QUALITY ENGINEERING EDUCATION – A REVIEW FOR DISCUSSION

WITHIN THE ARAB STATES REGION

 

By Russel C. Jones, Ph.D., P.E.

World Expertise LLC

Falls Church , VA , USA

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 Covering many facets of engineering education in the current global environment, this paper attempts to focus on developments and trends that are of particular relevance to engineering education in the Arab States Region. Overall trends in engineering and engineering education are noted, and particular attention is paid to developments in engineering education in the author’s home country – developments typical of those currently racing throughout the Western world. Recent reform movements in engineering education are covered, with particular emphasis on curricular developments. Broader issues such as international exposure for engineering students and education for entrepreneurship are also discussed. Much emphasis is placed on formal accreditation processes for engineering education, and guidelines for basic program content are provided. Assessment techniques are explored, as well as an exit exam approach. Regional agreements across national borders covering educational equivalency and cross-border practice are examined. Needs for continuing education and lifelong learning are described, along with descriptions of distance education approaches. Finally, readers are alerted to the need to consider adaptation of foreign approaches carefully, adapting relevant ideas only as appropriate for the local situation. A concluding section makes recommendations for the consideration of engineering educators in the Arab States Region.

 

A study commissioned by the Cairo, Egypt office of UNESCO

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

             Executive summary                                                                                           1

             Introduction                                                                                                       3

             Megatrends in engineering education                                                                  3

             Capacity building – engineers for developing countries                                         13

             Engineering education and accreditation in the United States                                 16

             Education of engineers for international practice                                                  20

             Developments in teaching and learning                                                                 29

             Technology in learning systems                                                                            31

             Developments in engineering education in the United States                                    33

             Enhancing engineering education in Europe                                                            39

             International experience for engineering students                                                  40

                  through distance learning techniques

             Entrepreneurship for engineering students                                                             45

             Global accreditation trends                                                                                   48

             International trends in engineering accreditation and quality assurance                   53             

             Guidelines for definition of necessary basic knowledge                                           61

             First professional degree                                                                                      66

             Outcomes assessment                                                                                         67

             Evaluation of distance education                                                                          72

             Industry – University interactions                                                                        74

             Cross-border engineering practice                                                                      75

             ABET substantial equivalency evaluations                                                           80

             It’s time to rethink engineering education conferences                                          84

             Foreign adaptation of US engineering education models                                        89

             Conclusions and recommendations                                                                      94

             References                                                                                                       95

 

INTRODUCTION

 Developments in communications, travel and trade over recent decades have produced a global network of ideas, institutions, and economies. Engineering practice and its related technologies have become global in scope and scale. To be effective, today’s engineering graduate must not only be grounded in scientific and mathematical fundamentals, engineering principles and design, but must also have a global outlook and the broader skills to work in society in both home country and internationally. Engineering education is thus challenged to prepare a technically competent graduate, as it has done traditionally, and to add several dimensions of broadening – all within a program of reasonable length.

As engineering has become a more global profession, issues of quality assurance of engineering education programs have been amplified. Clients or customers in a given country or region want to be assured that the engineering being provided on products and services is of high quality – protective of the health, safety and welfare of its citizens. When some or all of the technical work is being done by foreign educated engineers, questions of quality assurance typically arise. Formal accreditation of engineering programs is today the standard by which such quality assurance is sought.

In response to the changing nature of engineering practice, and its globalization, engineering educators have been reforming their offerings. In the classroom, the emphasis is typically moving from ‘teaching’ to ‘learning’, where student centered active learning is seen as the goal. Modern technologies, particularly in computers and communications, are having major positive impacts on how the education is being delivered, and how students and faculty interact with one another. Broadening of the curriculum to include teamwork and communication skills, business and entrepreneurship elements, international dimensions, sustainable development, etc., is occurring throughout engineering education. In addition, outcomes assessment is replacing technique specifications in shaping the engineering curriculum and its evaluation.

  The topics that follow are all interrelated, and the reader is encouraged to continuously integrate the concepts while proceeding through the paper. References and appropriate web sites for further exploration of important topics are provided along the way.

 MEGATRENDS IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION

 In 1982 John Naisbitt introduced a new technique of gleaning trends in our society in his best-selling book Megatrends – content analysis. He based his futurist predictions on a detailed analysis of what the news media were reporting, by taking time to connect individual events to begin to understand larger patterns. His premise was that the most reliable way to anticipate the future is by understanding the present.

