There are a number of skills I wish that I had acquired before I went out into the wider world. I would have liked a course on getting a job. It could have included:
Resume writing
Researching companies as potential employers
Interviewing skills
Networking
Universities could do a lot to help new graduates entering the workforce. Since jobs today are far from employment for life, those skills would prove useful a number of times.
My school [bucknell.edu] has a well-respected career development center that is very connected to the corporate world and alums. Perhaps your school had a career center also, but didn't advertise very well. Just a thought...
At my libral arts college they have a class in that that we are all required to take in order to graduate.. they make us go through a whole interviewing mockup before we get to leave the place... saddled with debt..
I think that you would probably find that most (if not all) universities do offer these services, just not as classes. Where I go to school we have a Career Services department which does exactly the things you outlined. They have luncheons/breakfasts with potential employers and network, they have tutorials on what employers are looking for in resumes and interviews. In fact they even have a service where they set up mock interviews for you and give you feedback on your performance.
Notwithstanding that, there tend to be other things on campus (and off) as well. I'm heavily involved in the computer club at my school [yorku.ca] and we have speakers who talk about almost all the things you mention within the context of computers and IT. I'm also involved with the the Canadian Undergraduate Technology Conference [www.cutc.ca], which assuming you're a canuck and in a CS-like program, would be great for you too. On their schedule they have a job fair for attendees, they have seminars with people in industry where you can actually speak with them afterwards and a bunch of other things. I highly recommend people in university check out these sorts of things. Thus far a bunch of my friends have scored jobs directly through that conference.
In the end, you really do have to do this stuff yourself.
The point is that a University is an institution of higher learning, not a job training center. Their goal is to impart knowledge and expand the scope of knowledge, not to get you a particular job. The former role is of course their historical origin, and, I think is very worthwhile, because it is that attitude that continues expansion of knowledge in many fields.
This especially applies to fields that are not terribly marketable, such as some of the humanities, arts, and pure math and science. While these may not be cash cows directly, their developement does lead eventually to innovation with commercial or political application, or enrichment of the culture as a whole. I think these are very worthwhile, even essential goals that must be maintained. Many people at Universities these days (both students and faculty) want to turn them into vocational school. While I think the school definitely has to provided guidence to resources, it is wrong to pervert an institution of higher learning into a job training center.
I think there's certainly nothing wrong with wanting an education that just trains you for a job. There are certainly places for that, places more like DeVry or Strayer, so you might look into something like that and/or interships.
Finally, I think that they don't teach all the neccessarry skills for an entry level position also as a pragmatic matter. They simply can't. The variety of requirements for different jobs are too large or it requires an amount or kind of experience (say coding a major project), that they can't provide in the limited setting of classes. I think they feel that they can't teach you the specifics, so the best solution is to teach you the things that will allow you to learn the skills you will need, and integrate them into a coherent framework.
Good show! I couldn't agree more. The purpose of a well-rounded education is to have an arsenal of rhetorical and logical weapons on hand for every situation. AND IT WORKS. Unfortunately there are a lot of uneducated folks running around touting the glories of a paractical education. One that prepares the student for a job....we used to have that type of school. It was called the guild system and was eventually replaced by the better, more adaptive school system we have now. It is interesting that on a message board with so many smart people, there are still idiots who don't think learning about art or language or history is important. Granted, it is LESS important if you are a CS major than if you are a history major but education has intrinsic value of its own far removed from the dollar sign.
Studying many things does NOT make one ignorant of all of them (as the lead stories writer so erroneously pointed out) it makes one well informed and gives one a broad bas from which he can draw knowlege and expand in many directions. A person who is trained in one thing only will not be able to synthesize information from many sources, will not be able to branch out and will be continually trapped into whatever their "practical" education gave them. Furthermore, it isn't as if there is no specialization in college....did the original writer graduate, I wonder?....once one declares his major, that becomes his focus. In the first two years I was "well rounded" taking foreing language, history, english, astronomy, psychology, chemical biology among other things. I declared as a history major and that become my primary (though not singular) focus.
A University education is meant to make one EDUCATED! The purpose is not to make one a great job candidate. To elevate the human race as a whole, and rescue our culture from the gutter, it is neccessary for each one of us to become as enlightened and educated about as many subjects as possible while maintaining a core sbject we are excellent in. For those who want practicality to come from their after-high-school education:
Get your second rate education at Devry and shut the fuck up.
Oh yeah you're one of those "there's more to life than money" people. That of course is true, but it doesn't help when you DONT have the money to begin with. So how about people make their money FIRST and then become the useless enlightened liberal arts majors this story is talking about?
One that prepares the student for a job....we used to have that type of school. It was called the guild system and was eventually replaced by the better, more adaptive school system we have now.
I think that you miss two important points. First, as valuable as a modern education is to somebody who learns from it, not everyone has the intelligence or personality to benefit from it. Having an alternative system so that people who don't fit in to the modern educational system are able to learn something and become productive members of society is very valuable. Second, that system still does exist and is actually quite strong still. Vocational education and even straight apprenticeship programs still exist; many union jobs, for instance, follow more that approach more or less closely. Also, much as it pains me to point it out, graduate school is much, much closer to a traditional apprenticeship program than most academics are willing to admit.
I think that you miss two important points. First, as valuable as a modern education is to somebody who learns from it, not everyone has the intelligence or personality to benefit from it.
I do see some merit to this argument, even though it smacks of elitism. I'm a bit of an elitist myself. "Unfortunately," most Slashdot readers live in democracies. Through the use of the vote, every adult is allowed a say on a variety of issues, ranging from different tax schemes to pornography laws to the environment. Unless we're going to deny the uninformed the right to vote, we simply don't have the luxury of saying that some people just aren't worth the trouble of educating.
Having an alternative system so that people who don't fit in to the modern educational system are able to learn something and become productive members of society is very valuable.
You don't have to be terribly bright to get a lot out of a comparative religion or Western history class, if you're interested in the material. I think that if every American had taken courses like these, we would be in a much better political position for responding to the September 11th attacks. As things stand now, people who don't know Islam from Buddhism are writing their conresspeople to voice their support for bombing "that one country I can't seem to find on the map. Aftaliban, I think they called it."
Second, that system still does exist and is actually quite strong still. Vocational education and even straight apprenticeship programs still exist; many union jobs, for
instance, follow more that approach more or less closely. Also, much as it pains me to point it out, graduate school is much, much closer to a traditional apprenticeship program than most academics are willing to admit.
