First I am a firm believer of the old adage "There is no such thing as a stupid question". I think that if it is well thought out and researched first, the only thing stupid is not asking and remaining ignorant.

Every once in a while we will get a flourish of questions from so called engineering students or graduates that make me scratch my head. Questions that any grade school student with a minimal exposure to technology would know the answer or at the very least have a general idea of the answer.

But these questions aren't being asked by grade school students they are being asked by graduates or near graduates of an engineering degree. How is it possible that anyone even in the first year of their engineering degree lack such basic knowledge?

Is it they don't pay attention in class and drift through school? Most of these basic question seem to be coming from members in third world nations. Could it be the dismal quality of education in those countries that is at fault?

Either way, it is absolutely frightening that schools seem to be graduating engineers without the most basic of knowledge. My concern is that these people might be designing aviation systems, automobiles or medical equipment, all of which could be used by me, my friends an family.

This lackluster approach to engineering might explain why Toyota had to first replace the leaf springs on a friend's truck under recall. and now has to replace the whole frame under recall. Japan is not exactly a 3rd world country but nothing says they don't farm out some of their engineering or manufacturing to 3rd world countries as so do so many other companies just to save a buck.

 

The bright ones wouldn't come here asking for help on basic questions, so consider this "selection bias".

I'm not convinced there are more bad engineering students today than in the past. I think they are just more visible -- like all other "bad" things -- because of social networking. We didn't have this in the past.

Over a hundred years ago, when I went to college, I had great disdain for group projects. I was the one who always wound up carrying the weight of the group. There were few other students I considered even marginally competent.

Engineering is a meritocracy. The cream rises to the top and gets the hard problems -- and relishes the responsibility.

The others become support personnel or wash out entirely.

Most of them become communications majors before they ever have a chance to do damage as a practicing engineer.

 

First I am a firm believer of the old adage "There is no such thing as a stupid question".

See reply to next quote.

I think that if it is well thought out and researched first, the only thing stupid is not asking and remaining ignorant.

True, but that's a big "if." If the question is not well thought out, and if it could have been researched first with minimal effort and a high probability of getting the information sought, then I would certainly call the question "stupid."

A certain former AAC member we're all familiar with, banned but who keeps coming back here again and again under new user names, has a habit of doing just that: asking questions that he could easily answer himself, merely by doing a simple Google search. Very often, just plugging the title of his AAC thread into Google yields the information he's after. Those questions are, IMO, stupid.

How is it possible that anyone even in the first year of their engineering degree lack such basic knowledge? Is it they don't pay attention in class and drift through school?

That's possible.

But more often, I think, it's attributable to the fact that while most EE courses do a good job of teaching circuit analysis, they don't do as well at circuit synthesis. Creating a circuit ex nihilo to do a specific task and to meet specific requirements is a lot different from figuring out what a circuit does, given the circuit. It requires a different set of mental disciplines, as well as a "creative knack" that not all engineering students possess.

Most of these basic question seem to be coming from members in third world nations. Could it be the dismal quality of education in those countries that is at fault?

I don't know that the quality of education in those countries is in fact dismal; often, it seems the opposite. Asian countries, for example, seem to produce large numbers of extremely talented engineers (as well as their quota of dimwits).

Another factor may be operating here: in some cultures, the concepts of "individual merit" and "do your own work" aren't as central as they are here. Life in those cultures is communal, and work is collective. Being on your own, and being held accountable for your own work, is alien to them-- even scary. So on their own they feel insecure and uncertain about even basic information, and they come here to ask questions.

Just a thought...

 

Every once in a while we will get a flourish of questions from so called engineering students or graduates that make me scratch my head. Questions that any grade school student with a minimal exposure to technology would know the answer or at the very least have a general idea of the answer.

I'm not an engineer, but this problem is not limited to engineers. As a die maker/machinist, most of the guys I worked with could not imagine or design projects for themselves. I did a lot of "government" work for myself while my company job machine was running. Some of the things I made were things some of the other guys I worked with would have liked to have, and they were capable of making them. But there first question was always, "where did you buy/find the blue prints?". They could never believe I made my own prints. It just didn't hit them that some where, some one decided how things work or what was needed to make it work. All they got into the trade for was the money, since it is usually the highest paid one. The same goes for the people that go into engineering, of any kind, they have no real "passion" for what there doing, just looking at the $$ down the road.

