An engineer by any other name- Texas Legislature to decide if programmers can legally use title

Houston Chronicle ^ | March 29, 2003, 11:53PM | R.G. RATCLIFFE

[Chad Fairbanks]

UL Testing is a pain in the --- LOL... Not as bad as getting the CE mark, though ;0)

[reg45]

I don't care what my job title is as long as they pay me the BIG BUCKS!

[reg45]

Enough of the software engineers, sanitation engineers, etc.

railroad engineers, domestic engineers ...

[sam_paine]

Know what you mean! Imagine if software had a similar compliance test!

[Chad Fairbanks]

Some software (certainy not ALL) does have very strict compliance testing - On the wall of my cubicle, I have a printout list that explains the various regulatory standards any software I write (Yes, I also do 'Software Engineering') must meet - for example, all of our Alarms are software-driven - and they have certain federal regulatory standards they must meet, and if they do not meet or exceed those requirements, someone is in trouble... It's certainy different for some guy writing code to create a Word Processor... If the Bold doesn't work, no one will die...

I DO have a problem with 'sanitation engineers', 'Customer Service Engineers' and in most cases 'Software Engineers'... Some VB Programmer, writing software, is a lot different than a guy who, for example, writes software which communicates with Natural Gas Meters for meter 'proving'...

I guess my point is, not ALL Software "Engineers" are Engineers - but some are...

[ALS]

Only an idiot would hire someone WITHOUT credentials to build a bridge. My rant was not about the obvious.

It's about all this anal crap like we see from dorks with a PHD in religion or philosophy that INSIST on being called "doctor", etc. That's deceptive, simply calling yourself an engineer when that's exactly what you do isn't.

There's got to be a limit on this anal PC bullcorn, and a buncha puffy chested engineers is a good place to start.

[nwrep]

How do you admit that you don't know how something works and then simultaneously throw out an attack on "hicks" that do?

Sorry I don't mean to start a flame war. I was reacting to how some people down there saw it fit to define criteria for Engr. based on their interpretations.

What REALLY needs to be stopped, which isa totally different thing, is crap like the Microsoft Certified Systems Engineers misnomer. Microsoft is not any kind of accredited educational agency, nor are the people associated with this program involved with "engineering" anything at all.

I agree on PE for Civil/Mechanical, etc. Also agree with you about MCSE being not really Engineering and IT programmers not being real engineers. No argument about that.

My point was about EEs. How can you expect EEs to go through the PE crap when we mostly work for private corps. and have very little contribution to public works, like Civil/Mechanical guys do? We work on cutting edge technologies, make significant intellectual property contributions (just compare patents in EE related fields to Civil/Mechanical) and don't think some 50 year old bureaucrat in Austin should sign off on our certification. That was the point I was trying to make. I did not mean to come across as insulting.

[gitmo]

The term "engineer" is used too loosely today.

I agree ... WE were using it first.

[gitmo]

Know what you mean! Imagine if software had a similar compliance test!

You haven't seen the testing standards we employ for software. My last project had over 7,000 pages of testing requirements. The testing took 9 people close to a year. I'm not willing to shut down a billion dollar enterprise by inadequate testing.

[Maximum Leader]

I was thinking the same thing!

There were train engineers before there were licensed professional enginners. And of course the Corps of Engineers could face problems if the P.E.'s had any say in the matter.

[algol]

Instead of trying to license all uses of "engineer", Texas should license a few specific ones: "mechanical engineer," "electrical engineer," "civil engineer," etc.

That, or something similar, may be a reasonable compromise. I think that in Colorado, anyway, those are the only areas where you can even get a PE license. (My wife's the one who did the EIT exam, her degree is in materials engineering. I'm just a bit pusher ;-).

Software engineering is too new and varied to be licensed. And, the public-safety aspect of software engineering is missing, so the state should just butt out.

Actually, that (public safety) seems like an excellent reason for the state to butt in. I've worked with lots of people who call themselves software engineers (I've had Senior Software Engineer on my biz card or job description for quite a few years), but most of them are just programmers who know bugger all about engineering, either from the safety aspect (its amazing how few have heard of the RISKS digest, let alone read it) or from the economic aspect (know who Boehm is, understand COCOMO (Constructive Cost Model), etc.)

This is perhaps less true in some specific industries (aviation, military, etc) where the risks of defective software are clearer and where there are mandated processes and procedures to follow. Those processes do greatly bog down the development process, but they're necessary because most programmers, despite the "engineer" in their job titles, really are clueless about developing robust and reliable software.

(And yeah, some of the reasons for that is because the field is relatively new and the technology changes quickly -- but that's all the more reason for care when developing life critical applications. And bear in mind that even a database app can be life critical in a medical, law enforcement or military context.)

[algol]

It's certainy different for some guy writing code to create a Word Processor... If the Bold doesn't work, no one will die...

Thank you for demonstrating the exact problem with the state of software development today.

"If the Bold doesn't work, no one will die." How do you know that? I can think up scenarios where if the bold doesn't work, someone could well die. Patient care instructions where something other than the usual is normally highlighted in bold -- printout doesn't have any bold text, overworked nurse misses the special instructions, patient dies. (Sure, there are other problems in the overall methods and procedures if that happens, but it could happen.)

