Christian Bodmer
Andrea Leu
Lukas Mira
Heinz Rütter
SPINE
Successful Practices
in International
Engineering Education
Final Report
May 2002
Benchmarking Study
Partner Universities
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
g
Carnegie Mellon University
Ecole Centrale Paris
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
Georgia Institute of Technology
Imperial College London
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen
Technische Universiteit Delft
Initial Partners
g
g
Engineers Shape our Future
Rat der Eidgenössischen Technischen Hochschulen (ETH-Rat)
SPINE
Successful Practices in
International Engineering Education
Christian Bodmer
Andrea Leu
Lukas Mira
Heinz Rütter
CREDITS
Initial Partners
Engineers Shape our Future (INGCH), Zurich, Switzerland
Rat der Eidgenössischen Technischen Hochschulen (ETH-Rat), Zurich, Switzerland
SPINE Partner Universities
Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), Pittsburgh, USA
Ecole Centrale Paris (ECP), Paris, France
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich (ETHZ), Zurich, Switzerland
Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech), Atlanta, USA
Imperial College (IC), London, UK
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, USA
Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen (RWTH Aachen), Aachen, Germany
Technische Universiteit Delft (TU Delft), Delft, the Netherlands
Authors
Dr. Christian Bodmer, Transfer Center for Technology Management, Universität St. Gallen
Dr. Andrea Leu, Senarclens Leu + Partner - concert group, Zurich
Dr. Heinz Rütter, Lukas Mira, Rütter + Partner - concert group, Rüschlikon
Project collaborators: Adrian Berwert, Janine Blattner, Michael Landolt, Nicole Mauchle
Members Assembly of Delegates
Dr. Stephan Bieri (President, ETH-Rat) Prof. John Anderson (CMU), Prof. Daniel Grimm (ECP), Marina de Senarclens (INGCH), Prof. Dominique de Werra (EPFL), Prof. Walter Schaufelberger (ETHZ),
Prof. Jean-Lou Chameau (Georgia Tech), Prof. Chris Hankin (IC), Prof. Anders Eriksson (KTH), Prof.
Dick Yue (MIT), Prof. K. F. Wakker (TU Delft), Werner Weber (RWTH Aachen).
Members Steering Committee
Georges-André Grin (Chairman until June 2000, ETH-Rat), Prof. Konrad Osterwalder (Chairman since
June 2000, ETHZ), Prof. John Anderson (CMU), Marina de Senarclens (INGCH), Anton Demarmels
(INGCH), Prof. Martin Hasler (EPFL), Prof. Walter Schaufelberger (ETHZ), Prof. Jan van Katwijk (TU
Delft)
Project members of SPINE Partner Universities
Dr. Herma G. Büttner (TU Delft), Dr. Ruediger Schmidt (RWTH Aachen), Prof. Bill Wakeham (IC)
Project Team
Dr. Christoph Grolimund (chair, ETH-Rat), Dr. Christian Bodmer, Dr. Andrea Leu, Dr. Heinz Rütter
Official Consultant
Heidrick & Struggles, Zürich
Translation
Melanie Fletcher, Peter Grimshaw
© Initial partners: Engineers Shape our Future, Zurich and Rat der Eidgenössischen Technischen
Hochschulen (ETH-Rat), Zurich
CONTENTS
Contents
Preface
9
Daniel Grimm, Ecole Centrale Paris
John L. Anderson, Carnegie Mellon University
9
11
Executive Summary
13
1.
15
Summary
1.1
University structure
15
1.2
Education / Internationality
16
1.3
Cooperation with universities / industry
18
1.4
Performance of engineers
19
1.5
Reputation of universities
20
2.
Project Description
21
2.1
Partners and project organization
21
2.2
Objectives
22
2.3
Benchmarking and successful practices
23
2.4
Methodology
23
3.
Partner Universities
27
3.1
Carnegie Mellon University
27
3.2
Ecole Centrale Paris
30
3.3
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
33
3.4
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
36
3.5
Georgia Institute of Technology
39
3.6
Imperial College
42
3.7
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
45
3.8
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
48
3.9
Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen
51
3.10
Technische Universiteit Delft
54
4.
4.1
Surveys Professors, Engineers, Managers
Introduction and methodology
57
57
4.1.1
Questionnaires and feedback
57
4.1.2
Evaluation
61
4.2
General findings
62
4.3
Education / Internationality
64
4.3.1
Quality of education
64
4.3.2
Job-related experience during studies
76
4.3.3
Teaching methods
77
4.3.4
Learning environment
80
4.4
4.4.1
Cooperation
Cooperation with other universities
84
84
CONTENTS
4.4.2
Cooperation with industry
87
4.4.3
Benefits of cooperation
91
Performance of engineers
92
4.5
4.5.1
Engineering competences
4.5.2
General professional competences
4.6
Reputation
92
101
110
4.6.1
Important aspects for the reputation of universities
110
4.6.2
Reputation of universities
114
4.7
5.
