Engineer - losing credibility?

[John Foster]

I recently read an article in Computer Weekly from the BCS (British Computer Society), which claims that the word engineer is being misused in job descriptions. The example they give states that road sweepers, office cleaners, etc are now often referred to as 'domestic engineers'. They (BCS) claim that this is leading to a loss of credibility for suitably qualified engineers, and they are asking for a change in legislation to stop the word from being misused.

I am listed on agency as a 'systems engineer' although I am not certified as such. I have 12 years experience in the field and, without sounding too cocky, believe that I could turn many certified engineers inside out.

I was just wandering whether a change in legislation would mean that I could not be referred to as an engineer. I agree to a large extent with the position the BCS as taken, but what is a suitably qualified engineer?

Comments please.

[MacGyver]

I am pretty certain that professional engineers' associations in Canada are trying to reserve the use of the term "engineer" and "engineering" through legislation so only people who have been qualified as a Professional Engineer (P.Eng) can use them. I would agree that they are totally overused by people who have absolutely no authority in engineering. My professional orginization, OACETT (http://www.oacett.org), has exclusive rights to the titles Certified Technician and Technologist.

You are not a sanitation engineer, you're a garbage collector. You drive a truck around, pick up garbage and put it into the truck. Where's the engineering in that?

[http://forums.windrivers.com/cgi-bin/forum1/noncgi]

I've seen the term "Network Engineer" or "System Engineer" overused the most in my field.

Anyone who knows what they are doing has tried to put these on their business cards/title sooner or later. I think it's primarily to sells ones' services to a corporate mentality that thinks you are required to pay someone at an increased rate as soon as you see the word "engineer".


Software Engineer is straightforward--programmer. Haven't seen that one misused a lot.

Just my $0.02

[Raijen]

I've seen the term "Systems engineer" and "Software Engineer" used as well. Although i preform a similar function to "System Engineers" I wouldn't go so far as to call myself one. To me an engineer implies either

A) Far more experience than I have :)
B) A degree from a university/College.

I fit neither category, and thus wouldn't go so far as to call myself an engineer.

My 2c

[John Foster]

Originally posted by WebJedi_Master:
I've seen the term "Network Engineer" or "System Engineer" overused the most in my field.


Yeah I know what you mean. I am not a certified systems engineer, yet agencies insist on listing me as such. They need to sell our services, agreed, but to give us a title that is incorrect is hardly professional. The excuse I am always given is that systems engineer fits my experience.

[Shard]

I totally agree that the term "engineer" is overly used. When I worked for AT&T/NCR a few years ago, my title was Customer Engineer. Customer Engineer? I designed customers? No, I repaired customer's equipment. Silly, just plain silly. Currently my title is Systems Technician, and that suits me just fine.

[smokewolf]

No offense. As far as paper certifications go, it's not the certs fault. It's really a combination of employers solely trusting the peice of paper, it's those boot camps that claim to get you that 100k a year job (then never even show you how to plug in a hard drive) and those individuals who believe a piece of paper gives them the knowledge of an actual professional.

As for people who will not get certified, I think it hurts the actual program for certifications (the more of those who actually know their stuff the less there are of those who do not). And I do not mean this as a flame (so please do not be insulted), but I also think it's odd that people will not even take the time to get certified. I mean no one would go to a doctor who says "well, I know more than those guys who got their degree, and that paper does not prove anything." Believe me, I have had dozens of people claim that they have technical skills, but when actually tested they do not. I even had guys who looked briliant and spoke as if they knew the material, but for every major problem they fixed, they created 10 minor ones that took longer to fix than the major one. And this actually showed though on testing, the answered all of the tough questions right, but missed the simple ones.

Certifications are there so that others can varify your claims of knowledge through 3rd party unbias agencies. I do understand everyones issues about the certs technically not doing that job and letting untrained have that peice of paper, but if I feel that people who do not even try to work with the system have no grounds for knocking it. Certifications are necessary in being able to seperate the real techs from the phonies.

