Very Bad Experiences in EE School - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Nickelbender
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 01:34:42 pm
content: Hi everyone, First of all I'm not sure if this is the right place for this topic, but I thought this fit the best and this is very much electronics related.I'm currently 18 and studying electronics in school (Not engineering but still to be professional in the field). All my life have I been interested in electronics, from like very young I was interested in how things worked. And once I got old enough to understand some basic stuff about devices I was tearing down every thing I got into my hands. At 12 I really got into electronics as I got the Arduino kit from my dad, which had a breadboard and components. At 14 I got my first oscilloscope etc etc. Anyway all my life electronics has been portrayed as a very friendly and inviting field. Many of the youtubers and other influencal source I watched were very much encouraging of discovering yourself, innovating and coming up with new things. Doing whatever interests you. So the field felt like home.After Basic School (Different school system than everywhere else soo pardon) I applied to an electronics based school which I would come out with having a qualification in electronics. and I got in.Now I've been there for a two years now, and first it wasn't too bad, the school even let me do my own projects there and stuff. But lately after certain events I've looked at the school (Specifically the people in the school such as teachers) with a more critical view. And realized that it's quite horrible. The way they portray the field is just plain bad, filled with judgement, expectations and lots and lots and lots of critique. I don't really even know where to start talking about it.Well first there is the huge amount of judgement. So many times have I designed something only for it to get absolutely shitted on by my teachers. If things aren't done their way it's your fault and you suck. You rarely get any compliments of any kind for stuff you do unless its the next rocket to the moon or something.Then there is the complete discrimination of amateurs and hobbyists. So many times is it brought up how pretty much hobbyists are ruining this field because they don't know a resistor from a capacitor, and basically an attitude that being a hobbyist is not acceptable or is just a stage you should get away from. It's hard to put it into words the way they talk about hobbyists but it is really really bad, in general there is a huge amount of judgement floating around. It seems like according to them hobbyists and amateurs do everything wrong and are dumb as a shoe.Then probably my least favourite thing is the huge disrespect of creativity, coming up with unique solutions, and discovering stuff yourself. Creative solutions get shitted on, and if you discover something by yourself, so many times have I thought "This is so cool" after discovering something only to be hit with some passive agressive speech with the approximate message of "This is basic, it isn't cool you didn't actually do anything of importance". According to them becuase I discovered something myself that has already been discovered makes it completely insignificant. Also all retro tech related is automatically bad. I managed to complete a personal dream of mine of designing a little 8 bit microcomputer. A little 6502 based simple single board computer with and expansion bus and stuff. (I was 17 at the time). I was really excited to show it in school (The design that is) only to not recieve a single compliment, just becuase it's old tech automatically means it isn't an achievement at all of anything. And was sorta told in the side that I shouldn't be interested in retro tech and it is bad.In a nutshell the way that the field of electronics has been portrayed to me for the past few years Is horrible, and it geniuenly makes me upset because I feel like everything I do there is incorrect and wrong and I don't get any support for the field I so so love. Currently its spring break and I know im gonna finnish school no matter what. But I am geniuenly considering is this a field I fit in, becuase I feel like everything im not good at is what they use to hurt me with and everything im good at, doesn't matter.I don't really even know the point of this post, I guess I just sorta want to vent a little to a community that hopefully would understand. Also I would like if there would be some ideas on what could be done, or if my teachers are correct etc etc, your opinions on the matter.Anyway thanks for reading my huge essay, hope this is a good enough of a place to put this in.Regards,Nick

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 01:57:53 pm
content: There is an old idiom that says that "Those who can, do; those that can't, teach" and I found that it's frequently true.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 02:16:51 pm
content: I'm not going to comment on your specific case, since I don't know enough about the details - and the devil is always in the details. I will, however, make a few observations that may or may not be relevant to your case; it is up to you to decide.There is, as with most professions, a tension between the "practical" and the "theoretical". This manifests itself in the distinctions between engineers/technicians and doctors/nurses. IMNSHO both are necessary and neither is sufficient. Practice without theory is blind fumbling, theory without practice is mental masturbation.Amateurs start with the practical, but to become professional they must also understand the theory.Amateurs build small standalone things. Professionals build large things and components that will incorporated in large things.Amateurs think about how things work. Professional think about why things work, the limits in which they work (and don't work), and how things fail.Amateurs work alone. Professionals work smaller or larger teams.Thus, what might be sufficient for an amateur can be insufficient for a professional.I expect a formal university education to concentrate more on the formal theoretical side since that is fundamental to everything they do during their entire career. I also like to see a course have some practical design element to highlight the value of the theory, even though the implementation details will probably be obsolete within 5 years.When I was interviewing job candidates, I wanted to assess not only their theoretical knowledge (what is the answer to X, compare and contrast Y and Z), but also whether they had done more than was necessary for their course. For the latter I wanted to see them set a difficult goal, do it, and then be able to discuss what they had learned and what they would do differently next time. You can probably do the latter, but of course I have no idea whether you could do the former.My suggestion: learn the theory and understand why your instructors think their approach is superior. Either way you will benefit

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 02:20:06 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on June 03, 2025, 01:57:53 pmWe've all often found "those whothinkthey can do, actually can't do".

author: ftg
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 02:33:12 pm
content: Was that some electronics technician track in vocational school?My unfair impression about that was that they aim to teach people to be come service & repair technicians and production line workers, less innovators and builders.But their attitudes sound terribly toxic.Because in collage (AMK) my teachers were happy about hobbyists, as that meant you had a genuine interest in the field and a drive to learn.And very many of us had a strong hobbyist background. I sure did.I will also echo tggzzz's point how a professional they must also understand the theory.Coming from a hobbyist background the most valuable thing was that theory. So that one could go from building to designing.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 02:37:56 pm
content: Sorry to hear you're not having a great time. If you love electronics, you can, and should, have a great career doing it.As a total aside, it's interesting to hear you built a 6502 based board at 17yo, because I did too - it was a sound sampler with a few cool audio effects, based on a 6502 with an ADC and a DAC, all implemented on breadboards for my Electronic Systems A-level. The difference is, that was quite a long time ago, and it wasn't vintage at the time - it was an absolutely current, revelant piece of technology.However: nowadays, itisvintage. It really doesn't represent the way in which anything is built commercially these days, and here's where I think your teachers may have a point. Whilst it's a shame they weren't more encouraging, they may have quite rightly been wanting to steer you towards learning the ways in which modern, commercial designs are made in practice.Think, for example, about what your board can do, then compare and contrast with what a $5 ARM microcontroller can do. The modern device is a fraction of the size and enormously more capable. What you've built might be a fun project, but it really isn't that relevant to someone working in the electronics industry, and your teachers may be frustrated that you've put a lot of time and effort into a blind alley.In career terms, you would absolutely have been better off spending the time learning C, or VHDL, or Python, or PCB layout, or how to solder a 0.5mm TQFP without all the pins ending up shorted together.Hobbyists love to make things for the sake of it, and that's fine. Use an off-the-shelf dev board, a quirky processor, or something with "duino" in the name if you want to - but then take a moment to look at all the commercially made electronic devices around you and note that none of them are made this way.It's true that some teachers don't really understand their subject, and they just work from a syllabus, learning just as you are but just one or two lessons ahead. They're simply not in a position to judge whether any alternative approaches have merit, because they don't know any better. It's a shame if that's the case, but that need not stop you following the course syllabus and completing the assignments the way the course's authors intended.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 02:59:29 pm
content: Quote from: ftg on June 03, 2025, 02:33:12 pmWell put.

