Professional Documents
Culture Documents
of Civil Engineers
Civil Engineering
Body of Knowledge
for the 21st Century
Preparing the Civil Engineer
for the Future
Prepared by the
Body of Knowledge
Committee
of the
Committee on
Academic
Prerequisites for
Professional
Practice
January 12, 2004
Contents
Abbreviations
Abstract
Executive Summary
Background
Purpose of Report
Committee Approach
Body of KnowledgeWhat Should Be Taught and Learned?
Body of KnowledgeHow Should It Be Taught and Learned?
Body of KnowledgeWho Should Teach and Learn It?
The Next Steps
Closing Thoughts
3
4
5
5
6
8
9
9
Introduction
11
11
12
12
12
13
14
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
20
20
20
20
21
21
22
24
29
30
iii
31
32
33
33
35
36
36
37
39
iv
39
39
41
41
42
43
45
47
49
49
50
53
54
55
55
56
57
58
59
60
62
62
63
64
65
66
66
68
70
71
72
73
Taking Responsibility
Student Focus
Supportive Habits and High Standards
Liberal Perspective
Student Obligations and Expectations
Matching Students and the Civil Engineering Profession
73
74
75
75
75
78
80
Closing Thoughts
82
Acknowledgements
84
85
85
85
85
86
87
91
92
93
93
94
95
96
Appendix EBibliography
97
101
103
103
104
105
106
107
108
108
108
108
108
109
109
109
110
110
110
110
Workshop Resources
Questions/Suggestions/Interested in Participating?
111
111
114
114
115
115
116
116
117
117
117
118
Notes
119
Figures
Figure 1. The 15 outcomes in the recommended BOK consist of the
ABETs 11 outcomes plus one depth outcome and three breadth
outcomes.
23
35
43
45
53
70
Tables
vi
44
52
113
112
115
Abbreviations
AAEE
ABET
ACEC
ASCE
ASEE
Bachelor of Science
BOK
BSCE
CCPE
CEU
CH
Credit hour
CPD
EAC
ECEI
EdAC
ELQTF
vii
viii
ETW
ExCEEd
GPA
GRE
HEC
IACET
MBA
M.Eng.
Master of Engineering
MOE
Masters or equivalent
NACE
NCEES
NHI
NRC
NSF
PDH
QBS
Qualifications-Based Selection
SAME
TAC
TCAP3
TCFPD
USDLA
30
Abstract
role of experience and describing the roles of faculty, practitioners, and students.
The BOK has what, how
and who elements.
The BOK Committee conducted its deliberations and presents its recommendations in this report arranged by these
three themes: 1) what should be taught to and learned by
future civil engineering students; 2) how should it be taught
and learned; and 3) who should teach and learn it. The
Committees primary focus was the what.
The what recommendations are cast in terms of 15 outcomes that, compared to todays bachelors programs,
include significant increases in technical depth and professional practice breadth. Included in the 15 outcomes are the
11 outcomes currently used by the Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology (ABET). Each outcome is further described with a civil engineering commentary. The
outcomes include recognition, understanding or ability
competency levels in broad and deep areas essential to the
future practice of civil engineering at the professional level.
Executive Summary
Background
Todays world is fundamentally challenging the way civil
engineering is practiced. Complexity arises in every aspect
of projects, from pre-project planning with varied stakeholders to building with minimum environmental and community disturbance. A 2001 ASCE report Engineering the
Future of Civil Engineering (www.asce.org/raisethebar) highlighted the significant and rapid changes confronting the
profession, while recent events have demonstrated our vulnerability to human-made hazards and disasters. The risks
and challenges to public safety, health, and welfare will continue to escalate in complexity, and the civil engineering
profession must respond proactively. The 2001 report also
concluded that the current four-year bachelors degree is
becoming inadequate formal academic preparation for the
practice of civil engineering at the professional level in the
21st century.
Recognizing the preceding and in keeping with the leadership role of civil engineers in the infrastructure and environmental arena, the ASCE Board of Direction acted. In
November 2001, this fundamental preparation issue facing
the civil engineering profession led to the adoption by the
board of ASCE Policy 465, which supports the concept of
the masters degree or equivalent as a prerequisite for licensure and the practice of civil engineering at the professional
level. The board believed that education beyond the current
bachelors degree was needed to adequately prepare engineers for practice.
TCAP 3 developed an
implementation master
plan for which the Body of
Knowledge (BOK) was the
foundation.
Purpose of Report
The purpose of this report is to present the recommendations of the BOK Committee and, secondarily, to describe
the process used to arrive at those recommendations. The
Committees recommendations follow these three themes:
The Committees primary effort was the what. CAP3 and its
constituent committees will refine the what and focus on
further developing the how and who.
Committee Approach
The BOK Committee took a future-oriented approach
encompassing infrastructure and environmental problems
and opportunities for future decades. The committee
approach included making a broad interpretation of practice to include many roles and functions. Institutional and
individual flexibility was stressed. Committee correspondents were used to solicit concerns and ideas and to critique
draft materials. Committee members proactively participated in key conferences and workshops and presented and
published papers and articles to expand interaction with
stakeholders.
BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
The following four characteristics of the model full or parttime civil engineering faculty member are evident to the
BOK Committee:
Effective Teachers: Student learning is optimal when faculty members effectively engage students in the learning
process. The development of engineering faculty as effective teachers is critical for the future of the profession.
These are explicit success factors for those who will teach the
21st Century civil engineers. They reflect the need and the
opportunity to raise the bar in all three dimensions of the
civil engineering BOK: the what, the how and the who.
The success of tomorrows
civil engineering students
will be enhanced if their
aptitudes, interests, and
aspirations resonate with
the unique and special
attributes of civil engineering.
Closing Thoughts
ASCE recognizes that expanding the civil engineering BOK
through additional education and enhanced experience, as a
prerequisite for licensure, probably cannot be fully implemented without somewhat similar modifications affecting
other engineering disciplines. Engineering licensure in the
U.S. is typically generic, rather than discipline-specific, and
education and experience requirements are generally the
same for all engineering disciplines. The ASCE encourages
societies representing other engineering disciplines to also
consider the necessity for and ramifications of raising the
bar in the long-term interest of maintaining public safety,
health and welfare.
Participate in the formulation ofas well as the implementation ofprograms and projects related to their
expertise,
Conceive, plan, design, and manage large civil infrastructure systems including transportation, water, wastewater,
structures, land use, energy, and security,
10
Introduction
Policy Statement 465 focused on the designation of a masters as the first professional degree. However, in the
TCFPDs view, the question was not what should be the first
professional degree but instead what should be the educational prerequisite for the practice of civil engineering at the
professional level, that is, licensure. The TCFPD recommended that the focus should be changed to establishing the
prerequisite educational requirements for licensure and
practice at the professional level. Accordingly, Policy Statement 465 was re-titled as Academic Prerequisites for Licensure
and Professional Practice and revised to read: The American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) supports the concept of
the masters degree or equivalent (MOE) as a prerequisite
for licensure and the practice of civil engineering at the professional level. The ASCE Board of Direction unanimously
adopted the revised Policy Statement 465 in October 2001.
The entire policy, an issue discussion, and rationale are
included as Appendix A.
11
Civil engineering must restructure its 150-year-old educational model to meet the challenges of the 21st century.
Future practitioners must be prepared to recognize and
manage increased complexity. Education beyond the current
four-year bachelors degree will provide the next generation
with the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary to ensure
the high standards of the profession and protect public
safety, health, and welfare.
A Long Way to Go
Engineering graduates
need greater design proficiency, more knowledge of
technologys role, and
improved understanding
of business, economics,
and management.
12
Fewer Credits
Civil engineers are expected to simultaneously possess
broader capability and greater specialized technical competence than was required of previous generationsa nearly
impossible challenge with fewer required college credits.
Students earn at least 20 fewer credits than did their counterparts in the 1920s. While they take comparable proportions of mathematics, science, and general education,
todays students complete, on average, 18 fewer credits of
engineering topics. That is a whole semester less of technical
education at a time when, by almost universal agreement,
the complexity of the modern engineering project escalates.
How can tomorrows civil engineers design safe, cost-effective projects, accounting for greater complexity and uncertainty, with less formal education?
13
Growing Complexity
To maintain what we have
as we plan and build for
the future, civil engineers
will have to apply creative
technologies and solutions.
The nations (and worlds) infrastructure has grown increasingly mature, dense, technically complex and interconnected, especially in urban areas. To maintain what we have
as we plan and build for the future, civil engineers will have
to apply creative technologies and solutions.
Fortunately, compared with a few decades ago, there are
numerous new tools and techniques to address project challenges. Yet the ever-expanding body of scientific knowledge
and resulting engineering technology is not without consequences. The vast increase in technologies, materials, and
processes available to the civil engineer has become daunting. While cost-effective technologies provide more accurate
and reliable information, someone must still interpret the
data in its ever-expanding detail while sufficiently understanding the consequences of its adoption and application.
Greater Accountability
This complexity emerges in an era when the public is playing a more active role in private and public projects alike,
through more open planning processes, environmental regulations, and elevated community expectations that place
greater responsibility on those executing project developments. To be sure, this involvement from end-users and
stakeholders provides valuable input, but it adds an element
of complexity to the way projects are conceived, planned,
designed, and built.
As the complexity in society and projects mounts,
the risk to public safety,
health, and welfare
increases.
Definition of B+M/30&E
The BOK to be defined in support of ASCE Policy Statement
465 applies explicitly to those civil engineering educational
tracks intended to prepare tomorrows civil engineering student to become a practicing (licensed) professional engineer.
