I can think of with this nice
    characteristic is initial letters of name. You try telling your
    secretary to remove all applicants whose name does not begin with 'A',
    'B' or 'C', and if you still have way too many you can restrict it down
    to applicants whose name begins with 'Aa'.

    I haven't had a chance to read this entire string, so this question may
    have been answered somewhere and I missed it.
    
    What is *in* Los Alamos?  
    
    Lorna
    

    Los Alamos is where the atomic bomb was developed. It is my
    understanding that there has been a large scientific community there
    ever sense. With lots of PHDs in physics, electronics, and mathematics.
    
    In addition, at one time at least, there was a large military
    community. I think of the military community as being much more rank
    conscious than the science community. Perhaps the science communtity
    learned it from the military. On the other hand, perhaps the science
    community is more status/rank conscious than I think.
    
    
    				herb

    Thanks.
    

    I'ts strange that degree bigotry has hit Los Alamos.  My father
    told me that during the bomb effort, that they grouped neighborhoods
    according to income, rather than education.  This could mean that a
    PhD, and a Master plumber or carpenter would be neighbors.  I think 
    he said that it was a social experiment, courtesy Uncle Sam.  Now this
    was, several decades ago, but I wonder if whoever set this up published
    a report on the experiment.
    
    Meg

    re .66, isn't that how most neighborhoods, in the US, are set-up
    anyway?  ( I mean, if a person can afford the house, nobody seems to
    care how they got the money [well, as long as they're white in some
    cases, probably]).
    
    Lorna
    

    Lorna,
    
    I had to laugh at your question of what is *in* Los Alamos.  :-)
    
    
    Nothing dear, absolutely nothing............ 8*)

re: .62

"We hire largely degreed people because that's the easiest way for
 secretaries to thin out the applicants for their managers who are
 too busy to make their own considerations personally" is a pretty
 flimsy excuse for a way to do business.

Personally, I've never asked anyone to prescreen resum�s for me, because
the criteria I'm looking for aren't that easily ferreted out.

-Jack

I think .38 says it pretty well.

I took 19 years to get mine.  Mostly at night and weekends.  My degree was
for me ONLY.  It has nothing to do with my work or profession.  Digital did
not pay for it.  I studied what I wanted to and learned what I wanted to. In
the end, I received a B.A. in Professional Development and had about 192 credit
hours.

John

    re: .69
    	Some people don't have such an easy job with resum�s. I have heard
    of cases where someone attempting to recruit a group of 5 people
    received over 1000 applications. If we accept "the criteria I'm looking
    for aren't that easily ferreted out" then you probably take about 5
    minutes per resum� (my estimate). If you have no pre-screening then
    that is about three working weeks of your time before you get to
    interviewing anyone.
    
    	I am not saying that having a filter on academic qualifications is
    fairer than just interviewing the first hundred out of the thousand
    applicants or rejecting everyone whose name contains the letter "E",
    but it is probably easier to justify to *your* management than spending
    the three weeks reading, or many of the other alternatives.
    
    	Maybe you have never had so many applicants as to have to make 
    a flimsy excuse for spending three weeks of your time.

re: .71

You are correct in concluding that 1000 is far greater than any number of
resum�s I've ever had to consider at one time. And if I were in need of
filling a project to that extent from a pool of candidates that large,
I'd likely be using a recruiting organization to do some pre-screening
and I'd be spending some time with them up front to clarify my needs, beyond
strictly credentials.

But 5 minutes per resum� can be an excessive figure depending upon what
one is looking for, as well. I've often gone through better than a
hundred resum�s in two hours or less in order to weed it down to a dozen
or so which might be worth further consideration. "Reading" them in detail
isn't necessarily required. I've always felt that it's time well spent.

-Jack

    Anyone who thinks a degree is worthless should visit Ireland. I spent
    some time in the states after getting a Cert in Electronics here in
    Galway. (I probably wouldn't even be considered for the job only
    because of the Cert.). I found that in the States everyone was treated
    equal and that the techs were given far more responsibility than they
    are here. Many of them had backgrounds outside of academic institutions
    such as in the Navy and Army?? which is not as prevalent here.
    
    It was a shock when I returned to Ireland and discovered how cliquish
    and closed-off the degree-holders are in this company and how non
    degree holders are not taken seriously. I know of at least two people
    here who are top-class at their jobs and better than any engineer but
    will always be at technical level because they don't have a degree.
    
    I would advise anyone who values their job and have not got one already
    to start now, in the future it looks like this company will start to 
    weed out some people that are no longer required. No prizes for
    guessing who will get the bullet.........
    
    It is my opinion that people are considered as dirt without a degree in
    Ireland. This is allowed because of the high unemployment( 20%) which
    gives bosses the luxury of wide choice of degreeholders for even the 
    lowest of jobs. At least in that respect I am lucky as my 13 years
    experience with DEC hardware counts as something and allows me a
    comparatively decent wage but I find the fact that I have absolutely no 
    control over my work environment very frustrating indeed. 
    
    This is not likely to continue for long as products get more reliable
    and less mistakes are made in manufacturing there will be less need for
    technical staff.
    
     I am studying for a degree in Information Technology for that reason.
     If it allows me to keep a job in DEC I will be happy. THe way things
    are looking that is the best one can hope for...........
    

    
    I'm a Senior Engineer at the South Queensferry semiconductor
    manufacturing plant in Scotland. During my years at Motorola and the
    OEM I subsequently worked for prior to employment at DESL, I've come
    across many graduates porporting to be engineers, and who basically
    couldn't work a screwdriver.
    
