[Policy Pulse] Turning Point in Engineering Education for a New Industrial Renaissance: Universities Must Stand with Industry

Engineering education in Korea has grown alongside the trajectory of industrialization over the past 70 years. In the aftermath of war, the government and industry established a basic engineering framework centered on key industries in the 1960s. In the 1970s, Korea achieved success in overseas expansion—exemplified by the so-called "Middle East Boom"—by cultivating talent in heavy industries such as chemical, mechanical, and civil engineering. During the 1980s, semiconductors and automobiles led the domestic industry, and the rise of the IT sector since the 1990s marked a leap forward for Korean engineering education.

In this way, nearly all sectors of Korean industry have benefited from engineering education. Fields such as textiles, chemical engineering, electrical and electronic engineering, mechanical engineering, and civil engineering have formed the foundation for national wealth creation. Almost every field has experienced, or is experiencing, its own golden age. Even less popular fields like ceramic engineering have evolved—from focusing on inorganic materials to merging with new materials and metals—solidifying their place as core disciplines in materials engineering relevant to the semiconductor era, and are now enjoying a renaissance with the rise of AI semiconductors. Shipbuilding has recently garnered attention not only in its traditional domain but also through its synergy with the defense industry, while traditional defense sectors are experiencing renewed growth due to ongoing conflicts. Most recently, AI has become the focal point in software and computer-related fields, encompassing all areas of engineering and driving the AI transformation (AX) of each discipline. Thus, Korean engineering education has played a crucial role as a guardian, overcoming the limitations of its humble beginnings and producing talent that fuels industrial growth, demonstrating its underlying strength.

However, today’s environment is far more complex than in the past. The technological hegemony competition between the United States and China, restructuring of supply chains, and an economy centered on high-interest financial capital are prompting a reevaluation of the foundation for Korean engineering. Under the Bretton Woods system and later the World Trade Organization (WTO) regime, as societies advanced, the role of engineering in developed countries—especially in the United States—became concentrated in core fields and increasingly sustained by international students. More talent shifted from engineering to finance and the service industry, gradually weakening the foundation of traditional manufacturing. In the United States, it became common for students to study electrical engineering, electronics, or computer science at the undergraduate level, then pursue a master's degree in business and move into the financial sector. This trend contributed to the stagnation of engineering education in manufacturing and foundational fields. Yet, recent global conflicts—so-called "real wars" involving energy, weaponry, and semiconductors—have paradoxically highlighted the renewed importance of manufacturing and engineering from a new perspective. For advanced nations such as the United States, traditional engineering education is being reconsidered not only for maintaining military power as a hegemonic state but also as the cornerstone of economic survival and supply chain security—in fields such as semiconductor chips and beyond.

Ultimately, a nation’s sustainable competitiveness depends on a "well-balanced engineering ecosystem." To achieve this, university education must shift from siloed major-centered instruction to a convergence-based approach that solves problems using AI and AX, moving away from theory- and test-centered education toward project-based learning that addresses real-world challenges. In addition, the focus on employment rates based on domestic job placement should transition to cultivating global industrial leaders with international capabilities. Engineering education policies must also move beyond nurturing only select promising fields. While targeted support for advanced industries such as semiconductors, biotechnology, and AI is certainly necessary, balanced development and integration across foundational engineering fields—mechanical, chemical, civil, shipbuilding, and industrial engineering—are essential for creating synergy. In advanced countries such as the United States, the post-industrial focus on only a few popular engineering fields, while neglecting others, has led to serious challenges, such as the decline of manufacturing and national defense. In Korea, short-term industrial trends have intensified the concentration of students in electronics and computer engineering, while enrollment in traditional engineering disciplines is rapidly shrinking. If this persists, it could weaken the backbone of the entire industry in the long term. Therefore, it is also necessary to advance AX in traditional engineering fields. Otherwise, there may be a shortage of highly skilled personnel in the future, and this imbalance could pose a risk to the entire industrial ecosystem.

Given these circumstances, joint action by universities, corporations, and the government is essential. University-level restructuring should focus less on quantitative reduction and more on technologically integrated remodeling. For example, civil, environmental, and urban studies could be merged with AI-based smart infrastructure, construction automation, and carbon-neutral technologies. Chemical and materials science could be expanded through integrated education with the battery, hydrogen, and semiconductor materials industries. The entire curriculum should be reorganized around "industrial AI transformation," maintaining the unique characteristics of each major while enhancing digital competency. Moving beyond a closed, compartmentalized culture, curricula should be revised and systems shifted to a demand-oriented model that allows students to make interdisciplinary choices and develop future competencies in conjunction with AI.

Second, the government must establish a long-term workforce supply and demand policy based on industrial needs. The Ministry of Education, Ministry of Science and ICT, and Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy must jointly and regularly assess the demand for each engineering discipline, and use scholarships, research funding, and industry-linked internships to guide the distribution of talent, preventing excessive concentration in particular fields. Social mechanisms—such as adjusting engineering fees and providing technical incentives within public projects—should also be implemented to reduce wage gaps between high-paying sectors like semiconductors and AI and other engineering disciplines. Just as Korea has experienced success across all engineering fields, support must be provided to encourage universities to reorganize their engineering curricula through AX and convergence.

Third, a shift in societal perception is also important. The current university admissions structure intensifies the trend toward medical schools, potentially reducing the pool of technology professionals the country needs. Strategic campaigns that emphasize the societal value and the role of engineering professions in national security, as well as more realistic compensation for relevant industries, are required to restore respect for engineering across the board. The industrial site is safeguarded by people, and people are shaped by education. When these changes are realized, Korea will be able to advance as a "powerhouse of AI-engineering convergence."

Ultimately, the direction of engineering education is not simply a matter of adjusting academic departments, but a question of "redesigning the national DNA." When a balanced engineering ecosystem, AI-driven convergence education, and close cooperation between industry and academia come together in harmony, Korea can once again experience an industrial renaissance. One more condition is necessary for this renaissance: universities, corporations, and the government must operate as a unified team—anticipating industrial trends, cultivating talent, and supporting large-scale business orders at the governmental level.

Advanced countries never let their companies fight alone on the world stage. In recent wars and conflicts, AI companies have gone beyond merely providing technology; they have played a pivotal role as "architects of war" and "digital commanders." With their ability to analyze massive data in real time, identify targets, simulate battlefield situations, and reshape the course of military operations, close collaboration between government and business is essential. The era in which companies travel the world alone to make sales has passed; now, even the president is a national salesperson. As Korea's national brand rises, it is time for the government to actively brand industries such as K-semiconductors, nuclear power, batteries, plants, and construction—just as it has done with K-culture. Presidential overseas visits, official development assistance (ODA), development bank diplomacy, and security cooperation must all be leveraged to secure major projects worldwide. To usher in a new renaissance across all engineering fields, government support for universities, scholarships and military service benefits for Millennials & Gen Z (MZ Generation), housing support, and tax incentives for university students must be carefully reviewed and implemented. The synergy of universities, corporations, and government underpins innovation and convergence in the AI era, laying the foundation for Korea to once again achieve a renaissance in engineering and related industries. This may be the optimal and perhaps final opportunity to do so.

Choi Keechoo, President of Ajou University

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.