The committee expects that the majority of BSCE graduates
will want to eventually become licensed, and will, therefore,
plan formal education paths to help fulfill the BOK.
15
The CAP3 and the BOK Committee recognize that there has
been and probably always should be a richness and variety in
civil engineering education. Implementation of Policy Statement 465 should not detract from that valuable attribute of
the profession. Other bachelors and/or masters civil engineering options are possible and desirable but may not fulfill
the BOK needed for implementation of Policy Statement 465.
One example might be a BSCE followed by a traditional
engineering science-oriented masters degree. Such an
undergraduate-graduate program could meet an individual
career need while not providing the entire BOK. That would
not preclude the holders of those degrees from becoming
licensed engineers because there could be many paths to fulfillment of the total BOK.
Some practice-related outcomes of the BOK which might
not be part of a traditional masters program may be
achieved in the undergraduate program or perhaps in one or
more additional courses in the masters program.
Purpose of Report
The purpose of this report is to present the recommendations of the BOK Committee and, secondarily, to describe
the process used to arrive at those recommendations. Presented here are the committees BOK views and recommendations arranged by three themes; 1) what should be taught
and learned, 2) how it should be taught to and learned by
civil engineering students, and 3) who should teach and
learn it. Stated differently, the three elements of the BOK, as
recommended by the committee and described in this
report, are:
16
Audience
The BOK Committee hopes that the report, or portions of
it, will be read by a broad and varied audience including
ASCE leaders, ASCE members, civil engineering and other
educators, licensure officials, accreditation personnel,
employers, representatives of other engineering organizations, leaders of other professions, and other stakeholders.
Accordingly, the report is designed to be useful to a wide
range of potential users.
Guiding Principles
When embarking on its task of defining the BOK necessary
to achieve the goals of ASCE Policy Statement 465, the BOK
Committee established three primary principles in guiding
its work. First, the approach would be future-oriented, that
is, focused on the needs of civil engineers well into this
century.
17
The spectrum of possible interpretations of practice considered by the Committee ranged from a narrow view focusing on the design function to a broad interpretation
encompassing many and varied functions commonly
encountered within civil engineering. The committee chose
a position closer to the latter, recognizing that one of our
professions attractive attributes is the rich variety of important and challenging roles and functions it offers.
The committees definition of practice includesbut is not
necessarily limited toplanning, design, investigation,
teaching, applied research, management, public administra-
18
Teaching methods,
Modernizing curricula,
Relative emphasis on technical depth (e.g., many structural engineering courses) or on professional practice
breadth (e.g., project management).
19
programs and individual flexibility in selecting or assembling B+M/30 programs are stressed.
Approach
The BOK Committee
approached its assigned
project in a systematic
fashion.
The BOK Committee approached this BOK project in a systematic fashion. This section describes the process by which
this report was generated and by which comments on it were
solicited and incorporated.
Work Plan
The BOK Committee developed a project work plan, consisting of key tasks and target completion dates. The work
plan was updated and extended as the committees work
proceeded. It typically included completed, in-process and
planned tasks and deliverables.
The work plan included studying the BOK approaches used
by other professions and entities. For documentation of this
aspect of the Committees research see its white paper titled
Moving Toward a Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge for the
21st Century: Background.4
Correspondents
Correspondents contributed significantly to the
substance of this report.
20
Another element of the committees approach was participation in key conferences and workshops and writing BOK
focused articles and papers for selected publications within
and outside of civil engineering. These activities provided
another means of moving stakeholders from awareness to
understanding and soliciting input and broadening support.
Lists of completed and planned conferences and workshops
and articles and papers appear in Appendix G.
CIVIL ENGINEERING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
What Should Be
Taught And Learned?
21
As the starting point for its BOK deliberations, the committee chose ABETs 11 outcomes5 (listed in Appendix H) for
four main reasons:
22
3 Breadth outcomes
1 Depth
(project management,
outcome
+ construction, and asset
(specialized
management; business
technical area)
and public policy and
administration; and
leadership)
the following three broad levels of competence for individuals intending to become licensed professional civil engineers:
Level 3 (Ability) is a capability to perform with competence. An engineer with the ability to design a particular
system can take responsibility for the system, identifying all
the necessary aspects of the design, and match objectives
with appropriate technological solutions. As an engineer
develops, the engineers abilities also develop so that more
challenging and difficult problems can be solved.
23
The 15 Outcomes
The BOK is presented in this section in the form of outcomes and commentaries developed by the BOK Committee. The parenthetic notation at the end of the first 11
outcomes indicates correspondence to ABETs 11 outcomes.
Commentaries explain
outcomes; they are not
prescriptive.
The purpose of the commentaries is to elaborate on and illustrate each outcomes intent. The commentaries are not
intended to be prescriptive. The outcome-commentary format provides what the committee views as a desirable deliverable for stakeholders: a list of succinct outcomes, each linked
for illustrative purposes to an explanatory commentary.
Outcomes are viewed as being applicable over a long period
of time (e.g., years). In contrast, some illustrative topics
mentioned in commentaries will be ephemeral, requiring
modification in response to technological advances and
other changes.
The 15 outcomes broaden
and deepen ABETs current
11 outcomes.
24
25
27
28
Attitudes
As stated earlier, the BOK is defined as the knowledge, skills
and attitudes necessary to become a licensed professional
engineer. Knowledge, skills and attitudes are the essential
components of the what dimension of the BOK. Individual
experiences and review of studies prompted the BOK committee to include attitudes in the BOK.
29
Prevailing Thoughts
Attitudes were found to be
integral parts of the BOK
of other professions and
specialties such as architecture, accounting and
project management.
30
English writer James Allen11 speaks of the power of the conscious mind in his book As a Man Thinketh. He refers to it as a
garden, which may be intelligently cultivated or allowed to
run wild and observes that regardless of whether the mind is
cultivated or neglected, it will bring forth. Allen goes to say,
thought-forces and mind-elements operate in the shaping
of a persons character, circumstances, and destiny. In other
words, as you deeply think so will you become.
CIVIL ENGINEERING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Joseph Murphy12, a theologian and scientist using the conscious mind-subconscious mind nomenclature, focuses on
the power of how one thinks and feels. His book portrays
the subconscious mind as being receptive to the conscious
mind, impressionable, sleepless, non-reasoning, creative,
eager, action or execution-oriented, intelligent, idea rich,
and ageless. Murphy explains: If you imagine an objective
clearly, you will be provided with the necessities, in ways you
know not of, through the wonder-working of your subconscious mind.
31
Attitudes as Catalysts
Despite the complications of subjectivity and ambiguity, the
BOK Committee members are convinced that attitudes
must join knowledge and skills as one of the three essential
components of the what dimension of the civil engineering
BOK.13 The manner in which a civil engineer views and
approaches his or her work is very likely to determine how
effectively he or she uses hard-earned knowledge and skills.
Some attitude sets are
contagious and have productive catalytic and synergistic effects within the
professional practice of
civil engineering.
32
Which Attitudes?
Having stated the critical role of attitudes in the civil engineering BOK, a question naturally arises, Which attitudes
should be included in the BOK? As a partial answer to the
question, the committee assembled the following list of attitudes, that is, value-driven feelings or emotions, possibly conducive to effective professional practice of civil engineering:
Commitment
Confidence
Consideration of others
Curiosity
Entrepreneurship
Fairness
High expectations
Honesty
Integrity
Intuition
Judgment
Optimism
Persistence
Positiveness
Respect
Self esteem
Sensitivity
Thoughtfulness
Thoroughness
Tolerance
Professional attitudes are intimately linked with the corporate or professional culture in which a civil engineer operates. Therefore, the institution itself, whether it is a civil and
environmental engineering department at a university, a
corporation, or a governmental entity, should define the set
of attitudes it believes to be most appropriate to the most
effective functioning of its civil engineers. A given civil engineering department or employer might select that a subset
of appropriate professional attitudes and integrate them into
their education or development programs. The selected attitudes might be tailored to the departments or employers
principal focus or function such as design, construction,
research, or public works.
33
Confidence
Consideration of others
Thoughtfulness
Curiosity
Sensitivity
Self esteem
Entrepreneurship
15
Outcomes
Fairness
High expectations
Respect
Honesty
Positiveness
Persistence
Integrity
Intuition
Optimism
Judgment
35
The committee recommends that each employer and university civil and environmental engineering department
select a set of constructive attitudes, possibly calling them
professional attitudes. They may draw on the example list
provided earlier and use other sources. They should teach
about the selected attitudes within the B+M/30&E process.
By so doing, helpful attitudes will be available to support
individual outcomes as needed. More importantly, learning
about and hopefully embodying constructive attitudes will
contribute to the wholeness of tomorrows civil engineer.
A Lifelong Effort
Fulfilling the BOK is the
first step in lifelong professional learning for the
future civil engineer.
36
37
Designers of tomorrows
curricula are urged to take
a fresh look at both undergraduate and graduate
programs.
38
BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
How Should It Be
Taught And Learned?
Formal undergraduate
education, graduate study
or equivalent, co- and
extra-curricular activities,
and experience will be
used to fulfill the BOK.
The BSCE could provide an attractive and appropriate liberal education for the 21st century. On earning the degree, a
graduate would have many varied and attractive options.
Examples are:
39
The committee assumes that forward-looking civil engineering faculty and their colleagues will continue to explore
improved pedagogy. The need to do so is driven, in part, by
ABETs shift from inputs to outputs; from what is taught to
what is learned. In the course of its work, the committee
assembled some resources for improving teaching effectiveness, included in Appendix I.
