Many UK Electronics engineers are doing nothing at work

[Simon]

Sure, give me an IQ test any day. Universities do not quantify your IQ, only your ability to bullshit your way through an exam which in this country seems to amount to being able to write you name and second guess which bit of the poorly written module your poorly written do it at home question is aimed at and copy

Which specific universities are you referring to here?

You're certainly not describing any university exam I ever recall. Mine were incredibly demanding of the ability to understand technical questions and solve them by applying cold, hard science in an objectively correct way.

How old are you?

I am doing a teeside distance learning course at HNC level. I have also had to deal with graduates (I do not know where they studied) who were incapable of problem solving and lacked basic electronics understanding.

[tggzzz]

I have fought valiantly against many an HR team on this front to the point of getting rid of a few HR staff for discrimination 

Excellent.

I've never worked anywhere where I felt that was necessary; perhaps bad HR-droids wouldn't have employed me in the first place.

[tom66]

Which specific universities are you referring to here?

You're certainly not describing any university exam I ever recall. Mine were incredibly demanding of the ability to understand technical questions and solve them by applying cold, hard science in an objectively correct way.

I went to the University of Leeds.  I earned a first class degree (83% grade overall), MEng, in Electronic Engineering, with honours.

I did not find it particularly challenging.  Some exams were hard, but it was mostly a memory exercise. A few exams, I got only 45%, just above the pass mark,  I just wanted them to be over with.  The hardest bits were coursework, but I did electronics as a hobby (and still do).  I had my own lab (oscilloscopes, soldering irons etc) so doing coursework at home, and not in the limited lab hours, meant I could achieve a lot more, and my practical work was generally better, especially software wise. 

Most lectures were a waste of time.  The lecturers could have been easily summarised into 1/3rd or 1/2 the time actually taken, or would be better as a slideshow or article.  As a result, I cannot say I attended every lecture, as I had better things to do with my time.  Mostly finishing coursework.  I didn't have much of a social life during university because I was focused on results.  I also did some contract work to gain experience from the industry while at university and took a gap year to do an internship.

Overall, though, I think it was worth it. I learned a lot at university, and I was able to get a good job offer pretty quickly after graduating.   I've definitely learned more in my last 18 months at my current employer than 4 years of university, though. 

[bd139]

If only the was some kind of test to determine this. Like, I don't know, an exam or something 

Hmm. Problem is when Ug went to the best fire school in the country they made him sit through lectures and text books on making fires. When he graduated first in fire studies and landed himself at a "big fire" company he didn't even know how to make a small fire but knew all the theory. It took 4 years of his 30 year median lifespan to do this fire studies course and landed him with a decade of debt, pretty much finishing him off. Right after this he met Mrs Ug and they had Ug Junior 1, 2 an 3. At this point the money was shit because his fires were no good. So the options were to teach yourself again or find an exit plan. SO fuck that, Ug got into making the new thing he had heard about while at fire school: wheels. Wheels paid for his house and his early retirement so he could live his life out before dying of a preventable disease at the ripe age of 34. Ug likes fire but and likes to play with it but now has time to develop a deep understanding of it.

I see a lot of Ug's. Hell I'm an Ug. What I want to see is more Ig's who pissed around with fire in the woods for a decade and know fire intimately through self interest. Ig wants to do the job because he is interested in it and will cover any gaps in capability and aptitude.

Well, at least they get to do nothing, which is better than spending all day running round the building scribbling dates, times and serial numbers into ledger books. Which seems to be the way things have gotten in big business, thanks to 'accountability' and ass-covering. 

I don't know. There is an advantage there. Some of the accountability and ass covering actually serves to protect the people implicitly as the accountability logical fallacy works in their favour. The accountability chain has to be 100% trusted or it isn't useful and no one wants to admit to the latter. Therefore any shit that goes into it is implicitly trusted even if it's rubbish. You can't question it because you question everything that is in it.

Case in point, back in '02 I was working for a trendy internet startup and we slacked off for a whole week while the boss was away and played Unreal Tournament. Friday 16:30, did timesheets. Was never questioned.

I have fought valiantly against many an HR team on this front to the point of getting rid of a few HR staff for discrimination 

Excellent.

I've never worked anywhere where I felt that was necessary; perhaps bad HR-droids wouldn't have employed me in the first place.

I tend to work for rapidly growing organisations. HR sort of explicitly becomes a function as they scale past 70 or so staff in a department or whole company. You can feel the step of friction there when they start to exist. I think HR is some step function of the universe; any significant organisation automatically evolves HR.

