The engineering pipeline

Throughout the readings in class, we have discussed the engineering pipeline and how it relates to the number of students who still pursue engineering in college. In Brown's The Engineering Student Pipeline, he states that the number of engineering graduates will decrease, at the time, in 1987. Although this was written a while ago, many of the statements still hold true. In general, the majority of engineering degrees are obtained by white males and we are seeing a downward trend of engineering degrees to minorities, including women. Why is it that these groups end up falling out of the engineering pipeline?

In my opinion, early development and recognition is plays a vital role in retaining students in this pipeline. As previously mentioned in class, focusing on certain courses during middle school opens the door for further science and math development. Having the proper resources for these students will allow them to gain the skill set required for them to continue in engineering. But, it is without mention that administrators must be working towards this goal. Brown states "the participation of both women and minorities will require intervention programs in the K-12 system and greater access to science and math instruction in that system". These interventions could include programs that support STEM careers, or as simple as counseling for the students who show interest in a STEM field. Although intervention is a start, it is not the only method in keeping the students in the pipeline.

In chapter 3 of Women in Science, titled The Pipeline, the author states, "while interventions are essential stopgaps, they alone cannot solve the fundamental problems distancing women from careers in engineering". The chapter presents different scenarios that might alleviate the overwhelming amount of women leaking out of the pipeline. In addition, intervention is more of an attempt to form a model for the women to follow and it is not sufficient in keeping the women in the pipeline. The chapter focuses on the cultural barriers women face even after they have completed the engineering pipeline. It is interesting to note that many women who have a career in engineering still have a high possibility of leaving their career. I would have thought that since these women "beat the odds", they would continue to work in industry despite the obstacles.
>
> Overall, it is a research project of it's own to really pinpoint why minorities are the first to leak from the engineering pipeline. As an engineering student, I truly believe that intervention/retention programs are extremely beneficial to minority engineers. Yet, it is not the only factor preventing us from continuing our engineering education.
>
>

Student Involvement and Early Preparation: A Recipe for Minority Student Success

Being a female, first generation Mexican-American student that started off as an Aerospace Engineering major here at CalPoly, two articles spoke to my experience as a life-long student: Raymond Landis’s “The Case for Minority Engineering Programs” and Shirley McBay’s “Improving Education for Minorities”.

Both of these articles were written in the late 1980s, around the time I was born, yet approximately two decades later I find some of their recommendations and insights still timely and relevant.

As I see it, Landis concerns himself not only with the discussion of recruitment of minorities into college engineering programs, but also with the issue of retention. The “attrition”, or loss, of minority college students at white engineering schools can be addressed by examining “the educational environment that our predominantly white schools present to minority students” (756). Landis wants to know why despite good pre- indicators of success in college such as SAT scores, GPA, high level math and science courses taken( 756), minority students still perform less impressively than their white counterparts. Landis focuses on the educational environment, and suggests that increasing student involvement is the key to retention and success.

I find Landis’s suggestion to be beneficial, but it is lacking another aspect that impacts minorities’ success; what needs to be accounted for is the psycho-social impact of the change in demographic environment that minority students undergo on the way from high school to college. Speaking from personal experience, I graduated from a high school where I was able to take a reasonable number of AP classes and graduated number 15 in my class, AND it was also a high school were at least more than 95% of students were Latino/a. To go from that kind of cultural surrounding to a “white engineering school” as Landis could most certainly apply to CalPoly, is staggering.

I believe that Landis is on the right path in offering student involvement as a solution to retention and success in college, as, in reading his article, I felt all his observations about why I feel like I am falling behind apply to me (i.e. amount of time spent on campus, interaction with faculty, participation in student organizations, interaction with other students, etc.) While I agree with Landis, I feel that the particular brand of “involvement” he is promoting lacks a sense of integration. By integration I mean fostering an interaction between minority and non-minority students and faculty. Landis lauds the Multicultural Engineering Program (MEP), which I agree is commendable, but we must not forget that college is a stepping stone to success in the professional world, where cultural isolation is not something for which we are aiming. Student involvement should take on the role of bridging feelings of “otherness”, and lend an opportunity for minority students to find a place within the larger student population. Also, it is important to note that minority students are not just defined by their cultural identity but by their interests as well, and I think that should also be an important aspect to foster.

I feel that Mc Bay’s article addresses Landis’s isolated focus on postsecondary education, as Landis states that we should dispel the “myth of preparation”, the preparation undertaken in K-12 education. While I feel it is right to concentrate on how university environments have historically impeded minority student success, Mc Bay offers that “interventions should occur at the earliest possible time” (37). I feel this argument only makes sense, because education is a cumulative process, and success in college is dictated in great part by this preparation. This preparation requires extra help to address potential lacks in a minority student’s experience. For example, a minority student is more likely to be a first generation college student, and since their parents cannot provide their own experience for how to navigate their children’s advance in education, pre-emptive counseling programs such as MIT’s Minorities Introduction to Engineering and Science Program help fill the void.

Lastly, Landis talks about student-faculty interaction as a component of a successful student’s involvement, however, he also notes that faculty that are non-minority can sometimes be a source of discouragement for minority students. I feel McBay addresses this problem by suggesting that we “redouble our efforts to recruit more minority teachers” (39) and this starts precisely in K-12 education, where “we must seek out and nurture minority students with the talent and interest to become teachers” (ibid).

I believe between Landis’s and McBay’s suggestions, we have a start for ensuring minorities’ success in the educational system as well as the professional world.

Works Cited

Landis, Raymond B. "The Case for Minority Engineering Programs." Engineering Education (1988): 756-61.
McBay (1989), “Improving Education for Minorities.”

WWII: advances for women?

World War II so often is hailed as women's big break in the workforce. With men off to war, women were recruited to fill in the formerly dominated jobs in industry and government. Women with math or science degrees were quickly swept up to help the war effort. Was this period of time really a breakthrough for women in the workforce or was it simply a tease that pointed out just how gendered science and technology are in the United States? I think that even though women constantly struggled to gain equal position with men, the World War II era did offer women opportunities to advance their position in the workforce.

