E D U C A T I O N
Education for Civil Engineering:
A Profession of Practice
M E R L I N K I R S C H E N M A N , P. E . , C . P. C . , M . A S C E ; A N D B R I A N B R E N N E R , P. E .
Recently there has been considerable
discussion about improving the civil
engineering education process. This col-
umn will attempt to look at many
aspectsofhowthecivilengineeringedu-
cation process can be improved. The col-
umn will provide a forum for anyone to
contribute their ideas or comment on
the essays that are published in this
space.Wearehopingtogetconsiderable
input from practicing civil engineers.
Additional input from the total body of
civil engineers may add a broader per-
spective to the discussions and the
results.
It is interesting to compare engineer-
ing education to education for many
other professions over the past several
decades. Many of these other professions
have added one or more years to the edu-
cation requirement. Engineering has
held onto the four-year bachelor’s degree
for about 100 years, while other pro-
fessions have adjusted their education
requirements to meet the challenges of
the times. In addition to having a stag-
nant four-year entry requirement to
become an engineer, during the past
50 years many universities have
reduced the civil engineering curricu-
lum an equivalent of one semester’s
worth of technical courses. During this
same 50-year period, the practice com-
ponent of civil engineering education
has been overshadowed by the increased
emphasisonresearch.
Engineering is a profession of prac-
tice. By definition engineering is the
application of science and mathematics
to building projects for the use of society.
Unfortunately, the current system dis-
courages engineering faculty from
actively participating in practice. In
some evaluations, practical experience is
considered a distraction or worse for jun-
Downloaded 03 Jan 2010 to 193.140.201.71. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyright
I N P R A C T I C E
ior faculty seeking to achieve tenure.
Facultymemberswithoutadequatepro-
fessional practical experience are operat-
ing at a serious handicap trying to teach
a profession of practice. To be a profes-
sional engineer one must be competent
inthepracticalsideofengineering.
The intent of this column is to gener-
ate discussion and a lot of good ideas
regarding how to improve the profes-
sion, especially civil engineering educa-
tion. Once the vision is developed for
what a civil engineer is to be, leadership
and project management principles
should be applied to assure the desired
outcomesareachieved.
Some of the topics we wish to con-
sideranddiscussinthiscolumnare:
1. Was the civil engineering cur-
riculum reduced by a semester-
equivalent of technical courses
over the past 50 years because
of: market requirements, lack of
resources, lack of vision and
leadership, or some other com-
bination of reasons?
2. How has the civil engineering
education system developed so
that practical experience for uni-
versity teachers is not encour-
aged? You would not want your
medical doctor taught by some-
one who had only read about
but could not perform a proce-
dure. Why should engineering
be different?
3. What criteria or systematic
changes should be made to cre-
ate incentives for faculty to be-
come competent in the practical
side of engineering? Many fac-
ulties consider practical experi-
ence a detriment to advance-
ment, possibly because the
evaluation criteria used for fac-
JANUARY 2010 䊏
54 Leadership and Management in Engineering
ulty promotion and tenure con-
sideration gives no credit for
practical experience. This crite-
rion has not served the engineer-
ing profession very well and
should be revised. Promotion
and tenure criteria should sup-
port the engineering profession
not work against it. In a previ-
ous journal article, Kirschenman
共2008兲 discusses the importance
of faculty having practical engi-
neering experience and proposes
some approaches to faculty de-
velopment that would assist
educators in obtaining that ex-
perience.
4. How do other countries manage
the practice component of civil
engineering education? Are fac-
ulty members better acknowl-
edged for their practical engi-
neering experience?
5. Faculties are under extreme
pressure to develop a research
program. Research accomplish-
ments are the main qualification
criteria used for promotion and
tenure considerations. Where is
the evidence that this approach
is beneficial for the faculty and
or the engineering profession?
6. What is the main benefit of fac-
ulty research to the engineering
education process and to the
preparation of graduate engi-
neers? Should faculty concen-
trate on basic or applied re-
search?
7 Research faculty members who
are not interested in engineer-
ing—the application of science
and mathematics to projects for
the benefit of society—should
be assigned a different category.
 E D U C A T I O N
Perhaps call them scientific re-
search faculty but not engineer-
ing faculty. There is always a
need for basic scientific research.
8. ASCE’s “Raise the Bar” effort
has been involved in improving
the engineering education pro-
cess for approximately 10 years.
In the summer of 2008 they
published the Body of Knowledge
for the 21st Century, second edi-
tion. This should be reviewed
for any significant additions or
corrections.
9. The National Academy of Engi-
neering 共NAE兲 recommends
