<p>I’m not saying that the situation you are describing never happens. I can just tell you that people on this forum who think that they are getting an engineering degree when they major in EET are somewhat misinformed.</p>
<p>I have nothing against technology degrees and there is absolutely nothing wrong with obtaining a technology degree, but it does not qualify someone for many traditional engineering jobs. This is fact. Also, my comment was directed at aarons914 not you buster.</p>
<p>ME 76
Your right most people think EET and EE are the same. I also find people that think electronics technology and electronics engineering technology are the same.</p>
<p>At my College electronics technology and electronics engineering technology are not the same at all. They will not let students who do the electronics technology into the electronics engineering technology because the EET classes use calculus in the electronics classes and students in the electronics technology do not have to use calculus at all.</p>
<p>Just to give a example of what I doing in a power electronics class:</p>
<ol>
<li>Design a class B amplifier with a non-inverting gain of 48, capable of delivering 8 W into an 8 ohms resistive load. Determine the following:</li>
</ol>
<p>supply voltage(-/+ 18V, -/+ 28 V, or -/+ 56 V) bias components</p>
<p>R<em>f and R</em>i values</p>
<p>P_Q @ worse case(assume a sine wave input)</p>
<p>heat sink Thermal resistance (T_a = 50 degrees Celsius)</p>
<hr>
<p>To me this sound like something a EE would do.</p>
<p>ME 76</p>
<p>Check out busters link, if Lockheed Martin requires an EE or EET than it shows they think of them as very close. And I’m in the same boat as Buster in my MET program, its a 4 year degree that is ABET accredited and I still take calculus just not as much as a pure engineering. Besides for that we take the exact same classes and more engineering classes since we take a few less math classes so we get a few more specialized engineering courses.</p>
<p>What I keep reading from people is that they have engineering technicians with a few classes or maybe an associates degree which is completely different and possibly what you’re referring to. But if you really think taking calc 3 and diffEQ is the difference between a real engineering degree and a fake than I guess we have to agree to disagree.</p>
<p>How to EET majors even complete the advanced EE courses without cal 3 and DiffEq? There are certainly differential equations to be solved in EE, I would imagine. I would be surprised if they never use Laplace’s equation - not to mention Poisson’s equation - to solve for electric fields with well-defined boundary conditions. Not to mention all the vector calculus E-Mag requires to do right…</p>
<p>How do you do upper-level EE courses justice without the extra math? Or are EE majors that much more technical than what I’m used to in Physics? We had to use concepts from all of the calculus courses, diff. eq., linear algebra, and a variety of concepts not previously learned… basic fourier stuff, pde.s, etc.</p>
<p>Laplace’s equation was covered in my Adv engineering math class</p>
<p>So did your curriculum cover the topics of Cal III and Diff Eq? I thought I heard somebody say that those topics weren’t covered by the ET degree…</p>
<p>I mean, if you learn all the same things as an EE major, then the name doesn’t really mean much. A rose by any other name, right? What do EE majors take that you don’t?</p>
<p>Edit: I guess aarons said that the ET degree didn’t need to cover Cal III and Diff Eq. That’s true, but any engineering degree worth its salt will require these courses. At worst, it’s an exercise in developing mathematical maturity; at best, it’s a set of tools an EE would need to do the job.</p>
<p>With the BSEET am doing I have take up to Advanced Engineering Mathematics 1 & 2. I also have to take calculus base physics 1 & 2.</p>
<p>But my BS.EET is only TAC/ABET and not EAC/ABET.</p>
<p>I only know of a few BSEET programs that make you do more than calculus 1 and that make you do calculus base physics 1 & 2.</p>
<p>It sounds like your program is the exception rather than the rule, then. In general, without a background in advanced applications of applied mathematics, how does one study advanced topics in EE?</p>
<p>Not only that but Id say EE in general is much more math intense than other engineering fields, I know my schools EET program takes calc 1,2 and 3 but still not Diffeq. </p>
<p>I’m in MET and aside from basic integration and differentiation it’s not super math heavy. From what Ive heard from actual engineers most of the higher end math is hard to apply to real problems anyway, a lot of the data needs to be obtained experimentally. It would be nice to have problems that work out perfectly in a book but if you’re designing an aircraft wing would you rather trust a formula or readings from strain gauges to get real numbers on the stresses a wing receives.</p>