41
42
Public
Private
California State
University,
Los Angeles
Colorado
State
University
Case Western
Reserve
University
Wentworth
Western
Institute of
Michigan
Technology
University
Iowa State
University
Rose-Hulman
Institute of
Technology
Bucknell
University
University of
Louisville
University of
Oklahoma
The committee strategy is to work closely with interested, varied civil engineering departments and then widely disseminate
their curricula designs to serve as examples of how to provide
much of the BOK. Partner institutions are shown in Figure 3
along with their public or private status. Additional information is provided in Table 1. The ten participating institutions
include public and private institutions that are either researchoriented or primarily undergraduate institutions.
In addition to more focused efforts with individual civil
engineering departments, the committee is also seeking
opportunities to work with groups representing a cross-section of departments. Regional meetings of department
heads provide one mechanism for this approach.
43
Institution
Department
Date of Initial
Workshop
Contact Person
Public
Research
Oriented
Colorado State
University
Civil
Engineering
11/25/02
Iowa State
University
Civil and
Construction
Engineering
1/21/03
Marlee A. Walton, PE
Adjunct Professor
marlee@iastate.edu
University of
Oklahoma
Civil
Engineering
and Environmental Science
1/13/04
Graduate degree
accredited
University of
Louisville
(See Appendix L)
Civil
Engineering
10/16/03
Primarily
Undergraduate
California State
University, Los
Angeles
Civil
Engineering
4/28/03
Western Michigan
University,
Civil and
Construction
Engineering
7/16/03
Research
Oriented
Case Western
Reserve University
Civil
Engineering
3/31/03
Primarily
Undergraduate
Bucknell
University
Civil and
Environmental
Engineering
5/20/03
Rose-Hulman
Institute of
Technology
Civil
Engineering
8/25/03
Wentworth
Institute of
Technology
Civil,
Construction,
and
Environment
9/30/03
Private
44
For
Profits
On
Campus
Distance
NonProfits
Colleges &
Universities
On
Campus
Distance
Agencies
On
Campus
On
Campus
In addition, in the future, part of the BOK might be delivered through high-quality, standards-based educational programs offered by firms, government agencies, professional
societies, and for-profit educational organizations. Engineers seeking to acquire the BOK will find many means
available to them.
Distance education is
instructional delivery that
does not constrain the student to be physically
present in the same location as the instructor.
45
46
47
48
49
Professional knowledge and skill development (e.g., communication, leadership, management, teamwork) needs
to be improved within the civil engineering community.
These require learning and application via experience.
While a foundation for these knowledge and skills can
and should be laid in the classroom, it is not possible in
classroom settings to adequately teach the manner in
which these professional capabilities are applied in varying contexts and circumstances.
50
Outcome 1 (an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering) would be achieved in the B
and/or M/30.
Outcome 7 (an ability to communicate effectively). Students would go from Level 2 (understanding) obtained in
their formal education to Level 3 (ability) via experience.
51
Understanding
Ability
an ability to design and conduct experiments, as
Recognition
engineering problems.
Understanding
Ability
an understanding of professional and ethical
Recognition
Understanding
responsibility.
an ability to communicate effectively.
Recognition
Ability
Understanding
the broad education necessary to understand the
Recognition
Understanding
impact of engineering solutions in a global and
societal context.
a recognition of the need for, and an ability to
Recognition
Ability
engage in, life-long learning
Understanding
a knowledge of contemporary issues.
Recognition
Understanding
an ability to use the techniques, skills, and
Recognition
Outcome
1. an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
science and engineering.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Notes: Fulfillment of the BOK is achieved through progression of up to three levels: Level 1 (recognition), Level 2 (understanding), and Level 3 (ability). Bold indicates the terminal competency level to be achieved by B+M/30&E as a condition of
licensure.
1. Some of the recognitions in the Column 2 could be elevated one level to understanding and some of the understandings in the last column could be elevated one level to ability. See Outcome 15 as an example.
2. Essentially all of the items in the last column are applicable to all engineering disciplines. Therefore, one application format and review procedure might be used for all licensure applicants.
3. In Outcome 10, knowledge is defined as equivalent to understanding.
52
3
Ability
Post-licensure Education
& Experience
2
Understanding
B + M/30
Postlicensure
additional
outcomes
8
Life-long learning
Impact of engineering
Outcomes
10 13 14 15
53
Leadership
Contemporary issues
Communication
Multidisciplinary teams
Engineering problems
11 12
Design
Engineering tools
1
Recognition
Technical core
Levels of Competence
Post-licensure higher
competency levels
1. All 15 outcomes are to be taken to at least Level 1 (recognition) via formal education. That is, formal education
lays the foundation for all 15 outcomes.
2. The light gray and medium gray (the area below the
heavy line) represent the what dimension of the posthigh school, pre-licensure BOK. Of the 15 outcomes,
nine (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 12,) are to be taken to
Level 3 (ability) through education and/or experience,
and the remaining six (6, 8, 10, 13, 14, and 15) are to be
taken to Level 2 (understanding).
3. For five outcomes (1, 2, 5, 11 and 12), the target competencies for the BOK are fulfilled entirely through formal
education (B+M/30). This is shown with light gray.
4. For the remaining ten outcomes (3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13,
14, and 15), the target competencies for the BOK are
fulfilled through formal education and experience
(B+M/30 and E). The light and medium gray depict
education and experience.
5. While ten outcomes are heavily dependent on experience, the other five outcomes will be enriched by experience.
6. Competencies in some or all outcomes may grow, as
shown by dark gray, to and beyond Level 3 (ability) via
post-licensure experience and/or education.
7. The dark gray area also indicates that additional outcomes (beyond 15) are probable after fulfilling the prelicensure BOK.
54
How can experience be useful during the B+M/30 experience? Should cooperative education and/or other paraprofessional experience gained during the B and/or M/30
process count toward experience? If so, under what
conditions?
55
The following shall be considered as minimum evidence that the applicant is qualified for certification
as an Associate Engineer (presently engineer intern)
with respect to engineering education. The applicant
shall possess:
a) A masters degree in engineering from an ABET/
EAC accredited graduate program, or; (this presumes
future dual level accreditation with a masters degree
from an accredited program becoming the primary
pathway to licensure)
b) A bachelors degree in engineering from an ABET/
EAC accredited undergraduate program, or the
equivalent, and 30 additional credits of upper level
undergraduate or graduate coursework in engineering and/or related professional practice topic areas.
All of the graduate engineering degrees and coursework
noted above could be accomplished in conventional oncampus settings, or could be completed via distance learning. Distance learning education will continue to play an
increasing role in the future education of engineers as discussed earlier in this report.
Implementation of these changes within the licensure system
will require a number of challenges be addressed. Some of
these challenges and potential solutions are discussed below.
56
Upon the adoption of new engineering educational requirements similar to those described above, a masters degree
from an ABET-accredited graduate program would become
of significantly more value, as such a masters degree would
necessitate that both the undergraduate and graduate curricula fully meet ABET criteria. A masters degree from an ABET
accredited program would become the new gold standard
for engineering education. The BOK Committee hopes that,
upon implementation of these changes, ABET would modify
its rules to allow dual accreditation of undergraduate and
graduate programs in engineering at the same institution.
CIVIL ENGINEERING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Engineers educated in
other countries need to be
accommodated in the
licensure system.
Some, but not all, states provide a licensure pathway for those
having bachelors degrees in Engineering Technology accredited by the ABET Technology Accreditation Commission
(TAC/ABET), with added years of experience typically
required prior to licensure. NCEES has taken the position
that the Model Law standard shall be the ABET/EAC bachelors degree, and that the decision to incorporate pathways
for TAC/ABET graduates, and graduates from other degree
programs, is left to each individual jurisdiction. With the
incorporation of additional engineering requirements, the
states which currently recognize TAC/ABET degrees may
consider requiring a TAC/ABET bachelors degree and a masters degree in engineering (or engineering technology) from
an institution which has TAC/ABET-accredited programs.
Some states allow alternate pathways to licensure for those
who have bachelors degrees in related sciences, or other
fields in some cases, and who also have a masters degree in
engineering. This pathway could be fully satisfied by the
masters degree from an ABET/EAC-accredited graduate
CIVIL ENGINEERING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
57
58
to consider decreasing the 30-credit requirement if the bachelors degree required credits in excess of an established
threshold, say at 128. B+30 would be required for all bachelors degrees with credit requirements less than the established threshold.
Requests to proportionately decrease the 30-credit requirement might be evaluated by licensing boards on a case-bycase basis for those with credits in excess of the established
threshold. This evaluation would include confirmation that
the additional undergraduate credits earned were in technical and/or professional practice topic areas.
In the future, a variety of high quality educational service
providers (other than universities) may adequately provide
the requisite programs. These may include in-house educational programs sponsored for instance by engineering firms
or by Federal agencies, or educational programs offered by
professional societies. These programs might be considered
adequate to provide the 30 additional credits. However, such
programs would need to be of the same academic extent and
rigor as upper level undergraduate or graduate engineering
coursework.
59
Those who choose to use the plus 30 credit route for the
graduate education would have the choice of taking a variety
of courses from a number of different education providers.
Educational institutions and professional and technical
organizations would provide guidance as to the range of
courses necessary to provide the BOK. As course selection
would be at the choice of the individual, attainment of the
CIVIL ENGINEERING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
BOK might vary considerably among individuals. The minimum number of credits in mathematics and science, engineering, and professional practice topic areas might be
considered in order to provide some structure to overall
course selections.
