10 ms·

50% of US engineering students drop out - Why?

54 points by wumi 18y ago

Alex3917 18y ago
Incidentally, the National Science Foundation and the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics describe the Obama's education plan as abysmally bad. Specifically the NSF and NCTM are very much against the AP curriculum, which Obama wants to expand by 50% over the next few years. I think the exact quote is that AP science/math courses represent "the worst kind of pedagogy" or something like that.
- wtrk 18y ago
  The NSF and NCTM are anti-AP? I googled and didn't turn up anything on this, but it's altogether possible that I didn't search on the right terms. Do you have any links?
- donw 18y ago
  Could you provide some links? I googled a bit for some information, and didn't find much, and I'd like to read about this in more detail. It seems odd that either organization would be anti-AP, and Obama's proposed policies would provide more benefits to mathematicians and scientists who decided to teach in high schools...
  - Alex3917 18y ago
    I'll look it up in a couple hours when I go to the library. Basically my claim comes from Alfie Kohn's book The Schools Our Children Deserve, but I'll try to find the footnote with the primary source document.
    - Alex3917 18y ago
      http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10129 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10129 The report was issued by the NRC, not the NSF, but the NSF apparently agrees because they paying for an overhaul of the AP curriculum based on the report. Also, if you do a Google search for: NSF criticism of AP curriculum You see an overview of this as the second result. Also, I couldn't find this in that Alfie Kohn book, so I must have stumbled upon it in something I read around the same time.
      - bcostlow 18y ago
        A direct quote from that result: "The AP and IB courses, while including some of the best education in the subject currently available at the secondary level, tend in general to be out of date, too broad, and too inflexible in their curricula." So the argument the NRC is making is that the AP curriculum needs to be improved, but is currently some of the best available. In addition, the curriculum is being overhauled. So what exactly is the problem with advocating increasing AB and IBO students when, even though there are problems, it's currently some of the best education available, and an overhaul to bring it in line with the NRC/NSF recommendations is underway?
        Alex3917 18y ago
        So what exactly is the problem with advocating increasing AB and IBO students when, even though there are problems, it's currently some of the best education available, and an overhaul to bring it in line with the NRC/NSF recommendations is underway? First, "including some of the best education currently available" != "currently some of the best education available." What the report is actually saying is that a few components of the curriculum are good, but the courses overall suck. If you read the rest of the executive summary, it absolutely shits on the AP. This might be couched in academic language, but make no mistake about what they're saying. Now obviously if the courses are made to be completely different then advocating them might not be a bad thing. But right now all that's happened is the NSF has given the college board a small amount of money to reform the curriculum, a process which just started this summer. Right now we have no idea if any changes were actually made, and if so what those changes are and whether or not they are really inline with the NRC & NCTM standards. Anyway, all we know is that right now the president elect is advocating a curriculum that has kids going through the motions of science and math without actually learning the principles of either subject, and without learning what it means to think like a scientist or a mathematician. And these are just the science and math courses. There is every reason to think the other AP courses, the majority which are not being overhauled, are just as bad if not worse. Further, even if the science and math courses are overhauled, there are still lots of problems with them. For example, the assessments are inauthentic and norm referenced, and there is no reason to think this is going to change.
- kalvin 18y ago
  I call bullshit-- 1) Not a single source that can be googled. 2) The NSF gave the College Board 1.8 million two years ago to fund AP science courses: http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/51572.html http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/51572.html 3) It's highly unlikely that either organization, which have broader educational concerns than AP curriculum, would ever release a statement condemning either political candidate.
  - Alex3917 18y ago
    1) Read books. 2) The source you linked to supports my claim, if you actually read it. 3) They didn't release a statement condemning Obama, but they've been criticizing the AP curriculum since the 90s. (And Obama's plan is to increase the number of students taking the AP.) I'm sure they'd never actually criticize Obama himself, at least not yet, since they will depend on him for lots of other stuff.
timr 18y ago
Because it's far easier for a smart person to get a business degree that pays just as well, if not better? Because a degree in engineering is a fast-track to career marginalization by the frat-boy MBAs who see technical workers as interchangeable cogs? Because engineering virtually guarantees you a minimum of social interaction in college, when your peers are actually enjoying their lives? Because you'll run smack into the wall of age (and possibly sex) discrimination, right when you should be entering your prime earning years? Because you've got to eternally compete in the job market with 20-year-olds who will always be more proficient with new technologies, and willing to work at lower wages? Let's be real: as a career, engineering sucks. We shouldn't scratch our heads and act totally shocked when young people turn their noses up at the prospect of working like a dog until they turn 40, only to be laid off by the guys who played frisbee golf and drank their way through school.
- carterschonwald 18y ago
