Physics Feasible In Undergrad For Engineering In Grad School?

[tnunamak]

Hi guys,

If you don't want to read all of the boring background info, just skip to the asteriks** to get to the meat of my question.

I'm in the first semester of my sophomore year of undergrad, and up until now my plan was to major in computer science, major in business, and get a minor in physical education. I chose comp. sci. because I liked it (I'm liking it more and more now), I chose business because I want to work for myself, and I chose the PE minor because it's only 6 classes and it's the only thing that nutrition, exercise physiology etc would count for, and I wanted to take those.

Now I'm having second thoughts about business. I'm taking 18 hours a semester, which is the maximum course load you can take (without paying extra per class), and after taking 2 econ classes, management, and marketing, I've kind of decided that I'm not getting what I wanted out of business, and I'm not enjoying it.

After deciding to drop business, tons of possibilities began to make themselves visible in my mind. I really like the idea of engineering; I took an engineering graphics class in high school drawing things in Auto-CAD but hadn't given it much thought since then. I've always liked to build/create things (one reason I'm drawn to computer science), and after applying higher level math to computer science, I've found that math isn't so bad when I'm using it for my own purpose. Engineering seems to fit pretty well. The problem is that the engineering major here is over 80 hours; you get here as a freshman and your schedule is laid out for you for the next four years, which is unique here because it's a liberal arts school. I don't even know if it would be possible to finish an engineering major if I stayed here for an extra year.

I had a lengthy discussion with a friend of mine who hasn't made up his mind on what he wants to do. He said he is considering engineering, but it obviously too late (for either of us). The alternative would be to put it off until grad school, which I have already planned on going to anyway.

**In the mean time, it would seem like a good idea to put my left over hours towards something of use, and if I plan on doing engineering, physics seems like the best choice. The major is only 30 hours, and if I take a few summer classes I should be able to pull it off.

The risks are basically

1) It just becomes too much work to do and I fail. I don't like to think about this one though, I am sure I can do it if I push myself hard enough.

2) I end up not liking engineering, which would be a very painful discovery, because I will have invested an enourmous amount of energy into it by the time I start doing it in grad school.

The potential benefit is that I might come to love engineering, or even physics, more than I thought and my career choice will be easy. There are certain aspects of it that I already know I will enjoy, but there might be others I run into that detract from the whole thing. Only experience will tell.

I will be working pretty much non-stop. I have no illusions about that. I have never worked like that before, so I am not completely sure if I can handle it. I would guess that I can do it but I don't know at what cost or side effect. I am very determined.

My question is, does my plan seem realistic and will it get me where I am hoping to go? Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I would be glad to hear any comments you guys have.

Thanks

Tim

Edited September 27, 2005 by tnunamak

[scottkursk]

1) It just becomes too much work to do and I fail. I don't like to think about this one though, I am sure I can do it if I push myself hard enough.

It's better to have tried and failed than to have never tried. Mind you, don't do something stupid and suddenly devote your life to marble sculpture if you can't even draw. It took me 6 1/2 years to get through college and I've got an amazing well rounded education that has served me well. My father was a rocket scientist, seriously, and so he wanted me to become an engineer but I hated it. He had a mind for it and truly enjoyed it. He opened a business after he retired from NASA but it floundered becuase he had absolutely no "instinct" for business. Everything isn't for everyone. So I went with PoliPhi because I was interested in politics, economics, etc.

2) I end up not liking engineering, which would be a very painful discovery, because I will have invested an enourmous amount of energy into it by the time I start doing it in grad school.

Tim

Three years into a political philosophy degree I had no intention of going into law but into politics. I discovered Objectivism in that time and realized I'd have to comprimise my beliefs and become an amoral drone to be successful in the campaign management field, which is what I wanted to do. I switched to personel management and never looked back. I earn a whole lot more than I ever would have had I not started over in year 3. However, I got a well rounded education and have used my knowledge of politics and philosphy to my advantage as a stockbroker. Heck, I originally had no intention of becoming a stockbroker since I only had 1 finance class in college. I wanted to go into HR. So never fear about what the results are because you will find a field that you excel in if you are a strong person and are willing to work hard at it and keep looking.