author: MAS3
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 03:07:42 pm
content: I really don't agree with AndyC-722's reply.Doing things this way (building you own "vintage" device, whatever it may be), will teach you where things originate from (and for instance what troubles were encountered designing stuff at those times).That will also help you understand where nowadays electronics originate from and you would be able to see pro's and cons of these modern devices / parts, because not every development is an absolute improvement.Schools will teach you to apply this black box for that and another black box for something else.It depends on the school and its goals whether they would bother to tell you about what actually goes on inside that black box.Schools should be open to any kind of learning method, but they don't because it complicates their job.Some students aren't compatible with their schools (but this should be stated the other way around).These student often prove to be very skilled after holding on though their education, and come up with top notch devices later on in their careers.But they will have to fight to be able to reach this, and have to be willing to fight for that.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 03:23:25 pm
content: You mention that you are 18, and you have been studying at this school for two years. In terms of educational systems, that puts you at the "high school" level of study, which is typically designed to prepare you for entry into the workplace (vocational/trade school), or to prepare you for entry to college/university for more advanced studies.At the part of the educational journey, you are expected to be more of a "sponge", to learn fundamentals and to absorb the wisdom imparted by teachers. Practical work and creativity is important, but would be considered secondary to learning what is in the curriculum, and would often be more of an extra-curricular activity.Maybe there is a mismatch between your expectations, and what the school is trying to teach you? Whatever direction your future career takes you, you are unlikely to be successful unless you are fully able to apply the current and latest technologies, and understand enough theory to do this.

author: krish2487
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 03:27:58 pm
content: Quote from: MAS3 on June 03, 2025, 03:07:42 pmI agree with your sentiments broadly..The way I see it, the OP has thedrive... what a school is supposed to teach isfocusanddiscipline. They are by no means mutually exclusive and in fact are complementary. either will take one a ways.. but eventually its the combination of all those that separate a hobbyist from a professional.@OP, I m sorry that you are facing these issues, but as tggzzz said, the devil is in the details ( which we know nothing about ). I will also point out that such a dismissive attitude is not by any means unique in academia, its many times worse in industry. Especially since you have to deal with other aspects like politics and backbiting and insecure people.Do not give up if you are passionate about the field. This knowledge and experience ( small, big, retro, vintage, current) is something you will carry throughout your life, but you wont deal with the dismissive people all your life..A useful skill is to brush off criticism and take what you can to make your situation better.

author: Sorama
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 03:30:35 pm
content: You don’t go to school to do want you want to, but wat they and the curriculum want you to do.You are going to have a hard time, whether you will go to college or straight to a job if this is your attitude.It seems you already do.

