Young engineers are often the ones most in need of a disciplined approach to the design process. Although they enter the workforce equipped with appropriate engineering skills, they must establish methodical work habits if they are to pursue a successful career. Failure of a design to meet contractual requirements—far more common than causing physical injury—can result in costly litigation. The key elements of discipline in an engineering design team are visibility, involvement, frankness, and commitment, as well as an orderly attitude toward the preparation and presentation of design data. The present paper reviews the presentation of calculations and sketches, and provides a checklist that helps eliminate arithmetic errors, shows that code requirements are met, documents the design process, and ensures work is independently reviewed. In today's engineering market, with design information flowing rapidly between companies, countries, and continents, it is essential that the young engineer embrace disciplined design approaches at the earliest opportunity.

In the last half‐century, strange notions about planning have taken hold in the technological community. Their origin can be traced to the socialist idea of total planning, but engineers and planners are usually unaware of this. The present paper attempts to clarify these notions by seeking the proper framework for planning. This framework is based on the concept of order. Human social order is governed by two kinds of laws. The first are general laws of conduct independent of purpose; they form the basis of the general, spontaneous order and permit statistics. The second are the command‐like laws that govern the order of organizations created for the pursuit of purposes or objectives. Planning applies only to this last order, the statistics of the first being a necessary input. To apply the command‐like laws of planning to the first order is a senseless idea. Whenever attempted, it only produces distortions that upset both kinds of order.

The education of our future civil engineers is incomplete without an appreciation of the men who created the profession of civil engineering in the late 18th and early 19th century. This paper presents an approach to introducing the history and heritage of civil engineering into existing course work by the use of packaged “history modules.” One such module is contained in this paper with two additional modules available to the reader on request. The module traces the evolution of truss design and construction from da Vinci and Palladio in wood to Whipple in iron. It describes the efforts of many men over a 300‐year period to move truss design from an art form (pre‐1847) to a science with the publication of Squire Whipple's book of 1847. It is my hope that additional modules will be written and packaged by ASCE for distribution to engineering faculty around the country.

In the United States, a practicing engineer cannot perform services without the fear of a lawsuit. Some strategies for avoiding civil liability include assessing the risk before accepting the assignment, purchasing errors‐and‐omissions insurance, and using limitation‐of‐liability clauses in contracts. Each strategy has advantages and disadvantages. For example, by purchasing insurance, the insurance company will have to pay the attorneys fees, provide the legal defense, and pay judgments up to the limits of the policy. But insurance can be very expensive, and some engineers believe that having insurance invites lawsuits. Another common strategy is to use a higher factor of safety in the design, which may cost the client more but will reduce the risk of failure. The trend in the United States is toward a more litigious society, one where failure will not be accepted without a lawsuit.

Many questions have been raised recently concerning the integrity of certain professions and the people associated with them. Unfortunately, there are many who cannot define the term “profession,” much less explain the criteria used to classify an occupation as such. To what extent do the responsibilities of a professional differ from those of anyone else? This is a question that every engineer should ask him‐ or herself on a daily basis. As professionals, engineers have a tremendous obligation to society. The profession is dedicated to honestly and unselfishly serving mankind. If the honor of engineering as a profession is to remain intact, all engineers must be committed to the standards to which they pledge themselves.

Engineering‐ethics education in baccalaureate programs may be ineffective for many college‐age students because of misconceptions that they have developed from experiences in their personal lives. These misconceptions shape their reactions to case studies of ethical conflicts that arise in professional practice. The misconceptions prevent them from responding to value dilemmas in ways considered acceptable by the professional community. A new model for presenting topics in professional ethics is introduced. The method, which is known as the constructivist learning model (CLM), will be more effective then the traditional approach in helping students recognize these misconceptions and modify their knowledge base in a way that will let them properly deal with topics in professional ethics. A CLM for ethics education is developed and examples are provided. The model represents an alternative approach that should lead to more effective ethics education.

Recent advancements in desktop‐computer multimedia coupled with lower prices have increased the use of this form of educational technology in engineering programs around the country. An example of a self‐paced, multimedia module, developed to highlight stream discharge measurements, serves to illustrate what is possible at relatively low prices using midrange desktop computers. The proliferation of such examples, however, raises larger issues that merit discussion in the engineering education community: Who should develop these materials? How should they be incorporated into the classroom? Will faculty find that their efforts jeopardize their promotion and tenure opportunities?

Today, civil engineering is at a crossroads for a variety of reasons including a shift in cost patterns of buildings, new environmental demands, and the invasion by other professions into traditional areas of engineering. A broader vision—a new model and a new ideal—for civil engineering is needed if the profession is to achieve its fullest potential in the service of society and is not to become narrower and less influential. The key elements of that vision are a redefining of civil engineering as the profession that makes human habitats possible and the assuming by civil engineering of the lead role among professions, from architecture to urban planning, that are dealing with aspects of the human habitat. The challenge to civil engineering is not to accept the status quo in its role as a profession, but to develop in concept as well as in realization the ability to integrate beauty, moral excellence, and physical excellence.

A proposal for improving the current Equal Business Opportunity program is presented. The basic principles of the recommended program are: to provide incentives to owners and contractors on both private and public projects to upgrade the status of minority contractors by providing technical assistance or employment; to minimize the role of the city in regulating the construction environment; to make the process voluntary rather than mandatory; to require minority contractors to qualify for the program; to provide an incentive to develop the skills of minority individuals needed to create a nucleus of minority professionals in the construction industry; to educate the public on the importance of upgrading minority skills for both the welfare of the construction industry and the competitiveness of the United States in the international marketplace. This study is based in part on personal interviews conducted with the various interest groups in the construction industry.

In December 1989, an ASCE task committee conducted an opinion survey of civil engineering programs in the United States accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology to assess the present status of civil engineering materials courses and to report the results to both ASCE and the responding departments. The committee sought department views of the importance of materials courses and the desired course content in a typical civil engineering program. The respondents were asked to rate the relative importance of topics in design and rehabilitation. The results suggested that traditional civil engineering materials are typically taught in a three‐lecture, one‐laboratory sequence. The questionnaire revealed information on the equipment and other facilities to be marginal at best. Availability and quality of classroom instructional material are rated “good” by the respondents. In the area of incorporating real‐world problems into the materials course(s), the respondents report that the courses generally are not broad enough to accomplish this objective. The task committee's recommendations for improving the materials engineering sequence are included.