Study first as far as you can and then gain mentored on-the-job experience to be the best professional.

Study first as far as you can and then gain mentored on-the-job experience to be the best professional.

More or less in the same vein as Ian, I would argue that maybe the most "balanced" model is "long studies" (i.e. following the Bologna model 3 years BA and 2 years MA) coupled with intensive internship, on-the-job training.

I co-manage a BA and MA study in intercultural communication, information & media studies. From their second study year on, all our students have to accomplish at least a 3-months internship per year and, as far as possible, in foreign countries.

Thanks to Peter and Ian for their answers but I want to score the two mentioned factors based on their importance, then if we wanted to prioritize these factors which one has the higher place?

You will not drag numbers out of us! The world needs both technicians and engineers; nurses and doctors.

@Ian Kennedy, What do you mean by numbers??

Academic study is most important, but it does not necessarily mean acquiring university degree. There are many examples where persons, without having any university degree, made significant contributions. One such person was Thomas Alva Edison, who was self educated person, and was one of the most prolific inventor. I would like to emphasize that education is must for acquiring knowledge , but method of acquisition of knowledge may be different. Acquiring knowledge is not enough, the development of skill is important. Application of knowledge leads to skill development, and this takes place through practical experience. Finally I would like to quote Paul Dirac, " Golden eras occur when ordinary people can make extraordinary contributions ".

Hi @Dattagupta!

As you said, education is must for acquiring knowledge, but method of acquisition of knowledge could be different. (My thought) acquiring knowledge is not enough. For any kind of job, the development of skill is very important. The practical experience is a core factor for any kind of job, including to be a teacher. As Pablo Picasso said, " Talent exist but it just find working ".

You want to weight the two factors to get a score. We (The RGs) cannot give you the numbers you are asking for, because degrees and work experience are not interchangeable entities: They are like apples and pears. We cannot say that 2.5 apples = 1 pear.

Thanks to all answers.

@Ian Kennedy, here in this question the number is not intended. If you read the emphasis I put on in the answers part, I stated I wanted to know from you experienced (RGs), both in academics and in industry which of these factors would be high in priority for a real practice.

Hi @Ali Tizar! You need a necessary balanced between both. (My thought) having studied some papers of the professor Raúl Espejo.

" To perform effectively means being able to carry out our expectations on the situation. For instance, suppose we are learning how to fly a glider. We take some basic lessons of how to take off and how to land properly and then we go along to fly alone. During the first flights when we look outside through the front window we will distinguish just clouds. Later on, after approaching regularly some of these clouds and experiencing recurrent strong changes in altitude we may start to distinguish some clouds from others. So, after a while, we may distinguish cirrus from cumulus and those from nimbus. But those distinctions are accompanied by corresponding practices on flying the glider. In fact, we have learned

that by approaching cirrus we will be able to gain in altitude and by passing through a cumulus we will experience some turbulence. In other words, in order to become more effective in this domain of gliding, we have been making new distinctions by which we have developed suitable new practices". (Espejo, R. and Reyes, A., 2012)

@Miriam L. Filgueiras Sainz de Rozas, Thanks again.

Perhaps this question is expressed by other RGs before or maybe you have heard of such an expression before but what I really want to know the importance of these two qualifications in a fashion to discriminate them. "Experiencing" is not constraint to anytime or anyplace and as one example to Miriam's is gliding but following the academics is a rather new concept. we all start experiencing from this world when we all are born, but we start to learn in academia when we are generally 18. This is what makes experiencing different from taking an academic procedure to achieve a degree.

For me to understand the significance of both approaches to learn a substantial ability in order to contribute afterwards, is different for these approaches with considering the practice. This is what I saw, heart and experience from the senior practitioners. For instance I heard from a person once without any formal education about local economics statements that you could not hear from an educated person. This uneducated person used his experience to formulate the situation and concluded with a rule that is completely different from an academic person and even much better. The reason is in academic practice they dont consider these situations for a real world and they just teach general rule where in this situations are not effective. Another example in dentistry, which in 30, 20 years ago they were people practicing this discipline without a real education in some countries. But when it comes to educated dentist we see their work is much better.

Thus, my conclusion is experience and academic approaches are different for different practices. Again I will be happy to see more comments.

Thanks

Both are necessary. If an engineer designs a road and tests each layer in a lab but has not been out on the project to lay and compact the materials with the actual machines that will do the job, in the actual climate presented during the project; he will not obtain the results he plans for. If he has operated the machines himself under similar circumstances with the same materials, he might come close.

If the operators of the machines have no understanding of the reason for the design, the objective, or the properties of the materials, they will not build the road designed on paper. They will make a layered path of different composites that will crumble into a trail of garbage.

These two situations often occur. Projects are started that look good on paper and in the lab, but in reality they do not work and must be torn out and started over or are abandoned.

It is possible to bring together people of practical experience and those of academic knowledge to design a project together, and get good results. The possibilities of this working out the first time I would imagine are about 1 in 3; the others being partially and not at all. The reason being the worker and the academic have little respect for eachother.

If one person has both: knowledge and experience they will respect both; in themselves and in others.

Thanks Rhonda for you answer.

Again the question returns to comparison of these two qualifications whereas each of them is unique and comes from with different activities. If we dont want to put them in a competitive analysis rather to inspect each of those independently and see the results, how would the impact be? The problem of the analogy between these qualifications is their substantial differences which makes analogy ineffective. Also the problem as Ian Kennedy described, we cannot assign a number for each of them in regards to their impact on the practice, by this view would be mitigated.

Yes, Ali, both you and Ian are absolutely correct. Apples and pears can not be compared, and a numeric value can not be applied to their impact. Your question is interesting.