A foundation for professional practice or can we engineer ethically?

There is a play by the French philosopher Jean Paul Sartre called “Dirty hands”. It is a story about a veteran leader of the Communist party and a zealous young party member. At a crucial moment in the drama, the young man accuses his leader of betraying the party’s ideals. The older man answers this harsh accusation in the following words: “How you cling to your purity, young man! How afraid you are to soil your hands! All right stay pure! What good will it do…Well I have dirty hands. Right up to the elbows. I’ve plunged them in filth and blood. But what do you hope? Do you think you can govern innocently?”

Do you think we can engineer innocently? Or as Sheppard would question: How to engineer ethically when the objective risk of complex systems is given? (pg.137)

We all will agree it is important to integrate professional life with personal convictions in order to maintain moral integrity. In the course of practicing engineering, engineers solve problems. While the engineering decisions must be also guided by moral values, concern and respect for others, usually engineering decisions are generally guided by the project management variables of cost, schedule and quality. It is a challenge for the engineer in industry to find and ethical balance in the cost –schedule – quality competition.

How do you proceed when your boss is telling you: “These numbers aren’t going to work for us.” How do you engineer ethically when someone is suggesting you to add a higher number for the cable loss and telling you that we will have differences with the customer’s company in the testing equipment anyway? Do you feel extremely uncomfortable as this is not an internal data, but final results for a product? Do you tell your manager you could not proceed this way with integrity? Do you leave the company when suggested to proceed as instructed; after all, the numbers were very close to the required specs.

You truly understand that the outcome of any project is highly important for the company as that effect its reputation and revenue. On the other hand “…There are boundary conditions on making money and as a professional you don’t just do everything that you’re asked to do; you are not just a hired gun” ( Sheppard, pg.137). No, definitely you are not a hired gun, you only happen to have a small child to take care of, a visa status to deal with, a daily builds to pay, and so on. Then again, how do you engineer ethically?

With ethics, there frequently is no absolute right answer, just a personal best answer, and it all comes down to our choices and us. Then how we have been tough and how do we teach engineering ethics? In general students have a difficult time dealing with too much complexity. However, the real world is complex, dynamic, is not transparent, and this is true in the world of ethics as well as engineering. We can deal with complexity by exchanging ideas and creating models. However, the cases use as models in teaching engineering ethics are intended to reflect ethical problems that arise frequently in engineering under rather ordinary circumstances. Then, it is necessary that we understand the differences between models and real life.

In the 1920s, less than a third of the Engineering educators considered the study of differential equations to be necessary for an engineer’s education. In the engineering world of the future, a sound understanding of the theoretical and practical sides of engineering ethics will be as necessary to the proper education of engineers as a knowledge of differential equations is today, if not more so” (K.Stephan, 2001).

As of today, even that Criterion three of ABET's Engineering Criteria 2000 requires engineering programs to demonstrate that their graduates have an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility the teaching of engineering ethics is still not a high priority in engineering education. Engineering ethics course is not mandatory and when offered through engineering schools is integrated through the curriculum in a variety of different forms.

As I have personally experienced unethical issues on the work place, I believe that the development of sensitivity how ethics work in the real world and how ethical problems can affect the entire professional careers of engineers is essential knowledge for students graduating Engineering Schools.