  This section of the paper looks at recent and current events in engineering education at the international scale, as reported over the past three years in the International Engineering Education Digest, and attempts to connect them in ways that reveal megatrends in engineering education. From the rush of universities to get into for-profit distance education ventures, to the worldwide drive toward harmonization of degrees and their quality assurance mechanisms, to downturns in engineering enrollments due to student disenchantment with the profession, the topics repeated in the monthly issues of the Digest provide a pattern that helps to illuminate current megatrends, and to project them into likely future directions.

  Using three years of the International Engineering Education Digest as a data source, and with the luxury of hindsight, four major themes emerge from the world of engineering education:

Ø                  Changes forced by the fragile world economy;

Ø                  Student and professional mobility;

Ø                  The use of communications and instructional technology;

Ø                  The increasingly loud voice of the social imperative. 

These individual themes are complex enough, but when taken together they are intertwined, interactive, synergistic, and strike to the core of not only engineering education around the world, but also of higher education in the new millennium.

  The economy

  “An investment bank has made a deal . . . that will have it pay for one-third of the cost of a new chemistry building in return for a share of the profits from any spin-off companies in the next 15 years.  … The bank . . . is confident that it is getting a good deal, on the basis of its own expertise and experience in advising high technology and biotechnology companies” (Digest 18 December 2000).

  Presumably, the university’s confidence was equal to that of the bank.

  This Digest article captures the changing scene of higher education, where, in the face of decreased funding, universities are making more aggressive and complex business deals in hopes of shoring up resources.  The famous university in question, Oxford in the UK , has been strapped for funds as are sister institutions in the US , Ghana , Vietnam , Venezuela and Australia . 

  Since 2000 money has been exceptionally tight for higher education around the world.  As the world economy has faltered, colleges and universities have been forced to adopt strategies for increasing revenues and decreasing costs.  Among those strategies are instituting or raising tuition, changing research funding, finding efficiencies in traditional operations, and developing new, for-profit business ventures.  The current environment has also been hospitable to the growth and expansion of new educational organizations around the world, both for-profit and not-for-profit.

  From a US perspective, where both public and private institutions have long flourished side by side, the notion of paying for higher education is not new.  Even public universities have raised what were originally modest rates of tuition and fees long decades ago to a point where the difference between the cost of attending a public and a private institution may today be minimal.  In the US discussions about college costs have been dominated by arguments over how much to raise tuition in the face of budget shortfalls, and the relative balance between loans and grants for students attending college.  Missing are broad-based debates on whether higher education is at all the responsibility of the state.

  But elsewhere in the world, expectations, history and culture are different.  Students have traditionally attended universities for free, or have paid only symbolic costs, or even have been paid for attending a university.  That is fast changing, as the Digest has reported. In 2002 Canadian students protested increased tuition which raised the average student debt load to about 15,600 US$ (Digest 18 February 2002). The Association of African Universities endorsed the imposition of tuition in its 170 member institutions spread through 43 countries, places where higher education has traditionally been free. The implications for the poorest of the poor are clear, but the trade offs are painful, especially in view of the crises in health care, starvation, and employment, all of which present competing priorities.  A later report, picked up in the Digest ( 5 August 2002 ), predicts increased chaos in already unstable African universities in light of these new changes.  An interesting side note is a recent entry (Digest 6 May 2002) that reports the decision of the government of Slovakia to make fees for distance education illegal.  In addition to their regular curriculum, which is free of charge, many Slovakian universities have been offering such distance education courses, citing great need and popularity.  The universities claim that without charging for them, they will be forced to close them down.  The government says that all education should be free. Stay tuned.

  Under conditions of budget constraint, research funding is undergoing major changes around the world. Long-standing assumptions are being rejected, and the national infrastructures which have controlled the distribution of research funds have been remade.  Japan , for example, created a new super ministry for funding research, presumably based on the need to better coordinate projects and assess progress and success (Digest 26 January 2001). Other countries, long dedicated to virtual lifetime funding support for researchers, have begun to impose productivity measures on their researchers and to withdraw funding for those whose output is not judged sufficient in quality or quantity. The Chinese Academy of Science has been moving in this direction across its 123 research institutes (Digest 10 March 2001).  Northwestern University in the US vowed to do the same (Digest 10 March 2001).  The European Commission, acknowledging the fragmentation in its programs of scientific research, has set in place a four year, 16.2 billion US$ program (Framework 6) to promote pan-European projects and trans-European mobility for researchers.   Targeted support is to include: information technology, genomics and biotechnology, sustainable development and global change, nanotechnologies, aeronautics and space, and food safety (Digest 10 March 2001). The French government has attempted to boost research spending, but most of it has been defense related, and civilian R & D funding was scheduled to only barely beat inflation rates (Digest 12 October 2001). Argentina has been especially hard hit, closing labs, reducing researchers' salaries, and facing radically devalued funds (Digest 8 April 2002). 

