I think what you're missing is the shear number of candidates. Does requiring (or even weighting at all) academics result in false negatives, absolutely. However candidates with a CS degree tend to, on average, perform better and there's a lot less of them when compared to "total population looking for a job". This makes filtering on a degree a cheap and effective signal when you aren't dedicated to having technology people do nothing but interview all day and everyday to find talent without hefty prepruning.

That make sense. I have no real life perspective on that because I've mostly worked on my own stuff, alone, but I can see where one might get overwhelmed by applicants.

I don't know about the coding section of the IT world, but I know when it comes to IT security, job posts requiring degrees are usually just there as a formality. It's more of a recommendation than it is a requirement. The key factor is to never not apply because you don't have the degree they want. If they are a company with any sense, they will take your experience much more seriously than they do any formal education. Granted almost all modern coding jobs require you to take a real time coding test through something like a Skype call, so you have to be able to back up the skills you put down.

Ok, thank you for that.

One of the reasons I got to thinking about this is I read a piece on doing well in an interview and it mentioned a "Fizz/Buzz" test, which I'd never heard of, and it gave an example of one. I looked at it and thought it seemed pretty simple and I'd never even heard of a "Fibonacci sequence" (I had to play with that some more though because it's just fun).

But a solution was as easy to code as I expected so that left me a little baffled. I can see how it demonstrates one's ability to implement logic, but it left me wondering if the bar is that low to get hired or if there are that many applicants that could not solve it needing to be weeded out?

If the latter is the case, how did they get a degree?

(Or maybe the example was very simple, I really do not know because I've not been anywhere near a "tech center" and don't get to hang out much with those who work in the industry)

You would be SHOCKED at how many promising-sounding candidates show up in an interview completely unable to write Fizz/Buzz, or Fibonacci, or strrev(). Or they can write it, but it takes 10 minutes. I've seen this so many times and I still have trouble believing it (though the rate has improved somewhat with better up-front screening techniques).

A lot of them are just nervous or have performance anxiety.

It’s a real thing. I’ve seen brilliant coders completely bomb interviews.

Not if they have a big enough pool to draw candidates from. They're playing a numbers game, and would rather spend their time on better prospects. If having a degree makes a candidate more likely to get hired (arguably true), they would use that filter to improve their odds.

Now, if they can't find enough people, loosening criteria to allow for candidates without degrees would be a wise strategy.

They do.

Recently applied for a position I am somewhat qualified for (all the right resume keywords and x years of experience). Recruiter calls me in for an interview only to tell me the 'client' wants someone with a degree.

Degrees are nice to have for getting past bureaucracy. However,I still maintain for IT an programming jobs,the time and financial investment is largely a waste.

Several forward thinking firms (including bozo recruiters) figured this out long ago. You don’t need a college degree to be talented.

“When you look at people who don’t go to school and make their way in the world, those are exceptional human beings. And we should do everything we can to find those people,” Bock said. Many businesses “require” a college degree; at Google, the word “college” isn’t even its official guide to hiring. > https://venturebeat.com/2014/04/25/why-google-doesnt-care-ab...

Google is forward thinking? This is the same company that requested not only college, but highschool GPA and SAT scores from applicants and whose interview process is entirely textbook algorithm questions.

I have a degree and then some. But if what you are thinking about is a regular "build a website in this dynamic language using this new-fangled framework that is the best thing since sliced break" job, then yes, they are losing out. What you need for that is experience coding, coding, coding, coding. But things like linear algebra, master thesises, relational algebra, complexity analysis, compiler construction, finite automata theory and all that amazing and fun stuff that you dabble with in universities is, more or less, completely useless.

I dunno. I am self teaching and I am finding things like compilers, os stuff, grammars, fsm, automata stuff, etc quite helpful. Like trying to write a parser helps understand the code I am writing a bit better, as well as understanding how abstractions like futures and promises could be working below the hood. While I understand that I may not be always right in the way I am understanding these stuff, I won't say they are completely useless.

There are plenty of people out there with valuable skills that get overlooked. And yes it's unfortunate, but think about it from the recruiters perspective. They try to maximize their ROI on candidates. Filtering by ones with a degree increases the probability of hiring a candidate, so it's just an easy way to make hiring more efficient. Just need to set yourself apart in some way, maybe by having some github projects or a portfolio to share, and lack of degree should be less of a hurdle.

