Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
(OP)
Last fall, I went to my 10 year university graduation reunion. Looking back, I am glad that I chose engineering as a career. I enjoy what I do for a living.
And although there were some aspects of my engineering education that I enjoyed at university, I have to admit that overall I was disappointed.
Sometimes, we need some distance to make an assessment. Now, I can look back at my engineering education and I can honestly say that it was the “boot camp” program in my university that I disliked.
“Boot camp” is le mot just, when you consider that approximately half of the students either failed or dropped out on the first year. To make matters worse, I sensed that many of the members of the academic staff were actually proud of this fact. Many students feel that the main goal of the university is to “weed out” students, instead of providing them with an education.
What did this outdated mentality accomplish, except turn young students away from our noble profession?
Unfortunately, too many universities and colleges still have “boot camp” programs in place. What I would like to see is university engineering programs that students can enjoy. Much can be done to make engineering school more appealing. For example, interesting design projects can be incorporated into courses.
Certainly, the programs should be challenging, but the outdated “weeding out” process must be a thing of the past. Our new generations will not buy into the old cliché that one must “pay your dues”.
An interesting fact that I learned at the reunion, was that many of the top students that had enjoyed this “boot camp” program, were selling mutual funds. And many of the students who truly enjoyed “the existential pleasures of engineering” (to quote from Samuel Florman), were working as engineers, designing, manufacturing and building things.
In the next five years we must say good bye to the old “boot camp” engineering school program, and put it in the dust bin where it belongs, and demand a better engineering education for future generations.
And although there were some aspects of my engineering education that I enjoyed at university, I have to admit that overall I was disappointed.
Sometimes, we need some distance to make an assessment. Now, I can look back at my engineering education and I can honestly say that it was the “boot camp” program in my university that I disliked.
“Boot camp” is le mot just, when you consider that approximately half of the students either failed or dropped out on the first year. To make matters worse, I sensed that many of the members of the academic staff were actually proud of this fact. Many students feel that the main goal of the university is to “weed out” students, instead of providing them with an education.
What did this outdated mentality accomplish, except turn young students away from our noble profession?
Unfortunately, too many universities and colleges still have “boot camp” programs in place. What I would like to see is university engineering programs that students can enjoy. Much can be done to make engineering school more appealing. For example, interesting design projects can be incorporated into courses.
Certainly, the programs should be challenging, but the outdated “weeding out” process must be a thing of the past. Our new generations will not buy into the old cliché that one must “pay your dues”.
An interesting fact that I learned at the reunion, was that many of the top students that had enjoyed this “boot camp” program, were selling mutual funds. And many of the students who truly enjoyed “the existential pleasures of engineering” (to quote from Samuel Florman), were working as engineers, designing, manufacturing and building things.
In the next five years we must say good bye to the old “boot camp” engineering school program, and put it in the dust bin where it belongs, and demand a better engineering education for future generations.





RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
I do have a problem with the system if a student having trouble can find no place to get help, but I expect them to make an effort to learn the information on their own before approaching the TA or professor and demanding they be led by the hand until they understand. Many don't really try.
I agree that we need to "demand a better engineering education for future generations" but I also believe that the engineering classes don't do enough to weed out the students with less aptitude. I took a sophomore-level class recently to prepare for graduate school in EE (and no, I hadn't been exposed to the material before - I have a degree in physics and math) where I received an A grade with a 97% average and a student received an A- grade with a 73% average. Looks like I worked too hard to learn the material. My fault. I shouldn't have tried so hard.
I think a better engineering education program could be developed by helping PhDs learn how to teach. Assuming they can because they have a PhD is just plain wrong. Many professors could benefit from a teacher-training course, and most have never had one (this pretty much applies to all subjects).
One problem I see with colleges that don't introduce students to a taste of difficulty (or even failure) is that they build egos. People are afraid to be wrong, or their feelings get hurt. Too bad. A program that lowers egos builds humility and teaches a student to learn (and respect) their ability level. An engineer that strays too far from their ability level due to overconfidence is asking for trouble.
By the way, I'm about to go back to school full time to get my PhD after 9 years in industry - so I can teach. I hope to get tenured somewhere, then make teaching my priority and research secondary (though I won't neglect it entirely). I really do want to work toward giving students a better engineering education, but their effort won't enter into their grades unless it shows up as knowledge of the material.
xnuke
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
It is true that some potentially good engineers fail to make it through the "weeding out" process. However, a less academically rigorous program will allow too many through that should not be engineers.
