Experiences on dynamic simulation software in chemical engineering education

Commercial process simulators are increasing interest in the chemical engineer education. In this paper, the use of commercial dynamic simulation software, D-SPICE® and K-Spice®, for three different chemical engineering courses is described and discussed. The courses cover the following topics: basic chemical engineering, operability and safety analysis and process control. User experiences from both teachers and students are presented. The benefits of dynamic simulation as an additional teaching tool are discussed and summarized. The experiences confirm that commercial dynamic simulators provide realistic training and can be successfully integrated into undergraduate and graduate teaching, laboratory courses and research. © 2012 The Institution of Chemical Engineers.

University-led innovative and inspirational engineering education

The UK Government and large employers have recognised the skills gap between learners leaving the education system and the requirements of employers. The current system is seen to be failing significant numbers of learners and has been accused of schooling but not educating our young people. University-led technical colleges are one part of the solution being developed to provide outstanding engineering education. This paper focusses on the learning experience that the Aston University Engineering Academy, the first University-led University Technical College (UTC), has created for entrants to the Engineering Academy in September 2012, when it opens in brand new buildings next to the University. The overall aim is to produce technically literate young people that have business and enterprise skills as well as insight into the diverse range of opportunities in Engineering and Technical disciplines. The project has brought University staff and students together with employers and Academy staff to optimise the engineering education that they will receive. The innovative model presented has drawn on research from across the world in the implementation of this new type of school, as well as educational practices from the USA and the Scandinavian countries. The resulting curriculum is authentic and exciting and expands the University model of problem-based learning and placements into the secondary school environment. The benefits of this close partnership for University staff and students, the employers and the Academy staff are expanded on and the paper concludes with a prediction of progression routes from the Academy.

Practice based learning approaches in collaborative design and engineering education:a case study investigation into the benefits of a crossdisciplinary practice based learning strategy

This study explores the ongoing pedagogical development of a number of undergraduate design and engineering programmes in the United Kingdom. Observations and data have been collected over several cohorts to bring a valuable perspective to the approaches piloted across two similar university departments while trialling a number of innovative learning strategies. In addition to the concurrent institutional studies the work explores curriculum design that applies the principles of Co-Design, multidisciplinary and trans disciplinary learning, with both engineering and product design students working alongside each other through a practical problem solving learning approach known as the CDIO learning initiative (Conceive, Design Implement and Operate) [1]. The study builds on previous work presented at the 2010 EPDE conference: The Effect of Personality on the Design Team: Lessons from Industry for Design Education [2]. The subsequent work presented in this paper applies the findings to mixed design and engineering team based learning, building on the insight gained through a number of industrial process case studies carried out in current design practice. Developments in delivery also aligning the CDIO principles of learning through doing into a practice based, collaborative learning experience and include elements of the TRIZ creative problem solving technique [3]. The paper will outline case studies involving a number of mixed engineering and design student projects that highlight the CDIO principles, combined with an external industrial design brief. It will compare and contrast the learning experience with that of a KTP derived student project, to examine an industry based model for student projects. In addition key areas of best practice will be presented, and student work from each mode will be discussed at the conference.

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.

A tudományterületi sajátosságok következményei a kutatásban, az oktatásban és a felsőoktatási intézmények vezetésében (The consequences of disciplinary difference on teaching, research and institutional management of higher education)

A szerző tanulmányában vizsgálja a tudományterületek különbségeinek következményeit az oktatásban, a kutatásban és a felsőoktatási intézmények irányításában. A tanulmány első felében a tudományterületek episztemológiai és közösségi különbségeit tárgyalja Becher és Trowler (2001) népszerű kategorizálása alapján. A tanulmány második felében a tudományszerveződésre, a publikációs gyakorlatra, a doktori képzésre, az oktatás céljára és formáira, a diákok tudásképére, valamint a menedzsmentfelfogásra gyakorolt hatást mutatja be. A konklúzióban egyrészt a minőség- és teljesítményértékelési rendszerek differenciált megközelítésének szükségességére hívja fel a figyelmet, másrészt arra, hogy a Bologna-rendszer és az élethosszig tartó tanulás erősödésének következményeként egy-egy mesterszakon nemcsak a hallgatóság háttere, előismerete lesz sokszínű, hanem a tudásról alkotott képe is. Ez újfajta oktatói szerepeket és oktatási megközelítéseket tesz szükségessé. ________ In the article the consequences of disciplinary difference on teaching, research and institutional management is examined. In the first part of the paper the epistemological and sociological differences of scientific disciplines are summarized based on the popular typology of Becher and Trowler (2001). In the second part the influence of differences on organisation of sciences, publication practices, PhD studies, the goal and form of teaching, students’ conception of knowledge as well as on the understanding on management and leadership are discussed. In the conclusions, attention is drawn on the necessity of differentiation in quality and performance management processes. Another conclusion is that new roles for teachers and approaches for teaching is required if students’ conception of knowledge become more heterogeneous which is the result of result of life long learning and Bologna-reform.

