New Engineering Fellowship Scheme
Action Research Report
25 October 2004
By
Professor Sa’ad Medhat
PhD MPhil CEng FIEE FCIM FCMI MInstD
Commissioned by:
Gatsby Technical Education Projects
Allington House
150 Victoria Street
London SW1E 5AE
www.getep.co.uk
T
Undertaken by:
New Engineering Foundation
Erico House
93-99 Upper Richmond Road
London SW15 2TG
www.neweng.org.uk
info@neweng.org.uk
Tel: 020 8786 3677
Version: 1.3 / 25 October 2004
2 - 67
Table of Content
Acknowledgement
4
The Challenge
5
1.
6
6
8
Contextual Background
1.1
The Productivity Gap
1.2
The Skills Gap
Executive Summary
11
2.0
Introduction
2.2
Key Objectives
2.3
The Action Research
15
16
17
3.0
The Survey
3.1
Responses to Questionnaire
3.2
Summary of findings
19
20
36
4.0
The Advisory Panel
37
5.0
Implementation Phase
5.1
Selection of Colleges & Fellows
5.2
Awards
5.3
Placements
5.4
Web Development & Virtual Knowledge Centre
5.5
Knowledge Transfer
5.6
Communications
5.7
Marketing & Promotion
5.8
Scheme Management
5.9
Expected Outcomes
38
38
39
39
40
41
41
41
42
43
6.0
Recommendations
6.1
Raising awareness & recognition
6.2
Engaging employers
6.3
Developing new engineering and technology materials
6.4
Sharing and embedding good practice
6.5
Funding and sustainability
44
44
45
47
48
49
7.0
Cost Projections
7.1
Cost Breakdown
50
51
Appendices
A: List of Respondent Colleges
B: List of Nominated Fellows and their Colleges
C: Copy of Questionnaire
C: Sample of Supporting Letters
D: Members of the Advisory Panel
E: Sources and References
52
53
55
57
60
66
67
3 - 67
Acknowledgement
The project reported here was commissioned by the Gatsby Technical Education
Trust and carried out by the New Engineering Foundation1.
We would like to acknowledge the assistance we received from many sources
throughout this Action Research Project. We particularly wish to take this opportunity
to thank Peter Hesketh and Dr John Williams of the Gatsby Foundation and the
Gatsby Technical Education Projects (GTEP) for their support and guidance.
We are also grateful to the lecturers, advisers, professional networks and
representatives from industry, higher and further education that have provided us
with their views and feedback during the survey phase.
Finally we would like to thank the members of the Advisory Panel (listed in Appendix
E) for their enthusiasm and helpful contribution.
Despite the long-term decline in much of engineering manufacturing, there
continues to be strong demand for engineering skills in the UK economy,
especially in the fast-growing electronics, telecommunications and other new
and emerging industries. A number of engineering and technology employers
are experiencing difficulties in filling vacancies, mainly because of the
shortage of people with the relevant skills and experience. Skill shortages are
apparent at all levels but especially at the higher end of the vocational
spectrum, which includes technologists and engineering technicians.
1
Sponsored by the Gatsby Technical Education Trust (www.getep.co.uk) , the New Engineering
Foundation is a not for profit, independent and strategically focused organisation that works with key
partners and stakeholders to ensure that the UK modern engineering industries have continued
access, now and in the future, to the skills and talent they require. Our objectives and strategies
reflect these responsibilities.
It aims to nurture interest in Life-Long Learning of modern engineering and technology amongst
educators across our schools, colleges and universities. (http://www.neweng.org.uk/)
4 - 67
The Challenge
One of the greatest challenges for policy-makers in the UK today is solving the
chronic skills shortage in the science, engineering and technology (SET) sectors.
Finding a resolution to this skills shortage, particularly at the further education level,
is key to developing a competitive, leading-edge economy, capable of sustaining
wealth creation and improving the overall standard of living.
The Action Research Study
The purpose of this action research study is to assess the viability and reaction to the
development of a fellowship award scheme that aims to improve the professional
development of lecturers of engineering and technology departments in further
education colleges.
The scheme intends to achieve this aim by providing colleges with grant awards
towards the placement of their lecturers in industry or at a technology or engineering
centre in a university. Thus, improving the overall quality of engineering provision
concomitant with industrial demands and reflecting the priorities of the modern
engineering economy in the UK.
5 - 67
1.
Contextual Background
Two key drivers that underpin the UK competitiveness and growth are the level of
productivity and the skills needed for the economy. However, report after report
continue to highlight the UK’s deficiencies in skills and productivity when
benchmarked against EU and international competitor economies. The current gap in
skills required for the economy is mainly centred on intermediate level, such as
advanced apprentice or technician.
1.1
The Productivity Gap
For several decades, the UK has been suffering from a productivity gap, whereby its
workforce produces less output per person than many international competitors. The
shortfall is reflected across most sectors of the economy, with the gap being
generally larger in manufacturing industries than in the service industries sector.
Over the course of recent decades, the UK has witnessed a strong, steady
improvement in economic performance and levels of prosperity. GDP per head has
increased fifteen-fold over the last thirty years, growing at an astonishing annual
average of 17.3% in the 1970s, 8.1% in the 1980s and 4.6% in the 1990s (See
Figure 1)
GDP per head
UK, 1972-2002
£20,000
£18,000
£16,000
£14,000
£12,000
£10,000
£8,000
£6,000
£4,000
£2,000
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
£0
Figure 1: GDP Per Head 1972-2002 (Source IMF 2002)
Nonetheless, GDP per head in the UK remains well below that of other major
nations, ranking eleventh out of fifteen EU and seventeenth out of thirty OECD
countries. It is also about 10% below the G-7 average. (See figure 2).
One reason for this is that greater prosperity in the UK has largely been a function of
rising employment, rather than stronger productivity performance.
6 - 67
This has resulted in a “productivity gap” whereby workers in the UK produce
less output per person or hour worked than their counterparts in other
countries.
GDP per head generally depends on both the proportion of people in employment
and their productivity performance. In the UK, this has meant that economic benefits
resulting from rising employment have not been strengthened by productivity-related
benefits, to the extent that they have in some other industrialised countries.
GDP per head (2002)
By PPP, US dollars
50,000
45,000
40,000
35,000
G-7 average
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
Fig
ure 2 UK GDP Performance (Source: OECD 2002)
Today, productivity levels in the UK are still 31% lower than in the US, 14% lower
than in France and 5% lower than in Germany (see Figure 3).
International
comparisons of
productivity using the
alternative measure of
output per hour worked
show similar positions
for the US and
Germany with respect
to the UK, but a slight
improvement for
France.
Labour productivity (2002)
Index, UK=100
140
GDP per w orker
130
120
110
100
90
80
US
G7 (ex UK)
France
Germany
UK
Japan
Figure 3 UK GDP Performance vs. G-7 Average
Source: ONS 2003(a)
7 - 67
1.2
The Skills Gap
It is generally accepted that skills play an important role in driving productivity, as all
enterprises need access to appropriately qualified workers to function efficiently and
effectively; realise their business or public service objectives and be competitive and
profitable. Skills may also encourage innovation, as a highly skilled workforce is able
to adapt to new and more sophisticated technology or work practices more rapidly.
UK labour force skills
Percent of w orkforce
70
60
US
France
50
40
Germany
UK
30
20
10
0
Higher
Intermediate
Low
Level of qualification
Figure 4 Skills Level in the UK labour workforce
(Source: O’Mahoney & De Boer 2002)
Despite the importance of a good skills base for productivity and innovation, the UK
still has a skills shortage. Figure 4 shows that the proportion of UK workers qualified
to intermediate skill levels (such as apprenticeship, skilled craft or technician level) is
also low – 28% in the UK compared to 51% in France and 65% in Germany.
Competing in the Global Economy
Developing and maintaining a technical workforce with the right skills will be even
more critical to the future success of UK manufacturing. The cost of labour in
many emerging economies such as China, India and Eastern Europe means that
low skilled manufacturing work can be easily undertaken more competitively in
such countries. Therefore, the UK manufacturers cannot compete in terms of
cost with such countries and must instead rely on technology, quality, reliability
and on the application of a more technologically advanced and skilled labour
workforce.