Book chapter from Sheppard et al, 2008; week 10

I would like to devote my comments to the book chapter of Sheppard et al, 2008, which I read with pleasure, and which we discussed today in class. The authors described many aspects related to engineering practice and engineering education, and I am going to touch some of them. The chapter begins from identifying what is engineering. A couple of “official” definitions of engineering practice were presented. One of them was made by the U.S. Department of Labor, and second one- by ABET. Department of Labor describes engineering as the application of the “theory and principles of science and mathematics to research and develop economical solutions to technical problems…the link between perceived social needs and commercial applications” p.3. ABET gives similar definition: “Engineering is a decision –making process (often iterative), in which the basic sciences, mathematics, and engineering sciences are applied to convert resources optimally to meet a stated objective”p.3.
Then, authors divided engineering knowledge in three major categories: knowing that (declarative knowledge), knowing how (procedural knowledge) and knowing why (strategic knowledge). “The knowledge that engineers must bring to bear in their work includes knowing how to perform tasks, knowing facts, and knowing when and how to bring appropriate skills and facts to bear on a particular problem” p. 5.
Later, Sheppard et al. discussed the aims and components of engineering education:“although engineering schools aim to prepare students for the profession, they are heavily influenced by academic traditions that do not always support the professional needs” p.2. The authors stated that for at least a century, the U.S. engineering education was strongly influenced by the French model, when curriculum of science, technical subjects and humanities were taught before application.
Three major components of contemporary engineering education are:
•Learning about science (concepts & phenomena) , and accumulation of deep theoretical knowledge;
•Learning engineering concepts (e.g. problem solving, design, analysis), and accumulation of procedural knowledge with practical skills in lab environment,
•Learning ethical and humanity aspects.
The authors noticed that Ethical responsibilities became a feature of engineering recently. The focus on ethical consequences of engineering practice was not critical for the past. But in the present time, ethics and humanity issues can significantly influence on engineering decision-making. “Because engineers’ work directly affects the world, engineers must be able and willing to think about their ethical responsibility for the consequences of their interventions in an increasingly interlinked world environment” (p.8). But from the other side, talking about college level courses devoted to ethics, humanities, and social science, the author presented some kind of contradiction: too often students are forced to choose certain human science courses to satisfy curricula requirements. “The courses and their content remain largely disconnected from the technical education program, and it is largely up to the student to bring them together, if they brought together at all”. I liked the Figure 2.1, where the authors represented components of engineering education. Analysis, lab work, and design activities somehow intersect with each other; but the ethics component is opposite from other components. Ideal model for engineering education is presented on the Figure 21.1, “Networked Components Model”, where all parts/components are bind together and represent an entire model.

Types of Statements...

Among the many things that Latour, et. all, noticed while studying the laboratory environment was this obsession with inscription. There were a variety of papers everywhere: some papers the lab attendants brought with them into the lab; others they generated while in the lab – just papers, papers, papers! Later in the chapter 2, the author begins to analyze the content of some of these documents, and ends up with by categorizing the statements of the lab environment into 5 types. If being ranked; the lowest being Type 5 and the highest, Type 1. Type 5 statements are assumed knowledge (what you initially come into the lab with). Type 1 statements are conjectures (it’s what you’re asserting after you’ve done some scientific work in the lab). As was discussed briefly during in class today, the assumption is that somehow, in the process of performing the duties associated with being a member of the lab environment and/or being a SCIENTIST, your statements magically become transformed from a Type 5 into a Type 1 and now, are all-of-a-sudden yours statements are “worthy” of being put onto a piece of paper.

Two things dawned on me during this discussion during class (and some of my peers alluded to this as well):

(1) Are not Type 1 statements a kind of assumption/assumed knowledge as well – the only distinction is that now these assumptions are based on SCIENCE? So then, is there a real difference between Type 1 and Type 5 statements?

(2) Once your statements have gone through this “magical” transformation process and you now are deemed worthy to make Type 1 statements, what happens if you leave this specific lab environment and perhaps, go to another lab… By this circular process, don’t your hard-earned Type-1-statements automatically become assumed knowledge again?

Reference:
Latour, Bruno & Steve Woolgar. (1986) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientic Facts. Princeton University Press. Chapter 2: An Anthropologist Visits the Laboratory, pp. 43-103

YouTube and Video Tool Links

I mentioned a FireFox add-on that allows people to download any YouTube video - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/13990/

Also, I mentioned a codec package that has the Haali media splitter tool that will allow them to split the audio from video effortless and without rendering any video - http://www.filehippo.com/download_klite_mega_codec/

Hoppingtonly yours,
--SNL

Engineering Artifacts

I try in this post to trace three engineered artifacts that are associated with the man-made transportation systems and that were developed over different periods of human history and in different places in the world. I organized this post so that:

• First, I describe each engineered artifact
• Then, I briefly describe the impact of that engineered artifact
• And finally, I give a description of the presence of this artifacts in the culture in or after which it existed

The three artifacts which I talk about here are:

• Petra, the city, in present Jordan
• The industrial revolution in the United Kingdom in the 18th and 19th centuries
• Space exploration in the modern age, the 1950's and beyond

I talk about Petra, the city, in present Jordan, as an engineered artifact, just like any city is. The unique location of Petra allowed it to be the control point for many commercial routs passing through. Its impact on the life of the Nabataeans increased as they mastered controlling the water supply with dams and water conduits, which made the city be a natural oasis in the desert [1].


