Elevating the status of the Engineering Profession 4

[josephv]

Our world is faced with environmental problems, a looming energy crisis, famine and poverty.

These are problems that can be ameliorated by some technological fixes. It is engineers who should lead us towards our better future.

But instead of leading, our profession is battling to survive.

Our noble profession is besieged with layoffs, underemployment, salary reductions, and diminishing job prospects.

Amid these predicaments, concrete actions are being undertaken in Ontario, Canada to elevate the status of the Engineering Profession, and make us leaders.

1) The Ontario Society of Professional Engineers was created in order to help educate the government and the public on the importance of the engineering profession.

2) The Engineer in Residence Program was launched so that, volunteer engineers would visit public schools and help teach youngsters on how math and science are applied in the real world.

3) “Engineers without Borders” is a charity that is helping developing countries.

4) Universities are revamping their curriculum to include design courses and applied engineering in the first year of studies. In addition to this, more emphasis is being placed on communication skills.


What actions have been taken in your corner of the world to elevate the status of our profession? What additional actions should we take?

 

[HamishMcTavish]

I hate to say it but to have the engineering equivalent of LA Law, Hill St Blues, ER etc would go a long way....public perception is everything these days and the main source of images is the box!

Regards, HM

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[swertel]

Watch "Extreme Engineering." I think it is on the Discovery Channel. It is even on during prime-time. Of course, I don't ever see any commercials advertising the show, but it's there.

Sadly, from the episodes I've seen, the show focuses mainly on civil engineering. They do very little in BioMechanics, Environmental, or other engineering functions. The topics of the show are large construction projects that get the a lot of notice because they are so visible. Normal people (admit it, we engineers are not normal) do not see the awe in things like heart valves. Come on, we can not make an electronic heart so there will no longer be a waiting line for heart transplants. That's not cool or awe inspiring? What's wrong with the world?

--Scott

For some pleasure reading, the Round Table recommends FAQ731-376

 

[samv]

A lot of "normal" people watch Junk Yard Wars - or am I so deeply entwined in an engineering circle that I don't know any normal people!! ok so junk yard wars perhaps isn't the ideal show - but it's fun to watch!

 

[rhodie]

Cable TV has somewhat picked up on engineering type shows.
I frequently watch that show on Discovery about those NY boys that build motorcycles. It's entertaining, and includes information about machine processes like sheet metal fabrication and powder coating.

Given, it wouldn't be much fun to watch if the Dad didn't periodically drop an F-bomb or throw a monkey wrench at his son, but it portrays a more real-life picture of engineering than a typical star trek episode.

A TV show from the past is primarily responsible for my career in engineering; I used to watch "Wings" on the Discovery channel when I was a kid, and all those stories about aircraft designers, engineers, and pilots got me really interested in engineering. That, and those burned-in images of the Tacoma-Narrows bridge having a grand-mal seizure and self destructing.

From those early experiences, I always knew I wanted to be part of the action, from the beginning: Engineering!

 

[FrenchCAD]

Nothing is done in France to higher the image of Engineering.

It's a strange dilemna we have here.

On one hand, France makes fantastic engineering developments, especially in Civil Engineering (Bridge of Normandy, the next coming bridge of Millau) and in Transportation (TGV and Airbus, keeping in mind Airbus is European).

On the other hand though, French people aren't much "sensibilized" by this. They're more like "Hey, this TGV is a good thing, I can travel Paris to London in less than 2 hours, sweet" and they don't see it a huge technolic product, at the cutting edge of train systems.

French audiance isn't interested in engineering, they're just interested in what it gives them to ease their lives or whatsoever.

As a person, I've been asked many times what I was doing in my life : "I'm studying Mechanical Engineering" "Sweet, you repair engines then? I have a problem with mine" I mean, come on, wake up people!

In companies, workers see us engineers more like the bad guys, because we're over them in the company...We really suffer a bad and dark image in France.

Cyril Guichard
Mechanical Engineer

 

[RDK]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again before BobPE does, one way to improve the status of the engineering profession would be mandatory licensing and protection of the title engineer. We have this in Canada and the profession is held in higher regard than it appears to be elsewhere.

How can you expect that the public perception of engineers will be high if any idiot can call himself an engineer and worse practice engineering?