  A significant crisis in scientific publishing is driven largely, but not exclusively, by economics.  Universities are seeking to maintain their traditional ways of acquiring and making available research findings, but at reduced costs.  As an economic problem faced by all colleges and universities, the problem to many seems amenable to solution by the Internet.  Just put journals on line immediately: low cost, instant access to ideas, free scholarly inquiry, etc.  Not so fast, say publisher representatives  (Digest 12 October 2001).  Quality costs money.  So the question and the solutions linger. Although not seen as central to the interests of many engineering educators, in the light of current world events the related problem of book publishing of works in Arabic takes on an added interest.  With 275 million speakers of Arabic throughout 22 countries, a run of 5000 copies of a book by Middle Eastern publishers is considered large (Digest 24 August 2001).  Something to think about.

  This grim global scene of the funding available for all of higher education is lightened somewhat when we look at the creative ventures of some institutions attempting to balance their meager budgets.  In the UK , for example, eighteen universities banded together to offer advertisers an opportunity to promote their products or services on the university screen savers (Digest 12 October 2001). (Holy pop-ups!) The British government also offered a onetime bonus to educational institutions that decided to go private and forego public support  (Digest  15 February 2001).

  More serious financial maneuvers have included efforts by Temple University of Philadelphia to start a for-profit online school, which was closed down when a new president took over (Digest 3 August 2001).  California had to rethink its interruptible service contracts with energy providers after considering what cuts offs would mean to medical facilities, laboratories and such (Digest 15 February 2001).

  While the impact of communication and instructional technology in engineering education over the past three years will be discussed in the next section of this paper, we need to spend some time here considering how technology has offered entrepreneurially minded university administrators some dazzling opportunities for making money.  The Digest is full of articles about how this university or that around the globe has plunged into production of on-line courses or modules in hopes of making money, only to be disappointed.  It didn’t take the dot.com collapse for universities to learn that the investment needed to create quality online programs was heavy and the profits did not quickly roll in to help balance the university budget.  There have been some creative efforts to use the new ventures  to compensate individuals, a welcome innovation in view of generally stagnating salaries in higher education.  University College Cork staff, for example, working at the national Microelectronics Research Center , were in line to profit from commercial spin-offs.  The center decided to distribute half of the equity gained to its staff members (Digest 18 December 2000).  More than one university has seen the advantages of encouraging faculty to be creative online and to reap profits, to blunt the effect of minimal raises.

  There are limits, however, to efficiency measures and creative entrepreneurship when it comes to managing the financial existence of a college or university. The strong growth of private and for-profit institutions of higher learning around the world has attracted a great deal of attention.  In country after country, the tradition of a single, publicly funded system of higher education has given way in the face of increasing demand for access which outstrip national resources.  Governments have admitted candidly that they cannot provide places for all the qualified students in their countries who want to attend college, and thus have created legislation and policies which invite, encourage, and support the entrance of private money into their countries for building new universities. 

  In the US , educators have become familiar with such entities as corporate universities (Digest 6 May 2002, also 15 February 2001 ), and private for-profit programs (Sylvan Learning Systems, the University of Phoenix , etc.). Along with their growth has come a tension, articulated by some as the conflict between the need to retain quality in education vs. the perceived monopoly that traditional institutions have on the delivery of higher learning in the US .  This tension arises whenever another country contemplates expansion of educational opportunities offered by anyone other than traditional institutions.  Since resolution of this issue requires some complex evolution of social expectations placed on national governments, should developing countries defer decisions on creating increased educational opportunities for their young by rejecting what may prove to  be some questionable initiatives from abroad?  Is there a need for new academic credentials to aid in this challenge?  Can we grasp the urgency of the problem just by looking at China , where only about 11% of its young attend college? 

  The overarching concerns that these budget squeezes create, exacerbated by the creative solutions proposed in desperation, are ethical ones. Who benefits from higher education, the individual or the society?  If the emphasis is on individual benefits, should universities try to turn that around?  What is the pay back expected of a university graduate to the  society which funded his or her education? Who should fund research?  Are public-private partnerships inevitably tainted?  Should private donations, complete with limitations and conditions, increase or decrease?  Engineering educators are centrally involved in these deliberations, on both a local and a global scale.  Their contributions to the dialogue would be valuable.

