""Kevin Cullimore"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > A fair amount of people who focused their academic pursuits on "natural > sciences"/mathematics work in the private sector. Some of them have jobs > which apply concepts & concrete knowledge that was part of their curriculum. > Some of them pusued a masters because they could actually learn something > about their field of interest (which can be profoundly hard to do within > undergrad programs) or it helped advance their pursuit of compensation or > responsibility. Some really competent Masters students opted to not pursue > PhDs because of the prospects of divorce and minimal returns based on their > current job status. If they can't pass the quals, I'm not sure the > conferring of the Masters is in order. Conversely, there are PLENTY of good > reasons to NOT let someone in a PhD. program even if they CAN or DO pass > their quals.
On the other hand, many of those master's degrees guys really were guys who couldn't pass their quals. So whether you had a legitimate reason for getting a master's degree or not doesn't really matter in terms of getting a job or for professional prestige or whatever - you will be deemed 'guilty by association' by being lumped together with a bunch of, shall we say, rejects. Is that unfair? Yeah, it is. But that's life. Surely you realize that HR and other hiring directors often make decisions based on what's on a piece of paper, and you therefore have no chance to explain the details of your situation to them. The fact is, you are judged by the people you associate with. If you associate with a bunch of thugs and criminals, you shouldn't be surprised when people think you are a criminal yourself. Now, I'm not saying that master's degree holders are criminals, it's just an example I'm using. I'm just saying that if you associate yourself in a group of people for which there are indeed a large proportion on PhD failures, then people will often jump to the conclusion that you are also one yourself. > > I've encountered plenty of cases where better experiences can be had with > Mathematics BS grads than CS MS grads, because the math folk don't assume > that four years of algorithms & programming (and ponentially many other > topics except real-world microcomputer-based support & networking > issues-diclaimer, I'm aware that that is changing at the painfully slow pace > that most curriculms adhere to when reforming themselves, but the damage is > done) entitle them to godlike status where their intuitions concerning > technologies, formal systems and issues that they have had NO PRACTICAL > experience with are concerned. As far as the CS folk in question are > concerned, since they already know everything, they can be VERY difficult to > train. (I'm aware of the existence of exceptions, but they are not the ones > making laughingstocks of their respective IT groups, so they do not occupy > as prominent a place in my consciousness) > > It's interesting that you align CS with engineering, since the > knowledge-gathering aspect of CS adheres better to the rhetoric and ideals > of the natural sciences ever could, due to the nature of the subject matter. Well, then I suppose you would also find it interesting to note that the vast majority of American universities (don't know about Europe) also lump CS into their engineering departments, rather than into their science departments . Surely there is a reason for this. > > Dragging back in the original question, the CCIE somewhat affirms the > ability to perform hands-on work and apply concepts in unfamiliar contexts > with success slightly quicker than random trial and error generally produce > in a vendor-specific state-space. Its ameliorative influence upon your > career is somewhat dependent upon Cisco's success, IT's success and your > personal goals. I see high level networking jobs where a masters in computer > science is a prerequisite for having your resume read (very effecient, > since it reveals two things: that human resource folk still misunderstand > that you can sneak by a CS program without an acceptable understanding of > how electrical patterns present on one computing device can magically be > made to replicate themselves on a remote computing device through the > wonders of networking, and that the employer in question is explicitly > choosing to use a filter that will quickly reduce the numbers of resumes > that have to actually be read, even though that might rule out some of the > best candidates). Whether or not the hands-on and advanced conceptual > knowledge are relevant to higher-level jobs is industry & even company > dependent, but you can bet that if a company can make it irrelevant so that > they don't have to compensate you for that knowledge, they will. An MBA is > supposed to provide you with the cognitive wherewithal to lead the overall > success of business efforts, which in many cases requires leaders to delve > into profoundly non-technical issues. If, following the completion of your > desired course of study, you wish to deal with people & financial issues > outright, by all means go for the MBA. The situation (besides, of course, > hands-on) where not having a CCIE might hurt you is if you have to lead a > team of them, and your role requires you to understand issues at their level > in order to communicate with them or make successful customer-related > decisions. