27 Sep
2010
27 Sep
'10
1:30 p.m.
On 9/27/10 4:20 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
"I'm highly educated. I just didn't get that education in a
school."
I could certianly claim the second aprt of that. The firsr part is open
to debate ;-)
However, I would argue that there is a difference betwene education and
training in that the second implies (at least to me) being shown how to
do something and being expected to follow that procedure. Mind you, I do
have a license for 'self training in wireless telegraphy' :-)
I have a similar belief. The word "training" to me implies "nothing
more than rote memorization" with no understanding of any concepts or
science.
Not many businesspeople understand this. Keep in mind, though, that
most management types think of (for example) computer programmers as
"glorified typists" (actual quote from upper-level manager), and often
think of any I.T. work as "mind-numbing digital toil" (actual quote from
BusinessWeek Magazine article, around 2003). What we do is to be
"trained", not "understood" or "mastered", and we are all
interchangeable (barely-) skilled laborers.
In other words, the people in control have NO CLUE, and society is
circling the drain as a result.
Many don't. I've worked with a few.
I suppose I
like to think that nobody who isn't trained in the equipment would
be allowed to mess with it - but if they've got a cigarette dangling from
their mouth at the time then they probably deserve everything they get :-)
You might want to rephrase the first part of that. I have never been
trained in computer repair. Or in soldering, Or in using machine tools.
Or in classic computing in general. Or in....<Insert whatever you
assocaite me with :-)). Do you feel I shouldn't be allowed, say, to mess
with an HP9830? Our
society is quick to dismiss any learning that doesn't happen
within the four walls of a school. Or worse yet, they insist that it's
impossible to learn in any other way.
Tell me about it. It really annoys me. The powers-that-be need to realise
that there are people who ahve taught themselves things to a very high
level, and are quite capable of applying that knowledge... Put it this way : You need to emply a guy as a C++
programmer. Who would
_you_ rather have :
A chap who has a bit of paper saying he knows C++, based on the fact he
did a 2-week course in the language, but has no other programming experience
A chap who's never written C++ and has no programming qualifications at
all. On the other hand he's taught himself to program in serveral
languages and has written many thousands of lines of plain C.
I know who I'd rather have. And I know, alas, who the HR department would
pick.
Yep, exactly.
This is
complete bullshit, of course, but like the Emperor's new
clothes, most companies don't want to admit that it's the non-degreed
fellow in the low-paying position that keeps the whole place running,
rather than the expensive PhD (present company excluded of course!)
whose hiring resulted in a press release.
ACtually, I could argue that a Ph.D. at least the way I, and my parents,
did it involves a lot of self-teaching, and a lot of hands-on work. Maybe
some don't, though ;-( But a first degree (BA/BSc) over here involves almost
no origianl thought
or hands-on expeirence at all most of the time. And it shows, I despair
when I hear of people with degrees in electronic engeineering who've
never soldered antything toghter, and people with degrees in mechancial
engineering who wouldn't recognise a lathe if it got up and bit them.
Yep.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL