clope023 said:
What is being argued is that departments allow for more practical dedicated electives that students could choose from along with the more standard/traditional curriculum; electives such as electronics, programming, scientific computing and numerical analysis, LabVIEW for data acquisition, among other things. These would be applicable to both people going into experimental physics for grad school and those who would seek employment after undergrad, things like scientific computing, programming, and numerical analysis would obviously benefit theorists as well.
What physics programs do not currently allow for electives in electronics, programming, scientific computing, numerical analysis, LabVIEW, etc.?
Of course it's a good idea for physics departments to allow for these things and incorporate them into their programs.
And I think we agree that physics programs should constantly strive for improvement.
To keep my points in context I have been responding to this initial assertion:
Crek said:
Considering that completion of BS degrees nowadays is essentially technical in purpose(to get a job) most departments have done a terrible job keeping relevancy.
This is incorrect on two accounts.
First, the purpose of a non-professional undergraduate degree is to provide an education in that field. It cannot be for vocational training because there is no vocation to provide training for (outside of academia). If you orient the degree to train the student for a specific profession such as engineering - it becomes an engineering degree. If you want a hybrid program that covers the core physics curriculum, but also qualifies the graduates as engineers, it becomes an engineering physics degree. But if you take an honours physics program and opt to specialize in astrophysics by taking courses in stellar evolution and introductory cosmology, it's not reasonable to expect that to translate into direct qualifications in the commercial sector because there just aren't that many companies that provide those things as services. What that means is that ultimately if the student chooses this route, it's up to the student to do the translation.
Second, most physics departments have not "done a terrible job keeping relevancy." The data indicates that on average physics graduates do quite well when they go on to seek employment outside of academia. They have low unemployment rates, their starting salaries are comparable to those of engineers, and they have high job satisfaction. (For references see
AIP Physics Bachelor's Initial Employment, or
APS White Paper on Economics of a Physics Education.) And it's not like universities just teach their students and don't care about what happens when they graduate. As I've said previously that's why universities have job fairs, coop programs, internships, career offices, etc. Many even have programs to promote the jump from research to commercialization of ideas. Universities are dripping with opportunities to gain real world work experience.