What is missing engineering education
Rich Nass from embedded-computing.com interviewed me about my thoughts on engineering education. To begin with, it is important to note that studying at the university is not an engineering education, but only the beginning of this process. Too many of us, practitioners, have decided that we can stop learning after graduation. There is an alarming fact that, on average, a “firmware person” reads only one technical book per year, and this is in an area where constant changes are the basis of our profession.
When I was in college, a long time ago, I felt that the University of Maryland offers a significant engineering program. But at the same time, the course suffers from excessive attention to theory (to the detriment of practice-pp). We were not allowed to solder because we were afraid that we would burn the school!
The school offered too few specific manuals. I attended too many math classes, finding the subject interesting. But most of these classes, like abstract algebra, were a waste of time (Let me disagree with a respected author. Nothing is so useful for an engineer and a programmer as mathematics, and abstract algebra should be made part of OOP learning - comment of a translator) . Calculus was worth teaching, as it is the basis for most science. I'm glad I recognized him, although it's amazing how rarely I used him in my career. When my son told me that he needed help in a high school class of calculus, I had to re-examine the subject to stay a step or two ahead of him. It was humiliating to find that my skills were so degraded.
Circuit classes were terrible. There were only two of them: one on the circuits (probably passive commons — p.), And the other on the theory of the transistor. Both were very theoretical, and did not give information about real circuits. There were many complex mathematics, such as impulse response, which was not useful to me at all for the last 40 years. But there was not a word about Darlington pairs, two-stroke op amps, amplifier classes, and everything else that had been so important for decades.
')
If you look at the program, today the EE requirements seem to be more realistic, although it is difficult to understand how a practical presentation class is possible. But there is more electronics, it seems, than I taught in the early 70s. The University of MD still requires two courses in electromagnetism, and I am willing to bet that they are as incomprehensible as they were in the old days. This material is more important than anything in the world of high-speed communication lines, but the course should be more accessible to students who will go to systems design and will not practice arcane mathematics (explicit reference to “Black Magic Course”). .). Today, only one chemistry class is required, which is quite good. I thought that the second class that we went through, organic chemistry, was just memorizing material.
Today, MD requires one class of English, for technical documentation. Returning to my time, the combined course was obligatory. We also had to take a literature class.
Engineering programs require too many classes in too short a period of time. Few people manage to meet the four years, and the fifth year, with the astronomical cost of education, can be financially destructive. But I’m sure we can wave our wand to squeeze in some more urgently needed additional classes.
Number one on my wish list: written and verbal communication. I think that students should take several classes on this topic. They just have to learn how to write, and write well. Our era is the era of communications, and in the meantime, too many techies have no communication skills.
There is a growing gap between the technically competent and those of our customers who do not understand the difference between zero and one. We must bridge this gap. If we cannot explain what our products do, how they are used, and their advantages, no one will buy our products. When we collect requirements, negotiate with customers and suppliers, or make purchases, which characterizes many engineering works, we will communicate orally and in writing with other people who do not understand the basics of our field. Those who can do it effectively will succeed , the rest will remain in a kind of purgatory, immersed in pure technical problems, with no prospects for advancement.
In developed countries, engineering is in decline. This means that developers will increasingly work with engineers in other, cheaper countries. English can become an obstacle, a problem in the inability to use it effectively and the development will stop until both parties spend more time puzzling at the last e-mail riddles or extracting meaning from a poor presentation.
Engineering students must write each semester. The only way to master this path is the same as in solving equations - constant practice. Calculus is easier than communication, because the correct answer in the equation is one, and prose is much more diverse. This is actually good, because in the real world most of our problems have solutions based on many complex factors. There is often no one correct answer, only the worst. Or there is an answer that does not satisfy anyone, but at the same time it causes the least number of objections. Based on these requirements, there is only one class at the University of Maryland, “The Social and Ethical Aspects of EC Technology," which deals with non-quantitative results.
I remember well how at the age of 20 I spoke with my dad, a mechanical engineer, about cleanliness of technology, and that the results are always clear. He laughed. And he was right.
Public speaking must also be required. Most of us hate them. But it is an integral part of our profession. We all know developers who are afraid to speak in a meeting. This means that the team does not benefit from the use of this person’s knowledge and experience.
We have to learn how to conduct comfortably short presentations in front of the group. hold a rally with PowerPoint and state your point of view with clarity and power. (Many people blame PowerPoint, but the problem is that these applications are used incorrectly, and not in the application itself).
Many object that not everyone can physically be speakers, but why not? Demosthenes suffered from a speech defect, and got rid of him, practicing in a conversation with pebbles in his mouth. He advanced and became one of the greatest speakers in history. Winston Churchill suffered from stuttering in his youth, and suffered "painfully." Ralph Waldo Emerson motivated him: “All the great orators were bad orators at first” (and this is not about King George? Remarkable movie “The King Says” - p.)
