Poor Quality Education in USA, UK and India is Responsible for Joblessness

I understand your point, but do you really want Harvard or Oxford or the Sorbonne to become career schools?

Professional education system is supposed to visualize current need and must impart knowledge to survive. You do not pay US$20000 per year fee to read newspapers. Engineering education is going down drastically away from professional abilities of current need and it is more like paper work and paper degree and a bit not fitting to become a fitting engineer in large number of institutions. This point is of great concern today. Large number of student go to higher education to get skilled and to find some good job somewhere. Only few learn to become scientific and self esteemed to survive on their own. I think, Harvard University management course did adopt this idea of refunding the tuition fee for foreign students who will like to return to their countries of origin if they find no way to get into professional work in USA.

While I agree with you in part, the availability of jobs also needs to be taken into account. It no use if the person is well trained but there are no jobs available for him/her.

I've always been of the mind that people who go to college should come out ready and licensed to work as professionals. He shouldn't be allowed to graduate until he proves that he can do his job. I feel sad for those guys who spend five or more years in an engineering course, graduate, review for their board exams, only to fail. I've heard of a few unfortunates who took it so badly as to commit suicide.

There's also the proportions of people taking particular courses. We have a lot of people taking engineering and nursing courses. This results in a lot of competition for available jobs in these fields. What happens is you find people doing jobs that they did not train for or people with degrees who are working in menial jobs.

Focusing on the educational system will not solve the problem. That is my opinion.

regards,

Vulcan

Dear Vulkan,

That is the real point that people are not made professionals and that is one great reason to believe that education system has gone down the drain and also the money and time spent at the Universities is virtually becoming a shear wastage.

In India we do not have large flux of foreign students, but what locals get is no where to what they spend in term of money and time on available poor quality education. Looks to me that other countries are also following similar tactics.

Only few Universities and Institutions are worth counting where still there is some quality education and exposure to current technology and science level, and most of the others are below standard and only offer paper degree. I think the education system has become a brainless monster with lots of hunger for money and it can not give back anything great in return.

Who is John Galt?

why do you want to know?

The essence of John Galt is not approval or disapproval of others, but individualism vs. altruism.

Whereas altruism in its purest form states:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," individualism is content with the Golden Rule:

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," and its near Confucian corollary:

"Don't do unto others what you wouldn't want done to you."

John Galt is a genius engineer who observes ever more "progressive" measures taken against the producers in society, taking the wealth they create and redistributing it to the non-producers (sound familiar, Joe-the-plumber?). He decides to withdraw his services from society, choosing to work at menial labor rather than inventing new forms of energy and the like. He also convinces his peers to similarly go on strike. Not coincidentally, the working title of the Atlas Shrugged manuscript was, "The Strike." The idea was that everyone else goes on strike, let's see what happens when the fountainheads of true progress do so. The result is the collapse of civilization. (Rand's earlier novel in a similar vein was "The Fountainhead").

The eventual title of Atlas Shrugged came from the following conversation in the book between two business tycoons discussing ever more onerous government interference and regulation (sound familiar? - the book was published in 1957).

"If you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his shoulders, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater the effort the heavier the world bore down upon his shoulders--what would you tell him to do?"

"I … don't know. What … could he do? What would you tell him?"

"To shrug."

Sound like your are blaming the institution for the students lack of finding a job. So what you want is your money back. How would the institution know if the student actually made an attempt at finding a job. Or they picked a Degree in a field that was so over whelmed with people that there are no jobs. Are the institutions failing or is the student making poor choices or lacking initiative.

If made mandatory then these institutions would most likely refuse to accept any foreign student.

I all so thought that foreign students went abroad to to return that education home to the people that need it the most.

I know that times are getting tough in the job market. But lets put the blame where it belongs on Wall Street. The mortgage companies gave out loans to people that could not afford them. They found loop hole around laws that made the loans unsecured. People wheeling and dealing oil futures started it, pushing the cost of oil way past its value. Which inflated the cost of every thing. This inflation caused people to loose their jobs.

Dear Ozzb,

Students pay a fee for the counselling and advisory services. Most of them attempt for job prospects and their sincerity can not be doubted. Institutions are one step up in thinking and analyzing and they should analyze and advice properly rather than just running a shop to grab a student to run a program.

This is utter malarkey. The mortgage meltdown is directly due to the Community Reinvestment Act passed under James Earl Carter, and reinvigorated under William Jefferson Clinton. The essence of this law is that it is unfair that not everyone in the country can afford the American dream of home ownership.

Those who don't have the income or the discipline to save for a home should have the same home ownership opportunities as their betters (of course that term "betters" is my value judgment; that judgment is antithetical to the Community Reinvestment Act philosophy).

Banks were penalized or threatened with penalties if they didn't make a certain percentage of loans to these otherwise unqualified buyers. Once banks realized how the game was played, they rewrote the rules to encourage such lending. Bank employees responded appropriately to the rewards being offered, as is to be expected.

The rest, as they say, is history.

Don't expect the colleges or universities to follow this. They are in business to make money and compete for students just like any business.

Another reason it won't happen is because these institutions pay more homage to the degree, to the paper, than to the education it is supposed to represent. Students know this and spend more time bragging about where they graduated from, and give no time to talking about what they learned.

The real world is less interested in the degree and more in the ability of the graduate to contribute to the company's success.

Lastly, there is an important distinction between designing something and being able to make it, a distinction today's young graduates do not understand, especially in the engineering disciplines.

L.J.

Dear Laughing Jaguar

That is the real point. If it is business then it must be a quality services for which huge money is paid. Your Laptop with lots of software for just <$1000 is a quality education and good business but what if you pay $20000 each and spend years and do not get even the worth of a Laptop. If education does not make one useful to the society and one capable to find work then they are running a professional education like non professional cheating station.

Not really, the colleges in The States are quite liberal.....what ever that means today.

But they look at students as product. The colleges receives subsidies, grants based on the number of students they push through the systems.

Another reason I beginning to see, And this is a personally opinion. Is that parents believe that if the children, are going to have a better future they have to get a college degree. At one time this was true

But now thats where it stops, Just putting their kids through college is not enough to give them a ticket to a better life. Its up the the student to make the most of it, and realize that what a degree does is open the door a little wider. After obtaining the degree that is when the real work starts.

phoenix911

Dear phoenix911

Liberal is the sense of many choices is not a bad idea. However, many institutes simply use the titles to make a great show but inside the teaching they are blank and the mind of the student also remains blank.

my point exactly, no substance.

If shoe is badly designed and getting torn off even before it is used then that is what I am talking about here and not that it does not fit the foot, it does not has the required material itself. Perhaps one can blame the quality of the teachers at some places and resources at other places. Whatever it is, it is sub standard.

dear Shyam

I agree with what you say about the education system. I can not comment on UK or India, but USA is sub standard. I don't however believe it starts at college level. I know of a lot of adults who, if they can't see their hands, can't solve a math problem. I disagree with a previous post that the real world doesn't care about degrees, just the ability to perform. I work for a very large company and if you don't have a degree you will not make it into management. You can be very knowlegable and have all kinds of experience, but if you don't have a degree,you may make lower level management but no mid level. Once you are in it doesn't matter if you do good or not as long as the boss thinks you do good. I sit by and bite my tongue as really bad business decisions are made because the boss thinks it is a good idea. Nobody is held acountable because they are all cut from the same cloth. The bosse's boss is also predisposed with pleasing his boss, even if it is not in the company's best interest.

