Abstract: The case study looks at how we use guest lecturers from industry (and academia) at Cranfield University. In the case study we examine why and how module leaders use guest lecturers in their modules. Furthermore, we also cover the student perspective. How do students perceive this form of industry collaboration and what are their expectations from guest lectures? The case study will benefit the EPC community by giving insight and advice on how to include guest lecturers in the curriculum. While many universities use guest lecturers from industry, very little research has been conducted into module leadersā and studentsā experience with guest lectures. The case study provides good practice examples based on studentsā and module leadersā feedback.
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Authors: Ian Hobson (Senior Lecturer and Academic Mentor for Engineering Leadership Management at Swansea University and former Manufacturing Director at Tata Steel) and Dr Vasilios Samaras (Senior Lecturer and Programme Director for Engineering Leadership Management at Swansea University)
Keywords: Academia, Industry
Abstract: Throughout the MSc Engineering Leadership Management program, the students at Swansea University develop theoretical knowledge and capability around leadership in organisations. Working alongside our industry partner Tata Steel, they deploy this knowledge to help understand and provide potential solutions to specific organisational issues that are current and of strategic importance to the business. The output of this work is presented to the Tata Steel board of directors along with a detailed report.
Aims of the program
In todayās world, our responsibility as academics is to ensure that we provide an enabling learning environment for our students and deliver a first-class education to them. This has been our mantra for many years. But what about our responsibility to the employing organisations? Itās all well and good providing well educated graduates but if they are not aligned to the requirements of those organisations then we are missing the point. This may be an extreme scenario, but there is a real danger that as academics we can lose touch with the needs of those organisations and as time moves on the gap between what they want and what we deliver widens.
In todayās world this relationship with the employment market and understanding the requirement of it is essential. We need to be agile in our approach to meet those requirements and deliver quality employees to the market.
How did we set this collaborative approach?
In reality the only way to do this is by adopting a collaborative approach to our program designs. Our aim with the MSc Engineering Leadership Management (ELM) at Swansea University is to ensure that we collaborate fully with the employment market by integrating industry professionals into our program design and delivery processes. In this way we learn to understand the challenges that organisations face and how they need strength in the organisation to meet those challenges. This of course not an easy task to accomplish.
In our experience professionals within organisations are often overrun with workload and trying to manage the challenges that they face. A university knocking the door with an offer of collaboration is not always top of their priority list, so how do we make this happen? You need to have a balance of academics and experienced industry leaders working within the program who understand the pressures that business faces. They also often have networks within the external market who are willing to support such programs as the ELM. The power of collaboration is often overlooked. Itās often a piece of research, dealing with a specific technical issue, it is rarely a continuum of organisational alignment. If the collaboration is designed for the long-term benefit of improving employability, then organisations will see this as a way to help solve the increasing challenge of finding āgoodā employees in a market that is tightening. So overall this becomes a win-win situation.
How was the need for the program identified?
Our program was developed following feedback to the university from the market that graduates were joining organisations with good academic qualifications but lacked an understanding of how organisations work. More importantly how to integrate into the organisation and develop their competencies. This did come with time and support, but the graduates fell behind the expected development curve and needed significant support to meet their aspirations.
Swansea University developed the ELM to provide education on organisations and how they work and develop the skills that are required to operate in them as an employee. These tend to be the softer skills, but also developing the studentās competence in using them. Examples include working as teams and providing honest feedback via 1-1s and 360s and team reviews.
In our experience the ability to challenge in a constructive way is a competency that the students donāt possess. All our work is anchored in theory which provides reference for the content. The assignments that we set involve our industry partners and provide potential solutions to real issues that organisations face. Ā The outcome of their projects is presented to senior management within the host organisation. This is often the high point of the year for the students. This way the students get exposure to the organisations which extends their comfort zones preparing them for the future challenges.
What are the program outcomes?
