A matter of professionalism? Reflection and reflexivity in continuing engineering education and practice

The argument that this paper sets out to critique is that in order to promote professionalism in Engineering Education and Practice, graduate level engineering programmes need to introduce the concepts of reflection and reflexivity into the curriculum right from the onset. By focusing upon the delivery of a newly developed „Work Based‟ Master’s level programme in Professional Engineering, this paper provides an overview of the first part of an empirical study which sets out to investigate the challenges associated with embedding reflection and reflexivity into Engineering Education. The paper concludes by noting that whilst student engineers may struggle with the concepts of reflection and reflexivity, with support and encouragement such difficulties can be overcome. Moreover, by encouraging students to reflect upon their Professional Practice, the programme not only enables students to consider how they may apply what they have learnt to their Professional Practice, but also encourages them to think about how they can link their experiences as Professional Engineers to what and how they learn both whilst on the programme but also as lifelong learners.

Managing the multiplicities of graduate level education! Are Master’s students’ expectations matched by their experiences?

With rapid increases in student fees reflecting moves towards a QUASI Market model of Higher Education in the UK and across much of the Western World[1], many universities find themselves having to meet progressively higher levels of student expectations[2]. This is particularly the case at undergraduate level, where increases in fees over the past decade have far exceeded inflation. Yet with so much attention on ‘consumer savvy’ undergraduates, the question of whether Master’s level students’ expectations are matched by their experiences is one which remains largely unanswered. Grounded in an empirically grounded approach to learning and teaching developed by the paper authors[3], this paper sets out to being to answer this question. In doing so it makes a distinctive contribution to debates about graduate level engineering education and concludes with a number of recommendations. Discussion: The ‘MSc: Managing Expectations’ Project analyses the expectations and experiences of Graduate level Engineering Management Students over a two year period. Focusingon the ‘student experience’, three main concepts are identified as being particular relevant to enhancing learning [3]: Relationships: Variety: Synergy. Relationships: Based on empirical research, the significance of Relationships within the academic environment is discussed with particular attention being paid to the value of students’ social and academic support networks, including academic tutoring. Variety: Grounded in a statistical analysis of ‘engagement data’ together with survey and interview findings, the concept of variety critically examines students’ perspectives and experiencesof different approaches to learning and teaching. Synergy: Possibly the most important concept discussed within this paper, the need for constructively aligned curriculum is extended to reflect the students’ apriori knowledge and experienceas well as employer and societal demands and expectations. The conclusion brings the different concepts within the discussion together, providing a set of practical recommendations for colleagues working both at graduate and undergraduate level. References 1.Gibbs, P. (2001) "Higher education as a market: a problem or solution?." Studies in Higher Education 26. 1. pp. 85-94. 2.Tricker, T., (2005) Student Expectations-How do we measure up. University of Sheffield. Available from: http://www.persons.org.uk/tricker%20paper.pdf Accessed 9/10/14 3.Clark, R. & Andrews, J. (2014). Relationships, Variety & Synergy [RVS]: The Vital Ingredients for Scholarship in Engineering Education? A Case-Study. European Journal of Engineering Education. 39.6. pp. 585-600.

Engineering for employability:a transition into CDIO

This paper draws upon the findings of a three year study which tracks an institutions journey of CDIO. In focusing on the student perspective the findings discuss students’ prior learning experiences and their expectations of university. The study considers students’ early perceptions of CDIO; emergent findings suggest that whilst CDIO is not really what students expect when they first arrive at university, most prefer it to ‘traditional lectures’. Indeed the majority indicate that they believe the approach enhances their employability and provides a more engaging learning experience. The conclusion argues that with its focus on problem-based learning and team-working, CDIO has changed the face of the 1st year experience for mechanical engineering and designed students within the university and that in doing so it has enhanced transition and ultimately promoted student success.

Laboratory focussed learning of core electronic engineering concepts in the first year of an honours degree programme

In common with most universities teaching electronic engineering in the UK, Aston University has seen a shift in the profile of its incoming students in recent years. The educational background of students has moved away from traditional Alevel maths and science and if anything this variation is set to increase with the introduction of engineering diplomas. Another major change to the circumstances of undergraduate students relates to the introduction of tuition fees in 1998 which has resulted in an increased likelihood of them working during term time. This may have resulted in students tending to concentrate on elements of the course that directly provide marks contributing to the degree classification. In the light of these factors a root and branch rethink of the electronic engineering degree programme structures at Aston was required. The factors taken into account during the course revision were:. Changes to the qualifications of incoming students. Changes to the background and experience of incoming students. Increase in overseas students, some with very limited practical experience. Student focus on work directly leading to marks. Modular compartmentalisation of knowledge. The need for provision of continuous feedback on performance We discuss these issues with specific reference to a 40 credit first year electronic engineering course and detail the new course structure and evaluate the effectiveness of the changes. The new approach appears to have been successful both educationally and with regards to student satisfaction. The first cohort of students from the new course will graduate in 2010 and results from student surveys relating particularly to project and design work will be presented at the conference. © 2009 K Sugden, D J Webb and R P Reeves.