This applies to 2 year or less schooling, not EE 4 or 5 years schooling. It would seem that electronics circuit analysis S/B repetitive.

Another thread related to this one could be titled, "how electronics circuits are so diverse and different that basic ET schooling falls short"

Isn't it just a matter of measuring voltages, current, frequency, time parameters, resistance & reactance etc. etc. per schematics and appropriate data sheets which should be pretty universal and repetitive across diverse circuits?

 

This applies to 2 year or less schooling, not EE 4 or 5 years schooling. It would seem that electronics circuit analysis S/B repetitive.

Another thread related to this one could be titled, "how electronics circuits are so diverse and different that basic ET schooling falls short"

Isn't it just a matter of measuring voltages, current, frequency, time parameters, resistance & reactance etc. etc. per schematics and appropriate data sheets which should be pretty universal and repetitive across diverse circuits?

I don't know quite how to answer your question for the following reason. I have known people with engineering degrees who were dumber than a bag of hammers when it came to debugging and diagnosing problems with systems under development. On the other hand, I have known technicians who understood what they were working on and had keen insights during the development and debugging process. I don't think education is a "one-size-fits-all" proposition.

 

... Also.. you can read and study all you want as far as how to ride a bicycle, but until you actually do it, there isn't a book out there that can prepare you.

" I have known people with engineering degrees who were dumber than a bag of hammers " - same ... I had one guy that if you gave him a schematic that wasn't in the same orientation as he learned it in the "book" he was completely lost.

 

So based on what you guys said, experience trumps schooling and education in electronics.?

The root of this question I suppose, is: "What makes someone proficient and valueable who works at analyzing and understanding how circuits are supposed to work?" (i.e. techs and engineers) That wouldinclude those who fix and repair and those who invent and create electronics gear?

Construction, soldering, wiring, pc boards etc. being just a "given" skill that everyone should already know.

 

So based on what you guys said, experience trumps schooling and education in electronics.?

The root of this question I suppose, is: "What makes someone proficient and valueable who works at analyzing and understanding how circuits are supposed to work?" (i.e. techs and engineers) That wouldinclude those who fix and repair and those who invent and create electronics gear?

Construction, soldering, wiring, pc boards etc. being just a "given" skill that everyone should already know.

No.

There are three essential elements, all equally important.

1) Knowledge
2) Experience
3) Intellect

 

As another example, you could book-learn everything known about playing baseball, but you would fail miserably the first time you stepped on the field.

 

Electronics is based on Math-Equations,
the problem is, the numbers are all "squishy" in the real-World.
Having a "feel" for where they may be the most "squishy" is an Art that must be developed with experience.

Then there are Transducers, which are hardly ever actually Linear.

Then there are Sensors, which are hardly ever actually Linear.

Then there are the requisite differing "Fields" in Electronics,
each of which has it's own "Bucket-of-Worms", also requiring "specialized" Experience.
Many astounding "Experts" in Digital-Technologies can't understand a simple beginner Analog-Circuit.

Then there's Programming-Languages,
which "could be" considered part of "Electronics" overall,
the learning of which, are equivalent to becoming fluent in various spoken-Languages.
And there are at least ~10 to ~15 different, popular, Programming-Languages,
very similar to the common Spoken-Languages of People.

And there's more .............
Very little of which can be learned from a Text-Book.

That's why a Forum, like this one, can be very valuable, because of the sharing of Experience.
.
.
.

 

"Squishy" Math. Interesting.

Yeah I would think that programming languages is a different skill. You could be a programmer and know squat about electronics
from what I see. Digital is kind of interesting but you could be into digital without even touching electronics. Just 0's and 1's, on & off.
Quantum computers supposedly are going beyond digital 0 & 1, which would make them more powerful.
In any case I tend to be more attracted to Analog as it seems to work more like"Nature" rather that a switch you turn off and on
which is what dgital is.

