Engineers and Engineering Technology Degrees (please read)

College Majors Engineering Majors
1

Please, I want all engineers, students, parents, company recruiters and engineering technologist on this forum to understand that some school’s engineering technology programs are more advanced than others; they are not the same. Do not assume or underestimate a person’s ability simply because a program is Engineering technology. People say that it is equivalent to a “glorified technician” or the nurse and doctor analogy, that is so not true and shows how misinformed people are. I would personally say the analogy is more of MD vs DO, they are different paths/methods to the same thing, but they are both still doctors.

For all practical purposes, the ABET Bachelors of Science in engineering technology in the (USA), not Canada!!! is just as qualifies to be an engineer compared to the traditional engineering degree, it all depends on the school’s curriculum. In academia, it is “Technologist” but in the real world, you are still titled as an engineer. Most of my friends with the ET degree work as design/manufacturing engineers.

Traditional engineering program is more theoretical and advanced in science/analysis, but so is the engineering technology in its application based/real world approach. I took both engineering and engineering technology curriculum and I believe that the engineering technology prepares your real “skills” to be an engineer.

I saw no disadvantage/difference in both programs, (unless you study interdisciplinary subjects like mechatronics). For instance, at my school, we take; calculus 1&2, physics 1&2, Differential equations, Finite Element analysis, Computational methods/numerical analysis, statics, strength of materials 1&2, thermodynamics, aerodynamics 1&2, heat transfer, engineering economics, project management and a lot of CAD/CAM classes. The program curriculum is as follow; page 84
https://www.vaughn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/UndergradCatalog_1516.pdf

All the core engineering classes use separate differential equations to derive the main equations for the problem, the theory is explained, I do not get why some people think engineering technology students can’t do theory work because of lesser required mathematics classes they have to take. We used the same books/professors with engineering students.

For those that graduated in (BSME or BSMET), be proud of yourself, for it is an accomplishment many cannot achieve. Both engineers and engineering technologist are the same in “practical”. Students worked really hard for that degree in Bachelors of Science and no one can take that away from you. We use different methods, it’s like comparing an automatic transmission to a manual transmission, both still changes gears.

If your brain gets excited or like to solve design processes/ methods or 3D designs, CAD, manufacturing, industrial/product design, 3Dstudio max, then the engineering technology would make more sense for you because you see engineering from a “design/concrete/build/make/hands on” point of view.

If you like to solve/derive advanced mathematics or understand more abstract phenomena; Tylor series, Laplace/inverse transforms, special relativity, matrices, linear algebra/ guess Jordan approach or fascinated with Lagrangian/ naiver stokes equations in fluids mechanics then the traditional engineering is for you because you see engineering from a “solve/phenomena/scientific/abstract design” point of view. I am not saying it is fixed, because both degree overlap each other, the problem for most programs is balancing both theory and application.

Engineering technologist graduates/students, do not limit yourself or accept inferiority when you apply for jobs and they say you not qualified or belittle your degree, why would you even want to work for such egotistical people and companies anyway? you know your worth, simply move on and keep applying elsewhere that welcomes you, do not let people dictate all the hard work, project, exams and the pain you put yourself through in school.

I would recommend doing the traditional engineering degree, not because it is better, but it is well known and accepted as the standard degree to have as an engineer if you are completely done with school. Take the required mathematics and physics sequence to make yourself theoretically equivalent to traditional engineers, then apply to grad school at your own pace and remove the stigma of the “T” just for insurance/peace of mind, and if you cannot afford grad school or get a job simply try a different field or area similar to your degree, be confident in your skills and yourselves.

I apologize for the long post, just had to get it all out “so the world can see” (bane’s voice).

2

So, all within the same post, you claimed that (some) engineering technology programs have the same courses and background as their engineering counterparts, while also saying that ET is more “practical.” I’m not sure how you can support both claims.

Also, you are making comparisons based on a mechanical engineering program that does not have ABET accreditation. Only the ET program there does.

