Archive for the ‘engineering’ Category

We live in a time of revolutionary change. Not only is the world relying increasingly on technology for economic growth and job development, but the nation is making the difficult transition of refocusing a significant amount of its technology investment from national security to international economic competitiveness. At the same time, we view technology as important in helping solve many difficult societal problems, from creating environmentally-sustainable development and improving communications, to devising more effective and cost-efficient health care systems. Communications developments alone are leading to profound redefinitions of such concepts as “community,” “library,” “corporation,” and even “university.”

Within this technological context, engineers play an ever more significant role. They develop new manufacturing processes and products; create and manage energy, transportation and communications systems; prevent new and redress old environmental problems; create pioneering health care devices; and, in general, make technology work. Through these activities, engineers create a huge potential for the private sector to develop national wealth. As noted by Richard Morrow, past chairman of the National Academy of Engineering, “the nation with the best engineering talent is in possession of the core ingredient of comparative economic and industrial advantage.”

And just as important as their specific technical skills, engineers receive valuable preparation for a host of other careers in such areas as finance, medicine, law and management. These professions require analytical, integrative and problem-solving abilities, all of which are part of an engineering education. Thus, engineering is an ideal undergraduate education for living and working in the technologically-dependent society of the twenty-first century.

Responding to Changing Needs

One of the strengths of engineering education in the United States is the broad spectrum of engineering colleges whose development has been unconstrained by a single, centrally-prescribed mission. The more than 300 colleges of engineering range from highly research-intensive institutions to those that focus largely on undergraduate education, with many variations in between. Even with the considerable differences in missions, undergraduate engineering education programs maintain universal core curriculum content and minimum standards through the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), a national partnership between academics and practicing engineers. Additionally, most engineering schools have forged close relationships with industry and benefit from annual assessments of their programs by external advisory boards that have strong industry participation.

While U.S. engineering education has served the nation well, there is broad recognition that it must change to meet new challenges. This is fully in keeping with its history of changing to be consistent with national needs. Today, engineering colleges must not only provide their graduates with intellectual development and superb technical capabilities, but following industry’s lead, those colleges must educate their students to work as part of teams, communicate well, and understand the economic, social, environmental and international context of their professional activities. These changes are vital to the nation’s industrial strength and to the ability of engineers to serve as technology and policy decision makers.

Most important, engineering education programs must attract an ethnic and social diversity of students that better reflects the diversity of the U.S. and takes full advantage of the nation’s talents. Not only does the engineering profession require a spectrum of skills and backgrounds, but it should preserve its historical role as a profession of upward mobility.

In response to these needs, engineering colleges throughout the country are experimenting with new approaches to curricula, rethinking traditional teaching modes, and developing innovative ways to recruit and retain students from underrepresented groups. The largest and potentially most revolutionary effort is led by the consortia of colleges funded by the National Science Foundation’s Engineering Education Coalitions program. These national engineering college consortia each include a variety of schools ranging from predominantly undergraduate institutions to the most research intensive. The consortia are working to redesign curricula and improve teaching methodologies, each offering a different perspective and strategy.

While it is too early to gauge the success of the coalitions, they exemplify the engineering education community’s leadership and willingness to adjust to change. We applaud and encourage these efforts, but also stress the importance of including partnerships with industry and government in reformulating engineering education.

Indeed, a degree in electrical engineering can open many doors, in part because electrical engineering is so broad. Electrical engineers have taken on many tasks that you might expect people with other technical degrees to do. Semiconductor processing, for example, is highly populated by electrical engineers, but its basis is in physics and chemistry. Other areas include optics (as applied to communications), aerospace engineering, and even life sciences. “A lot of people don’t realize that a lot of biomedical devices are actually electrical devices,” noted Georgia Tech’s May.

Engineering jobs also cut across technical disciplines. More and more, mechanical, chemical, and biomedical engineers use electronics to measure a product’s performance. “Who says you’re not going to do test and measurement on a chemical process for drug manufacturing?” asked Looft. “That’s a huge area. And you better know a little bit about chemical processing when you go into that job.”

Some people with engineering degrees move out of engineering jobs but stay in their respective industries by moving into sales, marketing, and management (a few even become editors covering the industries from which they came). Others move into fields such as law and medicine. Law firms, looking for patent lawyers with technical backgrounds, may hire engineers or engineering graduates and pay for law school.