I believe that there are some serious flaws in the PE licensing procedure but these can be fixed. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

Tests are a poor proxy measure of professional competence. The FE should be passable by any graduate of an accredited university. If you did not pass an accredited university then it should be difficult for you to obtain a license, not just a couple more years experience but a tough rigorous system of exams that approximate the exams written in an accredited university degree.

The PE should be based on references from engineers who know and are familiar with the applicants experience and capabilities. To use a multiple guess format where the correct answer is in front of you is a poor measure of professional competence. The test questions that I have seen are of the nature of how much deflection will this beam have? A real world example is to design a structural system that will satisfy some design constrains in an economical manner with due regard for the long term and the capabilities of the potential builders. This design has to be put into a reasonable presentation so that tradesmen can follow the drawings and actually build it. Calculating deflection is only a small part of this and is usually done on the computer anyway.

What needs to be done is to take the licensing boards away from the state and make the profession self-governing. In some states, as I understand it, the same state agency that licenses engineers also licenses carpenters and hairdressers. While I mean no disrespect for hairdressers and carpenters, they are not in the same league as we are.

There needs to be protection of the use of the title engineer. If anyone can pass a few tests and become a Microsoft Certified System Engineer, then why should the public respect the years of education and experience that are required to be engineers? If garbage men can call themselves sanitary engineers, then why should the public have any respect for us, especially those who are real sanitary engineers involved in the design of waste disposal systems and responsible for the protection of public health and the environment?

There needs to be protection of the right to practice engineering. If anyone can design and build any sort of manufactured item, then why should the public have any respect for us? All it takes is a business license and a welding rig and anyone can call himself the Director of Engineering for Sam’s Welding Shop and design items that he manufactures.

You need a license to drive a car but you do not need one to design one. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this?


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[BobPE]

Cheers RDK....good post...I was holding off on posting because, believe it or not, I know I sound like a broken record, and, well, that is ok with me...but it is nice to know that otheres out there realize someting is broken, and better yet, we are the ones that can fix it...

I think as a whole we engineers take great pride in not being in the spotlight because we are stigmitized that if you are in the spotlight, its because something went wrong...

I agree with you that lowering the bar is not the direction we should be going...as a side to that, I think helping other engineers up to the bar is a good direction...

I have stopped explaining to people what I do, they just have no clue...and its mostly our fault, because we do our jobs so well...Things work when people want them to work, and they take it for granted.

I think Canada does have a better system, our system here in the US is a bitter "us - them" struggle created by outside forces that ZAPS all our creativity on how engineers can move forward to better the world.

Advertising as an engineer in the US is strictly regulated and is one of the downfalls to engineers reaching the masses. I often push for public service promotions in my state to let people know what an engineer is and how they impact their daily lives...but, alas, no one is interested...

Rhodie:

I loved wings...and that confounded Tacoma-Narrows bridge is a tribute to one of the few things that just about every person can recognize about engineers...failure...YOu ask them what they know about the bridge and the cant recall, other than the engineers messed up.

I got started on the engineering path as a kid, I thought the garden hose was the coolest thing going...now my primary focuse in engineering is fluid mechanics...

One thing though I would change is your post RDK...no one has a right to practice engineering, it's an earned privledge, one that can be lost. I think that once us engineers realize that licensure, and ones ability to keep it, makes us a whole (not smarter, not better, not above anyone else...and all the BS that people think about it)engineer, only then will we be able to move forward....

BobPE

 

[GregLocock]

That would be much more sensible.

As far as the testing goes, why not just forbid 'engineering' degrees that do not meet the required standard? In effect, in the UK, this is what happens. Each engineering course is assessed and if it does not meet the standard then you have to pass additional papers before it is accepted as a real engineering degree. This happened to me, because my course did not include enough (well, any) of the 'soft' stuff (Engineer in Society). Fortunately a few years later they retrospectively changed the acceptability of my course, I don't know why.

If all engineering degrees satisfied this minimum requirement then the PE exam would not need to have any technical content.

In Australia engineering is reasonably well respected, perhaps the colonies retain a folk memory of 'before the country was civilised' ? Grin.



Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[TheTick]

Perhaps if we were all required to go to 7-10 years of school like doctors and attorneys. Maybe mandatory licensing like for doctor, attorneys, CPA's, truck drivers.

Some sort of boot camp or academy wouldn't hurt either.

Good and evil: wrap them up and disguise it as people.

 

[electricpete]

Response to Greg’s question: why not put PE exam into college?

- Requirements for PE licensure is not limited to exam. It includes verification of experience and character.

- A person will not be eligible for PE until they have completed the experience. Doesn’t it make more sense to verify their “current” knowledge (at time of application) than their past knowledge (during school).

- College exams can be passed on short term memory. PE exam verifies the fundamental have been retained over a longer period of time, implying the material has been more internalized.

The question for Greg: What’s wrong with requiring a professional to demonstrate a minimum knowledge by exam prior to licensing?

 

[Binary]

electricpete, I only need to challenge you on one point... well-written exams rely very little on memory and much more on the ability to apply knowledge in the solution of problems. In fact, many of my engineering exams were either open book or permitted notes of some sort. Short-term (or long-term) memory had very little to do with being able to successfully solve the problems.

 

[electricpete]

I agree to a certain extent. However there were also classes where I received an A in college and today I don't remember much of the course... either never really really knew it to begin with, or forgot it over time.

Which is more relevant in determining whether a working professional applying for licensure posseses the minimum knowldge?

- A test of the working professional's knowledge conducted today and administered under uniform controlled conditions for all candidates?

- A test conducted several years before when the individual was immersed in academia.

Back to the opposite question: what is wrong with asking a professional to demonstrate minimum knowledge by exam?

 

[Binary]

What is wrong with asking a professional to demonstrate minimum knowledge by exam?

Nothing at all. In fact, from what little I know of the PE exam, I'd say it's a bit weak. For example, the CPA exam in California consists of three 8-hour sections which are (at least in part) made up of subjective, open-ended questions, not simple multiple choice, right/wrong questions. If the PE exam doesn't at least live up to that then I question its merit.

I think a well-written test, subjectively graded, perhaps coupled by individual evaluation by a board of engineers, would be a much better standard by which to bestow a PE license. It sounds like the existing test is not that bad. Getting your PE is basically just a matter of wheter you work with PE's so that you can get their references.

I'd say that any engineering college whose exams can be passed by students using memory as opposed to sound problem-solving skills is not worth a dang and should not be accredited by ABET.

This opens up a whole other can of worms because everybody knows that the rigor of exams is frequently dependent on the professor who, under the name of academic freedom, does whatever (s)he darn well pleases.

 

[BobPE]

Binary, the you cant even begin to compare the CPA to the PE.....the CPA is not even close....An engineer could pass the CPA by reading a few prep books (and of course meeting the exam qualification requirements), an accountant could not pass the PE without and engineering degree...that is a big difference.....

A PE is evaluated on an individual basis by a state board (made up of PE's) BEFORE someone takes the test because getting your PE is more than taking a test....

I am not sure what test you are refering tot had had simple multiple choice right or wrong answers, but it sure isnt the PE....nor is it the EIT....

I have a lot of friends ( 2 Electrical 1 Structural, 1 ME) that cannot pass the PE test....they went to top notch engineering schools...worked for cunsultants...and, the EE's in particular have taken the test over 7 times...these are not dumb people....don't say the test is easy until you take it....Once you take the test, I hope you come back to the forum and call me an idiot because the test was so easy...I would like nothing more than to get to call you wise ass PE.....LOL

BobPE

I do like (imagine that...lol) your comments on engineering schools....even with ABET accreditation, which isnt saying much, there are some schools that just should be allowed to continue to teach engineering!!!!

 

[rhodie]

BobPE

Get off your high horse!


lol... I still feel like saying that almost everytime I read one of your posts! PE's are smart, but to trivialize the CPA exam as something an engineer (not even notated as a PE, but a regular engineer!) could pass by "reading a few prep books" is just totally ridiculous. I'd venture to guess that you've never even seen a CPA test. It's not exactly the SAT, man! It's a rigorous and comprehensive exam (which Binary did an excellent job of outlining), not one that's easy to pass without some formal Accounting Theory and certainly not one to be passed by a part-time book reader. That's the whole point of the CPA exam!