3

More practical in the sense that although the ET do not take more advanced theory classes like calculus based physics 3 or linear algebra, C++ computer programming, AC/DC circuit analysis, control systems etc, they take more practical electives that are geared towards the end of the degree in CAD and CAM courses. This is based off my own experience, others might be different.

I am not saying one is better than the other or trying to start a fuzz here, i am simply trying to let future student and engineers know/understand that some of the ET programs is not as weak in theory as some people might think and that they can work as engineers depending on the path they take. You have to look at the individual/school curriculum not the degree itself. It is also all about how you present yourself, interview skills, resume, and internships. People have forgotten what engineering is all about, yes its is scientific in theory, but theory with application to solve, design, improve real world problems.

At my school, the mechanical engineering program doesn’t have ABET accreditation yet but the Mechatronics engineering program does. They just introduced the mechanical engineering program last year so yes it doesn’t have it yet, eventually it will. I have taken classes from both curriculum so i know its not far off in theory.

I would leave you guys with an interesting quote from one of the greatest inventor of all time, “Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. ”
― Nikola Tesla

4

I’m not questioning the validity of MET programs, but I can say your MD/DO analogy is not accurate. MDs and DOs now days differ in title only. The curricula are almost identical and under the law the degrees are viewed as being the same.

A better analogy might be optometry/ophthalmology. I’m an optometrist. I have additional medical residency training and worked along side ophthalmologists for over 20 years. We all did routine care and we all did medical care. I however never did and never will do intraocular surgery and at least in the foreseeable future, no OD will.

So, can METs be functional engineers, possibly even doing the exact same thing as some MEs depending on the job? Sure. Are they the same? No they aren’t. The range of what MEs can do is quite a bit broader.

5

Academic discussion. So few colleges offer ET vs ENG.

I had looked into this for one of my kids, not a single one of the schools he applied to offer this.
There are others he could have applied to, but few and not on campuses he otherwise wanted to attend.

6

Good points eyemph, i like that analogy, it is certainly better than the nurse/doctor relationships between the tech and eng.
So you can call yourself a Doctor, just not a medical doctor, but you will still be considered a doctor non the less right?. A doctor in optometry, not doctor in medicine, but still a doctor because you have attained enough knowledge in your field to tech and apply it.

Same can be said of engineering technology and engineering. In academia, yes they are not the same, I agree, but they are not completely different either, similar but different. When they are hired, their title is still “engineer, design engineer, manufacturing engineer, quality engineer, product/ industrial engineer etc.” not “technologist” I have never heard anyone who did ET called that on the job.

If they are not the same/similar enough, then why can they both sit for the FE and PE exam to become licensed engineering professional? An optometrist cannot sit for the USMLE only MDs/DO can last time I checked. So MD/DO i think its an accurate analogy.

I am just trying to really understand what the big deal is based on this forums I see on ET vs E and why most people try their best to make sure the ET degree is not as valid compared to the traditional engineering degree. They make is sound like engineering technology is the bastard child ( John Snow) of Mr. Stark that no one wants to affiliate with in Game of Thrown and the engineering degree is the Elite and beloved/precious son.

What if the ET then go to grad school and get a degree in engineering, would they then be able to do apply their range more just because of the degree? I don’t think so, yes they will have new skill set to advance in the field. I think it depends mainly on the individual’s potential or ability. Me for example, I just like to design and apply FEA analysis, but prefer the process of design more than analysis. I don’t see myself in the R&D or designing the next rocket propellant engine for NASA/SpaceX, I can design/manufacture the parts and components on CAD/CAM but don’t have enough interest in its analysis even though I understand how it works.

For example, I can take classes to learn how to sing or get a degree in Music, but I know for a fact no matter how much I try, I cannot sing like Prince, Beyoncé, Usher or Adele. My singing degree doesn’t change the fact that I can’t sing like Adele. I am simply saying look at the individual and what they have accomplished not the degree title alone.

7

PAs cannot practice without physician oversight.