The treasury of Petra [2].

The Newdigate Prize in 1845 was awarded to John William Burgon's Poem Petra, who referred "to it as the inaccessible city which he had heard described but had never seen:" [1]

"It seems no work of Man's creative hand,
by labour wrought as wavering fancy planned;
But from the rock as if by magic grown,
eternal, silent, beautiful, alone!"[1]

Next, the industrial revolution in the United Kingdom in the 18th and 19th centuries produced so many artifacts that changed the landscape of the country, and therefore, the life of its people. It is no wonder how the development of automated machines have allowed access to rivers, canals, roads, and railways which did not exist before.

The impact of the industrial revolution changed the economy; jobs that were traditionally performed by laborers (including kids) were no longer needed [3]. The fact that machines have changed the way we live and move is still present in our daily lives nowadays.


The Iron Bridge, Schropshire, England [4].

Recently, and in the United States, I can talk about the transcontinental network of railroads and highways that required decades of commitments to complete, and the impact it had on the life in the United States in so many ways, but, instead, I would like to talk on space exploration as the new frontier. NASA's former administrator, Dr. Michael Griffin noted in a speech that:

"...the spirit of exploration is something embedded in our human DNA. In a certain sense, this must be true, or the human species would still be confined to East Africa, if it existed at all. And indeed, this genetic trait must lie even deeper than the human species; most members of the animal kingdom range as far and wide as their physical adaptability allows. So, while exploration beyond one’s known habitat is usually difficult and dangerous for an individual, it clearly provides survival value for the species as a whole, in the longer run. And, in the very long run, this may indeed be the single most compelling reason for space exploration."[5]

I will leave it up to you, the reader, to examine the impact and presence of the space exploration in our current days. Dr. Griffin in his speech indicated that, "Carl Sagan captured it nicely when, in his usual droll manner, he noted that if the dinosaurs had had a space program, they would not be extinct."[5]

References:
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petra [Accessed 28 October 2010]
[2] http://www.adventure-travel.org.uk/ASIA/petra.php [Accessed 28 October 2010]
[3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_in_Great_Britain_during_the_Industrial_Revolution [Accessed 28 October 2010]
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution [Accessed 28 October 2010]
[5] Griffin, Michael D. (2005) "Remarks for 56th International Astronautical Congress," Fukuoka, Japan.

Circles of Knowledge

In response to Rumsfeld's youtube video posted by George, I offer the above diagram. I first learned about this in high school from my sophomore English teacher, Mrs. Berry. She zealously drew this diagram on the board (sans the axes since they change for each person) and, to this day, describes it as mind-blowing. Perhaps instead of Koen’s conjecture that “to be human is to be an engineer” we should take on Bowker’s view and say “to be human is to categorize.”

Some thought on the classification of design

When I work on the essay of what is engineering, I use the word “design” to set a boundary for the discipline of engineering. Naturally, I have to think about the meaning of design, why it could separate engineering from other domains. Finally, I build my statement on the four-category of systems design intruduced in Figueiredo’s paper (Figueiredo, 2008): design as functional analysis, design as problem-solving, design as problem-setting, and design as emergent evolutionary learning.

In my understanding, the classification of design into four categories is related to the complexity of the problems that engineers are going to tackle. I begin to analyze the engineering problems that require different category of the design process according to the structure and complexity of the problem. I am confused by the categorization of the problems that require design as emergent evolutionary learning with the problems that require design as problem-setting. In Figueiredo’s paper, design as emergent evolutionary learning is involved in dealing with “ill-structured and complex” problems - the problems are unclear at the started point, the goals are implicit, while design as problem-setting is involved in considering less “ill-structured” problems – the goals and criteria of the problems are unstated but could be discovered or negotiated. In such description, I think there is no clear borderline between these two kinds of problems. As a result, I wonder whether there is a clear classification between design as emergent evolutionary learning and design as problem-setting. When engineers take into account both the problems and their solution to understand a temporary situation (design as emergent evolutionary learning process) and then proceed to another temporary state in the problem-solving process, their decision-making process could also be seen as a kind of discovery of the implicit goals and frame of the problems (design as problem-setting).