Opinions differ within TCAP3 regarding methods used to
validate attainment of the BOK for those who do not obtain
an ABET/EAC masters degree. Some believe strongly that
BOK attainment should be the deciding factor for licensure
decisions, and that an independent evaluation service
should be provided within an organization such as ABET or
NCEES to assess BOK attainment, after the fact, for engineers who obtain the additional education by the plus 30
credit route.
TCAP3 members who are involved in the engineering licensure system contend that a decision not to license an engineer would not likely survive subsequent legal appeal if the
applicant, for example, possesses an ABET/EAC bachelors
degree, and an engineering masters degree from a major
U.S. university, but is lacking several professional practice
components.
The licensure system is likely to continue to involve decision-making on the basis of degrees, course titles and credits
rather than on a defined BOK. Thus, decisions affecting
applicants careers and livelihoods can be made and
defended on clear rather than subjective criteria. Continuing
to do so may be complicated in the future by the change in
ABET criteria toward outcomes and away from prescriptive
course requirements.
Overall, TCAP3 wishes to establish documentation procedures for the attainment of a requisite BOK as a prerequisite
for licensure as a long-term objective. TCAP3 members
familiar with the licensure system recognize that this is an
area where further analysis is needed.
NCEES is considering the establishment of a non-technical
professional practice examination to be taken immediately
prior to licensure. If such an examination is implemented
and is both rigorous and inclusive of all of the professional
practice topics in the civil engineering BOK, then the fulfillment of the BOK might be presumed by an applicant having
30 additional credits in technical and/or professional practice topic areas and by having successfully passed the professional practice examination.
61
62
Implementing additional engineering education requirements as a prerequisite for licensure will probably require
that such changes apply across the board to all engineering
disciplines. The ASCE is certainly not specifying what additional engineering education requirements might be appropriate in the long run for mechanical, electrical, and other
engineers.
However, the BOK Committee suggests that the ASCE
encourage societies representing other engineering disciplines to consider the BOK required to practice at a professional level in the future, and to work with the ASCE in
raising the bar in a manner which is effective for all engineering disciplines in continuing to protect public health,
safety and welfare.
Implementing additional
engineering education
requirements as a prerequisite for licensure will
probably require that such
changes apply across the
board to all engineering
disciplines.
Licensure Mobility
Significant progress has been made in recent years through
the NCEES Council Records Program and administrative
revisions in licensing board policies to allow for expedited
comity for licensed professional engineers. It is important to
maintain such mobility enhancements as engineering education requirements are increased. This could be accomplished by establishing a new Model Law Engineer category
for those meeting the increased educational requirements.
It is important to maintain
mobility enhancements as
engineering education
requirements are
increased.
63
About half of the states currently require continuing professional development (CPD) for renewal of licenses for professional engineers. The CPD regulations typically allow credit
for college coursework as well as for activities such as seminars, conventions, conferences, obtaining patents, service as
an officer of a professional society, or publication of papers
or articles.
State regulations typically equate hours spent in these various activities to college semester credits (i.e., 45 professional
development hours spent in seminars or conferences is the
equivalent of one semester credit). Typically, licensing
boards do not evaluate and approve the service providers or
the content of the activities. Many of the activities used for
CPD by professional engineers are not equivalent in rigor,
content, learning and assessment to upper level undergraduate or graduate level engineering courses.
NCEES provides model rules and regulations for CPD that
have been used by many jurisdictions in order to provide
uniformity. The procedures for assigning and equating credits for various activities are therefore in place in many states.
The model rules require that the topic be relevant to the
practice of engineering and that the activities have technical,
ethical or managerial content.
64
The program described in previous sections entails additional engineering education that is equivalent in rigor, content, learning and assessment to graduate engineering
education. The majority of continuing professional development activities presently available in the U.S. has not
reached that level. Some programs from alternate service
providers (firms, agencies, professional societies) may be
shown by independent evaluation to be of equivalent scope
to graduate level education, and might be incorporated in
plus 30 credit education programs as a result.
BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
ASCEs 1995 Civil Engineering Education Conference34 recommended action in four areas: professional degrees, integrated curriculum, faculty development, and practitioner
involvement. ASCE Policy Statement 465, in a broad sense,
addresses all four. For example, the what and how of this
BOK report relate directly to professional degrees and an
integrated curriculum. The who, the subject of this section,
addresses faculty development and the complementary
topic of practitioner involvement.
As noted by ABET, The faculty is the heart of any education
program. Respecting the crucial role of teachers and in
keeping with its charge, the BOK Committee contemplated
the ideal civil engineering faculty of the future and their
even more important role. Who should they be, as individuals and collectively? What will enable them to be successful
in facilitating the accomplishment of the BOK? What are the
characteristics required of educators to aid them in motivating and guiding students to the mastery of the BOK?
65
strengthen civil engineering teaching. The following sections identify areas where this can be accomplished.
Four Characteristics of
Civil Engineering Educators
The following four characteristics of the model full or parttime civil engineering faculty member became evident to the
BOK Committee:
Effective Teachers: Student learning is optimal when faculty members effectively engage students in the learning
process. The development of engineering faculty as effective teachers is critical for the future of the profession.
Have Practical Experience: Educators should have practical experience in engineering subjects that they teach.
Most civil engineering faculty should hold professional
engineering licenses.
Scholars
This use of the term
scholar goes far beyond
the traditional, restrictive
view of scholarship as
basic research.
This use of the term scholar goes far beyond the traditional, restrictive view of scholarship as basic research.
Instead, the Committee adopted the more inclusive view of
scholarship espoused by Ernest L. Boyer in his seminal work,
Scholarship Reconsidered, Priorities of the Professoriate.37
66
The Scholarship of Teaching comprises developing examples, analogies, and images that form the bridge between
the teachers understanding and the students learning. It
clearly fits the expectation of expertise in faculty, as it
requires that faculty also be learners, always extending
their own knowledge and understanding.
67
Effective Teachers
Appropriate teaching
education and training
are critical to enhancing
the effectiveness of faculty
in creating excitement for
learning by students.
Intellectual excitement is
apparent from a teachers
technical expertise, organization, clarity of communication, engaging presentation, and enthusiasm.
68
Low
Moderate
High
High
6. Intellectual Authority
8. Exemplary Lecturer
9. Complete Exemplary
Moderate
3. Adequate
5. Competent
7. Exemplary Facilitator
Low
1. Inadequate
2. Marginal
4. Socratic
69
Figure 7. The ExCEEd Model is consistent with wellestablished teaching and learning principles.
Structured organization
Based on learning objectives
Appropriate to the subject matter
Varied, to appeal to different learning styles
Engaging presentation
Clear written and verbal communication
High degree of contact with students
Physical models and demonstrations
Enthusiasm
Positive rapport with students
Teacher
As
Role
Model
the course), presented in an engaging manner, demonstrating enthusiasm for the subject and maintaining positive rapport with the students, with frequent assessment of student
learning (not grading), and making appropriate use of technology (see http://www.asce.org/exceed).
This model is a useful tool as it is consistent with well-established principles of teaching and learning. Significant scholarship was devoted to its development and validation. For
the individual teacher, it provides a solid framework for
development of individual teaching styles and an opportunity for continued growth as an effective teacher.
The model provides specific and incremental areas to assess
current strengths and weaknesses for the teacher to focus
improvement efforts. For an institution, it provides a roadmap that may be used in developing a faculty development
program.
Students who aspire to practice civil engineering at the professional level will benefit from a heterogeneous group of
faculty ranging from some who are engaged in academia to
others who are fully engaged in the practice of civil engineering. While the majority of faculty will be full-time engineering educators, some should be part-time, leading-edge
practitioners.
Potential practitioner participants should meet the same criteria as the full-time faculty as described in this section,
namely, scholarship, teaching effectiveness, and positive role
modeling. Practitioner faculty might teach entire courses or
co-teach with full-time faculty.
71
Summary
The answer to who should teach the civil engineering
BOK? is a faculty of scholars, all of whom have developed
as effective teachers, have an appropriate level of practical
experience, and are positive role models for the profession.
These are explicit success factors for those who will teach the
21st century civil engineers. These teachers will personify
the need and the opportunity to raise the bar in all three
dimensions of the civil engineering BOK: the what, the how
and the who.
72
BODY OF KNOWLEDGE
Taking Responsibility
In Building an Engineering Career (1946), Professor C.C.
Williams47 outlines skills, attitudes, and awareness needed
73
for success in engineering. For student success, he emphasizes good study habits, cooperation with instructors, learning factual material, thinking and logic, attention, and openmindedness. Most importantly, he argues students are
responsible for their own education and development.
Student Focus
Williams cautions educators that the student is not a vessel,
therefore, to be filled with knowledge; he [or she] is rather a
growing and expanding organism to be guided and trained
in his [or her] growth. In his formulation, the instructor
does not flunk or pass a student. Rather, among other
duties such as mentoring and composing effective learning
sessions, the instructor helps students seek out information,
compiles their marks on assignments, and provides feedback
and support through formal and informal channels.
The instructor serves the
student by carrying out his
or her teaching responsibilities in a competent and
caring manner.