As an employer, I will say that it is the cert that will catch my eye. There is something about a person who will not even bother getting certified, no matter the reason. If you know your stuff prove it. Now I am not blind to the fact of paper techs, everyone who comes through my door gets tested, but it is the certified ones who get through the door in the first place.

I hope that this comes across as I intended.

Recap: Certs are good. Paper Techs are bad. Techs without certs ok, but need to get with the program to help improve the certs and help lessen paper techs.

[BadBoyJoe]

I also agree that the "Engineer" title is being abused. But, what some people don't realize is that "True Engineers", the ones with a degree, are sometimes worse than a newbe with no degree. I've seen it too many times. My title is Workstation Engineer. My employer did not know what title to give me or what department I should be in because I do many things. I do a lot of Lan administration, tech support, programming, and system administration. So they decided to give me the Engineer title. Some people got mad about it and accused me that I do not deserve this title... "You don't have a degree, I do, so I'm better than you and you don't deserve it". The funny thing was when the same people that accused me, came running to me for help when they did not know how to use FDISK or map a network drive. I'm not trying to brag here, but I'm sure that you guys have seen this many times too.

I don't consider myself to be any less of an engineer than someone who has been to school to earn the title. I've earned it too, but I don't have the degree to show for it. I've worked much harder to earn the title than the people that went to school to get it. I had to learn everything on my own. If I did not love what I do, it would have been impossible. But anyone can go to school and get a degree and call themselves an Engineer. One good thing thought is that there are a lot of Engineers out there who actually do know what the heck they are doing (thank GOD for that).

Its true, the title is being abused a lot, but sometimes you have to step back and look at the big picture to see who actually deserves the title... The smart guy with no degree, or the technically challenged dude with the degree. Its for you to decide.

[artpego]

i am good. really really good. am i an engineer? not a chance. started out in college to becomae an electrical engineer but i drooped out of that race. i use the title "technology consultant" which covers a broad field in this businees without trying to sound to bold. leave engineer to engineers... be a garbage consultant, computer consultant or sex consultant (garbage men, techs, escorts) instead. :)
when you use the title engineer there are just way too many things that can get confused by potetial employers, current employers and clients. you will waste your time and most often the time of those who wish to use your services.

[smokewolf]

I am sorry, I forgot to relate that to the present discussion.

Anyways, I believe "engineer" is an appropiate title for those who can show their expertise.

Here we reserve the use of Engineer for a person until they pass through the necessary "hoops". Until then they are just technicians. But those "hoops" include numerous testing, but through internal standards and external 3rd party certs. We also demand active participation in Assoc. and Organizations designed to help the computer industry. I know other agency follow similiar guidelines, but there are so many "mom and pop", "johnny come lately" and such that will use whatever terms they can to get business.

To fight this, we spend alot of our time educating the populous about the industry and how it works. I never thought I would find so many people who never thought that pc techs should be certified just like car mechanics. Once we talk to them, they always insist on certified technicians. This also aids in education about the differences between normal techs and engineers. Our corporate customers know theres trouble when we call in our engineers vs. our techs.

I think that by changing or restricing words is not going to help much. But by reform of the tech industry into requiring a stricter certification program (just like the ones for every other technical field) would go alot further into assuring that those who hold the title tech or engineer truely are such.

[derekb]

I feel that for someone to be considered a engineer you must have completed a degree or program that qualifies you as one. I think that computer engineers are not actually engineers, lets face it we don't really engineer anything. I have a degree in Manufacturing Engineering and the classes that I took did not prepare me for anything remotely close to what I'm doing now. So even though my title has the word engineer in it I don't think of myself as one. I also think that the word engineer is being used as a more PC way to describe a less glamorous position. :rolleyes:

[cylith]

FTI : For what it is worth a Software Engineer is not just a programer. In fact very little of the Software Engineer's job invloved programming. We are responsible for the design, implementation, and testing of programs. I'm not saying we don't program but it isn't our main responsibility.

jdc

[as06001]

Titles are just something to supplant someones ego....I would much rather have my title be "The guy who makes $150,000 a year" than be called an engineer. :p