I'd be interested in some clarification on the last comment. It's plausible, but I think that there are some fundamental differences. For example, since the instructor of a graduate can assume something about their students' prior education, they can use analogies and explanations that could never be used on an apprentice (and since the instructor went through a similar education, she should have such analogies available).
When it comes right down to it, education is about making connections. If you don't have a broad overview of things before starting your "real" education, you'll have no way to hook between the things you're learning for job X and anything outside that specialized function. You'll know certain things very well, but you'll often end up very lost when asked to move beyond what you already know.
I do see some merit to this argument, even though it smacks of elitism. I'm a bit of an elitist myself.
I don't mean that in an elitist sense of "some people aren't worth educating". If anything I'm trying to say the exact opposite- that everyone is worth educating. Some people observably do a poor job of learning under our current mainstream education system. The current system is designed to suit people at about the 5th percentile and above, and a lot of people below that level have trouble picking up the material. Some other people simply have trouble working in a traditional academic setting, get bored with classes that are "dumbed down" so that the 5th percentile people can get them, have different styles of learning, or the like. Rather than abandon those people as unteachable, we need to have alternative educations available for them to try to teach them in a way that will help them to become as productive in society as the people who are well served by the current mainstream system.
You don't have to be terribly bright to get a lot out of a comparative religion or Western history class, if you're interested in the material.
But that last bit is really the kicker. Not everyone is interested in that material, and trying to shove it down those people's throats is doomed to failure. There are none so unteachable as those who will not learn. Now some of that can be cured through good teaching- good teachers can find a way to make material relevant to their audience- but not everyone is going to be persuaded to care. It's sad but observably true.
I'd be interested in some clarification on the last comment. It's plausible, but I think that there are some fundamental differences.
Perhaps I should clarify that my thoughts were focused primarily on PhD programs, where I'm more confident that the comment is correct. Most PhD programs have comparatively light academic requirements; after their first couple of years most PhD students aren't even required to take any classes. Instead (and much like an apprenticeship program) the emphasis is on gaining experience in job skills. For PhDs these include performing research, writing papers, teaching undergraduates, and the like, but they're learned informally through hands-on practice and personal instruction by more experienced people in the field. They're not taught in an academic instructional setting. This shouldn't be terribly surprising, as our college system grew directly out of the Guild system.
I just finished a 4 month work term (summer job) for the federal government at a federal prison... in short.. it was probably one of the most difficult jobs i have ever had to do... and as far as i'm concerned... will ever have to do.. but I think my university education prepared me for the most unusual environment i had to enter... university taught me how to think about things that werent in the textbook. you'd be surprised how much getting up in front of your class to analyze nova scotia's fiscal budget, then learning about the different native tribes prepares you for. The two things that got me through 'my prison time' were communication skills, and constant decision making. (thank you management classes:)
universities have a purpose and vocational schools (private or public) also have a purpose.
Disclaimer: i am canadian
here, you can take a 2 year certificate program at a college, or attend a vocational school for specific skills and a lot of people do... it's quick.. and you learn a lot about a little. You come out, and you're set to enter the workforce in your chosen industry.
If you go to university, be prepared to learn a little about A LOT. Universities have a lot of history to them... and they are diffrent institutions... they really are higher learning, and they are also not for everyone.
I think you are right that a lot of people these days want to turn uni's into vocational schools.. but that is not what they are or should be. we have very strict general liberal education requirements for every degree program at my uni and that may be the only thing that prevents it.
these kind of requirements encourage literacy, oral expression, critical thinking, problem solving, sense of historical conciousness, and a grasp about what the sciences tell us about the world... this kind of depth of knowledge is only taught at universities, and as far as i'm concerned... will ever be. It has made me much more mature than i was only a few years ago.
I have no idea what i'm going to do when i have my degree in my hand... but i do know that i can enter almost any industry that i want to... and i'm as "well-rounded" as they get (i'm one of those who has changed my major 3 times)
no troll intended... but I really do think that university graduates, degree holders... are much smarter people than those that aren't.. but NOT more important. We need rocket scientists at nasa.. but we also need people to package the food they're taking to the moon with them. they're also a lot more pretentious, but they've been forced to think in different ways that no other educational institute could make you do... and thats what makes degree holders "well-rounded". The whole "think outside the box" thing is nothing new... you cant survive university without doing it.
I too have issues with my school... I think they're doing an excellent job with technology (that's available to us) but not necessarily with teaching us different ways of doing things with the technology available to us (it's alot easier to just buy all the microsoft licenses and teach that)
university education is very essential to our society... we need people to build bridges, represent us in governemnt, and play with bacteria all day to make sure we can still drink the water. we also need people to climb up electrical poles and turn our power back on after a storm... and frankly.. i'm glad those ppl know a lot about a little rather than a little about a lot. A well rounded education IS a good one.. it might just not be your destiny.
I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. I actually got into a debate with my Political Science professor about the very meaning of college.
The discussion came to programming and he passed out an article from some respected magazine about programmers coming from different liberal arts backgrounds. He then proceeded to ask the class what do you expect out of a college education. I raised my hand and told the 130+ in the class that I expected to be trained to get a really good job and everything over that was gravy. Startled by my commentary he began to relate the virtues of getting a college education and I agreed with him except for one point.
The whole idea of college 50 years ago was to expand your horizons and try different things, maybe even as little as 25 years ago actually. Now, try to get a professional job outside of sales without a college education; it can't be done. To me it has become another requirement of a job. My grandfather never finished high school and was the manager of a number of Levins stores starting in 1955. You can't get a job managing a McDonald's without a college education anymore.
So excuse while I burst everyone's bubble about well-roundness. I think there is something for being well versed in other cultures, knowing whats going in the world, the ability to speak and write well, and knowing how to manage others. However, well-roundness is just another word for employable so don't use it to cram classes that dont contribute to that goal into my schedule (not mine specifically because I'm graduated: metaphorical my schedule =) )
The whole idea of college 50 years ago was to expand your horizons and try different things, maybe even as little as 25 years ago actually. Now, try to get a professional job outside of sales without a college education; it can't be done. To me it has become another requirement of a job. My grandfather never finished high school and was the manager of a number of Levins stores starting in 1955. You can't get a job managing a McDonald's without a college education anymore.
I think you could probably get a job managing a McDonald's without a college education - it'd just require that you "work your way up", probably much like your grandfather did. What it basically comes down to is you have to prove your competence somehow - whether that be by completing college ('if they could do that for four years, they must be responsible') or by proving your responsibility day after day (and of course after you do it at one place, other people will believe you can do it based upon past performance).