8 - 67
Figure 5 shows that almost 4% of all UK enterprises have skill shortage vacancies,
and almost 7% report skill gaps, where employees are deemed to be less than fully
proficient in their job.
Sector
Agriculture, hunting, forestry & fishing
Mining & quarrying
Manufacturing
Electricity, gas & water supply
Construction
Wholesale & retail
Hotels & restaurants
Transport, storage & communication
Banking & insurance
Real estate, renting & business activities
Public admin, defence, social security
Education
Health & social work
Other services
Whole economy
Skill gaps by sector
% of firms Skill shortage
Employment
reporting
vacancies % of firms
Skill gaps
as % of skill shortage
as % of reporting
as % of
economy
vacancies
employment skill gaps employment
1.3
1.3
0.6
6.0
3.5
0.4
15.7
3.8
0.5
9.2
4.9
0.8
-7.3
3.7
1.7
4.9
3.5
15.1
2.5
0.5
6.8
4.4
4.4
3.0
0.5
8.4
6.0
7.0
4.0
0.6
6.0
3.4
4.5
3.8
0.5
9.2
3.9
11.5
5.3
1.7
6.5
3.6
6.7
4.1
0.2
11.4
4.2
8.1
4.6
0.4
7.6
1.6
11.0
4.5
0.8
9.2
2.9
5.4
3.0
0.9
5.0
3.5
100.0
3.7
0.8
6.9
3.9
Source: Skills Development Agency 2003
Figure 5 – Skills Gap by Sector
Finding the right technical and engineering skills at levels 3 and 4 remain to be
problematic for many employers, particularly for those from the small and medium
size engineering and technology sectors.
Figure 6 - Skills Shortage and Recruitment Difficulties (Benchmark Research)
9 - 67
Figure 6 shows the job types where employers believe it is hardest to find skilled
staff.
New and emerging industries such as Bio-tech and medical instrumentation seem to
suffer the most in finding the appropriate level and quality of skills that further
education colleges and training organisations claim to be providing to the market
place.
The Productivity-Skills Link:
We must raise the ambition in the demand for skills. We will only
achieve increased productivity and competitiveness if more employers
and employees are encouraged and supported to make the necessary
investments in skills”.
21st Century Skills-Realising Our Potential, White Paper, DfES, July 2003.
10 - 67
1.0 Executive Summary
The Government’s approach to improving the UK’s long-term productivity
performance has two broad strands: maintaining macroeconomic stability to enable
firms and individuals to plan for the future, and implementing microeconomic reforms
to remove the barriers which prevent markets from functioning efficiently.
ƒ
Two key drivers that underpin the UK competitiveness and growth are the level of
productivity and the skills needed for the economy. However, report after report
continue to highlight the UK’s deficiencies in skills and productivity when
benchmarked against EU and international competitor economies. The current
gap in skills required for the economy is mainly centred on intermediate level,
such as advanced apprentice or technician. The percentage of UK workers
qualified to intermediate skill levels is 28% in comparison to 51% in France and
65% in Germany. Finding the right technical and engineering skills at, for
example, NVQ levels 3 and 4, remains to be problematic for many employers,
particularly for those that form the first and second tier of the engineering and
manufacturing supply-chain. In addition, the productivity levels in the UK are still
31% lower than in the US, 14% lower than in France and 5% lower than in
Germany.
ƒ
It is anticipated that the FE provision will expand over the next decade, to
address the skills shortage in the economy and the increasing student population.
Currently, lecturers in FE are not being trained and updated with the new skills
and knowledge required to teach engineering in 21st Century. As the demands
from the expanding provision increase in parallel with the technological changes,
the gap between what is being taught and what employers need, is going to be
even wider, making a student’s FE experience meaningless, and in some cases,
worthless. This bleak situation can only be avoided if lecturers start to undertake
professional development. Unfortunately, the lack of professional development is
no more demonstrable than it is in the Engineering and Technology departments
in Further Education colleges today.
ƒ
Following the Government’s recent reforms of further and higher education,
Foundation Degrees will be a key component of FE provision and will replace the
Higher National Certificate and Diploma (HNC/D) qualifications. The requirement
for lecturing staff to teach on Foundation Degrees, will therefore, exacerbate the
shortfall in professional development even further.
ƒ
It is therefore, no surprise, to note that many reports published by quality
assurance regulators such as Ofsted (Office for Standards in Education) and
QAA (Quality Assurance Agency2) have frequently cited inadequate levels of
professional staff development in FE Colleges, particularly in engineering.
2
Assessing higher education provision in further education colleges (e.g. HNC/D, Foundation Year of
university degree programmes, Foundation Degrees)
11 - 67
Extract from a QAA Report on Engineering Provision of HNC/D…
The currency of the teaching material is very much influenced by
students, many of whom work for highly advanced companies. Although
there is a policy to support staff in the updating of their skills through
secondment to industry, there is concern that such secondments are not
taking place due to the difficulties in arranging cover for absent lecturers.
The teaching is therefore heavily reliant on old industrial experience
of staff.
ƒ
A key factor in achieving a visible difference in the capability of our students
studying at further and pre university level education is to enhance the skills and
knowledge base of their academic tutors in the further education college (FEC)
sector.
The Scheme
ƒ
Recognising the stated need, Gatsby Educational Trust has commissioned an
action research study to assess the level of professional development of lecturers
in engineering and technology departments in FE colleges, and to propose a
scheme that will raise the lecturers’ skills and knowledge base to achieve
industrial relevance and an overall improvement in the learning experience for
students.
ƒ
The proposed scheme aims to offer FE colleges the opportunity to apply for a
grant of a maximum of £10,000 per college to enable them to nominate three of
their lecturers to be seconded for a period of three weeks to industry or to an
engineering and technology centre in a university. The total grant requested
spread over the three year (2005-08) period is £939,000.
The Action Research Study
ƒ
A number of approaches were deployed in order to engage key stakeholders
(colleges, employer associations, and relevant government departments) and to
collect the data required for this project. These included a database compilation
of approximately 300 Further Education Colleges; A two-page questionnaire was
sent out to Principals and Heads of 300 further education colleges during August/
September 2004; and a review of a number of relevant economic research
studies and policy papers and assessments was conducted.
ƒ
79 colleges participated in this study and demonstrated that whilst ‘traditional
engineering’ was still highly prevalent within the FE sector, an overwhelming
enthusiasm was shown by these colleges to pursue professional development to
update their knowledge and skills within the new engineering and technology
areas.
12 - 67
ƒ
This study identified the lack of formal professional development in engineering
and technology departments, and found that funding for staff development was
highly dependent upon internal college funds. Research findings showed that
there seemed to be a concentration of FE course provision within a narrow
spectrum (both range and level) of engineering and technology subjects.
ƒ
The study also highlighted the weak and under-developed links between
employers, universities and the further education colleges, as well as the limited
engagement of FE in technology and knowledge transfer activities. The level of
engagement in commercial projects such as product development was also found
to be very limited. Companies attributed this limitation mainly to the low levels of
competence and relevant experience of engineering and technology staff, as well
as, poor physical resources in colleges. However, the study has identified a very
healthy appetite by FE lecturers for teaching higher education courses such as
Foundation Degrees and Access to degree courses.
ƒ
70% of the surveyed colleges clearly stated that they already had a temporary
staffing system in place to enable their lectures to participate in the fellowship
scheme with minimum disruption to classes and students. Of the remaining
respondents, 24% suggested that although they didn’t have a temporary staffing
system in place, they did not foresee this as an issue as they intended to
implement a temporary staffing scheme in the near future.
ƒ
An overwhelmingly enthusiastic response was received from all the surveyed
colleges. 146 nominations for fellowships were also received. Government
Ministers and organisations such as the Association of Colleges, Sector Skills
Development Agency, Institute of Directors, CBI, EEF, HEFCE and Regional
Development Agencies have also endorsed the scheme.
