Rio de Janeiro, 3 September 2000
Congratulations for your efforts in organizing the continuation of the ICEEs, always looking for the best mechanisms to do so.
I would like to give you some insights, asking you to pass along this message to the other steering committee members.
The ICEEs started in Taiwan, mostly as a Chinese - American endeavor devoted to Engineering Education. The conference in Washington D.C.(1996) was very much connected to the ASEE meeting that occurred at the same time. This was a kind of first moment of the ICEEs.
A second moment started in Chicago (1997), when the ICEE's became really an International event. The "Partnership for Development" motivation started a period when collaborations was understood as an important mechanism for improvement of Engineering Education. This moment coincided with the maturity of the American Coalitions of Schools of Engineering, a symbol of partnership. The conference in Rio (1998) extended the concept of partnership to the several possible alliances between industry and Schools of Engineering, government and Schools of Engineering, Civil Society and Schools of Engineering, the rest of the University and the School of Engineering and so on. The Prague conference (1999) extended the area of the conference to Eastern Europe, keeping the concept of partnership. The recent conference in Taipei (2000) saw the onset of the iNEER, an important network to keep alive the partnerships started during the conference and the results of the conference in the period in between ICEEs; besides, from the key note speeches, panels, session and workshops, I think that we can wrap a few philosophical aspects of Engineering Education, connected to the present social and economic realities (I do not expect to be complete in the following list):
I understand that we are starting a third moment of deeper maturity of the conference. The positive results of such conferences to the community of engineering educators, in particular to the host country, became obvious by the growing number of candidates to host ICEEs. In this third moment, I understand that general statements involving the above list or other items are useful only to be brought to police makers, but not to be hammered on ourselves. During the ICEEs 97 to 2000, we could see a growing number of papers with real results measured in reaching some of the goals above mentioned. I understand that from Oslo to the next conferences we should focus on:
Specifically to the next ICEE in Norway, I think that panels and workshops with results should be organized and the presentation of techniques in use should be encourage. Also, typical results of partnerships and alliances should also be presented.
Well, those are thoughts to be discussed. Thank you for your attention.
Return to FEEDBACK ON ICEE-2000