Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
Executive Summary
Introduction
The Committee on the Education and Utilization of the Engineer
(CLUE) established the Panel on Infrastructure Diagramming and
Modeling to carry out the following activities:
· study the structure and dynamics of the engineering community;
· assess in quantitative terms the engineering community its
past, present, and future;
· assess the underlying driving forces and causes that influence both
entrance into and exit from that community;
· identify the sources from which the community draws its mem-
bers and those predictors and relationships that would lee useful in
assessing the state of the engineering profession; and
· arrive at findings, conclusions, and recommendations with regard
to these matters.
In order to achieve itS mission expeditiously the panel undertook five
major tasks, which are described briefly below.
1. Defining Engineering Early in the panel's work, it became
apparent that many organizations, societies, and government agencies
have their own definitions of engineering. Also, different engineering
studies and data bases use different definitions in arriving at conclu-
sions. It also became clear that new developments in engineering had
1
OCR for page 2
2
INFRASTRUCTURE DIAGMMMING AND MODELING
rendered some of the older definitions obsolete. It was therefore impor-
tant for the work of this panel and of the whole committee that a
common definition be provided.The definition eventually formulated
See Chapter 1) comprises engineering, the engineering community,
and the engineer, as well as engineering support groups.
2. Determining Influences on the Engineering Community The
panel studied both past and possible future influences on the engineer-
ing community to establish their likely effects on the structure of
engineering and on its population See Chapter 2J.
3. Diagramming The panel considered a schematic flow diagram
to be essential in understanding the complexity and dynamics of the
engineering community. Basing its efforts on the definitions it had
developed, the panel gave a great deal of attention to formulating a
comprehensive diagram. The diagram it produced includes the major
sources, flows, and activities of the engineering community and repre-
sents a realistic assessment of the complexity and interaction of this
community. The diagram has various levels of detail {see Chapter 3J.
4. Modeling As a further aid in understanding the dynamics of the
engineering community, a simplified model was developed to study
current and near-term causal relationships. Models sponsored by the
National Science Foundation {NSF were used to gain further insight
into current and near-term relationships and to study long-term rela-
tionships and effects. The panel's modeling work consisted of two
parts: ~ 1 J an evaluation and critique of existing approaches to modeling;
and {2J development of a simple, first-order model The "CLUE model")
of the engineering community to permit exploration of "what-if" types
of questions with regard to supply and demand See Chapter 4J.
Readers should note that the CEUE model is used in a simplistic
predictive fashion, and caution must be exercised not to attribute accu-
racy beyond the model's intended capabilities.
5. Analyzing Data Bases The panel undertook a thorough analysis
of existing and relevant data bases in an effort to determine the size of
the engineering community and to provide a source of data for trend
analysis. Such quantitative data analysis was needed to identify trends
and changes that are important in assessing the supply, demand, and
utilization of members of the community. J The data base sources were
then used to quantify the major parameters, stocks, and flows of the
diagram referred to above. The panel's work focused on compatibility
and consistency among data leases, as well as on their completeness
{see Chapter 5~.
OCR for page 3
EXE C UTIVE S UMMAR Y
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
3
The findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the panel are
presented below. Where possible, they are organized to parallel the
major tasks of the panel; however, many derive from the insights
gained from multiple and diverse viewpoints considered lay the panel.
Engineering and the Engineering Community
There is considerable diversity of opinion among individuals,
groups, and organizations on what constitutes engineering and what
criteria should lee used for a quantitative assessment of the engineering
pool. Once the panel had chosen and applied criteria, however, the
engineering community was found to lie larger than merely the sum of
persons with engineering degrees. In fact, the engineering community
contains significant numbers of
· individuals with baccalaureate or higher degrees in science and
mathematics who have acquired status as engineers;
· people whose highest degree is an associate engineering degree or a
technologist degree and who have acquired status through experience
as engineers or as engineering technicians or technologists; and
· individuals who over years of experience and/or noncollegiate
training have acquired the skills and knowledge to do Mona fide engi-
neering work.
Furthermore, the practice of engineering is split among many disci-
plines, not all of which share a common technology lease. Also, many
engineering tasks now are multidisciplinary; computer science, sys-
tems analysis, lousiness administration, economics, psychology, and
other knowledge areas may play major roles in both the engineering
problem statement and its solution. In addition to this new multidis-
ciplinary environment is the fact that the engineering community is in
a continuous state of flux the tasks of engineering, its boundaries, and
its tools are changing.
As a result of these findings, the panel concluded that any definition,
model, survey, or data base must recognize and encompass the diver-
sity of engineering. And so must programs aimed at the education or
enhancement of the engineering profession.
Thus, the panel recommends that the National Academy of Engi-
neering and the National Science Foundation, in cooperation with the
Engineering Manpower Commission and the professional engineering
societies, develop continuing programs to heighten public, govern-
ment, and industrial awareness of the importance of engineering to
OCR for page 4
4
INFRASTRUCTURE DIAGRAMMING AND MODELING
U. S. technological competitiveness and the need for an adequate sup-
ply of highly qualified engineers. Furthermore, these organizations
should develop the necessary data and analytical tools to permit con-
tinuing analysis of the engineering profession in order to provide infor-
mation on which educational institutions, engineering societies,
government agencies, and industries may base decisions and actions.
Definitions: Engineers, Engineering, and
the Engineering Community
There is wide variability across the engineering community regard-
ing the meaning of the terms engineer and engineering. From the stand-
point of the educational system, the primary criterion is the degree
granted; in the workplace, however, job content and performance are
most important.
The lack of commonly accepted definitions of engineer and engineer-
ing complicates the collection, reporting, and analysis of data pertain-
ing to the quantity and quality of engineers and others involved in
engineering-related work. Existing data strongly reflect this defini-
tional ambiguity. In addition, current definitions do not adequately
describe the larger community of engineering, which includes those
involved directly in the engineering enterprise, those acting in a sup-
port capacity, and those potentially qualified for engineering-related
work but not now so engaged.
The panel concluded that a comprehensive, commonly accepted def-
inition is necessary as a basis for describing the engineering commu-
nity in broad terms. Such a definition is also essential to permit the
accurate collection, display, and analysis of data about the profession.
Finally, it is a prerequisite for reaching appropriate decisions that will
affect the engineering community.
The panel also concluded that any definition of engineers, engineer-
ing, and the engineering community must simultaneously encompass
the mission/philosophy, credentialing, function, and context of opera-
tion in which engineering is performed. It must anticipate and allow for
the development and addition of new technology and new branches of
engineering, as well as the decline of existing ones.
As a result of these findings, the panel recommends that the defini-
tions presented in Chapter 1 of this report be accepted by the engineer-
ing community and used as the basis for data collection, reporting, and
analysis by all organizationsinvolvedin such activity.
OCR for page 5
EXE C UTIVE S UMMAR Y
Forces Affecting the Engineering Community
5
Graduates of four- and five-year engineering programs constitute the
single major source of personnel to fill new engineering job openings.
However, the increasing utilization of two-year pre-engineering pro-
grams in community colleges has had a significant influence on the size
of the engineering community and on the demand for four- and five-
year engineering education. Among the external forces affecting flows
into the engineering community, the size and quality of the high school
graduating pool have had a significant influence.
The panel also found that there is considerable supply elasticity for
the engineering community. For example, there are large numbers of
engineers without engineering degrees, who presumably entered the
engineering labor force when demand was high. There also appears to
be a large " strategic reserve" represented by those who have qualified as
members of the engineering community in the past but who either left
the profession entirely or, more likely, are currently engaged in mana-
gerial and engineering support activities.
Other forces with significant influence on the practice of engineering
and on flows into, within, and out of the engineering community are
social factors [public attitudes); economic factors Compensation for
engineers, availability of capital for investments; political factors {e.g.,
public policy, regulation; and technological factors Rate of obsoles-
cence of engineers, discovery of new technologies, and the need for
increased productivity. A factor of special interest that is having a
growing influence on the engineering community is the emerging
interest of women and minorities in engineering as a career. In addi-
tion, the supply of people for the engineering faculty pool is limited by
the stringent credentials for admittance. This situation is compounded
by the observed decline in the relative number of U.S. Ph.D.s and the
proportion of those who enter teaching at the undergraduate and grad-
uate levels.
Imbalances between supply and demand created by sudden or unan-
ticipated changes are redressed by a combination of events: increased
production from the engineering education system, sometimes at the
expense of changing admission and graduation standards; flows from
the reserve and support pools; and flows from the hard and soft sciences
and other sources.
Historically, adjustments by the engineering community to tne
.
forces affecting it appear to have been roughly adequate in most
instances to meet technological challenges and the needs of society.
OCR for page 6
6
INFRASTRUCTURE DIAGRAMMING AND MODELING
However, because of increasingly rapid changes in technology and
related industrial and societal pressures, as well as increasing competi-
tion from abroad, the panel concludes that industry, government, and
the engineering profession must pay continuous and close attention to
the internal and external forces affecting the size and capability of the
engineering community in the United States.
Based on the considerations delineated alcove, the panel recom-
mends that
· engineering societies at state andlocallevels urge state education
departments and local school boards to establish and implement ade-
quate math and science curriculum standards to prepare qualified stu-
dents for entryinto college engineering programs without the need for
remedial work;
· the engineering societies and schools develop active guidance pro-
grams for elemen tary and secondary school systems to encourage quali-
fied students to enter engineering;
· community colleges be encouraged to expand theirpre-engineer-
ing programs in close cooperation with the four-year engineering
schools;
· all employment sectors be encouraged to study and continuously
monitor the utilization of engineers to ensure that theyrealize their full
capabilities; and
· special programs be developed to interest qualified women and
minorities in engineering.
