Filling the Engineering Gap by Vivek Wadhwa, an update on the previous post: USA Under-counting Engineering Graduates. In this article Vivek Wadhwa writes:
This is exactly right. We need better information. The Duke study was an excellent step in the right direction but more is needed.
With all the problems that need solving in the world, we probably need many more dynamic engineers. India and China need them as badly as the U.S. does. But by simply focusing on the numbers and racing to graduate more, we’re going to end up with more transactional engineers — and their jobs will likely get outsourced.
I am not convinced that this dynamic versus transactional engineering distinction is the key. I am willing to listen to more evidence. But I am not at all sure this “dynamic engineering” is the answer. I think it might be too simplistic an explanation. Still at least it is an attempt to look at the matter more deeply. I think much more effort would be helpful. And I am hoping those working on this at Duke, and others, provide us with some additional data, research, theories and proposals.
Related posts:

Pingback: Curious Cat Science and Engineering Blog » Blog Archive » House Testimony on Engineering Education
Pingback: Curious Cat Science and Engineering Blog » Blog Archive » Phony Science Gap?
Pingback: CuriousCat: The Importance of Science Education
Pingback: Curious Cat Science and Engineering Blog » Mexico: Pumping Out Engineers
Pingback: Curious Cat: Engineering Education Worldwide