Companies can choose to hire B.S. engineer or B.S. engineering technology graduates. Interesting enough, they prefer the B.S. engineer even when the engineering technology graduate appears to be a better fit to the job.
The only explanation I can see for this is that the company figures that an unqualified person is more likely to have made it throught the engineering technology program and so does not want to take on the increased risk of hiring an ET graduate.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
The points that xnuke and rbcoulter make are valid ones. We need to understand the basics like as if it were simpley natural in order to fully appreciate the advance topics.
If your struggling over simple statics or mechanics of materials, you can't expect to learn much about the reinforced concrete or steel design if you problem lies in calculating the loads on the members.
Often times I teach engineering mechanics classes and I am really surprised each semester how little interest some students have in the subject. Many expect you do to thier homework for them...I could go on and on. I make myself available to them at anytime of the day. I practically have to beg them to come to me with problems or to call and set up a time for extra work/help.
I bring a lot of practical examples to class in an effort pique their interest. For some, its just not there. At that age, not everyone knows what they want to do.
When I was young I was timid about the so-called weed out classes but now I am in favor of them.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Many engineers have more lives in thier hands with one design than doctor will in his entire life.
ProEpro
www.whitelightdesign.com
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Remember that the content and grading in high school courses is all over the map. What may be an A at one high school could only be a C at another. One high school could get students to the start of calculus another may only be teaching introductory algebra.
I would rather see the weeding out stage at the first year of university. That way the determining factors can be the same for all.
Having said that the weeding out should be somewhat humane. There should be additional help for struggling students and a second chance for those who fail. The average student who applies himself or herself should be able to succeed.
My graduating class was just less than half the starting class. We lost most of these after first year. There were a few dropouts after second and almost none past that point.
What’s better finding out early that you are not suited to be an engineer or put in the full four years and then find out in the real world?
Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng
Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
I understand that some countries have national exams for university students which might have some merit in the US.
I took a degree in chemistry after engineering. At that school, the final for each chem course was a standardized test developed by the American Chemical Society. The benefit there is that you remove the variation in difficulty level that exists between different profs. It's also nice to see how you stack up against a large pool of students.
That's my biggest gripe with universities, the lack of uniformity between individual teachers. Inside of two semesters everybody knows who to try to dodge. Ideally, an 'A' from Duke should represent the same subject mastery as an 'A' from Podunk State. This should be especially true in different sections at the same university. Unfortunately, it's not.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
I don't make the above statement intending to be glib--as an undergrad something close to 40% of the engineering students either dropped out or changed majors at my school. Discounting the kids who transferred due to lack of funds (and went to other engineering programs), I don't recall more than a handful of students who would've (in my estimation) made even mediocre engineers.
As a TA at a prestigious school, we still had to weed out kids. I can say that the professor and TA staff did everything we could to allow students opportunities to pass the class (a sophomore-level introductory course). Out of about 60 students, only a few failed. None of those who failed garnered an ounce of sympathy from the staff (in each case for this course, it was laziness over intellectual capacity).
I agree with the above comment made about doctors--leave the liberal arts majors to deal with fragile egos. Engineering and sciences are much more quantitative (and riskier). One can opine forever on the merits of an artist over others in a LA curriculum; in this even hacks can earn a living. Hacks should not be allowed to debate whether or not a bridge or building will stand--this process demands some level of skill. If in the process of requiring competence some people find themselves not up to snuff, that is the sad reality of life. It's better than the alternative (needless deaths).
Brad
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
The big thing I think should be taught is problem solving. Once you know how to do that, you can apply it to any subject; you just need to gain the appropriate background in the subject. But at my own prestigious alma mater, such a thing wasn't taught. You had to learn it by "sink or swim" in freshman physics, without even knowing that it was essential, and without being given any direction. Luckily for many of us, freshman physics was pass/fail, which took the grades pressure off the adjustment period.
Are there "The engineering approach to problem solving" courses out there? (There's a "problem solving" course in the program I teach in now, but it's not really about problem solving; it's about programming. Not the thing I have in mind. Programming's a useful tool, but it's not the first thing you have to do to solve a problem.)
If such subjects do exist, I'd be interested to see the approach -- maybe something I could incorporate into my own teaching.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
As a mature aged student, I underwent the first year of engineering with my eyes closed to the reality of the engineering degree. At exam time I soon learnt that you need to really apply yourself to the theory so that you can solve problems. My learning curve included a couple of interviews with lecturers and the head of faculty as well as discussions with "mentor" engineers. I also stood back and looked at whether or not I really wanted to do engineering. It was an extremely tough time, academically, emotionally and financially.
