Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Every year, hundreds of millions of dollars are spent in the United
States to improve the public understanding of engineering (NAE,
2002). Despite these efforts, educational research shows that k–12
teachers and students generally have a poor understanding of what
engineers do (Cunningham et al., 2005; Cunningham and knight,
2004). Polling data show that the public believes engineers are not
as engaged with societal and community concerns as scientists or as
likely to play a role in saving lives (Harris Interactive, 2004). And when
asked to judge the relative prestige of professions, people tend to place
engineering in the middle of the pack, well below medicine, nursing,
science, and teaching (Harris Interactive, 2006). Parents, however, are
generally amenable to the idea of their sons and daughters opting for
careers in engineering.
Understandably, engineers, engineering educators, and the orga-
nizations that represent them want people to have an accurate, more
positive impression of engineering. However, there also other impor-
tant reasons for improving the public understanding of engineering:
OCR for page 2
CHANGING THE CONVERSATION
• Sustaining the U.S. capacity for technological innovation.
A better understanding of engineering would educate policy
makers and the public as to how engineering contributes to
economic development, quality of life, national security, and
health.
• Attracting young people to careers in engineering. A better
understanding of engineering should encourage students
to take higher level math and science courses in middle
school, thus enabling them to pursue engineering educa-
tion in the future. This is especially important for girls and
underrepresented minorities, who have not historically been
attracted to technical careers in large numbers.
• Improving technological literacy. To be capable, confident
participants in our technology-dependent society, citizens
must know something about how engineering and science,
among other factors, lead to new technologies (NAE and NRC,
2002).
GOAL OF ThE MESSAGING PROjECT
The goal of this project, primarily funded by the National Sci-
ence Foundation with additional support from the Georgia Institute
of Technology and the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, is to encourage
coordinated, consistent, effective communication by the engineering
community to a variety of audiences, including school children, their
parents, teachers, and counselors, about the role, importance, and
career potential of engineering. The project had three objectives:
• to identify a small number of messages likely to improve the
public understanding of engineering
• to test the effectiveness of these messages in a variety of target
audiences
• to disseminate the results of the message testing to the engi-
neering community
This project did not have the goal of developing metrics for mea-
suring the effectiveness of messaging efforts. Nevertheless, it is reason-
OCR for page 3
Executive Summary
able to ask what one might look for as evidence of “improvement” in
public understanding of engineering. One indicator of improvement
would be the number and diversity of organizations using this report
to shape their engineering outreach. Over time, we would hope to
see growth in this set of organizations, and that might be measured
through surveys of the engineering community. A longitudinal study,
combined with “dipstick” surveys before, during, and after the deploy-
ment of new messages, could indicate the extent to which the public
recognizes the new messages or associates certain key words, such as
creativity and innovation, with engineering.
The remainder of the Executive Summary is focused on survey
results for the messages, and it briefly discusses testing data related
to several shorter, more punchy “taglines.” Additional findings are
described in the full report, and complete data tables of the survey
results are provided in an accompanying CD. The CD also contains a
copy of the full report as a PDF.
METhODOLOGy
Through a request-for-proposals process, the committee selected
the communications firm Bemporad Baranowski Marketing Group
to oversee message development, in partnership with Global Strategy
Group (GSG), a market research company. GSG and Harris Interactive,
another market-research firm, were selected to test the messages.
The study used qualitative and quantitative research. The qualita-
tive research included in-depth interviews, youth “triads” (same-sex
groups of three 9–11-year-olds), and adult and teen focus groups
to determine perceptions of engineers and engineering by different
groups as a basis for developing a positioning statement, messages,
and taglines. The quantitative research consisted of an online survey
that oversampled for African Americans and Hispanics. The goal of
the quantitative research was to shed light on the findings of the focus
groups and provide a statistically sound foundation for the committee’s
recommendations. The committee also solicited feedback through pre-
sentations at relevant meetings and by posting an interim status report
on the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) website to encourage
input from a cross section of the engineering community and others.
OCR for page 4
CHANGING THE CONVERSATION
In the interviews, focus groups, and youth triads, small samples
were selected without statistical procedures. The results of this quali-
tative research had to be tested through quantitative methods. In the
quantitative research, the online survey, respondents were part of
volunteer survey panels. Thus we could not control exactly who would
take part in the survey, and the responses may not accurately reflect
the demographics of the sample populations. This common limitation
was addressed by weighting (i.e., adjusting survey responses upward
or downward to match the demographic variable of interest). Non-
responses also affect the representativeness of a sample, and thus the
“generalizability” of the results. Another limitation was that respon-
dents were required to have access to the Internet. In the committee’s
view, these methodological issues do not detract from the usefulness
of the study’s findings.