Although I can't say that this is necessarily true for McDonald's, I have certianly seen it happen at other places (mainly pizza places, where I've worked at many of throughout high school and college).
The American college changed drastically after WWII, when it was flooded by men taking advantage of the G.I. Bill. These men were different from the prior students in that they were older,
and that they did not come from an upper class background. They knew that this was a special opportunity, and they were intent on taking advantage of it. The idea of college was emphatically not to "expand your horizons" for these men.
From the beginning of the 20th century until this time, college was primarily a place for rich young men to play football and join fraternities until they were old enough to take the position their fathers had set up for them. There was no pretense of well-roundedness from either the faculty or students in this environment either, although many of the faculty didn't really care for their students, except for the rare few who were "grinds", that went to class and actually studied.
Before this, college was more about learning Latin and Greek than anything else, on the theory that learning hard languages improved memory.:)
I'm not 100% sure, but I think the origin of the "well-rounded" student was probably from the 1960's or 1970's. In any event, I'm pretty sure the 1950's image you present is wrong. If you're interested you may want to try this link [socsci.kun.nl].
The point is that a University is an institution of higher learning, not a job training center.
I fully agree with you. I was not trying to turn universities into something they are not and should not become. However, presumably when one earns a degree, one intends to do something with it. That something is often to apply it in the workplace. Other alternatives include graduate school and research in an academic setting.
I got what I considered to be an excellent education from a top engineering school. I don't use most of the tools and programming languages that I learned then any more, nor would I expect to after more than a decade. But I use a considerable amount of the theory that I learned.
Let me restate what I wish I had had available. I wish I could have taken a single, elective course to learn a few of the job hunting skills that I have had to pick up elsewhere over the years. I believe our career center had some seminars that fit this need, but they were not well advertised.
The trouble is, liberal arts education is nearly dead. Marxism, deconstructionism and a thousand other fads have rotted the once-proud liberal arts curriculum till all that remains is a grinning skull. Intelligent people who perhaps were destined for liberal arts become engineers and programmers instead. The people remaining in liberal arts are mostly those who should not be in a University at all. They will party for four years, sleep in class while the professor deconstructs the imperialist tropes of Shakespear, and emerge on the job market as mental children in the guise of adults.
They'd be much better off if they just knew Latin, Greek, arithmetic and the classics. Then at least they'd equal schoolboys of 100 years ago. Four years of mental laziness at that critical age, however, permanently harms the mind.
I can't tell if this is a troll or not, but there are some good ideas in here. There are a lot of kids who do come to college eager to learn (or at least I assume that there are). To the extent that they're exposed to the utter silliness that is deconstructionism, these kids are being cheated out of a real education.
I agree with this poster's belief that there's very little intellectual rigor outside of the science classes. Perhaps in history, where students have to be study subjects in depth and defend their conclusions. But I could list any number of majors that I could have simply slept through.
But that's what students are asking for: a dumbed down curriculum. Too often, when it came time to fill out teacher evaluations, the main sentiment was, "He grades too tough," or "blah blah blah. . . How can she expect us to know THAT?"
I am aware that some Slashdot readers have defied the odds and managed to breed. To those individuals, I implore you to raise your kids not to expect things to come easy. Show them that learning is worthwhile. Don't let them think that education should always be as easy as watching Sesame Street. And above all, get them to ask questions by answering the ones they do have as well as you can.
(Note: If your kid already has a poster of Stephen Jay Gould on their bedroom wall instead of Ricky Martin, you may have gone a bit overboard.)
There are a number of skills I wish that I had acquired before I went out into the wider world. I would have liked a course on getting a job. It could have included:
Resume writing
Researching companies as potential employers
Interviewing skills
FWIW, I took a course [unlv.edu] over the summer that went into these areas (among others). For the catalog under which I'm graduating (I'm on the "ten-year graduation plan":-) ), this is a required course. The degree requirements [unlv.edu] in the current catalog (and the past two or three) haven't included it, however; instead of ENG 404 (technical writing), CSC 472 (software design and development, which is primarily a group-project class) is now required. Odds are fair that you have something similar to ENG 404 available; if you're interested in it, you should be able to take it as one of your open electives...or maybe even just for sh*ts and grins, if you're so inclined (it was an easy A, and as a summer-session class, it only took five weeks).
However, I know many who were never taught the fine art of finding a job.
I think an additional topic that would be of great benefit to highlight would be "How to negotiate your total offer package (i.e. salary, benefits, stock options, joy ride in the company lear jet, etc)" or something to that affect.
But then, I suppose, folks like me, who are studying for their M.B.A. would have to take classes on, "tips and tricks to counter-offer everyone who took RealWorld 101 when they were a freshman."
I should know, I took the course when I was at the Art Institute of Pittsburgh. It was folded into the flat portfolio class for some reason, and went over the *basics* of how to go about doing everything you want out of a course like that. I passed it through social engineering - I made friends with the instructor, cut her under-the-table deals in the print lab and scan lab, and pushed prints for any student she sent me. And I gave a lecture to my class on printing above 72 DPI (I was the ONLY computer animation student at the time that knew how to print at 300 dpi!). So I passed.
A class is basically an expensive cliff's notes for something you're going to need in real life. There's no better way to pick it up than hands-on experience, and no - repeat- NO- class can do that for you. Let me address these proposed course points of yours from my personal experience:
Resume Writing: the ProDev class sucked for this, being incredibly basic. How did I get a decent resume? Simple- when work was slowing down at my current job, my boss told me "make up your resume and let me see it." So I did. He shot down about half of it and suggested changes. I made them. Repeat until he was happy with it- THEN he told me to run it by the assistant chair of Education, who has a Masters in English. He had a few suggestions. By the time I passed the gauntlet, my Resume rocked the casbah.
Researching Companies and Potential Employers: I've never had to do this, actually- it's been calls out of the blue, or emails from friends saying "hey, this guy's looking for...." since day one. This is a good thing- I live in Pittsburgh, and none of the local companies look like anything I'd want to work for. I'm happy where I'm at.
Interviewing Skills: This is the essence of social engineering. If you don't convince the interviewer that you're a guy who not only does the job well, but can get along with him, you should be fine. If you click, you're almost guranteed in. If you're not laid back and congenial, and don't have some social skills, forget it. I have friends that are a hell of a lot better at various aspects of what I do, but they couldn't talk a rock into sitting still.
