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 8
c
Participation in Continuing
Education The Engineer's
Perspective
This chapter focuses on the engineer as a user of continuing educa-
tion and evaluates current information about continuing education
participation with respect to the following questions:
1. Why do engineers participate Or not participate) in continuing
education?
2. How do the needs and motivation of the engineer vis-a-vis contin-
uing education differ with career stage?
3. To what extent do engineers participate in various types of contin-
uing education?
4. Does participation in continuing education by engineers vary by
level of education, career stage, field, size/location of firm, or employer
financial support?
5. How does continuing education affect an engineer's career?
The panel addressed these questions by evaluating published research
results and analyzing data already collected rather than by conducting
new studies. Several difficulties are inherent in this approach.
First, most of the published studies that relate to the engineer and
continuing education were done in the late 1970s some, even earlier.
Few, if any, studies have been conducted in the 1980s. The reason for
this gap is that support for research on continuing education for engi-
neers came primarily from the National Science Foundation {1977b),
which has not funded such research since about 1980. Without more
8
OCR for page 9
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
9
current data, we cannot ascertain whether the results obtained in the
late 1970s or earlier are applicable to present conditions in the field of
engineering. This caveat should lie kept in mind by the reader when
reaching conclusions based on the material presented here.
Second, existing survey data present several problems. One is the
time lag involved in making surveys available for public use. For exam-
ple, a major study analyzed here is the Bureau of the Census Survey of
Natural and Social Scientists and Engineers {NSSEJ, a biennial longitu-
dinal survey for 1972-1978. This was the most recent survey for which
public-use tapes were available and that included a representative sam-
ple of working engineers. Thus, the caveat on conclusions noted for the
published studies also applies to the analysis of the NSSE survey. A
second problem with the NSSE data is that the scope of the survey was
very broad; continuing education was not its focus. The results, there-
fore, cannot answer many of the panel's questions. Moreover, many
questions cannot be answered directly by the raw data but require
major manipulations of variables involving extensive, time-consum-
ing, and often difficult programming. J
Given these limitations, it is clear that s~gn~can~ gaps In cur Know~-
edge of the engineer and continuing education will remain after this
analysis is completed. One of its aims, therefore, will be the identifica-
tion of research needs in continuing education for engineers.
The following sections present the panel's evaluation and analysis of
the issues raised in the questions listed above.
, . .
Motivation for Participation
Data from several studies can help explain why engineers participate
in continuing education. Two nationwide surveys of engineers were
conducted by Battelle Memorial Institute in large urban [Levy and
Newman, 1979J and small nonurban firms "Welling et al., 1980J. These
surveys allow comparisons of engineers' objectives in pursuing contin-
uing education and their employers' perceptions of those objectives.
Also, since the questionnaires in the two studies were somewhat com-
parable, the panel compared data on most {but not allJ the objectives of
engineers pursuing continuing education in large urban and small non-
urban firms.
For engineers in large urban firms, the most important reason for
participating in continuing education was to prepare for increased
responsibility Table 1J. For those in small nonurban establishments,
however, the most important aim of continuing education was to per-
form their present jobs better. This difference may be a result of the
OCR for page 10
10
CONTINUING EDUCATION OF ENGINEERS
TABLE 1 Judged Importance Ratings by Engineers and Their
Employers of Employee Objectives for Participation in Continuing
Education
Objective
-
Prepare for increased responsibility
Perform present job assignment better
Promote intellectual stimulation
Prevent obsolescence
Attain increased knowledge
Attain enhanced or authority position
in new field
Remedy deficiencies in initial training
Prepare for new job in same field
Prepare for new job in new field
Attain a salary increase
Fulfill requirements for promotion
Maintain present position in company
Get to know others in field
Prepare for or maintain professional
registration
Engineers Employers
Urban Nonurban Urban Nonurban
(N = 140 ~(N = 100) (N = 851 (N = 76)
3.9
3.5
3.7
3.3
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.6
2.5
Meet expectations of supervisor 2.1
3.2
3.8
3.2
3.4
3.0
2.6
2.7
2.0
2.0
1.7
2.0
2.6
1.6
1.7
4.0
3.7
3.2
3.7
2.7
3.5
2.5
2.8
3.0
2.6
3.9
3.9
2.9
3.3
3.6
3.1
2.7
2.5
2.9
2.8
3.1
2.5
2.4
2.4
NOTE: Rating scale ranges from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (of highest importance).
SOURCE: Levy and Newman ( 1979J; Welling et al. ( 1980~.
greater number of opportunities for increased responsibility in larger
organizations. Such a difference is not seen in the two studies between
employers, who rate preparation for increased responsibility and
attaining better performance in the present job as equally important
objectives of continuing education.
Preventing obsolescence is rated the second most important objec-
tive of continuing education by engineers in small nonurban firms.
This supports the results of earlier studies, which found this to be the
number one objective {Kaufman, 1974, 1975J. The prevention of obso-
lescence goal was not included in the survey of large urban firms; in
those organizations engineers considered intellectual stimulation the
second most important objective. However, factor analysis of the data
Presented belowJ shows that engineers who chose intellectual stimu-
lation as an objective tended also to believe that continuing education
was important to prevent obsolescence. Regardless of the size of the
firm employers tended to perceive intellectual stimulation as a less
important objective of continuing education than did their engineers.
