The paradox of "engineering science"-a cold war debate about education in the U.S

Kline, Ronald R.

doi:10.1109/44.868938

Cited by 18 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To explain the overemphasis on science in engineering education requires a historical analysis of the forces that shaped engineering curricula after World War II (Kline, 2000). In particular, there was a shift toward "engineering science" subjects at the expense of design and manufacturing, even to the point of "the education system has treated engineering as synonymous with engineering science" (Suh, 1990).…”

Section: Distinction Among Engineering Science and Mathmentioning

confidence: 99%

Matching pedagogical intent with engineering design process models for precollege education

Tate

Chandler

Fontenot

et al. 2010

AIEDAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public perception of engineering recognizes its importance to national and international competitiveness, economy, quality of life, security, and other fundamental areas of impact; but uncertainty about engineering among the general public remains. Federal funding trends for education underscore many of the concerns regarding teaching and learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics subjects in primary through grade 12 (P-12) education. Conflicting perspectives on the essential attributes that comprise the engineering design process results in a lack of coherent criteria against which teachers and administrators can measure the validity of a resource, or assess its strengths and weaknesses, or grasp incongruities among competing process models. The literature suggests two basic approaches for representing engineering design: a phase-based, life cycle-oriented approach; and an activity-based, cognitive approach. Although these approaches serve various teaching and functional goals in undergraduate and graduate engineering education, as well as in practice, they tend to exacerbate the gaps in P-12 engineering efforts, where appropriate learning objectives that connect meaningfully to engineering are poorly articulated or understood. In this article, we examine some fundamental problems that must be resolved if preengineering is to enter the P-12 curriculum with meaningful standards and is to be connected through learning outcomes, shared understanding of engineering design, and other vestiges to vertically link P-12 engineering with higher education and the practice of engineering. We also examine historical aspects, various pedagogies, and current issues pertaining to undergraduate and graduate engineering programs. As a case study, we hope to shed light on various kinds of interventions and outreach efforts to inform these efforts or at least provide some insight into major factors that shape and define the environment and cultures of the two institutions (including epistemic perspectives, institutional objectives, and political constraints) that are very different and can compromise collaborative efforts between the institutions of P-12 and higher education.

show abstract

Section: Distinction Among Engineering Science and Mathmentioning

confidence: 99%

Matching pedagogical intent with engineering design process models for precollege education

Tate

Chandler

Fontenot

et al. 2010

AIEDAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To explain the overemphasis on science in engineering education requires a historical analysis of the forces that shaped engineering curricula after World War II. [27] According to Simon, "Schools of engineering... are all centrally concerned with the process of design.... [yet] it is ironic that in [the twentieth] century the natural sciences almost drove the sciences of the artificial from professional school curricula, a development that peaked about two or three decades after the Second World War. Engineering schools gradually became schools of physics and mathematics....The use of adjectives like applied concealed, but did not change, the fact," [26].…”

Section: Importance Of Engineering and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the shift to "engineering science" may have made sense in the context of the cold war [27], a re-emphasis on the creative aspects of engineering design is needed to maintain competitiveness in the current globalizing context.…”

Section: Importance Of Engineering and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Transdisciplinary Discovery and Innovation: Models and Tools for Dynamic Knowledge Integration

Tate

2010

TJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

his paper presents challenges faced in rapidly accelerating technological development and the need for a transdisciplinary approach to engineering systems. An analogy is drawn with theories of technical system development to propose a mechanism for dynamic knowledge integration using transdisciplinary approaches. The mechanism for dynamic knowledge integration is based on a three-level progression of the scope of transdisciplinary research activities. Concepts and tools from engineering design and innovation are used to explain challenges and opportunities for the future of transdisciplinary research, and preliminary measures for transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge integration are discussed. Validation of transdisciplinary research is then discussed in light of approaches to philosophy of science and the sociology of intellectual discourse. Examples are given of transdisciplinary research areas that combine engineering design with other fields such as sustainability, biology, management of technology.

show abstract

“…As a result, the NSF Act authorized funding for research in "the mathematical, physical, medical, biological, engineering, and other sciences." The upshot of this official designation of a field of engineering science was that it "encouraged colleges to develop research and teaching programs in this field in order to garner federal funds [8]." Soon after NSF was created, the Engineers' Council for Professional Development commissioned a study to investigate "ways in which engineering education could keep pace with the rapid developments in science and technology [6]."…”

Section: A the Origins Of Engineering Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

A Look at the Past and Present of General Engineering and Engineering Science Programs

Newberry

Farison

2003

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we discuss engineering programs named Engineering (sometimes referred to as General Engineering) and Engineering Science. Our purpose is to explore the role such non‐specialized programs have played, and currently play, in the overall scheme of engineering education. There are currently forty‐eight programs offered at U.S. institutions with EAC/ABET accreditation under the name Engineering or Engineering Science. Such programs are typically characterized by a general or interdisciplinary nature, and as such do not have to satisfy any discipline‐specific EAC/ABET program criteria beyond the basic criteria. Our analysis of Engineering and Engineering Science programs consists of two parts. First, we explore the historical trends in the evolution of such programs. Then we examine their uses, their current status, and their prospects for the future.

show abstract

The paradox of "engineering science"-a cold war debate about education in the U.S

Cited by 18 publications

References 17 publications

Matching pedagogical intent with engineering design process models for precollege education

Matching pedagogical intent with engineering design process models for precollege education

Designing Transdisciplinary Discovery and Innovation: Models and Tools for Dynamic Knowledge Integration

A Look at the Past and Present of General Engineering and Engineering Science Programs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About