SYSTEMS ENGINEERING EDUCATION IN THE US: TEXTBOOKS AND PROGRAMS

摘要

Fraser and Gosavi examined the nature of "systems engineering," described six possible meanings of the phrase, and made recommendations concerning what industrial engineering programs should teach about systems engineering. This paper expands on that work and provides more evidence for further conclusions by examining the topics covered in textbooks in systems engineering and the topics taught in MS in Systems Engineering programs in the US and elsewhere. We take a fresh look at the textbooks on "systems engineering" and the similarities and differences in the topics covered in them. Although quite a few textbooks are available in the market, most authors have their own favorite theme that appears to run through the book. While this approach is understandable, it makes it difficult to define the essence of systems engineering. While some textbooks are geared towards what constitutes systems thinking, others focus on what systems engineers can do in terms of optimizing the system. Also, some of the newly emerging subjects that are taught within the core of systems engineering programs appear not to be covered in many textbooks. Examples of such topics include: "model-based systems engineering," "risk management," "network management," and "complex systems." We investigate in particular answers to the following questions. How many of books that provide an overview of systems engineering cover these topics? We will also present an analysis of how these topics are related to the overall philosophy of systems engineering. We also analyze the content of Master's degree programs in systems engineering, primarily in the US, that offer degrees with the word "systems" in the title, focusing on the 25 largest programs, which accounted for 64% of the graduates of such programs in 2010. The programs have much in common, but differ in their focus on different industries and on different tools. Some programs seem to have been designed to meet the needs of specific industries and even of specific companies. We use these findings to support conclusions about the nature of systems engineering education and to make recommendations to industrial engineering programs about the appropriate education in this area for industrial engineering students at the undergraduate and graduate levels.