Slashdot Mirror

There are obviously a wide variety of both cultural and biological factors that influence the likelihood of anyone going into engineering, and the distribution of these differs between men and women. The dramatic rise of technical women in the last century reflects the dramatic changes in cultural views on the role of women. It's impossible to define a specific equilibrium point for the male:female employment ratio because of the constant changes in both cultural views and in the structure of the workplace.

One needs to distinguish between women's interest in, accessibility to, and aptitude for engineering as a profession. I'd like to think we've mostly eliminated any gender bias in accessibility, and I hope we can eliminate any external biases influencing the interest component. But, unpopular as it may sound, there are probably small but statistically significant differences in the average innate interest and aptitude for engineering when taken across the whole female population. This doesn't mean that women can't be outstanding engineers, or that the average female engineer is somehow less skilled than the average male engineer; it just means that if the proportion of the engineering population stabilizes at less than 50%, we shouldn't necessarily be surprised or concerned, and we should not feel obligated to force an even ratio. This is what the previous poster was referring to when he said that engineering is "undemocratic".

I should point out that -- in contrast with the increases of the past century -- over the last six years, female enrollment in undergraduate engineering in North America has been steadily decreasing , in all disciplines, both in absolute numbers and as a proportion total students. There is much confusion and speculation on the reasons for this.

I can't think of a single sex-specific talent or skill in the field of engineering. Are you claiming that males are biologically better at math, logic, spatial relationships, that sort of thing?

There are many recent cognitive and neurological studies that show statistically significant, complex patterns of sex differences in these skills. That doesn't mean one sex is emphatically better than the other -- but they definitely process such information in different ways. These differences no doubt have an influence on the effectiveness of different educational techniques and the interest and motivation one has to enter a field that relies heavily on particular cognitive skills. Females, perhaps, might simply tend to find engineering more boring than males.

An engineer is a graduate of an engineering school.

Many places take it one step further. In Canada, an "engineer" is someone who has professional licensure in engineering. IIRC, they were trying to do the same in Texas. I honestly think this is a good idea.

The president of the IEEE gave a talk at my campus a few years back. He suggested that engineers were not respected (and compensated) for their skills because of the public's perception of engineers. This included two parts. First, engineers are usually portrayed as the source of the hero's problem in movies. Now, part of this is because engineers' lives aren't usually that interesting, and little can be done about this. Second, many people call themselves "engineers" who are not actually qualified to be engineers. The argument is that you can train someone to do something complicated, but an engineer has the understanding to invent many complicated things. I've met lots of people who have "engineer" job titles that don't actually do any engineering. Electricians, mechanics, and plumbers are not electrical, mechanical, and hydraulics engineers, respectively. In contrast, a physician is a physician. If a radiology technician tries to diagnose someone, it's going to cost somebody a buttload of cash.

A graduate of the computer science department is not an engineer, they are a programmer.

I think a better statement would be "Graduates of a computer science department are not engineers, they are mathemeticians." That said, if someone can prove they know software engineering by getting licensed, they are an engineer. I'm not talking about being certified to administer a database. I'm talking about designing complicated programs, proving algorithmic complexity, and optimizing for the range of applications from embedded to high-performance systems. A lot of that sounds like CS, and if they can prove it, a CS can be a PE (professional engineer).

/Not a CS or a PE, but an EIT (Engineer in Training)

so in canada we can. This is were I graduate this summer:
http://www.etsmtl.ca/english/index.html

the software engineering degree is acknowledged by the BCAPI.
http://www.ccpe.ca/e/ccpe_boards_2.cfm

more info there about the differences between comp sci, IT eng, software eng, electrical eng, etc:
www.computer.org

I concur. I'm from Canada, have an (actual) engineering degree and working in the US doing software development. Having everybody and their brothers call themselves "engineer" is... annoying.

http://www.ccpe.ca/e/imm_incanada_1.cfm/

http://www.ccpe.ca/

Yes, oooh yes. I hate when people all over claim to be a whatever-engineering. If you got an engineering degree, you're an engineer, if you don't have the degree, you're anything but an engineer.

I don't know how it is everywhere else in the world (or even in the US), but up here in Quebec, it is actually illegal to claim being an engineer if you are not a member of the "Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec" (Engineering Order of Quebec). And the Order only allows people who have an engineering degree.

