Like conversations about 21 century skills, one about education for engineering is too large if framed as if the answer will be the same for 100 years!

At the Centre for Real-World Learning we are convinced that an important next step if we are to increase the numbers of students opting for engineering and especially the uptake of girls, is to reframe engineering not as primarily defined by disciplinary knowledge but by engineering habits of mind.

You might find these research reports/papers useful.

Bill

So, as I understand the question, two very different groups of education are involved. Once engineers and computer scientists who continue to develop the IT world. This is happening today in such a way that complicated technology and mathematics is being transformed to a user-level, making the learning processes of the users, not least the young generation, just by keyboard, mouse and the push of a button to make useful work. - The second group are the users. For them, there are greater problems of changing their lives, depending on how far they live in the IT world. This includes functional dependency (addiction), increasing time constraints (which conflict with the allegedliy time-saving function of IT equipment), social changes, risks of harm, viruses, fakes or fraud. This changes the lifeworld, but users are hardly aware of it.

Artificial intelligence can be used as supportive material as technology is evolving on a daily basis.

Engineering is one of the big components of the U.S. national science standards, Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). Hopefully what this means in the higher ed arena, is that the beginning point in the college level classes is a bit more advanced than what it has been in the past. Students will hopefully have a better idea of how and where to start in proposing engineering solutions and in the processes of designing solutions. Perhaps, they will have more of a comfort level with the tools and not be afraid to not have the correct answer the first time, but continue to go "back to the drawing board" as is often the case when coming up with engineering solutions. The challenge in this is the high stakes testing that K-12 schools are required to do, especially in the public school arena, and unless "the test" specifically addresses the engineering principles with more of an open ended approach, engineering/designing may not be as big a part of the process. States that have adopted the NGSS as their state science standards are just beginning to implement them into the state tests, so it will be a few years before we have adequate data to determine the effect of integrating engineering into the curriculum piece. The lead states on the NGSS adopted them in 2011 and began integrating and implementing them in 2013, with the application of them into the testing beginning in just the last couple of years. 65% of U.S. students (across 38 states) are in states that have outright adopted the NGSS or have state standards based on the NGSS (http://ngss.nsta.org/About.aspx).

Hope some of this information is helpful to you on a K-12 education basis.

Like conversations about 21 century skills, one about education for engineering is too large if framed as if the answer will be the same for 100 years!

At the Centre for Real-World Learning we are convinced that an important next step if we are to increase the numbers of students opting for engineering and especially the uptake of girls, is to reframe engineering not as primarily defined by disciplinary knowledge but by engineering habits of mind.

You might find these research reports/papers useful.

Bill

The pedagogical tendencies of these careers indicate that it will be a teaching that is increasingly interactive with the practice.

Focused on the development of professional skills.

Access to knowledge more expeditiously, technologies will increasingly facilitate it.

The virtual Reality and the simulators will have a more preponderant presence.

Bill-

I completely agree with you. The engineering habits of mind are huge and the habits seem much easier to implement with girls that engineering as a discipline. Not sure why. I have had to do a great deal of encouraging my female students to try to "tinker" and have found greater success when partners are same gender than mixed gender. Even now, there is quite a bit of "let the guys do the 'engineering' thinking" in mixed groups. But it is better than when I started teaching 30 years ago.

Thanks for the report/paper links. I'm saving them to my files to read once I finish my papers due this week. :-)

Dear Colleagues,

I think engineering education as a field of interest is extremely broad and complex (levels, strands, interests, objectives, conditions), and the 21st century is a rather long period of time (four generations, shifting paradigms, emergent needs, unpredictable motions, changing relationships). Thus, the two together create a complicated domain of discourse, even if several simplifications/neglects are considered and only speculative, rather than evidential reasoning is pursued. Perhaps it would be meaningful to restrict our discussion to the coming 15-25 years, and break down the holism of the domain according to the traditional tree of engineering disciplines and education.

Best regards,

I.H.