As women took over traditionally male dominated jobs during wartime, the affects of feminization demonstrate the highly gendered workforce. In Jennifer S. Light's article "When Computers Were Women" she presents an interesting paradox that despite all the propaganda about women flooding the workforce, they were still hidden and their work was suppressed. Light states that, "While celebrating women's presence, wartime writing minimized the complexities of their actual work. While describing the difficulty of their tasks, it classified their occupations as subprofessional…they rarely received credit for innovation or invention" (456). A prime example Light uses is women's role in the ENIAC (Electronic Numerical Integrator and Computer). As women filled the computing role in this technical industry, the reputation of this mathematical job became feminized. Although in the pre-war era this job had been viewed as a man's job, as women began to work at it, the high regard for this position diminished. Instead the man's job became the manager over these projects. Light says that, "popular accounts portrayed civilian jobs for women as appropriately feminine, "domestic" work for the nation—despite the fact they were formerly done by men."

Although it does appear that as women took to male dominated jobs the respect and credit typically given to men was not awarded women, the Wartime workforce experience was a necessary step to propel women into the workforce. Society of Women Engineers opened chapters on many university campuses with the goal of informing women of their capability and opportunities to become engineers. One reason that SWE was founded was to dismiss the belief that "girls often shied away from technical pursuits because they simply did not realize that women could go into engineering" (Bix). Since women's self-exclusion was an inhibitor of women's presence in the technical field, the media's call for women in engineering was an explicit invitation to them to join the workforce. In Light's article she cites the Department of Labor's Women's Bureau as saying, "The need for women engineers and scientists is growing both in industry and government…now is the time to consider your job in science and engineering." During World War II, the opportunity was opened for women to gain work experience in engineering fields. Even after men came back from the war, women had had a taste of participating in the working world. And this taste encouraged them to continue to fight for opportunities in the engineering work force, and also to know that they are capable of participating.

Although I agree that women did experience discrimination due to the sexual division of labor or the feminization of their roles as engineers during the war, I think that it was a beneficial experience that encouraged activism after the arrival of men.

Light (1999): "When Computers Were Women"

Bix (2004). “From “Engineeresses” to “Girl Engineers” to “Good Engineers”: A History of Women’s U.S. Engineering Education"

Reading Reaction #2: Engineering Engineers

While many teenagers think that they are choosing their career paths when they apply for college as juniors and seniors they do not realize that they have been tracked to specific fields. In The Engineering Student Pipeline Bowen states that “The preparation of American youth for careers in engineering starts in reality in kindergarten and ends, for entry, with an engineering baccalaureate degree over a decade and a half later”. While Bowen explains how this is true within engineering, he does not mention that it is the same across all professional fields. Students are pushed away from some fields and into others based on race, gender, stereotypes, perceived ability, and attitude. Tracking is done by both parents and teachers and in many cases is done unconsciously. One way in which tracking works is through verbal cues. If constantly told that you are good at math and science, but writing is just not your thing you will eventually start to believe this. This will cause you to care more about the work associated with what you are good at, and use excuses like I am just not a good writer as an explanation for your C+ in English. These verbal cues can also be compounded with grades you receive. As soon as children start to accept that they are better at math then they are at writing and begin to put less effort towards working on their writing skills they will begin to receive better grades in the subjects they are “better” at. Bad grades will reinforce the thought that they are not good at a subject and will cause a snowball effect. Eventually, they truly will not be good writers because they have ignored English for years while spending all of their time learning mathematics. This is important to note because of how stereotypes affect this tracking. As the Dean’s task force published in its findings and recommendations, “the fraction of engineering students who are women peaked at less than 20 percent and has declined”. With such a small proportion of women in engineering fields, there is a common stereotype of engineers as males. This stereotype is involved in the tracking of girls and boys from a young age. Stereotypes like these influence how teachers and parents track children. Unconsciously teachers and parents give praise and push children in certain directions based on stereotypes and cultural norms. As stated earlier, tracking is apparent across many groups including race, gender, and social class. Tracking leads many children to drop out of education pipelines before they can decide for themselves whether or not they like the field. In order to keep as many children in every education pipeline as long as possible, work needs to be done at every level of education. Increasing the number of children in all education pipelines will not only provide them with the opportunity to study a broader range of subjects, it will also increase the number of students attending college, as less students will be denied from college because they do not meet the standards. Tracking causes some of the imbalance we see in today’s careers, but are there factors with more influence on this imbalance?

Malta's Sense of Self

It is quite remarkable to see how large of an influence and impact religion has on the tiny island of Malta, especially in more recent history. A 90% Christian population is not a statistic to be overlooked, and is one that falls in the top 20 countries that have high Christian percentages. As such an overwhelmingly large percentage of the people are Christian, it has become a defining factor of being Maltan since the times of St. Paul. The (relatively) recent sense of independence that Malta has experienced has produced a constitution that allows for “freedom” of religion, but at the same time declares Christianity (Roman Catholicism) as a state religion. For me at least, these seem nearly contradictory. Having a state religion established means that the government, in a way, expects the Maltese to be Christian. This leads to political decisions being aimed towards what may be religiously “correct” (i.e. ones that may promote religious ideals rather than ones that may progress the country as a whole: realize these two are not always correlated). I realize that this is simply the norm in Malta, and is likely generally regarded as a perfectly acceptable and reasonable method of making decisions. It is simply difficult for me, a member of another country which is in many respects different from this religious extreme, to understand how it has become the social norm.

In a bit of irony, the other largest defining aspect of being Maltese, based on a few of the readings, is the Maltese language itself. An extremely small number of people speak it in the world, making it unique and its speakers identifiable. The irony comes from its origins: the Arab invasion in 870 CE. This left an Islamic influence on the Maltese culture during that time which has propagated and can be seen in various aspects even today including the naming of some towns and villages. The fact that these influences are Arab in nature, conflicts with the extreme part of the culture that is now Christian. If being Maltese means pulling from conflicting ideals, it is interesting that it persists (a bit of what Dr. Gambin spoke about) throughout the culture.

