
The Problem with Higher Education - An Unfortunate Email - Selfcommit
http://www.selfcommit.com/2013/11/the-problem-with-higher-education.html
======
hkmurakami
The reason why you get this kind of behavior from advanced degree programs is
(you probably guessed it) _rankings_.

When "acceptance rate" is one of the factors in your ability to inch up those
of so precious rankings, marketing yourself to applicants in this fashion
suddenly makes sense. Sure, you'd like the best, most qualified applicants to
matriculate. But more immediately, you have a need to inflate the number of
applicants to your school, keep the number of seats constant, and make your
program look "more competitive" to get into.

IMO this kind of short cutting may work in the short term, but erodes the
quality of the student body in the long run.

Whenever you see "has been investing heavily in their marketing efforts" from
a graduate program, I take it as a warning sign that something might be
cookin' in the kitchen.

~~~
snoonan
Right, the incentive is to reject the highest possible number of applicants.
The system is built around reducing friction for applying while rejecting
almost all of those people as cheaply and easily as possible.

I wouldn't be surprised if some schools create entire "pre-disqualified"
marketing funnels specifically designed to automatically reject everyone.

~~~
Selfcommit
>I wouldn't be surprised if some schools create entire "pre-disqualified"
marketing funnels specifically designed to automatically reject everyone.

That thought really just rocked my world. It's just crazy enough to be true.

Why else would they turn away a paying customer?

------
drakaal
I have attended more than a dozen Colleges and Universities. I have a degree
from none.

I had a ground floor corner window office at Microsoft. (those who know, know
what that means)

I was told by Google if I took a job with them I would have to "finish" my
studies with in 2 years of taking the job.

I was on the standards committee for h.264, VC1, HD-DVD, and Bluray. Today I
build some of the most advanced Natural Language Processing systems on the
planet.

What is wrong with higher education is the belief that it is necessary to do
well. There are definitely fields where I want the person to have earned a
Doctorate. (I would like my Brain Surgeon to have at least one if not two) But
over all I find that the person with the discipline to find out what they need
to know through seeking someone who can teach them, or through reading, or
through taking a gig that will train them is far more impressive than
attending a school. Especially for IT.

~~~
thoughtsimple
>I was told by Google if I took a job with them I would have to "finish" my
studies with in 2 years of taking the job.

Why? What would happen if you didn't? Would they fire you? It seems very odd
that Google would value an unnecessary degree over the actual experience that
was why they were interested in you in the first place.

~~~
yeukhon
Parent doesn't have any degree and the minimal qualification for almost all
Google's software engineering is a bachelor. I am sure some people are
exceptions.... like the most brilliant people you find probably just too
famous to deal with a degree. I guess they just want to ensure most of the
people at Google (except the reallly really really top famous talents one) are
at least on the same page? I guess? And it might be easier to calculate salary
as well. I am not saying parent is not smart - just referencing what is listed
on the career page.

~~~
drakaal
Yes. The particular position was related to Video Compression. There are maybe
10 people in the whole world at my level in that space. We each have slightly
different skill sets, so I will say "same" level. There are probably 50 in the
world that are comparable in that they have enough working knowledge to know
where to look something up to do 90% of what the top 10 can do.

Most of those have a PhD but in the top 10, myself and one other have no
degree, 2 have art degrees (film stuff).

In the top 50 few have masters, 2 don't even have highschool diplomas.

~~~
ars_technician
>There are maybe 10 people in the whole world at my level in that space.

This is highly unlikely. It's more like 10 people that you know of. Less than
1/3 of the world speaks English. Some advanced video firm in China that has no
interest in participating in US standards bodies could very easily have more
people with your skills.

~~~
drakaal
If you are trying to build something that is compliant with the various
standards, the best people are the people who wrote the standards. There are
about 10 of us who have been on enough of the standards bodies that we know
all the ambiguities and how they are meant to be interpreted. There is no guy
standing around in China who was spying on those meetings and therefore knows
more about them than we do.

And many of the people on that list are not English speakers. Math is the
primary language.

Do you know what Chinese for discrete cosine transform is? Discrete cosine
transform. Hebrew for Deinterlace? Deinterlace.

------
enraged_camel
One of the reasons I decided not to pursue a master's degree is their
ridiculous over-reliance on undergraduate GPA scores.

I was kind of a dumbass in college. I didn't take anything outside of my major
seriously - I merely took them to fulfill the so-called "general education
requirements." As a result, my GPA suffered.

More than half a decade later, those mistakes are basically ensuring that I
can never get into a top-tier master's program, regardless of my GRE/GMAT
scores or letters of recommendation.

Sigh. Oh well.

