Category Archives: Arts and Letters

Higher Education for the Mid Career Professional

Earning three masters degrees and a graduate certificate in four different subjects and currently completing a PhD as a mid career professional, I thought I would share some thoughts on the best way to deal with the very real phenomenon of credential inflation.  At some point in your career you will likely be faced with one of two issues: (1) a particular credential is needed for career advancement (e.g., an MBA) or (2) a desire or need to change careers (e.g., you want to start teaching in higher education or technological change has wiped out the industry you are in).  How do you go about getting the required credential and retraining/education while still employed?

Fortunately there are lots of options: night and weekend programs, MOOCs, online degree programs, blended programs.  Assuming that you are paying for education and not your employer there are some things to consider.

First, higher ed is expensive.  From a pure accounting perspective, does the net present value (NPV) of future cashflows justify the cash spent on the education?  This raises the issue of prestige.  Prestigious degrees are expensive.  If you’re looking at Harvard, Yale, Berkeley, Stanford, it is likely that the NPV is negative.  As a mid career professional, you are unlikely to see large enough increases in salary to justify spending $100,000-$200,000 for a masters degree.  Your payback period may be longer than the length of your career still ahead of you.  If you are merely acquiring a required credential, skip the prestige if you are footing the bill.  If a career change is in order, then prestige may be valuable in opening doors, but realize that the you will never get the return on investment in accounting terms, only in increased social status due to the prestigious qualification.  You can impress people with that Harvard sheepskin on the wall.

Second, will you learn something?  As I discovered in my own sojourn through higher ed, price does not equate to quality.  Of every university I have attended–University of California, Santa Barbara (BA), Gratz College (MA), Diablo Valley College (business school prerequisites), Oxford University Extension (archaeology classes for fun), University of Nebraska-Lincoln (MBA), Regent University (Certificate in New Testament, mainly to learn Koine Greek), Troy University (MS), and University of Leicester (PhD in progress)–the best education I received was at Troy University, a big state school in Montgomery Alabama whose mission is mainly teaching.  The training I received in International Relations there was top notch.  The strongest parts were the training in theories of international relations and in research methods, which are crucial for later success at the PhD level.  Second place has to go to the junior college on the list, Diablo Valley College.  Because DVC’s mission is teaching not research, the faculty are truly invested in student success.

Third, study what you don’t know.  This was advice I received from Rick Kreysar, former US professional soccer player and senior executive at Computer Associates.  Since I was getting my MBA as a required credential for advancement (or even a lateral move since at my level computerized resume screens weed out candidates without one), he suggested that study something I didn’t already know.  It was great advice.  I spent a decade in IT, sales and marketing.  Instead of studying sales and marketing, I studied finance for my MBA.  It gave me tools to (a) stop paying for financial advice, (b) increase risk adjusted returns of my retirement plan, and (c) taught me mathematical tools I apply regularly in my current role outside of finance.

So you need to learn something and do it on the cheap, how do you succeed?  Start with a self assessment.  Have you been out of school a really long time?  Academic work can be challenging at first.  Consider baby steps at a junior college.  I remember utterly flaming out on my first research paper at Gratz College because I was so inexperienced at ‘playing the game’ after 10 years out of school.  Are you a self starter or do you need to be coached and/or prodded to do things?  Distance education, MOOCs, and the UK tutorial system, require you to be very self-disciplined.  Do the reading, get the work done, stick to a schedule.  I frankly sucked at this as a 18-22 year old undergraduate, but was absolutely able to be disciplined as a 35 year old.  

A word about MOOCs: MOOCs open up education to the masses at a very low cost, but I personally found that the very low cost is an impediment to finishing.  The penalty for blowing off a class and not completing is low.  You’ve gotta really want it and not be easily distracted by life (work and family obligations especially).  It is hard to tell your spouse or kids you can’t do something because you have to study, when that class was $30 and not $1500.  That is at least my $0.02 on the subject.

My General Advice on choosing a distance program

Comparison shop.  Higher education is expensive, but you can find bargains.  Many big state schools in the Midwest and South offer in-state or discounted tuition for out-of-state students.

