Expanding the Public Perception of Civil Engineering

by Katy Haralampides, Civil Engineering Magazine, Fall 2006

The Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary defines a civil engineer as “an engineer whose training or occupation is in the design and construction especially of public works (as roads or harbors)”. When asked randomly at the Fredericton Market (spring 2006) about their opinions of engineers and engineering students, the majority of residents from the community responded that engineers are very smart, math-oriented people (often a male pronoun was used) who build bridges and roads. This is not an unusual perception of engineers. The portrayal and understanding of engineering by those outside of the profession is that it is a nerdy, difficult career choice that has little or no impact on society.

It is not a surprise to me, then, to look around my classroom and see dismal numbers of women in attendance. In fact, there has been a decline in the percentage of women enrolled in engineering programs in Canada after it peaked at approximately 21% in 2001 (Canadian Engineering Resources Board 2004). Much effort is being focused on understanding the factors that are hindering young women from choosing engineering as a career (Extraordinary Women Engineers 2005; Wharton 2001). There seem to be two findings that post-secondary engineering educators can help to address directly: the narrow perception of engineering by the public, and the pedagogy and content within engineering programs.

But, first, why do we care? Is it a problem that the number of women and minorities in North American engineering classrooms is so small? Absolutely. The US National Academy of Engineers believes that engineering is “impoverished” because of the lack of diversity, as it affects the quality of life of every person in society. Bih (2006) mentions the effects from a lack of diversity awareness and training: “Space is socially constructed, just like language. The arrangement of space reflects and reinforces gender, ethnicity, and class relations in society. However, teachers and designers in the field have been utterly insensitive to gender.” In Germany, a petition was filed requesting planners and engineers address gendered realities in the field of transportation (Spitzner 2006), and urban planners in Kosovo’s post-war cities are receiving gender equity training by the UN-HABITAT Governance and Development Planning Programme (GDPP) to help them understand gendered necessities as they rebuild (Galezia 2006).

Where is this in the university curriculum in North America? Are we designing and constructing our public works responsibly and ethically if we do not address the diversity of needs? Not if you do not have a diverse population of engineers. Franklin (1999) states that “The great contribution of women to engineering, science and technology lies precisely in their potential to change the technostructures by understanding, critiquing, and changing the very parameters that have kept women away from these fields. It is extremely important to encourage girls no only to use engineering, science, and technology, but also to design, create, and contribute to our society.”

So how do we reach these young women? Grasso, dean of engineering and mathematical sciences at the University of Vermont, says “women see law and medicine as offering an opportunity to make a difference in society. They don’t see that opportunity in engineering. We have treated engineering as an end in itself, not as a vehicle to help make society better.” (Sanoff 2005). Most portrayals of the profession stress the challenging aspects, and emphasize the need for advanced math and science abilities. While the girls demonstrate an equal aptitude for these subjects, the messages received from the engineering profession do not resonate with their career motivators – enjoyable, good working environment, making a difference, good income, and flexibility (Extraordinary Women Engineers 2005; Wharton 2001). Factors such as streaming out of math and science courses, perception of difficulty, lack of exposure to role models, lack of knowledge about engineering, and the social status of the profession were also cited by Anderson and Gilbride (2005). Outreach programs, advertising, science and engineering camps, and other efforts are good methods for reaching young women and helping to expand the perception of engineering, but efforts must also be made in the classroom to address gender issues.

According to Riley (2003), efforts toward increasing the participation of traditionally underrepresented groups in engineering have not placed sufficient emphasis on pedagogy or curriculum as avenues for reform, despite repeated calls to do so. Liberative pedagogies, in which students develop the capacity for critical thinking and reflective action through student-centred approaches to learning, hold a great deal of promise for changing not only engineering education, but also the nature of the profession as a whole. Eschenbach et. al (2005) mention strategies that include cooperative learning, providing students a voice in classroom management decisions, structuring interactions to facilitate all students’ participation, and having students participate in designing evaluation strategies. With the implementation of feminist pedagogies, the following questions can be addressed: How are engineering processes influenced by the historical frameworks of their development? How are decisions made? Who makes decisions? Who benefits from the decisions? What values do they reflect?

Pearson et al (1989) encourage interaction, cooperation and trust, connected, holistic thought, joining feeling and thinking, increasing social responsibility. The current literature also stresses the importance that women attach to the positive and negative impact of science and technology and to the field’s potential social benefits. As a result, many decide to study engineering because of its social usefulness (Frize, 1996; Rosser 2001).

It is clear that within engineering education we need to include problems that reflect women’s values and interests - problems that reflect the broader social context or are socially derived. Change can be initiated in some courses through the introduction of material that has a current interest in the media, or in everyday life. For example, having the students design emergency relief housing for earthquake victims in Indonesia or Pakistan would serve as an interesting project, or basis for classroom examples. They would learn about alternate materials, simple designs, as well as international policies, codes, and costs. Discussions of poverty and social responsibility can therefore be integrated into conventional material. As a former resident of New Orleans, I would also suggest studying housing for hurricane-ravaged areas. The Katrina Cottage (www.cusatocottages.com, see photo), for example, is a simple design that can be analyzed that brings in global awareness to the classroom.

Some universities are starting to incorporate projects being conducted by non-profit organizations such as Engineers Without Borders (EWB) into the curriculum. Their policies of sustainable development, appropriate technology, environmental integrity, and socio-cultural factors are concepts that are important for all engineers to learn, whether solely practicing in Canada, or are aspiring to travel and work overseas. At the University of New Brunswick, a new Design and Communication course was introduced for the first year students in 2005, that involved a group design project, about which they learn and demonstrate communication skills such as teamwork, producing graphics, presentings, and report writing. The students were asked to design a water-hoisting system to raise water out of a 40-m deep well in Zambia. The project was developed in conjunction with EWB, and we were in contact with a UNB EWB volunteer (shown in photos) who was stationed in a village in Zambia. The students were also asked to consider the impact on the village with the introduction of their technology, and were made aware of the “should we versus can we” concept. Engineering students are not often exposed to this awareness, and are not asked to critically evaluate their designs in terms of impact on society. Most completed the course with a heightened awareness of the responsibilities associated with being an engineer, and the potential impact of introduced technologies on a community. When asked, many suggested that this year’s course offering should incorporate another EWB project. Maybe, just maybe, if word gets out that this is what you encounter in engineering undergrad courses, we could build the reputation that engineering is first and foremost an interesting and exciting career choice with huge potential make a real difference. It can lead in many directions, embracing new and old technologies, materials, and processes, working with other disciplines to help humans and nature globally.