These findings are partly supported by the results of a recent survey of
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers {IEEEJ members
OCR for page 11
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
11
Adam, 1984), which found that the two most important reasons why
they took educational courses were to learn new technology {59.2 per-
cent~ and to obtain intellectual stimulation `40.1 percent). In contrast,
the two most important employer objectives for continuing education
were to prepare engineers for increased responsibility {53.7 percent)
and to perform present jolt assignments more efficiently [46 percent).
The size of the firm may also affect the rewards and the perceptions of
rewards for participation in continuing education. Engineers in small
nonurban firms, for example, were less likely to participate to attain a
salary increase or a promotion than were those in large urban establish-
ments {see Table 1~. Furthermore, while small nonurban employers
rated the salary and promotion objectives of continuing education as
much more important than did their engineers, such differences were
not found in large urban companies. It would appear that small non-
urban establishments may not be providing for communicating the
existence off rewards as well as opportunities for increased re-
sponsibility-that could motivate engineers to pursue continuing
education.
Among the lowest rated objectives for participation in continuing
education was to meet the expectations of the supervisor, a finding that
has been corroborated by the IEEE survey {Adam, 1984~. Once again,
engineers in small nonurban firms provided the lowest ratings. The
importance of supervisors in motivating their engineers to participate
in continuing education has long been known Kaufman, 1974, 1975~.
From the results of the Levy and Newman and the Welling et al. studies,
it would appear either that few supervisors expect their engineers to
participate in continuing education or that supervisors fail to commu-
nicate that expectation when it does exist.
Factor analyses of engineers' objectives in pursuing continuing edu-
cation identified several broad, relatively independent categories of
motivation. Each category includes related objectives that can be sum-
marized as follows {not in order of importance): to maintain and
improve job performance; for increased responsibilities, advancement,
and rewards; for intellectual stimulation; and to prepare for a new job.
While the studies cited above indicate that differences in work envi-
ronments apparently do affect engineers' motivation to participate in
continuing education, the data are too limited to arrive at any meaning-
ful conclusions.
Barriers to Participation
A question related to motivation is why engineers do not pursue
continuing education. However, in the two studies discussed above, it
OCR for page 12
12
No Payoff
No Need
Reason for Not Participating
Company Does Not Encourage
Supervisor Does Not Encourage
Company Financial Support Insufficient
Physical Distance Prohibitive
Needed Courses Not Offered Conveniently
Other Personal Commitment More Important
Other
CONTINUING EDUCATION OF ENGINEERS
...................... . ,,., ~
A,
................
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
.. .... .. ....... ......
. ....
.............
.............. --.-. . -.- ~
At_
,, ,,,.,,,, ,,, ~
0 20 40 60
PE RC ENT OF NO N PA RT I C I PANTS
FIGURE 1 Employee reasons for not participating in continuing education within the
last three years. SOURCE: Welling et al. (19801.
was asked only in the survey of small nonurban firms "Welling et al.,
1980J. The most frequent reason engineers gave for not participating
{cited by almost two-thirds of the respondents J was their prohibitive
distance from sources of continuing education [Figure 1J. The next
most important barrier [for almost halfJ was that needed courses were
not offered conveniently [i.e., were not offered at all or were not offered
at times when the individual could attendJ. About one-third did not
participate in continuing education because other personal commit-
ments were more important. And approximately one-quarter of the
engineers indicated that they did not pursue continuing education for a
host of reasons [including no need for it in their present positions, no
payoff in terms of organizational rewards, and no encouragement by
their immediate supervisory.
From these results it is clear that while organizational barriers and
personal commitments deter engineers in small nonurban firms from
participating in continuing education, the greatest obstacles are the
distance, inconvenience, and unavailability of courses. To determine
whether the distance barrier could be overcome, the engineers in the
survey were asked how far they were willing to travel for continuing
OCR for page 13
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
13
education. They were most willing to travel far to attend workshops,
seminars, and conferences that involved at least one overnight stay
{Table 2 and Figure 2~. For continuing education activities not involv-
ing an overnight stay, the acceptable distances were relatively short and
diminished rapidly as the number of regular trips increased. It appears
that while engineers in small nonurban firms are willing to travel some
distance to participate in continuing education, they may still be too far
from locations where courses they want are offered. In these situations,
alternative instructional media for example, video-would be one
way to overcome the barrier.
For engineers employed in urban areas the obstacles to pursuit of
continuing education may not be that different. One study that pro-
vided data on this issue was a survey of more than 5,000 engineering
society members residing in the Washington, D. C., metropolitan area
{Ehrlich, 1980J. Ehrlich determined that lack of time was the most
important barrier, followed closely by inconvenient location, incon-
venient time, end unavailability of courses {Table 3~. Physical distance
as a barrier was not measured directly in this study; however, the
importance of the inconvenient location barrier indicates that physical
distance may also be a major deterrent to engineers in urban areas. Lack
of time can also be associated with physical distance, but it is probably
related more to personal and work commitments. Of additional bear
TABLE 2 One-Way Travel Distances Judged Reasonable for
Participation in Continuing Education By Mode of
Educational DeliveryJ
Standard
Mean Deviation Range Median Number of
Mode of Delivery Miles) (miles) [miles) {miles) Employees
One-day workshop/seminar/
conference with no overnight
stay 93.1 57.5 25-500 97.5 179
Workshop / seminar/ conference
of at least one day with at
least one overnight stay 278.8 355.5 25-3,000 198.1 176
Once a week for a quarter/
semester 48.1 32.0 5-250 48.0 169
Twice a week for a quarter/
semester 37.8 26.2 1-250 30.8 167
More than twice a week for a
quarter/semester 26.4 19.0 1-150 24.3 163
SOURCE: Welling et al. 119801.