  In the end, it is difficult to attribute lessening support for higher education solely to the current state of the world economy: that is today’s explanation/defense.  Tomorrow will likely be the same, with a different excuse.  The case for education, as the solution for society rather than one of its many problems, has not yet been made.

  Technology

  The complexity and interconnectedness of the challenges facing engineering education  are  nowhere better seen than by looking at instructional and communications technologies.  Certainly technology has been viewed, as outlined above, as an opportunity for earning money for institutions and individuals, thus relieving some budget problems.  Technology also offers  cost-cutting solutions by creating operational efficiencies. Communications and instructional technologies are a means of increasing access to higher education, and thus are related to the social imperatives facing higher education.  It is a way of increasing student and professional mobility, through virtual visits, courses, recruiting and communication.  Technology has been offered as a means of increasing the effectiveness of both teaching and learning.  In fact, technology has been such a driving issue in engineering education that it has merited its own category in the Digest.

  In reviewing the past three years of the Digest we can see evidence of a substantial amount of rash behavior related to technology, with decisions being made quickly, only to be retracted in the light of the inexorable forces of reality, profitability, feasibility, readiness and politics.  While we learned long ago that technology hardware was not cheap, it has taken a bit longer to accept that integration of technology into teaching, learning, research and life is neither cheap nor easy. 

  Technology’s potential for increasing access to higher education was immediately evident and is now visible throughout the world.  An African Virtual University is up and running (Digest 6 May 2002).  Japan , Thailand and Vietnam are among the countries considering establishing an “international cyber-university” (Digest 6 May 2002).  China is working with US and Australian universities to offer more distance education programs taught in English (Digest 6 May 2002).  The Indira Ghandi National Open University is using FM radio and TV satellite downlinks for its programs, the largest in India , serving 750,000 students (Digest 18 March 2002). An on-line Islamic university now functions in the US   (Digest 5 August 2002).

  Huge investments have been made in instructional technologies in the US .  When the bubble burst, with dot.coms and the economy going belly up, some say that engineering was buffered because it had used technology wisely (Digest 26 November 2001).

  While admiring the ability of various technologies to increase access to higher learning and their suitability to engineering education, we cannot escape the problem that much of distance learning has yet to be assessed in terms of learning outcomes.  We have probably come too far to have the entire enterprise collapse, and the alternative -- persistent ignorance around the globe -- is too dangerous to consider.  But we need to attend to assessment, to have a better grasp on what really works when we use the tools of technology in the instructional process.  If more students do not learn more, more effectively, more efficiently, with better retention and ability to use what they have learned, why use technology?

  Communication and information technology (CIT) has been a great boon to international contacts among engineering and science researchers. There is no need to provide examples to prove this point.  And for engineering students who can communicate with their peers around the world, there are great advantages.  However, this great potential has yet to be systematically exploited to offer students international exposure through technology and to expand the reach of international engineering meetings and conferences to engineers in the developing parts of the world.  In fact, the digital divide appears to be increasing, as forward motion in developing countries is slow, while  advances in technology, software, hardware and individual competencies accelerate in other parts of the world (Digest 18 March 2002).

  The variety of technology-related projects, programs and activities in engineering education has produced  important results, including some which were unintentional.  For example, it has become apparent to anyone who has engaged in distance education that modern teaching includes several discrete functions which must be decoupled in order to achieve the desired learning results.  Instructional designers and technology experts are now active members of the teaching team which traditionally included only a professor plus graduate assistants (Digest 22 September 2001).  This can lead to a feeling of loss of control on the part of faculty, but probably also a welcome sense of humility and appreciation for collaboration.  A developing history of the use of instructional technology has even allowed the definition of new problems and the vocabulary with which to discuss them.  Take, for example, the notion of “linkage rot,” the tendency of links to become outmoded over time, as sites disappear or are renamed or relocated (Digest 6 May 2002).  “Linkage rot” is real evidence of the half-life of most technical knowledge, and how fungible knowledge and evidence are, both valuable pieces of understanding.

  The pervasiveness of English as the dominant language of higher education and research has been emphasized and intensified by technology.  King Faisal University (Digest 8 April 2002), a private institution in Saudi Arabia , has recently opened, using English as its sole language of instruction.  South Korea expanded its courses taught in English to attract more international students.  (Digest 3 August 2001 ).  While having a dominant language of communication across higher education has some great advantages, it also can create a false confidence in steadfastly monolingual American engineering students that English is the only language they need, and that concurrent with the growth of English has been the disappearance of cultural differences.  It is for engineering educators to emphasize that this is not true, and to create learning experiences which prove this to their students.   False expectations about the very real cultural and linguistic differences which cover the globe can limit engineers’ effectiveness in the  exercise of their profession in the global marketplace.

