As someone who completed a (on-campus) CS masters at GT, I really wish I didn't. The classes were of very poor quality - it was clear that they were a low priority for most faculty. Andrew Ng's Coursera class on Machine Learning was the pedagogical highlight of my time at GT, and I did it on my own initiative (and it's free).
I know people have many reasons to get a Masters. If your goal is to take some higher-level classes, you can do better than GT. If you are self-motivated enough to do an online degree, you can do it for free. Aside from free offerings from sites like Coursera, you can find whole courses up from many institutions - with syllabi, lecture slides, homework assignments, etc.
If you're planning to do it for the salary, in my experience the degree ended up being worth a $95K to $115K bump in starting salary. Compare this with the 2 years of industry salary that I would have received, and the 2 years of experience (and raises that come with that). I know I wasn't paid better than the folks who had been with the company for 2 years more than me.
If you're thinking about it for the sake of your resume, I do hiring screening / interviews now (for Data Science and Software Engineering positions) - and I really don't care if the applicant has an MS or not (or what classes they may have taken). Most folks I know that do hiring think similarly. My main signal from your resume is projects you've been on and how you contributed.
From my point of view, this program is a losing proposition for any potential student.
I just graduated from the OMSCS (online master of science in computer science) program, and I found it a wholly worthwhile experience. It was challenging, informative, and for the most part well-run. Software Analysis and Test in particular was a real eye-opener. And while Computability, Complexity, and Algorithms was a hideous death march of terror, the material they covered was some of the most interesting I've ever experienced.
Yes, you can study the same material on your own, but you won't earn a degree from it. Now that I've got the degree, I'm in much better shape to pursue further learning on my own.
Note, however, that I didn't do this to improve my resume, go fishing for a new job, or try to get a raise. With tuition reimbursement from my company I only spent $3500 over 2 1/2 years to earn a full-fledged master's degree.
Based on the above, I can't agree that it's a losing proposition.
I did both my BSCS and MSCS at Georgia Tech. While I have many complaints about the school, the quality of the classes is not one of them, for either the undergrad or grad programs.
That said, with a couple of notable exceptions, the graduate classes are there for PhD students as first and second year background material so they have some starting points for their research. This naturally leads to a format where the semester can effectively be described as a long reading list of papers and lectures to spur discussion on the content of the paper. I was planning on pursuing a PhD when I started into my MS, so this format worked quite well for me at the time. In the years subsequent to that, the grounding from those classes has given me starting points for deep dives into problems I encountered at work[0].
It's interesting that you brought up machine learning. Charles Isbell's Intro ML class was a significant exception to the pattern I described above. In addition to high quality, pre-prepared lectures peppered with entertaining anecdotes, the had high quality projects that worked with pratcial tooling. It was also probably the highlight of my graduate career[1].
[0]: In particular, the material covered in my graduate systems classes has been invaluable for not reinventing the wheel for the thousandth time. The material from the couple compilers classes I took on a whim has been a huge boon when talking about software correctness. I work on the hypervisor underneath GCE. Correctness is near and dear to my heart, but performance is right there with it :)
[1]: For undergrad that dubious honor has to go to Olin Shivers, not only because of his eclectic teaching style, but also because his class completely altered the way I think about problems in computer science. In particular, my mindset shifted to one of models of computation and decomposition of problems into subproblems for which the simplest model could apply. I have an example I'd like to write up, but it's a bit long for a footnote.
I also graduated with a MSCS from GT. While I agree that a Masters degree is not a good signal for a job candidate, having Georgia Tech as your last institution of study instead of your potentially "lower" undergraduate program is.
The question remains is if an online degree has the same credibility. Looking back at my time at GT, I cannot see how operating solo, without the constant feedback from your peers and faculty, is as good. There is more than just what is in the study material. The other question is if the entrance requirements are still as stringent.
I'm sorry you didn't like the on-campus experience at Georgia Tech -- but the online program sounds like a clear win. For less than $10,000 tuition, you could've gotten a top-10 degree and your $20,000-per-year salary increase... all while still working, so you would've also accumulated raises and experience while finishing the degree.