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "nrf" > To: > Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 11:55 AM > Subject: Re: MBA or CCIE [7:41809] > > > > > > > > I'd tend to agree in traditional science fields like chemistry (my > > > original major), but not in computer science/networking outside pure > > > academia. I can look at an assortment of IETF leaders and find people > > > anywhere from college dropout to PhD. Even some key academic > > > researchers (not faculty) such as Scott Bradner have masters' > > > degrees, not PhD's. > > > > But notice that was why I was restricting my discussion to only the > natural > > sciences and mathematics, where a master's degree may not be very > positive, > > and could actually be negative. Different rules apply to, say, engineering > > (I still consider CS to be more engineering than natural science). And, > of > > course, to business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This isn't just the "Old Guard." A co-director of the IETF Routing > > > Area, Abha Ahuja, died suddenly and tragically at the age of 27. She > > > had a bachelor's degree. One of the Advisory Council members of ARIN > > > got his appointment around his 21st or 22nd birthday. > > > > > > There are, however, people who are innovative architects and > > > programmers in their 60s and possibly older. Not a networking person, > > > but Grace Hopper was active technically until her death at 85. Talk > > > about titles -- in her case, if we used some of the European forms, > > > she'd have been Rear Admiral Doctor Hopper...not counting honorary > > > doctorates. > > > > > > There's also the irrelevant PhD issue. Two esteemed colleagues, deep > > > in routing theory, both have PhD's -- in physics. Neither of their > > > dissertations had anything whatsoever to do with computer science. > > > > > > >or at least not as > > > >high in esteem as you might think (master's degrees in business, > > > >engineering, or in the the liberal arts are a different story). I > don't > > > >know about Europe, but at least in the US, a master's degree in > > mathematics > > > >(or any science) has the negative connotation of being a PhD-failure - > > the > > > >guy entered a PhD program but couldn't cut it, so the school bestowed > > upon > > > >him a master's degree as a consolation prize. In fact, most of the > > > >biggest-name math schools in the United States do not even offer a > > > >terminal-master's degree program. According to USNews and World > Report, > > the > > > >top 5 graduate math programs in the US in alphabetical order are > > Berkeley, > > > >Harvard, MIT, Princeton, and Stanford (Caltech is actually not > considered > > a > > > >top5 program). The only one of those schools that may offer a > terminal > > > >master's degree in mathematics is Stanford, and I'm not even entirely > > sure > > > >they really do. I know Berkeley doesn't offer a terminal math degree, > > nor > > > >does Princeton, Caltech MIT, or Harvard (Harvard does offer a terminal > > > >master's in Applied Mathematics, but runs it under its engineering > > > >department - yes, Harvard actually has an engineering department). > > Instead, > > > >these schools grant master's degrees to PhD candidates who couldn't > pass > > > >their quals. So in some cases, that master's degree could serve more > as > > a > > > >hindrance than a help. For example, saying that you have a master's > > degree > > > >in math from Berkeley might impress some lay people, but every once in > > > >awhile, you'll run into some people who know what's up, and may start > > > >thinking you're a washout. > > > > > > > > > > > >So the point is, in the US anyway, if you want to pursue graduate study > > in > > > >mathematics, you should probably go all the way and get your PhD. > > > >Otherwise, don't do it at all. Get your MBA or something like that. > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> Good Luck. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> ""Antonio Montana"" wrote in message > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > >> > Hi all, > > > >> > > > > >> > Maybe this topic is discussed several times but I still can't > decide > > > >> wether > > > >> > to go for the CCIE or to go back to a good business school for > MBA. > > > >> > > > > >> > I am doing networking for 3 yrs now and can see that it's getting > > > harder > > > >> to > > > >> > find a good. Have all Cisco cert's except of the "lab" and some > > others > > > >> > Microsoft, Novell etc. and a Computer Science degree. > > > >> > The problem is, that here, in europe, some CCIE's are doing jobs > > like > > > >> System > > > >> > or Network Administration, which is indeed not well paid at all. > > It's > > > >just > > > >> > like creating some user logins, assigning and administering IP > > > addresses > > > >> and > > > >> > do some entries or changes on DNS or even Exchange Servers. > > > >> > > > > >> > Ok I understand that, it's better than being unemployed. > > > >> > But is this a CCIE job ?? Really don't think so. > > > >> > > > > >> > I don't know when the telco market is going up again, but I really > > > think > > > >> > about going to school and getting a management education. > > > >> > Jobs for MBA's are still there. > > > >> > > > > >> > Who knows if and when the market will give back the CCIE's the > > > >recognition > > > >> > they earn ?!? > > > >> > > > > >> > So, should I stop my track towards the CCIE and go to the "dark > > side" > > > ?? > > > >> > > > > >> > What do you think guys ?? > > > >> > > > > >> > cheers > > > >> > tony > > > -- > > > "What Problem are you trying to solve?" > > > ***send Cisco questions to the list, so all can benefit -- not > > > directly to me*** > > > > > > **************************************************************************** > > **** > > > Howard C. Berkowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Chief Technology Officer, GettLab/Gett Communications > > http://www.gettlabs.com > > > Technical Director, CertificationZone.com > http://www.certificationzone.com > > > "retired" Certified Cisco Systems Instructor (CID) #93005 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42122&t=41809 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
