Malcolm Gladwell's much contested principle that 10,000 hours of deliberate practice can make anyone world-class in a field, aside.
Software engineering is incredibly high in demand, there are countless free resources and courses available online, and there are a lot of people out there with the capacity to teach themselves. Software engineering is probably the single most enabling thing one could teach themselves in today's world.
There are people who learned how to code, tossed an app in the App Store and made millions. Or someone who started a wordpress blog, dabbled in some customization and discovered a passion for writing code that they never knew existed. It's like teaching yourself how to read, it enables you to learn and understand more.
It's probably one of the few professions where Malcolm Gladwell's contentious principle holds true. Do it religiously for 5-6 years and absorb everything you learn like a sponge, and you are probably more of an expert in your field than someone graduating from a University because you're on the cutting edge whereas they're just figuring out where they fit into the picture.
You know, not everyone needs to do a degree to be good in a field.
There is such thing as a traineeship. Yes, they lose out on a lot of the concepts and focused study, but I'd take sharp trainee over a hand pressed graduate any day.
Universities have a vested self interest in controlling who can join a profession, they would prefer it if every worker everywhere needed a degree. Just look at the slow assimilation of vocational studies into uni courses (stuff like wine making, nursing, etc.)
It is needed in some cases, you want people to be properly educated, but that's only when the tuition is necessary for that education.
Engineering (software) probably doesn't for the most part, and I think most people resent the hoops they have to jump through because a university wants to stay relevant, hence the down votes.
Ha. When my career started I was one of the first in the office with a relevant degree. Everyone else had started as an accountant. Which, if you think about the evolution of business computing, makes perfect sense.
Tangentially, presumably for the same reasons, both genders were evenly represented.
Condescending? Please explain why you see it like that.
When you go to a doctor, you expect that they completed training and are certified to practice medicine. It is the same for the engineering profession. Would you want to work in a high rise building that was designed and built some self-titled engineers who have never been appropriately trained?
That's incorrect. In the US, you take the Engineer In Training (EIT) exam when you graduate university, then require 4 years of industry experience before you can sit the PE (Professional Engineer) exam. If you pass that, you can call yourself an Engineer.
But that's only for actual Engineering disciplines. We in software don't need to take an "Engineer" test for the same reason we don't need to take a "Rock Star" test or "Ninja" test. We use the title as a courtesy, not an indication of qualification.
> In the US, you take the Engineer In Training (EIT) exam when you graduate university, then require 4 years of industry experience before you can sit the PE (Professional Engineer) exam. If you pass that, you can call yourself an Engineer.
I believe you that this is the requirement for some fields of engineering. However, there are thousands of people reading HN with the job title 'software engineer' who did not take those exams.
For four years, my business cards read "engineering". As in, does engineering work but cannot sign off on documents and thus is not an Engineer.
I left for software before sitting the PE, so they'd read the same were I to return to doing Mechanical Engineering work.
But of course it's silly to stand on principal on such things, so I've never taken offense to anybody calling themselves whatever they like. If the janitor can be an engineer, certainly anybody else can too.
I imagine Architects feel the same way. And Cardiologists will as well, when we start appropriating their title.
You don't need a PE to call yourself an "engineer". Every working engineer calls himself an "engineer" on his resume. What you people are forgetting is the Industrial Exemption. Companies are allowed to call their employees engineers and use that word in their job titles because of the exemption.
The PE thing really only applies to stuff like civil engineering projects.
Well there are certifications and licenses for civil engineers. But not other forms of engineering, and 'engineer', unqualified, is not a protected word. In fact for the most part we don't really have protected words (1st amendment and all that).
I can call myself any of those things without getting into legal trouble. If the context is that I misrepresent myself to have credentials I do not, that could be a crime yes. But saying I'm a doctor, professor, or even judge doesn't automatically get me in trouble as it would in other countries.
