A recent publication from the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching raises questions about whether engineering curricula are sufficiently focused on professional concerns. The study’s authors hint at the idea that engineering programs have too often put professional issues on the backburner while emphasizing a very “science-centric” approach to education. To be sure, they aren’t claiming that science is unimportant, but they are saying that the science needs to be linked more carefully to matters that affect the professional lives of engineers. They also recommend that more professors spend more time “rubbing elbows” with practicing engineers.
Knowing that most engineers have strong feelings on the issue of education, we welcome your comments here. Have engineering programs become too “science-centric?” Do they spend enough time on professional concerns? Tell a look at the story on our website and tell us what you think.
The question of whether engineers could have foreseen the shortcut maintenance procedures that led to the crash of American Airlines Flight 191 in 1979 will probably linger for as long as there is an engineering profession.
More than 35 years later, the post-mortem on one of the country’s worst engineering disasters appears to be simple. A contractor asked for a change in an original design. The change was approved by engineers, later resulting in a mammoth structural collapse that killed 114 people and injured 216 more.
If you’re an embedded systems engineer whose analog capabilities are getting a little bit rusty, then you’ll want to take note of an upcoming Design News Continuing Education Center class, “Analog Design for the Digital World,” running Monday, Nov. 17 through Friday, Nov. 21.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.