author: BadeBhaiya
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 03:39:41 pm
content: Teachers are often hard on hobbyists because their sample size of "hobbyists" is students. They usually have no idea about hobbyist projects which rival commercial ones. From their perspective, hobbyists are indeed very incompetent. Possibly they were hobbyists once too, and now remember how imperfect and ignorant their thinking and approach to the craft was before they gained education and complemented their skills.Secondly, engineering in general is indeed a pessimistic field. Tell me how many times do your projects work the first time? Do you yourself even expect your project to work the first time you turn them on? Usually the answer is NO. But that no is the reason why our modern world is so reliable and convenient.Teachers seldom wish ill of their students, but teachers do hate it when students take home the incorrect lessons from their teaching. Its one thing that teachers don't like to tolerate in my experience. They try to "correct" their students until they learn the thing they want to teach.And as for compliments, well, let's just say you'll get used to not getting them, as you grow upDon't worry, your achievements are not connected to the compliments as you may believe right now.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 03:58:20 pm
content: I used to lecture at a university in England, but not in the EE field. I can't really comment on the details of your experience, but I would say that the level of unkindness you have received - assuming you have reported it accurately - worries me, and I'm left wondering about the management culture at your school.Without hearing both sides of the story, it's hard to tell if any of it is justified. For example, if you are too wrapped up in your own creativity and not paying sufficient attention to what the teacher is teaching, some of their frustrationmightbe justified. They are required to teach to a syllabus, and their performance will be judged by how many students get through their exams (it's not supposed to be like that, but it really is). The syllabus rules.On the other hand, if it is as unpleasant as you describe, and you are co-operative and diligent, and competent at the syllabus, then it might be time to discuss this with other people.First, bring the subject up with your fellow students and try to get a feel for if it's just you who feels this way, or if others do. It will help put your experience into context, and if it is just you, think about what that implies.Next, is there a lecturer who is approachable enough for you to sit down and talk about it? Put to them that you feel the environment is not very encouraging and at times feel hostile. Ask them if they think it is supposed to be this way. Ask them for frank and honest feedback on how well you are fitting in with the course.Finally, if you feel the responses are unsatisfactory and you still believe the problem is bigger than just you, arrange an appointment with whoever the lecturers report to: it'll be a Head of Department, or something like that. When you speak to the HoD, don't directly criticise a specific individual. Rather, say you want to offer some feedback on your experience and ask if this situation is what they intend. Be ready to acknowledge that you might be contributing to the problem, but don't roll over and give them an out. You must come across as reasonable, but with a legitimate issue that needs their attention.As for the workplace, I don't believe what you have experienced is at all representative. UNLESS - and I need you to read this carefully - you are more interested in what you want to do,and not fully engaging with what the employer requires you to do.I had a colleague exactly like that - he always thought he knew better than his boss what was required, and how to go about it. Maybe he had some kind of self-esteem issue and needed to convince himself that he was the smartest guy there. I don't know. Honestly, he was a bloody nuisance and a burden on the company. If he could have been sacked he would have been, but employment law in Britain makes that very hard.So don't be that guy! If you do as you're told, keep your nose clean, and always keep in mind that you can't see the whole picture from where you are standing, you should be OK. Never make the mistake of thinking you know better than your boss. You might, but probably not. Be diligent and take pride in your work, but don't make the mistake of "over-delivering" in order to look good: firstly, it pisses off your colleagues; secondly, time spent delivering more than asked for is time and money wasted, and bosses hate that.Remember this: for the eight or nine hours of each day that your employer buys off you, they call the shots.For the other 15 or 16 hours, you can do whatever you like.If you observe these basic workplace rules, you shouldn't have to suffer the hostility you are currently experiencing.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 04:02:05 pm
content: In general, teachers have a hard time dealing with students that already have some knowledge about the topic they teach, because that creates an imbalance in the class, making it harder to handle.Also, they often find that those students, while having knowledge and some experience, often lack theory and fundamentals (which makes sense) but feel sometimes a bit too "confident" nonetheless.It's often easier to teach people with no preliminary knowledge (except for the prerequisites).Of course, there are exceptions. But generally speaking, academic courses are tailored a certain way and made for people with certain prerequisites, and nothing more. They are not adapted to people already having some knowledge and experience, but just lacking some theory and fundamentals. That would be a completely different kind of courses with a different approach. That's rarely what you'll find in academia.Thing is, if you want to learn the theory and get a degree, you have pretty much no choice, so you'll have to chalk it up. Learn what you don't know and avoid talking too much about what you do know and what you can do. That will often elicit jealousy from your peers rather than positive feedback.That sucks, but welcome to the real world. Actually, that's a preview of what you're going to run into in the professional world. That doesn't mean EE is not for you. That may mean that you're more made to later run your own business. In the meantime, unless it's absolutely unbearable, I would suggest dealing with it, learning as much as you can along the way, and get your degree. After that, you may remember that maybe starting your own business will make you happier.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 04:14:19 pm
content: Quote from: MAS3 on June 03, 2025, 03:07:42 pmGood! I do like to play devil's advocate sometimes because it improves the quality of debate on both sides. I could foresee a string of replies to OP nodding and agreeing that their teachers were poor, but that wouldn't have helped or solve anything.That said...QuoteI don't believe that learning a lot about how things were in the past - but aren't now - is a particularly good use of limited time and brain capacity.Moreover, it can lead to a dangerously backward mindset if you're not careful. For example, I clearly recall a product I designed some years ago which had twice as many channels in half the space as its predecessor. From a customer's point of view it was simply better - but the senior technician whose job it was to assemble and service it absolutely hated it with a passion.Why? Because it used physically smaller parts, surface mount, fine pitch etc - all the things that were required to fit everything required for each channel into 1/4 the original board area. In his mind, it was absolutelynot possibleto service the new product, when what he really meant was "I, personally, with my current knowledge and skill set, cannot service this", which isn't the same thing at all.And no, I wasn't going to go back and redesign it using DIP ICs and through hole resistors like its predecessor.QuoteAs per the last part of my original post - they're teaching a syllabus. They're teaching problems, and some ways to solve them. They can't teach every possible way to solve every problem, and that's OK. A student's time to be inventive will come - but it'll be in their own time until they're a fairly senior engineer. By that point, they'll either be named on a number of patents, or they'll have learned why things are done a certain way after all.

author: krish2487
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 04:28:07 pm
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on June 03, 2025, 04:14:19 pmWell put and quite reasonable arguments... However.... I would like to argue that without knowing the basics it is impossible to be good with more advanced topics.. Just like addition is the fundamental building block for multiplication, without knowing how a mpu operates - address space, data space, fetching instructions and executing it is rather hard to understand how a mcu operates. Similarly without knowing the basics of logic gates, one would struggle to understand and solve a problem using karnaughs maps and consequently implement it on a FPGA. Without knowing atleast the fundamentals of datastructures one would fare very poorly in the implementation of algorithms and write optimized code to run on a MCU.This is where the words I highlighted above in your post come into play. I m sure you too will agree a reasonable understanding of the basics ( no matter how old ) is always relevant and useful. Its when this is taken to the extreme that it becomes a rather trivial waste of time and effort. If anything, of late I m seeing a lack of such in depth understanding in todays young engineers. It looks like most of them approach engineering and life as a black box abstraction. Absolutely no drive to understand the underlying mechanics

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 04:33:10 pm
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on June 03, 2025, 04:14:19 pmI agree to some point. Modern day systems are far more complex compared to what they where -say- 25 years ago. Nowadays it is very likely you end up building upon a foundation made by somebody else. Knowing all the intricate details is more likely to slow you down than to speed things up.

author: Sorama
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 04:34:34 pm
content: Quote from: krish2487 on June 03, 2025, 04:28:07 pmThis behavior of some young EE's is also visible in repair shops or IT guys.They don't know the OSI model, the can't give you the subnet range if you give them a /20...

author: Nickelbender
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 05:26:39 pm
content: Thanks for all the comments, To clear few things up, first of all, I do try to balance my own stuff and school stuff and have managed to do it quite well in my opinion. Second of all, I am well aware of the fact that retro stuff really is useless these days, and that modern stuff should be looked into. But how I see it is that retro stuff can be learned from too, and it is good to know where things came from. Plus atleast for me being able to do example vintage tech stuff just sorta gives me more drive to continue stuff. Often when starting something do I first start in the very beginning and then move to more complex stuff, thats sorta my process, example it's easier for me to start with a 6502 computer, and once I know the ins and outs of that I start to look into more complex stuff.I try my best to put school as the no.1 priority, and I would say I try to do things as correctly as I can. In my own opinion I co operate with the teachers. But the issue more is that, not only do the topics that the teacher complain about bother me, its also the fact that they are just outright mean, calling stuff "Stupid" and "Bad".We are often yelled at, complained at repeatetly, and I've overheard the teachers shittalk students personally behind their backs.I can get behind learning stuff their way, and focusing on school and their teachings I can get behind all that. But what really mainly annoys me is the absolutely abusive way that they are treating us. And these points ive made about not receiving compliments or getting shit talked of your designs, while they tell me that my design is bad they tell it in a mean and outright upsetting way. In my opinion they are pretty much bullying us at worst.Most of the stuff I mentioned doesn't bother me practically its more the way its done, it feels very mean and judgemental. I understand their points of view with the practical issues such as design choices, but where they fail is to deliver this critique in a constructive manner. Instead of trying to help us learn about our mistakes and turn them into better, they bully us until we do it right.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 05:35:38 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on June 03, 2025, 04:33:10 pmI agree withthatto some point.The fundamental theory won't change, but which component to use and which button to press changes frequently. The former is vital for a lifetime career, the latter is transitory for one project. Guess which a university should emphasise and which it should minimise. e.g. Norton/Thevenin/KCL/KVL, small signal vs large signal, filters/amplifiers and Bode plots, Byzantine Generals problem, Dining Philosophers problem, ACID properties, FSMs, synchronous ve asynchronous electronics and comms, etc