September 2022 will be our fifth year. The program is accredited by the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET). Our numbers have increased year on year, and we are running cohorts of up to 20 students. Itās a mix of UK and international students. The program requires collaboration between the university faculties which has brought significant benefits and provided many learning opportunities. The collaboration between the engineering and business schools has made us realise that working together we provide a rounded program that is broad in content, but also deep in areas that are identified as specific learning objectives.
The feedback from the University is that students on the ELM program perform well and they have a more mature approach to learning and have confidence in themselves and are proactive in lectures. From our industry partners they feed back that the ELM students are ahead of the curve and are promoted into positions ahead of their peers.
What have we learned from the program?
As lecturers, over the years it has become very clear that the content that we deliver must change year on year. We cannot deliver the same content as it quickly becomes out of date. The theory changes very little, but the application changes significantly, in line with the general market challenges. It is almost impossible to predict and if we sit back and look at the past 4 years this pattern is clear. We also need to refresh our knowledge and we have as much to learn from our students as they do from us. We treat them as equals and have a very good learning relationships and have open and honest debates. We always build feedback into our programs and discus how we can improve the content and delivery of the program. Without exception feedback from a yearās cohort will modify the program for the following year.
Looking ahead
We are being approached by organisations interested in the University delivering a similar program to their future leaders on a part time basis which is something we are considering. We do however recognise that this program is successful because of the experience and knowledge of the lecturers and the ability to work with small cohorts which enables a tailored approach to the program content.
We believe that collaboration with the market keeps the ELM aligned with its requirements. Equally as importantly is the collaboration with our students. They are the leaders of the future and if the market loses sight of the expectations of these future leaders, then they will fail.
The ELM not only aligns its programs with the market, it keeps the market aligned with future leaders.
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Authors: Steve Jones (Siemens), Associate Prof David Hughes (Teesside University), Prof Ion Sucala (University of Exeter), Dr Aris Alexoulis (Manchester Metropolitan University) and Dr Martino Luis (University of Exeter)
Abstract: Siemens have worked together with university academics from 10 institutions to develop and implement holistic digitalisation training and resources titled the āConnected Curriculumā. The collaboration has proved hugely successful for teaching, research and knowledge transfer. This model and collaboration is an excellent example of industry informed curriculum development and the translational benefits this can bring for all partners.
Collaboration between academic institutions and industry is a core tenet of all Engineering degrees; however its practical realisation is often complex. Academic institutions employ a range of strategies to improve and embed their relationships with industry. These approaches are often institution specific and do not translate well across disciplines. This leaves industries with multiple academic partnerships, all operating differently and a constant task of managing expectations on both sides. The difference about Siemens Connected Curriculum is that it is an industry-led engagement which directly seeks to address and resource these challenges.
In 2019 Siemens developed the āConnected Curriculumā, a suite of resources (see fig1) to support and enable academic delivery around the topic of āIndustry 4ā. A novel multi-partner network was formed between Siemens, Festo Didactic and universities to develop and deliver the curriculum using real industrial hardware and software. Siemens is uniquely positioned to support on Industry 4 because it is one of the few companies that has a product portfolio that spans the relevant industrial hardware and software. As a result, Siemens is more able to bring together the cyber-physical solutions that sit at the heart of Industry 4.
Figure 1 – Core resources of Siemens Connected Curriculum
Connected Curriculum Aims
The scheme set out with a number of designed aims for the benefit of both Siemens and the partner universities.
Increase the ability of graduates to have an impact on complex Industry 4 topics
Develop graduate employability/recruitment through real world understanding nurtured through industrial case studies and problem-based engagement with industry.
Expanding the market with engineers familiar with Siemens’ industrial hardware and software
Develop and keep current the skills of academics in a rapidly changing technical landscape
A model that supported sustained industrial investment in academic capability
A model that was scalable to engage future institutions
Connected Curriculum Implementation
In 2019, four universities agreed with Siemens to create a pilot programme with a common vision for where Siemens could add value, how the university partners could collaborate, and how the network could scale. The initial pilot programme included Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU), The University of Sheffield (UoS), Middlesex University (Mdx), and Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU). Since the success of its pilot programme, as of Jan 2022 Connected Curriculum now has ten UK university partners with the addition of Teesside University, Coventry University, Exeter University, Salford University, Sheffield Hallam University and The University West of England. The consortium continues to grow and is now expanding internationally. The university academics and the Connected Curriculum team at Siemens have worked together to develop holistic digitalisation training and resources.
