I see the end of the SICP approach (not just SICP itself) as the canary in the coalmine for the end of University education itself for technical fields.
Killing SICP is the admission that the artist/creator-engineer is dead and the technician/plumber-engineer is the only engineer that matters for the economy.
IMO University itself is failing that very utilitarian litmus test if what you need is people with piece-wise qualifications that can be as easy to swap out as humanly possible, then there are already existing models of education providing just that better than University degrees.
People are paying top dollar for stuff that can be done much better with perhaps a combination certifications and online programmes. Much more efficiently, cheaply, and with just as much access to the same information, teaching manpower etc etc.
If I were a teenager now rather than back in the 90s, I honestly wouldn't know what to do. Degrees remain important as CV items and have a lot of vestigial traction, but they're terrible value as simultaneously their price has shot up and their nominal utility has plummeted. You are forced to make a very risky call as a teenager as to where will things be in 4-5 years time in what you expect your discipline to be in the medium term.
> Degrees remain important as CV items and have a lot of vestigial traction
I really don't think that's true anymore besides for starting. But once you start, the degree bears only some weight when aiming for higher roles that hold a political status/value.
I agree with the rest of your post, but I also think there should be a wider distinction between a degree in computer science, software engineering and "computing".
E.g. in Italy we have a degree for all three: computer science leans more heavily on the side of theory and math, software engineering is mostly an engineering degree with more programming-related exams and computing (which we call "Informatica") is the one which leans more than the rest on the practical side of programming while having much less exams on the theoretical and engineering side.
Here in Spain it's "ingeniería informática" it's what is means. a bit of EE, huge on CS, and a good chunk on math. No software engineering. The software trade degree it's another thing, and legally it can't be called an engineering degree.
Killing SICP is the admission that the artist/creator-engineer is dead and the technician/plumber-engineer is the only engineer that matters for the economy.
IMO University itself is failing that very utilitarian litmus test if what you need is people with piece-wise qualifications that can be as easy to swap out as humanly possible, then there are already existing models of education providing just that better than University degrees.
People are paying top dollar for stuff that can be done much better with perhaps a combination certifications and online programmes. Much more efficiently, cheaply, and with just as much access to the same information, teaching manpower etc etc.
If I were a teenager now rather than back in the 90s, I honestly wouldn't know what to do. Degrees remain important as CV items and have a lot of vestigial traction, but they're terrible value as simultaneously their price has shot up and their nominal utility has plummeted. You are forced to make a very risky call as a teenager as to where will things be in 4-5 years time in what you expect your discipline to be in the medium term.