5.1
Additional Results
Successful Practices
Introduction and methodology
118
123
123
5.1.1
Overview of topics
123
5.1.2
Methodology
125
5.2
Carnegie Mellon University
126
5.2.1
Introduction to engineering courses in parallel with ma-thematics and science
126
5.2.2
Broad undergraduate studies with high flexibility for students
128
5.2.3
Cross-disciplinary approach and team projects
131
5.3
Ecole Centrale Paris
135
5.3.1
Restructuring of final year: combination of professional and scientific approach
135
5.3.2
Implementation of long-term strategy for internationality
139
5.3.3
Strong links with industry in funding, teaching, and research
144
5.3.4
Integration of non-core competences and human sciences
150
5.4
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
153
5.4.1
Internationalization in research and education
153
5.4.2
Focus on basic sciences in combination with strong links to industry
156
5.4.3
Integration of new, important topic areas in engineering curricula
159
5.5
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
161
5.5.1
Cosmopolitan and very international composition of faculty
161
5.5.2
Well defined internal and external evaluation system
163
5.5.3
Mechanical Engineering: strong focus on project orientation
168
5.6
Georgia Institute of Technology
171
5.6.1
Interdisciplinary research centers
171
5.6.2
Strong entrepreneurial program
174
5.6.3
Excellent distance learning / Distance education program
179
5.7
Imperial College London
184
5.7.1
Integration of project and teamwork into curriculum
184
5.7.2
WISE (Women in Science and Engineering) program to attract female students
187
5.7.3
“Mastery” to provide engineers with a more holistic education
189
5.8
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
192
5.8.1
Integration of lectures, exercises, and teaching of non-core competences
192
5.8.2
Creation of international master programs
194
5.8.3
High level of interdisciplinarity
198
CONTENTS
5.9
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
200
5.9.1
Successful quality assurance by external Visiting Committees (VC)
200
5.9.2
Innovative way of creating new units
203
5.9.3
Education: Broad, fundamental, yet practical
205
5.10
Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen
208
5.10.1
High number of interdisciplinary activities and research areas
208
5.10.2
High involvement of students in research
212
5.10.3
Students with broad view and deep fundamental knowledge
215
5.11
Technische Universiteit Delft
220
5.11.1
International MSc Program
220
5.11.2
Elaborate external and internal quality management
224
5.11.3
Highly innovative program in Electrical Engineering
227
6.
Final Remarks (Stephan Bieri, CEO ETH Board)
233
APPENDIX A: Data Collection (Facts and Figures)
235
APPENDIX B: Listing of Potentially Valuable Practices (PVP)
257
Table of figures
Abbreviations
Participating firms
Partner universities
PREFACE
9
Preface
Daniel Grimm, Ecole Centrale Paris
The project initiated by our Swiss partners to compare engineering education around the world is all
the more praiseworthy as it is the first time that such an enterprise is undertaken. Generally, comparisons between higher education institutions are based on research performance, research being the
main concern for faculty as it drives their academic career.
The way information has been extensively collected by varied groups of persons, professors, alumni
and companies, ensures a comprehensive view of our institutions. This is very valuable for us not only
for the comparison aspect, but also to gain knowledge of our own image through a neutral structure.
Moreover, this initiative occurs at the right time. Everywhere, there are discussions about all aspects
of globalisation, and governments are trying to set rules aiming at lowering the obstacles to student
exchanges.
Education, together with its higher education dimension, is a long-term process, going from the age of
3 in kindergarten to the age of 24 or more, with variations from one country to the other. The duration
of 21 years is clearly out of the time scale of any government!
Thus, the construction of a higher education system is more the result of history and social behaviour
in a given country, rather than the result of a governmental policy. This is the reason why there are
such differences between educational organisations. The consequence is that each has qualities and
weaknesses. So, when a harmonisation process is started across boarders, the problem is to avoid
losing the qualities of each through a levelling to the mean or even the lower level.
Of the institutions involved in SPINE, eight out of ten are engaged in double degree programmes. This
practice of student exchanges is set to enable some graduates to get the best out of two different curricula. In addition, as neither of the degrees is obtained with a lowering of the requirements, the moving student stays a significant amount of time in the foreign country. At the age of twenty, a stay of
two years in a foreign country leads to an in-depth acquisition of the local culture, language, way of
thinking and system of reference. Our experience also shows that, having done this once, the double
degree graduate will be aware of the very existence of cultural gaps, allowing him or her to adapt more
easily in any new country.
But to succeed, this double degree policy requires certain conditions in the organisation of engineering
education. One of them is the progression of knowledge acquisition in the course of studies after secondary education. There are two approaches. One is to start from fundamental sciences before going
on to applications, the second is more application oriented from the beginning, leading to an intermediate degree, which is a professional one, before entering a Master’s degree programme with an increase in the scientific and conceptual level.
