Complaining about the "broken education system" is getting old

[FJV]

As an engineer, if you don't have practical skills you aren't a good engineer.

Not the entire truth in my opinion.

For the good engineers, technology and engineering is a lifestyle. This leads to mechanical engineers having a hobby lathe at home. Electrical engineers soldering at home. Programmers programming multi user games in their spare time. Etc, etc.

Someone for who designing things is more than just a job. Those people often make very good engineers in my opinion.

As for education, concerning the situation in the Netherlands, we are really failing those kids who want to be engineers in my opinion. After all it is not their fault that education is declining, but they do end up paying the price.

Take for instance teaching multiplication (arithmetic). There are at least 3 methods of multiplying 2 numbers, yet only one method is taught. The result is that children for who that method is not the best for them will suck at basic multiplication, where they might be good at multiplication if they were offered a different method.







Of course I am also slightly pissed of that they haven't taught me when I was a kid these methods. That may also be a reason why I'm grumpy about the state of education.

[vxp036000]

When I was in school, I learned how to compute square roots with pen and paper.  How many folks can do that nowadays?  I agree that math and sciences generally are not well taught in high school.  But my college experience, however, was exactly the opposite.  I guess it's because I majored in technical field.

[IanB]

Take for instance teaching multiplication (arithmetic). There are at least 3 methods of multiplying 2 numbers, yet only one method is taught.

And that in itself is wrong. One should not be teaching methods, but meaning. What does multiplication mean? How do we understand what we are doing when we multiply two numbers together? It is not just an exercise in following a prescription. It is purposeful activity with value behind it. Once we "get" what is going on, we can discover our own methods for doing it.

This video is relevant:

http://youtu.be/a-e8fzqv3CE

[vxp036000]

Here's a fun exercise to try if you think you really understand multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction.  Pick an arbitrary radix, say radix 3, and try performing some basic computations.  If you're really brave, try integrating in a different radix

Take for instance teaching multiplication (arithmetic). There are at least 3 methods of multiplying 2 numbers, yet only one method is taught.

And that in itself is wrong. One should not be teaching methods, but meaning. What does multiplication mean? How do we understand what we are doing when we multiply two numbers together? It is not just an exercise in following a prescription. It is purposeful activity with value behind it. Once we "get" what is going on, we can discover our own methods for doing it.

This video is relevant:

http://youtu.be/a-e8fzqv3CE

[Uncle Vernon]

I haven't seen too many folks without a formal education inventing new ................

That says more about what you see through tunnel vision than anything about the ability of others!

On the other hand, I can teach any monkey how to choose appropriate components and use of a soldering iron.

Yep you can skill up primates with no trouble. Which says little for those who want to use a degree as an excuse for a total absence of physical skill or practical application! Five years of a degree and no one in all that time told you which was the hot end of a soldering iron?

There are techs, and then there are the engineers.

Yep and there are good and bad, skilled and incompetents in both camps. Retards that see some sort of elitist boundary between themselves and other skilled people are fools too themself and a burdon to others.

Go wave your degree at someone who gives a fig! I employ based upon competence rather than qualification. Many of the just qualified are certain fails an aptitude and more importantly attitude.

And please don't get me started on the numerous jobs titled engineer that require no engineering ability whatsoever.

Far be it from me to encourage you to bang on about any topic you have little or no clue about.

[vxp036000]

Most folks working at the bleeding edge of EE hold PHDs, in my country, at least.  The folks working at Google, Agilent Labs, university research labs...  You would get laughed at trying to work at a place like that with an undergraduate degree or lower.  That's just an observation; you're welcome to draw your own conclusions.

What I disapprove of is how a lot of techs can't accept that they don't have the same understanding of electronics as an EE.  I'm not talking about practical experience, but rather the fundamentals of semiconductor physics, signal processing, the intricacies of bandgap references, etc.  This sort of knowledge is essential in the design process, but not as relevant to the job of a tech.