74
Liberal Perspective
In addition to striving for excellence, Williams challenges
the engineering student to expand his or her horizons: A
professional student should seek to liberalize his [or her]
education wherever feasible. Williams encourages students
to engage the arts and culture in order to appreciate the
intellectual achievements and emotional experiences of people at their best. This outlook is as important today as it was
when Williams penned these words in 1946. Given the growing complexity of engineering practice, the onset of the global village, and the challenges to civil engineering from
other professions, a holistic outlook beyond an engineering
focus is more important than ever.
Students should be
encouraged to view the
BOK as a foundation of
and roadmap for life-long
learning.
75
1. Students must understand while it is their responsibility to actively engage the BOK, they are entitled to the
full support of their faculty, department, and profession in this endeavor. As Williams stated, the student is
responsible for developing appropriate study habits,
cooperating with instructors, learning factual material,
thinking logically, and paying attention. But the student
is also entitled to an environment that is conducive to
learning the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary
for civil engineering practice. This includes instructors
and mentors who want to help the individual student
develop and hone his or her unique qualities and abilities and a profession responsive to the needs of the
future and willing to create opportunities for meaningful success. Recall the earlier comments about a partnership relationship, not a master-subservient one.
2. Students must be committed to excellence in their education at all times. Students should not settle for passing
grades in any of their courses, but must attempt to take
full advantage of their natural gifts and the opportunities to learn and apply material presented to them. Students should master fundamentals, appreciate both the
big picture while paying attention to details, be aware of
and seek to understand nuances such as the difference
between precision and accuracy, and learn how to
present and defend ideas and their work products.
Commitment to excellence outside of the classroom is
also encouraged through cooperative education experiences, other paraprofessional work, student organizations and competitions, and campus and community
involvement outside of the engineering arena.
3. Students must understand that they are developing as
managers and leaders. Students of today are the practitioners, managers, and leaders of tomorrow. Every student must develop his or her management and
leadership skills and apply them in everyday situations.
They must view their development as part of an ongoing process of improvement that is continual and
integral to their engineering practice and engagement
with society.
4. Students must value a diverse perspective that includes
the liberal arts, tolerant attitudes, and active inclusion.
The civil engineering student is responsible for keeping
an open mind, being culturally sensitive, and engaging
76
the world that exists beyond the doors of the engineering classroom. As part of this charge, students should
strive to be liberally educated and well rounded in their
thinking and attitudes.
Over the span of an engineering career, students who
aspire to become professionals must understand that the
courses they take outside of engineering can be as
important as the courses they take within civil engineering departments. Students must learn to value and
assess diversity. Students should actively promote the
diversification and integration of their classes, campuses, and communities.
5. Students must understand that civil engineers are making and remaking the world every day. They are
involved in the action of the real world. The earlier this
is imparted to students the better. Civil engineering is an
exciting, proactive discipline that revolves around the
creation of the actual, practical, and possible. Civil engineers provide the backbone for the economy by helping
to plan, design, construct, and maintain the nations
infrastructure while protecting and restoring the natural
environment.
6. Students must understand that they can help maintain
civil engineerings vitality. Civil engineering students
should recognize that they are an integral part of the
continual revitalization of the profession. Their opinions and thoughts on the BOK must be taken into
account, and they must actively participate in the continual renewal and progress of the profession.
7. Students must understand the importance of life-long
learning and be committed to extending their education beyond the formal education they receive in college. Graduation is a first step towards professional
practice. Development within the profession demands
student commitment to continue education after graduation. This can be done in a variety of ways including
taking additional courses at a recognized college or university, attending professional meetings, and/or taking
approved continuing education courses through ASCE
or other professional societies. At a minimum, students
should get into the habit of reading professional journals in their areas of special interest before graduation
and continue this habit after graduation.
77
Success in the study, and eventual practice, of civil engineering is likely to be enhanced if a persons aptitudes, interests,
and aspirations resonate with the unique or special
attributes of civil engineering. Students are much more
likely to meet their responsibilities, obligations, and expectations (as described above) and are much more likely to
achieve success and significance, if they are informed about,
attracted to and excited by civil engineerings unique or special characteristics.
In the spirit of encouraging discussion of civil engineerings
unique or specific attributes, the Committee offers the following characteristics as possibilities:48
Greater Span of Functions and Expectations: About twothirds of all civil engineers work in consulting firms or
government; most other engineers are employed in
industry. Because of their place of employment, civil
engineers tend to work for smaller organizations and, at
almost any point in their early career, tend to have a wider
range of functions to perform.
For example, a young engineer at a small to medium sized
firm could expect to have the following kinds of varied
assignments: write portions of a report, accompany a
senior engineer to a meeting with a client or a public
78
meeting and make part of the presentation, attend a seminar and report on it to colleagues in the office, coordinate the work of surveyors, do field reconnaissance at a
potential construction site, and use one or more computer programs.
The committee recommends that the profession continuously seek to articulate these unique and special attributes
and communicate them to K-12 students and their parents,
teachers, and counselors. This recommendation is not
offered as a means of attracting more young and other people to the profession. This is not a matter of numbers.
Instead, the goal is to have a greater fraction of civil engineering students having qualities consistent with those of
the profession.
The preceding unique or special attributes of civil engineering have implications for people contemplating studying, or
who are already studying, civil engineering. They should be
aware of the unique and exciting nature of most civil engineering projects, cognizant of the possibility of the catastrophic impact of failed projects, and recognize the
environmental stewardship inherent in the work of civil
engineers.
They should strive for an extra measure of written and communication skills and refine interpersonal abilities to function effectively within a varied group of co-workers, clients,
and the public at large. They should be prepared to interact
with a wide variety of individuals and groups who may not
be as analytically oriented as most civil engineers.
79
Addresses the roles of education and experience in fulfilling the pre-licensure BOK;
Outlines the roles of full and part-time faculty, of practitioners, and of students in teaching and learning the BOK.
In keeping with the explicit request in the charge, the preceding was accomplished by intensely interacting with stakeholders within and outside of civil engineering.
This report is dynamic
and will evolve.
While the charge to the BOK Committee is essentially complete, the civil engineering BOK, as described in terms of
what, how and who, in this report is dynamic and, as such,
will evolve. That evolution will be stimulated primarily by
the curricular design projects that were initiated by the committee.
Expected refinements to
the BOK are the principal
reason this report is the
First Edition.
As of the completion of this report, ten diverse civil engineering departments are designing or otherwise creating, on
paper, B+M programs supportive of the BOK. As those
designs proceed, using the BOK defined in this report as the
design criteria, the designers are likely to offer suggested
refinements to the BOK. Expected refinements to the BOK
80
are the principal reason this report is the First Edition. CAP3
will provide addenda and/or reissue this report in the form
of additional editions in response to BOK refinements.
To facilitate continuation and expansion of the curricula
design projects, the BOK Committee, working with CAP3,
initiated the formation of a new constituent committee in
September 2003, namely the Curricula Committee. Appendix N is the charge to the Curricula Committee. The Curricula Committee is working with ASCE Institutes to ensure
that Outcome 12, the technical specialization outcome, is
addressed and integrated into the specialty certification
effort that is on going within the ASCE. Termination of the
BOK Committee in early 2004 preceded by formation of the
Curricula Committee in September 2003 means that the
BOK effort moves from focusing on defining the BOK to
creating B+M curricula that will, in combination with
focused and progressive experience, use the BOK to prepare
tomorrows civil engineering professionals.
This report also supports other initiatives needed to implement ASCE Policy Statement 465. The Accreditation and
Licensure Committees are leading these important efforts.
As noted, this report is also being used in the implementation of ASCEs specialty certification program. The BOK,
presented in this report, is the foundation on which implementation of Policy Statement 465 is being built.
81
Closing Thoughts
82
Participate in the formulation ofas well as the implementation ofpolicies, programs and projects related to
their expertise,
Conceive, plan, design, and manage large civil infrastructure systems including transportation, water, wastewater,
structures, land use, energy, and security,
83
Acknowledgements
84
APPENDIX A
Policy
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
supports the concept of the masters degree or equivalent as a prerequisite for licensure and the practice
of civil engineering at a professional level.
ASCE encourages institutions of higher education,
governmental units, employers, civil engineers, and
other appropriate organizations to endorse, support,
and promote the concept of mandatory post-baccalaureate education for the practice of civil engineering
at a professional level. The implementation of this effort should occur through establishing appropriate
curricula in the formal education experience, appropriate recognition and compensation in the workplace, and congruent standards for licensure.
Issue
The practice of civil engineering at the professional
level means practice as a licensed professional engineer. Admission to the practice of civil engineering
at the professional level means professional engineering licensing, which requires:
A body of specialized knowledge as reflected by a
combination of a baccalaureate degree and a
masters or equivalent (MOE)
Appropriate experience
Commitment to life-long learning
The required body of specialized knowledge includes a technical core, technical electives, a nontechnical core and technical and non-technical
courses to support individual career objectives. The
current baccalaureate civil engineering degree is an
entry-level degree that may no longer be adequate
preparation for the practice of civil engineering at
the professional level.
85
Rationale
Requiring education beyond the baccalaureate degree for the practice of civil engineering at the professional level is consistent with other learned professions. The body of knowledge gained, and the
skills developed in the formal civil engineering education process are not significantly less than the
comparable knowledge and skills required in these
other professions. It is not reasonable in such complex and rapidly changing times to think that we can
impart the specialized body of knowledge and skills
required of professional engineers in four years of
formal schooling while other learned professions
take seven or eight years. Four years of formal
schooling were considered the standard for three
professions (medicine, law, and engineering) 100
years ago, and while medicine and law education
lengthened with the growing demands of their respective professions engineering education did not.