Siemens developed a specific team to resource Connected Curriculum, which now includes a full-time Connected Curriculum lead and two Engineering support staff. In addition to the direct team, the initiative also relies on input from a range of experts across the multiple Siemens business units.
The collaboration between multiple institutions and Siemens has proved hugely successful for teaching, research and knowledge transfer. We feel this model and collaboration is an excellent example of industry informed curriculum development and the translational benefits this can bring for all partners. Evidential outcomes of these benefits are demonstrated through the following examples.
Multi-disciplinary delivery
In 2020 Teesside Universityās School of Computing, Engineering and Digital Technologies completed a module review including the embedding of digitalisation, resourced through Connected Curriculum, across its Engineering degrees. A discipline specific, scaffolded approach was developed, enabling students to build on previous learning. This includes starting at a component level and building towards fully integrated cyber-physical systems and plants. Connected Curriculum resources are used to inform and resource new modules including Robotics Design and Control and Process Automation. Due to the inherent need for multi-disciplinary working on digitalisation projects many of these have been structured as shared modules. As Siemens work across such a broad range of industries we are able to embed case studies and tasks which are relevant and foster collaborative working. The need for these digital skills and collaborative approaches has been highlighted by a number of studies including the joint 2021 IMechE/IET survey report: The future manufacturing engineer – ready to embrace major change?
Impact on Industry
In May 2021, Exeter’s Engineering Management group and a manufacturer of electric motors, generators, power electronics, and control systems (located in Devon, UK) collaborated to create digital twins for the assembly line of the Internal Permanent Magnet Motor.Ā With the support from Siemens, we implemented Siemens Tecnomatix Plant Simulation to develop the models. The aim was to optimise assembly line performance of producing the Internal Permanent Magnet Motor such as cycle time, resource utilisation, idle time, throughput and efficiency. What-if scenarios (e.g. machine failure, various material handling modes, absenteeism, bottlenecks, demand uncertainty and re-layout workstations) were performed to build resilient, productive and sustainable assembly lines. Two MSc students were closely involved in this collaborative project to carry out the modelling and the experiments.Ā Ā Our learners have experienced hands-on engineering practice and action-oriented learning to implement Siemens plant simulation in industry.
Industrially resourced project-based learning
In 2020 Siemens was involved in the Ventilator Challenge UK (VCUK) consortium that was formed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. VCUK was tasked with ramping up production of ventilators from 10/week to 1500/week to produce a total of 13500 in just 12 weeks. Inspired by this very successful project, academics at MMU approached the Connected Curriculum team asking if the project could be replicated with a multidisciplinary group of 2nd year Engineering students. MMU Academics and Engineers from Siemens codeveloped a project pack using an open-source ventilator design from Medtronic. The students were tasked with designing a manufacturing process that would produce 10000 ventilators in 12 weeks. The students had 6 weeks to learn how to use the industry standard tools required for plant simulation (Siemens Tecnomatix) and to carry out the project successfully. The project attracted media attention and was featured in articles 1 and 2.
Keys to Success
So, what made the Connected Curriculum so successful? Digitalisation is clearly a current trend and so timing has played an important role. One of the most significant reasons is that Siemens not only led the scheme but resourced it. This has been key to supporting the rapidly growing need for relevant academic expertise. The on-going support from Siemens is also key for issue resolution and to support implementation for universities in adopting new curriculum. Engaging academic partners early in the process was key to ensuring the content was relevant and appropriately pitched.
Siemens breadth and depth of technological expertise across numerous technologies has been a key factor in the success of this initiative. Combined with its global engineering community, this has facilitated a rich integrated curriculum approach which covers a range of aligned technologies. Drawing on internal experts across its global community has allowed the initiative to benefit from a wealth of existing knowledge and resources. Having reached critical mass the initiative is now financially self-sustaining. Without reaching this milestone continued engagement would have been impossible.
