1. Well, we’re going to have to agree to disagree, I think. Hard/soft isn’t value-neutral on my view.

2ab. There is a tradeoff, yes. But if that tradeoff enables more people to be engineers, and those engineers are still competent, I think that’s alright. The necessary and sufficient conditions of being an engineer aren’t static.

2c. Your class on ethics being a sham is a great reason why engineering programs should have more of a focus on ethics, like Smith’s. Your ethics class being ineffective doesn’t mean that all ethics and engineering classes are.

The humanities method (interesting word, ala our early modern class of sophomore year) works for people who have the inclination and the formation such that they can and do pursue the humanities on their own. Most people need more than just the opportunity to pursue a humanist education though. I like the Smith program precisely because it has the possibility of producing more engineers with humanist tendencies.

Related Posts

1. 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)
5. Engineering Education: Dumbed Down? (Part V)