OCR for page 14
14
CONTINUING EDUCATION OF ENGINEERS
More Than Twice a Week
Twice a Week
Once a Week
1
One Day With No Overnight Stay
One Day or More With Overnight Stays
1 T1 1 1 1 ~
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Ml LES
FIGURE 2 One-way travel distances judged reasonable for continuing education.
SOURCE: Welling et al. t 1980~.
ing is that 35 percent of the engineers in this study were working as
managers and were probably required to devote more time to their lolls
than nonsupervisory engineers. In general, it appears that, despite the
greater availability and proximity of educational institutions, the most
important barriers to continuing education participation for engineers
in an urban area are similar to those in nonurban areas. Whether this
TABLE 3 Barriers to Continuing Education Participation by
Engineersin the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Area Percents
Barrier
Lack of time
Inconvenient location
Inconvenient time
Course not available
Course poorly presented
Unaware the course was offered
Lack of incentive
Insufficient employer financial
support
Educational level too low
Educational level too high
a Percentages are based on 4,447 respondents.
SOURCE: Ehrlich t1980~.
Very Moderately Slightly
Significant Significant
Barrier Rarri er
42.2
38.1
37.1
35.2
16.5
17.2
12.4
17.4
10.8
2.9
Significant Insignificant
Barrier Barrier
14.8
15.7
18.2
15.2
20.7
22.2
25.2
16.3
17.3
13.2
28.6
26.8
26.0
18.2
21.5
19.7
23.2
14.9
15.1
7.9
14.1
19.2
18.4
31.0
40.5
40.5
38.8
51.0
56.3
75.5
OCR for page 15
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
15
conclusion applies to all urban areas including those with a high den-
sity of private, high-technology firms remains to be demonstrated.
Motivation and Barriers Among Older Engineers
Studies of older engineers produced somewhat different results in
terms of motivation and barriers to continuing education. Kaufman
{1982a) examined the major goals of participation in specific continu-
ing education courses of older engineers With a mean age of 50) in six
large technology-based organizations. Almost half of the sample had
participated in formal courses during the previous three years. The
results revealed that by far the most important goal of these engineers
was better performance in their present jobs iTable 4~. In fact, more
than three out of five engineers took courses with this goal in mind.
The study also showed that more than one-fifth of the engineers
enrolled in courses for the intellectual stimulation they provided;
somewhat fewer participated to prepare for increased responsibility.
In the Battelle studies {Levy and Newman 1979; Welling et al., 1980)
these goals were also important but not as important as they were to
the older engineers. The lower mean age-the mid-30s of the engi-
neers in the Battelle studies probably accounts for this difference. Not
one of the older engineers gave a salary increase or promotion as his goal
in pursuing continuing education. And it is very likely that the older
engineers had only limited opportunities for advancement, in which
case continuing education would not have helped. Among older engi
TABLE 4 Major Goals of Older Engineers in Six
Organizations Who Participated in Continuing
Educationa
Goal
Percentage
Perform the present job assignment better
Promote intellectual stimulation
Prepare for increased responsibility
Meet the expectations of the supervisor
Prepare for a new job in the current field
Enhance one's position in the field
Remedy deficiencies in initial training
Prepare for a new job in other fields
Fulfill requirements for promotion
Obtain a salary increase
61.1
22.7
19.2
8.3
7.3
7.3
3.6
3.6
0.0
0.0
a N = 81.
SOURCE: Adapted from Kaufman ( 1982~.
OCR for page 16
16
CONTINUING EDUCATION OF ENGINEERS
neers, therefore, continuing education appears to be focused primarily
on job-related needs.
Kaufman also asked older engineers why they did not participate in
continuing education. Clearly, the most important reason they cited
was that too much time would be taken from family or personal life
iTable 5~; more than half of the engineers rated this reason as moder-
ately or extremely important. Another obstacle the engineers cited,
which may have been related to the personal life response, was the
travel time required This was an important barrier to about one out of
four respondents). Almost as many were affected lay the offering of
courses during work hours; their job requirements obviously did not
allow them to take time off, and they were apparently unwilling to
devote their personal time to continuing education. For about one
respondent out of five, continuing education was not required for the
job. Relatively unimportant factors in not taking courses were prereq-
uisites, financial support, and competition from recent graduates.
Continuing education participants and nonparticipants generally did
not differ significantly in their ratings of barriers with one exception.
Engineers who had taken no courses in the previous three years were
much more likely than course participants to have jobs that did not
require them to do so. Thus, an engineer's job appears to be an impor-
tant determinant of participation in formal continuing education
courses.