Overall, though, I think it was worth it. I learned a lot at university, and I was able to get a good job offer pretty quickly after graduating.   I've definitely learned more in my last 18 months at my current employer than 4 years of university, though. 

I don't think it was worth it for me. I had to support the course with TOAE to make it of any practical value. So I did a degree side by side with it. The degree was less valuable!

[CJay]

I'd really love to work in one of the companies treez describes, but they don't exist. This is not the soviet union. Yes there are lazy people, but there are not swathes of people paid to willfully do nothing!

Companies like this have existed in the UK, but I think its mostly a bygone thing. In the early 80s I could have taken you to a certain canteen at a certain defence contractor which was full of people, mostly trained mechanics, drinking coffee all day, who were never expected to do a stroke of work.

I am aware that this could have been the case once, but not anymore.

Private companies, perhaps not, but there are a few places I have had the 'pleasure' of doing work for where unions still rule the roost (I've had my union membership questioned and been called 'comrade' in a non ironic way on more than one occasion) and the engineers have a cosy little rest area where they can sleep, watch Sky, play games etc.

True they're on standby but the kit is reliable and I've spent more than a few nights with my feet up waiting for parts to be delivered while they snore in an armchair.

[coppice]

I tend to work for rapidly growing organisations. HR sort of explicitly becomes a function as they scale past 70 or so staff in a department or whole company. You can feel the step of friction there when they start to exist. I think HR is some step function of the universe; any significant organisation automatically evolves HR.

Of course you feel a difference when HR moves it. The day before the company had a staff of 70 people. The day after the company had a head count of 70 resource units. The day before people were seen as individuals, with their own particular strengths and weaknesses. The day after the resource units were seen as a homogeneous interchangeable commodity, despite the front line constantly fighting against this for practical reasons.

[Simon]

I did not find it particularly challenging.  Some exams were hard, but it was mostly a memory exercise. A few exams, I got only 45%, just above the pass mark,  I just wanted them to be over with.  The hardest bits were coursework, but I did electronics as a hobby (and still do).

This is my problem, I have a very poor memory so i would foil most exams, yet in no job has someone told me "you can't use text books" so the exam situation is unrealistic and biased towards people that can remember shit and are vaguely competent even if they are not actually that clever.

[tggzzz]

If only the was some kind of test to determine this. Like, I don't know, an exam or something 

Hmm. Problem is when Ug went to the best fire school in the country they made him sit through lectures and text books on making fires. When he graduated first in fire studies and landed himself at a "big fire" company he didn't even know how to make a small fire but knew all the theory. It took 4 years of his 30 year median lifespan to do this fire studies course and landed him with a decade of debt, pretty much finishing him off. Right after this he met Mrs Ug and they had Ug Junior 1, 2 an 3. At this point the money was shit because his fires were no good. So the options were to teach yourself again or find an exit plan. SO fuck that, Ug got into making the new thing he had heard about while at fire school: wheels. Wheels paid for his house and his early retirement so he could live his life out before dying of a preventable disease at the ripe age of 34. Ug likes fire but and likes to play with it but now has time to develop a deep understanding of it.

I see a lot of Ug's. Hell I'm an Ug. What I want to see is more Ig's who pissed around with fire in the woods for a decade and know fire intimately through self interest. Ig wants to do the job because he is interested in it and will cover any gaps in capability and aptitude.

The trouble with Igs can be that they are very good at fires made from trees, but can't see/understand the similarities/differences of fires made with fossilised trees.

Theory without practice is mental masturbation. Practice without theory is blind alchemical fumbling. Theory and practice are complementary; each is insufficient on its own.

I have fought valiantly against many an HR team on this front to the point of getting rid of a few HR staff for discrimination 

Excellent.

I've never worked anywhere where I felt that was necessary; perhaps bad HR-droids wouldn't have employed me in the first place.

I tend to work for rapidly growing organisations. HR sort of explicitly becomes a function as they scale past 70 or so staff in a department or whole company. You can feel the step of friction there when they start to exist. I think HR is some step function of the universe; any significant organisation automatically evolves HR.

There are a couple of numbers that occur repeatedly. One is that an ideal team size is 4-6; beyond that and intra-team comms becomes a problem. The other is that people can have "relationships" with up to 150 others; beyond that and significant impersonal organisational overhead must appear.