ƒ
An Advisory Panel with representatives from the Supply and Demand as well as
the Regulator was established to guide the implementation of the scheme. It had
its first meeting on 30 September 04. Members of the Panel included
representatives from: the Association of Colleges; CBI; Engineering Employers
Federation / also representing SEMTA Sector Skills Council; LTSN- (Learning
and Teaching Support Network for Engineering) also representing the Higher
Education Academy; Institute of Directors; North West Development Agency and
QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority)
13 - 67
Recommendations
The study confirmed that there is an urgent need to address the professional
development of engineering and technology lecturers in the FE sector and made the
following recommendations:
ƒ
Raise awareness and recognition of the need to engage in a structured
programme of professional development;
ƒ
Engage employers in a compelling way to ensure that business opportunities and
benefits can be identified readily by employers;
ƒ
Develop new engineering and technology materials that can be integrated into
the course curriculum and can be regularly maintained and refreshed;
ƒ
Share and embed good practice to provide case studies, guides and support
information on professional development activities in engineering and technology;
ƒ
Provide a sustainable level of funding to enable dramatic technological,
educational and political reforms to take place.
Key Outcomes
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
180 lecturers across 60 FE Colleges will gain an up to date professional
development experience;
Innovative curriculum and learning materials including the use of e-learning will
be generated;
A “virtual knowledge centre” will be created to maximise the knowledge sharing
and dissemination;
An annual workshop will be held to promote the scheme and its outcomes;
The cascaded impact from this scheme will also benefit some 3000 other
lecturers in this field and ultimately will enhance the learning experience of some
60,000 students in engineering and technology.
Conclusions
This report shows that if we are to meet the standard and quality that is required in
advanced vocational education, engineering and technology lecturers in the FE
sector must engage in a structured programme of professional development. The
proposed scheme will play a major role in achieving and implementing the current
educational reforms that are being undertaken.
In meeting the stated need to reduce the UK’s productivity and skills gap, the
professional development of our lecturers in further education institutions must be
given a high level of priority and importance.
14 - 67
2.0 Introduction
There are many studies that reported on the shortages of Engineering Skills in the
labour market. Engineering skills continue to be required in a variety of sectors
across the UK economy. It is estimated that around 2.5 million people are in
occupations that have some engineering component, about half of which (1.3 million)
are in direct engineering occupations.
Presently, the supply and demand of engineering skills are experiencing a profound
change.
Firstly, the engineering and technology industry market-space in the UK is
experiencing significant change, which is leading to greater potential in new
technology and business development. These changes are the result of many factors
including:
ƒ
The convergence of computing and telecommunications technologies;
ƒ
The growing applications of newly emerging engineering technologies such as
biotechnology and nanotechnology.
ƒ
Political and economic pressure to revitalise our manufacturing base, by
promoting new and emerging technologies as candidates to augment and where
appropriate, replace the UK’s traditional manufacturing activity.
Secondly, the Further Education Colleges have equally a number of challenges
facing them:
ƒ
Articulating the expected student growth and providing the skills and
competencies demanded by industry to meet today’s technological and
engineering advancements;
ƒ
The difficulties that colleges face in putting their
professional development programmes. The lack
programmes has resulted in some teaching experiences
traditional in design, and unable to capture the ‘exciting
of engineering and technology.
lecturing staff through
of such development
in colleges being dated,
and innovative’ aspects
There are many concerns regarding the teaching quality in the Further
Education College sector which have frequently been raised by various
quality assurance agencies such as Ofsted, QCA, QAA and many in the
sector have been searching for ways to enrich the teaching experience in
engineering and technology.
15 - 67
2.2
Key Objectives
Essentially, the key objectives of this study are:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Undertake a survey of further education colleges to assess their
response to the proposed New Engineering Fellowship Scheme;
Assess the willingness of business and industry associations in
supporting and promoting this initiative to their member organisations;
Outline the process for implementing the New Engineering Fellowship
Scheme including:
o Selection and award process
o Placements and industrial feedback
o Knowledge transfer resulting from Fellows’ placements to both
students and other academic staff in the sector;
o Promotion of Scheme
Identify the anticipated level of penetration in terms of the number of
tutors and colleges and host organisations participating in the
scheme;
Develop metrics and review processes for assessing effectiveness.
What Constitutes New Engineering
The following example list is by no means exhaustive, but It gives an indication of some of
the engineering and technology disciplines that lecturers may wish to become involved
with during their secondment period.
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Advanced Manufacturing Technologies (e.g. automotive, pharmaceuticals)
Aerospace Engineering
Biochemical Engineering
Biometric & Biosystems Engineering
Biotechnology (e.g. biomedical engineering)
Chemical Engineering
Coatings & Surface Technologies
Control & Process Engineering (e.g. food processing)
Environmental Engineering
Ergonomic Engineering
Forensics and IT security
Gaming and Leisure technologies
Geotextile Engineering
Geothermal Engineering
Hyrometallurgy & Hydrotechnical Construction Engineering
Marine Technology
Microelectronics, Optoelectronics & Photonics
Mobile Telecommunications
Music and Broadcast Technologies
Nanotechnologies
New Energies
New Materials & Polymer Engineering
Operations and Maintenance Engineering (e.g. automated inspection systems)
Petroleum Engineering
Pharmacology Engineering
Robotic Engineering & Cybernetics
Safety Engineering
16 - 67
2.3
The Action Research
A number of approaches were deployed in order to engage key stakeholders
and collect the data required for this project. These included the following:
Database compilation:
A database of approximately 400 colleges was initially complied and through
desk research, 300 colleges were then identified as a potential target
audience for the survey. As part of promoting the concept for the New
Engineering Fellowship scheme, all 400 colleges were written to, to advise
them of this development.
Questionnaire:
A two-page questionnaire comprising of 15 questions was developed and
tested and subsequently sent out with an accompanying letter to Principals
and Heads of 300 further education colleges during August. Whilst
unfortunately, the timing of the summer vacation was not favourable, the
responses nonetheless, were overwhelmingly enthusiastic from colleges and
supporting organisations.
A copy of the questionnaire is attached in Appendix A.
Meetings and consultations:
A number of meetings were conducted with such organisations as regional
development agencies, association of colleges, and the learning and teaching
support network for engineering.
In addition, the following organisations have also been contacted in order to
seek their support and feedback on the New Engineering Fellowship Scheme:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Advantage West Midlands Development Agency
Association of Colleges (National and Regional Offices)
British Chambers of Commerce
CBI
City & Guilds
Cogent –Sector Skills Council for Chemicals and Petroleum
Department for Education and Skills
East Midlands Development Agency
ECITB – Construction Industry Sector Skills Council
Edexcel Foundation
EEDA – East of England Development Agency
Engineering Employers Federation
Foundation Degrees Forward
Higher Education Academy (Prof Paul Ramsden)
Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE)
HM Treasury
Institute of Directors
Learning and Skills Council (National)
Lifelong Learning Sector Skills (David Hunter)
London Development Agency
17 - 67
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
LTSN (Learning and Teaching Support Network for Engineering)
Motor Industry Forum
National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education
National Forum of Engineering Colleges
North West Development Agency
One NorthEast Development Agency
QCA (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority)
Sector Skills Development Agency
SEMTA Sector Skills Council
South East of England Development Agency
South West Development Agency
Specialists Schools Trust
Small Business Service & National Business Link Service
Yorkshire Forward
Website
A dedicated web site (www.neweng.org.uk or www.newengineering.org.uk)
was constructed to:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
enable colleges to participate in the survey data online and to provide
a mechanism for collecting enquiries and feedback;
engage other target audiences electronically through the use of a
virtual meeting capability;
Promote the New Engineering Fellowship Scheme to other networks
to enable them to promote the Scheme to their members (e.g.
Foundation Degrees Forward, JISC- Joint Information Systems
Committee, AoC and NFEC);
Provide updates, info-sheets, news and responses to frequently asked
questions with respect to the scheme;
Ultimately, provide an online knowledge centre for tutors to use across
the FEC sector.
Communications, Networks and Events
The initial action research was promoted through a number of networks and
organisations in addition to electronic communication media such as
Newswire and EngTalk.
A number of organisations that were contacted have also kindly promoted the
New Engineering scheme thorough their regular information distribution
activities such as email-shots, newsletters and events:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Foundation Degrees Forward (FDF)
NFEC
NATFHE
Institute of Directors
LTSN- Engineering
Specialists Schools Conference 21 September, Institute of Physics
Regional Development Agencies
Association of Colleges emails and newsletters
Engtalk - Newsletter
Newswire
18 - 67
3.0 The Survey
A database of 396 further education and sixth form colleges was compiled.