Furthermore, this strong sense of belonging and the specific identifiers that the Maltese use in present day are quite different to Malta historically. Malta, being a pit-stop along trade routes and a country that has simply been ruled by the current world power (which has switched many times), has had a difficult time establishing traits that set it apart from other areas of Europe. It has simply been mainly an extension of other cultures. But since gaining its independence, it has developed a sense of self. It uses the traits discussed above, and has very recently (2004) joined the EU as its own nation. These steps of independence mark important milestones in Malta’s development. To quote Dr. Gambin again, Malta is in a state of adolescence as a country, and is still “finding itself,” which I find extremely interesting.

(502)

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2009/127324.htm

http://www.guidetomalta.net/malta-culture/maltese-culture-religion/

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080726/opinion/true-maltese-identity

http://www.maltabulb.com/maltese_culture.html

Global Thinkers and Diversity

It is very interesting to compare America’s individualistic mindset to Japan’s collectivist mindset. In America, there is constant competition and goal to get to the top. It is refreshing to hear about how another country is able to excel by having an extraordinary amount of “group effort and team spirit” (Honda 1). But this difference can be seen as both a negative and positive way. First off, the negative perspective is that there is very “little opportunity for individual creativity” (Honda 5) since the goal is to conform and have no disagreements. But in a positive light, this helps holds the group together and highlights the importance of teamwork and a sense of belonging to a group.

What I thought about most when reading the Americans working in Japan is how important it is to become a global engineer and learn how to be accepting and respectful of other cultures. Thinking about different cultures, I start to think about the United States. Especially in California, we are quite diverse and have many different people and people who have acculturated by combining U.S. culture with their own culture. But in Cal Poly, where there is such a lack of diversity, we don’t really get a chance to meet others who are different than ourselves. With a society comes dominant images and culture and it is inevitable to believe in that dominance when you have nothing else to compare it to. As a state school, we lack international students compared to private schools. How do we become understanding and accepting of others when we can’t even meet people with different cultures? And even if we did have people with different cultures at our school, how do we have everyone be able to get out of their own friends circle, which is usually a homogeneous group consisting people of their own race, and into a diverse circle?

Those who have been able to encounter different cultures have gained and thrived “as global thinkers, to make them far reaching in the way they look at things” (Legg), along with being able to learn how to work with different people in another culture. This idea of global thinkers is very similar to why diversity is a benefit. With different cultures, values, experiences, etc. comes different perspectives and thoughts that would help us not only in our education, such as in classroom discussions, but also for us as people to grow aware and accepting of someone different from ourselves. I’m not only talking about race and ethnicity but also other factors that shape a person like gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic background, religion, etc. I’m not saying that our engineers cannot become global engineers, but I think that diversity (a diverse staff and diverse student body) for Cal Poly can become a step and the beginning into becoming a thriving global engineer.

Honda (1992), “Working in Japan: An Insider’s Guide”.

Legg (1989), “American Engineers in Japan: Same Profession: Different World”.

Reading Reaction #2: Inadequate Justification

The article, “Re-thinking Schools,” by Benji Chang and Wayne Au discusses the negative effects that the Model Minority myth has imposed on to Asian Americans. It is easy for the general population to claim that the Model Minority myth is a “good stereotype,” but like Chang and Au explain in their article, there is no good stereotype. Unfortunately, Noy Thrypkaew reveals how installing the myth of the model minority is, in fact, what makes it easier for the United States to justify not lending proper aid.

Stereotyping people lumps masses of different cultures together. For example, the Asian Americans who immigrated from Korea around the 1990s had a much different upbringing than the immigrants who came from Cambodia, but when the two different cultures entered the United States, typically they would each be lumped in to the Asian American stereotype of being a Model Minority. Again, people might not understand why this is bad. The answer is easy. Just like all of us saw growing up or even today at Cal Poly, unfortunately, class matters. The majority of immigrants from Cambodia most likely have not achieved more than a high school education, while it is very likely that the Koreans have received a higher education. Therefore, when getting settled in the United States, resources would have been much easier to attain for the Korean immigrants, in this case, because he or she was able to speak English and had the education to better guide them in finding work.

Cal Poly has been ranked as one of the highest CSUs for household income and as society is well aware, Cal Poly is also one of the highest ranked CSUs for academics. The correlation makes perfect sense because parents that went to college themselves or were able to send their children to good schools gave their kids a much higher chance of receiving a higher education. On campus, it is not uncommon to hear students say “I didn’t even have a choice. I was always going to go to college.” When kids grow up in that kind of atmosphere they have an incomparable incentive and desire to succeed and do well in K-12th than children in very poor schools or not going to school at all. Like Thrypkaew says "parents' lack of education leads to a lack of role models and guidance. Without those things, youth can turn to delinquent behavior and in some very extreme cases, gangs, instead of devoting themselves to education" (Noy).

If the Model Minority theory is installed in society then the teacher who has both the Cambodian and Korean immigrant in their classroom could unconsciously have high expectations for both children which would completely diminish the intentions for equality. A common description of the Model Minority is that they are “private and quiet,” but Benji Chang and Wayne Au tell their readers to “rethink how [they] interpret and act upon the silence of Asian-American students in [the] classroom” (Au Chang). Silence could mean so many different things! It is terrible to assume that they are being silent since they are very studious because it could actually mean that they don’t understand the material or are insecure about their English.

Unfortunately, not only would the Cambodian be at at a disadvantage in the classroom because of a lack of education, but Thrypkaew also explains how a woman maned Mali Keo, that fled Cambodia with her four children in 1992, “was still haunted by searing memories of ‘the killing fields,’ the forced-labor camps where millions of Cambodians died.” And due to the “brutal beatings she suffered at the hands of Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge, she was still wracked with physical pain as well.” Yet, Mali Keo was considered an Asian American and therefore, a Model Minority, so when she and her kids got to the United States they “didn’t need help.” This idea that “strong values” is all immigrants need in order to succeed and live the American dream is absurdity. American’s fight for free therapy for U.S. soldiers because it is common knowledge that experiences such as the one Cambodians experienced are traumatizing and it would be impossible for them not to effect any human being (Noy).

