ThinkingNectar

Wired have a rather interesting, if not insightful article on why it sucks to be a engineering student. I am “formally” trained in Computer Engineering and does relate to the different points raised in the article. And this post should be informative to those who just attended the open house in NTU or NUS.

1. Awful Textbooks
Thick, dry, black and white manuscripts are rarely a source of inspiration and sometimes can cause loads of confusion. Often, the text is poorly written and interrupted by lengthy equations with symbols that are different from those used by the professor during lectures.

This is pretty obvious. Technical textbooks are hardly Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew reading material. (I digress but Encyclopaedia Brown is far better than the brothers and chick combined.) It takes plenty of focus to read and comprehend technical textbook. Time and effort.

And please do not tell me about speed reading. Try to pull that speed reading stunt on reading these textbooks? I yet to meet anyone who can speed read a page of equations or algorithms. In lesser textbook, you might just get lucky knowing that you can speed read some definition or theory.

To side track, and apologies to my non-local readers, Singapore is blessed with low priced edition of many established textbooks. We are a first world country enjoying developing countries when to come to textbooks. Compare the prices of textbooks in the local university campus book stores with those in Borders or Kino. For once, I can find an item that is affordable in the local education scene.

2. Professors are Rarely Encouraging
During each class, a professor that would rather be tending to his research will waltz up to a blackboard or overhead projector and scribble out equations for an hour without uttering a single sentence to create some excitement.

I came across certain Professors who are really helpful while some are simply too tied up in their research. I do know that professors are measure more in the number of papers they write than the ratings they get in their annual feedback. Hence some professors are more focused in their research than in their teachings.

I will judge a professor in the quality of delivery. If the notes are clear and lectures easy to understand, I will leave the excitement out. Just hope that the professors care about student’s opinion when mistakes are spotted.

Last but not least, I observe that investing seems to be a very popular topic with engineering professors during lunch time. True enough that they need to prepare for their retirement, but are not the local university paying them well enough so that they do not spend their specialised brain power in the stock market?

3. Dearth of Quality Counseling
College students may not have a sense for how to build their resume and they might be clueless about the variety of career opportunities that await them. Unfortunately, some academic advisers do little more than post fliers about internships and hand out a checklist of classes to take. They should make some projections about the future job market, learn about the interests of each young scholar, and offer them tailored advice for how to best prepare themselves.

This is arguable. The local university curriculum does covers resume writing (mostly encapsulated in Technical and Business writing module in engineering courses). May not be comprehensive to ensure a job, but surely a start. Also, most university have a career placement office where students can approach to seek advice on such issues. But here, I will ask this question, how much does those HR trained career placement officers know about the engineering industry? Less the average pay scale and big name companies?

Once again, engineering, you are on your own.

4. Other Disciplines Have Inflated Grades
Brilliant engineering students may earn surprisingly low grades while slackers in other departments score straight As for writing book reports and throwing together papers about their favorite zombie films.

Some professors view undergraduate education as a type of natural selection, but their analogy is flawed. Many of the brightest students may struggle while mediocre scholars can earn top scores because they have a larger group of supportive friends to or more time to dedicate to studying.

Inflated Grades? A case of the grass is greener on the other side? I can say it is a big fat no. Given a fixed number of credits a module earned, most engineering modules will require more effort and work from the student as compared to business or other “softer” subjects. When it comes to engineering modules, your thoughts, feelings and insights count for nothing much as compared to the accuraccy of your calculations.

Offering alternative point of view for the sake of offering so does not go down well when your maths or logic fails to deliver. No point writing long winded essays if the technical argument is weak.

Education as a form of natural selection. That is a damn interesting way to put things. I cannot comment much on this point thou.

5. Every Assignment Feels the Same
Nearly every homework assignment and test question is a math problem. Only a few courses require creativity or offer hands-on experience.

This is pretty much true. Maths maths and more maths. For my case, it is at times, code, code and more code. That is the nature of engineering training. Application  I believe is important as engineering is about making things work. And of couse, creativity and hands-on will surely make the learning more interesting but the professors will need more effort in designing the assignment and grading them, refer to point 2 above.

And to add a few pointers of my own, and again localising to the local context here:

• Engineering is the dumping ground

Engineering in Singapore, sadly is seen as the dumping ground for students who had not fared well enough to get into med school, accountings or even business. This give engineering a bad reputation but it does not mean that engineering does not have its share of bright students.

Engineering bright students in Singapore are imported from overseas. That spells a gloomy picture for the locals. For a country that is proud of its Maths and Science education between the age of 6 to 18,  this is a very bad that the continuity is not there into tetiary education. Is it a issue with that system that younger students (6 to 18) does not have much choice but to take up maths and science but once the opportunity arise, they jumped onto subjects that are away from the maths and science fields?

And for those who are in engineering, braced yourself for competition with bright students from China and India, and our neighouring countries who are on our govertnment scholarship. After the degree is earned, again they are there to fight for the same jobs you are seeking. You have been warned. I am not too sure if the business schools have talent import from other countries in Singapore.

• Engineering does not pay well 

And last but not least is the issue of pay. Top engineers does not make the most money compared to those in the medical and law firm. Also include the banks and MNC people. Refer to this PDF. For a quick info:

Median Salaries of the Top 8 Earners in the 6 Professions in the Staff Grade I (MR4) Benchmark

• MNC 4.86 million
• Lawyer 4.65 million
• Banker 4.40 million
• Accountant 4.00 million
• Local Manufacturer 2.74 million
• Engineer 0.75 million

Overall, it is not too good to be a engineer now right?

Again, I do appreciate the engineering training I have. Just that the education system, the media and local universities are protraying engineering  as an attractive option to new A-levels holders who may not know the big picture of what they are getting themselves into.