« AnteriorContinuar »
school, and the business courses by the school of business administration. This group of courses is in addition to the four-year courses in engineering in the engineering school and the graduate courses of business in the school of business administration. It was decided as a fundamental requirement of these five-year combined programs of study that they must contain all the engineering, scientific, and general study of the four-year programs, and this is accomplished in the following manner: The first three years of the five-year programs are identical with the first three years of the corresponding four-year programs; and the time of the last two years of the five-year programs is made up 40 per cent of engineering courses and 60 per cent business courses, the engineering being the fourth-year subjects of the engineering programs, and the business courses being the backbone of the two-year graduate course in industrial management offered in the business school.
It is not possible to plan a four-year program to train young men both for engineering and business. The time is inadequate for both. It is a serious question whether five years is sufficient for this double training. It is important, however, above everything to make sure that rigorous training in fundamentals shall not be replaced by courses which, however interesting or informing they may be, do not in themselves offer the best medium for mental training, or are given in a way that does not require vigorous thought.
W. R. RITTMAN, professor of commercial engineering, Carnegie Institute of Technology. Managers or administrators can not be developed by a four or five year course in college, nor can mechanical or civil engineers be developed in that time. The industrial world will have to develop and determine the product. We are not about to lose the fundamentals of life or education just because of an educational experiment which may result in a somewhat different procedure. Fundamentals vary in form and manner of presentation from year to year. There are to-day fundamentals of a greater variety than in the early days of education. Take, for example, the social and economic sciences. They are of a different character and equally important. The man or the engineer who is grounded in the fundamentals of the social and economic sciences, or a foundation of the fundamentals of an exact science, will have a useful and profitable place in the world. It is not intended that he displace the old-line engineer, the designing and constructing civil, mechanical, or electrical engineer. Both types or groups are necessary.
R. L. SACKETT, dean of engineering, Pennsylvania State College. Many years ago one of the technical papers of this country showed, after careful study, that about 50 per cent of the graduating engineers were in executive positions. The old type of instruction, while different from that at present, offered opportunity for the development of executives. In the development of executives to-day more will have to be done by example. Less importance must be placed upon the subject taught. It is not a question of putting character in, but of drawing character out, of giving the young man an opportunity to develop leadership in surveying, in the laboratory, and in the other places where we have not yet developed it.
EVERETT W. LORD, dean of the college of business administration of Boston University Schools of business administration can not teach engineering. To teach the things which must be taught young men before they graduate our school has had to lengthen the course to five years, one of which must be spent in actual business. Business training ties up with every kind of professional training. The engineer does not need it any more than does any other professional man who has to sell his services and himself. Practical training courses of the social and economic type are essential to every professional man.
EVENING SESSION Monday, May 1, 8 o'clock, College of Fine Arts. Delegates and visitors were the guests of the institute at a dramatic performance and smoker. The speaker at the latter function was the president of Carnegie Institute of Technology.
ARTHUR A. HAMERSCHLAG. The fine arts have been neglected in American cities and institutions of learning. We have been so accustomed to borrowing and imitating the art of other countries that it seems an anachronism to hope to have an indigenous background created by our own artists. All the arts are interrelated. Breadth of sympathetic coordination, vital to a full comprehensive and intelligent development of the individual, is not possible without access to all the arts that use color, form, structure, letters, and harmony, as foundation mediums. All students who · attend this fine arts college are expected to acquire facility in the use of more than one medium, and they have the association of artists in music, painting, architecture, drama, and sculpture, with the beneficial education reactions which only these varied arts can supply.
The plays presented to-night in the Little Theater were given by students who have as their objective careers as playwrights, actors, scene painters, producers, costume designers, etc. In giving their performance they are teaching themselves the art of self-expression, acquiring versatility, ease and poise, diction and carriage. Each of the five major fine arts has one floor of this building exclusively used for its own workshops, drafting rooms, ateliers, and classrooms. The symphony orchestra offers public performances, and the architects enter into the beaux arts competitions in the same spirit as do other students in other laboratories concerned with their own development. All the students who study in this building come immediately into an atmosphere of related arts.