Choose a school people will have heard of.  To an extent reputation matters.  When I was looking at MBA programs, I narrowed my list of schools according to budget and eliminated schools that nobody has heard of.  For example, if all else being equal you’ve got a short list of a small liberal arts college, a directional school (universities with North, South, East, or West in the name) and a big school people have heard of, choose the bigger name.  It helps with the job applications, casual conversations and leveraging an alumni network.

I am a huge fan of accelerated programs.  Programs that cram 15 weeks of material into 9 or 10 weeks are a boon for somebody who works.  They will kill you on the reading and research papers are stressful due to time constraints, but I found that the drawbacks are more than offset by the benefits including: making progress while taking one class at the same time, which aids focus; fewer discussion board postings/problem sets per term; if the class sucks, you’re stuck with it for 33% less time.  I found that by going to school year round, it was easier to stay on the tread mill and finish.  Both Troy and Nebraska were accelerated: Troy 5 semester terms per year, Nebraska had 4 semester terms per year.

Accreditation matters.  Make sure any university in the US has regional accreditation if going for an MA or MS.  There are degree mills that prey on uninformed consumers.  Furthermore, avoid any MBA program that is not AACSB accredited.  Internationally, it isn’t a real MBA unless it is AACSB accredited.  Those schools offering one under their standard regional education are not conferring a real MBA.  It is the same deal with unaccredited law schools, by the way.  If it is not ABA accredited, you just wasted your money.

International programs

International education is fraught with peril but can be tremendously rewarding.  I did some exploration here, and for a US resident there are some gotchas.  First, while every nation has its own standards for accreditation, for a US resident, you should always consult the list of foreign schools eligible for student loans from the US Department of Education.  A qualification from a school on the list is likely to be considered a real qualification, when it comes time to evaluate it.  Most large US employers and all education institutions will use a transcript service to scrutinize your education to see if it meets the standard of the degree claimed.  You won’t have much trouble with degrees from the developed world, but you may with degrees from the Third World.  Furthermore, professional societies may have additional hoops to jump through for licensure.  Take law as an example.  In the United States you will take a 4 year undergraduate degree, then go to 3 years of law school, and sit for your state BAR exam.  In the UK, however, a law degree is an undergraduate qualification.  Plus you will still need to learn US law by completing an LLM degree in the US to learn US law before you sit for the BAR exam.  (Hint: this may be the cheaper and shorter option.)

Transfer from one system to another can also be almost impossible.  In the UK for example, for a bachelors degree there isn’t the US equivalent of general education requirements.  BA degrees are 3 year degrees in your field, not 4 years with half your course work outside your major area as in the US.  You study a subject for three years at two different levels, roughly equivalent to US lower division and upper division course work.  The actual number of modules studied is much lower since the modules themselves are much bigger in scope.  Thus transfer is almost impossible without either substantial bureaucratic hassles or almost starting over with a qualification or testing out of stuff with CLEP tests.

The way education is conducted is also very different.  It is a culture shock going from the US system to the UK system.  The first shock is that the quantity of work produced is much lower.  For example, in the US, written assignments have minimum word counts, in the UK, they have maximum word counts.  In the US prolixity is rewarded, but in the UK it is punished.  I actually found it very difficult to scale down arguments to fit the word counts.    There are also fewer assignments.  A typical module may have one seen and one unseen paper of less than 5,000 words.  Contrast that with a typical course in International Relations at Troy that had 2 or 3 seen papers of 7,500 words or more plus weekly question responses of 400 words or more.  Frankly, I am thankful that International Relations at Troy had an arduous exit exam process, because it prepared me for the type of unseen papers I would encounter in the UK.

Also, the UK makes a big distinction between research degrees and taught degrees.  Graduate school in the US has very different aims.  An MA or MS in the US is taught degree.  You do a bunch of course work, at least 30 semester units of it, and then do a small research project or, in the case of some MS degrees, more coursework and maybe an exit exam.  An MPhil is a research degree.  You are learning how to do research and along the way mastering the basics of a field.  It is a very different concept.  Think of the US and the Henry Ford model of graduate education and the UK as offering an artisanal model of higher education.  If you need structure, look to the US.  If you want freedom, look to the UK.