The Model Minority Myth is really just an easy way for Americans to justify not helping immigrants of any race. Too many Asian American immigrants “share the fate of other people of color when they are denied access to good education, safe neighborhoods, and jobs that provide a living wage and benefits. But for the sake of preserving the model-minority myth, conservative policy makers have largely ignored the needs of Southeast Asian communities” (Noy).

Works Cited

Chang, Benji and Au, Wayne . You're Asian, How Could You Fail Math?. 2008 Winter. 16 Feb. 2011.

Thrupkaew, Noy. The Myth of the Model Minority. 7 April. 2002. 16 Feb. 2011.

Collective Progression and Hierarchy

Working in Japan: An Insider's Guide for Engineers

This article was very insightful and interesting. It provided great insight to not only Japanese engineering, but also to Japanese culture as a whole. In was interesting to see the similarities but mostly differences between U.S. and Japanese culture. Of the differences, the one that stuck out as most relevant was that of the social order in the work place. In U.S. culture, in almost all aspects of life, it its usually the individual who sticks out with the most with individual achievements that receives the biggest at highest promotions. Individuals are always trying to out-do the next person and self-promote – this is not the case in Japanese culture. The Japanese believe that what is good for the company, is good for Japan. They believe in collective success over individual success. In each individual employee there is a sense of commitment to ones country. No one employee is trying to outshine the next. Even if one’s idea is heard and dismissed, another, and perhaps better idea is politely suggested. In the article, it provides and example of how counter ideas are mentioned in brainstorming activities. On page 2 it states, “A Japanese tends to behave in a way that is inoffensive and often complimentary to other people, not only his bosses but also his junior and senior colleagues. A polite Japanese would say, "I agree with you in a way; however, there is another idea, like this…," even if he actually rejects your idea. A Japanese seeks to gain the support of other people, which he hopes will lead to substantial cooperation from a majority of the members of his organization and, in turn, promotion.” This conflict-free way of employee interactions seems to be very helpful in the effort to bring progress not only to the company but also to Japan as a whole. This unique style of social interactions in the workplace has obviously improved the overall environment of engineering workplaces throughout Japan and can receive some credit for Japans economic boom. Many genius ideas have come from such engineering companies with this workforce culture.

How to Bow

This animated short, along with its side notes were also very insightful. I had no idea the importance and intricacy to sharing and receiving name cards in the business world. These social interactions in the workplace are another aspect of Japanese culture that differs greatly from our culture. Simple gestures such as sliding a name card in your wallet after receiving it would be seen as a sign of disrespect where as if someone were to take one of my business cards and put it in the wallet I would appreciate that they are taking the time to put it in a responsible place. Another interesting note about exchanging name cards was the order in which people present their cards. It’s one of many examples of how the hierarchy works in the workplace. “When a number of people are to exchange cards, the order stats with the senior person and proceeds to those less senior. If a higher ranking person from the group you are meeting mistakenly goes to present his card to a lower ranking person from your group, the lower ranking person should be alert enough to step back a bit to let his superior exchange cards first.” In my opinion, this display of rank and respect for superiors is much deserved and seems like a great way for people to appreciate and also understand what its like to progress their what up the ladder of seniority and hierarchy.

Minorities and Majorities

One article that interested me was Improving Education for Minorities by Shirley McBay. This article did make good points. She pin pointed the areas in which she felt that needed to be fixed in order the better the education of the minorities. She presents 9 principles that will led to more students in improving the education they received. She also does do a great job in pointing out the various studies and programs that have been done and have demonstrated change. I understand where she is coming from but at the same time , because of what I am studying, I feel the history behind the education system is missed.
One principle she does mention is in one study the Texas-based AVANCE demonstrated that the parents who participated in the program were “more likely to be involved with the child’s school and serve as a parent leader.” I also feel this is important and a huge step towards education. However, it is not explained why it that these parents were not going to meeting or more involved with the school and their child’s education She presented the solution to the problem but did not explain why there was a problem. And I feel that is important in changing the way parents feel. What was it about this program that urged parents to participate more? What did the program change for them in their lives?
Another interesting point made, or comment is , “ the school’s physical location allows students to work in , and feel connected to a middle class environment that provides ordinary but important role models for the,” Yes , students do need minorities, but to me was what struck me was, “ the schools physical location ” and “feel connected” To me it seemed that the differences between middle and low class needs to be better explained. Why would feeling like being a part of the middle class have an impact on a student? What are the thought concerning the middle class and why is it so important for the students to feel connected? I understand the context of the excerpt I used but, at the same, I feel the urge to connect it to the idea that a minority may feel connected but will not be a part of it. In other words, the idea of never being accepted into mainstream society and being on sidelines.
At the beginning of the article I felt a sort of disconnection because the word minority was used repeatedly. It seemed that it was a group of minorities and that to me was interesting because it was as if all the minorities were lumped together. I understand fort eh purpose of her paper and her study it may have been easier to lump them together, but at the same time that assumes all minorities are all the same and these 9 principles will change that. However, at the end of the article, I did notice that she used the term “our children” at the end unifying not just the minorities but also the “majorities”. Even the term “majorities” stuck out to me. Who are majorities? What she means by the usage “majorities” would be interesting and why she uses it would be interesting and important.

