Readers’ Viewpoint

San Juan Star

782-0310

Please note: In the interest of easier typesetting, I would be happy to send a copy of this letter by e-mail in whatever format you choose. My email address is noack@urayoan.uprm.edu.

My postal address is Thomas L. Noack, P. O. Box 5416, Mayaguez, PR 00681-5416, and home phone (787) 832-4501.

On December 20, 2001 an open letter from Ing. Iván Nicolau Nin, president of the Colegio de Ingenieros y Agrimensores de Puerto Rico was printed as a full-page insert in the San Juan Star and also El Nuevo Dia. This letter was primarily an attack on the quality and direction of the engineering programs at the Mayagüez campus, and more particularly of the Electrical and Computer Engineering programs. I have taught in this department for over nineteen years, in both programs, but primarily in computer engineering. I hold a PE license and am a CIAPR member.

Ing. Nicolau Nin ran for president of CIAPR on a platform attacking UPRM, and that he has continued these accusations against UPRM on several occasions, including a radio show appearance last May and this letter. The May comments were reported in the San Juan Star then, I wrote a rebuttal as a Viewpoint letter, which the Star chose not to print. The engineering dean and department chairmen at UPRM also replied via a press conference; their response was based in part on my rebuttal, which I had shared with them. It is interesting that these incidents have occurred at the beginning of academic recesses when the University was handicapped in responding.

Also, some years ago, CIAPR lost a lawsuit in which they tried to compel UPR to use only professors who were members of CIAPR to teach in engineering, and they have sontinued to seek changes in legislation to compel this. Several past presidents of CIAPR have made similar attacks on the Colegio.

I feel that Ing. Nicolau Nin’s comments are highly inaccurate and are a libel on programs of high and improving quality, that he and the CIAPR leadership are misusing CIAPR resources in continuing them, and that University employees should not be forced into supporting an organization that is their employer’s legal adversary. Viewpoint´s letter size limitations do not permit a detailed analysis of his letter. I hope the Star gives the University equal space to respond.

The questions the establishment of the computer engineering program because a revalida in computer engineering did not exist then (1981). The revalida used in Puerto Rico, as in almost all U. S. jurisdictions is one prepared by the National Council of Engineering Examiners (http://www.ncees.org). The exam has little relevance to electrical engineering, and practically none to computer engineering. In spite of the title, it is definitely not concerned with the fundamentals common to all branches of engineering, but primarily those of certain branches, namely civil, mechanical, and industrial engineering; it merely forces schools to include these courses because of the nature of the examination. It is definitely not concerned with the fundamentals of either electrical or computer engineering. Also, because it is designed for applicants who graduated several years previously, it cannot cover recent developments. A forward-looking program such as computer engineering cannot expect to find support from an examination rooted in the past.

It should also be noted that the role of engineering licensing, and thus both revalida content and the preparation and professional emphasis of those taking the exam are quite different. In the U. S., licenses are generally required only of engineers practicing before the public; those teaching in universities or working for corporations (except consulting organizations) rarely need them. The CIAPR is a uniquely Puerto Rican and Latin American institution, in Latin America it is often used to exclude outsiders from practice, curiously enough the Venezuelan counterpart did this to a present senior employee of CIAPR and UPRM graduate.

I believe this controversy points out the misuse of engineering licensing and the need for review of the engineering licensing statutes in Puerto Rico. Ing. Nicolau Nin is not really a democratically elected representative of engineers in Puerto Rico, he is the head of a self-perpetuating lobby established by statute. He was picked by a nominating committee almost four years ago, and only those who attended the CIAPR convention of that year (at a cost now of $900) could vote for or against him. I believe it is time for the University to question the continued existence of the Colegio; it does not represent engineers in Puerto Rico, but merely collects $200 per year for acting against their interests. Also, the University should question whether its faculty should be made or even allowed to pay dues to the University’s legal adversary.

Sincerely,

Thomas L. Noack, Ph. D., P. E.

Mayaguez