If shoe is badly designed and getting torn off even before it is used

Try the other foot..............

micahd02 wrote: ". . . one who chose to engineer because it is what makes him tick. . . "

You and I are kindred spirits.

I live inside of a paradigm articulated by Joseph Campbell, the famous mythologist who so influenced George Lucas.

It's Mr. Campbell who validates my behavior of almost 7 decades with the counsel to: "Follow your bliss!" In other words, do what your passions call you to do.

That is exactly what I have done and while I have lived an eclectic life, through both feast and famine, my passion for creative design. self expression and my pursuit of challenges continue unabated. My regular footnote, a quote from Eric Hoffer, says it all.

The educational community is the one that places such an unhealthy attachment to the Sheepskin, at the expense of all else.

I worked in education for a few years and at the risk of bragging, I created results that were far beyond their expectations.

I was able to do so, not because I am smarter because I am not. Not because of any secret method but simply by doing what I'd learned to do in the the highly competitive business world.

When asked why I did not have my degrees plastered all over the walls of my office, my response got me into trouble:

"In the world I usually play in, my clients have greater interest in my ability to produce results than in diplomas."

The educational community, from high-school right up through graduate school, is a world of cloistered academicians, insulated from the challenges of the real world and preoccupied with their own pompous grandiosity.

Since they live and teach in a fantasy land, we should not be at all surprised when the product of a myopic academia shows up so poorly.

There is a time worn assertion that "Those who can DO. . . . . those who cannot, teach!". There are exceptions to this. I've met them so I hate to paint the educational community with so broad a brush but, if the shoe fits. . . . . !

The entire educational model has to be thrown out and replaced with those who alternate regularly between the classroom and working in the real world. THAT would make an enormous difference!

In the field of engineering, I'd sooner have Clarence L. "Kelly" Johnson or Burt Rutan as teachers than many of the boring people I've had to suffer with.

I'll never meet "Kelly" Johnson but have met Rutan many times and expressed this to him. Given my experience of the man, I suspect he'd sooner speak to a tent full of passionate amateurs at an airshow in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, than be leashed to some academic community or the "Bored-room" (sic!) of a corporate environment.

Given his innovative mind and demonstrated success, who could blame him.

L.J.

Understand where you're coming from but have a slightly different take.

Rutan sold Beech Aircraft (now Raytheon) on making the composite "Starship" aircraft a couple decades ago. The idea was to build a super-light aircraft modeled after the types of aircraft Rutan is famous for- one or two person highly experimental models that can meet a specific performance goal. The "Starship" was a pusher prop design that was supposed to be close to business jet performance, but at lower cost. By the time that Beech got done meeting all the FAA regulations, the Starship was not nearly the aircraft that Rutan had promised, and the cost was higher than projected.

Lesson learned: there is a huge difference between the visionary and the engineering of real-world products. Someone else made the point in an earlier post in this thread that there is a big difference between designing something and making something producible at a profit.

Or, as a friend of mine who designs solid-state memory says, "Until you design something that they make a million of, you haven't designed s--t."

You can't simply equate Rutan/visionary with good and boardroom with bad. It depends on what the goal is.

EMC wrote: "Understand where you're coming from but have a slightly different take."

Others I know who are closer still to SC and Rutan have said much the same thing you wrote about what happened at Beech.

I am however, addressing the temperament of a man whose ideas spew forth faster than the corporate world can deal with. Trying to slow down to their rate of doing things was like walking in fly-paper for him. He was glad to get out there.

What sets him apart, aside from his prolific creativity, is that at his age, he still is passionate about his work and still views the world through the young, unjaded eyes of a child. In the context of teaching, which I was addressing at the time, vibrant, enthusiastic men like him are absolutely priceless.

Teachers like that don't need to teach which gets to the heart of this entire conversation.

People who facilitate the learning process, do so by inspiring students to learn on their own. It is how they are "Being" in front of the classroom that gets the job done.

Those who are simply "teachers" can not do that.

BTW, it was I who spoke about designing things that could be actually be made.

L.J.

Small correction - it's now Hawker Beechcraft. Raytheon sold it off earlier in the year.

Hooker <-- who grumbles over 90's, 100's, 200's and U-21's on a daily basis

interesting response

1) what is a non degreed engineer? what states are you allowed to practice in? who signs off on the projects you come up with, or set specs for?

sorrry i can't get what is left of my head around that concept please send a reply ala moose or via this setup.

2) what responsibility do the persons preparing(?) encouraging(?) another human to enter into some university course bear in assuring the entrant that when he or she gets the shingle that some prospects for employment in that educated for field wil in fact be available? for those who have access to it and are capable of thinking beyond a literal reading of written words in thier line of sight ( sarcasm intended) look at the editorial warnings which have been put out on this very subject by / from / through the KIPLINGER (RTM) magazinefor families has written about for years.

3) hope that the original poster does not get barraged with a emails suggesting he is taking a anti american stance iwhen he is as i see it in his post seems to be effectively suggesting those universities through thier collecting of fees from foreign students are not much better than surge milkers.

'da ber

Barf wrote: "1) what is a non degreed engineer? what states are you allowed to practice in? who signs off on the projects you come up with, or set specs for?"

I can't speak for he to whom you directed your question but for me a non degreed engineer is one who has the knowledge and skills of an engineer but does not have the imprimatur of an accredited college. He exists solely on his or her own merits.

Given some of the things posted here, said accreditation is not worth much any more.

Just so there is clarity to this: you asked about a non-degreed engineer. However, you then went on to describe the practices of a Licensed Engineer.

The distinctions between them are not the same.

Perhaps you wish to rephrase the question?

L.J.

He exists solely on his or her own merits.

I agree, merits that came with a very high price tag, that was paid for in more ways that can be defined here.

LJ wrote

"can't speak for he to whom you directed your question but for me a non degreed engineer is one who has the knowledge and skills of an engineer but does not have the imprimatur of an accredited college. He exists solely on his or her own merits."

So how do you prove that you have the skills to be an engineer LJ ? A degree in the field means you have shown that you have passed the needed requirements to practice engineering. If you don't have a degree one can still obtain a PE license which again proves that one has the knowledge to practice engineering in a given field were they are licensed. I certainly won't go to a medical doctor that didn't pass medical school. So why would I trust you to do professional quality engineering and pay you the going rates of the degreed and/or licensed engineer when you don't have a degree or PE licensed ?

DG

Guest wrote: "A degree in the field means you have shown that you have passed the needed requirements to practice engineering"

Nothing could be further from the truth!

All a degree is, is evidence that you've taken a series of examinations in which you successfully parroted what you read or heard the teacher say. Any savant can do that. The same can be said for PE's.

Wisdom doesn't come from reading or listening. That's information. Wisdom comes from showing up for life!