adding a significant amount of
technical breadth, nontechnical
knowledge, and some technical
specialization to the current re-
quirements for a bachelor’s of
science in engineering. They
recommend taking five years to
reach this education objective.
NAE also recommends that the
first engineering degree be a
master’s and the bachelor’s
would then be a preliminary en-
gineering degree. What would
it take to get to that point?
10. The book Winner Take All, How
Competitiveness Shapes the Fate of
Nations, discusses the relation-
ship the education system has to
a nations’ culture and business
environment. Education sys-
tems support this environment
but do not establish it. Some
relevant comments are: “The
education system is not a lead-
ing indicator of national com-
petitiveness but a lagging indi-
cator. It reflects rather than
anticipates the national vision. It
will not succeed any better than
the economic and political sys-
tem it is designed to sup-
port…” “Key participants in
the education system can sug-
gest to business and political
leaders that they consider vari-
ous alternatives; for example,
Leadership and Management in Engineering
Downloaded 03 Jan 2010 to 193.140.201.71. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyright
I N P R A C T I C E
the education community con-
stantly comments on the need
for more emphasis on math and
science. In the long run, how-
ever, the direction on the na-
tion’s technology, products, and
markets will not be set by the
education system but by the po-
litical, economic, and business
leaders of the country. Like any
organization, the education sys-
tem responds to the quality of
its leadership” 共Elkus Jr. 2008兲.
It appears that what has been
missing and what needs to oc-
cur in the engineering educa-
tion system, is for industry to
provide strong leadership to the
education system and establish
the requirement for better edu-
cated and prepared engineering
graduates. This requirement
would create a market for better
prepared engineering graduates.
Without this market, any
education-led efforts to better
prepare engineering graduates
likely would not be sustainable.
Once this market exists for bet-
ter educated and prepared engi-
neers, the education system will
respond and support it.
11. In the distant past, engineers
functioned more as master
builders. On what basis has en-
gineering education changed to
prepare a graduate engineer to
be more of a technician and
problem solver, than a profes-
sional engineer who is also a
leader? We need to return the
engineer to hold the respect the
public had for engineers at that
time.
12. We need to change the public’s
perception of engineers from be-
ing just problem solvers to be-
ing professionals who can lead
the public discussions and iden-
tify what problems society
should resolve.
13. We need to develop the non-
䊏
55 JANUARY 2010
technical side of engineering as
well as the technical side. Engi-
neers must be prepared to be
leaders in society.
14. What are the best ways to teach
young engineers to be leaders?
15. How to develop meaningful
and mutually beneficial indus-
try/faculty interaction. This
should be more than a social re-
lationship. Faculty and industry
engineers should be able to step
into each others shoes. Both the
education and practicing com-
ponents of civil engineering are
subcomponents of the overall
system of civil engineering.
Both components are stronger
when they support each other
while at the same time support-
ing the system of civil engineer-
ing. Therefore, it is difficult to
comprehend how education
would benefit by isolating edu-
cation from the practical side of
engineering.
16. Should the civil engineering
department industry advisory
boards be more active in devel-
oping criteria for the employ-
ment, promotion, and tenure of
faculty?
17. The use of project-based teach-
ing-learning methods in the
classroom.
18. The use of engineering design as
the core theme in every semes-
ter, starting with the first semes-
ter as a freshman.
19. Other relevant topics.
We invite the engineering public to
submit their ideas on the education of
civil engineers, and to also comment on
any topics that have been discussed.
Together we can make significant
improvements to the engineering edu-
cation process and restore engineers’
capability to be leaders of the public dis-
cussions related to society’s projects. We
look forward to some interesting and
thought provoking comments. Com-
ments can be sent to Brian Brenner, edi-
 E D U C A T I O N I N P R A C T I C E

tor of this journal, or to Merlin Kir-
schenman.
REFERENCES
Elkus, R. J., Jr. 共2008兲. Winner take all,
how competitiveness shapes the fate of
nations, Basic Books, New York.
Kirschenman, M. 共2008兲. “Importance
of practical and professional experi-
ence for engineering faculty.” Lead-
ership Manage. Eng., 8共1兲, 6–7.
Merlin Kirschenman is a profes-
sor emeritus and former chair of the
Construction Management and
Construction Engineering depart-
ment at North Dakota State Univer-
sity. He can be contacted via e-mail
at:m.kirschenman@ndsu.edu.
Brian Brenner is an associate at
Fay Spofford & Thorndike in Burl-
ington, Massachusetts. He can be
contacted by e-mail at: bbrenner@
fstinc.com.

JANUARY 2010 䊏
56 Leadership and Management in Engineering

Downloaded 03 Jan 2010 to 193.140.201.71. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright; see http://pubs.asce.org/copyright