This strikes me as so odd. My CS degree had tons of practical classes but it was all application of things you learned because, being quasi vocational, the best

This strikes me as so odd. My CS degree had tons of practical classes but it was all application of things you learned because, being quasi vocational, the best way to learn to program is by doing so the learning to program portion of the degree were the assignments to the classes. We had loads; your standard welcome to Java course, the second level where we had some of the early Google Nexus phones and experimented with building little apps [0], then a whole class on development methodologies which had a lab/group project portion where we were adding to a little digital health document system that was actually passed from class to class taking the best version(s) from each semester and adding to it on the next, and at the end a Senior capstone project. Each semester generally had at least one largely practical class. > It is as if you expected architects (the house-designing kind) to build houses, but never even give them any training in how to nail two planks together. Well architects don't build houses, they design them. The learning of computer programming is best to learn by doing after an introduction to the basics of some language. I have a hard time believing programs just fail to mention the existence of debuggers over the entirety of their program. There's a lot of the programs that expect you to figure out the precise tools you want to use for yourself. [0] The core assignment of this actually kind of failed because it was flawed from the beginning but it was still quite useful. We were supposed to build a lock screen that "locked" the phone when we went above a configurable speed. The main issue was the GPS data available to the apps in that early version of Android was very spotty.