My perception is that there are certain jobs out there which require more education than is actually necessary to do the job. Coming immediately to mind is our own Jim Chabot, who is a very experienced builder. Because he doesn't have all of the necessary formal educational requirements, Jim cannot be an architect, and is limited in the size of the building he can construct. Given the amount of experience and the number of licenses Jim has in the field of building, I imagine that he is entirely capable of being an architect, and I'm guessing the requisite degrees would be a bit redundant at this point.
I feel as though there are multiple professions, such as architect, which require a degree of formal education that is not necessary to be a daily practitioner. An architect needs an engineering degree, which would be very useful if the person is planning on going into research or experimental architecture. But if the person is planning on staying within the existing norms of architecture, it seems like the ability to be a researcher is a bit superfluous. My guess is that there are other professions where the formal education prepares a person to be both a researcher and a practitioner, but as a result, those who want to be practitioners are forced to spend more time in school learning to do things (like conduct studies, or design experiments), which they never intend to do. But without gaining this additional education, they can't be fully licensed in their field. They could go out and get on the job training, and be fully capable of doing everything that a practitioner does, but because they haven't learned to be a researcher as well, they're considered ineligible to practice.
On the other hand, many people feel an MDiv is too much education for a pastor, and I disagree with such a claim. So I could be way off
Do you feel that the requisite education for your field is too much, too little, or just about right?