First off, I would like to make it clear there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between scientists and engineers. Scientists discover, engineers build. Scientists seek knowledge of the world and its properties; engineers apply the knowledge discovered from science and put it to practical use. So technically speaking, engineers are the receivers of science so there is no need for us learn to communicate our findings since there are none.
As far as the reading goes, I agree with the effectiveness of an informal dialogue, as in the professional panels hosted by the Dana Centre. However, in today's collegiate world, there is not near enough time for students to engage in panel style lectures. There is not enough time in a semester for a panel to both follow a curriculum and address the requirements of the course. The deficit model, or death by powerpoint is an effective system when lecturites (people who are lectured to) are allowed to ask questions and engage in the presented topics, a system present at many colleges.
This is an interesting post, and has me thinking. Of course it is incorrect to conflate scientists and engineers (though many growing subdisciplines are doing exactly this). And I suppose your definition (engineers build!) is technically correct. But engineers do a lot more than this--the design, implement, evaluate, interact, and engage. If they didn't, they could be replaced by robots, right? Engineers are different from technicians.
ReplyDeleteAnd while you may not have "findings" necessarily, it seems to me that engineers are still being called on to improve their ability to communicate with the public and to engage on matters of importance.
Your post suggests you would prefer engineering stay in its own world; but is that realistic or even possible?
I agree that scientists and engineers are two different people. Engineers often cannot communicate their information for trade secrets. Scientists seem to me to be more theoretical and don't implement the science they study. I think engineers should communicate their thought, but not to the public. I think there should be an intermediate step. The more engineers study communicating, the less science they can study.
ReplyDelete