ME 76

aaron914, you are full of it.

http://catalog.asu.edu/files/majormap09/TSMECBS.pdf

This shows your curriculum. This show that your classes are not true engineering classes. For instance, applied mechanics of materials and applied dynamics are not the traditional engineering courses. These are facts. Nowhere in your curriculum are, vibrations, heat transfer, kinematics, control systems, numerical methods, true fluid mechanics, true thermo, etc..... and general physics is probably not calc based.

Give it up man. Your degree is a technology degree, not an engineering degree.

buster2009

ME 76, your right aaron914 physics is not calculus base:
This is from the college web site
-------------
M PHY 111 General Physics. (3)
fall, spring, summer
Noncalculus treatment of the principles of physics for nonphysics majors. Students whose curricula require a lab course must also register for PHY 113. 3 hours lecture, 1 recitation. Prerequisite: trigonometry.
General Studies: SQ (if credit also earned in PHY 113)
----------------------------

Now this is my Physics 2 class
---------------------------------
PHYS-320 College Physics II with Lab
This calculus-based course covers topics such as thermodynamics,
heat transfer, electromagnetic fields, wave propagation,
optics, sensors and transducers. Students use computer
software to simulate system performance and analyze
data acquired through lab exercises. Prerequisites: MATH-260
and PHYS-310 / 5-4
---------------------------------------------------
I just want to say, that i'm doing a EET right. But I have had Cal 1-4 and calculus base physics 1 & 2. But I did not have to do Cal 3&4 for the EET program. I just did the class because I want to.

@AuburnMathTutor, I never said EET did more engineering classes. Just that the circuit analysis, electronics classes in my EET program use calculus.

When your looking at engineering/technology books you have three types:

1. One that has ET: Thats for electronics technology(just use Trig)
2. One that has EET on it: That's for electronices engineering technology( This use Cal 1-2 in the book to solve problems)
3 Than you have the hard core EE books.

Here is the example:
At my college students doing electronics technology program would use this book for their first digital electronics class: Amazon.com: Digital Fundamentals (10th Edition) (9780132359238): Thomas L. Floyd: Books
The ET just cover the basics

And Students in the EET program use this book for the first class in digital electronics: http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Design...7442223&sr=1-1
The EET covers more design and VHDL prorgamming

The truth is you have 3 programs
EE--- Full engineers
EET ---- Not a engineer, but know more than a tech does and does more than repair work
ET --- Just a tech that does repair work

aarons914

ME 76 did you compare it to http://catalog.asu.edu/files/majormap09/ESMAEMBSE.pdf
which is the ME program at ASU? It's pretty damn close but you're right, the technology degree isn't as math intense but more hands on.

I think for 90% of entry level jobs a traditional engineering degree vs a technology degree isn't going to make a difference but if you're talking heavy design or research then yes you should go for the straight engineering degree because you will most likely need your masters and probably Phd.

And as far as the classes you mentioned, yes we do applied mechanics of materials which basically means we apply the formulas and don't derive them like Im sure the regular mechanics class does. That class in the applied type also has a lab associated where we test pretty much every formula we use in class, which I thought was pretty cool. And as far as thermodynamics, heat transfer, and fluid transfer, it's all been converted into thermo 1, 2 and 3 now, not sure why but Im pretty sure that's an ABET thing cause Ive seen other schools do the same thing.

All Im saying is it's a lot closer than people think in terms of the 2 degrees and especially right out of college they compete for similar jobs, I'm at least realistic enough that I don't think Ill be a lead engineer for NASA designing a space shuttle or anything with a technology degree.

aarons914

Oh and here are education requirements from a Mechanical Engineering job at Boeing:

Level 1 - Bachelor, Master or Doctorate of Science degree from an accredited course of study, in engineering, computer science, mathematics, physics or chemistry. ABET is the preferred, although not required, accreditation standard.

I think we can agree that if they think someone with a degree in computer science or chemistry is able to do the job, than someone with an ET degree could too.