Microsoft even had some legal trouble in Quebec with their so-called Microsoft Certified Systems Engineers (MCSE).

All that being said, I am a junior software engineer, based on both what I do and what the law allows me to say I am.

That really depends on where you live. In Canada, you aren't allowed (against the law) to call yourself an engineer if you aren't licensed as a professional engineer by the ccpe. Even if you have a degree in engineering, you're allowed to wear the iron ring, but you can't call yourself an engineer. In Canada, it's a profession, like a doctor, or lawyer. It carries legal liability that you are taking responsibility for your actions.

yah, the interesting thing is.. if you are in any other type of engineering (computer, electrical, mechanincal, mechatronics, enviromental, chemical, geological, civil... etc) you get a Bachelors of Applied Science, in Honours ___ Engineering

but if you are in Software engineering (which at my university - waterloo http://www.uwaterloo.ca/ (which im going to guess you are at as well), which is a joint engineering / math program you recieve a Bachelors of Software Engineering.

licensing is something in and of itself
see http://www.ccpe.ca/e/index.cfm, http://www.peo.on.ca/, and http://www.ccpe.ca/e/index.cfm

yah, the interesting thing is.. if you are in any other type of engineering (computer, electrical, mechanincal, mechatronics, enviromental, chemical, geological, civil... etc) you get a Bachelors of Applied Science, in Honours ___ Engineering

but if you are in Software engineering (which at my university - waterloo http://www.uwaterloo.ca/ (which im going to guess you are at as well), which is a joint engineering / math program you recieve a Bachelors of Software Engineering.

licensing is something in and of itself
see http://www.ccpe.ca/e/index.cfm, http://www.peo.on.ca/, and http://www.ccpe.ca/e/index.cfm

Actually it was Canada Canadian Council of Professional Engineers

Having been a grad of only a Technical College for Computer Engineering, I cannnot even call myself an Engineer. I am working through the OACETT tests currently, and only then will I be able to actually call myself an Engineer by title if/when I pass them all.

It's like a big cult. Seriously.

Well, it's also something that's potentially harmful. There is a reason that universities need to be accredited to offer engineering degrees, and that once you become a professional engineer (PEng) you can lose that license if you don't do your job properly.

A lot of people don't realize that calling yourself an 'engineer' carries the same sort of weight and responsibility as calling yourself a doctor or a lawyer. You have people's lives in your hands (and often on a bigger scale than doctors - when doctors screw up, one patient dies.. when engineers screw up, bridges fall down and many people die). You can have your engineering license revoked for bad pratice. And just like doctors and lawyers, you can get in a lot of trouble for praticing engineering without a license.

I've met a lot of MCSE's that couldn't solve their way out of a cardboard box, and yet, they have the word 'engineer' in their title. And these are the people designing and implementing often mission-critical systems that our society depends on.

The PEO brought Microsoft Canada to court over this issue, and although Microsoft will still use the MSCE title, they (and people holding the title) are only allowed to use the acronym MSCE or full title, and are not allowed to call themselves simply 'engineers'. A lot more information on this can be found at PEO's Software Engineering site.

Basically, Microsoft is not willing to change the title (citing it would cost them too much, and they like the branding it has), and want to continue using the term 'engineer'. The CCPE and the various provincal bodies (PEO, APEGGA, etc) are now talking enforcement, saying anyone that misrepresents themselves is facing $50,000 fines.

1. all of Canada
2. the IEEE statement on the title of engineer

Guess you've been caught talking out of your ass again (but that's what ACs do)

Actually it is more then just "licenced"...

You need to have done at least 4 years in engineering courses in a reconized University. You are member of a professionnal order... which mean you can be kicked you out and lose the title "engineer" even if you you did is "legal" right. Canadians Engineers have an ethic code to follow besides the law.

Now I know a bunch of computer engineers, most of those guys are hardware, not software, but these guys wouldn't want to be engineers under Canadian law if they were doing programming.

So True! In Canada, the term "Engineer" holds much. Believe me the software industry would simply collapse if programmers could be liable for the "Ethic" aspect of software.

---
I'm not English spekin so the abouve texte is ful of mistakes.