[n8dawg]

i see it like this if your current job wants to call you such let it be. but, if you dont have any qulification or nothing to back up your "engineer" name dont start go looking for another job saying that you are and engeneer

[eenge99]

I've never considered myself an engineer, a specialist maybe. If one has been certified by a recognized authority and has had been OTJ for 3 or more years then maybe they could call themselves an engineer. I used to pump gas but never called myself a "petroleum transport technician". :rolleyes:

[WinKrushR]

My view of the term Engineer is a combination of a person's training and their specific job duties. I know a person that has their Electrical Engineering Degree and is a contractor for new apartments and subdivisions. What does he call himself? An "Electrician". Do I call myself an electrician? I work with electricity every day...little sparks of on/off and ones/zeros all over the place, don't I? No, I'm not. I'm an engineer. Granted, I don't have a Degree from a University stating such, but I went to school for Music Education and Performance. Am I a performer? A virtuoso?
Nope. My job is to teach. Microsoft, Macromedia, Adobe and so forth. What's my title? Technical Instructor. Were I performing job duties at which I was actually ENGINEERING, I could expect to be called such.

Network Engineers build, design and maintain networks, right? Systems Engineers have a large scope of responsibilities that fall along those same lines. Some areas of society have indeed cheapened the title, but don't think that that those titles lessen your certification.

[kannibul]

My "favorite" mis-used title:
Nail Technician
how freaking technical are finger nails??

[jbar1]

en·gi·neer (nj-nîr)
n. Abbr. e., E., eng., engr.

1. One who is trained or professionally engaged in a branch of engineering.
2. One who operates an engine.
3. One who skillfully or shrewdly manages an enterprise.
I really do not see what everyone has their panties in a bunch for. One should take the time to be sure of the meaning of a word before using it. As I see it you have 2 choices. You can accept the word as the dictionary implies or I guess you can have your own meaning. And I am sure that different dictionaries will give different meanings. This dictionary says nothing about a sheepskin or piece of paper needed in order to be considered an engineer. And if you have to have CERTS just to open your door then you are probably missing out on a hell of a lot of good talent. If my wife wants to consider herself a domestic engineer that is find with me as she has sure as hell earned the right. I tell customers that I will have to engineer a system to suit their needs, but I don't imply that I am an engineer. Some refer to me as an engineer but I just ignore it, much the same as someone telling me they are an engineer.

[Triumph]

Here in Providence, home of the Thug Mayor - Buddy Cianci, we have engineers at the Water Authority down the street who couldn't think their way out of a paper bag and are basically thug plumbers who lay pipe at such a slow pace, a snail would be faster. These guys have no education except high school ( and even that I doubt) and call themselves engineers? I guess that makes me hydro flow repair engineer after I fixed a toilet this weekend.

[EasyPray]

en·gi·neer (nj-nîr)
n. Abbr. e., E., eng., engr.

1)One who is trained or professionally engaged in a branch of engineering.

2)One who operates an engine.

3) One who skillfully or shrewdly manages an enterprise.

The 3rd definition actually leaves the "engineer" open to some interpretation doesnt it? Certain designations are protected such as Doctor, but who would you consider to be a "Real" or "qualified" engineer?

[Sowulo]

I ain't no engineer--I'm a 'put the pieces together and make them all work right technician'--someone else already did the designing and manufacturing. (although some of those shouldn't be allowed...)

[Kymera]

Intersting SmokeWolf, I've hired a couple people myself and the first thing that catches my eye is the experience, then the education, and lastly the certs. Putting value on the certs is what leads to people who can answer the hard question, but can't figure out the easy question. You can be CCIE'ed all you want, but if there is no practical experience . . . I would rather have someone who has spent 2-3years working in NetOps for some company than someone who spent $10k on a 6 month crash course.

As for the title on Engineer, I think it should be used in a promotional/hierarcal related way. For example in a normal business environment there are the analysts, associates, AVP, VP, Director, Managing Director then President, or something similar. When someone hands you a card that says Associate VP, you have some idea where someone stands in that company. There's no reason the Tech sector could not have a similar setup. Something like technician, administrator, engineer, senior engineer, Director, Managing Director and President. After you hit a certain level you no longer are involved with the technology, but with the business of running the technology groups, and thats why the last couple levels are the same as the business units.