In general, barriers to continuing education participation tended to
be less prevalent among these older engineers than among engineers in
TABLE 5 Reasons Given by Older Engineers for Not Participating
in Coursesa
52.1
23.1
21.4
17.5
6.2
7.8
1.4
Reason
Too much time taken from family/
personal life
Too much travel required
Courses offered during working hours
Job does not require more education
Not having adequate prerequisites
Financial burden too great
Possible competition from recent graduates
Percent Rating Reason as
Moderately / Extremely
Important
Mean Rating
3.4
3.1
2.1
2.8
1.7
1.4
1.4
a N = 147.
SOURCE: Kaufman (1982a).
OCR for page 17
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
17
other studies. This may very well be an artifact of the commitment to
and resources provided for continuing education by the older engineers'
employers. An indication of the accuracy of this possibility is the lack
of financial obstacles to course participation among these engineers in
contrast to those in other studies.
One final interesting point is that there is some evidence indicating
that the motivation to learn may decline among older engineers {Dubin
etal., 1973;Kaufman, 1974,1975J.Butthereisalsoverylittleresearch
on why such a decline should occur. Understanding how the needs and
motivation of engineers to participate in continuing education change
with career stage is a major gap in our knowledge of lifelong engineering
learning.
Factors That Determine Participation
As mentioned earlier, it is difficult to obtain accurate recent data on
the degree of participation of engineers in continuing education. In the
mid-1960s LeBold et al. jl966J conducted a national sample of more
than 4,000 engineers. That study, one of the most comprehensive to
date, revealed that 73 percent of the engineers surveyed felt that in their
fields formal instruction in modern developments in technology was
necessary to keep up to date; a total of 77 percent agreed that short
courses {as opposed to advanced degree workJ would be sufficient for
such updating. Despite this seeming consensus on the value of short
courses, however, only 54 percent of the engineers reported ever receiv-
ing noncredit education or training.
The situation may have improved by the early 1970s. By then an
estimated 68 percent of the nation's engineers who provided informa-
tion on continuing education to the National Science Foundation
{1975aJ reported having received some type of nondegree training.
However, only 34 percent reported participating in employer-spon-
sored in-house courses and 24 percent pursued correspondence or
extension courses. Other types of education reported by engineers
included formal, postapprenticeship, on-the-job training {24 percentJ;
courses at adult education centers (18 percentJ; and military training
applicable to civilian occupations t17 percentJ. Thus, although about
two-thirds of engineers by the early 1970s reported having received
some type of continuing education, much of it may have come earlier
in their careers.
The following sections discuss various factors that may affect an
engineer's participation in continuing education.
OCR for page 18
18
Educational Level
CONTINUING EDUCATION OF ENGINEERS
Some evidence indicates that participation in continuing education
is related to the engineer's educational background and field. Accord-
ing to National Science Foundation NSF) data { 1975aJ, the percentage
of engineers who had participated in any kind of program declined
dramatically with increasing education Stable 6~. Almost 9 out of 10
engineers without a college education had received some type of train-
ing program, compared to only half of the Ph.Ds. Indeed, continuing
education may well be a path to becoming an engineer for those with
limited educational background, although the pattern of training may
differ depending on its extent. The NSF data showed that for those with
no college education, extension or correspondence courses were pre-
dominant with well over half of such engineers enrolled in training
programs of this type. For engineers with an associate's degree or some
college education, employer-sponsored courses were most popular
More than two-fifths having enrolled); in addition, more than one-
third of these engineers enrolled in extension or correspondence
courses.
Engineers with bachelor's and master's degrees also favored
employer-sponsored courses, but only about one out of three had actu-
ally participated in such training. And relatively few Ph.D. engineers
had pursued any specific kind of continuing education. As an explana-
tion of this phenomenon it might be argued that Ph.D.s would lie
expected to continue to learn on their own, especially through their
research. Another possibility may be that Ph.D.s are actually attending
professional society courses, which were not included in the survey.
TABLE 6 Percentage of Engineers Who Had Received Training
During Their Career [by Educational Attainment in 1972)
Associate of
No 1-3 Years Arts and
All Engineers Total College College Science B.S. Master's Ph.D.
Any training 67.9 86.3 79.3 72.3 68.1 66.4 50.1
On the job 24.3 23.4 27.0 23.6 25.3 22.3 11.7
Employer courses 34.1 32.2 40.5 42.6 35.2 32.2 13.8
Extension/
correspondence
courses 23.9 54.8 34. 1 35. 1 22.9 23. 7 15. 1
NOTE: Data are based on a weighted population of engineers, excluding
nonrespondents.
SOURCE: National Science Foundation ( 1975a) .
OCR for page 27
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
27
lated areas is limited and primarily involves activities offered away
from their firms.
Employer Support
All available evidence indicates that employer support for engineer-
ing employees enrolled in university courses has long been widespread.
In a survey in the mid-1960s, 77 percent of the engineers surveyed
reported that their employers provided partial or full reimbursement
for part-time university courses; 25 percent also received release time
during the day. And 9 percent were able to enroll in graduate degree
credit courses on their employers' premises {LeBold et al., 1966J.
