<p>here is yahoo finance too, engineering tech is the same starting as engineering</p>
<p>[most-lucrative-college-degrees.html:</a> Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance](<a href=“http://finance.yahoo.com/college-education/article/107402/most-lucrative-college-degrees.html]most-lucrative-college-degrees.html:”>http://finance.yahoo.com/college-education/article/107402/most-lucrative-college-degrees.html)</p>
<p>From what I’ve heard there is a HUGE difference between the 2 year technology degree and the 4 year technology degree. The 2 year one seems like it would make you a glorified machinist or electrician, while the 4 year one regularly gets recruited by major companies to fill engineering type positions. </p>
<p>If you can get licensed as a professional engineer like bigtree is saying, then no matter what anyone says or wishes, you are legally recognized by the government as an engineer.</p>
<p>There is also a huge difference between the 4 year engineering technology degree and the traditional engineering degree. As I’ve said before, a traditional engineering degree is calculus and differential equation based and a technology degree is not. You can get licensed as a professional engineer without any type of engineering degree provided you have enough work experience in most states so this argument is somewhat pointless. The fact is that even with a technology degree in a lot of states, you will have to have much more work experience than someone with a traditional engineering degree to get licensed.</p>
<p>As bigtrees states, there are companies that will consider technology degrees for some engineering positions, however, this is not always the case. The companies where I have been will not consider technology graduates for engineering positions. Regarding the salaries, even if they do start out very close, I am skeptical that they will remain that close. I stand by my assertion that in general and at many companies, a traditional engineering degree will offer more flexibility and opportunity than a technology degree.</p>
<p>I found this quote from the Bureau of labor statistics [Engineering</a> Technicians](<a href=“http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos112.htm]Engineering”>http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos112.htm)</p>
<p>‘Many 4-year colleges offer bachelor’s degrees in engineering technology, but graduates of these programs often are hired to work as technologists or applied engineers, not technicians.’</p>
<p>So there is a distinction between technicians and BET’s. And I think technologists or applied engineers are just government jargon for engineering. </p>
<p>I am in complete agreement with ME76 though…If you went up to the employers at the CF here with a technology degree they would tell you to take one good look around and give one reason somebody is going to hire you. As an engineer about to graduate it would be hard enough competing with regional engineering grads, like say northwestern in Chicago or UW in madison…now you want to come in with a tech degree, good luck with that. </p>
<p>A Ph.D or M.S. in engineering is where I would draw the line for making comparisons; out of respect. But for undergrad engineering, ok sure, and good luck.</p>
<p>That’s well put, Cyclone. As fresh grad with a MET degree under my belt, I was just about worthless to most employers. I graduated during a bad economy, and engineers were a dime a dozen. I had a heck of a time getting the attention of anyone trying to hire engineers (since I was an almost-engineer) but overqualified for most any other position.</p>
<p>Now, seven years out of college and having done three different positions with engineer in the title and holding a professional engineer license, I don’t have the same problem. But the first few years were tough.</p>
<p>As I keep saying, I recommend a ME degree over MET but a MET over no degree at all.</p>
<p>and we’ve come full circle again,lol</p>
<p>Every thread here comes full circle or becomes a giant circular ****ing match. Why does it surprise you here? haha</p>
<p>My advice is to figure out the kind of jobs you want to do and see the education requirements for them. I think you’ll find that most employers don’t really care if you have a technology degree or an Engineering degree. The exception being research type work in which case you need a PHD and the ME vs MET argument doesn’t matter in that case.</p>
<p>i started writing a really long post, but i guess i’ll just sum it up. MET programs vary from school to school. Non ABET credited programs give the rest a bad rep. </p>
<p>Coming from a soon to have BSMET and starting MEME next semester and having a job lined up, i can tell you some MET grads do get the shaft by some companies. Then there are others that i believe were just straight up slackers and shouldn’t really be engineers in the first place. They also tend to be averaged in the numbers.</p>
<p>Practicality wise, MET program will train a more useful engineer on the job than an ME graduate. </p>
<p>Someone mentioned something about PE. MET students aren’t required to take the FE, but if he chooses to do so, whats to keep him from getting a PE with some job exp? I havn’t seen PE problems, but i assume they are similar to FE problems. If that is the case, they are all real generic engineering problems… endurance seems to be the biggest challenge haha.</p>
<p>If you plan on getting a Masters though, ME may be a better route. MET grads must take prereq classes before starting the 500 level stuff. Some schools offers an ME minor in MET major to bridge the prereqs.</p>
<p>someone else mentioned salaries. 50 seems on the lower side… even for an ME. Knowing other MET and MEs, there dosn’t seem to be any difference in starting salaries. They range from 55-60, and it really depends where you work- both location and whether its a big company or not.</p>
<p>if your worried about those things or that im making stuff up seeing im just a random person on the internet, go ME for a safer route.</p>