[andrew]

Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I would be glad to hear any comments you guys have.

I'm currently a sophomore at the University of Michigan pursing a degree in Mathematics and Economics, so I don't claim to be any wiser about this than you.

I think pursuing Computer Science and Physics is great, because as long as you have a minimal liberal arts education to compliment your concentration, you are left with a lot of options for graduate work. Your concentration will provide you with excellent quantitative reasoning and critical analysis skills, which are needed for any graduate program (Engineering, Business, Law, etc.).

Basically, from what I've learned by talking to advisors and professors, your undergraduate education is the best chance you'll get to study a broad group of subjects that really interest you. Just make sure you study a passion of yours, learn it well, and you'll be open to numerous graduate options.

I'm not sure if that helps at all, but it's my 2 cents.

...after applying higher level math to computer science, I've found that math isn't so bad when I'm using it for my own purpose.

P.S. Ever considered getting an applied math degree, say in discrete math and algorithmic methods? If you are certain computer science is a desired career path, a strong understanding of the mathematical core of computer science might be helpful.

Good luck.

Edited September 28, 2005 by andrew

[scottkursk]

Basically, from what I've learned by talking to advisors and professors, your undergraduate education is the best chance you'll get to study a broad group of subjects that really interest you. Just make sure you study a passion of yours, learn it well, and you'll be open to numerous graduate options.

I agree to a point. College tends to give you a basis of knowledge in your field. It's when you actually get out into the field that you get to start applying your knowledge and building upon it. That is why work study and a quality internship can be worth its weight in salt. I've seen people with degrees as diverse as art history and engineering become extremely succesful stockbrokers. I've seen even more people with 4.0s in finance and marketing from good schools fall flat on their face because they couldn't think "outside the box." (apologies but it fits even though I detest that phrase)

What the succesful people all shared in common is the ability to learn and adapt. Mind you, my field is not as techincally driven as engineering fields but the idea is the same. But then sales and finance is in a very real sense as hard to learn to be good at as being able to set up an EMC storage array. It's really a matter of what you are good at and more imporatnly what you enjoy doing.

As for your advisors, when I was in college in the late 80's, every advisor and his brother was advising people to get liberal arts degrees but take enough IT, finance, or whatever classes to give you some qualifications. That was bad advice because I saw a large number of people with bs degrees that have no real applicability in their field. If you are interested in math, focus there but try to fit in some philosphy or logic classes along with some art history. You'll be more well rounded and though you may not see a direct correlation immediately, when you get out in the work a day world you'll be able to view problems from different perspectives than people who have strictly focused educations. That will give you a real leg up and improve your technical skills.

[HaloNoble6]

I have extensive experience with the matter. Answer the following:

-Do you enjoy, or do you see yourself enjoying the idea of, discovering new concepts in science?

-Do you enjoy, or do you see yourself enjoying the idea of, discovering new ways to apply the spectacular amount of scientific concepts that already exist?

-Which of the above two do you think you would enjoy more? Would you enjoy both? Would one not be acceptable at all?

The practice of engineering, generally, is concept application. That is, it's applied physics. The study of physics is, generally, concept formation. So, basically, all engineers need a strong background in physics, but if you think you'll get bored with finding new applications for physics, and would rather find new physics, act accordingly. The pure physics track, however, is very long, and highly academic. Academia comes with a set of baggage, so you probably should also take this into account. Just some thoughts.

[xavier]

I'm a senior mechanical engineer at the University of Michigan. I've had a few summer internships and am applying to engineering graduate schools.

I agree with Felipe...sort of.

In general, if you have a strong background in math and science, you should be able to get into an engineering grad school. Keep in mind that for engineering, math is more important than science. Engineers take upper level math classes, but only need freshman physics.

This leads to the workload you mentioned. If you can do senior level math, you will mostly breeze through the engineering classes. If you dislike using math, engineering school will be a nightmare.

Since you are majoring in computer science, it seems like a route you may want to consider is a dual major in computer science and math, then go to grad school for computer science engineering.

I'm a big engineering geek, so I may be biased, but it seems like such a natural extension to go from computer science (liberal arts school) to computer science (engineering). The only difference is a focus on appication.

