Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Perhaps high schools need to do a better job of guiding students toward appropriate majors.
I think a lot of us can agree on that. They could do better guiding toward majors, colleges beyond the local area, and career information in general.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
Most of those I knew who were weeded out of engineering majors either dropped out, flunked out, or switched their major to Human Development and Family Studies..
.
Funny thing is, most of the ones I know who were weeded out went into Engineering or Math. Chem-E and Ceramics seemed to be popular. (side note for those not familiar, Ceramics wasn't about art pottery, but covered a lot of construction materials and things like silicon wafers). Some may have gone to education or nursing. Can't think of anyone who went into a "Studies" program.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
in looking at syllabuses and lecture notes online, and in seeing what my peers were doing, I would say that what I learned in AP was identical to what they learned in college. And, as I explained, I know for sure that my AP Chem class was identical to the chem class that Syracuse University students took. I should also mention that my AP Physics C teacher had a daughter whose then boyfriend was a student at the college that I attended. He showed my teacher all of the exams that he had in the first 2 physics classes (the weed out classes), and said the exams were actually much easier than the AP exam.
.
If that's the case, then it again makes we wonder about the level of material being taught there. When I looked at the material on the AP exam, it much more closely matches what was taught in the non-technical "physics for teachers" classes than in the technical "physics for engineers" classes. The tests in those classes were not multiple choice. Rather the questions began with phrases like "Derive, from first principles ...." The final exam for my first semester physics class had five questions, was given out following midterms, was open book/open notes/open library, and we had six weeks to turn it in. It took every bit of that six weeks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
What I mean is that they work against us by having exams at inconvenient times (such as Wednesday before Thanksgiving after the dorms are closed), having major assignments due at inconvenient times and not allowing them to be handed in early, by having draconian attendance policies with no exceptions for any reason, where missing class even for a funeral is 10 points off your average, and there are no makeup exams, and any exam you miss, even for a funeral, means getting a 0. and given excessive amounts of busywork homework, not challenging homework like the professor that you mentioned liking gave you. I would also say that outright refusal to explain your grading policy is also working against students, but the academics who dominate this forum just think I was a grade grubber. Openly admitting that they break the rules but that they have tenure so there is nothing anybody can do is working against students.
How many professors did you have that did these things? You've already mentioned that you didn't have the class wit the Wednesday night exam. Having things due at inconvenient times, I assume by that you mean everything due the last week before exams which is a chronic planning problem with professors, but so well known, it's a part of college life. The only thing in that list that really stands out is the attendance policies which seems kind of ridiculous since so many professors had no attendance policy. That's the one that seems the most out of touch with students.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
Does this mean that you'd be travelling between the high school and college. Seems like a burdon, and it seems that it precludes having a normal high school life and participating in extra-curriculars, and having a job outside of school. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something. My high school definitely did not offer anything like that. And, even if they did, the consensus was, rightly or wrongly, that colleges would be more willing to accept the AP class since the colleges were more familiar with it.
.
Yes, they traveled between high school and the college. If there were enough enrollments, then the professor traveled to the high school to give it. What it mostly turned out was spending half a day at the high school and half a day at the college. I can understand when you went through that AP was the thing. Like I said earlier, my kids did mostly AP with only some dual enrollment. But knowing what's out there now, I'd push dual enrollment as a better option because it meets both high school and can knock a year off college at the same time. Didn't have any impact on extracurriculars because they did those in the afternoon or after school.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
Mostly things like intersection design, traffic signal timing, lighting, and ITS. MITS = MIT + ITS.
First of all, the vast majority of my civil engineering classes had nothing at all to do with traffic / transportation. Many of them were structural, geotechnical, or environmental, and none are even remotely related to the work that I do. Aside from that, everything was very theoretical, not real-world oriented, and very mathematical. I did well in college since I am very mathematically oriented. But in real life, my field is less mathematical, and more about "engineering judgment", which is not something that I am strong in at all. I do not know if engineering judgement is something that you either have or don't have, or if it's something that a better college could have taught me.
The few times I did go to office hours for engineering classes, the only response I'd ever get was "use your engineering judgment". But anything that didn't mirror what the professor wanted was marked wrong. So it was never about judgment. To my mind, engineering judgment is basically mind reading. For the poll, I counted that as the advice not being helpful
When I say I used much of what I learned, I don't mean that I was trained in the specifics of a job. Rather than I used what I learned to understand the job and get it done better. An engineering degree isn't the end of education but the beginning. It's the background; the license to learn on the job.
