TechnoTN Forum Working Group 2 Report: Qualification, Accreditation, Industry, and Student Attraction

1. Techno TN ArchipelagoScience and Engineering Thematic Networks4th TechnoTN Forum4-5.05.07 Report from Working Group 2

2. Working Procedure • Brainstorming • Identification of the key topics • Formulation of recommendations

3. Theme 1 Qualification and Accreditation

4. Discussion Topics • Basic Issues • Relation between Institutional and Programme Accreditation • PhD Level (top priority for the London Ministers meeting) • Relationship between generic qualification and domain specific frameworks • Policy Level Issues • Relations among Techno TNs (possible joint declarations like the declaration of the 4 Europ. Quality labels, exchange of best pratices etc.) • Recommendation for the involvment of international experts in the accreditation process (institutional accred. included) • Relation between the forthcoming register of QA agencies and the domain specific accrediting bodies

5. Under the Spotlight: Institutional vs. Programme Accreditation • Interactions • Alternative or complementary? • Pros and cons

6. Institutional Accreditation Points against: • Risk of University closing towards the external world • Evaluation by experts in management and not by experts in the academic field • A programme from a good Institution is not automatically a good programme! Points in Favour: • Gives a label to the university • Offers a level of standardisation on information about modules and degrees • Helps student mobility • Positively considered by Industry and employers? • Clear message fo the community • Helps when there are new Institutions • More emphasis on the authonomy of the Institutions • Allows the focus on the whole Institutions • Flexibility of responsivness from the labour market (allows quicker modification of programmes)

7. Programme Accreditation Points not in Favour: • Danger of rigidity in curricula • More work, especially if there are many programmes in the same institution Points in Favour: • Helps academic and profesional mobility • Tells stakeholders about the quality of the programme from which the people they enroll are coming • Way to assure that the courses meet the interest of the Industry (employers) • Evaluation by peers from the same discipline

8. Specific RecommendationsTheme 1 • Programme and Institutional accreditation must coexist and complement each other • Prefer accreditation of Departments instead of accreditation of whole Institutions • Pogramme accreditation always in a quality environment (QA of the Institution) • Formulate a clear and unique definition of the word “accreditation” in order to avoid misunderstandings: e.g. • QA=Institutional Accreditation; • Programme Accreditation= suitability of the programme as an entry route to the ……. Profession • Ensure Qualty of the PhD Level too, with or without “programme standardisation” • The European Qualification Framework must generate domain specific frameworks

9. Theme 2 Industry/Innovation/Impact

10. Discussion Topics • Open Questions: • Definition of Innovation and Innovative courses (= which better meet the enterprises requests?) • Teaching Innovation • Innovation in the curricula • Innovation as new approach to problems • Innovation in Education: focus on new methodologies • Making students more innovative • Research-based learning as innovative way of teaching in all cycles • Increasing relevance of SMEs throughout Europe • EIT and KICs: need for more specificity and better defined targets

11. Possible role(s) of Industry in Higher Education • As prospective consumer of students • Enhance the students’ experience • Advice and guide on curricula • Fund raising • Problem solution/problem solving perspective • Tutors • Help to develop creativity in students (creative thinking and creative problem solving) However, Industry people are often very busy people and sometime reluctant to be engaged in education business!

12. Specific RecommendationsTheme 2 • Refocus on the very aim of Education: forming the students and involving them as much as possible • Take into account the Industry requests while preparing the curricula • Diffuse Research-based learning as innovative way of teaching • Collect best practices as far as innovative teaching is concerned • Introduce interdisciplinarity in the studies (also in PhD programmes) as a mean to enhance innovation • Internationalisation of the educational approach • Stimulate investments in order to ensure innovation in education methodology • Networks must be more propositive and involved as far as new projects are concerned (i.e. EIT and KICs)

13. Theme 3 How to attract students?

14. Discussion Topics • Importance to put in place initiatives to attract the students (e.g. Open Days) • Which is our target audience? For teenagers it’s too late because they already have their own perception. Better to try to involve younger children • Necessity to identify what kind of message we want to give • Main objective: attract people to techincal and scientific professions • Presentation of the approaches of ESTIA NET to this specific questions: Info days; Summer Schools and Mentoring.

15. Discussion Topics • Bottom up and top down approaches must be complementary. • Importance of teacher training to concentrate on the methods • Improve the image of scientists within the society • Analysis of critical factors such as: • Economic factors (necessity of interesting options for the students) • Political Factors • Social Factors (what kind of attitude families have towards that profession)

16. Different approaches according to the age of the people Very Young Teenagers Adults Make science applealing Clarify differences within sciences Job opportunities and reward

17. Specific RecommendationsTheme 3 • Use internet and other related means (i.e. blogs) to create an interesting learning environment • Create a clear link between the technical studies and the related profession in order to attract young students to the profession • Take initiatives at the European level as it is not a question related to a specific country • Take the opportunity of actions against climate change for a relaunch of science and engineering professions

18. Specific RecommendationsTheme 3 • Focus on young children and their families and make young people understand the difference among the technical sciences (engineering, chemistry, physics etc.) • Increase interaction between practice scientists and young children • Invest in regional science museums and in tools for teaching science at school • Concentrate on active ways to attract students such as the “Researcher nights”

19. Working Group Members Chairman: G. Augusti Rapporteur: E. Guberti J. Ligus P. Wauters I. Wasser R. M. Chueca Caste I. Tomas Estelle R. Betcheva J. De Vries M. P. Viola Magni M. Ioannides A. Smith M. A. Floriano S. Smirkarova I. Wettendorf G. Schleining M. Meszaros T. Ward O. Caltun

20. Thank you for your Attention!

21. Brainstorming Theme 1 - pag1 • Institutional vs Programme Accreditation – They can coexist! • Higher educ. Institutions are generally more interested in the Institutional accreditation while Industry (Employers) is more interested in the Programme Accreditation • What is accreditation? First of all it is necessary to define this term in order to avoid misunderstang. One possibility can be: “Accreditation as the entry route to the engineering profession” • Pogramme accreditation in a quality environment (quality assessment of the Institution) • Quality assessment of the Institution – becoming more and more common

22. Brainstorming Theme 1 – pag2 • Necessity to clarify from what perspective you consider accreditation (industry point of view vs institution point of view) • Dangerous political arena in this period as far as accreditation is concerned – necessity to find out a balance between programme and institutional accreditation • Hints about the Bulgarian system of accreditation (first institutional accreditation by the State and then also programme accreditation) • Programme accreditation of PhD Level (3rd cycle)?

23. Brainstorming Theme 1 - pag 3 • Quality Assurance of the 3rd cycle (Phd Programmes): on the Agenda of the London meeting and very different approach depending on the discipline and the country • Necessity to identify critical factors as far as Qualification and Accreditation matters are concerned • Advantages of the Institutional assessment: standardise understanding of what a label means • Tendency to make programmes flexible (i.e. with elective subjects) – how does this combine with a more rigid deifinition of the programmes? • Concern about the relevance of what is tough with respect to what the student will do in his profession

24. Brainstorming Theme 1 – pag4 • Programme Accreditation should involve external stakeholders – but this is often conraddicted all around Europe! • Which are the requirements for Instututional accreditation and which are the requirements for programmes ccreditation? Different approach and different focus • Don’t forget of legal requirements, which caracterise the technical profession. • The accreditation process can reduce the mobility towards not accredited Institution