One interesting organisation I worked for was Cambridge Consultants. They had 150 people, excellent HR (two people) and a continual staff turnover for good reasons - people were moving out to other activites in the area, typically startups. Thus I was interviewing candidates while serving my notice period; they had no problem with that since they knew I wasn't going to do anything reprehensible.

[tggzzz]

I did not find it particularly challenging.  Some exams were hard, but it was mostly a memory exercise. A few exams, I got only 45%, just above the pass mark,  I just wanted them to be over with.  The hardest bits were coursework, but I did electronics as a hobby (and still do).

This is my problem, I have a very poor memory so i would foil most exams, yet in no job has someone told me "you can't use text books" so the exam situation is unrealistic and biased towards people that can remember shit and are vaguely competent even if they are not actually that clever.

I have had "open-book" exams. Fools thought that would be sufficient that they could avoid preparation. During the exam there was - and should be - insufficient time to refer to books for more than checking a trivial detail.

Projects, on the other hand, are long duration and relevant use of books and other reference material is amply rewarded.

Hence projects should form a significant portion of the overall grade.

[Simon]

I have had "open-book" exams. Fools thought that would be sufficient that they could avoid preparation. During the exam there was - and should be - insufficient time to refer to books for more than checking a trivial detail.

Projects, on the other hand, are long duration and relevant use of books and other reference material is amply rewarded.

Hence projects should form a significant portion of the overall grade.

I have 7  modules with 3-4 assessments each and one project. What that project is to be is a great mystery because in theory I have not gained enough knowledge from the course to do anything practical so the only way to pass the last practical module is to know my shit outside of the theory I have been taught, ergo the previous 21-28 written assessments not to mention badly written modules are a waste of time and I may as well just do the practical.

[coppice]

I have had "open-book" exams. Fools thought that would be sufficient that they could avoid preparation. During the exam there was - and should be - insufficient time to refer to books for more than checking a trivial detail.

I've never been sure quite what the goal of open book exams really is. Is it to sucker the fools into less preparation, or is it to ensure a well prepared candidate is not severely hampered because one fact has slipped their mind under the stress of the exam. Perhaps its both.

[bd139]

The trouble with Igs can be that they are very good at fires made from trees, but can't see/understand the similarities/differences of fires made with fossilised trees.

Theory without practice is mental masturbation. Practice without theory is blind alchemical fumbling. Theory and practice are complementary; each is insufficient on its own.

Igs tend to know the theory behind it. Igs are the guys who will quite happily use every level of abstraction to solve the problem.

There is a third class; Ogs, who are merely assembly workers.

Ugs -> theoretical only (taught at universities)
Igs -> theoretical and practical (taught in industry after education or self-taught)
Ogs -> practical only (taught at trade schools and apprenticeships)

Hence projects should form a significant portion of the overall grade.

This is where it falls on its arse most of the time. From experience unfortunately. My immediate peers were totally useless. I mean hopeless. We had to work in groups because the final year projects were not insignificant. I carried the entire weight of our group on my shoulders and they leveraged my work to pass. Literally I did the research, the analysis, the engineering and the prototype build and they put their names on it. One of them didn't even turn up to the project meetings, not even once. My attempts to get them to assist were met with blank faces and me having to fill in the gaps in their education because they weren't there half of the time. And they passed with decent degrees. This was a total failure of the education system.

The tutor was even complicit with this because he didn't want to see anyone failing under his name.

I left with a sour taste in my mouth.

[CJay]

I am doing a teeside distance learning course at HNC level. I have also had to deal with graduates (I do not know where they studied) who were incapable of problem solving and lacked basic electronics understanding.

Similar experience here, I looked after final year students on a 'month in industry' program, there was only one out of many that actually had any interest or aptitude for the job, they could all spout theory but had no ability and fell over as soon as they were asked to apply it, one even told me he had no need of ohms law because he had a multimeter.

[CJay]

I have had "open-book" exams. Fools thought that would be sufficient that they could avoid preparation. During the exam there was - and should be - insufficient time to refer to books for more than checking a trivial detail.

I've never been sure quite what the goal of open book exams really is. Is it to sucker the fools into less preparation, or is it to ensure a well prepared candidate is not severely hampered because one fact has slipped their mind under the stress of the exam. Perhaps its both.

Open book exams are not uncommon in industry where a manufacturer offers 'qualifications' but wants to restrict it to employees of companies who are already tied in to the 'dealer' network, it's a lock in that restricts service work to those who are approved.

[nctnico]

Hence projects should form a significant portion of the overall grade.