In Bowker and Star’s paper, they doubted that there exists a real-world classification system that meets all three requirements listed in their paper. If my interpretation of unclear classification of the four categories of design is right, then it could serve as an example of violating the requirement of “the categories are mutually exclusive”. I become more interested in the examination of existing categorization that I could think about, which will definitely help me understand the theory of classification.

Dr. Sadker's Top Ten List of Compelling Issues in Education

Like Ruthie, I had the opportunity to listen to Dr. Sadker last Thursday. I had wanted to take time to further synthesize my ideas, but time keeps slipping away from me, so I am simply including some of my notes and reflections about the experience. I had the opportunity to see Dr. Sadker twice. The first was for an informal discussion for research opportunities between STEM occupations and education. The second was for a presentation on gender in the schools directed toward students. The impression I came away with was, “What a wonderful soul.”

During the first meeting, Dr. Sadker used a conversational style to talk about potential opportunities for research relationships between education and STEM. Dr. Sadker talked about the community outreach program that Tufts had in engineering and was unaware that Tuft’s program was based on our Epics program. The discussion went on to talk about the Purdue Epics program in the high schools and possible ways to research and recruit women through this avenue. We also discussed ways to recruit more women as engineering and physics teachers. I asked if there were ways and ideas that he had about researching programs and skills that started potentially as early as elementary school that not only generated an interest in sciences, but also helped women succeed in the STEM fields once they graduated. I think I am thinking about leadership, perseverance, mediation, - ability to shift their dreams when a door closes- that could start sooner. We have been very successful getting women interested in life sciences, yet they do not continue on in industry… Perhaps we need to continue to generate more interest and have more women pursue these careers so that potentially we reach what Malcolm Gladwell might call a Tipping Point – but if we know women are entering and pretty immediately leaving these fields, don’t we as educators have an obligation to engage in a discussion of these women’s experience before we continue to recruit more women to the same experience? I certainly don’t know the answer – I am just interested in ways to ask the question… Dr. Sadker responded by saying this was one of the difficult questions.

In terms of career, Dr. Sadker said that he wasn’t called to his relationship and research with gender; he was pushed into it. His story was that his wife and he were graduate students together and when they would work together or take classes together, despite his protest to the contrary, people gave him much of the credit that belonged to his wife. Fortunately for their relationship, he realized this. His wife went on to write an article about the “invisible” student and from their earned a book contract. Issues of gender in education became their joint academic pursuits. Dr. Sadker pointed out that gender is both masculine and feminine. Gender studies are not women’s studies but rather gendered studies of the feminine and masculine. He pointed out that while men benefit economically from associating themselves with the masculine gender, they are stereotyped more strongly at earlier ages, have many health issues, and die years earlier. Things I don’t normally think about when I think of white male privilege.

Dr. Sadker also pointed out that it was very important to consider lenses. People say that there are more women then men in college, but Dr. Sadker reported that in terms of middle class men and women, the attendance rate for college is within 1% of the other. He reported that it is African American males and Hispanic males where we lose the male attendance rate as African American and Hispanic women in particular attend colleges at much higher rates than their male counterparts. Dr. Sadker also pointed out that the races were stratified by types of institutions. Many community colleges in urban areas may have a diverse student body whereas ivy leagues colleges are still primarily white. On top of being white and middle class, people consider themselves in the middle class earning anything between 13 thousand to 250 thousand a year. Maybe we need to talk about what is really middle class. I have to agree with that.

So on to the afternoon session.

Dr. Sadker discussed his top 10 list of Important Issues

10) Shifting academic and health issues gap.

• · Women are still drastically under represented in engineering and computer science. In fact, the number of women in computer science is dropping.
• · Eating disorders are on the rise for men
• · Steroid use in teens is on the rise, particularly for women
• · 81% of 10 year old girls are scared of being fat
• · In the age range from 11 to 17, the number one wish for girls is to be thinner

9) Need for Multiple Lenses

• · White middle class men and women go to college at essentially the same rates
• · Over 60% of community colleges’ student bodies are comprised of women
• · Skin color is a critical element in college attendance particularly for men of color

8) Gifted, Special Education, and STEM receive the most funding in education

· These are also areas with more male workers and students – where there’s more money, there’s more men

7)Glass Walls/Glass Ceilings

• · Currently the number of men in elementary education is less than 9%
• · Nursing is heavily female as well, if men do go into it they are promoted to supervisory positions very quickly
• · Women in medicine tend to go into the five lowest paying fields

6) Are Men a gender too?