I think it's only fair to compare the best techs to the best EEs, not the best techs to the worst EEs (which seems to be the comparison several folks here like to make).  And, if I were looking to hire a tech, I really wouldn't care about having such a strong theoretical backing, because, like I already stated, it's not as relevant to the job of a tech.

I haven't seen too many folks without a formal education inventing new ................

That says more about what you see through tunnel vision than anything about the ability of others!

On the other hand, I can teach any monkey how to choose appropriate components and use of a soldering iron.

Yep you can skill up primates with no trouble. Which says little for those who want to use a degree as an excuse for a total absence of physical skill or practical application! Five years of a degree and no one in all that time told you which was the hot end of a soldering iron?

There are techs, and then there are the engineers.

Yep and there are good and bad, skilled and incompetents in both camps. Retards that see some sort of elitist boundary between themselves and other skilled people are fools too themself and a burdon to others.

Go wave your degree at someone who gives a fig! I employ based upon competence rather than qualification. Many of the just qualified are certain fails an aptitude and more importantly attitude.

And please don't get me started on the numerous jobs titled engineer that require no engineering ability whatsoever.

Far be it from me to encourage you to bang on about any topic you have little or no clue about.

[Uncle Vernon]

But I will say that, at least in my experience, a degreed EE can easily learn a techs job, but most techs could not perform the engineers job.

Curious that but as you say it's from your limited experience so is hardly representative of the rest of the industry. Over a long career in engineering I've seen many techs migrate to become excellent and sought after engineers. Many also attaining qualifications along the way.

Over the same period I've seen far too many degree wavers never able to develop the skills and dexterity for the physical aspects of our industry. The could talk for an hour about torsional load and stress while stillbeing unable to tighten their own wheel nuts!

Perhaps our disagreement stems from a different meaning of the term engineer vs. tech.[/qoute]
No it stems from a misguided sense of self importance and and an inability to recognise the contribution and skills of others! Arrogant and misguided condescension for the qualified clueless!

[vxp036000]

This is certainly true.  I've also seeing techs move on to EE jobs, but most of them also went on to get the degree.  I think we both agree that a good practical know-how is needed in addition to what is taught in a classroom.  At least at my school, we designed and built numerous boards in addition to coursework, so we came out with a good balance of practical and theoretical aspects.

But I will say that, at least in my experience, a degreed EE can easily learn a techs job, but most techs could not perform the engineers job.

Curious that but as you say it's from your limited experience so is hardly representative of the rest of the industry. Over a long career in engineering I've seen many techs migrate to become excellent and sought after engineers. Many also attaining qualifications along the way.

Over the same period I've seen far too many degree wavers never able to develop the skills and dexterity for the physical aspects of our industry. The could talk for an hour about torsional load and stress while stillbeing unable to tighten their own wheel nuts!

Perhaps our disagreement stems from a different meaning of the term engineer vs. tech.[/qoute]
No it stems from a misguided sense of self importance and and an inability to recognise the contribution and skills of others! Arrogant and misguided condescension for the qualified clueless!

[IanB]

This is interesting.

Should you employ a mechanical engineer who couldn't make a fair attempt at stripping down and rebuilding a car engine? (I'd say not, personally. In the words of Bruce Lee: "Don't think; feel." If you can't feel how a car engine is supposed to work, do you really understand engineering?)

[Uncle Vernon]

Most folks working at the bleeding edge of EE hold PHDs, in my country, at least.

Was the term bleeding edge introduced to describe the results of "when the clueless use hand tools"?

You would get laughed at trying to work at a place like that with an undergraduate degree or lower.  That's just an observation; you're welcome to draw your own conclusions.

You get laughed at a lot for using a qualification as a substitute for ability! I drew my conclusions long ago and they've proved spot on for decade. The main conclusion being that ability is inversely proportion to desire to wave qualifications in thefaces of others!