You mention "engineering judgement." In my experience that comes from the combination of understanding the science and engineering behind some as well as the practical application of that background. In the positive sense, it got developed and trained through projects, and working through theory in the classroom and then using that as the basis for learning the practical aspects on the job. It's a combination of both.
However, there is a caution with "engineering judgement." Far too often I hear it used instead of the culmination of knowledge and experience, used by lower-level engineers to justify their lack of deep analysis of the problem at hand. It may be, that your co-workers are using "engineering judgement" to cover the fact that they don't really understand what's going on. A big part of my job was to peer beneath whenever someone said "engineering judgement" to see if they really knew what they were talking about or if they were hand waving a magic phrase hoping the question would go away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
Maybe it depends on the school. I know plenty of professors who were paid for doing basically nothing, and they were proud of that fact.
Most employers say it makes you overqualified.
.
.
These are just things I haven't seen. MIght want to consider whether it's really "most" or "some."
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitsguy2001
Then instead of it being promoted as a Masters program, it should be promoted as a PhD program that most students are dismissed from after 2 years. If I knew what I knew now, would I have been willing to risk 2 years of my life to see if I got into the PhD program? I say no.
.
Just my experience was it was the entre' into the PhD program. Folks knew going in they were in competition for the PhD slots. The MS was considered the off ramp for those who didn't get into a PhD slot. Though many took the MS and went to a different college to get into the PhD program there.
First, high schools need to do a much better job of guiding students towards appropriate majors. No doubt about it! It's a real flaw in the US educational system - for high schools and colleges.
My daughter has always said she wished she left high school at age 16 to enroll full-time in a community college. I wish I had thought of community college as an option. My daughter needed more high level English classes and less teenage nonsense.
Absolutely agree on lack of guidance in high schools.
On the second part, both my kids wished they could have left/graduated high school sooner or had a full dual enrollment starting junior or senior year. Both of them felt that senior year especially was just holding them back; that they really didn't learn anything new that year and could have better used that time in college.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
I found professors to be clueless about employment prospects for the fields they were in. They were completely disengaged from that question. Later, when I worked at a university, I learned that there are a rare few professors who are well-connected in business or industry, who pull out all stops to arrange interview opportunities for their more promising students.
But generally, career advice is part of the academic advisers' job in each department; there's usually an undergrad and a graduate adviser, or a graduate faculty adviser. The undergrad adviser is the person who arranges job seminars for employers who call the department to request that a job seminar be arranged for students to learn about available opportunities in their field, what the qualifications are, and so forth. So the adviser is the person to approach with questions about employment possibilities in any career path related to the major.
This raises a similar point to the thread's title question; undergrad advisers don't understand why students don't come in to get to know them. Like professors' office hours, the advisers' office hours aren't just for guidance in program requirements, course requirements for graduation, and that kind of thing. (This info is available in college publications, so many students don't see the need to visit an advisor.). But the advisors can be aware of special scholarship options, may be in a position to recommend the high-achieving students for local organizations offering awards or scholarships, have information on employment opportunities in the field, and may even have informative handouts from employers. They're potentially a valuable resource. And so is the college job placement center. These resources are overlooked by some students.
My college and as best I can tell neither did my kids college, have a separate advisor. You were required to meet with your academic advisor each semester. But career work was done through career center which was totally voluntary and not very degree specific.
Quote:
Originally Posted by YorktownGal
Usually, your academic advisor was the chairperson of your major. Your academic advisor had to sign off on your course selection for each semester. How do people not get to know their advisor (the chairperson of their major)?
My professors approved papers/essay subjects. It was required before a student could began writing. So again, how do people not get to know their professors.
.
If that's the case, then it again makes we wonder about the level of material being taught there. When I looked at the material on the AP exam, it much more closely matches what was taught in the non-technical "physics for teachers" classes than in the technical "physics for engineers" classes.