Those who choose to enter the engineering work force may find that they need skills beyond math, science, engineering basics, and problem solving. We asked the participants what additional skills employers now look for in engineering graduates. While we received some differing answers, everyone agreed that communications skills sit atop the list.

No longer is it enough to design circuits and get test results. You must communicate those results through written reports and presentations. Georgia Tech’s Williams noted that the university has integrated writing of technical documents into several courses, which UCSB’s Long echoed. WPI has even created an interdisciplinary major or double major in technical writing.

While schools have responded to employers looking for better communications skills, some in academia remain skeptical. One such person is Professor John Orr of WPI. “The standard example is if you hear an after dinner speech from the VP of company xyz, [he or she] will describe that employers need graduates with good communications skills, good teamwork skills, and some global experience. But when hiring managers come to campus, they look for skills such as experience with the latest Cadence software release. They’re looking for engineers who can be productive from day one.”

Regardless of whether communication courses are included, it’s becoming virtually impossible for schools to provide all of the required engineering skills at the undergraduate level. In fact, some people have begun to question if you should be able to enter the engineering work force with just a bachelor’s degree. Employers are looking more and more for graduates with master’s degrees, and the number of master’s degrees relative to bachelor’s degrees has risen in the past 30 years (Figure 1). (continued)

At the same time, the number of PhDs has remained relatively flat. During the last business downturn, companies may have scaled back their research budgets, relying on universities to do the work. “There’s a lot less research going on in industry than there used to be,” said UCSB’s Long. “Most companies have decimated their research labs.” Long argued that companies are looking for fewer PhDs than they did 10 or 15 years ago because they don’t have the facilities and don’t want to pay the higher salaries.

In recent years, industry has become more involved with academia. That’s good for the most part, as long as industry lets the teachers teach. Often, companies sponsor student projects or contribute to the funding of research labs. Students benefit from having worked on real-world projects and by making industry contacts, which can lead to employment upon graduation. Employers benefit because they can hire graduates with practical experience.

Overall, industry involvement in projects is welcome, because the companies provide equipment, materials, and sometimes funds for student projects. “If they’re paying for a project, then they should have the say over the project,” said WPI’s Looft. “But it can get too involved. I have companies that want to tell us what we’re going to do, educationally.”

Drexel’s Kam doesn’t agree. “I’m sure that there are horror stories here and there of companies who donated the equipment and wanted to control the curriculum,” he said. “But I wouldn’t call it a trend nor would I say this is widespread.” Georgia Tech’s May agreed that a few companies want too much involvement, but he doesn’t think it’s excessive. Companies are, after all, stakeholders in the graduates that these universities produce.

Looft said that companies go over the line when they say “you didn’t get it done” meaning that a student project didn’t produce a marketable product. When that occurs, he reminds companies that a student project is an educational endeavor that may not produce a working product.

Kam takes a different approach. He argued that companies need to get more involved in the educational process. “Industry is absent from the accreditation process,” he said. He wants to see greater participation from industry so universities can produce the engineers best qualified to keep companies competitive.

Whether you think the world has too many or too few electrical engineers, you’ll probably agree that engineers make an impact on people’s lives every day. Engineering has proven to be a satisfying career for many. Your work makes a difference in the world. Now, go out and tell someone how engineers contribute to society. I am sure many engineers proud to wear lanyards around their neck about their company.

Many students consider engineering careers because they’re good at math and science and receive encouragement to enter the field from their parents, teachers, and guidance counselors. “I think that’s a reasonable thing to do,” said Professor Gary S. May, ECE department chair at Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech). “It doesn’t mean that it’s the only career that’s available to you, or you’d be a perfect engineer because of that. But I think it’s a reasonable thing to tell students that engineering is an option for you because you have this aptitude.”

An aptitude for math and science is certainly a requirement for an engineering career, but is it enough? Not according to Professor Richard Vaz of Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI). Vaz, who is associate dean of the Interdisciplinary and Global Studies Division at WPI, said that the best engineers also have a passion for solving problems.

UCSB Professor Steve Long also cited “the willingness to do critical thinking” that makes good engineers. He argued that engineers are naturally curious and they want to know about something that’s not necessarily in a textbook.