A two-page questionnaire, including an online version, was designed and posted with
a letter to all the colleges in order to obtain feedback that would help define the
parameters for the proposed New Engineering Fellowship programme. This exercise
tackled a number of key areas including the following:
ƒ
Assessing the need for a Staff Professional Development programme in
engineering and technology;
ƒ
Identifying typical areas of current staff development;
ƒ
Highlighting the type of professional development activities that lecturers are
engaging in;
ƒ
Listing most common courses and subjects taught and highlighting the
proportions of staff numbers involved in the delivery of these courses;
ƒ
Assessing the reaction and the level of willingness to participate in the
proposed New Engineering Fellowship Scheme;
ƒ
Estimating the number of engineering lecturers that could benefit in this
scheme;
ƒ
Estimating the impact of this scheme on the student population.
The target audiences for this survey were college principals and heads of
engineering and technology departments in the further education sector.
19 - 67
3.1
Responses to Questionnaire
Q1:
Do you have the following Departments (Engineering; Technology)?
Total number of Participating Engineering and
Technology Departments in FECs
Total Number
80
60
40
20
0
Engineering
Technology
Figure 7
Question 1 was the lead question to ensure that respondents clearly recognised that
the survey was only applicable, if their college had an engineering or technology
department.
A total of 79 colleges confirmed that they had both engineering and technology
departments. Out of the respondents who answered, 47% had both engineering and
technology departments; 45% had only engineering departments and 3% had only
technology departments. 5% confirmed they had neither departments and therefore
did not complete the rest of the survey.
It is clear from this data that ‘traditional engineering’ is still highly prevalent within the
FE sector.
20 - 67
Q2:
If you have answered yes to Q1, how many students do you have in the
following departments?
Total Number of FTE students that could be
impacted by the scheme
Number of Students
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Engineering
Technology
Total
Figure 8
The survey showed that over 60,000 students could be positively impacted by the
proposed fellowship scheme3. From the respondent data, it can be seen that there
are just over half the number of students taking technology-based subjects to those
taking engineering-based subjects.
This response underlines the focus on traditional engineering as opposed to
technology.
3
This assumes that an average of 60 colleges take part in the New Engineering Fellowship Scheme.
21 - 67
Q3:
If you have answered yes to Q1, how many lecturers/teaching staff
(FTE) do you have in the following departments
Number of FTE Lecturers
Number of FTE Lecturers in Engineering &
Technology
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Engineering
Technology
Total
Figure 9
The Colleges were questioned on the total number of FTE lecturers in engineering
and/or technology, and the data shows that, like the students, 65% of the lecturers
are in engineering with 38% of the lecturers delivering technology-based subjects.
Again, the prevalence in further education is towards traditional engineering, rather
than technology.
22 - 67
Q 4:
What engineering and technology courses do you offer?
The following is a representative selected range:
A Levels
A+ and AS in Materials, Des & Tech Graphic, Communications, Design &
Technology
AVCE
BETEC 1st Dip Electrical and Electronics
BETEC 1st Diploma Operations and Maintenance
Certificate Mechanical 2d, 3d CAD
Elect Installations
FMA, AMA, Motor Vehicle, Fabrication & Welding, C&G, GCSE
Foundation Degree Machinery Management & Logistics
Foundation year 0 (Degree Access)
GCSE (Eng)
HNC/D Construction
HNC/D Electrical /Electronics, Computer Systems
HNC/D Mechanical
HNC/D Motor Vehicle
Mech, Elect, Electronics Eng, Manufacturing, Elec Install, Motor Vehicle,
Aerospace
Modern Apprenticeships (L1-4)
Motor Veh, Wldg, Fab, Water, Waste Water Eng
Nat Dip Electrical and Electronics
National Cert Electrical and Electronics
National Cert Mechanical
NC/ND
ND/NC Mfg, First Dip Mfg, Elect - FMA/AMA, Eng-AutoCAD C&G
NVQ 1-4, Construction and Civil Engineering
NVQs (1-3) Engineering
NVS 1 to Degree, Elect/Electronics, Mechanical, Production, MVE, Quarrying,
Road Surface Eng
2+2 BEng
EAL (EMTA)
It is worth noting that most of the colleges offered repetitive courses with not
much differentiation of their offerings. The range and the level of courses
offered are also very limited.
23 - 67
Q5)
In Engineering and/or Technology what is the breakdown of courses
and lecturers teaching at following levels (Please give figures, not
percentages):
In question 5, a review was made of the respondent Colleges’ course portfolio and
academic emphasis. Respondent data showed an overwhelming focus on City and
Guilds Certificates, illustrating that colleges are focused on supplying lower level
technical skills, whereas, industry in contrast, requires higher level technical skills
delivered through programs at a minimum level of NVQ 4 and/or HNC (see Figure 4).
36% of respondent colleges confirmed that they had Motor Vehicle or Auto
Engineering at C&G Certificate level, with a further 40% delivering ‘Performing
Engineering Operations’, which is a basic level course and has limited modern
engineering or technology themes.
900
C&G Cert
800
700
600
500
MAs
400
300
GCSE
HNC/D
200
A level
100
C&G Dip
Others (BTECH,
NVQs )
Found Yr0
0
Figure 10
From this data it is apparent, that the homogeny of Motor Vehicle Engineering and
Performing Engineering Operations is reflective of industrial requirements from
decades past, when the UK had a strong manufacturing base and a plethora of car
plants, all demanding students from such courses.
24 - 67
600
C&G Cert
500
MAs
400
HNC/D
Others
BTEC/NVQs
300
C&G Dip
200
GCSE
A Level
Found
Yr0
100
0
Figure 11
Although the UK industrial focus has moved on, most of engineering further
education has not. In addition, there is limited evidence to show that FE colleges
undertake regular market assessments to ascertain current and projected needs for
engineering and technology skills.
The response to this question clearly shows that for progress to be made in the FE
sector, a greater focus has to be placed on providing the current and projected skills
that industry really wants, and not what the lecturers want to teach.
25 - 67
Q6)
Do you provide Foundation Degrees in Engineering and / or
Technology?
Foundation Degree Engagement
Number of responses
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Yes
In the Future
No plans
Figure 12
The question of Foundation Degrees caused some confusion, as some Colleges
believed that Foundation Year 0 or Degree Access courses were in fact Foundation
Degrees. Following clarification on the definition, 31% of Colleges confirmed that
they already had a Foundation Degree in an Engineering and / or Technology
subject.
From the remaining respondents, 46% confirmed that they were in the
stages of planning to introduce a Foundation Degree; 14% claimed that they had no
plans to introduce a Foundation Degree and 9% failed to answer the question at all.
This response of almost a third of the respondents offering a Foundation Degree and
almost 50% preparing to offer a Foundation Degree, augured well for FE Engineering
and Technology development. Out of the 14% who confirmed that they had no plans
to offer a Foundation Degree, 30% were 6th form Colleges. Clearly, their decision was
borne out of their academic focus.
26 - 67
Q7:
How many members of teaching staff do you have on Foundation
Degrees in Engineering and Technology?
Analysing the number of teaching staff on Foundation Degrees found that almost
50% of the teaching staff was spread across just 5 colleges. This finding showed
that some Colleges were placing considerable teaching resources on their
Foundation Degree programmes, whilst others restricted staff involvement to a
maximum of 3 lecturers.
27 - 67
Q8)
Is your College accredited with one or more of the following:
(CoVE, Beacon, Specialists School)
Specialist
Schools Status
No Status
CoVE
CoVE & Beacon
Beacon
Special Status Accreditation
Figure 13
It is unsurprising to see that 66% of the respondents were CoVEs (Centres of
Vocational Excellence)4, Beacons or CoVEs and Beacons, as it is expected that
these Colleges would have a bias towards finding out about new initiatives to
increase the educational potential of their institutions.
However, from the 34% of the respondents that currently had no special status
accreditation 23% of these respondents have CoVE submissions in place and 10%
have Beacon College submissions in place.
4
It is worth noting that CoVEs are distributed on regional basis and are limited to one Centre per
subject per region. Please also note that some of the industry-led Group Training Associations
(GTAs) may also have CoVE status and as a result the statistical data returned might be slightly
skewed.