This learning curve lasted 2 years and helped me to avoid being weeded out.
Students who were in similar situations dropped out, some stayed. I think that the process helped people to re-organise their priorities and refocuss them on there chosen career. Our course treated many students as potential engineers and gave those that weren't the chance to swap to other courses often taking credit for subjects with them where appropriate. So even though students were weeded out they weren't pushed aside from university.
regards
sc
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
What is an excellent engineering education?
For me an excellent engineering education is one that is challenging, but also interesting. It is an education that helps develop engineers with outstanding communication skills.
Why does the stereotype of the nerd engineer with poor communication skills exist?
It is in part because engineering education lacks courses that help develop the students’ communication skills.
Why are there still so few women engineers? Why are there so few minorities? There are many women in law and in medicine, so what is wrong with engineering?
It is not because of scholastic aptitude, it is because the engineering program in university is seen by others (including many intelligent women) as being dull and cumbersome. There is an overkill of math and science courses, and too few “interesting” design and group projects.
Yes, I agree that engineering school must always be challenging. But at the same time it should be interesting, it should appeal to women and minorities, and it should help students become better communicators.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
"There is something very wrong with engineering education, when a university focuses on “wedding out” students, instead of proving them with an excellent engineering education."
I agree entirely, and I think any school which focuses on "weeding out" students for that purpose alone is a poor school. I personally have not experienced the case in which this happened by design. Rather, "weeding out" happens as part of the rigors of a difficult curriculum. In essence, "weeding out" is the unfortunate reality of a challenging curriculum (such as you have recommended), not an end in itself.
A certain amount of communications courses are required for an engineering accreditation. Should there be more? Perhaps, but at the expense of what other courses?
The dearth of minority and female engineers (and scientists for that matter) is much more due to a prevailing negative societal stereotype with math and science (best exemplified by talking Barbie stating "Math is hard"). Based on my experiences, good engineering requires a grasp of "high-level" (to non-engineers) mathematics such as calculus. Most girls and under-represented minorities in the US are discouraged from striving to appreciate and conquer math and science. This happens long before they enter a university.
Calculus is the foundation for math, science, and engineering. Most people I know who consciously eliminated engineering as an academic option did so because of calculus, not because of the courses which followed. Are you advocating an elimination of a calculus sequence? I don't think anything short of such a bold move will correct the problem (if the problem is indeed what you suggest it to be).
Cheers,
Brad
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
One of my favorite stories of all time is when Mattel got the ram chips messed around in the production line and had a bunch of talking G.I. Joes that said "Math is hard" in their best valley girl voice, and a bunch of Barbies that shouted "Get 'em boys! Move in!" in a grizzled sea-bass type drawl. The error went unnoticed until some got placed on the toy store shelves.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Any accredited school will have lots of typical communications course like English, literature, public speaking, and foreign languages. They don’t build people skills. They don’t make you more interesting. The only real difference in between a liberal arts degree and an engineering degree is that the liberal arts majors have more time for socialization.
What they should haveinstead are “Engineering Communications” classes. These should cover things like drawings, specifications, work instructions, lingo, and explaining complex issues.
ProEpro
www.whitelightdesign.com
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
The only thing engineers don't need is turning all their attention away from a well-rounded education. We need a good balance of letters, science and art. All science and no art makes for a very dull boy indeed.
And don't give me that nonsense about they "have more time for socialization." My poly sci friends spent their spare time sleeping, or playing foosball. Or watching reruns of Hogan's Heroes (I know nothink! Nothink!) They weren't honing "socialization skills"!
Having said all that, engineering education isn't what it used to be. Literally. In the 1970's, it took around 145 credit hours to earn a BSCE or BSME. Now it only takes 120. You had a lot more time to socialize than we did!
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Did you also walk uphill both ways in the snow?
Those gray hairs are showing.
Brad
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
1) engineering isnt always a cake walk. there is a lot of thinking and effort that has to be put into each design problem. if someone drops out of a class because it was "too hard" then good riddance. if you cant handle a difficult class, how are you going to handle a tough problem in the "real world." you cant just 'take a zero on it' you have to figure the problem out.