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Authors: Bob Tricklebank (Dyson Institute of Engineering and Technology) and Sue Parr (WMG, University of Warwick).
Keywords: Partnerships, Academic, Industry
Abstract: This case study illustrates how, through a commitment to established guiding principles, open communication, a willingness to challenge and be challenged, flexibility and open communication, itās possible to design and deliver a degree apprenticeship programme that is more than the sum of its parts.Ā
Introduction
Dyson is driven by a simple mission: to solve the problems that others seem to ignore.Ā From the humble beginnings of the worldās first bagless vacuum cleaner, Dyson is now a global research and technology company with engineering, research, manufacturing and testing operations in the UK, Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines. The company employs 14,000 people globally including 6,000 engineers and scientists. Its portfolio of engineering expertise, supported by a Ā£3 million per week investment into R&D, encompasses areas from solid-state batteries and high-speed digital motors to machine learning and robotics.
Alongside its expansive technology evolution, Dyson has spent the past two decades supporting engineering education in the UK through its charitable arm, the James Dyson Foundation. The James Dyson Foundation engages at all stages of the engineering pipeline, from providing free resources and workshops to primary and secondary schools to supporting students in higher education through bursaries, PhD funding and capital donations to improve engineering facilities.
It was against this backdrop of significant investment in innovation and genuine passion for engineering education that Sir James Dyson chose to take a significant next step and set up his own higher education provider: the Dyson Institute of Engineering and Technology.
The ambition was always to establish an independent higher education provider, able to deliver and award its own degrees under the New Degree Awarding Powers provisions created by the Higher Education and Research Act 2017. But rather than wait the years that it would take for the requisite regulatory frameworks to appear and associated applications to be made and quality assurance processes to be passed, the decision was made to make an impact in engineering education as quickly as possible, by beginning delivery in partnership with an established university.
Finding the right partner
The search for the right university partner began by setting some guiding principles; the non-negotiable expectations that any potential partner would be expected to meet, grounded in Dysonās industrial expertise and insight into developing high-calibre engineering talent.
1.An interdisciplinary programme
Extensive discussions with Dysonās engineering leaders, as well as a review of industry trends, made one thing very clear: the engineers of the future would need to be interdisciplinarians, able to understand mechanical, electronic and software engineering, joining the dots between disciplines to develop complex, connected products. Any degree programme delivered at the Dyson Institute would need to reflect that ā alongside industrial relevance and technical rigour.
2. Delivered entirely on the Dyson Campus
It was essential that delivery of the degree programme took place on the same site on which learners would be working as Undergraduate Engineers, ensuring a holistic experience. There could be no block release of learners from the workplace for weeks at a time: teaching needed to be integrated into learnersā working weeks, supporting the immediate application of learning and maintaining integration into the workplace community.Ā Ā
3. Actively supported by the Dyson Institute
This would not be a bipartisan relationship between employer and training provider. The fledgling Dyson Institute would play an active role in the experience of the learners, contributing to feedback and improvements and gaining direct experience of higher education activity by shadowing the provider.
WMG, University of Warwick
Dyson entered into discussions with a range of potential partners. But WMG, University of Warwick immediately stood out from the crowd.
Industrial partnership was already at the heart of WMGās model. In 1980 Professor Lord Kumar Bhattacharyya founded WMG to deliver his vision to improve the competitiveness of the UKās manufacturing sector through the application of value-adding innovation, new technologies and skills development. Four decades later, WMG continues to drive innovation through its pioneering research and education programmes, working in partnership with private and public organisations to deliver a real impact on the economy, society and the environment.
WMG is an international role model for how universities and businesses can successfully work together; part of a Top 10 UK ranked and Top 100 world-ranked university.
WMGās expertise in working with industrial partners meant that they understood the importance of flexibility and were willing to evolve their approach to meet Dysonās expectations ā from working through the administrative challenge of supporting 100% delivery on the Dyson Campus, to developing a new degree apprenticeship programme.
