As part of our Engineering Week celebration this past week at UMass Lowell, I presided over our Order of the Engineer induction ceremony.\u00a0 I always enjoy this event \u2013 although it is a bit somber, as we reflect on the history of the Order, which originally started in Canada, motivated by the collapse of the Quebec Bridge during its construction in 1907 and again in 1916.<\/p>\n
In our ceremony, we further reflect on the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster of 1986, as our alumnus, Mr. Roger Boisjoly<\/a> staunchly raised objections to the launch on the day before the disaster.\u00a0 He correctly predicted that the O-rings would fail in cold weather, which ultimately led to the shuttle\u2019s failure.\u00a0 Boisjoly ultimately received the Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility for his work.\u00a0 We use this example to illustrate the deep responsibility that we have as Engineers.<\/p>\n As you might imagine, reflecting on these two tragedies can lead to a somewhat depressing induction ceremony.\u00a0 However, we close by talking about the great advances in technology, and society, due to the efforts of Engineers and the world of opportunity that awaits the next generation of Engineers (our audience at the ceremony).<\/p>\n To aid in this discussion, I took the liberty to look up the definition of an Engineer.<\/strong>\u00a0 Here is the\u00a0Oxford Dictionary<\/a>\u00a0 version:<\/p>\n \u201c1 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0A person who designs, builds, or maintains engines, machines, or structures.<\/em><\/p>\n Other common sources, such as Merriam-Webster and Dictonary.com were no less glamorous.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not that any of these definitions are false (although I have never wanted to be accused of being a \u201ccontriver of something\u201d), but rather, there is no explanation as to \u201cwhy\u201d we design or \u201coriginate\u201d something.\u00a0 In my mind, this is misleading, as Engineers<\/strong> are driven to solve important<\/em> problems under various constraints.<\/p>\n In my continued search, I found a number of references to the definition of Engineering from ABET<\/strong>, the leading accrediting body of Engineering programs (although I could not find the exact reference on the ABET website<\/a>):<\/p>\n \u201cThe profession in which a knowledge of the mathematical and natural sciences gained by study, experience and practice is applied with judgment to develop ways to utilize, economically, the materials and forces of nature for the benefit of mankind.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n This is a vastly improved definition, as our motivation to be Engineers is stated clearly: to benefit mankind.\u00a0 But my years in academia want a more explicit definition.\u00a0 Thus, here is my attempt to define an Engineer:<\/p>\n \u201cA person who applies the laws of science and technology to the design, build and implementation of solutions that improve the human condition while considering performance, safety, economic and ethical impacts on the user, society, and the environment.\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n I believe a first step in attracting more people from all backgrounds to our profession is making it clear that the purpose of Engineering is not to \u201ccontrive\u201d things, but rather, to provide solutions to problems in order to improve our quality of life.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As part of our Engineering Week celebration this past week at UMass Lowell, I presided over our Order of the Engineer induction ceremony.\u00a0 I always enjoy this event \u2013 although it is a bit somber, as we reflect on the … Continue reading \n
\n
\n
\n