What's wrong with community colleges? Only a moron (or the uninformed) would spend five times as much money to take the same classes for the first two years at a four-year university when they can take the exact same classes and transfer the credits from a community college.
My bro' in law wonders why anyone would spend the money for college when there's places like community colleges or Univ. of Phoenix style places. He just got out of the Marines. I said - imagine you're in a bar talking with some guy about how great being in the Marines was, you're having a great time talking about military stuff. Then he tells you he was in the Coast Guard.
Now take that thought and put yourself in a job interview where you're interviewing someone who needs a four year degree. No offense to the Coast Guard, but they're not the Marines.
I agree with you about the University of Phoenix. We interviewed a person who supposedly had a B.S. degree in the subject (Business) from the University of Phoenix but could not perform the basic analysis of a balance sheet and income statement. On the other hand we interviewed somone who was working on her B.S. from a well respected public university but had an A. A. in Business from a community college. She passed all of the "technical' questions easily.
Because they aren't the same classes. They might have the same names, and be similar, but biology at stanford is a lot different than biology at a community college. (Though depending on your goals, the difference can mean the community college is better, or vice versa)
I agree. We used to watch the CC transfers flunk out of EE 300. Cause getting an A in Circuit Analysis at a CC isn't the same as getting a A or B or C at university (where the average SAT score is 200 pts above the smartest kid at CC).
FYI, the toughest and most information-packed class I had in 7 years of college was one I took at a community college. I later went to Clemson University and the University of Maryland. If you get a real professor to teach a lower level class at a major university and not some wet-behind the ears, over-worked teaching assistant, you've been a very lucky student. Sure, the over-all brain power and course offerings at a big school often surpass that of a community college. However, tenured faculty members of big schools usually don't teach the lower level classes. (Plus, those brains often suck at teaching.) So, get those first two years in at a community college if you can.
I've never considered Leno (mr. jay?) to be "one of our own" I always thought he was just another smart ass who happens to like bikes. Fortunately for him, he can afford to indulge his hobby, doesn't make him ***** to me.
Some of the very best electronic engineers I've worked with got their first two years in a CC, woked as ETs and then finished up at a 4 year college.
We occasionally see new EE's from a certain local University that don't know how to use an oscilliscope or a freakin' volt meter. How you can get a degree as an engineer and not know how to use the basic tools of the trade is a mystery only known to curriculum bureaucrats.
Nothing wrong with Community Colleges. But, if you eventually want to go to graduate school you're better off at a research univeristy. The students are the top 10% from the High Schools and the teachers have to teach at that higher level. In the community college you're in there with the bottom half of high school students and the teachers will teach at their lower level of performance. However, if you are a good student you will do well whereever you go.
Granted its helpful that an engineer know how to use all the equipment, but there are a couple of reasons we don't always. First, we have technicians, often from colleges (and nothing wrong with this at all) to whom a major portion of their schooling was very practically based, and thus are hired to use the equipment for us. Secondly our training is not designed specifically to know how to use a hundred and one pieces of equipment (though presumably you pick up a few , rather it teaches us the more fundemental abstract aspects of things, not always the purely practical. So the engineer might not be able to use the oscilliscope, but perhaps he/she knows the detailed inner workings of how its built, and fundementally why it works, likely something college level courses don't teach. Learning how to use a piece of equipment is relatively simple, learning how to use a piece exceedingly well is not, and neither University or College will teach you this, experience does, in fact you'll learn more from experience then you will from any degree. For an engineering degree you learn how to learn, and you learn how to think and for the "things" you learn, they tend to be at a more abstract and fundemental level. I'm a Master Degreed Materials Engineer from Canada, and I've reviewed college level curriculum and they're certainly are not the same as University. While we can get in a pissing contest over...but my school taught me this and his didn't blah blah, the reality is, in almost every circumstance I know (in Canada anyways), engineers tend to hold the more techinically challenging and usually higher salaried jobs. That's not to say college people don't, many do, but were we to stereotype, it would be in favour of engineers. I can only assume there's some reason for this, or then again, maybe everyone's got the wool pulled over their eyes and we all wasted our money....or perhaps maybe not Each education has it's place and value, and both are worthwhile (in fact more people should probably go to college), but they aren't the same.
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.