Engineering Education: Too Narrow or Too Broad? 8

[MikeMech]

I've had discussions with many friends about the merit and return on investment of a college education. Engineering is one of the few 4-yr degrees that offer relatively high job placement and salary right out of school. Most liberal arts majors must spend more years and $$$ geting masters and even doctoral degrees before having a shot at a decent paying job in their field.

By comparison, two years of trade school might put you on track as a CNC machinist. Like engineering, the money and job demand are generally good in the field, and earnings in the same ballpark.

Other issues aside, it seems that financially speaking, the more you can concentrate on technical education alone, the better the investment.

With more engineering students taking 5 years instead of 4 to finish, why should they have to take the liberal arts course requirements? Should engineering be treated more as a technical trade from an educational standpoint? Do any of you think the liberal arts aspect to your education has paid for itself during your engineering career, or was it just a way for the college to get more tuition from you?

 

[GregLocock]

A subject on which I am a bit bitter and twisted.

In the UK engineering degrees are accredited by the engineering institutions, that is, they don't count as 'real' engineering degrees unless they meet certain requirements. At the time I left school neither of the big two uni's offered an accredited engineering degree, and so after leaving university I would have had to take another paper, called 'The Engineer in Society'.

As you might imagine, this was socially 'relevant' piffle, not technical.

Fortunately, having taken it once and failed it (the only 'real' exam I ever failed) they retrospectively granted accreditation to my degree.

The problem is, with the exception of (keen) lawyers and medics, engineers had the highest workload at university. I had at least 3 lectures six mornings a week, labs most afternoons, and tutorials and reports and exercises to fit in as well.

Adding an arts requirement would not have been physically possible without dropping some technical subject, or extending the length of the degree.


Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[QCE]

Most engineers have very poor social skills and the main point of the these classes is to make engineers more well rounded. Does it work? I don't know but that is why they are there.

 

[GregLocock]

Speak for yourself.

Seriously.

Have you got ANY data to support the rather extreme assertion "Most engineers have very poor social skills "

which, deconstructed, implies that >50% of engineers have social skills that would measure as being "very poor" on some scale.

Since engineering is a cobination of analysis and communication I find that a most peculiar assertion.

Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[RDK]

The non-technical courses are intended to make you a well rounded person.

How can you appreciate the beauty in an elegant design if you never have studied art appreciation?

How can you appreciate the global economic discussions that effect engineering judgment if you have never studied economics?

How can you appreciate the finer points of a legal argument, which affects engineering, if you have never studied law?

How can you understand the role of the engineer in society if you have never studied sociology?

How can you understand professional ethics if you have never studied ethics?

How can you understand the philosophy of engineering if you have never studied philosophy?

How can you be a logical thinking engineer if you have never studied logic?

How can you understand the role of politics in the profession if you have never studied political science?

How can you understand the accounting, finance and other business aspects of the profession if you have never studied commerce?

The basic fact that this question is even being raised indicates to me that the lessons of the non-technical courses were missed.




Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[CRG]

The liberal art's courses that were required at the University that I went to, did not have courses that were of any benefit in grooming social skills. In contrast, many liberal art’s professors had the underlying intent on social indoctrination into their belief system. Their idea of social skills was to agree with them. It was an awakening for me to see first hand what was taking place in our educational institutions. I had a successful career in business before engineering school so I had a different perspective than most students.

QCE, many engineers are fortunate in having excellent social skills; however, they choose when to use them. Most engineers can choose the way they impact people, and many don’t have any interest in putting on the kid’s gloves to have a discussion. Hence, one might falsely believe that engineers do not have warm and fuzzy social skills.

With that said, I believe that the best information available to enhance one’s social skills is found in Dale Carnegie’s book, “How to Win Friends and Influence People.” The Dale Carnegie group offers a course centered on this book and is coupled with practice in public speaking. I highly recommend this course to anyone that has the desire to succeed.

Liberal art’s courses added little to my educational experience. I never regretted selling my liberal arts text books back to the school book store. I kept all my science, math, and engineering books and refer to them occasionally. Keeping them was a great investment into my engineering career. Perhaps the real question would be to ask how many engineers kept their liberal art's text books. And if they did, have they ever opened them since they graduated.

CRG

 

[4tuna]

Nice post RDK, I agree completely.

In my personal experience, communication skills (both verbal and written) are the single most important facet in job promotion and success. It is important to learn technical skills in school, but usually these are greatly enhanced by on-the-job training -- this is a normal, acceptable practice (compare any recent college grad with a 2-yr engineer and you will see what I mean).

However, it is not acceptable to learn how to write on the job. You must be able to convey your thoughts to your boss/coworkers/clients in clear, concise speaking or writing. In my experience, few college grads have well-developed communication skills, and it has been a career limiting factor for at least 50% of the coworkers I have had over the years.

I have never worked in an organization where the best technical engineer was the best paid engineer. It was always someone technically competent but with exceptional communication skills that held that distinction.

