[wenc]

So I have something of a different experience, not exactly with DePaul or U of C students per se, but let's say, A and B respectively, where A=practical and B=theoretical.

A or B students could generally get the job done, but B students tend to be able to go deeper because of their greater theoretical horsepower. I could assign them tasks of greater difficulty and they will figure it out on their own and deliver.

If the organization only requires A-level talent, then let's be honest, there's no difference between A or B students. The majority of enterprises out there really only require A-level talent.

But if your organization has the kind of challenges that require B-level talent (a minority of organizations, to be sure), I think you might struggle with A-level talent. I faced this first hand when I learned that I couldn't scale because I was limited with the A-level talent that I had and was spending an inordinate amount of my time training and guiding them that I barely had time to do my work.

In general you are correct, but in some very specific situations, my experience has been there's value in identifying the right kind of talent that fits the problems you are trying to solve.