How do they lose out if they find someone that meets the job requirements? Really they only lose out if they settle for somebody who can't do X and has a degree when there was someone who could do X and doesn't have a degree, assuming X is more important than a potentially well rounded education (quality obviously varies and I agree it is not a HUGE boon for most jobs).

I agree with your sentiment. However I think a well rounded education is important, having a group of well rounded individuals in a team will be more productive. As a hiring manager I think about the team also and not only the individual I am hiring.

I'm sure your right about one needing to be able to work with a team, and having a well rounded education may well be an indicator of that, but I can't say having a degree has been something I've been able to connect to it.

They lose out by screening out those who may have much more experience with broader capabilities and are more productive overall.

Different Perspective,

they don't loose out, they minimize their risk by not hiring someone who on the surface seems to know how to code but deep down below does not add a whole lot of value to the team because they lack in depth knowledge on subjects that go beyond coding.

I have 15 years of experience and went back to get a degree in CS. Why, because I realized there is a huge gap in my theoretical knowledge. Everyone nowadays seems so convinced that you can equate watching a couple of youtube videos to getting a 4 year education in a field.

This is a fallacious oversimplification of reality, no one in their right mind would say the same about engineering or medicine or law.

My 2c

It's funny that you equate not going to college with "watching a couple of youtube videos". Don't you think there are some non-college educated developers who read algorithm books, take online courses, etc? A motivated person can absolutely self-learn the CS that's taught in universities.

We are extremely fortunate today to have resources that enable one to independently study the entire contents of a CS degree in the fraction of time on their own schedule. Pursuing a CS degree while actively employed in the field is a foolish waste of money.

That's what I'm thinking too. I have spent so much time over the years studying and working with computers and languages and digging into specifics to accomplish a task that a degree would really mostly be a widow dressing that would be counter productive to obtain by distracting me from learning things more important in a real work environment.

I don't mean to imply I'm an wizard. I'm far from that. I've learned on a need to know basis and focused on building web apps and platforms to run them on. I do have a clue about what I don't know though, and that too is important.

But, as you've pointed out, most everything needed to learn how to do this stuff right is freely available and easily accessible and constantly evolving so at best you're learning with a snapshot of somewhat outdated material in a classroom. That's not a bad way to learn, but it's not how I've learned. I dove in headfirst and started making stuff, learning as I went.

Still, as to the original comment, I admire the hard work it takes to get a degree when one really applies themselves. It's no small accomplishment and I'm sure I'd learn a lot if I went through the process, and that I'd enjoy it too. I would love to be able to do that.

I decided to pursue a masters degree in CS while working because I realized hat I needed to gain more knowledge to grow professionally. I doubt that someone who studies a CS curriculum online without going through an accredited program is remotely comparable to someone who did.

All I am trying to say is that we have to differentiate between CS professionals and self thought programmers. There is a difference and I am stunned that people don't see the benefit of a university education.

I think such people exist, but I also think that this does not warrant someone to compare themselves to a professional with a degree. Much like I would not dare to compare myself to a doctor by reading a book about biology.

I've known guys with degrees that couldn't code their way out of a paper bag. A degree does not make one a professional.

"Everyone nowadays seems so convinced that you can equate watching a couple of youtube videos to getting a 4 year education in a field"

Well, I certainly did not.

I do know that some things come much easier to some people than it does for others. For example, one might spend a lifetime studying music but never create a remarkable piece of it themselves.

I think the ability to apply logic to coding solutions is similar. It's as much a gift as a learned skill and those who are gifted will almost always be better at creating solutions than those who are not.

There is a huge crowd that has a degree plus whatever experience you have. They don't consider it losing out, because no one would when you would see the sheer number of applicants along with their experience/degree.

Ok, but therein lies a rub because some of the "help wanted" ads I see have been running for months and they've still not hired anyone, or at least the ads continue to run.

This one, for example, has been up since June and has been included in the CouchDB "Weekly News" since then. Seems odd they've not filled the position and that's part of what got me wondering about this:

https://stackoverflow.com/jobs/142140/code-monkey-web-applic...

If someone with a degree isn't able to cross their interview, what would make then think that someone without a degree would be able to do it ? Why would they risk spending on the interview where they think the candidate has even lesser chance ?

The answer to the 1st question is nothing.

Nothing would make them think that and that's obvious so the real question is "why do they think that?" because the fact is there are a lot of great programmers that never got a degree.

The answer to the 2nd questions is to find someone who can actually do it. If you need a real world example look at Apple Computer.