Engineering Methodologies and Their Origins

The importance of becoming a global engineer could not be more emphasized than in the distinct differences found between American and Japanese engineers. The Japanese engineering method is highly based on an interest in success of the group rather than the success of the individual, as seen in the American model of engineering. What makes this so interesting to me is the motivational reasons that allow these unique methods of engineering to be successful. This is very intriguing because, as an engineer, I have learned we are looking at a very narrow scope of how engineering should be conducted. The following excerpt (found in the recommended reading section) clearly shows the reality of the different engineering methodologies,

“Such treatment is unthinkable for Americans. Some years ago I used a film from JETRO entitles “A Day in the Life of a Japanese Engineer.” In several scences, the “engineer,” explicitly identified as a college graduate, is seen helping production line workers repair or adjust equiment. He gets dirty and greasy with the men on the production line. A few students always reacted to this by questioning the authenticity of the film. Assurances to the contrary notwithstanding, they found such scene hard to believe.
Their expectations of an “engineering education” may be gleaned from a float in the Picnic Day Parade at U.C.-Davis a few years ago. The float featured a Mercedes-Benz. Stage money $100 bills had been inserted in the wheel covers. Engineering students in formal dress stood around the Mercedez and sipped champagne (more likely Budweiser). A sign on the side of the float said “Hard Work and Study Pays.” Even allowing for a certain amount of tongue-in-cheek humor, no survey of attitudes is needed to confirm the U.S. student perception that engineering is a route to high pay, not the factory floor.”

After reading this excerpt I found this very intriguing from the perspective of an engineering major in college. This particular section is very similar to my own experiences as an engineering major myself. Before picking my intended major in high school I was told by my friends, family and counselor that becoming an engineer would mean job security, prestige and most importantly (to them) a generous paycheck. This system of choosing engineering shifts the emphasis and motivatian to the individual and selfish gains rather than taking into account the group or society as a whole. From my experiences in high school and at this university the example above couldn’t be more true. We, the students, are constantly bombarded with statistics and figures of how much money each engineering major makes after leaving college and how important it is to the purpose of our college degree and we have even discussed this in ES 410. I have yet to read anything about the importance of contributing to society as one of the dominant images of attaining an engineering degree (or any degree for that matter) as seen in many of the readings about Japanese engineers.

At first, I thought both methods of engineering would work in the U.S. or Japan but after further readings and consideration at this point in time or the near future I don’t think it would be a possibility. The Japanese and U.S. children as a whole, and I am speaking generally for the sake of argument, are raised with a different mentality which translates to this difference in engineering ideologies. Every week the ICEX group volunteers at a nearby elementary school to teach robotics to 2nd graders to attempt to gain an early interest in engineering and specifically robotics. The second purpose and probably the most important is to get females and minorities involved in engineering before stereotypes set in and negatively influence them to stray from engineering. Each week we bring simple robots for them to play with and then hold a competition at the end of the class period. What I noticed as an outsider looking in was when a child won they would announce that they in fact were the winner or boast about beating someone else. This may seem very normal but that is not the case from what I have seen in Japanese sports. At a very young age Japanese baseball players are taught to love the sport from a group perspective (including both teams). When the game is over both teams are cheered for equally and it is common to not even remember the final score because there isn’t an emphasis on “winning” in the sense of who scored the most. The emphasis is on the sport and teams as a group rather than on the individual. A statement from another article articulates this point further,

“... the most important virtue is the striving for mutual harmony. In the company, the Japanese do not consider themselves as individuals but rather as a tiny part of a whole social system and they are very eager to look after the professional and personal duties that lead to the fulfilment of a perfect harmony. Defining themselves as part of a group does not make them feel unimportant, but rather comfortable and sheltered.”

I believe these ideals are what transfer to the dominant images of what it means to be an engineer in the U.S. and Japan. By learning about the Japanese engineering methodology and hierarchy, it is clear there is more than one way to create a system of successful engineers.My biggest question after reading this article still remains: Why are we not learning about this in our engineering classes (from a curriculum perspective)?

Is "Different" Bad or Good: Japanese Engineering Compared to American Engineering

Within the Untied States engineering field, the concept of “learn by doing” is a common and relatable saying. US engineering is based off selective education found in prestige colleges and universities, but also the skills one develops during their career. The success from these skills and education are what notably push them to higher levels of status within the engineering field. This system strongly promotes the concept of individual work to bring one success. For anyone that knows how US culture, this concept of “be the best you can be” is understandable. However, according to Gary Legg, Special Project Editor, these beliefs are the exact opposite of the image Japanese culture promotes to its citizens.

Legg’s article, American engineers in Japan: Getting by with a little help from friends, stresses the importance of how the Japanese culture affects the workplace, especially for engineers. Referring to American engineers who participated in an exchange program, the Americans were surprised to see such extreme differences within Japanese culture. Some of the main occurrences that took them by surprise was how Japanese people are “friendly and animates once you get past” introductions, lack of displayed emotion, and the idea that one will benefit more if they work as a team and not an individual. All these components express how Japanese people differ from the US, but does that mean they are unfavorable? A common tendency for many people is to associate the idea of something different with it causing a negative affect. This is an unfair assumption. If these typical Japanese behaviors were conducted within the US, then they might cause a negative affect to the participants because they do not adjust to American culture in order to benefit themselves. However, the same affect would happen for Americans who try to practice their American rituals within Japan, they are neglected from opportunities. Through the descriptions of the different engineers who participated within the exchange program, Legg’s stresses the importance of culture when considering the success of employment. These visitors would have suffered dramatically in and outside the workplace if their host families did not help them become accustomed to the local traditions.

Legg’s second article, American engineers in Japan: Same profession, different world, continues with the same theme as the first one by exposing differences between American and Japanese ideals. However, this article focuses more on the specific differences within the work environment of an engineers. It is interesting to see how the American engineers adapt to the hierarchal work place that institutes specific roles for each employee. In addition, how these engineers adjust to the longer work days and week, expected social drinking after the work day and the concept of team unity over individual success. Once again the issue of being different as a negative or beneficial idea rises. The conclusion that I have created by reading these articles is that it is neither. Each country has a different history which leads to their different way of education, work performance and culture. The important part is learning, understanding and accepting that all three of these influences affect each other. The only negative aspect is one who insists to ignore that these subjects are not interrelated. These individuals, or sometimes organizations, who refuse this concept are the ones who will not be able to fully benefit from any system. They will forever be considered a ““gajin” (foreigner)” and will not be able to move forward towards their desired goal. The purpose of the exchange program is to “grow people as global thinkers” so they can understand and accept any environment they work in, for this is vital to their success.

