Month: November 2015

How to be a Peaceful Engineer

How to be a Peaceful Engineer

In order to live in a peaceful world, it is essential that our engineers and technologies be peaceful. A week ago, I was at the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL’s) Annual Meeting, where attendees learned about building peace and lobbied our representatives to make the Atrocity Prevention Board (APB) permanent. Although the gathering did not focus on engineering, it led me to contemplate the roles that technology, engineering, and engineers play in peace building. I have collected some of my thoughts for this post.

Swords into Plowshares

“They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” King James Bible: Micah 4:3

While I was living in South Africa, I learned that, with the fall of Apartheid, the large prison that had confined peace activists like Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Luthuli, and Nelson Mandela was turned into South Africa’s constitutional court. Like in Micah 4:3, this structure of war and violence was transformed into a structure for peace and justice. In the verse above, the new technologies—plowshares and pruning hooks—offered people a new livelihood, resulting in food and nutrients for the entire society. So instruments of war and strife were transformed into tools meant for the success of the people.

Today we have guns, bombs, drones, and a multitude of other technologies that bring terror and death to people’s lives. If we want to build a peaceful world, we need to remold these technologies into ones that promote peace. It is the obligation of peaceful engineers to dismantle the technologies of war, and utilize the same material to build technologies that create respectable livelihoods and provide for the needs of all people. For example, engineers can create processes to turn guns into gardening tools for community gardens. Or turning manufacturing lines that produces tanks into manufacturing units creating solar panels. Engineers who actively dismantle the systems of war and turn them into systems of peace, are peaceful engineers.

Providing Access to the Marginalized

Technology has the ability to open up the world; it works like a bridge that provides access to land that is otherwise unreachable.

People throughout the world are marginalized, unheard, and do not have opportunities to pursue their dreams. During the Arab Spring, social media provided a platform for people to unite marginalized voices. Oppressive powers were attempting to silence people, yet through technology they found a way to speak, and they spoke loudly. This was only possible through technology.

An engineer working on technology that provides a voice and opportunity to the disenfranchised is an engineer for peace.

Holding Tension of the Whole System and Your Contribution

The examples above are a bit narrow in scope and complexity. These are small acts of peace that made a difference; in the complex industrial war system we live in, though, things are not that easy. Twitter may provide a voice to the unheard, but the cellphone where the Tweets originate was made with raw materials that were mined by children in forced labor, and overseen by the militias who cause war. The peaceful engineer needs to recognize, remember, and remold this system moving forward. It is not enough to focus so narrowly on one piece of the system. The end result is not the only issue; the process by which technology is created and made available also needs to coincide with our peaceful goals.

At the same time, viewing all the atrocities of the system can be daunting, and result in a feeling of paralysis. While recognizing the whole system, an engineer also needs to do what they are able to move forward on an individual basis. We must concentrate on the contributions we are able to make, while also supporting others who are working on different points in the system.

So, the peaceful engineer needs to open their awareness and heart to the complex systems in which they are living, while at the same time taking the steps that are actually within their grasp. We should know everything that needs to be done, and do everything that we are able to do.

I think this is where praying is most useful. As Quakers, we have the phrase “Holding in the Light” that essentially means that I am holding a situation into Divine presence. Here is a better explanation. If you are not religious, you may just want to send positive thoughts. No one person has control of the whole system, and we can only do our best.

Engineers Need to Know When Engineering Is Not Appropriate.

Bridget Moix from the Genocide Prevention Program recently returned from the Central African Republic. Last year, the villages were too violent to travel, but through intentional acts of peace, the region was stabilizing enough for her to enter. She spoke at the meeting about her experiences.

Bridget gave an illustration of an act of peace that she witnessed. In the village, a social cohesion committee mediated a conflict over a stolen cow. The villager who had stolen the cow agreed to pay for it, and this satisfied the villager whose cow was stolen. The social cohesion committee was able to address the conflict through peaceful means.

In this context, the role of an engineer is to do nothing – unless, of course, the engineer is a trained mediator. There are situations and times when it is not technology that is needed to solve a problem. The peaceful engineer needs to be trained to recognize these instances and respond accordingly. We cannot say that simply because technology is not called for, we have no responsibility.

“Building” Peace

We cannot create a peaceful world in a vacuum; we must work together to accomplish peace. Even though it seems daunting and impossible, it is important that we continue striving for peace.

