| It can be argued that the goods and services provided by engineers are qualitatively different from those provided by medical professionals. I believe that these qualitative differences do in fact lead to the difference. I don't see law and medicine as being anywhere near what engineering is. Don't get me wrong, they're not easy. But they are different socially, economically, etc. Just because it was done with them doesn't mean it should be done with engineers. You need a better reason than "why not?" to change something that works fine as it is.
And I think that examinations are fundamentally flawed, conceptually. I say, hire anybody who looks like they might do alright, and start them off with minimal responsibility. Then, after they demonstrate that they're competent, give them bigger and more far-reaching responsibilities. Fortunately, this is already how it is done, since the world is a sane place and this is the sane thing to do. On a side note, getting a degree does not demonstrate competence or knowledge, either. A degree is just a bunch of examinations.
I dislike the idea of making a master's education the minimum requirement for engineering. I believe the general requirement should remain a bachelor's. Does this mean I think master's degrees are worthless? No. Does it mean I deny that some associate's degree holders would make better engineers than bachelor's holders? No. But if one must generalize, I feel that a bachelor's degree is what the standard entry-level requirement should be, now, in the US. |