<p>That last post shows the difference between a technology degree and an engineering degree. </p>
<p>An engineer should be able to (very easily) mathematically model the stress on a wing and be able to design the best possible wing using those “higher end math” formulas (which really aren’t higher math). This method of calculate -> design -> optimize -> recalculate allows the engineer to cycle through thousands of designs before ever spending a single dollar on material. In addition, the engineer can see “why” things are happening, not just “what” is happening, in order to design a better wing. Once the wing is designed, the engineer should only really be using pilot data to validate an existing model to see if there was anything missed in the model.</p>
<p>An engineering technology degree doesn’t cover that level of detail because it’s an application degree (actually, it’s an applied applied degree). An engineer has already designed the wing, and all the technicians are doing is either a) putting the design into practice and collecting data or b) iterating through minor tweaks in the design in a trial-and-error local search process.</p>
<p>The technology degree graduates I’ve worked with in the past have all had 4-year degrees, and they make about half of a seasoned engineer. It’s only $10 or $20 thousand at the start of their careers, but engineers receive raises faster and have the potential for promotion though the senior ranks. The structure is similar to commissioned and enlisted personnel in the military.</p>
<p>aarons914, you really think that you take more engineering classes than a traditional engineering degree? You are once again misinformed. I didn’t say that calc 3 and diffeq are the only differences either. The differences are much more drastic than that. The engineering classes you think you take are not the same as traditional ones. If we compared your curriculum to a traditional ME program, you could see that you do not take more engineering classes. True engineering classes build upon diffeq and the so called “higher end” math that you claim is useless. </p>
<p>I have a BS in ME and I assure you that most companies will not consider ME and MET to be the same thing. G.P. Burdell is correct. Just because you reference one job posting doesn’t support your claim at all. </p>
<p>The T in MET is there for a reason. It is a technology degree, not an engineering degree. But by all means, keep telling people that you take more engineering classes than a traditional engineer. See how far that gets you in a job interview.</p>
<p>Well from the people that I know some have a BSEE and some have a BSEET. All of them had made over $45K when they started working. But this might because they are working at a defense contractor company and have a top secret clearance.</p>
<p>@aarons914, You should away trust mathematically model first. It saves a lot of time when designing something. Just think about it. Would you using try and error when your programming a CNC/CAM Mill? If you did you would be looking for a new job.</p>
<p>Also aarons914, that job at Lock Heed that asked for a EE or EET, was not for a design engineer but for a field engineer to over see teachs.</p>
<p>Most of the EET I know at Lock Heed are test engineers or filed engineers that help training the USAF/Army electronics teachs work their products. But some of them have made it into design positions after years(9+) of work.</p>
<p>You might want to think about getting a minor in Math. It would help you more if you want to try in get a MSME later.</p>
<p>Also from what I have seen is that students in a BSEET or BSNEET program are better at the higher end of math that the students in other BS ET programs like BSMET or BS Civil ET</p>
<p>@aarons914, look at this link it will show you more of what people do with a BSMET. The link is from Purdue at top engineering college that also has BS X. E.T program</p>
<p>[Job</a> Postings for Students](<a href=“http://www.tech.purdue.edu/MET/career/JobPostingsforStudents.cfm]Job”>http://www.tech.purdue.edu/MET/career/JobPostingsforStudents.cfm)</p>
<p>I didn’t mean to say you wouldn’t model a wing before testing it, you have to start somewhere what I meant was it’s just a start. My example of the aircraft wing came from a professor who used to do wing design for Boeing so it’s not just some random thought. </p>
<p>The other misconception I’m seeing is a lot of people seem to think you’re going to get a design job fresh out of college which is BS and you know it. All of the design jobs at the big companies are looking for at least a masters and a good amount of experience so ME or MET aren’t getting those jobs.</p>
