Barr, B (2008) UK civil engineering education in the twenty-first century. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 161(1), pp. 17-23. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
The paper reviews many of the recent changes in the general and specific education of civil engineering graduates including: grade inflation at GCSE, AS and A level; the pressure on engineering education due to university expansion in non-traditional subject areas; the negative effect of research assessment exercises leading to skewed academic appointments; common teaching for three years for MEng and BEng (Hons) degrees; the proliferation of MSc degrees; the potential threat arising from the Bologna declaration; together with some views from industry. The paper concludes with a proposal to maintain the 'gold standard' MEng degree by developing closer relationships between industry and academia via the initial professional development of graduates.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | education & training; research & development; reviews |
| Index terms: | engineering education, exercise, professional development, academia, proposal, inflation |
| Subjects: | professional education, economic analysis, project planning, health behaviours and lifestyles, educational institutions, professional development |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Project Management, Education, Business Strategy, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here