Academics at WMG worked closely with Dyson engineers, who offered their insight into the industrial relevance of the existing programme ā regularly travelling to WMG to discuss their observations in person and develop new modules. This resulted in a degree with a decreased focus on group work and project management, skills that learners would gain in the workplace at Dyson, and an increased focus on software, programming and more technically focused modules.
Importantly, WMG was supportive of Dysonās intention to set up an entirely independent higher education provider. Rather than see a potential competitor, WMG saw the opportunity to play an important part in shaping the future of engineering education, to engage in reciprocal learning and development alongside a start-up HE provider and to hone its portfolio for future industrial partnerships.
The programme
In September 2017, the Dyson Institute opened its doors to its first cohort of 33 Undergraduate Engineers onto a BEng in Engineering degree apprenticeship, delivered over four years and awarded by the University of Warwick.
Two days per week are dedicated to academic study. The first day is a full day of teaching, with lecturers from WMG travelling to the Dyson Campus to engage in onsite delivery. The second day is a day of self-study, with lecturers available to answer questions and help embed learning. The remaining three days are spent working on live engineering projects within Dyson.
The first two years of the programme are deliberately generalist, while years three and four offer an opportunity to specialise. This academic approach is complemented in the workplace, with Undergraduate Engineers spending their first two years rotating through six different workplace teams, from electronics and software to research and product development, before choosing a single workplace team in which to spend their final two years. Final year projects are based on work undertaken in that team.
The Dyson Institute enhances WMGās provision in a variety of ways, including administration of the admissions process, the provision of teaching and learning facilities, pastoral support, health and wellbeing support, social and extra-curricular opportunities, monitoring of student concerns and professional development support.Ā Ā
Key enhancements include the provision of Student Support Advisors (one per cohort), a dedicated resource to manage learnersā workplace experience, quarterly Wellbeing and Development Days and the Summer Series, a professional development programme designed to address the broader set of skills engineers need, which takes the place of academic delivery across July and August.
Continuous improvement Ā
The collaborative partnership between Dyson, the Dyson Institute and WMG, the University of Warwick did not end when delivery began. Instead, the focus turned to iteration and improvement.
Dyson Institute and WMG programme leadership hold regular meetings to discuss plans, progress and challenges. These conversations are purposefully frank, with honesty on both sides allowing concerns to be raised as soon as they are noted. An important voice in these conversations is that of the student body, whose āon the ground experienceā is represented not only through the traditional course representatives, but through stream and workplace representatives.
Even as the Dyson Institute has begun independent delivery (it welcomed its first Dyson Institute-registered Undergraduate Engineers in September 2021), both partners remain dedicated to improving the student experience. The current focus is on increasing WMGās onsite presence as well as the regularity of joint communications to the student body, with a view to supporting a more streamlined approach to challenge resolution.
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Author: Dr Salma .M.S. Al Arefi (University of Leeds)
Keywords: Science and Social Capitals, Sense of Belonging, Intersectionality, Student Success
Abstract: Being in a marginalised position due to feeling of otherness because of oneās gender as well as intersecting identity can create psychological hidden barriers. Coupled with science and social capitals such variables are key determines of studentās self-concept of engineering self-efficacy, competencies, and abilities. The impact of being othered may not only be limited to interest for participation in engineering but could extend beyond and significantly affect student engagement, success, and affiliation with engineering. This could impact students’ sense of belonging to their degree programme, university, and discipline, leading to adverse impacts ranging from low engagement to low attainment, or discontinuations. Such experiences can be greatly exacerbated for students with intersecting identities (ādouble, triple, jeopardyā), e.g., a female student who identifies as a first-generation, working-class, disabled, commuter, carer, neurodiverse or mature student. This report presents work on progress on a student-centred interventional case study on exploring the impact of the intersectional lived experiences of underrepresented, disadvantaged and minoritised student groups in engineering beyond obvious gender and pre-university qualifications characteristics.
