Reply
Mon 18 Sep, 2006 12:45 pm
How the Cow Ate the Cabbage
I am a retired engineer and I shall give to you what my understanding of the education of an engineer is all about; I do this because I think that almost all professional education in the US and elsewhere are very similar. I think that many young people have an uninformed view of these matters and I think that such erroneous views are detrimental to understanding the world we live in.
A young person receiving an education in engineering is taught the algorithms, patterns, and paradigms of their chosen profession. Essentially the student is taught the manual of the profession; just as a mechanic is taught the very same thing regarding the repair of automobiles. We were given the knowledge necessary to quickly become a productive worker for our employer.
The education of the professional is a rote learning of specific facts and how to utilize the tools of the trade as the patterns of the specific job dictate. The manual of the profession is temporally sufficient for the graduating student but the temporality is short lived. The work place is very dynamic and the graduate can function in the specific work place only for a short time before the reality of change forces the static individual into obsolescence because the manual of the profession is functionally diminishing as it is being taught.
I think that the educational institutions prepare graduates that fit the desires of the corporation but not the needs of the graduate. The work place is a rapidly evolving environment and the individual is not prepared properly to be a rapidly evolving worker.
Our institutions of learning are following the dictates of the corporation with little consideration of the student. Because this situation will never change until the citizens demand it one must recognize that any change must be contemplated as the responsibility of each individual. The individual can depend upon no institution to prepare them for the ability to evolve through out their work life.
The specificity of a given high school or college education is very beneficial during the early years of ones work life but this specificity is a drag on the rest of the work life. One must, in my opinion, learn how to learn and how to become a more flexible citizen thereby rolling with the punches of change.
A word to the wise is said to be sufficient, but I doubt that any of us qualify for a high grade in wisdom. Nevertheless, if you do not prepare yourself for such a future you might very well live to regret it.
Interesting. I've seen many labels attached to the manner in which we educate young people today, but, your statement that the education of an engineer matches the desires of the corporation is probably accurate.
coberst,
Where and how did you get your degree?
People nowadays have so many options on how to be trained in any field.
If they just want the title, they can get an online degree.
If they just want to be trained quickly for the work force, they can go to a technical school and get the kind of static training you're talking about.
Supposedly, going to a university for a bachelors degree is a good start to getting a more dynamic degree -- the idea is that you do not learn specific methods per say, but you learn about the fundamentals of the math required. Math IS static.
With a bachelors degree from a university a new graduate should be ready for engineering "grunt" work. With a masters degree they are intended to be even more dynamic. And with a PhD, even more so.
On the other hand, you might be able to learn the same skills faster by thrusting yourself into the workplace with less training and letting yourself adapt. I am going to assume that you consider yourself to have acquired the kind of dynamic learning that is required to be successful. Therefore, doesn't that imply that whatever training you got WAS sufficient?
Moreover, unless you have a PhD, you CHOSE to get the static training.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace