The emphasis in engineering courses is often on describing complex systems through mathematical and physical concepts. What is not covered may be teaching students a lesson as well.
When studying engineering, students must take many non-technical courses such as art, history, ethics, and sociology. Many times students wonder why they have to take non-engineering classes. That raises the question, “What is an engineering class?”
As reported by IEEE Spectrum, engineering graduates are less concerned about public welfare than when they started. With the integration of technology and society increasing at an accelerating pace, human factors are an essential component.
The finding comes from a Rice University report which blames a "culture of disengagement" in engineering education as the driver of this apathetic view of public welfare.
As described by Erin Cech, an assistant professor of sociology at Rice University, "I think the one-class or one-credit ethics course approach, which is bracketed off from what is seen by some as the 'real' (technical) engineering content, may be part of the problem."
The suggestion is to integrate social issues throughout the curriculum so that they are not seen as a side note, but a pervasive challenge.
The study surveyed engineering students from four universities with different structures. The four consisted of a premier technical school, a large, public university, an engineering-only school and a women-only liberal arts college. The difference between graduates from these schools? Not much.
The women-only college showed the highest concern for public welfare and the technical school the least. Even though the liberal arts college emphasized social elements to a greater degree, the increased focus did not prevent the disconnect.
As Cech explained, "One possibility is just a general development of cynicism of young adults. However, if engineering education is serious about producing students who express concern for public welfare, then the fact that engineering education does not appear to counteract the development of such cynicism is similarly problematic."
Weaving social concepts into already crammed engineering curriculum is not an easy task. Social concerns and challenges vary so much that one educator may think a particular aspect is more important than another.
In general, I don’t think it is the role of colleges to educate students how to care about people. This is something that should be engrained in the years before they arrive. Examining the ways engineering can impact society, however, is a very good thing.
The role engineering should not be perceived just as creating the next entertaining gadget, but also a means to solving water purity problems in a third-world country. Both are important, but the former tends to have a more “glamorous” appeal.
Even so, the design focus doesn’t need to be only on the device or component. It should also be on how it will impact the user. For better or worse.
Image courtesy of http://exps.org/contact/