Technologists vs. Engineers

[Exengineer]

I am seeing a growing trend where I am located. Companies are hiring technologists from two year programs in place of engineers from four year programs for many positions. They aren't doing it for cost savings so much because technologists pay has increased faster than engineers pay. Mechanical Engineering Technology seems to be a hot program, at least hotter than Mechanical Engineering. I think this is happening because companies want people who have more practical and useful skills, something universities are notorious for not providing. Back in 2007 William Wulf, President of the National Academy of Engineering, gave a talk on Engineering Education in the 21st Century. One of the things he said was "The practice of engineering has changed enormously from what it was 40 years ago, and engineering education hasn't changed very much at all." Not a ringing endorsement of engineering as a career choice is it? Recently I saw an ad for a Civil Engineering Technologist that offers the following: Compensation: $52,655 - $65,818 This is a regional government posting and they are looking for someone with at least a year experience. That's not bad pay for someone from a two year community college program. Many engineers with a year experience are getting about the middle pay in that range. People should no longer worship or exalt university engineering programs for being stupefying superior to all other four year degrees, because they are not. Now they aren't even superior to some two year diplomas. What is needed is harsh criticism of engineering departments that don't modernize, that use 35 year old equipment and textbooks that have barely been revised in that time span, that don't even attempt to teach anything practical or hands-on. I am sure there are many of them out there. There are some engineering degrees people have that are worse than none at all. :angry:

 

[cdcengineer]

I don't argue the bulk of your point, but I would argue that there is no such engineering degree that is worse than none at all. Any degree and education is better than none IMO.

 

[Slugger926]

Well, my manager (who may only have a GED) who got lucky with promotions can't tell the difference between a HS graduate, a 2 year engineering degree, and a ABET acredited degree. We keep losing work because he doesn't know the capabilities of his team, so we lose more people at layoff time.

More education is better, and the management chain that knows how to use the tallents of its team will gain more people and promotions over those who are clueless.

 

[picusld]

There are some engineering degrees people have that are worse than none at all. :angry:

What degrees would these be?

 

[MGX]

Technologist is a controversial term. There doesn't seem to be much concrete definition for it as far as I can see.

 

[Exengineer]

On the subject of some engineering degrees being worse than none at all, I know one you can pin that on:

Metallurgical Engineering

Many universities that had that program have either dropped it entirely or renamed it "Materials Science & Engineering" with less emphasis on the metallurgical part, which brings to mind bankrupt steel companies and deserted foundries littering the landscape. It is an obsolete degree in its old form and anyone still working who has it is at a disadvantage compared to other engineers.

 

[MA_PE]

On the subject of some engineering degrees being worse than none at all, I know one you can pin that on:
Metallurgical Engineering

Many universities that had that program have either dropped it entirely or renamed it "Materials Science & Engineering" with less emphasis on the metallurgical part, which brings to mind bankrupt steel companies and deserted foundries littering the landscape. It is an obsolete degree in its old form and anyone still working who has it is at a disadvantage compared to other engineers.

Try to convince people that do failure analysis, that this is a worthlees degree.

There may be worthlees programs but it depends on the application how "obsolete" it is. One should be careful not to generalize too much.

 

[picusld]

On the subject of some engineering degrees being worse than none at all, I know one you can pin that on:
Metallurgical Engineering

Many universities that had that program have either dropped it entirely or renamed it "Materials Science & Engineering" with less emphasis on the metallurgical part, which brings to mind bankrupt steel companies and deserted foundries littering the landscape. It is an obsolete degree in its old form and anyone still working who has it is at a disadvantage compared to other engineers.

So if a 22 y/o walked into an interview for any job with a BS in metallurgical engineering and his/her only competition was a 22 year old with only a HS diploma, you are representing that the one with HS diploma would get the job?

Seems unlikely to me.

 

[wilheldp_PE]

On the subject of some engineering degrees being worse than none at all, I know one you can pin that on:
Metallurgical Engineering

Many universities that had that program have either dropped it entirely or renamed it "Materials Science & Engineering" with less emphasis on the metallurgical part, which brings to mind bankrupt steel companies and deserted foundries littering the landscape. It is an obsolete degree in its old form and anyone still working who has it is at a disadvantage compared to other engineers.