[jimmm33]

When I go on service calls for warranty work the work order refers to me as a "Field Engineer". I'm just an A+ tech with a few months experiance.

[SuperMatty]

To derekb who posted... "I think that computer engineers are not actually engineers, lets face it we don't really engineer anything." Let me tell you, I am currently enrolled in Penn State's computer engineering program, and we definitely DO engineer things, such as logical circuits for example. Computer engineering IS an actual field of engineering...though, it's really a mix of computer science and electrical engineering. I would never call someone who can 'fix a pc' a computer engineer. It's completely different, and a complete disgrace to the engineering community when someone refers to a technician as a computer engineer.

[cordon]

slightly off topic: I saw a job advertised for a 'bar support technician'. They wanted someone to collect glasses.

Engineers analyse , design + specify solutions.
Technicians impliment those solutions + make repairs when things fall over...

The guy who sold them a 486DX66 as a top of the range games platform was a bulls**t engineer. It certainly meets part 3 of the definitions.

[lowrider066]

Well, I have suffered through four years of college to attain a computer systems engineering degree. The stuff that most IT people do is just that: application of technology. They should be refered to as technicians, NOT engineers. Also, the stuff that most engineers do isn't IT work. It's VLSI design, embedded processors, or other such engineering or design tasks. There's a whole different level from technician to engineer.

[Dagotex]

The term "engineer" is overused and misused. My official job title is Network Technician but I'm commonly referred to as the "Network Guy". Makes ya proud I tell ya.

[WebHead]

The engineer title is very abused. Legally you can't have the title of engineer, unless you've passed the proper certification and have a college degree(at least that's how it is here in California.) You can however use the term "engineering." For example, if you're part of an engineering group. I used to be part of the mechanical design team here at Texas Instruments, but since I don't have a degree, they wouldn't let me have the title. So instead, on the business card, I got "mechanical engineering" because that's the group I worked with. The term that should be used in most of these cases is "technician."

Technician=Someone who fixes technical problems with something an engineer designed, created, or built.

Engineer=Someone who builds, creates or designs something from the square one.

[WebHead]

Ooops, I forgot to add a couple more things here. We should all remember, that it doesn't really matter what your title is anyway. What does matter is, a) do you like your job? and b) Are you making enough money. The only reason people have titles in a job place, is because it's a way for the finance dept. to specify their employment assets. But if you're the type of person who places great importance on what you're labeled at the company you work for, then maybe you should take steps to improving your education so that you can have the title that you desire. And one more thing, I think that 6mths-2yrs (i.e. MCSE vocational courses, A++, etc.), is not enough experience for anyone to be labeled "engineer" in the computer industry.

[jimmr13]

Originally posted by Sowulo:
I ain't no engineer--I'm a 'put the pieces together and make them all work right technician'--someone else already did the designing and manufacturing. (although some of those shouldn't be allowed...)

Well I have all the certs and 3 college degrees, But I learned more in the shop just as Sowulo said, I take them a part fix the problem and put them back together. Customers happy, I'm happy and the Bank is happy.

[Jeff the Brit]

On this side of the Atlantic, the title "engineer" is associated by the general public with the guy holding the monkey wrench and the oily rag. In my former incarnation as an industrial chemist, I had the pleasure of working with/for some very fine engineers (male and female). The professional requirements for any branch of engineering here are tough, to say the least, with a university degree (heavy on the mathematics) and several years approved professional experience needed to attain the status of Chartered Engineer. Good ones (most of them) get a LOT of respect from me.

"Sikx munce ago i cudnt spel enjuneer now i ar wun" ... Sid the trainee washing machine repair guy.

Engineers turn imagination into reality !

[In The Wind]

Lets see, "Engineer-losing credibility?", yes indeed. Very overused by people straining "to be" somebody. Now that that is said, consider this: Engineer- the one who designed that POS that just laid your arm open with a hidden razor edge, while you were trying to replace a component that failed because it was under rated for the application. Technician- the one who takes the POS engineered box and makes it work. I get it. Just kidding!!!!

