Hmm, but while apprenticeship would cater to the "applied" portion of applied science, it doesn't exact fulfill the full requirements, in my mind.
I think the field should be split up. So far it has had a major divide between the IT worker, the IT manager, and the IT Tech Support group, but I think there should be a further split into a few more categories:
Hardware Installation and Maintenance
Hardware Research and Development
Software Installation and Maintenance
Software Research and Development
If we look at these 4 groups that generally get grouped into IT we see they are really only alike in that they deal with computers. I think the field has moved from a single science to a group of sciences and trades. Any type of installation and maintenance job could easily be learned as an apprenticeship, and usually is learned either on the job or from a technical school. Research and development positions are something that should require at least a minimal education. Yes apprenticeship is a good idea, but do you want to spend a minimum of one or two years teaching someone from scratch how to program and what a variable is and so on, even if it is a language dependant education?
Hardware might be an easier example,
while your standard electrician might have apprenticed to learn his trade, an EE (electrical engineer) probably had schooling and had to have minimally learned enough to pass his engineering certification.
Following the same login, someone that installs or maintains a group of computers or network could be taught what they needed to know on an apprenticeship type of level, but when it comes to designing hardware they need to have a much deeper foundation in the theoretical side of hardware so that they can go beyond what has been done and look for new ways to do things that are still feasible with materials and mechanisms available or soon to be available.
So while I would agree that your standard maintenance and installation person could very well learn on the job or as an apprenticeship, I think it is much more important that development and research people get a firmer grounding in theory.
In addition, if everyone in development is working with the same set of theories, than when they make an advance on those theories it is easier for others to understand or if they run into a new technology they will already have a starting point to learn it from instead of having to unlearn half of what they new about another technology first.
When you learn programming from the general, theoretical angle first, you have a solid basis to learn any language. When you start with one language then you learn the idiosyncracies of that language without even realizing it and then have to start a new language almost from scratch.
If I had my choice, I would have been taught old latin when I was growing up, becaue that would have given me the foundation, or roots, to a lot more languages than English has.
-Tarwn
01010100 01101001 01100101 01110010 01101110 01101111 01101011 00101110 01100011 01101111 01101101
29 3K 10 3D 3L 3J 3K 10 32 35 10 3E 39 33 35 10 3K 3F 10 38 31 3M 35 10 36 3I 35 35 10 3K 39 3D 35 10 1Q 19
Do you know how hot your computer is running at home? I do