On "education", and on the idiocy of hiring practices
- Thread starter johnbryanpeters
- Start date
I don't know, I did a lot of analytical stuff for my MS that I do today in my job. I also cringed at 10 page reports and now find myself pushing out that kind of stuff left and right. It may not always align with one's career path, and maybe that's the real issue there, how the F do you really know what you want to do when you are 16-17 years old? You really have no F-ing idea, so when you go to school, it's all kind of a cluster-F of classes and if you were lucky enough to be super-narrow in your path, like Aerospace Engineer, then your schooling will likely be well suited for it, but for more general stuff, it's going to be just like the article says.
My main beef is that there always appears to be very little quality control for teaching and really making people learn. Especially in some of the core stuff like science, math, english. These are often some of the hardest things to learn and the teaching methods employed are often archaic and tend to screw over the people that fall behind just a bit.
My main beef is that there always appears to be very little quality control for teaching and really making people learn. Especially in some of the core stuff like science, math, english. These are often some of the hardest things to learn and the teaching methods employed are often archaic and tend to screw over the people that fall behind just a bit.
I did one semester at Knox after graduating from HS, than bagged it and worked at a bunch of jobs, than the Army. At 25, I went to Northeastern serious-like and came out with an EE at 30. When at Northeastern, I put up with zero disruption from kiddies being paid for by their parents. Instructors, with few exceptions, were top notch.
In the last decade of my career I interviewed a lot of candidates. I wasn't interested in degrees, I was interested in what they could do, their capability to learn, and their ability to work with others.
In the last decade of my career I interviewed a lot of candidates. I wasn't interested in degrees, I was interested in what they could do, their capability to learn, and their ability to work with others.
I've known "smart" people who you would never want to work with, and "dumb" people who you would be ecstatic to have on your team. School can only teach you so much, there are intangible qualities that make some people valuable beyond what any grade or piece of paper could tell you.
That said, a lot of the stuff i learned in my ME program has gone *poof* and vanished. What stuck with me more than any of the individual concepts was the thought process required to solve problems and how to verbalize that. I am shocked at the number of engineers I encounter that have a difficult time collecting/interpreting data to make a cogent argument and plan.
I think in the past couple of decades, the evolution of technology has outpaced the ability of the education system to evolve and keep up with it. We are, as a whole, becoming a more educated nation, but other than record high levels of student debt I'm not sure we have a ton to show for it.