[fitzman]

In college, I was called a 'Beer Recycling Engineer'...But, dammit!, I earned that title! :D :D

[d0cman]

Websters defines engineer as:

One who is trained or professionally engaged in a branch of engineering.

This leads to the definition of engineering (as the other 2 follow the subject of this thread less closely):

The application of scientific and mathematical principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of efficient and economical structures, machines, processes, and systems.

This can be boiled down to the layman's terms of "One who solves problems by using math or technology"

Think about this one. To be called an engineer is to be called a problem solver. A Civic Engineer's goals is to design bridges that can withstand the forces of nature. A Mechanical Engineer designs machines to work efficiently or improves on the design of mechanical devices ... etc.

I think that the term domestic engineer or sanitation engineer shouldn't apply to cleaners or garbage collectors. They aren't coming up with solutions to problems, they are just fulfilling duties laid out to them. They are technicians. :eek: :eek:


Now all you techs (myself included) shouldn't get their hackles up. If your answers come from experience (from yours or others, but mainly yours) and deductive reasoning, rather than an answer supplied by a database of FAQ's, then you can consider yourself to be an engineer ... certified or not is just a question of formalization.

But that's a whole different discussion thread. :D :D :D

[NakedMessiah]

I think anyone that calls themself an engineer and are not should be punished by execution live on TV. :D just kidding.

Check your state board of registration for professional engineers to see if you can use the term Engineer in your State. Engineering Certification is really about public safety. I'm certifiable electrical engineer and I don't make anywhere near six figures in salary. :confused:

[Tech666]

Im a Tech ... plain and simple , i have most of an Electrical Engineering degree and decided i liked being the guy who fixes sh!t better. True engineers are born , not trained.

[]-[otRod]

I agree the term "engineer" is waaaay overused / overrated in the computer industry. I hold an MCSE certification, but dont feel it really qualifies me to be looked upon as an "Engineer" of any kind. I fix stuff. The training I went through to get that title did help me gain a lot of knowledge and experience that I feel does help - and I stress help - me perform my job duties, but shouldnt be a merit on its own. (unless of course there is some company out there who actually does hire MCSEs at a 100K salary based on the cert alone... HOOK ME UP!)

[Paliden]

Hmmm....engineer or tech...I'm neither one..
I'm a "TIT" - Tech In Training.. :eek:

[Foehammer]

My experience has been that the term engineer is overused in the IT industry. When I used to be on a helpdesk I was called a "Technical Support Engineer", not "Helpdesk Tech", which is all I really was. I think though that the definition of engineer is changing. The term seems now to mean an individual with strong technical abilities, rather than a run-of-the-mill soda-can-designing, the-physics-of-this-cog-in-relation-to-this-cog, sort of person. I don't know what I'm trying to say. :p

[jbar1]

Originally posted by Foehammer:
I don't know what I'm trying to say. :p

AHaaaa! You must therefore be an engineer ;) ;) ;)

[Underseer]

Originally posted by Nicholas 'Raijen' Furniss:
I've seen the term "Systems engineer" and "Software Engineer" used as well. Although i preform a similar function to "System Engineers" I wouldn't go so far as to call myself one. To me an engineer implies either

A) Far more experience than I have :)
B) A degree from a university/College.

I fit neither category, and thus wouldn't go so far as to call myself an engineer.

My 2c

That's not entirely true. I have one friend who is now an electrical engineer, but his degree is in physics. He has no educational background in engineering, yet designs circuits for Tripp Lite.

I have another friend who is an electrical engineer who has no college education, save perhaps for a class or two at the local junior/community college (and probably not EE-related).

Both worked their way up through the ranks starting as glorified repairmen, but neither can be said to be anything other than engineers in what they do now. It's not just about the degree. :)

Oh, and I totally agree that the word "engineer" is overused these days. Not only with respect to janitors, etc., but even in the case of Software Engineers, I think the term is abused. I know that programmers work very hard and are often very smart, but you don't see suspension bridges exploding every few months, do you? Computer science is way to young to be tossing around words like "engineer" just yet.