Networking: What it ALL boils down to. No one ever got a job without knowing somebody- unless the case is 100% pure "we need somebody NOW." Case in point- my first supervisor at my job was a guy like that. I got in because he knew me. My next supervisor got in because he knew him (both of these guys left), and a future coworker is getting in by virtue of strong recommendations from myself and my last supervisor. That's three people getting jobs because they knew one guy that was in the right place at the right time.
I was barely competent when I got in- I was the only guy this person knew - and that everyone he asked knew- who could do the job. I picked up the details as I went along, and forget nascent capabilities into actual skills. Having friends in good places can only get you so far- your actual skills are going to carry you the rest of the way. So it's not enough to have a lot of friends OR be amazingly good at what you're doing- you gotta have BOTH, or you're going to be having a hell of a time of it.
That's my experience- which I'm slowly melding into a collection of essays with intent to stick on a website when I have enough of them.
If you have questions, replace AT with @ and ask away.
The way AIP did ProDev for CAM students was to slap it on top of Flat Portfolio. Which meant that in addition to resumes, biz cards, interview practice, and other things, we were also responsible for passing (there was no curve- it either exceeded [a+], met [a], or failed [f]) an 18 item checklist of graphics work- life drawing, color pieces, backgrounds, storyboards, multimedia CDROM, etc. If you failed ONE of these items, you failed the entire class.
THAT was where social engineering came in. The instructor considered my photoshop work to be the strongest in the class and actually used it as an example several times. But at that point in time, my flat work (drawings) sucked ass. If I hadn't greased the rails- if the instructor had been a complete and total hardass instead of an ally- I would have failed the class on the merit of my flat drawing skills.
Which makes you wonder why they slammed two marginally related classes together and had the entire grade structure hinge on one of them, but that's something I prefer not to think about.
Ah, but in your response you show you did learn a key real-world skill: "social engineering." This is one of the best skills for getting along with cow-orkers, suppliers, employees, clients...
Find a way to make a personal connection with them, and have them "on-sides" when the going gets thick. They'll be motivated to work to keep the connection going. Loyalty, that kind of thing.
It works and it's something a lot of young kids haven't mastered right out of school.
It's another question what kind of program could enhance learning these skills. Assigning group projects is one attempt to sneak this skill set into the learning process. Not many classes have lectures on "How to win friends and influence people" (thank you Dale Carnegie) but you need to learn it somewhere.
On the broader issue of what courses to include in a broad education, I've seen some persuasive arguments that humanities classes help kids come to understand how people function in communities including the business world. Novels or plays about loyalty, betrayal, revenge and so on start to look pretty relevant indeed when you see business as an aspect of the human experience - one place where all those psychological forces are at work.
At many universities, including U of M (the school I go to), an engineering major requires that you take one upper-level technical communication course. I'm actually taking this now, and our first assignment was to write a resume. The other things you mention were also covered, albeit very briefly. You are required to take this class as an upper-classman, so it kind of prepares you for the "real world".
There are a number of skills I wish that I had acquired before I went out into the wider world. I would have liked a course on getting a job. It could have included:
Resume writing
Researching companies as potential employers
Interviewing skills
My undergrad alma mater (and I'm sure many other colleges) did indeed teach this kind of stuff, but not as part of the curriculum: they were optional short tutorial classes held after normal school hours for seniors.
I'm currently an MS student at a midwestern Univ also, I'm sure I've seen bulletin board postings for resume writing and interviewing skills. Though having been in the workforce for 13 years, I think I know enough to get by.
I agree with the other poster who said that university is not a trade school. But at the same time, there should be some assistance with making the transition from the academic to the working world.
Universities do offer a place to learn those skills. At mine it is called the Career Resource Center. You go in, they help with your resume and give you tips on interviewing....incidentally these are not difficult skills to learn. All they take is decent social skills and the ability to read and write competently. They are hardly worth spending a semester learning. If you need help, get out of the house more.
I consider these points more in the realm of career development. That said however, to cover your points one by one for those that I hire, it would be nice for them to have more general writing skills. It is amazing how many people with a university or college education do not have any writing skills whatsoever. This includes primarily those graduates of the sciences and engineering disciplines, but frequently includes those with other majors as well. If one cannot write, they cannot communicate. Even if they are very talented, and they cannot communicate, they are not much use. My advice here to those just starting college or university would be to take writing intensive classes.
As far as researching companies as potential employers, I would think this would fall under general research skills and the ability to question. I want people around me who have these abilities and apply them to every aspect of their lives, not just in the job search. While they are on the job, they should research and question everything they are involved with to make their tasks the most complete they can and ask as many questions of the process as they can. Hopefully they also do these things in their daily life to make them more complete and successful individuals. These people make better employees. Take classes in a variety of disciplines and take the harder courses rather than focusing on the easier ones. Also, take some basic science courses even if you are a business or art major. Your grades may not be as high in the end, but if you work hard and learn, the grades should not matter as much. The issue of grade inflation is another topic entirely that perhaps Slashdot should cover.
As far as interviewing skills, this also falls under communication abilities. For those that are well rounded, they can navigate through a wider variety of topics even if they do not have direct knowledge of a particular topic. They are able to draw upon resources from other experiences and exposures and apply them to the discussion. These people interview more successfully and their background shows. One of the best employee interviews I ever gave consisted of almost entirely a discussion of punk rock and how it related to politics and the socioeconomic climiate of the late 70's and 80's. We only discussed the details of the job in the last fifteen minutes and she turned out to be an awesome employee who unfortunately lasted only a year before going back to graduate school, but we were all better for her time in the job position.
Networking also falls under the well-rounded bit, but they have to have the networking skills in addition to a strong work ethic. I will not have charismatic folks hanging around that do not get any work done. Unfortunately, hiring these folks can be a bit tricky as one has to sift through the personality and get to what they can and do actually have the capacity to achieve.
As for myself, yes, I wish I had gone to a small liberal arts university someplace rather than fighting through the core science curriculum where I attended. The science can always come later, but often, getting a well rounded education starts at the undergraduate level (actually earlier, but deficiencies are best made up in university or college). I try to encourage even those who tell me they want to go into science or medicine to get a well rounded education and work in a science lab or medical arena part time on the side to find out if they really want it.