1.Ā Ā Ā Ā Problem Statement
Initiatives on closing the technical skills gap remain limited to access to either engineering education or the workplace.Ā Identifying and supporting students facing barriers to continuation can be key to enhancing student success in a way that bridges the gap between the ignition of interest and transition to the engineering industry.Ā Early but sustained engagement throughout the life cycle of an engineering student is however vital to cultivate students’ sense of belonging to their modules, degree programmes and the wider industry. That would in turn support the formation of their engineering identity.
Gendered identity, as well as pre-university qualifications, are yet perceived to exert the strongest force for marginalisation and underrepresentation in engineering education and the workplace. The impact intersecting identities can have in relation to ignition of interest, participation, as well as the formation of engineering identity, also need consideration.Ā Along with gender, characteristics such as race, class, age, or language can have an added impact on already minoritized individuals (the ādouble, triple, quadrant…. jeopardyā), whereby the experience of exclusion and otherness can be exacerbated by overlapping marginalised identities. Coupled with the self-concept of own science capital, efficacies, and competencies [1-2], the formation of engineering identity could be expressed as a direct function of a sense of inclusion or otherwise exclusion [3]. Within this context, such an inherent feeling of connectedness describes the extent to which the lived experience of individuals is acknowledged valued and included [4], which is a healthy fertilizer for the formation of engineering identity. Perceived threats to oneās belonging due to a feeling of exclusion or rejection could on the contrary negatively impact oneās perception of self-efficacy and hence affiliation with engineering.
2.Ā Ā Ā Ā Project Aims
The role of effect in learning to foster a sense of belonging and enhance a coherent sense of self and form the engineering identity has attractedĀ growingĀ pedagogical researchĀ interest. In academia, a sense of belonging has been shown to excrete the largest force on oneās intent to participate in engineering and to be the key sustainable vehicle for successful progressions. Because engineering learning activities are pursued in complex social interactions, acknowledging, and understanding the role of belonging in academic success is key to fostering an inclusive culture that encourages and recognises contributions from all.Ā It is hoped that the project outcomes can advise on understanding to support underrepresented, marginalised and minoritised students overcome self-perceived psychological barriers to their degree programme, university, or engineering workplace. The intersectional lens of the project is aimed to uncover key culprits that impact engineering identity formation for traditionally underrepresented, disadvantaged and minoritised students beyond obvious gender and pre-university education characteristics.
Outcomes will role model fostering an inclusive culture where engineering students from all backgrounds feel that they belong in an effort to support engineering higher education institutions to adhere to the changes introduced by the Engineering Council to the U.K. Standards for Professional Engineering Competency and Commitment around recognising inclusivity and diversity. This should be applicable to other STEM-related disciplines.
3.Ā Ā Ā Ā Decolonial partnership
The project centres on students’ voices through a decolonial participation approach that acknowledges participants as co-researchers and enables them to take an active role in the co-creation of the project deliverables. Participation will be incentivised through recognition (authorship, certifications) as well as financial incentives.Ā The use of evidence-based active listening to enable students to share their lived experiences of belonging through storytelling and story sharing is hoped to create a safe space to empower and acknowledge student voices so that every student feel that they matter to their degree programme, university, and discipline. That in turn would cultivate authentic learner identity and a sense of belonging.
4.Ā Ā Ā Ā Outcomes and future work
The findings are hoped to advise on a sustainable support approach whereby early and sustained engagement (throughout the student lifecycle from access to continuation, attainment, and progression) are prioritised to facilitate the transition of students into and from Engineering. Co-created artefacts from the project will be used to support access and continuation by providing examples of lived experiences for prospective students to associate with. Fostering a sense of belonging is hoped to have a direct impact on learner engagement, success, and attainment as well as enhancing studentsā ability to progress towards achieving their unique goals beyond their degree.
The second phase of the 2-year project will involve student recruitment and selection, interventional listening, storytelling-based approaches and co-creation of artefacts.
Acknowledgement
The work is carried out as part of the fellowship of the Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence in partnership with Dr Kendi Guantai, from Leeds Business School, Marketing DivisionĀ and Dr Nadine Cavigioli Lifelong Learning Centre at the University of Leeds.