 

As someone who went back to college a second time as a work experienced adult for a EE degree back in the early 2000's I can say everything about it was a huge disappointment in it's relevance and depth. So little of my classwork related to the reality of electrical engineering or any engineering it was sad.

By my views it was a disappointing 180 opposite of what my Tech Trades college experience was back in the mid 90's from when I got out of highschool. In my tech trades education most every clase related toe actual technical work and fields with loads of hands on work.

The EE was everything but electrical related class work but rather the now liberally views well rounded mile wide and inch deep nonsense and this was 15+ years ago.

3 - 4 English classes, 3 - 4 art related classes. 4 - 5 math classes that covered so little of reality it was sad. 1 C+ computer programming class, Canoeing, downhill skiing, public speaking,2 Psychology classes, several world and general cultural history classes, 2 very basic physics classes, 2 very basic chemistry classes, several geology classes I took as my electives, 1 remedial high school level introduction to electrical/electronics class, statistical analysis, 1 introduction to mechanical principles class (high school shop class) and a handful of other non engineering classes as well.

As or the faculty and class setup the vast majority of it was centered around mass lecture hall where 1 - 2 poorly trained student assistants did the bulk of the work addressing 100 - 200 kids at a time unless the professor was getting his class reviewed for job related reasons. Then the would come in for the days of their review talk big and technical (well beyond what had been actually ever taught in class to that point) then disappear once their reviews were over.

So yes, given my personal experience I can totally see how kids can come here with EE degrees and not know a damn thing about electronics or electricity in general, Almost everything I have for a knowledge base came from my Tech trades education and what I have added to that since through years of dedicated hands on self teaching regarding whatever real world challenges interested me.

Not worth the time and money investment in my opinion.

 

Agreed, this is not limited to engineers. We are witnessing a revolutionary shift on how people learn and interact as a result of technology, smart phones, internet, and social media.

The consequences are enormous:

1) Information is instantly accessible via smart phone/internet. There is not longer any need or incentive to memorize or analyze anything. Just Google it.

2) In the educational system, this means that the objective is not on learning but on merely passing the course with the highest mark possible.

3) Because of smart phones-internet-social media, users are more likely to follow "group think" rather than perform any rational, analytical thinking of their own. Because of this, users are being duped by false media and mainstream media that have ulterior motives with elite corporate/political/imperial agendas.

4) Users are addicted to the use of technology and will not realize/acknowledge this anytime soon.

 

Some of it I just see as plain lazy. Many literally want their homework done for them, as well as about everything else in life. I have developed a fondness for the lazy as it makes for less competition for my children and grandchildren. Unfortunately for many the real world is not like school in that while many get over in school the real world is not as welcoming to the lazy.

We see it here as well as other forums. Frequently the question turns out to be schoolwork but students are getting more creative. Eventually the truth becomes apparent. A question including words like urgent in bold quotes is always interesting. They knew a month ago a project was coming due and decided the last 5 days was enough time to get it done. Getting the fact it is school work involves navigating carefully.

My brother teaches at the University level and his stories of plagiarism never cease to amaze me. Google is their best friend but have the God given brains to at least reword the text. The professors teaching have seen it all before. Reminds me of my father's words echoing in my head, "Ronald, do you think I was born yesterday"?

Anyway, I contribute much of what we see to just plain lazy. That or they feel entitled?

Ron

 

One of my biggest peeves when I was in college the second time was the combination of dumbing down stuff to the point it was real world application useless or claiming that real world work did XYZ a certain way when my and anyone else's hands on experiences showed that was not and never would be the case in how a problem was approached.

I got it in that too often with the movement to the primarily mass lecture hall teaching format that used almost exclusively student assistants to to do all the work they wanted to reduce the workload on grading papers to be as low as possible. I can imagine the intent was to make it possible for 1 - 2 assistants to be able to grade 100 - 200 tests in a hour or two by hand or as fast a multiple choice punch cards could be shoved through a machine.