Funny, I'm currently employed (sys admin, web backend programming) now, but previous school tried to require me to take a course on "job search strategies". My last job? Lead linux admin for that college. So, I've gotten 2 jobs while attending that school, yet they maintain that I still need to be trained in job searchng. Eh, they also require that I take a course in "Network administration" that's taught in a lab that I maintained for a year and a half.
Almost all of higher education exists to show you how to think and solve problems. Given the ineptitude of several instructors, you're also presented with the oppertunity to work for people as clueless about your field as your future managers are likely to be.;) You rarely are presented with problems - and even more rarely, solutions - that you'll encounter in practice. Just learn how to solve problems and try to remember some basic skills, let experience get you the rest.
Here at Penn State [htto] everyone has to take an English class called English 202 which covers resume writing and researching. Plus it is specific to your major, English 202D is for business, English 202C for Liberal arts, etc. Interviewing skills and networking should be included in a mandatory class.
I took a great class called MGMT 424, Interpersonal relations in organizations. This class taught you how to deal with interoffice politics, how to deal with irate customers and employees. How to network and how to express your opinions without rubbing off the wrong way. Overall, I feel it was the most useful class I had in college.
Funny, that. I studied all of these as part of the compulsory section of my engineering studies.
Note that it's engineering taken globally -- not software engineering (though I did a compulsory optional semester in computer science) or mechanical engineering or electrical engineering or anything.
As a result? I'm one of the best coders in my company because I can learn things fast, and with just a year's worth of experience I was already promoted to team leadership.
By the way, in most French engineering courses you have to take three practical work experience sessions: the first as bottom of the hierarchy worker (I spent a month moving car parts around and shipping them to various dealers), the second as technician (I worked four months implementing low-level memory access for a telecom equipment manufacturer, playing around with Unix system calls, that kind of thing), and the third as engineer (six months spent designing and implementing complete applications at my current company). That usually takes care of the "learning from experience" angle.
(I'm not advocating the French system, which I think is fundamentally flawed as based on competition, with a side effect that people good at maths will graduate as engineers when they don't necessarily -- and often don't -- have any practical skills. I merely advocate the "let's not specialize; engineers will change jobs and job descriptions a lot, so teaching them to learn and adapt is more important than teaching them specialist knowledge" philosophy).
I second that. I was a total geek in university.
Now I wish I had spent less time studying and coding, and more time Networking and developing "people skills".
It's obvious in hindsight - there's nothing more valuable than other people.
I have been at three different universities. All three of these universities have had a career and internship office that teaches and or critiques: resumes, researching companies (including having local resources to help with the research), interviewing, and networking.
There was not a class on this issue at any of the three instititions. Learning these skills was not a requirement. However, should one desire it and have the motivation, these resources are available. I personally feel that fewer requirements and more options should be available in one's education. (This doesn't mean one should have to work less... but should have more control over their education.)
Many universities offer co-op programs where you take work terms for which you have to write resumes, read and apply to job postings, get through interviews and get hired. At the university of waterloo, it takes 5 years to do a co-op undergrad, and you get no summers off... each term is either a school term or a work term. At the end of the program you have 2 full years of work experience from 6 4-month terms.
This provides a nice counterpoint to what is learned on campus. It is more practical than theoretical and provides some of the training that a normal graduate would get from an entry-level position. It gives you a chance to apply some of the theoretical knowledge from classes in the real world.
Check out the co-op [uwaterloo.ca] program at Waterloo [uwaterloo.ca] for what you're looking for. All Engineering students and lots of other faculties are in the co-op program, it's what was a driving force behind the startup of the school. Real work experience, resume writing, more interviews than you could imagine.... You get lots of experience in potentially lots of areas (depending on your program and what you want to try out). There are six four-month terms in the typical co-op program degree, so you get lots of exposure. The real upside is that you get your 'training' and 'technical skills' through work, and leave the theory and design and the real school stuff to Universty classes. It's great, and it pays the bills. Can't say enough good about it.
WARNING TO ALL PERSONNEL:
Firings will continue until morale improves.
A course that I wish had been available (Score:4, Interesting)
Universities could do a lot to help new graduates entering the workforce. Since jobs today are far from employment for life, those skills would prove useful a number of times.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:3, Informative)
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:2, Insightful)
Or...
* You can be right, or you can be rich.
(Humility 101)
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
I think that you would probably find that most (if not all) universities do offer these services, just not as classes. Where I go to school we have a Career Services department which does exactly the things you outlined. They have luncheons/breakfasts with potential employers and network, they have tutorials on what employers are looking for in resumes and interviews. In fact they even have a service where they set up mock interviews for you and give you feedback on your performance.
Notwithstanding that, there tend to be other things on campus (and off) as well. I'm heavily involved in the computer club at my school [yorku.ca] and we have speakers who talk about almost all the things you mention within the context of computers and IT. I'm also involved with the the Canadian Undergraduate Technology Conference [www.cutc.ca], which assuming you're a canuck and in a CS-like program, would be great for you too. On their schedule they have a job fair for attendees, they have seminars with people in industry where you can actually speak with them afterwards and a bunch of other things. I highly recommend people in university check out these sorts of things. Thus far a bunch of my friends have scored jobs directly through that conference.
In the end, you really do have to do this stuff yourself.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:5, Insightful)
The point is that a University is an institution of higher learning, not a job training center. Their goal is to impart knowledge and expand the scope of knowledge, not to get you a particular job. The former role is of course their historical origin, and, I think is very worthwhile, because it is that attitude that continues expansion of knowledge in many fields.
This especially applies to fields that are not terribly marketable, such as some of the humanities, arts, and pure math and science. While these may not be cash cows directly, their developement does lead eventually to innovation with commercial or political application, or enrichment of the culture as a whole. I think these are very worthwhile, even essential goals that must be maintained. Many people at Universities these days (both students and faculty) want to turn them into vocational school. While I think the school definitely has to provided guidence to resources, it is wrong to pervert an institution of higher learning into a job training center.
I think there's certainly nothing wrong with wanting an education that just trains you for a job. There are certainly places for that, places more like DeVry or Strayer, so you might look into something like that and/or interships.