<p>Either way, despite what you hear about the economy on the news, engineers are in demand and will continue to be so. Look in the defense or medical field if you want some $.</p>
<p>
It depends on the state. Different states have different rules for licensure.</p>
<p>In many (probably most) states, ET grads can qualify for engineering licensure, although they typically need more work experience than an engineering grad. </p>
<p>But in other states, ET grad are flatly barred from engineering licensure by state law. In [url=<a href=“http://kyboels.ky.gov/GettingLicensed/Individuals/ProfessionalEngineer/FEAppInstructions.htm]Kentucky[/url”>http://kyboels.ky.gov/GettingLicensed/Individuals/ProfessionalEngineer/FEAppInstructions.htm]Kentucky[/url</a>], for example:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even ABET-accredited ET degrees are unacceptable in Kentucky (because such degrees have TAC/ABET accreditation, as opposed to the required EAC/ABET accreditation). So if you are interested in pursuing a PE license as an ET graduate, you need to look carefully at your state laws. An ET degree may or may not be qualifying, depending on the state.</p>
<p>There’s only a couple states that don’t allow the Engineering Technology degree. Florida is another such state.</p>
<p>As is [Tennessee](<a href=“http://tn.gov/commerce/boards/ae/engineer.shtml#RR]Tennessee[/url]:”>http://tn.gov/commerce/boards/ae/engineer.shtml#RR):</a>
I don’t know exactly how many states reject ET degrees for engineering licensure. To my knowledge, there is no comprehensive nationwide compilation of state engineering laws and regulations. Even if there was, it probably be out of date, because the rules change all the time. </p>
<p>I suspect that most states do have some provision for accepting ET degrees, but there are obviously some (such as KY, TN, FL) that do not. Furthermore, the states that do accept ET degrees have varying attitudes: some may accept them readily, others may make it harder. </p>
<p>The point is that you need to do some homework if you want to pursue engineering licensure with an ET degree. Depending on your state, it may not be a big deal, or it may be a hassle, or it may be impossible.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone who wants licensure from the beginning is debating between the two majors. More likely, someone with an engineering technology degree decides they want to get licensed at some point after gradutation.</p>
<p>At any rate, there will be changes to this in the future as some state licensing boards are pushing requiring a masters degree to get licensed. In all likelyhood, they will take a person with an engineering technology undergraduate degree and masters degree in engineering.</p>
<p>bigtrees, I heard about this, that it has taken to effect if you graduate past 2010 you will require a M.S. to get licensing…</p>
<p>I’m worried about this…I don’t like change…people need to stop changing stuff that doesn’t need to be changed…like at my school, it’s just become more and more stringent on VEISHEA celebration rules…it’'s so stupid, now they’re saying people from outside ames are not welcom anymore because the event could become too crazy…this is after a 150 yrs of tradition…our only party of the year but all of the buzzkill people on those stupid committees want to be able to say they did something…trash</p>
<p>back to licensure, yea I don’t like that, I can think of a couple reasons that could ruin the quality of graduate engineering degrees in this country. Engineering profession and academia are in pristine shape, don’t fix what has worked so well for so long…those dumb committes should look at the architecure profession if they want to fix something, I feel bad for that profession and I don’t want engineering to ever get screwed into something like that</p>
<p>I thought I’d share a story from a buddy in class today who just interviewed for a solidworks position. Standard interview stuff but they got to talking and the interviewer was telling him he now doesn’t hire people in the ME program because they’re too theoretical and have a hard time applying any of it to real problems. </p>
<p>Now I know there are probably opposite examples where an employer won’t even look at students with an MET degree but this basically backs up my theory that the ET degree is more geared for being useful as an engineer directly out of school and the traditional engineering degree is more useful to furthering your education.</p>
<p>Now I know there are some that feel an ME graduate can do anything the MET graduate can do and more but I just disagree. When I compare our curriculum to the ME program it’s clear to say they don’t have any experience in a manufacturing environment(We learn to actually use manual machines, write basic CNC programs, CAD/CAM software, writing routings and 1st article sheets), very little materials classes and they take a 1 credit solid modeling class where we take the same and also use solidworks in a lot of the higher courses as well. The ME is a more rigorous program, so I won’t argue that point but what I will argue is that most of that extra math isn’t very useful to the type of jobs that engineers will be doing with a bachelors degree in Engineering. </p>
<p>In conclusion, I’ll say what Ive said before and that is both degrees are good in their own way but the ME is more geared toward graduate school and the MET is more geared toward going straight into the workforce after college. So obviously I went with the MET option because I want to go to work when I graduate but if I was planning on getting a PHD I absolutely wouldn’t be ready for the higher level classes with my MET degree and I acknowledge that, so really it’s all about knowing your goals and choosing the better option for you.</p>
<p>That’s flat out wrong to say ME is for grad school. 90% of MEs don’t go to grad school. </p>
<p>One of the things that you gotta learn as an engineer is to read between the lines. The employer doesn’t really feel that ME graduates can’t do the job. What he really means is that they are cheap and want to hire a discount engineer. So they feel they can offer less to a MET person and only hire them.</p>