PhDs

The PhD is the way you enter the higher education guild and is also a required credential for some fields–e.g., policy work in Washington D.C. pretty much requires a PhD, working as a research scientist in industry requires a PhD.  Here is where reputation matters.  If you want to be a professor at a tier 1 research university your chances of being hired into a tenure track position is much greater with a prestigious degree (Ivy League, a ‘public Ivy’, Stanford, or Oxford/Cambridge).  For jobs in industry, what your research was and who you did it under is more important than reputation.

The PhD means you will most likely have to quit your job, although there are a small set of programs, mainly in professions like business and psychology, that are part-time.  Furthermore, there are more and more part time programs in the humanities and social sciences being launched in order to attract enrollment, even at really good schools.

I am currently doing a part-time low residency PhD in Politics and International Relations at University of Leicester in the UK, which was one of four programs in International Relations that I found: Manchester Metropolitan University, Birmingham, Leicester, and King’s College London.  King’s College London was my first choice because they have a famous expert in international peacekeeping, Mats Berdal, whom I wanted as my supervisor, but he was full up with students.  Because you are admitted on the strength of the research proposal in the UK (see below), you can get into disputes over relevant literature and methods (which nixed MMU).  That left Birmingham and Leicester.  Leicester was more eager to have me.  

The PhD is very, very, very different in the US and the UK.  In the UK, they are minting a person who knows how to do a substantive and original piece of research, full stop.  In the US, they are certifying you as an expert in the field, who also knows how to do research, hence 90 additional semester units of course work and comprehensive exams are required before you can even think of starting your research (essentially you will be doing two+ masters degrees worth of coursework before doing research).  Admission in the UK is based primarily on the strength of a research proposal and whether they have resources to supervise your research.  If you plan on returning to the US to work in US higher education, you will be more heavily scrutinized, because of the difference in the qualifications.  A UK PhD is generally looked down upon in the US, partly due to cultural factors–you haven’t ‘paid your dues’ in suffering through the sadistic US system–and partly because there is suspicion that you haven’t mastered your field.  

Let’s assume that already hold a masters degree or two.  In the US, you will likely not be able to transfer units from other schools (the reason cited will be ‘we issue {Berkeley, Stanford, UCLA, Harvard, …} degrees here’), you will suffer through 3-4 additional years of coursework on top of what you have already done, sit for your comprehensive exams, then they will look for supervision for you in the department with no guarantee of continuing (it being contingent on their being space in a lab for you or a supervisor available; I know more than one person who got to this point and exited with an MPhil or MA because there was no supervision or lab available).  You write your research proposal and only then start your research.  Tack on a couple more years at a minimum for research and writing and you are finally done.  Except perhaps in Mathematics where the dissertation is usually short, this is a Bataan death march, doubly so in the humanities.  I remember having teaching assistants in classes at UCSB having already spent 7-8 years and weren’t done yet.

Contrast that with the UK: gain admission, which be definition means they have supervision for you and you have a decent research proposal; you take whatever modules you need to be able to be successful in your research, which at a minimum is a required research training module and required research ethics training (I’ve not had to register for modules beyond the required due to my own background and mainly do short seminars in skills I need); go before an internal review board after a year or two to show your progress to date and a finalized research proposal; they either accept is as worthy of a PhD and can be completed in a timely fashion or not.  Then you are advanced to do your research, you do it, write it up and an outside examination committee reviews the dissertation, examines you orally (the feared viva), and decides whether to confer the degree.  (External examiners are also a big difference between the US and UK systems.  It is how they ensure quality in the UK.)  You are done much faster with less pain, assuming you have quality supervision.  But you’ve got to be confident that you can work in this less structured environment to complete it.  

I chose the UK route because I already held 3 masters degrees and wasn’t going to waste time with the equivalent of 2 more, I was over 40, and needed a required credential for policy wonk work.  (Dream job is at RAND Corporation.)  There is a ton of unacknowledged age discrimination in the US.  US programs don’t want people past their 30s and certainly nobody who would be 50 when finished.  It makes sense from the perspective of the  guild because they will be investing resources in minting a new member of the higher education guild.  They want to make sure that you have a lot of time left in the guild before retirement, at least 30 years.  I did not encounter any of that in applications in the UK.  UC Berkeley and Stanford on the other hand–as they say in New York fuhgettaboutit.

