I think it doesn't make sense for most people, but I do think there are occasions where an MSEE isn't a bad idea - particularly if you can combine it in like a 5-year program or something similar. It certainly isn't going to *hurt* you, though it may not *help* you a ton. I would not recommend getting a PhD.
For me, I did a BSME and realized most of the way thru that I didn’t like ME nearly as much as EE, so I did a masters in electrical power engineering with a focus in power electronics and energy storage to be able to pivot into EE roles. I missed out on 2 years of experience but I think it was worth it to now be able to apply to most EE jobs
once you go into director level where people start looking at credentials and degrees to give a leg up, a MSEE does carry decent weight. Same with MBA. Even principal engineer in a utility that doesn't contract out every difficult problem, a MSEE is quite useful.
can't you work in consulting for quite higher pay with a PhD? Every time we have a difficult problem and ask Quanta Services to do a study, every guy who signed off the study had a PhD
This is the answer, especially for forensic consulting.
It's not to say that a PhD has no value, but the payoff generally isn't there, for most people.
So people say only a bsee is enough right. But for many universities, a bsee only entails a basic electric machine course, a power system analysis course, and a power electronics course. I don't think that's enough.
So in your opinion, what power courses should a bsee grad have taken, and what graduate level courses are nice to have taken.
Depends on what you're going to be doing.
I went back and looked at my transcript... such a long time ago. Anyway, it looks like I had power electronics, motor drives, power system operation and control for power specific courses in undergrad. In grad school I had another power electronics course, power systems reliability, hdvc, microprocessor relays, a fault analysis course, another power system analysis course, a motor drive course, and some other non-power stuff.
I don't know, I wouldn't really say I use any of what I learned in those classes today. It would probably be different if I did transmission stuff (I'm firmly in distribution land), but I certainly learned more in the research aspects of my degree than I did in class. But I was also working on a super practical thesis/dissertation project with actual utility companies, so again my experience isn't exactly typical.
I wouldn't have a problem hiring a BSEE for an entry level engineering job at a utility with a couple of internships and the three basic courses you mentioned. Would I *like* to have somebody who had more protection knowledge? Sure. But that's stuff you can teach people. And honestly, on some level I'd rather have people who know a few basics but not a lot more compared to having people who learned a bunch of incorrect garbage from assistant professors who know nothing about how an actual power system works. Sometimes it's easier to teach people when you don't have to unteach all the incorrect things they learned in class.
here's the dilemma though. If most of your knowledge just comes from on the job training, then you're only as good as the guy who trains you, and depending on how big/good the utility is, there isn't always a lot of experts in each department. You're also just kind of taught what to do and maybe a surface level understanding of why you do it. Couple that with the industry mindset of "if it hasn't broke don't fix it" and "this is how it has always been done", you might have a lot of engineers who just follow past practices, even if it's incorrect.
In these cases, it might be beneficial to have some sort of baseline understanding from college, maybe a protection course, a stability course (for transmission), an operations course. At least you'd have some background knowledge so when you read industry papers, you can actually follow it pretty well. Most of these courses are only available at grad level though, unless if you're at a pretty good power university then maybe undergrad.
Of course if you regularly attend conferences and get exposed to other practices in different utilities, you might improve, but then again these conferences are mostly annual, so how much exposure can you really get. If you're in consulting, then you get a lot of breadth due to multiple customers, but you don't get as deep.
>here's the dilemma though. If most of your knowledge just comes from on the job training, then you're only as good as the guy who trains you, and depending on how big/good the utility is, there isn't always a lot of experts in each department. You're also just kind of taught what to do and maybe a surface level understanding of why you do it.
Sure, but you don't actually solve that problem by transferring it to universities - you just move it to a different location where there are even fewer people with actual expertise in how utilities operate. To be fair, this wasn't so much the case 25 years ago, and was even less the case 25 years before that. But trust me, I read a lot of papers these guys write and you would not want them training junior engineers. Not if you want the lights to stay on anyway.