  Student and professional mobility

  “Student mobility” and the Bologna Declaration have become more familiar subjects since the European Union began to focus attention on the need for its students to be able to navigate more smoothly the European “space of higher education” without regard to borders (Digest 12 April 2001). For engineering educators, it is particularly important to consider also professional mobility, as professional engineers and educators have increasingly higher expectations of being able to navigate the labyrinth of licensure and practice requirements around the globe.

  In the US since September 11, 2001 , the media have given intense coverage to immigration, immigrants, and the governmentally sanctioned policies and practices for controlling access by outsiders to the United States .  H-1B visas now are being discussed by people who didn’t know they existed when the millennium arrived.  When the Digest began in May 2000, it was still plausible to consider expanding the quota of specialists granted entrée into the US for specialized needs, in particular in science, technology and computer science (Digest 1 May 2000).  The scene quickly changed, however, with the downturn of the economy and the upturn in terrorism: requests for H-1B visas dropped, and professional groups began to view those who advocated for higher quotas as the modern day equivalents of scabs, attempting to flood the market with lower-paid engineers and computer scientists from overseas to the detriment of native-born professionals seeking work in a difficult economy.  For those with eyes to see, the immigration issue in the US was only part of a  similar dynamic being felt around the globe (Digest 8 April 2002).  “ Australia has slammed its door to the ‘less civilized,’ the U.S. border with Mexico has been strengthened, Britain plans to increase requirements for immigration, and Germany is grappling with integration of immigrants.  Some of the increased barriers to immigration are the result of  9/11 concerns, while others are economically motivated” (Digest 8 April 2002).

  We should note that mobility to some is brain drain to others.  Students and engineering faculty have proven to be particularly adept at following the best the world has to offer, regardless of national borders.  US engineering educators have been provided with large quantities of statistics describing fluctuations in the national origins of their students (Digest 22 October 2002).  Figures usually demonstrate that the number of US students ready, willing and able to engage in higher education in engineering are in decline (Digest 26 November 2001), while large numbers of international students wait eagerly in line to take their places in US universities at both the graduate and undergraduate levels.  Once a comfort level had been achieved with the strong presence of overseas students in science and technology programs in the US , questions began to be raised about where these overseas students would go once having earned a degree (Digest 22 October 2002, and 2 December 2002 ). Then related questions were posed: about student mobility across the states of the US; about the quality of US primary and secondary schools as related to student interest in and readiness for advanced studies in engineering and technology; and about the nature of and need for a diverse student body, what it takes to achieve it, and at what cost.  Engineering faculty face the issue every time they enter a classroom or laboratory; it is worth the effort to step back and consider the large issue of why we are where we are.  

With demographics demonstrating what is already being felt in countries such as Germany and Spain – the dearth of college aged populations – mobility, even in the name of economic integration across Europe , can sometimes be  threatening.  Spain is already experiencing a decline in the college age cohort, with universities under the gun to attempt to back-fill with expanded programs, and Germany is rapidly growing gray, with dire predictions of accelerated decline in technical prowess.  Being suddenly thrust into competition with excellent universities in nearby countries, competition for both students and faculty can be perceived as another impediment to economic stability.  

Brain drain is on everyone’s mind.  Despite economic downturns, the US remains a prime destination for engineers and engineering educators from overseas who want to benefit from dynamic ideas and a comparatively wealthy  economy.  The Digest has reported on numerous initiatives taken by governments around the world to retain their best scientists, researchers, and educators, in face of the lure of the US (Digest 12 October 2001).  The Canadian government, for example, recently set out tax incentives for keeping  Canadian-born scientists at home (Digest 1 January 2001). But while some countries seem still not to get it, and persist in making marginal and defensive moves to prevent mobility, Tanzania’s leaders have demonstrated that they get it: they have instructed their universities to educate the young to be “job creators,” not “job seekers,” thus virtually mandating the inclusion of entrepreneurship in the education of future engineers (Digest 12 April 2001).  To the young and ambitious, the lure of being able to prosper at home by using their engineering education in start-up enterprises is often enough to prevent plans for migration abroad. 

Professional mobility for engineers has everything to do with accreditation and licensure issues around the world, and the Digest has recorded this issue in some detail.  Efforts continue to create some consistent standards, enabling engineers to practice outside of their home countries (Digest 26 November 2001).  Of course, licensure issues immediately raise quality control issues, along with accreditation issues, resulting frequently in a hot mix of idealism seasoned with turf protection and national defensiveness (Digest 18 March 2002).  But the search for common global grounds for quality standards, fair employment practices, and useful application of human resources goes on.  That this section of the paper is not longer is less a reflection on the importance of this theme than it is of the lack of real progress that has  been  made over the past three years.