What I disapprove of

To be honest nobody gives a flying flap what you do or don't approve of.

is how a lot of techs can't accept that they don't have the same understanding of electronics as an EE.

What is more guiling is some jackass assuming they have attained superior understand of all things at all times over all others. That is nothing but arrogance and simple ignorance! End Of!

[vxp036000]

Yes I would hire a mechanical engineer that doen't know how to strip the engine down.  The guy designing it doesn't need any more than a general understanding of how the thing is assembled / disassembled.  But, the mechanical engineer had better have a strong understanding of the physics of how the engine works.

Does the IC designer know the intricacies of characterizing his IC and debugging it in the lab?  At the places I've worked, most certainly not.  The tech worries about these things.  Instead, I would expect the designer to have a very strong understanding of the semiconductor phyics and circuit architecture.  We're past the days of a jack of all trades and live in a world of specialization, to everyone's benefit.

[vxp036000]

I think this attitude sums up what I see from techs and not so much from the EEs.  I don't see nurses claiming to be more knowledgeable in medicine than doctors.  Why do we see techs that think they know more about EE than someone with an 8 year degree in the field?

Most folks working at the bleeding edge of EE hold PHDs, in my country, at least.

Was the term bleeding edge introduced to describe the results of "when the clueless use hand tools"?

You would get laughed at trying to work at a place like that with an undergraduate degree or lower.  That's just an observation; you're welcome to draw your own conclusions.

You get laughed at a lot for using a qualification as a substitute for ability! I drew my conclusions long ago and they've proved spot on for decade. The main conclusion being that ability is inversely proportion to desire to wave qualifications in thefaces of others!

What I disapprove of

To be honest nobody gives a flying flap what you do or don't approve of.

is how a lot of techs can't accept that they don't have the same understanding of electronics as an EE.

What is more guiling is some jackass assuming they have attained superior understand of all things at all times over all others. That is nothing but arrogance and simple ignorance! End Of!

[Uncle Vernon]

I think this attitude sums up what I see

Not much thinking and not much vision.  Anyone that sees a degree as the sole source of knowledge is a fool to himself! Even worse is those jackasses that assumed they learnt everything in a short five to eight years. People who think they know everything are usually the ones that know next to nothing. Doctors & Nurses? WTF?  UV hands out another "perennially clueless badge" to the latest try hard.

[vxp036000]

More of the same...  I'm not going to stoop to name-calling and denegrading others.

[Uncle Vernon]

More of the same...  I'm not going to 

Good! You just toddle off and be condescending and self important to somebody who actually wants to listen! Good luck.

[free_electron]

When I was in school, I learned how to compute square roots with pen and paper.  How many folks can do that nowadays?

Great.. so you can replay an algorithm just like a trained monkey ...

Meanwhile, someone who has real work to do grabs a 1 $ calculator and moves on. Anno 2012 it is USELESS and a WASTE of TIME to even do such things by hand .

Does the IC designer know the intricacies of characterizing his IC and debugging it in the lab?

And how do you expect your engineers to ever learn from their mistakes ?
And if you work where i do , yes , as an ic designer you WILL sit in the lab and debug your own brainfarts, or prepare to be shown the front door. We have no room foor stiff upper lip, nose in the wind, people that think they are better than others because they have a (fake) mahogany framed piece of paper stuck on their wall. The silicon doesn't lie. You may have a whole wall of diploma's, if your piece of silicon you produced does not work you are still a bad engineer .
And if it's the techs that get it running , i'll hire those guys instead of you. After all they made it work. All you did was make something that didn't...

[vxp036000]

No one is questioning whether or not a good designer produces a working product.  What I am saying, is that you will not see a tech with the background needed to design something like a start of the art class C microwave amplifier with pre-emphasis to compensate for AM distortion on an IC.  I wouldn't even trust a lot of folks with an MS to design something like that.  There's nothing fake about a four to eight year degree in circuit design.