28 - 67
Q9) Does your college has a Staff Development programme in place?
This research found limited examples of structured Continuing Professional
Development (CPD) systems within colleges, that is, where systematic training and
development took place linked to an appraisal or performance management system.
There are self-evidently wide variations between large and small colleges, in terms of
the attitude to, and availability of, opportunities to train or pursue personal
development interests, with the larger colleges offering more staff development
opportunities.
It is worth noting that although the Centre for Excellence in Leadership5 will mainly
focus on college principals, the Centre could also play an important role in
developing the generic skills required by engineering and technology course tutors.
5
Announced by the Government in 2003 as part of the ‘Success for All’ reforms of the further education
sector.
29 - 67
Q10) If Yes, what staff development activities do you engage in? (please list)
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Employer engagement
AQA Edexcel update programmes, NSS Workshops
Awarding body updating
course development
CPD through work Placement in industry
Cross-College Staff Development days
Curriculum Development and Management
DPA, FOI acts
Equality & diversity
Exam Boards Internal & External Training
External assessor
External Curriculum Updating
External Training Courses
Full range of staff development including staff development days
General Education Development
Higher Qualifications
ILT: Induction, Retention & Achievement
Improving Teaching & Learning Schemes
Industrial updating
Industrial Visits
In-house Training
Initial Teacher Training
INSET training days college-based
International best practice updating
Key skills integration
Management Development Programmes
Masters, Cert Ed programmes
Personal and Professional Development
Product training
Research
Secondments
Sharing good practice
Specific subject matter training
Staff Briefings, Courses from outside speakers
Subject specific & generic skills training based on results of Professional
Development Review process
Teacher training courses
Teaching qualifications
Technical qualifications
Widening participation
Work placement
30 - 67
Q11)
How are these staff development programmes funded?
Internal vs External Staff Developm ent Fund
External
Funding
Internal
Funding
Figure 14
The survey showed that the majority (89%) of the Colleges funded their staff
development activities from their own internal budgets. This shows that the majority
of Colleges’ professional development activities were ad-hoc and uncoordinated, and
mainly were not undertaken through any initiative requiring external funding. Of the
external funding bodies that were mentioned, the Learning and Skills Council and the
European Social Fund were the most prevalent sources of funding for Colleges.
31 - 67
Q12)
Would your College/School be interested in taking part in the New
Engineering Fellowship Scheme that will enable your lecturers to spend
time in Industry or at an Engineering/Technology Centre in a University?
71% of the surveyed colleges have nominated lecturers and provided their names, to
take part of the secondment scheme.
26% of the surveyed colleges have not
confirmed the names of their nominated lecturers due to the fact that some of these
colleges have larger sized departments and as such confirmation of the nominees
takes slightly longer. The remaining 3% of the respondent colleges advised that this
scheme was not applicable as they did not have any engineering or technology
departments.
32 - 67
Q13)
Do you have a temporary teaching staff system in place to cover for the
absence of one or more members of staff on the Secondment
programme?
Temporary Staff System
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Yes
No
Responses
Figure 15
As the Fellowship Scheme will inevitably require Colleges to have in place some form
of a temporary staffing system, one of the questions of the Survey was enquiring
whether Colleges already had a temporary staffing system. Out of all the
respondents who answered, 70% clearly stated that they already had a temporary
staffing system in place. Of the remaining respondents, 24% suggested that although
they didn’t have a temporary staffing system in place, they did not foresee this as an
issue as they intended to implement a temporary staffing scheme in the near future.
33 - 67
Q14)
When would be the most suitable time to undertake the Secondment
programme in your College?
Best Secondment Times
Summer
Holiday
Jan
June
Easter Holiday
July
Figure 16
In order to stage the Secondment period appropriately, Colleges were questioned on
what they thought was the best secondment times during the year. The summer,
Easter and the month of July, were evenly distributed as the most popular
secondment times, with each having 23%. The early summer was also popular, with
17% of the respondents stating that June was the month most suitable for a
secondment period6. Even January was voted as the right month for secondment by
14% of the respondents.
6
It worth being aware of company shut-down for stock maintenance, which normally occurs in
manufacturing companies during end of July and early August.
34 - 67
Q15)
Please indicate whether you would be interested in taking part in the
Development Workshop which will be held in London?
Induction Workshop
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Yes
No
Figure 17
This question assessed the respondents overall interest and wish to be involved in
the Fellowship programme. With a resounding 82% of respondents claiming that they
wanted to be involved in the Development Workshop, it is clearly apparent that this
programme is one that is both greatly wanted and needed.
35 - 67
3.2
Summary of findings:
The research has identified a number of inter-related findings including:
ƒ
Lack of formal professional development plans in engineering and
technology;
ƒ
The concentration of course provision on a narrow band of engineering
and technology subjects;
ƒ
Weak and underdeveloped links between employers, universities and the
further education colleges;
ƒ
The funding for staff development is highly dependant on internal college
funds;
ƒ
The lack of uptake of new teaching methodologies such as e-learning;
ƒ
Limited engagement in technology and knowledge transfer activities;
ƒ
The level of engagement in commercial projects (e.g. product
development) is very limited, due mainly to low levels of competence or
relevant experience of engineering and technology staff;
ƒ
Poor physical resources;
ƒ
There is a healthy appetite for teaching higher education courses in
further education (HND, Foundation Degrees and Access to degree
courses).
Therefore, the New Engineering Fellowship Scheme presents a number of
excellent opportunities for engineering and technology lecturers in FE Colleges to:
-
Undertake professional development in a ‘business-setting’ and have the
exposure to current industrial practices and skills transfer mechanisms
including e-learning and blended learning;
-
Improve the level of technical competence and develop materials that have
industrial context and relevance;
-
Utilise equipment and resources that may be available at the employer’s
(including an engineering and technology centre in a university) site to:
o
o
o
develop appropriate case studies;
develop links that will enable student placements and project work;
conduct projects for the employer, thus strengthening the relationship
between the college and the employer.
36 - 67
4.0 The Advisory Panel
The Panel will have senior members from business and industry, academia, the
Association of Colleges, the Learning and Skills Council, Regional Development
Agencies, the Higher Education Funding Council, the Specialist Schools Trust and
other specialist and professional representatives, in addition to representatives from
the Gatsby Technical Education Trust7.
The Panel, amongst other things, has the remit for:
ƒ
Advising the Scheme Executives and Sponsors on the overall direction of the
New Engineering Fellowship Scheme;
ƒ
Assessing submissions made by colleges for the New Engineering Fellowship
Scheme;
ƒ
Recommending grant awards to colleges under the New Engineering
Fellowship Scheme;
ƒ
Promoting awareness of the initiative through appropriate networks and
channels.
The Advisory Panel meeting took place on 30 September 2004 and discussed the
implementation plan of the scheme. The Panel were enthusiastic in supporting
the New Engineering Fellowship Scheme and were unanimous in agreeing the
findings of the action research study.
7
The Advisory Panel member names are listed in Appendix D.
37 - 67
5.0 Implementation Phase
We have identified 79 colleges - although additional responses have arrived
subsequent to the closing date of the survey which was 10 September 04 - as
prospective recipients for the New Engineering Fellowship award.
5.1
Selection of Colleges & Fellows
(1) We have stipulated that as a pre-cursor to submitting a request for the grant,
colleges must complete the two-page questionnaire, as it provides valuable
background information about the participating college.
(2) An Advisory Panel has been established and met on 30 September 04 at the
Institute of Directors. The Panel have unanimously endorsed the report and
confirmed their willingness to support the programme, as well as helping with the
assessment of all applications received from colleges for the New Engineering
Fellowship grant. (See List B for names of Panel Members);
(3) All respondent colleges that have completed the survey have been informed to
submit their three-page proposals before the end of November 04. This process
will also be repeated in years two and three of the scheme.
(4) Colleges will be required to make a brief proposal consisting of 3 pages A4
(maximum), outlining:
1. the case for introducing New Engineering teaching and learning in their
college, highlighting the number of students that are likely to benefit;
2. the expected outcome from the secondment;
3. the links to other key curriculum subjects;
4. type of industry and the location of secondment;
5. the background of up to 3 lecturers that have been nominated in the
Questionnaire for participation in the Fellowship Scheme;
6. the anticipated dates to undertake the secondment period.