Not everyone, though, has a clear reason for studying engineering. “When I ask students why they want to study engineering, very rarely can they articulate a reason,” said Vaz. “If they can, it usually doesn’t line up well with what engineers really do, which is solve problems and make the world a better place.” Some people, we learned, go into engineering because of the prospect of earning a decent living with just a bachelor’s degree. “That [belief] won’t get you very far,” added Long. He also cited “pushy parents” as another wrong reason that some young people study engineering.

While some people study engineering who might have been better at something else, many people who could make good engineers miss the opportunity because they don’t know what engineers do. “We don’t see enough of the brightest people coming into engineering because early in their educational paths, they get advice that essentially blocks their way,” said Moshe Kam, professor of ECE at Drexel University and VP of the IEEE Educational Activities Board (EAB). “There is a feeling that we won’t have enough people, we won’t have the right people, and because of that, we won’t have enough innovation,” he added.

Kam based his conclusions on meetings with representatives from 53 companies that hire electrical engineers. He also found that high school guidance counselors may unconsciously steer women with the ability and prerequisites for studying engineering into other fields because, “It’s not something that women do, and that’s a myth that we need to shatter.”

Georgia Tech’s May noted that some of the issues that divert women away from engineering also apply to minorities. “We have to show that engineers are normal people with normal lives with the same sorts of concerns as everyone,” he said. “This also affects our ability to recruit minority students. I say that from experience.”

And that future resides in the young men and women considering technical careers, their teachers and mentors, and the industry leaders who work with the academic community.

Electrical engineering can be a rewarding career. You learn how things work, you solve problems, and you use your knowledge to create products that enhance—and even save—lives. The field changes rapidly, providing new opportunities for engineers to grow professionally, be creative, and make a difference in the world. For these and other reasons, many engineers wouldn’t dream of doing anything else.

The engineering profession in the US, however, is at a crossroads. New technologies offer the promise of rewarding careers, and there are infinite products yet to invent. But despite these limitless opportunities, enrollment in engineering programs at American universities is flat at best.

The numbers speak for themselves. Figure 1 shows the number of US electrical and computer engineering (ECE) degrees earned from 1971 through 2003. From the late 1970s though the 1980s, ECE degrees rose steadily, and salaries went right along with them as employers snatched every ECE graduate in sight. By the 1990s, ECE degrees dropped steadily.

To find out why people choose—or do not choose—engineering as a career, what employers look for, and industry’s role in engineering education, we spoke with professors, students, and professionals.

From our interviews, we found numerous reasons why young people enter engineering, the most prominent being that they already know an engineer, usually a parent or relative. Knowing someone in the field gives young people the introduction they need to pursue engineering as a career. Furthermore, teachers and shop courses may pique someone’s interest in engineering. Conversely, many bright students never study engineering because they don’t know anything about what engineers do.

Figure 1. Electrical and computer engineering degrees rose in the 1980s and dropped through the 1990s, with master’s degrees becoming a larger portion of the total.

Math majors don’t always get much respect on college campuses, but fat post-grad wallets should be enough to give them a boost.

The top 15 highest-earning college degrees all have one thing in common — math skills. That’s according to a recent survey from the National Association of Colleges and Employers, which tracks college graduates’ job offers.

“Math is at the crux of who gets paid,” said Ed Koc, director of research at NACE. “If you have those skills, you are an extremely valuable asset. We don’t generate enough people like that in this country.”

This year Rochester Institute of Technology hosted recruiters from defense-industry firms like Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, as well as other big companies like Microsoft and Johnson & Johnson.

“The tech fields are what’s driving salaries and offers, and the top students are faring quite well,” said Emanuel Contomanolis, who runs RIT’s career center.

Specifically, engineering diplomas account for 12 of the 15 the top-paying majors. NACE collects its data by surveying 200 college career centers.

Energy is the key. Petroleum engineering was by far highest-paying degree, with an average starting offer of $83,121, thanks to that resource’s growing scarcity. Graduates with these degrees generally find work locating oil and gas reservoirs, or in developing ways to bring those resources to the Earth’s surface.

(more…)

In early times, the practice of engineering was that of a trade or craft with training occurring through some form of apprenticeship. As it developed into a profession and more recently as an academic discipline, it took on the shape of other academic disciplines, with preparation being an education rather than a training. An important turning point in the Unites States was the land grant college act (Morrill act) of 1862 which established an institution for the teaching of agriculture and the mechanical arts (engineering) in each state. This officially legitimated engineering in higher education although it still had the form of training. Interestingly, this act came into being during the American Civil War and was signed by Abraham Lincoln.