This is where it falls on its arse most of the time. From experience unfortunately. My immediate peers were totally useless. I mean hopeless. We had to work in groups because the final year projects were not insignificant. I carried the entire weight of our group on my shoulders and they leveraged my work to pass. Literally I did the research, the analysis, the engineering and the prototype build and they put their names on it.

I had a similar experience over 2 decades ago. Well... nearly. The class (about 8 people or so) was offered a complicated project we could tackle as a 'team'. I quickly realised I was the one who was going to do all the hard work. So I declined doing the big project. That didn't get me extra social points though.

[Zero999]

Everyone should hire based on aptitude and capability...

If only the was some kind of test to determine this. Like, I don't know, an exam or something 

*runs*

Sure, give me an IQ test any day. Universities do not quantify your IQ, only your ability to bullshit your way through an exam which in this country seems to amount to being able to write you name and second guess which bit of the poorly written module your poorly written do it at home question is aimed at and copy. Yes in my current HNC course the only way to answer one question was to copy and paste. I gave credit to the course material of course so that i was not accused of plagiarism.

Unfortunately an IQ test wouldn't help much. There will be bright people with no interest in the subject or willingness to work and there are people who are less gifted but more driven. It also won't help out the experienced from inexperienced. A more intelligent person may learn something more quickly, but if there isn't time for them to learn, then it's better to employ someone with the experience.

One of the good things about formal education is it helps to sort out those who can be bothered to learn a lot of stuff which doesn't interest them and those who don't want to.

[tggzzz]

The trouble with Igs can be that they are very good at fires made from trees, but can't see/understand the similarities/differences of fires made with fossilised trees.

Theory without practice is mental masturbation. Practice without theory is blind alchemical fumbling. Theory and practice are complementary; each is insufficient on its own.

Igs tend to know the theory behind it. Igs are the guys who will quite happily use every level of abstraction to solve the problem.

There is a third class; Ogs, who are merely assembly workers.

Ugs -> theoretical only (taught at universities)
Igs -> theoretical and practical (taught in industry after education or self-taught)
Ogs -> practical only (taught at trade schools and apprenticeships)

Ah. If I had known that definition of Igs, I would have agreed. Without any definition I presumed Igs were practical only.

As for your definition of Ig, I agree they are the ideal. I prefer a self-taught Ig to an in-industry Ig because self-taught implies a very strong internal motivation that will last a lifetime.

Hence projects should form a significant portion of the overall grade.

This is where it falls on its arse most of the time. From experience unfortunately. My immediate peers were totally useless. I mean hopeless. We had to work in groups because the final year projects were not insignificant. I carried the entire weight of our group on my shoulders and they leveraged my work to pass. Literally I did the research, the analysis, the engineering and the prototype build and they put their names on it. One of them didn't even turn up to the project meetings, not even once. My attempts to get them to assist were met with blank faces and me having to fill in the gaps in their education because they weren't there half of the time. And they passed with decent degrees. This was a total failure of the education system.

I'm in two minds about cooperative projects. Learning how teams work/fail is valuable experience. Having clearly delineated personal achievement/failure is also valuable. In either case a decent candidate can use the experiences during job interviews; "what I would do differently next time" is something any interviewer likes to hear.

Projects on my course were single-person, but having recently returned to an open day on the 40th anniversary of graduation, it appears that they are now team projects.

The tutor was even complicit with this because he didn't want to see anyone failing under his name.

I left with a sour taste in my mouth.

Yes, that is indeed a modern failing.

As I have recounted elsewhere Prof Eric Laithwaite used to insert one question that could not be answered well in the time. He expected the good students to recognise impossibility and avoid it!

[tom66]

This is where it falls on its arse most of the time. From experience unfortunately. My immediate peers were totally useless. I mean hopeless. We had to work in groups because the final year projects were not insignificant. I carried the entire weight of our group on my shoulders and they leveraged my work to pass. Literally I did the research, the analysis, the engineering and the prototype build and they put their names on it. One of them didn't even turn up to the project meetings, not even once. My attempts to get them to assist were met with blank faces and me having to fill in the gaps in their education because they weren't there half of the time. And they passed with decent degrees. This was a total failure of the education system.

I had the same thing during my third year group project. 

Luckily, the work was marked independently.  One slacker in our group of five (the others were fine) did almost no work and at the end got 33% grade.  I got an 80% grade.  Document what you did, prepare to defend it, and write a good report. 