  this also means that if you're going into it, you have to really like it (in addition to being relatively intelligent), which is why the article talks about the "surprising" statistic that mit et al have very high retention rates (though I think caltech is a counterexample)
  - jhancock 18y ago
    There are many aspects to consider in the differences in drop-out rates. One is that not all engineering programs are the same. MIT's education is very different than RPI's or Georgia Tech's (I'm went to GT). The RPI or GT style is more like 5 years of boot camp (yes, its really a 5 years program, another problem to consider when comparing against a management degree). Its a non-stop grind of 6 classes at a time with tests every week. MIT's is fewer classes with higher student:teacher ratio. The MIT program is structured to guide students to the finish line. The GT or RPI approach is very clear that they are trying to cull students. I don't think either approach is wrong. They are just different. Do they produce different types of engineers? maybe. There are many other aspects to consider as well.
    - 18y ago
lhorn 18y ago
That's because our system somehow rewards real estate speculators, mortgage brokers, middle management, lawyers and healthcare professionals way more than it rewards engineers. I don't really know why this is happening, but I am sure you all have met a few MBA types who have "the vision" and looking for "just" a code monkey to build their fortune. This is also the reason why GE/Ford/Chrysler continued building shit for decades, giving out multi-million dollar bonuses to their top-tier management. Someone suggested it's because we live in a "services economy" not a "product economy" and, therefore, the value of engineering is declining. There is some truth in that: google isn't an engineering firm, they are in the entertainment business, very much like ESPN, Fox and those annoying guys in big hats at your local Tres Amigos.
- kalvin 18y ago
  That's funny, it's a routine complaint at Stanford that all the campus job fairs are filled with companies recruiting engineers and nobody else. :p Our system also rewards engineers way more than teachers, graduates who go into public service, and-- at graduation time, at least-- anyone with a humanities degree. I'd worry about fixing compensation for teachers before rewarding engineers... Google is an engineering firm, they just happen to make money from ads.
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
  - yummyfajitas 18y ago
    Compensation for teachers is fantastic, as long as you compare it properly to compensation for other workers. To begin with, multiply by (12 months worked by others)/(9 months worked by teachers). Then add in the value of the state health plan, usually fantastic. Then add in the real value of a defined benefit pension plan (chances are you only get a defined contribution plan) available in most states. Then add in the value of tenure, which I'll tentatively estimate as effectively doubling the salary (1). All that is actually pretty good for a group of people who tend to come from the bottom of the barrel cognitively (http://www.ncsu.edu/chass/philo/GRE%20Scores%20by%20Intended%20Graduate%20Major.htm http://www.ncsu.edu/chass/philo/GRE%20Scores%20by%20Intended...). The idea that teachers are underpaid is a myth propagated by teachers unions and their lackeys in the media. (1) Many tenured professors could easily double their salary by quitting, but choose not to.
rsheridan6 18y ago
Any recent engineering grads here who can tell us if there really is a shortage? If you guys are getting multiple job offers with hiring bonuses, there is. If not, there isn't.
- elecengin 18y ago
  As class of 2005 grad (who incidentally goes to Olin), I have multiple offers w/ signing bonuses. Whether this is a sign of a shortage, I am not sure.
  - pchristensen 18y ago
    It's a sign of a shortage of graduates that companies trust to be of a certain caliber. Either you have done something to distinguish yourself, or Olin has developed a track record that companies trust, or both.
mechanical_fish 18y ago
I agree that there are probably a lot of improvements to be made in undergraduate engineering education. However... I think it's a big mistake to assume that every engineering dropout represents a failure of the college, or even a failure of the student. Maybe it's simply a question of incoming students not having the slightest idea what an engineering degree is all about. I seem to remember a lot of people who signed up for engineering before they discovered that you need to learn a lot of fairly difficult math and physics to be an engineer, after which they switched to something else. That's why the dropout rate is so much smaller at MIT and other elite engineering schools: The students are preselected for their affinity for math and/or physics. For example, I can't help but notice that Olin's "redefinition of engineering education" includes this bullet point: Applicants are required to spend a weekend at Olin before acceptance. During the weekend they participate in team engineering projects to assess their teamwork and technical skill. Note: "Assess their technical skill." Now, I'm not saying that Olin's not a great school, but if you get to hand-pick the students, and then you give them a 100% scholarship, having a low dropout rate isn't much of an achievement. I assume with confidence that the vast majority of calculus-phobic people get weeded out before they ever get to Olin. At least, I hope so, because otherwise this practice would be cruel and unusual punishment: Other engineering schools require students to take foundational courses in physics, thermo-dynamics, chemistry, and math for the first two years. Olin introduces these disciplines as needed throughout the 4 years. If there's anything worse than hitting the wall in year one, it's being encouraged to go through a year or two in the major before you hit the wall.
liuliu 18y ago
Well, I nearly drop out recent two years. It is unbearable in university to see so many students who are 4th year and don't have basic skills in programming (i.e. comparing two double variables in C with == operator). As playing a while with profs, I am so confident that I have all the skills and knowledges I should know in the next 3 years. It is just had to stick on CS major when you had them all. The only reason I still here is that I am so desperately wanting to publish a good paper in next year.