Finally, I think that they don't teach all the neccessarry skills for an entry level position also as a pragmatic matter. They simply can't. The variety of requirements for different jobs are too large or it requires an amount or kind of experience (say coding a major project), that they can't provide in the limited setting of classes. I think they feel that they can't teach you the specifics, so the best solution is to teach you the things that will allow you to learn the skills you will need, and integrate them into a coherent framework.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:2, Insightful)
Studying many things does NOT make one ignorant of all of them (as the lead stories writer so erroneously pointed out) it makes one well informed and gives one a broad bas from which he can draw knowlege and expand in many directions. A person who is trained in one thing only will not be able to synthesize information from many sources, will not be able to branch out and will be continually trapped into whatever their "practical" education gave them. Furthermore, it isn't as if there is no specialization in college....did the original writer graduate, I wonder?....once one declares his major, that becomes his focus. In the first two years I was "well rounded" taking foreing language, history, english, astronomy, psychology, chemical biology among other things. I declared as a history major and that become my primary (though not singular) focus.
A University education is meant to make one EDUCATED! The purpose is not to make one a great job candidate. To elevate the human race as a whole, and rescue our culture from the gutter, it is neccessary for each one of us to become as enlightened and educated about as many subjects as possible while maintaining a core sbject we are excellent in. For those who want practicality to come from their after-high-school education:
Get your second rate education at Devry and shut the fuck up.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
Earning more money than someone with a not too usefull liberal arts degree is the result of a second rate education?
Hrmm...
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that you miss two important points. First, as valuable as a modern education is to somebody who learns from it, not everyone has the intelligence or personality to benefit from it. Having an alternative system so that people who don't fit in to the modern educational system are able to learn something and become productive members of society is very valuable. Second, that system still does exist and is actually quite strong still. Vocational education and even straight apprenticeship programs still exist; many union jobs, for instance, follow more that approach more or less closely. Also, much as it pains me to point it out, graduate school is much, much closer to a traditional apprenticeship program than most academics are willing to admit.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
You don't have to be terribly bright to get a lot out of a comparative religion or Western history class, if you're interested in the material. I think that if every American had taken courses like these, we would be in a much better political position for responding to the September 11th attacks. As things stand now, people who don't know Islam from Buddhism are writing their conresspeople to voice their support for bombing "that one country I can't seem to find on the map. Aftaliban, I think they called it."
I'd be interested in some clarification on the last comment. It's plausible, but I think that there are some fundamental differences. For example, since the instructor of a graduate can assume something about their students' prior education, they can use analogies and explanations that could never be used on an apprentice (and since the instructor went through a similar education, she should have such analogies available).
When it comes right down to it, education is about making connections. If you don't have a broad overview of things before starting your "real" education, you'll have no way to hook between the things you're learning for job X and anything outside that specialized function. You'll know certain things very well, but you'll often end up very lost when asked to move beyond what you already know.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:2)
I don't mean that in an elitist sense of "some people aren't worth educating". If anything I'm trying to say the exact opposite- that everyone is worth educating. Some people observably do a poor job of learning under our current mainstream education system. The current system is designed to suit people at about the 5th percentile and above, and a lot of people below that level have trouble picking up the material. Some other people simply have trouble working in a traditional academic setting, get bored with classes that are "dumbed down" so that the 5th percentile people can get them, have different styles of learning, or the like. Rather than abandon those people as unteachable, we need to have alternative educations available for them to try to teach them in a way that will help them to become as productive in society as the people who are well served by the current mainstream system.
But that last bit is really the kicker. Not everyone is interested in that material, and trying to shove it down those people's throats is doomed to failure. There are none so unteachable as those who will not learn. Now some of that can be cured through good teaching- good teachers can find a way to make material relevant to their audience- but not everyone is going to be persuaded to care. It's sad but observably true.
Perhaps I should clarify that my thoughts were focused primarily on PhD programs, where I'm more confident that the comment is correct. Most PhD programs have comparatively light academic requirements; after their first couple of years most PhD students aren't even required to take any classes. Instead (and much like an apprenticeship program) the emphasis is on gaining experience in job skills. For PhDs these include performing research, writing papers, teaching undergraduates, and the like, but they're learned informally through hands-on practice and personal instruction by more experienced people in the field. They're not taught in an academic instructional setting. This shouldn't be terribly surprising, as our college system grew directly out of the Guild system.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
I just finished a 4 month work term (summer job) for the federal government at a federal prison... in short.. it was probably one of the most difficult jobs i have ever had to do... and as far as i'm concerned... will ever have to do.. but I think my university education prepared me for the most unusual environment i had to enter... university taught me how to think about things that werent in the textbook. you'd be surprised how much getting up in front of your class to analyze nova scotia's fiscal budget, then learning about the different native tribes prepares you for. The two things that got me through 'my prison time' were communication skills, and constant decision making. (thank you management classes
universities have a purpose and vocational schools (private or public) also have a purpose.
Disclaimer: i am canadian
here, you can take a 2 year certificate program at a college, or attend a vocational school for specific skills and a lot of people do... it's quick.. and you learn a lot about a little. You come out, and you're set to enter the workforce in your chosen industry.
If you go to university, be prepared to learn a little about A LOT. Universities have a lot of history to them... and they are diffrent institutions... they really are higher learning, and they are also not for everyone.
I think you are right that a lot of people these days want to turn uni's into vocational schools.. but that is not what they are or should be. we have very strict general liberal education requirements for every degree program at my uni and that may be the only thing that prevents it.
these kind of requirements encourage literacy, oral expression, critical thinking, problem solving, sense of historical conciousness, and a grasp about what the sciences tell us about the world... this kind of depth of knowledge is only taught at universities, and as far as i'm concerned... will ever be. It has made me much more mature than i was only a few years ago.
I have no idea what i'm going to do when i have my degree in my hand... but i do know that i can enter almost any industry that i want to... and i'm as "well-rounded" as they get (i'm one of those who has changed my major 3 times)
no troll intended... but I really do think that university graduates, degree holders... are much smarter people than those that aren't.. but NOT more important. We need rocket scientists at nasa.. but we also need people to package the food they're taking to the moon with them. they're also a lot more pretentious, but they've been forced to think in different ways that no other educational institute could make you do... and thats what makes degree holders "well-rounded". The whole "think outside the box" thing is nothing new... you cant survive university without doing it.
I too have issues with my school... I think they're doing an excellent job with technology (that's available to us) but not necessarily with teaching us different ways of doing things with the technology available to us (it's alot easier to just buy all the microsoft licenses and teach that)
university education is very essential to our society... we need people to build bridges, represent us in governemnt, and play with bacteria all day to make sure we can still drink the water. we also need people to climb up electrical poles and turn our power back on after a storm... and frankly.. i'm glad those ppl know a lot about a little rather than a little about a lot. A well rounded education IS a good one.. it might just not be your destiny.
