Go to Post You don't just click and drag the "Swerve drive go roundy roundy" VIs from the palette onto the canvas? - marshall [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 06-11-2011, 17:03
ebarker's Avatar
ebarker ebarker is offline
Registered User
AKA: Ed Barker
FRC #1311 (Kell Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Kennesaw GA
Posts: 1,437
ebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

In some of the talks I give to groups I ask "everyone that is a teacher raise your hand" and then I ask "of the teachers here, if you learned how to teach AFTER you left college, raise your hand". Most all teachers learn how to teach after teacher college. In college they learn a lot of stuff, including a lot of learning and teaching theories. They even get to do an internship called student teaching. But the real learning comes later, in the class, after graduation.

In engineering college it is commonly the same. Learning a lot of theory about a lot of stuff. Really learning how to be an engineer often waits until after college, after a lot of work, and hopefully under the mentor ship of a good engineer...hopefully.

So where does an engineering professor learn how to be a professor ?
.
__________________
Ed Barker
Reply With Quote
  #32   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 08:26
IKE's Avatar
IKE IKE is offline
Not so Custom User Title
AKA: Isaac Rife
no team (N/A)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,153
IKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

I can't believe this section has not gotten more attention:
From the article...
“You’d like to think that since these institutions are getting the best students, the students who go there would have the best chances to succeed,” he says. “But if you take two students who have the same high school grade-point average and SAT scores, and you put one in a highly selective school like Berkeley and the other in a school with lower average scores like Cal State, that Berkeley student is at least 13 percent less likely than the one at Cal State to finish a STEM degree.”

A 13% higher success rate of graduating a STEM student should be investigated.
Reply With Quote
  #33   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 08:42
Ether's Avatar
Ether Ether is offline
systems engineer (retired)
no team
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Rookie Year: 1969
Location: US
Posts: 8,130
Ether has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IKE View Post
A 13% higher success rate of graduating a STEM student should be investigated.
Berkeley could easily improve their "success rate" by dumbing-down their curriculum.


Reply With Quote
  #34   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 10:19
GaryVoshol's Avatar
GaryVoshol GaryVoshol is offline
Cogito ergo arbitro
no team
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Royal Oak, MI
Posts: 5,764
GaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ether View Post
Berkeley could easily improve their "success rate" by dumbing-down their curriculum.
Or by improving services to students, such as better teaching, tutoring, access to learning labs ...

Without an in-depth study of what goes on in the two programs, you can't say why one school has a better success rate than the other. Nor can you say what the "worth" of the degree is to those who complete the program.
__________________
(since 2004)
Reply With Quote
  #35   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 10:25
Ether's Avatar
Ether Ether is offline
systems engineer (retired)
no team
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Rookie Year: 1969
Location: US
Posts: 8,130
Ether has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryVoshol View Post
Without an in-depth study of what goes on in the two programs, you can't say why one school has a better success rate than the other. Nor can you say what the "worth" of the degree is to those who complete the program.
Yup. Or whether Cal State's "success" rate is actually "better" than Berkeley's.


Reply With Quote
  #36   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 10:43
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,797
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IKE View Post
I can't believe this section has not gotten more attention:
From the article...
“You’d like to think that since these institutions are getting the best students, the students who go there would have the best chances to succeed,” he says. “But if you take two students who have the same high school grade-point average and SAT scores, and you put one in a highly selective school like Berkeley and the other in a school with lower average scores like Cal State, that Berkeley student is at least 13 percent less likely than the one at Cal State to finish a STEM degree.”

A 13% higher success rate of graduating a STEM student should be investigated.
This concerns me. I'm having trouble at a tough school. If my odds of success are better at decent-but-not-spectacular state schools, should I just go to those?
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
--2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
.
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
-- 2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design -- 2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
-- 2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
-- 2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 MN 10K Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
Reply With Quote
  #37   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 10:52
Dmentor's Avatar
Dmentor Dmentor is online now
Registered User
AKA: Daniel Bray
FRC #1895 (Lambda Corps)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Manassas, VA
Posts: 85
Dmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant future
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

I've thought a lot about our current educational process and wanted to share a few of my concepts for revolutionizing education (particularly collegiate engineering):

1. Direct Competition - As we have all experienced within FIRST, competition is an incredible motivator. Properly structured, competition can both make learning fun and motivate us to keep going farther than we might ever have thought possible. MIT's 2.007 competition is a perfect example. With regards to courses like statics, I could see integrating CAD products within physics simulation engines to create games requiring statics principles to excel.