2) i personally dont want a mediocre engineer designing things that i will be using some day. if anyone is allowed to pass through as an engineer, a lot of crappily designed, unsafe things are going to be made and i might get hurt. i dont want to get hurt.
i do agree though that instructors need to provide help outside of class. 'sink or swim' isnt an effective teaching tool.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Actually, I had to swim both ways - remember, it was in Houston! And as to the gray hairs, well, mine's turning loose before it turns gray!
But seriously, the reduction in credit hours is quite serious. ASCE is so concerned that they are now pushing for a Master's degree to be considered the first professional degree. Expect most of the other engineering societies to follow suit over the next decade.
It's all about money - literally. Universities can generate higher total fees - without raising tuition - by taking in more students without increasing staff or facilities. They have done this by lowering the credit hours required, which reduces the number of classes that must be taken. Capitalism at work!
I wonder why ABET hasn't dealt with this by threatening to withhold accreditation; I guess they're all bark and no bite.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Note that I'm not disputing your statement; in fact I may be corroborating it.
Interesting . . .
Brad
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
ProEpro “Should it be easy to get a medical degree?”
”Many engineers have more lives in thier hands with one design than doctor will in his entire life.”
A “boot camp” University with an obstacle course curriculum does not make better engineers. Nor does it help promote safer designs. What I am advocating is the development of well rounded engineers with excellent communications and leadership skills. Technical Writing courses (e.g. memo writing 101) are not enough, and are typically quite dull. It is the liberal arts, specifically an understanding of philosophy and of our history that helps promote better communicators and leaders.
Unfortunately, our universities fail to grasp this simple concept and they continue to be stuck in the 1940’s.
Focht3 “The only thing engineers don't need is turning all their attention away from a well-rounded education. We need a good balance of letters, science and art. All science and no art makes for a very dull boy indeed.”
I completely agree. And I will add that all science and no art make a nerd engineer with poor communication skills. We do not need nerds; we need good communicators and good leaders.
Cbiber “The big thing I think should be taught is problem solving. Once you know how to do that, you can apply it to any subject; you just need to gain the appropriate background in the subject. But at my own prestigious alma mater, such a thing wasn't taught. You had to learn it by "sink or swim" in freshman physics, without even knowing that it was essential, and without being given any direction.”
This is an excellent idea. I agree there needs to be a freshman course on engineering problem solving.
Qshake “Often times I teach engineering mechanics classes and I am really surprised each semester how little interest some students have in the subject. Many expect you do to thier homework for them...I could go on and on. I make myself available to them at anytime of the day. I practically have to beg them to come to me with problems or to call and set up a time for extra work/help.”
This is a very problematic situation, and I do sympathize with you. However, rather than blaming the students, could the problem be that not enough is being done to attract better engineering students to our Universities?
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
I must, however, object to the term "boot camp". There is a definite difference between "weeding out" and "boot camp". "Weeding out" is simply a cheap attempt at scaring the timid away from a school that is too small to handle demand.
"Boot camp" is a training course designed to ensure the future success of recruits entering the military. Everything about boot camp is a calculated learning experience to imart necessary skills to a newcomer entering military life. Moreover, much of military training is a trial by fire experience which teaches the students to reach deep inside and find the strength (intellectual, spiritual, and physical) that they didn't know was there.
I believe engineering students and students in general need more boot camp-like experiences.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Thank you for your reply. Here is the definition of boot camp from dictionary.com:
boot camp
n.
1- A training camp for military recruits.
2 - A correctional facility that uses the training techniques applied to military recruits to teach usually youthful offenders socially acceptable patterns of behavior.
I am referring to the second definition (i.e. not the military training).
The boot camp approach that is used to teach youthful offenders is not a good model for engineering students. In fact, I am not so sure it helps youthful offenders much either.
Cheers,
Joseph
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
As far as "weeding out" goes, if the end result is students emerging with greater strength of character, then I don't care what the university's intent was.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Sadly enough, the opposite is true. We are not developing students with "greater strength in character". But we are developing poor communicators instead of well rounded engineers.
Our profession is facing critical problems:
1) The perception that Engineers have poor communication skills
2) The lack of Engineers in leadership roles
3) The lack of women and minorities in Engineering
4) Unemployment and under employment
Sticking to the old school and putting our heads in the sand will not help. Our Engineering Educations is due for a major revamp.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
In spite of my alm,a mater's efforts to help every student succeed, I was shocked to see how much the little snivelers whined when they got homework.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Our profession is facing critical problems:
1) The perception that Engineers have poor communication skills
Many of the engineers that I deal with DO have poor communication skills. It seems that a superiority complex comes with the package when you purchase an engineer. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule, but the engineers that actually CAN effectively communicate are quickly sucked up and reassigned into other roles.
