{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015727391874180863, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.389121338912134, '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 Challenge to Change: On Realizing the New Paradigm for Engineering Education

The new paradigm for engineering education goes beyond the need to keep students at the cutting edge of technology and calls for a better balance in the various areas of engineering school scholarship. There is considerable concern that perpetuation of the old paradigm by engineering schools will all but assure minor roles for engineers in the future as well as difficulty in adapting to the exigencies of the fast‐paced global marketplace. However, the transition from the old to the new paradigm will not be easy since many of our research‐intensive universities are faced with financial pressures while the wherewithal to make the change rests mostly with those who oppose the change in the first place. This situation, coupled with the fact that there is no “one‐size‐fits‐all” transition paradigm, represents the challenge to change. Still, a number of engineering schools have made significant changes and have developed innovative approaches in their undergraduate programs. Taken together, the proven methodologies and knowledge gained should make it possible for most engineering schools to devise revitalization programs that fit the context of their institution, its student body, faculty, and objectives. This paper argues for a study to assess the impact of the tools and methodologies developed by pace‐setting engineering schools and the NSF Engineering Education Coalitions to lay the foundation for future reform initiatives.