Try to convince people that do failure analysis, that this is a worthlees degree.

There may be worthlees programs but it depends on the application how "obsolete" it is. One should be careful not to generalize too much.

You beat me to it. We use metallurgists all the time to see why parts may have failed. The only problem is that we don't have enough of that type of work to keep one on staff full time. They usually organize into firms that specialize in material analysis, and they can pretty much charge whatever they want. Very handy to have around though.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

Re: Exengineer

Specialized does not equal obsolete. Lack of training and knowledge about new technologies, processes, and products makes someone obsolete.

 

[Supe]

On the subject of some engineering degrees being worse than none at all, I know one you can pin that on:
Metallurgical Engineering

Many universities that had that program have either dropped it entirely or renamed it "Materials Science & Engineering" with less emphasis on the metallurgical part, which brings to mind bankrupt steel companies and deserted foundries littering the landscape. It is an obsolete degree in its old form and anyone still working who has it is at a disadvantage compared to other engineers.

Try to convince people that do failure analysis, that this is a worthlees degree.

There may be worthlees programs but it depends on the application how "obsolete" it is. One should be careful not to generalize too much.

Or try to convince any welding engineer that metallurgists are worthless. Metallurgists in large EPC/Construction companies basically name their price. Even more so on the chemical side of things. Inconels, monels, hastelloys, copper-nickel alloys, especially in lethal/corrosive service... metallurgists make/break the refinery/processing industry.

 

[Exengineer]

"Specialized does not equal obsolete. Lack of training and knowledge about new technologies, processes, and products makes someone obsolete."

Also working in an obsolete industry (steel making, foundries) makes one obsolete. All of that is being pushed into China and other countries. Not much of it is left in North America.

 

[momech]

The notion that metallurgical engineers work only, or even primarily, in steel mills is false.

 

[picusld]

The notion that metallurgical engineers work only, or even primarily, in steel mills is false.

To add to the above, The notion that any degreed student can only work in their field of study in college is false. Also, the notion that a degree on its own doesn't set you apart from someone with a HS diploma is false.

 

[Exengineer]

The notion that metallurgical engineers work only, or even primarily, in steel mills is false.

To add to the above, The notion that any degreed student can only work in their field of study in college is false. Also, the notion that a degree on its own doesn't set you apart from someone with a HS diploma is false.

Very true, most metallurgists do not work in steel mills, certainly not in this era, although they probably did at one time. The notion that someone with a degree (assuming in an engineering field) can work outside their field of study in college is now almost the norm, most engineers end up working way off the subject matter they majored in. I know few chemical engineers who work in any position remotely involved in chemical engineering. Arguably, some degrees are no better off than a HS diploma. Any construction contractor would probably take a high school grad over someone with a BA in business or economics if hiring for grunt labor for example. The HS grad would be less likely to get bored or distracted by other opportunities. Also, it appears that nowadays a BA or BS in any field has about the same value as a high school diploma did 40 years ago. The reason is sheer numbers. There has been an explosion in the number of degree holders of all types in that period, and as most people know, the value of anything goes down when the quantity of it goes way up without a corresponding increase in demand.

 

[MGX]

So was the original post in regards to engineering technology degrees vs. engineering degrees? Personally I've met BSET people who are excellent and some with traditional engineering degrees that are clueless.

Or was the post about the public and their equating the two?

EDIT: Nevermind, you're refering to those with associates degrees being hired as engineers. In that case there is quite a difference between the two and I have to agree.

 

[momech]

Any construction contractor would probably take a high school grad over someone with a BA in business or economics if hiring for grunt labor for example.

Well, no kidding! Your original Technologists vs. Engineers said nothing about grunt labor. If I was hiring a ditch digger, I wouldn't bother hiring someone with an MBA. :true:

 

[MGX]

So what does a technologist do?

 

[wilheldp_PE]

So what does a technologist do?

Technologizes.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

So what does a technologist do?

Leverage synergies to maximize outcomes.