What do you think?
Rate this book
Engineering Technology Education in the United States
The vitality of the innovation economy in the United States depends on the availability of a highly educated technical workforce. A key component of this workforce consists of engineers, engineering technicians, and engineering technologists. However, unlike the much better-known field of engineering, engineering technology (ET) is unfamiliar to most Americans and goes unmentioned in most policy discussions about the US technical workforce. Engineering Technology Education in the United States seeks to shed light on the status, role, and needs of ET education in the United States.
194 pages, Paperback
Published December 27, 2016
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
March 11, 2017
We have relocated to Durham to be close to our daughter who has joined the mathematics faculty at Duke. One of my passions in retirement is engaging and retaining more women and underrepresented minorities in STEM: I have engaged with Triangle Women in STEM and with the local affiliate of NCWIT.
Two things leap out in my in this report. First that participation of women in ET is markedly lower than in engineering. Second ET provides a path for those making a career change later in life.
p. 5. The committee found little evidence of formal outreach or communication to K-12 teachers, students, or students’ parents concerning ET and its connection to postsec- ondary education and employment.
p. 6. Compared with engineering, ET education programs, particularly at the 2-year level, are more attractive to older students and students currently underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) elds.
p. 17. North Carolina is a leader (5.2%) among those granting "less-than-one-year" certificates.
p. 84. weighted summaries indicate that 2-year programs (N=86) draw primarily from two populations—high school students and adults who are changing careers or adding to their skills—but returning veterans also are a signicant source of students for these programs (Figure 3-6).
p. 87. The current student was completing a 2-year electrical engineering technology program at Camden County College. the two 4-year graduates both received their degrees from Southern Polytechnic State University, now Kennesaw State University (one in electrical engineering technology and the other in mechanical engineering technology), and were early in their work careers.
p. 130 -131. Indeed, students o en attend community colleges because theyare geographically immobile, at least relative to those who attend 4-year- degree-granting schools.
p. 155. Very abstractly, if engineers are viewed as being responsible for designing the nation’s technological systems, then engineering technicians and technolo- gists are the ones who help build and keep those systems running. However, the reality is more nuanced than that.
p. 159. RECOMMENDATION 2: The ET education community should con- sider ways to make the eld’s value proposition more evident to K-12 teachers, students, and students’ parents, as well asto employers.
p. 161. FINDING 3: Compared with engineering, ET education programs, particularly at the 2-year level, are more attractive to older students and students currently underrepresented in STEM elds and of less appeal to women overall.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Research is needed to understand why certain segments of the population graduate at higher frequencies from ET programs than they do from engineering programs and why women are even less engaged in ET than they are in engineering.
p. 163. FINDING 4a: e connection between an ET education and the ET workforce is fairly weak. Those with ET degrees work in a broad range of occupations, and those employed as engineering technologists have a diverse degree background.
INDING 4b: Though average salary data hide potential low- and high-salaried outliers, the overall gap in earnings between technicians and technologists is quite small compared with the di erential between engineering technologists and engineers. e relatively small salary pre- mium for technologists, as compared with technicians, may be reducing incentives for entry into 4-year ET programs as well as tamping down overall interest in technologist jobs. Conversely, the relatively high salary potential of technician-level jobs may serve to increase interest in these jobs and educational pathways to them.
p. 164. RECOMMENDATION 4: Research is needed to better understand the reasons for the apparent loose coupling of degree attainment and employment in engineering technology.
Two things leap out in my in this report. First that participation of women in ET is markedly lower than in engineering. Second ET provides a path for those making a career change later in life.
p. 5. The committee found little evidence of formal outreach or communication to K-12 teachers, students, or students’ parents concerning ET and its connection to postsec- ondary education and employment.
p. 6. Compared with engineering, ET education programs, particularly at the 2-year level, are more attractive to older students and students currently underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) elds.
p. 17. North Carolina is a leader (5.2%) among those granting "less-than-one-year" certificates.
p. 84. weighted summaries indicate that 2-year programs (N=86) draw primarily from two populations—high school students and adults who are changing careers or adding to their skills—but returning veterans also are a signicant source of students for these programs (Figure 3-6).
p. 87. The current student was completing a 2-year electrical engineering technology program at Camden County College. the two 4-year graduates both received their degrees from Southern Polytechnic State University, now Kennesaw State University (one in electrical engineering technology and the other in mechanical engineering technology), and were early in their work careers.
p. 130 -131. Indeed, students o en attend community colleges because theyare geographically immobile, at least relative to those who attend 4-year- degree-granting schools.
p. 155. Very abstractly, if engineers are viewed as being responsible for designing the nation’s technological systems, then engineering technicians and technolo- gists are the ones who help build and keep those systems running. However, the reality is more nuanced than that.
p. 159. RECOMMENDATION 2: The ET education community should con- sider ways to make the eld’s value proposition more evident to K-12 teachers, students, and students’ parents, as well asto employers.
p. 161. FINDING 3: Compared with engineering, ET education programs, particularly at the 2-year level, are more attractive to older students and students currently underrepresented in STEM elds and of less appeal to women overall.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Research is needed to understand why certain segments of the population graduate at higher frequencies from ET programs than they do from engineering programs and why women are even less engaged in ET than they are in engineering.
p. 163. FINDING 4a: e connection between an ET education and the ET workforce is fairly weak. Those with ET degrees work in a broad range of occupations, and those employed as engineering technologists have a diverse degree background.
INDING 4b: Though average salary data hide potential low- and high-salaried outliers, the overall gap in earnings between technicians and technologists is quite small compared with the di erential between engineering technologists and engineers. e relatively small salary pre- mium for technologists, as compared with technicians, may be reducing incentives for entry into 4-year ET programs as well as tamping down overall interest in technologist jobs. Conversely, the relatively high salary potential of technician-level jobs may serve to increase interest in these jobs and educational pathways to them.
p. 164. RECOMMENDATION 4: Research is needed to better understand the reasons for the apparent loose coupling of degree attainment and employment in engineering technology.
Displaying 1 of 1 review