How Much Electronics Does a Tech Really Need to Know?

In a recent and rather heated discussion of DC/AC principles in the AAS program at the college where I teach, we addressed the issue that many of you have only thought about. That is, how much DC/AC theory does a person really need to know to do a superior job as an ET? I won't try to relate all of the gory details here, but I must say that most faculty are more emotional than logical about this subject. It is not unlike the discussion of whether to teach conventional current flow vs. electron flow. In the end, it does not really matter to the student, but it become a major issue with faculty often with ugly outcomes.

The result of this discussion was our merging or DC and AC into a single 4 semester hour course. The logical prevailed over the emotional which is probably a good thing in this case.

Let's take DC first and analyze what is NOT needed. One thing for sure is that we really do not have to know much about mesh and nodal analysis. This is strictly for the engineer or scientist and even those guys don't use it all that much. I still do some engineering and design on a consulting basis and I haven't used it in years. If I do need to use it, I simply resort to one of the simulation or math software packages that I use. I am not really sure that other engineers really use it all that much either as that sort of problem is usually solved in software. So why not just leave it out? Techs don't design anyway, and that analysis is certainly not going to help with what techs really do on the job: troubleshoot, measure, test, service, instally, maintain, manufacture, etc.

Another thing that most textbooks include is the delta to wye and wye to delta conversions in resistor networks. Does any one really use this? I never have but some faculty believe that since it is in the book, it must be taught. Really.....? Why?

Magnetic circuits is another area of consideration. Just how much does not really need to know? Most books present far more breadth and depth than needed. Most of that theoretical instruction is more physics and design than tech stuff. Most techs will never design a coil or transformer, select a ferrite core or otherwise need all that detail on Teslas and Maxwell's. Some magnetic background is definitely needed but not at the analytical level.

In AC we have a similar thing. Just how much RC and RL circuit analysis is enough? Techs need to know about reactance, complex impedance, phase shift and resonance, but how much is relevant to the job? Cerainly it is not necessary to design complex AC circuits like filters. And the AC course should factor in RF. It seems that most texts and courses emphasize 60 Hz, audio and other low frequencies and forget to mention that the AC we use today is at least up to 10 GHz in many practical apps.

What I worry about most is what is missing. Like detailed coverage of wiring and cabling. Just think about how much of a techs job is fixing, running, making and troubleshooting cables. We need major coverage of that. And AC power wiring. It is not rocket science to be sure but every tech eventually has to deal with the AC breaker boxes, outlets, wiring, ground, GFI, etc. It needs to be taught. And a littl three phase as well. We don't need to teach all that complex three phase math and power calcualtions however.

I could go on here, but you get the picture. Some theory is good and necessary. Ohm's and Kirrchoff's laws and even Thevenin's theorem are essential. Calculating impedance and phase angle as well as resonance is fine, but beyond that, it is useless for a tech in the real world.

Several times in the past I conducted a formal job and task analyses for technician jobs as a way to determine what the tech needed to know to do that job. It is a tedious process but one that is very revealing. Several years back I analyzed a TV repair tech job for example. As it turns out in actually observing techs fix TV sets, VCRs, etc. and in discussions with them about how they do this job, very little actual electronics theory is needed. In fact, a good number of the most successful techs had no formal electronics training. They simply learned to fix TVs by fixing TVs. It is more about knowing the product and its flaws, what goes bad and how to replace it.

Isn't fixing PCs the same way? Most PC repair techs do not know electronics. My son who got his career started by fixing PCs told me one time when I asked when he was going to learn electronics that you don't need to know much about electronics theory to fix a PC. He is right.

As it turns out, most tech jobs are like this, even more so today simply because techs cannot access the circuits that the were once trained to access. They simply replace boards, modules, subassemblies or maybe an IC. Most of the work is test, measurement and troubleshooting. They do need to know how to use a multimeter and a scope and more than ever the spectrum analyzer.

The point here is that the courses and textbooks are still skewed to design and analysis when they should be focused on the real needs. Faculty will nearly fight to the death to keep all that math and analysis in a course needed or not. I guess if that is the way you learned it, you probably still believe that is the way it should be taught. And chances are you were trained as an engineer to analyze and design rather than do tech work. I wish just for once, that those who teach electronics technology would go to work in a job for which they are training people and find out what they really need to know. I have. It is not what you learned in school and not what you think.

The bottom line is that when changing your course content and curriculum, just try to minimize the theory, math and analysis and focus on the real needs in industry.

If I get any response at all to this little diatribe it is probably going to say that a such a dumbed down DC/AC course is never going to transfer to a 4-year BSET program. So...? If that is your sole concern and not what is needed for jobs, then by all means keep teaching your engineering level DC and AC and ignore everything I have said here. Just remember, that only a few percent of all AAS degree graduates actually go on to a BSET program. For most colleges, teaching for the minority, or their own self gratification, is apparently more important than for preparing grads for real jobs and meeting employer/s needs.