perspective


Linking Academia and Industry

During my years as a student at the University of New Haven and as a working engineer, I've noticed a disjointed relationship between academia and industry. This fractured relationship is having a serious effect on the evolution of technology and the passions of those who want to be — and are — a part of this technical evolution.

In college, engineering students learn to transform the physical world into analytical notation. Five to 10 years after graduation, our approach to problem solving changes dramatically. The analytical tools learned in school are simply not used to their potential.

Some believe that use of the analytical skills learned in school are too time-consuming in real-life scenarios. Preventing the engineer from using these tools makes the possibility of returning to them in the future more difficult.

During the past decade, I've witnessed a deepening philosophical separation between what engineers do in the field and what their academic prerequisites train them to do. With few exceptions, engineers in the field become experts in technical protocols and international standards, as well as organizers of all product and procedural documentation and minutiae. At the same time, academia is impressing students with the virtue of being the conveyors of future technology and emphasizes the necessity of learning difficult analytical tools as a means of developing these new technologies.

As the new program chair for our local ASME New Haven Section, I am facing a dilemma — how to initiate open dialogue among engineering professionals and how to bridge the gap between what engineers are taught in school and what they will be required to do on the job.

Together with my colleagues on the New Haven Section's executive committee, we formulated some basic criteria that we will use to develop our programs.

We plan to be the arbiters of group discussions led by experienced engineers that are informal and interactive. We hope to host them at some of the local engineering colleges and invite anyone who might be interested, irrespective of academic credentials or background. It may not be necessary to give it a formal structure. However, it could take the form of a club or perhaps some other school-sponsored organization.

This will attempt to create a forum through which engineers can practice those skills for ends other than good test scores. Members can present and share technical knowledge and analytical methods for the purposes of review as well as continued education. If an engineer's current job requires producing only anecdotal instead of quantitative solutions to problems, those skills will be maintained for the time when a new career opportunity presents itself.

Engineers require mathematical tools and strong deductive reasoning skills because they are often exploring very new areas of technology that must include a hypothesis and theoretical proof. The opportunity to present information to their peers can help develop public speaking and interpersonal skills. It will also reinforce the importance of all the skills learned as an engineer and might make one consider that success in engineering doesn't necessarily culminate in a management position. At best, it will produce an almost communal atmosphere for the exchange of ideas and engineering practices.

The main conduit between academia and industry lies with the engineer and it is my intention to make good use of it.

— Michael Redler
Program chair, New Haven Section

back to columns