In my degree first year first semester, I was studying Programming Fundamentals. The subject teaches you how to use C++, and at the end, you will be asked to submit a final assignment. For my cohort, we are tasked to make the Ultimate Tic Tac Toe.
I have obsession with codes that are clean, readable, maintainable. I want classes to inherit from one another correctly. I try not to repeat myself (DRY principle). And I try my best to deliver the best user experience in the apps I make.
The assignment makes up 20% in the assessment. And apparently, if you manage to implement extra features like LAN, or a simple timer, or artificial intelligence opponent, you get extra marks. But the total marks from this assignment will never exceed 20%.
I spent days and nights perfecting my game. And I dare say, my submission not only has multiplayer capability over LAN, but it has the best overall user experience, as well as UI aesthetic, among my peers.
A lot of my peers got a full 20%, so did I.
They submitted codes that are messy, unreadable, and the game has terrible UI, but they met the criteria, so they got 20%.
Not to say they do not deserve 20%, but it made me realise one thing – the school does not care about great works.
No extra credits will be given to the extra miles you took. Your work is still being judged on the marking criteria. They did this to give chance for people to score 4.00, but this is discouraging people from doing great works.
When I work as web developer, I get to write clean codes that other teammates can easily understand and modify, and I get credits for it.
I don’t get any credits doing the same in university coursework.
This is why I really really prefer working over “studying”.