8

Look, I’ll give you that your program seems to require more theory than some I have seen, given that it includes differential equations. However, it’s still not all that strong in theory. It doesn’t even include multivariable calculus. That plays an extremely important roll in a number of mechanical engineering fields, especially those that fall within the field of continuum mechanics (e.g. mechanics of materials and fluid mechanics). You can’t do things like fluid mechanics in much depth without things like divergence and curl in your toolbox.

ET degrees are valuable and they are not inferior to traditional engineering degrees. They are just different. The two essentially form a Venn diagram. Some of their jobs overlap, and some are unique to each degree.

You don’t need to justify anything. Just do your job, enjoy your life, and don’t worry so much about what everyone on the internet thinks.

9

Well, it’s a bit disingenuous to suggest you’re taking the same classes, though. According to the catalog, the department designation for most of these courses for engineering technology majors is EGR, and for mechanical engineering majors, MEE. They are different courses. Like @boneh3ad said, you don’t seem to take classes like multivariable calculus or linear algebra for your ET program. It’s not really possible to study topics like finite element methods and numerical methods without a firm grasp of linear algebra, or topics like fluid mechanics and heat transfer without a good understanding of multivariable calculus.

Anyway, to echo the others above, I agree completely that neither degree is better than the other. They’re just different, with some overlap, but it’s misleading to try and paint them as being essentially identical degrees.

10

@AuraObscura, As i previously said, i have taken both classes from both curriculum. I was initially studying the engineering curriculum then switched to engineering technology, not because it was too hard, it was mainly for personal reasons like difference in interest, financial aid qualification, duration of program, cost, curriculum structure etc. The engineering technology program was started with the school and is very established. The engineering program was introduced between 2007-2009, Only one of the engineering curriculum just received its ABET accreditation last year.

And just so you know, the FEA and computational/numerical analysis classes are taught by the same professor, same exams and the same book, its a difficult class to understand if you have no firm grasp of advanced mathematics.

The code of the classes just represents what major you are taking, they did that specifically for ABET accreditation even though majority of the classes are taught by the same professors and text books. The code are meant to make sure students do not take different classes that are not towards their degree audit, it also prevents them from losing financial aid etc.

@boneh3ad As far as multivariable or calculus 3, been there done that, that is my favorite maths class to be honest; vectors, partial derivatives, greens theorem etc… i totally agree, yes it really helps in classes like heat transfer and fluids mechanics, aerodynamics. I personally think they should add multivariable calculus in the curriculum due to its applications.

Since it is an aeronautical school and close to major airports in the city, both programs are highly sort out at career fairs by major aeronautical companies like locked martin, northrop, boeing etc. Its a really good school, 92% of graduates get jobs in the field or go to graduate school.

Thanks guys for all your input, i have a better idea now on what the situation is.

11

But again, you are basing a lot of your statements on your experience at this one school, and your school is somewhat peculiar among these options. It looks like it’s engineering technology programs are unusually robust and its full engineering programs are unusually limited in their scope. You can’t really make general inferences about engineering versus engineering technology based on that.

Again, I don’t look down on ET at all, but it just isn’t true that the two degrees are the same in general.

12

@boneh3ad,@10s4life, I agree and understand what you guys are saying, we are actually saying the same thing. I never said engineering and ET are the same curriculum, they are not. i also never thought or think you look down on ET, i have never heard you talk down on ET in this/any forums so i know you good.

I said similar but different, thats why i said i now have a better understanding of the situation, my school is unique in its ET program but most schools are generally not like that and i can’t compare my own situation to others. Does that sound about right? :slight_smile:

13

I tend to assume any program with the term “Technology” in its title will be more practical than theoretical. That looks to be the case with the EET program, in comparison with an EE program.

I’m reminded of the difference between a CS degree and a Software Engineering degree. Most CS degrees are a lot more theoretical than Software Engineering degrees, and CS grads tend to look down their noses at SE grads. But ultimately they both end up doing the exact same work once they get out of school.