The State of the Electronics Technician (Part 2)
Education, Electronics May 7th, 2007The other day I left you with a bunch of questions about the state of electronics technicians. All questions have answers and sometimes those answers can be painful. What is painful is not the answers the questions have, but the consequences are great if we do not answer and implement the answers.
Over the past few months I have been having enjoyable conversations of late with Louis Frenzel of Electronics Design and Tom McGlew of MATEC about what has been going on in electronics and electronics education. They have helped shaped my comments and questions, as well as brought forth these possible visions.
Much of the training that technicians acquired as recently as five years ago has become out-of-date due to rapid technological advancements in many areas of electronics and other technologies. We can envision a Systems Approach for Electronics Technology education. This fresh, new approach will invigorate electronics curriculum:
- By inserting a systems point-of-view in every phase.
- Programs can be restructured to make them more relevant to industry and more attractive to new generations of students.
- Programs will be more adaptable to the needs of their learners – those who are new students and those who are currently employed.
- Existing curricula need not be replaced wholesale but can be enhanced by adding new approaches and attracting new student populations.
In the long-term electronics technology departments can, no, they must evolve from their current course content to an updated and more systems-orientated orientation that is more in keeping with contemporary practices.
I would really enjoy hearing your perspective on what I brought up. Not all the questions were answered. We should all have our thinking caps on and we should all be working on ways for this vision to become a reality. The consequences are too great not to be thinking about this.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Hi All, Just my 2 cents worth. Electronic technicians are currently being taught as “engineering technicians” a job in my view does not exist anymore. Engineers design, model, evaluate, and test their designs using computer modeling tools. No longer does the engineer take a new design to a technician to have that design built, modified, and tested; instead the engineers computer has simulated the new electronics well enough to enter production. A conventional test technician suffers the same fate with all of the computer modeling and testing/data logging capabilities monitored by the engineer directly. The component level technician is virtually non existent and not cost effective for employers. But we still educate that technician to the component level in a very narrow area of study, I am the first to say the basics are critical however a broader set of basic skills are needed. Consider this we no longer repair most if not all consumer electronics. It is cheaper to purchase a new device that has much more capabilities than to repair the old unit. A technician working in a production environment is subject to that monetary issue, time is money and production can not be down if the company is to be competitive. What does the technician of today do? They have to trouble shoot systems and determine the fastest and cheapest way to repair that system. They have to be able to troubleshoot and maintain electrical, electronic, and mechanical systems as well as implement effective reliable repairs. For technicians to prosper they have to add value to their employers bottom line. Conventional component level education will not perform for our technicians or their employers.
Teach the basics but teach a much broader view of those basics including systems,electrical,electronics, quality, maintenance, machines, and control. Don’t be like the professor that states “my program will never change” Change or die it is as simple as that.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:03 pm
John, I totally agree with your perspective. I get a chance at conferences and visits to various schools around the country to talk with coleagues and many are rapidly coming or already have come to this point of view. Just last year Arizona Atate university has revamped and renamed their department to the “Electronic Systems” department offering both BS and BAS degrees. Here is the challenge that many describe. To continue to bring in topics to augmnet the basics as you suggest, what must come out of the program to make room? I think faculty can best decide that in view of their local situation.
mike