Re:Too Many Managers: The Strategic Use of Titles to Avoid O...
by chipsa on Friday February 03, 2023 @07:00PM
(#34649630)
I'm pretty sure ASU [0] is accredited.
0: https://asuonline.asu.edu/online-degree-programs/undergradua...
Re:Too Many Managers: The Strategic Use of Titles to Avoid O...
by barbecue_sauce on Friday February 03, 2023 @07:51PM
(#34650052)
Re:Too Many Managers: The Strategic Use of Titles to Avoid O...
by mindslight on Friday February 03, 2023 @08:16PM
(#34650239)
This is flat out wrong. Many engineering positions do not require a PE certification or state licensure. For example, consumer products are mostly regulated by liability and testing regimes like UL/FCC as opposed to stamping a design to assert that it meets the requirements. Engineers designing consumer products are still engineers.
I agree that the profession of "software engineering" could stand to have much more of the rigor of engineering. For example, it's painfully missing a sense of ethics about large scale surveillance systems. But your argument is biting off way too much.
Re:Too Many Managers: The Strategic Use of Titles to Avoid O...
by gregoryl on Sunday February 05, 2023 @04:43PM
(#34669808)
The ship has sailed, and you're fighting with an intense zeal that doesn't match the problem. Why die on this hill - are you reserving the "engineer" title for some purpose in the software field?
Note that even on your own Stanford and MIT links above, they reserve the term "engineering" for programs OTHER THAN "Computer Science" (e.g. "Chemical Engineering", "Electrical Engineering", etc). Show me a "Software Engineering" program at any accredited university.
There's no confusion, I am 100% talking about PE regulations. One requires a license to practice chemical engineering, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, all but the most entry-level roles in aerospace engineering, etc. Employers effectively cannot hire non-licensed workers for those positions.
If that does not apply to your job, then you are an "engineer" only in the sense of LinkedIn puffery.
Mind you, this applies to all us (myself included) in the software development field. I'm not trying to be a gatekeeper. Rather, the complete absence of gatekeeping is the entire point here.