It is clear that such employer support for university courses has
contributed greatly to the education of engineers. By the early 1970s, 41
percent of the engineers pursuing graduate education had received
financial support from their employers. In terms of the sources of these
funds, only savings and earnings were more prevalent than employer
support Stable 15~. Of those who received employer support, 40 percent
depended entirely on such funds to pursue graduate education, and an
additional 46 percent had only one other source {generally their savings
or earningsJ. Indeed, the employer was the single most important
source of funds for the graduate education of engineers, with savings
and/or earnings next in importance.
By the late 1970s, employer support for advanced and continuing
education of engineers had become quite prevalent, but it varied with
TABLE 15 Sources of Funds for Financing Graduate Education
of Engineers
Single Most
Sources Used Important Source
(N = 4,805) (N = 3,787)
Source of Funds N %N %
Employer 1,968 41.01,177 31.1
Savings or earnings 2,402 50.0966 25.5
Research or teaching assistantship 922 19.2455 12.0
Veteran's benefits 804 16.7391 10.3
Fellowship 857 17.8338 8.9
Aid from family 853 17.8269 7.1
Loans 253 5.341 1.1
Other 391 8.1150 4.0
SOURCE: Preliminary analysis of the Bureau of Census Survey of Natural and Social
Scientists and Engineers (1972) .
OCR for page 28
28
CONTINUING EDUCATION OF ENGINEERS
the size of the firm. In one survey, 83.2 percent of 334 large urban
establishments provided such support, as compared to 45.8 percent of
236 small nonurban firms, with the difference being highly significant
"Welling et al., 1980~. Related research revealed that 61.3 percent of the
engineers in the small nonurban firms whose employers did not pro-
vide support for advanced and continuing education had not partici-
pated in courses during the previous three years; in firms that did not
provide support, only 37.1 percent of the engineers had not participated
"Welling et al., 1980~. Lack of employer support, therefore, appears to
play a significant role in discouraging participation in courses, espe-
cially in small nonurban firms where travel time is also a major barrier.
Other research indicates that more than 9 out of 10 engineers work-
ing in high-technology firms are reimbursed for tuition, but most of
this support is available to engineers early in their careers Thompson
and Drake, 1983~. This may partly explain the very low rate of partici-
pation in advanced education among midcareer and older engineers.
Outcomes of Continuing Education
Despite industry's enormous investment in continuing education,
few studies have addressed the impact of continuing education on the
individual engineer. Other than a state-of-the-art review of the research
literature in 1977 {Kaufman, 1978a), no comprehensive attempt has
been made to assess the outcomes of continuing education for engi-
neers. This brief review is an initial attempt to begin updating that
earlier work.
Effectiveness Ratings of Courses
One approach to assessing the outcomes of courses is to obtain global
user ratings of their effectiveness. While this method does not provide
information on specific outcomes, it does give a gross indication of the
utility of different kinds of continuing education for engineers.
In judging the degree of success of continuing education in meeting
their objectives, participants who worked in large urban firms rated
every kind of continuing education between successful and very suc-
cessful {Levy and Newman, 1979~. Effectiveness ratings by engineers
from small nonurban establishments were more variable Welling et
al., 1980~. Participants gave the highest ratings to noncredit and other
educational activities [e.g., workshops, seminars, conferences) that
were conducted away from the firm {Figure S). Educational presenta-
tions at technical society meetings received the lowest ratings. The
most disagreement among participants [as indicated by a high standard
OCR for page 29
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
TYPE OF ACTIVITY
DEGREE-RELATED CREDIT COURSE
NONCREDIT COURSES
- CONDUCTED AT ESTABLISHMENT
NONCREDIT COURSES
- CONDUCTED AWAY FROM ESTABLISHMENT
BRIEF EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES
- CONDUCTED AT ESTABLISHMENT
BRIEF EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES
- CONDUCTED AWAY FROM ESTABLISHMENT
ORGANIZED SELF-STUDY ACTIVITIES
EDUCATIONAL PRESENTATIONS
29
- . . ~
'''''''''2' '' '''''''"-"'''""'""'''-"''""""""''"""'"'"''"1
_~_4
,.,,,, . ,, ,.,,,, ... ..... ~
LEGEND
~ ESTABLISHMENTS
|||||||||| PARTICIPANTS
NOT AT SLIGHTLY MODERATELY VERY EXTENSIVELY
ALL
EFFECTIVENESS
FIGURE 5 Comparison of the judged effectiveness of continuing technical education as
perceived by small nonurban establishments and participants. SOURCE: Welling et al.
( 1980~.
deviation) occurred for degree-related courses. Comparison of the effec-
tiveness ratings of participants with those of their employers reveals
interesting trends. Brief educational activities conducted away from
the establishment were rated highly by both participants and employ-
ers. Participants rated activities conducted at the establishment as less
effective than did their employers. On the other hand, noncredit
courses conducted away from the establishment, degree-related credit
courses, and organized self-study were all rated more highly by partici-
pants than by their employers. Engineers and their employers, there-
fore, tend to disagree somewhat over what kind of continuing
education is the most effective.