Until a graduate learns how things are actually made, he or she is useless as a designer. And, as any manufacturer will tell you, kids out of college don't know "Bupkas" about how things are made. And, to further the general consensus, they don't teach that in a classroom.

Most of these kids wouldn't know a stamping press from an injection molding machine if you dropped it on them!

I had one youngster, a senior in college studying mechanical engineering, in my prototype shop. He was awestruck when I he saw me use a pop riveting tool to secure two pieces of sheet metal! He's 22 years old, studying to be an ME and he's never seen a pop rivet? Most kids are like that today.

A college professor I know acknowleged to me that half the students in his class on computer design had never seen the inside of a PC until they started his class!

AND THEY ARE GETTING DEGREES IN ENGINEERING!

And then some wonder why Detroit can't compete?

L.J.

You have pointed out rightly at the present situation and I appreciate it. Teachers are like Parrots and they further generate more Parrots in the form of degree holder engineers who can pass exams but are unable work as real engineer. Perhaps they will learn from technicians after they join their job position if at all they are employed.

Dr. Shyam:

You wrote"Perhaps they will learn from technicians after they join their job position if at all they are employed."

Interesting point, well taken. However, the truth of the matter is that a non-insignificant fraction of those who earn credit for their academic abilities refuse to recognize the expertise gained by experience, sans the academic credentials. Any former or currrent senior military enlisted person can tell stories of the junior officers who refuse to listen to the voice of experience. Happily a significant portion of those officers, counseled by even more senior, and experienced officers, learn to listen, and survive to learn. But those who don't are too like the credentialed engineers who've never "turned a wrench" or "installed a cross-connect" and yet disdain the knowledge of those of us who learned by doing.

I can work with anyone, and willingly will do so, as long as there can be mutual respect. But a lack of respect, or even the presence of outright disrespect, leads me to allow the disdainful one to "learn by arcing", if he or she won't "learn by harking".

Micah

LJ wrote

"All a degree is, is evidence that you've taken a series of examinations in which you successfully parroted what you read or heard the teacher say. Any savant can do that. The same can be said for PE's."

I'm so glad to know that my 8 years in school and my 2 degrees mean that I'm just a savant ! It sounds like that you don't even have a degree, yet you comments about an educational system that I bet you failed in. Your term "Non Degreed Engineer" is just away for you to pretend that you have the skills to be an engineer.

DG

I meant to add in the post (but forgot to) that I wrote yesterday- that while I am an Electronics Technician- schooled/certified/qualified to maintain various Air Traffic Control and Weather Forcasting Systems, does NOT mean that-

1) Simply because- in the course of my job- I have trained hundreds of military people coming through our command how various systems operate- and how to maintain/calibrate/troubleshoot these systems- does NOT mean that I can call myself a teacher.

2) Simply because I have- in the course of my job- devised modifications to systems to meet operators needs- that really were on an engineering level- and that required knowledge of a system on a complete in-depth level and required a thorough understanding of what the changes I was making to them to get the systems to operate in the desired manner, does NOT mean that I can call myself an engineer.

To date, my average in all courses taken, is 3.98, in a "4.0 is perfection" system. I've challenged and passed about 25% of my courses without taking the full academic route. If you are arrogant enough to believe that one who chooses not to pay for a course he or she sees no value in has "failed" then, yes, I've failed. I will not pay, either in time or money, to listen to someone who arrogance is inversely proportional to his ignorance of the real world, while he pontificates about a subject he knows only from his own lectures. Rather, I'll pursue my own methods of getting the knowledge I need.

While there are, and I have been taught by many, college professors of the "Get your knuckles dirty with the techs" types, I have also found many who prefer their own ignorance. I won't waste my time or money on the latter. More power to you if you choose to. I would suggest that in that case, you may succeed in the program, if success is measured in sycophancy. But then we're just circling back to success by parroting.

For those of you who know the word sycophancy, but prefer to express it otherwise, yes, I know the word is paraphrasable as "kissing the south end of a northbound donkey". I'm trying to be genteel here.

Micah

I find it a shame that the schools that you attend and the professors that you meet don't have a single thing, not a single idea that would be worth your time or tuition to investigate.

I have had single emails from a professor that I felt were worth the term's tuition.

I can't imagine that there are accredited programs that are so deficit that there is not one thing worth learning, not one way of doing it better, not one way of looking at or approaching something a little differently presented at some point over an entire term that you wouldn't benefit from, that you wouldn't find useful.

My very best life lessons were from an absolute worst in class boss. Seeing how not to do things were great lessons for me. Perhaps a crappy professor could, by contrast, give you a glimpse of some undiscovered way of thinking as you reflect on (or repudiate) his "ignorance of the real world methodology."

Sadly, you don't even get the benefit of those kind of lessons to confirm that you are indeed on a better path, because of your censure of these educators and self imposed exile.

Diversity doesn't just mean tolerating people of different race, nationality , gender, age, or class. Sometimes it just means giving all people a modicum of respect despite their difference from your "preferences."

Or in New Testament terms that you might find easier to understand: "Love one another; love your neighbor as yourself."

Labelling people as ignorant or arrogant because they haven't done / can't do things your way is hardly an exemplar of this kind of teaching. Is it?

peace.

milo

Again we are in agreement.

I am not a degreed engineer. At times I do the same work as an engineer. Many times an engineer values my insight and seeks me out.

Many engineers can do what I do. Some can not. But could with training, and some schooling.

It is through a combination of schooling and practical experience that I have had the success I have had. Del del Gato, I believe you Milo, and certainly others and I, have expressed on this forum the tremendous value in apprenticeship.

A good engineer will seek out an experienced and qualified field or tech or related trade person. A skilled tradesman or tech or field person will not bypass the engineers approval.

The point - know what you know. And when you don't know; know where to go.

cr3

Just to add. Some of us have chosen not to rcv an engineering degree because that is not what we wish to do. Some of enjoy being away from the office more.

Arguably, many engineers enjoy the finer details and broader knowledge that degreed engineers typically possess.

Micah,

Thing have changes since I went to college 20 + years ago. But even then there were problems.

I was out of high school for about 8 years before I went back to college.

It took about a semester before I could make an adjustment. But there was something that I remember, when I was taking advance calculus, I had one heck of a problem getting high grades, or even passing grades for that matter. I was so disturbed I was going to drop out.

And I talked to my professor, that I was dropping out. He asked why. And I told him. I'm not getting it, I'm failing. He told me something that I was surprised about. He asked my is it because I was not passing the tests. I told he yes. He said that was nothing. He could see that I knew the processes, and he knew I as he said "recognized the patterns in the sand" and that it will come to me. I was impressed that with all the students he knew my records, off the top of his head.

Well I stayed, and I never regretted it, nor did regret even thankful that I talked to him. For just 20 minutes of one on one discussions with him, through out the courses I took with him, I called him my mentor.

As far as GPA, mine were 3.895, but the people that scored higher or did their best to get the 4.0. Lets say in industry they struggled.

I found that college is what YOU make of it. YOU have to want to gain knowledge. And its up to YOU to make it work for YOU. Its not a magic wand, or a silver bullet, what education is, is yours to do what YOU wish with it.