2) The lack of Engineers in leadership roles
See point 1 for an explaination of why engineers aren't in more leadership roles.
3) The lack of women and minorities in Engineering
Bah. Pure drivel. If more women wanted to be engineers, they would. As far as minorities in engineering, I see plenty of "minorities" in other parts of the world being engineers. Again, if more American minorities wanted to be engineers, they could.
4) Unemployment and under employment
I understand unemployement, but not "under employment". Aside from that, I wholeheartedly agree with you here. We need more employed engineers in America!
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Under employment =
At least that's my take on it.
Based on what I see here in Northern CA, it's a serious problem.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Not everyone has the attributes to become an engineer so a certain amount of attrition is to be expected. This may give a bit of a bootcamp or purposeful weeding out connotation to the curriculum. I don't think or expect this to ever go away. From my experience, most of the "weeding out" occurred within the first year of school with the first level calculus, physics, chemistry or other technical course. This was where the student decided whether or not they really wanted to persue an engineering degree at all or the type of engineering they wanted to major in. "Major(s)" did not have to be decided on until the end of the sophomore year. Generally from that time onward, there was very little attrition.
I think that most of the attrition at my alma-mater was due to students becoming surprised and therefore overwhelmed at the sheer pace of the information being presented. It rapidly became apparent to those who succeeded that we were going to have to work hard and often together in order to make it through the program (skills that have definitely helped in my working career). Those that left were often happier or relieved knowing that they were meant for a different vocation.
I agree wholeheartedly on the need for more rounded education and communication skills. These were often left open as electives (though required to be outside of the sciences/engineering curriculum). Some sort of technical writing or communication class, ethics, and history could be added to a "recommended" electives listing leaving others completely open for exploration. Perhaps the best class I had was "Senior Lab" in which we had to setup, and conduct experiments then write up the results in a format "suitable for publication". A new experiment was conducted each week with the results due at weeks end.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Your point is well taken.
I agree with you, hard work in engineering education is very valuable and has much merit.
My main concern is that there should be much more emphasis on developing communication skills. And there should also be more engineering courses (e.g. interesting design courses), in the first 2 years of the curriculum, so that the students realize that there is a reason for studying all this math and science (i.e. they see the light at the end of the tunnel).
Here is what I would like to see done:
1) At least 1 language / communication / history course per term
2) Elimination of "graduate courses" in the undergraduate curriculum (e.g no quantum physics courses for undergrads)
3) All math and science courses must have more emphasis on presentation and communication skills (e.g. a student should be able to stand up in front of the class and explain how he solved a problem, or as you said present a report "suitable for publication")
4) A mandatory Engineering Problem Solving course should be added for first year students
5) A mandatory Applied Engineering (e.g. design) course should be added for second year students
6) More emphasis on philosophy and history. A student should know about Newton's life and about Descartes' philosophy, and not just memorize their theorems.
7) An engineering student should be able to write essays on important social issues, and write an excellent resume and cover letter (i.e. not just memos).
Let's not settle for the status quo...
So, I ask the engineering community...
Why can't we be better?
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Sounds good to me. It's too bad that there are not likely to be many professors who visit these forums. There are a lot of gems to be found in this information mine.
Regards
I might take some exception with the quantum physics at undergrad levels. For my degree it was required in order to understand some of the devices making use of quantum characteristics. It would also be needed for anyone looking into the nuclear field.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
The purpose of many courses of military training is not only to impart knowledge of a particular subject matter, but also to condition the student for certain types of behavior.
One example of this is the U.S. Navy nuclear training program. There, students need to assimilate new information at a rate 2-3 times faster than the average college student. Additionally, the school is set up to condition students to question everything they see and hear and not accept anything strictly at face value.
Putting engineering students through a grueling academic schedule does more than teach calculus and weed out the unmotivated. To succeed, a student must be either extremely gifted -OR- he must catch on to managing his time and setting his priorities while simultaneously maintaining his physical and mental health.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
I agree with your post, however many universities already basically do this.
I know mine did!
I agree with a couple of things I see in the postings. Weeding out is necessary! However, after the first year of jumping through hoops, the courses should focus on education and people skills.
Again, this is what my university did!