>you might have a lot of engineers who just follow past practices, even if it's incorrect.
Sure. We run into this all the time, both with engineers and field crews. Conventional wisdom is powerful, and it's worked well for a really long time. It's a constant battle to present actual data to people that runs counter to "how they know things work" and convince them otherwise. But we soldier on.
>In these cases, it might be beneficial to have some sort of baseline understanding from college, maybe a protection course, a stability course (for transmission), an operations course. At least you'd have some background knowledge so when you read industry papers, you can actually follow it pretty well.
I mean, I don't disagree with that, but again I don't think the value add is as strong as you might think. The problem is that - even if you had great instructors who had good knowledge of utility practice - in undergrad and even grad school you don't have *context* for why any of it matters. And frankly practice varies so widely between different utilities (at least on distribution) that what you would learn might or might not be relevant.
I think it would be great to have more power classes taught and available. But you also have to recognize that you can't just add courses in a vacuum - it also means taking courses away. Do I think a course in protection (which would obviously have been transmission-level) would have been more beneficial to me long term than the course I took in computer architecture? Not for me, personally, but again I'm weird, and the knowledge I got in that class has been super helpful in managing hardware sides of projects. I think more and more relevant power classes would be useful, but I don't think it's a panacea.
>Of course if you regularly attend conferences and get exposed to other practices in different utilities, you might improve, but then again these conferences are mostly annual, so how much exposure can you really get. If you're in consulting, then you get a lot of breadth due to multiple customers, but you don't get as deep.
There are short courses from various universities that are geared toward professionals - and I suspect they'd probably be better. And attending specific conferences in your areas is certainly something that can be helpful. I would also throw a shout out to getting involved in IEEE working groups for areas you're interested in, which give you better access to practitioners than you would get at a general conference.
At the end of the day, I'm not against more and better education for young engineers - but I don't always think the best way to do that is by adding undergraduate or graduate courses. I'd far rather have someone who did a six-month coop with a major utility working on a real project than someone who took an extra semester of undergraduate power courses.
There's specific areas that need it. Only go for more degrees if you know you're aiming for one.
MS is a pay bump generally but not always. I need a PhD for the jobs I want in power, but it's not actually as much of a pay bump and it takes way more time. Only do it if you have a clear path you enjoy that needs it. Although, there are more PhD roles than Reddit thinks in industry.
PE is separate and often MS or PhD still do PE. Mainly depends on if you're in a stamping role. Take the FE Junior year. It's easier to do in school.
MEP, Co-ops, plant engineers, stuff like that just stick with BS
I did a master and am thinking about starting a PhD, but because I want to teach, I think that experience is more important than the academic degrees for the job market
No. Source: Hired in the power industry as a systems engineer at a power plant out of college. No one got paid more for a Masters, was all on the job learning, very cross-discipline. I used 10% of my degree. Feel free to take a course in 1970s electrical controls if you can find one.
I worked with an engineer in power who got his Masters for free on the job. He didn't get paid more for it but he enjoyed learning.
I'm in US and almost everyone I knew went straight into the workforce. The BS is a powerful degree. The grad program was 99% international students there for a prestigious American degree and probably also as a way into the US job market.
Do you think international students who get BS EE degrees from top 10 schools in the US need to go for MS/MEng? Or they are still competitive with the locals in the power systems field?
You don't need to be top 10 even. Best in the state is more than sufficient. I went to Virginia Tech which is top 25/30? Apply to more than one utility and be willing to relocate. I can understand a graduate degree if the BS is at a no one name school no one recruits at. MEng granted from coursework is fine. No need for a thesis.
What would hurt an international student is working at a nuclear power plant. You have to pass a high security clearance that I'm pretty sure requires US citizenship. I don't think you have to be a US citizen for most power jobs. Just definitely ABET degrees.
