One thing to bear in mind is that university success depends more on being compliant to authority than intelligence, at least until you get to the grad school level, and maybe then too.
Doing coursework and showing up for class, is not 'compliance to authority' - it's just the process - and fyi voluntarily chosen by the student in most cases.
In most schools you don't even have to show up or do much frankly, you can just 'write the final' if you think you're a genius.
The workload in most programs surpasses the ability of 'just smart' folks to wing it, and so grades are definitely a measure of conscientiousness behaviour in the student as well as intelligence.
After 20 years of hiring I will take the 'good grades, reasonably bright' student, who was diligent and conscientious over the possibly genius person who didn't do much. 95% of even eng. work requires diligence, competence, focus, the ability to work with others, assumption of responsibility and a hint of leadership. I've never once seen a 'genius move' in my entire career where the totally brilliant dude made the difference. Maybe in some highly specific R&D things, but that's rare.
I should add: that 'someone is good at University' doesn't make them a better person, it doesn't make the more creative, moral, more suited to a whole host of things, it doesn't mean they're geniuses etc. etc.. It mostly just means they are 'good at University'. Which might happen to be a good benchmark for 'good at being a white collar employee'.
Though college is not for everyone, it's objectively not a 'sheeple producing scam', and 'most people' know that. You're entitled to your opinion, surely, but I don't think you speak for the masses on that one.
If you think you're such a hot shot that you don't need the assignments or the midterm to prepare you, they'll usually let you write and count the final alone towards 90% of your grade. Good luck, though.
Anecdotal: I am constantly on the verge of failing classes because to me it's really difficult to attend class, and because many points are assigned to the busywork that is attending class, I lose them, at this point it's a ritual where the (often really bad) teachers pretend to impart knowledge for two hours just to earn their wage. I easily perform way above other classmates when it comes to big projects and tests, of course I have to make up for my grade, but it's bullshit that I am "on the verge of failing" when I demonstrate great understanding and knowledge of the class material. Why is this bullshit? Because I am paying to be taught pertinent information, not to be put on trial for how much busy work I can put up with. But this can be explained because universities are not primarily interested in benefiting the students, their primary interest is on working as a gatekeeper for employers who (the majority) care a great deal about obedience above smart work.
There's extremely few professors good enough to truly warrant 2 hours of focus per class, yet many of them feel literally offended if students don't show up for class, it's a crooked system.
> In most schools you don't even have to show up or do much frankly, you can just 'write the final' if you think you're a genius.
my experience has been the absolute contrary.
This certainly seems to be the case. You write:
> universities are not primarily interested in benefiting the students, their primary interest is on working as a gatekeeper for employers
But my experience was of a university that only cared about getting graduates employed to the extent that league tables included this statistic. What they really wanted was to trade people towards being academics (and would sometimes look with disdain upon capable students leaving to be paid well in industry instead of heading for academia).
My grade was based almost entirely on end of year exams with a token amount of assessed coursework (which was, like the exams, not specific to any course). So one did not need to attend lectures (and many did not, especially if the lecturer were bad or the student hungover). Doing homework was only enforced by the social pressure of not wanting to admit to not having done it, although if you didn’t do any then you might be punished (eg made to wait a year before returning) even if you do ok in exams.
Granted I went to university in the U.K. and other universities or the American system might be different (eg I understand American universities grade classes individually and if one signs up for a class, one will get a grade; whereas we did not have that and so one could attempt difficult classes that might not be taken to exams).
I only went to university a few years ago so I suppose this is a counter anecdote to your anecdote. Also if you really so above your peers and bored of your teachers then you should find some harder classes and some teachers whom you want to talk to. And maybe find some relevant university person to talk to about your difficulty attending class (although they mightn’t be much help)
Very interesting
>if you didn’t do any then you might be punished (eg made to wait a year before returning) even if you do ok in exams.
These are the rules I do not understand and find counterproductive, but your uni seems much more lax.
>you should find some harder classes
I have done this already.
>although they mightn’t be much help
Thanks for trying to help, but you are right, nothing would change, I am almost done with Uni so I'm about to put it behind, but I feel entitled to criticizing how inefficient it is, when a math class has 3 tests during the course of 4 months and they can be passed by studying for 4 days before each test without attending class, then it feels too silly and wasteful to me, but I have no choice but to put up with it.
There are basically ZERO jobs that don't involve mostly grinding.
Even the most creative jobs - like author, painter, composer, athlete - do you realize they are just as much of a 'grind'? Authors wake up at 7 am, sit down and force themselves to bang out 1000 words a day - often if they don't, there's no book. Do you think it's enjoyable every day? No - it's work.
Bach wrote a piece for almost every day of his life. Quincy Jones spent all day every day for decades arranging and arranging music. You don't think he found that tedious quite often?
Professional composers will tell younger aspirational composers that they need to learn to work quickly and bang stuff out, or it's not going to work.
Do you think pro baseball players, who play a game every day for 3/4 of a year, for 20 years straight are 'in the zone' every day? Or maybe it's a grind for them as well?
That said, your lack of motivation might flip when you start working and you can see the material impact of what you call 'tedious work'.
Uni work assignments are not busywork, and I suggest strongly that if you're not doing most of the work, that you're not getting the most out of the experience. Those assignments help you internalize the knowledge in a better way than otherwise. And your professors may seem bored but hey, they have more interesting things to do like their own research. 'Teaching' is a secondary function of Profs. Many of them hate it.