- bluelu 18y ago
  That's a language issue and not a people issue. C also allows you to assign variable in if clauses, which can cause hard to find errors.
  - liuliu 18y ago
    It is not a language issue. In some perspectives, you may say that it is a processor issue of handling float. But this is the fact of every nowadays processor. Languages don't have the responsibility to deal with processor's fault, people do.
ojbyrne 18y ago
I was hoping that Don Dodge would actually have some kind of technical background (because mixed technical/business backgrounds are in my opinion the best). Nope - accounting undergrad/MBA. Preach to someone else.
fallentimes 18y ago
Because I would have gotten C's & D's in Engineering school working my ass off. Because in business school I graduated with great grades, didn't do anything, and landed a pretty awesome job. Undergraduate business school was somewhat worthless, but all the free time allowed me to learn how to start my own business and campus job hop like a mofo.
mattmaroon 18y ago
It's not useful to compare raw numbers against India and China since their population is larger than ours. Also, what % of total college students drop out? It's got to be near 50 (though maybe less for declared majors).
- nradov 18y ago
  Furthermore, it's stupid to compare numbers of technical graduates. It's not the numbers that count but the quality. Has there been any academic research on the average quality of technical graduates in the USA versus India and China? I don't mean just memorization of facts and formulas, but ability to creatively solve real-world problems. Perhaps that's impossible to objectively measure.
  - pchristensen 18y ago
    "It's not the numbers that count but the quality." For the short term economy (1-5 yrs), the quantity counts much more than quality. If Bank of America needs to hire 500 interchangeable Java programmers, they probably can't use or manage 10 excellent programmers instead. But for the longer term, a couple Sergeys and Zuckerbergs (or for that matter, Grahams and Morrises) are much more valuable.
siong1987 18y ago
"At the recent Web 2.0 conference John suggested that the US should staple a Green Card to every foreign student's engineering diploma and encourage them to stay in the USA." I really agree this. It's hard for a foreigner to work here.
- queensnake 18y ago
  Not hard enough.
- lliiffee 18y ago
  It isn't really an unmitigated good, though. By increasing the incentive for a foreigner to get a US engineering degree, it would increase the competition for those slots, and result in fewer US students getting degrees. Of course, if the foreign degree holders stay in the US, that might be OK, but things must be thought through carefully. For example, presumably at least some people not interested in engineering, but interested in a green card would get degrees. Mixing up incentives is a dangerous business. I would prefer a more mundane approach, like increasing the number of H1B visas.
  - potatolicious 18y ago
    Keep in mind that all schools have a foreign student quota - i.e. slots that will either be filled by foreign students or not filled at all. Foreigners do not compete with domestic students for college enrollment at all. I would prefer an approach that is more realistic and honest about the state of immigration - the H1B is organized as a work visa, not an immigration visa. What the US needs to do is establish means for direct immigration for qualified, professional people. The problem with H1Bs all stem from the fact that, if the recipient desires permanent residency, he/she is essentially a slave to the sponsor company for 5+ years. This encourages abuse both in employee treatment and in wages - which affects everyone. If highly qualified people can simply immigrate to the US and find jobs, without signing themselves into virtual slavery, we would all benefit.
    - lliiffee 18y ago
debt 18y ago
Because engineering is difficult.
- elecengin 18y ago
  I don't agree that difficulty is the reason for high dropout rates. Olin has long been lauded for it's almost zero dropout rate, but I will not use that to make my point since we have a very small sample size (300 people) and we are relatively selective, and therefore not representative of the average US engineering student. Instead, lets look at ASU in this study: http://www.foundationcoalition.org/publications/journalpapers/asee97/3553.pdf http://www.foundationcoalition.org/publications/journalpaper... The study found that the top 5 reasons (as summarized on page 3) are: 1) reasons for choice of SME [Science, Math, Engineering] proved inappropriate 2) poor teaching by SME faculty 3) inadequate advising or help with academic problems 4) non-SME major offers better education/more interest 5) lack/loss of interest in SME ("turned off science") Reasons 2, 3, 4 and 5 are directly related to failures of the institution. Sure, there are students who cannot comprehend the coursework, but those are few and far between compared to the numbers who simply do not receive the support necessary for them to succeed. This study, along with many others, points to a common trend: we blame the student for being incompetent or unmotivated, instead of blaming the institution for not providing them the necessary help (that they are paying tens of thousands for).
  - yummyfajitas 18y ago
    Reasons (4) and (5) are not necessarily a failure of the institution. If a student likes dinosaur bones more than ODEs after being exposed to both, how is that a failure at all? Students may have an incorrect idea of either science or their personal preferences, and college may correct these views. That's a good thing. Another fact to note: I don't see "I'm not smart/hardworking enough to be an engineer" as even an option. It would be interesting to know what fraction of students flunked out or were barely able to avoid this fate. Plus, I'm highly suspicious of the quality of this study. The authors appear to be morons: ...only the difference on the seventh ranked reason... was statistically significant (p=.019). ... However, another [statistically insignificant] difference worth noting is...
ynomad 18y ago
Because Don Dodge wears a toupee. Oops wrong article.
gamble 18y ago