(5) All grant applications will be assessed by the Advisory Panel and responses from
panel members will be collected and the final decision will be made by the New
Engineering Foundation within two weeks after the submission being circulated to
panel members. Dates for subsequent meetings will be published on the website
and colleges will be informed accordingly. The Panel will meet four times a year
during January, March, July and October to assess applications.
(6) The Panel will convene in December 04 to assess and confirm the first batch of
colleges.
(7) Following the Panel’s approval of college applications, a list of approved colleges
containing the institution’s name, contact details and the names of the nominated
lecturers will be formally submitted to the Gatsby Technical Education Projects, to
arrange payments.
(8) The first list will be announced before the end of December 2004.
38 - 67
5.2
Awards
The maximum grant value is £10,000 per college.
Grant
Number of Fellows
t
£10,000
(max)
Three. No additional grant will be given, if the college wishes to
second 4 lecturers.
£6,000
If a college nominates only two lecturers.
£3,000
Exceptionally, the Panel may approve grants towards supporting
one lecturer from an applying college.
(1) The grant will be awarded to the successful college within a period of three weeks
following the Panel’s approval.
(2) Colleges are required to confirm receipt of funds.
(3) A list of all successful colleges will be published on the New Engineering website
and updated on a regular basis accordingly.
(4) Colleges are required to ensure that the secondments take place at the specified
dates identified in their application; or within three months following the approval
of their applications. This time envelope is given in order to ensure that colleges
identify and secure appropriate placements as well as avoiding any unnecessary
term-time pressures on the lecturers.
(5) Names of all seconded Fellows and their placement destinations together with
the brief summary of projects being undertaken will be published on the New
Engineering website and updated accordingly. This will also provide a regular
source for press releases and other PR activities.
(6) The Fellows are required to provide ‘online feedback’ following their successful
completion of the placement period.
5.3
Placements
(1) Fellows can pursue placements either in industry or in an engineering and
technology centre in a university.
(2) The college survey has indicated that many of the respondent colleges have
identified a possible destination host organisation for placing their nominated
secondees.
(3) The Scheme’s Partners such as the Institute of Directors (IoD), CBI and EEF
have all agreed to promote the scheme to their members. Some organisations
such as the IoD have already commenced with the promotion.
39 - 67
(4) Government agencies such as the RDAs have already agreed to promote the
scheme to their regional employers and encourage the local Business Links and
GTAs to also provide assistance.
(5) The New Engineering Foundation will also provide information on potential
placements through its website. In addition, direct contact will also be made with:
a. Contacting FTSE 300 companies;
b. Large engineering and technology employers
c. Specialist networks and interest groups (LTSN-Engineering and CIHE).
(6) The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), the Learning and
Teaching Support Network - LTSN (Engineering), the Higher Education Academy
and the Foundation Degrees Forward have all agreed to promote the Scheme to
their universities and institutions of higher education.
(7) Fellows will be encouraged to divide their placement into two stages:
a. Initial mapping of skills and knowledge required by the host organisation
against the courses provided by their colleges;
b. Undertake a piece of engineering and scientific work that the Fellows could
utilise in providing new or improved teaching and learning content to their
students.
(8) Fellows will be required to:
a. provide a self-assessment Feedback reflecting their placement experience;
b. present the outcomes to their peers;
c. publish the content in an e-learning format for inclusion on the VKC; and
d. participate in the annual workshop event.
(9) Colleges will be encouraged to obtain feedback from the host organisations
where their staff have undertaken the placement.
Attention will be given to the way in which the benefits are “packaged” to employers,
highlighting in a compelling way, advantages to the host organisation. Case studies
from placements will provide an excellent platform for press releases and promotion
of: the scheme, the host organisation and participating Fellows.
5.4
Web Development & Virtual Knowledge Centre
(1) The web development including the creation of a Virtual Knowledge Centre based
on approximately 150 users per annum. This activity will include the following:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Establishing a dedicated web and email server.
Creating a branded Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) using a Learning
Management system.
Providing each Fellow with a dedicated neweng.org.uk email.
Setting up a PowerPoint to flash conversion server to enable Fellows to
publish their presentations to the web and share their presentation with
others.
Establishing a Virtual Conferencing / Classroom environment that will be
integrated into the VLE.
Making e-learning authoring tools available to Fellows to enable them publish
their case studies and learning materials electronically.
40 - 67
5.5
Knowledge Transfer
(1) Sharing information and good practice to maximise the benefits gained from the
secondment experience is a key constituent of this scheme.
(2) Fellows will be required to publish the outcomes of their placement experience;
(3) Different communication means will be utilised to achieve this dissemination
requirement and to build a capacity for informed networks. The results of this
process are intended to help other lecturers in the sector with, for example,
curriculum development and planning of new engineering and technology
modules, as well as encouraging those colleges that have not participated in the
scheme yet to engage.
(4) The use of e-learning by the Fellows will be highly encouraged, as it will provide
one of the useful mechanisms for capturing the lectures’ tacit knowledge and will
help them with embedding the new knowledge into curriculum development within
their institution, and sharing it with others in their field across the FE sector.
5.6
Communications
(1) A number of draft press releases are being developed in conjunction with
colleges and various associations. Also, we have primed relevant national
newspapers (TES, Guardian and the Independent) about the immanent
announcement of this scheme, once the funding is confirmed.
(2) A more targeted approach will also be undertaken through the various networks,
agencies and associations that have confirmed their intention to promote the
scheme to their respective audiences.
(3) A New Engineering e-newsletter will be created and will regularly be circulated to
all colleges, universities as well as agencies and industry associations. This will
complement other partners’ electronic communications (websites and enewsletters) activities in promoting the Scheme.
5.7
Marketing & Promotion
This activity will include:
(1) A number of Press Releases are being developed in conjunction with colleges
and various associations, and National newspapers (TES, Guardian and the
Independent) have been primed to announce this scheme, once the funding for
the scheme is approved. Davies Adam Consulting were used in the initial action
research phase and we intend to continue to use them during the main phase of
the programme. Their annual charges are £6000 based on press management
and production of 5 PR articles per annum.
(2) An annual event will be staged and awards will be handed out to Fellows.
Dignitaries will be invited to attend this event.
41 - 67
5.8
Scheme Management
It is suggested that the New Engineering Foundation should be the Administrative
Agency for the Scheme on behalf of Gatsby. The New Engineering Foundation is
now becoming known to all the colleges that have participated in the survey as well
as Government Departments and their agencies. Its fresh approach to professional
development and the lack of a negative legacy, has given it the opportunity to attract
interest from many lecturers, individuals and organisations. It offers lecturers and
partners a sense of belonging and promotes a ‘can do’ mindset, as well as a modern
and non-political approach in promoting and implementing the scheme. In addition,
the Programme Director will have the overall day-to-day responsibility for running the
scheme.
ƒ
The Programme Director will be responsible for the overall creation and
development of the scheme, as well as monitoring the progress of the scheme.
ƒ
The Administrative Agency will be responsible for providing information and
support to colleges and their prospective lecturers’ applying for the scheme;
ƒ
Duties of this function include, amongst others, the following:
-
Application management and assessment
Administration of grant
Panel Administration and secretariat
College support and guidance (telephone and email)
Financial reporting to Gatsby
Evaluation follow-up and monitoring of Fellows to ensure that post
secondment criteria have been met
Compiling information about organisations with potential placements
Collecting feedback on scheme progress
Information provision to government departments, agencies and relevant
associations.
42 - 67
5.9
Expected Outcomes
(1) All seconded Fellows are expected to demonstrate how their experience will be
passed on to students.
(2) Upon successful completion of the secondment period, each Fellow will be
required to undertake the following:ƒ
Formulate innovative curriculum topics as a result of their secondment
experience;
ƒ
Define specific educational goals in relation to embedding New Engineering
into the curriculum;
ƒ
Develop examples of effective classroom practices using new engineering
subjects;
ƒ
Create new teaching and learning practical activities to help students
understand more clearly;
ƒ
Integrate on-going assessment of student performance in order to monitor
and promote learning;
ƒ
Identify plans for continuous personal and professional development;
ƒ
Produce e-learning teaching materials as a result of the secondment
experience. Access to e-learning authoring tools will be made available to
participating Fellows through the New Engineering website;
ƒ
Make presentations to peers on the secondment experience and the learning
that has been acquired.