Diagramming and Modeling
The panel found it difficult if not impossible to understand the flows
and relationships within the engineering community without a com-
prehensive schematic portrayal of that community. Since no such com-
prehensive schematic portrayal existed, however, the panel developed
a comprehensive flow diagram of its own, which proved adequate to
display this complexity.
The development of the schematic portrayal of the engineering com-
munity revealed a complexity in structure and flows greater than is
generally understood. Construction of the flow diagram also led to the
identification of two large populations not previously considered part
of the community a technical reserve and a pool of staff support.
In relation to modeling, the panel found that existing models pertain-
ing to engineering do not encompass the entire engineering commu-
nity as defined in Chapter 1 of this report. Nor do they track the flows as
represented by the diagram described in Chapter 3. A model structured
OCR for page 7
EXE C UTIVE S UMMAR Y
7
to match the flow diagram should allow broad sensitivity analyses of
flows and resulting impacts on the pools identified. This is more impor-
tant than striving for absolute accuracy.
It must be said that the rapidly changing and unpredictable character
of technology and of the economic, political, and social influences
affecting the profession militate against development of a reliable pre-
dictive model. This, however, does not preclude the use of a model for
gaining insights and drawing broad conclusions about cause-and-effect
relationships and for focusing on shortcomings of data. Thus, diagram-
ming and modeling of the engineering community are necessary activi-
ties for understanding the complexity and interaction of the various
stocks, flows, and interrelations within the engineering community.
The panel recommends that the flow diag, am presented later in this
report be adopted by the engineering communityand used as a basis and
guideline for collecting data, analyzing flows and relationships, and
nrniPctin~ the effects of changes in flows and! relationships.
~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~J1 ~
Data Bases
Data on the engineering community are collected, analyzed, and
reported by several different organizations, each for its own particular
purpose. {The most extensive data bases have been developed by the
National Science Foundation, National Research Council, American
Association of Engineering Societies, Engineering Manpower Com-
mission, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and National Center for Education
Statistics. J The diverse structure and purposes of the existing data bases
make it extremely difficult to integrate or compare data. For example,
for 1982 there are estimates of the numbers of engineers in the United
States that vary from 1.2 million to 1.9 million. Without standard
measurement criteria there is no discernible way to reconcile these
differences. As a result, these inconsistencies make it difficult to
develop either quantitative or qualitative descriptions of the engineer
. .
ng community.
Further limitations of the data bases include the following:
· There are major gaps in the data particularly for the numbers and
flows of those members of the engineering community without engi-
neering degrees E.g., technicians, technologists, and individuals with
degrees in other fields).
· Existing data on employment of engineers by specific industry are
inadequate. Since industry is the major employer of members of the
engineering community, this constitutes a serious gap in the data
bases.
OCR for page 8
8
INFRASTRUCTURE DIAGRAMMING AND MODELING
· Sample size and structure of existing data will permit limited
individual disaggregation for sex, minorities, employment specialty,
degree, employment sector, and age, but multiple disaggregations E.g.,
sex and age) are restricted.
· None of the existing data leases, either singly or in combination,
can adequately support the flow diagram and model referred to in Chap-
ters 3 and 4 of this report. Current data do not permit complete quanti-
tative or qualitative analysis of flows into, within, and out of the
. . .
engmeermg community.
· There are reasonably good data on students at the secondary,
undergraduate, and graduate levels and on flows of degreed engineers.
These data, however, permit only limited disaggregations of persons
within the working pool.
· Almost no data exist on the technical reserve.
As a result of these findings, the panel concluded that available data
bases provided only a limited understanding of the engineering com-
munity as defined in this report. Therefore, it is virtually impossible to
construct an accurate and internally consistent picture of the entire
engineering community, including those engaged in engineering as
well as those engaged in engineering support, over the last 20 years. To
assess the technological strength and competitiveness of the United
States accurately, there must be complete and accurate data on engi-
neering and scientific manpower.
The panel thus recommends that the National Academy of Engineer-
ing periodically convene a conference of all organizations involved in
the collection, analysis, and reporting of engineering manpower data
with the goal of making those data more complete, more accurate, and
more compatible.
In addition, future data collection efforts should be guided by an
agreed-upon overall schematic of the engineering community, similar
but not necessarily identical to the pow diagram described in this
report.
Existing data collection efforts should be modified to provide, as a
minimum, information on all segments of the engineering community
as depicted in the pow diagram in this report. (Chapter 5 provides more
specific recommendations.J
Efforts also should be undertaken to ensure the accuracyandreliabil-
ity of existing data bases and current methods of data collection and
analysis. In particular, the reliability and accuracy of the Occupational
Employment Surveyshould be evaluated because of itsimpact on deci-
sions affecting the engineering community.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
engineering societies