If I recall correctly, something like 20-30% of undergraduates drop out during the course of their degree. Engineering is generally the most difficult program, so you'd expect that the dropout rates would be higher. I suspect there's also a number of transfers to less demanding programs baked in there. Why should we want to minimize drop-out rates anyway? It doesn't necessarily indicate there's a problem with the curriculum - engineering should be a tough program. The only way you could minimize drop-outs would be to prevent all but the strongest students from entering in the first place. I think it's telling that the highly-selective schools have very low drop-out rates. Is MIT's methodology all that different from less selective universities? I doubt it.
bokonist 18y ago
A 50% dropout rate may be a sign of health - it means the courses haven't been watered down. I'd be far more worried about a 95% graduation rate. States universities are less selective with general admission, so the engineering departments have to screen out the students who aren't up to the challenge. MIT pre-screens everyone so it's not fair to compare it to state schools.
- Brushfire 18y ago
  I think the other problem here is that we have no information available about other programs. Isn't it just as likely that people drop out of all or many programs at relatively the same rate? Psychology, Pre-Med, Law, Business, Journalism, Poli Sci, etc. These are undergraduates, after all.
nradov 18y ago
The Olin program looks pretty similar to what Harvey Mudd College has been doing for decades.
- elecengin 18y ago
  You are right - there are many similarities. In fact, our Dean of Faculty came from Harvey Mudd. I think that Olin has a bit more freedom to innovate, though, given it's young age (fourth graduating class this year). There is a joke around campus that no class has ever been the same for two years - in almost every case, there are significant overhauls that result from student feedback. While this makes things tumultuous (and of course there is no guarantee that change is good), it is clear that the profs are not willing to settle on something that is just "good" or "acceptable". Did you get this feeling at HMC? I can't really make a more detailed comparison without more information about what aspects of Harvey Mudd you find similar.
nazgulnarsil 18y ago
I thought it was common knowledge that the only 2 useful B.S. degrees are C.S. (and related) and Finance (and related).
- fallentimes 18y ago
  Accounting is more useful than finance. /did both
  - nazgulnarsil 18y ago
    I slot accounting under finance. but yes. the reason those two B.S.s are useful is that there is ALWAYS work for book keepers and coders. any city, any time. Might not always be good work, but you'll always be in demand.
    - fallentimes 18y ago
      Unfortunately you can graduate with a degree in finance and not know shit about accounting.
    - LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
      I'm a programmer writing accounting software... not always exciting work but there's no shortage of work to be done.
      - nazgulnarsil 18y ago
        handling software for accountants is probably the holy grail of "can't be fired".
- rsheridan6 18y ago
  Biology is good if your grades are good enough to get into a professional program. Not so much otherwise.
  - emmett 18y ago
guruz 18y ago
I am not sure about the exact numbers, but i suspect it is the same in Germany where I have been studying. (at least in Stuttgart / Germany)
geebee 18y ago
Look like I'm showing up late to this discussion. I'll just comment on the "stapling a green card to every engineering degree awarded to a foreign national idea." I have no doubt this would increase the incentives for foreigners to study engineering in the US, but if we only do this in engineering and not in medicine, law, business, art, humanities, etc... well then wouldn't we create an incentive for US citizens to avoid engineering degrees and instead go into areas that are insulated from foreign competition? It seems that this has already happened to some extent. If one of our goals as a nation is to increase the interest of our young people in science and engineering, we should at least consider the effect a program like this on their career choices, shouldn't we? I'm not saying there's no room for debate on this subject, but I'm eternally amazed that pundits almost never consider this possibility when making this recommendation. (BTW, in "the world is flat", Friedman suggested doing this for all doctoral degrees, not just engineering...)
rbanffy 18y ago
The article fails to acknowledge that MIT and Olin have 2% drop-out rates because they are f*ng hard to get in in the first place. The drop-out rate is directly proportional on how easy it is to enroll in a hard program. The school I graduated from, FEI (in Brazil), has a very high drop-out rate in the first semester - about 50% on my freshman year, mostly due to calculus and physics. It's also regarded as a top private school in its field. So, that's why those teachers are not being fired - because students pay for their first semester whether or not they stick around for the second one.
bobochan 18y ago
My theory is that a high percentage are forced out because there are incentives for doing so. Undergraduate programs are ranked based on the percentage of graduates they place in competitive graduate programs and top employers. Getting weaker students to change majors lowers the denominator. Engineering and science faculties, in general, want to produce stars and have little interest in helping students along that find the material interesting but challenging.
bluelu 18y ago
If my university only had a 5% drop out rate, I would have studied at the wrong university. If everybody get's a degree, everybody is equal and your degree is worthless.
redrobot5050 18y ago
I know the wash-out rate at my school -- just during the "freshmen engineering" program was 50%. The next year, the wash out rate was 25%. They don't want airline safety / nuclear reactor controls / bridges devices made by D students. And the best way to ensure that's going to happen is make the person really really really want to call himself an engineer. Its far easier to be a a liberal arts major and convince two girls to follow you back to your place.
Dilpil 18y ago
Two words: Linear algebra. Or if you wish, Differential Equations.

