Reality-based Curriculum?

The concept worked pretty well in the middle ages with guilds and apprenticeships, and it is still the model followed by plumbers and electricians. The challenge becomes broadening one's education beyond just engineering, ala the liberal arts education model, or focusing narrowly on engineering with perhaps a little mathematics, ala the traditional approach to apprenticeship or journeyman work.

The tyranny of the guilds and their control over things dealt with by their guild were a huge bar to progress in those days. If you built a chair and sold it, and you were not a guild member = problems. They also kept their trade secrets for a lone period.

We now suffer under a software tyranny, overlaid with patent tyranny. This is reminiscent of the radio patent wars back in the 20's and later. Much like the patent war that wrecked any chance of success by the Wright brothers, who were unable to progress in their own art, being just lucky bike makers - no true analytical or technical skills - they sued any and all planemakers and refused to licence reasonable, net result, smarter people made end runs and left them to with on the vine.

Similarly, we are entering into a period of protracted litigation on many radio and portable computer fronts, it is a problem.

Guilds back in the days of yore - not so nice

When we studied in 1960s our curriculum did not include practical work but we did "experiments" in the lab taking measurements,drawing graphs and submitting as "course work". We did not know wire sizes,conduit sizes,wiring systems,motor rewinding,starters for motors,how to test a motor,fault finding in control circuits, how to size a motor or generator etc. In mechanical subjects like thermodynamics we never saw an IC engine in a dismantled state exposing internal components , how to fix it or a water pump in dismantled state or how many types of pumps are available in the world how to select a pump and so on. Most importantly safety at work places were never taught to us. We were clue-less when we went to work. My suggestion is to get a degree in engineering one should follow a course for about 7 years with theory and manual practical work mixed with site visits to workshops,factories,testing labs etc.Diploma course can be 4 yrs with mixed theory and manual practical work and site visits. For those who has financial difficulties part time or weekend courses with the first 2 or 4 yrs of full time theory and part time practicals for a recommended duration may be arranged. An engineer should be technically fit when he goes to work and should not depend on others to be introduced to practical aspects.

I suspect that the institutions a person attends and the density of mechanical activity in one's non-school environment have a lot to do with how well one understands engineering, mechanical. I never saw the inside of an IC engine in school in a class I was taking for credit, but I had repaired several IC auto engines, including pulling heads, valve jobs, carbs, etc and my friends did others with me there. My exposure to thermodynamics was a desire to get the theory. That was what I wanted. The first degree (Bachelor's) was five years and if you had a master's you could be heading a lab. For engineering, a big school with lots of students and government money (including military contracts) gave much involvement on the side. This is USA. The parts of the world less focused on combustion engines and power consumption would have less exposure to extra-curricular activities in these fields. Safety was what was required to be in a lab. The 21st century has a lot of different approaches. Just because the USA approach enabled us to burn up what at the time was the world's largest known reserves of oil in my lifetime does not suggest that that was the best course.

The course content should touch all aspects/areas in any field of engineering selected by the student. For instance if you go to a hospital there will be "earth monitoring system" not found in other places. The engineer should know what are the components needed for a complete workable system to call for quotations from manufacturers/agents. If the quotation is without any component the engineer will be blamed. Another important aspect is BMS or energy saving techniques or renewables. So the engineering students should visits various kinds of installations before getting his certificate. In exams held in university/college most of the question ends with"calculate..............". How many engineers are doing calculations in workplaces. First he must know materials,techniques, machines used,tools necessary and man power before going to work.

The purview of engineering, even of "limited" mechanical engineering, is so breathtakingly large that expecting to be able to solve the problem or bring to completion the research or " fix it" upon first being exposed, is silly. A good engineer doesn't need the specific information in his head already, he needs the ability and knowledge of how to identify, find, retain, and apply that information, or how to create it. My father was trained as an electrical engineer, but graduating during the depression he found work as a mechanical. He became the acknowledged "world authority" on certain aspects of mechanical engineering. He never worked as an electrical engineer, but the math, the materials specs, the goal-oriented mindset he used was the same.

Yes, we need the teachers to be engineers and pleased to be, as well as qualified.

It's an amazing thing to witness. My brother and his wife are kind of anti establishment types. The importance of formal education for their kids takes a back seat.

Enter my little nephew...............their son. He is a born engineer and a sponge for knowledge. He's 10 or 11 now and is obsessed with how everything works. He can take things apart, and put them back together properly. It's nonstop, and to me, it's a beautiful thing. He's an engineer......................and he can't help it.

This is an exceptional case.All kids of 10yrs of age do not possess that skill but only a few especially whose parents have engineering background will have that kind of skill. But the rule is if a person after 18yrs of age undergo an apprenticeship/course of study for at least 04 yrs he will get some not complete working knowledge in any field.

This is true. But, whether it's engineering or anything else, college/apprenticeships, won't do a person much good without some initial interest in whatever the subject is.

Of course, it's also rare for a person to make money and earn a living doing something that they enjoy. My little nephew is a natural born engineer. I like to think that I am too, but not like him............................I have to work harder at learning things.

I was under the impression that, at least in the US (in most states), there was still a requirement that a graduate of an engineering school still must complete 4 years of "engineer in training" apprenticeship before he or she could apply for certification as a "Professional Engineer". Seems a medical doctor must also spend several years in internship before they can claim to be a real doctor...

Has this gone by the wayside these days?

If one tries to cram additional study requirements into a typical 4 or 5 year engineering program, one must cut some of the "non-essentials", or lengthen the study period. The old way, with work experience coming after formal schooling required 8+ years for full accreditation. What's wrong with that?

The UN should take steps to maintain high standards in member states in the field of professional education like engineering,medicine,architecture, accountancy,chemists, mathematicians by laying down criteria for selection,syllabus,training etc as they do (standards)in ILO,WHO,FAO etc. I don't think at present they have a UN agency for professional and formal education. In some third world countries after about 12 years of schooling, students sit for an examination (theory)in four subjects excluding IQ test specified by the authorities for selection for higher studies. Students get private tuition and obtain high scores in the examination and get selected. Chemistry is made compulsory for selection(other subjects are physics,pure/applied mathematics) to study for a degree or diploma in engineering. After 4 years of education they are appointed as engineers Engineers. Training(site visits) is given only during seasonal holidays(end of each semester). Similarly students in the field of medicine also sit for 4 papers(chemistry, physics,botany,biology) for selection. After 4 years of study and an year of internship they get appointed as doctors. They object starting of private medical colleges on the grounds that they received the highest grades in examination held for admission and those who obtained lower grades also should not treated on par with them. What is the practice in developed countries?. What is the opinion of UN?. Should the internship last at least 3 years?.