Would you recommend engineering to a recent high school graduate? 31

[EngineerDave]

I have had this discussion with other engineering colleagues of mine. Assuming a student was talented and did well in math in the sciences, would you recommend that they go into engineering, or something else like law or medicine?

The reason for our cynicism is in part due to the lack of jobs and the decrease in manufacturing in the US.

What I would recommend, to say my nephew who is a few years away from graduating high school is that engineering is a great undergraduate major, but for grad school perhaps a law degree or a medical degree may ultimately be more effective.

All in all I don't regret going into engineering, but I do worry about it's future in the US.

 

[HgTX]

Okay, what profession *doesn't* this apply to? Even medical examinations have been known to be accomplished over a remote.

You people are sounding like we should just shut down the universities and tell our kids to be electricians and hairstylists. Forget about getting an education; that'll just make them overqualified for the tradesman jobs.

Go see the "tailspin" thread (thread730-101041) for a brighter (and I think more realistic) perspective.

Hg

 

[Lorentz]

Hello HgTX!

In response to your observation:

"You people are sounding like we should just shut down the universities and tell our kids to be electricians and hairstylists."

Consider metengr's July 30th post in the thread:

Who is to blame for US outsourcing
thread730-100141

he states:

"If I had kids in high school that were not compelled to go to college, I wouldn't force them to attend college. Instead, I would send them to a trade school and learn an employable trade."

Now remember metengr (who I believe is this week's TipMaster of the week) is a happily employed 20 year veteran engineer. In the "tailspin" thread he expresses this to sms:

"sms;
Even after 20 years of working in the engineering field, I have no complaints and enjoy my work. I understand and share your enthusiasm!"

There are a lot of happily employed engineers who are grateful for their careers, but hesitant to recommend engineering to recent high school graduates. They see changes that lead them to believe there will be fewer opportunities in future. Again referring to the outsourcing thread, consider Dorfer's August 2nd post:

"Fortunately I have convinced my five kids to stay out of manufacturing and go into the health sciences, or research. As a professional engineering manager I cringe every time I talk to a graduating high schooler who wants to be a mechanical engineer. There are still jobs available but I tell them be flexible, willing to relocate, and work some pretty long hours."

I will say though, that I think you personally have chosen wisely and that your field is likely to fare much better than average (compared to other areas of engineering).

 

[makeup]

So many good points put forward. I tend to agree that engineers in western countries will have to look at positioning themselves in the niche product and development arena. Maybe looking at servicing local markets, those where it is not practical or to sensitive to allow our countries in. The problem will be that the number of opportunities available will be few. This will mean that we will need fewer engineers and the job market will become extremely competitive. Therefore I have come to the opinion that if a young person is set on engineering and has the potential to be very good then yes I would say go for it. If however the person is unlikely to achieve the best results I would advice against and to try something else. Also as the training for engineers becomes more specialised and fewer people go into engineering it becomes extremely difficult for educational centres to put together appropriate training programmes and this will lead to having a few engineering centres of excellence with limited places. I except that there are many other issues that will affect the future of engineering, but in the UK we have allegedly lost 102,000 maunfacturing jobs in the three months to June 2004 so the job market is getting tighter. The industry is not getting bigger.

 

[Lorentz]

Hi makeup!

I think having a few "centres of excellence" would be a good idea. But sadly, I cannot imagine universities with poor engineering schools willingly forfeiting tuitions by closing their doors.

And that raises a question: how do you differentiate a good engineering faculty from a poor one?

I've heard some people say that good schools publish more journal papers and have more graduate students. By this criteria, a faculty that kept enrollments at levels far above local industry needs would really shine. A large number of their graduates would have difficulty finding work and opt to continue their studies. More graduate students leads to more publications and (by the above criteria) a higher ranking for the university.

I think a better indicator of an engineering school's quality is provided by surveying how much success their graduates achieve once they are employed in industry. By this criteria, I would have to say that sms went to a first rate school even if it does not have the prestige of an MIT.

By the way makeup, would it be possible for you to transition yourself into the same field as sms? (He works solving dynamics problems in rotating machinery, see his Aug 10 post.)

 

[makeup]

Hi Lorentz,

One of the main reasons for doing the degree was to be able to diversify from my original career root and learn about other subjects including: fluids and thermodynamics etc. The problem that I am having is finding a company who is prepared to invest in a mature person starting near ground zero. Most companys are looking for x years experience and there is only one way to get that. This unfortunately excludes me from many positions for which I know that I would be up and running a lot quicker than a fresh grad. But its up to the companies at the end of the day, I like to think of it as their loss rather than get all upset about it.