A model mother

The Wall Street Journal published an article on the 8 January 2011 featuring Amy Chua and her essay “Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior” (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111504576059713528698754.html). This is part of her introduction: “A lot of people wonder how Chinese parents raise such stereotypically successful kids. They wonder what these parents do to produce so many math whizzes and music prodigies, what it's like inside the family, and whether they could do it too. Well, I can tell them, because I've done it”.

She divulges the asian secret of success. She reveals the magic formula. Follow her rules, and your kids can be model citizens too!

It is medieval of American society to continue pretending that the American social structure is based on a hierarchy of values and morals. There have been enough movies and television series on crooked, sexy, successful people for the population to know that no such thing exists.

But when it comes to race and class it as if all that could possibly affect a person is his/her morals and values. In that case, the ghetto is a byproduct of horrible values and lazy people. Bad things happen to bad people! Thrupkaew’s “The Myth of the Model Minority” explains one possible way this idea has been invented: “Because Asian Americans' success stems from their strong families and their dedication to education and hard work, conservatives say, then the poverty of Latinos and African Americans must be explained by their own "values": They are poor because of their nonmarrying, school-skipping, and generally lazy and irresponsible behavior, which government handouts only encourage”.

Granted, Amy Chua, parenting does play a role in shaping a child’s life. But that is just part of it. Her article poses two problems: the perpetuation of asian stereotypes and the idealized american dream: anyone can succeed who works hard enough, or is strict enough on their kids.

Throughout her article she continually refers to the Chinese mother. She does not refer to all asian mothers. While this distinction may be helpful to her essay and in speaking about herself, it does little to define one population.

In the minds of the majority of Americans, Chinese gets clumped with the rest of Asian populations. This is a problem: “Asia contains nearly four billion people and over 50 countries, including those as diverse as Turkey, Japan, India, the Philippines, and Indonesia” (Chang & Au 2007).

Since the Asian category has been so heavily relied upon to make easier generalizations and labels, it has stuck. The government and the categories they have institutionalized may be at fault: “despite the clear inaccuracies created by lumping populations together, the federal government still groups Southeast Asian refugees under the overbroad category of "Asian" for research and funding purposes” (Thrupkaew 2002).

The model minority does not refer to one specific group of people form a particular country. The dominant images in the United States have done a spectacular job of characterizing asians creating the model minority and inaccurately representing an American population. The article by Chua reinforces those images. As a Chinese mother, she inadvertently is speaking for Asians because that is how America will interpret it and it mimics what is shown in the media, so it must be true for all.

Interestingly, on the side of the article on the WSJ website, there is a journal community poll that ask readers “which style of parenting is best for children?” one bubble has “permissive western parenting” and another has “demanding eastern parenting”. I wonder if this question is truly addressing geographical regions, or racial values. Obviously, it may be attributed to culturally values as well based on where one is coming from, however, lumping the whole of the east and west is too broad and leads to generalizations like the model minority.

Doing Business With Japan

The United States once used to be the dominant image of innovation and development, yet has now had to share this high ranked seat with Japan. Japan in time built itself from the ground up to become a top industrial nation in the world today. Japan and the United States are always in communication with business making it important for one another to understand each others cultural norms and what is socially acceptable. A large discrepancy between Japan and Americans is that Japan feels that “the nails that sticks up, gets hammered down.” While Americans feel that we should all work together as a team to fulfill goals. Sue Galatz, an American woman, lived in Japan with a Japanese host family for 6 months learning about the true identity of Japanese men and women that Americans never see.
Within America we label individuals with stereotypes that tend to inhibit our ability to view the person in actuality. The United States is apt to label the Japanese individuals as has hard working, non-emotional, and stingy. This enables us as Americans to look past the typical mold of Japanese individuals. Only when we have close contact with these stereotyped individuals can we break our initial ideas and begin to create new ones for the Japanese. Galatz and another man from the United States lived with families that did not stick to the typical Japanese mold. “Galatz’s (host mom) likes to drink whiskey and water and play pachinko, and McLaughlin describes his, a former nurse, as a wild one, really crazy, really off the wall, really excitable." (Legg) Is this the image that everyday Americans envision stay at home Japanese women? The stereotype that we associate with theme women is that she is calm, always at home, and spending there day getting ready for their husband to get home. These discrepancies begin to distance what could be relationships between different cultures, that at this point do not not understand each other fully.
This misunderstanding is also carried out in the workplace that usually men tend occupy in the professional world of Japan. American business integration within Japan has increased over the past decades, making communication between each other key for eliminating these misunderstandings. “A foreign businessman or women who wishes to work in Japan therefore needs to be aware of and adapt to its basic principle if he wishes the business relationship to lead to a successful outcome.”(How To Bow) A goal of the Japanese businesses is to strive towards mutual harmony within a company. It is hard for Americans to comprehend this sense of obligation that the Japanese have to the business they work in, which could cause one another to not see eye to eye. There are very many small yet important steps that need to be taken when meeting with a Japanese business man/woman. “How To Bow” gives the reader a clear example of the many small details that one needs to follow in order to viewed in the correct light of the Japanese business man/women. How an American is portrayed in the eyes of the Japanese can easily become a generalization for who all American businessman are. This could potentially be a lot of pressure on the shoulders of Americans, as though we hold the key to the level of success that all American businesses has.


Sources
How to Bow: http://www.how-to-bow.com/

Legg (1989), "American Engineers in Japan: Getting by with a Little Help from their Friends"

Individual Achievement or Team Success?

Cultures can vary from nation to nation, with a wide array of social norms and work practices. While this holds true around the world, perhaps no two cultures vary more than the United States and Japan. One country values an independent mind with an outspoken character and the other values a consensus minded person with loyalty. One country stresses innovation and individuality while the other enforces practicable principles and standardization. Rarely do we see such successful, yet opposite, cultures take enormously different approaches to work and social structure.