I also lucked out in my supervision.  My supervisor himself is a non-traditional student who came back to higher ed mid career in order to make a career change and got his PhD in his 40s.  Since I am not trying to get a tenure track position in the US after graduation, I am less concerned about how a UK PhD is viewed.  Be advised, if you go the UK route and you are looking for a tenure track position in the US, I suggest you stick with Oxford/Cambridge due to reputation concerns, make sure you also teach undergraduate modules, network heavily in professional societies, and publish, publish, publish.  You’ll get interviews based on your reputation not the school’s.

Check back in with me at the end of 2020 to see how my UK PhD experience went at the end of the journey.

The Influence of Sci Fi Book Covers

I’ve become hooked on The Expanse, a TV show that has run on the SyFy Channel until it was cancelled and picked up by Amazon for the up coming season. I have binge watched the first two seasons. It is truly a classic TV show.

I have not read the books (the first three are on order), but the TV show is distinguished by its plausible vision of the future when humanity has colonized the solar system, its complex characters, its plausible extension of current technology trends into the future, and its near-feature film production values. That last I want to dilate on.

The art of show is fantastic. The sets, costumes and CGI look great. Maybe it is because the double record album of the Star Wars soundtrack came with a poster by the noted artist John Berkey, which I had on my wall, but since childhood I have liked science fiction art. The look of The Expanse harkens back to classic science fiction book covers by Berkey, Chelsey Bonestell, and Chris Foss.

I really enjoyed reading this interview with the artists behind the show. I learned about the collaboration between artists and the writers, set designers, and graphics departments who turn concepts into realities. It also confirms for me the belief that it takes both talent and accident to get your big break.

There is so much artistic talent out there not working in high art.

Forming an Informed Opinion on an Issue

There has been a lot of research on the way mass opinion is formed.  The research typically falls into two buckets: (1) diffusion models where opinion makers (elites) set informed opinion, which diffuses through the populace based on its persuasiveness and how supported the opinion is, and (2) interaction models where people hold independent opinions with varying levels of confidence, which are either reinforced or changed based on interactions with others.

There are variations on these two models that explore details, for example, the role of extremist views and clustering of like-minded people into opinion ghettoes.  There is a growing body of work on the impact of Internet social networks on the process of opinion formation.

At root, this research is all about how to influence public opinion.  It is instrumental.  How can I, as an elite, leverage the process to achieve my political ends?

I would like to take a slightly different take on this.  Why is it so many would-be opinion makers fail to do their homework and make so many errors of fact?  Members of the media are theoretically supposed to do the homework before reporting, yet, errors creep in all the time.  Is the error willful, laziness, the effects of time pressure, shrinking editorial resources, inability to detect “Astroturfing,” or that the Internet has made us stupid?

Willful Errors

An opinion maker (or informed agent who transmits information) willfully spread falsehoods or exaggerations in order to achieve some higher goal. Gun control is an issue area beset with claims on both sides that are factually inaccurate and uses ad hominem as a rhetorical technique.

Laziness

Presented with an issue, we formulate an opinion of that issue based on a combination of prior learning (stored knowledge) and through a process of categorization according to temperament and experience. The process is short circuited and we immediately “jump to a conclusion” in this model. It leads to error, because no effort was expended in investigation.

Time Pressure

In a 24-hour news cycle at Internet speed, opinion makers and informed agents in media operate under extreme time pressure which produces the same effect as laziness, although, not because the agent refuses to expend the time and energy in investigation, but because there isn’t time to do the investigation. The net effect is the same, bad information.

Shrinking Editorial Resources

I see this in my local paper. Basic errors that should have been caught by editors slip through to the printed page, and unlike the Web page, a printed paper cannot be corrected after the fact.

Inability to Detect Astroturfing

Organizations with agendas have weaponized the research on mass opinion formation and are very, very good at manufacturing opinion in a given issue area. This process is called Astroturfing (as opposed to authentic grass roots movements). Detection of Astroturfing is difficult. There are a few strategies, like hearing the same vocabulary from multiple sources, the use of ad hominem (attacking the characteristics of the opponent), and genetic arguments (attacking the source of the argument). The way Astroturfing works is to make an opinion seem more widespread, and therefore more influential, than it is. Make it seem to be generally held common sense and people will be more persuaded.

