(no subject)

[jackofallgeeks]

One of the major problems I have with the way schools are run these days is that the rule used to measure success rewards things like discouraging students from taking challenging courses. And that's shit.

Comments

[circuit-four.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's basically why I didn't become an computer engineer. "Hmm. On one hand, I could have the next four years planned for me, get my GPA shredded by a sink-or-swim process put in place largely to control the job market, lose my scholarship, compete with people who will put up with any crap in order to get rich, deal with professors and TA's who are willfully incompetent because the university loves their research, and come out of it with a shot at getting filthy rich if I'm willing to work 50-hour burnout weeks. On the other, I could built an independent curriculum out of Buddhism, Soviet history, and late-night strip poker games, have about a tenth of my classes in bars, have actual conversations with my profs, study things that fascinate me, hone my critical thinking faculties for their own sake, and learn why our society toils like little worker ants instead of just joining them."

Hmmm, gee. :) Not that there's the tiniest thing wrong with choosing the other path, especially if you have a more natural ability with CS and math than I did -- and a much greater attention span. But you know, it turns out I just didn't love computers, and I absolutely hated not being able to dabble for fear of tanking my GPA. It would've been nice to take just one or two CS courses that weren't taught under a "cull the herd" mentality, though.