Once again about education, theory and practice ...
Here a lot is written about the poor quality of Russian education and indicate this as the main reason for the lack of professionals. You can agree, you can not - but I don’t see a direct connection between education and professionalism.
I can’t stay away and therefore try to clarify the position.
School and university are not intended to train superprofessionals in any field. This is not their task. They provide the fundamental knowledge necessary for human life and general development. They should at least learn to work with information, analyze it, be able to use the acquired knowledge in a complex. It’s impossible to train normal programmers in an ordinary school - for someone who wants to become an economist has enough knowledge of the fundamentals of programming (to understand how a normal person needs what it is), for a programmer it’s enough to know the fundamentals of economics, etc. - why too much? Even the same future programmer, in principle, within the framework of the program, is enough to know the basics of programming in different languages. Enough and NEED to know! If a certain area is of interest (and it’s just the teacher’s task to competently interest it), someone who wants to become a professional in this field will further study this area on his own — for the rest of his life. Do not be proud that you have mastered something yourself - this is the norm. No one will and should not forcibly push into a person what is not interesting to him. After all, people who become gurus in their field, and those who cannot explain who he studied for these five years - and where does the university and teachers come out of the same university?
At school and at the university, I also thought that teachers fill their heads with all kinds of nonsense not related to their specialty - but strangely enough, now I see this as an advantage of Russian education. A person should approach the problem comprehensively, and this is possible only if there is knowledge from various fields. You can be proud that you have learned some kind of programming language perfectly, and not be able to correctly write content for the site, not be able to submit it, and just not be able to maintain a civilized conversation - and then complain that one of the colleagues with a high school is earning more (because they hire a person, not a PC - even a powerful J).
There are of course exceptions, but they rather confirm the rule.
Thus, the school / university should give a fundamental foundation, the theory of everything and develop the desire for self-education. The knowledge of teachers in most cases is enough for this (it is even possible that you know more than a teacher in some narrow field). But the practice must be developed exclusively independently. Practitioners should help and organize this process. At school, we can talk about electives, at the university about seminars (by the way, is there such a concept of J?). Many complain that students and schoolchildren do not know anything practical - but what prevents you from going to the same school or university in your free time and conducting a practical elective / seminar? If there are such cool specialists as follows from the posts, they will surely be happy to accept such a proposal. This will allow you to confirm to yourself and to everyone that the person is truly professional (especially if something good comes out of the wards). This is probably one of the most accurate criteria for determining professionalism - when your students say "I studied with ..." and not write how poorly we are taught. The rest is a thing in itself. In no case should this be considered as a waste of time - teaching at the university will allow practitioners to communicate with people, answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of the modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself. This is probably one of the most accurate criteria for determining professionalism - when your students say "I studied with ..." and not write how poorly we are taught. The rest is a thing in itself. In no case should this be considered as a waste of time - teaching at the university will allow practitioners to communicate with people, answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of the modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself. This is probably one of the most accurate criteria for determining professionalism - when your students say "I studied with ..." and not write how poorly we are taught. The rest is a thing in itself. In no case should this be considered as a waste of time - teaching at the university will allow practitioners to communicate with people, answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of the modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself. answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of a modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself. answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of a modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself.
The only question is whether there really are so many professional practitioners who can be allowed to teach someone else ....
Which practitioner is ready to go to teach? Which of you will be taught? What can you give students yourself? Will you be able to make sure that they do not write about you a month after your studies that they did not teach anything at the university? If you answered no to all of these questions or are in doubt - should the education that exists be so blasphemed? Where is it better and why?
In general, as always - who if not us? Change what you don’t like.
I can’t stay away and therefore try to clarify the position.
School and university are not intended to train superprofessionals in any field. This is not their task. They provide the fundamental knowledge necessary for human life and general development. They should at least learn to work with information, analyze it, be able to use the acquired knowledge in a complex. It’s impossible to train normal programmers in an ordinary school - for someone who wants to become an economist has enough knowledge of the fundamentals of programming (to understand how a normal person needs what it is), for a programmer it’s enough to know the fundamentals of economics, etc. - why too much? Even the same future programmer, in principle, within the framework of the program, is enough to know the basics of programming in different languages. Enough and NEED to know! If a certain area is of interest (and it’s just the teacher’s task to competently interest it), someone who wants to become a professional in this field will further study this area on his own — for the rest of his life. Do not be proud that you have mastered something yourself - this is the norm. No one will and should not forcibly push into a person what is not interesting to him. After all, people who become gurus in their field, and those who cannot explain who he studied for these five years - and where does the university and teachers come out of the same university?
At school and at the university, I also thought that teachers fill their heads with all kinds of nonsense not related to their specialty - but strangely enough, now I see this as an advantage of Russian education. A person should approach the problem comprehensively, and this is possible only if there is knowledge from various fields. You can be proud that you have learned some kind of programming language perfectly, and not be able to correctly write content for the site, not be able to submit it, and just not be able to maintain a civilized conversation - and then complain that one of the colleagues with a high school is earning more (because they hire a person, not a PC - even a powerful J).
There are of course exceptions, but they rather confirm the rule.
Thus, the school / university should give a fundamental foundation, the theory of everything and develop the desire for self-education. The knowledge of teachers in most cases is enough for this (it is even possible that you know more than a teacher in some narrow field). But the practice must be developed exclusively independently. Practitioners should help and organize this process. At school, we can talk about electives, at the university about seminars (by the way, is there such a concept of J?). Many complain that students and schoolchildren do not know anything practical - but what prevents you from going to the same school or university in your free time and conducting a practical elective / seminar? If there are such cool specialists as follows from the posts, they will surely be happy to accept such a proposal. This will allow you to confirm to yourself and to everyone that the person is truly professional (especially if something good comes out of the wards). This is probably one of the most accurate criteria for determining professionalism - when your students say "I studied with ..." and not write how poorly we are taught. The rest is a thing in itself. In no case should this be considered as a waste of time - teaching at the university will allow practitioners to communicate with people, answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of the modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself. This is probably one of the most accurate criteria for determining professionalism - when your students say "I studied with ..." and not write how poorly we are taught. The rest is a thing in itself. In no case should this be considered as a waste of time - teaching at the university will allow practitioners to communicate with people, answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of the modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself. This is probably one of the most accurate criteria for determining professionalism - when your students say "I studied with ..." and not write how poorly we are taught. The rest is a thing in itself. In no case should this be considered as a waste of time - teaching at the university will allow practitioners to communicate with people, answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of the modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself. answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of a modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself. answer questions and receive valuable information from the most active part of a modern audience, i.e. constantly learn yourself. In addition, direct work with future colleagues will allow you to select the most interesting personnel from the very beginning and prepare them for yourself.
The only question is whether there really are so many professional practitioners who can be allowed to teach someone else ....
Which practitioner is ready to go to teach? Which of you will be taught? What can you give students yourself? Will you be able to make sure that they do not write about you a month after your studies that they did not teach anything at the university? If you answered no to all of these questions or are in doubt - should the education that exists be so blasphemed? Where is it better and why?
In general, as always - who if not us? Change what you don’t like.