Education is only a tool, and is only as good as the owner is on how to apply it.

phoenix911

Amen to everything you've said here. I, too, have had a couple of professors who had a seminal influence on my learning processes, and they are the reasons I keep going back.

Micah

phoenix911, that was a nice response and one that I would like to endorse, thank you.

Maybe, & maybe a lot more. It varies by individual.

I've read time & again: "the real benefit to a degree is developing a system to think + learn, that will serve the rest of your life"

Could it just be possible that some folk could have these as innate abilites? without Uni to force them to it?

True, no body is the same.

one person can look at an inanimate object and see nothing, another can look at it and find an answer...........grasshopper. ("grasshopper" a joke from a sitcom long ago)

You are correct that many engineering students do not have the mechanical skills/aptitude to back up their educational skills. Many of us have been tinkerers since we were pre-teens. I got my General class ham radio license before I was in high school, and building my own ham radio transmitters/receivers/accessories before I was in high school. 42 years in/around the Navy as a technician has shown a downturn in the number of people who work with their hands when they are in their formative years. Now it's all video games and skateboards. Hopefully, owning a skateboard at least teaches a kid how to use a screwdriver. Where I work, we frequently have engineering students accompany engineers on major equipment installations. This is wonderful for them, as they learn the practical to go alongside the theoretical. I have always maintained that before an engineer can graduate, he should have to work on- maintaining/repairing that which is is going to design for at least a year.

However, the bottom line is that there needs to be a standard, a proof that a person has met a certain level of proficiency in anything... be it an engineering degree, a medical doctor's licensing exam, a lawyers bar exam- or a drivers license! Without an exam, and a credential, what standard IS there? None! Do we accept someone's word as to what a wonderful driver they are? NO! If they don't have a drivers license, we don't allow them to drive!

So someone blowing their own horn will never be an acceptable standard of qualifications. It can't be. There are those who can do things- accomplish things- and those are usually the ones who get ahead, and succeed in life. And alont their life's path, they generally pick up the credentials along the way. I do know several people who have partially pursued degrees, but ended up not completing them as they found a path in which it was not needed... but they got that path through particular skills and drive and motivation. These are people with the kind of material that Burt Rutan, Bill Gates, Walt Disney, and many others have, however they are the exception, not the rule. The majority of the rest of us have to play by- and live within the rules that says you need a drivers license to drive, a degree to practice engineering, a license to practice medicine or law. The ones who's list of accomplishments and grandeur exist purely in their own mind- and who live in a bubble of their own ego will never get ahead. They may get by by pulling the wool over the eyes of those around themselves- for a while, but in the end, they will fall by the wayside. There are those who claim wondrous accomplishments, but when pinned down, cannot provide any evidence of it. Occasionally stories make the papers of so called self-styled doctors who are jailed for practicing medicine without a license, and other such stories. While standards may (sadly) be dropping over time- what does that say for those who can't- or don't even meet those standards? Simply saying that one is an educator- when no proof of that exists, or of accomplishments that exist only in one's mind do not a reality create.

These are the ones to whom the saying "Those who can, do- those who can't- teach" refers to.

It was the Hyatt Regency in Kansas City. A really stupid miscalculation because they didn't think about the difference between a single support rod and a series of support rods.

Thank you. And vindication appreciated. It WAS a poor (not to say, criminally unsound) ENGINEERING job. And SOMEONE signed off on it, either before or after the fact (By the methods I cited elsewhere).

Micah

actually, it was the type of joint between the support rods. And that mistake never should have happened if the people (engineers) behind it were practical. but thats hind sight.

Here, here.

Dear micahd02,

EXCELLENT again.

This is precisely what I have been trying to get across in another thread "Education" and got severely humiliated by vituperative "Graduate Engineers".

Over 360 Final year Graduating "Engineers" have passed through my guidance on their mandatory project work and without exception, they have expressed that they got to understand what "Engineering" really means and found severe faults with the educational system which made them "Memorise" and vomit it all in the exams and thereby getting fantastic scores (with zero comprehension of their subjects).

They had even been intimidated not to put any questions and to look only into the "Notes" dictated by the Professors and Lecturers.

Such Graduate Engineers are considered "Superior" by our ill informed society and they get the best of proposals for marriage alliance from rich parents of "Would-be" wives.

As you said, our work satisfying a customer is the best certification and the machines and systems designed and built-up and performing are the proof of our functionality as Engineers. Institutions can save themselves by recognising such work of Professional (Non-Graduate) engineers and allow credits to be accumulated for the issuance of "Professional" degree at par if not superior to a purely theoretical or academic degree.

Thank you again and regards

D.Ramakrishna Naidu

Dear micahd02,

EXCELLENT!!!

I too am a non-degreed engineer with over 110 engineering projects completed (43 working years) through my innovations/inventions and supervision of the work of Degreed engineers.

I could not have said it better than you.

Thank you and regards.

D.ramakrishna Naidu

I really did not appreciate the idea that Institution is responsible for ensuring jobs to thier graduates. Who can say for sure, how would be the job market say after four years(period for engineering study)? Economy changed within one year itself so much due to market forces, who can predict correctly about unemployment scenerio in future? A student should consider many items including strenghts and weakness in himself before taking up a subject for pursuing for higher studies. If one has come out in flying colors in studies, he has many avenues for earning. Working for a company is one among them. So don't blame an institute for getting a job or not.

Thanks.

Shyam you cant blame institutions point blank if you can travel back in time to 50s and 60s it was normal for only capable students with a right attitude for selecting their field of university education like engineering,commerce,medical etc with an intention of achieving some thing in his chosen field How ever over a period of time at least in India the goal of entering univaricity was to land a job in UK,USA and some how become a citizen of the UK/USA to add more confusion a degree in electranics and computer science were concidered a pass port to USA or developed world to day you wont find any takers for hard core mechenical,electrical,or any basic engineering streams to make it even bad organisations like IEEE promotes only High end electronics and computer engineering and draws huge bunch of students with scholarships and incentives to more student wings of IEEE.hence from the very beginning students join the universities with an attitude to go abroad and land a job with a fat pay check of $s, with a multi national company (I am not against it,But not at the cost of basic engineering)In fact parents are to be equally blamed for moulding this attitude of child from the kindergarten level.

secondly banking and financial segment is factor drawing a huge chunk of students to choose MBA after graduation and was offering a huge compensation packages till melt down hit i was surprised Huge set of qualified engineers have lost their bearings who opted for MBA and were marketing heads of several banking and non Banking institutions in fact the Attraction of Jobs abroad was so high the in the technical book shops you don't find any basic engineering books except Text books,authored to help students score marks in the examinations.How sad the situations is.

crm

Hi crm,

I agree with your point that when there were few institutions and it was difficult for one to get into professional education system, people really took pains to achieve something great in the few years on the college campus. Now that there are Laptop and Mobile with all and credit card in pocket, to achieve something with hard work is becoming thing of the past. I think there is greater pressure on the education system and it is failing to innovate faster than the pace at which industry is moving or demanding. Education is more like junk internet resource in which there is little feeling of discovery and more feeling of garbage collection and filtering. People now are becoming Internet garbage collectors, considering it like a source of everything and not putting time in sharpening their own brain. Some among this big lot are still clever and believe in sincerity so they are better prepared than others.