These are some of my personal reflections on what it means to be a peaceful engineer. I would love to hear your thoughts on what I wrote and any ideas you may have on what is needed to build peace.



Photo: “And they shall beat their swords into plowshares” by Suzie Tremmel is licensed under CC BY 2.0


ABET’s Personal Impact

I contributed my personal story to, a group of engineers, scholars, educators, and others who are concerned with changes that the engineering accreditation board is implementing.

Against ABET

by Julia Thompson

I am writing this post today to share how ABET criteria influenced me as a person, explain the changes that are happening in ABET, and provide some suggestions on how ABET can improve the accreditation criteria. It is my hope that the reader will not only understand why the suggested changes to ABET can negatively impact engineering, but also gain some insight about positive ways to move forward.

Personal Story

It may seem a bit peculiar that an education policy is so impactful to a person’s life, but that has been the case in mine. As an undergraduate at UC Berkeley in Chemical Engineering, I came to the realization that my education was almost entirely focused on technical and scientific knowledge and lacked the humanities, social sciences and ethics. As a consequence, students leaving this program lacked a level of self-awareness that my non-engineering peers had; graduating…

View original post 979 more words

The need to Humanize Chemical Engineering Students: Part 4 of Julia’s Engineering Journey

The need to Humanize Chemical Engineering Students: Part 4 of Julia’s Engineering Journey

By Julia Thompson, Ph.D.

For the final assignment in my Energy & Society class in my junior year of university, we were to write a policy memo based on a topic that we learned in the class. Most students wrote about energy policy, since that was the subject. However, I decided to focus on engineering education policy because that was the most meaningful learning I had in the course. I wrote the following memo, with the support of a roommate who sat with me for about 20 hours to help me articulate what I wanted to say.

Soon after I sent it, the document was forwarded to the Curriculum Committee (I was copied on this email). This was in December, and by March there was announcement of changes for graduation requirements. They adopted three of the seven recommendations that I had presented.

The need to Humanize Chemical Engineering Students

By Julia Thompson and Luis E. Urtubey

The University of California at Berkeley has one of the top-rated chemical engineering programs in the US; but this program, with all the technical and scientific knowledge it imparts, also takes a serious toll during four years of the lives of its students. The chemical engineering curriculum is set up for making excellent engineers, but it also produces flat and uncaring human beings. It directly violates ABET accreditation criteria number 3, in the below transcribed sections, which require that students have attained:

d. an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams

f. an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility,

h. the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context

j. a knowledge of contemporary issues

Currently the major consists of approximately 133 units, and all but 23 are strictly technical. Within those 23 units, the American History requirement, the American Institutions requirement, the Subject A requirement, and the American Cultures requirement must be fulfilled. Consequently, with the substantive time commitment and lack of emphasis on Humanities, Social Science and Ethics, the program leaves students deficient in terms of self-development and unaware of many facets of society and the wider world.

I propose to modify the curriculum into one of a more humanistic perspective. Therefore, I recommend, with the goal of satisfying the aforementioned ABET requirements, the addition of two mandatory courses focused on ethics, globalization and/or development studies. The objective of these courses would be to give a broader perspective of how engineering impacts society and the world. I would also recommend the creation of 16 to 20 elective units by the elimination of Engineering 77, MCB 102, EECS 100, the Physics 7C/Chemistry elective, the Chemical Engineering elective, the Science elective and one of the Engineering electives. The objective of this would be to give chemical engineering students the opportunity of pursuing in greater depth their interests and fostering their personal development.

The abovementioned courses for elimination are not an academic necessity, as they are not required to fulfill any of the ABET accreditation criteria (appendix I). Specific reasons for the elimination of each course are listed below (appendix II).

In conjunction with a change in the curriculum, we should also strive for a more caring classroom environment. A more humanistic approach in teaching methods and homework assignments ought to be a sought after ambition. Professors, in general, as some already do, need to address their students in a more caring and understanding manner; student’s lives are difficult, in many cases both inside and outside the classroom, and professors should be encouraged to express an understanding of this and to work with students if personal issues arise. This enables the student to feel more comfortable, and to habitually perform better.

