[pa7x1]

Top European universities provide pretty good education pre-PhD level, in many cases the first 3-5 years in European schools is superior and more focused than the equivalent US curriculum. The first 1 or 2 years in US universities seem spent filling the gaps left by a mediocre High School education.

US universities are then miles ahead of most European schools in their PhD programs bare a few exceptions (Oxford, Cambridge, ETH...).

[srtjstjsj]

US college isn't longer because it's remedial, it's because it has more out of major liberal arts required courses.

There are a lot of remedial classes at US colleges, but those students wouldn't be in college at all in Europe.

[7thaccount]

This is true. There are a lot of pointless liberal arts classes for a STEM degree in the US. For example, my engineering degree required 3 English classes, psychology, fine arts, and sociology. These were all incredibly easy and I found the course material was what I was used to as a freshman in highschool (no I'm not exaggerating). So those classes weren't even remedial, but felt like a joke. Please note that I'm not saying all liberal arts classes are a waste, but I think all the 101 classes are pretty bad. The fact that people were complaining and struggling to make a C was mind boggling. The university says they're there to make you well rounded, but we all know it's an excuse to charge more money. The human brain can only take so many technical courses at the same time as well, so it's not like I could cram in another mathematics or engineering course and stay sane. Instead of giving you a break and getting to use that time to study, you have to take the useless other classes which costs more money.

[ridaj]

> There are a lot of pointless liberal arts classes for a STEM degree in the US.

I understand, this was my outlook when I left school too, but I changed my mind about that.

It took me maybe 5 years of work experience before I realized that no matter how "technically" smart I was, my technical skills were worth shit if I couldn't communicate better with my teammates. My writing was poor, I couldn't explain myself concisely, I could get flustered when someone didn't understand a point that looked straightforward to me... I had no notion of how I might go about convincing someone to do something I needed, especially someone who wasn't working in the same field as me or didn't have the same educational background. Not saying I'm a rockstar at this either now, but at least I understand the benefits of well-roundedness in a way that I didn't see earlier in my career.

I also see this with some of my younger colleagues now, who seem to care about technical output and cranking out smart stuff, but they're having problems communicating or taking feedback, and it's really clamping their future professional opportunities until they work on that...

Anyway - I don't mean this to disclaim your experience of feeling like you were wasting your time, and maybe the classes weren't the right level for you, just pointing out that at least for some people in the tech field, lack of skills in the humanities dept eventually prevents their professional advancement, hence it's not necessarily a waste of time for everyone to take classes outside of their major even if they're studying in a STEM field...

[fiblye]

I think he means there are classes that really are pointless. They're basically adult babysitting.

I found quite a few interesting history/culture/etc classes and enrolled in them. They had no prerequisites, but offered engaging material. A week in I notice... these classes don't fulfill my general education requirements--only the most fundamental, non-challenging classes do.

So I switch from classes with 15-20 students that would've involved long discussions, some research, and actual thinking, into lectures of 150 students and only 3 multiple choice tests in the entire semester.

I went to every class. Never was I challenged. They were very much "here are facts. Memorize these for the tests" classes and nothing more. Very surface level stuff. Not even any questions from the professor, and oftentimes if students asked questions, the professors would tell them to ask later because they're short on time. Just a waste of time and money.

[7thaccount]

Yep, this is what I was getting at. Also, the test facts are part of a study guide literally telling you what is on the test and people still fail.

[7thaccount]

I've been out of school for a decade now and would agree that communication is vital. However, that isn't learned via English Literature, psychology, sociology, art history...etc. Public speaking, writing descriptive emails and so on require practice, literacy, and putting yourself in someone else's shoes. Something like Toastmasters in class form would've been nice.

[pathseeker]

None of what you identified are covered in these useless classes. In my undergrad we had a sociology course that when over how people have different roles in life (family head, care giver, money maker, etc). It was all stupid obvious stuff without any non-technical merit.

If only those mandatory liberal arts classes taught things as useful as communicating and writing...

[hakfoo]

The one that got under my craw was when I went to see an academic advisor with one or two semesters left.