Regarding "Math"
Do you think electronics requires more "intellect" (brain power) than other job skills whaich are at the same pay grade level?
What I mean is, you have at the 2 year AS degree, education level (for lack of a better yardstick) "Food Technician", Medical Technician" "Auto Mechanic Technician", "Machining Technology", "Nursing Technician", "Chemical Technician" "Air Conditioning & Heating Technician" ETC.
Does electronics take more Brain Power (intellect) than those other "technician" level type jobs and are the pay scales similar?
Or is electronics in a higher intellect skill class by itself?

 

Total nonsense.

Firstly, salary compensation is not commensurable with the skillset required for the job. Hence this is non-debatable.

Math is the language of all the physical sciences and engineering. Without the math and the love of the subject, you are headed nowhere fast in any field of engineering.

I don’t see the separation between electronics and programming. If you have the third asset (intelligence) you have the ability to master both areas.

 

I don’t see the separation between electronics and programming. If you have the third asset (intelligence) you have the ability to master both areas.

Well of course there would have to be a given level of intelligence to do either one.
The inclination and or aptitude might be different however. Also the inclination toward personal satisfaction as
that is an attribute which is included on aptitude tests by psychologists when they give tests to people to find out
what they are best suited for, which does not just measure intelligence, but also what a person likes or what motivates
them. It's the old, 'Right Side and Left Side" Brain operative. Physics has both math and romantic, imaginative and even
religious dimensions. Analog seems to mirror the maleability of nature, which may account for the "squshyness" spoke of
where digital follows a path of hard well defined logic.

That being said, still the question of 2 year education Technician training (for lack of a better comparative yardstick) and the intellect required for electronics as compared to other 2 year technical education programs, and if the intellect level is similar or not remains. Pay compensation would also be something to know, in a free market competitive economy anyway.

 

I consider myself very fortunate, after a long career covering Many aspects of both electrics & electronics.
Looking back, at retirement, I mentioned that I had not worked a day in my life, I enjoyed it all.
If it got to be on the mundane side, I moved on to other pastures!
It was a career that covered many aspects in the fields of Electrical/Electronics.
My first memory was around 8yrs of age, wiring up my sisters Doll House !
Bottom line, It became an interest, NOT a job!

 

Exactly!

What inspires and motivates you? Is it the carrot or the stick, or something else?
For some, sadly, a job is the means to an end.
Life is a journey, not a goal.

I have an engineering degree but got paid to be a technician. Do I regret it? Not one bit!

 

" It became an interest, NOT a job! " - Yes !! ... I feel as though I get paid to play ... It has never felt like work ... I have been fortunate to have been able to turn my hobby into a career despite my parents apprehension ... "Are you playing with wires again?" ... from my dad being an attorney, and my mother an interior designer (<- old school without a computer) .... Now? I'm 56 and have been doing this gig for 35+ years

 

Total nonsense.

Firstly, salary compensation is not commensurable with the skillset required for the job. Hence this is non-debatable.

Math is the language of all the physical sciences and engineering. Without the math and the love of the subject, you are headed nowhere fast in any field of engineering.

I don’t see the separation between electronics and programming. If you have the third asset (intelligence) you have the ability to master both areas.

+1
You don't need to love math as a science or art, you need to be comfortable with math as a way to explore HW and SW designs.

I don't love my car either. It's a tool to get you where you want to go in both cases.

 

electronics circuits

Electronics is a very large field. In school there is not time to teach everything. You just touch the basics. After about 50 years I am still learning.
I went to the University and a 4 year trade school at the same time. They have very different ways of approaching things. At Uni we did the math behind microwave communications. At the trade school we built a transceiver and fired a beam across town, bounced it off the engineering building and received it back. It really helped me to have both educations.
It is most important to learn how to learn, problem solve, find answers.
No matter what you learn it is probably outdated already. My first radio, I built with tubes. Later I moved to transistors. My last radio project was software defined radio that I add to a FPGA. In 1960 who would have believed that a computer program could suck radio waves out of the air and drive a speaker using PWM.
Never stop reading and learning.