[tnunamak]

P.S. Ever considered getting an applied math degree, say in discrete math and algorithmic methods?

Not really, I like math but I think I would prefer more of a focus on whatever science, where I would just pull from math whenever I needed to.

As for your advisors, when I was in college in the late 80's, every advisor and his brother was advising people to get liberal arts degrees but take enough IT, finance, or whatever classes to give you some qualifications. That was bad advice because I saw a large number of people with bs degrees that have no real applicability in their field. If you are interested in math, focus there but try to fit in some philosphy or logic classes along with some art history.

The curriculum is set up so that I will have to take plenty of classes that don't fit my field, but I don't usually try very hard in those classes or pay attention too much (I get decent enough grades). I am taking things like art history, so if they end up helping me... great.

I have extensive experience with the matter. Answer the following:

-Do you enjoy, or do you see yourself enjoying the idea of, discovering new concepts in science?

-Do you enjoy, or do you see yourself enjoying the idea of, discovering new ways to apply the spectacular amount of scientific concepts that already exist?

-Which of the above two do you think you would enjoy more? Would you enjoy both? Would one not be acceptable at all?

The practice of engineering, generally, is concept application. That is, it's applied physics. The study of physics is, generally, concept formation. So, basically, all engineers need a strong background in physics, but if you think you'll get bored with finding new applications for physics, and would rather find new physics, act accordingly. The pure physics track, however, is very long, and highly academic. Academia comes with a set of baggage, so you probably should also take this into account. Just some thoughts.

Until recently, raw science and math were never very exciting to me in themselves, but lately I've been applying higher level math like calculus to computer science and my feelings about math have changed drastically. I like it now .

Between discovering new concepts in science, and applying existing ones, I think I would like both, but if it comes to something like researching in a lab, or building things as an engineer, engineering sounds more appealing, if that's what you mean.

Between math and physics, which would you consider more important for engineering (I can do a math major or physics major)? I ask in case you don't read my response to xavier below.

Keep in mind that for engineering, math is more important than science. Engineers take upper level math classes, but only need freshman physics.

This leads to the workload you mentioned. If you can do senior level math, you will mostly breeze through the engineering classes. If you dislike using math, engineering school will be a nightmare.

You say that math is more important than physics... Why? Everyone I have talked to, including a very bright computer science professor who has an astrophysics phD, and who's word I take very seriously, say that physics would be more useful than math.

You are the first engineer I have talked to though, and you seem to think otherwise. So now I'm back to the question of, if I want to do engineering in grad school, would math or physics be more helpful? And when you say senior level math, what level are we talking about?

One thing I haven't considered until now, is to just forget about getting a second major, and take engineering/math/physics classes that wouldn't amount to anything on paper, but would help me in grad school. I don't know if I like the idea of that, but if you guys have any thoughts about it, I'd be glad to hear them.

Edited September 30, 2005 by tnunamak

[xavier]

You say that math is more important than physics... Why? Everyone I have talked to, including a very bright computer science professor who has an astrophysics phD, and who's word I take very seriously, say that physics would be more useful than math.

You are the first engineer I have talked to though, and you seem to think otherwise. So now I'm back to the question of, if I want to do engineering in grad school, would math or physics be more helpful? And when you say senior level math, what level are we talking about?

One thing I haven't considered until now, is to just forget about getting a second major, and take engineering/math/physics classes that wouldn't amount to anything on paper, but would help me in grad school. I don't know if I like the idea of that, but if you guys have any thoughts about it, I'd be glad to hear them.

To rephrase Felipe's question: Do you want to:

A. Discover the laws of nature so that engineers can use them to improve our lives, OR

B. Take the laws of nature discovered by scientists and use them to improve our lives.

An engineer only needs freshman science, but needs upper level math like calculus, partial differential equations, linear algebra.