A study of engineering society members in the Washington, D.C.,
area produced somewhat different results {Ehrlich, 1980~. College-
credit courses for a graduate degree clearly received the highest ratings
{Table 16~. Other types of continuing education were rated lower, but
OCR for page 30
30
·o
o ~ -
~ ~ o
~ o ~
-
o
4=
be
· -
cn
4=
cn
·~ -
b4
o
~-/
·~c
v
be
· - ~
·-l
4=
o
o
of
be
·~ -
'e ~
a) En,
~ - -
· -
~ 'A
v
of;
he
~ o
fug
,~ o
-
_ a;
:^ ~
.
4 -
c)
be ~
- ~
ho
:^
-
ao ~
~ · -
o ~
2 L:)
._
4 -
~4
._
._
~ o
to ~
~ Cal
Ed ~
~GoUs Cal
.... .
~ o~ CM~ ~ ~
1 A)1 ~1 w)1 be) 1U ) 1
.>
4=
O ~ ~ GO ~ ~ ~ Cal Cal
O ~ ~ ~ ~ oO O G~ ~ O
. . . . . . . . . . . .
O O - oO G~ ~ ~ O
M - cM
~- - ~
O ~ ~ O ~ ~ O G~
............
~t - ~ C~ ~ ~ - ~ c
O ~ CM ~ - ~t - ~ CM ~
- - - x
a'
c~
.
-
~- - - - - ~
oo u: - o ~ oo - ~ - oo o o ·
. . . . . . . . . . . .
O ~ GN ~ C~ ~ - ~ G~ ~ -
cN ~t - cM - c~ - c ~cM
- - - - - x
o
=
.
- v
au ~
~ ~o ~o
O C ~cn
~ ~ ~o O
.
:o U 5 ~, j ~
.~ c, O ,s V) .~ '= U)
co ~ ~ (e ~ t4 a' F~
~ CT, ~ O o
b4 ~ 0^
-o ~ ~ ~ O ~o ~ ~o
C-) ~ ~(: cn O
CC P4
~ o
~ o
~ -
~ -
o c~
~ o
~ c~
=5
~ ~-
~ ~ O
o ~ oo
~ cL. G~
C~ ~ -
C~ ·_ ~
~ ~ _
ao ~
'~ a'
=-
C¢ ~
. .
x
o
OCR for page 31
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
31
all were at about the same level. Among courses provided by universi-
ties, those offered at local campuses and at places of employment were
rated the highest, and televised or videotape programs provided by
universities at the place of employment were rated the lowest {Table
17J. For noncredit continuing education, short courses were rated the
most effective; live video courses without "talk-back" capability were
rated the least effective {Table 18J. Compared to the latter, live video
with "talk-lack" was judged considerably more effective. It appears,
then, that the interactive capability provided by "talk-back" is critical
in making this mode of instruction effective. Tutored video instruction
[TVIJ is a technique that has successfully combined live interaction
{and its feedback capabilityJ with the flexibility of video Baldwin and
Down, 1981; Gibbons et al., 1977J. While the traditional face-to-face
courses may be rated as more effective than televised or videotaped
programs, the latter, if used in an interactive mode, could be as effec-
tive. Other techniques are continually being introduced so that a
choice of a delivery system can be made based on course objective,
content, and audience.
fob Performance
Few studies have attempted to evaluate the effects of continuing
education on the job performance of engineers. A major problem is the
difficulty of measuring performance. One approach has been to use
managerial performance ratings or rankings. In a study by Kaufman
~ 1978a), there was a positive relationship between the number of gradu-
ate courses completed and subsequent job performance. But this was
true only for engineers working in research and development {R&D)
and not for those in organizations doing more applied work in develop-
ment or manufacturing. Thus, the work environment has an important
impact on continuing education outcomes as well as on participation
Kaufman, 1982a). Also, data across organizations on employer-spon-
sored in-house training showed consistently that the poorest per-
formers tended subsequently to enroll in the greatest number of
in-house courses. However, participation in such courses did not lead
to improved performance. One study indicates that in-house courses
may have differential effects {Kopelman, 1977~ . Over a four-year
period, performance decreased among R&D professionals who com-
pleted in-house courses that were longer than 20 hours; those taking
shorter courses improved their performance. It has been suggested that
this difference may be more a reflection of the objectives of the partici-
pants than of the effectiveness of the courses themselves. Those taking
OCR for page 32
32
an
.. -
CC
.0
o
. -
v
be
.=
., -
4=
o
· ~
A)
v
v
¢
. -
cn
· ~
v
o ¢
CC
be ~
. - ~
_
~ it,
cn O
CC ~
._,
a' ~
~4
.=
A=
Cal
Cal
an
Cd
C)
- A=
$ =~ ~
°
z o
.
_ .
C)
V:
Cal
a' g
a'
.
a' ~
.=
.=
8 ~
~ o
to ~
~ Cal
o ~ of ~
Cal 1 Cal 1 ~ 1 lo) 1
lo) 1 ~- 1 ~- 1 Go 1
~ _ ~ _
_ ~ ~ Go o ON Do o
. . . . . . . .
cM ~ ~ ~ ~ cN
O ~ ~ U~ ~ ~ G~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~
~ - ~ - ~ - ~ -
O ~ G~ O
. . . . . . . .
