On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:03:49 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
IMM wrote:

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 16:03:38 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


IMM wrote:


Electrical and electronic are now very different fields and have been
for a
very long time.

Only in jumped up technical colleges where its not to be expected that
you will be taught to think for yourself.

********!! Snotty uni attitude again. Snotty uni's don't teach properly,
as they give all the top jobs to themselves, so why know about something
useful.

You really have no idea, do you? When I applied to go to university,
I interviewed at five different places, as was the norm through UCCA
(now UCAS). These were from a range of traditional and redbricks,
some in what is now known as the Russell Group, some not. All of them
took great pains to explain that they are not in the business of
vocational training but in an education in how to think and how to
approach issues, exactly as I already stated and TNP echoed.
Absolutely not an Oxbridge thing.

More recently, my daughter did a similar application exercise and
interview round among a range of universities including some of the
ex-polys. Among the original universities the principles of what
they are about have not changed from their perspective, although some
of the ex-polys did say that they considered themselves to be more
vocational.

To me the issue is not about teaching, but about learning, and the
main part about learning is motivation and breadth of thought. I
certainly had relatively few lectures, and then there were tutorials
and practicals and projects. The timetabled time was a relatively
small proportion in total. The main aspect was self motivated study,
going and talking to the researchers and lecturers to get information
and reading above and beyond the minimum expected.

Not surprisingly, a lot of people who do well in that environment end
up being adaptable to different situations afterwards and have a
thirst to find out about new things. That may well correlate with a
successful career.

This type of environment isn't for everybody. Some people do better
in an environment where more of the information is taught and it is
more vocational. I see nothing wrong with that or view it less
valuable to society or the individuals involved than a university
environment.

The point is that the university education is and should be more about
how to think, how to go about finding, dissecting and applying
information, and doing so quickly, efficiently and adaptably.


The ordinary degree at cambridge is in engineering only.

Covering everything from building bridges via heat engines to electronics.

Madness!!!! I can just see a board designer, saying "the next job is doing
a bridge". get real. Well reality passed the snots by a long time ago.

That isn't what was being said. The point is one of adaptability of
the individual and is perfectly real..





---

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl