<p>Engineering, especially Chemical Engineering, is one of the most versatile, stable majors that a person can have. I could be mistaken, but I think the field has pretty good job stability. Therefore, it’s recommended when the economy is down. Also, after taking a semester of AP Physics B, I have nothing but the upmost respect for what engineers do.</p>
<p>
Agreed. Dbate is just a kid who doesn’t know what he’s talking about and his attitude is a simple reflection of the culture around him. My foreign husband was pretty shocked at the negative attitude towards science, math and engineering he saw in the U.S. when he first arrived as an undergrad. There is a definite American bias towards the arts and humanities and the only science career most students here consider is medicine.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Now, just making sure I read this right…</p>
<p>if I’m not an engineer, does that still mean I clearly don’t know what I’m talking about?</p>
<p>Scientists and engineers who are good at what they do have a talent for it that is no more or less valuable than talent in anything else. It takes just as much talent to be a “Shakespeare” as an “Einstein”. While many nonengineers find math difficult, good engineers find it easier and more enjoyable than reading a novel.</p>
<p>As far as comparing apples to apples, the typical doctor is more favorable looked upon than the typical engineer in the US. By the way this is not true outside of this country and is one of the reasons that places like China and India produce so many competent technical people. In Germany, if you have a Ph.D. in a technical field, you are addressed as Doctor. In the US, it is not customary to be referred to as Doctor because you are not a “real doctor”.</p>
<p>"My foreign husband was pretty shocked at the negative attitude towards science, math and engineering he saw in the U.S. when he first arrived as an undergrad. There is a definite American bias towards the arts and humanities and the only science career most students here consider is medicine. "</p>
<p>Exactly - very well said!!</p>
<p>you know…I just don’t get this. Such useless bluster.
I grew up in a working class family and was taught to appreciate what EVERYONE does…whether it’s a doctor, engineer, factory worker, or janitor.
Beyond that I have deep respect for any field of work that requires hard work and dedication. that would include engineers, lawyers, doctors, nurses…the list goes on.
And the stereotypes some of us cling to are just plain wrong. One of my favorite people sells used cars. His services are in great demand at this moment…and he’s a terrific and honest guy. And he’s proud of what he does…very cool.<br>
Who cares what lines of work are more favorably looked upon? silly stuff… and a horrible basis for choosing what you will do in life. And to add that, who CARES what school you went to? (other than some narrow-minded IBers and consultants). Honestly…</p>
<p>DocT: That isn’t true. I have a PhD in a humanities field and am often referred to as doctor by all sorts of people. I don’t request it. I prefer my first name in anything beyond the classroom.</p>
<p>I work for a Dutch company. Our workers here never call anybody here Doctor. When we talk to our colleagues over there, if we do not address them as Doctor either verbally or in written correspondence, it is viewed as a slight and people have been reprimanded. You are probably called Dr. if you’re in academia where it is common. It isn’t commom in the US in industry to refer to somebody in that manner unless they are a highly respected (famous) individual.</p>
<p>This is all irrelevant to what I thought was the principle topic of the discussion which was “rethinking the costs of attending an elite college.”</p>
<p>Fair enough.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then, to tie this little dispute back into the original topic: Perhaps one could say that the more real skill is required to do your job successfully, the less important it is to attend an elite school. There are certain fields in which personal connections and the school’s reputation will get you a good job. There are other fields—and I would contend that engineering is one of them—in which you will be judged primarily on the skills you demonstrate, not the pedigree you carry, and so attending an elite school is not as important.</p>
<p>Mantori, I disagree. The prestige of one’s engineering school matters a great deal… it’s just that what is prestigious to people who hire engineers may not be the same as what the folks down at the local grocery store consider prestigious. Companies that recruit technical talent know exactly what they want, in terms of training, rigor, connections made, types of internships or research, etc. Graduating from a no-name engineering school doesn’t mean you are unemployable, but at the top of the engineering pile the opportunities are quite different. You can get a fantastic job with a top tier company coming out of Hopkins or MIT or Caltech (none of them Ivies by the way) with a 3.1, and those same companies wouldn’t even interview you coming from a no-name engineering school unless you had a 3.6 or higher.</p>
<p>Even if the only measure is “national employers” vs. local ones… you cannot assume that pedigree is irrelevant for engineers.</p>
<p>And there are many jobs outside of engineering which require “real skill”. Forensic accountants, architects, art conservationists, linquists, historians, clinical psychologists, epidemiologists… there are good ones, there are quacks, there are people who don’t know what they are talking about. So yes, these jobs require “real skill” to do their jobs succesfully. Can you get hired by a top tier, global architectural firm coming from a no-name school? If you are at the top of your class, if your professors are prepared to go to bat for you, if your portfolio is dazzling, and if you’ve worked hard making connections. Is it easier if you come out of a top school? You bet.</p>
<p>I tend to agree with Suzuki’s assertion. Though my experience is just anecdotal personal experience, I can say, when I was hiring engineers for the firm I was working for, which at that time was the world class super elite, I was not so hung up with the pedigree, etc. So, I was a bit surprised when we found out that my son’s intended field (the world of high finance) is still saturated with the “pedigree bigots” (so, 1950ish…). And, this became one of the two reasons why we decided to fork out an indecent amount of money for U Chicago, when he had a full ride offer from a very good out-of-state public school. Again anecdotal, but he may be already benefiting from that “pedigree” this summer even before he starts at that university this fall as a freshman.</p>