Perhaps this retention of a four-year undergraduate
engineering education has contributed to the lowered esteem of engineering in the eyes of society, and
the commensurate decline in compensation of engineers relative to medical doctors and lawyers.
Current baccalaureate programs, while constantly undergoing review and revisions, still retain a
nominal four-year education process. This length of
time limits the ability of these programs to provide a
formal education consistent with the increasing demands of the practice of civil engineering at the professional level. There are diametrically opposed
forces trying to squeeze more content into the baccalaureate curriculum while at the same time reducing
86
the credit hours necessary for the baccalaureate degree. The result is a production line baccalaureate
civil engineering degree satisfactory for an entrylevel position, but which may be inadequate for the
professional practice of civil engineering. The fouryear internship period (engineer-in-training) after
receipt of the BSCE degree cannot make up for the
formal educational material that would be gained
from a masters degree or equivalent program.
The implementation of this concept will not happen overnight. While ASCE cannot mandate that it
be done in a specified time period or manner, ASCE
will be an active partner with other groups and organizations to accomplish this policy. The ultimate full
implementation may not occur for 20 or more years.
Appropriate grandfathering for existing registered
and degreed engineers would be a part of the implementation process. This concept is a legacy for future generations of civil engineers. However, perhaps
the most important aspect of the implementation of
this policy is already in place. Within the U.S. system
of higher education, high quality, innovative and diverse masters degree programs currently exist in
colleges and universities to support this concept. A
growing number of organizations now offer high
quality on-site and distance learning educational opportunities. The active support of this policy by all of
the stakeholders in this process, such as the educational institutions, the registration boards, and the
various employers of civil engineers, will be required
to develop and promote the elements necessary to
eventually implement this concept.
APPENDIX B
87
88
nomic model. With doctoral student Markus Klausner, he developed management models and a datalogger chip for use in electro-mechanical devices
that informs cost effective re-manufacturing and reuse. These dataloggers have been implemented in
power tools and automobiles. He also contributed a
widely cited analysis of the life cycle consequences of
lead acid battery powered vehicles.
Dr. Hendrickson has been active in several professional and civic organizations. He was head of the
Civil Engineering Department Heads Executive
Council for the American Society of Civil Engineers.
He served as a committee chair for the Transportation Research Board and co-founded a continuing
international symposium on advanced technologies
in transportation engineering. He has received
teaching awards, published extensively on engineering education, and led the very successful undergraduate engineering curriculum reform at Carnegie
Mellon in 1989/90.
Dept. Civil & Environmental Engr.
Porter Hall 119
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
Tel: 412-268-2941
Fax: 412-268-7813
Email: cth@cmu.edu
RALPH J. HODEK, PhD, PE, earned a BSCE from
the Michigan College of Mining and Technology, an
MS from Michigan Technological University, and a
Ph.D. in geotechnical engineering at Purdue University. Since that time he has been at Michigan Technological University where he teaches in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. He is
licensed to practice in the State of Michigan and
consults in the area of geotechnical engineering to
owners, engineers, and contractors.
Hodek serves as vice-chairman of the Michigan
Board of Professional Engineers, and he also serves
as a member of the Michigan Board of Land Surveyors. He is a Fellow of ASCE and has been active in its
Technical Council on Cold Regions Engineering
where he chaired the executive committee and participated with the Committee on Frozen Ground
and the Committee on Education.
Hodek is active in the accreditation process for
engineering programs. He serves as a program visitor for the Educational Activities Commission of
ABET. Hodek is also a member of ABETs Applied
Science Accreditation Commission on which he represents ASCE.
Michigan Technological University
Route 2, Box 455
Chassell, MI 49916
Tel: 906-487-2797
Fax: 906-523-4572
Email: rjhodek@mtu.edu
THOMAS A. LENOX, PhD, has over 33 years of experience as a leader, team builder, and manager in
diverse professional and academic environments.
During his 28-year military career, he spent 15 years
on the engineering faculty of the United States Military Academy (USMA) at West Point including five
years as the Director of the Civil Engineering Division. As Director, he supervised 19 faculty in the
ABET-accredited civil engineering program.
Upon his retirement from the U.S. Army on October 1, 1998, Lenox became the Director of the Educational Activities Department for the American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). As Director of
Educational Activities, he led several new educational initiatives collectively labeled as Project ExCEEd (Excellence in Civil Engineering Education).
He continues to be very active in ASEE and other associations which foster teaching excellence and has
written numerous papers, made presentations, and
run workshops dedicated to teaching and teacher
training. Lenox is currently serving as ASCEs Managing Director of Professional and Educational Activities.
He received a BS degree from the USMA, a MS
degree from Cornell University, an MBA degree
from Long Island University, and a PhD from Lehigh
University.
ASCE
1801 Alexander Bell Drive
Reston, VA 20191-4400
Tel: 703-295-6000
Fax: 703-295-6222
Email: tlenox@asce.org
JAMES J. OBRIEN, PE, has over 29 years of experience as a leader, team builder, and manager in diverse professional and academic environments. During his 26-year military career in the US Army Corps
of Engineers, he spent 13 years on the teaching faculty of the United States Military Academy (USMA)
at West Point, the US Armys Command & General
Staff College, and the University of Notre Dame. He
taught numerous engineering mechanics, civil engineering, and leader development courses. OBrien
received a BS degree from USMA and a MS from
Stanford University.
Upon his retirement from the U.S. Army on November 1, 2000, OBrien became the Director of the
Educational Activities Department of ASCE. During
his time with ASCE, he had staff responsibility for
influencing, initiating, and implementing appropriate activities throughout the formal education process of civil engineers. OBrien continued to develop
and refine the educational initiatives of ASCE collectively labeled as Project ExCEEd (Excellence in
Civil Engineering Education). A notable example is
the ExCEEd Teaching Workshop, a nationally recog-
89
90
91
Other Contacts
Jeffrey S. RUSSELL, PE, Chair, ASCE Task Committee on Academic Prerequisites for Professional Practice (TCAP3), Tel: 608-262-7244, Email: russell@engr.wisc.edu.
Members of TCAP3, who served while this BOK
project was being conducted, were:
Richard O. ANDERSON, PE, Email:
Roape1@aol.com.
Norman L. BUEHRING, PE, Email:
normbuehring@msn.com.
Angela DESOTO-DUNCAN, PE, Email:
Angela.L.Desoto@mvn02.usace.army.mil.
John E. DURRANT, PE, Email: jdurrant@asce.org.
Jonathan C. ESSLINGER, Email:
jesslinger@asce.org.
Gerald E. GALLOWAY, Jr., PE, Tel: 571-334-2103,
Email: gerry.galloway@titan.com.
92
APPENDIX C
3 Breadth outcomes
1 Depth
(project management,
outcome
+ construction, and asset
(specialized
management; business
technical area)
and public policy and
administration; and
leadership)
5. The Body of Knowledge (BOK) is the foundationeverything builds on it. The BOK is the
knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to enter the practice of civil engineering at the professional level. The report, Civil Engineering BOK
for the 21st Century: Preparing the Civil Engineer
for the Future is available at www.asce.org/
raisethebar.
Path #1. The B+M path refers to a formal educational program consisting of a baccalaureate
degree and an ABET/EAC accredited masters
degree1 once the proposed dual-level accreditation is implemented. Dual-level accreditation
will allow universities to voluntarily seek ABET/
EAC accreditation for both undergraduate and
graduate programs in the same engineering discipline. While it is not required that the baccalaureate degree (the B within the B+M path) be
an ABET/EAC accredited degree, the masters degree (the M within the B+M path) must be
ABET/EAC accredited. In all cases, the overall
B+M program should lead to the fulfillment of
the requisite Body of Knowledge.
Path #2. The B + 30 path refers to an educational program consisting of an ABET/EAC ac-
93
94
Note
1. Within the context of this document, the various
forms of the term ABET/EAC accredited degrees
refer to engineering degree programs accredited by
ABET and programs commonly considered to be
comparable. Typically, comparable programs have
included Washington Accord programs, Substantially Equivalent programs, and ECEI-assessed
programs. Please see http://www.abet.org for more
information.
APPENDIX D
Number of U. S. Engineers1
1:9
210,000
90%
10%
380,000 resident licenses (2002)
24%
Lists not maintained by discipline;
approximately 50%-60% are licensed CEs;
67% of those taking PE exam take civil exam
81% (36% repeat)
58% (31% repeat)
218 programs (67 private, 148 state, and 3
federal)
35, or 16%
44%and this has been consistent for about
25 years
about 8,500 (2002)
about 35,000 (2002)
22
95
approximately 50%
$36,000 (1999)
$42,300 (1999)
$70,000 (1999)
$90,000 (1999)
2.8%
Sources:
1. National Science Board, Science & Engineering Indicators 2002, Vol. 1, http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind02/start.htm
2. Sanoff, A.P. (2003). Americas Newest Export, Prism, March, 19-23. The top 10 global producers of engineering undergraduate degrees are China (196,340), Japan (103,440), Russia (82,409), U.S. (60,914), South Korea (45,145), Germany
(32,663), India (29,000), France (22,828), United Kingdom (22,012), and Mexico (21,358).
3. Appendix 5-1. Scientists and Engineers in the U.S. Labor Force, by Occupation, Sex, and Highest Degree, http://
www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsf00327/pdf/appb.pdf
4. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/buildingbig/profile/career/civil.html. Other sources of salary data, not used here, include the
NSF database (http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsrca/start.htm) and the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE).