54 points by wumi 18y ago

Incidentally, the National Science Foundation and the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics describe the Obama's education plan as abysmally bad. Specifically the NSF and NCTM are very much against the AP curriculum, which Obama wants to expand by 50% over the next few years. I think the exact quote is that AP science/math courses represent "the worst kind of pedagogy" or something like that.

wtrk 18y ago
The NSF and NCTM are anti-AP? I googled and didn't turn up anything on this, but it's altogether possible that I didn't search on the right terms. Do you have any links?
donw 18y ago
Could you provide some links? I googled a bit for some information, and didn't find much, and I'd like to read about this in more detail. It seems odd that either organization would be anti-AP, and Obama's proposed policies would provide more benefits to mathematicians and scientists who decided to teach in high schools...
- Alex3917 18y ago
  I'll look it up in a couple hours when I go to the library. Basically my claim comes from Alfie Kohn's book The Schools Our Children Deserve, but I'll try to find the footnote with the primary source document.
  - Alex3917 18y ago
    http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10129 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10129 The report was issued by the NRC, not the NSF, but the NSF apparently agrees because they paying for an overhaul of the AP curriculum based on the report. Also, if you do a Google search for: NSF criticism of AP curriculum You see an overview of this as the second result. Also, I couldn't find this in that Alfie Kohn book, so I must have stumbled upon it in something I read around the same time.
    - bcostlow 18y ago
      A direct quote from that result: "The AP and IB courses, while including some of the best education in the subject currently available at the secondary level, tend in general to be out of date, too broad, and too inflexible in their curricula." So the argument the NRC is making is that the AP curriculum needs to be improved, but is currently some of the best available. In addition, the curriculum is being overhauled. So what exactly is the problem with advocating increasing AB and IBO students when, even though there are problems, it's currently some of the best education available, and an overhaul to bring it in line with the NRC/NSF recommendations is underway?
      - Alex3917 18y ago
        So what exactly is the problem with advocating increasing AB and IBO students when, even though there are problems, it's currently some of the best education available, and an overhaul to bring it in line with the NRC/NSF recommendations is underway? First, "including some of the best education currently available" != "currently some of the best education available." What the report is actually saying is that a few components of the curriculum are good, but the courses overall suck. If you read the rest of the executive summary, it absolutely shits on the AP. This might be couched in academic language, but make no mistake about what they're saying. Now obviously if the courses are made to be completely different then advocating them might not be a bad thing. But right now all that's happened is the NSF has given the college board a small amount of money to reform the curriculum, a process which just started this summer. Right now we have no idea if any changes were actually made, and if so what those changes are and whether or not they are really inline with the NRC & NCTM standards. Anyway, all we know is that right now the president elect is advocating a curriculum that has kids going through the motions of science and math without actually learning the principles of either subject, and without learning what it means to think like a scientist or a mathematician. And these are just the science and math courses. There is every reason to think the other AP courses, the majority which are not being overhauled, are just as bad if not worse. Further, even if the science and math courses are overhauled, there are still lots of problems with them. For example, the assessments are inauthentic and norm referenced, and there is no reason to think this is going to change.
kalvin 18y ago
I call bullshit-- 1) Not a single source that can be googled. 2) The NSF gave the College Board 1.8 million two years ago to fund AP science courses: http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/51572.html http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/51572.html 3) It's highly unlikely that either organization, which have broader educational concerns than AP curriculum, would ever release a statement condemning either political candidate.
- Alex3917 18y ago
  1) Read books. 2) The source you linked to supports my claim, if you actually read it. 3) They didn't release a statement condemning Obama, but they've been criticizing the AP curriculum since the 90s. (And Obama's plan is to increase the number of students taking the AP.) I'm sure they'd never actually criticize Obama himself, at least not yet, since they will depend on him for lots of other stuff.

timr 18y ago

Because it's far easier for a smart person to get a business degree that pays just as well, if not better? Because a degree in engineering is a fast-track to career marginalization by the frat-boy MBAs who see technical workers as interchangeable cogs? Because engineering virtually guarantees you a minimum of social interaction in college, when your peers are actually enjoying their lives? Because you'll run smack into the wall of age (and possibly sex) discrimination, right when you should be entering your prime earning years? Because you've got to eternally compete in the job market with 20-year-olds who will always be more proficient with new technologies, and willing to work at lower wages? Let's be real: as a career, engineering sucks. We shouldn't scratch our heads and act totally shocked when young people turn their noses up at the prospect of working like a dog until they turn 40, only to be laid off by the guys who played frisbee golf and drank their way through school.