P.s Dr. Lucas, thanks for the interesting documents!

Engineering education would have to respond to the new Industry 4.0 revolution. The latter should be transformed from the traditional labor-machine-intensive setup to one that is a completely digital. Progressively, there should be a focus on engineering education on moving towards a socio-technical-digital ecosystem in which physical virtual dimensions are increasingly intertwined for providing smart services . This conference paper elaborates more on the implications of Industry 4.0 and by extension engineering students expected skills and knowledge:

Conference Paper Industry 4.0.: Unleashing its Future Smart Products and Services

Best regards,

Debra

This is the 21st century, so sample the university catalogs that are usually valid for 10 years for the students that begin the programs.

The greatest changes are the speed and availability of computer software, data, and design information. A big risk is that electronic records can be lost or corrupted, after they replace paper records.

For engineers a large concern is the encrypted signatures and time stamping of electronic records.

Good judgement and experience are just as necessary as in previous centuries. Also the ethics, responsibilities, and obligations are not changed.

Interesting discussion and worthy answers.

what if the engineering education turn into self study; or merge into other disciplines?

How about the changes of the institutions of engineering/technological education? Will 'the university' remain the same or can we expect a virtualization (socialization) or any other radical trasformative steps?

asking from me?

forecasting is a professional field, however, I guess we do not have physical educational spaces anymore in next 5 years... what you called cyber-physical systems might turn into simplistically readily accessible virtual platforms...

as another possibility; we may expect that self study manner become inclusive so that institutions merged or closed, Because all the disciplines are getting close together by renting out other major's methods.

see this paper:

"Lessons Learned from Applying Design Thinking in a NASA Rapid Design"

Dear Colleagues,

Many thanks for all the answers.

SP

I tend to think it will evolve so rapidly that by the time someone earns their degree (at any level), and publishes research, it will be deemed antiquated within five years. Think of the computer scientists when the first Apple was constructed - they were probably learning FORTRAN and other languages that are now considered quaintly entertaining and have almost no practical use anywhere. Same goes for most life sciences - assumptions about life on other planets changes as liquid water is found. As far as engineering goes, the primary question involves what type of engineering? Many of the aspects are relatively universal, but vary if you change specific factors such as zero-G and other details which change some of the laws of physics.

This is not my field, but I am curious how a typical university student will deal with spending $XXX,XXX for a degree that does not provide these kind of complexities into the curriculum. While many of the better universities may think ahead, I fear most do not, and their graduates may not have the necessary practical skills to deal with the evolution of the trade.

Dear Gary,

This is the real problem.

What, how to teach and for what reality, if the reality changes so quickly?

How to teach fabrication or construction at a time when current methods are being abandoned due to radically different new materials and incredibly superior permormance?

best regards,

SP

Dear Sergio,

I absolutely agree with you on this matter. Teachers are trained to provide instruction to students in a specific field or fields. If that field is changing dramatically and said teacher cannot continually update their own basic knowledge, what happens to their students?

Most construction-related instruction is done using "old school" techniques which are almost never used in modern construction. What is even worse, is that the vast majority of young people have no basic knowledge to work from unless they come from rural environs, and their knowledge is behind the times. Those who do work in the trade are no so specialized they have no practical skills outside their niche. This summer I have been working in construction and have seen an absolute dearth of practical skills at almost every level...

I do not have the answer [yet], but I think we are off to a good start simply by adding these complexities together and trying to find a root cause. If we are lucky, we may find the solution.

Respectfully,

Gary

If the contents are changing so fast, then perhaps the best (most competitive) educational strategy seems to be which equips with a basic insight in the content of a particular domain of engineering (and engineering in general on system level), but, methodologically or didactically, focuses on learning and practicing the capabilities that are needed to explore, acquire and process dynamically changing, heterogeneous and complicated contents over a relatively longer period of time (considering that even the methods/enablers/technologies of learning are changing over time)?

Dear Imre,

I agree with what needs to be done.

But there remains the question of how to do it?

