Engineering Education (Reprise)

Posted Mon Jul 9, 2007 in

Some time ago, I wrote a bit about engineering education in this country. I wrote about my opinion that an engineering education should comprise a liberal arts degree with an emphasis on mathematics and science followed by two years of professional education.

I’ve thought this for a very long time (like more than twenty years). I still think this, but the thoughts go nowhere because no one is listening.

I had an opportunity to visit with one of my ex-students the other day. We were discussing the fundamentals of engineering examination that is the first part of professional registration. Over the last few years, the civil program at Texas Tech saw a decline in pass rates amounting to about 30 percent. This sent the administration into a tizzy and word came down that “something must be done.”

In typical university fashion, committees were formed and studies made. We had reports at faculty meetings and word passed on to the dean.

Eventually I had a brainstorm (or brain-fart if you prefer). I’ve probably written this before, but it bears repeating. The issue is one of unintended consequences. My assertion was borne out by the dialogue with my ex-student.

We recently reduced the number of credit hours required for graduation. The target is 120 credit hours, but I think we were at 126. Courses traditionally required of engineers, a second course in engineering physics, thermodynamics, and electrical circuits became alternates or electives. Students then refused to take them (or course). They lacked certain components in their education that are still expected for the examination.

This is coupled with my assumption that many students pass just barely. I think the passing score was 70 percent and my ex-student shared that many of her friends passed with 70 or 71. Given about five percent of potential credit is lost because of curriculum changes, this is enough to put some students below the passing score. In my estimation, that would amount to about 30 percent or so.

I have no idea what Tech will decide to do to fix the problem. It is one of multiple constraints — the pressure to reduce the number of credit hours required for graduation and the pressure to produce high fundamentals of engineering examination passage. In my opinion, they can’t have it both ways.

The bandaide approach was to make the review course college wide (College of Engineering). I understand the civil students thought that was a disaster. I’m not surprised — they removed the discipline specialists from the equation. Again, what seemed like a good move to conserve resources had unintended consequences.

I wonder what they’ll do next. I expect, ultimately, universities will move to a bachelor of engineering degree and then the professional degree will be a master’s degree, like ASCE wants. It’s a bad idea and reduces the value (yet again) of higher education.

My opinion is that this is neither smart nor efficient. Either use the model that works, or change the model to something equivalent (like my idea of BA and professional school). What they’re doing is not working.