For example, a mechanical engineer only uses F=ma. Take an example problem in a freshman physics book, say, an object and an applied force. But what if this force is distributed unevenly along the surface of the object? And the surface is curved and the force is only normal to the surface (hydrostatic)? Now you need differential calculus to solve the problem. What if your object has different rigidity, so that it has different spring constants at different parts, in different directions? Now you need transformation matrices and linear algebra to model and solve the problem. So it has turned from a physics problem to an engineering problem. Lots of math, but the physics is only Newton's mechanics, not black hole theory or the Schrödinger equation or anything like that.

I can guess what happens with computer science. A computer scientist will say "Method A is accurate, Method B has fast convergence, and Method C has good cache." A computer science engineer will say: "Can we combine the best of the 3 to have good accuracy, convergence, and cache? What trade-offs will I have to make? Which is my priority, given my application?"

When you apply to grad school, you attach your transcript, so they see what classes you took. In your essays, you can tell them you focused on science/math classes. I would focus on math more than science.

Generally, engineers make more money than scientists, and have more job opportunties. This is because engineering school focuses on math and problem solving.

Of course, you can blur the line, with "applied physics" or "applied physics engineering" which some schools have.

Oh yeah I forgot:

If you want to go to grad school for comp. sci. engineering, major in comp. sci., even if it is liberal arts school. Don't major in math or physics. A minor in math may help, but a minor in physics will not.

Most important: do what you like!

Edited September 30, 2005 by xavier

[tnunamak]

Thanks. I am still majoring in computer science, I will just be taking physics on as a second major.

Maybe I should show you the physics and math majors.

Physics:

Courses Required for Bachelor of Arts degree in Physics

(30 hours of Physics + 15 hours of Math)

* PHYS-1311 (or 1309) Introductory Mechanics

* PHYS-1111 Introductory Mechanics Lab

* PHYS-1312 (or 1310) Introduction to Electricity, Magnetism, and Waves

* PHYS-1112 Intermediate Physics Lab

* PHYS-2094 Physics Seminar (4 semesters)

* PHYS-3131 Advanced Experimental Physics I

* PHYS-3321 Statistical Physics and Thermodynamics

* PHYS-3322 Classical Mechanics and Nonlinear Dynamics

* PHYS-3323 Intro to Modern Physics

* PHYS-3324 Experimental Physics

* PHYS-3335 Electromagnetic Fields

* MATH 1311 Calculus I

* MATH 1312 Calculus II

* MATH 2321 Calculus III

* MATH 3323 Applied Linear Algebra

* MATH 3336 Differential Equations

And at least one of the following:

* PHYS-3225 Photonics & Electronics Lab

* PHYS-3325 Optical Physics

* PHYS-3333 Quantum Physics I

Math:

*MATH 1311 – Calculus I

*MATH 1312 – Calculus II

*MATH 2321 – Calculus III

*MATH 2326 – Intro to Abstract Mathematics

*MATH 3323 – Applied Linear Algebra

*MATH 3360 – Real Analysis I

*MATH 3362 – Modern Algebra I

*MATH 2094 (twice) – Major’s Seminar

*MATH 3194 – Junior Writing Workshop

*MATH 4394 – Senior Project

6 of the following, at least one must be numbered 4XXX

*MATH 3320 – Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists

*MATH 3334 – Mathematical Statistics I

*MATH 3335 – Mathematical Statistics II

*MATH 3336 – Differential Equations and Linear Algebra

*MATH 3338 – Mathematical Modeling

*MATH 3341 – Theory of Numbers

*MATH 3343 – Combinatorics

*MATH 3351 – Numerical Analysis I

*MATH 3352 – Numerical Analysis II

*MATH 3355 – Non-Euclidean Geometry

*MATH 3357 – Partial Differential Equations

*MATH 3359 – Difference Equations

*MATH 4361 – Real Analysis II

*MATH 4363 – Modern Algebra II

*MATH 4364 – Theory of Complex Variables

*MATH 4367 – Advanced Differential Equations

*MATH 4391 – Special Topics

*MATH 4398 – Honors Thesis

*MATH 4399 – Honors Thesis

As you can see, the physics major entails taking math through linear algebra and differntial equations, whereas the math major will give me no physics.

Considering this, would math still be the better choice in your opinion?

[xavier]

If it's your second major that you can't decide on, talk to a couple of engineering professors, preferably in the areas that interest you. At this point, you are fine tuning, and won't make a big difference in grad school admissions, since both math and physics are technical-ish.