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 05:40:47 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 03, 2025, 04:02:05 pmI was cocky like that.Fortunately, two weeks into my university course an informal test result enabled me to recalibrate my confidence and attitude. Yes, I do mean "enabled"; it was my recognition that I needed to change and my choice to adjust my attitude.I hope the OPre-reads Steve Thackery's posthttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/very-bad-experiences-in-ee-school/msg5936090/#msg5936090

author: NE666
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 05:59:01 pm
content: Quote from: SteveThackery on June 03, 2025, 03:58:20 pmI've had the 'pleasure' of finding such individuals under my management and/or direction on a number of occasions. My conclusion, after the first few times, was that it is invariably ego driven. Specifically, the need for constant overt stroking and praise. The best solution I found was to simply deny them that, politely and professionally: keep them laser focused on what they're supposed to be doing. Be honest at appraisal time about how their contributions actually stack up against the objectives set for them, and their defined duties and responsibilities. Meet their longing, Martin Prince style "please sir, pick me, I'm ever so smart" looks across the table in meetings for words of praise or selection for 'prime' projects with just a smile and silence. Go out of your way to ensure that you engage with them no differently to any other colleague.In most cases, a shortage of cookies and pats on the head means that they leave of their own accord, hoping to find them with another employer.

author: NE666
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 06:23:32 pm
content: Quote from: Nickelbender on June 03, 2025, 05:26:39 pmTo precis and paraphrase some of the advice given above by others, I strongly suggest that you try to make a subjective determination of whether this is most a likely a 'them' or 'you' problem. As Steve said, a good starting point would be to ask around your fellow classmates, to get a picture of how frequently and to what extent the same views are held.Either way, appropriate action is advisable, given your strength of feelings on this matter and how they will undoubtedly affect your learning experience and influence future interactions with educators and employers.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 07:41:17 pm
content: Consider that it is entirely reasonable that they aren't interested in your side project, just as it is entirely reasonable you are proud of it.While it is reasonable to expect that parents are enthusiastic, it is optimistic to expect strangers to be.If teachers feel your project is negatively affecting your studies, then they should let you know.For the avoidance of doubt, I don't know whether any of that is relevant to your situation; that's for you to decide.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 07:46:25 pm
content: If I may explain some of the details of education in Finland:After comprehensive school (ages 7-16, nine grades, compulsory for everyone), students can continue on either tolukio(Gymnasium/preparatory high school/grammar school) to prepare for university, or toammattikoulu(vocational school). There are also schools that combine both.Fromammattikoulu, one can continue forwards toammattikorkeakoulu, which roughly corresponds to polytechnic or college.To enter university, you need to passlukioorammattikouluorammattikorkeakoulu; it is toughest to get in fromammattikoulu(a few percent of new students). There is alsoAvoin yliopisto/Avoin korkeakoulu, Open University, where anyone can study, but does not certify. Most universities will accept specific suitable courses, though.If I've understood correctly, OP is studying forsähkö- ja automaatioalan perustutkinto, which translates roughly to "electrician". In the European EQF level scale, it is a Level 4 qualification. It is the basic certificate needed to work as an electrichicken, and to get intoammattikorkeakoulu/college/polytechnic for e.g. forsähköinsinööri(electrical engineering; EQF level 6, or Bachelor's degree). From that level, one can continue to University for adiplomi-insinööri, or Master of science, and even to PhD.Essentially, he's at the high-school/vocational school stage.Unfortunately, the school system in Finland is in somewhat of a crisis, at all levels. I know the University-level failure first-hand, and have close ones switching track from vocational/college-level schools due to horribly bad teachers. Quality is tanking, and there is no real quality control or even willingness to enforce any kind of quality guidelines if there are any. Firing people, especially teachers, is extremely difficult in Finland, much moreso than in e.g. UK. Unless a teacher commits an actual crime, they can be impossible to fire. The administrators prefer to let things lie, because fighting against bad teachers can backfire and kill their own future careers, so they just tend to not rock the boat and find somebody or something else to blame everything on. Some don't bother to do even that, and simply claim there are no problems.Personally, I'd want to encourage him to stick with it, and get the certification. There are better teachers the higher you get –– I don't mean everyone is, I mean you can find schools and teachers that are better! –– and you really do need the certification to go forwards. If you want to continue studies, it is imperative you find out about the actual teachersfirstbefore choosing a school.It is even worse in Universities, because they only provide an academic certificate, and the courses are diverging so far from what companies need that those are becoming less and less useful. Getting support for actual new research is difficult; it is much easier to get funding for research already done elsewhere (and we've discussed this in other threads).Back to OP. At 18, the key thing is to maximize your options, and try to gain experience and knowledge of what you actually want, what you might be good at (or get good at). Planning beforehand is a good idea, even though it is quite rare in Finland; basically no young people plan their future well here. I didn't!It would be a very good idea to first write down what you like, what you'd like your life to be in say five years and ten years from now, and then do some planning –– preferably with multiple options, like branches in a tree or bush –– on how to get there.Having an electrichicken's certificate is a very good start. So much so, I've even considered whether I should get one too, and I'm almost fifty.It does also open several further education/specialization opportunities. For me, I do have basic electronics and lots of theory from physics at University, but being certified to do mains wiring and similar installations could be quite useful (it particularly matters with insurance stuff).Right now, I avoid anything over 12V DC or so, all AC, and mostly play with 3.3V and 5V digital logic and interfacing USB gadgets to embedded Linux devices. It would be more accurate for me to call myself a Linux specialist than physicist, really.I suspect it would be more useful for OP to hear from those with more successful careers and fewer career-related issues than I have had, though! 👍

