Download
1 / 12
120 likes | 260 Views
From whence and to whither?. …or should that be “to wince and to wither” Bill Garland, Canada, Dec. 11, 2007, IAEA TM on KM. Goal: to facilitate multinational academic cooperation. Ritch: “purpose of WNU is to do useful things that would otherwise not be done”
E N D
From whence and to whither? …or should that be “to wince and to wither” Bill Garland, Canada, Dec. 11, 2007, IAEA TM on KM
Goal: to facilitate multinational academic cooperation • Ritch: • “purpose of WNU is to do useful things that would otherwise not be done” • “want to see stuff happening on an institutional level” • “want a true partnership between industry, universities, government, …” • But is the goal correct?
Cooperate ..on what? • Myth #1: Our goal is NOT to produce databases, archive documents, unify university degrees. • They are just a means to an end • Our goal is, presumably, to produce Highly Qualified Personnel (HQP) • Need to define qualified • It is industry who defines this, not academia
Why “Academic” cooperation? • Goal: to facilitate multinational academic cooperation • I don’t think so. It might be the means but it is not the goal. • Using this word has put a box on our thinking. • We seem to be stuck in the mode of using “degrees” as a means to achieve competency. • Who says that degrees ensure competency? • Myth #2: University degrees give HQP. • Fact is, Mastery is not assured by the current university system.
University – Industry mandate gap • Universities tend to be research intensive • Focus is on Master’s and PhD level • Research opportunity vs. teaching duty • We’re not going to change that. • Industry needs mostly engineers at the undergraduate level who have some degree of nuclear competency.
The education pipeline • Myth #3: The education pipeline is long and that is that. • It doesn’t have to be. • We have a huge resource in the large pool of non-nuclear engineering students and professionals • ‘Nukify’ them.
An Injustice • Some of the best engineers do not academically qualify for advanced degrees. • Thus they are dead-ended. • This is very wrong.
What does this mean? • To summarize so far: • Need competent undergraduate level nuclear engineers • Universities don’t provide that • Can ‘repurpose’ existing people to shorten pipeline • Need to open pathways for the non-academic types • Which leads me to undergraduate level Professional Development as a focus • This appears to be a universal need • Run this outside the university accreditation system
How? • Use the well established and extensive university based courses • Develop PD modules from that • Give modules on the basis of Mastery • We do what is really needed (both content and standards) • Industry led to endure these modules meet their needs • Consult the teachers for proper pedagogy / andragogy
Role of WNU • WNU facilitates the development by: • Sanctioning the notion (to strengthen the individual’s voice) • Defining what modules are needed to ‘nukify’ an existing engineer, i.e. establish a de facto standard, and set the standards of competency • Thus, WNU sets a certification standard and fosters a cooperative activity in an institutional level partnership • This meets the Ritch criteria: • “purpose of WNU is to do useful things that would otherwise not be done” • “want to see stuff happening on an institutional level” • “want a true partnership between industry, universities, government, …”