>Andrew Ng's Coursera class on Machine Learning was the pedagogical highlight of my time at GT, and I did it on my own initiative (and it's free).
This is something I wanted to highlight from your post. I don't think this is surprising, nor do I think it is reasonable to state that a course (or a degree program) is poor quality because it didn't meet the standards of Ng's ML course. That is an exceedingly high bar.
Its something I noticed, because I am a recent grad, so while I was in my mid-level courses, and had recently taken Tech's intro CS course, I was able to watch (Harvard's) CS50 and other courses. But on the other hand, I've seen some very bad online courses. The successful and large online courses are successful and large specifically because they are head and shoulders better than the rest. And there are a lot of decent online courses, so to measure against what are some of the absolute best online courses is to measure against courses that have more resources, more planning, and more feedback than most.
(as an aside, they also have more incentive to be good, but that's a bit tangential to the point that they also have more opportunity to be good).
You type in "Machine Learning" on coursera and you get over 1000 results (not all of which are relevant, but assuming even 10% are), its little wonder that one or two are going to be better than the even the best courses that you'll take during a bachelors or masters, because Coursera offers more Machine Learning courses than most people will take in their Bachelors or Masters.
Combine that with these courses coming prefiltered (you've heard of the Stanford Course, but what about "Applied Text Mining in Python" from UMichigan, which for all I know might be great, but it doesn't come with the hundreds of recommendations that the Ng course does, so I don't know that it will be great) and you have a really great recipe for a bias against the in person courses.
This is interesting. I had heard good things about the program, so I'd love to hear more about what ultimately went wrong.
What track were you on? Do you think that had anything to do with it? What did your peers think about the program?
A $95 to $115k bump sounds pretty darn good. Did you already have a CS undergrad degree? Where from? Sorry for all the questions, feel free to share as little or as much as you're willing.
What you say is often true, however there are a number of places that will shitcan your resume if it doesn't have an advanced degree on it. For example SpaceX, but there are others, often in technical fields.
Also, hang in there. The degree may not have helped your current job as much as you'd like, but it may help more at a future company. Sadly we often need to change jobs to get a real salary bump.
I think you're looking at it in both a false comparison (opportunity costs for online are very different than your on campus experience; not to mention the explicit costs) and backwards (as to who is looking to get this degree).
The margins on adding a MS CS (or analytics) is less for a CS grad, but at 10k a degree and the flexibility of taking online they are huge for non-CS majors looking to pivot. 10k to bump your salary up 20k (while working and getting experience + raises) plus the knowledge add pays for itself.
Im biased on account of being in the program (supplementing my Electrical Engineering degree due to a change in career and life paths), and I know a lot more about graph theory, formal algorithms, and high efficiency computing than I did a year ago. These are things that help improve both your portfolio of rigorous projects (Im currently working to port over all of my high performance computing assignments to Rust) and assortment of tools for the ever annoying CS interview.
I'm enrolled in the OMSCS program currently (nearly graduated) while working full time. I started the program because I was already taking the online courses with Coursera, edX, etc, and it felt like a natural fit to get a degree while I continued to do so.
I didn't have a Computer Science undergrad degree, so perhaps I have a different outlook on this than you did. I'm currently working as a software engineer, so I'm also not forgoing earning a living by taking the time off from school.
In other words, while I can understand why you feel disappointed by your educational experience, there are other lenses through which this program makes sense. I feel good about having gone through it so far and I'm looking forward to finishing.
It sounds like you did the on-campus program at GT, so you took time off work to complete it. It's hard to argue with the fact that losing the wages to do that is a lot of missed opportunity.
However.... I think majority of people that take OMSCS (I am in my 2nd semester) and this new OMSA program do so part time while still maintaining their fulltime jobs and families.
I'm enjoying the MSCS program online so far and am also doing the ML specialization. I work full-time as a software engineer and just do the coursework part-time. My experience so far is that the assignments and learning are as rigorous as you want them to be.
