At the university I retired from soldering was a lab in one of the EE sophomore required courses. The EE department is a research-focused one, so the quantity of practical material—making simulations into actual circuits with all the real world mess and activity—wasn't emphasized.

However, for the same reason the importance coverage that was given was emphasized and the undergraduate lab manager who has a practical, industry background. He does a great job of teaching soldering and prototyping activities, and the capstone project always requires actually building something operational.

There are a few standout institutions where the combination of the self-selecting student population and the focus of the faculty (or at least enough of the faculty to matter) means that practical work is something naturally part of the education you'll receive there.

Three that come to mind, representing three different ways of providing practical skills are:

MIT, where there is plenty of theoretical research going on but also a very large body of practical work, so students have the chance to learn if they choose;

The Colorado School of Mines* (a general engineering school) whose 150+ years of practical engineering and applied science make practical work part of the fabric; and,

Rose-Hullman where practical work is an explicit focus, and where students are likely to graduate into jobs where research is not the emphasis.

*I really love Mines. Their history and practical focus is great stuff.

In the fall of 1966 I was about to enter my sophomore year at the University of Michigan School of Engineering. All my little friends were telling me I needed a set of "Steam Tables" to go with my Eugene Dietzen log-log duplex decitrig slide rule. In those days the cost of that resource was about $30 IIRC. Rather than succumb to the wisdom of the crowd I made an end run by taking thermodynamics in the physics department rather than in the mechanical engineering department. Best decision ever.

 

In the fall of 1966 I was about to enter my sophomore year at the University of Michigan School of Engineering. All my little friends were telling me I needed a set of "Steam Tables" to go with my Eugene Dietzen log-log duplex decitrig slide rule. In those days the cost of that resource was about $30 IIRC. Rather than succumb to the wisdom of the crowd I made an end run by taking thermodynamics in the physics department rather than in the mechanical engineering department. Best decision ever.

I had to take physics thermo (statistical thermodynamics) and chose to also take engineering thermodynamics. I did that with several other courses, such as physics intermediate mechanics and engineering dynamics. What I realized is that these are not simply the same material presented from a different perspective -- never the twain shall meet. There is virtually no overlap -- you have to work really hard to relate the material in one to the material in the other. I had numerous friends give me grief for taking both versions when I didn't have to, but boy am I ever glad that I did. Very eye opening and mind expanding compared to either set by itself.

 

In the fall of 1966 I was about to enter my sophomore year at the University of Michigan School of Engineering. All my little friends were telling me I needed a set of "Steam Tables" to go with my Eugene Dietzen log-log duplex decitrig slide rule. In those days the cost of that resource was about $30 IIRC. Rather than succumb to the wisdom of the crowd I made an end run by taking thermodynamics in the physics department rather than in the mechanical engineering department. Best decision ever.

My stint in academia was at a rival school. In fact, the rival school.