The Internet Makes Us Stupid

The Internet is a tremendous store of data and information. The Millennials and the iGen are the first to have grown up with instant access to huge stores of information available at a key stroke. Acquisition of knowledge requires effort. Reading at that level is work. Since there is so much information available for recall, it is merely practical that a person would just use Google as memory. The problem with this approach is that in the process of knowledge acquisition, a person learns a set of skills to evaluate information presented: such as logic and rhetoric for fallacy detection, synthesis through typologies and analogies, use of statistics, and experimental design.  Without the effort expended in knowledge acquisition a person is crippled in the ability to form informed opinion, and temperament takes over.

In an ideal world, a person presented with an issue would first search his/her existing store of knowledge and, having a motivation to learn, would conduct a search of existing information, filter that information based on the merits, while using the meta-self (self-criticism) to assess personal bias, coming to an informed conclusion.

Instead what seems to happen is one of two methods:

First, when presented with an issue, a person searches the existing store of knowledge, finding none, merely formulates an uninformed opinion or accepts an argument from authority as long as it conforms with the person’s temperament.

Or there may be a failure to apply a bias failure if there is indeed a desire to learn.

In this era of “alternative facts,” “fake news,” Astroturfing, and opinion ghettoes, how can we as a citizenry address this problem? Do the work is one. For example, it has been reliably shown that handwriting notes is superior to typing.  Learn how to read a book.  Bring back the study of rhetoric.  Second, be curious and skeptical, but temper skepticism with common sense. Radical skepticism, the root of academic schools of thought labeled Critical and Theory, with a capital C or T, does not lead to knowledge but destroys it. It is corrosive to positive knowledge. It is solipsistic. When I take the epistemological position that only what is in my own mind is “real” and there is no objective reality, then “alternative facts” are no longer “fake.”

Thomas Reid, a philosopher in the Scottish common sense tradition, wrote: “It is so irksome to reason with those who deny first principles, that wise men commonly decline it.” Some skeptical criticism of positivism (the philosophical position that positive objective knowledge is possible) is valid. Positivism cannot answer every question—e.g., metaphysical questions are a misapplication of positivism—but it can answer many questions. Radical skepticism denies the ability to gain positive knowledge on first principles. However, radical skepticism fails the lamp post test. Were we to take the position that the senses are unreliable and therefore no reality exists outside my own mind, then we would forever be walking into lamp posts, since they are unreal. Advice: Be skeptical of the radical skeptics and decline to adopt their first principles.

A Final Note

There is no denying the challenge of knowledge specialization. So much new knowledge is produced in narrow specialized areas that the average person is not capable of synthesizing it due to lack of context and knowledge. Based on that fact, a person of average intelligence is now required to accept arguments from authority. However, the person of average intelligence can be armed with certain tools for evaluation. For example, publication bias is a real phenomenon. Only surprising findings make it into print. Scientific confirmation of common sense is viewed as proving the apodictic and never makes it into print. Furthermore, negative findings never make it into print, so do not assume that one study makes an established fact.

Be extremely suspicious of epidemiological studies. Unless there is miraculously a “natural experiment,” where all other plausible causal factors except the one under investigation are controlled for, these studies are highly suspect. They rely typically on self-reported data, possibly non-random samples, and assumptions of population homogeneity. Epidemiological studies are the beginning of the formulation of a research question, not the end. Correlation is not necessarily causation. Without controlled experiment and establishing a causal chain, findings are an unconfirmed hypothesis as to causation. This is why government diet advice flip-flops so much—don’t eat too many eggs, because they cause heart disease—oops, my bad—you can eat eggs again.

In social science, do not make the assumption that an empirical finding is reliable. Social phenomena are complex and any study applies a theoretical approach that defines the model (a simplification of reality) to explain a phenomenon. The theoretical approach defines what variables will be omitted in a study. Correlations without a strong argument for causation are just that, a correlation. The model chosen can determine the result. Take for example the debate over IQ and life outcomes. When statistical regression is chosen as a tool for analysis, you’ve just made the assumption that factors do not interact, unless you create interaction terms a priori. The variables are independent causal factors that are pitted against one another for statistical significance according to an arbitrary threshold (the conventional test is a less than 5% chance that the result is in fact accident). Thus, there are two sides of the debate: People doing parsimonious (few variables) regression models who say that IQ and not upbringing is highly determinative of life outcomes (the quantitative researchers) and people who take an “intersectional” approach that say that multiple causal factors interact in non-linear and possibly incommensurable, ways to produce the measured effect (the qualitative researchers).