I'm getting exactly what I'm looking for out of it (a somewhat structured environment to learn in), so for me I would say this isn't a losing proposition.
Really? Pretty much all feedback for OMSCS has been very positive. It sounds like you're bitter about something, or had a particularly bad experience. Can you provide more details about classes you thought were poor and what was poor about them?
This is great news. However, anyone who's used Piazza (the main "classroom" tool for OMSCS) knows that it's hardly ideal. I think a better collaboration/discussion tool is imperative to making the experience better for the "average" student.
Sure the top students in the program are going to do well, by definition, but there are plenty of more "middling" people like myself that can only be brought up to the next level with proper discussion/interaction with classmates. From my experience even PHPbb would be a more effective tool than Piazza.
---
Suggestions (if Piazza folks are reading):
1. Allow one to delete follow-ups.
2. Allow students to create private "study group"-like
threads that aren't in the main feed.
3. Make it easier to upload pictures and other content.
4. Make things live. Normally this wouldn't be necessary, but anyone in the program knows many students post the same thing at the same time as a response to an event (like an email). By doing this you prevent redundant threads from being created.
5. Use some sort of up/down voting system that way the community can self-regulate.
There are plenty more things I'd improve, but for the sake of brevity those are some I just came up with on the spot.
I'm currently in the Master of Science in Analytics program at gatech, so if anyone has any questions feel free to ask.
My experience so far has been excellent. I just started my second semester, and I can say that the curriculum covers exactly what I wanted to learn with the exception of one class. The program is extremely practical, it's only one year and is focused on getting the students jobs. The professors are great, and I highly recommend it to anyone wanting to get into the field.
How much statistics is involved? I'm asking because I have a friend who is interested in math and statistics but wants to go to grad school for something a bit more practical, while still having some challenge in terms of statistics.
Can anyone speak to the value of the general online CS Masters degree offered by Georgia Tech? I'd been considering it, as it allows you to keep working while you improve your resume. I'm curious if employers (1) can tell it was completed online and (2) distinguish between individuals getting the residential MA versus the online MA. Thanks in advance.
"Will the degree I receive from the OMS CS program be the same as the on-campus MS in Computer Science or will my degree say “Online”?
Your diploma will read "Master of Science in Computer Science," exactly the same as those of on-campus graduates. There will be no "online" designation for the degrees of OMS CS graduates."
An employer could simply notice that your location and your school are in different places. However, IMO it's more impressive to have been working a full time job and doing a degree than the opposite.
I live in Atlanta and work with a bunch of Tech grads. Tech is one of the most prestigious engineering universities in the southeast (if not the most), and its degrees are tremendously valuable.
AFAIK, this is Georgia Tech's second online masters degree course, which demonstrates that the university now stands behind their online degree program. One of my coworkers is currently enrolled in their other online masters program, and he speaks highly of it.
If this is anything like their first online masters program, there is no distinction between the online and on-campus diploma. The degree is a full-fledged Georgia Tech degree. This is what makes it so attractive--employers and other educational institutes won't know you didn't physically attend the campus.
I'd be happy to get more of my coworker's opinion on the program if you like. I'm interested in it myself...
While technically GA Tech makes no distinction between the two degrees, in practice employers can often tell. However this isn't always a bad thing.
I'm a current student and I switched jobs about halfway through the program. I'm living in Austin so it came up in the interviews that this was an online program. I explained to people that I was doing the online degree in my spare time but taking it slower and that all the courses were the same as the on campus counterparts. Generally speaking the interviewers seemed to be impressed by this and said that it showed a strong work ethic.
I can't give hard facts about the value of the program but given that it only costs between $7k and $10k to complete I think it will pay for itself very quickly and perhaps already has.
There is a good podcast/audio interview[1] with C Charles Isbell, Jr., Professor and Senior Associate Dean at GA Tech., on the TWiML podcast. He discusses how their first online master's program has worked, and I found it quite informative.