~~~
Derbasti
Interesting. I am part of the board of admission at my local university in
Germany. We don't even see the undergraduate grades of applicants for the
masters program. Furthermore, if an applicant shows a significant improvement
from his first semester to his last semester, we typically see this very
positively--that studend grew with his studies.

~~~
Selfcommit
Do you have a Computer Science program?

~~~
Derbasti
Nope, it's engineering only (though German engineering, which is more hands-on
and less business than American engineering).

------
greenyoda
It sounds like universities are adopting the same kind of dysfunctional
behavior that lots of companies are using to recruit employees: automated
application systems with inscrutable criteria that reject qualified applicants
without any human involvement, followed up by spamming previously-rejected
applicants (in the case of job-seekers, via LinkedIn).

Now, just wait for the inevitable whining: "It's sooooo hard to find qualified
grad students in the U.S., so we need the government to increase the number of
student visas."

If universities or companies are seriously trying to recruit qualified
applicants, there should be a human being at the other end, not a mindless
piece of software.

~~~
vizeroth
Most universities aren't having much trouble finding qualified applicants.
Instead, they're having trouble finding enough funding to expand their
programs to meet the demand, especially in public universities.

However, it could be assumed that a previously-rejected applicant may have
done any number of things to improve their qualifications in the 3-12 months
between application periods. Most universities will have some advisors that
will be able to tell you any number of things you can do in a relatively short
period of time to improve your chances of being accepted, such as re-taking
exams or specific classes. In other cases, related programs may have more
openings (or fewer applicants), improving your chances of getting into those
programs.

Sometimes just getting to know the people involved in the program (faculty and
advising staff) can improve your chances, as being able to recall a face that
goes with the name on the page can be the deciding factor between two
similarly-qualified candidates. At the very least, it shows an active interest
in the program, as opposed to someone that sent out applications to X, Y, and
Z universities (after all, how many of the accepted students actually enroll
is important, too).

------
ChuckMcM
Hah, it would be interesting if Cassey replies. It would be more effective to
write them a letter and post it to them. No doubt 99% of the replys to the
email are "no such address" or "user email inbox is full" or something equally
un-germane to the process of recruiting. As a system administrator you could
write to the President of the University and explain to them how Cassey
appears to be wasting college resources with an ineffective spamming campaign
but mention that if you were a student there, pursuing your Masters degree,
you would also be available on a work study basis to help Drexel develop a
much more accurate and useful student recruitment tool, this would greatly
enhance the value to Drexel of having you be part of their program.

~~~
ars_technician
Cassey isn't wasting resources. Schools want a high rejection/acceptance
ratio. It's in their best interest to recruit applicants regardless of their
abilities/background since they will just reject them anyway.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
How is that not wasting resources?

~~~
ars_technician
Admissions people are usually employed full time. Once they have enough
students, they might as well boost the rejection rate of the school
(subsequently boosting the school's ratings).

------
colechristensen
There are a series of serious and growing issues with higher education and the
pursuit of a career as an academic and this is clearly a symptom. As I see it,
there are three separate goals: personal growth of students (education for
it's own sake), providing a quality workforce, and expanding the reach of
human knowledge and achievement. Through a series of well-intentioned but
misguided attitudes, the whole system is getting progressively more broken and
serving it's goals (or my version of them) less and less.

It's a hard problem to solve, and we see the beginnings of solutions, but we
all have a long way to go and the future doesn't necessarily look all that
promising without some pretty significant changes in our culture.

------
privong
It seems as though Drexel is acting somewhat foolishly (at minimum, just
putting their foot in their mouth), but it's not clear that this particular
incident relates to higher education in general.

~~~
Selfcommit
True enough - I suppose my search for an interesting program (That I could
'qualify' for) has soured me towards Higher Education in general.

Needless to say, their email was not well received...

I wish I could find a legitimate school, with an online program, that would
accept me.

~~~
jkimmel
Just out of curiosity, did you apply to Georgia Tech's Online Masters when it
opened a few months ago?

It will be interesting to see how they treat candidates with primarily
industry credentials/experience, given that an online degree may attract a
higher proportion of these prospective students (industry credentials suggest
a full time job, which may lead to a preference for an online degree, but I'm
obviously speculating).

