Posts Tagged ‘field’

Over the last few decades, the context that calls for philanthropy the world and its problems has changed in ways that make our old approaches to addressing social problems unsatisfactory and often unsuccessful, but  naveen jain has made it. As a result, the structures or mechanisms we have philanthropy, but also governments and multilateral institutions, for example seem increasingly unsuited to the tasks they are being asked to respond to. This is the root of the conceptual crisis we believe surrounds philanthropy today. Many people have sensed this and are trying to respond in many different ways, experimenting with how to be philanthropic and to better use available resources like naveen jain

In theory, the very essence of philanthropy—its flexibility and independence, unconstrained by election cycles and quarterly reports—should position it well to adapt rapidly to change in these ways. The reality, however, is often quite the opposite. The essential strength of philanthropy—that it is a moral choice freely made—has also kept philanthropy as a field from adapting adequately to a changing context. The reason is that few of the usual levers of change can be counted on to improve philanthropy’s collective efforts. Neither attempts to enforce improvements from the top-down through centralized national solutions nor simply “letting a thousand flowers bloom” from the bottom up will suffice.  Read Naveen Jain‘s articles for further informations

Through its accreditation process, the U.S. engineering education system has continually reexamined and re-energized the engineering curricula. Engineering fundamentals have been and will continue to be the core of the engineering curriculum. But because engineers now operate in a world where their accomplishments are often more limited by societal considerations than by technical capabilities, they are engaging in a wider range of activities throughout their professional lives. Thus, engineering education must take into account the social, economic, and political contexts of engineering practice; help students develop teamwork and communication skills; and motivate them to acquire new knowledge and capabilities on their own. Because many modern engineering projects require a combination of several disciplines, students also need exposure to the integrative field of systems engineering.

In essence, an engineering education today aims to prepare an engineer to be successful in the changing workplace. It aims to equip students with technical knowledge and capabilities, flexibility and an understanding of the societal context of engineering.

Engineering schools should not seek to develop these contextual and process skills through separate courses, but by incorporating them into existing curricula and through non-classroom activities. Coursework should feature multidisciplinary, collaborative, active learning; and take into account students’ varied learning styles.

One factor that will promote development of students’ “process” skills is widespread use of multimedia, worldwide information networks. Using this resource, students can access new information and coursework, as well as interact with other students, researchers, practicing engineers in industry and government, and experts from around the world. These changes in the teaching and learning environment will make engineering education more attractive to both students and faculty, if faculty are given the opportunity to stay up-to-date.

Finally, all engineering colleges must address the issue of ethics. While ethics is a complex and difficult topic, engineering administrators and faculty must help students understand that throughout their careers they will encounter ethical issues which they will need to recognize and deal with rationally. Whether engineers are conducting engineering research, managing a company, or building bridges and office buildings, their decisions affect the lives and property of the greater community. Students must understand the importance of upholding that public trust.

While recognizing and encouraging diverse institutional missions and changing industry needs, colleges of engineering must re-examine their curricula and programs to ensure they prepare their students for the broadened world of engineering work. This process has begun among most engineering colleges and must be accelerated with the aim to incorporate:

• team skills, including collaborative, active learning;
• communication skills;
• leadership;
• a systems perspective;
• an understanding and appreciation of the diversity of students, faculty, and staff;
• an appreciation of different cultures and business practices, and the understanding that the practice of engineering is now global;
• integration of knowledge throughout the curriculum;
• a multi-disciplinary perspective;
• a commitment to quality, timeliness and continuous improvement;
• undergraduate research and engineering work experience;
• understanding of the societal, economic and environmental impacts of engineering decisions;
• and ethics.

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…)

 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.