I bemoan the extent of the shift from teaching to research in universities, and its effect on the education of engineers. I also appreciate impacts of the limits (e.g. graduation credits, other required courses, recruitment pressures, etc.) that universities face. I think there is little we as professional engineers can do to change these trends and limits on universities. Therefore, I also believe it is time to rethink the level of competence we expect from new college and university graduates, and to ensure that the profession provides a path to gain the additional skills required to perform the tasks expected of a licensed engineer. That is our (the profession's) responsibility; we need to ensure that only qualified persons obtain licenses, and to ensure that there are sufficient engineering professionals to meet societies needs.
To wit, I suggest that we revise the requirements on the engineering curriculum to fit the constraints put on the universities, and that we test the graduates to ensure they have obtained the required level of competence using a revised EIT exam. This might involve developing specialized EIT exams for entry into the various branches of engineering in order to allow the educational program to fit within the limits imposed on the universities. Beyond completing the curriculum and passing the EIT there can (and I believe should) be requirements for additional course work and practical experience prior to sitting for the professional exam. These could (I'd argue should) include communications skills. Again, these can be specialized for the various branches of engineering. Licenses themselves can be restricted to various branches as necessary to ensure that the burden on prospective engineers is acceptable.
An experience requirement for license could invite exploitation of new graduates. We need to address this concern. Further, the licensing exam must be structured to test that the required knowledge and skills that are not included in the curriculum have been mastered. Again, the topics can include safety, communications skills, and professional judgement.
We need to ensure competence in the area of practice and we need to be able to recruit engineers. Combined, in my value system, these two objectives are more important than ensuring engineers have competence in all fields of engineering.
In short, I do not hold much hope for imposing our training requirements in full on an education system subject to a wide range of outside constraints. I believe the profession needs to deal directly with the need to ensure a sufficient number of competent engineers continue to enter the profession. We still need to rely on the educational system to provide the bulk of engineering training, but we also need to provide the training that the educational system cannot or will not provide.
Dan Sheer, P.E. (ret), LM. ASCE
Columbia, MD
------------------------------
Dan Sheer LM. ASCE
Retired former President HydroLogics Inc.
Columbia Maryland
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 12-12-2021 09:29 AM
From: Mitchell Winkler
Subject: ASCE Safety Initiative Highlights Flaws in Current CE Education System
I applaud the initiative to strengthen the teaching of design and personal safety into the undergraduate curriculum ref Academic Safety Challenge. Civil Engineering, September / October 2021
However, the challenges with implementation reflect a somewhat sad and disturbing commentary on our current educational system. Specifically, and as highlighted in the article, many civil engineering educators are focused on theory and / or lack practical experience to teach safety. The article is specific to safety but safety in my opinion is a proxy for a more extensive gap in engineering skills. Bringing in lecturers or professors of practice to teach topics like safety treats the symptoms and not the root cause of a larger problem in my view. Getting the educational system to get the right balance back between educators with theory and practice is not going to easy but we need to try.
How do others see the problem and solutions? Did others see the irony in the safety article?
------------------------------
Mitch Winkler P.E., M.ASCE
Houston, TX
------------------------------