With these principles in mind, for instance, the department should establish guidelines for homework assignments. A more consistent difficulty level must be ascertained. Currently an assignment can take from 5 to 25 hours. When taking 4 to 5 technical classes it is exceedingly difficult to plan and schedule both study and personal time, since it is uncertain how much work will be needed for any particular week; this leads, in many cases, to unneeded stress, low self esteem, and just plain poor performance.

The proposed changes, if implemented, will have little or no detrimental effects on the students’ potential performance in the workplace. It is a commonplace for professionals to tell students they do not employ much of what they studied while in school. These professionals are not always working directly as engineers, but have positions of a non-technical nature, such as management, sales or other fields. For instance, a class in economics or business could have been a wise option during their time in college. More electives would allow students to better explore their options.

Appendix I


Lead Society: American Institute of Chemical Engineers

These program criteria apply to engineering programs including “chemical” and similar modifiers in their titles:

Curriculum. The program must demonstrate that graduates have: thorough grounding in chemistry and a working knowledge of advanced chemistry such as organic, inorganic, physical, analytical, materials chemistry, or biochemistry, selected as appropriate to the goals of the program; working knowledge, including safety and environmental aspects, of material and energy balances applied to chemical processes; thermodynamics of physical and chemical equilibria; heat, mass, and momentum transfer; chemical reaction engineering; continuous and stage-wise separation operations; process dynamics and control; process design; and appropriate modern experimental and computing techniques.

Appendix II

Engineering 77 Introduction to Computer Programming for Scientists and Engineers  — Engineering  (ENGIN) 77 [4 units]

Description: Elements of procedural and object-oriented programming. Induction, iteration, and recursion. Real functions and floating-point computations for engineering analysis. Introduction to data structures. Representative examples are drawn from mathematics, science, and engineering. The course uses the MATLAB programming language. Sponsoring department: Civil and Environmental Engineering.

Basis for elimination: According to professor Reimer, this course was added to get students more comfortable with computers, since they play a fundamental role through out the program. However, students would gain more by adding a topic in chemical engineering 140 (increasing the units of that course from 4 to 5); devoting some of the discussion hours on the computer programs the course uses; and/or teaching the Graduate Student Instructors the programs that the students use.

MCB 102 Survey of the Principles of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology  — Molecular and Cell Biology (MCELLBI) 102 [4 units]

Description: A comprehensive survey of the fundamentals of biological chemistry, including the properties of intermediary metabolites, the structure and function of biological macromolecules, the logic of metabolic pathways (both degradative and biosynthetic) and the molecular basis of genetics and gene expression.

Basis for elimination: This course is not needed to understand any of the basic principles of chemical engineering. It incorporates biochemical knowledge that could be useful in certain specific fields, but not all. Furthermore, many students very vocally question the value of this course. This course should be non-mandatory.

EECS 100 Electronic Techniques for Engineering  — Electrical Engineering  (EL ENG) 100 [4 units]

Description: Analysis of passive circuits, sinusoidal steady-state response, transient response, operational amplifiers, digital building blocks, digital systems, microprocessor control, power systems, and machines. This course is not for students majoring in electrical engineering.

Basis for elimination: This class was added for chemical engineers to better interact with electrical engineers. Many chemical engineering students choose not to work in fields that require them to work with electrical engineers, therefore this class truly benefits only a few students. This course should be non-mandatory.

Physics 7C or Chemistry elective, Chemical Engineering elective, Science elective, One Engineering elective

Basis for elimination: By the end of the chemical engineering program students have substantial technical knowledge of their discipline. Six technical electives should not be required in addition to the core load. One technical elective and one engineering elective would suffice. The students would be better served by the opportunity to study subjects that are new to them or of their particular interest, for either personal development or career purposes.

Connection to my Personal journey

At the time I sent the letter, I was restless and could barely sleep. I was excited and nervous – did I overstep a boundary? I spoke my truth, and was eventually heard, but it was not an easy process. I had resistance from faculty members – one in particular who made me question if I really belonged in engineering (which I will talk about in a coming post).

Another important part of this experience, which influenced me and impacted the direction of my journey, was that I felt alone. I did not have other engineering students whom co-signed the letter. My family did not understand what I was talking about, and I had not yet found a spiritual community I could lean on. I lived in a cooperative with around 40 people that I could talk to from many majors, but none were connected to the process in which I was engaged. Eventually I connected with others that share my desire for holistic engineering, and the search to build a community of like-minded engineers has been, and continues to be, a central driving force of my journey.