[randcraw]

As someone who had a BS in biology before earning a part-time MS in CS (in 1990) I can say unequivocally -- the degree was a life transforming game changer.

With a non-tech BS degree, all too few HR departments (esp in bigger companies) will invite you interview for a software job. Without the CS degree, I was a pariah with very limited prospects. Frankly I doubt that POV has changed appreciably, even after 27 years. Business-men/women are a conservative lot. They take as little risk as possible. If you lack credentials, they hire you, and you fail... they look bad and have a hard time explaining why they hired you. But if you had a relevant tech degree, their ass has far better cover.

Of course, if you already have a BS in CS, I can't speak to the value of adding a MS. Even when I earned mine, the incremental added value beyond the BS wasn't overwhelming. But some employers care more for advanced degrees than others. Uncle Sam and most large companies automatically kick you into a higher salary bracket if you have one.

It also doesn't hurt if the school granting your MS is renowned. Aside from silicon valley (apparently), I suspect 95% of employers will be very positively impressed by a degree from GT. I know several employers responded favorably over the years to the mere fact I had a degree from Johns Hopkins. Like it or not, your alma mater often matters.

[geebee]

Great point. MS degrees may have changed somewhat since 1990, though.

One problem is that MS degrees don't really cover the general curriculum. They're often, even when rigorous, used to allow students to focus on a topic or project that isn't as lengthy as a PhD. For instance, someone with a CS might be interested in numerical computing, and work on ways to solve various differential equations.

The downside here is that this means a math or physics major might get an MS in CS, and do some programming in numerical computing, but not know much about algorithms or data structures.

I'm presenting this in the context of a genuine, rigorous MS degree, because it doesn't need to be a watered-down experience to still show the pitfalls.

Some MS degrees do require certain core courses before you can apply - so they'll take a math major, but they'll require that this student complete certain undergraduate courses - some before applying, some while enrolled. This can add time to the MS degree but avoids that scenario I described above.

Of course, once you've actually taken those courses (say, a math major passes courses in data structures, algorithms, compilers, and operating systems), then the MS may not be critical for finding a job anymore. But the degree can help.

Unfortunately, I've noticed a trend toward discounting MS degrees or even holding them as a negative indicator. This is probably because people get an interview because they have an MS, but then are tested during a technical interview on general CS that they may not have taken.

Not sure of the solution. I think the best approach is to take promising students from other fields, but then make sure they've taken the additional core coursework. This would add some time to the degree, but if all MS students did this, I think the degree would be more respected.

As it stands, the BS in CS is respected, because it (if the school is accredited) must contain all those core courses that tech companies love to quiz people on.

Whether those topics are actually relevant to the job is an entirely different topic!