<p>And ME 76 at ASU my MET degree is 128 credits compared with 120 for the normal ME, they take about 2-3 more math classes I think, our general studies are the same so what do you think we take for the extra 17 credits?</p>
<p>And way to compare apples to apples GP Burdell; “they make about half of a seasoned engineer”, I’m not comparing what an ET grad makes compared to a seasoned engineer, here’s a 2009 jobs link, pretty big difference in starting pay.</p>
<p>[Top</a> 10 Degrees List: Best Majors for the Highest Starting Salary 2009 | Darwin’s Finance](<a href=“http://www.darwinsfinance.com/top-10-college-degrees-2009/]Top”>http://www.darwinsfinance.com/top-10-college-degrees-2009/)</p>
<p>I will say this again, and if anybody sees a way out of this, please tell me.</p>
<p>How do EET majors take more engineering courses than EE majors, when practically all of E. Mag. requires Cal III and DiffEq?</p>
<p>???</p>
<p>For instance, if I gave you a square ring of charge and told you the voltages on the four sides, could you get the voltage at an arbitrary point inside? If I asked you whether or not a magnetic field with components (x, y, z) could exist, what would your answer be? Why?</p>
<p>Not to mention QM. Do EE majors have to do any QM? If they do, all bets are off.</p>
<p>Hell, even basic circuit analysis uses basic differential equations, right? I mean, if I give you an arbitrary loop circuit with resistors, capacitors, and inductors, and ask for the current through the circuit at time t, how do you answer that?</p>
<p>I’m just unconvinced that any degree without Cal III and DiffEq can be of comparable depth to an EE degree. I’m no fan of EE, but there comes a point when you’ve got to face facts.</p>
<p>aaron914, you are full of it.</p>
<p><a href=“http://catalog.asu.edu/files/majormap09/TSMECBS.pdf[/url]”>http://catalog.asu.edu/files/majormap09/TSMECBS.pdf</a></p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>Give it up man. Your degree is a technology degree, not an engineering degree.</p>
<p>ME 76, your right aaron914 physics is not calculus base:</p>
<h2>This is from the college web site</h2>
<p>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.</p>
<h2>General Studies: SQ (if credit also earned in PHY 113)</h2>
<h2>Now this is my Physics 2 class</h2>
<p>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</p>
<h2>and PHYS-310 / 5-4</h2>
<p>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.</p>
<p>@AuburnMathTutor, I never said EET did more engineering classes. Just that the circuit analysis, electronics classes in my EET program use calculus.</p>
<p>When your looking at engineering/technology books you have three types:</p>
<ol>
<li>One that has ET: Thats for electronics technology(just use Trig)</li>
<li>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.</li>
</ol>
<p>Here is the example:
At my college students doing electronics technology program would use this book for their first digital electronics class: [Amazon.com:</a> Digital Fundamentals (10th Edition) (9780132359238): Thomas L. Floyd: Books](<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Fundamentals-10th-Thomas-Floyd/dp/0132359235/ref=pd_sim_b_5]Amazon.com:”>http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Fundamentals-10th-Thomas-Floyd/dp/0132359235/ref=pd_sim_b_5)
The ET just cover the basics </p>
<p>And Students in the EET program use this book for the first class in digital electronics: <a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Design-CPLD-Applications-VHDL/dp/1401840302/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257442223&sr=1-1[/url]”>http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Design-CPLD-Applications-VHDL/dp/1401840302/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257442223&sr=1-1</a>
The EET covers more design and VHDL prorgamming</p>
<p>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</p>
<p>ME 76 did you compare it to <a href=“http://catalog.asu.edu/files/majormap09/ESMAEMBSE.pdf[/url]”>http://catalog.asu.edu/files/majormap09/ESMAEMBSE.pdf</a>
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.</p>
<p>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. </p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>Oh and here are education requirements from a Mechanical Engineering job at Boeing:</p>
<pre><code>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.
</code></pre>
<p>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.</p>
<p>^ 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.</p>
<p>I would imagine most jobs in ME <em>strongly</em> 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…</p>