If you do math, you will be a super brainy computer science engineer. Or something like that.

If you do physics, you will have a broader background, with a more diverse skill base.

[tnunamak]

It looks like I'm the gears have been put into motion for me to start doing physics, I'm going to sit in the physics I class then go from there next semester.

[peoplater]

You seem like a smart guy and like many other smart people you have the same problem. For a second, just forget about everything, and by that I mean money, fame, power, recognition, failure, success and all the other stuff that goes with being smart. Once you do that ask yourself this question, "What is my passion?". If you can answer that question then you will be set.

[Eternal]

I'm an engineer myself. I got my B.S. in Electrical Engineering, and then followed up with M.S. in Electrical Engineering as well. I graduated last year, so I can give you a few pointers, with pretty recent information.

Why pick engineering? I always liked math/physics in high-school, so when it was time for college, I figured I'll probably end up majoring in math or physics. Howerver, once I started looking at the course work, I realized the whole math/physics deal was a little too theoretical for me. Not only that - the second problem was getting a job once you graduate, and a job that pays well. It is then, that I discovered that Engineering may be the ideal combination - the only question was which field of Engineering.

I ended up picking Electrical Engineering, because I was always fascinated with electronics. As a kid I've taken apart more Radios/TV Sets/Computers that I can remember. C. Clarke once said that "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - so in a way Electrical Engineers are modern-day "wizards".

I should also mention, that I considered going into Programming (Computer Science), but in the end decided against it. Here's the reason why: I classify majors as Library Majors, and Classroom Majors. Unfortunatelly Computer Science is a Library Major (my opinion only). What do I mean by Library Major? You can learn the subject on your own, just by going to the library - there's really no need for school. Engineering on the other hand is a Classroom major. There's a lot of hands-on labs involved, with some pretty expensive equipment - so unless you enroll, you can forget about mastering the major. In the end I went to school for Electrical Engineering, and ended up picking programming on my own as a hobby - and I think I did a pretty good job, being that I do a lot of Embedded Programming these days.

I had a number of friends majoring in Computer Science (my roomate was actually one of them), and most of them did the Math double major, because it only required a few extra classes - so if you plan on sticking to Computer Science, I strongly urge you to look into that - it may be worth it. As far as the curriculum, both Computer Science majors, and Engineering majors had the same courses during the first year, and then it slowly started to diverge during sophomore year (but my Computer Science friends were still in most of my classes) - it's only starting in your Junior year, that Engineering classes really take off. Computer Science majors take much more Math courses than Engineering majors - the furthest we got was Differential Equations, and Probability and Statistics, but at the same time we did more Physics than Computer Science people.

A few notes regarding Physics vs. Math, as when it applies to Engineering. Forget Physics - as somebody correctly pointed out in this thread before, as an engineer you only use the most fundamental physics concepts - it's Math that really helps you deal with problems. And not some boring "proof math" either - we're talking the "interesting" math - Fourier Analysis will become your friend forever. Actually if I had done anything different in my path of study, it would be taking more Math courses as an undergrad - especially Discrete Mathematics, because it's indispensable when you're working in digital domain.

The nice thing about majoring in Engineering, is that you will get to do a little in any path of engineering, no matter what major you picked. Even though I was an Electrical Engineer, I got to play around with some Chemical Engineering, do some Mechanical Engineering, and take some required Programming courses as well, not to mention Math and Physics. And I have two Electrical Engineering friends who ended up working for big banks, because of their good Systems backgrounds. Also - don't forget that Engineering majors are very flexible - because they allow you to focus on specific Concentrations that you enjoy towards the end. EE is one of the toughest majors out there, so it clearly shows that I you are capable of learning.

So here's my advice. First of all - no matter what you do - don't forget one fundamental truth. Most employers couldn't care less about how many majors/minors you have. What they care about is, whether you are capable of doing the job, or at least learning to do the job. That is one reason, why instead of wasting my time taking 100 classes a semester, to satisfy dual major requirements, I only ended up sticking to my original major. Instead, once junior year started, and I was able to start taking a lot of evening classes, I found an entry position in my field. Initially I was doing crap-work, because I didn't know enough - but I learned, and I learned fast, and while some of my buddies were starting to look for a job after getting their B.S., I already had a full-time position, and a title of an Engineer in my company, with 2 years of experience. Always opt for getting more experience, as opposed to more courses.

