Search

This publication is the sixth in a series produced as part of the Cedefop project The changing nature and role of VET (2016-18). Based on analysis of developments over the past two decades (1995-2015), the report provides important insights into developments and change processes related to vocationally oriented education and training at higher levels (levels 5 to 8 of the European qualifications framework). Building on detailed national case studies, the report demonstrates the expansion and diversification of vocationally oriented education and training offered at higher levels in European countries and the variations in how countries use the higher levels: there is evidence for strengthening vocational principles at higher levels in various ways as well as for strengthening academic principles. It also covers current debates and potential future challenges, including juggling labour market demands and wider societal values, finding the right balance between academic and vocational principles, and achieving parity of esteem between academically oriented and vocationally oriented qualifications at higher levels, by improving awareness and visibility of the latter. [The research was carried out by a consortium led by 3s Unternehmensberatung GmbH, and includes the Danish Technological Institute, the Institute of Employment Research (University of Warwick), the Institute of International and Social Studies (Tallinn University) and Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini. The Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB) in Germany is supporting the project as a subcontractor.]

This case study presents and discusses the English for Academic Study Telecollaboration (EAST) project, carried out between Science, Engineering, and Technology (SET) students from different higher education institutions. In this telecollaborative project, the students work across borders and cultures on real-life SET discipline-specific scenarios and develop a number of soft skills and attributes alongside. The paper shows how the telecollaborative exchange has been set up and what changes were required to adapt the existing course, particularly its assessment procedures, to ensure the project was well integrated into the curriculum. It also attempts to evaluate the project, taking into account the differing outcomes and learning experiences of the participants from the partnering institutions. It concludes that adding the telecollaborative project to the existing course resulted in a richer educational experience for the participants and development of a number of skills but points out imbalances in the treatment of the participants from the assessment point of view and suggests how these inequalities could be addressed in the future. [For the complete volume, "Assessing Virtual Exchange in Foreign Language Courses at Tertiary Level," see ED624433.]

This paper examines evidence from the HESA DLHE six-month Censuses and 3½ year ('longitudinal') surveys relating to three aspects of the flows of those who have left university with Higher Education Engineering qualifications, to test the robustness of the conclusions of SKOPE Research Paper No. 122 (Dixon, 2015), which showed strong evidence that most Engineering graduates do not go on to work in the sectors of the economy that might be expected, in particular in the 'natural' Manufacturing sub-sector. Specifically, the paper examines three questions: (1) whether evidence of starting salary levels for those from particular disciplines going into particular sectors could explain the relative flows (on the assumption that higher salaries for graduate vacancies in a particular sector would attract more applications); (2) whether evidence of sector destinations three years on from the (six-month after graduation) Census data analysed in Dixon (2015) would show up significantly different levels of 'leakage'; and (3) whether those entering employment having completed Taught Masters (as opposed to First Degree) courses in particular Engineering disciplines would tend (in the light of their apparent greater interest and deeper understanding in the specific discipline) to enter the "expected" sectors more than their Bachelors colleagues. The "bottom line" answers to these questions is that -- with rather minor exceptions -- none of the relevant broader evidence from HESA DLHE data over a ten-year period significantly questions the very considerable 'leakage', away from the 'natural' Manufacturing sub-sector, that was found and presented in Dixon (2015). (1) There is "some" correlation between the "average salaries offered" (by employers in each 'destination' sector to cohorts from each Engineering discipline examined) and the "size of the flows" from each discipline into each sector, but it is limited and rarely strong. While there might be reasons why average salary differences might not be large enough to provide a sufficient incentive for Engineering graduates to choose one sector over another, evidence of considerably greater correlation would have been helpful to justify the traditional response of classical economics to employers' concerns about shortages: "offer more money"! (2) While there are sample size issues constraining the statistical precision of comparisons between the two DLHE surveys, these have been addressed, and comparisons of the "linear flows" of graduates from each discipline into the natural Manufacturing sub-sector show (a) comparatively very small differences, and (b) on balance, slightly "greater" 'leakage' three years on; and (3) More MSc's in "Automotive" and "Aerospace Engineering" have, over the ten years examined, then gone into the "Manufacture of Motor Vehicles"... and "Air and Space craft manufacture" (respectively) than BEng's from these disciplines. However, for the other disciplines compared, there is little difference, and -- in terms of entry into Manufacturing as a whole, for the most recent year in the period - the fraction of the disciplinary cohorts entering "any type of Manufacturing" is slightly "higher" for MSc's than First Degree (FD) graduates in "three" Engineering disciplines, though "lower" for MSc's than FD's in "four"! This new evidence, therefore, only serves to "strengthen" the great importance of NOT assuming linear flows of Engineering graduates into the "natural" Manufacturing sub-sectors corresponding to their discipline, in particular in policy responses to reports of shortages from such sub-sectors.