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 08:47:10 pm
content: Some first hand experience, when a kid long ago in grad school an adjunct prof (day job at Raytheon) taught the Advanced Electromagnetics course, which is about an esoteric and obscure course as there is in the EE corriculum, and really tough to boot (only 7 out of 35 stayed after midterm exam).The prof knew this and made a point at the close of every 3hr lecture to identify its real world use. That really resonated and being a "hands on" type allowed the connection between theory and practice. Much later as an adjunct ourselves, we were asked to create a set of advanced grad school courses (1st RFIC courses) and teach this (students & some faculty). Remembering our undergrad experience we made a point of identifying actual use of the lecture subject, and even bring in actual physical hardware, chips and wafers are smallAnyway, the point is the teachers likely know more than you, the good ones make things interesting, the great ones like our EM prof take the time to illustrate the connections between theory and practice. So, listen, learn and ask questions, even if about use in a theoretical course, the teacher may realize the importance of practicality if they don't teach such.Most important, stay focused on learning, even if it seems worthless for some theoretical subject! Case in point, during our mentioned undergrad EM course, we had a take home to prove Bartlett's Bisection Theory (no Internet or Google then!!). This proved useful decades later when we developed a 3D version to help solve an optical/electrical performance dilemma.Stay focused and stay in school, it will all come around in due time, and in hind sight you'll see and benefit from the advantages of the learning experienceBest

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 08:52:35 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on June 03, 2025, 07:46:25 pmI can't comment on Finland, but that is good advice.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 09:06:52 pm
content: I have had some similar experience to you, OP, in my secondary school class. Like you, I had purchased my first oscilloscope at age 13, and was building circuits before that with multimeters. I think the reality is teachers are often overstretched and they do not have time to support the individual "spark". This can create frustration, both for the student and the teacher. The teacher really just wants you to follow the curriculum. At the end of the day,theirgrade is not determined by how much enthusiasm they give one or two bright students, but on the mark the whole class gets. Pay rises, bonuses, promotions and even job security might be on the line, depending upon the institution. It is the unfortunate reality of modern education. I do think the teachers you have may have been a little harsh going by what you've described though.However, I would agree somewhat with @AndyC_772. As I have grown from a hobbyist into a professional engineer, I come to realise that my cocky young self really knewnothing. There is a huge gap between being a hobbyist and being a professional engineer. When you want to make actual products, you need to have a thorough grasp of the theory of things. About electrical safety. Product lifecycle and sourcing. You need to understand why, for instance, electromagnetic compliance is a critical issue . Software is more important than ever; it's one thing to want to program a 6502, it's really neat to be able to do that yourself, but it won't teach you much about writing code for a processor made today that has a 32-bit wide data bus, uses nested interrupts and is programmed in C or even C++. And then understanding how to structure and design software: you can blink an LED or drive a display, but what about maintaining a 100,000 line code base for a complex embedded system? This is why the theory and understanding here is really important. It can seem boring, but it iscritical.In my experience I would say actually it is quite rare for engineers to practice their field as a hobby. Of the colleagues I have, probably less than 10% do electronics or software in their spare time. I'm one exception though even as I've grown older that has reduced somewhat as other things have become more interesting and I want to switch off from work and put my skills to other use.Stay the course, keep up your studies, get the grade - that's what school is for. In your spare time, practice projects and build things that keep you interested. Do that for your personal development and your curiosity, it's all good. But unfortunately, you're going to probably struggle with getting enthusiasm from schools. It's just the way the world works. I wish it didn't... but... what are we going to do? I can tell from your path you're probably quite similar to me, and you'll probably do pretty well and have yourself sorted for a job pretty soon. Ttry to get an internship if you can, it'll really help getting the experience that's very hard to teach.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 09:24:29 pm
content: is the teacher one with 10+ years of experience working or is it someone that worked for 6 months, picked up all the bad habits that new employees (the yes men) are used for (kind of like using them to 'ram' 'clogs') and went to teach?it is a sound and common tactic to try to reassure a new team that the prior problems were from 'old equipment'/methods and that there is no hard intellectual problems around anymore (which might scare people off when they realize how complicated it could be with the usual low pay etc). Kind of like redoing the kitchen really nice when you try to sell a house there was a quadruple homocide in. If you just work for a little while it sounds great and you parrot it, not so much once you see where the real engineering issues are.Also he is just making shit up because its the grad students that don't know electronics smaller then a integrated system running linux connected to commercial dataloggers. Low level design means picking a new OS. Very useful I suppose if you land that job as a project manager for the entire power grid that needs to be modernized because some politician threw a shipping container of cash at them or something. There is a big focus on networking already complicated things (mesh, automation systems ,etc). Those are the jobs they try to push you in because it actually rewards you the money that the university claims you will make.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 09:37:10 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on June 03, 2025, 01:57:53 pmIt's sad that we tend to treat teachers so poorly. Even the ones who sacrifice their careers to teach.My wife had a very successful career. Since we met, she had talked about becoming a teacher. Later in life, she when back to school to get her masters so she could teach in the field that she worked in. She worked in education for about decade. Kids for the most part were great. Between a few parents and the government's policy changes, she retired.When going to school I had a few teachers who worked in the industry. They were by far my favorites. I attempted to contact a few of them but by that time, many had passed away.So fuck your comment.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 09:46:17 pm
content: and its usually thisTry not to get upset by cocky people. You will see them get totally tripped (by seemingly lower complexity things) into a pile of manure eventually, or watch them refuse the most simple of jobs that lead to massive headaches. And some places like to hire cocky people, so they concentrateEvery field has its snobs, in mechanical you will find people that utterly refuse to pick up a file or run a manual machine, in programming there is people that will refuse to write a script, in sales people that refuse to deal with people worth less then some number. It does work (i.e. ferrari dealership) but I would say more often then not it costs you opportunitiesYou just came across someone that is the equivalent of a 'ferrari salesman' in the 'car sales world'

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 09:59:05 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 03, 2025, 09:37:10 pmThe vast majority of teachers in my school were from industry, where they would have been paid more. So very much not a universal thing.Also Stray Electrons statement is not relevant at all to OP, because the issues mentioned so far are not related to technical knowledge or experience, its some kind of personality problem or culture issue in the school. Not sure what OP can do other than discuss with department dean, assuming they are not part of that same culture. Discuss how it is not conductive to learning.In terms of your personal projects, just keep them to yourself, your friends, and online. Some of the knowledge will transfer to school, some wont.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 10:16:17 pm
content: I think the personality that you found is "bull", like the one you make steaks out of. common

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 10:17:14 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on June 03, 2025, 09:06:52 pmThis is very true but is more touching on the subject that having a formal education helps to get professional projects going. It just gives you a huge advantage over people who are 'self thaught' but lack a whole lot of knowledge.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 11:17:46 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 03, 2025, 05:35:38 pmAll good for a design Engineer, doing stuff from scratch with the components & techniques available now, but not so much for EEs & Techs (particularly the latter) trying to keep 20 to 30 year old equipment functional.The "Big Boss" just sees the $million plus cost of replacing a large, expensive device with a current design, & wants you to keep the "old Tech" stuff going.Quote

