Restructuring the Engineering and Engineering Technology Relationship
Publication: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 119, Issue 2
Abstract
The pattern of engineering education, which typically requires four years for completion of a degree that allows entry to practice, is put in perspective by comparing it with educational requirements for other professions. Driving forces for change in the current pattern are examined, with accreditation proposed as the mechanism to effect appropriate change. The growth of engineering technology programs is seen as one major stimulus for change, and several possible scenarios for future development of these two interrelated fields are explored. One scenario, which recommends significant upgrading of engineering education, is proposed for adoption by the profession. The comprehensive engineering profession model proposed includes modifications to current norms in education, recognition, and practice.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
ABET accreditation yearbook. (1991). Accreditation Board for Engrg. and Tech. (ABET), New York, N.Y.
2.
Engineering education and practice in the United States. (1985). NRC/NAE National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
3.
“Engineering technology education.” (1972). Final Rep. of the Advisory Committee, American Soc. for Engrg. Education (ASEE), Washington, D.C., Jan. (1968).
4.
“Final report on goals of engineering education.” J. Engrg. Education, 58(5).
5.
Grinter, L. E. (1955). “Report on evaluation of engineering education (1952–55).” J. Engrg. Education, 46(1), 29–63.
6.
Hammond, H. P. (1940). “Aims and scope of engineering education.” J. Engrg. Education, 30(7).
7.
Hammond, H. P. (1947). “Engineering education after the war.” J. Engrg. Education, 34(9), 589–614.
8.
“A national action agenda for engineering education.” (1987). A report of the task force on a national action agenda for engineering education, American Soc. for Engrg. Education (ASEE), Washington, D.C.
9.
“Proposed revision of advanced level accreditation criteria.” (1989). Annual Rep., Accreditation Board for Engrg. and Tech. (ABET), New York, N.Y., 106–108.
10.
Pleta, D. H. (1984). The engineering profession. University Press of America, Inc., Lanham, Md.
11.
Proctor, C. S. (1939). “Professional aims of the civil engineer.” Civil Engrg., 9(3), 151–152.
12.
“Quality of engineering education.” (1986). Final report of the quality of engineering education task force, American Soc. for Engrg. Education (ASEE), Washington, D.C.
13.
Report on the engineering sciences. (1958). ASEE Follow‐up Committee on Evaluation, American Soc. for Engrg. Education (ASEE), Washington, D.C.
14.
Sissom, L. (1979). 47th annual report. Engrs. Council for Prof. Dev., 55–57.
15.
“A vision for the future of U.S. engineers.” (1991). Report of the 2000 Task Force, Nat. Soc. of Prof. Engrs. (NSPE), Washington, D.C.
16.
Walker, W. A. “Goals of engineering education.” Final Rep., American Soc. for Engrg. Education (ASEE), Washington, D.C.
17.
Wickenden, W. E. (1930). Report of the investigation of engineering education (1923–29). Soc. Promotion of Engrg., Vol. I.
18.
Wickenden, W. E. (1934). Report of the investigation of engineering education (1923–29). Soc. Promotion of Engrg., Vol. II.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 119 • Issue 2 • April 1993
Pages: 153 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Mar 17, 1992
Published online: Apr 1, 1993
Published in print: Apr 1993
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.