ƒ
Participate in the Annual Event in order to share with other fellows the
experience gained and highlight areas of good practice.
43 - 67
6.0 Recommendations
This action research has confirmed the urgent need to address the professional
development of engineering and technology lecturers in the further education sector.
Fundamentally, it is believed that the only way to ensure the vocational learning
experience is enhanced and developed, is by strengthening the technical capability
of engineering and technology lecturers in further education colleges. In addition to
meeting the expectation of intermediate level qualifications, such as Foundation
Degrees, it is essential to have an industrially aware and technologically respected
cadre of lecturers that can create relevant educational programmes and achieve the
level of credibility required.
Furthermore, for the current and projected educational reforms such as the 14-19
Tomlinson review and the proposed unitisation of the national curriculum framework
by QCA to work, we must ensure that staff training plans should accompany these
reforms in parallel.
The following five
recommendations:
6.1
cross-cutting
themes
form
the
basis
of
this
report’s
Raising awareness & recognition
It is important to ensure that colleges become fully aware of the opportunities
offered to their engineering and technology lecturing staff by the New
Engineering Fellowship Scheme. Communication channels are being created
through government agencies and professional associations to ensure
continuous momentum of information flow about the scheme, its benefits to
lecturers, colleges and ultimately students and their employers, is undertaken.
At a local level, colleges and intermediary organisations such as Business
Link should promote the successful stories about the seconded Fellows and
their placements thus encouraging others to participate and to be part of the
“success story”.
At a regional level, regional development agencies are also encouraged to
promote the successes of the scheme as part of their skills development
agenda.
At a national level, the New Engineering Foundation will further develop the
partnerships approach with such organisations as the CBI, the Institute of
Directors, the Engineering Employers’ Federation, the Foundation Degree
Forward, the relevant Sector Skills Councils, Association of Colleges, the
National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education and the
National Forum for Engineering Colleges, to promote the benefits of the
schemes and its outcomes.
National media and the press will also be informed and encouraged to report
on the successful stories from colleges and employers that have participated
in this scheme.
44 - 67
An annual event will also be held to award all the successful Fellows and
recognise their colleges and the participating employers in this scheme.
Senior public figures and Government Ministers and representatives will be
invited to participate in this event. Such an event will provide an excellent
vehicle for engaging the national press and media, in gaining their support
and participation in the Scheme.
Discussions will also be pursued with appropriate professional associations
and qualifications award bodies to explore the possibility of professional
recognition of Fellows, following their industrial placement, with credits
towards a professional qualification such as a Chartered Teacher or a
Professional Lecturer in order to lock the Fellows into a process of continuing
professional development.
All of these activities described in this section will undoubtedly raise the
profile of vocational education in the engineering and technology areas.
6.2
Engaging employers
There needs to be a demand pull for the New Engineering Fellowship
Scheme to match the push from colleges and their representative
organisations, to ensure the full successful realisation of this scheme. This
“pull” can be a developed in the form of a number of compelling business
propositions that could be used to encourage employers to take part in
providing placements for the Fellows.
These include:
Stage 1 – (Week 1)
As an ‘ice-breaker’ the initial proposed activity could take the form of carrying
out a ‘mapping exercise’ by the seconded Fellow of the technologies and
processes the host company is using or likely to use in the near future, and
the training provision offered by the Fellow’s college, in that region. It is
envisaged that the stage 1 exercise will present both the company and the
Fellow with a manageable entry-point to this relationship thus, enabling
confidence to be built by both sides.
Stage 2 – (Weeks 2 and 3)
ƒ
Development of case studies. Case studies based around the
application of a new system or the use of a new type of technology are
very important communication tools that companies often require to
advise their supply chain partners and customers of their offerings.
ƒ
Development of experiments and tests that could inform the product
development or marketing functions in organisations.
45 - 67
ƒ
Researching and
improvement;
ƒ
Developing reports on functions that require process improvement
(e.g. production process; logistics control and management)
ƒ
Application of ITC or improved automation in a specific function or
process. Observing areas where automation or new information
technology applications could benefit the business.
ƒ
Assessment report of new technologies / new methodologies that
could impact the business (competitor assessment of new
technologies). This is a useful way for the business to be appraised of
other competitor developments in their market-space;
ƒ
Participate in product or process development and testing. It is always
useful to have an individual that is not closely associated with the dayto-day activities to bring fresh views and provide feedback;
ƒ
Participate in CAD/CAM and other forms of computer aided
engineering activities (modelling, simulation, prototyping) are always
attractive for companies. Fellows could engage in these processes or
undertake the development of guides that could be used by the
company internally with their staff or externally with their clients. In
addition, such an exercise would also provide useful case studies for
the Fellow.
ƒ
Companies who are running Foundation Degrees or planning to run a
Foundation Degree in the near future may experience difficulties in
undertaking such academic activities, such as student assessments
and developing well structured student assignments. Therefore, there
is a clear opportunity for employers to engage lecturers from FE
colleges to help with such course requirements. Inevitably, there are a
number of by-products to the business in developing their internal
training mechanisms to reflect the new methods for undertaking
course assessments.
evaluating
areas
that
may
require
further
Clearly, it is very important to ensure that the New Engineering Fellowship
“package” is made compelling to employers so that they can see the business
opportunities and benefits immediately.
In addition, the role of business associations, as well as local and regional
agencies is very important in ensuring that companies are advised and
communicated with, in relation to the scheme. Already, many organisations
have commenced with this promotional activity (Institute of Directors and CBI)
to their members and confirmed their wiliness to continue to support the
promotion of this scheme. Likewise, university networks such as LTSN and
through HEFCE’s policy team have also conducted promotional activities and
agreed to support the ongoing promotion of the scheme to the higher
education sector.
46 - 67
Furthermore, through such devices as the New Engineering Fellowship
Scheme, employers can provide an important source of shared training
capability at local and regional levels, by influencing curriculum and training
development in their colleges. Such an approach should also be encouraged
by the relevant sector skills councils through the sector skills agreements at
local and regional levels and promoted through the Skills for Business
networks.
This scheme may also provide a future platform for considering reversesecondment arrangements from industry to colleges. Such arrangements
might be particularly useful when considering the redeployment of staff from
the manufacturing companies into the further education sector.
6.3
Developing new engineering and technology materials
Ultimately, if the New Engineering Fellowship Scheme is to achieve the level
of visible impact in improving the teaching and learning experience of the
students, new and modern engineering and technology topics will need to be
produced and integrated in to the course curriculum and regularly maintained
and refreshed.
One key area that could help in driving and harnessing innovation in teaching
and learning is e-learning. E-learning could also be used as a vehicle to
“smuggle” change in the educational sector. As more lecturers become more
comfortable in using e-technologies to introduce new pedagogical styles or
reinforce existing ones, the sector will experience a self-advocated change
that will enhance the educational experience of students.
The New Engineering Foundation is encouraging all participating colleges
and their nominated Fellows to use e-learning as part of a ‘blended learning’
solution when developing case studies that are the result of their placements.
The Cisco Academies could also be utilised as a means to exchange and
deliver some of the case studies using the communications infrastructure
available through the network of those academics.
Using such solutions will ensure that the applications of new engineering and
technology are integrated within the various course syllabuses and will enable
lecturers to strike a pedagogical balance between active and reflective
learning, sensing and intuition, visual and verbal, sequential and concurrent
needs of students. In addition, using e-learning as part of a blended learning
approach will also provide lecturers with a platform for strengthening and
enriching their own technical development activities.
Standards and assessment regulations bodies such as QCA
(the
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority) and QAA (Quality Assurance
Agency) are now moving towards the development of credit based systems
that are recognisable and transferable, which has driven the need to use elearning methods in course content development. The proposed approach
here will further underpin QCA and QAA policies and will also help with the
realisation of the Government strategy on e-learning.
47 - 67
6.4
Sharing and embedding good practice
Lecturers in further education colleges are drawn from diverse professional
and industrial backgrounds. It is worth noting that the Further Education
sector has a high proportion of “part-time” lecturers.
