yes,you are right.MIT is larger,and facilities are very sophisticated. but everything need to build up from the foundation,then the ground floor,then 1st....
at the moment,i am at the initial stage,my wings are still not strong and full of feathers.i need to grasp a lot of knowledge before start doing work with those high-tech equipment.i say ECS is the best,this is for me at this particular level(the stage to build a solid foundation).i am content with the amount of knowledge that i have gained for these 6 weeks.
talk about learning,if you could understand the principles very well,then these underlining principles would help you analyse harder problems,and create new products.
on this aspect,ECS is the best,teaching is great,and the course basically covers everything.which is what i like.so ECS does help me improve my understanding and acquire knowledge.
on enhancing skills,i don't think at this level,we have a big difference from MIT.
i think the difference might be they push their students even harder.
but i don't think this is good,because flying before running will miss some foundamentals.
or more importantly you can regard it as logical steps which is crucial for engineers.
I admit that ECS does push us very hard,but i think the pace is well enough to cover the basics.
obviously hard stuff occupies in at great amount which i believe is the similar to MIT.
what you are saying is very genuine,the postgrad level is better than here,because the much greater outlay of the institute and the research facilities are more widely available. |