Institutions can only go so far.
We have a
personal,
professional responsibility to share what has been shared with us to those who will listen. Fear of "training your replacement" is usually not warranted, because others will recognize the contributions you've made.
My degree required 152 hours when I began college, but changes (albeit too late for me to take advantage of) to the curriculum had the degree down to 132 by the time I graduated (with 165 hours and a minor in Literature). Many of the reductions were effective and efficient, some reduced the breadth/depth of technical education, however. Regarding the gaps, the University fully supported and encouraged design competitions, student organizations, etc. and structured many of their classes to force teamwork to happen.
When I started in the workforce after graduation, I was fortunate to have supervisors and other senior engineers invest in my own technical knowledge, but more importantly, encourage and support my involvement in ASCE (for other young engineers, it may have been another professional society or civic organization). They challenged me to take on a leadership role early on, because THEY knew the value that experience would bring to the company in the future. In my 14 years after graduation, I've been able to mentor and supervise a number of young engineers in similar fashion, and the #1 contributor to whether those engineers are "GREAT!" or simply "adequate", rests with the individual. They have to WANT to learn, to grow, to be challenged, and to be involved.
So 2 points (at a penny apiece, you can call it my 2 cents):
1. If we want to raise the bar, the public has to know a civil engineer. Not just the value civil engineers bring to public welfare, but the value a civil engineer brings to the
intangible parts of their community. Are we known as a profession that is dedicated to our communities, or are we known as a profession of awkward pocket-protector introverts? ASCE and universities can only do so much in this regard...a publication or production isn't nearly effective as a personal interaction. So we, as Civil Engineers, need to get involved with our communities so that even if they don't understand the complexities of something like an infrastructure bond issue, they know and trust a Civil Engineer who says it's something their community needs. Get involved outside the walls of your home and work.
2. We have to help others reach the bar we want to set. I'm reminded of those wall climb obstacle courses you see in Tough Mudder races. it takes a few people pushing from below, a person pulling from the top, and someone willing to reach out their arms in order to raise the collective to the top. That's our personal, professional responsibility. Our universities and our professional societies can provide us tools to make the incline flatter or the starting elevation a little higher, but there will always be a need for peer support, from alongside, from within, and from above. Get involved in the professional lives of others.
------------------------------
Kensey Russell P.E., M.ASCE
HNTB
Oklahoma City OK
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 07-12-2017 12:59
From: William Hayden
Subject: Identified Gaps in The Formal Education of Civil Engineers - Update (?)
In June 1995, the culmination of some 3 years or so of preparation, led by professor Dr. Jim Yao, Texas A&M, resulted in an "ASCE Education Conference" in Denver, CO. At the end of that conference session, there was a lively 'give and take' as attendees* raised questions about matters presented. There were four main "gaps" noted that were recommended to be included in the formal education of the next generation of civil engineers. They were knowledge and skills related to:
- Leadership,
- Teamwork,
- Communications, and,
- Business Knowledge.
That information was founded on some 3 years of advance preparation involving business leaders, managers and academics in teaching and administration.
Then a professor stood and asked of all the following question:
"Who will first teach us? We never received education on these subjects ourselves. How then do we teach them to our students?"
To which no one responded.
The notes above are based on remarks made at the end of the conference to the entire conference audience by Jim Poirot, former ASCE President, and Chair of Ch2M Hill.
So, here we are some 22 years later.
Q1. What changes have been observed in the professional lives of our CE graduates
relative to any one or more of the four identified main "Gaps" identified by educational
and professional CE experts over two decades ago?
Q2. What CE academic programs have developed incorporating parts of the above noted 4 recommended topics?
Respectfully offered for dialogue.
* About 70% academics (faculty, Dept. Hds., Deans), , 25% practitioners, 5% administrators.
------------------------------
William Hayden Ph.D., P.E., CP, F.ASCE
Management Quality By Design, Inc.
Amherst NY
------------------------------