PHD vs MS

There are a few UofIs. UIUC? (BSEE '74)

IMO, an MSEE is a useless degree unless there are no jobs open when receiving the MS. The experience gained, money made, and raises in one year (much moreso two) offset any benefits of an MS. Many employers will pay for an MS (and give time off for classes). That leaves the only use for an MS being a way point on the road to a PhD. OTOH, if he's burnt it's time to do something else before it gets worse (it most likely will).

I think more doors close with a PhD than open. The ones that remain open (other than the obvious academic) are research positions and highly theoretical positions in large corporations. If that's what he wants, great. OTOH, there are far more design/development/manufacturing engineering positions than "research" positions, which a PhD might close the door to ("over qualified" isn't a joke).

Let the "kid" find out what he wants to do.

Really! Long time!

I have a friend with a MS in EE. He is working as a contractor doing graphics on control systems. The degree has marginally helped. Most every one is asking for/interested in a PE. If you can not stamp drawings there is little use for upper level degrees. I make about the same money as my buddy and I have an HS diploma and some electrical certifications. Maybe he should consider work study with one of the electrical manufactures. I know Eaton/Cutler-Hammer has positions in the meter development. At least they did in Pittsburgh area or in Canada.

He really needs to pick a path to narrow the feild. I personally took the power path. Not so much into electronics. If there are big switches, transformers I am the guy. This morning I was doing some switching for a facility on their 11.5 MVA substation complex, 69 kV. No big deal, I am pretty sure most PHD's would be shaking once they crossed the fence line. They do not want to pay someone to be there all of the time and I will not work for $11 bucks an hour they pay their electricians. oopps they get double today.

The requirement for a PE is dependent on the industry. There isn't much need for a PE in the microprocessor development end of the biz. ;-) OTOH, there are no HS diploma types around and the senior architects usually have a PhD. Most have a BS or MS (most of them got it after starting).

It doesn't take a PhD to quiver there. 5V is getting a little on the high side for what I do. ;-)

I have not seen any demand or appreciation for a PE outside of construction. But if you have a 4 year degree and can get some other PEs to be references, then getting a PE is a matter of passing a test. I suspect that someone who could NOT pass the PE exam would have to be told to come in out of the rain!

If it were not for the "industrial exemption," everyone using "engineer" as part of a job title is in violation of the Business and Profession Code--at least in California. Thus, you could not be an Electrical Engineer or a Consulting Engineer legally in California without PE registration. I believe that even with the industrial exemption, some titles such as Structural Engineer are reserved not only for PE's but for those who have met other specific requirements.

To be certain, the code is available via internet from some Government sites in California.

Bill

-- Ferme le Bush

6 of one, half a dozen of the other: It's variable and depends on how theoretical or how much research of what types he wants to get into, if at all, or whether he wants to be a hands-on type of guy.

There must be lots of job fairs and even some companies offering interviews just for the sake of learning different branches of the industry.

IMO, one of the best things about an MS is that you're not so limited to any particular field, especially if you excelled in physics and the related courses.

So far the only thing in any of the posts I really disagree with is that an MS can hinder or hurt; that's pure BS. I suppose t hey're referrring to the company feeling they're "over qualified", but the interviews pretty much weed out whether the guy really wants the job or wants a stepping stone. With all that progress, he can also massage his resume in so many different ways it's amazing, and each one will be good.

The PE is true in some fields, but not all by any means. Having a PE has lost a lot of its luster these days too, so it's not what it used to be. IMO and many others too.

Your son is probably in the best environment to get answers to his questions if he puts a little extra time into researching and actually taking with and interviewing any/every company he can locate and get invited to. And that's not counting what the counseling etc at the school can provide him for leads. Any U wants their students to get jobs, so they usually go all out to help the guys figure out the real world. It can be pretty bewildering getting started.

Wishing him the most fantastic luck!

Pop

... : >

: > I have not seen any demand or appreciation for a PE outside of construction. : > But if you have a 4 year degree and can get some other PEs to be references, : > then getting a PE is a matter of passing a test. I suspect that someone : > who could NOT pass the PE exam would have to be told to come in out of the : > rain! Right out of school, they're pretty easy to handle, esp someone like the poster's kid sounds like. After a few years though, the more technically oriented even find it quite a hassle to get through! : >

: >

: If it were not for the "industrial exemption," everyone using "engineer" as : part of a job title is in violation of the Business and Profession Code--at : least in California. Thus, you could not be an Electrical Engineer or a : Consulting Engineer legally in California without PE registration. I believe : that even with the industrial exemption, some titles such as Structural : Engineer are reserved not only for PE's but for those who have met other : specific requirements. : I don't know what that IF means: are you saying you have to be or don't have to be? That's pretty vague, really.

I also think I dispute it unless it's come about in recent years. It's just not clicking: I know a guy without even a degree but who took the tests and passed tham at sc, and he's calling himself an engineer and was hired as an engineer in SD. Some engineers run trains, some ... well, you get my gist, I think. I can't find anything that says an EE must register as a PE in California. I know they tried back about the 70's, maybe 80's, but ... don't think it happened.

Can you give me some references? I'm curious.

TIA,

Pop

: To be certain, the code is available via internet from some Government sites : in California. : : Bill : : -- Ferme le Bush : :

Why does the heading say PHD which is not a PE. Did you mean a BSc in engineering? vs a MSc (or MS) in science?

In Canada, where engineering schools must be accredited to meet certain standards (and these are demanding and periodic reviews are made to ensure that these standards don't slip), a BSc in engineering along with 2 years of proper engineering supervision is required (the standards put the onus of testing on the universities). The difference that I see between here and the US, is that, because of this standard process, engineering graduates do not have to undergo separate tests when applying for P.Eng (PE) status. There are also tests that can be taken by those with considerable experience and knowledge or have graduated from a non-accredited university. These are individualised in that credit may be given for certain subjects. The test material is set by engineering professors in a local accredited university. This is not an easy route.

Oh, Yes- if you use the name "Engineer" you legally have to have a P.Eng. The only exceptions are historic such "steam engineer" "Microsoft System Engineer" is not legal. "Microsoft System Professional " is legal as long as "Engineer" is not used.

The California code is available at

PE's receive enforcement notices from time to time. Usually, but not always, the punishment is a mere slap on the wrist. Every now and then when there is blatant malpractice, the punishment can be sever.

-- Ferme le Bush

Most of my professional life, I was covered by the industrial exemption. When I finally tried for a PE, I had enough experience and a Ph.D. In California either one by itself was sufficient to avoid taking the Fundamentals of Engineering or Engineer-in-Training exam. I went directly to the PE in EE exam and passed the first time around. Not with flying colors.

The exam through me a few curves. Instead of a simple code question as in past exams, there was a multiple part mandatory question regarding emergency hospital power. In addition, previous exams all had a problem on faults that required the use of symmetrical components. That was one of the few things I actually studied for, but that year there was no such problem.

Bill

-- Ferme le Bush