Posted on 06/02/2006 12:10:29 PM PDT by stainlessbanner
You decide.
follow-up from previous articles
who would have an interest in lying about this and making us think they are a great resource pool? hmmm..
"who would have an interest in lying about this and making us think they are a great resource pool? hmmm.."
The Left and the MSM tear down the U. S. and build up China at every opportunity. It is ridiculous. China is a primitive and backward nation that has made remarkable progress in recent years---but is still a primitive and backward nation.
Take an example. Chinese per capita income doubled in the 1990s. Doubled! Now, the US had a good decade in the 1990s, one of the five or six biggest booms in American history, but our per capita income percentage increase was a tiny fraction of China's! Why, if current levels of increased continue, China will pass the US up quickly!
Now the fact: per capita income in China increased from $300 a person a year in $1990 to $600 a person a year in 2000. That means over 10 year period, per capita income in China increased by a whopping $300. If that happened in the US, we would be in a major depression. Admittedly, this is a wonderful thing for China. All over China, people can now afford bicycles. That really is a big improvement.
But the idea that China is moving to overtake us would be a laughable joke---were it not part of a extensive tissue of lies woven by the MSM to make United States look like it's some kind of backwater, loser nation.
Good thing we don't think of an engineer that way.
Engineering education needs to intersect social sciences and humanities to get to that point. "Whatever country does that first will create a citizenry that's able to address the problems of the world in a more holistic context," Johnson said.
The new engineering "addresses the problems of the world holistically." Engineering as political science. Hippie talk BS.
All I know is that my nephew is in engineering and will graduate next year having earned straight A's, if he continues how he started. We have some brilliant kids out there.
But will they be able to design and build a bridge?
Maybe we'll be using virtual bridges by then, so it won't matter.
Can anyone tell me why engineers need to have a public policy perspective of their work ?
Can't you see the fate of, say, the newly-invented transistor if some engineer had decided that it was contrary to public policy ?
Do we live in China or the US of A ?
It's OK - it will make us feel better knowing the engineers were motivated by the holistic context of their work.
See Atlas Shrugged - Ayn Rand sure pegged this dean.
Engineering education needs to intersect social sciences and humanities to get to that point. "Whatever country does that first will create a citizenry that's able to address the problems of the world in a more holistic context," Johnson said.
One of the major reasons I went into engineering was because I wasn't forced to take the BS classes every other major was required to take. This happened because to graduate an engineer, I needed too many technical classes. We were still taking 20 credits a semester without all the humanities etc. I'm very thankful my mind wasn't polluted, but strengthened by engineering.
If they try to do as she says, engineering will either turn into a 6 year major, or will turn into another fluff degree.
One thing that I can stand about those types of classes is it is an easy A. It does balance out some of my lower grades in such classes like Quantum Chemistry, Advanced Quantiative Analysis. (Chemistry, Close enough to engineering).
It all depends on what your definition of engineer is.
In both China, India and USA only some engineers are technical. Here in software IT land, there are many "engineers" who are not doing technical work designing or writing code. They are managing, coordinating, facilitating and otherwise "engineering people and the process" not the product.
I am increasingly coming to believe that the increase in IT coordinators and facilitators who waste the time of the productive people is a direct result of the feminization of our culture to be sensitive to feelings rather than be sensitive to facts and logic.
We can't mention that a program has a logic error because it would hurt the programmer's feelings... and if that programmer is a woman, minority, or other special category it would create a hostile work environment to point out a logic bug.
I have a relative who is a highly-regarded engineer, and I was shocked when he described how thorough his education was back in the early 1960s.
If they try to do as she says, engineering will either turn into a 6 year major . . .
For all intents and purposes, it already is. Most major engineering societies in the U.S. recognize a master's degree as a base standard of competence for professional practice in engineering.
In other words, we need engineers, and scientists too, to take more liberal arts courses so they can be indoctrinated away from the cold, hard facts of their disciplines and be more 'open' to the liberal agenda.
That's a good point. I'll take another spin at what you said. Technology and industry has progressed so much that a master's degree is needed to just understand and work in the areas we currently develop in.
btw...what do you mean by 'focus on specialized subject areas'?
Thank you for the ping.
"Engineering education needs to intersect social sciences and humanities to get to that point. "Whatever country does that first will create a citizenry that's able to address the problems of the world in a more holistic context," Johnson said."
I will have to ask my newly electrical engineering graduate what he thinks about this idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.