 

[HgTX]

Lorentz say: "I've heard some people say that good schools publish more journal papers and have more graduate students."

Nah, that's a diploma mill. At least the "more graduate students" part. A really good program needs to be selective and not accept too many students. You're absolutely right--the worth of a program is to be measured in what its graduates achieve. There are two standards there, though--one for the students who go on to academic careers and one for those who go to the real world. For example, MIT is not very good at all for structural engineering--unless you happen to want a PhD in one of a handful of highly specialized programs that they do excel in. They'll admit this themselves.

But what I'm really here to say...

Maybe we need to clarify what the topic is really about. Would you recommend engineering to a student who is debating between engineering and chemistry? Medicine? Law? English Lit? Education? Fine arts? Or to a student who is debating between a 4-year engineering program and a 2-year technician program? Or to a student who is debating between engineering and being a car mechanic? Or is the question not would you recommend engineering to someone who's just asking, but would you strongly push engineering to someone who's not really thrilled? A number of these questions have been answered in this thread--but they're all different questions.

Because of my own prejudices, I assumed we were talking about a college-bound high school senior who is trying to decide what major to pick for college. They are, conceivably, actively considering engienering. To say "not recommend" to me means "advise against". And I don't think I'd go there--I can think of very, very few fields that aren't subject to outsourcing, downsizing, etc., which is the point I was trying to make.

Look at what I was listing above. Research fields? Those can be done overseas. Education, fine arts? No money in it. Medicine? So far, so good. Law? Same. What if they don't want to be a doctor or a lawyer? What's left?

The answer is engineering, education, fine arts, chemistry, and all those other "non-recommendable" fields which are nonetheless producing thousands of graduates across the US, and yet we don't seem to be buried in a sea of homeless who have all finished college in the last 10 years.

The first time I saw some really snazzy design software I thought, "Okay, there goes engineering--we've all been automated." But that's not true--the rote number-crunching is being stripped away by newer tools, and what remains is Engineering Judgement. You're faced with a situation not exactly like something in the book--now what do you do? *That* is what we're really here for. And that's harder to ship to some engineering "factory" overseas. It requires direct contact with the site/product, other parties, etc. It's at least as much communication as calculation. An engineer who has that kind of skill, not just one who can run design calcs, stands a pretty good chance of survival. It's the faceless Dilberts that are in trouble. Not that anyone deliberatly aims at being a faceless drone, but for those who are attracted to engineering because they think it'll let them avoid people and just play with numbers--that vision of engineering is more likely to land them in a vulnerable position.

Your mileage, as they say, may vary.

Hg

 

[Lorentz]

Hi HgTX!

Great post!

I agree with you when you say:

"....we don't seem to be buried in a sea of homeless who have all finished college in the last 10 years."

We are far from buried, but that's not to say there are not people like that out there. Check out this link that dannym provided:

Career Guide for Engineers and Computer Scientists or

http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/

For the record, about half of the Ph.Ds I know (from my age group) are tenured professors or at least employed in jobs deserving of their advanced degrees (I'm speaking here only of scientists and engineers). But the other half are for the most part under-employed. And sadly, I know of one poor Post-Doc who was left high and dry when his mentor jumped ship for greener pastures. The last time I saw him was decades ago, and he was literally in rags.

The choices open to high school graduates can be broadly grouped into three classes; university/college, trades programs, or jumping right into the workforce. I can think of examples of successful people for each of these groups.

I agree with you that "Dilbert" has the most to worry about, but I'll bet the professors who teach "Dilbert-type" courses are still telling naive high school students that things could very well turn around by the time they graduate (that one is a classic).

I think everyone agrees that the fields with the best outlook are those that require some type of ongoing physical presence. However, while these are difficult to offshore, a lot of those jobs can be done more economically by a technician or technologist. And in future I think most of them will as I stated in my heretical August 8th post.

If this thread has accomplished anything, I hope it will have been to encourage high schoolers and their parents to "think outside the university box."

Well time to say goodnight and take Dogbert out for a walk. (Oops! I said too much.)