carterschonwald 18y ago
this also means that if you're going into it, you have to really like it (in addition to being relatively intelligent), which is why the article talks about the "surprising" statistic that mit et al have very high retention rates (though I think caltech is a counterexample)
- jhancock 18y ago
  There are many aspects to consider in the differences in drop-out rates. One is that not all engineering programs are the same. MIT's education is very different than RPI's or Georgia Tech's (I'm went to GT). The RPI or GT style is more like 5 years of boot camp (yes, its really a 5 years program, another problem to consider when comparing against a management degree). Its a non-stop grind of 6 classes at a time with tests every week. MIT's is fewer classes with higher student:teacher ratio. The MIT program is structured to guide students to the finish line. The GT or RPI approach is very clear that they are trying to cull students. I don't think either approach is wrong. They are just different. Do they produce different types of engineers? maybe. There are many other aspects to consider as well.
  - 18y ago

lhorn 18y ago

That's because our system somehow rewards real estate speculators, mortgage brokers, middle management, lawyers and healthcare professionals way more than it rewards engineers. I don't really know why this is happening, but I am sure you all have met a few MBA types who have "the vision" and looking for "just" a code monkey to build their fortune. This is also the reason why GE/Ford/Chrysler continued building shit for decades, giving out multi-million dollar bonuses to their top-tier management. Someone suggested it's because we live in a "services economy" not a "product economy" and, therefore, the value of engineering is declining. There is some truth in that: google isn't an engineering firm, they are in the entertainment business, very much like ESPN, Fox and those annoying guys in big hats at your local Tres Amigos.

kalvin 18y ago
That's funny, it's a routine complaint at Stanford that all the campus job fairs are filled with companies recruiting engineers and nobody else. :p Our system also rewards engineers way more than teachers, graduates who go into public service, and-- at graduation time, at least-- anyone with a humanities degree. I'd worry about fixing compensation for teachers before rewarding engineers... Google is an engineering firm, they just happen to make money from ads.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
- yummyfajitas 18y ago
  Compensation for teachers is fantastic, as long as you compare it properly to compensation for other workers. To begin with, multiply by (12 months worked by others)/(9 months worked by teachers). Then add in the value of the state health plan, usually fantastic. Then add in the real value of a defined benefit pension plan (chances are you only get a defined contribution plan) available in most states. Then add in the value of tenure, which I'll tentatively estimate as effectively doubling the salary (1). All that is actually pretty good for a group of people who tend to come from the bottom of the barrel cognitively (http://www.ncsu.edu/chass/philo/GRE%20Scores%20by%20Intended%20Graduate%20Major.htm http://www.ncsu.edu/chass/philo/GRE%20Scores%20by%20Intended...). The idea that teachers are underpaid is a myth propagated by teachers unions and their lackeys in the media. (1) Many tenured professors could easily double their salary by quitting, but choose not to.

rsheridan6 18y ago

Any recent engineering grads here who can tell us if there really is a shortage? If you guys are getting multiple job offers with hiring bonuses, there is. If not, there isn't.

elecengin 18y ago
As class of 2005 grad (who incidentally goes to Olin), I have multiple offers w/ signing bonuses. Whether this is a sign of a shortage, I am not sure.
- pchristensen 18y ago
  It's a sign of a shortage of graduates that companies trust to be of a certain caliber. Either you have done something to distinguish yourself, or Olin has developed a track record that companies trust, or both.

mechanical_fish 18y ago

I agree that there are probably a lot of improvements to be made in undergraduate engineering education. However... I think it's a big mistake to assume that every engineering dropout represents a failure of the college, or even a failure of the student. Maybe it's simply a question of incoming students not having the slightest idea what an engineering degree is all about. I seem to remember a lot of people who signed up for engineering before they discovered that you need to learn a lot of fairly difficult math and physics to be an engineer, after which they switched to something else. That's why the dropout rate is so much smaller at MIT and other elite engineering schools: The students are preselected for their affinity for math and/or physics. For example, I can't help but notice that Olin's "redefinition of engineering education" includes this bullet point: Applicants are required to spend a weekend at Olin before acceptance. During the weekend they participate in team engineering projects to assess their teamwork and technical skill. Note: "Assess their technical skill." Now, I'm not saying that Olin's not a great school, but if you get to hand-pick the students, and then you give them a 100% scholarship, having a low dropout rate isn't much of an achievement. I assume with confidence that the vast majority of calculus-phobic people get weeded out before they ever get to Olin. At least, I hope so, because otherwise this practice would be cruel and unusual punishment: Other engineering schools require students to take foundational courses in physics, thermo-dynamics, chemistry, and math for the first two years. Olin introduces these disciplines as needed throughout the 4 years. If there's anything worse than hitting the wall in year one, it's being encouraged to go through a year or two in the major before you hit the wall.

liuliu 18y ago

Well, I nearly drop out recent two years. It is unbearable in university to see so many students who are 4th year and don't have basic skills in programming (i.e. comparing two double variables in C with == operator). As playing a while with profs, I am so confident that I have all the skills and knowledges I should know in the next 3 years. It is just had to stick on CS major when you had them all. The only reason I still here is that I am so desperately wanting to publish a good paper in next year.

bluelu 18y ago
That's a language issue and not a people issue. C also allows you to assign variable in if clauses, which can cause hard to find errors.
- liuliu 18y ago
  It is not a language issue. In some perspectives, you may say that it is a processor issue of handling float. But this is the fact of every nowadays processor. Languages don't have the responsibility to deal with processor's fault, people do.