When I was in school, I learned how to compute square roots with pen and paper.  How many folks can do that nowadays?

Great.. so you can replay an algorithm just like a trained monkey ...

Meanwhile, someone who has real work to do grabs a 1 $ calculator and moves on. Anno 2012 it is USELESS and a WASTE of TIME to even do such things by hand .

Does the IC designer know the intricacies of characterizing his IC and debugging it in the lab?

And how do you expect your engineers to ever learn from their mistakes ?
And if you work where i do , yes , as an ic designer you WILL sit in the lab and debug your own brainfarts, or prepare to be shown the front door. We have no room foor stiff upper lip, nose in the wind, people that think they are better than others becasue they have a (fake) mahogany framed piece of paper stuck eon their wall. the silicon doesn't lie. You may have a whole wall of diploma's, if your piece of silicon you produced does not work you are still a bad engineer .

[vxp036000]

And let's talk about square roots.  If it's so useless to know how to compute a square root, how about you design a CMOS processor that computes a square root?  Now what are you going to do? 

[free_electron]

And let's talk about square roots.  If it's so useless to know how to compute a square root, how about you design a CMOS processor that computes a square root?  Now what are you going to do?

You grab the square root IP block from the design library and implement it.
Or ,  you google 'square root algorithm verilog' , and chuck it through the synthesizer. move on. why do you want to keep reinventing the bloody wheel ? Now, if you are after developing a whole new algorithm to do square root , be my guest , But you'll have a hard time defending it to the boss why you want to spend time making a square root generator if we already have on in the IP pool , can find one on opencores and has been proven to be correct.

You are not an island... there is other people in your cmpany, and outside of it. they may have solved the problem. use and re-use... Invent, not re-invent.

There's nothing fake about a four to eight year degree in circuit design

That's correct , but do not expect people to kiss the ground you walk on because you have a piece of paper with a shining star on it ... The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Good cooks always taste and eat their own stuff. Really great cooks don't need a recepy. And most of the food was invented by people that did not have a formal training as a cook.

Edison, Tesla, Galvani, Ohm , Ampere , Volta , Farnsworth, DeForest, Marconi and more recently Jim Williams (RIP). None of them had a paper with shining star. And 99.99999999999% of those with a shining star are never going to do what those 'paperless' guys did. They won't even come close. Not in a million years.
So get off your throne and do something useful. Then we'll talk.

And don't compare doctors to engineers... not in things where life is involved.. if you fuck up as an angineer you take a new board or you reboot. If you fuck up as a doctor... you killed someone.

[vxp036000]

Umm, your design library doesn't have a square root compatible with your process.  It has flips flops, NOR gates, NAND gates, and MUX's.  And what happens when your copied square root design doesn't work?  Since you know nothing about how it works, good luck trying to fix it.

And performance?  You're only given x number of clock cycles to execute your square root operation.  It needs x digits of accuracy.  It needs to fit in this physical area, meet some power requirements, I/O requirements...  People talk about synthesizers like they're a god-send.  I can't tell you how many times we've seen the synthesizer screw up and you get to fix the design.  Automated layout?  Not on a mixed signal IC.  Yup, copy and paste.  Let's see how far you get with that.

By the way, in the field I work, a small design error will kill someone in a heartbeat.  So yes, it is very comparable to a doctor's work.

With respect to school, no one walks out of school without at least a handful of working designs, at least not where I graduated.  So yes, it demonstrates more ability than you would like to admit. 

[IanB]

You grab the square root IP block from the design library and implement it.
Or ,  you google 'square root algorithm verilog' , and chuck it through the synthesizer. move on. why do you want to keep reinventing the bloody wheel ? Now, if you are after developing a whole new algorithm to do square root , be my guest , But you'll have a hard time defending it to the boss why you want to spend time making a square root generator if we already have on in the IP pool , can find one on opencores and has been proven to be correct.