[Hippie_Tech]

It seems like everything is being referred to as engineering nowadays. I've even heard of a janitor as being called a custodial engineer. Is this good or bad? I don't think it's either one. A lot of it has to do with the fact that the title "engineer" implies a lot of knowledge in a particular area. It's more to help someone feel better about there job not to belittle the people that have a real degree as an engineer.
As for whether or not certificates make you a better tech. No they don't. It only tells me you've taken a basic test in the subject and passed. If you have a few years of hands-on experience in the field, I would hire you over a paper tech anyday. A cert doesn't get you a job. Experience does. It's unfortunate that a lot of people won't even look at someone without a cert as I've already read in this forum. Some people don't have the resources to get the certs.

[Outcoded]

I'll just stick to guru then.

[NakedMessiah]

Originally posted by Hippie:
As for whether or not certificates make you a better tech. No they don't. It only tells me you've taken a basic test in the subject and passed. If you have a few years of hands-on experience in the field, I would hire you over a paper tech anyday. A cert doesn't get you a job. Experience does. It's unfortunate that a lot of people won't even look at someone without a cert as I've already read in this forum. Some people don't have the resources to get the certs.

I had to go through 4 years of internship hands-on experience before i could apply for certification to be called an engineer. I didn't know that you could be certified w/o experience.

[Darksteel]

it really depends on the certification you go for. microsoft network certifications around my area go for virtually nothing. myself, i think that 'engineer' implies the creation of something. an electrical engineer creates electronics. an electrician works on/repairs electronics. the same goes for mechanical engineer/mechanic(non-auto related obviously). however, as far as the title of engineer goes, i think that at least a college degree should be required to be titled an engineer. so someone majored in electronics engineering that repairs circuit boards would be considered an electrical engineer even though he does not create or engineer electrical equipment.

[In The Wind]

It seems that a common thought here is how the employer views the term, i.e. college or university based use of the term. I know that when I go looking for an engineer, I look for the correct alphabet soup behind his name, that indicates education. I also look for references in the industry, and most likley they are of equal or more important value. Strong personal recommendation carries even more weight, when coming from someone that has had cause to use the services of said engineer. Course I don't look for engineers that often for the purpose of employing them, more likely to THANK them for the POS that I just technicioned my way thru. I know, bad grammer.

[Hippie_Tech]

It seems like a lot of people are thinking that a four year bachelors degree is better than four years as a tech. I was up for a job at our local Public Power company to do what I do now (repair computers/printers). I got beat out by someone who had 6 months of computer experience and a bachelors degree. It didn't seem to matter that he was a political science major. He had the degree, I didn't. End of story. Besides the fact that a four year degree in computer science is going to be way behind the times when you finally get the degree (by at least a year behind.) Colleges can't teach current technology and OS's because they have to prepare the curriculum before they teach it. Never mind the fact you have to take classes that don't even pertain to the subject matter. I had to take four semesters of English, two semesters of Sociology, an Art class, and others in the two years I spent at college. Number of semesters for my major: 4. All the while I'm paying to learn that there is an African tribe where the women and men have their roles reversed. I ran out of money and never looked back. After my two years studying to be a computer engineer, I had learned zip. A four year degree amounts to nothing as far as computers are concerned, unless your talking programming. There are obviously some things that colleges can teach you. Computers is not one of them. That is a hands on job.

[Hippie_Tech]

I would like to apologize for the wording of my last post. I didn't mean to come across as a bitter, angry, sour grapes kind of tech. I like my current job. It's just the whole idea of having to get a certificate to say that you're good at what you do just seems....ahrrgh!!!

[sprkymrk]

Originally posted by Hippie:
It seems like a lot of people are thinking that a four year bachelors degree is better than four years as a tech. I was up for a job at our local Public Power company to do what I do now (repair computers/printers). I got beat out by someone who had 6 months of computer experience and a bachelors degree. It didn't seem to matter that he was a political science major. He had the degree, I didn't. End of story. -------
Never mind the fact you have to take classes that don't even pertain to the subject matter. I had to take four semesters of English, two semesters of Sociology, an Art class, and others in the two years I spent at college. Number of semesters for my major: 4. -----All the while I'm paying to learn that there is an African tribe where the women and men have their roles reversed. After my two years studying to be a computer engineer, I had learned zip.

