The good, the bad, the missing

Having not posted for a while, I've been sitting around contemplating where I'm at with how I feel about engineering. After having talked to recent graduates from engineering programs and non engineers, I see that there are a few of the former that have come across the same weird feeling as I have, whereas the latter does not seem to see the reason for my concern.

I tried searching the internet for other people that may be blogging about their mixed feelings on the medical, law, or engineering professions, and there's surprisingly little about the profession group organization itself. Most things that come up are issues that engineers face, or how engineers have had to face a corrupt group that they had to work with. I'm wondering if the topic of corruption or issues with the governance of the PEO is just something I perceive, or that people aren't speaking about it. Recent graduates have told me that they've contemplated why the PEO acts the way they do, why their literature is packed full of "gossip" over who sued who over improper engineering practices (this seems like petty squabbling to me when engineering designs are not compromised). Apparently, I'll learn more about the PEO during the Iron Ring Ceremony that I will have in about 2 years time. Some of the information provides insight into why the PEO is organized as it is, and some information will make silly concepts even sillier. One of the aspects of the PEO that I find silly is how the PEO portrays itself to the public, requiring engineers to make the public aware of the profession, yet many of their resources and decisions seem closed-book.

Non-engineers have generally been of the opinion that these type of professional organization woes happen with multiple professions such as doctors, lawyers, architects, and anything with a registered organization. It was pointed out that at this point, what matters is that my life's work is what I am interested in, and that I just have to deal with the ridiculousness of the self-governed organization because I will get it almost anywhere. Essentially, I'm being told to, as in the words of my very good friend Chris, "suck it up, princess". Not desirable, but I see the truth in what they sat, I just have a hard time accepting it.

The good that I have concluded about the professional engineering is that it is essential to have a governing system to structure engineering design in order to protect the public. I see this moreso than anything in structural engineering. As a sidenote, it is interesting to see how the general media covers the consequences of the breaking of dams in Alberta. This type of catastrophe is the kind that an engineer hopes to never have associated with their name for the livelihood in the engineering industry. I have been finding through my co-op terms that your engineering reputation in the industry is extremely important as a measure of trust, though this is perhaps one of the profession's weaknesses. Engineers would rather jump through as many hoops as possible within the PEO to maintain a clean design history free of major errors. Therefore, I see nothing majorly wrong with the PEO Act which instructs engineers on their duties, roles, and obligations since I believe these are essential common sense (should this exist) ground rules. On the other hand, the human aspect of the PEO seems a bit flawed with respect to the information that I know.


And now for something completely different...

I may yet have an outlet for my engineering profession queries. During my next school term in fall 2010, UW is setting up a course to explore the current issues facing the engineering industry. These topics will hopefully branch into sustainability, economics, and politics. The actual purpose of this  course is to improve communication skills via conventional (written, spoken) and non-conventional (blogs, vlogs, audio recordings) means. Now, this course is by application only, which I had done (in a oh-so-boring conventional letter mainly because I wanted to use a form factor for my appliation that I was comfortable with). I hope to be accepted where I may be able to ask my questions about the engineering industry and the function of the PEO and other societies for engineers. This could be a good think tank pick-other-peoples'-brains opportunity that may strengthen the resolution of my questions. I have no problem in admitting that I was wrong about my feelings of the industry or the profession, I just feel like I have a lack of information available, or that it's just not a common enough viewpoint to be able to find that many others to discuss this with. Why are fresh ideas hard to find?

My engineering dichotomy...

I find the topics I study and work with (structural and geotech stuff the most) really interesting and useful. I guess I define my sense of usefulness for my studies by how much I can better the world around me. See, what I like about civil engineering is that there's a very short metaphorical distance between what you design and what happens in the real world, that's fantastic in my opinion (though we very much need the theorists and researchers in our world). Designing a massive building would not fall into my definition of usefulness since I really believe that the best designs return the earth to their natural conditions or complement the natural surroundings as much as possible.

My issues with engineering arise from the societies that isolate engineers and the profession from the rest of the population. The professional organizations establish the code of ethics that engineers need to abide by, which sounds perfectly legitimate considering the impact of what they design. Where I start to question them is when they take so much pride in displaying the legal issues of people claiming to be engineers, or when an engineer is exposed for gross violations of the code of ethics. I feel as though the engineering organizations and societies instill a sense of cultish secrecy, and then they wonder why not enough people (women for example) are joining. Myself still looking from the outside, why would a woman feel completely comfortable in a field where the societies perpetuate a "gentleman's club" atmosphere? flawed logic I know, but I get that feeling sometimes. I think the reasoning is that you want to keep the societies as a think tank for those trained to think in diverse ways and to keep the profession honest means to kinda close it off to the public. It doesn't have to be this way, it's their current model because people are apathetic or approve of the way things are currently. At the same time, professional engineering is trying to reach out...I don't know seems a little too much like our current closed-door government for my liking.

So that's where my thinking is at for engineering, and why I feel that staying in school will a) let me avoid the parts I do not like b) delay my entry to the industry until I perhaps come to terms with the dichotomy or c)...something else I have not thought of. I spent a while mulling this post over though it's still not complete, there's soo much on this topic I want to explore.