[Tesla]

I've got degrees in math and physics, and I currently work for a high-tech company. Speaking from personal experience I can say that in industry the difference between a scientist and an engineer is very slight. This will vary depending on your field, but for the several companies I've worked most technical people end up doing much of the same work. Majoring in physics is a bit of a double edged sword. The generality of the field gives you a very broad skill set and a great resume, but at the same time it doesn't really give you specific expertise. Let's just say that I had to slog away at crappy jobs for a few years before getting good work.

As far as preparing you for graduate study in engineering, I think it's great. You get great problem solving, mathematics, programming, and electronics experience, all of which are very valuable tools for engineering.

[tnunamak]

I spoke with an engineering professor last week to ask about what it would take to get into grad school and she basically told me that I might as well stay here an extra year and do an engineering major, because I will be taking all of the classes sooner or later. So now I am registered for two engineering classes and am on track to graduate with a degree in 2009, on top of my CS degree. I don't know if I will stick with physics, it is another 22 hours after I take the required classes for engineering.

I should also mention, that I considered going into Programming (Computer Science), but in the end decided against it. Here's the reason why: I classify majors as Library Majors, and Classroom Majors. Unfortunatelly Computer Science is a Library Major (my opinion only).

I understand exactly where you are coming from when you say this, but let me tell you, even if I had not come to college and spent the same amount of effort/work on learning programming, I would probably not have been as good at it in three years as I have gotten in a year and a half. There are things that the professors direct you to learn where you don't understand the point of learning them -- until later. For example, I am taking a functional programming class right now, and I will probably never do functional programming again after this. If I had decided to learn how to program on my own, I would have never even considered functional. But what will I get out of it? On top of other things, I can solve recursive solutions blindfolded, which is an extremely good skill to have. Also, computer science is NOT programming. Computer science is the science of computing. Programming is just using a language to solve a problem. about 20-30% of the classes I have taken so far have included no programming, but have been based upon theory, and I'm sure I will see more of that when I get into more upper level classes. Anyway, I only have 5 more of them left and it just makes sense for me to finish what I started if it's not going to be that hard.

I had a number of friends majoring in Computer Science (my roomate was actually one of them), and most of them did the Math double major, because it only required a few extra classes - so if you plan on sticking to Computer Science, I strongly urge you to look into that - it may be worth it.

At my school, computer science has very minimal math requirements (calculus I and either some logic classes or two other math classes of your choice), so a math double would not be ideal in my situation.

A few notes regarding Physics vs. Math, as when it applies to Engineering. Forget Physics - as somebody correctly pointed out in this thread before, as an engineer you only use the most fundamental physics concepts - it's Math that really helps you deal with problems. And not some boring "proof math" either - we're talking the "interesting" math - Fourier Analysis will become your friend forever. Actually if I had done anything different in my path of study, it would be taking more Math courses as an undergrad - especially Discrete Mathematics, because it's indispensable when you're working in digital domain.

This is something I have been realizing more and more after talking to engineering professors and students. The engineering major at my school only requires two physics classes, so as I have said above, I don't know if I will stick with it or not after switching to engineering. We'll see.

The nice thing about majoring in Engineering, is that you will get to do a little in any path of engineering, no matter what major you picked. Even though I was an Electrical Engineer, I got to play around with some Chemical Engineering, do some Mechanical Engineering, and take some required Programming courses as well, not to mention Math and Physics. And I have two Electrical Engineering friends who ended up working for big banks, because of their good Systems backgrounds. Also - don't forget that Engineering majors are very flexible - because they allow you to focus on specific Concentrations that you enjoy towards the end. EE is one of the toughest majors out there, so it clearly shows that I you are capable of learning.

This is another thing that helped me decide to start an engineering major in undergrad -- I don't know what type of engineering I want to do, so if I can get a taste of each field, I will be better off.