Is such higher education to many helping the society in any way? If not then why not place some restriction on it. I have seen in Singapore that only less than 1% enter the degree courses after education at school level. In India, every one want to get many degrees and they still remain uneducated. I wonder if USA has been using a high fee as deterrent.

I just wonder about it now that after few years, professional degree may not have any meaning at all. Think of any one and every one becoming a doctor if you have mushrooming medical colleges on every street. It is bound to happen.

Dear Raju11

It is really worst in India than in USA or UK.

Let me explain how the engineering institutes operate here. By law engineering institutes are allowed to charge four years fee even though student never understands anything and fails all the four years. Failed students are not allowed in the regular class but are still asked to pay the fee. Their Original certificates of earlier education are kept as security, and they are also threatened of legal action to pay fee. After all this they get no degree as University disqualify them after some time. Such institutes or such system I call an education Mafia. I have seen them implementing in this way.

Some institutes luckily have good teachers so students feel great about being there but many institutes are using diploma holder to teach degree engineers. Many teachers I have evaluated do not have quality to teach engineering degree and are just unable to find job elsewhere so they go for teaching profession and remain underpaid themselves.

My observation is the result of many years research on education system. I am working with institutes to improve their system of education but found that some institutes are only behind money and nothing else. One of the institute even closed the final year engineering classes completely as they have no sitting place for them. Students do not complain as they may be given zero marks in internal exams and may finally fail in the exams.

Some students are really bad themselves and come for education only to get married. They are not interested in education so institute can not be blamed for their status. I feel that at least 50% students should find the education worth the money and with some good results in finding placement after education.

Education system in India is almost a Russian circus with so many institutes and almost anyone and every one tried to be an engineers without education. I think both institutes and students themselves are to be blamed for it. More blame goes to governments who now use education as cheap labor making education some kind of joke and institutes a place of misery.

I agree that unless students themselves are serious about education, no matter how good the teachers are, they will end up in the dust bin trap. I still will blame the institutes as they are not supposed to accept the one who have no interest and must reject them. That is why there is examination system.

Worst thing to learn was that some institutes started giving very high marks to students such that all new student consider it a honey gift so give preference to come to such institutes. Other institutes were forcing the students to fail such that they need not come to class as institute had space crises. Something that goes in the minds of institute planned has nothing to do with education but is some kind of very dirty plan behind the seen.

Authorities who come to approve the institutes go back with heavy bag full of currency to the extent they may never be able to get legally in their entire life time. If we have to say something to them, will they hear? Perhaps yes and will ask more money from these people to avoid us pointing at them.

Recently engineering institutes are allowed to run double shift so now the engineering seats will double and teachers are same numbers so quality bound to come down further. Just wait for the dooms day in professional education.

Some one else can point out the problems elsewhere. I have given details of the serious problem that I see here.

Many software engineers do not know where in the memory program gets loaded or even a difference between EXE and COM files. No computer these days comes with any technical manual. Working engineers some times are better than degree holders.

Sounds like a student whine - "I want this, and I want that, and I want it NOW!"

Being ripped off by a bank or a university, it doesn't matter, it's part of the education you get at the University of Life and it better prepares you for the fact that the world is not there to GIVE you a living, you have to hew it out of the rock for yourself.

"Control your destiny or someone else will!" -- Jack Welch

I copied that saying from a CR4 poster and I apologise for not being able to attribute it by name to the poster concerned but I think it strikes the correct note for this discussion.

This not a road side bagging but a cry against wide spread crime committed in the name of quality education a highly fee charged service but poorly delivered and those committed crime are having the last laugh. Don't you realize the seriousness of the massive problem. Most of the mushrooming engineering institutes collect fee to increase the size of their building each year and the student does not acquire any great knowledge at the institution and under goes private tuition to learn. Universities and Institutions are simply becoming a paper degree printing press.

Dear Shyam,

I would like to give my opinion as per below:-

1.Cost of education in U.S,U.K & Australia is high. Even locals find it difficult to bear such high costs. These Institutions are not surviving on the fees paid by students but with many Govt. and private grants.

2.Selection of the degree is done by student himself. He has to first have overall view of the job opportunities for the degree selected by him. When he is investing such large chunk of money on his carrier he has to consult many to arrive at right decision.

3.Availability of the jobs also depends on the economic situation of the country and changing times. Some technologies become outlived in short period.

4.To ask for refund of the fees from the countries and institutions sounds ridiculous as they were not responsible for selecting particular degree course, they are simply providing education.

5.May I know which American University accepted such proposal of refunding the money in case student does not get job in his native country?.

6.There are many courses being conducted in Universities across the world which have no job potentials, it personal selection of the course by the student in which he has liking to pursue such degree.

I think it was Harvard University for their Business Management degree. When institutes have lots of NSF and other grants then why are they charging such a high fee at the first place.

Dear capblanc

You have a valid point and I appreciate it. Planners are responsible if their plan results in financial disaster to someone who has not yet started a life but trusted the so called stalwarts or pillars of knowledge. You can see by looking at the numbers and how bad it is now.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

Why did Bill Gates, Larry page, Sergei Brin, Larry Ellison, Lakshmi Mittal, Chad Hurley et al, all succeed where the whiners you're standing up for all fail?

They DEVOURED their knowledge as if it was a meal and they were hungry.

You don't get that kind of stuff spoon-fed to you while you wait for some piece of paper that says YOU ARE NOW A MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE.

Education is there if you want to reach for it. Don't expect it to be handed to you - YOU HAVE TO SEEK IT OUT FOR YOURSELF.

A google executive, i don't know who, recently said;

JUST TEN YEARS AGO, A TOP PROFESSOR AT MIT, WOULDN'T HAVE HAD ACCESS TO THE BREADTH OF KNOWLEDGE THAT A KID IN A VILLAGE IN BANGLADESH HAS AT HIS FINGERTIPS TODAY.

It's there.

If you want it, take it.

Otherwise, go play games on your PC while you wait for the self appointed judges to hand you your piece of paper.

Horse is there and water is there but horse fails to drink the right type of water and gets infected. Education is becoming a contaminated water these days.

Dear Guest,

Why haven't you signed in? What is your background?

I don't see the correspondents as whiners only people offering their opinions on the limitations and failings of a system which has its roots in feudal society.

Some of these dropped out before graduation, Gates included. Most made their fortunes because of their business acumen, not their academic qualifications.

Do not misunderstand me, I do not belittle their achievements. They were in the right place at the right time and they had the ability and intelligence to take advantage of their opportunity. These people owe more to their entrepreneurial skills than their education.

The question is how many more potentially great people don't reach that full potential because of the way the system makes getting a second bite at the education cherry a near impossibility.

Am I whining? No, I have my own business, employ a staff, what I have is mine. I'm no multimillionaire because I lack the business acumen, drive and singlemindedness

Regards

Chas .

All true, and yet...

Could another Bill Gates come along, to replace our current O/S?

These stories are rare, expressly because those special windows of opportunity are quite narrow.

