I went to a small liberal arts school (Clark University in Worcester, Mass), and majored in physics and minored in mathematics. Of the 32 courses I took there, 2-3 were bullshit courses. The required "perspectives" as the called them. And even with the scholarships, the education was not cheap. I ended up graduating without having taken a single computer science/engineering course. I then proceeded to work as a software developer, having taught myself Pascal, C, C++, Java, PHP, JavaScript, Python, SQL, and 2-3 other much more niche languages while in middle school, high school and college. I am now in my third year working full time as a software developer and I am not looking to go back to physics directly. From a certain perspective it may seem that I have wasted four years at Clark. I rarely use the knowledge I gained there directly.
However, I need to emphasize the opportunities that I had at Clark. First, I worked in a research lab since my first year. It did not start out as cutting edge "wow look at what I've discovered" type stuff, but by my junior year I was working on novel and interesting stuff (related to organic magnetism). My findings were surprising to me as well as to my professors (of course having to do a lot with their guidance). This is not something you can do on your own. You either work for a private company's R&D (probably requires quite a bit of the "rubber stamps" you mention), the government (even more of 'em) or at a research University. This alone was worth it for me.
Next, I worked as a Resident Advisor for almost three years. This is a job which requires you to learn a ton about people, how to deal with them, how to lead them. Not something that can be taught in a classroom, but also I think something that is perfectly practiced on 250+ freshmen entering the campus. Not a job I'd want to have as a career, but one of the most valuable life lessons I've learned.
On top of that, I got to work for the IT department there and actually develop fairly complex web applications. Besides working with great people, it also provided me with awesome references, and so far quite a few hours of freelance work after I graduated. Yes, I could have done projects on my own, but this kind of work was a bit different. For example, I learned to gather requirements, estimate development time, etc.
Lastly, I met some awesome people. I understand that places like MIT take this effect to the next level. I don't have a large network of people in my field from Clark. However, I did have a friend there with whom I developed a social network which showcased my talents to my potential employers after I graduated, and allowed me to get my offer letters. True, I could have met someone to work with elsewhere, but having a large-ish web project under my belt made getting a job easy.
Basically, what I am trying to say is that from a certain perspective I did not waste my time at Clark. I did not walk the alternative path, but I did enjoy the one I did walk.
P.S.: I think that comp. sci. and computer engineering are a special field. Much of the stuff you'd care to learn is online. FOSS makes it easy to learn and experiment and read great code. Anyone with an analytical mind, lots of persistence and free time can become a software developer at least on some level. My wife is currently going through a graduate program to become a Physician Assistant (a clinician in the US). Her experience is drastically different. Everything is very practical. Today she is learning how to put on casts, for example. This is stuff she will be using. Here the dimploma is still a proof that you actually are able to decide matters of health, life and death; prescribe medication; perform surgery; deliver babies; or tell a patient they have cancer. My point is that not all fields have the same issues as others.
I agree with the benefits you've mentioned, I think right now I'm just bitter. I would think a liberal arts school, particularly Clark, would offer a significantly different experience than the one I received. As well, I think I would enjoy a practical program like the one your wife is going through. That is clearly learning tangible skills valuable in the real world.
I think my largest frustration is that the purpose of school, in my humble opinion, is to educate students. To get information (a liberal definition of information capabilities, skills, networks, etc.) from textbooks and professors and extracurricular programs, and cram into the students head in a way that leaves them capable of using it in the future. The purpose of an education is to educate. It killed me to find out that this was hardly the first priority. Somethings are done right, many more wrong, but the bottom line and priorities of the school I attended seemed off. (I was at McGill University by the way)
Comments
I went to a small liberal arts school (Clark University in Worcester, Mass), and majored in physics and minored in mathematics. Of the 32 courses I took there, 2-3 were bullshit courses. The required "perspectives" as the called them. And even with the scholarships, the education was not cheap. I ended up graduating without having taken a single computer science/engineering course. I then proceeded to work as a software developer, having taught myself Pascal, C, C++, Java, PHP, JavaScript, Python, SQL, and 2-3 other much more niche languages while in middle school, high school and college. I am now in my third year working full time as a software developer and I am not looking to go back to physics directly. From a certain perspective it may seem that I have wasted four years at Clark. I rarely use the knowledge I gained there directly.
However, I need to emphasize the opportunities that I had at Clark. First, I worked in a research lab since my first year. It did not start out as cutting edge "wow look at what I've discovered" type stuff, but by my junior year I was working on novel and interesting stuff (related to organic magnetism). My findings were surprising to me as well as to my professors (of course having to do a lot with their guidance). This is not something you can do on your own. You either work for a private company's R&D (probably requires quite a bit of the "rubber stamps" you mention), the government (even more of 'em) or at a research University. This alone was worth it for me.
Next, I worked as a Resident Advisor for almost three years. This is a job which requires you to learn a ton about people, how to deal with them, how to lead them. Not something that can be taught in a classroom, but also I think something that is perfectly practiced on 250+ freshmen entering the campus. Not a job I'd want to have as a career, but one of the most valuable life lessons I've learned.
On top of that, I got to work for the IT department there and actually develop fairly complex web applications. Besides working with great people, it also provided me with awesome references, and so far quite a few hours of freelance work after I graduated. Yes, I could have done projects on my own, but this kind of work was a bit different. For example, I learned to gather requirements, estimate development time, etc.
Lastly, I met some awesome people. I understand that places like MIT take this effect to the next level. I don't have a large network of people in my field from Clark. However, I did have a friend there with whom I developed a social network which showcased my talents to my potential employers after I graduated, and allowed me to get my offer letters. True, I could have met someone to work with elsewhere, but having a large-ish web project under my belt made getting a job easy.
Basically, what I am trying to say is that from a certain perspective I did not waste my time at Clark. I did not walk the alternative path, but I did enjoy the one I did walk.
P.S.: I think that comp. sci. and computer engineering are a special field. Much of the stuff you'd care to learn is online. FOSS makes it easy to learn and experiment and read great code. Anyone with an analytical mind, lots of persistence and free time can become a software developer at least on some level. My wife is currently going through a graduate program to become a Physician Assistant (a clinician in the US). Her experience is drastically different. Everything is very practical. Today she is learning how to put on casts, for example. This is stuff she will be using. Here the dimploma is still a proof that you actually are able to decide matters of health, life and death; prescribe medication; perform surgery; deliver babies; or tell a patient they have cancer. My point is that not all fields have the same issues as others.
I agree with the benefits you've mentioned, I think right now I'm just bitter. I would think a liberal arts school, particularly Clark, would offer a significantly different experience than the one I received. As well, I think I would enjoy a practical program like the one your wife is going through. That is clearly learning tangible skills valuable in the real world.
I think my largest frustration is that the purpose of school, in my humble opinion, is to educate students. To get information (a liberal definition of information capabilities, skills, networks, etc.) from textbooks and professors and extracurricular programs, and cram into the students head in a way that leaves them capable of using it in the future. The purpose of an education is to educate. It killed me to find out that this was hardly the first priority. Somethings are done right, many more wrong, but the bottom line and priorities of the school I attended seemed off. (I was at McGill University by the way)