Most employers couldn't care less about how many majors/minors you have. What they care about is, whether you are capable of doing the job, or at least learning to do the job. That is one reason, why instead of wasting my time taking 100 classes a semester, to satisfy dual major requirements, I only ended up sticking to my original major.

If I started over, I probably would have just done engineering had I known that I wanted to do it. But I am only a few classes away, and I find it interesting, and I may want to do some CS work sometime anyway.

I could honestly care less about what employers want. I'll find the job I want, I'm not worried about that. I just want to make sure that I am going down a path that I want to go down and that will get me to where I am trying to go.

As far as preparing you for graduate study in engineering, I think it's great. You get great problem solving, mathematics, programming, and electronics experience, all of which are very valuable tools for engineering.

This is a little encouraging, and now that I think about it, it makes a lot of sense.

Thanks guys.

[Tesla]

Before deciding to stay an extra year as an undergraduate you might want to consider the cost. It might be cheaper to take the same courses as a graduate student. If you get tuition waivers, as some programs provide to graduate students, that would be 1 year that you don't have to pay as an undergraduate. But without waivers tuition as a grad student is inevitably more expensive than for an undergraduate.

I could honestly care less about what employers want. I'll find the job I want, I'm not worried about that. I just want to make sure that I am going down a path that I want to go down and that will get me to where I am trying to go.

I suggest you change your attitude towards what employers want... The employment marketplace is about supply and demand after all. You should definitely work in the field you like but there is a lot to be said for tailoring your skill set to make yourself more employable.

[Eternal]

I suggest you change your attitude towards what employers want... The employment marketplace is about supply and demand after all. You should definitely work in the field you like but there is a lot to be said for tailoring your skill set to make yourself more employable.

I would also add, that whatever you are learning in school right now, is already outdated by a few years if not more, especially when it comes to engineering. That's why your ability to learn fast is much more valuable, than what you already know.

[tnunamak]

Before deciding to stay an extra year as an undergraduate you might want to consider the cost. It might be cheaper to take the same courses as a graduate student. If you get tuition waivers, as some programs provide to graduate students, that would be 1 year that you don't have to pay as an undergraduate. But without waivers tuition as a grad student is inevitably more expensive than for an undergraduate.

I suggest you change your attitude towards what employers want... The employment marketplace is about supply and demand after all. You should definitely work in the field you like but there is a lot to be said for tailoring your skill set to make yourself more employable.

By getting the undergraduate degree and staying one extra year, I should be able to eliminate much more than I would be able to in graduate school during that extra year, since I can begin taking classes for the degree immediately. The engineering major at my school is over 80 hours, in contrast to some majors which are as few as 30-35, so I'll be covering a lot of ground. The other option would be to stay until my fourth year, then go to graduate school without the undergraduate degree and pick up where I left off. I don't really like this idea because I'd be a few credit hours away from an undergraduate degree which might make a difference in determining what graduate school I am able to go to, among other things. Also, I was very lucky that my grandfather, before he passed away, arranged a trust which covers education expenses for myself and all of his other grandchildren. From what I understand, there is more than enough money available, so that I don't have to worry about the cost of school. Unless it would make a huge difference financially, I don't know that it would be worth it. Also, if I end up liking physics, staying the extra year will give me time to explore that more as well.

As far as worrying about what employers want, the question of me having a job should be a non-issue for the most part. Concerning what specific work that I want to do, could you explain a little more about what you mean when you say "tailoring your skill set?" To what extent, in your opinion, should it play a role? My attitude is not that I should completely neglect what employers are looking for, but that it will be a much lower priority than doing precisely what I want to do. I can't really see the need for a job necessitating a major change in how I pursue my academic career.

I would also add, that whatever you are learning in school right now, is already outdated by a few years if not more, especially when it comes to engineering. That's why your ability to learn fast is much more valuable, than what you already know.

This makes a lot of sense. In computer science, for example, you use very little of the actual material that you have learned in school, once you get to the real world. By then, however, you should be accustomed to learning new languages and should be able to pick things up pretty quickly. I can see it being the same way in engineering. Hopefully, this shouldn't be a problem for me (I don't think it will).