Hmm, let us think this through. First, "engineers" is a very broad
category- as is any "profession" such as nursing, etc. As i have said
earlier, there are recruiters who go to different campuses for their line
engineers and their management potentials- they recognize the spread in
talent and training. Nursing is even more dramatic as the 3 year programs
get pushed down to 2 year associate degrees and the four year RN's move
towards management-- so I don't know how to respond to your "box" except
to point out that the system recognizes the difference in the individuals
who are hired for various positions and potential future positions. In
animal feed, two formulas can have the same analysis yet very dfifferent
results in feeding trials. The difference is defnined as udgf, undefined
growth factors, a parallel to some of the issues raised above?
Next there are several other mixed metaphors floating around. The first of
these is the thematic line of liberal studies and another is
interdisciplinary (cross, multi, etc) education and a third is the
training for professional competence. Thus we are starting to deconstruct
the various issues in much the same way that Jose Ortega Y'Gassett did in
his late 30's tract, Mission of the University which may serve as a format
to help in this discussion.
thoughts?
tom
a post script here- Engineers are an interesting study- i have a broad
based educated engineering friend who makes his living being an engineer's
engineer and an engineer for clients where his job is to provide oversight
to prevent engineers from making mistakes and getting those who do to pay
for their mistakes rather than getting paid for change orders covering
their mistakes. This is interesting because we have talked about the high
tolerance or price a system can pay for errors- its not that the engineers
are competent, but rather the system that can deal with large errors and
still function in spite of the mistakes. The same holds in medicine- the
human body has a high tolerance for ambiguity...grin...:
tpa
Steve Eskow wrote:
> Tom, I need for you to return to the failure you're trying to undo, or the
> problem you're thinking might be overcome with a different kind of
> education.
>
> Is the problem that graduates of our engineering schools are bad engineers?
> Bad human beings? Unable or unwilling to join with other experts to work on
> projects that require the talents of the physicist, the engineer, the
> sociologist, and the political scientist? ..snip..
--tabeles <tabeles@tmn.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>