用历史解读CDIO及其应用前景

An Historical Interpretation of CDIO and its Application Prospects

理论与实践的关系一直是工程教育争论的焦点，不同国家处理这一争论的方式有所不同。在美国，教育界在实践与理论之间如同钟摆不断寻找平衡，而欧洲，双元制的工程教育体系分别侧重于工程教育的理论和实践两个侧面。第二次世界大战以后，工程需以科学为基础的观念影响更深、更广，尤其是60年代后，工程教育基至忽视了实践、经验等特性，使得”工程”与”科学”、”工程师”与”科学家”界限模糊，工程师在社会中的作用和地位受到质疑。自 70年代始，”回到实践”的呼声强烈。本文认为，CDIO是对当前工程教育”理论”与”实践”问题的一种解决方式。CDIO只是应对目前工程教育困境的诸多解决方案中的一种。就CDIO本身而言，对于不同国家、不同层次、不同具体情况的学校可能会有积极的启发意义，但不意味着它是唯一可借鉴的做法。

This is a review of different development trajectories of profession and education of engineering fin Europe and the USA. Engineering education emerged in the service for training skilled technicians for militaries needs and national infrastructure development. In the late 19th century and early 20th century， science was regarded as the foundation of engineering. Since then， theory and application has long been the focus of debate in engineering education. The history of engineering education development shows that the solution to such debate varies by countries. In the USA， the education field pendulated between the two sides， trying to seek a balance. In Europe， the dual system of engineering education each focuses on the two sides of theory and application. Since the WWII， the call for engineering having solid scientific foundation have had louder and wider repercussions. This is reflected by the fact that since the 1960s， practice and experience had gradually lost value in engineering education， the border between “engineering” and “science” and between “engineer” and “scientist” had became increasingly blurred， and the role and status of engineer was under doubt. Since the 1970s， “return to practice” has become louder and stronger. This study argues that CDIO is viable solution to theory─practice issue in engineering education. Indeed it is only one among many solutions to current challenges to engineering education. It is not a panacea and its value may differ by country， level of education and type of institution.