I once had a manager who scolded me for not subscribing to any engineering magazines. I explained that I normally use books to expand my skills. In response, she said “That’s no good! Books are out-of-date by the time they’re published. You need to be reading magazines and journals to keep up-to-date!”
I understand that viewpoint, but personally, I think it’s a bit unreasonable. To say that technical books are already obsolete by the time of publication… well, I think that’s a gross exaggeration. They may not be absolutely current, but really, how often is that truly critical?
Besides, while magazines and journals may be more current, a lot of what they contain is of questionable utility. Many new conventions and technologies never really catch on, and trying to predict their future can be a full-time job itself. Books can still discuss current methodologies, and are usually more comprehensive and organized.
Also, a lot of engineers work in cross-disciplinary fields. This means that they have more than enough material to learn, even without magazines or journals. A mechanical engineer can often benefit from learning more about computer programming, for example, and that can occupy most of one’s free time.
Anyway, those are my thoughts on this matter. What say you?
I think your boss is right. Books are for reference, not current information. A book typically takes months or years from writing to publication, magazine articles perhaps just a few weeks. And many things that end up in books are widely discussed and debated in journals long before the books are published.
And of course much of the info in magazines is of questionable utility - if it was all well understood and analysed, it would be in a book. The point of professional journals is to examine the validity of new “knowledge”, and to FIND wider applications for it.
IMHO, look in a book if you’re trying to find an answer for something YOU KNOW has been asked and answered before.
Next time tell your boss, “Magazines are old news. I use the internet”.
You’re confusing types of knowledge. Yes, an ME can benefit from learning C++ (so can almost anybody who uses computers professionally), and that skill is better learned from a text than a journal. That is not “keeping up with what’s current in the field”. What it IS is broadening your knowledge base to other related fields, and books are perfectly ok for that.
You have to strike a balance between the two. Your boss seems to think you have the wrong balance. You might NOT. Your choice of learning “older” but still relevant information may be correct for your job. And it probably IS the correct choice for most people.
This would probably be a useful discussion to have WITH your boss. Does (s)he WANT you to generate new products with the latest technology? Do you work in R&D? Or is your work more about re-design of well-understood technology for particular applications?
I think that’s a great oversimplification. Some books are for reference; others aren’t. I’ve read many a book on programming styles and methodologies whcih I would not classify as “reference,” and which were nonetheless highly educational.
Also, are you seriously suggesting that books don’t contain current information? Once again, I think that’s a severe overgeneralization. It’s all a matter of degree. A good book on programming techniques, for example, can remain “current” for many years.
I remember when the Unified Modeling Language (UML) came out. I read some of the books, and they were most decidedly current. If I had relied on magazines to learn about modeling languages, I could quite likely have spent days learning a convention that nobody would follow.
Actually, I do that as well. Yet another reason why I don’t normally rely on magazines – although I do refer to them as necessary.
I wasn’t being clear there. What I meant is that such endeavors are time-consuming enough, and often more valuable. This can leave precious little time for “keeping current.”
Remember, in the OP, I said that I use books to EXPAND my knowledge. Keeping current is only one part of that, and not necessarily the most valuable aspect.
Learning is not a “one size fits all” proposition – and yes, this applies to so-called “current” knowledge as well.
For some, magazines may be the best way to become a better engineer. For others, it will be primarily books. (For some, it may even be the Web, although I don’t think that’s a very good source if used in isolation.)
There will inevitably be a trade-off between currency and utility. If you pick your books judiciously, you can still keep fairly current, and it’s more likely that your new knowledge will actually be useful. Besides, I’ve found that engineering books are usually better written than most engineering mags or journals – partly because they have more space available, and have a more iterative editing process.
I used to read IEEE journals all the time. Eventually, I gave that up. They were still informative, but I found the signal-to-noise ratio to be rather high for my particular purposes. I had plenty of other stuff to learn anyway, and time was in short supply. Besides, I knew that I could always do a literature search if it was truly warranted.
As an aside, I found that some of the most helpful material I’ve read has been from non-engineering references – books on critical thinking or self-management, for example. When time is a limited commodity, the engineer must decide which materials he or she will concentrate on.
The point of professional journals is to examine the validity of new “knowledge”, and to FIND wider applications for it.