ThE ENGINEERING MESSAGING LANDSCAPE
Current and past engineering outreach to the public and message
development have been ad hoc efforts, and metrics for tracking results
have rarely been used. Although a variety of useful tactics have been
tried, no consistent message has been communicated, even among
projects by the same organization. Most outreach initiatives target high
school students with an eye toward “priming the engineering education
pipeline.” Less attention has been paid to elementary and middle school
students, where efforts would serve a “mainline” function of promot-
ing technological literacy and stimulating interest in mathematics and
science. With the notable exception of National Engineers Week, most
outreach programs have been local.
In general, messages targeting younger children attempt to con-
vince them that mathematics and science are easy or fun and that engi-
neering is challenging, exciting, hands-on, and rewarding. Messages for
older, prospective college students tend to emphasize career potential.
For the most part, these have been direct statements emphasizing the
personal benefits of being an engineer.
A recurring theme in many messaging efforts is that engineering
requires skills in mathematics and science. Frequently, these messages
OCR for page 5
Executive Summary
suggest that students must have an aptitude for and strong interest in
these subjects to succeed in engineering.
ChANGING ThE CONvERSATION
In collaboration with the committee, the consultants developed
a positioning statement to guide future outreach activities by the
engineering community (Box ES-1). This optimistic, inspirational
statement emphasizes connections between engineering and ideas
and possibilities, rather than engineering as a math and science based
method of solving problems. The statement describes engineering as
inherently creative and concerned with human welfare, as well as an
emotionally satisfying calling. In short, the statement changes the tone
and content of the conversation about engineering. A positioning state-
ment is the conceptual foundation for a communications campaign,
but it is not usually shared with the public.
BOX ES-1
New Positioning Statement
No profession unleashes the spirit of innovation like engineering.
From research to real-world applications, engineers constantly dis-
cover how to improve our lives by creating bold new solutions that
connect science to life in unexpected, forward-thinking ways. Few
professions turn so many ideas into so many realities. Few have
such a direct and positive effect on people’s everyday lives. We are
counting on engineers and their imaginations to help us meet the
needs of the 21st century.
Findings from the Qualitative Research
Students in the focus groups and triads were asked to describe
their images of engineers, their understanding of engineering, their
reactions to examples of engineering, their views on current school
subjects, and their hopes for future careers. Participants in the parent
OCR for page 6
CHANGING THE CONVERSATION
group were asked to describe their thoughts and ideas about career
choices for their children. Both students and parents were also asked
their reactions to several preliminary messaging “themes” (Box ES-2)
based on the positioning statement.
BOX ES-2
Preliminary Messaging Themes
Ideas in Action.
This theme underscores how engineering uniquely bridges the
world of science with the real world.
Life Takes Engineering.
This theme focuses on the field’s essential role and life-changing
work.
A Limitless Imagination.
This theme speaks to the innovative, design-driven nature of
engineering.
Free to Explore.
This theme evokes the constant journey that is the engineer’s quest
for new solutions.
Shape the Future.
This theme speaks to how engineering offers an empowering and
rewarding career.
An Enterprising Spirit.
This theme recognizes the inventive spirit and pioneering contribu-
tions of the field.
Summary Findings: Students
• Most students understand that engineers “design and build
things” but have a limited sense of what engineers actually do.
• Students have a generally positive impression of engineers,
but many feel that they are not smart enough to become
engineers.
OCR for page 7
Executive Summary
• Many students believe engineering work is sedentary, per-
formed mostly on computers, and involves little contact with
other people.
• Most girls believe women can be engineers as well as men.
• When asked to name engineers, most students could only
name men.
• Examples of engineering related to familiar objects and
activities stimulated the most interest in learning more about
engineering.
• “Making good money” was named most often as a career goal.1
However, the idea of “making a difference” also had very strong
appeal.
Summary Findings: Parents
• Most parents thought engineering would provide job security
(e.g., good salary and benefits) and a career path for advance-
ment and success.
• Parents tended to favor the practical messaging themes, reflect-
ing their emphasis on job security for their children.
Findings from the Quantitative Research
To test the results of qualitative research, the committee col-
lected quantitative data from an online survey administered to nearly
3,600 individuals. The survey instrument comprised six questions
about views of engineering and engineers and four questions about
the proposed messages and taglines that had been refined to reflect
the results of the focus groups and triads (Box ES-3). The survey was
administered in two phases: to an initial sample of teens and adults in
December 2006 and an oversample of African American and Hispanic
teens and adults in spring 2007.