<p>That would make sense until you look at starting salaries of both and see that they’re within a couple grand.</p>
<p>Sure, but that doesn’t prevent a hopeful employer from thinking that a MET grad will take less than a ME.</p>
<p>From personal experience, they probably will to (for a year or two).</p>
<p>You know even if that were true it would still prove that they think the MET grad is just as qualified but that they could get them at a discounted rate, otherwise they would just pay more for the ME grad.</p>
<p>I’ve been doing some reading on the posts here discussing MET vs ME degrees. Typical responses from both sides. I’ll share my experiences with this forum in an attempt to clear the air on this subject. I graduated from UPJ (University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown) with a BSMET in 1993. Took the FE exam and passed it without issue whatsoever. </p>
<p>The economy was tight at that point and I ended up landing a job with a die casting company and then with a packaging machinery company. I was never referred to as a technician or machinist and my title always included the word “Engineer”. I later received an MBA from Xavier university and went into the field of Product Management…I saw how sloppy many Engineers were when it came time to justify what they wanted to develop on the company $. Ended up in a PM role for a major materials handling company and then finally into a Director’s position with that company and finally a Director’s position with a medical products company. The ONLY time in my dealings with others at work where my MET degree was referred to as “not a real engineering degree” was whilst I was working as a Director for a global medical products company…but how ironic that I wasn’t even there to do an Engineer’s job…but you see my boss has a BSME and just assumes that my degree was something from the local community college.</p>
<p>I see these comments people make about MET degrees and shake my head. Never assume ALL MET programs are created equally. At UPJ we were required to complete 3 calculus courses and one Differential Equations course. Additionally, all the basic science courses were also required as was heat transfer, thermodynamics (2X), fluid mechanics, machine design, etc. In addition they had some higher level courses offered in advanced thermo, advanced fluids (CFD analysis), FEA (Ansys and self written program work). Do I feel my math was “watered down”…no way, we regularly solved problems which required the use of the higher math they required for the program. I’ll site a few more examples of the course work for the skeptics:</p>
<p>Writing programs to perform Runge Kutta analysis
Writing programs to perform fourier transforms
Writing programs to isolate natural frequencies of a vibrating structure</p>
<p>I’m not talking about loading data into a software package…I’m talking about taking a rough data set and writing a computer program to harvest out the desired “hidden data” needed.</p>
<p>My point being this…to assume an MET graduate is nothing more than a glorified technician or machinist as some people would like to paint them is just wrong and without facts to backup that statement you really look silly…fact of the matter is most METs are more geared towards the results based world that 99.9% of us work within. I don’t dispute that a straight ME program is more theoretical…it is, but that doesn’t mean you’ll outperform an MET in a results-based position. I do believe that’s what most places look for…RESULTS!</p>
<p>I’ve heard all the comments and seen the people who hide behind their paperwork and try to intimidate others. Results speak volumes more than ANY college degree from ANY university. I’ve worked with straight ME guys whe would have a hard time engineering (designing) or managing their way out of a paper bag and then I’ve worked with guys who have no degrees who are as sharp technically speaking as anybody because they have applied themselves and have the element of creativity and vision that it takes to be a development person or a designer.</p>
<p>My BSMET degree has worked very well for me and I certainly don’t think comparing an ME to an MET degree is like comparing a dr. to a nurse. I mean, come on guys, let’s be a little more objective than that! I’ve seen department heads with MET degrees and I’ve seen straight MEs who don’t have the vision to manage keeping the interior of their car clean. The point here is this…if you want to be a department head or leader of a group, chances are you’ll need a higher degree anyway to get there. At that point your job becomes more business-oriented and less about the engineering details. If you can’t effectively manage a group you won’t last. That holds true for whatever undergrad degree you have.</p>
<p>I’m 40 now and last year I made 5X what I made right out of Engineering school. That wouls have never happened without my MBA, but at the same time if the MET degree is so horrible as some on here are stating, it would have never happened either. Apply yourself and good things happen, ME, MET, or no degree at all for that matter.</p>
<p>I would caution people to take a look at the individual and the university before making statements about how inferior the MET degree is to the ME degree. I’m one positive outcome of an MET degree and I can assure you there are many others. I have yet to come up against one ME who I saw as out of my league technically speaking. Perhaps the program I was in is the exception to the rule (it is one of the best MET programs in the country), but what most freshly groomed MEs will quickly realize is that they won’t use 85% of the stuff they learned in school. A person with a good base degree with a lot of innovation, creativity and management skills will EASILY outpace a person with a “better” degree with no innovation, creativity or management skills. That’s true in terms of professional accomplishments and pay.</p>
<p>Additionally, the MET pay vs ME pay is almost identical…within a few thousand $ of each other. I guess industry is speaking best for all of us.</p>