Engineering Education: Too Narrow or Too Broad? 8

[MikeMech]

I've had discussions with many friends about the merit and return on investment of a college education. Engineering is one of the few 4-yr degrees that offer relatively high job placement and salary right out of school. Most liberal arts majors must spend more years and $$$ geting masters and even doctoral degrees before having a shot at a decent paying job in their field.

By comparison, two years of trade school might put you on track as a CNC machinist. Like engineering, the money and job demand are generally good in the field, and earnings in the same ballpark.

Other issues aside, it seems that financially speaking, the more you can concentrate on technical education alone, the better the investment.

With more engineering students taking 5 years instead of 4 to finish, why should they have to take the liberal arts course requirements? Should engineering be treated more as a technical trade from an educational standpoint? Do any of you think the liberal arts aspect to your education has paid for itself during your engineering career, or was it just a way for the college to get more tuition from you?

 

[Iskit4iam]

PS-
You raise excellent and valid points. My complaint about the LA coursework isn't that it wasn't beneficial, it was that it wasn't focused. There should be special courses aimed at technical professionals.

Why does no one seem to make the argument that history majors wouldn't benefit from having a better understanding of math and technology. But, that's another thread.

 

[TheTick]

re: Why does no one seem to make the argument that history majors wouldn't benefit from having a better understanding of math and technology. But, that's another thread.

Add journalists to that list!

"Great ideas need landing gear as well as wings."--C. D. Jackson

 

[Muggle]

I'm going to wade in here, bt first let me say I am not an engineer - and my degrees are liberal arts degrees I do however, work extensively with engineers to resolve wastewater treatment issues.

The problem, as I experience it, is not limited to engineers, but is true of any speciality degree in the sciences - and that is a "narrow point of view". By that I mean and inability or a refusal on some folks parts, to look outside their own technical area of expertise to find an answer to a probelm. The univeristies and much or our industry is based on "specialties" and though that helps in specific areas, it does not allow for "synthesis" of information, techniques, etc. that can lead to new and innovative solutions. Too narrow a focus and you loose the forest for the trees. 30%+ (according to the national news) of CEO's in this country are liberal arts graduates - Why? Because these folks have a "little bit of knowledge on a wide range of subjects" meaning they can synthasize information to find a solution. Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, and others did this - they understood various mechanics (chemical, structural, electrical, etc.) and could "see" a soution, though needed a wide range of various "specialists" concerned with only one aspect of the problem to resolve various issues, then took all the answers and put them together to create the main/large view solution.

The "well rounded definition" that the universities use, ahs been bastardized to diminish the engineer and technical student as a matter of social standing - meaning that without liberal arts, the "technical monkeys" would never undestand classical music, art, literature, etc. That's B.S. - the main reason for a wider educational base is to see the "whole" picture - to be able to synthesise the information from your own and other disciplines to find the answer to the problem - especially new and innovative answers.

I think liberal arts majors do not get enought technical teaching - but the main problem is one of the colleges and universities not teaching how to merge and synthesize (different then analizing)various ideas and knowledge to resolve issues - this includes issues outside of the sciences - there are just as many narrow minded specialists in the social sciences too, let alone archeology,anthropology, history, etc.

That's my thoughts..

 

[Focht3]

Ah! A post from "the other side" that I can agree with!

(Although you're not on anyone's side but your own...)

I will agree that many college students graduate with too narrow a focus. They don't get the "larger picture" that (many of us believe)was more prevalent 100 years or so ago. I was already a student of music, the arts, and literature before I went to college - I did not need to take a college class in order to appreciate Tennyson, Poe, C.S. Lewis or many other great writers and poets. I had six years of private music lessons, including music theory, before I filled out my first college application. I already enjoyed the theater, opera and symphony. And I had already spent lots of time in museums and art galleries.

Could I have learned more about these areas in college? You bet. Do I have some gaps in my liberal arts education? Probably. Would they have enhanced my "social value" at cocktail parties? Perhaps. But I'm not devoid of an appreciation of art, music and literature simply because I took a limited number of liberal arts classes in college. After all, there are such things as extracurricular activities - and they don't entirely revolve around alcohol...



Please see FAQ731-376 for great suggestions on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[TheTick]

Muggle:
Nice post, but.....
A technical shortcoming in your post. You state that 30% of CEO's have liberal arts degrees. So what?

What percentage of overall graduates have liberal arts degrees?

How successful are the CEO's w/ liberal arts degrees compared to others?

What degrees do other CEOs have? (business etc.). What about advanced degrees? Many MBA's have liberal arts BA's.

"Great ideas need landing gear as well as wings."--C. D. Jackson

http://www.EsoxRepublic.com

 

[MikeMech]

If 30% of CEO's have liberal arts degrees, does that mean the other 70% are engineers?

My wife's Interior Design professor explained the difference between an architect and an engineer to the class yesterday: An architect designs buildings that fall down and kill people; an engineer designs buildings that make people want to kill themselves.

Maybe if architects and engineers had broader educations I wouldn't think that was funny...

 

[Maui]

There is often a stigma associated with a given profession, and the stigma associated with engineers is the "nerd". Comic strips like Dilbert tend to promote this viewpoint. I'm not knocking Scott Adams here- I think that some of his work is terrific. But the perception that engineers can be described as a group of pocket-protector wearing, dorky computer nerds is pretty far off of the mark.

Communication skills are not only the key to professional success in an engineering career, but are usually the key to personal success in other parts of one's life such as marriage. Engineers are rather gifted in terms of technical competence, and are usually able to communicate their ideas effectively to other engineers. But put them in front of a group of pharmacists or some other unrelated profession and they don't communicate very well at all. This is because they lack the ability to translate their ideas into the jargon that is typically used in these other professions. If you're going to get your point across, you've got to learn the language used by your audience. I have personally known engineers who were considered to be socially challenged. I've known others who were just the opposite.

The liberal arts courses required to complete an undergraduate engineering education serve several purposes. They provide the engineer with exposure to topics and points of view that differ from their core engineering courses. This has the potential to make the student more "well rounded" as others have pointed out. And if the student is very perceptive, they eventually come to realize that their college education is simply the starting point, and that their education will continue throughout their careers. An engineer should never stop learning. If they do, then it's time to retire. One of the other justifications for the liberal arts courses is to generate additional revenue for the university.

Yes, engineers have an overwhelming tendency to use logic and reasoning to draw conclusions from a given set of facts. That's what they are taught to do in college, and what they are hired to do professionally. Would you hire an engineer that didn't share these traits?


Maui

 

[pugap]

Has anyone had difficulty at some social gathering when asked to describe what it is you do, and they are not an engineer or even work with engineers? No amount of liberal arts classes can help with this, because unless you work in something like NASA it always sounds boring or too technical. If the liberal arts schools would teach require more technical electives, it might be different. Why is the emphasis always to make the technical student more "well rounded" when there is just as much lacking in the liberal arts student?

 

[PSE]

pugap,

In such a situation I generally try to find out what their job is and then perhaps relate my work in a similar manner the distinction being technology. Sometimes it is just fun to watch their eyes glaze over. It depends on how I am reacting to the individual at the time. I do like your last statement though. Well put!

Regards,