2. Use Technology - Just imagine if every university recorded video of all the statics lectures covered this year and made them available to all the students. This would enable students to get multiple perspectives that best align with an individual student's learning style. The students could then rate lectures and submit questions for topics not covered (or not covered well). Within a short period of time we would have a comprehensive library of lectures comprehensively covering the material and from a multitude of perspectives. A useful byproduct of this approach would be to give the professor's more time to dedicate to game design (note that I'm not proposing this to eliminate the role of teaching but rather to recast the role of teacher).

3. Reduce Abstraction - Teaching fundamental equations and relationships is good but in my opinion equations need to be tied to a physical understanding of the world. Real-world problems would be used to teach how principles are applied and the limitations in doing so. Collaboration with industry would be a great way to bridge the issue with domain expertise.
__________________
Dan was here.


2014 VA Semi-Finalist (2363, 1533), Johnson & Johnson Gracious Professionalism Award
2013 Johnson & Johnson Gracious Professionalism Award, Woodie Flowers Finalist - James Gillespie
2012 Chesapeake Finalist (358, 714), Johnson & Johnson Gracious Professionalism Award
2011 VA Semi-Finalist (122, 1111), Johnson & Johnson Gracious Professionalism Award
2010 DC Semi-Finalist (2912, 449), Dean's List Finalist - Chris Dorick, Xerox Creativity Award
2009 VA Semi-Finalist (612, 1908)
2009 DC Semi-Finalist (1712, 176), Imagery Award
2007 CMP Newton Semi-Finalist (68, 111)
2007 VA Rookie All-Star Award, Regional Semi-Finalist (343, 612), Highest Rookie Seed Award (#2), Website Award
Reply With Quote
  #38   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 11:11
theprgramerdude theprgramerdude is offline
WPI Freshman
AKA: Alex
FRC #2503 (Warrior Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Brainerd, Minnesota
Posts: 347
theprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud oftheprgramerdude has much to be proud of
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me View Post
This concerns me. I'm having trouble at a tough school. If my odds of success are better at decent-but-not-spectacular state schools, should I just go to those?
The flaw with comparing schools success rates is like the flaw of saying that an apple is much better than an orange. Unless what their graduates come out knowing is the exact same (and it's impossible for it to be, as the experience at a school is unique), saying X is > Y because of Z is impossible to verify because all the variables are qualitative.

I'm assuming you go to RPI? While a state school might have an accredited program just the same, small schools/programs like that excel because they're focused on producing far-more-than-competant engineers, rather than just a bunch of guys/gals that have a diploma with a BS in [field] engineering because they got by on a bunch of C's and some B's while partying for four years. Yes, it's tougher at some schools, because that's the primary point of going to one of those schools. If the latter was the goal, then you probably might want to transfer.
__________________
Attending: MN Duluth Regional
Reply With Quote
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 11:31
JamesBrown JamesBrown is offline
Back after 4 years off
FRC #5279
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Lynchburg VA
Posts: 1,285
JamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me View Post
This concerns me. I'm having trouble at a tough school. If my odds of success are better at decent-but-not-spectacular state schools, should I just go to those?
As some one who recently graduated from the same tough school I can tell you that there are huge benefits to going to one of the tougher schools instead of a decent state school. Prior to graduating I had multiple offers from major companies, including some that were willing to hire me into non-entry level positions. I have friends who went to decent state schools (it should be noted that there are some state schools with extraordinary programs as well as private schools with poor programs) and they are were not as well prepared to enter the work force as I was. Going through RPI I thought some of the classes were crazy, one example, I wanted to take a signal processing class at another school while on co-op, however I could not find a class that RPI would accept because all of the classes at other schools took two semesters to learn what we covered in one.