~ - ~ ~ oo ¢N ~ ~ ¢N
c~ - ~ ~ - ~ - ~ -
cM c~ ~ ~ o oo ~ o
. . . . . . . .
oo ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~
~ - ~ - - -
4=
u)
.
.
~o ~
.o ~
cC ~o ·=
~(,.)
.> ~·
·
n
~· - · -
c ~· - ~
ao . ~-°
~ ~ <` a
_ · U:
_ ~ O e4
O ~ O ~ ~
cn ~ O
=, =~= a=~, a,
P~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~
a to4 ~ a ~ :=, ~
C) ~ ~ X
- 0 ~ ~ - 0 ~ Q)
~E~
C~
CD
b4
-
-
o
.
o
~ ~.
.-o ~
4=
~ o
~ c.,
.= o
. -
. - c.)
4-
o ~
'o t,.o
- . -
g ~
oC .
.
a,, oo
=- ~
~ . -
o ~
~ - o
.. -
~ o
o ~
.
cq ~
5 o
bC c~
·> ~
_ ._
_ ~
4= tV
O ,=
4 - ~
a~
U)
C~ O
~ ^
._
~ O
~ >`
5
C~ ~ ~
O
4~.~ 0
._
CC ~ C~
C~
O ~ C)
CC .0
·U)
..
.>
O
Z ==
C~
X
C~
._
-
._
X
o
-
C~
S
o
o
-
4=
o
4=
U)
CrO
~_
O
oo
_'
~-
.~ ,=
~ .
Q) -
Q)
. .
L~
o
V'
OCR for page 33
33
-
o
be
. -
cn
._,
CC
as
a:
. -
REV
v
be
·_f
·_'
o
·_1
an
v
o
Ad
o
CO
be
·0
REV
Pa ~
an,
lo_
· - _
4= TV
V
At;
TV
oO · _1
o
o
rim ~
Cal
an
·-
=~ ~
°
z o
._
C)
au
a:
_ ._
on a)
._
_
U) ~
~ ._
o
z
._
4=
Lo
bO
.=
g
g
~o
au c~
~ o oo ~ ~U)
. . . . . .
GN 1 ~ 1 0 1 ~ ) 1 ~I
~ 1 ~- 1 ~t 1 ~ 1 ~1
oo ~ oO ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ G~
c~ c~ ~ ~ r~ ~ 0 ~ oo '~
_ _ _
G~ u~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ON C;x
O ~ ~ ~ U: ~ G~ ~ oo ~ ~ oo oo
C~ C~
oo C~ oo C~ ~ ~ ~ C~ U) ~ O
.. . . . . . . . . . . ..
O ~ ~ oo CN ~ ~ oo U~
U~ ~ ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ ~C~
_ __
-
U~ ~ 0N ~ L~ ~- ~ 00 ~ ~ G~ O0 ~ ~
. . . . .. . . . . . . . .
O ~ ~ O
C~ ~ CM C ~
_
_
_ g
rY ._ ~
C ~ ~
._ ~ C~
O ~C,0 g _
E - ~VJ: ~==
u a 3 ° D v
O ~o O ~.>
C ~CC ~CC ~> ~
.-
_
X
Cl)
·_.
-
C)
._
o
-
4 -
U) =,
O
O
~_
O
~ O
~ CC
C~ ~
~V
,-=
.
O
O ~ oo
~ c,, ~
CO ~ -
C~ · - ,=
cn
~,= ~
~ sm
P~ ~
·,~ ~
. .
Cd
o
C~
OCR for page 34
34
CONTINUING EDUCATION OF ENGINEERS
longer courses may have done so to remedy deficiencies in their knowl-
edge and skills, whereas those taking shorter courses may have wished
to acquire specific skills that could be readily applied to the perfor-
mance of their jobs.
Salary
In evaluating the effects of continuing education, salary has been
treated as a substitute for or equivalent of performance {Morris, 1978aJ,
but this equating of salary with performance has been questioned
jKopelman, 1979~. The results of the study showed that course partici-
pation was positively related to salary, although these results have been
criticized on several methodological grounds Kaufman, 1980;
Kopelman, 1979), bringing into question the validity of the study's
conclusions. Other research has failed to find a positive relationship
between participation in continuing education and changes in salary
{Kaufman, 1982a).
Obsolescence
The degree to which continuing education for engineers can reduce
the obsolescence of technical knowledge and skills has yet to be dem-
onstrated conclusively. Kaufman {1974) defined obsolescence as the
degree to which professionals lack up-to-date knowledge or the skills
necessary to maintain performance in their work. This definition was
adopted by the National Science Foundation t1977a). However, relat-
ing continuing education to obsolescence is difficult because of the
problems in measuring obsolescence. Some studies have used knowl-
edge checklists ;Perucci and Rothman, 1969) or tests of knowledge
j Mali, 1969J, and such indicators have been found to be related to
advanced education. Another method of measuring obsolescence is by
means of a self-assessment approach {Kaufman, 1978b J. The number of
technical courses completed in a three-year period by older engineers
was found to be related to lower obsolescence as measured by a self-
assessment instrument {Kaufman, 1982a . Indeed, technical courses
apparently reduced obsolescence more than either reading or attending
professional meetings and seminars.