All five messages were scored at least “somewhat appealing” by
the overwhelming majority of adults and teens. The message with the
1By contrast, teens in the online survey rated the importance of salary second or
third behind “interesting work” and “work that makes a difference, is meaningful.”
OCR for page 8
CHANGING THE CONVERSATION
BOX ES-3
Messages Tested in the Online Survey
Engineers make a world of difference.*
From new farming equipment and safer drinking water to electric
cars and faster microchips, engineers use their knowledge to
improve people’s lives in meaningful ways.
Engineers are creative problem-solvers.
They have a vision for how something should work and are dedi-
cated to making it better, faster, or more efficient.
Engineers help shape the future.
They use the latest science, tools, and technology to bring ideas
to life.
Engineering is essential to our health, happiness, and safety.
From the grandest skyscrapers to microscopic medical devices, it is
impossible to imagine life without engineering.
Engineers connect science to the real world.
They collaborate with scientists and other specialists (such as ani-
mators, architects, or chemists) to turn bold new ideas into reality.
*This message was inspired by a similar theme used to promote National
Engineers Week.
highest “very appealing” rating among all groups was “Engineers make
a world of difference.” This message was also considered the “most
believable” and “most relevant.” In general, however, girls were less
enthusiastic than boys about all of the messages.
“Engineers connect science to the real world” was given the fewest
votes for “very appealing” among all groups and was the least “person-
ally relevant” for all groups but African American adults. This finding
was confirmed when survey participants were asked to choose a single
“most appealing” message.
OCR for page 9
Executive Summary
The survey also revealed some significant gender differences. For
example, boys in the initial sample found “Engineering makes a world
of difference” and “Engineers are creative problem solvers” equally
appealing. Girls also found “Engineering makes a world of difference”
the most appealing. However, the second most appealing message for
girls was “Engineering is essential to our health, happiness, and safety.”
Girls ages 16 to 17 in the African American sample and all girls in the
Hispanic sample found this second message significantly more appeal-
ing than did the boys in those groups.
Testing of Preliminary Taglines
In addition to messages, the online survey tested several prelimi-
nary taglines (Box ES-4). Because of time and funding constraints, the
taglines had been developed intuitively from the results of the qualita-
tive research, without the benefit of creative prototypes (such as posters,
TV ads, or web pages). In addition, the taglines were only tested in the
online surveys. Thus the results may not represent the best measure of
their true potential. Nevertheless, several taglines tested well.
The tagline “Turning ideas into reality” tested well among all
survey respondents. This straightforward tagline, which is consistent
with the messages used to promote National Engineers Week, is more
descriptive than evocative and conveys a direct message that does not
require additional creative context. As a stand-alone tagline, it makes
BOX ES-4
Preliminary Taglines
• Turning ideas into reality
• Because dreams need doing
• Designed to work wonders
• Life takes engineering
• The power to do
• Bolder by design
• Behind the next big thing
OCR for page 10
0 CHANGING THE CONVERSATION
the most sense of the seven. It is interesting to note, however, that the
phrase “ideas into reality” also appears in the full description of “Engi-
neers connect science to the real world,” which was the least appealing
of the five tested messages, especially among women. This discrepancy
reinforces the need for additional testing of taglines. A tagline that
tested especially well among teens in the initial survey was “Because
dreams need doing.”
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Happily, our research showed that engineers do not have major
image problems. In fact, contrary to the image engineers have of
themselves, the public views engineering and engineers in a relatively
positive light. Our research showed that fewer than 15 percent associ-
ated the words “boring” or “nerdy” with engineering. In fact, most
adults and teens respect engineers and consider their work rewarding
and important, but perhaps not enough to inspire them to become
engineers.
We did find that the public has a poor idea of what engineers actu-
ally do on a day-to-day basis; and there is a strong sense that engineer-
ing is not “for everyone,” and perhaps especially not for girls. Most
current messages are framed to emphasize the strong links between
engineering and just one of its attributes—the need for mathematics
and science skills. In other words, current messages often ignore other
vital characteristics of engineering, such as creativity, teamwork, and
communication.