COERC 2002: Proceedings of the Annual College of Education Research Conference

This conference was designed to offer a view to novice scholars of what scholarship is and provide insights on how to share knowledge with others.

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.

Essays on the Economics of Higher Education

At least since the seminal works of Jacob Mincer, labor economists have sought to understand how students make higher education investment decisions. Mincer’s original work seeks to understand how students decide how much education to accrue; subsequent work by various authors seeks to understand how students choose where to attend college, what field to major in, and whether to drop out of college.

Broadly speaking, this rich sub-field of literature contributes to society in two ways: First, it provides a better understanding of important social behaviors. Second, it helps policymakers anticipate the responses of students when evaluating various policy reforms.

While research on the higher education investment decisions of students has had an enormous impact on our understanding of society and has shaped countless education policies, students are only one interested party in the higher education landscape. In the jargon of economists, students represent only the `demand side’ of higher education---customers who are choosing options from a set of available alternatives. Opposite students are instructors and administrators who represent the `supply side’ of higher education---those who decide which options are available to students.

For similar reasons, it is also important to understand how individuals on the supply side of education make decisions: First, this provides a deeper understanding of the behaviors of important social institutions. Second, it helps policymakers anticipate the responses of instructors and administrators when evaluating various reforms. However, while there is substantial literature understanding decisions made on the demand side of education, there is far less attention paid to decisions on the supply side of education.

This dissertation uses empirical evidence to better understand how instructors and administrators make decisions and the implications of these decisions for students.

In the first chapter, I use data from Duke University and a Bayesian model of correlated learning to measure the signal quality of grades across academic fields. The correlated feature of the model allows grades in one academic field to signal ability in all other fields allowing me to measure both ‘own category' signal quality and ‘spillover' signal quality. Estimates reveal a clear division between information rich Science, Engineering, and Economics grades and less informative Humanities and Social Science grades. In many specifications, information spillovers are so powerful that precise Science, Engineering, and Economics grades are more informative about Humanities and Social Science abilities than Humanities and Social Science grades. This suggests students who take engineering courses during their Freshman year make more informed specialization decisions later in college.

In the second chapter, I use data from the University of Central Arkansas to understand how universities decide which courses to offer and how much to spend on instructors for these courses. Course offerings and instructor characteristics directly affect the courses students choose and the value they receive from these choices. This chapter reveals the university preferences over these student outcomes which best explain observed course offerings and instructors. This allows me to assess whether university incentives are aligned with students, to determine what alternative university choices would be preferred by students, and to illustrate how a revenue neutral tax/subsidy policy can induce a university to make these student-best decisions.

In the third chapter, co-authored with Thomas Ahn, Peter Arcidiacono, and Amy Hopson, we use data from the University of Kentucky to understand how instructors choose grading policies. In this chapter, we estimate an equilibrium model in which instructors choose grading policies and students choose courses and study effort given grading policies. In this model, instructors set both a grading intercept and a return on ability and effort. This builds a rich link between the grading policy decisions of instructors and the course choices of students. We use estimates of this model to infer what preference parameters best explain why instructors chose estimated grading policies. To illustrate the importance of these supply side decisions, we show changing grading policies can substantially reduce the gender gap in STEM enrollment.

Proceedings of The 14th Annual South Florida Education Research Conference

Full proceedings of the 14th Annual South Florida Education Research Conference held on June 6, 2015. Editor is Chief: Sarah M. Nielsen, Ed.D. Associate Professor, English, DeVry University