I agree. I had somme college and was planning on getting a degree. But why take courses like English Comp, Social Sciences, and Algebra (not to mention Speech 101, Alternative Lifestyles 200 and Underwater Basket Weaving)to learn about computers or whatever? I had all that crap in high school. Instead I went the MCSE route. It was 9 months and actually pertained to the job. This was not a boot camp either. My reasoning was that an MCSE was as good in most employers eyes as a 4 Year degree. Plus I still get to be called an Enginerd...I mean Engineer.

:)

[silencio]

Legislating language is wrong; period.

In who's hands to they plan on putting the responsibility of determining if someone is an "engineer"?

Math is really simple, the more rights you give away the fewer you have.

[macg]

Where I work they call us 'Field Service Engineers' but I think its a thing that my employer does to charge higher rates. I have certs from Dell, C*mpaq, HP etc...but I also have an Associates..no one else where I work has a degree....so I really used that in my salary negotiation. Does it make me a better tech? No not really...to me its kinda like that A+ thing...I dont have one of those...but I dont see the point in that...perhaps if you are a novice...but I learned about computers from the military, and then got cert from the manufacturers..so what is the point in getting an A+?!?!

[macg]

Sorry kinda got off topic. :eek:

[smiddy98]

It just so happens I'm making a transition in jobs. Reading most of your posts here made me do some soul searching as to what my actual roll is in the scheme of things. I think that, as a couple have pointed out, we tend to think too deeply about trivial points. From there a tendancy to polarize the subject, then mass hysteria sets in. As Pop-Eye always said, "I am what I am, and that's what I am!"

:p

[Sowulo]

My income doubled the year after I finished my masters. The interesting thing is, the degree is in Human Studies--the study of our relationships with self, other, the environment, and the transcendent--nothing whatsoever to do with being a self-employed on site computer tech (on the surface anyway). But everything connects to everything. I believe the reason my income went up was precisely because of my degree work (yes, even my studies of shamanism around the world, and the extensive journals of poetry I wrote for an independent study). Specifically, I believe my income went up because my communication skills improved with my education. I am sold on the relevance of a good liberal arts education. A well-rounded, person with good communication skills will always be able to find a way to fit her/his skills to the marketplace....

[clascomp]

Originally posted by SuperMatty:
I would never call someone who can 'fix a pc' a computer engineer. It's completely different, and a complete disgrace to the engineering community when someone refers to a technician as a computer engineer.[/B]

To the contrary, it may also be an insult as a technician to be refered to as an engineer.

Maybe today was a bad day to bring this up. A computer was brought to us for repair today, after a so called "engineer", employed by a large hospital, couldn't diagnose a bad frigin power switch. A tech had it fixed in 15 minutes. The "engineer had it for 2 months.

Earlier this month we were callled in to diagnose problems with a new network. A "Network Engineer" had set it all up, but couldn't figure out why a couple of computers weren't connecting, all that was wrong was a couple of jacks were punched down incorrectly.

I have no problem with someone being called an engineer. But what I want is someone who can actually solve the problem, no matter their title.

We are a small computer and consulting firm. If I were currently hiring, of the 6 people at the top of my list, only 2 have any cert's at all. We, and hopefully our customers, are interested in people who can fix the problems, in the most efficient possible way. Although I always encourage education, title is not a good measurement of knowledge, and knowledge is gained by experience.