I know I could have gone to a decent state school for a much lower cost and probably graduated with a higher gpa but I would have lost out on the Academic Intensity, Undergraduate Research, Professional Development, and Networking opportunities that a school like RPI offered. After 4 years in Troy, countless hours studying (often things I wil never use again like Mat Sci) and student loans that total the same as what my parents payed for there first house I can tell you that I am still confident that I made the best decision for myself and my career when I passed up my Full Scholarship to go to URI and went to RPI instead.
__________________
I'm Back


5279 (2015-Present)
3594 (2011)
3280 (2010)
1665 (2009)
1350 (2008-2009)
1493 (2007-2008)
1568 (2005-2007)
Reply With Quote
  #40   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 11:32
ebarker's Avatar
ebarker ebarker is offline
Registered User
AKA: Ed Barker
FRC #1311 (Kell Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Kennesaw GA
Posts: 1,437
ebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond reputeebarker has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmentor View Post
I've thought a lot about our current educational process and wanted to share a few of my concepts for revolutionizing education (particularly collegiate engineering):

1. Direct Competition - As we have all experienced within FIRST, competition is an incredible motivator. Properly structured, competition can both make learning fun and motivate us to keep going farther than we might ever have thought possible. MIT's 2.007 competition is a perfect example. With regards to courses like statics, I could see integrating CAD products within physics simulation engines to create games requiring statics principles to excel.

2. Use Technology - Just imagine if every university recorded video of all the statics lectures covered this year and made them available to all the students. This would enable students to get multiple perspectives that best align with an individual student's learning style. The students could then rate lectures and submit questions for topics not covered (or not covered well). Within a short period of time we would have a comprehensive library of lectures comprehensively covering the material and from a multitude of perspectives. A useful byproduct of this approach would be to give the professor's more time to dedicate to game design (note that I'm not proposing this to eliminate the role of teaching but rather to recast the role of teacher).

3. Reduce Abstraction - Teaching fundamental equations and relationships is good but in my opinion equations need to be tied to a physical understanding of the world. Real-world problems would be used to teach how principles are applied and the limitations in doing so. Collaboration with industry would be a great way to bridge the issue with domain expertise.
Sorry - Woodie beat you to it, here jump to the 26:00 mark to see super-produced educational material.
__________________
Ed Barker
Reply With Quote
  #41   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 11:35
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,797
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesBrown View Post
I know I could have gone to a decent state school for a much lower cost and probably graduated with a higher gpa but I would have lost out on the Academic Intensity, Undergraduate Research, Professional Development, and Networking opportunities that a school like RPI offered. After 4 years in Troy, countless hours studying (often things I wil never use again like Mat Sci) and student loans that total the same as what my parents payed for there first house I can tell you that I am still confident that I made the best decision for myself and my career when I passed up my Full Scholarship to go to URI and went to RPI instead.
Thanks for the reassurance. I need that sometimes, this school is quite tough.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
--2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
.
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
-- 2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design -- 2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
-- 2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
-- 2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 MN 10K Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
Reply With Quote
  #42   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 11:48
JamesBrown JamesBrown is offline
Back after 4 years off
FRC #5279
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Lynchburg VA
Posts: 1,285
JamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond reputeJamesBrown has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmentor View Post
I've thought a lot about our current educational process and wanted to share a few of my concepts for revolutionizing education (particularly collegiate engineering):