Some group projects have a collective mark. Those were the worst but a small percentage of the overall module mark.  But I accepted that,  it's the cost of university projects, I guess.  Most of them were marked independently.

[tggzzz]

I am doing a teeside distance learning course at HNC level. I have also had to deal with graduates (I do not know where they studied) who were incapable of problem solving and lacked basic electronics understanding.

Similar experience here, I looked after final year students on a 'month in industry' program, there was only one out of many that actually had any interest or aptitude for the job, they could all spout theory but had no ability and fell over as soon as they were asked to apply it, one even told me he had no need of ohms law because he had a multimeter.

Crap candidates indeed. 'Twas ever thus.

The crap ones need to be kept away from irons and keyboards, and shunted towards something less demanding.

[tggzzz]

Luckily, the work was marked independently.  One slacker in our group of five (the others were fine) did almost no work and at the end got 33% grade.  I got an 80% grade.  Document what you did, prepare to defend it, and write a good report. 

It is a shame to teach undergrads the benefits of armour-plating their back.

[bd139]

The crap ones need to be kept away from irons and keyboards, and shunted towards something less demanding.

Unfortunately they all seem to have ended up in IT 

Luckily, the work was marked independently.  One slacker in our group of five (the others were fine) did almost no work and at the end got 33% grade.  I got an 80% grade.  Document what you did, prepare to defend it, and write a good report. 

It is a shame to teach undergrads the benefits of armour-plating their back.

Actually that makes me happy about my university education. I learned mostly about:

• Politics
• Futility
• Asshats
• Dick sucking

[Simon]

Everyone should hire based on aptitude and capability...

If only the was some kind of test to determine this. Like, I don't know, an exam or something 

*runs*

Sure, give me an IQ test any day. Universities do not quantify your IQ, only your ability to bullshit your way through an exam which in this country seems to amount to being able to write you name and second guess which bit of the poorly written module your poorly written do it at home question is aimed at and copy. Yes in my current HNC course the only way to answer one question was to copy and paste. I gave credit to the course material of course so that i was not accused of plagiarism.

Unfortunately an IQ test wouldn't help much. There will be bright people with no interest in the subject or willingness to work and there are people who are less gifted but more driven. It also won't help out the experienced from inexperienced. A more intelligent person may learn something more quickly, but if there isn't time for them to learn, then it's better to employ someone with the experience.

One of the good things about formal education is it helps to sort out those who can be bothered to learn a lot of stuff which doesn't interest them and those who don't want to.

experience is a non qualification measure. i am suggesting measures that do not go by qualifications alone. Many people take courses in things they think will earn them money. My electrician can't even work out series/parallel resistances yet has more qualifications than me, obviously he would never be applying for a job in electronics and would never get one but he needs my help to set up a pump with some float switches.

[coppice]

Hence projects should form a significant portion of the overall grade.

This is where it falls on its arse most of the time. From experience unfortunately. My immediate peers were totally useless. I mean hopeless. We had to work in groups because the final year projects were not insignificant. I carried the entire weight of our group on my shoulders and they leveraged my work to pass. Literally I did the research, the analysis, the engineering and the prototype build and they put their names on it. One of them didn't even turn up to the project meetings, not even once. My attempts to get them to assist were met with blank faces and me having to fill in the gaps in their education because they weren't there half of the time. And they passed with decent degrees. This was a total failure of the education system.

The tutor was even complicit with this because he didn't want to see anyone failing under his name.

I left with a sour taste in my mouth.

All levels of education love the idea of group projects these days, and for good reason. Showing the ability to work in teams is important in most people's lives. However, nobody has developed any kind of workable mechanism for fair assessment of these things. That doesn't hold anyone back from implementing them, though. They just end up as a mechanism for pissing off and demoralising the smart and motivated, with random marks awarded to all.

In schools there is almost no ability to assess who does what. In universities the projects tend to have some mentoring steps along the way, where some kind of judgement might be made, but its pretty crude. In industry people also struggle to figure out who contributed the most to a package of work, but it matters less there. People aren't being marked at the end of a single package of work. The good people generally stand out from their consistency over multiple packages of work.

[Simon]

Happily i work alone

[schmitt trigger]

coppice;
actually, working in team projects at College is an excellent education to what one will experience multiplied many times during your future work-life.

Which is, how to quickly identify the bad apples, and to isolate them and prevent them from doing harm.

Usually, they are good for running errands, bringing in the pizza and refreshments, and other menial tasks.