Inequality much worse than most think

[LazyBoy]

Re: $8k not enough?

Sure the price of "credentials" spirals upward but the cost of acquiring knowledge is going down at the same time. We live in a autodidact's dream while the dream of "no child left behind" is increasingly a fiction. The best of times and the worst of times.

An interesting point. It would seem that bestowing credentials at the university level would be ripe for disruption by some form of we-don't-care-where-or-how-you-learned-it testing service. Of course, who bestows credentials on the service/institution?

Khan Academy, for example, seems to be about learning but not credentials.

[BadJuju]

Re: $8k not enough?

An interesting point. It would seem that bestowing credentials at the university level would be ripe for disruption by some form of we-don't-care-where-or-how-you-learned-it testing service. Of course, who bestows credentials on the service/institution?

Khan Academy, for example, seems to be about learning but not credentials.

Could be something like the National Craft Assessment & Certification Program.

[newnewthing]

Re: $8k not enough?

An interesting point. It would seem that bestowing credentials at the university level would be ripe for disruption by some form of we-don't-care-where-or-how-you-learned-it testing service. Of course, who bestows credentials on the service/institution?

Khan Academy, for example, seems to be about learning but not credentials.

Programmers are the classic example were people are hired based on what they can do. In fact the best programmers often never bother to graduate college. They get obsessed with programming and often ignore their other studies. I have hired many programmers without significant formal education. OTOH, if you need programmers to implement Kalman filters or other specialized stuff you are more likely to find that in a formally educated person who also enjoys programming. But even in advanced areas the necessary knowledge is widely available for free as are the tools to play with it.

[jpatter666]

Re: $8k not enough?

Programmers are the classic example were people are hired based on what they can do. In fact the best programmers often never bother to graduate college. They get obsessed with programming and often ignore their other studies. I have hired many programmers without significant formal education. OTOH, if you need programmers to implement Kalman filters or other specialized stuff you are more likely to find that in a formally educated person who also enjoys programming. But even in advanced areas the necessary knowledge is widely available for free as are the tools to play with it.

You got it -- the best programmers I know either didn't graduate or barely graduated because classes were a distraction from their "real" work. All went on to very (in some cases very, VERY) successful careers in IT.

There's what we call the "super-programmers" -- the mantra was that one of these guys was worth 10 ordinary programmers. It's true -- and most of these guys went out to Silicon Valley which gives you some insight as to why the awesome stuff seems to continually come from there.

[BadJuju]

Re: $8k not enough?

You got it -- the best programmers I know either didn't graduate or barely graduated because classes were a distraction from their "real" work. All went on to very (in some cases very, VERY) successful careers in IT.

There's what we call the "super-programmers" -- the mantra was that one of these guys was worth 10 ordinary programmers. It's true -- and most of these guys went out to Silicon Valley which gives you some insight as to why the awesome stuff seems to continually come from there.

Here's the thing, though. How many professions are like that? A programmer can show up to a job with ample evidence of his skill by demonstrating projects he has done. I don't know of any places that lets me wire up electrical systems or install conduit as a demonstration of proficiency. It is all based upon 'experience,' which is really just time on the job and not actual experience. It would be swell if I could do that because I know a hell of a lot more than most people with a similar amount of time in the craft, but I cannot demonstrate it.

[littleshark]

Re: $8k not enough?

Here's the thing, though. How many professions are like that? A programmer can show up to a job with ample evidence of his skill by demonstrating projects he has done. I don't know of any places that lets me wire up electrical systems or install conduit as a demonstration of proficiency. It is all based upon 'experience,' which is really just time on the job and not actual experience. It would be swell if I could do that because I know a hell of a lot more than most people with a similar amount of time in the craft, but I cannot demonstrate it.

I think in a private mkt anyone with much more proficiency than others rises to the top pretty fast, and if someone who is so much better than someone else is being held down they will usually leave that job for a better opportunity or go out on their own. I think most people who are that much better than others, aren't the type who just sit back and do nothing about it. In a profession that is unionized, like electrical workers in many instances, that can be a different story and the struggle and politics around it I'm sure can be daunting.

[BadJuju]

Re: $8k not enough?

I think in a private mkt anyone with much more proficiency than others rises to the top pretty fast, and if someone who is so much better than someone else is being held down they will usually leave that job for a better opportunity or go out on their own. I think most people who are that much better than others, aren't the type who just sit back and do nothing about it. In a profession that is unionized, like electrical workers in many instances, that can be a different story and the struggle and politics around it I'm sure can be daunting.

Not at all. The only way to move up where I am at is through time on the job and by having your tongue up someone's ass while holding a dagger to anyone else in the line of 'succession.' Skill and knowledge factor very little into it. And this is in a non-union place.

[shiny!]

Re: $8k not enough?