Based on our research, we can make a strong case that effective
messaging will require audience segmentation. The “branding” of engi-
neering must be modified to appeal to (1) teens in general, (2) teenage
boys, and (3) teenage girls, as well as to (4) adults.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The committee’s first two recommendations address how the
positioning statement and messages should be used. These recom-
mendations are immediately actionable by organizations interested in
improving public understanding of engineering. The third and fourth
OCR for page 11
Executive Summary
recommendations, which suggest the need to refine the preliminary
taglines and to develop a public relations “tool kit” for the engineer-
ing community, can be addressed in the near term and will require
dedicated personnel and funding. Efforts to carry out the last recom-
mendation, which proposes an ambitious, large-scale communications
“campaign,” can begin immediately, but successful implementation will
require long-term, sustained effort by many organizations.
Using the Positioning Statement
Recommendation 1. To present an effective case for the importance of
engineering and the value of an engineering education, the engineering
community should engage in coordinated, consistent, effective com-
munication to “reposition” engineering. Specifically, the engineering
community should adopt and actively promote the positioning state-
ment (Box 4-1) in this report, which emphasizes that engineering and
engineers can make a difference in the world, rather than describing
engineering in terms of required skills and personal benefits. The
statement should not appear verbatim in external communications
but should be used as a point of reference, or anchor, for all public
outreach.
One of the most significant findings of this project is the strong
association in the mind of the public between competency in math-
ematics and science and the ability to become an engineer. “Must be
good at math and science” was by far the most frequently selected
attribute of engineering in the online survey, suggesting that messages
emphasizing this attribute have been understood by all adults and teen-
agers. Unfortunately, many of them appear to consider this a negative,
a barrier to engineering studies. In keeping with this finding, our test-
ing also showed that the weakest of the five tested messages portrayed
engineers as “connecting science to the real world.”
We conclude, therefore, that continuing to emphasize math and
science in marketing or rebranding engineering is unnecessary and
may damage rather than increase the appeal of engineering. The
same can be said of messages that focus on the practical benefits of
OCR for page 12
CHANGING THE CONVERSATION
being an engineer, rather than the inspirational, optimistic aspects of
engineering.
An example of how the medical profession is promoted may help
illustrate the potential value of Recommendation 1. The medical pro-
fession does not market itself to young people by pointing out that they
will have to study organic chemistry or by emphasizing the long, hard
road to becoming a physician. The image of the physician is of a person
who cures diseases and relieves human suffering.
When promoting engineering, our appeal should tap into the hopes
and dreams of prospective students and the public. This approach
would also have the virtue of placing math and science, correctly, as
just two of a number of skills and dispositions, such as collaboration,
communication, and teamwork, necessary to a successful engineer.
Adopting Tested Messages
Recommendation 2. The four messages that tested well in this
project—“Engineers make a world of difference,” “Engineers are
creative problem solvers,” “Engineers help shape the future,” and “Engi-
neering is essential to our health, happiness, and safety”—should be
adopted by the engineering community in ongoing and new public
outreach initiatives. The choice of a specific message should be based
on the demographics of the target audience(s) and informed by the
qualitative and quantitative data collected during this project.
Our research should not preclude others from pursuing mes-
sage development, but we strongly feel that the rigorous process
we used to generate our messages justifies their widespread use. In
February 2008, the NAE launched a new website, Engineer Your Life
(www.engineeryourlife.org), which aims to interest academically pre-
pared high school girls in careers in engineering. The site used our
message “Engineers make a world of difference” on its homepage and
adopted other key words vetted in our research, such as creativity
and problem-solving.
OCR for page 13
Executive Summary
Using the Preliminary Taglines
Recommendation 3. More rigorous research should go forward
to identify and test a small number of taglines for a nationwide
engineering-awareness campaign. The taglines should be consistent
with the positioning statement and messages developed through this
project and should take into account differences among target popu-
lations. In the interest of encouraging coordination among outreach
activities, the results of this research should be made widely available
to the engineering community.
Given additional resources, it would have been useful in this
project to develop and test more taglines in context and to test the con-
textualized taglines in focus groups. The results reported here should
be viewed as preliminary, but the positive responses to several of our
preliminary taglines in online testing suggest that they may be able to
be used effectively for engineering-outreach projects.
Developing a Shared Public-Relations Resource
Recommendation 4. To facilitate the deployment of effective messages,
an online public relations “tool kit” should be developed for the engi-
neering community that includes information about research-based
message-development initiatives and examples of how messages have
and can be used effectively (e.g., in advertising, press releases, informa-
tional brochures, and materials for establishing institutional identity).
The online site should also provide a forum for the sharing of informa-
tion among organizations.
One reason ad hoc efforts to promote public awareness of engi-
neering have had limited success, at best, is that they do not convey
consistent messages. In addition, because of the discontinuity and lack
of coordination among these activities, effective metrics cannot be used
to refine messages or improve outreach. The committee believes that,
in the short term, consistent use of messages, even by a modest number
of organizations, would be a huge step forward in promoting a more
positive public perception of engineering.