All of that is true of course. But one should also be open minded. Even something as straightforward as a square root calculation has been reinvented when special requirements necessitated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_inverse_square_root

In most cases one should look to what exists, but occasionally creativity is warranted.

[vxp036000]

I like how no one has pointed out the tech that invented amplifier pre-distortion techniques, built the first HD infrared CCD, defined the architecture for the AMD FX-4100... Oh, that's right.  It was done by folks who went through 6 to 8 years of school studying the worthless theory.

[free_electron]

design library doesn't have a square root compatible with your process

You can synthesize logic in ANY process. Even in an analog process. All you need is 3 primitives. NOT , AND OR. Everything else can be constructed from those when it comes to digital.  A single transistor forms a not gate , and gates can be made in wired-logic with diodes if needed. Square root is an algorithm a trained monkey can execute. I don't know how it works. I never had the need , nor the desire to find out. If the need ever arises i will look up 'square root algorithm' , read it and code it up. Knowing how to do it is irrelevant. it's a party trick. nothing else. useless knowledge. Besides, if i ever catch an engineer coding up a square root algortihm i'll fire him. That is a trivial job that can easily be done by a tech...

what happens when your copied square root design doesn't work

Then you were too stupid to verify it works and pick a working one and you should not be an engineer ! You use proven designs. Cadence, Mentor and other IP vendors will happily supply...

And performance?  You're only given x number of clock cycles to execute your square root operation.  It needs x digits of accuracy.  It needs to fit in this physical area, meet some power requirements, I/O requirements...  Yup, copy and paste.  Let's see how far you get with that.

For any given algorithm you will need x clock cycles. can't go faster than that. no point in trying. As for area , same thing. if a flipflop is 1 square millimeter in your process and you need 10 flipflops you need 10 square millimeter + x amount of routing space. if the boss tells you you only get 5 square milliemter .. bad luck it can't be done. You can try until the cats come home.
As for power requirements , I/O requirements. same as above. if you need 8 datalines and you only have 4 you will have to cook up some mulitplexing scheme and you will incur a speed penalty. And if every mos has x gate charge and y leakage you will be wasting x electrons per clock cycle. Multiply by clock speed and you know consumption. The formulas are known , The lab has characterised all cells for your given process and it is all fed in the design library. You don't even need a calculator, the design tool will tell you. If it can't be done you will have to either shrink technology, get lower leakage technology, drop supply voltage. You can't bend the laws of physics.

None of the problems you mentioned require you to know how a square root algorithm works. Knowing how the algorithm works is IRRELEVANT in al those cases. (maybe you could give them to your tech. He'll know how to do it)

Here's another slapper : ( i went back through the thread .... )

What I disapprove of is how a lot of techs can't accept that they don't have the same understanding of electronics as an EE. 

What i disapprove off is engineers that think techs are a lower life form to be treated with disrespect and disdain. And especially disapprove of engineers that think that techs could never have a greater understanding of EE than their 'engineer overlords'. Real engineers do not look down on, or consider themselves 'better than'. They work alongside.
Engineers need to know and accept that techs know things that engineers don't and vice versa. They collaborate... they don't piss on each other (friendly bantering aside)

So get off your throne... you are making a fool of yourself.

as for  :

You would get laughed at trying to work at a place like that with an undergraduate degree or lower.

Nobody in SV (silicon Valley) looks down on you if you don't have a formal degree. It's how many successfull designs you have, how many products are sold or used every single day that contain your design or idea and how much money they bring in for the company that matters. Heck , half of the companies out here were started by degree-less people...

What does get frowned upon is thinking you are better because you got a ribbon in school....

I like how no one has pointed out the techs

- that have to fix all the crap the golden ribbon engineers produce so it actually works. those are the real heroes.

or the techs that made the first board for the untested silicon, debug the non-working chip, found the internally misconnected reset line (one block was active high, the other active low. the 'engineers' forgot an inverter...) , did a cut with the laser on the naked die , plunked a probe needle on it to set the reset line to the right level, got the crystal oscillator to run and found the bug in the mask-rom bootloader , patched it , so the software people could go on and write software...