5. http://www.abet.org/
6. AAES (2002), Engineering & Technology Enrollments and Engineering & Technology Degrees.
7. http://nspe.org/lc1-cpc.asp
8. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Recent College Graduates surveys and Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study, First Follow-up survey.
9. http://www.ncees.org/exams/pass_rates/
10. Bruce Kramer, Time to Rethink Engineering Education?, Pres. at Univ. of South Florida, March 6, 2003.
96
APPENDIX E
Bibliography
97
98
99
100
APPENDIX F
101
102
APPENDIX G
103
104
Conference Presentations
BOK Committee members and others participated
in conference sessions devoted or related to the civil
engineering BOK and/or curricula. Active conference participation provided additional opportunities to move stakeholders from awareness to understanding and to solicit input and broaden support.
Conference participation completed or planned is as
follows:
a. June 2002 ASEE Annual Conference, Montreal,
Canada (Lenox, Russell, Walesh).
b. July 2002 Institute for Civil Infrastructure Systems Conference, Glen Cove, NY (Walesh).
c. July 2002 North American Engineering Education Workshop, Cleveland, OH (Russell).
d. October 2002 Global Changes in Engineering
Education International Colloquium, Berlin
(Russell).
e. November 2002, Department Heads Council,
ASCE Annual Conference, Washington, DC
(Russell, Walesh).
f. February 2003, International Conference/Workshop on Engineering Education (Yao Conference), Texas A&M University, College Station,
TX (Russell, Galloway).
g. April 2003, New Mexico Section ASCE, Spring
Meeting, Las Cruces, NM (Walesh).
h. May 2003, ACEC, Annual Convention, Boston,
MA (Walesh).
i. June 2003 ASEE, Annual Conference, Nashville,
TN (Lenox, Russell, Smerdon, Walesh).
j. June 2003, ASEE Engineering Deans Council,
Nashville, TN (Smerdon, Walesh).
k. September 2003, International Congress on Civil
Engineering Education, Spain (Walesh).
l. September 2003, Michigan Section ASCE,
Kalamazoo, MI (Galloway).
m. October 2003, Oklahoma City Branch ASCE,
Oklahoma City, OK (Russell).
n. October 2003, ASCE Committee on Water Resources Certification, Las Vegas, NV (Walesh).
o. November 2003, ASCE Annual Conference,
Nashville, TN (Lenox, Russell, Walesh).
p. November 2003, SunCoast Branch, Florida Section ASCE, Sarasota, FL (Walesh).
q. February 2004, UW-Plateville ASCE Student
Chapter (Russell).
105
APPENDIX H
ABET states that Engineering programs must demonstrate that their graduates have:
(f)
(a)
(g)
(h)
(b)
(c)
(i)
(d)
(j)
(k)
(e)
106
APPENDIX I
1. A Bibliography from the Eberly Center for Teaching Effectiveness at Carnegie Mellon: http://
www.cmu.edu/teaching/documents/bibliography.html
2. An Education Resources Page from a Master Engineering Educator, Richard Felder: http://
www.ncsu.edu/effective_teaching/
3. The National Science Foundation sponsored several Engineering Education Coalitions which
have developed large amounts of material on improving teaching and specific courses. Websites
for the coalitions are:
Gateway: http://www.gatewaycoalition.org
Greenfield:
http://www.mie.eng.wayne.edu/research/greenfield/greenfield.html
SUCCEED: http://www.succeednow.org
Synthesis Coalition:
http://www.synthesis.org
4. The American Society of Civil Engineers ExCEEd
(Excellence in Civil Engineering Education)
Teaching Workshop (ETW) for improved teaching: http://www.asce.org/exceed/
Foundation:
http://www.foundationcoalition.org
107
APPENDIX J
108
Masters of Engineering in
Civil Engineering
Coursework Program option: 30-33 semester course
credits
Design Program option: 20-28 semester course credits, 3-6 thesis semester credits
Timeline: 12 to 18 months
Entrance Degree: bachelors in engineering, mathematics, or science
Example Coursework Program: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Student graduates with a bachelors degree in engineering.
Student completes at least 30 civil engineering
graduate credits.
Student may elect to do a thesis or design project
with 3 or 6 graduate credits.
Masters of Science
Coursework Program option: 30-36 semester course
credits & design project
Thesis Program option: 24-30 semester course credits, 3-6 thesis semester credits
Timeline: 18 to 24 months
Entrance Degree: bachelors degree
Example Thesis Program: University of Central Florida
Student graduates with a bachelors degree in engineering, allied fields, or sciences.
Student completes at least 24 civil engineering
graduate credits in a specific field.
Student demonstrates professional competency
by preparing a research or application thesis
project with at least six graduate thesis credits.
Student will convene a committee and submit for
a final oral examination that will defend the thesis.
Masters of Science in
Engineering Management
Coursework Program option: 33 semester course
credits
Timeline: 24 months
Entrance Degree: bachelors in engineering, mathematics, or science
Example Thesis Program: University of California,
Berkeley
Student graduates with a BSCE.
Student completes at least 24 civil engineering
graduate credits and six graduate credits outside
of the civil engineering department.
Student demonstrates professional competency
by preparing a research or application thesis
project with at least nine graduate thesis credits.
Student will convene a committee and submit for
a final oral examination that will defend the thesis.
109
APPENDIX K
Project Purpose
Engage faculty and institutions with a goal of being
leaders in major educational innovation and reform
in the design of B+M programs that will substantially provide the Body of Knowledge (BOK) needed
to satisfy the educational portion to implement
ASCE Policy Statement 465. That policy states The
American Society of Civil Engineers supports the
concept of the masters degree or equivalent as a prerequisite for licensure and the practice of civil engineering at a professional level.
Project Process
The suggested project process consists of these eight
steps:
1. Identify a small number of diverse civil engineering departments attracted to the opportunity to
lead in the design of B+M programs supportive
of ASCE Policy Statement 465.
2. Inform CE and other faculty, college administrators and possibly others at a particular institution
about ASCE Policy Statement 465, the status of
its implementation, the BOK needed to enter the
practice of civil at the professional level in the
21st century, and the opportunity to lead by developing exemplary B+M curricula.
3. Engage faculty, so that their interests, education
and experience help to refine the BOK and set
the stage for curriculum design and implementation of ASCEs Policy Statement 465.
4. Encourage faculty, as they become aware of the
curricular need and opportunity, to re-examine
the entire current curriculum and then brainstorm ideas, identify possibilities, and create options.
110
3. BOK Committees Moving Toward a Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge for the 21st Century:
Background (one copy for the department)
4. Accreditation Committees strategic issues paper
(one copy for the department)
5. BOK Committees Civil Engineering Body of
Knowledge for the 21st Century: Preparing the
Civil Engineer for the Future (one copy for the department and excerpts for all participants)
6. Other selected presentations, papers, articles, reports, etc.
Workshop Resources
Provide copies of the following for all participants,
except as noted:
1. Hard copies of PowerPoint presentations used
for agenda Items 2 and 3
2. Engineering the Future of Civil Engineering (one
copy for the department)
Questions/Suggestions/Interested in
Participating?
Contact Jeffrey S. Russell, Chair, ASCE Committee
on Academic Prerequisites for Professional Practice,
Tel: 608-262-7244, Email: russell@engr.wisc.edu.
111
APPENDIX L
112
During the fifth graduate/professional year, students take a set of specialized courses in the Higher
Studies Division and earn the Master of Engineering
Degree (M. Eng.). During the first term of the graduate/professional year, a regularly enrolled full-time
student is required to select an approved M.Eng.
thesis topic, and the members of the students thesis
committee.
The five-year total for the BS plus the M. Eng. is
162 semester hours, 132 for the BS and 30 for the M.
Eng. Two specialty areas are offered through the
Higher Studies Division, Facilities Engineering and
Public Works Engineering. Both areas meet ABET
criteria requirements for engineering topics. At the
discretion of the students advisor, certain environmental engineering courses may be substituted to
fulfill program elective requirements for either Facilities Engineering or Public Works Engineering.
Additionally, the department offers Master of Science (MS) and Doctor of Philosophy degrees. The MS
degree is more research oriented than the M. Eng.,
and slightly more difficult to enter. Students must
earn a 2.75 undergraduate grade point average (on 4.0
scale), and earn a combined score of 1000 on verbal
and quantitative portions of Graduate Record Exam.
Curricular requirements for the MS are presented in
Table L-2. UL also offers a joint Master of Engineering/Master of Business Administration program.