Maybe the answer is learn to learn how to do things. The solution can be on a solid basis of understanding phenomena through sciences, but in a practical way, returning to be a engineer as the professional who is able to solve unusual problems.

What do you think about this?

Dear colleagues,

I would like to add one more thought regarding this topic. Industrial world is easily adaptable to revolutionary developed IT knowledge. However, there is a lack of basic mechanical engineering to be involved in curricula. I know students, good engineers, but when they need to calculate a simple equation such as 9x12, they use calculator (it is a demonstrative example). There were great inventions made in the past, all calculated by hand. I don't mean we should come back to old-time teaching. Not at all. I mean modern methods must be mixed with theoretical knowledge regarding real world in a certain way. It is clear that mechanical engineers should be distinguished from computer engineers considering real space applications. Still it is difficult to generalize the whole field.

Thank you for interesting remarks!

JG

Engineering Education for the 21st Century

There is no more important mission for an engineering school than the preparation of its undergraduates for their careers. In today’s rapidly evolving engineering landscape, we have an increased obligation to transform the undergraduate educational experience from the traditional pedantic curriculum in explicit disciplines to a broader foundational experience for life-long success.

Engineering, by its very nature, requires its practitioners to continue learning new things long after their formal education ends. This has never been more true than today, when we can see an accelerated pace of engineering innovation continuing for decades. Engineers need to evolve, and so do engineering schools.

At the College of Engineering, we’re taking on that challenge by broadening the education of our students. While mastery of the technical aspects of engineering must remain at the curriculum’s core, we need to add new dimensions that will better prepare students for the world of today and tomorrow.

We want to provide an undergraduate education that ensures our graduates can be creators – the artists, if you will – of the scientific and quantitative spheres. They need to understand how technology works so they can be effective as innovators. They also need “soft” skills, such as the ability to communicate their technical ideas and concepts, and galvanize a wide array of people, including those without technological backgrounds and people from other cultures. Combine these skills with the ability to be life-long learners, and our graduates have the potential to make real impacts that can better our quality of life for generations to come.

The first thing we need to do is capture the imaginations of freshmen as soon as they arrive on campus. The traditional first-year courses focus on math, science, physics and computing are designed to build the fundamental technical skills, and are necessary. They are also difficult and unless students see how this material relates to the extraordinary innovation potential of their chosen major, we run the risk of turning them off to engineering right away. Also, a first year course explicitly dedicated to introducing students to areas in which engineering advances society could help freshmen see the forest while they climb the trees.

We offer an array of enrichment experiences that need to be expanded so more students can take advantage of them. For example, the study abroad program we began in 2001 in Dresden, Germany was immediately popular. Students crave the international experience, and a program that enables engineering sophomores to fulfill their course requirements overseas – and thus not delay their graduation – has great appeal. We’ve added similar programs in other countries, but there remains more we can do.

We also are rapidly expanding the opportunities our students have to work in faculty research labs. This has emerged as another popular endeavor for our students and one where they are enjoying great success. We offer a great number of internship and coop placements for our undergraduates and these are heavily utilized.

The College expanded community service opportunities by establishing a chapter of Engineers Without Borders. Our EWB students scouted a project that aimed to bring electricity to a remote Peruvian village. More of the opportunities are needed at the global, national and local community levels.

But we can also do more to broaden our students’ horizons right here on campus. We have begun to explore joint courses with other schools and colleges at BU that have special applications for engineers. Among them is a potential business-to-innovation program with the Questrom School of Business, and a new program in materials science and engineering that engages faculty and courses from engineering and other departments like physics and chemistry and which will support a minor available to all of our engineering students.

Being an engineering leader this century requires a broad education that goes beyond the classroom and the laboratory. The engineering profession is poised to make its most significant impact on human history in the coming century, and Boston University graduates should be on the crest of that wave.

reference//http://www.bu.edu/eng/about/deans-welcome/dean-lutchen/engineering-education-for-the-21st-century/

regards