If you are there simply to 'ascertain some knowledge' then maybe you should do an online U, or skip Uni and just read some texts. I'd advise against it.
Your perspective will change as you enter the workforce, have a career for some period, do a lot of hiring, and especially get exposed to Uni recruitment.
I would advise any University student (even my younger self) that if they enjoy the subject material at all, or if they have any affinity for it ... then 'that's as good as it gets' and to just do the work and move through it. You will get a lot out of it, and be a better person for it ... it may not seem like it right now, but it will with hindsight.
It's funny you mention teachers being bored because perhaps the problem is that teaching is done wrong, it's funny you also mention "maybe you should do an online U, or skip Uni and just read some texts", because that's exactly what I would do if wasn't so risky to trust that someone out there will take a chance hiring me without going through the systematic gatekeeping, with online Us there's an issue of finding reputable ones (at least georgia tech has an online MS program now, might give that a try at some point).
Here's the huge difference between grinding at work and grinding at school, at work you get paid for it, at school you are being made to grind because someone else thinks that's the best way for you to learn, it feels infantile, teachers should only be there to answer and clarify questions, and the material should all be written. Also there's a difference between grinding because you know it helps you develop the skills you need/desire, let alone money, and grinding because some jackass doesn't know how to teach and assess knowledge.
It's also not about being in the zone every day, people can be "in the zone" perhaps a few hours per day, being generous, there's a whole discussion to be had about productivity in knowledge workers in relation to hours spent working in a day, there's a point where more hours doesn't correlate with more productivity, but anyway, I guess if I'm going to sum up my reply shortly it'd be something like:
Not all work is equally exhausting, not all grinds are equally tedious, and not all grind is pointless tedium, busywork teaches obedience not knowledge.
I can recognize grinding is helpful, but I strongly believe university falls on the "extremely inefficient grind" end, and I feel entitled to criticizing it when it's supposed to be in service of the students.
That's not condesending that's reality.
Accept the fact people with considerably more experience at 'adulthood' will have developed more knowledge from that experience.
"I strongly believe university falls on the "extremely inefficient grind""
You have no way of comparing it to any facet of life if you're a regular university student.
If you haven't even had a real career job, then haven't the exposure to lots of other schools, haven't hired from all over, from all classes and walks of life, from many countries and witnessed the difference. Then you're going to have a hard time judging.
" at school you are being made to grind because someone else thinks that's the best way for you to learn"
Maybe you've worked as a waiter? Or unloading trucks? That's 'mindless grind'.
Solving problems, reading books, researching and writing essays is almost never a waste of time. It's an exceptionally good way to learn, and 'not being paid for it' is irrelevant. For example, the only way to learn to write well, is by actually writing. English and Software! I'm ashamed to say I graduated Engineering woefully inarticulate ... because I didn't respect language and the Liberal Arts. I do now, and I regret not paying more attention. Many of my peers share my regrets.
"grinding because some jackass doesn't know how to teach and assess knowledge."
Profs aren't necessarily supposed to be great teachers, they are lecturers. It's your job to get something from it. If the prof is lecturing decent content, if it even makes sense, if the course work is rational, then he's doing at least his job.
If you're calling your profs 'jackasses' already now ... you're going to have a long, hard life ahead of you.
Consider that your profs are probably pretty smart, and fairly knowledgeable and that teaching a bunch of ungrateful teenagers is probably not that rewarding for them, as they try to do their research.
You could always just drop out and be an instant billionaire, right? Or you could put your head down, do the work, try to learn something, have some fun, make a thing or two get some decent grades and move on and be a better human being for it.
You say, "I already know this stuff, can I just take the final?"
Uni says, "this is a required course for graduation, you must take it."
If you don't comply or push hard enough to make Uni comply with you, you don't graduate.
This is how I ended up learning all about System.out.println my final semester of university.
It's true that if you want credit for completing a major, then it is necessary for you to actually complete the major, but that still doesn't equate to graduating at or near the top of your class.
I completed all of the courses for the major, with the exception of CS101, introduction to computer programming. I took many classes that ostensibly had a prerequisite on CS101, including additional nonrequired courses that could have easily been substituted for CS101. Nonetheless, as you say, it was "necessary for [me] to actually complete the major" by going back after taking CS4xx to complete CS101. Was this a required part of the major? yes. Was it a valuable part to be required without exception? Maybe, but I tend to not think so.
> I don't see anything in your response about success
"Not graduating" is a pretty clear way in my mind to "not succeed." I indicated that compliance to authority in my experience was necessary for graduation, which implies that it was necessary for success, does it not?
> graduating at or near the top of your class
ok?
I don't quite agree with his overall conclusion that university education is pure compliance off of this one gripe though. Moreover, I do believe that many universities allow you to bypass certain module via a test / some other demonstration.
I don't think it is purely or even mostly based on compliance. I was responding to:
> How in the world does "being compliant to authority" contribute to university success
by indicating one way the compliance contributes to success.
You say, "I already know this stuff, can I just take the final?" Uni says, "Yes, you can test out of it and get credit for the class."
I was allowed to take the final for any class I wanted to and if I passed I would get the grade I got on the test. I thought this was pretty standard as I've seen it at multiple universities.
I had another really authoritarian teacher that insisted to follow the book by the letter. I got a 75% grade, I was sad I was aiming for 55% as a signal to say that he was a terrible authoritarian.
Clearly authoritarian teachers should be the former, not the latter. However, some of my classmates begged to differ the exact opposite.
Interestinglt enough, these are all true stories. I wish they were hypothetical.