Innovation
One outcome of continuing education that has barely been touched
upon by researchers is innovation, which may be considered the oppo
OCR for page 35
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
35
site of obsolescence. Again, the problem in part is measurement. In
perhaps the only study linking innovation and continuing education,
Ransom [1983) found evidence that those who spent more time in
professional development activities maintained significantly higher
levels of innovation, based on expert judgments.
fob/Career Changes
The impact of continuing education on job or career changes has
rarely been evaluated. One issue of interest is the retraining or reeduca-
tion of the midcareer engineer. The introduction and diffusion of major
changes in technology often lead to a surplus of experienced midcareer
engineers whose knowledge and skills have become obsolescent ;Kauf-
man, 1974, 1975; Schillinger et al., 1980~. It would appear that two
complementary problems resulting from these changes could be
largely ameliorated with a single solution namely, reducing the short-
ages of personnel skilled in applying the new technologies by reeducat-
ing the surplus midcareer engineers through formal continuing
education programs.
Indeed, a federal evaluation has reached the same conclusion: since
employer-sponsored continuing education "can provide a rapid and
focused means for relieving spot personnel shortages in specific sub-
fields and for improving productivity by renewing the skills of mid-
career scientists and engineers in industry, it could provide a relatively
cost effective means for the Federal Government to intervene in the
science and engineering market when clear national needs require such
intervention" National Science Foundation and Department of Educa-
tion, 1980, pp. 43-44~. However, shortly after the publication of this
report, federal support for research and development in the continuing
education of engineers, which had been funded through NSF's Direc
torate for Science Education, ceased completely.
The limited research available on the reeducation of midcareer engi-
neers has focused on government programs for the unemployed jKauf-
man, 1982b; Pascal, 1975~. Related research has demonstrated that
training and educational activities after job loss are associated with
significant career change, but a cause-and-effect relationsip has not
been proven Kaufman, 1979b). For employed midcareer engineers,
academic, industrial, and governmental reeducation activities remain
essentially undocumented; research on employer-sponsored midcareer
reeducation per se has been reported only for individual cases of univer-
sity-industry collaborative programs [e.g., Reddy and Rabins, 1984~. It
is clear that there is a great gap in knowledge about midcareer reeduca-
tion in engineering and its effects on jobs and careers.
OCR for page 36
36
CONTINUING EDUCATION OF ENGINEERS
Findings
1. A meaningful body of knowledge has begun to accumulate regard-
ing continuing education from the perspective of the engineer, but
most of it is derived from studies conducted prior to 1980 with support
from the National Science Foundation. Whether these results are appli-
cable to current conditions in engineering cannot be ascertained. {For
example, the expanded use of computers and video-based delivery sys-
tems in current continuing education offerings might affect some of
these results.) This caveat should be kept in mind when reviewing
these findings.
2. Engineers participate in continuing education with a variety of
objectives; typically, these may involve maintaining and improving job
performance, preparing for increased responsibilities, pursuing
advancement and rewards, promoting intellectual stimulation, pre-
venting obsolescence, or preparing for a new job. Relatively little is
known about the role of the work environment in motivating continu
. ~ . . .
ng education participation.
3. Major barriers to participation in continuing education include
the travel time involved, the inconvenience or unavailability of needed
courses, and personal commitments the engineer considers more
important. Organizational factors {e.g., a particular job does not require
continuing education; there are no organizational rewards or encour-
agement by supervisors) appear to play a secondary but still important
role.
4. All the available evidence indicates that most engineers partici-
pate in continuing education at some point in their careers and that the
rate of participation has been growing. It would appear that by the early
1980s over half of all engineers were participating in some type of
annual continuing education with employer-sponsored in-house
courses predominating.
5. Participation in continuing education varies substantially with
the size and location of an engineer's employer. Those engineers who
work in small, geographically isolated firms show only limited contin-
uing education participation, primarily involving activities offered
away from their firms.
6. Employer tuition support has been the most important source of
funds for continuing education among engineers, although much of
this support is used for graduate education. Such assistance is prevalent
in the overwhelming majority of large urban firms; most small nonur-
ban firms do not provide it.
7. The evidence appears to be too limited to arrive at any conclu
OCR for page 37
PARTICIPATION IN CONTINUING EDUCATION
37
signs regarding the impact of continuing education on the individual
engineer; despite the enormous resources allocated to it, relatively
little is known about its effects. The studies that do exist give results
that are not generally consistent and that may, in some cases, have
methodological flaws.
Recommendations
Considering the dated information noted above on continuing educa-
tion for engineers, the panel believes the following recommendations
are appropriate to close the gaps in our knowledge:
1. The National Science Foundation jNSFJ should resume its role in
supporting research and development {R&tDJ in continuing education.
2. A committee should be established within NSF to assist in the
development of continuing education support activities. Its members
would include continuing education researchers and practitioners
selected from universities, private industry, and professional societies.
3. A comprehensive continuing education R&D program should be
developed with the active participation of the federal government, aca-
demia, industry, and professional societies. This program should be
directed to collect current descriptive data on continuing education
participation and to study its impact {including that of reeducation
programsJ on the engineer.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
intellectual stimulation
