From: invalid@invalid.invalid   
      
   "Don Y"  wrote in message news:10g8   
   27$rbt3$1@dont-email.me...   
   > On 11/26/2025 3:10 PM, Edward Rawde wrote:   
   >> To a large extent it depends on the enthusiasm of the student and the   
   quality of the teacher.   
   >   
   > I think the bigger problem is the ego and (type of) involvement of the   
   > parent(s).  I've spoken with many teachers who claim they are afraid to   
   > grade their students based on merit -- the parents raise holy hell   
   > if THEIR kid isn't an "A" student.   
   >   
   > [Not unexpected in light of the prevalence of helicopter parents -- did YOUR   
   > parents ever attend a job interview with you??]   
      
   I would have been horrified if my parents had ever suggested that they should   
   attend a job interview with me.   
      
   >   
   > This instills a false sense of "competence" in the kid.  A neighbor's son is   
   > upset that he hasn't been PROMOTED after 6 months on the job... what the hell   
   > have you DONE in those 6 months that thinks you MERIT a promotion?   
      
   Hmm I probably was promoted after 6 months in my first job. That's partly   
   because   
   that's what the organization did with new graduates but it's also partly   
   because I could   
   use a soldering iron and do plenty of other things I wasn't taught on a degree   
   course.   
   From a coding point of view I could not only code (mostly in assembler) but I   
   had   
   already seen many examples of how to do things. So when I had to get an 8051 to   
   do 32-bit division and convert the result to decimal for a display it wasn't   
   too hard.   
      
   >   
   >> There's also a difference between what is taught and what is needed in a   
   workplace.   
   >> I could use a soldering iron when I got my degree, but most other graduates   
   couldn't.   
   >   
   > I disagree.  Skills are easy to pick up -- how long do you think it would   
   take   
   > to teach someone how to make a reliable solder joint?   
      
   As far as making a reliable solder joint is concerned I've seen many outcomes.   
   This is from prototype testing not production.   
   Here are some possible outcomes.   
      
   1. Perfect joint.   
      
   2. Perfect joint after being shown that keeping your wrist on the bench while   
   you   
   make the joint will keep your hand steady.   
      
   3. Good effort but here's how to remove grime and oxide film from the   
   resistor's   
   legs before you solder it.   
      
   4. Deliberately poor joint because "I shouldn't have to do this".   
      
   >   
   > What is needed in the workplace is the ability to LEARN.   
      
   Sure but if student's aren't learning during their college years then they are   
   likely   
   to think that that's how it will always be.   
      
   > Because only   
   > backwards looking businesses/industries worry about "today" as tomorrow will   
   > be here momentarily.  If your new hires are only good with today's skillsets,   
   > you'll be shit out of luck come tomorrow!   
   >   
   > Interviews (hiring processes) that rely on the applicant regurgitating some   
   > particular canned response are notoriously short sighted.   
      
   I remember being asked how I would add numbers together at 10 MHz.   
   After giving my answer the interviewer told me that most people would say   
   use a microprocessor. (Not possible with a cpu back then even if you could   
   clock the thing at 10 MHz.)   
      
   >   
   > We teach kids how to design algorithms using a completely bogus "programming   
   > language" that exists nowhere else.  A handful of "opcodes" (move l/r/f/b,   
   > probe, rotate 90/180/270, etc.) that a 10 year old can easily understand   
   > (no concerns about overflow, exceptions, cancellation, races, etc.).  And,   
   > to which he can PHYSICALLY relate.   
      
   Well you don't seem to be able to buy a simple SC/MP board and solder it   
   together yourself any more.   
      
   >   
   > "Solve the maze"   
   >   
   > The income level or socio-economic status of the student plays no role in how   
   > well they can perform.  Rather, assembling sequences of actions and LEARNING   
   > from their shortcomings is the route to success.   
   >   
   > [It is highly unlikely that they will even use said language in a job -- or,   
   > ever be called upon to solve a maze!  Yet, they have learned how to learn.]   
      
   Learn how to learn is fine but today's students do seem to have difficulty   
   solving   
   problems. Even when, these days,  the answer would be in their face if they   
   did a   
   bit of online research.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)