Some of my colleagues went to colleges that had separate "physics for engineers" classes. According to them, the curriculum and the exams were exactly the same. The differences being that in the "physics for engineering" classes, exams were intentionally given at times such as the Wednesday night before Thanksgiving after the dorms closed, and they said that you were not allowed to ask any questions in class. Basically a weedout version of the regular physics class but covering the same material. And they were not allowed to AP out of those classes. I would have voted for my feet and refused to attend a college with such a requirement.
Quote:
The tests in those classes were not multiple choice.
The AP Exam was not entirely multiple choice. Part was multiple choice, part was free response.
Quote:
Rather the questions began with phrases like "Derive, from first principles ...." The final exam for my first semester physics class had five questions, was given out following midterms, was open book/open notes/open library, and we had six weeks to turn it in. It took every bit of that six weeks.
I do not think that is the norm at most colleges.
Quote:
How many professors did you have that did these things? You've already mentioned that you didn't have the class wit the Wednesday night exam.
Every student in my major had to take the class with the Wednesday night before Thanksgiving exam, except me, since I APed out of it. I also APed out of most of the classes that gave exams on religious holidays. I did have 2 professors (same year, and in fact 2 consecutive classes) who gave an exam on Yom Kippur and refused to reschedule it, but I'm not Jewish so I couldn't complain. I did have an exam the Wednesday morning before Thanksgiving, and they refused to reschedule it, but that's not as big a deal since the dorms are still open then. Another popular day to give exams was the day that we had to wait in line to pay the housing deposit. If you had an exam in an early class that day, you sometimes had to choose between a 0 on the exam or not getting on campus housing. Election Day was also a popular day for exams, although none of my professors ever gave an exam that day.
Quote:
Having things due at inconvenient times, I assume by that you mean everything due the last week before exams which is a chronic planning problem with professors, but so well known, it's a part of college life.
No, I'm referring to the Wednesday night before Thanksgiving after the dorms closed, religious holidays (both Christian and Jewish), the housing deposit day, and Dec. 23.
Quote:
Yes, they traveled between high school and the college. If there were enough enrollments, then the professor traveled to the high school to give it. What it mostly turned out was spending half a day at the high school and half a day at the college. I can understand when you went through that AP was the thing. Like I said earlier, my kids did mostly AP with only some dual enrollment. But knowing what's out there now, I'd push dual enrollment as a better option because it meets both high school and can knock a year off college at the same time. Didn't have any impact on extracurriculars because they did those in the afternoon or after school.
My high school did not offer anything like that.
Quote:
These are just things I haven't seen. MIght want to consider whether it's really "most" or "some."
I just think we are living in different worlds than each other.
Quote:
Just my experience was it was the entre' into the PhD program. Folks knew going in they were in competition for the PhD slots. The MS was considered the off ramp for those who didn't get into a PhD slot. Though many took the MS and went to a different college to get into the PhD program there.
But that was not how this program was offered. It was offered as an MS program. The PhD program was separate, but an MS from this program was a de facto requirement. We were not told that no employer on the planet considered the MS offered by this program to be a legitimate degree. Years later, they admitted that, and even said so on the website. I guess somebody called them out on their bait and switch tactics.
Some of my colleagues went to colleges that had separate "physics for engineers" classes. According to them, the curriculum and the exams were exactly the same. The differences being that in the "physics for engineering" classes, exams were intentionally given at times such as the Wednesday night before Thanksgiving after the dorms closed, and they said that you were not allowed to ask any questions in class. Basically a weedout version of the regular physics class but covering the same material. And they were not allowed to AP out of those classes. I would have voted for my feet and refused to attend a college with such a requirement....
Sounds like ME 212 at TAMU in the 80s, thermodynamics. The stories of that class, such as tests on one's drafting board while on the bleechers in the basketball gym are rather classical. Supposedly, it was the course that turned many away from becoming engineers.
BUT......that's TAMU. That is, an engineer wearing an Aggie ring has a lot going for them so it's A and B. A: What the school does, one way or another, so only certain people enter into the profession? B: What are your feet worth to give up getting that prestige?
It's like being a lawyer. Sure, there are oodles and oodles of law schools but unless you graduate from a certain top tier, your odds of getting a decent job with someone are rather low.
Like the stories I was told of the USMMA during the 60s, where they kept the watch schedule going during the holiday break and people were flying back to stand their watch. Say "F*** YOU!" and skip the watch? That's a class one demerit, what they toss people out of school for, and saying you got your merchant licence from Kings Point is a LOT to give up on.