That sort of sloppy thinking gets carried through to other applications. Read the RISKS newsgroup (comp.risks) or digest for numerous examples. Not all fatal by any means, but ranging from that through having ones life ruined (think identity theft) and a few examples of plain inconvenience.

I guess my point is that, unless you know absolutely all the possible uses your software will be put, you'd better write it as though somebody's life depended on it, because it might. (Well, modulo the cost of such development, which is a real engineering trade-off too.)

[Rubber_Duckie_27]

OK...I wasn't saying that professionals in the compuer related fields CANNOT be extremely accomplished and well-educated. It is apparent that you are both, and I think that's fabulous.

The software/computer science field is so new in comparison to civil or mechanical engineering. Perhaps that is why there are more alternate routes to achieving prominence in the field. It is quite rare for someone without a degree in CE or ME to become a PE (although legally it is possible in a few states). In my area, at least, if you want a job as a mechanical or civil engineer, you're only taken seriously with an accredited 4-year degree. Having patents and being self-taught just doesn't cut it. Many of the laws regarding who can legally call themselves an "engineer" are pretty old...they don't take into account that in computer-related fields, it is possible and quite common to have good skills and abilities without a degree. PEs are usually civil engineers...I know less than a handful of MEs with a PE, and no EEs who have one. The laws are designed with MEs and CEs in mind.

I still don't think that most of the "software engineers" out there, who are often simply high school grads who took a VB class at the local community college, are actually engineers. Yeah, they can code like mad...but when it comes to traditional "engineering" activities, they have no clue. I worked my butt off to get my engineering degree, and it's cheapened when antisocial code monkeys who couldn't design their way out of a paper bag insist on calling themselves "engineers" on a business card. They're "programmers" or something similar, not engineers. The computer engineers that I know AREN'T the ones doing the coding...they're designing the systems and having the coders do the coding (that IS their job...).

I, for one, would be all for revamping the PE process to include Computer engineering. It could include people who HAVE been self-taught, and who have made significant contributions to the field (based on a board review). This capability for a PE without a degree exists in some states now.

[gcruse]

I am a member of the Society of Photofinishing Engineers. I had to take a battery of tests and demonstrate on the job competence. I don't have a master's degree. Does that mean I'm not a photofinishing engineer or just not an engineer? I once taught photojournalism at SMU, too, but never claimed to be a college teacher because it was in conjunction with my work. Oh, well. When you're past fifty and unemployed, you're screwed and it may not matter what kind of work you are out of.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Thank you for demonstrating the exact problem with the state of software development today.

We are in agreement there...

"If the Bold doesn't work, no one will die." How do you know that? I can think up scenarios where if the bold doesn't work, someone could well die. Patient care instructions where something other than the usual is normally highlighted in bold -- printout doesn't have any bold text, overworked nurse misses the special instructions, patient dies. (Sure, there are other problems in the overall methods and procedures if that happens, but it could happen.)

Well, what you are describing is not a Word Processor, which was what I was referring to... However, what you ARE describing would be something that, if used in the treatment and diagnosis of a patient, would be required to be classified as a medical device - in which case, it would require a 510K... In order to GET the OK to release, it would need to undergo far more stringent testing and validation - not so with Microsoft, for example, releasing Microsoft Word... Nice try though...

That sort of sloppy thinking gets carried through to other applications. Read the RISKS newsgroup (comp.risks) or digest for numerous examples. Not all fatal by any means, but ranging from that through having ones life ruined (think identity theft) and a few examples of plain inconvenience.

Preaching to the choir, man... I could tell you horror stories about bad software - software that kills - think 'X-Ray Machine of Death' as a perfect example...

I guess my point is that, unless you know absolutely all the possible uses your software will be put, you'd better write it as though somebody's life depended on it, because it might. (Well, modulo the cost of such development, which is a real engineering trade-off too.)

Well, since I work in a field where 'someone's life depends on it', I look at software different than a large percentage of the industry. Any software I work on is not a game, and I certainly do not look at it as such

[graycamel]

Reminds me of when I lived in Columbia, MO. The government there required Arby's to change their sign from Roast Beef to Roasted Beef. According to city ordinance, only roast beef like that served in fancy restaurants can be called Roast Beef.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Well, I don't care what their degree(s) are or where they're from, if they don't have a license in TX, they can't practice engineering there. They can call themselves (privately) anything they want, but can't advertise it publically.

Nor should the so-called "network engineers" who don't design ckts nor have the requirements.

Programmers don't "design" - they practice a different art. Electrical engineers follow a different prefession.

[jmax]

RE: Your PROFILE.

Think you need to head back to College Station for a refresher in English grammer. Your 4th and 5th paragraphs look like Greek. : )

With Regards.....

[cheme]

ditto to your remarks

[luckystarmom]

I don't know where you got your information. I graduated from the College of Engineering with a degree in Computer Science from Texas A&M. I took 3 semesters of Calculus, Differential Equations, physics, chemistry, general ed class, plus all of my computer science courses.

I'm a SAHM now, but when I worked my title was Software Engineer in California for over 10 years.

The license doesn't make sense for software engineers. It makes sense for Civil Engineers, and the test is geered towards that field. If they want to make separate tests for each field, then fine. However, they shouldn't make a software engineer take a civil engineering test to become a "professional" engineer.