Exactly Shyam,

I followed my father into electronics (he was the first radio ham in India in the 1930s, one of the first 6 TV cameramen at the BBC and a senior design engineer in Marconi on Radar in WW2). He could not have predicted the way electronic work would go. The economics of service work has flipped so even quite major equipment is no longer viable to repair..He could not have foreseen that.

How many more technologies will go the same way, disappear or change out of all recognition? Today's students need a versatile education system to allow them to continue education throughout their careers.

Regards

Chas

Dear capblanc

Yes, this is point I am making that the professional education systems are becoming unprofessional systems and it is time to place a deterrent such that the fittest survive and useless find no place. Even if 50% part of the education is fitting to current need then there is some hope. Only paper degrees are generated by cheats running so called professional educational institutes. They actually must be subjected to law and consumer courts as they receive high fee from students. Deliver the desired level of skill else must refund the fee and also compensate for wastage of time and energy.

Women are to blame for the situation you are describing because they want their sons to wear a suit and have clean hands when they come home, so they hammer away at their sons that the only way to get ahead in the world is to be a lawyer.

So when the universities heard that the hot demand was for lawyers, they churned out lawyers till there was an excess of them.

But when applicants STILL insisted on training to be lawyers, even though there were visible signs of an excess already, the universities had to lower their standards of entry and exit in order to hoover up all the fees that the applicants wanted to pour into the universities pockets.

That entailed hiring dumber and dumber tutors so they got dumber and dumber graduates until the skill level of lawyers that were pouring onto Wall Street was such that they would happily advise their employees that it was OK to package up subprime mortgages and palm them off on other unsuspecting banks as investment vehicles.

Then the government was called in to bail out the banks that had swallowed the bent investment vehicles and the lawyers moved on to greener pastures after they'd scorched the earth around the banks.

I believe that the education policies are Government controlled and in India, they do have a way to limit the educational institutes and the courses that are run there. They can stop admission in education degrees if there is no need of trained teachers. It can also be done for other types of education.

I think India is allowed to churn out lots of engineers to flood the world with cheap engineers and to cause a cheap labor resource for it. I think they are not worried if salary will go down as total number will bring enough money for them to run their business. Similar position exists in Australia and they come to India to grab students. In recent years institutes from UK and USA started doing this in India. Worst thing to come is from them now as they are allowed to set up Universities and Institutes in India. India already has more than 10000 professional institutes and now that they are allowed to run double shift they become as good as 20000 in real numbers. I think, they will mushroom to 50000 number in another 10 years. Each institute produces more than 1000 professionals each year. This makes 10,000,000 or 10 million professionals each year coming out of the institute in India alone. One million of them go to foreign countries for higher education and jobs. As 80% of India population now very young so this factory is at its peak level and will remain so for coming 10 years. This will push more certified professionals from India to outside India in 10 years than total population of USA and UK put together. Those stay in India also work in outsourced job companies in India.

I am against all this type of professional training and will prefer if we have real good professionals at work.

do you seriously as readers to beleive any lawyer is willinng to walk away from work provided by a bank? that is as questionable an idea as expecting them to not be politiciams or attached to politicians just like scale is to steel.

'da ber

CAPBLANC wrote: "We are sent to school, . . . . to study for what attracts. . . our parents. The student is pushed to train for something he is not really interested in or he chooses a career in a field where there are no jobs."

The Vocational School in the County I live in suffered a nomadic existence for almost a decade. They could not find a permanent home nor were they able to get the funding needed to develop a respected curriculum for trades like carpenters, electricians, plumbers, machinists, etc.

Likewise, the regular high-schools, preoccupied with getting students into college, neglected and frequently dropped the "hands-on" classes often referred to as "industrial arts". These were often the only opportunity high school students have to work with simple hand tools. It's interesting to observe that the cooking classes taught as part of Home Economics were never threatened while machine shop classes disappeared completely.

At the root of all this is the dominant attitude of affluent parents in this upper class community who declare that their son or daughter is going to law school and not going to become a plumber or electrician, etc.

The irony of this is that the most highly paid people in this County have consistently been the trades-people! Not the doctors, not the lawyers, not the teachers but the licensed contractors!

It's also interesting to observe how many of today's college graduates are still living at home with their parents after finishing school because they can't find a job. Such is the reward for a Liberal Arts degree with things like a major in French History!

Sure they can get a job. . . " Would you like fries with that?"

L.J.

Chas:

You said "Far better would be to scrap the present system and rework it so that students start work with a good general education at 16 or 18 and continue their studies in parallel with their early careers."

I am so glad that you said this, as I could not have said it as well, and could not agree with it more. I have discussed the term "Kinetic Learner" in another thread, and pointed out that I am such. Many of us are kinetic learners, though some still manage to do well at "book learning", applying what is learned in 14-16 years of schooling after they finish the schooling. Those of us who learn kinetically would do much better in your educational model. I only wish I could have done so, but was pushed early on with "You can't take that class. That's for dummies. You are going to college." First, the class in question was a hands-on, four year auto maintenance and design course. Not doing the artwork, the body styling, but laying out the chassis, frame, power train, accessories, passenger space, etc., to achieve a workable auto. Then building it, if you were able. The training was given, but it was up to the student to do the work. No dummies need apply, I think. But the counselor was a college grad, who couldn't see that value of either Joe the Plumber OR Micah the Mechanic. Second, I wish the same counselor had told me who was going to pay for that college education. My parents couldn't, and neither could I. So I have gone in patches, as I could, or could not, afford it.

And I became, among other things, a mechanic. By the hands on, fix it yourself or don't drive it, method. It worked.

I learned electronic systems design, maintenance and troubleshooting the same way.

I wish I could have apprenticed in even one field, as I have NO doubt I'd be better at everything I do, with that experience.

Micah

1) is the word you intended to use here kinetic or kinesthetic? i understand kinetic is some type of energy or force that is being unleashed into onto whatever while kinsthetic is a idea that follows along the lines the human hand has a way of touching something and using it for whatever purpose. could you give me a bt more of a idea of which you meant plaese?

2) if i understand what you post here is that the best form of education is one that uses a system of hands on training will put the rest of the subjects a student is learning while taking a course in whatever to use and allow not just one component e.g. requiring a student to be able to prove some level of ability to use skills at welding and sheetmetal work after learning how to set up a template on layout tables, torch or shear cutting the stock to the designed pattern then either spot or stick weld the cut materials so that the next peice of the puzzle can be put together.is that idea right? if it is then do i understand what you say is that and there will NEVER be any aruguement from me that many schools have forgotten something called apprenticship training as part of the courses they teach, i add though that this is not only the fault of the school or the system it works under, how manyparents are actually actively involved in tell senior high trustees that cutting the skills development programes in local schools is not acceptable? how many parents have expressed to thier children similar values and concepts when the child has the nerve to say i do not wish to be a .... but maybe i would like to learn the craft of a ..... ..... because there are real visible benefits to learning it, one of which is I like doing it? this ties in with my last item.