[Winged One]

I find it funny when a organization has to use legislation to protect the quality of their reputation. I think the self regulating guilds like Doctors, Lawyers and Engineers has gotten out of hand. It is not like anyone is going to confuse a Electrical Engineer with a Sanataion Engineer, Why the heavy duty legislation to back it up? Who deterimins what is enough education or skills to be a Engineer? Who determins when a Engineer has done something wrong and needs to be punished? Who determins what jobs require a Engineer to do them? The Engineer guild thats who. A organization formed ages ago that has one huge monopoly. If you strip off all the politics what is a Engineer? If you answer someone who designs something then you could call me one. I am a CNE in Canada (love those laws) and Certified Novell Engineer in the rest of the world. I design Novell Networks from scratch. I take the Novell operating system (simular to the basic building materials a Engineer uses), I know its strengths and weaknesses, and I design a large network out of it. If the Network design should fail I am financially responsible for it. I don't have a large union backing me to deterim if I made a big mistake or a not responsible big mistake. I do not have a large Union to provide me with insurance to cover my butt if I am found liable.

anyway I ramble on, we need Engineers, just do we need Engineers to have a monopoly? :confused:

Winged 1

[Darksteel]

let me clarify a bit, i am not for the legislation, i just was citing my personal opinion. i just disagree with those people who call themselves sanitation engineers et al.
but regarding college courses, many colleges are going to a co-op program where students actually work in their field for almost half their college time. that counts for a lot more than they could ever teach you in a classroom. I know that if I had to choose between a guy with a degree but no experience and a guy with experience but no degree id go for experience.

as for engineer v. technician, we're really talking semantics again. not that i really care, its just that a job title really doesnt change the quality of a person's work.

[NakedMessiah]

Originally posted by Winged One:
I find it funny when a organization has to use legislation to protect the quality of their reputation. I think the self regulating guilds like Doctors, Lawyers and Engineers has gotten out of hand. It is not like anyone is going to confuse a Electrical Engineer with a Sanataion Engineer, Why the heavy duty legislation to back it up? Who deterimins what is enough education or skills to be a Engineer? Who determins when a Engineer has done something wrong and needs to be punished? Who determins what jobs require a Engineer to do them? The Engineer guild thats who. A organization formed ages ago that has one huge monopoly. If you strip off all the politics what is a Engineer? If you answer someone who designs something then you could call me one. I am a CNE in Canada (love those laws) and Certified Novell Engineer in the rest of the world. I design Novell Networks from scratch. I take the Novell operating system (simular to the basic building materials a Engineer uses), I know its strengths and weaknesses, and I design a large network out of it. If the Network design should fail I am financially responsible for it. I don't have a large union backing me to deterim if I made a big mistake or a not responsible big mistake. I do not have a large Union to provide me with insurance to cover my butt if I am found liable.

anyway I ramble on, we need Engineers, just do we need Engineers to have a monopoly? :confused:

Winged 1

Hmmm. Sounds like engineers has lost the credibility not because the word itself is abused, but the fact that they are monopolistic, politicians in a comfy union, and are a bunch people that you laugh at. I didn't consider myself being funny. So, I guess that makes me a comedian since I am an engineer, and I guess doctors and lawyers are comedians too. Okay then. Now the next time somebody gets hurt in an accident, be sure to yell "Somebody get a comedian, quickly!" "Oh, they have hired a comedian to sue us. We better settle this out of court right away."

[PuterGeekGirl]

I agree...janitor, now a toilet engineer? Come on...what is up with this. Wonder how it makes the REAL engineers of the world feel...would PI$$ me off...

[smiddy98]

Originally posted by NakedMessiah:
Hmmm. Sounds like engineers has lost the credibility not because the word itself is abused, but the fact that they are monopolistic, politicians in a comfy union, and are a bunch people that you laugh at. I didn't consider myself being funny. So, I guess that makes me a comedian since I am an engineer, and I guess doctors and lawyers are comedians too. Okay then. Now the next time somebody gets hurt in an accident, be sure to yell "Somebody get a comedian, quickly!" "Oh, they have hired a comedian to sue us. We better settle this out of court right away."

:D

Since I brew beer at home, does that make me a Master Brewer? Depends on how many I had and shared with friends. :eek:

[NakedMessiah]

Originally posted by smiddy98:
:D

Since I brew beer at home, does that make me a Master Brewer? Depends on how many I had and shared with friends. :eek:

Hey, whatever makes you happy while you are at home is fine with me.