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2025, 11:26:12 pm
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on June 03, 2025, 11:17:46 pmTrue enough. As I noted in reply #2, 'There is, as with most professions, a tension between the "practical" and the "theoretical". This manifests itself in the distinctions between engineers/technicians and doctors/nurses. IMNSHO both are necessary and neither is sufficient. Practice without theory is blind fumbling, theory without practice is mental masturbation.'I'm not sure why you lump Electronic Engineers (EEs) & Technicians together, but distinct from design engineers. IMNSHO the OP would benefit from understanding the distinction between engineers and technicians.We can't be sure, but it appears as though the OP is interested in design. While his current designs are (quite reasonably) something a competent technician could do, we don't know the OP's career objectives.

author: m k
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 10:03:17 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on June 03, 2025, 07:46:25 pmI'd say that get as many certificates as you can, especially if detour is short.Certificates I've missed through the ages are more capable electrician, basic level refrigeration technician and authorized account inspector.Practical difference is that if you follow orders and make a mistake as a certified person it's an error, otherwise you're a criminal.The actual happening is mostly irrelevant.On the other hand, it's said that know your stuff and you can talk yourself in.Maybe so, but what if you need a certificate to be able to talk.And after a prime time all certificates seem to be much more difficult to get.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 11:25:08 am
content: Quote from: Nickelbender on June 03, 2025, 05:26:39 pmYes, and no.It's certainly true that some of the things you need to know can be learned from vintage technologyas well asfrom modern technology. I spent way more of my childhood than I'd like to admit writing 6502 assembler, and it's how I learned about what a memory map is, how interrupts work and how they always seem to trigger at the worst possible time, what a pointer is, how to directly control a piece of hardware by writing magic numbers to its registers, etc.However: nowadays I spend probably 75% of my time writing embedded code which runs on ARM microcontrollers. Thesealsohave a memory map, interrupts, built-in and external peripherals, and so on. The skills needed are, at the most basic possible level, similar.But we aspire to have skills that are more than just the most basic possible.[As an aside, I've found that academics in particular sometimes have a weird aversion to practical reality. During my own degree course, the computer science lecturer invented his own hypothetical object-oriented version of Pascal, which he used to teach the theory of what OO meant; I don't think I'll ever forgive him for not just teaching C++ that, you know, actually exists and is useful.]So, bearing that in mind: it's not useful today to know about zero-page pointers, or the difference between the X and Y registers. Paged memory isn't nearly such a thing, now every modern CPU has an address bus wide enough to cover its entire memory space. (I saidmodernCPU, PIC18F, get back in your box). Nobody uses external, parallel bus RAM at 2 MHz, and you don't need an EPROM eraser any more.Rather than waste time coping with those things, you're better off learning about vector tables, interrupt priority, gated clocking and idle modes for power saving, PLLs, libraries and compiler optimisation. Learn theactualperipheral set for a modern microcontroller, one that you might actually design into a new product in 2025. Learn what a high speed serial bus is, and how to terminate one correctly. Pick up an STM32 Nucleo board for $15, download a free IDE and make it blink an LED. Learn to lay out and route a 4 layer PCB with a proper solid GND plane, then get some manufactured for next to nothing in China and see how easy it is the 2nd and subsequent times around.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 03:28:57 pm
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on June 04, 2025, 11:25:08 amI agree; when I returned to embedded, I was horrified and delighted at how little had changed in 30 years: still C on 8 bit processors. (There were also 16 and 32 bit processors, as there were 30 years ago.) The only differences are cost, size and speed - i.e. nothing fundamental. still the same old crap; we need radical improvements I picked things up where I left off very quicklyQuoteTeaching should be done with the simplest equipment that demonstrates the principles. Once seen and understood, the principles are easily translated to more complex equipment.QuoteElectronic engineers yearn to create their own processor+instruction set. Computer scientists yearn to create a language+compiler. Neither should be inflicted on students.C++ should definitely not be taught, unless the course includes the (very entertaining)C++ FQA. Seriously. And if you understand those Frequently Questioned Answers, you will conclude that C++ should not be taught.Much better to teach things that will be everyday standard practice in a few years: multicore/multithread computation, NUMA memory, and distributed systems.QuoteThose are all learned quickly and easily after the basics are understood. The half-life of thedetailsis 3-5 years, and almost certainly won't be relevant in the first jopb. Hence don't bother teaching them.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 03:43:20 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 04, 2025, 03:28:57 pmI've worked with a lot of EEs over the years and I only met one physicist who designed/implemented their own processor + instruction set. Having done just this on a hobby level, I can say I did have a lot of fun with it but none of my coworkers have ever expressed a desire to head down this path. Seems rare.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 03:52:59 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 04, 2025, 03:43:20 pmMost EEs and CSs are sufficiently sensible to realise their yearning should remain a fantasy or a hobby