The country of Japan has always fostered a culture of respect and deference to authority. This can be seen in the dominant symbols throughout their history such as the Samurai or bowing to guests. While many other nations had shed their monarchy history decades or centuries before, Japan's citizens still had a powerful connection and revere for the Emperor; with his word being equal to that of a God. This culture stressed on its citizens to devote their lives to the strength of the nation over that of individual achievement. Even after the defeat of Japan in World War II, the culture of devotion to the common good did not wain. As companies started to rebuild they incorporated the best characteristics of this unique culture into modern workplace efficiency. Because workers are less likely to be independent and demand personal attention, they are grouped together with other workers that have similar tasks. The structure of the tasks and duties is hierarchical with everyone knowing their place. This formula helps to achieve an assembly line like efficiency with everyone doing their part for the success of the team.

The idea of working for a team success rather than for personal achievement is very interesting. Individuals who are talented or more ambitious than the norm may find a team oriented atmosphere cumbersome or slow moving. In a situation where ideas and innovation are key to success, a person who must rely on teammates for support may sink under the waves. Both approaches to business and work structure have their advantages and disadvantages. That is why companies such as Tektronix have exchange programs where engineers spend time in another country and learn the varying practices. Legg (1998) mentions that while many of the tasks that the engineers perform are the same, the work environment is quite different. "Like most engineers in Japan...[they] work six days a week, usually from eight in the morning until ten at night. They wear [must] uniform." These longer work days can be stressing on Americans and take getting used to. Also Legg mentions that Japanese engineers have a work culture that is very harmonious, with very little disagreement between bosses and workers. While this might lead to fewer arguments, a better idea might fall by the way side because someone was too afraid to speak up. An Insider's Guide for Engineers (1992) talks about the hierarchy of the desk layout in Japanese businesses, with bosses being up front looking down over their workers. Just imagining this scene conveys the idea of micromanagement and intimidation to workers. The guide also discusses how workers are not supposed to leave before another employee and especially the boss. This pressure to perform must weigh heavy on workers in this system.

References:

1. Legg, Gary (1989). American engineers in Japan: Same profession, different world.

EDN

2. Working in Japan: An Insider's Guide for Engineers. (1992). Mechanical Engineering

Colonization and Island Culture

Most of the island cultural, political, environmental and human studies have started in the recent decades. It makes sense that a lot of attention is paid to the islands in the Pacific because there are so many, and so many of them have been colonized and then allowed to independently establish. However, I think looking at countries that are specifically affected by conflicting cultures and political/social/humanistic views have the most interesting histories. One thing that is interesting to see is how often island countries are taken over and ruled by other (typically Western) countries. Studying island culture has been brought about by a number of different organizations with focuses and specializations in many different fields. There are a number of interesting facts and cultures that are brought to islands, and they tend to be interesting cross-sections of history and cultural overlapping. As Shima, The International Journal of Research into Island Cultures states,

“These realisations have led a new generation of archaeologists to establish interdisciplinary links in order to better understand the development of island societies and their relation to mainland cultures” (Shima, The International Journal of Research into Island Cultures).

One island in particular that is interesting to investigate is Malta. Malta was colonized by France and Britain, and these two countries significantly affected Maltese culture, and yet Malta was still able to keep some of their traditions. Under Napoleon’s French rule, the Maltese were given a constitution, “slavery was abolished, a secondary school system was established, the university system was revised almost completely and the legal system of Malta was enhanced by a new Civil Code of law” but it wasn’t all “improvements to Malta and its people, however. Maltese churches were ransacked, being robbed of gold, silver and precious art” (Guide to Malta.net). Revolts against the oppressive French rule ended in protestors’ deaths (Guide to Malta.net). After the Maltese experience with France, the people ‘voluntarily request[ed]’ rule from Britain.

The British government would soon use Malta during WWII as a cornerstone in the Mediterranean Sea for the fight against the Germans in WWII. Malta was used by Britain during World War II as a safeguard and stronghold in the Middle East and for their supply of oil during the war (Moses, 2008). Malta was seen by Churchill as the

"windlass of the tourniquet" on the supply lines of Gen. Erwin Rommel's Afrika Korps, and Rommel was moving across North Africa in pursuit of the Mideast oil. If Hitler got the oil, it would all be over—before the United States even bad a chance to get there” (Moses, 2008).

The use of Malta by larger, Western countries is shown in the rule of Britain and France, and it is unfortunate to see that countries can be used by one another. I think it is interestingly underestimated what even a couple years of rule by any other country can do to the moral of the people in the country being ruled. The ties that are cut and the dependence created by the ruling country can create an automatically oppressive feeling to the people. I know when visiting and learning about Thailand on my study abroad quarter, they were very proud to never have been ruled by another country, and that pride stood strong in the government and the Thai people.

Brig Bagley : Critical Response # 2

Brig Bagley

Critical Response #2

One very interesting contrast between Great Britain and France is the different statuses of engineers in each country. Their individual histories have shaped the image and roles of engineers, either by giving engineers an important place in society, or by considering engineering a lesser, even non-professional way of life. The same profession, so to speak, was completely different in different societies due to the specific situations these societies had to offer for engineers.

In Great Britain, engineers spawned from the crafting society, inventing—out of necessity—better ways of life. However, at that time in Great Britain, craftsmanship was considered inferior to positions such as lawyers and doctors—those who took years of theoretical and literature-based schooling. Having emerged from the “blue collar” area of society, engineers did not receive recognition, sufficient support, or even social status for many years. The appreciation for the skill and talent of the belittled craftsmen was years in the making. In the article “Engineers in Britain: A Study of in Persistence,” (28) Smith and Whalley emphasize the fact that “engineers have found it difficult to separate themselves from their manual, craft origins, and therefore issues of status have bedeviled the ‘occupation’ for over a century.” It is clear that the history of Britain and its earlier view of craftsmanship ruined the success of the engineering profession for decades.