Study Habits

The Wall Street Journal features a humorous/lifestyle article at the bottom center of the front page each day.  Today features an article on the trauma today’s keyboard generation suffers when students are faced with a professor who bans laptops in the lecture hall.

This is the first generation to be weaned on a keyboard and who may not have learned cursive script in elementary school.  Some schools no longer teach it.  The students then are at a loss to take lecture notes by hand.

As someone who is a product of the California public schools and University of California, Santa Barbara, albeit in a prior generation (Gen-X), I can tell you that in school, I learned to “do school” and not to learn.  It is not surprising that these students are struggling with certain skills like note-taking.

It wasn’t until my third masters degree, International Relations at Troy University, that I was actually taught certain skills, like

  • structured note-taking on articles read
  • how to write a literature review
  • how to do literature searches
  • how to develop research questions
  • how to write a research proposal

The first two were taught in the required course that prepared students for their comprehensive exams, which was called Theory and Ideology in International Relations.  The final three were taught in the required course in research methods.

There is research that supports the laptop ban.  Students retain more when they take handwritten notes, rather than typewritten ones.  It is for this reason that I have resisted using the computer and am maintaining handwritten lab books as I conduct research for my PhD in Politics at University of Leicester.  (The University would rather I use electronic tools, but I resist.)

Leicester also has an excellent induction program that teaches the skills necessary to be a successful researcher.  There are some excellent sources to learn how to be efficient and successful in higher ed that I recommend.

First, indispensable is Cal Newport’s How to Become a Straight-A Student. In it he lays out some key strategies for being successful while working less hard: time management, deep work, triage, and writing effectively.  My key take-away from the book is the time management method from Seven Habits.  I now maintain a daily to-do list and a things to remember list in a small pocket-sized notebook.  Reserving time for deep work is also really important.  What works for me is scheduling a block of time 50-90 minutes, when I can concentrate on a topic deeply without any distractions.  Here is were the laptop (and phone) ban can help since working with pen and paper prevents you from browsing the Web or checking Twitter, Facebook, email, etc.  The devices are so seductive.

Second, I bought on a whim Mort Adler’s book, How to Read a Book, which for the first time, systematized for me the process of reading critically, interrogating the text.  It also taught how to do a literature review–what he calls syntopical (same topic) reading.  That said, the chapters on specific genres are can be safely skipped in my opinion, because they are biased by his Great Books of the Western World program of which he is famous.

Third, Doing a Literature Review by Chris Hart, used in the research training at Leicester, is an excellent resource on how to do a literature review.  He presents multiple strategies for categorizing a body of literature on a topic.  I am partial to lists rather than graphical methods, like mind maps, but do whatever works for you.  He also covers the practicalities of structuring the literature review for a thesis in different fields.

Loaning a Loan Word

There is an all-purpose word for chaos, mess, tumult, or commotion in modern Hebrew: balagan. It passed into my everyday vocabulary when I lived in Israel. For example, my wife and I use it to describe the state of the household after the grandparents have visited and spun up the kids. The word just rolls off the tongue: ba-la-gan. I have caught myself using the word even with people who don’t speak Hebrew, much to their confusion.

Today, I was surprised to see it used in the headline of an AP story in Yahoo! News.  The story is about how the Israeli security establishment views the latest developments in the Syrian Civil War.  Does the use of the word in a headline portend  the passing of the word into English as a loan word?

The word itself is not originally Hebrew.  This article from Haaretz describes the travels of this wonderful word.   It passed into modern Hebrew via Russian to describe the temporary dwellings used by traveling puppet shows. The word’s origin is actually in Persian, meaning a yurt. Passing into English would make it a loan of a loan of a loan word. The word will have changed hands more times than a sub-prime mortgage in 2007.