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 05:02:15 pm
content: I've spent quite a lot of time thinking how we could teach future programmers better.The way I see it, starting with imperative programming model makes it harder to later expand to asynchronous interfaces and parallelism, because you essentially have to "unlearn" your imperative skills first: we start by giving them the impression/illusion of absolute control, then afterwards, advancing to more complex concepts, pull that from under them and tell them we cannot actually have that kind of control anymore in more complex environments. It's bass-ackwards.What I wonder is if starting with HTML + Javascript –– GASP! –- would actually workbetter.You see, it is a ridiculously easy environment to get visible results, so motivation is not a problem; but it is also a fully event-driven environment, where the programmer has very limited control over things. There is no moment where you think you are in full control, dictating every step the browser environment does, which is what I believe is the main block later for understanding and mastering async I/O and parallelism and such. Instead, you intuitively grasp the event-triggers-my-code model.I believe the event-driven model is best for learners, because it gives a functional and correct intuitive understanding of the other concepts, and instead of lying first and correcting later, it starts from a reliable basis, adding more bricks one at at time, without tearing down parts to replace with better ones. Asynchronous I/O is just sending an event, with the result (either data if a read/receive, or completion status if a write/send) received as an another event. Blocking calls as provided by most OSes are just forcibly paired. Parallelism you can model via two events happening simultaneously. A good finite state machine advances based on events it receives, rather than "waiting in a loop". Cache effects are easily modeled, and so on.Yes, JavaScript is kind-of a crappy language, but everyone has a browser with wonderfully optimized interpreter, they cost nothing, and most browsers like Firefox have built-in debugging (browser console). If it crashes, you restart the browser. Doesn't matter what your OS is, so you won't be bound to any specific vendor. You understand the meaning of free open documentation (in the easily available full specification sense). It isgoodthat it is crappy and limited and easy: it's like learning to drive a bicycle when falling doesn't hurt unlike in the real world.The idea is that when the learner grasps the underlying concepts, they can progress to statically typed languages like C or even assembly, or branch out to other languages (Rust, C++, Python, Ruby, Go, Lisp, Haskell, etc.). In each case there are new concepts and differences to understand, so the key in JavaScript phase would be to remind that not all languages are like this, because each language has their own approach (andprogramming paradigm) to problem solving.Learners would progress from minimal control towards more detailed and full control, building on top of previous understanding, withoutreplacingprevious understanding or skills.I have reasons to believe this should work, but I could be wrong, of course.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 07:10:30 pm
content: Some interesting comments coming out about what constitutes the basic skills that every EE student should be learning.I have a simple mantra that I've tried to drill into every student that has crossed my path since I've been a senior engineer:"I don't care what you can do. I care what you canexplain to methat you've done."My business takes on summer students regularly, and we always have what we think is a reasonable self-contained project for them to do while they're with us. Bear in mind, we're paying them for their time, and these aren't purely academic exercises - these are real jobs that need doing, and which require either time and/or skills that the permanent staff don't have. We're a small team, so chances are every smart person who walks through the door may bring something new to the table.We're not looking to award marks out of 10 for effort, we need someone who is able to be actually useful during their limited time with us. Moreover, we wouldn't be looking to recruit from top universities just to put someone to work on a production line, where productivity is guaranteed but any meaningful skills are wasted.Imagine, then, that you are the aforementioned student. On your first day with us, after we've said 'hi', set you up with a desk and a PC and showed you where the coffee machine is, we give you a job to do. The job is some data analysis; we're a sensor company, so we've gathered a whole bunch of data from sensors under different conditions, and we need you to look through it, make sense of it, understand it, and then do something with it that we've decided looks interesting and worthwhile. Master the underlying theory, fit curves, identify quirks, and so on.How you proceed, and the tools you choose to use, are entirely up to you. This may be the first time you've ever had this freedom.If you do the whole project in Excel, that's fine. Export it to Matlab. Process everything in Python on a Linux box. Convert the data into binary and write a C program. There's loads of options to choose from, provided you have the skills to do the work in some relevant, modern, useful way.There are two catches here.One: you do need to have the skill set to do this worksomehow, using the kind of up-to-date, real equipment found in a modern lab, none of which uses a 6502.Two: I'm not your academic supervisor. This isn't an academic exercise that I've carefully prepared, with a prescribed way of working and a standard form report that I'm completely familiar with.I don't know how you're going to go about thiswhich meansthe most important part of the job is the write-up.This brings me back to my earlier mantra. As a person with useful skills, you need to be able to present what you've done with them in a way that's meaningful to other people whodon'thave the same skills. By the time you reach the end of the summer break and leave us, you need to have not only done the work, but left behind a tangible record of what you did which is clear, complete, and readily comprehensible to someone with technical skills thataren'tthe exact same ones you have.If you don't do this, then you'll have left, and I'll have no idea what you accomplished - which in turn means,you accomplished nothing useful.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 07:32:06 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on June 04, 2025, 05:02:15 pmOnce upon a time I read an influential book by Abelson and Sussmann, the structure and interpretation of compute programmeshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_Interpretation_of_Computer_ProgramsAfter a while I realised what they were doing: recasting a programs structure away from a structure based on nested procedures and sequential execution, and towards data stream processing through concatenations of filters and computational transforms. In other words, they were making the structure be similar to analogue electronics and signal processing.IIRC the Jackson Structured Programming method did something similar, albeit very mechanistically and at a lower level.Enterprise automation structures at similar.You are doing something similar with events and FSMs.As someone who sees little difference between hardware and software, I think you are going in the right direction

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 07:43:15 pm
content: The problem with modern universities in the UK (and possibly elsewhere) is they are too focused on teachingfacts, which are important, but not at getting the students to think and reason logically (or; perhaps a little harsh, but filtering out those who are somehow unable to do so at an early stage). I have met so many junior engineers that can recite damn near every equation they have met, but when it comes to practically applying that knowledge, they're lost. And so many of them seem to burn out and quit the field after less than a decade, and end up doing something completely unrelated or drift into sales, tech support or god help the rest of us, recruitment.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 07:48:19 pm
content: As I've noted previously, Professor Eric Laithwaite at Imperial College used to set exams where one question was easy and sufficient get you a pass mark, one was more challenging and could get you a good degree, and one could not be answered adequately in the time available. He expected his undergraduate engineers to be able to determine which questions to avoid. If they couldn't, they wouldn't make good engineers anyway. I doubt he would be allowed to do that now, more's the pity.

author: Sorama
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 08:01:49 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 04, 2025, 07:48:19 pmI had a professor who said to each of them when a new group of 3 students entered his examination room ( oral exam):‘ which of the three levels are you? The one that has an 16/20, the one that had a 12/20 or the one with 6/20?”And this is no joke.

author: Tation
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 08:29:40 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on June 03, 2025, 01:57:53 pmWhat I have found is that axes "being good at teaching" and "being good at doing" are orthogonal, so any combination is possible.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2025, 11:40:19 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 03, 2025, 11:26:12 pmMy experience is of EEs & Techs working closely together to make stuff designed by other people altogether, in different countries & times, work together & continue to work, whilst the "Big Boss" doesn't want us to spend any money."Design Engineers" are the people both Techs & EEs in that kind of situation swear about, fairly or not!I do think, there has been a "dumbing down" of the function of Technicians since my time, with more of an emphasis on "monkey see, monkey do" becoming the norm.Techs used to have a solid grounding in theory, if not to EE level, certainly good enough to converse sensibly with an Engineer & more importantly, to decipher the often inadequate information provided by manufacturers distanced both geographically & in time from where the problem exists.I have never been in a situation where I have needed to bedirectedby an EE in how to do my job.Certainly, if we are both working on the same problem, I would consult them, but they normally made a few suggestions & left me to it!Consulting an EE "out of the blue" is often not useful, as they have moved on & are "up to their elbows" in a current project.Also, in my jobs, at times I have been 1000 plus km away from the nearest EE, so being "the Engineer's robot" would not have "cut the mustard"!

