I agree with the perspective that there is no "golden ratio" for the balance between practical and academic courses, as it truly depends on each student’s career goals. For instance, a student pursuing research may benefit more from a higher number of academic or technical courses to build the in-depth knowledge required for labs or academic settings. On the other hand, someone aiming to enter the industry would likely benefit from more practical courses taught by professionals who understand the real-world applications of their studies.

It’s not just about the number of courses, but the quality of those experiences. I’ve seen firsthand how one well-taught practical session can be more valuable than an entire academic course. For example, I took a class that was technically industry-focused, but the material wasn’t taught effectively because it was led by a researcher rather than an industry professional. However, a 2-hour session with a knowledgeable industry expert helped me grasp the concept in a much more applicable way. This quality of learning made a big difference in my understanding, enabling me to confidently discuss the topic in interviews.

Additionally, in my experience, employers tend to focus less on coursework and more on the academic projects and practical experiences students have gained as that is where more of the transferable “industry knowledge” is. That’s why I believe the ideal ratio depends on the student's career path and how well they can articulate what they’ve learned. A 50/50 split between practical and academic courses might be a good starting point to give students on both research and industry tracks strong opportunities. However, the quality of these courses is ultimately what will provide the most value, regardless of the ratio. A high-quality, engaging class will offer more learning than several mediocre ones, and that’s what students need most when entering their fields.

@asimbana , completely agree.

I find it very interesting going through the comments and seeing a slight divide, in that many that are already out of college agree that more practical courses would be better, and some in college are the opposite. Speaking as someone working in industry now, I strongly feel that learning more practical courses would have been an excellent boon.  I've used maybe 50% of my academia/hard engineering knowledge in my career, with the other half being the working with people aspect.

Having struggled in getting projects completed and having people cooperate with me, I've found myself wondering why on earth there wasn't more of an emphasis on this topic in school. It's interesting being on the other side also; my job has been accepting a steady flow of interns, and the ones who shine are the hard workers but ALSO the ones with good communication skills. The better the practical skills, the better the impression on many they left behind. I think the ratio should be slightly higher in undergrad, and definitely higher for an MS degree.

I think practical courses are very important for student after graduation. so many said experience is what employers really look for, and i agree with that point .Academic courses give us the theory , but without practice it is hard to apply the knowledge in real life. in my opinion, I would prefer a ratio closer to 40/60,with more practical courses. This way i can build the skills i need and feel more ready for industry jobs.

If you are pursuing a Master’s in BME, then you are most likely intending to use the knowledge gained from your classes in industry or in a practical setting. In this case, the ratio of practical to academic classes should be higher since this is a postgraduate degree and you gained a lot of academic knowledge from your undergraduate. For a PhD, however, you will need more in depth knowledge on specific BME topics and research, since that will be a large application of your PhD. Thus, more academic classes should be offered for a degree like that. Overall, it depends on what you want to do in the future with your degree. For me, I want to become a physician so I would appreciate academic classes more. I think there should be a large offering of practical and academic courses, but the student should talk to their advisor and have a personal plan that outlines how many practical and academic classes are required to best suit their interests. A large majority of students doing a BME degree and postgraduate degree are trying to work in industry, but I know a couple that are premed as well. NJIT allows undergraduate students to take graduate classes to fulfill undergraduate requirements. For those who are premeds, do you think it’s a good option to have physician and clinical setting focused graduate classes to bridge the gap between BME and clinical practice? 

I definitely resonate with the idea that postgraduate studies should lean heavily into the practical side to prepare us for the industry. A close friend of mine who transitioned into dental technology found that general theory only took her so far until she completed an extra course from elvtr ( https://uk.elvtr.com/course/dental-cad-design .) She mentioned that learning from active industry professionals allowed her to master digital restorative workflows that her academic background hadn't even touched upon.

In my opinion, there is no correct ratio of academic to practical courses that a student should take; it would depend on the goals of that individual. However, I do feel as though NJIT should offer significantly more practical courses. For undergrad, it makes sense for at LEAST 80% of the classes to be strictly academic, as it is essential for students to have a firm understanding of basic principles in order to be successful in future work. When it comes to graduate level courses, though, I would say about 50 to 70% should be practical, as a graduate degree is the last step before jumping into your career. It is not fair for a student to go through so many years (and such great tuition costs!) and come out of college with no proper knowledge or preparation for work. Students should first be provided with a solid background, and then that foundation should be built upon with knowledge that will actually help them secure and succeed in a job. The exact ratio of academic to practical courses that a student takes, though, depends on whether they plan on working in academia or industry - a career in academia would benefit from more focus on academic courses and a smaller number of practical courses, while industry requires a heavier focus on practical courses. 

I find that the ratio of practical to academic courses isn't the best, as you said, even if we max out with your courses, the ratio is 3:7, and that is us going out of our way to find practical courses within the degree, it isn't systemically encouraged to take on more practical courses within the program which I find is rather unfortunate. Personally, I really loved all the practical courses I had taken so far at NJIT such as in SolidWorks and biolab courses. Such courses had me applying what I learned outside of academia, such as making my own 3D prints or using the techniques I learned for cell culturing at the lab. Additionally, courses in coding specific languages are things employers actually look for, and practical experience, projects, etc, students can proudly add to their resumes. This course teaching about medical device development process and the affected bodies is crucial for students to learn about the workflow, jargon, and what is expected of them once they enter industry. Regular academic classes although crucial simply aren't application-heavy, making information harder to remember and learning harder to demonstrate when the time comes. That said, what do you suggest as a happy medium, understanding that both are crucial? Are settings like chemistry courses that have labs the pinnacle of how education should be across all courses? 

I feel like we need a lot more practical courses in our time here. In undergrad, I went out of my way to take extra courses like manual machining and CNC programming so I would be able to understand how devices are made and what the manufacturing design constraints are that I should think of when designing a device. I believe that these courses were some of the most impactful courses I have taken, as they made me think about how feasible my ideas were actually to produce. A good idea is only as good as its execution, and if you cannot make the product, then those good ideas are just wasted time and energy. I realized after I graduated that a lot of my friends and other entry-level engineers do not have that practicality component of their education.  

I believe it is important to have a mix of technical and theory courses, and the ratio should be closer to 40:60, with a requirement to take technical courses. I am taking this class because I am interested in it, and believe having another design course would help me in the future of my career. I also liked the simulations in your other course that I took, which made the group and I actually think through problems and propose tests to help solve the issues. I could have taken another theory-based course, but I felt that technical courses are where I learn and apply my knowledge best.

I believe the amount of practical courses offered at NJIT needs to be reevaluated. I always hear from alumni or recruiters that college does not directly prepare you for the industry and I believe that's something NJIT can and should change.

I understand the need and importance for academic classes for graduate students, more so specifically for PhD students who are looking to gain more academic experience in specific topics. Most graduate students pursuing a masters are banking on their MS degree to make them standout amongst other engineering prospects. That might not really happen if we are strictly taking academic classes rather than practical courses to better prepare for positions in the industry.

The ratio of practical vs academic courses highly depends on the position you would like to have in the industry, but if it were up to me I would say 4 out of 10 courses being practical is a good ratio. Practical courses are crucial for grad students in the industry or planning to join it soon. However, academic courses introduce you to new topics that might spark an interest in specific industry roles that you weren't aware of before. 

The BME department could set new guidelines for grad students looking to join the industry and set a requirement of specific practical courses that will better prepare students for the industry. Checking on the list of grad courses, I think the addition of more practical courses, like regulatory affairs, is crucially needed.