A colleague is nearly complete with his online CS Masters from GT. He has spoken well of it, so much so that another colleague has already applied and been accepted. I considered it as well, but I'm tired of traditional school and don't see a need for the MS when a BS is doing me fine. Maybe some day.
So based on what I've seen and read, I could recommend it.
I'm waiting for the online, low-cost undergraduate degree of comparable quality to the "real thing". Maybe it's already here. I recently checked up on tuition at my alma mater and almost barfed. With a kid on the way Mr. Market has 18 years to figure this out for me.
I am skeptical that this program will be a good signal for hiring analysts. In my experience, there are two things you need to select for:
(1) Understanding statistics. Hopefully this program will take care of this requirement, but it's not hard to find these people anyway. There is an infinite supply of science PhDs fleeing the academic job market.
(2) Behavioural/personality. People who will do well at the actual job. Example: can you tell when a PM is asking you to answer the wrong question, and how do you handle it?
You can easily find (1) with screening questions, (2) is the hard part.
But, I guess if you think you have (2) as a future analyst, this program could be a good way of getting (1).
Is there anything similar to the Online Masters but a Bachelor's degree? Most of the online universities like WGU seem like a get a bunch of certificates then you graduate.
Is there any business in creating a better "classroom" experience that what ex. Piazza is doing?
It seems like an are which could be improved immensely design/ux wise but it also seems like it could be an area where that's not really going to make you successful because the distribution is already owned by someone else.
I'm currently enrolled in the OMSCS program, and so far I would call it so-so.
I joined the program because I come from a non-CS background - undergrad in math, work in an unrelated field: consulting. I'm trying to pivot into a ML Engineer career. If you want to learn ML, you're better off going through the Ng Coursera course and from there pursuing some personal projects. The primary value of the program is the ability to get past recruiting coordinators simply due to the fact I'm enrolled in CS program.
The two undergrad CS courses I took at Berkeley were more rigorous, and were superior from a skills development perspective. But at the price, the OMSCS program is definitely worth it for someone coming from a different background.
Anyone have experience with this program without an academic CS background?
As someone with a BS in Materials Science & Engineering (at best a tangentially related field via sparse EE coursework) who does some level of programming at a tech job now, I'm curious what my prospects for admission would be. I'm confident I could handle the coursework, provided I could get my foot in the door.
As a related question, they mention taking courses to fill holes - are they receptive to Coursera offerings?
I feel $10,000 for an online course is way too much. Just because it carries a label of university doesn't make it worth it. Almost all of the knowledge is available online for free. Although a university course gives a structure around a subject and provides learning resources & materials but universities have to realize that because of this many people will not take these MOOCs. Because education is a business, future generations will turn out to be illiterate.
I'd definitely be wary of devoting 1+ year of my life full-time to "save" money on a program that costs "justs" $10K/year -- without looking at alternatives that might cost a bit more, but provide a much richer experience. (Yes, I have great deal of categorical skepticism about full-scale online degrees -- as opposed to occasional online courses -- in general).
Because even if you're unemployed, your most valuable resource is your time.
Anyone have experience with FT online college courses? Would it be possible to both work FT and complete the courses? Or would it best to work PT for a year?
I'm not yet convinced that online learning is an equivalent replacement for a university degree. Exceptions do exist. For the most part, people graduate from these online universities without the skills needed for the jobs they want.
The fact that the Masters in CS and presumably this degree both require having a traditional bachelor degree as a prerequisite seriously limits their usefulness and their reach.
Are there any similar tracks that do not have this requirement?
the price and convenience are hard to ignore, yes there are some unideal aspects of the program (like the software and collaboration/discussion tech) but all-in-all what a great opportunity.
I'm not entirely sure how this is such big news. It costs the same as doing it on-campus here, including all hardware and books etc. you might need over a ~4-5 year span.
[+] [-] throwawayGT|9 years ago|reply
I know people have many reasons to get a Masters. If your goal is to take some higher-level classes, you can do better than GT. If you are self-motivated enough to do an online degree, you can do it for free. Aside from free offerings from sites like Coursera, you can find whole courses up from many institutions - with syllabi, lecture slides, homework assignments, etc.
