Interesting, but kind of vague. I have the same concerns/questions as CivEnv. My comments follow two quotes.
"The new committee, which now includes two educators and two practitioners, will likely expand."
Steve: I am glad to see that practitioners are equally represented. I feel that with the expansion, ASCE should target to have practitioners in the majority. In my opinion, the breadth of the requirements (quoted below) will be beyond the capabilities of professors - particularly long-term, tenured folks - to fairly evaluate.
"...effort will look at experience in such areas as data analysis, project management, ethics and construction administration."
Steve: Fine, good idea, as long as the mix is appropriately staggered to fit what EITs actually do within their first four years or so. Most EITs in most disciplines likely have ample data analysis (aka, number-crunching). In Site/civil and Env., EITs do very few PM duties, except as assistants. I have no experience with "ethics", outside of school, after 10 years, numerous CEUs and a PE license...how/where does one get that? Which project does one bill for that? Likewise to PM'ing, in Site/civil and Env., EITs do very few CA/CM duties, except as assistants.
Engineering is the practice of the art of science - Steve
A) If it aint broke, don't fix it. I think state licensing is not a problem for anyone but ASCE
B) One of the great things about this country that is slowly dissapearing is the right for the states to regulate themselves. It seems everything is moving to national standards.
C)The article seems to indicate that ASCE is trying to equate experince to education. These really are two different things. A good engineer has plenty of both and one does not replace the other.
A few years ago ASCE was also pushing to make the masters the first professional degree. Meaning you had to have your masters in order to be an engineer.
For me, experience is much more important than additional schooling.
If we want to improve the quality of our professional engineers, then in my opinion, the area in need of the most improvement in "our system" lies with the engineering firms themselves. I would prefer that the states continue to manage their own professionals as they see fit.
These debates would all go away if the EIs were better trained while on the job. It is NOT the university's responsibility to produce "ready to design" consulting engineers. I believe they do a fine job getting them ready with the basics in hand. But I personally have seen all too many EIs running around thinking they know everything, with this entitlement mentality no less, and no one stepping up to the plate to properly train them.
I agree, CivEnvEng98. Young engineers are not being properly trained. Companies think that because a grad can run a computer, the grad is ready to do design without training or with little or no supervision. Running a computer program is not engineering. Knowing how to design without a computer and knowing if computer printout is correct is engineering.
ASCE need to find something else to do with their time and our money.
Like BelspringKen, I also used to be in ASCE, but not anymore. I did not see MUCH benefit to it. When I tell current members that, they look at me as if I'd just blasphemed. But, for USD120, I got 12 magazines...period. I do miss the CE mag, though, it is excellently written and very diverse. I just wish it wasn't USD10 per edition!
Engineering is the practice of the art of science - Steve
I agree that there needs to be bettr post graduate training and a greater emphisis on recieving a P.E.
The thing I don't like about the P.E. is you need 5 years of design experience, with out any direction on what that experience is. You could be detailing or working on permits in a firm doing the same thing every day for five years, never get out of the office and qualify for the PE.
Some one once told me there was a big difference between five years experience and one tears experience repeated five times.
I think most of today's younger engineers are well educated, but poorly trained. ASCE would better serve the profession if it developed guidelines for post graduate in field experience.