I think in a private mkt anyone with much more proficiency than others rises to the top pretty fast, and if someone who is so much better than someone else is being held down they will usually leave that job for a better opportunity or go out on their own. I think most people who are that much better than others, aren't the type who just sit back and do nothing about it. In a profession that is unionized, like electrical workers in many instances, that can be a different story and the struggle and politics around it I'm sure can be daunting.

There are many non-union states where this isn't a problem. An electrician can start his own business. A young electrician can work for an electrical contractor for awhile to prove his ability, develop a resume and contacts, save up his money, then go out on his own.

[vinoveri]

Re: $8k not enough?

An interesting point. It would seem that bestowing credentials at the university level would be ripe for disruption by some form of we-don't-care-where-or-how-you-learned-it testing service. Of course, who bestows credentials on the service/institution?

Khan Academy, for example, seems to be about learning but not credentials.

The medical and legal professions are great examples of professional monopolies that have partnered with government in regulating who gets to practice. Med school or law school (and its very very difficult to get into med school after age 30) are the only pathways now. Not so long ago, some basic knowledge provided by book learning and lengthy apprenticeships followed by examinations and peer recommendations allowed anyone at any adult age to engage in these time honored professions. Now one must subject oneself to a singular process and singular gateways. Only the government that can enforce licensure after all.

I've made this point several times before, acknowledging that we want a rigorous evaluation criteria for granting license to practice med/law, something I would argue we don't have now ... but always get the knee-jerk response of those inside who don't want open competition in their monopolized profession -e.g., "but the poor public won't be protected" and simliar nonsense. Anyone who has been exposed to med school in the past 30 years knows that it ain't that much or hard and there are plenty of mediocre MD's being produced (and as for law, don't get me started - that profession has become so politicized as to be a travesty).

For my MD and JD friends, not saying there aren't a whole bunch a majority of great competent and exceptional professionals and we're all the better for it, just that I suspect that there may be more of the exceptionals and less of the mediocre if the gates of training admission werern't so narrow AND the bar to licensure was just as high or higher. My older brother is a surgeon and he told me he knew what he wanted to be when he was 15 and never looked back. Some of us don't figure it out that early and those late bloomers shouldn't be foreclosed from a vocation just b/c they came to it late or want to take a different approach to learning.

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: $8k not enough?

The medical and legal professions are great examples of professional monopolies that have partnered with government in regulating who gets to practice. Med school or law school (and its very very difficult to get into med school after age 30) are the only pathways now. Not so long ago, some basic knowledge provided by book learning and lengthy apprenticeships followed by examinations and peer recommendations allowed anyone at any adult age to engage in these time honored professions. Now one must subject oneself to a singular process and singular gateways. Only the government that can enforce licensure after all.

I've made this point several times before, acknowledging that we want a rigorous evaluation criteria for granting license to practice med/law, something I would argue we don't have now ... but always get the knee-jerk response of those inside who don't want open competition in their monopolized profession -e.g., "but the poor public won't be protected" and simliar nonsense. Anyone who has been exposed to med school in the past 30 years knows that it ain't that much or hard and there are plenty of mediocre MD's being produced (and as for law, don't get me started - that profession has become so politicized as to be a travesty).

For my MD and JD friends, not saying there aren't a whole bunch a majority of great competent and exceptional professionals and we're all the better for it, just that I suspect that there may be more of the exceptionals and less of the mediocre if the gates of training admission werern't so narrow AND the bar to licensure was just as high or higher. My older brother is a surgeon and he told me he knew what he wanted to be when he was 15 and never looked back. Some of us don't figure it out that early and those late bloomers shouldn't be foreclosed from a vocation just b/c they came to it late or want to take a different approach to learning.

Francois Quesnay was a master surgeon in Paris before he wrote his seminal piece "Economic Table" where he likened the flow of money in the economy to the flow of blood in the body.

Some of the greatest minds in history never studied/obtained a degree in what they are now famous for.

For the most part due to politics and the structure of our current system, that kind of outside thinking is just about gone.

You need a degree in any field to be taken seriously or so I have been told.....

[gwynedd1]

Re: $8k not enough?

The medical and legal professions are great examples of professional monopolies that have partnered with government in regulating who gets to practice. Med school or law school (and its very very difficult to get into med school after age 30) are the only pathways now. Not so long ago, some basic knowledge provided by book learning and lengthy apprenticeships followed by examinations and peer recommendations allowed anyone at any adult age to engage in these time honored professions. Now one must subject oneself to a singular process and singular gateways. Only the government that can enforce licensure after all.

I've made this point several times before, acknowledging that we want a rigorous evaluation criteria for granting license to practice med/law, something I would argue we don't have now ... but always get the knee-jerk response of those inside who don't want open competition in their monopolized profession -e.g., "but the poor public won't be protected" and simliar nonsense. Anyone who has been exposed to med school in the past 30 years knows that it ain't that much or hard and there are plenty of mediocre MD's being produced (and as for law, don't get me started - that profession has become so politicized as to be a travesty).

