Master's in Engineering: Full-Time, Work First, or Part-Time Study?

Hello.
I am in the 4th year of automation and robotics (last semester) of the so-called I degree (VII sem.).
I have a few questions ...
1. Is it worth following Eng. to go "to master's" in full-time studies?
2. Could it be better to donate further education and look for a job at all?
3. Could it be better to find a job and go to "master's" degree in absentia?

How does the employer view the MSc?
There is some difference between mgr inż. and Eng. in starting work?

Hello!
In my opinion, it is worth doing a master's degree. I am in the 5th year of mechanics and no one I know at the faculty (both automatics and mechanics) graduated from Eng. they all went to the MSc. Maybe there will be voices against my opinion, but if only a colleague has the opportunity, let him go to the MSc in daytime, maybe it will not make any difference to one employer, but it may disturb the other. I encourage my friend to tire himself for another year !!!

Of course it's worth doing an MSc! Even in absentia. I have many colleagues at different stages of learning, and each one, however, strives to have as much as possible. It is true that I had uniform studies, but if it were otherwise, I would probably also strive for a master's degree.

Let me put it this way: the engineer himself is treated in the workplace as a technical specialist. A master's degree is a higher culture of science.

I hope I convinced you.

This year I graduated from MSc and I do not regret it. It was definitely worth it. It is worth considering such a solution in order to start work and study extramural, because then you will gain experience.

I will say yes, it depends on your situation, if you have your own company or you work in a stable company which is enough, it probably doesn't make sense.
And the second thing is whether you work in a profession at all, the one you are learning.
I went to the master's degree and now I'm finishing it, but I have mixed feelings about this decision. The choice is yours anyway.

It is always worth raising qualifications.
Most when I am young.
In life, it throws us in different directions.
The more you know, the better for you.
But you don't necessarily have to do a Master of Science (MSc) in the same specialty.
Then you will have more choice in the labor market.

And I know a lot of history or political science degrees working in key positions in companies.
As our firefighter says, everyone has a mummy
And the results of this is.
Learning "under the employer" is the biggest mistake you can make.
You learn to know more.

My dear. When I read the content of your posts, I would rather incline to the view that you are not predisposed to going to master's degree . Please take into account that an engineering degree is a professional title and insignificant in the current trends, where a certificate must be obtained for each activity. A master's degree has always been a university degree. And it is clear that not everyone has to have and use higher education. However, in the circles of management (and perhaps the intelligentsia), the title does matter. And whether it is worth it depends on the circumstances. In any case, this is the best time in a stabilized life when it can be done at a relatively low cost. Of course, we consider each case individually. It should also be added that currently studying is not necessarily an intellectual effort. As remuneration has a role in education.
And one more element. If we are operating in the area of former Galicia, it is worth having a sign on the door of the apartment with the words M.Sc. Eng.

Mczapski - and what does the location have to do with it?
On the one hand - doing a Master of Science (MSc) (especially in absentia) gives you practically nothing (except for a paper). Because you will learn the button, and the subject of your work will be 99% different from the subject of your studies.
On the other hand - in companies they look at receipts and the MSc is welcome (recently the doc: twisted .
It is true that I did my MSc in the previous century (a digression - from demotivators: the average person becomes an alcoholic after five years of drinking, the average student after five years of drinking becomes an MSc: twisted , but today I would not like to study anymore: not because of laziness (inherent in me) but it would not bring me anything to my old bubble and work.
My humble man: look for a job and for extramural - as long as you still want.

Mczapski
Currently, an engineer is also a university graduate. Only professional.
PhD MSc or Eng in production, it does not matter.
More experience and knowledge than papi
Because when you write paper yourself, it's something that is the easiest to have.
As for me, a better wise engineer than a MSc who wiped his 3 polytechnics for papyrus before he managed to finish it .
But they respect knowledge and value it if it is needed.

greetings

mczapski wrote:

[...]
And one more element. If we are in the area of former Galicia, it is worth having a sign on the door of the apartment with the inscription mgr. Eng.

But here it is obvious that there is a mistake in the abbreviations mentioned above ... ... Oh tempora o mores

mczapski wrote:

If we are operating in the area of former Galicia, it is worth having a sign on the door of the apartment with the words M.Sc. Eng.

Also, what some residents of the capital may hang on their door a sign with the words "attention, this is a smart guy".

Maybe this is a conversation on a different topic, but why "the rest of the world" doesn't like Varsovians?

If you are a young person without experience, it may be worth it, because at least with such a certificate you have a better chance of working, especially abroad, but you will certainly not learn anything if you want to have money and not praise, start your own business, such a paper is not for you then Nothing is needed, even then if something did not work out, it will be more important a professional achievement or apprenticeship than a certificate.
The richest people are poorly educated, at least in schools, but they decide about the shape of this world I have always wondered why those who teach usually make poverty when they are so wise? .
I even noticed that my friends, when they have problems, for example with work or free time, teach in schools and there they become terribly "magi" and even it's hard to talk to them normally, I also had a short episode in education, but I do not mention kindly especially the teaching staff .

If you have a choice, choose the second stage in absentia. I am going to do so, because the timetable irritates me. We start at 8 am, one activity, a window, a second class, a window, a third activity, a window ... and thus we finish Wednesdays and Thursdays at 8:00 pm. At least you will have all the classes on the weekend and a week at your own disposal.