On the other hand, I conduct my seminar “Better Firmware Faster” in Baltimore (November 7) and Santa Clara (November 14). Read more here. (By the way, was anyone at this seminar? Well, who didn’t bring fate? If so, share your opinion - p.).
When I was in college, a long time ago, I felt that the University of Maryland offers a significant engineering program. But at the same time, the course suffers from excessive attention to theory (to the detriment of practice-pp). We were not allowed to solder because we were afraid that we would burn the school!
The school offered too few specific manuals. I attended too many math classes, finding the subject interesting. But most of these classes, like abstract algebra, were a waste of time (Let me disagree with a respected author. Nothing is so useful for an engineer and a programmer as mathematics, and abstract algebra should be made part of OOP learning - comment of a translator) . Calculus was worth teaching, as it is the basis for most science. I'm glad I recognized him, although it's amazing how rarely I used him in my career. When my son told me that he needed help in a high school class of calculus, I had to re-examine the subject to stay a step or two ahead of him. It was humiliating to find that my skills were so degraded.
Circuit classes were terrible. There were only two of them: one on the circuits (probably passive commons — p.), And the other on the theory of the transistor. Both were very theoretical, and did not give information about real circuits. There were many complex mathematics, such as impulse response, which was not useful to me at all for the last 40 years. But there was not a word about Darlington pairs, two-stroke op amps, amplifier classes, and everything else that had been so important for decades.
')
If you look at the program, today the EE requirements seem to be more realistic, although it is difficult to understand how a practical presentation class is possible. But there is more electronics, it seems, than I taught in the early 70s. The University of MD still requires two courses in electromagnetism, and I am willing to bet that they are as incomprehensible as they were in the old days. This material is more important than anything in the world of high-speed communication lines, but the course should be more accessible to students who will go to systems design and will not practice arcane mathematics (explicit reference to “Black Magic Course”). .). Today, only one chemistry class is required, which is quite good. I thought that the second class that we went through, organic chemistry, was just memorizing material.
Today, MD requires one class of English, for technical documentation. Returning to my time, the combined course was obligatory. We also had to take a literature class.
Engineering programs require too many classes in too short a period of time. Few people manage to meet the four years, and the fifth year, with the astronomical cost of education, can be financially destructive. But I’m sure we can wave our wand to squeeze in some more urgently needed additional classes.
Number one on my wish list: written and verbal communication. I think that students should take several classes on this topic. They just have to learn how to write, and write well. Our era is the era of communications, and in the meantime, too many techies have no communication skills.
There is a growing gap between the technically competent and those of our customers who do not understand the difference between zero and one. We must bridge this gap. If we cannot explain what our products do, how they are used, and their advantages, no one will buy our products. When we collect requirements, negotiate with customers and suppliers, or make purchases, which characterizes many engineering works, we will communicate orally and in writing with other people who do not understand the basics of our field. Those who can do it effectively will succeed , the rest will remain in a kind of purgatory, immersed in pure technical problems, with no prospects for advancement.
In developed countries, engineering is in decline. This means that developers will increasingly work with engineers in other, cheaper countries. English can become an obstacle, a problem in the inability to use it effectively and the development will stop until both parties spend more time puzzling at the last e-mail riddles or extracting meaning from a poor presentation.
Engineering students must write each semester. The only way to master this path is the same as in solving equations - constant practice. Calculus is easier than communication, because the correct answer in the equation is one, and prose is much more diverse. This is actually good, because in the real world most of our problems have solutions based on many complex factors. There is often no one correct answer, only the worst. Or there is an answer that does not satisfy anyone, but at the same time it causes the least number of objections. Based on these requirements, there is only one class at the University of Maryland, “The Social and Ethical Aspects of EC Technology," which deals with non-quantitative results.
I remember well how at the age of 20 I spoke with my dad, a mechanical engineer, about cleanliness of technology, and that the results are always clear. He laughed. And he was right.
Public speaking must also be required. Most of us hate them. But it is an integral part of our profession. We all know developers who are afraid to speak in a meeting. This means that the team does not benefit from the use of this person’s knowledge and experience.
We have to learn how to conduct comfortably short presentations in front of the group. hold a rally with PowerPoint and state your point of view with clarity and power. (Many people blame PowerPoint, but the problem is that these applications are used incorrectly, and not in the application itself).
Many object that not everyone can physically be speakers, but why not? Demosthenes suffered from a speech defect, and got rid of him, practicing in a conversation with pebbles in his mouth. He advanced and became one of the greatest speakers in history. Winston Churchill suffered from stuttering in his youth, and suffered "painfully." Ralph Waldo Emerson motivated him: “All the great orators were bad orators at first” (and this is not about King George? Remarkable movie “The King Says” - p.)
On the other hand, I conduct my seminar “Better Firmware Faster” in Baltimore (November 7) and Santa Clara (November 14). Read more here. (By the way, was anyone at this seminar? Well, who didn’t bring fate? If so, share your opinion - p.).
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/242331/
All Articles