Why employ 10 highly qualified and truly capable professors to work with students on a 1:20-25 ratio like most tech trades colleges do when you can work on a 1:100+ ratio with 3 - 4 cheap student assistants covering that same 200 - 250 students? It's not like kids right out of highschool are going not know they are getting screwed over in their future careers for it and it would free up $100's of thousands of dollars more money for the college to burn up on their sports and student feel good for nothing programs.

My final year advisor was a pretty good guy and he openly admitted in his classes many times he hated how the university systems had degraded the concept and point of higher education to where it was. His and my opinions was that it was all just a diploma mill to fund the college sports programs. They full well knew they were turning out unqualified people just to suit the needs of pointless extra curricular activities and student wants.

 

I got my BSEE from the U. of Colorado in 1978, and my experience was pretty much the opposite of yours: relevant courses, small classes and professors who taught-- and did a good job doing it. There were a few courses which taught material I ended up never using in my work, but not many.

 

have developed a fondness for the lazy as it makes for less competition for my children and grandchildren. Unfortunately for many the real world is not like school in that while many get over in school the real world is not as welcoming to the lazy.

Unfortunately, once they hit the real world too often the lazy and worse are who run the show and the few who are not afraid to show they have half a brain and any ambition at all are who are going to be targeted for removal from the system by all means necessary.

A qualified and capable person can walk into a job and do what's needed to be done with such stunning effortless that hallowed monks chant in the background every time they take on a task yet that same person is who is going be run out of the company for something so insanely petty and dumb it will be mind boggling to think anyone would have thought to do it let alone dared try it.

Yet the village idiot standing next thim who can't open his own tool box without help plus has done 10's to 100's of thousands of dollars damage to company and customer equipment more than once will get promoted and praised like he's god gift to the world.

I and too many good capable people I know have fought that losing battle too many times to ever deny the reality of it.

 

How far academia has fallen in providing an education to the next generation is a huge hot button for me. But I shall refrain.

I agree about the plagiarism issue. It's so easy to find anything on the internet. But so can the graders so it's pretty easy to catch them. It's gotten so bad, I know of a college administrator that had to do a large report. He plagiarized the entire assignment. I know his supervisor pretty well and she was surprised by the quality so she googled the information in the report. Her first hit was the article the guy plagiarized. She spoke with him and asked where he got the ideas in the report. He said something like "just basic research". He was out the door by the end of the day. This is a guy with an advanced degree who should have a) known better and b) done a better job of covering his tracks. I doubt this was the first time he had done it.

 

I got my BSEE from the U. of Colorado in 1978, and my experience was pretty much the opposite of yours: relevant courses, small classes and professors who taught-- and did a good job doing it. There were a few courses which taught material I ended up never using in my work, but not many.

Exactly, your story is almost standard issue with your generations college experience at any level and is very similar to those of anyone who has went to any 2 - 3 year technical trades colleges as well. My mid 90's Tech Trades college experience was wonderful and I still hear a lot of good accounts from people a full generation under me when given the opportunity to talk about their educations.

Now as for the 4 year formal univerity people I have met over the last decade . The too common standard is dangerously ignorant, arrogant , entitled and proud as hell of their degree but utterly incapable of holding any factual rational conversation in order to prove they know anything real and useful about their field of expertise.

 

Why employ 10 highly qualified and truly capable professors to work with students on a 1:20-25 ratio like most tech trades colleges do when you can work on a 1:100+ ratio with 3 - 4 cheap student assistants covering that same 200 - 250 students?

Why pay highly qualified professors to teach idiot students when their research can earn a university much more money and prestige?

 

Why pay highly qualified professors to teach idiot students when their research can earn a university much more money and prestige?

Because the sports/special accommodations programs and their ever growing demands and facilities can't begin to pay for themselves?

Because none of it's about educating the masses any more?

Because too many are too ignorant and lazy to stand up and do anything about it?

Because proudly stupid and undeservedly demanding sells well?

All of the above?

 

Because none of it's about educating the masses any more?

Universities were never about educating the masses.

The concept that "everyone needs a college education" is rather new, historically speaking.

 

Some of it I just see as plain lazy.

I have to agree.