References
H. M. Watt, “The role of motivation in gendered educational and occupational trajectories related to maths,”Ā Educational Research and Evaluation,Ā vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 305-322, 2006.
F. Pajares,Ā Gender differences in mathematics self-efficacy beliefs. Cambridge University Press, 2005.
M. Ong, C. Wright, L. Espinosa, and G. Orfield, “Inside the double bind: A synthesis of empirical research on undergraduate and graduate women of color in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics,”Ā Harvard Educational Review,Ā vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 172-209, 2011.
T.L. Strayhorn, 2018.Ā College studentsā sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. Routledge.
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Authors: Dr Lisa Simmons (Manchester Metropolitan University), Dr Carl Diver (Manchester Metropolitan University), Dr Gary Dougill (Manchester Metropolitan University), Scott Pepper (GAMBICA), Paul Foden (NMCN) and Robin Phillips (Siemens Advanta Consulting).
Abstract: FutureMe is an event designed to enhance the aspirations, confidence and the graduate destinations of students. The series begins with an āindustry weekā- a unique collaboration between University and Industry – during which industry delivers keynote talks on: professional engineering, graduate skills, internationalisation, graduate destinations, and the flagship one day industry challenge. This event has been recognised by IET, and IMechE as good practice, in working collaboratively to show students what it is like to work as a professional engineer.
What is the case study about?
Assessment centre recruitment activities form an employment barrier to entry for students and can be challenging to prepare for. A large body of research suggests that motivation to begin and complete a degree in engineering; knowledge of the engineering field and its practitioners; along with students being able to identify themselves as ābeing an engineerā are all key drivers in student progression and graduate success. Through collaboration with industry partners, we have developed a range of events that not only give students much-needed preparation for the recruitment process but simultaneously allow them to explore their core identity and motivation.
This case study presents the development of the āFutureMeā event, which grew from a pragmatic approach to assessment centre preparation and into a self-sustaining, collaborative community between academia and industry.
What were its aims?
The core aims of the āFutureMeā activity are to:
Provide students with an immersive learning experience with industrial partners to enhance aspirations, confidence and understanding of graduate destinations
Provide industrial partners with the opportunity to work with students throughout their studies
Provide students with the opportunity to learn about how engineers work within a business
How did it come about?
Preparing students for the assessment centre recruitment process alongside studies can be challenging. These recruitment activities are difficult, adversarial, and often intimidating for students who have limited – if any – opportunities to gain experience before they face a real recruitment panel.
āFutureMeā was established in the first instance to provide an opportunity for students to work with industrial partners on a challenge that replicated activities that are often given to applicants in an assessment centre. Ā A key element of the challenge was that it should allow for multi-disciplinary and cross academic level working, and should not be overly technical to a particular discipline, rather it should give students an experience of how engineers work within business and the many functions within an organisation.
As the event was set up it grew to include keynote talks on; professional engineering, graduate skills, internationalisation, graduate destinations, and the flagship one-day industry challenge. Figure 1 illustrates the January 2022 schedule of events. Figure 2 provides further detail on the running order for the industry challenge session(s).
Figure 1 Example schedule of events
Figure 2 Industry Challenge Running Order
How was it set up?
Industrial partners were approached to take part in the event ā the industry challenge – via the Department of Engineeringās Industrial Advisory Board (IAB), GAMBICA, GM Chamber of Commerce and IET Enterprise partners.
Industrial partners were presented with
the rationale for the event
the running order of the challenge and requirements/commitments
learning requirements of the challenge
Interested parties then contacted the lead academic for a further meeting to discuss their challenge ideas and the event.
Figure 3 shows the process from initial email invites to industrial partners to the final challenge session
Figure 3 Step process showing how industrial partners develop a challenge to take part in the event
Who did it involve? (e.g., collaborating parties)
The rationale for the event was discussed for feedback with representatives from the Department of Engineering Industrial Advisory Board, GAMBICA and GM Chamber of Commerce.
