I know that you’ll judge me for this, but by identifying the standard, male dominated issue with “hard” subjects and things that this new female-friendly program emphasizes more (like ETHICS) as “squishy” is only perpetuating gender bias. I mean, c’mon–male = hard, female = squishy? We both know that both genders are more complex than that. I’m sure that it’s unintentional at least in your case, since you are a gentleman and a scholar, but it’s still there.
Furthermore, the program is not taking the focus away from the traditional content matter from engineering. They’re only balancing it with other important things–e.g., ethics.
Related Posts
[...] 2. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part II) [...]
By: Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part III) « The Arguenauts on March 2, 2008
at 1:32 am
[...] 1. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? 2. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part II) [...]
By: Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part IV) « The Arguenauts on March 2, 2008
at 1:34 am
[...] Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? 2. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part II) 3. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part III) 4. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part [...]
By: The Arguenauts on March 2, 2008
at 1:38 am
[...] Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? 2. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part II) 3. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part III) 4. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part IV) [...]
By: Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part IV) « The Arguenauts on March 2, 2008
at 1:42 am
[...] Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? 2. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part II) 3. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part III) 4. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part IV) [...]
By: Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part X) « The Arguenauts on March 2, 2008
at 2:05 am