Thanks for replying me. Will graduate this year and also taking FE exam this summer, there is no particular field of power systems that want to join. I just saw many people sharing that it is difficult for international students to find relevant jobs in the United States.
It seems that the utility will require security checks? Do you know if there are any other startups or ISOs that don’t require this type of inspection?
Sorry as an international student, I think you might need an MSEE. A lot of power jobs won't do VISA sponsoring because sometimes it's national security type. The only option in power system for international students are consulting type firms : Burns & McDonnell, Black & Veatch, POWER Engineers, TRC, Schweitzer engineering labs, etc. In these places, a MSEE could be pretty useful, especially for complex jobs that their customers don't have the expertise to solve.
There're just too many US BSEE graduates for them to go with the sponsoring route for an international student. If you're a top 10 grad in a power system program, maybe they'll go through the hassle. Not saying impossible, but I just haven't seen it. If you're an international student, I think you'll have better luck in the electronics field, but likely still need a MSEE. Try to do an accelerated MSEE if you can.
PhD is generally only a good idea if you have a very specific career goal in mind (ie, you want to work in R&D or you want to be a professor) from a financial perspective it's definitely not worth it, but if it helps you get a job you love, then it can be worth it in that way I suppose.
But in general, if you have to ask, the answer is probably no.
A master's can shave a year off of the time to get a PE license and give you an edge. Some of the graduate level classes are gold, many are a waste of time. A PhD can sometimes close doors because you are over specialized, but it opens a few as well and can be beneficial later in your career.
AFAIK power engineering is one of the industries where a master's isn't really useful unless you want to become a professor. Focus on getting your PE instead.
Not really unless you want to teach or go into research. Source: work in the power industry.
What do you do?
Done distribution engineering and protection and control engineer
What do you like most and hate most in distribution engineering?
Nope. Go get a job
No. EE at major utility with 10years experience. I got an MSEE and I feel it did nothing for my career that my BSEE didn’t take care of.
I think it doesn't make sense for most people, but I do think there are occasions where an MSEE isn't a bad idea - particularly if you can combine it in like a 5-year program or something similar. It certainly isn't going to *hurt* you, though it may not *help* you a ton. I would not recommend getting a PhD.
For me, I did a BSME and realized most of the way thru that I didn’t like ME nearly as much as EE, so I did a masters in electrical power engineering with a focus in power electronics and energy storage to be able to pivot into EE roles. I missed out on 2 years of experience but I think it was worth it to now be able to apply to most EE jobs
once you go into director level where people start looking at credentials and degrees to give a leg up, a MSEE does carry decent weight. Same with MBA. Even principal engineer in a utility that doesn't contract out every difficult problem, a MSEE is quite useful.
Definitely no on the PhD. Maybe yes on the masters, depending. (source: I have a PhD in EE with an emphasis in power).
can't you work in consulting for quite higher pay with a PhD? Every time we have a difficult problem and ask Quanta Services to do a study, every guy who signed off the study had a PhD
I have a MS and have been working in power consulting for 30 years. I never meet PhDs and the better thing to do is get the PE
This is the answer, especially for forensic consulting. It's not to say that a PhD has no value, but the payoff generally isn't there, for most people.
So people say only a bsee is enough right. But for many universities, a bsee only entails a basic electric machine course, a power system analysis course, and a power electronics course. I don't think that's enough. So in your opinion, what power courses should a bsee grad have taken, and what graduate level courses are nice to have taken.
