Change in Engineering Education: One Myth, Two Scenarios, and Three Foci

Abstract

AbstractChange is coming to engineering education, but many reform efforts have proceeded without explicitly examining the prime movers of change, the forces that resist change, or the facets or foci of the system that are most in need of change. This essay frames the current debate by seeing change as motivated by external competitive and technological forces. Resistance to change is viewed as being reinforced by the fundamental myth of engineering education that asserts the supremacy of basic research over all other engineering academic activities. After providing evidence that the myth resulted largely from an overestimation of the role of science and an underestimation of the role of engineering in World War II, the essay considers needed organizational, integrative, and programmatic changes. Among these are the creation of student‐faculty teams responsible for delivering a quality education, bottom‐up alliances with industrial clients, and a number of proposals aimed at helping the profession explore its human, philosophical, and historical underpinnings. The essay concludes by warning that times of great change risk making matters worse through the unintended consequences of reform. A principled methodology of reform is suggested that advocates distributed and competitive implementation together with a special appreciation for knowledge that is difficult to articulate.