 

[liberty]

Nursing is a good example of a stable career where you can practice your trade anywhere and won't be affected much by outsourcing. I wouldn't recommend it to someone who feints at the sight of blood, or doesn't like mandatory overtime, or wants to live in a $500,000 house, drive a Jag and retire when they are 40. Such riches are not common for the engineering graduate either. The reality is there will always be a need for engineers, but if you are looking to get rich, or even pay back your student loans likety split, don't go there.

I like what I do, even if it takes me far from home where I am alone for weeks at a time, or requires 70-hour weeks when I am home. With 3 small kids it can be hard. It's not the perfect lifestyle and my wife resents it because this was not the situation when we got married - I worked at a Fortune 100 company in a division that's since been completely offshored. Then I was at Fortune 10 company where I trained the 2 Satyam engineers who would do my work after I was laid off. I am lucky because my projects now are all defense-related, so I don't feel direct offshoring pressure. Pressure may come indirectly from a job market full of engineers displaced by offshoring. Without violating recruiting rules I would encourage them to look at defense contractors as billions of dollars in bids have been won and these firms are out looking. Just don't expect a cushy 40-hour week with <5% travel required. It's not going to happen.

 

[Lorentz]

Hello All!

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but oldluddite provided a most informative link in the "outsourcing" thread that I think might be missed, so I'd like to discuss it here.

Many have offered the opinion that even if the prospects for engineering may not be the best, other fields may be no better, so a young person might as well be encouraged to take a chance on doing "something they love."

The problem with this, is that most young people I have spoken with know little of the realities of engineering. (Unless they personally know an engineer how could they know otherwise?) They may be in love with a dream job that doesn't even exist.

For example, there is a popular misconception that most engineers are engaged in exciting work developing new products. The paradox here is that while most products are designed by engineering teams, the majority of engineers will never be involved in such jobs. Far more engineers work in construction design, commisioning new facilities, project management, maintenance, or even sales . So if a young person is not interested in these areas, the odds are slim that they will find an engineering job they enjoy.

(Note that HgTX became a civil engineer "because I have loved the look of steel structures since I was a little kid." THAT'S a good reason for going into engineering.)

And the number of product design jobs in the 1st world is getting smaller as can be seen from the following article:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-816337,curpg-1.cms

A Vice President of one of the leading CAD/CAM firms is quoted as saying:

"Now that offshore delivery has been proved to work, huge amounts of product development and design will shift from high cost regions such as the US, Western Europe and Japan to India, China, Russia."

So for young people in India, China or Russia who are interested in product design, my adice would be to sign up for an engineering program. For young people in the 1st world, take a look at other options.

 

[HgTX]

I think it's probably true, as some here have said, that kids don't have that good an idea of what it is that engineers do. I sure didn't and my mother and grandfather were engineers; I grew up playing on a factory floor. (Those steel coils that collect under the drill press? Not good toys.) If I'd really understood which engineers do what, I might have started out in the right field and spared myself eight years "out in right field". (Then again there's something to be said for not being a teenager any more when I got my engineering education.)

So here's the opposite face of the original question: I get the occasional mass-mailed solicitation to participate in some kind of educational program for kids--career days, that sort of thing. I'm usually feeling too swamped by life in general to commit to them, but (and here's the question) should I be making the effort to go to these programs and talk about what it is I actually do? Why? (Or why not?) Profengmen advises well not to spread doom and gloom, but should an effort be made to spread information, period?

Hg

 

[HgTX]

Can we step back, on both sides, from the hyperbole?

1. Most of us do come into contact with college-bound kids. Some are raising them right now. We are all qualified to tell them about our own experiences and what we observe directly.

2. As mentioned before, different fields have different situations. I think "the profession" is a bad notion--there is no single profession of engineering. Besides, at least in my experience, you have to put something more specific than just "engineering" as a proposed major on the college application. So there will be different answers for different fields.

3. For those fields in trouble, the job market is tight; it is not nonexistent. How much of a risk-taker is this hypothetical high-schooler? How likely are they to stand out above the crowd? How strongly do they feel about the subject matter? If they really love it, they gotta try (as long as they really do have a good understanding of what they might be doing when they come out). There's no job market for artists and musicians either. (Then again, I don't know whether I'd encourage any child of mine to "follow their dream" into the fine arts at my expense for four years...)

4. For a kid you have extended contact with (and who actually wants a serious answer), consider helping them do the research for what kind of job prospects they might have for various fields--and not just engineering, but anything they think they might be interested in. It's hard stuff to think about when you're 17.