  The social imperative

  While students from around the world strive to acquire the strongest possible technical education in engineering, some older hands persist in proclaiming that the ill-named “soft skills” are the ones which will ultimately be key to the successful practice of engineering by up-and-coming engineers.  But the list of “soft skills” too often is limited to things such as public speaking techniques, management skills and the ability to work well in teams.  What is missing is an understanding of how the growing social consciousness around the world is making it imperative that engineering students understand the implications of their work.  Technical skills applied without regard for the ultimate result of the work can lead to the creation of world societies characterized by the worst dreamed evils.  Technique without conscience, we know, is a danger.

  The Digest has placed an emphasis on diversity from the very beginning, and recognized that diversity means different things in different societies.  Stagnation or weakness in the pool of students eager for engineering education has finally reached a point where even some of the most conventional thinkers agree that the student body must be diversified to more accurately reflect national and regional populations.  This means, in different countries, different mixes. In countries such as Iran and Afghanistan this means that particular attention must be paid to disengaging young women from the religious strictures which limit their attendance at school and their pursuit of education outside of national frontiers (Digest 4 January 2002).  The US continues to wrestle with the value and legality of affirmative action in higher education (Digest 22 September 2001). In a country such as India , the challenge is to enroll more of the outcasts of the caste system (Digest 27 March 2001).  Of course, this sort of expansion of the pools results predictably in calls for more quality control, as new sorts of students challenge the norms established by . . . the establishment.

  How to integrate ethical issues into the engineering curriculum remains a work in progress, along with how to prepare students to work and live well with people whose culture, language, skin, religion are different.  The Digest has not recorded very many efforts in these directions, but the overwhelming coverage of the destructive results of discrimination makes the issue self-evident.  Ethical issues covered in the Digest, and which should be a part of engineering education include:

Ø                    what responsibility the young have to giving back to the world for their education;

Ø                    consideration of the extent to which research should be driven by the needs of society rather than the curiosity of the researcher;

Ø                    intellectual property issues, especially in light of the wide-spread perception that western aid is too often a guise for western theft of  ideas  from developing countries;

Ø                    how to combat the technological divide;

Ø                    how to promote and educate for entrepreneurism;

Ø                    how to assure the quality of engineering practice;

Ø                    assessment of what engineering societies are doing around the world to solve the social issues, not to exacerbate them;

Ø                    sustainable development, and international aid programs;

Ø                    how to keep borders open for those involved with teaching, learning and creation, without imperiling national security in face of very real threats;

Ø                    how to instill in students a sense of ethics in their university studies which will carry over into their professional conduct;

Ø                    the extent to which engineering schools should invest public and private funds into regional international development;

Ø                    whether technology can bring about more social equity.

  The social imperative inherent in the practice of engineering presents a huge potential agenda, one which individuals, universities and professional organizations around the world must attend to. Most recently a UNESCO/OECD study called “Financing Education – Investments and Returns,” (Digest 3 March 2003) demonstrates a positive correlation between secondary and post-secondary education and economic recovery.   It validates the view of those who have been urging engineering educators to recognize their key roles in forming young people who will apply engineering skills to solving global problems. 

Concluding observations

               Although the economists of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have failed in improving the status of people in poor countries through attempts at stimulating economic growth with foreign aid, we must find effective ways of ‘teaching people how to fish’ instead of sending them fish. Engineering education and technology development can provide the base for capacity building which leads to economic benefits  from engagement in the global economy, as well as to the effective local utilization of foreign aid resources guided by indigenous engineers.

Ø                  Take care for China ! Its sheer size makes it important: the welfare of many millions of people depends on the quality of decisions being made every day in China and elsewhere. The fate of the Chinese people is inextricably linked to the fate of their education systems.

Ø                  Engineering students increasingly need to be educated for international practice. Programs of study should include education in languages, cultures, and mores of foreign countries. International experience through study abroad and internships are a must. Faculty need to show the way, with their own international activities.

Ø                  More engineers must act as public intellectuals, drawing upon broad-based skills and experiences to provide articulate leadership in the modern world.

Ø                  While graduate education in engineering in the US still is the best in the world measured by its attractiveness to students and faculty, it falls short from a  US   perspective in two respects. We Americans want and need more applicability and social progress. Our popularity abroad should not blind us to the shortcomings we, as insiders, can discern (Digest 26 January 2001).

