<p>The essence of your argument is: If you don’t need to “know” it after taking a class, then why learn it at all.
The other variant of this argument is when people say, “Don’t worry about learning everything because you can always look it up later.” The point is to gain intuition so that you can build on the concepts in higher level classes. In mechanics, you may not remember everything, but when you get more abstract by applying things like momentum to electromagnetism and waves, it will be easier to learn because you have a feel for it.
However, in order to gain this intuition, you have to know how to learn it very well at one time.</p>
<p>It doesn’t matter as much if you forget some of the details. However, the details are easier and faster to refresh when you know . When you first learn an equation, you should be struggling a little bit to figure out why it makes sense rather than taking it at face value. Once you figure it out, though, the next time you need the equation you can look it up and understand how and when to use it, and why and in what situations it is appropriate to use it.</p>
<p>James, you’ve received some very good advice. You clearly have great intelligence and drive. You have so much going for you! </p>
<p>A note on your instructor’s seemingly off-hand comments about ‘forgetting’ what you learn: this professor may just be very comfortable with what he/she doesn’t know (or once knew, but now cannot possibly recall with 100% fidelity). </p>
<p>As people mature from novice to ‘expert’ in a domain, they develop a more fluid, meta-understanding that is far less dependent upon recall of specific exemplars. Novices, on the other hand, must begin by memorizing and actively categorizing bits of discrete information. In huge quantities. As expertise develops, many of the original exemplars will be forgotten, but the higher-level capacity remains. And grows. Your professor(s) may simply be very familiar and comfortable with this process; perhaps they also want to encourage their hard-driving students to be fluid, rather than too grinding, in their approach, such that meta-learning can start to take hold. </p>
<p>I earned a Ph.D. and do extraordinarily interesting work using it in an ‘applied’ setting. I’ve forgotten a LOT, but have developed new areas of expertise, wisdom has been gained, and after many years in the field, I have excellent professional judgement. Most importantly, I have a very clear sense of what I <em>don’t</em> know and that makes me a bona fide Expert. :)</p>
<p>I am a UCLA Engineering alumnus who went through a similar experience. I also had a 3.4 GPA my second year. When I first enrolled in UCLA, I was excited to be at a place where (I thought) people learn for the sake of learning. I was naive. I didn’t get very good grades my first 1.5 years - I just wanted to learn things and enjoy learning. Then I realized something - I am going to forget what I learn after exams anyway! So I might as well focus on learning through an exam-based approach and focus on getting A’s in my classes. “If these people who aren’t really passionate about the subject get higher GPA’s than me then I can do it too,” I thought. And so I did.</p>
<p>I think one of the consequences of putting all these over-achievers into one place (such as UCLA) is that you get all these people who are conditioned to get good grades and take on leadership roles in extracurriculars. During senior year, these same students will be striving to get positions at places like Google, Microsoft, Goldman Sachs, Accenture, Intel, etc. I am currently in a PhD program at another top school and I notice a similar academic culture. I also witnessed a similar thing at another top school where I was a visiting student. </p>
<p>I didn’t like most of the students in my engineering major because it appeared to me that they weren’t that passionate about the subject and just wanted good grades so they can get jobs after graduation. Now that I think about it, it’s perfectly okay. The world doesn’t need everyone to be so passionate in the subject that they get a PhD in it (we already have too many PhDs in certain subjects…). Almost all of my friends in college were outside my major (though most of them were engineers…) though I got along with everyone in my major.</p>
<p>As for forgetting what you learn - it is inevitable. If you ask me about things like optical resonators, binary search trees, Carnot cycles, central limit theorem, the effects of the chirality of carbon nanotubes, or physical metallurgy, I probably could not provide a good answer and have forgotten a lot of it, but I do know where to look it up and remember the general ideas. Learning something that you have forgotten takes much less time than the first time.</p>
<p>Take a year off and travel. Just pick somewhere random and go. Best choice anyone can ever make with their life is to open themselves up to the world. It will change your life, clear your mind, and help you figure out whether you really want to abandon your education or continue to finish your degree.</p>
<p>UCLA is a huge school and is not for everyone. Lower division classes are large and can be very impersonal. There is often little contact with the instructor. It may get better in upper division classes which are usually smaller and more on-point with your major. However it may just be that UCLA is not a good fit for you. Have you looked at taking a leave of absence? That might be a good way to step back and be more objective.</p>
<p>Peter Thiel is a Silicon Valley investor and was a PayPal founder. He is encouraging people to consider skipping college to launch their ventures, the fellowship link above is for that purpose. Many of his views echo the OP’s comments.</p>
<p>It’s obviously controversial, and it wouldn’t surprise me if it’s been a thread topic here (I haven’t looked, but given why we are here I expect the reaction would be overwhelmingly negative). </p>
<p>Clearly that path isn’t right for everyone (and may be wrong for almost everyone), but if you might be the next Gates or Zuckerberg…</p>
<p>A student who “drops out of college” (i.e. formally withdraws while in good standing) can typically resume later relatively easily, so if whatever venture s/he does on the Thiel fellowship or otherwise is not successful, s/he can just return to college and complete his/her degree. Withdrawal in good standing is typically not an irrevocable action.</p>
<p>Yes, there may be headlines like “Thiel encourages students to drop out of college”, but that leaves out the nuance that the Thiel-funded startup is more like a gap year(s) or extended co-op job during one’s college years. Of course, if it is stupendously successful, the Thiel fellow may not return, but most startups are not, so odds are that many of the Thiel fellows go back to school afterward.</p>
<p>Having a degree is a way to tell future investors/employeers/graduate schools that you are capable of graduating with an engineering degree.</p>
<p>Perhaps you can continue with the degree, but then do some entrepreneural things in your spare time. You will either start making money or not, but either way you will get that degree.</p>
<p>Finish the quarter, and do as well as you can academically. You’ve paid for it.</p>
<p>Then, see whether you can get a personal leave of absence rather than withdrawing at the end of the quarter. If you decide to come back to UCLA, it’s easier to do it if you’re on leave rather than having withdrawn from the university.</p>
<p>I go to UCLA too and I really want to drop out…but I’m a philosophy major so I’m probably at a worse place than you are. I never liked school that much but I love to learn. The thing is I don’t feel like I have learned anything at all. going to school and writing essays have become so painful that I think I’ve developed a phobia for it…when I look around in the classroom, all I can think about is why the hell these people seem so enthusiastic about something so useless…and I look at the professors and think that…wow they spent their whole life on academic research about this…?? I doubt that many students are genuinely interested in philosophy…most of them just care about their grades and plan to go to law school. It wasn’t exactly what I expected it to be…I was interested in philosophy and enjoyed reading and writing, but I just discovered that I hate my major and I just hate school in general. I am into art and I really want to pursue a career in the gaming or film industry. I didn’t go to art school because of well…asian parents. but I realized that going to UCLA just doesn’t make me any smarter or better…I feel stuck and feel like I’m wasting a lot of time and money on an overrated education…</p>