 

[MikeMech]

RDK, I personally place a high value on the liberal arts portion of my education. So much so that I went to school an extra semester to make sure I took non-required (sometimes even non-credit) courses that I thought would help me understand the world around me.

All of your points are valid, and I personally agree with them. But the market in general doesn't financially reward non-technical education as well as technical education. While I can think of many individual exceptions, the salary statistics show that, other factors being equal, you get the quickest and often best payoff from technical education. I'd consider medicine and the law as technical fields as well as plumbing, welding, etc.

I guess my point is that a liberal arts grounding is good for personal reasons and helpful in support of technical skills, but for an individual with limited finances, is it worth investing $50-$100K plus years of lost wages for the indirect benefits? If the job market thinks a well rounded person is valuable, why don't they pay english majors as much as CAD draftsmen?

 

[CRG]

RDK,

I agree, “The non-technical courses are intended to make you a well rounded person.”

The problem is, not everyone has the same definition of what a well rounded person is.

CRG

 

[RDK]

4tuna

Communication skill was one that I missed. In my undergraduate courses, including my non-technical electives, I never had to write an essay or make a presentation to a group.

This has changed but that was my experience.

When I started MBA school the class was split into technical (mostly engineers but also a couple of computer science types) and arts types (including a few commerce graduates but a lot of arts graduates).

At the start of the program the arts could not figure out how to turn on their calculators let alone how to use them. The engineers could not write their way out of a wet paper bag.

At the half way point the arts types had found the on switch but could not add 2+3 and get any number between 4 and 6. The engineers were holding their own in the written part.

By the end of the program, the engineers with their superior logic skills and precision were better business writers than the arts types who by then were confused as to why 2x3 was the same as 3x2.

When I look back at my classmates the arts types generally went into areas (HR, marketing) where math skills were not as important and the engineers went into the management areas where math skills were important.

The biggest predictor of success was the communication skills (written, verbal and presentation) of the individual.


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[PSE]

The engineering curriculum at my university was intense. There were several semesters that all I had were technical classes. To "balance" this concentration, the curriculum had required open electives outside of the engineering program. The only mandatory "humanities" course being english. Did taking them make me a more "rounded" person? Personally I think that I was (and still am) quite well rounded to begin with. The open electives were enjoyable in that they provided a mental break from technical thinking all the time. Unless one experiences an Epiphany during such a course, it is unlikely that a single class will have much effect on their personality or character. The attributes/aptitudes and affinities have to be present in the first place.

If I had the option of those electives being technical classes I would have been able to get three degrees within my four years. Engineering, Physics, and Mathematics. However, I think my brain might have rebelled at such a load. At almost $25K per year to go there (almost 20 years ago), I did not have the means to stay beyond 4 years. One of my enjoyable courses was on Shakespeare, the professor stated during the very first lecture that (sonets aside), reading it was boring and that it should be acted out rather than just read. He proceeded to do just that for the remainder of the course. Today I still enjoy going to Stratford Canada for the Shakespearean performances they offer.

Regards,

 

[Iskit4iam]

My daughter is in engineering at the U of Toronto. Virtually no liberal arts required. I like that approach. The two semesters of LA courses I needed were of little value to me but ate up a lot of time. But I understand the argument about being well rounded. I just never understood why LA majors didn't have to take calculus to round them out.

I agree that engineers need communication skills and would benefit from them. Ditto economics and ethics. However, the courses I took about "Athletics of the Greeks and Romans" and "The politics of Richard J. Daly and the Chicago Democratic Regime" weren't very helpful. (I grew up in Chicago and was a track jock so I thought I could relate ie: work less). No one guided me to courses that would have developed useful skills or were just fun. It was more important to find classes that fit my schedule. How are things today?

Since I left engineering school I completed a MS and bunches of courses in literature, communications, arts & crafts, writing and music. They were fun, didn't affect my GPA and expanded my horizons.

There were technical courses I couldn't fit into my schedule that would have been beneficial. I would have prefered to get four years of an engineering education.

 

[QCE]

Greg,

I'm afraid that engineers have a rep as "social retards". From what I have seen in the feild it is some what true. I was not making a personnel attack on you just stating what I have seen. If you want an example of the stereotype check out a Dilbert comic.

It has been stated many times in this thread that communication skills are the key to success in an engineering job. However many engineers sit in their cubicles cranking out designs and have poor interacting skills. My point is that the arts classes are there to improve commication skills.

Sorry I could not point you to a satisfactory study of the dorkiness of some of my peers. Maybe I can get funding for the study.

QCE

 

[GregLocock]

Or, you can retract your unproven assertion.

Your call.







Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[TheTick]

I went to a Jesuit university on an NROTC scholarship, so I had a lot of extra non-engineering wedged into my schedule.

The university imposed a 9 credit philosophy and theology requirement. Waste of time? From a career perspective, maybe. However, I graduated knowing that I got more than a 4+ year oversized tech school degree. Also, it was a good experience writing for those classes. Quite an experience writing an "A" paper on a subject that one doesn't think relevant. Also, where else is a male engineering student going to meet female students?