3) consider the last part of your post is the real sticking point in the issue of education. the attitude of the "counsellor" who expressed a opinion the he / she / it(?)couldn't see persons who are "manual laborers" as anything but dummies because the shingle from the university of upper podunk gave it permission to think like that. what right does a shingle from any place give a "counselloer" the right to express that thought? does the shingle also grant the right to eventually undermine the qualities inherent in a system of education that lasted for at least 1300 years (e.g. apprenticeships) then sit back and grouse about the poor quality of product he she it has to deal with when the jet pump kicks off at 02:00 and the toiulet won't flush?

'da ber

Kinesthetic is the term used by the multiple intelligence community.

http://www.learning-styles-online.com/style/physical-bodily-kinesthetic/

http://homeworktips.about.com/od/homeworkhelp/a/tactile.htm

http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm

micah's post makes a good point in that classroom pedagogy is poorly aimed at kinesthetic learners.

milo

thanjs very much for taking the effort togive me a better idea of the differences in the two words, that will some how get printed off and stored for reference to.

what makes it valuable to me is the way it is presented, you like andy and a few others take the time to put that extra effort into what you reply with, this allows me to use what is literally left of my brain to root around and understand an idea or phrase, i will if it ok with you pass this on to other a.b.i. owners.

'da ber

You're welcome.

I have had the pleasure of supervising kinesthetic learners, and it is truly a joy to watch them work. Its like a dance, smooth no wasted movements. Really sweet. However, communicating could be difficult, as i used words that conveyed what i saw in my head, while he was trying to listen for words about "doing." It was a bit of a mismatch until we figured out where each of us was, so to speak.

My QA manager once upon a time was a kinesthetic learner, and giving him a manual to do a setup was pointless. Giving him tools to try and set up the machine and he was in the zone.

I found out later he did body work on the side- talk about wired 'to do'-body work is all hands...

Of course you are welcome to pass this info on, thats one of the reasons for posting, to help folks find out what they want to know and can use and share.

Thanks for your positive comments.

milo

I've always expressed it as Kinetic, in that the application of the skill begets more skill through the learning by doing (i.e., unleashing the forces applied with, and into, the hands, teaching the hands what the "right way to do it" will feel like. The Japanese are believed to hold the view that if the form is perfect, the result will be also. I don't know how true that may ever be, but I do know that if I have "done it, and it came out right" I am more likely to do it the same way with the same result next time. I know also that no matter how many times I read how to do it, and how many times I follow those instructions, it does not become any better than a mediocre product, until my hands can feel how it should work. Perhaps the best example is the way I learned to repair Model 28 Teletype machines. The diagrams are in great detail, and extremely clear, in the manuals I used. But due to the compact and complex nature of the machines, I was never successful in repairing them until I could do it blindfolded. Not that I NEEDED to do it blindfolded. I NEEDED to trust that my fingers could feel the right relationships of the parts better than my eyes could see them. I do gunsmithing the same way, even though I can clearly see the parts. My hands have a more precise knowledge of how the parts should feel than my eyes can see.

Perhaps the word is Kinethetic, but I have never thought so. I'll bow to others on this one, though.

I've known very few people who work Calculas problems (basic Calc, to be sure) in their heads, while driving a bus cross-country, merely from studying it in the book. If you don't use the skill, you won't be able to do it at "gut level" or have a "gut feel" for whether your answers are even in the ballpark. But I learned to do them that way by practice, because I like to, and can. (Afterward, given time, I used to check my answers on paper. I no longer see the need, since they always checked out. Now I go to the paper method, or the calculator or computer, only when I need either more precision, or a record of the answers,for example, to support some argument I am making later).

I find that I learn everything better by doing it while learning it. I CAN learn from the books, and pass the tests, but I don't get any LASTING value out of that mental exercise. The lasting value comes in learning, and cementing, a skill by application.

For that reason, I cannot agree more strongly with the need for apprenticeship as, at least, and available learning method.

Micah

I mean no particular offense, but there's a lot of whining in this thread. I don't have a PhD because I wasn't smart enough; I don't throw stones at people who are. Likewise, if I don't have a job, I don't blame a school; it's up to me to get out there and get the best job I can, just like it was up to me to get the education I wanted, was qualified for, and could afford. We need to row our own boats.

Greetings.

I have a relative that teaches in a university in the USA (PHD in electrical enigineering).

We were discussing the fact that when he went to college in 1988 he was not required to know how to do mechanical drawing as I had to. I was amazed.

Then he got to the real whizzer that they did not give A,B,C,D, or F grades where he teaches at the university. They only gave pass or fail. I don't want any engineer of any type to get a pass education graduation. I want one with an A or a B education graduation. The dumbing down of people wherever. This sounds like the new math of years ago that they guessed what the answer would be. I want an engineer that knows what the answer is and can prove it. Is this what is causing all of these big buildings and bridges to fail. They guessed at the answer in their calculations.

The education system that allows this kind of stupidity is useless. What kind of college, university, high school, middle school, and grade school administrators and teachers are running the system where they say that they need more money, more money, more money and don't do any better. I know of one school district that has a school system administrator (PHD BIG Bucks) and TWO assistant administrators (PHDs BIG Bucks). Three high roller PHDs to run a school district. Give me a break the business world couldn't afford this kind of wasteful spending and survive.

They design school buildings that Cannot be added onto. Tear down buildings that are functional. Design flat roofed buildings in areas where there is heavy snow load and the roofs fall in ruin the building and cause the taxpayers to fix the problem that never should have happened.

It seems that we need business people running the education system and not educators where I am at. The administrators are supposed to be Working for the taxpayers in every country, state, county, and city. They need to be makde accountable now or fired. We need to make the system work and change it NOW.

Now if you will excuse me I will get down from my chair.

Dear OlympiaWA

I do not want any one to get down from their chair. In fact more such people are required who understand and accept the facts and are considering to make small change in the system. The desired change in the course will avoid disaster.

Point here is very clear and I feel that educated and clever people should not take the poor and needy of the society for ride in the name of education which is not worth counting. Can't we predict that only this much number and of this type of quality are needed so they only need to under go through typical education. It is more important to put those people behind the bars particularly those who have taken money and have not delivered the quality education. Now that teachers are different from institute management that collects the funds then who is actually responsible for the problem?

Dear TVP45

I think you have a point. However, I am talking here of professional degree which is supposed to provide education in front line areas to provide genuinely perfected skills along with scientific ideas and pointer to research attitude. Most important is the fitness to get into professional work stream. It is like a military school which tells you how to fight a war and if you can not learn to do that and asked to go home after training then that school must close down as unfit training zone.

Engineering and Medical degree supposed to be for a well defined purpose and when you find even graduate and masters degree are not providing enough in depth knowledge then the person under training very likely can not find a suitable job position is the test that the skill imparted was not good enough. Hence, money back policy is not a bad idea and it will provide a deterrent to bad teaching schools. Institutes need not wait for four or five year to know if the person is unfit for training and even within first year they can ask them to leave will be much better than giving wrong hope and many years of wastage of time and money.

Assume that you want to learn to cut hair or stitch a cloth then training does provide all that else it is meaning less. Unfortunately professional education is becoming much worst these days and education is like general knowledge class and you are reading a dictionary for meaning of words.