Ø                  Effective quality assurance systems are needed for all engineering education programs around the world. Mutual recognition agreements to move toward acceptance of educational equivalency are a must to allow appropriate mobility for practicing engineers.

NOTE: The above material is taken from a paper by Bethany S. Oberst and Russel C. Jones, presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education and published in the Proceedings of that conference – which are copyright by ASEE. All back issues of the International Engineering Education Digest are posted on the web at http://www.worldexpertise.com.

  CAPACITY BUILDING – ENGINEERS FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

Technical capability is needed for developing countries to engage effectively in the global economy. In addition, technical capability is needed to assure the effective utilization of international assistance sent to developing countries. A well-educated technical workforce pool must be in place before technology-based multinational companies will be attracted to make investments in production facilities and other areas. The day is past when such companies would simply introduce expatriates from developed countries to attempt such operations. Current political and economic realities require that a population of well-educated and trained indigenous people be available to sustain technically based industrial operations.

  A technical workforce pool should also be specifically educated and prepared to engage in entrepreneurial startup efforts that meet local needs. Well-educated engineers and scientists in developing countries will find appropriate ways to extend R&D results to marketable products and services responsive to local needs – to their personal economic benefits as well as to the economic benefit of their countries. Further development of such entrepreneurial startups can lead to products and services that profitably extend to regional markets, and eventually global markets.

  Indigenous science and technology capacity is also needed in developing countries to assure that international aid funds sent there are utilized effectively and efficiently – both for initial project implementation and for long term operation and maintenance. Too often in the past, major projects in developing countries have failed to meet desired and designed objectives because there is not a local base of technically qualified people to assist in implementation in ways that are compatible with the local culture and environment.

  Thus it is clear that developing countries need their own indigenous technological expertise. They cannot afford to buy it from developed countries, and even when technical expertise from developed countries is provided by external funding it is often ineffective in appropriately responding to local needs and constraints. Capacity building of technical expertise in developing countries is key to enhancing their ability to become economically self-sufficient.

  What is needed

  The Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, has used the acronym WEHAB to describe the areas in which aid must be provided to developing countries in order to build self-sufficiency: water and sanitation, energy, health, agricultural productivity, and biodiversity and ecosystem management. Engineering and science are key in each of these areas – and an indigenous capacity in these technical fields must be developed to assure that foreign aid funding is used effectively and efficiently.

  Education is key to capacity building. While aid to developing countries must include significant funding for K-12 education, university level education, and continuing education in the fields of engineering and science are most urgently need.  It is recommended that support for indigenous technical capacity building be included in each aid project in a developing country.  Universities and other educational agencies need to be built, re-equipped, and sustained, along with their faculties; graduates need continuing education to maintain their technical expertise; incentives must be provided to convince young people to remain in their homelands and invest in their collective future.

  In discussions of higher learning needs in developing countries one problem that is often neglected is the instability of universities and research institutions.  Universities in some parts of the world where education is most needed are too often rocked by political unrest sufficient to disrupt all teaching and research functions.  An essential component of capacity building is to ensure the continuing functions of higher learning and research even through economic, social and political upheavals.  Institutions of higher learning must be supported as a source of solutions to a nation’s problems, not endured as a source of additional problems and uncertainty.

  In addition to capacity building and the provision of foreign aid in developing countries, developed countries must make political and economic decisions that allow emerging market countries to trade effectively in the global marketplace. It is inappropriate and inefficient for a developed country to build trade barriers against imports from emerging countries, and/or to subsidize its own economic sectors to undercut the supplying of appropriate products from developing countries, both of which have happened recently in the US and France.

  The Gender Imperative

  Women must be given priority in education efforts at all levels to assure long-term societal development.  No nation can afford to write off one-half of its population in the interest of conforming to long-standing cultural norms, however well meaning or god-given they are proclaimed to be.  In order to jump start economic recovery in the poorest countries, women are the key, because they play a dual role.  They can raise the living standards of their immediate families, and they can also create an environment in which both female and male children will have a better chance for improving themselves through education and thus effect far-reaching changes in their societies.

  Enhancement of engineering education

  Developing countries need world-class engineering educators in order to mount effective engineering education programs at their local universities. Today the typical pattern is for bright young talent in developing countries interested in engineering education to complete programs of study through an undergraduate degree in their home countries, then to go abroad to North America or Western Europe for doctoral study. Sufficient financial aid, in the form of fellowships from international agencies or assistantships at the universities where graduate level study is undertaken, is typically available today. It is important to assure that doctoral graduates from institutions in developed countries do return to their home countries to take up faculty careers.

