The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Five Major Shifts in 100 Years of Engineering Education
Abstract
In this paper, five major shifts in engineering education are identified. During the engineering science revolution, curricula moved from hands-on practice to mathematical modeling and scientific analyses. The first shift was initiated by engineering faculty members from Europe; accelerated during World War II, when physicists contributed multiple engineering breakthroughs; codified in the Grinter report; and kick-started by Sputnik. Did accreditation hinder curricular innovations? Were engineering graduates ready for practice? Spurred by these questions, the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) required engineering programs to formulate outcomes, systematically assess achievement, and continuously improve student learning. The last three shifts are in progress. Since the engineering science revolution may have marginalized design, a distinctive feature of engineering, faculty members refocused attention on capstone and first-year engineering design courses. However, this third shift has not affected the two years in between. Fourth, research on learning and education continues to influence engineering education. Examples include learning outcomes and teaching approaches, such as cooperative learning and inquiry that increase student engagement. In shift five, technologies (e.g., the Internet, intelligent tutors, personal computers, and simulations) have been predicted to transform education for over 50 years; however, broad transformation has not yet been observed. Together, these five shifts characterize changes in engineering education over the past 100 years.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research
Prince, M. (2004) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x · Cited by 7,334 · cited 1×
“engineering is vast [95], [111], [112].”
Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1374249 · Cited by 2,682
Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543069001021 · Cited by 1,943
Cooperative Learning Returns To College What Evidence Is There That It Works?
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998) · Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning · doi:10.1080/00091389809602629 · Cited by 1,011
Self-citationDesigning and teaching courses to satisfy the ABET engineering criteria
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2003) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00734.x · Cited by 866
Firebaugh, S. L., & Piepmeier, J. A. (2008) · IEEE Transactions on Education · doi:10.1109/te.2008.919699 · Cited by 14
Cited by
Singer, S., & Smith, K. A. (2013) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20030 · Cited by 835
Self-citationBorrego, M., & Henderson, C. (2014) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/jee.20040 · Cited by 463
The Effect of the FIRST Robotics Program on Its Graduates
Rocker Yoel, S., Shwartz Asher, D., Schohet, M., & Dori, Y. J. (2020) · Robotics · doi:10.3390/robotics9040084 · Cited by 20
Rodriguez-Gil, L., Garcia-Zubia, J., Orduna, P., Villar-Martinez, A., & Lopez-De-Ipina, D. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2883500 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Froyd, J. E., Wankat, P. C., & Smith, K. A.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the IEEE
- Published
- 2012-05
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- Special Centennial Issue
- Pages
- 1344-1360
- ISSN
- 0018-9219 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2256
- OpenAlex
- W2125344860
- Cited by
- 496
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 44.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Five Major Shifts in 100 Years of Engineering Education. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/jproc.2012.2190167
- The paper
- Froyd, J. E., Wankat, P. C., & Smith, K. A. (2012). Five Major Shifts in 100 Years of Engineering Education. Proceedings of the IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/jproc.2012.2190167
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.