~~~
Selfcommit
Honestly, I was really looking forward to that program. I started the process,
but was deterred by: 1) The need for official Transcripts (I attended 3
undergrad schools - 2 of which require in person forms/snail mail and a 2-4
week waiting period) I have unsealed formal transcripts I can send in - I
don't understand why those arn't enough for a conditional acceptance.(based on
verification)

2) The need for letters of recommendation (As I mentioned in the post - I've
recently asked my employer/co-workers for letters twice, I hate to impose that
again)

It might be worth revisiting GT's program.

------
Selfcommit
Update: Not sure if someone actually read my reply, but I just received this
from Drexel, unprompted.

[http://i.imgur.com/JP8c0i6.png](http://i.imgur.com/JP8c0i6.png)

------
brohoolio
I recently attended a lecture by our college of engineering graduate
admissions recruitment officer. He basically wants a 3.7 GPA or higher and he
says he'd get it were it not for a couple if departments who insist on
bringing in the occasional person with a low GPA. Sounds like he's going to
strong arm them in the next few years into not accepting those kids. They do
all sorts of recruiting tricks to target the smartest kids to come to graduate
school.

It's all about those ranking metrics, never mind all the successful people
that for whatever reason either didn't graduate or did poorly in undergrad.
Doesn't matter if you went out and ended up being successful.

~~~
vizeroth
Two major things combine to increase those entrance GPAs: 1) As the number of
applicants increases, the number of openings increases at a much slower rate
(if at all), and GPA is a simple starting point for quickly sorting out a
large number of applications.

2) When departments/colleges allow exceptions with lower GPAs, the students
are rarely as successful in the program as those that met the minimum GPA
requirement. This usually leads to fewer exceptions being granted.

No matter how successful we are in professional life, graduate school is still
school. The two are very rarely as strongly linked as some would like, and the
best measurement admissions staff have for how well you will do in school is
how well you have performed in school previously.

In my case, it doesn't even matter that the university finds me qualified
enough to work for them in my field of study. My grades are a major problem
for admission, and I'm better off improving them elsewhere, first.

------
beachstartup
i graduated with a 2.01 GPA from my undergrad program nearly 10 years ago (a
top 20 school, basically the best public STEM school in the nation). since
then i've worked extensively for big name-brand companies and have cofounded a
multi-million dollar services firm which i now run.

after doing some very cursory research into MBA programs, i decided that it
probably wasn't worth the effort and money required to even apply, given my
academic achievement. a non-starter, so to speak.

the only answers i could wrangle out of admissions folks and people who had
gotten their mba were bogus platitudes and non-responses, i couldn't get a god
damn straight answer out of ANYONE whether or not it would be a waste of time
to pursue admissions with a C average in undergrad, even given my professional
track record. not a single person said "yes. it is possible that an elite
school will accept you with a C undergrad gpa." even worse, nobody said that i
would be rejected outright. basically, nobody knew.

i got the distinct feeling that mba programs cast a wide net on applications
and keep the secret sauce of admissions as closely guarded as possible.

therefore, i gave up on the process and have pretty much decided that i am
done with school for life. it's not really feeling like much of a loss, to be
honest, especially considering it would take me over 500k of lost earnings and
tuition to go to a school anyway. i dunno if that's worth it.

~~~
Selfcommit
My situation is very similar to yours.

(Although if I'd founded a multi-million dollar start-up I don't think I"d be
interested in continuing school)

~~~
beachstartup
having an mba and getting some job that pays me $250k/year to do basically
nothing would be a great plan B in case my company goes belly up.

running your own company makes working a job, any job, even the golden
handcuffs elite jobs, look like a fucking cakewalk. no joke.

~~~
Selfcommit
I'll bet - Sounds very exciting. Hopefully someday one of my own projects
takes off.

------
ChristianMarks
If only this were _the_ singular problem with higher education.