    In an environment where hi-tech bits of kit have to be repaired (and
    quick) with a high degree of intuitive fault-finding and perception,
    I've always found that the guy with an electronics formal education (in
    this country, an HNC or HND, both part-time courses of four or five
    years taken whilst working in a practical environment) and a car or
    motor-cycle in bits at his home is the clear winner.
    
    Fortunately, the semi-conductor industry recognises this fact and will
    promote such a person from Engineering Tech to Engineer, to Senior
    Engineer, to Principal Engineer without bias, based on his ability to
    perform, not what bit of paper he has (I don't remember ANY
    prospective employer of mine asking to see my HNC). Digital Equipment
    Scotland Ltd has the same idea, even though it could mean a section
    manager having one or more Principal Engineers in his section at the
    same grade as himself. 
    
    I know that if I'm faced with a promotional or hiring choice, I tend to
    look at what the guy (or Gal; we have female Engineering Techs too) has
    done with his life outside work as well as his working experience. Too
    often I've seen excellent "Paper Engineers" fall down when it comes to
    common sense or fault perception on equipment. I've also known many
    excellent engineers (read engineering techs) go up the ladder rapidly
    without so much as an O-level, but who has the "right" hobbies or
    pursuits. As I say, luckily the semiconductor industry recognises these
    skills for what they're worth and promotes (and pays) accordingly.
    These comments apply equally to equipment and process-oriented people,
    by the way; at no time in my thirteen years in ion implantation have I
    seen anyone held back because they don't have a degree.
    
    By the same token, there are undoubtedly jobs which definitely require
    grads to start with.
    
    The other thing is, it pays to be aware (my boss is) that not everyone
    WANTS to progress automatically up the management path; many of us are
    happy to confine ourselves to the Engineering path, doing what we know
    best and still effectively contributing to the oiling of the Digital
    wheels (sic) and receiving the rewards due. At least there are ways to
    progress in my job, without being "bogged down" or looked down upon by
    some haughty graduates.
    
    He_who_was_brought_up_in_a_scrapyard_and_doesn't_have_a_degree.....
    
    Les Cowan @SQF

    How many people can actually say their job is made easier because
    of their University education anyway? How much of those 3,4 years
    work turned out to be useful in the real world?

    Not a whole lot, for most people I know.

    Dave 

    Me.
    
    There are times when I need calculus, or thermodynamics, or mechanics,
    or physics, or chemistry to solve an EE problem at work.
    
    When I started looking at FDDI for DEC several years ago, I had to pull
    out a textbook on statistics and probability theory to figure out why
    error rates were specified as bit-error-probablities and how to test an 
    FDDI system for compliance.
    
    It's truly amazing how the sciences intermingle.

    Hmm, yes, maybe its less true in the hardware world. In the world
    of software though the science changes all the time. Experience
    is definitely of considerably more value than what you have on 
    a certificate.

    Dave

    I think the technology probably moves a lot faster in the hardware
    world than in the software world.  In fact, one problem we've had in
    the last two groups I've worked in is the proliferation of hardware
    platforms we need to support.  Also, as the speed of the processors
    and the availability of large amounts of cheap memory increases daily,
    the programmers have to be very flexible and have to understand
    basic principles.  Experience is not as important in this environment
    as flexible intelligence.  Whether you get flexible intelligence from
    your education is another question.  But you don't necessarily get it
    from experience either.  Neither people with a lot of experience or
    people with high-falutin' degrees should pat themselves on the back
    or sit on their laurels.  You don't have time for that.
    
    					- Vick

>    Hmm, yes, maybe its less true in the hardware world. In the world
>    of software though the science changes all the time. 
    
    Yep.  That's why a chaotically obtained non-computer-related degree
    from a wild-eyed pretentious liberal arts college with a semi-minor in
    philosophy and loads o' humanities research is the best prep for
    software engineering.
    
    Ray

    I've been told that one of the reasons I have my current job (long may
    it wave) is that I mentioned absinthe during an interview.
    
    Ray

    Re: .80
    
    If fluency in one's native language is a predictor of success in
    software engineering, then I fear that most software engineers I
    know are failures.  If I see a note or a memo where there are
    at least two spelling or grammatical errors per paragrapgh, I can
    be fairly certain a software engineer wrote it.  It's depressing.
    
    You know the old saying - "Yesterday I couldn't even spell
    engineer, today I are one."
    
    					Steve

    Should be "none of me are sane."

re: .79

	you know, Ray, I _resemble_ that remark.  After finishing a
	FORTRAN course (during my undergrad in Soc/Psych with liberal
	amounts of English and Humanities sprinkled in) I steadfastly
	resolved never to have anything to do ever again with computers.

	A couple years out of college, my karma ran over my dogma.

	A few more years of software experience later, I picked up
	a masters in software, part time.

	I wouldn't trade in my liberal arts undergrad for a technical
	degree, ever.  I find it amusing though, when other engineers
	resent my creating new acronyms, like NB.  (note bene)

	Mark

	

re .84:

They object to NB because it's only two letters.  It's fear of the unknown --
they'd probably react the same way to a cyclops.

.84>	resent my creating new acronyms, like NB.  (note bene)
    
    It's actually nota bene.

    I think the objection to NB is because they didn't learn it from
    an engineering course and can't remember the differences among
    NB, IE, and EG.
    
    ed

    Ain't nothing new about the NB acronym.