A defining characteristic of current U.S. educational policy is the use of data to inform decisions about resource allocation, teacher hiring, and curriculum and instruction. Perhaps the biggest challenge to data-driven decision making (DDDM) is that data use alone does not automatically result in improved teaching and learning. Research indicates that translating raw data into useable information and actionable knowledge for teachers requires not only adequate technical and social supports, but also an awareness of how educators in real-world settings actually use information to make decisions. Yet, little is known about DDDM in higher education, in general, and how postsecondary faculty make sense of and use data in their instructional decision-making processes, in particular. In this paper, we use naturalistic decision-making theory to generate practice-based descriptions of how 59 STEM faculty at three large public research universities used data as part of their course planning. Interview transcripts and notes taken while observing planning meetings were analyzed using an inductive approach to content analysis. In practice, respondents used different types of data and other information obtained from, for example, student assessments, end-of-semester evaluations, and conversations with colleagues. Results indicate that faculty generally collect and analyze data in informal, ad hoc scenarios ungoverned by institutional policy. Exceptions include disciplines with accreditation pressures and team-taught courses where structured (and supported) opportunities exist for faculty to collect, analyze, and reflect upon data about student learning. Thus, while numeric data are clearly viewed by this population of faculty as the most rigorous, in practice, even those that use quantitative data also use other sources of information. These results suggest an opportunity for educational leaders to design policies and professional development initiatives that facilitate a more formal collection of and reflection on data by faculty. In pursuing such technical solutions, however, policymakers and educational leaders must carefully negotiate the tension between rigor and relevance, and learn from the challenges experienced in the K-12 sector regarding DDDM.

This paper presents a case study in which the authors attempted to understand the impact, on student choice, of reforms in tertiary education in Australia, namely, a shift towards a demand-driven system and the blurring of the distinction between vocational education and training (VET) and higher education. The authors compared the advanced diploma and the associate degree in engineering and related technologies offered as a pathway to a four-year degree, using data available in October 2011 on the websites of providers and from the Victorian Government, the first jurisdiction to adopt an entitlement model and the state in which most mixed-sector tertiary institutions operate. The authors show that, while higher-level VET qualifications may come at a cheaper up-front cost, they are increasingly being seen as a poorer investment than a university course of study. In particular, the cost of delayed entry to the labour market, curriculum mismatch, and the greater ease of getting a loan for a university qualification will influence a student's decision to undertake higher-level VET qualifications. Appended are: (1) Overview of the operation of government-supported places and income-contingent loans; (2) The tuition costs a government-subsidised student has to pay to convert an advanced diploma or an associate degree into a bachelor degree in engineering, 2012; and (3) Tuition fees per year for Associate Degree in Engineering Technology at RMIT University. (Contains 1 figure and 14 tables.)

Using data from the 2008 University of California Undergraduate Experience Survey, we show that study time and academic conscientiousness were lower among students in humanities and social science majors than among students in science and engineering majors. Analytical and critical thinking experiences were no more evident among humanities and social sciences majors than among science and engineering majors. All three academically beneficial experiences were, however, strongly related to participation in class and interaction with instructors, and participation was more common among humanities and social sciences students than among science and engineering students. Bok's (2006) influential discussion of "underachievement" in undergraduate education focused on institutional performance. Our findings indicate that future discussions should take into account differences among disciplinary categories and majors as well. (Contains 4 tables and 13 footnotes.)