Hours
12
12
6
30
Credit
Hours Total
General Education
ENGL 101 College Writing I, 102 College
Writing II
6
CHEM 201 General Chemistry
3
EMCS 101 Engr Analysis I, 360 Prob. & Stats
7
PHYS 295 Intro. Lab I, 298 Mech., Heat & Sound 5
CEE 370 Engineering Hydraulics
401 Civil Engineering Seminar on Professional
Practices
530 Construction Materials
9
Arts, Humanities, Social & Cultural Studies
15
General Engineering Studies Division
CHEM 203 Gen. Chem. Lab I
1
EG 105 Engineering Graphics I
1
EMCS 102 Engr. Analysis II, 104 Computer
Algebra
5
GES 100 Campus Culture
1
PHYS 299 Intro. Electricity, Magnetism
And Light
4
Basic Studies Division
CEE 201 Programming for CEE
205 Mechanics I: Statics
254 Mechanics of Solids
255 Mechanics of Materials Laboratory
260 Civil Engineering Field Measurements
288 Civil Engineering Co-op Seminar
289 Civil Engineering Co-op Internship I
320 Fundamentals of Structural Analysis
360 Transportation Systems Engineering
389 Civil Engineering Co-op Internship II
400 Applications in Civil Engineering Program
402 Professional Seminar in Civil Engineering
421 Fundamentals of Concrete Design
422 Fundamentals of Steel Design
450 Geomechanics
470 Surfaces Water Hydrology
471 Water Supply and Sewerage
488 Civil Engineering Co-op Internship III
551 Foundation Engineering
45
CHEM 202 Gen Chem II
3
Program Elective (CEE 420 Matrix Structural
Analysis or 460 Transportation Systems
Design)
3
EE 252 Intro to Electrical Engineering
3
EG 214 Computer Graphics
1
EMCS 201 Engr. Analysis, 205 Matrix Methods,
307 Numerical Methods, 330 Linear Algebra 10
GEOS 201 Physical Geology, 203 Physical
Geology Lab
4
IE 570 Engr. Design Economics
3
ME 206 Dynamics
3
Minimum Total (from above Divisions)
Course Name
Total
45
12
75
132
Minimum Total
A regularly enrolled full-time student is required to select an approved M. Eng thesis topic and the members of the thesis committee
during the first term of the graduate/ professional year. Non-thesis option is available and requires 600-level Civil and Environmental
Engineering courses to replace 6 credit hours of CEE697.
2
Both specialty areas meet the engineering topics criteria of the ABET/EAC.
3
The five-year total for the M. Eng. degree is 162 semester hours.
113
APPENDIX M
Introduction
This appendix does not constitute a committee recommendation but instead was created to stimulate
discussion of possible ways to validate fulfillment of
the BOK. Once the BOK is fully defined and accepted, the challenge will be to match an individuals
record against the defined BOK, and make a judgment as to whether or not the individual has met the
requirements. The BOK Committee hopes that these
future-oriented ideas will serve as a catalyst for creation of other possible approaches to a difficult issue.
The committee believes that there will be many
approaches and that ultimately state-licensing
boards will adopt the approaches that best meet
their needs. As discussion of the increased educational requirements continues, the committee expects to engage the breadth of experience that exists
within ASCE and the engineering community in
dealing with this challenge. The committee does not
expect that ASCE or state licensing boards will immediately adopt one approach or another, rather
that as the dialogue continues, the most appropriate
approach can be developed.
The Challenge
As the explanation of the B+M/30&E process in Appendix C indicates, there may be many paths to fulfilling the BOK. While the Committee expects that the
majority of civil engineers seeking licensing will follow a path that leads from an ABET/EAC-accredited
baccalaureate through an accredited, engineering
masters degree, it does recognize that many may pursue fulfillment of the BOK through post-baccalaureate, non-degree, course work; that many may come
into civil engineering following graduation from nonABET baccalaureate programs; or that many may
114
Table M-1. Various means may be available to validate fulfillment of the BOK
Undergraduate
ABET Related Degree Programs
1. ABET-accredited BS; Washington
Accord
2. Non-ABET; accredited BS; TAC/ABET
accredited Engineering Technology BS
3. ABET-accredited BS
Non-ABET or Non-Degree Programs
4. ABET-accredited BS
5. Non-ABET accredited BS; other
Engineering programs
6. Non-ABET accredited degree
Post-Graduate
Validating Means
ABET-accredited masters
ABET university
ABET-accredited masters
(program satisfies BOK)
ABET university
ECEI
The above entries represent the most likely cases; however, there are other combinations that could be considered.
115
116
Non-ABET B+30
Some individuals possessing a non-ABET bachelors
degree in engineering may wish to pursue attainment of the BOK through the 30 credit hour route.
The difficulties described in the previous section
would be exacerbated with this combination. While
obtaining the BOK by this approach is theoretically
possible, based on the complexities of evaluating
non-standard programs, validation or certification
of such programs would appear to be an action that
would be taken on a very exceptional basis. Such validation would most logically be accomplished by the
ECEI. Individuals should be discouraged from following this path.
No Quick Fix
As with all parts of the movement to increased education as a licensing prerequisite, options like those
described above would not be instituted overnight.
Each would have to be carefully examined and carefully discussed with NCEES and, eventually, state licensing boards.
Notes
1. The evaluation of courses from different programs and institutions is carried out as a routine
part of modern higher education. The Joint Statement on the Transfer and Award of Credit issued by
the American Association of Collegiate Registrars
and Admissions Officers, the American Council on
Education, and the Council for Higher Education
Accreditation notes that, it is important for reasons of social equity and educational effectiveness
for all institutions to develop reasonable and definitive procedures for the acceptance of and transfer of credit among institutions. With the development of appropriate guidelines, organizations such
as the ASCE could carry out the validation (and certification) of non-standard programs that seek to
satisfy the BOK.
2. The Washington Accord is an agreement between the bodies responsible for accrediting professional engineering degree programs in Australia,
Canada, Ireland, Hong Kong, New Zealand, South
Africa, United Kingdom, and the United States. It
recognizes the substantial equivalency of programs
accredited by those bodies, and recommends that
graduates of accredited programs in any of the signatory countries be recognized by the other countries as having met the academic requirements for
entry to the practice of engineering.
3. Canadian Engineers Qualifications Board. 1995.
Canadian Council of Professional Engineers Interpretation Guide: Assessing the Suitability of Engineering Experience of Candidates Being Considered
for Admission to the Practice of Engineering in
Canada and Structured Engineer-in-Training Programs.
117
APPENDIX N
1.
2.
3.
4.
118
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10. Provide a final report documenting the Curricula Committees work and results.
11. Complete the preceding in two years.
Notes
7. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology. 2002. Criteria for Accrediting Engineering
Programs. Baltimore, MD.
8. Maxwell, J. C. 2003. Thinking For A Change.
New York, Warner Books.
9. Peck, M. S. 1997. The Road Less Traveled and Beyond: Spiritual Growth in an Age of Anxiety. New
York. Simon and Schuster.
10. Hill, N. 1960. Think and Grow Rich. New York.
Fawcett Crest Book.
11. Allen, J. (no date). As a Man Thinketh. White
Plains, NY. Peter Pauper Press.
12. Murphy, J. 1963. The Power of Your Subconscious
Mind. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall.
13. For a similar view, see Angelides, D. C. 2003.
From the Present to the Future of Civil Engineering Education in Europe: A Strategic Approach, Proceedings of the International Meeting
in Civil Engineering Education, Ciudad Real,
Spain, September. (Advocates a European civil
engineering educational system that provides
civil engineers with a set of knowledge, skills and
attitudes needed to meet societal needs.)
14. The United States Military Academy strives to
have students understand, internalize and act on
constructive attitudes. See: U. S. Military Academy, 2002. Cadet Leader Development System.
West Point, NY.
15. ASCE Task Committee on Civil Engineering
Specialty Certification. 2003. Report of the Task
Committee on Civil Engineering Specialty Certification, September.
16. Russell, J. and W. Stouffer. 2002. An Analysis of
Existing Civil Engineering Programs, presented
at the International Conference/Workshop on
Engineering Education honoring Professor
James T.P. Yao, Texas A&M University, College
Station, TX, February 21 & 22, 2003.
17. www.dlrn.org/
18. www.ocw.mit.edu
19. Tsai, S. and P. Machado. E-learning, Online
Learning, Web-based Learning, or Distance
Learning: Unveiling the Ambiguity in Current
119
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
Terminology
Elearn
Magazine
2001
(elearnmag.org).
MIT. Using Technology to Melt Educational
Boundaries. Open Door, Ideas and Voices from
MIT, November 2000 (alumweb.mit.edu/opendoor/200011/).
fuqua.duke.edu/admin/
Mangan, K. 2002. Colleges in 16 Countries
Work to Create Virtual Medical School. Chronicle of Higher Education, Chronicle Daily News,
Wednesday, October 9.
www.gradinfo.ce.gatech.edu/distance_learning
www.pdsc.usace.army.mil
www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov
Roesner, L. and S. Walesh. 1998. Corporate
University: Consulting Firm Case Study. Journal of Management and Engineering ASCE.
March/April.
Brewer, M. PBS&J University. Personal communication, September 2002.
ASCE 2002. Continuing Education Fall/Winter
2002-03. Reston, VA.
For an example, see www.aticourses.com
www.detc.org
www.iacet.org
National Council of Examiners for Engineering
and Surveying. 2003. Report of the Engineering
Licensure Qualifications Task Force. A Task Force
of the NCEES.
Massie, W. W. 2003. An Industrys Guide to the
Offshore Engineering Curriculum. Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.
(Massies graph presents knowledge and skill
(similar to the knowledge, skills, and attitudes in
this report) on the vertical axis, using four
knowledge levels (similar to the three competence levels in this report). Stages of a project
(e.g., set design criteria, select best solution) appear on Massies horizontal axis. The space defined by the two axes shows the origin (e.g.,
bachelors degree, masters degree) of the knowledge levels and project stages.)
ASCE. 1995. Summary Report 1995 Civil Engineering Education Conference (CEEC 95).
Adelman. 1998. Women and Men of the Engineering Path: A Model for Analysis of Undergraduate Careers, U.S. Department of Education,
Washington, DC.
Astin, A. W., and Astin, H. S. 1993. Undergraduate Science Education: The Impact of Different
College Environments on the Educational Pipeline
of the Sciences. Los Angeles Higher Education
Resource Institute, UCLA
Boyer, E.L. 1990. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of The Professoriate, A Special Report. The
120
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.