Educational experts, past and present, urge engineering colleges nationwide to transform their pedagogical paradigm from a predominantly lecture- to an inquiry-based teaching approach. Written comments by two seniors, deploring having to read and write in a required course of an ABET accredited program, highlight a common expectation of today’s students. Presented are the disturbing results of a survey that assessed the level of learning skills exhibited by 1,020 engineering freshmen. Time management not only surfaced as needing drastic remediation but it also correlated with the level of students’ motivation to succeed in college. Problems with poor time management were listed by 25% of the freshman cohort at the end of the first semester. From monitoring the submittals of online homework it was learned that timeliness corresponded with the final grade achieved in a course. The work presented in this paper indicates that universities need not only to address the students’ learning preferences but also equip them with the skills necessary to engage actively in the knowledge-building process, a necessary sea-change in engineering education.

This paper describes a module that was introduced into a civil engineering degree program with the help of professional engineers. The aim was to develop a bridge between the world of learning and professional practice by putting students in the role of consulting engineers working with industry to produce a feasible solution to a real inquiry from a client. The module is placed in context by comparing the goals of accredited civil engineering programs in the United Kingdom and America, by describing how it is linked to the degree program and by explaining the matrix developed to identify the skills the students needed to demonstrate their ability to practice as professional engineers. Details of the module are given with examples of student work and feedback.

The civil engineering profession has been undergoing an identity search. With the advent of information technology and the global market, competition from engineering offices elsewhere and from other local professions is unprecedented. Technical engineering knowledge is no longer a guarantee for career success; rather a combination of numerous professional skills is required. The growing unease of civil engineers about their undefined role in the knowledge economy has led many to question civil engineering education. Although there is a push to enhance the humanistic and business aspects of the curriculum, there is a shove in the opposite direction to strengthen the technical content and keep abreast of technical change. Discussion of this socioeconomic problem within the ASCE forum has often used linear deterministic thinking that is characteristic of technical problems. Social and economic systems are usually more complex and harder to understand than technological systems. If we start making new policies to address the problems of the profession based on fuzzy, incomplete, and imprecise mental models, we may end up with counterintuitive results. This paper proposes a systems thinking approach to the reform of civil engineering education based on System Dynamics modeling, a feedback-based object-oriented modeling paradigm. Such a tool can capture the dynamic nature of complex systems and the nonlinear feedback loops that are often responsible for counterintuitive results of policy making.

How a consulting design civil engineer would respond to two site safety situations would depend on the decision criterion the engineer chooses. One situation is observing a site condition that poses a hazard to construction workers. A second situation is choosing during the design process between a traditional component and one that is more expensive but inherently less risky for the construction workers. Potential decision criteria determining the engineer’s responses to these situations include maximizing the firm’s profits, complying with the firm’s contract with the client, complying with federal safety standards, complying with ASCE’s policy on construction site safety, and complying with ASCE’s Code of Ethics. The paper also discusses how the responses to these situations would be slightly different for an engineering manager and if the engineer was part of a design-build team. The results of this theoretical analysis suggest that engineering firms should establish site safety-related policies and that changes may be warranted in ASCE’s Code of Ethics and the federal safety standards.

Lawyerization has become more and more prevalent in the engineering and construction industry. Some would argue the merits of firms’ retaining lawyers on staff as providing cost savings on projects through averting potential litigation. Others view lawyers as increasing project costs due to increased overhead. Therefore, it is important to understand the pros and cons of lawyerization as viewed by the contractor, designer, owner, manufacturer, and supplier. This paper discusses the current role of lawyers in the engineering and construction industry and examines the factors that contribute to the lawyerization of the industry.

Resolving construction disputes using an adversarial approach is considered to be in opposition of the maintenance of a harmonious relationship between two parties. The modern arbitration process may emulate the litigation proceeding leading to delay and cost escalation. During the past decade, the Hong Kong Government has implemented a mediation clause as an alternative mode for settlement of construction disputes. In this paper, the experience and insight into resolving construction disputes by integrating mediation and then arbitration in Hong Kong are highlighted. The state-of-the-art modern mediation process and its philosophical origins are reviewed. The shortcomings of the present system are pinpointed. The success of the adjudication now practiced in the United Kingdom may suggest that there is a place for another process of dispute resolution, which may help improve the situation. The prospect of the proposed mediation/adjudication and then arbitration mechanism is discussed with particular reference to the construction industry in Hong Kong.

Effectiveness of any alternative dispute resolution (ADR) method depends on the national legal system to which it is subjected. In Singapore, the increasing growth in the use of ADR methods may be adduced to developments in the Singapore legal environment. This paper reviews the characteristics of the Singapore national legal system for arbitration. It examines how the legal system facilitates effective use of ADR. By its features, the Singapore national legal system ensures parties’ autonomy but deters parties from taking opportunistic advantage of the voluntary nature of ADR. It enables procedural flexibility, and confidentiality of arbitration proceedings. It insulates the arbitration process from intervention from the Singapore courts and from corruption; and it provides maximum judicial support in the arbitral process. Hence, it ensures that disputes can be brought to a conclusion within a reasonable amount of time, at a reasonable cost, as well as preserving business relationships. The Singapore legal system insures the integrity of arbitration and the independence of arbitrators and arbitral institutions by immunity provisions. In addition, the legal system enhances the use of mediation and conciliation in a sequential tier with arbitration by providing a time limit for mediation or conciliation to terminate should they fail to produce a mutually acceptable settlement. In Singapore, the court system is generally known to be efficient; hence, ADR faces the practical challenge of becoming lengthier than court proceedings. The continuing search for and use of expedited arbitration procedures by arbitral institutions such as the Singapore International Arbitration Centre should reduce this challenge. This paper provides useful information on how a national legal system may be designed to support the use of ADR methods and facilitate their effectiveness.

Prior to construction of a bridge or highway, the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requires an evaluation of the effect of the project on the human environment. The purpose of NEPA is to require the head of the federal agency that is committing funds to the project to consider its actions before deciding to proceed with the project. This paper will analyze the general provisions of NEPA to remove some of the mystery related to the environmental concerns raised by bridge or highway projects and to emphasize to transportation planners that these concerns must be addressed prior to beginning a major bridge or highway project. The intent of this paper is to provide some guidance to transportation planners in light of these statutes as they begin the planning stages for highway and bridge projects.

Prior to beginning a major highway or bridge project, the transportation planner must address requirements set out in the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). NEPA requires a specific evaluation of the effect a major highway or bridge project will have on the environment. This evaluation must include consideration of the effect the project may have on the habitat of an endangered species, which implicates provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and on historical properties in the vicinity of the project, which implicates provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). This paper presents requisites of NEPA that integrate the requirements of ESA and NHPA into the initial evaluation of the impact on the human environment of a major highway or bridge project. The intent of this paper is to provide guidance to transportation planners in light of NEPA, ESA, and NHPA statutes as they begin the planning stages for highway and bridge projects.