In the United States, engineering technology (ET) education is offered via two- and four-year degree programs at both public and private institutions. Many ET programs, principally at the four-year level, are accredited by ABET, the Association of Technology, Management and Applied Engineering (ATMAE), or other accrediting bodies while some are not. Both two- and four-year ET programs educate students in a hands-on manner for careers in the engineering profession. Generally speaking, two-year ET programs in multiple engineering fields prepare engineering technology students to work as technicians and engineering assistants. Four-year ET programs, especially accredited programs, educate students to work as engineers in a variety of engineering positions. While engineering technology enrollment is about one-third the size of the related engineering program enrollment in the U.S., ET provides an important pathway for filling the spectrum of engineering positions in businesses, industry, and government. An important aspect of engineering technology education is that it attracts students who prefer to learn from an experiential approach rather than a theoretical one. Engineering technology education pedagogy heavily relies on hands-on laboratories and application approach work as a large component of a student's ET education. New and old engineering technology education leaders have a significant influence on how ET education continues to evolve and provide graduates with the contemporary and industry-valued, knowledge, skills and abilities that are needed to be successful in today's engineering professions. Engineering technology leaders are defined for the purpose of this paper as program directors, chairs, and deans, or academic program heads who hold similar titles with engineering technology as part of their portfolio of academic programs. To assist with the preparation of a 2019 Engineering Technology Leaders Institute (ETLI), a panel session featuring six ET leaders was organized to focus on the question of what is, or should be, the future of ET over the next 10 years and beyond. The session committee surveyed ET leaders via several ET listservs. Data from the ET leaders survey provided background information to help initiate the discussion questions and who should represent ET leaders on the ETLI panel session. The background data in the survey included opinions on top issues and concerns as well as ET leaders perceived opportunities and threats to engineering technology programs. Summaries of the panelists' comments from the ETLI session and the ET leaders survey data are presented in the body of this paper.

In recent years, various professional societies or individuals have put forth statements outlining how engineering and engineering education could improve or adapt to better meet the needs of society. Typically, such studies do not specifically address engineering technology's role as a part of the educational spectrum. While building on these previous works, the ASME Vision 2030 efforts provide additional insights to both the value of mechanical engineering technology but also to how it should change to provide an even better education for its students. This paper presents suggestions towards such change. While focused on mechanical engineering technology, the suggestions and data in the paper can be extrapolated to engineering technology education in all its disciplines. The strengths of engineering technology graduates as engineering practitioners and as implementers of technology; job-ready and focused on applied engineering, are a partial answer to what industry has told academia about the current needs of industry.

The role and scope of the engineering practice is transforming rapidly and academia should change to better prepare graduates. The ASME Vision 2030 Task Force investigated the current state of mechanical engineering education and practice within industry through assessment of recent literature addressing the shape and content of engineering and engineering technology education, through conducting workshops among stakeholders at key conferences and gatherings, and by extensive surveys of industry supervisors and early career engineers. As a result, the Task Force has formally recommended, and begun to advocate for, specific actions to strengthen the following seven aspects of undergraduate mechanical engineering education curricula: creating curricula that inspire innovation and creativity, increasing curricular flexibility, offering more authentic practice-based engineering experiences, developing students' professional skills to a higher standard, attracting a more diverse student body, increased faculty expertise in professional practice, and adapting post-graduate education to support specialization for practicing engineers. Partnership between industry, professional societies, government, and academia is needed to successfully implement these recommendations and help develop the full potential of mechanical engineering graduates. Initial actions have been taken towards implementing several of these recommendations.

Vision 2030 – Charting the Future of Mechanical Engineering EducationIntroductionIn July 2009, the ASME Center for Education formed an engineering education task force,subsequently entitled ASME Vision 2030. The Vision 2030 Task Force is still actively pursuingtwo primary objectives: help define the knowledge and skills that mechanical engineering ormechanical engineering technology graduates should have to be globally competitive in the 21stcentury, and, to provide recommendations for mechanical engineering education curriculatowards providing graduates with necessary expertise for successful professional practice.Paper ContentsWhile the task force is still active, much progress has been made. This paper will provide anoverview of the task force composition, the approach towards accomplishing the goals, andinitial findings. Importantly, the task force is not composed of just academics. Rather, industryrepresentatives have been involved from the initiation of the task force and an extensive surveyeffort was undertaken to gather input from both industry and academics. The paper willsummarize these data, the issues revealed by them and curricular modifications to address thoseissues.The task force recognizes that the role and scope of mechanical engineering practice have beentransforming rapidly. What mechanical engineers do, and how they do it, is changing due to anumber of drivers, including the expansion of the discipline's boundaries and the multifacetedimpact of the globalization of engineering and manufacturing. In addition, many contemporaryengineering problems are considered to be 'multi-disciplinary' in nature, involving more thanclassic mechanical engineering expertise and traditional knowledge domains. These importanttransformations within mechanical engineering profession serve as motivators for academicprograms to make significant changes to mechanical engineering curricula and serve as a basisfor recommendations coming out of the task force.The Vision 2030 task force has identified the challenges of sustainable engineering, energy, andhuman health as ones where mechanical engineers should lead development of innovative andsustainable solutions. There are many opportunities for mechanical engineering education tofocus on the challenges of improving human health and alleviating poverty in the developingworld. Many students find such activities attractive and very rewarding; as they provide a venueto apply their mechanical engineering skills to improve the quality of life of people in lessfortunate circumstances. The paper reflects the task forces suggestions for curricular change toreflect this perspective.The task force believes that implementing suggested changes to mechanical engineeringeducation, mechanical engineering and mechanical engineering technology programs will attracta wider diversity of students and educate students that will be well suited to lead, bothtechnically and politically. Such graduates will be well equipped to face the demands of rapidlychanging business models and the rapid expansion of technology, communication, andworldwide engineering talent.

