[claystu]

I don't see anything in your response about success.

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.

[esyir]

Eh, I do see his point though. I've been in a similar situation myself due to a transfer once in the past where, due to university requirements, I had to take a module that I was uh, "overqualified" for to fulfill major requirements.

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.

[twtw]

> pure compliance off of this one gripe though

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.

[twtw]

perhaps I wasn't clear.

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?