  When fresh engineering doctoral graduates from universities in developed countries return to their developing countries to take up university faculty careers, they need startup funding for laboratory equipment, computers and communications, and curriculum development. Such funding should be a priority for international aid agencies committed to local capacity building.

  Curriculum development for engineering education programs in developing countries should be informed and guided by the state-of-the-art of engineering education in developed countries – but tailored to local needs and constraints. Considerations such as the amount and type of mathematics and science to be included, technical specialties to be offered, broadening subjects to be covered, etc. are important.

  Engineering faculty members in developing countries need the opportunity to interact with engineering educators elsewhere for professional development. Funds need to be provided for at least periodic travel to professional conferences in developed countries or at the international level. Mechanisms for technical updating – such as sabbatical periods abroad and participation in periodic technical conferences in developed countries – must also be provided to engineering faculty members in developing countries. In addition, electronic mechanisms – such as electronic conferences, digital libraries, etc. – must be made available.

  Economic development needs

  Beyond the building of a well-educated workforce base, developing countries need assistance in moving ideas from conception to economic viability. Industry incubators, where R&D results or other intellectual seeds can be developed to economically viable products and services, are one effective mechanism. Startup funding for entrepreneurial individuals and teams is another key ingredient on the road to self-sufficiency. Training in small business development – intellectual property rights, finance, management, marketing, international trade, etc. – in another key ingredient. External funding for such activities can be very effective and efficient foreign aid, leading to more self-sufficiency for developing countries.

NOTE: The above material is taken from a paper by Russel C. Jones and Bethany S. Oberst, presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education and published in the Proceedings of that conference – which are copyright by ASEE.

 

ENGINEERING EDUCATION AND ACCREDITATION IN THE UNITED STATES

With the signing of the Washington Accord in the late 1980’s, engineering education in the United States of America took on a broader international aspect – agreeing to substantial equivalency with several other countries. The Accord has been expanded and extended, and has led to efforts to take a next step – some form of mutual recognition of practice certification or licensure.

  Quality assurance of engineering education in the USA has matured since the establishment of the Engineers Council for Professional Development (now the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology) in the 1930’s, and a significantly different approach to criteria for accreditation has been adopted as of the year 2000. The new EC2000 approach is based heavily on outcomes assessment, rather than the previous detailed procedural specifications.

  Engineering education in the US has been reformed greatly over the past several years, due in large part to the major activities stimulated and supported by the Coalitions program of the National Science Foundation. Science and math courses have been integrated in many cases, teamwork has been encouraged, and design has been moved earlier in the curriculum and continued throughout the four-year programs.

Introduction

Engineering education in the United States of America is a strong and vibrant enterprise. Many attribute the current strength of the USA economy to the pool of engineers and other technical experts who provide the driving forces behind high technology products and services, which make the USA economy function effectively, and provide a major factor in international trade.

  There are some 300 accredited engineering colleges in the Unites States of America , most embedded in larger institutions where they comprise about 10% of the total student body. Bachelor’s degrees in engineering, the common point of entry to the profession today, require a heavy four year program of study – built upon 12 years of pre-college education in primary and secondary schools. Some 60,000 students graduate with Bachelors degrees in engineering each year at present, with another 30,000 completing Masters degrees and another 6000 completing Doctoral programs. A Masters program typically requires one or two years of study beyond the Bachelors degree, and the Doctorate typically another two or three years beyond the Masters degree.

  The number of high school graduates who enroll in engineering programs in the USA has been declining significantly in recent years, despite a sustained and increasing demand for technical graduates by employers of engineers. In the mid-1980’s, engineering schools were graduating some 80,000 Bachelors degree students per year – a number that has dropped some 25% since then. It appears that many students are selecting other, often less demanding, paths to the technical employment marketplace – such as computer focused courses of study or quasi-engineering programs with less rigorous mathematics and science requirements.

  There are some interesting trends among recently graduated engineers that may also be impacting on whether young people choose engineering education for career preparation. Many engineering graduates are now experiencing major job changes every few years throughout their careers, as employers ramp up and downsize depending on market shifts and mergers. These changes are often disruptive, and often lead to lateral job placements at best, thus giving the impression that the engineer pool is a ‘commodity’ – rather than engineering seen as a career with progressive placements. In addition, many engineering graduates – particularly those accepting first positions out of college – are being employed by financial consulting firms and similar non-engineering employers, who want to utilize their quantitative skills for a few years while they are on top of the latest high tech state-of-the-art. At some engineering colleges, as many as 40% of the recent graduates have taken such first jobs.