Is Engineering Different from Engineering Technology?

This is a frequent question for students and parents who may not be familiar with engineering fields. To avoid unexpected loss of time and money, it is best to ask a few questions before selecting a program. This can also impact college transfer student studies and graduate school studies.

(Let us digress a moment to bring along the liberal arts majors)

Leonardo da Vinci and Albrecht Duerer were two famous engineers who did not have to deal with this question in their own pioneering era ( i.e., before the Ivy’s). The Civil Engineers of earlier Roman times had aggravated the problem with the addition of concrete, roads, aqueducts and arenas, but technology had still not exploded into the ever increasing gale we are now experiencing. All these people who worked so well with their hands, still had to develop educational tools.

When formal engineering education took hold in Europe and America, mechanical aptitude, mechanical drawing, material casting/machine shops, algebra basic science and basic grammar were the rule. The more traditional university studies did not belong to the world of the working class. This class distinction also inhibited the development of many engineering programs in many well established universities.

While in engineering college admissions a frequent question dealt with mechanical aptitude. The common assumption was that mechanical aptitude and drafting were the heart and sole of engineering and every parent knew that. While still an engineering student at a different engineering school, I interviewed a VP at MIT for our school paper and questioned why they had dropped the requirement of mechanical drawing from their program. He answered that there are only so many hours in four years and that they needed more time to teach theory in math and science courses. An ever widening use of the rapidly developing sciences were pushing the need to understand more theory so the engineers could develop the myriad of new applications. They needed both, but they did not have the time to do both. Our own school dropped drafting as a required course for the same reason a few years later causing the author of the countries largest selling drafting textbook to resign after decades of teaching.

Change can be tough!

Programs kept growing and changing. More theory is needed in engineering today, BUT we still need the modern technology tools and techniques taught in technology programs. Both can not be accomplished in one four year program.

Students who had completed a four year technology program with a BS in (fill in the major) technology would apply to a graduate engineering program in the same field and be referred by the graduate school to undergraduate transfer admissions. As I was in transfer admissions at the time, I can report that these students were not happy to hear that they needed about a year’s worth of courses to catch up on theory before they were ready for graduate school.

Foundation courses in math, science, thermodynamics, etc. may be designed to be open or closed ended. The open ended courses teach more theory on the assumption that more in-depth courses are to follow. Foundation courses (particularly in math) need to be engineered to couple up with the next carload of theory.
As usual, students need to collect information to make an informed choice. It is my belief that one of the factors holding many female students back from selecting engineering studies is this belief that they need mechanical aptitude and and familiarity with hand tools to study engineering. At the end of one interview a liberated mother was prodding a civil engineering dad to permit their daughter to pursue the daughter’s engineering interest even though she my hear men swearing on the job.

This information is based on ten years experience in engineering and engineering transfer admission which is now 35 years old. It would be helpful for more recent participants in the fields of engineering and engineering technologies to jump into this discussion as the same old questions are still popping up. Please tell us how it has changed.

How an individual arrives at a given income cannot be covered or explained here as it probably varies widely. It also doesn’t address a basic problem.

That is an awfully long post to answer a question whose answer is simply “yes”.

It is difficult for me to believe in one word answers. It is like saying there is no such thing as climate change and leaving it at that. I also feel history helps us to place an issue in context. Context is important to understanding. Speed does not imply accuracy in the learning process. I’m not interested in racking up my score here!

Responses to an older technology thread raised the issue of income as an important determinate in program selection. An anecdotal two line response about an individual receiving a high income may lead to impulsive decisions. We know that the majority of entering freshmen do not end up majoring in the same field envisioned at 16 while in secondary school. I’m concerned that an answer without context increases the probability of a collapsing bridge.

I feel this should be a process of dialogue and discovery and not a multiple choice answer.

One of the problems, though, is that this topic has been discussed at length many times in this forum, so I don’t really know why we need another thread to rehash all of the same points.

Engineering technology is less math-heavy, less theory-based, and more “hands-on”. If you drew a Venn diagram of the careers for each, you would find some overlap, but quite a lot of differences. Graduates of technology programs typically earn less than those with traditional engineering degrees (though still earn a respectable amount), and their jobs are no less valid or valuable than traditional engineers; they’re just different.

That’s really all there is to it.

Here are answers to the question from ABET (which accredits both engineering and engineering technology degree programs) and Rochester Institute of Technology (which offers both kinds of degree programs):
http://www.abet.org/accreditation/new-to-accreditation/engineering-vs-engineering-technology/
http://www.rit.edu/emcs/admissions/academics/majors/engineering-tech-or-engineering