World-War II was the second turning point when it was discovered that many of the technical innovations necessary for that effort came from scientists, mathematicians, and theoretically educated engineers rather than traditionally trained engineers. Most engineers prior to that time had been trained to develop and apply ideas already in existence, not to create new solutions to new problems. After WWII, the university curricula in engineering became much more scientific and mathematical. It took on more elements of an education rather than a training. It slowly became a real academic discipline in its own right rather than only an application of other disciplines. However, it retains the integrating role of applying the physical and life sciences using some of the tools of the social sciences, law, and policy and the values derived from the humanities, letters, arts, and business.

We are now going through a third transition in engineering in response to many factors in society and in technology itself. In the larger picture, society went through the agricultural phase, the industrial phase, and now the information phase. These three phases of civilization created and were created by the most powerful and applicable technologies of the time. Engineering is and will be the creative element in the information age as it has been in preceding ages.

One of the first distinctions that must be made is between science and engineering. It is not a simple distinction because the two are so interdependent and intertwined, but whatever difference there is needs to be considered.

Science is the study of “natural” phenomena. It is the collection of theories, models, laws, and facts about the physical world and the methods used to create this collection. Physics, chemistry, biology, geology, etc. try to understand, describe, and explain the physical world that would exist even if there were no humans. It is creative in building theories, models, and explanations, but not in creating the phenomena that it studies. Science has its own philosophy with an epistemology, esthetics, and logic. It has its own technology in order to carry out its investigations, build its tools, and pursue its goals. Science has its organizations, culture, and methods of inquiry. It has its “scientific method” which has served as a model (for better or for worse) in many other disciplines.

Science is old. It was part of the original makeup of a university or college in the form of natural philosophy. It came out of antiquity, developed in the middle ages, blossomed in the renaissance, was the tool of the enlightenment, and came into its present maturity in modernity. Indeed, the history of science is, in some ways, a history of intellectual development. This is certainly only true in conjunction with many other strains of philosophical, economical, theological, and technological development, but science is a central player in that story. Science is often paired with the arts (and Humanities and Social Sciences) in the “College of Arts and Science” of a traditional university.

Engineering is the creation, maintenance, and development of things that have not existed in the natural world and that satisfy some human desire or need. A television set does not grow on a tree. It is the creation of human ingenuity that first fulfilled a fantasy of a human need and then went on to change the very society that created it. I use the term “things” because one should include computer programs, organizational paradigms, and mathematical algorithms in addition to cars, radios, plastics, and bridges.

Science is the study of what is and engineering is the creation of can be. Only recently has engineering developed the set of characteristics that make it a legitimate academic discipline. Earlier, engineering often was viewed only as the application of natural science. Now, engineering has developed its own engineering science for the study of human made things to supplement natural science which was developed to study natural phenomena. Parts of computer science are wonderful examples of that. Engineering has its own philosophy and methodology and its own economics. It even has its own National Academy.

We differentiate science and engineering, not because their difference is great, but because, in many ways, it is small. Science could not progress without technology, and engineering certainly could not flourish without science and mathematics.

A more illuminating comparison might be between the humanities and engineering. One might find more similarity in style (not content) between English literature and engineering than between science and engineering. Both literature and engineering are the study of human created artifacts. Both teach creation in the form of creative writing and engineering design. Both teach analysis in the form of literary criticism and engineering analysis. Both are intimately connected with the needs and desires of individuals and society. A similar analogy could be made between art and engineering looking at studio art, art criticism, and art history.

Most scientists (but not all) feel there is some unique objective truth behind the physical phenomena they are studying. Their goal is to find it and describe and explain it, and this truth is unique although the approaches and approximations to it are certainly not. In literature and engineering, the designed entity is not unique to the situation, but it is a creation of the particular writer or designer and perhaps unique to the creator.

The distinctions of this section are not as clean or clear as have been presented here. The boundary between science and engineering can be and often is murky. Many items of study in science are influenced if not literally created by people. This is obviously true in biology and the life sciences but also true in physics where certain elements in the periodic table do not exist in nature. Perhaps, therefore, the areas of pure science are very limited. On the other hand, since people are members of our natural system, an argument can be made that their products are as natural as anything else and, therefore, the areas of pure scientific study are very broad. Clearly engineering is constrained in what it can create by the laws of science as everything is. Nevertheless, there is a difference in spirit in the two disciplines worth trying to delineate.