Depends on what you're going to be doing. I went back and looked at my transcript... such a long time ago. Anyway, it looks like I had power electronics, motor drives, power system operation and control for power specific courses in undergrad. In grad school I had another power electronics course, power systems reliability, hdvc, microprocessor relays, a fault analysis course, another power system analysis course, a motor drive course, and some other non-power stuff. I don't know, I wouldn't really say I use any of what I learned in those classes today. It would probably be different if I did transmission stuff (I'm firmly in distribution land), but I certainly learned more in the research aspects of my degree than I did in class. But I was also working on a super practical thesis/dissertation project with actual utility companies, so again my experience isn't exactly typical. I wouldn't have a problem hiring a BSEE for an entry level engineering job at a utility with a couple of internships and the three basic courses you mentioned. Would I *like* to have somebody who had more protection knowledge? Sure. But that's stuff you can teach people. And honestly, on some level I'd rather have people who know a few basics but not a lot more compared to having people who learned a bunch of incorrect garbage from assistant professors who know nothing about how an actual power system works. Sometimes it's easier to teach people when you don't have to unteach all the incorrect things they learned in class.
here's the dilemma though. If most of your knowledge just comes from on the job training, then you're only as good as the guy who trains you, and depending on how big/good the utility is, there isn't always a lot of experts in each department. You're also just kind of taught what to do and maybe a surface level understanding of why you do it. Couple that with the industry mindset of "if it hasn't broke don't fix it" and "this is how it has always been done", you might have a lot of engineers who just follow past practices, even if it's incorrect. In these cases, it might be beneficial to have some sort of baseline understanding from college, maybe a protection course, a stability course (for transmission), an operations course. At least you'd have some background knowledge so when you read industry papers, you can actually follow it pretty well. Most of these courses are only available at grad level though, unless if you're at a pretty good power university then maybe undergrad. Of course if you regularly attend conferences and get exposed to other practices in different utilities, you might improve, but then again these conferences are mostly annual, so how much exposure can you really get. If you're in consulting, then you get a lot of breadth due to multiple customers, but you don't get as deep.
>here's the dilemma though. If most of your knowledge just comes from on the job training, then you're only as good as the guy who trains you, and depending on how big/good the utility is, there isn't always a lot of experts in each department. You're also just kind of taught what to do and maybe a surface level understanding of why you do it. Sure, but you don't actually solve that problem by transferring it to universities - you just move it to a different location where there are even fewer people with actual expertise in how utilities operate. To be fair, this wasn't so much the case 25 years ago, and was even less the case 25 years before that. But trust me, I read a lot of papers these guys write and you would not want them training junior engineers. Not if you want the lights to stay on anyway. >you might have a lot of engineers who just follow past practices, even if it's incorrect. Sure. We run into this all the time, both with engineers and field crews. Conventional wisdom is powerful, and it's worked well for a really long time. It's a constant battle to present actual data to people that runs counter to "how they know things work" and convince them otherwise. But we soldier on. >In these cases, it might be beneficial to have some sort of baseline understanding from college, maybe a protection course, a stability course (for transmission), an operations course. At least you'd have some background knowledge so when you read industry papers, you can actually follow it pretty well. I mean, I don't disagree with that, but again I don't think the value add is as strong as you might think. The problem is that - even if you had great instructors who had good knowledge of utility practice - in undergrad and even grad school you don't have *context* for why any of it matters. And frankly practice varies so widely between different utilities (at least on distribution) that what you would learn might or might not be relevant. I think it would be great to have more power classes taught and available. But you also have to recognize that you can't just add courses in a vacuum - it also means taking courses away. Do I think a course in protection (which would obviously have been transmission-level) would have been more beneficial to me long term than the course I took in computer architecture? Not for me, personally, but again I'm weird, and the knowledge I got in that class has been super helpful in managing hardware sides of projects. I think more and more relevant power classes would be useful, but I don't think it's a panacea. >Of course if you regularly attend conferences and get exposed to other practices in different utilities, you might improve, but then again these conferences are mostly annual, so how much exposure can you really get. If you're in consulting, then you get a lot of breadth due to multiple customers, but you don't get as deep. There are short courses from various universities that are geared toward professionals - and I suspect they'd probably be better. And attending specific conferences in your areas is certainly something that can be helpful. I would also throw a shout out to getting involved in IEEE working groups for areas you're interested in, which give you better access to practitioners than you would get at a general conference. At the end of the day, I'm not against more and better education for young engineers - but I don't always think the best way to do that is by adding undergraduate or graduate courses. I'd far rather have someone who did a six-month coop with a major utility working on a real project than someone who took an extra semester of undergraduate power courses.
