Several peers (friends yet ;-)) I have asked my opinion on the claims of Engineering for some time. And me "I left wanting" enough, so in this post, try to express myself as clearly as possible.
As titled, I think academically, Computer Engineering should be treated like the rest of Engineers. While I think there are many gaps in the curricula that are taught, and the University should adapt the curriculum so that graduates leave with some knowledge, which in my opinion, are indispensable. About content that should be collected could write a lot, and I put it as a task for future posts. In this, I want to extend the powers and duties of Computer Engineering professionals. As the academic level appear to the Directors and Deans, they have enough controlled issue.
First, and for the clueless, I would note that the concepts powers and duties are not synonymous. The cards are competencies in the areas of knowledge that a particular title should be "competent." The professional functions, regulated by law (not curriculum), do not refer to knowledge of people with a certain degree, but specific professional responsibilities of persons holding a particular profession. That is, the powers have a legal character (responsibility), and records of an academic skills (knowledge). Telecommunications Engineering has expertise in computer science, and it seems logical, it is not logical that the Computer Science does not have its own computer chips. But that, as I said before, it seems to already have quite tied the directors and deans. As for the powers do not exist. Another inaccuracy I've heard is that the Engineering will disappear. Already there are new qualifications tailored to Bologna, to be comparable with the old. Currently
School gives you tools to develop skills, if not still working, are wasted. Being equal, I'd take a graduate ... but equal. Ie can not claim to be head of projects without "being in the world." When a surgeon ends his long career, you need to continually forming. With a Computer Engineer must be the same way. This world is changing day by day.
There is room for graduates as analysts, architects, project managers ... and I am of the opinion that we should not pass all ranks (although this would help a lot). What is clear is that you have to prove to be valid and be trained in the disciplines that will develop professionally, and that a priori not guaranteed a title for himself. I fear that a critical application would be led and managed by a graduate without knowledge acquired during the race, and inexperienced.
Graduates who live apart from requiring the working world, real and tangible projects, and ignore the importance of exercise and not remain only theoretical concepts applied to anything, despite having learned to solve complex problems (which is what I value most of my time by the school), then do not resolve them in their day to day, should have no place in the high places of business. Yes, they can study a competition, and become servants or teachers. It is so important to know "what one knows" how to know "what you do not know, and I think that is the problem of some graduates who live behind the market. Do not know "what you do not know."
I see it as a SWOT matrix of life: How to exploit my strengths?, How slow the weak?, How to stop the threats?, How to take advantage of opportunities? From there I set targets, and actions to reach these objectives, but have to work many more 40 hours a week (one sure to be shocked). By this I mean that the title should not be used for a professional unprepared to agree to positions where they demonstrated their inability, or for the entitled to relax and not have to train and gain experience in different subjects you will need in day.
is true that as a result of studying such a tough race, the title comes later in the career (usually), but the fact remains that the progression of the graduate (if leverages the skills learned) will be faster. In fact, the knowledge of "this or that" frameworks are important, but not more than the capacity analysis, algorithms, problem solving ... It takes much less to master a framework that learning to reason (many do not ever would get.) This is what experience has shown me.
therefore, not take away powers to the chips in Telecommunications Engineering, and of course would create the relevant files for Computer Science (we are on it.) As for the powers, would let the market be free, to keep the company in Spain to compete at a disadvantage to overseas, where there is no regulation (at least in the most important). The indiscriminate entry of graduates without experience at the higher skilled of a company, as a result of a hypothetical regulation, and demand for these posts, would be very negative for ICTs (ITs elsewhere) English.