<p>If he were in the engineering field, it may have been a different story.</p>
<p>Sergei Brin, one of the founders of Google, dropped out of his grad program at Stanford when Google was getting launched. He was a math and comp sci major at…(horrors!) the University of Maryland.</p>
<p>The smartest folks I know are engineers and academics (or folks who trained as such but may now be pursuing a different path).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would suggest that you actually read the statement. Engineering does have a low barrier because a person with a BS in chemical engineering is “gasp” a chemical engineer. NOONE with a BS only is a lawyer, or a doctor, or in most cases upper management in a company. The same is not true of engineering.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What is extremely ironic about this statement is that you lambasted me for looking at prestige in terms of dollar amounts and then turn around and use that same justification. Is Silicon Valley really prestigious because it is innovative? No, they are prestigious because they were able to make money off of that innovation which further ingrains the fact that prestige (at least in America) is inextricably linked to money. But you are also further obfuscating the fact that the engineers that you yourself look to interms of prestige are no longer engineers but entrepreneurs which is just a businessman. So are they prestigious because of engineering? Nope, they are prestigious because of thier business skills. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not being cocky. To be cocky would be like saying i could do all engineering in a day or something, but the fact still remains that engineering is NOT a top profession. </p>
<p>What is more troubling is the cocky attitude that so many within engineering assume. They constantly speak of the “rigor” of engineering and how they are so valuable to society and blah, blah, blah. But the fact remains that the average engineer didn’t graduate from MIT, or even Georgia Tech (a school with ridiculous low admission standards) and will be nothing but a simple engineer never contributing to the “innovation” that they cling to in order to justify thier profession. A PhD in engineering, yeah you should deserve respect, but a BS, that doesn’t deserve respect at all. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is also something that contributes to the false concept that engineering is prestigious, just because something requires math does not make it difficult in fact much of physics is actually quite simple. The stuff we were learning in Physics B I had done when i was in eigth grade. And contrary to the idiotic poster who seems to be insulting me by insulting my intelligence, I am fully capable of handling an engineering curriculum heck these were the primary things I was doing during my summers of high school: </p>
<p>9th Quantitative Analysis of Electron Transition in Helium</p>
<p>Dbate states: “but I like other smart people realize that engineering is a dead profession that is not valued by society”</p>
<p>Dbate, could you elaborate on this.</p>
<p>Well the top people in my class like 1-10 are not intent on becoming engineers. They are majoring in engineering (like I was) but they ultimately intend to become doctors for the most part, although one girl is going into fashion. And I think in general many smart people eschew engineering because people do want money. I mean look at the TOP schools, most of them do not have a strong engineering focus and I would wager they have the best talent in the entire country. Although obviously there are caveats. Alot of smart people major in engineering as a backup in case they don’t go to medical school.</p>
<p>The reason most of your “top” schools do not focus on engineering is because people in engineering can choose to go to awesome “top” schools devoted to their field. Why in the world would the best talent chose Harvard etc for engineering when they can go to a number of “top” engineering/science schools who throw money into cutting edge research and the tools to do it with. </p>
<p>Without engineering and its great advancements medical Dr.'s would be stuck practicing medicine as it was 100 yrs ago. No computers, MRI.s, CAT scans, biotechnology, gene sequencing, specialized instruments etc (this list can go on forever). </p>
<p>I really think you need to rethink your “dead profession” theory.</p>
<p>I am a bit confused as to why the smartest teenagers in your class are majoring in engineering (as a back up) when they don’t want to be engineers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s funny because law school was my backup in case I didn’t get into grad school in engineering.</p>
<p>Engineering is a great profession. A lot of engineers, though, have sort of an agrieved attitude - feel as if they don’t get the respect they have coming. I’m not sure why this is, exactly. Probably because, unlike medicine or law, there is no real control on the supply of engineers. As dbate notes, one can become an engineer with a four year degree from a school with very low admissions standards so long as you manage to pass the classes. There is the PE exam but that is a far cry from passing the Bar or Medical Licensing hurdles. So I think engineering has never come into its own in terms of compensation in the way that medicine and law have done - and we could argue that this is the case for valid reasons - the barrier to entry is lower than with these two professions.</p>
<p>Dbate,</p>
<p>I see some similarity between you and our ex-president from Texas, who happened to be graduated from Yale/Harvard.
The reason that top public engineering schools have low admission standard is because of a lot of people like you; talented but only want to go to HYP for prestige and best FA if you are poor. If more people apply to tech majors , then the selectivity among public engr school will goes up.
Easy to get in these public engineering schools doesn’t mean it’s easy to get out. Those who can not make it usually end up in business major.
I agree that engineers are not well respected in US. In many US companies, I saw critical decision made by engineering that is overruled by business people. I was a little shocked when a German engineer has a final say on critical matters. Talking about German engineering.
I am impressed by Dbate’s achievement in Physics. However, that only proves that Dbate is capable of learning advanced physics. Can he/she apply that to solve real world problems if he/she becomes an engineer? After all, engineers are only good if real world problems are solved. I personally have more respect to engineers that help building a better world than PHD that is good for writing theory and publishing academic papers.</p>