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Your initials and attitude match those of someone I knew in college. Never mind.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
At my university we had the following courses:
1st Year:
Seminar Class - basically public speaking
English 111 - Shakespeare and Classics
2nd Year:
Design Class - A design class were you actually work for a company for 4 months and they give you a design problem. You work with your industry contact and are assigned a professor at the university to answer questions for you. The main focus of this is a professionally written report and a presentation in front of the faculty and industry.
Art Class - Take one course of your choice from the Arts and Science Department.
3rd Year:
Communication Class - A public speaking and professional writing course that they push you very hard in. (This is very key)
2 Lab Classes - These are very intense hands on classes. (Good Stuff)
4th Year:
Design Class - Similar to 2nd year class. Involves faculty and industry but runs for 8 months.
1 Lab Class - See 3rd Year
1 Art Class - See 2nd Year
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Women and minorities are underrepresented in engineering fields, and I believe that it hurts the profession as a whole. We need to represent all of society, not just one portion of it. The hostility that women/minorities encounter in some engineering fields is quite real. Engineering school is tough enuf-why stick around if other students and faculty make it clear you are not welcome?
I thought we got over this archaic view 20 years ago (that women just don't want to be engineers). Unfortunately, speaking with current undergrads, things do not seem to be improving.
"Boot camp" is a symptom of the belief that engineers have to be taught to be tough. Problem solving can be taught in other ways.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Unfortunately too many women are now herded into engineering by "encouraging women enrollment in engineering" groups. It's all good to "fight the power". But I have talked to a lot of women lately that either dropped out after first year to do what they really wanted to study or are pretty sour engineers.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Most of my female friends from college aren't engineers anymore --
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
* The few women in my engineering program went to school for free largely due to an overabundance of scholarships available to women in engineering careers.
The overabundance is caused by not enough women taking advantage of them.
(i.e. Most women could care less about engineering. It's not a stereotypically "feminine" position."
* The "minorities" I went to school with only considered themselves "minorities" on scholarship applications. I cannot tell you that they were treated any different or given detremental consideration over "majority" colored students. (That is the way it should be, BTW.) The "minorities" were the first to be hired after graduation, however. Everyone has a strong incentive to be "affirmative action" compliant. In this sense, the "minorities" actually have the advantage.
I thought we got over this archaic view 20 years ago (that women just don't want to be engineers).
I think that the archaic view is the one that says "to think that women don't want to be engineers is archaic." You go into a sixth grade, eighth grade, or senior class and ask for girl's hands on "Who wants to be an engineer when they grow up?" and you'll see your the root cause of the "problem".
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
When I switched to engineering, I could ask questions about applications and get no nonsense straight forward real world answers. I found this to be very encouraging and motivating. I also tended to learn more when I had research projects where I actually had to design and build somnething. Universities should consider letting engineering teachers teach the math and physics courses to engineering students.
I had a tough time with some of my courses but I stuck it out and finished. There were some students I thought would be pretty good engineers but they couldn't put the time into it because they had to maintain full time jobs. I think that's a travesty. I worked also and I could sympathize. In cases like this the weeding out is not good because there are many students who would do well under different circumstances. They were not academically or intellectually deficient.
I also feel that the overall university curriculum is geared more toward preparing the student to be a researcher.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
J.G
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
At my alma mater fewer than 20% of the engineers graduated in four years even though we had to declare on matriculation and changing majors was nearly impossible because it was so impacted.
Even if you could handle 17-19 units per quarter, every quarter, there was no way you'd get all your classes to stay on schedule. The 4-yr grads usually had at least 2 summers in there.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
J.G
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
After reading many of the responses above, I came to the conclusion that many underachievers are trying to defend their position in life by blaming the system. Just because they were spoon fed at home does not mean that they should expect this in life. Remember, when the going gets tough, (the weak quit) the tough get going. I believe that the purpose of engineering school is to develop basic skills to enable one to research and solve problems. No coddling should be allowed in school. It reduces the quality of education to the lowest common denominator. When I went to school, I was interested in getting the most education for the dollar invested.
CRG
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
CRB
No one is whining. You obviously didn't read as many responses as you say you did.
Your statement "When I went to school, I was interested in getting the most education for the dollar invested." is exactly the point these people are trying to make. Why be uncessarily burdened with "busy work" simply for the purpose of washing out lesser students? Instead, why not cover the other 95% of engineering that doesn't normally make it into the classroom? The "lesser students" will wash out of their own accord because of lack of interest and boredom; if not in college, then after they work for a couple of years. How many miserable engineers (that hate doing their work) do you know? I'd say not many.
