I'm also curious. I think there's a lot that I wouldn't intuitively think about now with CS courses but other than advanced algorithms and time complexity analysis, I've been entirely self taught and anytime I learn a new language or concept I struggle with it by trial-and-error.
I could read a whole book about C and not be able to regurgitate any of it, or struggle with a sample application in C and learn the mechanics as I go, so that I get an actual working knowledge of it rather than something intangible.
For example, I'm in a class that is covering concurrency primitives. People understand them, kind of. They can trace a program, but they can't use them or explain where they'd use them. On the other hand I have a project making extensive use of them so I have an idea of how they're used and why they're useful and what they do... AND I also understand HOW they work.
Now which is more pracitcal? Exclusively self-taught? Exclusively book-taught? A mixture? The problem has probably more to do with CS curriculums in my opinion.
I could read a whole book about C and not be able to regurgitate any of it, or struggle with a sample application in C and learn the mechanics as I go, so that I get an actual working knowledge of it rather than something intangible.
For example, I'm in a class that is covering concurrency primitives. People understand them, kind of. They can trace a program, but they can't use them or explain where they'd use them. On the other hand I have a project making extensive use of them so I have an idea of how they're used and why they're useful and what they do... AND I also understand HOW they work.
Now which is more pracitcal? Exclusively self-taught? Exclusively book-taught? A mixture? The problem has probably more to do with CS curriculums in my opinion.