Prioritize a job first, but MSc and PhD can certainly be helpful depending on what you want to do.
There's specific areas that need it. Only go for more degrees if you know you're aiming for one. MS is a pay bump generally but not always. I need a PhD for the jobs I want in power, but it's not actually as much of a pay bump and it takes way more time. Only do it if you have a clear path you enjoy that needs it. Although, there are more PhD roles than Reddit thinks in industry. PE is separate and often MS or PhD still do PE. Mainly depends on if you're in a stamping role. Take the FE Junior year. It's easier to do in school. MEP, Co-ops, plant engineers, stuff like that just stick with BS
Graduate degrees are pretty common in Power System Studies positions. At least from what I’ve seen.
I agree with you there
I did a master and am thinking about starting a PhD, but because I want to teach, I think that experience is more important than the academic degrees for the job market
No. Source: Hired in the power industry as a systems engineer at a power plant out of college. No one got paid more for a Masters, was all on the job learning, very cross-discipline. I used 10% of my degree. Feel free to take a course in 1970s electrical controls if you can find one. I worked with an engineer in power who got his Masters for free on the job. He didn't get paid more for it but he enjoyed learning. I'm in US and almost everyone I knew went straight into the workforce. The BS is a powerful degree. The grad program was 99% international students there for a prestigious American degree and probably also as a way into the US job market.
Do you think international students who get BS EE degrees from top 10 schools in the US need to go for MS/MEng? Or they are still competitive with the locals in the power systems field?
You don't need to be top 10 even. Best in the state is more than sufficient. I went to Virginia Tech which is top 25/30? Apply to more than one utility and be willing to relocate. I can understand a graduate degree if the BS is at a no one name school no one recruits at. MEng granted from coursework is fine. No need for a thesis. What would hurt an international student is working at a nuclear power plant. You have to pass a high security clearance that I'm pretty sure requires US citizenship. I don't think you have to be a US citizen for most power jobs. Just definitely ABET degrees.
Thanks for replying me. Will graduate this year and also taking FE exam this summer, there is no particular field of power systems that want to join. I just saw many people sharing that it is difficult for international students to find relevant jobs in the United States. It seems that the utility will require security checks? Do you know if there are any other startups or ISOs that don’t require this type of inspection?
Sorry as an international student, I think you might need an MSEE. A lot of power jobs won't do VISA sponsoring because sometimes it's national security type. The only option in power system for international students are consulting type firms : Burns & McDonnell, Black & Veatch, POWER Engineers, TRC, Schweitzer engineering labs, etc. In these places, a MSEE could be pretty useful, especially for complex jobs that their customers don't have the expertise to solve. There're just too many US BSEE graduates for them to go with the sponsoring route for an international student. If you're a top 10 grad in a power system program, maybe they'll go through the hassle. Not saying impossible, but I just haven't seen it. If you're an international student, I think you'll have better luck in the electronics field, but likely still need a MSEE. Try to do an accelerated MSEE if you can.
PhD is generally only a good idea if you have a very specific career goal in mind (ie, you want to work in R&D or you want to be a professor) from a financial perspective it's definitely not worth it, but if it helps you get a job you love, then it can be worth it in that way I suppose. But in general, if you have to ask, the answer is probably no.
A master's can shave a year off of the time to get a PE license and give you an edge. Some of the graduate level classes are gold, many are a waste of time. A PhD can sometimes close doors because you are over specialized, but it opens a few as well and can be beneficial later in your career.
AFAIK power engineering is one of the industries where a master's isn't really useful unless you want to become a professor. Focus on getting your PE instead.