It is not about what we learn. We are offered the same wx classes that any other Met. school offers. A learning process is based on the individual - it doesn't matter what school you attend. If you want to learn the material and you're motivated enough you will, and that is the bottom line.
I read a comment earlier on what a met. should know, and of course it was making reference to MSU. It mentioned CIN, CAPE, some of the models, and some of the processes in the atmosphere. We are taught every bit of that, and obviously much more. That is not the point at hand, as I mentioned earlier. The point at hand is how much do you want to apply yourself. How much extra time does one take to interpret models for example.
I've met numerous people who have graduated from a reputable school, and hadn't learned a dang thing. Just because they took the classes and went to the school doesn't mean they are a genius in Met. As you might imagine, I am a recent MSU grad and work at a network station. At the opposing station there is a grad from Penn State, who, in my opinion, doesn't have a dang clue.
Another example, I had to teach our morning Met. who graduated from Oswego State virtually everything about forecasting Severe Wx. Then later, we had a grad for our morning show from Penn State, who, again in my opinion, was very arrogant, and didn't have a clue. All he could talk about was all the math he took while he was at PSU, and how he applies it to his forecasting which was just a bunch of bologna.
Don't get me wrong, I've learned numerous equations in our theory classes, and when I say equations I mean equations, not things like how to determine LI, SI, CAPE, and so forth.
It is not MSU, it is the individual. We meet all curriculum for the AMS, NWA just as any other school would.
We have some very good instructors that teach our Met classes. And before anybody can pass judgment on our program, come in and sit in on a class or two. You may change your mind on whether we should be called a Met. or not.
recent grad