AuburnMathTutor

^ True enough, but then again, a CS major and an ME major - even if they're applying to the same job - wouldn't be competing for the same job function. Likewise, an MET and an ME might not be competing for the same job function. Your degree may not speak as loudly as your particular experiences and particular coursework, in which case it wouldn't necessarily be productive to arbitrarily exclude people with any technical degree.

I would imagine most jobs in ME *strongly* favor ME graduates... although I wouldn't be too surprised if, every now and again, they wanted to hire an ME to be part of a team which needed, say, some strong computing skills, or some strong mathematical ability, or somebody who's very hands on and familiar with some specific machinery. I think they list all these majors not for the everyday case, but in order to protect themselves just in case they reject, say, an ME and then turn around and hire a Math major...

G.P.Burdell

This is getting out of hand. OK. I give in. Engineering Technology is the same as engineering. ET grads make the same as engineering grads. They take the same classes, understand the same amount of material, and perform the same tasks in industry.

Now, what I can't figure out is why there are separate colleges (not just programs) at most colleges that offer both degrees, why employers will hire one but not the other for a particular job, why one degree leads to exempt employment but not the other, why the vast majority of graduate schools in engineering accept one but not the other, why the programs that do accept both degrees put the students into different programs, why states will recognize one for licensure but not the other, any why ABET certifies them differently.

At the end of the day, the two degrees are fundamentally different and have fundamentally different purposes. If you wanted to be an engineer, why didn't you go to engineering school? There are two reasons I can come up with: 1) because you couldn't get into or stay in an engineering school or 2) because ET fit your ideal career path better than engineering. If you want to make the argument that ET is the same thing as engineering, that just shows that it wasn't the latter that sent you to an ET school.


An electrical engineer should be making over $60k to start.

aarons914

No one is saying they're exactly the same, just more similar than some give it credit for. You're studying the same subject but taking a different approach. And my personal story is that I thought I wanted to go into pure engineering out of High School but upon doing a lot of research into the actual things they do I was turned off. So I enrolled in MET which I hope will allow me to do more hands on type of things within the engineering field, I don't really care if I'm involved in the initial design, I would almost rather get the prototypes and get to test them and make improvements on the design. But like Ive said in this post it doesn't really seem like those jobs exist, all I really see are engineering jobs. Now if someone with and ME and another person with an MET degree both get hired for a position, you may be right that the ME gets put into more of the design roll where the MET is placed in more of a technician roll, I haven't graduated yet so I don't know.

G.P.Burdell

You're not studying the same thing. Engineering is an entirely theoretical approach. You learn and first principals with the goal of being able to use them to explain how, why, and what if. Technology is the application of the principals learned.

It's like comparing Math and Accounting. Accountants learn arithmetic and apply it. But they don't understand why math works the way it does. If you ask "what is one?" You'd probably get answer like "it's a number". An accountant doesn't understand what a number is, or where it comes from, they just know what to do with it based on some memorized rules and properties. A mathematician, on the other hand, can explain to you (ad nauseam, probably) what a number is and can prove ideas like addition and subtraction.

So why do we have accountants? Why isn't everyone a mathematician? Because accounting and mathematics require different fundamental skill sets. If we required all students to learn both skill sets to be accountants (or mathematicians), the average accountant would start his career at age 30. Besides, once an accountant accepts the "rules" the mathematicians set, there's no reason for an accountant to have to understand the mechanics behind those rules. The accountants should just check with the mathematicians periodically to make sure nothing has changed ("hey, Bob... does it still go 1, 2, and then 3?")

The problem comes in when an accountant declares himself to be a mathematician and tries to jump into a proof or when mathematicians declare herself to be accountant and starts auditing. That usually doesn't end well for the accountant or the mathematician. Sometimes they need to understand that there are many things they don't understand.

rheidzan

When I was in school, CET is where people drop from CE... not the other way around...

buster2009

G.P.Burdell, I'm doing EET because it's more of what I like to do(BTW for cal 1-3 I had all B's). I never said that EE and EET are the same. But I do know RF engineers who are design RF circuits, but they did not start out has RF engineers. If they would have had a EE they could have been RF engineers a lot faster.