DO NOT TALK DOWN ON TECHS !

[vxp036000]

Again, more name calling.  I'm not saying techs aren't needed.  I never said that EEs knew everything that techs do.  I did say that EEs know some things that techs do not.  And you still haven't answered my questions about the techs that invented the things I already mentioned.  What techs are working in R&D doing design at Google, Agilent Labs, and all the other tech hot spots? 

So when you don't meet the area, I/O, power specs because your copied design doesn't meet it, you tell your customer it's not possible?  Hah, I'll jump in and blow their minimum requirements right out of the water using my own algorithm / architecture.  Now you lost a customer to your competitor.

One more point: at least in my country, it is almost impossible to get an engineering job without a degree.  And if you want to design circuits, it's a minimum of an MS. That's what the employers are looking for and there is a reason for it.

[free_electron]

Again, more name calling.

pot calling kettle black. You started it !

the techs that invented the things I already mentioned.

so ... that's three things for the engineers... how many things where invented by techs ?. ( see my list of 'great names'. they were all without 'engineering degree' , yet they were the biggest inventors of all time. There wouldn't be any 'electronic engineering' if it weren't for the degree-less trailblazers...
Bill gates ? The two steve's that started that 'fruity' company ?
Even einstein didn't have a degree. I dare you to top that !

  What techs are working in R&D doing design at Google, Agilent Labs, and all the other tech hot spots? 

Come down here and i'll introduce you to a whole bunch. I have been in electronics all my life (19 years professionally now) . I do work in Silicon valley, I am part of a design team that makes mixed signal silicon with production numbers that top 1 million devices a day. People trust their family pictures to it. Google has massive buildings full of these devices, each with one of these chips on board. Been doing that for seven years. The 12 years prior to that i worked on DSL technology before people knew what that was. I was part of the team that made the first working modem. Got the line matching hybrid to work right, did the pcb design (very tricky one. lots of calculations to get impedances correct, flight times, matched line lengths etc.. the engineers were scared of that.. pcb design was unknown territory for them..) , got the first cached ARM to run (the above mentioned tech that found and fixed the misconnected reset line in the silicon was me...) . I rewrote the entire bootloader (after fixing the bug in the first one and finding out it was still total crap). Every DSL CO modem chip uses that bootloader. It is now the standard. Subsequent silicon releases implemented the logic to interconnect ARM DSP memory and the other blocks that i first had designed and hand built using TTL chips on breadboard and proven it worked. They also use the mulitport memory architecture i devised to pump up throughput.

Not bad for someone that quit school at 18, does not have a formal degree, has a job as senior staff engineer and does R&D on new technology. I go all over the world teaching and helping other engineers and techs use and design in these devices. I help them troubleshoot their designs ( even if it has nothing to do with my device, but with the system in general ). I never get this let's talk down on the tech attitude. Not in the US, not in Asia, not in India. It's only some stuck-up european countries that think the world of themselves. Yes, i am from europe myself so i can say this. Certain european countries have made it their engineers culture to piss on anything and anyone that does not have a framed piece of paper. It is ladled on in their schools and universities.

So yeah, it brushes me the wrong way whenever i hear 'engineers' talk down on 'techs'. Techs have nothing to be ashamed of and should be treated with respect.

So come on down, and i'll introduce you to some 'techs'. But leave your attitude home ( or make sure you wear an asbestos overcoat.... it may heat up very quickly ).

Hah, I'll jump in and blow their minimum requirements right out of the water using my own algorithm / architecture. 

hold it.... 'your' algorithm ?  We were talking about the algorithm you learned in school.... it'll be pretty much useless.. Inbetween the time you learned it and now there are probably better/faster algorithms ot there than that old thing. So it is still useless. a party trick. Nothing more.