ojbyrne 18y ago

I was hoping that Don Dodge would actually have some kind of technical background (because mixed technical/business backgrounds are in my opinion the best). Nope - accounting undergrad/MBA. Preach to someone else.

fallentimes 18y ago

Because I would have gotten C's & D's in Engineering school working my ass off. Because in business school I graduated with great grades, didn't do anything, and landed a pretty awesome job. Undergraduate business school was somewhat worthless, but all the free time allowed me to learn how to start my own business and campus job hop like a mofo.

mattmaroon 18y ago

It's not useful to compare raw numbers against India and China since their population is larger than ours. Also, what % of total college students drop out? It's got to be near 50 (though maybe less for declared majors).

nradov 18y ago
Furthermore, it's stupid to compare numbers of technical graduates. It's not the numbers that count but the quality. Has there been any academic research on the average quality of technical graduates in the USA versus India and China? I don't mean just memorization of facts and formulas, but ability to creatively solve real-world problems. Perhaps that's impossible to objectively measure.
- pchristensen 18y ago
  "It's not the numbers that count but the quality." For the short term economy (1-5 yrs), the quantity counts much more than quality. If Bank of America needs to hire 500 interchangeable Java programmers, they probably can't use or manage 10 excellent programmers instead. But for the longer term, a couple Sergeys and Zuckerbergs (or for that matter, Grahams and Morrises) are much more valuable.

siong1987 18y ago

"At the recent Web 2.0 conference John suggested that the US should staple a Green Card to every foreign student's engineering diploma and encourage them to stay in the USA." I really agree this. It's hard for a foreigner to work here.

queensnake 18y ago
Not hard enough.
lliiffee 18y ago
It isn't really an unmitigated good, though. By increasing the incentive for a foreigner to get a US engineering degree, it would increase the competition for those slots, and result in fewer US students getting degrees. Of course, if the foreign degree holders stay in the US, that might be OK, but things must be thought through carefully. For example, presumably at least some people not interested in engineering, but interested in a green card would get degrees. Mixing up incentives is a dangerous business. I would prefer a more mundane approach, like increasing the number of H1B visas.
- potatolicious 18y ago
  Keep in mind that all schools have a foreign student quota - i.e. slots that will either be filled by foreign students or not filled at all. Foreigners do not compete with domestic students for college enrollment at all. I would prefer an approach that is more realistic and honest about the state of immigration - the H1B is organized as a work visa, not an immigration visa. What the US needs to do is establish means for direct immigration for qualified, professional people. The problem with H1Bs all stem from the fact that, if the recipient desires permanent residency, he/she is essentially a slave to the sponsor company for 5+ years. This encourages abuse both in employee treatment and in wages - which affects everyone. If highly qualified people can simply immigrate to the US and find jobs, without signing themselves into virtual slavery, we would all benefit.
  - lliiffee 18y ago

debt 18y ago

Because engineering is difficult.

elecengin 18y ago
I don't agree that difficulty is the reason for high dropout rates. Olin has long been lauded for it's almost zero dropout rate, but I will not use that to make my point since we have a very small sample size (300 people) and we are relatively selective, and therefore not representative of the average US engineering student. Instead, lets look at ASU in this study: http://www.foundationcoalition.org/publications/journalpapers/asee97/3553.pdf http://www.foundationcoalition.org/publications/journalpaper... The study found that the top 5 reasons (as summarized on page 3) are: 1) reasons for choice of SME [Science, Math, Engineering] proved inappropriate 2) poor teaching by SME faculty 3) inadequate advising or help with academic problems 4) non-SME major offers better education/more interest 5) lack/loss of interest in SME ("turned off science") Reasons 2, 3, 4 and 5 are directly related to failures of the institution. Sure, there are students who cannot comprehend the coursework, but those are few and far between compared to the numbers who simply do not receive the support necessary for them to succeed. This study, along with many others, points to a common trend: we blame the student for being incompetent or unmotivated, instead of blaming the institution for not providing them the necessary help (that they are paying tens of thousands for).
- yummyfajitas 18y ago
  Reasons (4) and (5) are not necessarily a failure of the institution. If a student likes dinosaur bones more than ODEs after being exposed to both, how is that a failure at all? Students may have an incorrect idea of either science or their personal preferences, and college may correct these views. That's a good thing. Another fact to note: I don't see "I'm not smart/hardworking enough to be an engineer" as even an option. It would be interesting to know what fraction of students flunked out or were barely able to avoid this fate. Plus, I'm highly suspicious of the quality of this study. The authors appear to be morons: ...only the difference on the seventh ranked reason... was statistically significant (p=.019). ... However, another [statistically insignificant] difference worth noting is...

ynomad 18y ago

Because Don Dodge wears a toupee. Oops wrong article.