Therefore, it is important to ensure that the experience gained as a result of
the secondment scheme is captured and ultimately embedded in the course
curriculum thus producing the required dividends in the learning experience of
students.
Many devices will have to be employed here to achieve this goal and to build
a capacity for informed networks. Recognising the intended use of e-learning
will provide one of the useful mechanisms for capturing the lecture’s tacit
knowledge and sharing it with others in the same field, within the lecturers
own institution or across the FE sector.
A “virtual knowledge centre” is being proposed to achieve this objective and
will be made available centrally through www.neweng.org.uk website.
The virtual knowledge centre will provide:
ƒ
support information on professional development activities in
engineering and technology;
ƒ
a list of case studies and presentation resources from staff
secondment training activities;
ƒ
a series of guides that will help colleges with the following:
i. Structuring staff development and performance appraisal for
lecturers in engineering and technology and identifying
pedagogical methods appropriate for teaching such disciplines.
ii. Developing new courses that will embrace new engineering
and technologies including:
ƒ
ƒ
How to engage in an Initial market scoping and
assessment for new course development;
Curriculum creation and engaging in new assessment
techniques and continuous improvements.
A number of tools that will help with producing e-learning content will also be
made available to Fellows through the www.neweng.org.uk web site.
A Fellows’ “virtual interest group” using electronic chat or virtual classroom
technology will also be encouraged to facilitate sharing of materials and
exchanging ideas within the sector.
48 - 67
Appendices
A:
List of Respondent Colleges
B:
Copy of Questionnaire
C:
Copy of Info Sheet
D:
Sample of Supporting Letters
E:
Members of the Advisory Panel
F:
Sources and References
52 - 67
Appendix A:
List of Respondent Colleges
A total of 79 colleges have participated in this survey:
Alton College
Basingstoke College of Technology
Bexley College
Bishop Burton College
Bolton Community College
Boston College
Bradford College
Branfield College
Brooksby Melton College
Broxtowe College
Burrnley College
Burton College
Bury College
Carlisle College
Carshalton College
City College Brighton and Hove
City of Bath College
City of Bristol College
Colchester Institute
Cornwall College
Crawley College
Darlington College of Technology
Doncaster College
Dudley College of Technology
Ealing, Hammersmith & West London College
East Norfolk Sixth Form College
East Riding College
Eversham and Malvern Hills College
Filton College
Grantham College
Grimsby Institute of Further & Higher Education
Hadlow College
Hartlepool College of Further Education
Herefordshire College of Technology
Highbury College, Portsmouth
Huddersfield New College
Huntingdonshire Regional College
Keighley College
Kendal College
King Edward VI College
Lambeth College
Leeds College of Technology
Lincoln College
Liverpool Community College
Loughborough College
53 - 67
Macclesfield College
Manchester College of Arts & Technology
Merton College
Mid-Cheshire College
Milton Keynes College
Myerscough College
Nelson and Colne College
New College Durham
Newcastle College
Newcastle Under-Lyme College
Newham College of Further Education
North West London College
Northampton College
Oldham Sixth Form College
Plymouth College of Further Education
Preston College
Reaseheath
Rotherham College of Arts and Technology
Somerset College of Arts and Technology
South Cheshire College
South Downs College
Southport College
St Helens College
Stockport College of Further & Higher Education
Strode College
Suffolk College
Sussex Downs College
Tameside College
The Oldham College
Uxbridge College
West Cheshire College
Wiltshire College
Wirral Metropolitan College
Worcester College of Technology
Yorkshire Coast College
54 - 67
Appendix B:
List of Nominated Fellows and their Colleges:
College
Nominee 1
Nominee 2
Nominee 3
Alton College
Matthew Chart
Graham Knight
Adrian Dee
Basingstoke College of Technology
J Lynn
P Dixon
K Harland
Bexley College
Tony Ashcroft
Bolton Community College
James Oldroyd
Dave Carr
Boston College
Keith Lott
Graham M
Gibbs
Mike Bean
Bradford College
Ray Cooper
Maria Emmott
Stuart Gwent
Branfield College
John Dudley
Barbara Oakley
John Haines
Brooksby Melton College
Pete Robinson
Phil Spencer
John Jones
Broxtowe College
M A Ryan
D Gupta
Burrnley College
Mike Borher
Hasnet Khan
Sara Halton
Burton College
N.G Hammond
J Johnson
H Murphy
Carlisle College
Colin Luhrs
Peter Gagan
Neil McAllister
Carshalton College
Nigel Powell
Megan Williams
Colin North
City College Brighton and Hove
Gary Humphrey
Keith
Wolstenholme
Mark Thompson
City of Bath College
Leon Smith
Non
Non
Crawley College
Mr K Meucher
Mr D Falkner
Mr A Catani
Ealing, Hammersmith & West London College
T Mangat
I Campbell
M Homayonpour
East Norfolk Sixth Form College
Stuart Simpson
Adrian Whiteley
Peter Matthews
East Riding College
J P Curtis
S Elliot
D Lee
Grimsby Institute of Further & Higher Education
Simon Smith
Andrew
Pearson
Gavin Hall
Herefordshire College of Technology
Michael Kenting
John WebleyJones
William Watling
Highbury College
Pete Swain
Ian Clapson
Dave Thompson
Huntingdonshire Regional College
Laurie York
Frank Vanni
Louise Morris
Keighley College
David Sharp
Brian Swales
Stuart Cann
Kendal College
David Bland
Liam McGuire
Leeds College of Technology
Darren Bagshaw
David Paramo
Phil Woodhead
Macclesfield College
Steve Webb
Adrian Guirey
Tony Day
Merton College
Simon Bunton
Raj Sud
Mike Brown
Milton Keynes College
Martin Markham
Rod Bottley
Ian Ranson
Myerscough College
Adam Eckersley
55 - 67
College
Nominee 1
Nominee 2
Nominee 3
Nelson and Colne College
Brent Marshall
John Wood
Newcastle College
John Allinson
Paul Rumbles
Arthur Stapley
Newcastle Under-Lyme College
Claire Machine
David Chapman
Alexandra Carter
Newham College of Further Education
Mike Scott
Gavin Cross
Northampton College
Austin Beeching
Nicola Blakey
Paul Sturdy
Oldham Sixth Form College
John Howe
Preston College
Roger Watson
Alan Pepper
David Edge
Rotherham College of Arts and Technology
S Aizlewood
S Eades
A Leggott
Somerset College of Arts and Technology
Pete Gingell
Krystyn
Woodward
Chris Kelly
South Cheshire College
Tom Binkley
Raimund
Birnbacher
Paul Mason
St Helens College
D Murphy
G Freeman
N Fellows
Stockport College of Further & Higher Education
David Batte
Richard Smith
Colin Patrick
Strode College
Jim Hall
Julia Beer
Sean Jenvey
Suffolk College
Alan Cracknell,
Sue Wesson
David Warigett,
Steve
Bassingthwaite
Les Allum, Dave
Vaughan
Sussex Downs College
David Bullock
Kaz Wysocki
Keith Santer
The Oldham College
Mike Bonney
Nick Evans
Dave Mills
Uxbridge College
Mr G Gannat
Mr C Murdoch
Mr M Tungekar
Worcester College of Technology
Jim Mustard
Richard Nokes
John Cowie
Yorkshire Coast College
Martin Eves
Phil Midgley
Dave Speck
Total nominated as 0f 30 September 2004 = 146
56 - 67
B:
Copy of Questionnaire
57 - 67
C:
Sample of Supporting Letters
60 - 67
Appendix D:
Arlett, Carol
Berkman, Janet
Lo, Jenny
Medhat, Sa'ad Prof
Neil Bentley
Williams, John Dr
Wilson, Richard Dr
Wilton, Neil
Wood, Stirling
Advisory Panel Members
LTSN-Engineering / HE Academy
Engineering Employers Federation
Association of Colleges
New Engineering Foundation / Gatsby
CBI
GTEP, Gatsby
Institute of Directors
North West Development Agency
QCA
66 - 67
Appendix E:
References and Sources
Additional data sources used in the preparation of this report include:
ƒ
Department for Education and Skills
ƒ
Department of Trade and Industry
ƒ
Office for National Statistics
ƒ
Centre for Economic Policy Research, London
ƒ
Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics
ƒ
OECD.
67 - 67