Traditional educational systems tend to inhibit the preparation of young students for adulthood. This paper presents an alternative that effectively uses on‐the‐job training as an integral part of education. Cooperative education is not a new idea in the academic world. In fact, it has been in existence for almost 86 years. It is a method, however, that has been underused by most institutions across the country. This form of education combines classroom instruction with practical experiences in industry. Students are provided a unique opportunity to link education with industry experience, accelerating their overall maturity and development. In comparison, traditional teaching methods isolate students from the real work environment. This paper explores the need for cooperative education. Advantages from the perspective of students, employers, universities, and society are presented. The results of a study on criteria for a successful cooperative education program are described. The writer provides personal description and analysis of his cooperative‐education experience, along with suggestions on how students can maximize their cooperative‐education experience.

Converging lines of evidence lead to the thesis that sustainable international engineering projects that support economic and environmental development require user participation in service‐level decisions, and that these decisions are sustained by cross‐cultural transfers of technology from foreign consultants to host‐country‐counterpart professionals. It follows that the most successful consultants will be those who best assure resources to this end in meeting contractual obligations for advisory, supervisory, and training services. An underlying premise in this analysis is that cooperation is economically and technically more efficient than competition, particularly competition between consultants and clients. A framework and draft terms of reference for information and technology transfer are presented. Effective transfer of technology requires: (1) Insistence by the host‐country government that it take place; (2) secondment of the most competent professionals as counterparts; (3) training resources amounting to an additional 15–20% in time and money during project identification and preparation; and (4) due regard by expatriate engineering firms for the possibility that host‐country staff training is likely to be in the best strategic interest of the firms.

NO two civil engineering problems—as well as all other engineering problems—are the same. Rather, each problem has always demanded, and still demands, a unique solution, which—from past experience—depends entirely on the human and material resources of the locality in which the problem exists. This paper highlights some observed behavior of materials and human resources available in the developing, mostly tropical, nations as distinct from those obtainable in the mostly temperate, advanced countries in Europe, North America, and so forth. Most of the existing standards and codes of civil engineering practice originated in these developed countries and are based on the materials and sociological factors prevailing there. Thus, the paper calls for evolution of locally based standards and codes in the developing nations. Alternatively, the existing (imported) ones should be adequately modified before applying them to design and construction of civil engineering facilities in these developing nations. This will surely remedy the common mistakes of the past and present and make for a better future.

The plan you adopted five years ago may not be the best choice for your business today! Employers with existing plans or those contemplating new plans must consider many factors. Also, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) now says you must restate your existing qualified retirement plans by the last day of the plan year that begins in 1992 or risk plan disqualification! What's more, where a group of businesses is controlled by one owner, strict controlled group rules now require near equal benefit accruals for all employees in the group.

This article discusses the definition of the practice of professional engineering through practice and education. The definition is compared with the existing educational practices and faculty. Many faculty are not practitioners of the profession and cannot provide the insight into the engineering processes. Little is taught beyond some basics. The complete engineering process of planning, design, construction, operations, and maintenance is needed. The education system replaces a senior professor with a junior assistant professor, inhibiting many able practitioners from applying to relieve the faculty shortage. A profession should seek to fill slots with professionals. This would require that incoming faculty have engineering as well as academic experiences. A profession must be able to control its work products. Engineering has failed and enabled the courts to mandate many changes through civil law suits and tort claims. Failure to act as a profession has created many of the tort claims and litigation problems. Illustrations of these failures are given.

Although the term technology transfer is relatively new, the business of moving technology and ideas between originators and implementers has been going on almost since time began. With the accelerating pace of technology development and the pressing issue of increasing competition on a global scale, the formerly ad hoc approach to such activities must become more systematically planned and scientifically based. Engineers have been slow to adapt to this need and must begin to recognize that the practice of technology transfer is an integral part of their activities that directly influences the effectiveness of many of their efforts. The paper begins with a discussion of the mythology that has grown up around technology transfer activities. This mythology now often impedes the implementation of effective and properly designed technology‐transfer programs. Using this discussion as a base, a generic framework is developed that defines the different levels at which such programs apply. A clear distinction is made between those oriented to tactical needs versus those directed at strategic goals. The framework also distinguishes between public‐ and private‐sector needs and sets out three technology maturity levels, which are seen to be tied to distinct, characteristic approaches to technology transfer. A series of guidelines for developing technology‐transfer programs are derived from these discussions, and in a final section, new facilitating technologies such as expert systems, computer‐aided learning, and integrated application‐documentation systems are outlined.

In Singapore, before June 1, 1989, a professional engineer's (PE) design was not required by law to be checked by others. Instead, the design was deemed to be accepted by the building control unit and constructed accordingly by the builder on site. The building control bylaw, which governs the practice of engineering and building control functions, has been revised with fundamental and drastic changes to include a checking element in the relevant act. The accredited checker's (AC) system is introduced according to the new Building Control Act 1989 (BCA'89), which had adopted a totally different approach. BCA'89 requires a project PE's design to be checked by another independent PE called the accredited checker (AC) who is accredited by the Building Authority of Singapore. In addition to this requirement, the vetted design has to be subsequently checked and approved by a newly established branch called the building structural branch (BSB). These changes are so fundamental that they will definitely have a far‐reaching effect in Singapore practice. This paper serves to discuss the fundamental changes made and their implications contained in BCA'89. Responses and controversial views from the industry are analyzed, and the author's view is presented.

A number of educators have recently called for increased emphasis in the engineering curriculum on the relationship between technology and social, political, economic, ethical, and legal concerns. These observers agree that the typical practice of selection of elective courses in the humanities and social sciences does not adequately facilitate the making of connections between engineering and other modes of inquiry. A solution that does not rely on humanities and social science courses for emphasizing the relationships between technology and society is the development of engineering courses that incorporate the study of these relationships. This paper describes the development of a new course, entitled “Engineering Professionalism and Ethics,” required of all engineering majors at Lafayette College, Easton, Pa. The course is designed to provide an introduction to the role of the engineer in society; time value of money concepts and engineering economic decisions; engineering ethics; safety and risk assessment; the professional responsibilities of engineers; and the legal aspects of engineering.

The systems of engineering education in Latin America and the United States developed quite differently and have different strengths and weaknesses. The universities of Latin America tend to emphasize professional training, while those of the United States have emphasized research and a somewhat more investigative approach. Curricula, goals, and the duration of studies are substantially different, as are the composition and interests of the faculty. At present, educators and practicing engineers in both regions are critically evaluating their own programs and, in many cases, recommending changes directed toward correcting perceived deficiencies. Before either society adopts sweeping changes in its present system, it could profit by examining the experience of the other. In particular, the emphasis upon professionalism, which is common in Latin America and is often urged in the United States, may be seen to have served less well than the more theoretical approach of most U.S. programs.

It is essential for active engineers to attend technical conferences to keep abreast of new developments. This paper is aimed at making conference presentations as effective as possible. The main purpose of attending a conference is to learn from each other. For this purpose to be achieved, the papers must contain valuable information, the speakers must convey the information effectively, and there should be adequate opportunity for discussions during and between sessions. Many new ideas originate through these discussions. Poor presentations defeat the main purpose of attending a conference by making it difficult to understand the material, thus inhibiting discussions after the presentation. The advantages of audience feedback are, thus, not realized. It does not make sense to spend hundreds of dollars on airfare, hotel, and registration fee, only to fail to prepare adequately for the presentation. The most important criterion for effective conference presentations is organization. Drawing on his experience, the writer provides guidelines for organizing the presentation, preparing materials, rehearsing, maintaining audience interest, and finishing on time.