Hg

 

[liberty]

(showing hand)

I hope my comments about engineering are not contrued as "doom-and-gloom". If a neighbor's child was considering engineering, and they asked me if I would recommend it, I would concede I am not a qualified career guidance counselor. Being an engineer, I would present the requirements and information I know about the problem and let the parent and child choose for themselves whether they want to tackle it.

Engineering degrees are currently overpriced and the likelihood of walking off the graduation stage and into an engineering job is diminishing, especially when there is a recession. Engineering is highly competitive and becoming more so due to offshoring trends, and this leads careers for the most part to require long hours and travel. You will often toss and turn in the night about a problem you're working on, and sometimes might even dream (or have nightmares) about it. If you don't have good problem-solving skills, you are likely to fail or make unnecessary work for yourself.

Advising there will be tough competition and hardship is not being doom-and-gloom. These are just risks and challenges that do offer rewards when you are successful. It is merely a good idea for a student to know what to expect when they follow a recommendation to pursue engineering.

If a fully-informed student understood and accepted the challenges ahead, then YES, I would recommend engineering.

 

[havesealwilltravel]

It is that true (but obviously trivial) that future is unclear. However, the best predictor of near term events is current trends. In engineering the trend is currently negative and that trend does not seem to be reversing itself. In fact, it is getting worse.

No matter what skill set an engineer possesses, how much he enjoys engineering or how proficient he is at engineering, in my experience, an unemployed or under employed engineer is not a happy, fulfilled individual. Encouraging a young man or woman to go into a profession where they are not likely to enjoy a fulfilling prosperous life long career is morally offensive to me. I wouldn’t feel good about myself if I was less than honest with a young person.

Even though several people have posted unrealistically optimistic and intellectually appealing projections of the current and future of engineering, there is nothing in the real world to bear out your opinions. Possibly the impact of off shoring and the other problems affecting most engineers have passed you by. You’re lucky.

One person asked in his post for a show of hands of people who lost their jobs “a direct result of it going over seas”. I (and hundreds of others who I know directly) have lost jobs to off shoring. I lost 3 jobs due to off shoring: I was a field engineer for a steel producer who scaled back due to foreign competition. I was a systems analyst for a manufacturing automation company who closed as the machine tool industry went overseas. I was an engineer of a consulting company who moved their engineering operation to the Philippines.

Fortunately, I have never actually been laid off. I have always been able to arrange a new job before the old job actually ended. However, my luck probably won’t last forever.

I don’t understand the challenge to document job loss. A person would have to be very narrow-minded not to be impacted by all the off sourcing information in the news for the last decade. I’m sure that even the issuer of the challenge knows many engineers who have “hit the bricks” due to either jobs going overseas, loss of business to foreign competition or cheap foreign workers being imported.

If engineers opened their minds, kept abreast of current events, had apathy for those less lucky than themselves and avoided the “I’ve got mine and to hell with you” attitudes, then, maybe engineers could improve their profession.

Encouraging large numbers of young men and women to enter engineering serves only the desires of employers by keeping a large supply of highly intelligent, well educated engineers available in the labor pool and “hungry” for employment. It also guarantees lower wages and lower turnover due to excessive competition for jobs. An excess of engineers is detrimental to the goals of the individual engineer.

 

[makeup]

You have my vote.

 

[sms]

I guess I am narrow minded, but I am still positive on engineering. I have recommended it to my 5 kids (including 3 teenagers), and as I come across kids with an interest in math and science I recommend it to them as well.

A large supply of highly intelligent, well educated engineers available in the labor pool will not be “hungry” for employment. They will change the world!

 

[liberty]

Speaking of trends, it looks like there are plenty of advertised openings right now, and that is an improvement over 6 months ago (go to hot jobs or monster or dice and do a general search in your discipline). Many are for the 1-3 years experience range, so high-ranking graduates with co-op experience should be doing very well, providing a willingness to relocate. This trend also means more opportunities in the "invisible job market", where positions are filled without ever being advertised.

Along with recommendations for engineering, supply plenty of pep talks. Engineers who don't plan on being the best at what they do are most likely the ones who will be replaced by those $5/hr Satyam (Indian) engineers.

"The harder I work, the luckier I get."

 

[sms]

I posted this elsewhere, but this is more reason to recommend engineering IMHO> I received the following from Langer regarding their pay survey of ASME members. Based on this it appears that at least mechanical engineers that are members of the ASME are doing pretty well! Junior engineer has a median salary of $50000. That has got to be better than a cell phone salesman.....