The whole tone of your reply is condescending, as if you have something some other people here don't have. I'd consider that character trait justification for some serious self-evaluation, and remember: There is always someone smarter, better looking, and faster than you.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Your statement "why be unnecessarily burdened with busy work . . ." implies that there is coursework which only exists for the point of frustrating us. I ask this question in all sincerity--what courses in your experience qualified as this "busy work"? I have thought through all of my coursework in undergrad, and there is not a single engineering nor math class which I can list as such. Some people could argue that the humanities electives would qualify, but these are clearly outside the scope of what this thread is discussing.
All of my math requirements were necessary to appreciate engineering theories which were later presented. All of my lower-level engineering courses were likewise necessary to appreciate subsequent engineering courses. Were many of these lower-level classes hard? Yes. But they weren't hard for the sake of nailing people, they were hard for the sake of PREPARING us.
Maybe others (including yourself) had a different experience, or maybe a similar experience but have not had the opportunity to use them. I am sincerely curious--what particular science/math/engineering (required) courses did you have that you view as being of little use?
Brad
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Oh I remeber now how badly I needed to study unique factorization and congruences, the ring of integers modulo n and its units, Fermat's little theorem, Wilson's theorem, Chinese remainder theorem, finite fields, quadratic reciprocity, and the Fermat theorem on primes congruent to one modulo four, etc.
I think most people will agree that this was a hoop to jump through!
Having said that, I have no problem with that. However I made it through the hoop so I'm a little biased.
QCE
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Rhodie, I do have something that a few people who have commented in this thread don’t have: Experience, Success, and Confidence. This is not to imply that you do not have these qualities. Perhaps when you recommend serious self-evaluation for someone else, you need to look at yourself first.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
I found out soon after graduation that most of what I had learned the past 5 years wasn't going to help me much in the "real world" and I've since come to the conclusion that the engineering degree just tells people that you have the problem-solving skills and the fortitude to find a solution. I will admit that at the time, I though that professor who assigned 60 calculus problems in one night was sent from satan and that he had to be crazy but as I can sit back now and look at the whole picture of the last 10 years, I am very satisfied with my university experience and some of my hardest professors are actually my favorites because I learned the most from them (except the one or two who were hard just to be hard).
Whether intentional or not, there will always be some degree of weeding out no matter how easy the professor makes it. I do think it's good practice to see just which students are there to seriously buckle down and earn a degree or which are there because they have nothing better to do.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
"I ask this question in all sincerity--what courses in your experience qualified as this "busy work"?"
1. My engineering college was ABET accredited, so my expeirence cannot be that different from most.
2. I'm of the opinion that an engineer cannot take enough math.
That said, I see no benefit of taking classes like Fortran, which took the form of one of those "washout" classes in my degree pattern. The prof. endlessly burdened us and tested us on the finer details of Fortran, a language long dead. Why not spend 16 weeks on a sampling of "modern" languages, teaching analytical thought (the important part!) for the entire time rather than a whole semester of obsolete garbage from the 70's? Fortran wasn't really hard, just pointless!
Another example: General Chemistry 2. Why!? Gen. Chem 1 I can appreciate and use, but anything further is too specific to be generally referenced by engineers. It was nothing but a prelude to Organic Chem, which is fine if you are an environmental/chemical major, but we were ME's and still required to take it. This again was a trouble spot for many of my classmates. (lack of interest?)
I left the ME program at my school in my fifth semester to pursue an MET degree. Most everyone questioned my judgement (i.e. "Can't you handle the hard stuff?") The truth of the matter is of course I could have, but I was wasting too much time in the ME program. (by taking endless classes in heat theory and fluid dynamics characteristics rather than learning reasonable engineering skills.) No freshly graduated ME I know knows anything more about CAD, CNC, PLC, Machine Shop theory, or Engineering cost analysis than any 2nd year MET student I know.
No ME program I am aware of teaches semester length classes on Quality Control, Operations Management, Material Handling / Facility Layout, ISO/QS requirements, or Logistics. Yet I see these skillsets listed in job descriptions FAR more than I see "Knowledge of micro-vibrations in FCC lattices" or "Elasticty Modeling for Thermoset Plastics". Granted, I completely understand the importance of such knowledge, but not the need to exhaust the understanding of such topics in a general engineering curriculum.