What is engineering? What is an engineer?? Although it is a very old activity or trade, engineering is a relatively young academic discipline or profession. Only in recent years has it reached a stage of maturity where some of its defining details and differentiating characteristics can be articulated. Engineering is the endeavor that creates, maintains, develops, and applies technology for societies’ needs and desires. Its origins go back to the very beginning of human civilization where tools were first created and developed. Indeed, a good case can be made for the defining of humans as those animals that create, develop, and understand the significance of technology.

Over time, the part of technology that acts as an extension of human capabilities became the purview of engineering. One can view bicycles, cars, and trains as extensions of walking and running. Airplanes are an extension and application of a bird’s ability to fly transferred to humans. The telegraph, telephone, radio, television, and the internet are extensions of talking, hearing, and seeing. The microscope, telescope, and medical x-ray are also extensions of human sight and vision. Writing, books, libraries and computer data-bases are extensions of human memory and the computer itself is an extension of the human’s brain in doing arithmetic and carrying out logical arguments and procedures. Indeed, looking around your environment in almost any setting, will illustrate just how pervasive technology is. In almost any home or office, there is very little that is truly “natural”; i.e., little that is not created or manipulated by technology. The food that you eat, the utensils that you eat with, the table that you eat off of, the house that you are in, the clothes that you wear, the book that you read, the television that you watch, the telephone that you communicate with, the car that you travel in — these are all technologies created by human cleverness to satisfy human needs. This process of creation is engineering and those who do the creating are practicing engineering, whether they call themselves engineers or not.

Not only is much of the inanimate world created by engineering, part of the living world is also. Almost all crops and agriculturally produced food stuff are “engineered” through selective breeding. The same is true of domestic animals such as pets and animals raised for food or sport. Certainly the dogs, cats, and cattle have not “naturally” evolved to their current state. They have been “created” or “designed” to satisfy human desires or needs. The slow and less exact methods of controlled breeding are being replaced by genetic engineering, tissue engineering, and applications of nanotechnology. We humans have the cleverness to do that. It is the development of the tools, theories, and methods and the understanding of the appropriate sciences and mathematics for that process that is engineering. It is a central part of the history of humanity.

Not only has engineering made our lives easier and longer, it has sometimes made them more terrible and shorter through improving our ability to kill and harm when we wage war. Indeed, military and defense needs have been a historic driver of technological advancement. One of the earliest categorizations of engineering was into military and civilian (or civil) engineering.

Because technology enables and causes change, it and its creators, the engineers, are viewed with mixed feelings. This is especially true in modern (perhaps post-modern) times when the negative side effects (“unintended consequences”) of technology must be addressed.

This note is an attempt to address the question of what engineering is and then that of what an engineer is. It is intended for the general public to better understand just what this thing that has such a profound effect on our individual and collective lives is. The note is intended for the student who is considering becoming an engineer and, therefore, it is for parents and high school and college counselors as well. It is for the university engineering student and professor and for the university administrator. It is for the state and federal governments who fund engineering education and research and the investor who invests in technology. It is for the husband, wife, parent, or child who wants to better understand their spouse, child, or parent. It is for everyone who accepts the argument that a human is a technological animal and that technology has a pervasive effect on our lives.

An important part of this note is the list of references. This collection of short essays is intended to open many topics and ideas, not develop them. A rather long list of references is given to allow the reader to pursue any of the many ideas further.

When deciding on a particular degree course, many students are unaware of the vast opportunities that lie in the broad area of engineering. This problem arises since most people are unable to define exactly what type of work an engineer performs.

The engineering profession is not well understood by the general public, even in the United Kingdom, who tend to associate an engineer with somebody who services their car or mends their washing machine! However, this type of work is rarely performed by graduate engineers. A professional engineer lives in a high-tech, fast moving world where the competition is fierce and the stakes are high.

With a degree in engineering, you are far more likely to be involved in the research, design and development of new products and services. Engineers have designed and created most of the world in which we now live. The subject is fairly creative and aims to solve everyday problems in a cost effective and practical manner. While many see engineering as a very technical subject, in reality many engineers will develop considerable management experience and the ability to communicate well and motivate individuals is an important skill.

