[weegee]

If someone does not attend an accredited school and graduate with an engineering degree (meaning that they take a standard list of engineering science courses) then I don't see how they can claim the title. Let alone if they don't apply for the license (I went through Boston University's engineering program but never actually applied to be a licensed engineer).

I can tell you that the computer science students had a far lighter course load with a lot more humanities courses.

[Rubber_Duckie_27]

I am a graduating engineer in a different state. I will be going for my PE, even though I don't anticipate ever needing it. I've worked hard to be an engineer, and if I ever moved to one of the very strict states (like Texas), I'd want to retain the title.

The computer science students at my school get a BS, not a BSE. They do not take as much physical science, and they do not take engineering core classes (mechanics, circuits, thermodynamics, etc.) that are required of engineering students. The CS majors have no right to call themselves "computer engineers" unless they have an accredited engineering degree. I think it's absurd that garbage men are called "sanitation engineers" or tech support people are "computer services engineers" or some other drivel. In my opinion, if you do not have an ABET-accredited degree, you are not an engineer, period!

Getting a PE requires passing a Fundamentals of Engineering exam, having roughly 4 years of work experience after the FE, and then passing the PE exam. In my state and most others, this process is virtually required for civil engineers, but I only know of a handful of mechanical engineers (my major) that have a PE.

[Tax Government]

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

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.

[saluki_in_ohio]

The term "engineer" is used too loosely today.

It makes me a little sick that I spent 4 1/2 years studying engineering in an ABET accredited school, then 2 1/2 years in an engineering graduate program so I can become a licensed engineer, while some 'script kiddie' with a high-school diploma and a little bit of knowledge of Visual Basic can be called a 'software engineer'.

[Amerigomag]

Two circumstances are at work here.

Traditional engineering pursuits are clinging to the concept that engineering involves creation of tangible, durable objects. Certified or liscensed engineers tradtionally received formal traning offered by recognized, 4 year, academic institutions requiring a well rounded educational background.

Technically trained people who have a very specialized education in conceptual processes have a place in the engineering world. Clinging to the old mechanical basis of the profession will eventually give way to a broader definition.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Much of the work done by licensed "professional" engineers requires knowledge obtained through a rigorous accredited academic program and years (usually about four) as an apprentice under a licensed engineer. The knowledge needed to accomplish an engineered project is considerable. The knowledge runs the gamut from pure deductive science to arcane codes designed by experience all woven together in a complex of ideas sometimes at odds with one another. The risks to the public for inept engineered work is great. Buildings could collapse, electrical systems can explode, dams can break open, waterworks could acquire fatal bacteria, and so on. The engineer must balance the safety of the public against the cost to provide that safety. The role of the modern professional engineer is certainly in accord with the modern use of the word engineer: to plan, manage, and put through by skillful acts or contrivance; maneuver. But the modern professional engineer who is licensed by approved state organizations is an outgrowth of the traditional engineer who evolved out military engineers who had their beginnings in Roman military engineering that organized and built much or the great Roman infrastructure.

One distinction that should be understood is the professional engineer is personally libel for defective work. This is in stark contrast to computer programmers and other technical professionals who “engineer” their work. When your operating system crashes do you sue the programmer or do you sue the Microsoft? Until programmers take personal liability for their work, they should not be counted among the Professional Engineers

[Andyman]

. . . himself an engineer.

How sexist of the Houston Chronicle.

[Fiddlstix]

Bump
To read later

[mikegi]

In my last job my official title was "Software Design Engineer". I referred to myself as a programmer because I didn't want the personal responsibility implied in "Engineer". With all the bugs in both hardware and software in the PC world, who knows when some of my code might be blamed for dropping a steel beam on someone's head!

[putupon]

Interesting. The title is thrown around pretty loosly in VA. Some companies even include "degree not required" or "degree required" in their engineering position want ads.

The PE at the end means something, though.

[Zack Attack]

Choo choo train engineers should sue them all. They are the real engineers.

[reg45]

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

[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.

[cruiserman]

Unless you're signing a drawing, it's a meaningless difference. IMO if you've passed the PE, and you want to set yourself apart as an "Engineer", put PE after your title.

[NoDegree]

Let me just say that this entire discussion is almost laughable. Just because a man (or woman) has gone to a college or university, earned a degree, and then took a test and passed it; does not mean he/she is a good engineer.

While in the Marines I was sent to a school called AVIC-7. The school was a an engineering immersion course that lasted 12 months, 8 hours per day, 5 days per week. Virtually every engineering subject was taught. It was heavy on electrical and mechanical courses but also included courses like radio wave propagation, metallic anomaly detection, hydraulics and numerous other courses. After leaving the military I started working in an environment where I was surrounded by highly educated engineers from many of the most prestigious universities, including one engineer in particular that was a West Point grad with a MSEE from MIT. After working with me for about six months, he and a number of other highly degreed engineers, some with the highly touted “PE” behind their names, would come to me for verification and / or confirmation of their work. When I told them I was “unqualified” to do that they just laughed and insisted that they needed my help.

In another instance; a friend of mine that had the same military background as me eventually went to the University of Texas and earned his BSEE. He was on the Dean’s list every semester. When I asked him if he learned anything in his engineering courses his responses was “Hell no! The reason I was able to stay on the dean’s list all the time was because I slept through my engineering courses and focused on all the other stuff!”

So my point is this: I have always been regarded as a top-notch engineer in both the electrical and mechanical fields. However, the only way I was able to overcome the stigma of not having a professional degree or a PE behind my name, was to start my own business. (It is amazing how having a card that says “President” on it automatically make you above reproach.) I would do my own designs and then pay a PE to review and stamp the drawings for me. I eventually turned my company into a $50M / year design-build firm. Now that’s my success story. But not everyone is a risk taker like me and I would like to see other’s like me, that have received our level of technical education in a non-university setting; get the proper recognition they deserve. There are thousands of men and women trained like I was that cannot make the pay or get the recognition they deserve because they never went to a college or university. It is a horrible inequity. I appreciate the guys that do go to good schools and get their degrees! I have lots of you working for me. But I want everyone to know that a degree does make an engineer a good engineer. It just means you can study and pass tests. The real test is how you do in real life and if I, or any others like me, surpass a degreed person(s) in talent, then we deserve the title ENGINEER as much as anyone!

Maybe one of you can “engineer” a fix for this problem?

[RFEngineer]

Why not “Registered Programmer”?

They see the title of “Engineer” as having value (or they wouldnt want to usurp it), but do not wish to actually attain it.

It’s not that hard to become a PE.

[TADSLOS]

I’m not a trained, qualified, certified engineer in any field so I don’t have a dog in this fight per se, except to point out that this smells like another government money grabbing scheme by netting more licensing fees from the growing number of software “engineers” entering the state for work. Sounds to me like the Texas legislature sees an opportunity to scoop up extra $$$ over semantics in the term “engineer”.

[CodeToad]

As someone in the engineering trades: NO! Programmers know programming languages but 99% don’t have a clue about engineering. That 99% doesn’t have a clue about what is happening in the computer or how computers work. They simply code until some kind of result they were after appears then think they’re the smartest people on the planet. It is why we have all kinds of safety critical software and systems certifications, to weed out the incompetent programmers from those that can actually design systems that won’t kill people.