France, in contrast, had a completely different historical story. About the time of the French revolution, everything in France changed. The government (before being overthrown) began to research and fund different types of engineering in hopes to gain the confidence of its people for a growing and superior military. Although this government failed, their plans did not. The newly established government continued the funding and support of engineering schools to train hundreds of new engineers. Because of this inflated view of engineering, the engineers of France did not often do what we in the United States think of engineers doing today. The engineers in France were revered and were given high leadership positions in all areas. In essence, engineers were the doctors and lawyers of France. In Ermenc’s article, “The French Heritage of Engineering Schools,” he mentions the engineering schools of France “supplied the needs of the government for naval, military, and strictly scientific and engineering personnel,” and that the objective of a particular school, the Ecole Centrale, was “to be the preparation of a corps d’elite of engineers for industrial leadership” (143). It is clear that the needs of France inflated engineering well beyond that of Great Britain. France put a great amount of respect and confidence into its engineers, and it is this history of France and engineers that influenced the greater part of engineering in the United States.

Although both Great Britain and France produced similar fields of engineering, the take and success in each country was greatly dependent upon its support by both the government and society. The freedoms and innovation and opportunities that we see in the United States were not available in either of the French or English states when engineering began. The history of that time primarily determined the growth and success of engineers and their careers.

Future Generations

The topic of women in engineering is one that has been growing in importance to me lately because although I am not a woman in engineering, I do have a 10-year old sister who is getting closer and closer to having to decide her major for college every year. She's a very smart kid, having read and understood books like the Harry Potter series at the age of 9 and testing in at an 8th grade reading level in 3rd grade (I believe she's up to 9th or 10th now). She is also great in math and has an interest in science. I have, of course, been trying to subtly influence her towards engineering by showing her the cool projects I have worked on, or by explaining what I know of how things work. My dad, who used to tease her by jokingly telling her she would become a doctor to support him financially, has now focused his attentions on encouraging her to follow in my footsteps after I told him the average starting salary of computer science and software engineering. I was excited when I heard her steadfast and resounding “no”s turn into “maybe”s. I would love to see her become an engineer, even if it's not exactly in the same field as me. That is, if that's what she wants.

This brings up the issue of what men in engineering can do to help. I know that as a role-model to younger students and children I interact with as an engineer I can say a lot more about how male engineers should act around and treat female engineers with my actions than with my words. My male engineering friends and I often forget what a “boys club” mentality we've developed from not being around many women, and act accordingly. As Bix states, “Evidence confirms suspicions that while equal opportunity sentiment and federal legislation might have helped open some doors for some women in the 1970s, the changing language and imagery of employment ads to denote hiring diversity did not solve more fundamental problem,” so while there has been progress in trying to change these attitudes, they still persist. I do know very intelligent female engineering students for whom I have a lot of respect. But as much as I try to adjust and monitor my own attitude, I have to influence the attitudes of those around me as well.

I am also slightly concerned about over-encouragement. How do I challenge my sister but make sure I don't push too hard? How will I know if it's something she really wants to do and isn't just doing it because her family wants her to? As a current engineering student and one who's known others that don't like it, I know that if it's not something she really wants to do and does not enjoy it she will fail, and that's the last thing I want to happen.

Bix (2004), “From “Engineeresses” to “Girl Engineers” to “Good Engineers”: A History of Women’s U.S. Engineering Education”

Booker T. Washington, the prophet?

It is appropriate, then, to suggest that, while their educational philosophies differ in terms of their methods, audiences, tone, and character, they are markedly similar in their aim. (Dunn 26)

Learning is human nature; learning who comforts and provides for you and what items are edible or not; learning how to walk, talk and play; and eventually learning complexities like histories, math, science, sociology, etc. We learn naturally, and naturally those that learn the most and best get ahead. The subjects and even attitudes learned can vary drastically in different cultures and regions, but the intent of learning is to position one’s self to survive; for everyone, everywhere. Academic education has persisted as a almost guaranteed ticket to survival, and thus is regarded as vital in many regions of the world. Other educations- medicine, farming, fishing, etc- also serve the same purpose, survival. In the Eurocentric, Enlightenment-influenced world we live in today, the education best suited for survival is that of the scholar, and his trade… money.

Our children have had educational advantages that thousands of white children never did have. (Washington, A Sunday Evening Talk)

But what if those things we learn in higher education aren’t as valuable to survival, as say the knowledge of how to reap and sew fields? Booker T. Washington suggests just that; that even though blacks are equally capable and should be provided the same higher education oppurtunities as whites, their plantation education should not go by the wayside, but rather recognized as an advantage over the whites who know little of how to grow crops. Washington’s philosophy clearly has merit in that such knowledge does place blacks ahead of whites in that regard, particularly if the goal of education is to quench hunger, as he suggests in A Sunday Evening Talk.
In his time, and certainly in the rural South, the reticence and ability to work and grow crops was valuable, however, his argument must be recognized within its historical and geographical context. A plantation education, or the knowledge and abilities hitherto acquired by those who received such education, serves a much smaller advantage in today’s capital driven society than in Washington’s era. Plenty of men and women who couldn’t pick a cotton ball wear the most lavish of clothes and children who don’t know the first step of planting a garden who are overwhelmingly obese. How can this be? Simply put, money. Money overrides any intellectual ineptitude i.e. Paris Hilton. Of course that neglects the importance of a university education as well, but the intent was to demonstrate the diminished advantage of the plantation education.
Will that advantage re-gain prominence in the future? As our global population skyrockects, capital becomes increasingly more valuable, but so too does the importance of agricultural adeptness. Knowing how to grow your own vegetables and raise your own chickens can save money, improve our environmental impact and prove healthier than questionable food production and distribution practices. Environmentalists, farmers and health experts would agree with Washnigton’s position. As governments become more and more outdated, and faith in such systems continually dissipate, self-sufficiency becomes paramount to successful living, a self-sufficiency received via the Washington’s plantation education. Perhaps Washington’s philosophy is outdated, perhaps it doesn’t apply as aptly to the present situation, but perhaps too, he has issued us a prophecy of success in the future. And to think… a Negro could come up with it!