There is wide demand for engineering graduates to be capable of working well in teams. The engineering accreditation body (ABET, www.abet.org) has responded to this need by requiring engineering programs to demonstrate that their graduates have "an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams" (Haag, Froyd, Coleman, & Caso, n.d.), and many engineering instructors have integrated the use of student teams into their courses. The characteristics of effective student teams have been widely studied, and there is ample research on what makes student teams succeed. Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (2007), for example, define five traits of effective student teams, and they note that each one is critical for success. The five traits are: (1) positive interdependence; (2) individual accountability; (3) face-to-face interaction; (4) interpersonal and small-group skills; and (5) assess its performance. The purpose of this Occasional Paper is to provide instructors with a framework for ensuring that student teams possess these five traits and are set up for success. A sample peer evaluation form is appended.

There is strong interest in broadening engineering education, bringing in more liberal arts content as well as additional subjects such as economics, business and law, with which engineers now have to be familiar. There are also cogent arguments for balancing against what is now the almost exclusively quantitative nature of the curriculum, adding more elements that relate to the actual practice of engineering, and structuring engineering education so as to provide multiple and later entry points, which should enable more informed career choices and make engineering attractive to a more diverse range of the population. Many have also sought a change in the level of the professional engineering degree from the bachelor's to the graduate level, which would logically, and probably also necessarily, accompany these changes. However, progress towards such changes in the United States has been marginal, in large part because incentives on the micro- and meso-scales do not match those on the macro-scale. On the other hand, there is much more substantial change in other countries, driven in part by the Bologna process. For the United States to be the last to change would be counter to the goal of retaining higher-functioning engineering jobs in the U. S. What needs to happen in order for the U. S. to change is evaluated. (Contains 37 endnotes.)

Many societal trends and needs call for engineers to broaden their outlooks, have more flexible career options, and work closely and effectively with persons of quite different backgrounds. Yet the education and general orientation of engineers have been directed inward toward the profession, rather than outward toward the rest of society and the world. Engineering education should change to create a broader outlook and understanding in graduates and thereby engender capabilities for linkages and more likelihood of advancement into management and/or movement into other areas. The appropriate steps include moving the accredited professional engineering degree to the master's level and building upon a liberal education bachelor's degree that is analogous to pre-medical education. (Contains 14 footnotes.)

Although the University of California, Berkeley has increased efforts to involve undergraduates in scientific research, little data exists regarding the number of undergraduate researchers. The University of California Undergraduate Experience Survey (UCUES) presents an opportunity to investigate the extent of undergraduate research involvement at the UC Berkeley. The data (N=5,347) show that the frequency of student participation in research under the direction of a faculty mentor varies significantly based on whether students are receiving course credit, pay, or working as a volunteer. Undergraduate research participation also varies between STEM majors and social science or humanities majors (non-STEM), with slightly more STEM majors participating. The data show that women are participating in STEM research opportunities at a lower rate than men but participating in non-STEM research opportunities at a higher rate than men. The data also show that Asian, Filipino, and Pacific Islanders (AFP students) account for 50% of all undergraduate researchers in STEM fields and 35% of all non-STEM researchers. However, the data also reveal that African American, Chicano-Latino, AFP, White, American Indian, and international students are all participating at almost the exact same rate in undergraduate research (between 24% and 27% by ethnic or racial category). Further analysis regarding the relationship between undergraduate research experience and the highest parental education level reached, as well as high school grade-point average and standardized test scores (SAT I and ACT) is presented. Implications for higher education administrators, education researchers, faculty mentors, and undergraduate students are discussed. (Contains 10 tables.)

Using data on upper-division students in the University of California system, we show that two distinct cultures of engagement exist on campus. The culture of engagement in the arts, humanities and social sciences focuses on interaction, participation, and interest in ideas. The culture of engagement in the natural sciences and engineering focuses on improvement of quantitative skills through collaborative study with an eye to rewards in the labor market. The two cultures of engagement are strongly associated with post-graduate degree plans. The findings raise questions about normative conceptions of good educational practices in so far as they are considered to be equally relevant to students in all higher education institutions and all major fields of study. (Contains 4 tables, 13 notes and 1 footnote.)

