4 ms·

Universities have a real problem: what they teach you has almost ZERO application outside of their ivy-covered walls. For most degrees (non-engineering, IMO), y

Universities have a real problem: what they teach you has almost ZERO application outside of their ivy-covered walls. For most degrees (non-engineering, IMO), you don't learn how to add value to the economy--you just learn to jump through academic hoops. I know too many people who have used almost nothing from their undergraduate degrees, and are now contemplating career changes because of it.

tkahn6 16y ago
"what they teach you has almost ZERO application outside of their ivy-covered walls" I am of the opinion that the problem is they don't focus enough on theory. CS Theory classes at my university are 4000 level courses. Until then, you're just learning 'good' OOP design with Java. "For most degrees (non-engineering, IMO), you don't learn how to add value to the economy--you just learn to jump through academic hoops." Yeah, I think you've absolutely nailed it.
- Qz 16y ago
  FWIW, Carnegie Mellon starts you on CS theory in Freshman or Sophomore year (depending on just how new to programming you are) and never really stops.
  - tkahn6 16y ago
    Yeah and I am very jealous. Fortunately I got into a grad class on symbolic logic which is where I'm getting all of my theory right now.
  - steveklabnik 16y ago
    Much better than the Java School we've got going on here at Pitt.
- ramidarigaz 16y ago
  I'm at CU Boulder, and they've done a pretty good job with the CS course. Freshmen are required to take a "CS As A Field Of Work And Study", which introduces both workplace concepts and some of the underlying theory of computers. I'm currently taking a "Discrete Structures" class. It's a 2000 level course, and it's all theory. And it's fun.
maqr 16y ago
Include engineering in this.
cageface 16y ago
Ideally college should teach you how to learn, to set a foundation for the rest of your life. At least in the U.S. though, inadequate high schools and overpopulated junior-level classes mean that you spend the first 2-3 years of college being pumped through a mind-numbingly mechanical process. If you're lucky in your fourth year you'll start to really be challenged to think for yourself. The kind of teaching you really want to encounter in college requires close, direct interaction with a mentor. In practice you don't actually get that much of this.
- protomyth 16y ago
  Your right about high school and that is probably where we really need the revolution. High School has become the babysitters for a group of Americans that are neither children or adults. We treat them as whichever one is convenient (prosecute as adults, rights as children). I really believe it does no good to "fix" college if the input is broken. It is a shame the area is locked from most innovation due to lack of funding for anybody but the rich. It would be interesting to try so real alternatives to the current High School system.
  - orangecat 16y ago
    It is a shame the area is locked from most innovation due to lack of funding for anybody but the rich. It would be interesting to try so real alternatives to the current High School system. I certainly agree with the second sentence, but lack of funding is generally not the problem: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2438214220070524 http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2438214220070524
    - protomyth 16y ago
      Under most circumstances, private companies cannot get paid that money. If vouchers were universal then that $8k per student would have a pretty good business case.
laserhase 16y ago
heh, just realized, in my case, I should have probably taken courses called 'emailing managing directors', 'scheduling meetings in obsolete Lotus Notes versions', 'using that one goofed-up sharepoint where you have to click through six unintuitive links to find the files that anyone actually uses'. (Yeah, I know, my current assignment is pretty lame, sorry-- my snark is directed at it, not you). Of course, I actually did learn this kind of stuff in college. You do similar stuff in the courses and it applies to the job in unpredictable ways. The point is that you learn to learn, and if you (with the college's help) do it right, you pick up the specific job skills much sooner. I know (from experience) this can be a painfully hard sell with HR at a lot of places, but saving a few months of learning-curve time for your employer or your clients adds value to the economy, especially in an economy where technology, tasks and jobs change so often.
jshen 16y ago
"For most degrees (non-engineering, IMO), you don't learn how to add value to the economy--you just learn to jump through academic hoops" I don't buy this at all. One of the must important skills for any industry is the ability to effectively communicate, and almost everyone that goes through college gets better at this. The people that just jump through hoops are doing it because they don't care about getting an education and just want the piece of paper called a degree. College is highly valuable to anyone that actually wants to learn.
- orangecat 16y ago
  I don't buy this at all. One of the must important skills for any industry is the ability to effectively communicate, and almost everyone that goes through college gets better at this. Sure, but is it really necessary to take on tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to develop those skills?
  - jshen 16y ago
    I took on zero debt. I went to community college in ca which was $11 a unit, now I believe it is about $25 per unit. Then I went to a state school which was about 8 grand a year. I worked the whole time I was in school and paid for it myself.
    - achompas 16y ago
      Congrats on getting through at such a low cost--it's really hard to attend nowadays without taking on so much debt. You have to know, though, that you (and I) are in a small minority of students today. And that's the article's point: college is so damn expensive now, almost everyone has to take on debt to pay tuition. The undergrad experience is badass, but it's also fraught with problems: -- Students are asked to choose a major (and thus, by implication, a career) before they turn 21. If they choose incorrectly and need a different degree, the costs are astronomical. -- Non-engineering classes are completely bunk until about the third year. Before then it's mainly "weed-out" courses which teach students little or overload them with work. -- The cheapest (public) schools also have the largest classrooms. You pay less in tuition, but quality of education suffers. We ask students to decide on a career during a transitional phase in their lives, in an economy where no one works in the same field for more than a decade, and then charge them $50k in the process? That's just unfair.

tkahn6 16y ago

"what they teach you has almost ZERO application outside of their ivy-covered walls" I am of the opinion that the problem is they don't focus enough on theory. CS Theory classes at my university are 4000 level courses. Until then, you're just learning 'good' OOP design with Java. "For most degrees (non-engineering, IMO), you don't learn how to add value to the economy--you just learn to jump through academic hoops." Yeah, I think you've absolutely nailed it.

