Two weeks ago, I posted a relatively ill-constructed survey loosely regarding education and experience. It was what I call a "talk-in" survey, i.e., the type that talk in radio shows have you participate in with no room for explanation. However, unlike talk-in surveys, I did leave one section for comments, and comments I got.
To revisit the survey, there were two questions: (1) All other things being equal, for any job requiring a degree of experience, which would be your first choice? The choices were
- A Bachelor's Degree from Harvard
- A Bachelor's Degree from a Private College
- A Bachelor's Degree from a State University
- A Bachelor's Degree from an Internet University
and (2) All other things being equal, for any job whether it requires a degree or not, which would be your first choice? The choices were:
- No degree and 5 years experience
- A high school diploma and 10 years experience
- A non-related degree and 5 years experience
- A non-related degree and 2 years experience
There were exactly 200 responses, and the breakdown is as follows:
- A Bachelor's Degree from Harvard = 7%
- A Bachelor's Degree from a Private College = 38%
- A Bachelor's Degree from a State University = 53%
- A Bachelor's Degree from an Internet University = 2%
- No degree and 5 years experience = 12%
- A high school diploma and 10 years experience = 16%
- A non-related degree and 5 years experience = 52%
- A non-related degree and 2 years experience = 20%
Education: Oddly, there are a few conclusions or at least extrapolations which can be garnered from these figures. First, some still put greater value on prestige (Harvard) than a degree from any other college or university. I'm not that certain that it comes from snob appeal, although that is a part of it. I also think that it is assumed that those who graduate from an Ivy League college have worked harder than those who graduated from state or other private universities. That is a false assumption as is the one which presumes that the professors at Harvard and Brown and Dartmouth etc. are better teachers than those at Mississippi Valley State College or Oberlin or University of Oregon. (Worst teacher I ever had was at a private college; the best at a California state university, but that's a whole 'nother story.)
And, as one emailer stated, "Harvard degrees are often attached to folks who see themselves as better, when they may not be. The fact of a degree is valuable, so I see more value in the degree plus the 5 years of unrelated experience." Now, if this statement is correct, when it comes to interviewing the Harvard (and by extension, all private college) graduate may very well have greater self-esteem and interview better because s/he is more self-assured. I have seen such individuals turn the interview around and place the interviewer on the defensive in such as way as to make his degree more important than experience or lack thereof.
At the same time, if the applicant is more articulate and self-assured than the interviewer, it's very possible, even likely, that the interviewer will scratch that individual. Such an individual could easily be seen as a threat.
No one commented on the fact that Harvard is a private university, but even if we combined the responses of private colleges and Harvard, the total would be 46%, still less than the 53% who said that they would take someone with a degree from a state university. I have a hunch (a private/state backed educated hunch) that the percentages reflect the population who answered the survey. I think we "vote" for those with similar backgrounds to ours. That would certainly seem true in regard to "Internet Universities." One person said that it would be difficult to take an Internet U. seriously when she had just gotten an ad from the premier IU via email. And while that particular "university" has been accredited, it has not been accredited in the minds of most HR professionals and many of the company owners who responded.
"To be honest, I don't personally care," said one respondent. "Obtaining a degree just shows you stuck with something for some length of time. We don't ask GPA, so the person could be kind of stupid and have a degree compared to a really smart person without a degree and so the "requirement" to have a degree doesn't really make a lot of sense. I learned a lot in school, but not really any more than I've ever learned on the job, except for how to drive and how to type. I always say those are the two most valuable things school taught me. But, degrees are important in this day and age--mostly because there's not a really great excuse NOT to be able to get one except that you're a rebel, a mom, or both (like me) and I was able to finish mine up on-line."
Now we're not sure what she finished up on-line (that's a dangling something-or-other, R) but we're hoping it wasn't driving lessons. In the meantime, her ability to communicate has given me some new respect for online coursework. But...one person who "defended" the Internet U. had five misspellings in two sentences, which unfortunately ran second to the nine misspellings from someone who voted for a high school diploma and 10 years' experience. I've always been a bit of a snob, but these are not really disparaging comments. However, I have always believed that written and oral articulation is what college promises and the key to success in any career. It may be why Dan Quayle won't be able to run for President again.
The following comment perhaps says it better: "Aside from the fact that there are always exceptions, I believe that a college degree (versus some college or no college) typically indicates (a) the ability to set a long-term goal (college degree), work toward the goal (with less hand-holding than is typical in high school) , and complete the goal (tenacity), (b) an aptitude for self-directed and self-disciplined study that may not have an immediate reward (versus learning a task on-the-job for a specific and immediate function), and (c) better oral and written communication skills."
Experience: As three respondents said - in one way or another - "Qualifying my answer: only if this is 10 years of SOLID experience, not 10 1-year positions."
Assuming that a degree, any degree, brings with it the ability to communicate, then it is not surprising that 72% said that a non-related degree and two to five years' experience would be their preference. In the early 1900s, few could go to college. After World War II, the GI Bill changed things and that generation was going to make certain that their kids got a college education as well. In the 60s, many states came up with the idea that everyone was entitled to a college education, at least at the community college level. Today, a college education is, to a great extent, taken for granted. Therefore, while many of us know of persons without a college degree or with "just" a high school diploma, we also know that these can be the best and the brightest. In other words, it isn't the degree: it's education, and there is nothing that says that someone without a degree can't be better educated than someone with a degree. I've known some pretty dumb people with degrees. I've known some brilliant people without.
And that leave experience. Just having a job and interacting with others educates us. Even bad experiences are educational...if we don't make the same choices or mistakes again. But this is more highfalutin philosophy than meaningful statistics. The truth is that the job dictates some of the conditions for getting a job; the interviewer's predilections dictate some; and the company dictates some. Then there's the first impression... But, one set of comments from a respondent really says it best:
"Candidly, I think most of "higher education" and professional designations (e.g. SPHR) is a fraud perpetrated on those who are taught to believe (by those who confer degrees and designations) that those letters are the ticket to the big bucks on easy street. It is fraudulent in that it just ain’t so! It is another form of business: the awarding of degrees. I have learned over 30 years in personnel (okay, so it’s now called Human Resources... as I was saying...) that one cannot win without the talent and the experience. Education can sometimes provide experience but by far, experience is the more important of the two. However, as I alluded to in the last sentence, talent carries 80% of the weight, in my opinion. Remember “Teaching pigs to sing?” ...And this is from a guy with a Ph.D.!"
I could have written that myself except that he also liked the Internet University.
All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2002. E. A. Winning Associates, Inc.