All authors of this case study, worked collaboratively to develop the event, engage additional industrial partners, and feedback to the academic teams.
What were the outcomes?
FutureMe event has run in January 2021 and 2022.
In each event, there were 900 students invited, 50 supporting academics and 20+ industry representatives.
The event has led to additional opportunities for collaboration, for example, other employability events, and curriculum support in larger projects and guest lectures.
Are there any evidential outcomes?
Students were surveyed pre and post-event, on their understanding of their career readiness, their work experience, why they chose to take part in the event and what they gained from the event.
Reasons for taking part in the event were largely (75% of respondents) related to understanding how engineers work in industry and to learning more about graduate destinations for engineers.
Post-event students enjoyed the short period of time to complete the challenge, the breadth of access to industry representatives and learning about how engineers approach challenges in industry.
What lessons were learned, or what reflections can you provide? What might you do differently?
Challenge development is a collaborative exercise between academia and industry to develop content that meets the learning criteria
The event for 2023 will move to fully onsite
Students need to have the benefits of attending the event clearly stated to improve student engagement
There is an over-whelming amount of support from industry to support this event, such that there has been a need to develop new initiatives to provide further opportunities for collaboration
Feedback from Industry
The students who I spoke to excelled and performed better than several experienced engineers that I have been interviewing over the last few months.
I found the sessions very interesting, the discussions through the Q&A after the presentations were very good. It was great to be able to delve into more of the technology stack and see how they approach it. I also found it very interesting that the two groups chose different use cases/verticals for their research, and it tilted the result to slightly different outcomes. Really interesting to see that!
A brilliant process and a great opportunity for productive collaboration between MMU and industrialists in the interest of enhancing student employability. Without a doubt, the students were the stars of the show. Super job!
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Weāve pulled together aĀ checklist of things for university departments to considerĀ when proposing to get involved in degree apprenticeships. Ā Itās still evolving so please do contact us if you have experience or advice you would like to add.
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Degree Apprentices must be employed for a minimum of 30 hours per week and must have the right to live and work in the UK.Ā A Degree Apprentice cannot be self-employed and must be:
a new recruit or an existing employee where an employer intends to support the individual complete the apprenticeship;
employed in a real job and the employer must pay a wage/salary and financially contribute to the cost of training and accrediting the apprentice.
An employer must enter into an Apprenticeship Agreement when taking on a Degree Apprentice at the start of the Apprenticeship.Ā If the student leaves or otherwise loses their job (eg because of misconduct or redundancy) then the employer would normally be held liable for the full course fees.
A national certification system operates for Apprenticeship.Ā It is currently a legal requirement that this is followed.Ā This is a simple process and more information can be found at Apprenticeship Certificates in England (ACE).
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
There have been recent reports that graduate recruitment will flatten off and apprenticeship recruitment will increase by 23 per cent. Reports from the Skills Funding Agency (SFA) agree. They are currently meeting large employers and finding significant interest in apprenticeships at all levels.
Government guidance states that there are currently around 1,000 degree apprenticeships. Government has made a pledge to increase the number of apprenticeships starts to 3 million by 2020 and to support this aim they are helping higher education providers develop and deliver degree apprenticeships. A degree apprenticeship is a real job where the employer invests in training and the employee receives a first degree during the course of the apprenticeship. Apprentices work for 30 hours a week. Learning fits around that work commitment and requires flexible learning modes like day or block release, distance or blended learning. Overall these programmes provide the opportunity for HEIs to open up to a much wider and newer audience and to introduce and instil HEās values, attitudes and expertise to a whole cohort that would not otherwise be accessed. It also enables HEIs to develop new relationships and collaborations with organisations and companies.
With the expected introduction of the āApprenticeship Levyā on all large employers in the near future, there is now a huge financial incentive for employers to engage with these programmes ā potentially as alternatives to traditional models of Higher Education, in order to recover their mandatory contribution to the Apprenticeship Levy, with this funding only being eligible to spend on apprenticeship programmes approved under the new standards.
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Theme: Collaborating with industry for teaching and learning
