This article outlines an opinion that organizations either tried skills based hiring and reverted to degree required hiring because it was warranted, or they didn’t adapt their process in spite of executive vision.

Since this article is non industry specific, what are your observations or opinions of the technology sector? What about the general business sector?

Should first world employees of businesses be required to obtain degrees if they reasonably expect a business related job?

Do college experiences and academic rigor reveal higher achieving employees?

Is undergraduate education a minimum standard for a more enlightened society? Or a way to hold separation between classes of people and status?

Is a masters degree the new way to differentiate yourself where the undergrad degree was before?

Edit: multiple typos, I guess that’s proof that I should have done more college 😄

  • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    10 months ago

    The control system and sensors algorithms would be developed by engineers (not software engineers). Then implemented by the software engineers. That is subsequently tested again by the non software engineers. It often auto coded from simulink models, requiring less input from software teams.

    Most of the software development done by software engineers or developers in aircraft is scheduling, connecting pipes, data recording, networking etc. Keeping the aircraft flying is done by other engineers. These algorithms are more related to aircraft dynamics, electrical systems and sensor physics than algorithms used in software. Most control systems implemented are represented as analogue electronics, even when the engineers have only ever used digital systems for their control. In these cases knowledge of non-software topics are more important.

    So it would still be people with degrees keeping the aircraft in the air. However, many of these roles could be accomplished by people who have non university qualifications or 4-5 year apprenticeships. But it’s hard to teach the background maths involved during an apprenticeship as it’s not being applied day to day and the other engineers skills may have atrophied compared to a university course. Degree apprenticeships do work well for this sort of thing.

    • cole@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      to be fair, software engineers are a lot more design heavy than implementation. software developers are the “implementers” where software engineers generally focus on the bigger picture as well

      • RedFox@infosec.pubOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        @ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world

        many of these roles could be accomplished by people who have non university qualifications or 4-5 year apprenticeships. But it’s hard to teach the background maths involved during an apprenticeship

        This was a very interesting example. Personally, I don’t use any of the higher math that degree programs wanted. For people in the field you’re talking about, it would be needed. So in that sense, a dev working for one company would be fine, until they wanted to dev for a company that needs those maths.

        I counter my own point though and say that most people who don’t use those higher level maths forget it. I am a very good use or lose example.

        @cole@cole@lemdro.id I agree there can be separation of role types. This is annoyingly inconsistent across industry. Lead/architect/principle/engineer terms get thrown around for all kinds of roles. Sometimes companies just use them as title changes for promotion and talent retention. It would be nice if companies considered adapting a standardize framework for some uniformity. The NICE model comes to mind, but I’ve had people tell me they think it’s too academic and not pragmatic in the real word. I don’t think I agree with them.