QUESTION: Why is this initiative being pursued?

Engineering disasters such as the Chernobyl nuclear power plant explosion, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and Hurricane Katrina can have extraordinarily devastating effects on public safety and our environment. This common-sense initiative seeks to ensure that all practicing engineers understand the causes and implications of such events. Such understanding can best be attained through changes to engineering accreditation criteria, which will ensure that engineering failures are addressed in all U.S. undergraduate engineering curricula.

QUESTION: How will this initiative be planned and implemented?

This initiative is being planned and implemented by Engineering Failure Education (EFE)—an advocacy group whose members strongly believe that education about engineering failures is essential for the professional preparation of future engineers. This organization of volunteers is funded entirely by supporter donations.

QUESTION: If the proposed change to the accreditation criteria is approved, will engineering programs be required to add new courses to their curricula?

No! The proposed ABET criteria change will only specify a student outcome—awareness of past engineering failures. Programs will have great flexibility in achieving this outcome. It will be entirely acceptable (and desirable) for programs to integrate case studies on engineering failures into existing courses. (Indeed, many programs do this already.)

QUESTION: In addressing this requirement, which engineering failures should be taught?

The proposed accreditation criteria change will not specify any particular engineering failures. Programs will have broad latitude in deciding which failures to address in their curricula. Our overarching goal is to provide programs with maximum flexibility, consistent with their educational objectives.

QUESTION: Why does the initiative recommend that this requirement be specified as part of ABET EAC Criterion 3, Student Outcome 4?

The ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) Criterion 3, Student Outcome 4 is concerned with students’ ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities and make informed judgments. Engineering failures often result from ethical lapses, failures to fulfill professional responsibilities, or poor judgments. Thus, thoughtful consideration of engineering failures is a highly effective mechanism for promoting students’ understanding of their professional and ethical responsibilities.

QUESTION: What resources can be used to meet this requirement?

There are numerous resources that can easily be integrated into existing programs. Below are a few examples:

BOOKS

• To Engineer is Human: The Role of Failure in Successful Design by Henry Petroski
• Design Paradigms: Case Histories of Error and Judgment in Engineering by Henry Petroski
• To Forgive Design: Understanding Failure by Henry Petroski
• Beyond Failure: Forensic Case Studies for Civil Engineers by Norbert Delatte
• The Johnstown Flood by David McCullough
• Why Buildings Fall Down: How Structures Fail by Matthys Levy
• Engineering Disasters: Lessons to be Learned by Hal F. Moore
• Collapse: When Buildings Fall Down by Phillip Wearne
• Fire on the Horizon: The Untold Story of the Explosion Aboard the Deepwater Horizon by Tom Shroder and John Konrad
• Flying Blind: The 737 MAX Tragedy and the Fall of Boeing by Peter Robinson
• The Great Deluge: Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans, and the Mississippi Gulf Coast by Douglas Brinkley
• Atomic Accidents: A History of Nuclear Meltdowns and Disasters from the Ozark Mountains to Fukushima by James Mahaffey
• Five Past Midnight in Bhopal: The Epic Story of the World's Deadliest Industrial Disaster by Dominique Lapierre and Javier Moro