If you're planning to do it for the salary, in my experience the degree ended up being worth a $95K to $115K bump in starting salary. Compare this with the 2 years of industry salary that I would have received, and the 2 years of experience (and raises that come with that). I know I wasn't paid better than the folks who had been with the company for 2 years more than me.
If you're thinking about it for the sake of your resume, I do hiring screening / interviews now (for Data Science and Software Engineering positions) - and I really don't care if the applicant has an MS or not (or what classes they may have taken). Most folks I know that do hiring think similarly. My main signal from your resume is projects you've been on and how you contributed.
From my point of view, this program is a losing proposition for any potential student.
[+] [-] g051051|9 years ago|reply
Yes, you can study the same material on your own, but you won't earn a degree from it. Now that I've got the degree, I'm in much better shape to pursue further learning on my own.
Note, however, that I didn't do this to improve my resume, go fishing for a new job, or try to get a raise. With tuition reimbursement from my company I only spent $3500 over 2 1/2 years to earn a full-fledged master's degree.
Based on the above, I can't agree that it's a losing proposition.
[+] [-] jsolson|9 years ago|reply
That said, with a couple of notable exceptions, the graduate classes are there for PhD students as first and second year background material so they have some starting points for their research. This naturally leads to a format where the semester can effectively be described as a long reading list of papers and lectures to spur discussion on the content of the paper. I was planning on pursuing a PhD when I started into my MS, so this format worked quite well for me at the time. In the years subsequent to that, the grounding from those classes has given me starting points for deep dives into problems I encountered at work[0].
It's interesting that you brought up machine learning. Charles Isbell's Intro ML class was a significant exception to the pattern I described above. In addition to high quality, pre-prepared lectures peppered with entertaining anecdotes, the had high quality projects that worked with pratcial tooling. It was also probably the highlight of my graduate career[1].
[0]: In particular, the material covered in my graduate systems classes has been invaluable for not reinventing the wheel for the thousandth time. The material from the couple compilers classes I took on a whim has been a huge boon when talking about software correctness. I work on the hypervisor underneath GCE. Correctness is near and dear to my heart, but performance is right there with it :)
[1]: For undergrad that dubious honor has to go to Olin Shivers, not only because of his eclectic teaching style, but also because his class completely altered the way I think about problems in computer science. In particular, my mindset shifted to one of models of computation and decomposition of problems into subproblems for which the simplest model could apply. I have an example I'd like to write up, but it's a bit long for a footnote.
[+] [-] donretag|9 years ago|reply
The question remains is if an online degree has the same credibility. Looking back at my time at GT, I cannot see how operating solo, without the constant feedback from your peers and faculty, is as good. There is more than just what is in the study material. The other question is if the entrance requirements are still as stringent.
[+] [-] jsokol1|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zardeh|9 years ago|reply
>Andrew Ng's Coursera class on Machine Learning was the pedagogical highlight of my time at GT, and I did it on my own initiative (and it's free).
This is something I wanted to highlight from your post. I don't think this is surprising, nor do I think it is reasonable to state that a course (or a degree program) is poor quality because it didn't meet the standards of Ng's ML course. That is an exceedingly high bar.
Its something I noticed, because I am a recent grad, so while I was in my mid-level courses, and had recently taken Tech's intro CS course, I was able to watch (Harvard's) CS50 and other courses. But on the other hand, I've seen some very bad online courses. The successful and large online courses are successful and large specifically because they are head and shoulders better than the rest. And there are a lot of decent online courses, so to measure against what are some of the absolute best online courses is to measure against courses that have more resources, more planning, and more feedback than most.
(as an aside, they also have more incentive to be good, but that's a bit tangential to the point that they also have more opportunity to be good).
You type in "Machine Learning" on coursera and you get over 1000 results (not all of which are relevant, but assuming even 10% are), its little wonder that one or two are going to be better than the even the best courses that you'll take during a bachelors or masters, because Coursera offers more Machine Learning courses than most people will take in their Bachelors or Masters.