This unique, 576-page publication reports the base salaries, other cash compensation, and total cash compensation of 8,963 members of ASME.

Nationwide, the median income of survey participants is $83,236.
The median income of some of the benchmark jobs investigated
were:

Research Director/Vice President ... $135,000
"Distinguished" Researcher ... $131,000
College/University Dept. Heads (11-12 mo. appt.) ...$125,000 Engineering Director/Vice President ... $123,100 Professor (11-12 month appointment) ... $120,000 Chief Marketing & Sales Executive ... $113,700 Environmental Manager ... $110,000 Consulting Branch Manager ... $103,500 Principal Consultant ... $102,000 Project Manager ... $95,000 Senior Engineer ... $84,000 Sales Representative ... $77,775 Intermediate Researcher ... $70,000 Project Engineer ... $63,775 Junior Researcher ... $50,047 Junior Engineer ... $50,000 Junior Consultant ... $42,700

 

[tgmcg]

I've been an engineer for almost 30 years and have never regretted the decision. I absolutely love what I do. Through my training and experience I have the skills and know-how to invent, design and build things that have never existed before, and solve problems that can benefit millions of people in a small or large way.

We are so overly concerned in the West about money, money, money. Money is a lousy motivator. If you love what you do and are dilligent in pursuing it, money will come to you. You may or may not live in a $500k home. But take a look at all the high-tech start-up companies and note how many were started and run by...you guessed it...engineers.

Engineering is an ancient and noble profession. We have accomplished great things and will accomplish even greater things in the future. Engineers are some of the finest people I have ever known. Generally speaking, we're straight-shooters, creative, optimistic, practical and imbued with a "can do" attitude. We are generally viewed in a positive manner by the public...like Dilbert. (g)

Like sms, my area of specialization is rotating equipment. I chose this field long ago as it offerred an immense and life-long technical challenge, and the pool of experts is relatively small worldwide. The more experienced we become, the more we are worth. I paid my dues working around the world in remote locations for many years and got my hands plenty dirty. Over the past 15 years I have honed and polished my analytical capabilities and design skills...even taught myself machining. You have to keep learning and pushing yourself...it keeps you sharp and enthusiastic.

If I had any advice to offer someone contemplating entering the field of engineering, I would tell them it's a great profession, but competition is becoming increasingly fierce. You must commit to being the very best you can be...for your entire career. Adopt the "restaurant" business model...you're only as good as your last meal.

Got my PE in 1992 after returning from overseas. Hadn't studies calculus in 17 years. Studied 8 hrs a day for months on end and aced the exams. The professional benefits and personal satisfaction gained from such an intense and comprehensive mid-career review were enormous. I believe our intellectual powers expand as we age, but the brain muscle needs to be exercised continuosly. If you've been putting off getting your PE..just do it.

Cheer up and be positive. If the same old, same old isn't working for you...try something different. You'll live. You meet a lot more interesting people when you're living on the edge.

Kind Regards,

Tom
Turbosystems Engineering Inc.

http://www.turbosynthesis.com

 

[kevstar]

I am an engineer through and through and wouldnt change who or what I am for the world, there is a great sense of achievement being an engineer and I would never willingly change that. However as I have said on another post else where, I left engineering 4 years ago to move into IT to gain programming experience that would enable me to move into the control/automation side of engineering. However having completed my goal of being able to programme I am finding it EXTREMELY difficult moving back into engineering with these EXTRA (not replacement) skills that I have. I am being looked at now like I can just about build mechano. Have I done something wrong I ask myself. I can only keep trying.

But if the engineering industry needs information thirsty, hard working allways learning why and how and what type people (such as myself) then why oh why am I finding it so hard to get back in?

 

[makeup]

Kevstar,

there are many of us out here in a simlar boat to you. I have been forced from enginering through redundancy. I am still continuing with my Beng but I'm not is an environment to really exploit it. Agreed its hard finding worth while positions but just keep trying. Ive looked at what the others have said and see valid points, but I maybe look at things differently. Ok you left to do soemthing completely different, dont look at it as a waste of time all things add value whether it be interpersonal, the way the organisation did things, you must have learned something that adds value to your worth. Agree with the statement that you cant do two jobs at once but you can do two different jobs, theres value added.