Qz 16y ago
FWIW, Carnegie Mellon starts you on CS theory in Freshman or Sophomore year (depending on just how new to programming you are) and never really stops.
- tkahn6 16y ago
  Yeah and I am very jealous. Fortunately I got into a grad class on symbolic logic which is where I'm getting all of my theory right now.
- steveklabnik 16y ago
  Much better than the Java School we've got going on here at Pitt.
ramidarigaz 16y ago
I'm at CU Boulder, and they've done a pretty good job with the CS course. Freshmen are required to take a "CS As A Field Of Work And Study", which introduces both workplace concepts and some of the underlying theory of computers. I'm currently taking a "Discrete Structures" class. It's a 2000 level course, and it's all theory. And it's fun.

maqr 16y ago

Include engineering in this.

cageface 16y ago

Ideally college should teach you how to learn, to set a foundation for the rest of your life. At least in the U.S. though, inadequate high schools and overpopulated junior-level classes mean that you spend the first 2-3 years of college being pumped through a mind-numbingly mechanical process. If you're lucky in your fourth year you'll start to really be challenged to think for yourself. The kind of teaching you really want to encounter in college requires close, direct interaction with a mentor. In practice you don't actually get that much of this.

protomyth 16y ago
Your right about high school and that is probably where we really need the revolution. High School has become the babysitters for a group of Americans that are neither children or adults. We treat them as whichever one is convenient (prosecute as adults, rights as children). I really believe it does no good to "fix" college if the input is broken. It is a shame the area is locked from most innovation due to lack of funding for anybody but the rich. It would be interesting to try so real alternatives to the current High School system.
- orangecat 16y ago
  It is a shame the area is locked from most innovation due to lack of funding for anybody but the rich. It would be interesting to try so real alternatives to the current High School system. I certainly agree with the second sentence, but lack of funding is generally not the problem: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2438214220070524 http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2438214220070524
  - protomyth 16y ago
    Under most circumstances, private companies cannot get paid that money. If vouchers were universal then that $8k per student would have a pretty good business case.

laserhase 16y ago

heh, just realized, in my case, I should have probably taken courses called 'emailing managing directors', 'scheduling meetings in obsolete Lotus Notes versions', 'using that one goofed-up sharepoint where you have to click through six unintuitive links to find the files that anyone actually uses'. (Yeah, I know, my current assignment is pretty lame, sorry-- my snark is directed at it, not you). Of course, I actually did learn this kind of stuff in college. You do similar stuff in the courses and it applies to the job in unpredictable ways. The point is that you learn to learn, and if you (with the college's help) do it right, you pick up the specific job skills much sooner. I know (from experience) this can be a painfully hard sell with HR at a lot of places, but saving a few months of learning-curve time for your employer or your clients adds value to the economy, especially in an economy where technology, tasks and jobs change so often.

jshen 16y ago

"For most degrees (non-engineering, IMO), you don't learn how to add value to the economy--you just learn to jump through academic hoops" I don't buy this at all. One of the must important skills for any industry is the ability to effectively communicate, and almost everyone that goes through college gets better at this. The people that just jump through hoops are doing it because they don't care about getting an education and just want the piece of paper called a degree. College is highly valuable to anyone that actually wants to learn.

orangecat 16y ago
I don't buy this at all. One of the must important skills for any industry is the ability to effectively communicate, and almost everyone that goes through college gets better at this. Sure, but is it really necessary to take on tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to develop those skills?
- jshen 16y ago
  I took on zero debt. I went to community college in ca which was $11 a unit, now I believe it is about $25 per unit. Then I went to a state school which was about 8 grand a year. I worked the whole time I was in school and paid for it myself.
  - achompas 16y ago
    Congrats on getting through at such a low cost--it's really hard to attend nowadays without taking on so much debt. You have to know, though, that you (and I) are in a small minority of students today. And that's the article's point: college is so damn expensive now, almost everyone has to take on debt to pay tuition. The undergrad experience is badass, but it's also fraught with problems: -- Students are asked to choose a major (and thus, by implication, a career) before they turn 21. If they choose incorrectly and need a different degree, the costs are astronomical. -- Non-engineering classes are completely bunk until about the third year. Before then it's mainly "weed-out" courses which teach students little or overload them with work. -- The cheapest (public) schools also have the largest classrooms. You pay less in tuition, but quality of education suffers. We ask students to decide on a career during a transitional phase in their lives, in an economy where no one works in the same field for more than a decade, and then charge them $50k in the process? That's just unfair.