• · Intuitive versus logical, logic assumed to be “better”
• · Men are mechanical and problems solvers
• · Men pay a terrible price for their gender roles

5) The testing issue

• · Knowledge and relevance is fleeting

4) Politicalization of Everything

• · Including and especially public school education
• · Take for example issue of evolution in Texas and sex education only in the form of Abstinence under Bush Administration

3) Who Commands the Language

• · College Admissions: Quotas, Affirmative Action, and Alumni Legacies
• · Ivy league only opened to women in the 70’s, (Columbia didn’t open up to women until 1980)

2) Single Sex Education versus Coeducation

• · Brains and Neuroplasticity - it is important for all of us to experience multiple ways of learning and knowing.
• · Men and women are more alike than different, they need to be educated in all types of ways to encourage all types of nerve growth
• There are more differences within the genders than between the genders

1) Speaking about Einstein and Newton

• · Synchronicity
• · 96% of reality is not seen
• · Energy is out there, we need to start moving it around
• · Recommended the book, The Living Classroom which talks about the role of energy in the classroom and connectivity

It was quite a discussion, with plenty of room for reflection….

Global Cologuium on Engineering Education

You may or may not have noticed that I missed class last week.  I was in Singapore, attending the ASEE sponsored Global Coloquium on Engineering Education.  (I had this wonderful opportunity because I was presenting a poster.)  I thought I'd post some of my reflections and recollections of the conference as they relate to the questions we are considering in class right now, namely "what is engineering?" and "what is engineering education?"  You might guess that this conference directly addressed some of these topics, and you'd be right.  But not from a philosophically rooted arguement.  It was more from a "this is what I believe" perspective.  And that's really what made the following comments quite interesting.

Ibrahim Yaacob, the Minister of the Environment and Water Resources, Singapore, said, "Engineering doesn't exist for its own sake, but for the sake of society."

Richard Miller, president of Olin College, talked about the need for a liberal education for engineers.  Justifying this need, he said, was the need to have engineers who:

1. Minimize unintended consequences of engineered solutions
2. Are system architects of complex systems comprised of technology, economics, politics, social and religious considerations
3. Conceive, create, and manage technology.

Dr. Miller also said that the typical engineering and science curriculum focused primarily on the concepts embedded in Feasibility.  He said the typical business and economics curriculum focused primarily on the concepts embedded in Viabilily.  And he said the typical psychology, arts, and humanities curriculum focused on the concepts embedded in Desireability.  He then suggested that true innovation is at the center of all three of those domains (Feasibility, Viability, Desireability).  He said that an engineer is one who envisions what has never been and does whatever it takes to bring it to reality.

Al Soyster, from the National Science Foundation, and a former dean of engineering, asked the question:  Should engineering education be for professional preparation or an academic discipline.

Xavier Fouger, of Dassault Systems (the makers of Catia software) said of a particular artifact, "it was engineered; it was deliberate."  I can only infer from his statement that he believes that engineering implies a deliberateness, an intentionality.

Chandrakant Patel, an HP Senior Fellow at HP Labs suggested that the engineering curriculum should include the broadest definition of economic, social and environmental spheres, which he called the "triple bottom line."  He said that engineers need to operate at the intersection of these three spheres.

Paul Gilbert, CEO of Quanser Consulting was the last speaker.  He had a very interesting quote with regard to the need for experiential learning in engineering education.  He said, "You can't have a platonic relationship with engineering."  He said that basic engineering skills (which he did not define) are a commodity, and as such, can be outsourced.  He said that solutions to today's problems will require pervasive technology, are tightlly coupled, complex issues which require systems level thinking, and will require an environmental focus.  He suggested that engineering education should include education on the following:

• world events
• policy developments
• legislation
• culture and communication
• world economic trends
• commercial realities
• complex systems
• practical experiences

You can see that some of the quotes/ideas that I have chosen to highlight are connected to each other and to some of the ideas we've been discussing in class.  Most of them talked about the economic realities that need to be considered.  Many discussed complexity, and how engineering must now be interwoven with society and societal needs.

This Week's Thought Questions

This week's questions are lined with synthesis. Good night and good luck! I have included the work of Donald Rumsfeld in case you feel confused or frustrated.