While the provincial Professional Engineering acts do not restrict the use of "Engineering", Canadian copyright law does.

"CCPE maintains official marks on the terms engineer, engineering, professional engineer, P.Eng., consulting engineer, ingénieur, ing., ingénieur conseil, génie and ingénierie. This helps CCPE's constituent members to enforce the provisions of the Engineering Act in their jurisdiction, and protect the Canadian public through the regulation of engineering practice."

(see here.)

In fact, the professional engineering body of Newfoundland pulled MUN's accreditation briefly over a "software engineering" program that they offered.

-legolas

Context: I'm in my 4th year of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a Canadian university.

As I am getting towards the end of my degree and I'm getting ready to head out into the big world and work, we've started to be taught several ethics courses. Additionally, I have recently received my iron ring - a symbolic (and secret!) ceremony that affirms my commitment to public safety. Through this, I have been picking up the subtleties of a professional designation.

A Professional Engineer, like a Professional Doctor, Nurse, Lawyer, etc., has a deal of responsibility to the public at large. The privilege of being able to build large buildings, for example, comes at the cost of being responsible that the building doesn't fall. Accordingly, Professionals have professional bodies that they are accountable to above and beyond their responsibilities as a normal citizen. The laws are also much harsher on a professional when they don't act in a professional manner.

My main issue with software developers using the title "Engineer" is that the software development industry at large doesn't seem to adhere to the professional conduct demanded of a professional. Just take a look at the standard EULA as an example - imagine if the designers of bridges did a similar thing? While I have no qualms about the software developer "engineering" in the sense of creating, I wouldn't call a first aider a "doctor", despite the fact they do the same thing.

From my perspective, the ideal solution would be to integrate the software developing business into the Engineering profession. In addition to having a professional title, this would be a healthy step towards maturity of an industry that is plagued by antitrust, among other things. This could help bring respect and dignity to the software developer - in addition to more money - which I believe is what people really want.

Anyways, until such time as this happens, I'm not comfortable with the use of "Engineer" by software developers. In Canada, the term "Engineer" is actually copyrighted to the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers - a few years ago, there was actually a conflict with a University that provided an unaccredited course called "Software Engineering", claiming academic freedom. It resulted in a mess, including the temporary withdrawal of accreditation to the engineering programs at the university.

Which was a bit counter-productive.

-legolas

IEEE is probably not the right body. Of course they'd be a large part of the governing body, but not entirely it. In Canada, software engineering and other disciplines, are controled by the Canadian Concil of Professional Engineers. As software engineering becomes more publicly recognized around the world, it would no-doubtedly be governed by the engineering board of the respective countries. It only makes sense.

I was speaking to one of the members of the CEAB who visted LU on Monday. He recieved his P. Eng designation first in Electrical Engineering then later in Software. He said that the purpose of the Software Engineer should be for critical systems, namely those that if the fail, would put people in danger. The same as Electrical, Chemical, Mechanical or Civil or other Engineering professions.

This doesn't mean that only software engineers can work on such projects. It means that before the software is used it must be approved or 'stamped' by a Software Engineer with a P. Eng designation.

This is not currently required by law in Canada (AFAIK).

Again, this doesn't mean that all programs have to be written by software engineers, or approved by engineers. It is just proposed for software that is life-endangering.

For more information:

• Links on the Professional Engineers of Ontario Page

P.S. Education alone does not an engineer make! It is the combination of education and engineering.

P.P.S It is also possible to become an Professional Engineer without attending an accredited program. Several requierments must be met but it is possible.

The terms engineer, engineering, professional engineer, P.Eng., consulting engineer, ingénieur, ing., ingénieur conseil, génie and ingénierie are official marks held by the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers on behalf of its Constituent Members.

Right now, EE's with software concentrations, and CE's are doing this kind of work, although not necessarily in the IT industry. They're the people who write the control software for nuclear power plants, or airplane autopilots; in general, critical systems involving the preservation of property or life. They're licensed, and if their software fscks up, they have professional (mal)practice insurance for covering their legal liability.

My point is, as the world starts to get more real EE's, CE's and SE's, I hope we'll start to see a more regulated, standardized software industry.

More info on SoftEng profession in Canada. Apparently, there's been some legal wrangling of late.