Engineering isn’t usually a cert. It’s a degree. I have a Bachelor of Engineering, majoring in Software Engineering. There’s probably a cert level qualification in software development, and frankly it’s probably just as good at producing effective software developers as an engineering degree, but it would be misleading, if you claim that only those with some particular qualification can call themselves engineers, for the qualification to be a cert.
You typically through getting your degree also become certified, but the key is while your degree lasts forever, the Cert has to be maintained and renewed.
Cert has a lifetime and expires and you have to keep it up to date.
Ah right, you’re talking certification. I was thinking certificate, because “Certificate I – Certificate IV” are very common less-than-Bachelor qualifications where I live, usually shortened to Cert I–Cert IV.
Obviously the terms “certificate” and “certification” are etymologically basically identical, but their meaning when it comes to the type of qualifications they represent are significantly different.
See, the thing is, software engineering in Australia is engineering. My degree was accredited by Engineers Australia and had the same requirements as a civil or mechanical engineering degree.
Of course, it definitely is still the black sheep of the engineering world. In the vast majority of (possibly all) cases, practising as an actual engineer is no different from practising as someone with a different degree (like IT or computer science), practising with a lower-level qualification like a certificate, or practising after being entirely self-taught.
In the US, to become a licensed engineer you need to get an accredited bachelor’s degree in it, and then pass the “Fundamentals of Engineering” exam to become a state-licensed “Engineer in Training (EIT),” and then work in the field for four years, and then pass the “Principles and Practice of Engineering” exam to become a state-licensed “Professional Engineer (PE).” The degree is just the first step.
Does Australia let civil engineers certify construction plans straight out of college? (Answer: apparently – and surprisingly – some states do!)
Fwiw in my previous comment’s second paragraph when I said “practising as an engineer” that meant “practising as a [software] engineer”. I wasn’t claiming that that’s how it works for all fields of engineering, but pointing out specifically how software engineering is more similar to degrees in computer science, IT, or being self taught.
I liken a software engineer to someone like an architect. Architects will spend countless hours doing research, sketching out designs, creating documentation and presentations, and maybe even building to-scale models. But one thing they don’t do is actually build their designs. The constructions workers do that. And in the case of software (be it web or otherwise), those people are the developers.
Now, there are exceptions to every rule. I acknowledge that - especially in computing - it’s possible to blur lines. But I still feel there many more developers than there are real software engineers.
But architects aren’t engineers either! We have engineers in building construction, they are called engineers.
They ensure all required calculations are done, all safety standards are adhered to, they complete detailed designs, and they sign off on a project legally so things like quotes and timelines have legal teeth.
And, unlike engineers in manufacturing whose deep-pocket corporations bought an exemption, Engineers in the A/E/C field are licensed. And if you screw up you can lose your ability to work in your field…forever.
I haven’t met an “engineer” who isn’t developing code. This is such a weird distinction. The people asking for a design are the customer, the high level design handled by the product manager, the nitty gritty is handled by the software engineers. Some businesses may make a distinction for payroll purposes but there is no prevailing standard.
I mean, engineering is really problem solving, and not do we web developers solve problems. We may have made most of them ourselves, and new ones when we solve those, but we do solve problems.
The term engineering is not about problem-solving, especially when differentiated from development. Engineering is about deliberate understanding and decision-making, about giving it an architecture, a structure.
You can develop without any structure, solving an issue, without understanding a bigger context or picture or behavior. But that’s not engineering.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.