The financial realities of studying for a degree cannot be ignored. Engineering is one of the few University subjects where companies are actively looking to sponsor students throughout their degree programme. If sponsored, the company will normally give you money during the university terms, and this can help to make life a bit easier!. Most companies will also offer paid work experience during the long summer holidays, and this is a very useful way of experiencing the type of work opportunities engineering has to offer. Sponsorship also offers the chance of a job offer after you graduate.

Job prospects for graduates with a degree in electrical and electronic engineering have never been so exciting. The huge growth in areas such as telecommunications has resulted in a large demand for suitably qualified students. In the past, many students have not realised how many opportunities lie in engineering, and this had led to companies finding it extremely difficult to attract people with the skills and experience they require. In general, engineering offers very rewarding work, as well as the potential for personal development, world-wide travel and good pay.

An Electrical and Electronic Engineering degree opens the door on many possible careers. Whether you want to be a manager or a technical expert, a sales person or a computer programmer, most electronics companies will need and value your skills. If at the end of your degree you decide that your future does not lie in engineering, then your degree can still be used to apply for a wide range of alternative employment opportunities.

In conclusion, a good degree in Electrical and Electronic Engineering from a university with strong research in growth areas such as telecommunications, as well as strong links to the industry, is an excellent and flexible foundation for future success.

 I was recently in the Student Union at Boston University chatting with a couple of students about their majors and the school.  Most BU students seem to be nice, but these two were a bit snobby.  Bad seeds, I guess.  During the conversation, they mentioned that they were majoring “Nutrition”.  I raised my eyebrow at the time, but didn’t think too much about it.

It wasn’t until later that I realized what had struck me: Boston University is one of the most expensive schools in the country.  If you factor in room and board, it rings to the tune of $42,000 per year (2005/2006), or $170,000 total!  Boston is also an expensive city to live in, and many students take out substantially more in loans just to cover normal, nonacademic expenses.  Therefore, we can assume the total bill for four years to be in excess of $200,000.  Even if one pays cash, keep in mind that the cash growth rate is similar to the loan money if placed in an appropriate security.  A person taking out a loan owes a similar amount of money to the cash growth that’s been lost over time.

Now college students tend to be optimistic, which is a good thing, but occassionally there needs to be a dose of reality (aka ‘life’).

REALITY: Nutrionists earn somewhere between $35 and $53K per year.  Superficially, a student might think, “well, it will only take me 4 years to pay back that $200K loan as a nutritionist/dietitian”.  Unfortunately, there’s a few things he or she might be forgetting: Number 1 is taxes , which will walk away with about 25% of our nutritionists’ salaries almost right off the top.  The other things generally unaccounted for are:

2.  Living Costs (Food, housing, insurance, automotive). 
3.  Interest on the loan, in addition to the loan itself. 
4.  Job market and availability of employment.

Let’s continue to use our Nutritionists by assuming that our two friends have no problem finding a job, and immediately land an average salary of $39,000.  Let’s also suppose that they suddenly learn how to be frugal and keep costs down.  In Boston, their favorite city, they choose modest housing and utility expenses, which account for $1000 per month, or $12,000 per year (Boston housing can range anywhere from $1000-$3000/mo).  After Federal taxes for their tax bracket, our two nutritionists are left with only about $20K per year of profit.  “Yay!” they exclaim to each other, “We can pay off our $200,000 student loans in only 10 years!” Then they go out for dinner and subtract an extra $3K from their salary for food and other expenses.  Suppose they devote all 17K each year to paying off the loan — with interest (about 6.8%) it will take almost *25 YEARS* to pay off the loan.  The amount that the two nutritionists owe grows every year that it is not paid off, so that in 25 years, they pay almost $200,000 EXTRA just in interest. 

Lets be practical.  Nobody devotes 100% of their income and lives like a pauper to pay off a loan unless they owe it to the mafia or a loan shark.  When in possession of an extra $20K, most people find ways to spend it on marriage, a house, or other luxuries.

If you plan to major in Nutrition or some other mostly low-salary field, it may be reasonable to attend a small college or state school with a total cost of $40,000 (or if you have substantial scholarships), but certainly not one that costs $200,000.  You do not want the growth on the interest to exceed your salary.

It cannot possibly be stressed enough how important it is to choose a major with an aggregate earning power higher than the cost of tuition.  If you pay more for school than you can possibly earn, you are wasting money on some “play time” and you are saddling yourself and your family with a debt that will last for the rest of your lives.