 

Electronics is a very large field. In school there is not time to teach everything. You just touch the basics. After about 50 years I am still learning.
I went to the University and a 4 year trade school at the same time. They have very different ways of approaching things. At Uni we did the math behind microwave communications. At the trade school we built a transceiver and fired a beam across town, bounced it off the engineering building and received it back. It really helped me to have both educations.
It is most important to learn how to learn, problem solve, find answers.
No matter what you learn it is probably outdated already. My first radio, I built with tubes. Later I moved to transistors. My last radio project was software defined radio that I add to a FPGA. In 1960 who would have believed that a computer program could suck radio waves out of the air and drive a speaker using PWM.
Never stop reading and learning.

I believe.
We used digital encoded audio using a KY-8 and tube UHF radios.
All designed in the 60's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NESTOR_(encryption)
The 8 was a ASIC computer/, digital device for voice crypto we worked on.
https://www.jproc.ca/crypto/ky08.html
https://www.navy-radio.com/xmtrs/src20.htm

 

An aside ,
Looking at things on the slant!
I wonder
Is the current AI like someone that's read every book on a subject,

 

So based on what you guys said, experience trumps schooling and education in electronics.?

The root of this question I suppose, is: "What makes someone proficient and valueable who works at analyzing and understanding how circuits are supposed to work?" (i.e. techs and engineers) That wouldinclude those who fix and repair and those who invent and create electronics gear?

Construction, soldering, wiring, pc boards etc. being just a "given" skill that everyone should already know.

I think you are trying to overgeneralize too much in a quest for some simple, neat answer that doesn't exist.

As others have noted, I have encountered "technicians" that were superb "engineers" and "engineers" that were lousy "technicians". I've also encountered more than a few of each that couldn't do either worth squat. But I have encountered plenty of both that were good at what they were and lousy at the other. If I limit things to people that were very good at both, I would have to say that most of them had an engineering background, but with considerable hands-on experience, gained either through formal education are simply picked up as they went along.

If I had to pick a single attribute that seemed to correlate most strongly with those that were strong at both, it would be a love of knowledge and learning in general. Not just about electronics, but about anything, even things that they had zero interest in. I've been involved with a group of people that have been meeting weekly since 1976 (I joined in about 1989). The original and official focus of the group is the 6502 microprocessor, a topic which is almost never mentioned anymore. In practice, it is electronics in general with a big dose of programming. But any given meeting might go off in any direction -- and for any reason. On many occasions, we would hear someone in a nearby room practicing for their thesis defense and we would invite them over to so that we could be a trial audience. It didn't matter what the topic was, we were an engaged audience that asked all kinds of questions. I had a student whose roommate was a taxidermist, so I invited her to the meeting and we spent hours talking about all aspects of taxidermy and everyone loved it. One night was spent talking about artificial horse insemination. It's just a group of people that naturally get drawn into the minute details of any topic because learning about things is fun and interesting. So you can just imagine the depth of knowledge and skill that this translates into in the field of electronics and software.

On the flip side, there is no shortage of people, whether they be "engineers" or "technicians", that have zero interest in developing their knowledge and skills any further than is absolutely required in order to continue getting their paycheck. Some of them are at least competent and proficient at a useful level in their particular niche in a company. They tend to gravitate toward roles in which they are essentially automatons, doing the same thing over and over. But there are plenty of tasks that need just that kind of person.

 

"Why is Basic Electronics Education Considered Not Adequate to be Proficient Compared to Experience?"

At the risk of being redundant or stating the obvious...

I think it's a false comparison as both are needed and work together to develop the needed skills to be proficient.

And of course it doesn't hurt to have talent.

 

"Why is Basic Electronics Education Considered Not Adequate to be Proficient Compared to Experience?"

At the risk of being redundant or stating the obvious...

I think it's a false comparison as both are needed and work together to develop the needed skills to be proficient.

And of course it doesn't hurt to have talent.

Yeah! Talent is one thing you CANNOT teach. We all know it when we see it and the lack there-of.