1. Direct Competition - As we have all experienced within FIRST, competition is an incredible motivator. Properly structured, competition can both make learning fun and motivate us to keep going farther than we might ever have thought possible. MIT's 2.007 competition is a perfect example. With regards to courses like statics, I could see integrating CAD products within physics simulation engines to create games requiring statics principles to excel..
This is a great idea but it does lack to some extent in practicality, There is already a ton of information to cover in a semester, adding in these types of projects (in addition to what already exists, I completed atleast one design project a semester while at RPI) just increases work load.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmentor View Post
2. Use Technology - Just imagine if every university recorded video of all the statics lectures covered this year and made them available to all the students. This would enable students to get multiple perspectives that best align with an individual student's learning style. The students could then rate lectures and submit questions for topics not covered (or not covered well). Within a short period of time we would have a comprehensive library of lectures comprehensively covering the material and from a multitude of perspectives. A useful byproduct of this approach would be to give the professor's more time to dedicate to game design (note that I'm not proposing this to eliminate the role of teaching but rather to recast the role of teacher)..
There are already schools and professors that do this, I spent a ton of time sitting in the student union watching vidoes of my professors solving equations as well as downloading lectures from simmilar classes at MIT, CMU and Stanford that were available online. Looking through iTunesU can provide some incredible resources. I do agree these videos are extrmely helpful especially when you have a professor who can't communicate clearly (Ian and Chris might be able to back me up if they took Diff Eq with Boudjelkha, the Schmidtt calculus videos were a life saver)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmentor View Post
3. Reduce Abstraction - Teaching fundamental equations and relationships is good but in my opinion equations need to be tied to a physical understanding of the world. Real-world problems would be used to teach how principles are applied and the limitations in doing so. Collaboration with industry would be a great way to bridge the issue with domain expertise.

Top engineering schools are doing this, mostly in the last two years once you already have a decent theoretical back ground. I do however firmly believe that a solid theoretical background is the base of what makes a good engineer a good engineer. There are plenty of alented designers and technicians with all the real world experience that you can imagine, however these guys (and gals) are not engineers. In my engineering department there is a whole range of ability levels, both theoretical and practical. I agree that practical experience is great but just because something worked once in one situation doesn't mean it will work again, the number of times I have seen boards fail because the designer "just used what we always used" and the part wasn't up to the current spec for the circuit is astonishing. There is alot to be said for knowing not just what equations to use but why you use them and where they came from.

Engineering is inherently difficult, it requires a firm grasp of advanced math and science, as well as a practical knowledge of how real world situations influence the mathmatical models. Engineering is jsut not for every one, it is hard and college is alot more fun when you don't spend hours studying or in lab. I definitely didn't go out and party as much in college as I could have with an easier major but I still had a great time and made great friends, and now that I am collecting a paycheck as an engineer every 2 weeks I can assure you that the work is worth it.
__________________
I'm Back


5279 (2015-Present)
3594 (2011)
3280 (2010)
1665 (2009)
1350 (2008-2009)
1493 (2007-2008)
1568 (2005-2007)
Reply With Quote
  #43   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 13:15
IKE's Avatar
IKE IKE is offline
Not so Custom User Title
AKA: Isaac Rife
no team (N/A)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,153
IKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by theprgramerdude View Post
While a state school might have an accredited program just the same, small schools/programs like that excel because they're focused on producing far-more-than-competant engineers, rather than just a bunch of guys/gals that have a diploma with a BS in [field] engineering because they got by on a bunch of C's and some B's while partying for four years. Yes, it's tougher at some schools, because that's the primary point of going to one of those schools. If the latter was the goal, then you probably might want to transfer.
Huh, and here I thought the reason that I made it through ME at Purdue was because the professors had undergone a rigorous revamp of their undergraduate engineering program after nearly loosing their ABET accredidation during the late 70's due to too much focus on research. I thought having the professors that wrote the textbooks that all of my friends from other schools were using was a big advantage, but it turns out must have been a lower standard... (this is a joke/dig).

In reality, it is important to find a school that fits you well and has a solid program. "Fit" can mean a lot of different things to different people. Larger Universities tend to have more opportunities. That being said there is also a larger population, and one of the big opportunities is to get lost in the crowd (not good for many).

Ether:
I am not sure that a less rigorous schedule would in fact graduate more from some of the more selective universities. Frequently the students going to those schools MUST be the top of their class. When they go to a school where they become AVERAGE, this can be a very bad experience. From some of the stories I have heard from some highly selective smaller schools, the imposed pressure can reach incredibly unhealthy levels. There is a very dark metric for this unhealthiness.
Reply With Quote
  #44   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 13:23
Ether's Avatar
Ether Ether is offline
systems engineer (retired)
no team
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Rookie Year: 1969
Location: US
Posts: 8,130
Ether has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IKE View Post
Ether:
I am not sure that a less rigorous schedule would in fact graduate more from some of the more selective universities. Frequently the students going to those schools MUST be the top of their class.
I think you may have taken my comment the wrong way. I didn't say to dumb-down the selection process. I said dumb-down the curriculum.

