Academic Leadership Followership: How to Change Engineering Education

1
Academic Leadership / Followership How to Change
Engineering Education

• Leadership is Not the Problem!

2
About This Leadership Session

• This special session is on Leadership in
  Academia.
• Two keynotes and three responders will look back
  and look forward to identify opportunities lost
  and opportunities to be seized.
• The goal is to transition Systems Engineering to
  the status of an indispensable profession.
• I (Wolt Fabrycky) hereby conjecture that Systems
  Engineering could be first among the engineering
  family to achieve full professional status, akin
  to architecture, law, and even medicine.

3
Change Engineering Education !

• There is nothing new about that statement.
• Calls for change appear continuously - it is the
  only constant!
• Change is usually expressed in terms of
  requirements for what the engineering graduate
  must be able to do.
• Change emphasizes knowledge as power.
• Knowledge as virtue is rarely mentioned.

4
Leadership Has Been Consistent

• Some sources of leadership
• ABET - Engineering Accreditation
• ASEE - Numerous Studies
• NAE - Forums / Working Groups
• NRC - Board on Engineering Education
• NSF - Centers / Grants / Workshops
• NSPE - Professional Policy No. 104
• Private Foundations - Fellowships / Grants

5
Some Major Studies

• ECPD Formed in 1932.
• Grinter Report of 1955 resulted in ECPD
  prescriptive criteria.
• Goals of Engineering Education in 1970s led to
  Professional Schools concept.
• Green Report, 1998.
• ABET Outcomes Criteria 2000
• And Many Minor Ones

6
Followership is Minimal Because

• Academia reacts to internal more than to external
  voices.
• Academia is not customer and bottom-line driven,
  as is industry.
• Academia is expected to be the promulgator of the
  body of systematic knowledge.
• Recommendations for change in engineering
  education are usually extensive and all inclusive
  and this is the biggest impediment to
  followership!

7
Engineering Discipline Structure

• Discipline focus provides essential bedrock -
  this is both desirable and necessary.
• Advances the body of systematic knowledge.
• Provides a foundation for the interdisciplines.
• Disciplines couples engineering education to the
  engineering and basic sciences.
• Disciplines are necessary, but no longer
  sufficient.
• Preserve the discipline structure, but overlay
  with key interdisciplines !

8
A Better Balance Must be Achieved

• Between the disciplines and interdisciplines.
• Both the warp and the woof, as in cloth.
• Encourage tenured senior faculty to elect dual
  affiliation (discourage for beginners).
• Interdisciplinary growth path for faculty.
• Research balance is needed too.
• Publish / practice and prosper!

9
Consider the Continuum

• With bracketing pairs of words or phrases
• Research / Development
• Analysis / Synthesis
• Depth / Breadth
• Specialists / Generalists
• Words on the left describe Specialty or Domain
  Engineering.
• Words on the right describes General or Systems
  Engineering.

10
Systems Engineering is Evolving as an
Interdiscipline in Academia

• But, acceleration thereof requires a dual track
  degree structure with
• Preparation for Teaching and Research - the MS /
  PhD (Academia, Research, Labs, ...).
• Preparation for Professional Practice - the MEng
  / DEng (Industry, Government, ...).
• Equivalency is the desideratum - relevant factors
  need to be identified and evaluated.

11
Systems Engineering Centric Programs

• There are 51 distinct degree programs at the
  basic and advanced level in the Systems
  Engineering Centric group (Category I).
• Included are only those programs where the major
  is designated as Systems Engineering.
• These SE Programs are offered by 34 institutions.
  
• The current count by program level is
• BS MS PhD
• Program count 11 31 9 Total 51

12
Domain Centric SE Programs

• There are 73 distinct degree programs in the
  Domain Centric Systems Engineering group
  (Category II). These programs are at the basic
  or advanced level with the major designated as X
  and Systems Engineering, Systems and X
  Engineering, etc.
• These Programs are offered by 38 institutions
  (some duplicate the Category I institutions).
• The offerings exist across several engineering
  domains, summarized as follows

13
Domain Centric SE Programs
14
SE Exists Mainly at the Advanced Level Within
Academic Institutions

• Of the 51 programs in the SE Centric group
• Only 11, or 22, exist at the basic level.
• Thus, 78 are advanced level programs.
• This 3 out of 4 ratio also applies to the Domain
  Centric SE group of 73 programs.
• -------------
• This pattern is quite similar to that found
  among the recognized professions of architecture,
  law, and medicine.

15
Immediate INCOSE Objectives

• Continue to encourage adoption of professional
  attributes within SE Centric and Domain Centric
  SE programs at the basic and advanced levels.
• Continue efforts to attain participating body
  status within ABET and begin preparation for
  INCOSE participation in SE accreditation
  activity.
• Support certification and licensing initiatives
  as they may relate to the SE academic enterprise.
• ____________
• Attainment of these objectives will make INCOSE
• a good follower, but not an outstanding leader.

16
Academic Leadership An Important INCOSE Goal

• Adoption of the following objectives will help
  INCOSE emerge as a recognized leader among
  professional engineering societies worldwide
• Initiate an effort to establish SE as an
  international interdiscipline, with preparation
  for professional practice attained via study at
  the advanced level.
• Begin developing a means to provide worldwide
  INCOSE certification of noteworthy professional
  academic programs in Systems Engineering.