ASME Vision 2030’s Recommendations for Mechanical Engineering EducationIntroductionStarted in July 2008, when the ASME Center for Education formed an engineering educationtask force, the Vision 2030 group has been led by representatives from industry and education,including engineering and engineering technology educators. The project investigated thecurrent state of mechanical engineering education and practice within industry throughassessment of recent literature addressing the shape and content of engineering and engineeringtechnology education and through conducting workshops among stakeholders at key conferencesand gatherings. Events included the ASME International Mechanical Engineering EducationConference (2009, 2010, 2011), the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Conferenceand Exposition (2009, 2010, 2011), the University of Houston’s Engineering TechnologySummit (2010), the annual meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education (2010),and the 5XME workshop sponsored by the US National Science Foundation (2009).To develop its recommendations, the Task Force identified key areas of knowledge, skills andabilities needed for mechanical engineering and mechanical engineering technology graduates tobe successful in a global economy, whether working in small companies or large. Focusing onthese key skills, the project developed and conducted extensive surveys in 2009 and 2010 ofthree key stakeholder groups in ME and MET: department heads, industry supervisors, and earlycareer engineers, to assess the strengths and weaknesses of mechanical engineering educationgraduates. Responses were received from academic leaders at more than 80 institutions, frommore than 1,400 engineering managers, and more than 600 early career engineers with less thanten years of practice.Paper ContentsThe Task Force found many reasons to advocate for fundamental changes in mechanicalengineering education. Arguments for change come from recent engineering education studies,analyses of the engineering profession and unique to this study, extensive current surveys ofacademia, industry, and early career engineers. Major findings of the full V2030 report include: • Society’s grand challenges, as articulated by the National Academy of Engineering, offer a compelling reason for substantial curricular change. • In a global setting, industry must be successful and able to create sustainable growth, so companies large and small must have a talented and well prepared engineering workforce. • According to nearly two-thirds of the over 1,000 industry managers surveyed by the V2030 task force, significant shortcomings exist in graduate’s grasp of practical engineering knowledge, engineering codes and standards and systems thinking. • Technical solutions are not enough and the roles to be played by mechanical engineering professionals in addressing business and societal challenges should not be limited to technical knowledge and solutions. • Mechanical engineer’s capacity for invention must be matched by a commitment to all aspects of innovation, including assessment of sustainability, life-cycle analysis, and other societal impacts. • Developing a technological workforce that can maximize the leverage of talent demands a priority on increasing the diversity of the mechanical engineering student body and faculty. • Industry, academia, government and professional societies need sustained collaboration to develop the full potential of engineering and engineering leadership.The paper will briefly discuss these seven findings as background information to help the readerunderstand how the Task Force saw aspects of the educational landscape emerge as targets forchange. These areas for change encompass a wide range, spanning the educational pathways ofmechanical engineering and mechanical engineering technology to the increasingly diversepractice of mechanical engineering. To affect change, specific strategies and actions foreducators, industry, and government to pursue are recommended by the Task Force. Theserecommendations for seven major outcome areas of curricular change are presented anddiscussed in the paper.

ASME’s Vision 2030’s Import for Mechanical Engineering TechnologyIntroductionStarted in July 2008, when the ASME Center for Education formed an engineering educationtask force, the Vision 2030 group has been led by representatives from industry and education,including engineering and engineering technology educators. The project investigated thecurrent state of mechanical engineering education and practice within industry throughassessment of recent literature addressing the shape and content of engineering and engineeringtechnology education and through conducting workshops among stakeholders at key conferencesand gatherings.To develop its recommendations, the Task Force identified key areas of knowledge, skills andabilities needed for mechanical engineering and mechanical engineering technology graduates tobe successful in a global economy, whether working in small companies or large. Focusing onthese key skills, the project developed and conducted extensive surveys in 2009 and 2010 ofthree key stakeholder groups in ME and MET: department heads, industry supervisors, and earlycareer engineers, to assess the strengths and weaknesses of mechanical engineering educationgraduates. Responses were received from academic leaders at more than 80 institutions, frommore than 1,400 engineering managers, and more than 600 early career engineers with less thanten years of practice.Paper ContentsThe Task Force found many reasons to advocate for fundamental changes in mechanicalengineering education. Arguments for change come from recent engineering education studies,analyses of the engineering profession and unique to this study, extensive current surveys ofacademia, industry, and early career engineers. Of importance to mechanical engineeringtechnology, major findings of the full V2030 report included the following. • According to nearly two-thirds of the over 1,000 industry managers surveyed by the V2030 task force, significant shortcomings exist in graduate’s grasp of practical engineering knowledge, engineering codes and standards and systems thinking. • Technical solutions are not enough and the roles to be played by mechanical engineering professionals in addressing business and societal challenges should not be limited to technical knowledge and solutions. • Mechanical engineer’s capacity for invention must be matched by a commitment to all aspects of innovation, including assessment of sustainability, life-cycle analysis, and other societal impacts. • Developing a technological workforce that can maximize the leverage of talent demands a priority on increasing the diversity of the mechanical engineering student body and faculty.The paper will briefly discuss these findings as background information and the strengths andweaknesses of mechanical engineering technology educational systems as viewed through theVision 2030 lens. How should mechanical engineering technology education change to addressthese findings? Such areas for change encompass a wide range, spanning the educationalpathways of mechanical engineering technology to the increasingly diverse practice ofmechanical engineering. The Vision 2030 Task Force has made specific recommendations asstrategies and actions for educators, industry, and government to pursue. Theserecommendations and how mechanical engineering technology educators can respond arediscussed.