Kings Point, in relation to our sub subject about schools not teaching what you need in industry presents, at least in the last century, an interesting alternative to that. In that, the merchant licence is the big thing and the general BS is very, very small. It did prepare one for the industry but if one had to rely on the BS they earned, odds are they would need to take a lot of courses afterwards.
Another note on this subject and that is being a good student, not being a know it all jerk (learned the hard way on that,too), can pay off. I've had a few times when being the gleamy eyed, front row sitting groupie has helped save my bacon.
Once, I laid down for a quick nap.....and slept through the final. Got a hold of the prof in a panic and he gave me an incomplete till the next semester when I could take the final. With another Prof, I was sleeping through every class after working my midshift because I had food poisoning....and didn't know it. When I saw the Prof on the day of the final, he said, "I had wondered what happened to you, you never miss class......OH MY GOD, YOU HAVE FOOD POISONING! Don't worry about the final today, you can take it with my undergrad class on Friday."
Taking school seriously in a fun sort of way is not a bad idea.
Sounds like ME 212 at TAMU in the 80s, thermodynamics. The stories of that class, such as tests on one's drafting board while on the bleechers in the basketball gym are rather classical. Supposedly, it was the course that turned many away from becoming engineers.
BUT......that's TAMU. That is, an engineer wearing an Aggie ring has a lot going for them so it's A and B. A: What the school does, one way or another, so only certain people enter into the profession? B: What are your feet worth to give up getting that prestige?
That isn't the school that they attended. But I am curious. What was the purpose of what you described? Did they feel that the ability to endure discomfort was a skill necessary for engineers? Did they want to keep the number of graduates artificially low, so they used that as a test as to who really wanted an engineering degree from that school? Or was that just the room that happened to be available for that test? Or something else?
In my case, rightly or wrongly, I think the professors believed that willingness to work on major holidays (both secular and religious), willingness to work when seriously ill, willingness to skip funerals in order to work, and willingness to blindly obey authority figures even when they were blatantly breaking the rules, were all necessary skills for engineers.
Quote:
It's like being a lawyer. Sure, there are oodles and oodles of law schools but unless you graduate from a certain top tier, your odds of getting a decent job with someone are rather low.
That may be true in law. But in engineering (at least in civil engineering; maybe other engineering fields are different), all employers care about is the piece of paper. At least in the private sector.
Quote:
Like the stories I was told of the USMMA during the 60s, where they kept the watch schedule going during the holiday break and people were flying back to stand their watch. Say "F*** YOU!" and skip the watch? That's a class one demerit, what they toss people out of school for, and saying you got your merchant licence from Kings Point is a LOT to give up on.
Yeah, it's the piece of paper that allows colleges to get away with doing whatever they want, since they know students will do anything it takes to get the piece of paper.
That isn't the school that they attended. But I am curious. What was the purpose of what you described? Did they feel that the ability to endure discomfort was a skill necessary for engineers? Did they want to keep the number of graduates artificially low, so they used that as a test as to who really wanted an engineering degree from that school? Or was that just the room that happened to be available for that test? Or something else?
In my case, rightly or wrongly, I think the professors believed that willingness to work on major holidays (both secular and religious), willingness to work when seriously ill, willingness to skip funerals in order to work, and willingness to blindly obey authority figures even when they were blatantly breaking the rules, were all necessary skills for engineers.
That may be true in law. But in engineering (at least in civil engineering; maybe other engineering fields are different), all employers care about is the piece of paper. At least in the private sector.
Yeah, it's the piece of paper that allows colleges to get away with doing whatever they want, since they know students will do anything it takes to get the piece of paper.
I don't know why they did that but supposedly they did.
HOWEVER, it sort of does fit into the formal explanation of what a Profession is. That is, there are only so many schools for a said profession, they only let certain people in, and then, they only let a certain number graduate. They have rules govern the conduct of those in that profession. Such as, say, being a Vet in Texas for how many Vet colleges are there in Texas?
On another approach, one of my acting profs put it down to us that we really had to work to get an A from her, that you don't get a good grade just by showing up for class (I can only guess what she was dealing with in this current student attitude world).
