So glad I left the publishing industry. I went in with a lot of respect many years ago, but it was so gross. All about how much money could be milked from students. Accuracy of information was in second or third place of importance
100%. They ripping off students selling books that are often complete garbage. In my experience "calculus" is a great example. The material is completely ossified in like the 1700s. The books are worthless tomes of useless calculations (especially in the age of computers). The whole system is about taking money, filtering people by useless exercises, and keeping people brainwashed and controllable. There's almost zero mathematical education. If they're lucky, the fundamental theorem of calculus will be mentioned for a few minutes. That's the peak of most people's education in math. It's pathetic.
I don't even get postsecondary for a good chunk of areas... Like computer programming, for example. Why would anybody need a degree that says "I don't know how to read textbooks, use Google, and learn in my own"? I'm sure there are lots of degrees just like that
Udemy.
Video classes for nearly everything ever IT.
IT changes and morphs over time.. but the basics are static.. get those statics. Decide what direction you want to go and design a learning path.
No need for college education often times
Because companies mostly don't want the degree to prove skill sets, which is why they don't generally ask for transcripts, just that you have a degree in a somewhat related field. The value of a bachelor's degree to a company is that it proves the applicant is capable of undertaking a ~4 year commitment, achieving a tangible result, and that they pass a threshold competence at navigating beaurocracies and interacting with other humans. The specific skills/experience the company wants are much better assessed using prior experience, interviews, assessments, etc.
It really just seems like it proves that the applicant is able to work in an environment where everything is already pre-installed and running with no need to learn basic troubleshooting, and that they were able to sit through a few years of focusing on specific aspects of a textbook and writing incredibly mundane programs... and quite possibly lack the ability to learn on their own and think outside of the box...
Interviews and testing seem like they would be a far better way to vet applicants
So glad I left the publishing industry. I went in with a lot of respect many years ago, but it was so gross. All about how much money could be milked from students. Accuracy of information was in second or third place of importance
100%. They ripping off students selling books that are often complete garbage. In my experience "calculus" is a great example. The material is completely ossified in like the 1700s. The books are worthless tomes of useless calculations (especially in the age of computers). The whole system is about taking money, filtering people by useless exercises, and keeping people brainwashed and controllable. There's almost zero mathematical education. If they're lucky, the fundamental theorem of calculus will be mentioned for a few minutes. That's the peak of most people's education in math. It's pathetic.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/alexs-adventures-in-numberland/2015/oct/05/maths-palace-built-by-calculus-rock-star-on-sale-for-14m
I don't even get postsecondary for a good chunk of areas... Like computer programming, for example. Why would anybody need a degree that says "I don't know how to read textbooks, use Google, and learn in my own"? I'm sure there are lots of degrees just like that
Udemy. Video classes for nearly everything ever IT.
IT changes and morphs over time.. but the basics are static.. get those statics. Decide what direction you want to go and design a learning path.
No need for college education often times
Because companies mostly don't want the degree to prove skill sets, which is why they don't generally ask for transcripts, just that you have a degree in a somewhat related field. The value of a bachelor's degree to a company is that it proves the applicant is capable of undertaking a ~4 year commitment, achieving a tangible result, and that they pass a threshold competence at navigating beaurocracies and interacting with other humans. The specific skills/experience the company wants are much better assessed using prior experience, interviews, assessments, etc.
It really just seems like it proves that the applicant is able to work in an environment where everything is already pre-installed and running with no need to learn basic troubleshooting, and that they were able to sit through a few years of focusing on specific aspects of a textbook and writing incredibly mundane programs... and quite possibly lack the ability to learn on their own and think outside of the box...
Interviews and testing seem like they would be a far better way to vet applicants