Combine that with these courses coming prefiltered (you've heard of the Stanford Course, but what about "Applied Text Mining in Python" from UMichigan, which for all I know might be great, but it doesn't come with the hundreds of recommendations that the Ng course does, so I don't know that it will be great) and you have a really great recipe for a bias against the in person courses.
[+] [-] codezero|9 years ago|reply
What track were you on? Do you think that had anything to do with it? What did your peers think about the program?
A $95 to $115k bump sounds pretty darn good. Did you already have a CS undergrad degree? Where from? Sorry for all the questions, feel free to share as little or as much as you're willing.
[+] [-] mixmastamyk|9 years ago|reply
Also, hang in there. The degree may not have helped your current job as much as you'd like, but it may help more at a future company. Sadly we often need to change jobs to get a real salary bump.
[+] [-] lordCarbonFiber|9 years ago|reply
The margins on adding a MS CS (or analytics) is less for a CS grad, but at 10k a degree and the flexibility of taking online they are huge for non-CS majors looking to pivot. 10k to bump your salary up 20k (while working and getting experience + raises) plus the knowledge add pays for itself.
Im biased on account of being in the program (supplementing my Electrical Engineering degree due to a change in career and life paths), and I know a lot more about graph theory, formal algorithms, and high efficiency computing than I did a year ago. These are things that help improve both your portfolio of rigorous projects (Im currently working to port over all of my high performance computing assignments to Rust) and assortment of tools for the ever annoying CS interview.
[+] [-] rayiner|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kaedon|9 years ago|reply
I didn't have a Computer Science undergrad degree, so perhaps I have a different outlook on this than you did. I'm currently working as a software engineer, so I'm also not forgoing earning a living by taking the time off from school.
In other words, while I can understand why you feel disappointed by your educational experience, there are other lenses through which this program makes sense. I feel good about having gone through it so far and I'm looking forward to finishing.
[+] [-] theflork|9 years ago|reply
However.... I think majority of people that take OMSCS (I am in my 2nd semester) and this new OMSA program do so part time while still maintaining their fulltime jobs and families.
Also, why the throwaway?
[+] [-] jps359|9 years ago|reply
I'm getting exactly what I'm looking for out of it (a somewhat structured environment to learn in), so for me I would say this isn't a losing proposition.
[+] [-] ftrflyr|9 years ago|reply
Your situation is anecdotal at best. You are critiquing an in person experience to an online experience.
[+] [-] nvarsj|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _m8fo|9 years ago|reply
Sure the top students in the program are going to do well, by definition, but there are plenty of more "middling" people like myself that can only be brought up to the next level with proper discussion/interaction with classmates. From my experience even PHPbb would be a more effective tool than Piazza.
---
Suggestions (if Piazza folks are reading):
1. Allow one to delete follow-ups.
2. Allow students to create private "study group"-like threads that aren't in the main feed.
3. Make it easier to upload pictures and other content.
4. Make things live. Normally this wouldn't be necessary, but anyone in the program knows many students post the same thing at the same time as a response to an event (like an email). By doing this you prevent redundant threads from being created.
5. Use some sort of up/down voting system that way the community can self-regulate.
There are plenty more things I'd improve, but for the sake of brevity those are some I just came up with on the spot.
[+] [-] almostkorean|9 years ago|reply
My experience so far has been excellent. I just started my second semester, and I can say that the curriculum covers exactly what I wanted to learn with the exception of one class. The program is extremely practical, it's only one year and is focused on getting the students jobs. The professors are great, and I highly recommend it to anyone wanting to get into the field.
[+] [-] codezero|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fad92|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rememberlenny|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ssanders82|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stoddler|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rememberlenny|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] piker|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _m8fo|9 years ago|reply
"Will the degree I receive from the OMS CS program be the same as the on-campus MS in Computer Science or will my degree say “Online”? Your diploma will read "Master of Science in Computer Science," exactly the same as those of on-campus graduates. There will be no "online" designation for the degrees of OMS CS graduates."
https://www.omscs.gatech.edu/prospective-students/faq
---
An employer could simply notice that your location and your school are in different places. However, IMO it's more impressive to have been working a full time job and doing a degree than the opposite.