Back to TAMU engineering of where one complaint was a pop quiz given on Monday for material listed on the syllabus to be covered the following Friday. Unfair and unreasonable? Probably.....but consider this in that one of the rewards of a college education is to be able to predict what someone else is going to do, to be able to read them and even stop or defeat them before they act.
In a Poli Sci of the Arab-Israeli Wars class, I estimated the the Prof would ask for the major final question either to track the development of the PLO or the history of the wars. That night, I researched and memorized the first. For the second, I had a copy of The Encleo. of Modern Warfare and memorized all sections up to the invasion of Lebanon (that's where the volume ended). The prof asked the 2nd question and I aced the test.
What one learns in college isn't just "in the books". Got to run.
I don't know why they did that but supposedly they did.
HOWEVER, it sort of does fit into the formal explanation of what a Profession is. That is, there are only so many schools for a said profession, they only let certain people in, and then, they only let a certain number graduate. They have rules govern the conduct of those in that profession. Such as, say, being a Vet in Texas for how many Vet colleges are there in Texas?
But the question is, if they need to keep the numbers artificially low (which I don't agree with, but that's another story), then what should be used to determine who gets in and who doesn't? In your case, it seems those who got in were those willing to accept physical discomfort. You seem to support that? Why do you feel that willingless to endure physical discomfort should determine who gets into a profession and who does not? In my case, it was basically who was willing to be a doormat and who wasn't. Was that the right way to do it? I say no, but others may say yes.
Quote:
On another approach, one of my acting profs put it down to us that we really had to work to get an A from her, that you don't get a good grade just by showing up for class (I can only guess what she was dealing with in this current student attitude world).
What did she say you have to do to get an A?
Quote:
Back to TAMU engineering of where one complaint was a pop quiz given on Monday for material listed on the syllabus to be covered the following Friday. Unfair and unreasonable? Probably.....but consider this in that one of the rewards of a college education is to be able to predict what someone else is going to do, to be able to read them and even stop or defeat them before they act.
How much was the pop quiz worth? If it was worth a major portion of your grade, then that was wrong. If it was more like bonus points, then I'd say that was fair.
That isn't the school that they attended. But I am curious. What was the purpose of what you described? Did they feel that the ability to endure discomfort was a skill necessary for engineers? Did they want to keep the number of graduates artificially low, so they used that as a test as to who really wanted an engineering degree from that school? Or was that just the room that happened to be available for that test? Or something else?
In my case, rightly or wrongly, I think the professors believed that willingness to work on major holidays (both secular and religious), willingness to work when seriously ill, willingness to skip funerals in order to work, and willingness to blindly obey authority figures even when they were blatantly breaking the rules, were all necessary skills for engineers.
That may be true in law. But in engineering (at least in civil engineering; maybe other engineering fields are different), all employers care about is the piece of paper. At least in the private sector.
Yeah, it's the piece of paper that allows colleges to get away with doing whatever they want, since they know students will do anything it takes to get the piece of paper.
I have some friends who went through TAMU back in the old days. One of the things I've learned from talking to them is the culture at TAMU, especially way back, was about hazing. Had nothing to do with academics, and everything to do with Aggie culture. It wasn't about whether you wanted to be an engineer, but whether you had what it took to be an Aggie. They had some incredible stories of the hazing that went on, but they were very proud of the hazing, both what they went through and what they inflicted on underclassmen.
I do think you're really reaching when using holidays as a reason schools are too tough on students. Very few schools celebrate religion holidays. How many schools, other than the one professor you keep mentioning, gave exams late Wednesday night before Thanksgiving? Or on December 23rd when colleges are closed for winter break? You can't generalize one off events to be "all."
\Does this mean that you'd be travelling between the high school and college. Seems like a burdon, and it seems that it precludes having a normal high school life and participating in extra-curriculars, and having a job outside of school. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something. My high school definitely did not offer anything like that. And, even if they did, the consensus was, rightly or wrongly, that colleges would be more willing to accept the AP class since the colleges were more familiar with it.
The way it was handled at my school was, that the students registered for an early morning class, so they'd only miss the first hour or so of the school day. They were at school for the rest of the day, and could participate in extra-curriculars if they wanted. It didn't affect their "highschool experience". I'm not sure what's so special about "normal highschool life", anyway. Some students are happy to escape it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