1. Sheppard’s and Bowker’s works are not divergent. Within the chapters read (and moreso without the chapters read,) the theme of categorical knowledge is thematically paraded. In Sheppard’s work (early on) we read that we have knowledge types, linear models, novice versus expert, component theory, and more. In Bowker’s work we see classification treated as a construct that brings order, value,(and perhaps even sanity). Please reflect upon both works from categorical point of view and address similarities between the two using language and structures from previous design-focused readings. Use succinct arguments from the reading to support your conjectures. (Ex. A starting point could be Bowker’s distinction of standards vs. classifications and how Sheppard lists items ad nauseum that could be one, the other, or both. One could then discuss Dorst’s or Giery’s or others’ work and the relationship between Dorst’s/Giery’s/others’ parameterizations as a new, thematic operationalizational (yes that is a word) lens upon which to refocus what one dissected from his/her’s treatment of Bowker/Sheppard).

2. Bowker speaks about the “cases” (p.10) that do not “fit.” Please reflect upon the classification and standardization processes as proscribed by Bowker using language and themes from Koen and Jonassen and give concrete examples of violations of both using the concept of a standard or classification that does not “fit” the standard or classification schema to which they (supposedly) belong. (Ex. One could, for instance, dissemble the later part of Bowker’s treatise and give examples of the macroscopic-to-microscopic classification problems in his or her particular line of work. One could then note when such a processes violate Bowker’s examples).

3. In light of earlier reading (Mann report and etc,) please reflect upon the later chapters in Sheppard’s work in using terms from Bowker’s work on classifications to illustrate where the needs of supposed stakeholders have led engineering education down the “primrose path to the everlasting bonfire,” so-to-speak. Feel free to expound upon the misclassification of stakeholders and how such issues have deleterious effects in engineering education. (Ex., I would mercilessly poach the current and historical relationship between industry and the Academy using the semantic differences between classification and standards, and note how these issues eventually lead to substandard engineers and engineering teaching practices at the college level and beyond).

4. Consider Bowker’s notes on classification schemas and the properties they add or detract from a subject, then reflect upon the observations of Latour and how Latour’s subjects added or subtracted value within their environment using classification or a lack thereof. Please be critical of not only Bowker’s writing but also of Latour’s methods or assumptions. (Ex. I would definitely make use of the difference between participant and withdrawn ethnography, take apart one or two of Latour’s conjectures, and then use see where that line of thinking overlaps with Bowker’s work).

A REAL ENGINEER

"In 1984 Bernard F Gordon, the inventor of the analog to digital converter, winner of the U.S. National Medal of Technology, and benefactor of the Gordon Prize for Engineering Education of the U.S. National Academy of Engineering, stated in a speech before the European Society of Engineering Education that A REAL ENGINEER is one who has attained and continuously enhances technical, communications, and human relations knowledge, skills and attitudes, and who contributes effectively to society by theorizing, conceiving, developing, and producing reliable structures and machines of practical and economic value." (Crawley, 2007, pp. 10-11) Gordon goes on to define the knowledge required for a real engineer as "relational understanding of the data from which he/she can synthesize new information to solve problems. He also maintains that this knowledge is not limited to science and technology but also should include an understanding of societal evolution through a study of history, economics, sociology, psychology, literature and the arts " (Crawley, 2007, p. 11)  Gordon defines skills as "the problem solving techniques of design exercised with creativity and judgment with communication skills critical to the engineer's roles of follower and leader." (Crawley, 2007, p. 11) Finally Gordon defines the attitudes of a real engineer as "a leader of a team of resources, with a spirit of curiosity and courage that leads to creativity and innovation, and  who accepts the challenges of competition with a perseverance to succeed."(Crawley, 2007, p. 12)

Conceive and Design

Conceive and design 

build and operate machines

makes engineering.

There was a great ENE blog

There was a great ENE blog
that discussed things from Dewey to bogs
Some people wrote lots
on philosophy spots
but I like to write in a fog.

There was a young girl at Purdue

There was a young girl at Purdue
who didn't know quite what to do
but she found E N E
and a great P H D
and now she's a professor too.

There was a young man at Purdue

There was a young man at Purdue
who created designs from the blue
His emergent mind
was caught in a bind
until Purdue turned him into an engineer too.

Concieve and Design

Concieve and design
build and operate machines
makes engineering.

creative design

Creative design
in many emergent minds
makes engineering.