The 1950s idea of a college education (Score:2, Interesting)
The discussion came to programming and he passed out an article from some respected magazine about programmers coming from different liberal arts backgrounds. He then proceeded to ask the class what do you expect out of a college education. I raised my hand and told the 130+ in the class that I expected to be trained to get a really good job and everything over that was gravy. Startled by my commentary he began to relate the virtues of getting a college education and I agreed with him except for one point.
The whole idea of college 50 years ago was to expand your horizons and try different things, maybe even as little as 25 years ago actually. Now, try to get a professional job outside of sales without a college education; it can't be done. To me it has become another requirement of a job. My grandfather never finished high school and was the manager of a number of Levins stores starting in 1955. You can't get a job managing a McDonald's without a college education anymore.
So excuse while I burst everyone's bubble about well-roundness. I think there is something for being well versed in other cultures, knowing whats going in the world, the ability to speak and write well, and knowing how to manage others. However, well-roundness is just another word for employable so don't use it to cram classes that dont contribute to that goal into my schedule (not mine specifically because I'm graduated: metaphorical my schedule =) )
Re:The 1950s idea of a college education (Score:1)
I think you could probably get a job managing a McDonald's without a college education - it'd just require that you "work your way up", probably much like your grandfather did. What it basically comes down to is you have to prove your competence somehow - whether that be by completing college ('if they could do that for four years, they must be responsible') or by proving your responsibility day after day (and of course after you do it at one place, other people will believe you can do it based upon past performance).
Although I can't say that this is necessarily true for McDonald's, I have certianly seen it happen at other places (mainly pizza places, where I've worked at many of throughout high school and college).
Bad example (Score:1)
and that they did not come from an upper class background. They knew that this was a special opportunity, and they were intent on taking advantage of it. The idea of college was emphatically not to "expand your horizons" for these men.
From the beginning of the 20th century until this time, college was primarily a place for rich young men to play football and join fraternities until they were old enough to take the position their fathers had set up for them. There was no pretense of well-roundedness from either the faculty or students in this environment either, although many of the faculty didn't really care for their students, except for the rare few who were "grinds", that went to class and actually studied.
Before this, college was more about learning Latin and Greek than anything else, on the theory that learning hard languages improved memory.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think the origin of the "well-rounded" student was probably from the 1960's or 1970's. In any event, I'm pretty sure the 1950's image you present is wrong. If you're interested you may want to try this link [socsci.kun.nl].
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:2)
I fully agree with you. I was not trying to turn universities into something they are not and should not become. However, presumably when one earns a degree, one intends to do something with it. That something is often to apply it in the workplace. Other alternatives include graduate school and research in an academic setting.
I got what I considered to be an excellent education from a top engineering school. I don't use most of the tools and programming languages that I learned then any more, nor would I expect to after more than a decade. But I use a considerable amount of the theory that I learned.
Let me restate what I wish I had had available. I wish I could have taken a single, elective course to learn a few of the job hunting skills that I have had to pick up elsewhere over the years. I believe our career center had some seminars that fit this need, but they were not well advertised.
mission of a University (Score:2)
They'd be much better off if they just knew Latin, Greek, arithmetic and the classics. Then at least they'd equal schoolboys of 100 years ago. Four years of mental laziness at that critical age, however, permanently harms the mind.
Re:mission of a University (Score:1)
I agree with this poster's belief that there's very little intellectual rigor outside of the science classes. Perhaps in history, where students have to be study subjects in depth and defend their conclusions. But I could list any number of majors that I could have simply slept through.
But that's what students are asking for: a dumbed down curriculum. Too often, when it came time to fill out teacher evaluations, the main sentiment was, "He grades too tough," or "blah blah blah. . . How can she expect us to know THAT?"
I am aware that some Slashdot readers have defied the odds and managed to breed. To those individuals, I implore you to raise your kids not to expect things to come easy. Show them that learning is worthwhile. Don't let them think that education should always be as easy as watching Sesame Street. And above all, get them to ask questions by answering the ones they do have as well as you can.
(Note: If your kid already has a poster of Stephen Jay Gould on their bedroom wall instead of Ricky Martin, you may have gone a bit overboard.)
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:2)
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
However, I know many who were never taught the fine art of finding a job.
I think an additional topic that would be of great benefit to highlight would be "How to negotiate your total offer package (i.e. salary, benefits, stock options, joy ride in the company lear jet, etc)" or something to that affect.
But then, I suppose, folks like me, who are studying for their M.B.A. would have to take classes on, "tips and tricks to counter-offer everyone who took RealWorld 101 when they were a freshman."
It's called "Professional Development". (Score:4, Interesting)
A class is basically an expensive cliff's notes for something you're going to need in real life. There's no better way to pick it up than hands-on experience, and no - repeat- NO- class can do that for you. Let me address these proposed course points of yours from my personal experience:
Resume Writing: the ProDev class sucked for this, being incredibly basic. How did I get a decent resume? Simple- when work was slowing down at my current job, my boss told me "make up your resume and let me see it." So I did. He shot down about half of it and suggested changes. I made them. Repeat until he was happy with it- THEN he told me to run it by the assistant chair of Education, who has a Masters in English. He had a few suggestions. By the time I passed the gauntlet, my Resume rocked the casbah.
Researching Companies and Potential Employers: I've never had to do this, actually- it's been calls out of the blue, or emails from friends saying "hey, this guy's looking for...." since day one. This is a good thing- I live in Pittsburgh, and none of the local companies look like anything I'd want to work for. I'm happy where I'm at.
Interviewing Skills: This is the essence of social engineering. If you don't convince the interviewer that you're a guy who not only does the job well, but can get along with him, you should be fine. If you click, you're almost guranteed in. If you're not laid back and congenial, and don't have some social skills, forget it. I have friends that are a hell of a lot better at various aspects of what I do, but they couldn't talk a rock into sitting still.
Networking: What it ALL boils down to. No one ever got a job without knowing somebody- unless the case is 100% pure "we need somebody NOW." Case in point- my first supervisor at my job was a guy like that. I got in because he knew me. My next supervisor got in because he knew him (both of these guys left), and a future coworker is getting in by virtue of strong recommendations from myself and my last supervisor. That's three people getting jobs because they knew one guy that was in the right place at the right time.