Therefore, understand that I do not hold a typical engineering degree, and that fact may disqualify my opinion on this subject, but I do believe I hold a "typical" type of engineering job, and I use a majority of the skills I learned in college rather than only a fraction. More than one ME I have worked with has expressed regret in not making the same choice I did.
I say the change that needs to be made is not eliminate the "weed-out" courses, but to become much more efficent and affectual with the coursework required. Maybe offer more distinct engineering degrees: Branch Mechanical Engineering into many specific degrees, i.e. Manufacturing, Product, Structural, Automotive, etc... Above all else, don't force me to waste 16 weeks and several hundred dollars on a class I won't make a dime off of in "the real world".
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
There is a whole world of engineering beyond the sclerotic realm of mechanical design that requires intimate knowledge of these subjects.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
1. Make fundamental things first in engineering education. Expose students to the concepts, elaborate where necessary, but don't make doctors out of undergrads, simply because the prof. wrote his doctoral thesis on the subject (and is comfortable with teaching it.)
2. I had to look up sclerotic.
3. I agree with the intent of what you are saying, but the problem is that engineers simply cannot be in college for 15 years. Make education simpler (not necessarily easier), and create more specialized majors. (This would require colleges to pick and choose specific programs, and operate on a truely not-for-profit basis, but that is another discussion!) Be more efficient, concentrate on clarity of the instruction, not "policing the ranks". Self-teaching yourself calculus because your professor had 400 other students besides you and left you with no other option doesn't make you a better engineer, it just means you got ripped off of your tuition money. (It is, after all, called "tuition" and not "intuition".) Don't neglect broad areas of basic instruction to focus on specific areas of advanced instruction for the sake of academic "haute monde".
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
I was an enlisted navy "nuke" going for a commission on a NROTC scholarship. I had seen most of the fluids and thermo before, which helped a lot. I needed more where I was going to end up (commissioned officer on nuclear submarine. For me, it was all very relevant.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Chem 2 - I would have agreed with you early in my career. Then, a failed run at getting into med school left me with a very strong chemistry background (quant, O chem, biochem, P chem, etc). That background got me two job offers, both with companies that were basically hardware folks but saw value in a hardware guy with a chem background. I took one of those positions and was ultimately given a task which didn't neatly fit into any category and one in which I had cause to regularly converse with chemists. The project was a raging success, mostly because I had enough chemistry to talk with the chemists but was still a mechanical engineer doing what was basically mechanical design.
You just never know what knowledge might prove valuable.
My dad always told me, "never turn down the chance to learn something new." I'm a huge believer in that.
WRT Fortran, it's as good as any other language for learning the fundamentals of programming without getting hung up in Windows objects. The only other that I might choose for a CSC 101 type class would be Pascal. I certainly would stay away from the various flavors of C and VB for a 1st class in programming. Just me, though.
RE: Engineering "boot camp" at universities should be a thing of the past
Thanks for answering my post in the manner which the question was asked (as opposed to taking it personally). FWIW, my second chemistry course WAS organic chem, so I'll grant you that one.
I never appreciated that there is a point to FORTRAN in particular until I had to write my own programs to insert into current commercial codes--some of today's commercial codes still utilize FORTRAN for user-extensibility reasons. I wish I hadn't forgotten as much as I had. Your particular gripes on FORTRAN appear to have more to do with a sadistic professor, and less to do with the intent of the course (which is to teach programming concepts to engineering students).
Beyond these two classes, it seems that many of your cited frustrations were with upper-level ME curriculum. It is noteworthy that I am in the field of structural analysis, yet the best work of my career (which received a very prestigious technology award) was done with knowledge in fluid mechanics and flow theory--coursework which until that time (I thought) had been wasted on me. Did I remember the exact details? No. But I had the basis and quickly refreshed myself. This is Tick's point--a BSME (and I would suspect in general any engineering BS) is intended to establish foundational capability for engineering growth. I don't begrudge you your MET, but it is a different beast in this respect.
As far specialization goes, my college (and others of which I am familiar) had a focused set of upper-level coursework ("cognates" or "specializations") which amounted to 5 courses worth of electives which were intended to deepen the knowledge of the student in a particular field. Examples within ME were Automotive, Plastics Engineering, and Machine Design. One could design their own, so long as they met criteria of a certain amount of high-level undergrad courses, and they had a coherent theme. I think this answers what you are suggesting as desired at the Jr/Sr levels.
Brad