gamble 18y ago

If I recall correctly, something like 20-30% of undergraduates drop out during the course of their degree. Engineering is generally the most difficult program, so you'd expect that the dropout rates would be higher. I suspect there's also a number of transfers to less demanding programs baked in there. Why should we want to minimize drop-out rates anyway? It doesn't necessarily indicate there's a problem with the curriculum - engineering should be a tough program. The only way you could minimize drop-outs would be to prevent all but the strongest students from entering in the first place. I think it's telling that the highly-selective schools have very low drop-out rates. Is MIT's methodology all that different from less selective universities? I doubt it.

bokonist 18y ago

A 50% dropout rate may be a sign of health - it means the courses haven't been watered down. I'd be far more worried about a 95% graduation rate. States universities are less selective with general admission, so the engineering departments have to screen out the students who aren't up to the challenge. MIT pre-screens everyone so it's not fair to compare it to state schools.

Brushfire 18y ago
I think the other problem here is that we have no information available about other programs. Isn't it just as likely that people drop out of all or many programs at relatively the same rate? Psychology, Pre-Med, Law, Business, Journalism, Poli Sci, etc. These are undergraduates, after all.

nradov 18y ago

The Olin program looks pretty similar to what Harvey Mudd College has been doing for decades.

elecengin 18y ago
You are right - there are many similarities. In fact, our Dean of Faculty came from Harvey Mudd. I think that Olin has a bit more freedom to innovate, though, given it's young age (fourth graduating class this year). There is a joke around campus that no class has ever been the same for two years - in almost every case, there are significant overhauls that result from student feedback. While this makes things tumultuous (and of course there is no guarantee that change is good), it is clear that the profs are not willing to settle on something that is just "good" or "acceptable". Did you get this feeling at HMC? I can't really make a more detailed comparison without more information about what aspects of Harvey Mudd you find similar.

nazgulnarsil 18y ago

I thought it was common knowledge that the only 2 useful B.S. degrees are C.S. (and related) and Finance (and related).

fallentimes 18y ago
Accounting is more useful than finance. /did both
- nazgulnarsil 18y ago
  I slot accounting under finance. but yes. the reason those two B.S.s are useful is that there is ALWAYS work for book keepers and coders. any city, any time. Might not always be good work, but you'll always be in demand.
  - fallentimes 18y ago
    Unfortunately you can graduate with a degree in finance and not know shit about accounting.
  - LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
    I'm a programmer writing accounting software... not always exciting work but there's no shortage of work to be done.
    - nazgulnarsil 18y ago
      handling software for accountants is probably the holy grail of "can't be fired".
rsheridan6 18y ago
Biology is good if your grades are good enough to get into a professional program. Not so much otherwise.
- emmett 18y ago

guruz 18y ago

I am not sure about the exact numbers, but i suspect it is the same in Germany where I have been studying. (at least in Stuttgart / Germany)

geebee 18y ago

Look like I'm showing up late to this discussion. I'll just comment on the "stapling a green card to every engineering degree awarded to a foreign national idea." I have no doubt this would increase the incentives for foreigners to study engineering in the US, but if we only do this in engineering and not in medicine, law, business, art, humanities, etc... well then wouldn't we create an incentive for US citizens to avoid engineering degrees and instead go into areas that are insulated from foreign competition? It seems that this has already happened to some extent. If one of our goals as a nation is to increase the interest of our young people in science and engineering, we should at least consider the effect a program like this on their career choices, shouldn't we? I'm not saying there's no room for debate on this subject, but I'm eternally amazed that pundits almost never consider this possibility when making this recommendation. (BTW, in "the world is flat", Friedman suggested doing this for all doctoral degrees, not just engineering...)

rbanffy 18y ago

The article fails to acknowledge that MIT and Olin have 2% drop-out rates because they are f*ng hard to get in in the first place. The drop-out rate is directly proportional on how easy it is to enroll in a hard program. The school I graduated from, FEI (in Brazil), has a very high drop-out rate in the first semester - about 50% on my freshman year, mostly due to calculus and physics. It's also regarded as a top private school in its field. So, that's why those teachers are not being fired - because students pay for their first semester whether or not they stick around for the second one.

bobochan 18y ago

My theory is that a high percentage are forced out because there are incentives for doing so. Undergraduate programs are ranked based on the percentage of graduates they place in competitive graduate programs and top employers. Getting weaker students to change majors lowers the denominator. Engineering and science faculties, in general, want to produce stars and have little interest in helping students along that find the material interesting but challenging.

bluelu 18y ago

If my university only had a 5% drop out rate, I would have studied at the wrong university. If everybody get's a degree, everybody is equal and your degree is worthless.

redrobot5050 18y ago

I know the wash-out rate at my school -- just during the "freshmen engineering" program was 50%. The next year, the wash out rate was 25%. They don't want airline safety / nuclear reactor controls / bridges devices made by D students. And the best way to ensure that's going to happen is make the person really really really want to call himself an engineer. Its far easier to be a a liberal arts major and convince two girls to follow you back to your place.

Dilpil 18y ago

Two words: Linear algebra. Or if you wish, Differential Equations.