Sometimes-- often, actually-- I catch myself wondering: why in the world, with the absolutely immense amount of electronics information floating around on the Web just a Google search away, do we have so many people come in here asking basic questions they could easily answer themselves with hardly any effort?

I started learning electronics as a child hobbyist back in the late 1950's, and by 1965 had accumulated enough savvy to get myself a summer job as a production test technician. Getting information back then was difficult: it took a lot of work to find stuff-- countless trips to the local library, and quite a few to the NYC Public Library, to find books on electronics, and magazines like Popular Electronics, Radio Electronics, and later EDN and Electronic Design. My copies of the GE Transistor Manual, the GE SCR Manual, and the Motorola Semiconductor Power Circuits Handbook were (and still are, actually) dog-eared, prized possessions followed years later by the National Semiconductor Linear Applications Handbook, a book of the same title authored by Linear Technology, and many other applications handbooks.

Back then, you really had to root around and scrounge to find stuff, and work your ass off to extract the information you needed from it-- information that today is a mere mouse-click away.

And maybe therein lies the answer to the question I posed above: I grew up expecting to have to work my ass off to learn things, or, for that matter, to accomplish anything else worthwhile. I expected to have to work, so now I don't resent having to. It feels normal; that's the way life is.

Today's electronic newbies, OTOH, blessed with the power of Google, don't have to work; at least, not as much. And maybe that's why, at the first sign of something they don't understand, they come running here for help.

Maybe I've answered my own question; maybe I haven't. Who knows...

 

I think it goes back to the laziness point earlier. People just want to be told an answer rather than actually understanding why.

And, yeah, I think all of us boomers here had to work at it to figure out electronics. Often it involved reading books that were way beyond me. I'd get maybe 10% of it but that became a foundation. Basically we had to learn how to learn. I still amazes me when someone asks "how to you know all this stuff?" I bite my tongue but would like to say "I actually use my brain. You should try it some time."

 

1) Information is instantly accessible via smart phone/internet. There is not longer any need or incentive to memorize or analyze anything. Just Google it.

2) In the educational system, this means that the objective is not on learning but on merely passing the course with the highest mark possible.

3) Because of smart phones-internet-social media, users are more likely to follow "group think" rather than perform any rational, analytical thinking of their own. Because of this, users are being duped by false media and mainstream media that have ulterior motives with elite corporate/political/imperial agendas.

4) Users are addicted to the use of technology and will not realize/acknowledge this anytime soon.

No more outside the box thinking I guess. His is typical of our Indian software "engineers" that we had recently to help us get over the peak of an enormous conversion project. I would describe their work as barely adequate. No outside te box thinking. A whole lot of copy, paste and modify. With much of the modifications being comment out code from the previous app to make it work in the new app.

I had to end up redoing 75% of what they did. They created more trouble for me than help. If I were in charge of the conversion and able to go back in time, I would assign them the most menial tasks and then have our developers fill in the blanks.

 

I think it goes back to the laziness point earlier. People just want to be told an answer rather than actually understanding why.

And, yeah, I think all of us boomers here had to work at it to figure out electronics. Often it involved reading books that were way beyond me. I'd get maybe 10% of it but that became a foundation. Basically we had to learn how to learn. I still amazes me when someone asks "how to you know all this stuff?" I bite my tongue but would like to say "I actually use my brain. You should try it some time."

I used to work on projects way before there was an internet. I designed an RS232 interface for the Atari which included a software driver. I wasn't a hardware nor software engineer. Somehow I figured it all out.

 

The Indian engineering issue is probably a cultural thing. This reminds me of a true story about a certain former CTO at Microsoft. In the late 80-s he traveled to India to recruit software engineers. He had his favorite questions that he asked all the candidates. They were good questions that provoked thoughtful answers. He comes back from India just raving about how good the Indian engineers are."They are like 13s and 14s" (staff engineer level designation at the time, demi-gods). And everywhere he went, they just got better. The company hired about a dozen of these water-walkers. They turned out to be capable but not the savants that the guy said. Then it came out that the early candidates (that didn't get offers, by the way) had shared the questions to their friends who, in turn, shared them with other friends. So, the candidates just kept getting "better".