To meet this demand the Carnegie Institute of Technology undertook to offer instruction which departed from the traditional course, the graduates of which have found themselves equipped with a type of knowledge which is passing from the field of practice. To handle the problems of the world's work in 1930 it has been necessary to create a new curriculum, the graduates of which will be equipped to fill acceptably the future specifications for commercial engineering,
This pedagogical experiment needs cooperation elsewhere, so that proven data relating to methods and courses which they have found productive may be exchanged and serve as common experiences to material advantage. Too few colleges in America are willing to venture into educational experiments. We must be aware of the great need which exists for a highly trained and able combination of business man and engineer. We need in our multiplicity of enterprises the individual leadership of men who have the selective mind, understand the fundamental principles of business, are familiar with the existing engineering practice, and who have the vision to comprehend the related activities of finance and commerce, together with their bearing on government economics. It must be an outstanding thought to which we are all committed that commercial engineering education has come to stay, and that the experiments in this field must be made in many places if we are ultimately to meet the growing demand.
The subject of this conference of commercial engineering education is also somewhat novel, having some of the elements of a new doctrine. The time-honored engineering education in the United States has won a definite and sure place because of the very wonderful nature of the performance of the graduates trained under the established curricula. For nearly 50 years our modern life has been influenced and enlarged as a result of the efforts of engineering graduates who have concentrated their whole energy on problems of efficiency and research; until rather recently engineering has been accepted and recognized as a profession with limitations. The fields of distribution, transportation, and sales were quite as distinct from engineering as if production, design, and research were not essentially a part of that profession.
American industrial operations have assumed quite recently such proportions that there has been created a demand for trained men, who are not only familiar with the fundamentals of engineering practice, but have had some training in the business side of the sales merchandising and financing of our large factories and mills. Tested by this requirement, the old-time curriculum is altogether inadequate. It lacks the breadth and vision, and the detailed subjects of instruction which enable intelligent and scientific attack on the problem of merchandising, problems of transportation and distribution, of financing, of personnel, and organization.
· THIRD SESSION.
Presiding officer: C. F. Scott, professor of electrical engineering, Sheffield Scientific
School, Yale University.
CIVIC AND SOCIAL TRAINING OF THE ENGINEER AND BUSINESS
Doctor SCOTT. Our engineering colleges are giving a certain proportion of their time to the new fields with which engineering is coming into closer and closer relation-not to train men in those fields, but to give them the outlook so that they can see the relation of their work to the broader fields into which, through their engineering careers, they may develop as time goes on. The executive is not made; he is developed. Engineering training is a pretty good beginning from which the executive and the man of large affairs, the director of larger interests, can be developed. It gives the student something of an insight into these relations which he may take up later, so that he will have broad vision as well as immediate proficiency in the work for which he is being trained.
C. R. MANN, chairman of operations and training division, General Staff, War Department, Washington. The Army offers perhaps what is the best educational laboratory in the country. It has all phases of engineering training, a large number of men, and the facility of controlling the conditions of the experiment in a way in which cther educational institutions can not. At the outbreak of the war there was an enormous job to do with the military establishment. There was much confusion as to how to organize the manpower of the country to perform that very striking technical job. How were we to find the men who had the particular qualifications for the special jobs required, to train men so that they would lit into the requirements of the military establishment. There were no definitions of the duties of the men in the various parts of the Army; there were no tests that had been developed to measure the experience and abilities of men. Before the war closed there had been developed by cooperation of all civilian agencies and the military authorities the crude outlines of a system of recording the abilities of men, and of classifying men and measuring their qualifications, and of specifying and defining the particular kinds of jobs, so as to make possible a reasonable and rational fitting together of
: 93076°—24- 4