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2025, 07:39:33 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on June 04, 2025, 11:40:19 pmOK; I don't understand what you mean by "design engineer".IMNSHO as an engineer, having a competent technician is delight: both complement each other to achieve more than either could manage on their own. And that's just as it should be, as with doctors and nurses.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2025, 05:22:56 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 05, 2025, 07:39:33 amI concur for us physicists also. Look at any kind of working physics lab, and you'll find capable practical technicians there, making things work.The key is synthesis of theory and practice, and of different levels of complexity.This is what I hoped to bring to computational materials physics myself: custom tooling and simulator development and optimization as a software technician, really; having a wide understanding of physics, chemistry, and biochemistry/biophysics (biomolecules), making possible research and research efficiency that today is sorely lacking. Unfortunately, the world is not really interested in that anymore, not here in Finland at least.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2025, 06:02:46 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on June 05, 2025, 05:22:56 pmAgreed.The OP (if they are still here) might consider a useful question about career development: is it better to be a jack of all trades and master of one, or a world expert in a niche? The answer is, of course, "yes, repeat no".In other words, there are advantages and disadvantages to each, and neither is right nor wrong. However, it isvery useful to be aware of the questionand toexplicitly make your choice.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2025, 06:49:03 pm
content: Exactly so. If I had all the nuts and bolts in my head in their right places, I could easily switch careers to Linux systems integration (putting together the software/firmware for Linux-based hardware), or do a push into embedded design myself, or just an admin for HPC clusters and such. Or maybe go for woodworking, or consulting on workflow optimization (after a little bit of additional learning). Teaching cert would require Uni courses here, and that conflicts with my nuts and bolts, but otherwise I like doing that (and tutoring and mentoring).A narrow career path can get you far, but it can also fail, which is why alternatives and possibilities and backup plans matter so much.With alternatives mapped out and constantly re-evaluated, even if you fall, you can switch tracks and not drop much at all. It's all in the planning ahead. We definitely don't encourage young people to plan ahead enough here in Finland; we way too often say "you have time to explore". That is not the same thing at all: exploring is fine, but does not preclude you from planning beforehand (including what you like to explore).Whatever you do, do monitor your well-being, physical and mental health. My error was to ignore the latter, and justpush throughfor over a decade; that broke me. If you suspect an issue, contact a professional therapist, for example in behavioural-cognitive psychotherapy, which is about learning useful behavioural and thinking patterns, and not "mumbo-jumbo touchy-feely blah-blah" stuff at all. Consider them personal coaches, no different than a physical therapist helping you rebuild muscles after breaking a bone and having it in a cast for a few weeks. Keeping up with physical exercise via hobbies or otherwise also helps with mental health; we're integrated social beings, us humans.

author: djsb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2025, 09:35:04 pm
content: This has been a very interesting read. I've learnt a lot. Thank you everyone. Time for some sleep.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2025, 09:04:08 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on June 03, 2025, 10:17:14 pmCombination of being "self-taught", and formal education is the killer. There just are so many non-overlapping upsides to both.But it's not untypical at all to be in the early stages of being "self-taught" when entering formal education, and it can create backlash. Usually, we overestimate our capabilities and knowledge at that point, and some/many teachers also give too little value to those experiences. Combine those two factors, and a cultural clash ensues.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2025, 09:07:53 am
content: Quote from: Siwastaja on June 07, 2025, 09:04:08 amYup. I've always looked for a form of that when interviewing candidates: those that do something beyond what they have been taught and beyond what is necessary for their course.That indicates people who enjoy learning new things on their own for the fun of it, and weeds out unimaginative time servers.

author: abeyer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2025, 07:20:15 pm
content: One other thing that hasn't been mentioned that might be worth thinking about now rather than later: Do youwantto make a passion/hobby into an education and career? It can have some advantages, but also some drawbacks that people don't necessarily think about.One that particularly may be related to the OP's issue: I've often seen young people who come into a field with a lot of passion struggle early on to collaborate and communicate effectively with others who don't share their same level of passion. Most get over it at least to some degree eventually, but it's certainly a thing I've seen plenty of people struggle with at the beginning of their career.A few others that come to mind, though far from exhaustive:It can be hard to balance caring a lot about the technical side of things in a personal way, when you often end up making decisions or taking approaches to things at the behest of a professor/boss/shareholder/customer/etc... Sometimes it might be the "right" business decision even when it's the "wrong" technical one. Other times you may just be stuck doing the flat out wrong thing because you're told to and don't have any choice. People who "don't care" as much personally often have an easier time approaching these kinds of situations where you might have to go along to get along.It can be really easy to get too much of a good thing and burn yourself out in one way or another. This could be working a lot because you don't have a clear distinction between work and play... which can lead to feeling overworked, under-appreciated, or under-rewarded. Or you might find that focusing on your work projects takes away from your motivation and enjoyment of personal ones, or vice versa.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2025, 09:08:56 pm
content: Quote from: abeyer on June 07, 2025, 07:20:15 pmTrue. Electronics engineering pays bad. In hindsight I should have looked into that before choosing a direction.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2025, 10:33:15 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on June 08, 2025, 09:08:56 pmOften yes, except in niche fields.Which is why EEs often end up climbing up the ladder to get a decent pay, and many will hit their level of incompetence this way (not willingly) - as we have discussed not long ago.Or they get into software (and often regret it, except for the pay), but this time is almost gone. Software development doesn't pay quite as well as it used to either and companies are laying off left and right.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2025, 06:58:00 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on June 08, 2025, 10:33:15 pmIt is a bubble that has lasted surprisingly long and needs to finally burst. This "AI" thing "replacing programming jobs" mostly is just a fancy phrase to rationalize the cuts to the programmers. Really, it's about reducing unnecessary work (one that does not need to exist in the first place, or that can be easily automated), and reducing the payroll of repetitive, manual, non-innovative programming work to the same level seen in any other repetitive, manual, non-innovative field of work.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2025, 08:14:19 pm
content: Quote from: Siwastaja on June 09, 2025, 06:58:00 pmIf it was trulyrepetitive, it would have been automatedlongago. It isn'tactuallyrepetitive, but is low-grade and seemingly repetitive - until it doesn't quite work. Technician level rather than engineering level, builder rather than architect, painter/decorator rather than artist.LLMs are good at getting things plausibly sort-of right, and appalling at getting things reliably completely right. Ask the medical or legal or pharmaceutical professions, or researchers trying to understand why an LLM "says" what it does.Rule of thumb: LLMs look good for subjects in which youaren'texpert, but for subjects where youarean expert you can see they often generate rubbish.As to why LLMs are popular, there are many reasons, including FOMO, wanting to look k3wl and hip, saving money in the short term before bonuses/options are paid.....

author: abeyer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2025, 10:30:28 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on June 09, 2025, 08:14:19 pmAlso just laziness... I would guess a pretty large percentage of "knowledge workers" seldom have their work closely reviewed or critiqued by an expert with any power to make them do better. Often just looking and sounding like an expert when talking to the pointy haired boss is sufficient to keep getting reasonable reviews and keep getting paid. There are a lot of people fine with doing no more than that, and if they can do that with minimal actual work on their own part, all the better.