OCR for page 14
CHANGING THE CONVERSATION
Launching a Campaign
Recommendation 5. A representative cross section of the engineering
community should convene to consider funding, logistics, and other
aspects of a coordinated, multiyear communications campaign to
improve the public understanding of engineering.
Over the long term, the committee believes a more explicit, coordi-
nated approach to public outreach is likely to yield better results than
we have obtained so far. Thoughtful targeting of the messages and
further refinement of taglines will be necessary, but not sufficient, for
success. Messages and taglines must be embedded in a larger strategic
framework—a communications campaign. The most effective cam-
paigns are driven by a strong brand position communicated in a variety
of ways, delivered by a variety of messengers, and supported by dedi-
cated resources. Effective campaigns also measure the impact of their
activities and, most important, are given enough time to succeed.
A campaign of the necessary size and duration to measurably
improve the public understanding of engineering will require signifi-
cant resources. Our consultants proposed a “conservative” price tag of
$12 million to $25 million per year for two or three years. The commit-
tee believes that, although this may be enough to initiate a campaign,
the long-term costs would be much higher.
Three concerns must be addressed for such an undertaking. First,
resources on this scale are not likely to be provided by government or
foundations. The engineering community, particularly large, influen-
tial, technology-focused corporations, must be enlisted to support the
campaign.
Second, the committee believes that centralized planning will be
necessary to ensure effective coordination and communication, which
would require agreement by the major participants. National Engineers
Week, a cooperative outreach venture in engineering, might be lever-
aged for this purpose. However, the creation of a new structure may be
necessary to coordinate a campaign.
Third, metrics will be essential to determining the effectiveness of
messages, strategies, and taglines. Although measuring the outcomes
of public outreach efforts is notoriously difficult, a campaign of this
OCR for page 15
Executive Summary
scope must include a substantial evaluation component to determine
what works and to improve upon elements that are not as effective as
expected.
A FINAL WORD
The project described in this summary and expanded upon in
the full report has followed a carefully designed process for develop-
ing messages for public understanding of engineering. The approach
utilized the services of professionals in the fields of communications
and market research, and it employed quantitative as well as qualitative
research methods. To ensure balance and accuracy, the committee’s
report and its findings and recommendations were carefully reviewed
by an outside group of experts. The rigor of the study process should
reassure the engineering community—and others interested in this
important topic—that there is now a tested set of tools available to
promote a more positive image of the field.
The most significant outcome of this project is the recasting of
engineering in the positioning statement. If it is adopted by the engi-
neering community, it will not only reshape engineers’ self-image, but
will also empower engineers to communicate more confidently with
the public.
As work continues on enriching, expanding, and disseminating
messaging resources, the engineering community can take immediate
action. Even if a national campaign is not immediately forthcoming,
the creative implementation of the messages and taglines in this report
can have an impact. Combined, consistent efforts by multiple organi-
zations following the same “playbook” can create positive momentum
toward making engineering more appealing and better understood by
students, educators, parents, policy makers, and society at large. In this
way, we may truly begin to change the conversation.
REFERENCES
Cunningham, C., and M. knight. 2004. Draw an Engineer Test: Development of a Tool
to Investigate Studentsí Ideas about Engineers and Engineering. Proceedings of the
2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposi-
tion. Salt Lake City, Utah, June 20–23. Washington, D.C.: ASEE.
OCR for page 16
CHANGING THE CONVERSATION
Cunningham, C., C. Lachapelle, and A. Lindgren-Streicher. 2005. Assessing Elementary
School Students Conceptions of Engineering and Technology. Proceedings of the
2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposi-
tion. Portland, Ore., June 12–15. Washington, D.C.: ASEE.
Harris Interactive. 2004. American Perspectives on Engineers and Engineering. Poll
conducted for the American Association of Engineering Societies. Final report,
February 13, 2004. Available online at http://www.aaes.org/harris_00_files/frame.
htm. (July 6, 2007)
Harris Interactive. 2006. Firefighters, doctors, and nurses top list as “most prestigious occu-
pations,” according to latest Harris Poll. The Harris Poll #58, July 26, 2006. Available
online at http://harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=. (July 6, 2007)
NAE (National Academy of Engineering). 2002. Raising Public Awareness of Engineering.
L. Davis and R. Gibbin, eds. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
NAE and NRC (National Research Council). 2002. Technically Speaking: Why All Ameri-
cans Need to know More About Technology. Washington, D.C.: National Academy
Press.