I had been fastidious about covering all the specified requirements, and my proposed course-load covered the remainder. Except apparently you needed 128 total hours, and actually covering the requirements of the programme left you six short. They designed the timetable assuming that people would bounce between majors or otherwise load up on go-nowhere electives, and the advisor basically said I could take underwater basket weaving and it would count for the gap.

I ended up taking a CLEP exam a few weeks later to claim the equivalent credits of several semesters worth of Spanish classes.

[dragonwriter]

> There are a lot of pointless liberal arts classes for a STEM degree in the US

Only in a liberal arts program. In an engineering program, there is almost none. Other programs may fall in between. When I was at UC Davis (which was before Biological Sciences was its own college), the non-major liberal arts course load went (both in general, and where multiple colleges had the same degree program, between those specific programs) College of Letters and Science > College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences > College of Engineering.

> For example, my engineering degree required 3 English classes, psychology, fine arts, and sociology.

That's, what, semester and a half all told? That's an odd basis for claiming “a lot”.

> The university says they're there to make you well rounded, but we all know it's an excuse to charge more money.

No, if they wanted an excuse to charge you more money they'd drop the liberal arts requirement, keep the length of the program constant, and add more engineering courses, whose faculty are much higher paid, and keep the same tuition to cost ratio.

[7thaccount]

I've looked at many programs and most schools claim that they want students to be "well rounded". I think that is pretty common and a scam, but that's just my opinion.

We may have a difference of opinions here, but six classes that I have no actual need for IS a lot to me. I still had to show up for those classes, listen to the instructors, do homework, buy stupid textbooks, and briefly study for the tests even though they were easy. That cost money that was the equivalent of me flushing it down the toilet, but more importantly, robbed me of additional time I could have spent studying for my thermodynamics, electronics, and differential equations classes (things that I was struggling in and I was intentionally paying good money to learn) or sleeping or actually getting to spend time with my fiance.

[baskire]

Curious what university you attended. From my experience the engineering liberal arts courses were still engineering focused. E.g. English was about writing ieee formatted papers.

I had an engineering ethics course where we discussed sensitive issues such as a medical radiology device which accidentally delivered 10x the dose due to sticky keyboard keys.

[7thaccount]

IEEE format would've been nice. Engineering ethics is required for ABET accreditation in the US, so we all probably had something similar.

[galaxyLogic]

I had a colleague who told me he went to a university in Florida. I asked him what did he study there, and he said "Golf".

[PaulDavisThe1st]

PhD programs in the US and elsewhere are often not directly comparable. Doing a PhD in the US typically involves 1-3 years still taking classes. Doing one in the UK means starting thesis-forming research immediately. Not really the same thing at all.

[ianmiers]

Uk CS PhD: spend one year figuring out what you are doing, 1/1.5 years doing research. 1 year writing up. Thats the summary I've gotten from several faculty.

On top of that, you have to go do a few postdocs if you want to do academia.(maybe a good thing, but not necessary in hot areas in the US for PhDs from highly ranked schools)

There's a reason the UK is trying to go over to centers for doctoral training and 5 year PhDs. Yes, in those and the US system, you spend 2 years taking classes. But in that time you are also getting spun up and then doing research.

[google234123]

Most programs I've seen have students starting research immediately. Sometimes you might have a few months of rotations through different groups.

[PaulDavisThe1st]

Every friend I have (or ex-wife :) with a US PhD (this spans physics, history, computer science, physiology, geology) did classes for the first 2 years (roughly).

[google234123]

You can do both at the same time.

[tnecniv]

non-US PhD programs typically require you have a masters. In the US that is not a requirement, hence the course work. If you are a more mature student coming in (e.g. have a masters) the course work is often a straightforward refresher and you can start doing research when you aren't doing classwork.

[pyuser583]

US and UK degrees in general are not comparable.

[Nimitz14]

Uk is the outlier here.

[Beldin]

Not compared to northwestern europe. France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Germany are similar (not the same - similar). Scandinavia probably as well, but i don't have experience there.

[Nimitz14]

In no serious field does one do a PhD in 3 years in Germany.