Anyway, it was intended in lighthearted way. Certainly not what I would expect (or wish) Berkeley would do.


Reply With Quote
  #45   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-11-2011, 13:45
Dmentor's Avatar
Dmentor Dmentor is online now
Registered User
AKA: Daniel Bray
FRC #1895 (Lambda Corps)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Manassas, VA
Posts: 85
Dmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant futureDmentor has a brilliant future
Re: Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ebarker View Post
Sorry - Woodie beat you to it, here jump to the 26:00 mark to see super-produced educational material.
Thanks! I'm not at all surprised that Woodie is still trailblazing. He is one of my heroes. His work with 270 shaped my thinking even while a high school student. His comments about equations and their relevance (at the 15:15 mark in the referenced video) are spot on. Equations without insight do not make an engineer. While there has been some progress over the last couple of decades in utilizing technology the traditional framework remains mostly in place. I suspect this has a lot more to do with organization momentum than critical thinking and problem solving though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesBrown View Post
This is a great idea but it does lack to some extent in practicality, There is already a ton of information to cover in a semester, adding in these types of projects (in addition to what already exists, I completed at least one design project a semester while at RPI) just increases work load.
I wasn't intentionally proposing more work load but rather suggesting a change in the current work load and evaluation mechanism. The games don't have to be as elaborate as in FRC or 2.007. During my time at college, I only had one course that did this. It was an industrial engineering course that was outside my major that I took because the professor was one of the best in the world. The game showed the complications of supply and demand on the production process and was definitely a motivator for me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesBrown View Post
There are already schools and professors that do this, I spent a ton of time sitting in the student union watching vidoes of my professors solving equations as well as downloading lectures from simmilar classes at MIT, CMU and Stanford that were available online. Looking through iTunesU can provide some incredible resources. I do agree these videos are extrmely helpful especially when you have a professor who can't communicate clearly (Ian and Chris might be able to back me up if they took Diff Eq with Boudjelkha, the Schmidtt calculus videos were a life saver)
Glad to hear this is catching on. Curious to hear your feedback on what the impact would be if the traditional lecture were removed and replaced with these video resources.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesBrown View Post
Engineering is inherently difficult, it requires a firm grasp of advanced math and science, as well as a practical knowledge of how real world situations influence the mathematical models. Engineering is jsut not for every one, it is hard and college is alot more fun when you don't spend hours studying or in lab. I definitely didn't go out and party as much in college as I could have with an easier major but I still had a great time and made great friends, and now that I am collecting a paycheck as an engineer every 2 weeks I can assure you that the work is worth it.
I've had the good fortune to have a complex engineering job which over the past couple decades has leveraged the vast majority of my college coursework in some form or fashion. I am thus painfully aware of the distinction between abstract theory and the practical implementation of theory. After mentoring numerous young engineers fresh from college, I've realized that this less than smooth transition was not unique nor has the problem gotten much better over time. Hopefully other engineering jobs don't experience this but it sure would be nice not to have to teach each and every new engineer what their coursework really meant when applied to this particular domain.
__________________
Dan was here.


2014 VA Semi-Finalist (2363, 1533), Johnson & Johnson Gracious Professionalism Award
2013 Johnson & Johnson Gracious Professionalism Award, Woodie Flowers Finalist - James Gillespie
2012 Chesapeake Finalist (358, 714), Johnson & Johnson Gracious Professionalism Award
2011 VA Semi-Finalist (122, 1111), Johnson & Johnson Gracious Professionalism Award
2010 DC Semi-Finalist (2912, 449), Dean's List Finalist - Chris Dorick, Xerox Creativity Award
2009 VA Semi-Finalist (612, 1908)
2009 DC Semi-Finalist (1712, 176), Imagery Award
2007 CMP Newton Semi-Finalist (68, 111)
2007 VA Rookie All-Star Award, Regional Semi-Finalist (343, 612), Highest Rookie Seed Award (#2), Website Award
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:23.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi