Perpetual Motion Education Machine
by Terry Baun
The author is the former chair of the SBE Certification
Committee.
I think every engineer at one time or another has
considered seriously the possibility of perpetual motion.
It seems so logical: Connect a motor to a generator
that provides the power that drives the motor that drives the
generator that provides the power that drives the motor that drives
the generator … Well, you get the idea.
But the simple truth is that the application of
outside energy is required in order to accomplish any task. Nothing
is truly self-sufficient. After all, perpetual motion is only
an unrealizable concept.
Demand
And so it is with engineering education. At one
time, we in the SBE thought that by setting standards and administering
tests, we could not only benchmark the achievements of our members,
but also provide the stimulus that would create additional educational
opportunities for the broadcast industry.
Unfortunately, that idea turned out to be just another
perpetual-motion dream. While it is critical that we recognize
the educational achievements of broadcast engineers by offering
certifications, we don’t see how that effort directly promotes
additional engineering education. We seem to be missing a piece
of the puzzle.
Our educational system is based completely on the
free-enterprise model – that is, schools provide educational
training to those who wish to enter certain fields of endeavor
based on the demand for that training and the expected job satisfaction
and financial rewards that come from the desired profession.
If you think about the profession of broadcast engineering
in those terms, it is easy to see why there are so few educational
opportunities offered. Yet our industry continues to demand trained
people.
Where is that basic and continuing education going
to come from?
About 18 months ago, the SBE Certification Committee
and Certification Director (and new SBE Fellow!) Linda Godby came
up with a plan to begin to offer educational programming as part
of the certification effort. This concept marked a significant
departure from our earlier view of the Certification Program as
primarily a standards-setting and benchmarking effort.
Our plan was to offer a one-day training seminar
for the new Certified Broadcast Networking Technologist Certification,
which would be followed by administration of the examination.
Thus, in one day of effort, engineers could become trained and
certified in this most important area of hardware support for
broadcast computer networks.
After beta-testing the tutorial at the NPR Engineering
Conference in 2000, we presented the concept to the Broadcast
Executive Directors Association. Our thinking was that a liaison
with the state associations was perhaps the most efficient way
of getting this training to the engineers who might be unable
to attend the major broadcast conventions.
The results?
• Twenty tutorials presented at 15 state broadcast
association meetings since February 2001;
• More than 150 hours of actual instructional
time given to members across the country;
• More than 200 new members brought into the
SBE;
• More than 300 new CBNT certifications this
year;
• Development of a continuing partnership between
SBE chapters and their state broadcast associations.
Two of the real benefits of the tutorial approach
are its availability and affordability, made possible by our association
with the state broadcasters.
And if there is one message that we have gotten
"loud and clear" from the state broadcasters, it is
that there is a definite need for more qualified engineering help
and that the tutorials we are offering are seen as responsive
to that need.
New offerings
Of course, being responsive means being sensitive
to the needs of everyone in the industry: engineers, stations,
management, ownership and regulatory agencies.
So, based on the success of the CBNT tutorials,
another tutorial was developed, designed to train Designated Chief
Operators in their required duties in preparation for station
participation in the FCC Alternative Inspection Program administered
by the state associations.
This effort has not only clarified the sometimes-confusing
FCC rules for many, but we feel it has also raised the level of
compliance with FCC rules in states where the tutorial has been
presented.
And we’re not done yet! As a result of feedback
from our tutorial participants, we are developing a third program,
this one designed as a basic review of RF technology.
This should serve as a primer for new engineers
entering the profession as well as studio and IT engineers who
wish to expand their knowledge base. We intend that digital TV
and radio transmission theory will be an integral part of this
presentation.
But who says engineering education is just for engineers?
In today’s consolidated communications marketplace, it is
essential that station ownership and management understand and
appreciate the unique work that broadcast engineers accomplish.
A tutorial called "Engineering for Managers"
is being developed to address this issue, and the first presentation
will be made to the Ohio Association of Broadcasters meeting this
fall.
Good investment
We may not turn managers into engineers, but we
certainly can bring to them a greater appreciation of the real
value that effective engineering brings to their stations, as
well as promote the idea that an investment in continuing education/training
for broadcast engineers is a wise business decision.
As engineers, we all know that perpetual motion
is a practical impossibility. But by continuing these targeted
and effective educational efforts, the Society of Broadcast Engineers
is providing the external energy that just may set the wheels
of broadcast education back into motion.
And that will go a long way toward not only benchmarking
the achievements of our membership but also advancing their value
to their employers and clients. And that will lead to better salaries
for engineers, which will lead to more educational opportunities,
which will lead to more qualified engineers, which will lead to
better engineering, which will lead to better station profitability,
which will lead to better salaries, which will lead to ...
You know, maybe it’s time we rethink that perpetual-motion
idea.
Radio World welcomes other points of view.
