Salt Lake City, Utah
June 20, 2004
June 20, 2004
June 23, 2004
9.825.1 - 9.825.28
Issues Driving Reform of Faculty Reward Systems to Advance Professional Graduate Engineering Education: Expectations For Core Professional Faculty D. A. Keating,1 T. G. Stanford,1 J. M. Snellenberger,2 D. H. Quick,2 I. T. Davis,3 J. P. Tidwell,4 A. L. McHenry,5 D. R. Depew,6 S. J. Tricamo,7 D. D. Dunlap 8
University of South Carolina 1/ Rolls-Royce Corporation 2 / Raytheon Missile Systems 3 The Boeing Company 4/Arizona State University East 5/ Purdue University 6 New Jersey Institute of Technology 7/ Western Carolina University 8
This is the fourth paper in the special panel session focusing on issues driving reform of faculty reward systems to advance professional engineering education for creative engineering practice and leadership of technological innovation to enhance U.S. competitiveness. This paper explores the conceptual beginnings of a template for improved faculty reward systems that better reflect the practice of engineering for full- time, tenure track professionally oriented faculty in schools of engineering and technology.
1. Background and History
The United States has built an excellent system of research-oriented graduate education that is second to none for the education of future engineering faculty and scientific researchers, and an excellent system of undergraduate education as preparation for entry into engineering practice, nevertheless a major reform in the U.S. system of engineering graduate education in context, organization, and culture to build complementary graduate programs of an advanced professional nature that enhance creative engineering practice for technology development and leadership of innovation in industry is needed.
Since implementation of the Vannevar Bush report (Science: The Endless Frontier) of 1945,1 which was followed by increased federal funding to accelerate the advancement of science, the nation’s schools of engineering have placed an increased emphasis on high-quality graduate education for academic scientific research. During this same time period, however, U.S. engineering education has not placed similar emphasis on high-quality professionally oriented graduate education for creative engineering practice and leadership of technology development and innovation in industry. Engineering graduate education in the United States has emerged primarily as a byproduct of academic scientific research,2 yielding organizational cultures and faculty reward systems that predominantly support the pursuit of academic scientific research.
2. Urgency for Reform of Professional Engineering Education for Practice
There is growing national awareness that the urgency for reform of engineering education exists not only at the basic level of undergraduate engineering education (as preparation for entry into engineering practice), but also at the advanced level of professional graduate engineering education to further the lifelong learning, growth, and development of graduate engineers after entry into engineering practice in industry. The ASEE Corporate Members Council and the Graduate Studies Division have established a National Collaborative Task Force for Engineering Graduate Education Reform to answer this call for reform of graduate engineering education, to better meet the needs of working engineers in industry, to stimulate technology innovation, and to enable a strong U.S. engineering workforce for competitiveness.3
“Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2004, American Society for Engineering Education”
Thomas, S., & Keating, D. (2004, June), Issues Driving Reform Of Faculty Reward Systems To Advance Professional Graduate Engineering Education: Expectations For Core Professional Faculty Paper presented at 2004 Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah. https://peer.asee.org/13718
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2004 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015