Welcome to studio and design education.  Looks like you're getting the same as everyone else in the history of arch school and If you prefer to solve problems by working backwards based on the answers in the back of the book, then you should have gone into engineering.

With that said, it's very very easy to get lost in the nonsense and arbitrary nature of design studios.  Some embrace the chaos and push themselves creatively, others turtle away and drown without a clear set of instructions.  I was squarely in camp one but I've seen several struggle to find "value".  What you're really learning in those first few design studios is creative exploration and creative development of ideas.  This is crucial as you eventually (unless you turtle away) develop your own design point of views and get thrown more challenging design problems.

protip, you have a lifetime ahead of you to learn software.  That's not what design school is for.  It is to teach you how to think and solve problems in creative ways.  

I'd echo Non Sequitur. Your experience sounds typical. I found the first two out of my 5 studios went just like that. 

I honestly didn't enjoy those first two, it was a lot of theatre and drama. Professors would describe your project as being in a constant state of crisis and frequently leave you feeling doomed about the next deadline. I feel like clearing landmines would be more relaxing (and more important to society)

For some, the process and mentality carries on into firms, especially if they are going for competitions. There are constant iterations, pivoting, throwing the entire design out and starting from scratch right before the completion deadline. 

For others, you'll end up doing staircases in condo towers for residential developers...

If there's one thing that design studio taught me an that I actually appreciate, is that you need to embrace change, learn to fall out of love with a bad design and keep investigating. That being said I didn't enjoy the environment and my creative process moves at a different pace.

Iteration is kind of an activity for its own sake. It is a general skill that studio is organized to teach and is important to have as a skill in itself - unlike the software you are learning (which will probably all be obsolete in 10 years). Or maybe EXACTLY like the software it is about learning how to do basic things so you will be able to pick up the next software without too much effort when it changes.

The things you described are what you're supposed to be learning how to do, listen to them. Maybe you just don't enjoy it, or need to work through some misconceptions. That's okay, part of the process. Just keep an open mind, you're not going to understand what and why you're doing immediately. It's called learning. 

I'll re-state some of your observations because I think they're pretty keen:

- Iterating is a very nuanced and useful skill. Lots of ways to do it and you get better the more you do it.

- Being grounded in reality sometimes holds you back.

- Beauty is one of many concepts that are useful for design.

- Buildings are complicated, your professors may be presenting you with information that you don't fully understand yet.

- See point two. Being an architect is being ten different professions, you need a broad set of skills. School focuses on one set.

- Presenting and researching is the most rare and critical skill an architect can have. You'll be principal with those chops.

All these are very good faith defenses of your observations. I'd agree with the other posters that describe not so idyllic studio experiences. I'm actually shocked how generous I'm being with studio as a format. I've had a good morning I suppose. 

There's no right answer. Learn what you can from each prof / lecturer and understand each their approach or strategy to solving the problem. Design is problem solving after all.  Then take what you feel is relevant to define your own approach.  It's important to be articulate about your approach and strategy and define your own "rules" even when you want to choose to be spirited or whimsical.

Also no one ever in the history of the profession has cared what grade your received in studio. You make it what you want. The images and story you write for the project is going to be what you carry in your portfolio, not the professor or the critique. Not the software skills. It's the compelling story of your design that matters and your ability to tell it both in images and the way you think and speak about the work.   

I was always told my poor presentation skills played against my good design skills and it would have been better to look at the drawings without my explanations. So you have a hand up right there. And research is essential, knowing where to look and what to look for is not something anybody can do. Last, one of my professors started the semester saying "delay the form", meaning don't get married to a shape, line or mass until you have solved all the "other" stuff, like the parti. That's what the iteration is for.

you are supposed to:

1. understand design process

2. understand deadlines and finishing on time

3. Understand that design is subjective 

1. There are different ways to design and iterate

2. Taking criticism and applying the knowledge

3. How to communicate verbally and graphically [i found that asking my peers for feedback helped when faculty was being a bit esoteric]

4. Be confident, but open to other opinions - learning to be able to be self aware and critique oneself [once we start working we have to be able to improve our own work w/o too much input from others]

one thing you'll learn which isn't quite part of any studio curriculum is that some people simply do not see architecture the same way you do. you will never create a design that satisfies them - because the design they appreciate is one you dislike.

and that's fine. you will have a ceiling on your grade, but get the work done and move on. once you get to elective studios, look for professors whose own work mirrors your interests. a sympathetic critic is the only useful one.

this is part of finding your voice as a designer. the more difficult it is, the more likely you have a strong voice and just don't know who your audience is yet. some classmates will breeze through easily - and in ten years you will see that unless someone is telling them what to do they can't really invent anything.

in my own experience as a student, the early year professors were the least accomplished professionally and had very little influence on my later thinking. the studios where i chose the professor were much more valuable. but you need the basic skills and flexibility as a designer to keep up with the more thoughtful studios.

The most valuable thing that design studio does - is to give you time to develop a design process.  As a professional your process will of course evolve, but what you do early in your education will serve as a foundation for that.  If you want a firm foundation, don’t build it on trends and all the newest isms.   Try to build upon the timeless fundamentals.