Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Should Structural Engineering be Separted from Civil Engineering

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
This seems to becoming a common topic in places other than this list server.
Let me throw my 37 cents in.

The Civil Field has gotten so broad (with the inclusion of Environmental) that
a 4 year  degree does not give anyone much emphasis in the areas they believe
they will be practicing in.  Not all schools have separated Civil and
Enviromental yet.  Go back to history, Civil was the "catch-all" field.  As
some areas got more elaborate such as electrical, they became their own
curriculum.

I think that the Civil and Environmental fields should be separated with the
following as a suggestion for which topics remain in which area.   I feel the
water quality, hydrology and waste treatment should go with Environmental.
All other areas should remain Civil.  I also think they should eliminate half
of the humanites electives at least.  The claim is that it makes us more
"well-rounded" to take them.  I for one have never used my Greek and Roman
mythology in casual conversation.  In fact, the only thing I remember from it
was 1) it was an easy A course  2) if it involved liquor and women...is was
Zeus.

It is very difficult to get a 4-yr civil degree and have any area of emphasis.
The removal of the water courses and the hours freed up by humanities should
get a undergraduate at least one area of emphasis.  

As far as them needing to know more aobut other areas of engineering, such as
electrical etc., I feel that is better learned during their 4 yr prison term
before taking the PE exam.

Just my thoughts..

Ron Martin (not Earl Conroy)
Martin Structural