[+] [-] echelon|9 years ago|reply
AFAIK, this is Georgia Tech's second online masters degree course, which demonstrates that the university now stands behind their online degree program. One of my coworkers is currently enrolled in their other online masters program, and he speaks highly of it.
If this is anything like their first online masters program, there is no distinction between the online and on-campus diploma. The degree is a full-fledged Georgia Tech degree. This is what makes it so attractive--employers and other educational institutes won't know you didn't physically attend the campus.
I'd be happy to get more of my coworker's opinion on the program if you like. I'm interested in it myself...
[+] [-] natesholland|9 years ago|reply
I'm a current student and I switched jobs about halfway through the program. I'm living in Austin so it came up in the interviews that this was an online program. I explained to people that I was doing the online degree in my spare time but taking it slower and that all the courses were the same as the on campus counterparts. Generally speaking the interviewers seemed to be impressed by this and said that it showed a strong work ethic.
I can't give hard facts about the value of the program but given that it only costs between $7k and $10k to complete I think it will pay for itself very quickly and perhaps already has.
[+] [-] Notre1|9 years ago|reply
1. https://twimlai.com/twiml-talk-4-charles-isbell-interactive-...
[+] [-] nkozyra|9 years ago|reply
And everyone who's been exposed to both says it's the same courses and rigor as the on-campus version.
(Source: 2 classes from finishing)
[+] [-] jonmb|9 years ago|reply
So based on what I've seen and read, I could recommend it.
[+] [-] pc86|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kirykl|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] greenpizza13|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nether|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jackcosgrove|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] phreenet|9 years ago|reply
https://www.coursera.org/university-programs/masters-in-comp...
[+] [-] merkleee|9 years ago|reply
(1) Understanding statistics. Hopefully this program will take care of this requirement, but it's not hard to find these people anyway. There is an infinite supply of science PhDs fleeing the academic job market.
(2) Behavioural/personality. People who will do well at the actual job. Example: can you tell when a PM is asking you to answer the wrong question, and how do you handle it?
You can easily find (1) with screening questions, (2) is the hard part.
But, I guess if you think you have (2) as a future analyst, this program could be a good way of getting (1).
[+] [-] intheclouddan|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ThomPete|9 years ago|reply
Is there any business in creating a better "classroom" experience that what ex. Piazza is doing?
It seems like an are which could be improved immensely design/ux wise but it also seems like it could be an area where that's not really going to make you successful because the distribution is already owned by someone else.
[+] [-] reztip|9 years ago|reply
I joined the program because I come from a non-CS background - undergrad in math, work in an unrelated field: consulting. I'm trying to pivot into a ML Engineer career. If you want to learn ML, you're better off going through the Ng Coursera course and from there pursuing some personal projects. The primary value of the program is the ability to get past recruiting coordinators simply due to the fact I'm enrolled in CS program.
The two undergrad CS courses I took at Berkeley were more rigorous, and were superior from a skills development perspective. But at the price, the OMSCS program is definitely worth it for someone coming from a different background.
[+] [-] jocro|9 years ago|reply
As someone with a BS in Materials Science & Engineering (at best a tangentially related field via sparse EE coursework) who does some level of programming at a tech job now, I'm curious what my prospects for admission would be. I'm confident I could handle the coursework, provided I could get my foot in the door.
As a related question, they mention taking courses to fill holes - are they receptive to Coursera offerings?
[+] [-] rajeshp1986|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kafkaesq|9 years ago|reply
Because even if you're unemployed, your most valuable resource is your time.
[+] [-] prodtorok|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] iblaine|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] simplegeek|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alnitak|9 years ago|reply
Are there any similar tracks that do not have this requirement?
[+] [-] danalloway|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] oneplane|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bk_geek|9 years ago|reply