This paper describes the joint collaboration of Broome Community College (BCC) (New York) and the State University of New York at Binghamton to help their engineering students become self-directed learners (SDL). Gerald Grow's model for staged self-directed learning is presented as a framework for the collaboration, with its four stages of student ability: (1) dependent; (2) interested; (3) involved; (4) self-directed. At each level, the role of the instructor complements the student's ability. To optimize the student's learning and promote development of SDL skills, a course needs to start where the student functions competently and then stretch them through activities that call on more active, independent learning. Self-directed learners, when confronted with a new topic which they need or want to learn, are capable of setting educational goals, establishing a program for learning the desired information/skills, adapting the learning program to their preferred learning styles, and evaluating their own level of achievement. At BCC, training in SDL skills is being built into second-year traditional, as well as asynchronous, courses through use of group projects. Binghamton integrates instruction in communications, computers, graphics and design, and provides a natural platform for developing SDL skills and attitudes. Joint development and the sharing of experiences has assisted both colleges in this project in building more effective programs and more self-directed students. (Contains 18 references.) (JA)

This document reports on the results of an ad hoc workshop called "S.E.E.ing the Future: Science Engineering and Education" Held at Dartmouth College in November of 2000 and sponsored by Dartmouth, the National Science Foundation, the Dow Chemical Company, and Science Service of Washington, DC. This transdisciplinary conference was one of a series of events that took place across the country to mark of the National Science Foundation's 50th Anniversary (NSFSO). The conference brought together leading thinkers in the sciences and arts-winners of National Medals of Science and Technology, Presidential Early Career Awards for Scientists and Engineers, leaders in industry and small business, university presidents and deans, writers, theologians and financiers--discussed the future of government funding of basic science and engineering research in the United States. Representing a diverse spectrum of those affecting and affected by science and engineering research, this grassroots group's findings and recommendations for the best uses of public monies are reported here. Among those findings are: (1) a deteriorating national infrastructure that may threaten U.S. leadership in science and technology; (2) public funding needs to balance the shift of industry research and development dollars from new research to short-term product development and profits; (3) funding agencies must expand their traditional definition of cost and benefit analyses for scientific research beyond dollars spent, discoveries made, and products developed to include the intellectual vitality of science, U.S. responsibility as a leading global citizen, and the fate of areas that are not founded; (4) in order to maintain its leadership positions in science and in the world economy, the U.S. must encourage, recruit, and retain a wide range of American young people--especially women and minorities--in science and engineering careers; (5) all Americans must be educated in the fundamentals of science; (6) the U.S. executive branch must establish a plan to promote long-term funding and evaluation of research initiatives and projects of benefit to the entire nation; and (7) the need for the federal development of a program to renovate the laboratories and teaching facilities at small and medium size non-research colleges. A list of conference participants is appended. (Contains 15 references and 39 endnotes.) (YDS)

Cyclical and structural issues in engineering skills formation in Great Britain were studied through a review of recent employment patterns, income patterns, employment projections, recent trends in education and training, and recent developments in technology and work organization. The review focused on the following issues: (1) the extent and nature of mismatches between the supply of and demand for engineering skills; (2) the extent to which engineering skill problems are cyclical as opposed to structural; and (3) the adequacy of current arrangements for engineering education and training. The following were among the main conclusions: (1) engineering skill problems are most apparent when they manifest in the form of external recruitment difficulties at the peak of each business cycle; (2) long-term trends in training levels and recruitment difficulties in the past 3 decades reflect structural rather than merely cyclical weaknesses in the British system of engineering training; (3) recent changes in markets and work organizations have significantly increased engineering employers' expectations of graduates; and (4) one way to expand modern apprenticeship (MA) numbers would be to develop preapprenticeship courses to prepare underqualified 16- and 17-year-olds for later entry to MA schemes. (Fourteen tables/figures are included. The bibliography lists 34 references.) (MN)

The National Institute for Science Education (NISE) is an organization in which scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds work collaboratively to address the important issues in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology (SMET) education. This document reports on NISE Fellows' experiences based on these questions: (1) How did you learn about the NISE Fellow opportunity? (2) Why did you want to be a NISE Fellow? (3) How has the experience affected you? (4) What is your assessment of the value of the experience? and (5) How might NISE improve the quality of the Fellow experience? Appendices include: "Call for Applications and Nominations for Fellows"; "NISE Fellows and Affiliations"; and "Bibliography of NISE Fellows' Products." (YDS)