I know for a 100% fact. That someone with a BSXET and that has worked in the filed for 8+ years can get a job as an engineer. I have 5 family members that have their P.E. and they have an BS Civil ET.

It's just like some people say you can not be a software engineer without a CS degree. But that is BS. I know lot's of software engineers that do not have degrees and they make a lot more money than someone with a BSEE or BSEET.

I'm just saying that sometimes there are 2 paths to the same goal. But one will take longer than the other and you will have to work 10 times harder to get there.

G.P.Burdell

This just goes to show that you do not understand what engineering actually is.

There are many paths an engineer's career can take: grunt work, technical work, or managerial work.

ET's will not be hired for technical work, and are almost never hired for technical management. The entire purpose of the ET degrees is to do the "grunt work" that engineers either don't want to do or charge too much to do. That encompasses the entire ET career.

Is it possible that an ET does grunt work next to an engineer that's not technically or managerially competent? Yes. Does that mean either of those two people are actually "engineering" anything? No.

But, we can keep going around in circles, if you want. I find that most 20 year old students think they know what they're talking about, even if they've never been in industry (or even in an engineering class, in your case).

MaineLonghorn

^^^^ +1. A friend used to have this sign up in his office: "Hire a teenager while he still knows everything." I think of that when I read a lot of posts on CC.

buster2009

G.P.Burdell, if you want to setup a meeting. I could have you talk to someone I know that's a engineer that has worked for RAC 15 years design audio/video amplifiers, RF circuits and so on. When we was working there he did not have a any type of degree.

Now he was a degree math and is working with high school studnets and his home town.

But this person has an IQ of 120. He also learn a more on outside of college than he could have in the class room.

You should look at the ARRL handbooks. A lot of the designs in those come from people without EE degrees.

So when you are talking about design/engineering work. Are you talk about overall design? Because I know ET that do design work under an engineer. The engineer gives them the requirements and they go from there.



Just to let you know. I work as a software engineer and I did not need a degree to get my job. I starting programming in C++ when I has 9 years olds and reading books on data structures and applying it. So when I started in my EET program I was able tested out of my C++ 1 &2, data structures 1 & 2 classes.

BTW, The other day I got a call. I will be going to the University of Kentucky for my BSEE starting next year. They are transfer 12 credit hours from my EET classes, and all my cal1-4, calculus physics classes, all the general eduction classes( So that a total of (56+ hours).

G.P.Burdell

Oh please. Get over yourself. I don't need you to set up any meetings.

The fundamental problem here is that you do not know what engineering is. You may think you know what engineering is, other people may tell you what they think engineering is, but you (and they) simply do not know what you do not know.

Good luck at Kentucky. I'm sure you'll learn a thing or two about engineering while there.

AuburnMathTutor

This thread has got very nasty.

Look, there's nothing wrong with an ET degree. Clearly, an ET degree and Eng. degree aren't the same or there wouldn't be two different majors in the first place.

When I say that I don't think IT is as worthwhile a major as CS/SE, I don't mean that IT is a waste of 4 years of your life. I mean that, all other things being equal, I feel the more theoretical and design-oriented the education, the better. Of course, things often aren't equal; if a person cannot succeed, or does not have access to, for whatever reason, an engineering program, but does have access to a good engineering technology program (IT included)... there's nothing wrong with that.

If the person knows the difference between what IT and CS/SE majors find their niche to be in industry, and bases the decision to go into IT on that knowledge... great, and IT is likely the better choice for that individual.

I don't think it's fair to say IT programs and CS programs are close to equal in terms of focus or rigor... perhaps there is more of a difference between IT and CS/SE than between ET and Eng.

I will say that engineering majors... and I would like to think CS/SE is better about this, but maybe not by much... tend to look down on other majors, even closely related majors, even things like math and physics (which are, in my opinion, "harder" - whatever that means - than engineering). There's groupthink that engineering is hard and the noblest major... I don't get this vibe from most other departments, well, at least not so strongly. Just my 2 cents.