A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF GLOBALIZATION IN THE MECHANICAL ENGINEERING CURRICULA OF TWO INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITIES

The availability of the Internet has generated potentials for new directions and the introduction of new paradigms in advocating the “globalization” of engineering education curricula in which primarily two or more universities on different continents collaborate in exposing students to diverse approaches to teaching and learning. A number of papers presented at engineering education conferences report on such collaborations; the Partners for the Advancement of Collaborative Engineering Education (PACE) organization promotes such collaborations and has been very successful in linking its members of over 60 universities and industry sponsors to collaborate on virtual design projects with heavy reliance on internet tools and commercial computer-aided engineering (CAE) software. Although most universities in the western countries have taken advantage of the opportunities available to “globalize” their curricula, very few universities in the developing countries are participating in global opportunities to enhance their engineering curricula.

In this paper, the Mechanical Engineering curricula of two universities, Howard University in the USA, and the University of Johannesburg, South Africa, are compared in terms of their curricula content as prescribed by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) and the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA) in terms of design experience, teamwork and the preparation of students to pursue life-long learning including the pursuit of advanced degrees.

The intent of this paper is to describe the commonalities of the two curricula and to identify areas in which the two universities can improve in order to produce graduates who can practice engineering not just locally but globally. Following a brief introduction of the two universities and their historical missions, descriptions of the curricula are presented using ABET and ECSA assessment criteria to guide the presentation. To conduct a fair comparison of the two curricula, the paper describes the employment opportunities in the two countries as a major factor in the evolution of the programs offered by the two departments. The paper concludes with recommendations for the two universities to implement in making their curricula more diverse in which opportunities exist for students to obtain training that makes them productive citizens of the “global village”. One such recommendation is for both universities to form collaborative partnerships with other institutions in and outside of their regions and to enhance the research experiences of its students.