For my MD and JD friends, not saying there aren't a whole bunch a majority of great competent and exceptional professionals and we're all the better for it, just that I suspect that there may be more of the exceptionals and less of the mediocre if the gates of training admission werern't so narrow AND the bar to licensure was just as high or higher. My older brother is a surgeon and he told me he knew what he wanted to be when he was 15 and never looked back. Some of us don't figure it out that early and those late bloomers shouldn't be foreclosed from a vocation just b/c they came to it late or want to take a different approach to learning.

And these I am sure contain some of the same people who don't like labor unions. For a time , quality control and standards is a justification. However the slippage into barrier to entry is just so easy.

[santafe2]

Re: $8k not enough?

The medical and legal professions are great examples of professional monopolies that have partnered with government in regulating who gets to practice. Med school or law school (and its very very difficult to get into med school after age 30) are the only pathways now. Not so long ago, some basic knowledge provided by book learning and lengthy apprenticeships followed by examinations and peer recommendations allowed anyone at any adult age to engage in these time honored professions. Now one must subject oneself to a singular process and singular gateways. Only the government that can enforce licensure after all.

I've made this point several times before, acknowledging that we want a rigorous evaluation criteria for granting license to practice med/law, something I would argue we don't have now ... but always get the knee-jerk response of those inside who don't want open competition in their monopolized profession -e.g., "but the poor public won't be protected" and simliar nonsense. Anyone who has been exposed to med school in the past 30 years knows that it ain't that much or hard and there are plenty of mediocre MD's being produced (and as for law, don't get me started - that profession has become so politicized as to be a travesty).

With regard to medicine, licensure is only the first hurdle. One must also pass their boards and now, retake their boards every 10 years to maintain board certification for their medical specialty(s). Coming up soon will be the requirement for continuous certification. This is a rolling three year training requirement that must be kept current to maintain board certification. So while a physician can practice without being board certified, they can't work in a hospital or bill Medicare / Medicaid and it's getting more difficult to bill insurance companies without maintaining certification. In the past many less rigorous physicians would use the qualification, "board eligible", but the period where one is board eligible is becoming quite small in most specialties. By the end of this decade, practicing medicine in the US without maintaining board certification will be challenging if not impossible in a metropolitan area.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: $8k not enough?

With regard to medicine, licensure is only the first hurdle. One must also pass their boards and now, retake their boards every 10 years to maintain board certification for their medical specialty(s). Coming up soon will be the requirement for continuous certification. This is a rolling three year training requirement that must be kept current to maintain board certification. So while a physician can practice without being board certified, they can't work in a hospital or bill Medicare / Medicaid and it's getting more difficult to bill insurance companies without maintaining certification. In the past many less rigorous physicians would use the qualification, "board eligible", but the period where one is board eligible is becoming quite small in most specialties. By the end of this decade, practicing medicine in the US without maintaining board certification will be challenging if not impossible in a metropolitan area.

A professional engineer in the US is also increasingly burdened by a blooming credentials racket; it looks like a broad and growing trend among most licensed or certified trades.
We must spend increasing amounts time and money taking mostly worthless training classes (continuing education) just to keep working at our jobs.
It's extortion, really.

[jk]

Re: $8k not enough?

A professional engineer in the US is also increasingly burdened by a blooming credentials racket; it looks like a broad and growing trend among most licensed or certified trades.
We must spend increasing amounts time and money taking mostly worthless training classes (continuing education) just to keep working at our jobs.
It's extortion, really.

it's just credentials inflation, like grade inflation in schools and colleges. just as now you need a [devalued] college diploma to get a job that used to held by a high school graduate, so your professional degree and certification/licensure is devalued by the need to re-establish, again and again, that you are worthy of it.

[wayiwalk]

Re: $8k not enough?

A professional engineer in the US is also increasingly burdened by a blooming credentials racket; it looks like a broad and growing trend among most licensed or certified trades.
We must spend increasing amounts time and money taking mostly worthless training classes (continuing education) just to keep working at our jobs.
It's extortion, really.

...and the likely future need to have a masters to get the PE in the first place (this has been on the table with the nationwide PE org for a while, presently I think it is on hold).

I remember when they first added the pdh requirement, the argument being made was that doctors and lawyers had such requirements, and it would be good for the profession. All I could think was, yeah, doctors go to conferences and get training, but what engineers can afford such trips? Only the top 5%. For the rest, not so easy.

It is an accurate characterization - at first the pdh's were very hard to get. In NY, the law seemed to be written to favor academia and state employees, who were either exempted or had the ability to get pdh's via teaching classes ("new" classes, however, still an easier effort that sitting and getting training). Then, many organizations qualified to give the training, including vendors, so that they could provide training on the subject area of the product, and it became possible to get pdhs during lunchtime seminars.

It is still a hassle though, the extra paperwork.

In the first place, getting the PE came along with the maturity and experience to KNOW when something was outside of your area of expertise, and one would take care to only perform work in areas that one was capable in. The pdh's, they are just one more thing to take care of in our "free" time.