This was a constant discussion when I was in school for mechanical engineering. How do you balance learning theory and learning how to apply that theory, given the limited amount of time available? It came down to a common gripe that we didn’t get enough time in the shop actually fabricating, and the refrained response was that we learn that stuff on the job.
My take was always that a strong theoretical understanding is what differentiates and engineering degree from a technical or trade degree that focuses more (or sometimes solely) on application and practical knowledge. In my mind, the ideal engineering degree focuses on the theory and provides just enough practical instruction to give you a starting point to begin applying what you’ve learned. I’m open to discussion on that though.
> I am an engineer, with a PhD in physics. The theory had exactly zero use as soon as I quit academia.
Counter-example: I have a M.Sc in CS, with a specialization in programming languages. I know how to build a compiler, and it helps me almost every day. I’m not building a compiler every day, but the things I’ve learnt from compilers influence every piece of code I write. I can better optimize my code knowing how it’ll be compiled/interpreted by the machine.
In fact, I spent a lot of time at the university complaining I was learning useless stuff. Nowadays I’m super-grateful to my teachers for providing me all that knowledge I use every day, even if it’s not a direct application.
My take was always that a strong theoretical understanding is what differentiates and engineering degree from a technical or trade degree that focuses more (or sometimes solely) on application and practical knowledge. In my mind, the ideal engineering degree focuses on the theory and provides just enough practical instruction to give you a starting point to begin applying what you’ve learned. I’m open to discussion on that though.