I have a problem with the phrase _the problem_ , as if there were a single,
uniquely identifiable problem. Example sentence: _The problem with 'the
problem' is that there is no canonical, singular, uniquely identifiable
problem._

------
ForHackernews
This was on Hacker News a while back, maybe give him a try?
[http://jeffhuang.com/rethinking_the_phd_application.html](http://jeffhuang.com/rethinking_the_phd_application.html)

------
rjzzleep
the problem with higher education is that with all it's great rhetoric it was
made for the greatest common denominator. it's not made to surface ones
capabilities and talents, it's rather designed to network and create as many
mediocre worker bees as possible.

on an unrelated sidenote, i'm looking for professions or studies where the
biggest gap exists between what is taught and is actually used or needed
during actual work or practice. if anyone has suggestions, please comment or
email me.

------
Estragon
Somehow I got on an email list which low-tier universities use to spam
potential students like this. He's right, they really are desperate for fresh
blood.

------
graycat
> At a point in history when self tutoring often provides more than the
> average Graduate course, it blows my mind how difficult it can be to get
> into a Masters program.

Things to consider:

(1) Take the GRE tests for both aptitude and your speciality. Really good
scores will be tough to ignore. And if your speciality is in a STEM field,
then you get to f'get about all the English literature, history, etc. and your
grades in those nonsense subjects.

(2) Emphasize points of success in your career. Why? Because you will look
like you are taking your career seriously and might later in your career be
able to make significant financial contributions to the university. Yes,
Virginia, universities like rich students!

(3) As in the quote, do some independent study. Then in your application,
describe the significant books and journal papers you have studied. You may be
doing enough independent study now just for your career.

(4) Get the description of the Ph.D. qualifying exams. Mostly the coursework
for a Master's and for preparation for the exams are similar. So, just study
the darned material on your own, apply to the Ph.D. program, and offer to sit
for the qualifying exams before being admitted. Offer tough to turn down.

Note, at one time the Web site of the Princeton math department just flatly
stated that the graduate courses were introductions to research by experts, no
courses were given for preparation for the qualifying exams, and students were
expected to prepare for these exams on their own. So, do it, on your own,
without going to campus.

That you successfully prepared for the qualifying exams on your own is big
time impressive and a big point for any graduate program because one of the
basic necessary conditions for success in a Ph.D. program is good ability at
independent study. So, showing such ability can make a graduate department
really happy, i.e., no longer afraid they will have to write your dissertation
for you.

(5) Find a problem, maybe at work, that needs solving and get a good solution,
both in theory and in practice. Write a paper and submit it for publication in
a peer-reviewed journal or a conference.

If are unsure on just how to do this, then find a friendly Ph.D., researcher,
professor to give you the _101 Big Secrets They Never Taught You in College on
How Get a Paper Published_ or some such.

Pretend to look for a recommendation of a suitable journal and write to a
suitable professor in the program you want to enter and send a copy of your
paper. So, _prime the pump_ via a backdoor. If he likes your paper, then it
can be that all the rest goes quickly. E.g., once I applied to a graduate
program at Cornell and got turned down. It happened that there was a prof
there I wanted to talk to about a problem I had at work and flew up. We took a
campus tour, and back at his office I showed him my problem and my progress on
it. Suddenly I got another letter from the department admissions saying I was
in. I didn't go. Via such things I also got into Brown, Princeton, and
Hopkins. I went to Hopkins.

(6) Typically a STEM department has a seminar series. These can be painful as
a toothache because you may be listening to stuff you don't have the
prerequisites to understand. But they can also be good because they can, on a
good day, give you some great help in picking a research problem.

Well, typically such seminars are open to the public, and maybe also the
department tea before the seminar. So, crash the party and meet some of the
profs and/or graduate students. From the students, get some of the 'low down'
\-- they can be quite helpful to a fellow suffering human.

You need to know that graduate school, really, is not much about learning.
Instead, the three most important aspects are research, research, and
research, as in "new, correct, and significant" and/or "worthy of
publication". For a prof, what's important is research good enough to get a
good grant, e.g., from the NSF. E.g., that Princeton Web site didn't even want
to teach basic material and only wanted students to get involved in research;
the assumption is that hard part was doing the research, not finding, reading,
and understanding it in the library.

As a graduate student, do some work that is nice and clearly publishable,
especially if you publish it, and can suddenly find that life in the
department gets much nicer.

Finally, my _Secret Guide to Research Success in STEM Fields_ is, "be wise,
mathematize". Basically get an ugrad math major with emphasis on topics that
can be important in the other STEM fields and then make the research basically
some new theorems and proofs. It's worked for me.

For the admissions office, try to f'get about them! They just can't be the
brightest bulbs on the tree.

