{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019658119658119658, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003418803418803419, 'mean_word_length': 5.7298850574712645, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The historical evolution of engineering degrees: competing stakeholders, contestation over ideas, and coherence across national borders

ABSTRACT Recent times have seen significant realignment of engineering degrees globally, most notably in the Washington Accord, a system of mutual recognition of accreditation across much of the Anglophone world and beyond, and the Bologna Process, impacting significantly on the form of engineering degrees in Europe. This article, tracing the historical evolution of engineering degrees, argues that recent events can be seen to be part of an ongoing process of reworking the arrangements for formal engineering education, based on a long-standing contradiction between the different stakeholders that have an interest in curriculum: the state, engineering employers, and academics. This is reflected in a contestation over what was historically termed the ‘shop culture’ of the employers versus the ‘school culture’ of the academy. Furthermore, contemporary developments of mutual accreditation beyond national borders can be seen to have an earlier echo in the relative measure of global coherence that was achieved in the 1870s.