All other education can be in the name of scientific education and can include big bang theories to research but professional degrees need to be for greater purpose else we are not making engineers but making a non-productive work force which again to look at training and where that will be as these professional education supposed to be just that which they are not. It is a real shame at their part. Why can't you all realize that? If not these professional institution can produce the work capability skilled men then who else can do? We need to correct their course and remind them of their duty and warn them that they are highly paid to provide services and in return they are playing a serious joke and getting away with it as there is latency in reaction in all of us to react in time and point the seriousness of blunder being committed in the name of professional courses. They are really not so professional courses as they do not make student fit to work in the industries.

Is any one saying here that the professional education in engineering is fit enough to take you to any good industry and one does not feel that lots of desired skills are missing and rejection by the industry is very likely and one has to under go training once again elsewhere and where is that elsewhere? Is this education good enough? If not then why institutes are not asked to change their education system? It is simply we have taken for grated that they can run the education in whatever way they want and not want so ever we need or at least what so ever is desired by the industries to employ them.

In four years of education, institutes can involve the industries to provide the desired skill such that a transition from education to work is made smooth. If it fails to do that for most of the students then they must be treated as careless people and not interested in true education and teaching and they must refund all fee immediately. If you find that one institute fails to get even 10% students their job positions and then they have to refund the education fee of 90% students then this will sure go as bad reputation for the institute and then no one will like to enter such institution. This is what I want to model our as deterrent for bad systems.

As is typical, I agree with some of TVP45, and disagree with other parts.

I agree with his position that an education is different than job training. In this I believe I disagree with the original post that started this thread. I am quite sure all education could be greatly improved, but I don't believe engineering per se can be taught in school such that the newly minted engineer is ready to hit the ground running and contribute to the bottom line of his employer the same as the engineer who has been out of school for five or ten or more years. Education, in my opinion, gives you the basic skill sets you need in order to solve problems, but you don't really learn to set up and solve those problems in school. That, at least, is my experience. I don't think I'm alone: engineering salaries tend to rise with increasing experience, so employers must by and large feel the same way.

I absolutely and in principle strongly disagree with many of the possibly tongue-in-cheek examples given for reasons to sue your high school. High school teachers vary greatly in knowledge and teaching capability, and should stick to teaching fundamental facts that students need to know. It is a very bad thing if part of a high school curriculum is to indoctrinate students into particular beliefs: there is no advantage to a student whatsoever in the working world as to whether he or she believes in evolution or some sort of intelligent design. And high school students have no background to critically examine the claims of the climate change hoax: if that is taught, it should be taught as a current event, with perhaps some debate as to pros and cons but absolutely no endorsement as to scientific validity. There isn't a high school teacher in the country (USA) who has the credentials to review the models and provide expert testimony as to their validity or otherwise.

Howdy!

I was careful not to say climate change was true, only that it was a legitimate area of study. I was actually thinking of you reading the post; I understand your objection and respect it. However, I maintain that the awareness of climate change (note, I'm not saying global warming) is something a high school graduate ought to know. But, I'm open to debate on this one.

Evolution, on the other hand, is absolutely settled science. If you come out of high school not believing in evolution, then the Westminster Dog Show must seem one heck of a mystery.

You're confusing evolution and natural selection.

Natural selection is the means by which evolution occurs. The fundamental tenet of the theory of evolution is that species evolve via natural selection. You cited the Westminster dog show as unexplainable without invoking evolutionary theory. I explained that evolution of species has nothing whatsoever to do with the different breeds of dogs. There is no natural selection, either - the selection that resulted in the various breeds is human intervention.

If i have confused something, then how does the Westminster dog show demonstrate evolution of species, natural selection, or any other facet of the theory of evolution?

How is evolution of species settled science?

Specify the evolution about which you speak, and I'll buy it. Within the species, yes, but evolution as taught today makes no such distinction. And the evolution you state to be established fact is exactly that about which I make my objection. No one with any sense will argue that a rabbit is a rabbit, whether a giant lopear, or a snowhshoe hare, and that there is definitely a differentiation for survival between the two (the Westminster Dog Show clearly points out another type of similar differentiation), but the arguments I can start with quiet questions don't hinge on "within species" differentiations. Rather, they start with discussions of how the supposed "cross species" differentiations occur.

Start with more precision, and the floor is open. But without that specificity, evolutionists become like the Sadducees and Pharisees of the New Testament. They both agree that Jesus was not "The Christ" or "The Messiah", but asking them to discuss the Resurrection from the Dead would deflect them to fighting each other, and make them lose all site of their real goal, to stamp out Christianity, and its worship of Jesus as Christ or The Messiah. Evolutionists lose site of the goal of stamping out Creationism in their own arguments about the mechanics of Evolution. And their belief differs not one whit, for that reason, from the faith of the Jews of the New Testament. It is still less an established science than an accepted art.

And yes, to head you off, there is a large amount of a similar problem among Christians. But we don't call our beliefs "established science" and ridicule those who disagree with us. The Bible tells us our belief in God and His work is only effectual if it is based on faith. We have no grounds to claim any other basis.

Micah

Please read my post more carefully. I didn't say evolution was a fact; I said it was settled science.

Please don't take my comments as an attack on religion. I have strong religious beliefs and see nothing incompatible between those beliefs and evolution. I hold, as do many Buddhists for example, that a conflict between science and religion means that the conflicting religious tenet has been incorrectly understood and must be changed. I recommend almost any of the books by Paul Davies as a way of seeing how scientists can also hold religious beliefs.

From your mouth to God's ears.

Two observations.

I doubt that God agrees with Evolution, since that isn't what He said in His book.

And where in the world did a guy with a moniker like TexasCharley learn a NewYorkism like "from your mouth (lips, really, as I understand the original) to God's ears"?

But mostly I agree with the points made. Let's just agree to stop short of requiring High Schools to convince our kids that their faith is wrong, on pain of lawsuit if they fail. Faith is, after all, based on belief, not on proof. And no court has ever managed to hold a third party responsible for a second party's faith, or lack of it.

And by the way, as a Science Fair Judge, and a Physics tutor, (with a lot of bio and chem tossed in), as well as a Test Engineer (total about 15 years), I will always argue that any system in which there are more questions with answers in disagreement among adherents to the system than there are among opponents of the system is NOT proven. And I HAVE proven, by doing it, that sitting in a room with 10 (or any number >2) scientists who believe in evolution, and asking no more than two questions, I can get THEM arguing, with no further input from me, about such things (supposedly among the proven) as the efficacy of Carbon 14 dating, or the appropriate methods of applying the technology, or from whence man sprang, in what part of the (supposed) evolutionary process, and when. There are many others about which they'll all argue passionately, and I'm sure I haven't begun to scratch your itch. But the point is, if they can't get together long enough to present a cohesive and united front against one solitary (and heretical ) unbelieving interloper, without "loping" off into some esoteric argument, IT AIN'T, EVEN IN THIER MINDS, PROVEN!

Does get me out of the room unscathed for a Starbuck's, though.

Micah

Will probably finish what you read later. No promises. You seem to have started talking about evolution or something. Not sure where that came from.

Could be some judgement aboout the Avatar. Not really sure. If so it probably isn't what you think.

As for the expression - I am from Texas. I don't live in a jar.