mjhjmtu

I have all the respect for students of sciences who go to a university to fully divulge themselves into a certain topic and understand it in and out.

But the truth is, that description simply doesn't fit most students. Most students go to university because they want a degree so they can get a job, and a lot of the stuff you'll learn simply isn't useful.

The obvious example is computer-science (but it applies to many other fields too, like engineering, economics, etc). If you study computer science at a university, and then choose to enter the field of software engineering, 95 % of your degree will be useless. In software engineering, it's mostly just knowing your tech and being able to code efficiently in it.

So why are students being forced to spend years and years studying to obtain a degree to get a job when that degree simply isn't necessary for that job?

Obviously you don't NEED to get a degree, but in today's environment, most employers expect it, so your hands are forced.

This seems like a gigantic waste for all of society.

Because nobody has a crystal ball to see the future.

By having a reasonably broad curriculum, a university can prepare the students for a good deal of possible scenarios, which gives them flexibility. No more jobs in your specific subfield? With the adequate background, provided by a good university, you can pivot fields to keep earning your pay. Been there, done that, it's quite handy :)

The universities don't have much of a choice in this matter. Whenever the university issues a degree in [topic], it's staking its name and reputation that the recipient of the degree is competent in [topic]. If the degree holder turns out to be unable to answer basic questions on [topic], then the university's degree is worthless and its reputation in tatters. For example, I would genuinely wonder what a university is doing if its physics graduates don't understand classical electromagnetism.

In other words, the real crux of your question is:

Obviously you don't NEED to get a degree, but in today's environment, most employers expect it, so your hands are forced.

If most of the things that are taught in degrees aren't needed, why are most employers expecting a degree? That is a question for another Stack Exchange.

University education is about education, not training. The university wants to contribute to an educated citizenry, not just industrial drones. You can, as you know, turn yourself into a drone, but don't try to make university education so impoverished, please. I studied mathematics. My daughter studied philosophy. Neither of those is training for anything specific. But we both learned how to think and to evaluate and to learn.

But even in CS you are very wrong about what is useful and what is useless. The most important skill isn't your use of existing technology to do something that someone wants done. The most important skill is to understand what should be built. Only then can you participate in the future without damaging the world and civilization.

There was a news article in the past couple of days that discusses the fact that at some large and important companies, Google in this case, are asking why are we building this. It is a very important question that you will get answered if you study history, philosophy, ethics, psychology, literature, etc. You won't get a sufficient answer by studying Java and DotNet and SQL.

European education is a bit different and the necessary education in what makes us human is normally taught to students before they enter the university. In the US, it is a continuous process, but secondary education often falls short, so, traditionally in the US it has been an important aspect of an undergraduate education. Graduate education is for specialization, but even there, it isn't just the technology to build todays tchotchkes.

What seems useless to you is what makes the future of the planet and its people viable.