Darwinism at work: College attitude change may provide college survival?

1. Darwinism at work: College attitude change may provide college survival? Trond Clausen, Telemark University College Porsgrunn, Norway 3rd CeTUSS workshop: Cross-disciplinarity in Engineering Education Uppsala, Sweden, 5– 6 December, 2005

2. References • [1] Clausen, T., Hagen, S.T., Hasleberg, H, and Aarnes, J.H.: Recruiting engineering students from vocational schools. Proc 7th UICEE Annual Conf. On Engn. Educ., Mumbai, India, 285-288 (2003) - background • [2] Clausen, T., Hagen, S.T., Hasleberg, H, and Aarnes, J.H.: Recruiting com-petence from vocational schools: Paradise Regained? Proc 6th UICEE Annual Conf. On Engn. Educ., Cairns, Australia, 199-202 (2004) - background • [3] Clausen, T.: Vocational School Interdisciplinarity as a Key to Success, Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Savannah, GA, USA (2004), http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie2004/index.htm - background • [4] Hagen, S. T.: Evalueringsrapport 3, Y-VEI, Høgskolen i Telemark (Telemark University College – TUC), 3901 Porsgrunn, Norway (2005) – tables and graphs

3. Project background – negative aspects • After the ”mid-nineties”: A dwindling student body, all engineering departments were affected • Electrical (power) engineering in particular suffered, resulting in the shut down of 8 of the country’s 11 power engineering departments. Three surviving departments exist in 1) Trondheim, 2) Bergen, and 3) Telemark (Porsgrunn)

4. Project background – positive aspects • Since 1974 a law has required all secondary education programs to ”promote scientific way of thinking and way of working”. - This could open for ”new thinking”-experiments like the Telemark University College’s (TUC) pilot project on recruitment directly from vocational schools • Such ”new thinking” is heavily and jointly supported (politically, practically, economically) by the labor organization and employer’s federations, the Air Force, the Ministry of Education and the Parliament • Positive…? The TUC thinking is – as expected - heavily opposed by major university & college rectors and some professors claiming such thinking to represent a flattening of “the academic level” and quality of education

5. Conflicting views • Traditional:The Academic Level in engineering is expressed by the student’s ability to solve particularly advanced equations in mathematics and engineering: The course content is the key • Alternative: At the bachelor level, the academic level is expressed by the selection, implementation, and documentation of learning processes: The professor role as an administrator of learning proces-ses is the key

6. Hand & Brain Equivalency Under the Law • One law of training governs primary and secondary education in Norway. Its § 2 “Pur-pose” states that the school system shall … promote “..scientific way of thinking and way of working…” • Thus, this principle applies even to the voca-tional school, which is a part of the secondary education system

7. Equivalence/Changes • ”Ordinary” students have a broad, general background but are technically almost illiterate. Thus, their engineering programs must contain material which is already well known by vocationally trained students • ”Vocational” students are already technically literal (practical and theoretical) at the elementary level but need a program taking them broader and deeper into certain basics, such as sciences, including liberal arts, mathematics etc.

8. Ill-defined quality criteria • “Quality” in higher education has recently been defined as (1) professor competency at the time of hiring, and (2) the number of students per professor rate • At TUC an educational research program has been designed to document, evaluate, and assess the pilot class

9. Pilot project quality assurance program • Scientific evaluation (international conferences on engineering education and articles in national and international professional journals) • External peer evaluation with respect to pedagogical and methodical aspects • The Project Board: • The TUC rector • The TUC-faculty project leader • 1 repr. from The Electrical Contractors Association of Norway (TELFO) • 1 repr. from The Federation of Norwegian Manufacturing Industries (TBL) • 1 repr. for The Norwegian Electricity Industry Association (EBL) • 1 repr. for The Air Force • 1 repr. for the Superintendent of Telemark primary and secondary schools

10. Evaluation and assessment 1. Evaluation • A continuous evaluation process, including tests, homework, laboratory exercises, projects etc. The final exam normally counts 30 – 60 % 2. Assessment • ”Surprise tests” about two weeks after first semester start, given to the ”vocational” class and selected reference groups simultaneously • Specially designed final exams given each year to enable a rele-vant comparison of ”vocational” and ”traditional” student groups

11. Six TUC benefits(better TUC economy and faculty joy not mentioned) • Internal organization has created many project ”owners” • An internal environment of self evaluation and criticism has been established • An internal culture of scientifically controlled ”cut and try” culture appears to emerge • Channels for future cooperation TUC and regional secondary schools are opening up • Direct links between organizations, federations, regional businesses and TUC are reinforced • Hand and brain integration in technical education are about to be restored

12. Y-VEINumber of applicants and factual number of students 2002 - 2005

13. Average grades through three years of study1st pilot class students (2002 - 2005)A (best) – E: passing grades; F = “fail”

14. Average grades through the first two years of study2nd pilot class students (2003 - 2005) A (best) – E: passing grades; F = “fail”

15. Average grades through the first year of study3rd pilot class students (2004 - 2005) A (best) – E: passing grades; F = “fail” Second year: 42 stud, but by now, no exams

16. AnyQuestions?