In the global knowledge economy of the 21st century we are witnessing an ever increasing pace of knowledge creation in the sciences and engineering. This exponential growth is gradually reducing the "half-life" of science and engineering (S&E) degrees. The developed and developing world economies alike are seeking out new ways to increase and sustain technical competencies and preparedness of their workforce. The U.S. makes substantial investments in higher education (undergraduate through postdoctoral levels). But once in the workforce, opportunities that are available for keeping oneself at the leading edge of S&E developments decline significantly. Despite widespread agreement in policy circles for the need for the U.S. to invest in lifelong learning opportunities for working professionals, an in-depth study on the topic has not been conducted. There are no systematic ongoing or recent efforts that would advance knowledge and understanding of the perceptions and role of lifelong learning as part of the culture in science and engineering professions. The last focused study on the topic was reported in the 1985 National Academies report on "continuing education". Since then dramatic changes have occurred in the education and workplace environments, now often characterized as a "flat world" in which nations ability to thrive depends on the quality of their workforces. The 2006 Spellings Commission report on the future of higher education calls for the "development of a national strategy for lifelong learning designed to keep our citizens and our nation at the forefront of the knowledge revolution." The proposed workshop is addressing the urgent need to assess current practices in lifelong learning and understand the unmet needs of the S&E working professional. It will synthesize information about lifelong learning gathered from a 2009 study. It will develop recommendations for policy-makers leading to a national framework for lifelong learning of engineers.
The future of U.S. competitiveness depends on a robust lifelong learning system for engineers. Such a system can only come into existence by means of a broad national policy which aims to help engineers keep up with changing technologies, ensure their continuing employability, advance their professional careers, and meet applicable legal requirements. The 2011 Lifelong Learning Imperative Workshop brought together over 50 thought leaders from industry, academia, professional societies and government to answer what such a policy should include and suggestions for recommendations and strategies moving forward. A set of recommendations and urgent action items for the different stakeholders have been developed to begin improving the quantity and quality of lifelong learning for engineers in the U.S. FOR BUSINESSES: Develop a learning culture by providing opportunities for and funding the lifelong learning for employees. Businesses should incorporate lifelong learning metrics into all performance reviews. FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SOCIETIES: Emphasize the urgency of need to promote the culture of lifelong learning among engineers in the U.S. Organizations with broad national reach like the NAE, IEEE, ASME and others should instigate and support efforts to develop new lifelong learning paradigms and possibilities. Engineering societies should also take on the responsibility to develop means of evaluating lifelong learning programs. FOR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS: Teach engineers that learning is a lifelong endeavor that is not limited to the classroom. Engineering professors must be in the forefront for setting the expectation that learning is not confined to courses related to obtaining a degree. Developing and teaching courses for engineers in the workplaces should become part of regular teaching responsibilities and not be restricted to summer modules. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICYMAKERS: High-level politicians in both political parties have stated their commitment to keeping the U.S. at the front end of the global technology curve. Therefore, they need to enact policies which encourage financial support for lifelong learning. Most of the successful lifelong learning programs in other countries are based on initiatives of policymakers. Agencies like NSF, Department of Energy, Department of Defense and others should work together to encourage universities and community colleges to have lifelong learning programs that prevent knowledge obsolescence and can be consumed by working professionals.
