Ageism and Job Opportunties in EE

in article snipped-for-privacy@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, snipped-for-privacy@netscape.net at snipped-for-privacy@netscape.net wrote on 6/18/05

The chances are that by the time you get a PhD, your job prospects will be very goo OR very bad OR anywhere inbetween. If you are able to predict such things, speculate on securities instead. Information theory might, or might not end up being useful for that.

If you come up with a blockbuster thesis, you should have no problem. But if you are ordinary, like most of us are, there will be age discrimination.

By the way, get a PE license.

Bill, PE, PhD (stands for pH disappointment, I think)

| I am a scientist doing research with a EE, and seriously considering | getting a MS (possibly PhD) in EE. I work a good deal in the | mathematical analysis of engineering problems, esp statistical signal | processing, and a higher degree in EE would give me a lot more | credability in my field, in addition to giving me a niche in which I | can specialize (not to mention the fact that I love it, and I'd also | like the option of doing a little consulting work on the side). The | problem is that I am now 42, and I wonder what the propspects of | someone like myself getting a good job are when I'd graduate.

That depends on the country you are comparing your pay level to the cost of living for. If that is India, you should find plenty of jobs that pay a comfortable living. But if it is the USA, the cost of living is so high (more than 6 times what it is in India), you will likely not be happy with a job in which you are expected to compete with people from other countries.

Matt,

Age discrimination is alive and kicking in the US if the job you are looking for pays anything and if you don't have much of a track record in that specific field unless, of course, you know someone with pull. Engineering is especially bad in this particular situation--especially if the nature of the work involves modeling. simulation, prototyping, etc... and can be done via telecommunting. Today, thanks to globalization, it is very easy to go offshore and obtain the services for fee schedules less than what a McDonalds employee makes. Fact of life. If you still wish to get into electrical engineering specifically, consider pursuing something that requires a "functional" body present in order to get a specific service or task accomplished.

PhD in EE??? You will be over qualified unless you are entrepreneurial and elect to pull something out of the ground yourself or perhaps settle for teaching. In the US these days an AS or BSEE, in most cases, is sufficient. Repeating Rifle's suggestion in getting a PE license is a wise one.

Personally, I think you would fare better getting your PhD in mathematics and a degree in engineering physics (with emphasis on electricity?). When all is said and done, you will certainly have more options.

JM2CW

Pete

What degree do you have now?

I think you job opportunities could be quite good with an MSEE. You research background will count as experience. I disagree with Phil on job opportunities in the US. We are having fits finding qualified people (MSEE) who are US citizens. We are tired of fighting the H1B beauracracy and are making every effort to hire citizens. With a strong background in math, some good research experience, and an MSEE, I would think you would have many opportunities. Your only problem will be that you will be overqualified for jobs as "plant engineer" for the local manufacturer, if that is what interests you.

As for a PhD, I am not sure this would help very much in the industrial world. Certainly if you want to enter acedamia, it is a must. I don't have a good feel for the market for engineers with PhDs. We hire them, but we are a small company that does consulting and research. We are also very particular about the PhDs we hire; only hiring those who have studied with certain professors.

If you can meet the requirements for a PE license, get it.

Charles Perry P.E.

I have a very interdisciplinary background. I have a BS in biology and physics. I've done most of my work in computational biology at a national lab, and then after a great collaboration with a pure mathematician, I "found myself" and realized that I wanted to study the physical world from amuch more mathematical perspective. I went back, got my MS in math, and now I'm working on signal processing problems with a group of EEs. What I love to do is make math accesible to technical people so that they can actually use it. I love this type of collaborative work, acting as a liason between the world of math and the world of "practitioners" or users of math. This might sound somewhat strange, but for example, in EE, esp signal processing, there a whole panoply of techniques which most people in EE cannot understand because they have become too mathematical. (I don't know if you are familar with the Bourbaki, a select group of the mathematical elite who gathered to try to make math as abstract and general as possible, to the pt where it was basically, in my opinion useless, but I see certain aspects of engineering math that seem to be somewhat similar) . There is a need for people to help (even technical people like engineers) find solutions to their math problems that they can actually understand, that are easy to use, are practical, and correct. This i what I've done most of my (adult) life, and it's what I'd like to do in EE. My guess is that a postion as a researcher or at a national lab, or doing consulting, if the work was steady enough, would be where I'd like to look.

Matt

This is a fascinating question in light of the modern export of engineering talent. The reduction in available engineering-focused creativity in the U.S. will (is?) forcing much of the research offshore. Given that the workers went in the last decade, and the engineering exodus is well underway, the researchers must follow in the next decade, if for no other reason than to be closer to those that implement the new concepts.

IMHO, we have at least 25 more years of this. Figure at least 10 to get the public schools convinced, and another 12 to shift out the last generation of non-engineeing students (read that "die-hard teachers"), plus university time after that. With retirement age creeping up, you and I might be there to welcome them to the profession.

Kevin

I am sick and tired of those "they need more arts" commercials. No! They need more math and hard science. Toss out the other crap like sports and music to give the kids a real education and if they can't handle it, transfer them to a vocational school. I keep hearing a stupid PSA on WSM radio where they ask a kid "Who is Louis Armstrong"? The kid answers, He was the first man on the moon. The next question is about Mikhail Baryshnikov who is confused with a football player. Its no wonder the kids are coming out of school so stupid. What does either of these have to do with real life, unless you are going to hang around bars and take your chance of making a living, or if you want to prance around on a stage. A good education will let you make a decent living, if you're willing to work.

Most teachers are too blind to make a decent living. The story is that schools don't have enough money, but the reality is that teachers keep re-upping for another year! So, I must disagree with your last sentence, and instead say that a good education will let you make a decent living, if you learned your own value.

If the teachers do not understand their own worth, how can they be expected to understand the worth of their students?

Kevin

Have you never heard, "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach."?

Paul Halmos taught, and he could do. He is just one of many people I could name who are very good academicians in math and also are the best in the world at their research areas. Do you mean just at the HS level or just in EE?

Its a common old saying that means what it says. In most cases someone with good skills in a field will working in that field. Those with a lesser knowledge can't cut it in the workplace and end up teaching others. Its the exceptions that prove the rules, isn't it? I'm sure yo had both good and bad teachers. Ones that can recite the text word for word, but can't get anything to work in the lab, or on the bench. Its the same for some EEs they can do great designs, but couldn't build a working prototype on a bet. Different people have different skill sets and abilities.

I got to thinking after your post, and I began to wonder if there aren't areas of EE that are difficult to "outsource". Are there areas (and I don't know if signal processing is one), that are, just to logistics or practicality, not easy to farm out?

Thanks,