Don't discredit the achievements of others simply because it isn't relevant to your personal situation.

LOL! You are something else, man! I look forward to your replies.

 

[BobPE]

thanks Rhodie...LOL....

Yes I have seen a CPA exam...have you? I sat with my EX wife while she took several sections of the exam...yea...sat with her, right next to her.....she pulled the test up on a computer at a TESTING center, and typed away...I got more answers right that her...top notch school, BS in accounting, MS in finance....

When I do talk, I know what I am talking about....so I guess that does make me something else...LOL....

"Don't discredit the achievements of others simply because it isn't relevant to your personal situation."......Words to live by Rhodie....words to live by....

LOL as I told you beofre, my horse is as high as you guys make it....the only difference is, there is room on my horse for more....get your PE and come on up and check out the view....

BobPE

 

[Binary]

BobPE:

You're right that I've never seen the PE test (and don't really remember much about the EIT back in '89). I was instead referring to the statements of your fellow PE where RDK said "The PE should be based on references from engineers who know and are familiar with the applicants experience and capabilities. To use a multiple guess format where the correct answer is in front of you is a poor measure of professional competence. The test questions that I have seen are of the nature of how much deflection will this beam have?" - a post to which you responded "good post".

I guess I misinterpreted Rick's statement.

Regardless, I don't know what state your ex took the CPA exam in but I have two brothers who took it here in California and it sounded brutal (and was most certainly NOT typed up on a computer in a testing center.)

I believe that the PE test in CA is an 8-hr test so, I'd have to agree with you... you really can't compare the 8-hr PE test to the 24-hr CPA test. Theirs is more rigorous.

From what I've seen of the CPA exam and the prep courses, you're just flat-out wrong. Believe what you want; I'm sure there's nothing I can say to change your opinions and I'm becoming less and less inclined to try...

 

[BobPE]

It's funny how quickly the CPA is defended, and how quickly the PE is denounced....

Back to the original post, I think that sums up a lot where engineering is going....About 20 percent of engineering graduates will become licensed engineers in the US, the remainder will be tearing at the structure all engineers should strive to achieve and maintain. The status of engineering here in the US has been and will be continue to be centered on PE's and non PE's and eventually this battle will be lost by all engineers as non engineering graduates take our places by using technology a few engineers develop. There will always be a need for PE's in the US to take on liability. My "opinion" for the exempt engineers is that lower paid technicians here in the US or overseas engineering graduates will take on this work. I see it as a sad state of affairs...I see it every day, not only in here, but out in the real world....

Having an engineer say a test is more rigerous due to the time allotment for taking the test...now thats not typical of an engineer...an engineer should know to compare apples to apples...Engineers are smart people, and this is another "opinion" I have...But I read posts from some engineers and it can make an engineer feel knee high to a dime....this profession is not about feeling knee high to a dime...We, as engineers, are on high horses, if you dont feel that way, then get out of the profession and stop trying to pull the leaders down...

See, in my "opinion" engineers are greater than doctors, lawyers, and CPA's, combined....If you can fault me for feeling that way about our chosen profession...I think you should question yourself about being in this profession....

binary, I misunderstood RDK's post about the beam....my bad....

The test here in the states wold go a lot similar to this in format, although this is a weak example:

Multiple choice question, series of 3...

Question 1: What is the deflection of a beam?

Question 2: Using this deflection, calculate the moment at some connection...

Question 3: Givn this moment, calculate the sheer on connecting bolts...etc...etc...

They are cascading questions that build on one another in many instances, although not all....A big problem with the exam is that they give you 5 choices...4 right wrong answers, and one correct answer....

BobPE

 

[rhodie]

See, in my "opinion" engineers are greater than doctors, lawyers, and CPA's, combined....If you can fault me for feeling that way about our chosen profession...I think you should question yourself about being in this profession....

I don't feel that way at all. Neither do many great engineers. Don't commit the ad hoc "No True Scotsman Fallacy" by inferring that because Binary doesn't think he is smarter than "doctors, lawyers, and CPA's, combined" he is somehow lacking as an engineer.

By the way, learn to write and spell better. We all make spelling mistakes, but no self-respecting engineer would be satisfied with such poor punctuation and spelling habits as yours. (...see how that fallacy works?)