As far as the NROTC and military experience goes, I learned much about what it takes to keep any organization moving in a productive manner. Learning in detail about leadership and management from a military perspective has made me both a better employee and a better leader.

If the ladies don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.

 

[QCE]

Greg,
As you stated:

"Since engineering is a cobination of analysis and communication I find that a most peculiar assertion."

I totally agree with your statement. However I find it amazing how some engineers in companies I have worked for fear public speaking, hide in their offices and in general only communicate via e-mail because they don't like to talk in person.


I will retract my statement:

"Most engineers have very poor social skills"

and replace it with:

I have met quit a few engineers that could take a public speaking or communications class. Maybe even a few extra arts classes.

 

[Focht3]

[blue]QCE[/blue] opined,

I'm afraid that engineers have a rep as "social retards". From what I have seen in the feild it is some what true. ... If you want an example of the stereotype check out a Dilbert comic.

Well, that "rep" may apply to you EEs, but not us "civil" engineers! And Dilbert is a computer programmer, anyway. That doesn't automatically make him - or his circumstances - as truisms for the engineering profession.

It has been stated many times in this thread that communication skills are the key to success in an engineering job. However many engineers sit in their cubicles cranking out designs and have poor interacting skills.

That may be the case for engineers working for a small number of large design firms and/or manufacturers. But I'd say the trend is away from that model for small to medium size firms. Everyone has to produce, and be presentable, these days. Or you don't have a job.

My point is that the arts classes are there to improve commication skills.

One can achieve the same goal by requiring students to make presentations, write papers, etc. for their engineering classes. This also encourages critical thinking and logic skills as well as good communication - particularly when your peers are permitted to challenge your work! And I disagree that "art" classes are about communications. They are about appreciating and understanding, not communicating. English classes, and a handful of classes on communications, are the only ones intended to improve communication skills.

Sorry I could not point you to a satisfactory study of the dorkiness of some of my peers.

I've known a few of them myself. Pocket protectors, polyester pants / suits, out of style hair, shoes, etc. But I think your mistake was in generalizing the condition to "most" engineers. You clearly missed the boat on that assertion. Those guys are the exception, not the rule.

By the way, do you have any figures to identify the number of practicing graduate engineers by discipline? I think you will find that the vast majority are civil engineers closely followed by mechanical engineers. Perhaps the problem is that your pool of experience is entirely too small...

Maybe I can get funding for the study.

Seems like a waste of money to me -



Please see FAQ731-376 by [blue]VPL[/blue] for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[Kiljoy]

I find myself to be the only engineer I know who took a semester of mime... As a matter of fact, due to my heavy interest in college theatre, people were surprised to find out I was an electronics major! I must be one of those rare occurances of an engineer with communications skills.

 

[Focht3]

I have done a fair amount of public speaking - and a little debate. Communication skills not only have to be learned, they have to be practiced. And I don't feel that another 2,3,4 - or more - liberal arts classes would have done much for me in this area. I might have developed an appreciation for certain art or literature forms, but it would not have helped me very much in my professional life.

Now, down here in Texas, a class in bird hunting would have helped my business communications immensely. Come to think of it, a class like that might have helped ol' Dick Cheney, too!




Please see FAQ731-376 for great suggestions on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[psnowhill]

As a consultant and a collegiate education professional I have seen both sides of the coin. I can say that liberal arts courses are absolutely necessary for producing a truly "successful" engineer. Will you make money in engineering without learning better communication skills, economics, history, or the law? Absolutely! I know several collegues and associates that really lack interpersonal skills and have little understanding of the world around them. However, they are outstanding engineers.

If engineering skills alone are qualifications for success, then I believe that probably everyone here is successful. However, to be considered a true success, one must significantly contribute to society in some way. It is not about grabbing all the cash you can and living in a 3 bdrm home with 2.5 kids a dog and a fish. To be a successful human being you need to think about how what you do will impact on others. In order to do that you must have some understanding of economics, politics, history, philosophy, religion, and the written and spoken word.

Forget the idea that kids are taking five years to get through school now. If technology continues to grow, then the time for students to graduate will also grow. There is just a lot more for them to learn. Certainly you wouldn't want students to use FEA methods without understanding von Mises failure criteria would you? As technology expands, the basics must still be taught. So the time it will take students to graduate will eventually expand. However, as far as I know, the number of credits students must acquire to graduate college with an engineering degree has not changed significantly for the last 20 years (at least in the US).

Whatever the case may be in the future, the removal of liberal arts requirements will not make you more successful nor will it make you a good citizen and it will not increase your return on investment. Without over-engineering, failure in one part of the design eventually leads to failure of the entire design. If there are no safety factors, then building on the edge will lead to a greater number of failures. Human beings are already operating on the edge of interpersonal skills and citizen responsibility. In many ways our society is failing (socially), further reduction in academic requirements will lead ultimately to complete failure of the system. Not the idea of success presented earlier. Anyway, I think you need some minimum number of liberal arts courses to help you make valuable decisions at some point in your life.