The employer may require MSc. for purely formal reasons, such as statistics, regulations, srutu tutu. We live in such a reality that even if you could build nuclear reactors and you do not have permission to do so - fall on the tree. You need paper for a stupid forklift. That is why it is good to collect as much as possible of these papers, and universities organize various courses, and there are discounts or even 100% free for students, so it is worth being a student to get everything you can from the university. And when it comes to classes, it is known that it is theory, theory and only theory. Papers and practical skills count.

Someone once got a job because he wrote in his CV that he is a moderator on the electrode

leonow32 wrote:

You need paper for a stupid forklift.

My friend, I understand, has such a paper, or can he use this "contraption"?

This is how I read these posts and I am not surprised that our country is as "developed" as it is. I understand that someone may say to do sociology or other, quite popular, directions for the paper, but when people want to be engineers and say that studies are only for the paper, I wonder what they are engineers.

This year I graduated from AiR at AGH in Krakow and I have mixed feelings about students. At the beginning, I was very surprised that 90% of people in this field of study graduated from high school. In a few subjects to pass, when everyone wrote some programs, gave lectures, I tried to involve something with electronics in a given topic, so people were surprised how to do such things. Fortunately, there was a small group of people (electronics madmen with which it was possible to do something together. I am generally sure that there are many people who finished AiR without having a soldering iron in their hands. Well, apparently not everyone needs it to be happy. When asked why they chose this course, the majority replied that it was well paid and that it was easy to find a job. Few people said that they were passionate about it. If someone does not want to learn by himself, then no one will teach him anything, and certainly approaching studies on the basis of just getting credit, misses the point. Integrals, etc. etc., but in my opinion, studies teach a completely different approach to work. They teach you how to work independently, how to gain knowledge yourself, and how to be flexible in terms of your work. It is not possible to use all the acquired knowledge, but some details have helped me many times. At the end, I will summarize, if someone is not drawn to a given direction, then do not try to push them there, because they will only unnecessarily waste their time and others.
Greetings

Just tell me what does automation have to do with electronics? I mean "pure" control theories.

Motronic wrote:

rasbas wrote:

I am generally sure that there are many people who finished AiR without having a soldering iron in their hands.

I call them "paper engineers".

Why? you need to be able to solder to be an engineer? Especially an automation engineer?

Ladies and Gentlemen! The discussion is a good example of Polish hell. In my speech, not a single word is empty and the unnecessary polemic results from the lack of knowledge and experience of the speakers. Some people do not mind making malicious comments completely meaningless. Rather, it's about expressing formal malice.
I finished my studies a long time ago. I did a lot of work. There were times of elation, ambition and depression.
As for Galicia, I suspect that my colleagues simply do not remember the times when, for example, in Krakow, the title was really important on the door of the apartment, which was not used in other places. That's it.
I will mention that due to the work performed, I got to know a large part of the country from border to border and I happened to be abroad (including several years on contracts)
As for the discussion about the title's status, I was reminded of Kwasniewski's status and the related discussions. If someone works in the so-called management circles, he can say something more about these matters. Hence my and not only my view that this is a very individual matter. Depending on how the fate unfolds, you can say years later that the Master's degree did not bring anything to life, or simply regret that it was not possible early. It is obvious that someone who takes tools (so-called craft tools) and makes them a way of life, titles that are not really needed. But when you want to show off intellectually is another matter. And if someone thinks of working in the scientific field, it is an absolute necessity.
I see. The information that I am in Warsaw is a procedural formality and I have never made it a banner. So malicious statements are probably rather a form of personal complexes, which should be treated.

rasbas wrote:

Integrals, etc. etc., but in my opinion, studies teach a completely different approach to work. They teach how to work independently, gain knowledge by yourself,

And in my opinion it is quite the opposite group collaboration is essential. If I had to do everything myself, I wouldn't get up from my desk. You have to be in a team of people who help each other and I cannot imagine my professional work without cooperation with other people. It is simply impossible for one engineer to do everything. The same in our field of study - someone is interested in electronics, someone else is interested in mechanics, and in this way we complement each other, because people are good for nothing.

Motronic wrote:

ghost666 wrote:

Why? you need to be able to solder to be an engineer? Especially an automation engineer?

I can't imagine otherwise. It's as if the Chief Tailor of the Country couldn't thread a needle.

I don't know why most people confuse electronics and automation After all, you can be a genius automatics without having an idea about electronics:> Well, unless we are talking about a machine repair guy who is called automatics.

Motronic wrote:

ghost666 wrote:

Why? you need to be able to solder to be an engineer? Especially an automation engineer?

I cannot imagine otherwise. It's as if the Chief Tailor of the Country couldn't thread a needle.

Buddy, don't take this as a spite, but you don't understand what I'm writing. An engineer is not only an electronic engineer. Are you suggesting that a bridge engineer also needs to solder? or a petrochemical engineer? It's like asking the Chief Tailor of the Country that he should be able to sculpt - it doesn't add up for me.

Well, unless you just don't know what the aforementioned automation engineer does, then I recommend that you find out and revise your view.

Considering the fact that even in a world without electronics, an automatic machine would have something to do, I still don't know why he needs this soldering iron; universities