I was barely competent when I got in- I was the only guy this person knew - and that everyone he asked knew- who could do the job. I picked up the details as I went along, and forget nascent capabilities into actual skills. Having friends in good places can only get you so far- your actual skills are going to carry you the rest of the way. So it's not enough to have a lot of friends OR be amazingly good at what you're doing- you gotta have BOTH, or you're going to be having a hell of a time of it.
That's my experience- which I'm slowly melding into a collection of essays with intent to stick on a website when I have enough of them.
If you have questions, replace AT with @ and ask away.
Re:It's called "Professional Development". (Score:1)
I passed it through social engineering.
Looks like you learned the material too.
It was two classes in one. (Score:2)
THAT was where social engineering came in. The instructor considered my photoshop work to be the strongest in the class and actually used it as an example several times. But at that point in time, my flat work (drawings) sucked ass. If I hadn't greased the rails- if the instructor had been a complete and total hardass instead of an ally- I would have failed the class on the merit of my flat drawing skills.
Which makes you wonder why they slammed two marginally related classes together and had the entire grade structure hinge on one of them, but that's something I prefer not to think about.
Re:It's called "Professional Development". (Score:1)
Find a way to make a personal connection with them, and have them "on-sides" when the going gets thick. They'll be motivated to work to keep the connection going. Loyalty, that kind of thing.
It works and it's something a lot of young kids haven't mastered right out of school.
It's another question what kind of program could enhance learning these skills. Assigning group projects is one attempt to sneak this skill set into the learning process. Not many classes have lectures on "How to win friends and influence people" (thank you Dale Carnegie) but you need to learn it somewhere.
On the broader issue of what courses to include in a broad education, I've seen some persuasive arguments that humanities classes help kids come to understand how people function in communities including the business world. Novels or plays about loyalty, betrayal, revenge and so on start to look pretty relevant indeed when you see business as an aspect of the human experience - one place where all those psychological forces are at work.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree with the other poster who said that university is not a trade school. But at the same time, there should be some assistance with making the transition from the academic to the working world.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:2)
As far as researching companies as potential employers, I would think this would fall under general research skills and the ability to question. I want people around me who have these abilities and apply them to every aspect of their lives, not just in the job search. While they are on the job, they should research and question everything they are involved with to make their tasks the most complete they can and ask as many questions of the process as they can. Hopefully they also do these things in their daily life to make them more complete and successful individuals. These people make better employees. Take classes in a variety of disciplines and take the harder courses rather than focusing on the easier ones. Also, take some basic science courses even if you are a business or art major. Your grades may not be as high in the end, but if you work hard and learn, the grades should not matter as much. The issue of grade inflation is another topic entirely that perhaps Slashdot should cover.
As far as interviewing skills, this also falls under communication abilities. For those that are well rounded, they can navigate through a wider variety of topics even if they do not have direct knowledge of a particular topic. They are able to draw upon resources from other experiences and exposures and apply them to the discussion. These people interview more successfully and their background shows. One of the best employee interviews I ever gave consisted of almost entirely a discussion of punk rock and how it related to politics and the socioeconomic climiate of the late 70's and 80's. We only discussed the details of the job in the last fifteen minutes and she turned out to be an awesome employee who unfortunately lasted only a year before going back to graduate school, but we were all better for her time in the job position.
Networking also falls under the well-rounded bit, but they have to have the networking skills in addition to a strong work ethic. I will not have charismatic folks hanging around that do not get any work done. Unfortunately, hiring these folks can be a bit tricky as one has to sift through the personality and get to what they can and do actually have the capacity to achieve.
As for myself, yes, I wish I had gone to a small liberal arts university someplace rather than fighting through the core science curriculum where I attended. The science can always come later, but often, getting a well rounded education starts at the undergraduate level (actually earlier, but deficiencies are best made up in university or college). I try to encourage even those who tell me they want to go into science or medicine to get a well rounded education and work in a science lab or medical arena part time on the side to find out if they really want it.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:2)
Funny, I'm currently employed (sys admin, web backend programming) now, but previous school tried to require me to take a course on "job search strategies". My last job? Lead linux admin for that college. So, I've gotten 2 jobs while attending that school, yet they maintain that I still need to be trained in job searchng. Eh, they also require that I take a course in "Network administration" that's taught in a lab that I maintained for a year and a half.
Almost all of higher education exists to show you how to think and solve problems. Given the ineptitude of several instructors, you're also presented with the oppertunity to work for people as clueless about your field as your future managers are likely to be. ;) You rarely are presented with problems - and even more rarely, solutions - that you'll encounter in practice. Just learn how to solve problems and try to remember some basic skills, let experience get you the rest.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
I took a great class called MGMT 424, Interpersonal relations in organizations. This class taught you how to deal with interoffice politics, how to deal with irate customers and employees. How to network and how to express your opinions without rubbing off the wrong way. Overall, I feel it was the most useful class I had in college.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
Note that it's engineering taken globally -- not software engineering (though I did a compulsory optional semester in computer science) or mechanical engineering or electrical engineering or anything.
As a result? I'm one of the best coders in my company because I can learn things fast, and with just a year's worth of experience I was already promoted to team leadership.
By the way, in most French engineering courses you have to take three practical work experience sessions: the first as bottom of the hierarchy worker (I spent a month moving car parts around and shipping them to various dealers), the second as technician (I worked four months implementing low-level memory access for a telecom equipment manufacturer, playing around with Unix system calls, that kind of thing), and the third as engineer (six months spent designing and implementing complete applications at my current company). That usually takes care of the "learning from experience" angle.
(I'm not advocating the French system, which I think is fundamentally flawed as based on competition, with a side effect that people good at maths will graduate as engineers when they don't necessarily -- and often don't -- have any practical skills. I merely advocate the "let's not specialize; engineers will change jobs and job descriptions a lot, so teaching them to learn and adapt is more important than teaching them specialist knowledge" philosophy).
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:2)
Now I wish I had spent less time studying and coding, and more time Networking and developing "people skills".
It's obvious in hindsight - there's nothing more valuable than other people.
Re:A course that I wish had been available (Score:1)
There was not a class on this issue at any of the three instititions. Learning these skills was not a requirement. However, should one desire it and have the motivation, these resources are available. I personally feel that fewer requirements and more options should be available in one's education. (This doesn't mean one should have to work less... but should have more control over their education.)
Co-op programs (Score:2)
This provides a nice counterpoint to what is learned on campus. It is more practical than theoretical and provides some of the training that a normal graduate would get from an entry-level position. It gives you a chance to apply some of the theoretical knowledge from classes in the real world.
Look into co-op (Score:1)