|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
Transformational
Paradigm for Engineering and
Engineering Technology
Education
|
||||||||||||
Last Update February 2009
Thank
you for visiting this site. This is a
work-in-progress that started in Spring 2008 and seeks to encourage
substantial discussion in several ways.
Below you will find links to articles, surveys, and feedback from various
constituents. You are cordially invited to complete a survey or to send your
comments directly to: Enrique Barbieri
ebarbieri@uh.edu Please indicate if
you’d prefer that your comments include your contact information.
Background Click on this section to read a
brief list of background information.
The new paradigm of
this position article is based upon the utilization of TAC of ABET Accredited
programs in Engineering Technology available in over 100 US Universities as a
logical, viable, and key component in
a student’s path to becoming an “engineer”. We are advocates of the Conceive, Design,
Implement, Operate (CDIO www.cdio.org)
framework: Read more about CDIO in the context of Engineering and
Engineering Technology Educational Options Click on this section to read about the proposed educational
options.
Conclusions
and Follow-up
In this work, we have taken the position that TAC of ABET
Accredited Engineering Technology programs that currently thrive in over 100
US Universities could be utilized to address some of the concerns that the 21st
Century engineering profession and education are facing. To our knowledge, this model has not been
previously discussed in an open forum and provides an alternative that would
meet the requirements of both the Department of Education for a first
professional degree in terms of length of study, and the U.S. Office of
Personnel Management for professional engineering positions in terms of
experiential learning. The model is
also an alternative to proposals recommending that master’s degrees be
defined as the first professional engineering degree. We advocate that engineering graduate
degrees maintain an emphasis on theoretical and research endeavors. Potential follow up discussion items with
educators and industry advisors that would shed light and bring other points
of view into this educational model include in no particular order: 1.
What are the academic requirements of a pre-engineering
degree? 2.
Standardization of breadth and depth of fundamental
engineering courses such as electric circuits and statics/dynamics. 3.
Pros and cons of 2-, 3-, or 4-year models for the BS-E
degree and accreditation concerns. 4.
Maintenance and staffing of laboratories. 5.
Capstone experiences and Undergraduate Research in E
and in ET. 6.
Graduate programs and opportunities in E and in ET. 7.
Faculty credentials, joint appointments, retention, and
Promotion and Tenure. 8.
Options for Universities that do not have ET
programs. 9.
Challenges and opportunities for Community Colleges. 10.
How to maximize the involvement of Industry and
Professional Organization leaders. Articles & Presentations
1. E. Barbieri and W. Fitzgibbon,
“Transformational
Paradigm for Engineering and Engineering Technology Education”,
Proceedings of the 2008 IAJC-NAIT-IJME International Conference,
|
Engineering
and Engineering Technology Industry Survey
|
ET Faculty
|
E Faculty
|
ET Students
|
E Students
|
ET Alumni
|
E Alumni
|
|
Summary of Comments and Survey Results [Fall 2008]
Summary of
Comments from ET Faculty
|
Summary of
Comments from E Faculty
|
Summary of
Comments from ET Chairs
|
Summary of
Industry Survey Results
|
