Higher education is a purposeful process of upbringing and education in the interests of a person, society, and the state, accompanied by the statement that a student has achieved educational levels (educational qualifications) established by the state. The level of education is determined by the requirements of production, the state of science, technology and culture, as well as social relations.
Now, everywhere you look everywhere people with higher education, and even with two or three. Indeed, most often it turns out that a person has studied for five years in one specialty, and works in another. It turns out that the person deceived himself, one might say lost five years of his life. To prevent this from happening, you must take off your "rose-colored glasses" and see reality. Therefore, it is necessary to debunk student myths.
A diploma is a ticket to a bright future. Today, many are striving to get higher education. But the very phrase "higher education" for the majority means getting a diploma, not knowledge. It is believed that the main thing is to get the coveted crust and that's it - a bright future in your pocket, but this is not at all the case. Today in our country there is a whole army of qualified specialists who cannot find a job in their profession. They cannot even not because their specialty is not in demand, but because they are such "experts" in their field.
You don't need to learn everything, you can learn it in practice. Often among students, it is generally accepted that only 20-30% of the knowledge gained at a university will be useful in practice. This is mistake. Ask any graduate of an institute or university who did not particularly try in his student years, and he will tell you that he regrets that he did not teach the theory, that he had to learn everything that was taught and even more.
You need to choose a prestigious specialty, regardless of ability. Applicants and especially their parents believe that it is imperative to choose a prestigious specialty, for example, to go to study at the Faculty of Law, even if the daughter has a natural inclination to painting, it is not important, the main thing is to choose a monetary profession. This is an erroneous assumption. Firstly, a person who has gone to study in a field that is completely uninteresting for him will learn through strength, or he will not study at all. Secondly, in the future in life, the greatest success can be achieved only in the field that is interesting.
The teacher, if he wants, will "fill up". Many students, failing to pass the test or exam, tend to blame the teacher for everything, they say it was he who "flunked" his poor fellow. In fact, everything is different. Here you need to remember one thing: if a student really knows the subject at "5", then no one, even the most nit-picking teacher, will ever "fill up", even if he tries very hard. In any case, you can always appeal and pass the examination of the commission, if, of course, you are confident in your knowledge.
There are enough lecture notes. Lectures are just a work plan. Only the very basics are given in the lectures to guide the student on the right path. A student can get real knowledge only himself. After all, the word "student" itself is translated from Latin as self-learning. At best, lectures give only 10-20% of knowledge, and the rest is in the library.
The first two years I’ll do some fun, and then I’ll start learning. The curriculum at universities is structured in such a way that general subjects (history, foreign language, life safety, etc.) are taught in the first two years. It seems that you should not be especially zealous in them, but there is one important point: as you show yourself for the first year or two, so they will treat you until the end of your studies. As they say, the first two years a student works for a student's record-book, the other three (someone has four) a student's record-book works for a student.
A bad teacher is to blame for poor knowledge. When entering a job, a yesterday's graduate understands that his knowledge is not enough for normal work, does not understand what and how to do. He thinks it was poorly trained. No, just as mentioned above - the teacher can give the student, at best, only 20% of the necessary knowledge, the rest must be obtained by himself.
No practice needed. The training program is structured in such a way that during the training, only the theory is given, which is necessary but not sufficient. For example, a student lawyer is taught what an agreement is, what it should contain - all this is described in detail in textbooks, but if he has never seen the agreement in person and has not tried to create it, then this specialist will not be able to provide quality services to his client. Therefore, in parallel to study, you need to practice where you are going to go to work.
You don't need knowledge to make a lot of money. Perhaps this was the case in the nineties of the last century, when everyone rushed to trade, but now everything is different. To get a good job, you need quality knowledge. Why does a director of a firm need a bad manager because of whom the firm will incur losses and not receive additional profits, even the blues will not help here.
I will only do my studies in order to become a good specialist. There is also another side of the coin, when a person goes head over heels to study - these are usually called "nerds". You cannot become an excellent "master of your craft" because a good specialist must not only know his subject, but also be able to communicate with people, be athletic, he must have many acquaintances and friends. It is necessary to attend various events in order to keep abreast of affairs and to know what is happening there outside the window.