The first approach is the European one, as in Europe the engineering professions are attractive. This
induces a population of students quite at ease with an abstract approach and able to learn theories
with a conceptual teaching. As the sciences fundamentals are taught generally during the first two
years, the studies last five years (on average) and there is no degree before the final degree. To fulfil
the needs of industry for engineers with an “applied” profile, there is a second curriculum, starting
straight after secondary education and different from the former from the very beginning.
The second approach prevails in the United States where long engineering studies are less attractive
than law or medical studies. Thus, the first degree is a professional one, adapted to the student audience. With the recent introduction of co-terminal Master programmes, in which the student receives
a Bachelor’s and a Master’s degree simultaneously, some leading US universities are now basing
their programmes on strong scientific disciplines taught at the very beginning of higher education just
like the ones of European technical universities.
10
PREFACE
In Europe, an attempt at harmonisation has been initiated. Its catch phrase, “3-5-8”, means that a first
degree would be awarded after a three-year programme of higher education. Then, after a two-year
complementary programme, would come a second degree. The end of the system is the doctorate
with a standard duration of three years of research full-time.
If it were to become compulsory for the first degree to be a professional degree, it would entail a fundamental change for the European institutions. Industry would no longer find the conceptual engineers
it needs to develop new fields and to manage complex trans-disciplinary projects as in aerospace for
example. But if the first degree is just a milestone on the way to the present degree awarded by the
European institutions involved in SPINE, then, our differences will remain a plus.
The SPINE report has identified Successful Practices among the partner institutions, enabling each
institution to adopt and adapt the most relevant practices fruitfully.
The world is more and more reliant on technologies, but they are not readily accepted by the public at
large: energy production induces greenhouse effect, Internet enables intrusions in our privacy, biotechnology is changing the essence of life itself, chemistry is linked with pollution. It is of the utmost
importance that entrepreneurs be aware of the necessity to explain the benefit of their application. The
engineer will have to be both a builder and an educator. Thanks to SPINE, decisive step has been
taken.
PREFACE
11
Preface
John L. Anderson, Carnegie Mellon University
The challenge of engineering education is to simultaneously prepare students for their first job and
their career 25 years later. As the proverb goes, it’s not where you start but where you finish. How
does the academic enterprise tackle this challenge? First, by realizing it exists. Second, by defining
educational goals and then examining the existing curriculum to see where changes are needed. And
third, by comparing best practices found among different universities. It takes courage to define desired outcomes in education, and even more so to compare existing practices with desired goals. The
engineering academic enterprise is one of the very few disciplines to muster this courage. SPINE –
successful practices in international engineering education – is unique in that it injects cultural differences (USA versus Europe) into the mix.
Engineering is a blend of technical, problem solving and leadership/communication skills and consequently questions arise when combining these factors. How much of each should be in the curriculum, how should each be taught, and what is the relative emphasis? Should each be taught separately or integrated? Thirty years ago technical skills dominated the teaching agenda, but today all three
are acknowledged as important. However, even defining the most important technical skills in a particular sub-discipline, such as mechanical or chemical engineering, is an issue, and the role of science
in engineering education is continually debated by educators. The question of diversity within our
global engineering community – utilizing the talents of all our citizens – is a fundamental issue that
must be addressed if we are to attract the best students into engineering.
Certainly the culture of a country affects biases in these areas. This is why SPINE is such an intriguing study. Increasing participation of underrepresented groups in engineering is a generally accepted goal of US universities – is it also so highly valued in Europe? What is the trend in the balance
of core (technical skills, problem solving) versus non-core (communication, business, ability to work in
teams) education in Europe as compared to the USA? Practical (problem based) versus theoretical
(science based)? These questions, and the opportunity to develop an international network of academic colleagues interested in improving engineering education, are the reasons that Carnegie Mellon
decided to participate in SPINE. We have not been disappointed. This report provides important data
and analysis that illustrate the similarities and differences between the cultures. Because technology
and commerce are global, it is important to understand these differences and learn from each other. It
is also important to maintain communication and continue such studies, perhaps in a more focused
way now that the landscape has been defined.
The SPINE project has been very fruitful to me and to Carnegie Mellon not only because of the data
and final report, but also because of the international network of colleagues who share our interest in
education. We look forward to continuing our relationship with this group and watching it evolve in
substantive ways. We should never undervalue the importance of global collegiality. The goal is not
to make common our cultures, rather it is to understand, respect and build upon their differences to
improve the human state. We have made a step in this direction with SPINE.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
13
Executive Summary
SPINE is a benchmarking study of engineering education focusing on successful practices in univer1
sity education in ten leading European and U.S. universities . The main objectives of the project are to
evaluate the quality and relevance of engineering education and to identify successful practices, i.e.
concepts, methodologies and tools in specific areas of engineering education which have proved successful according to defined criteria.
Qualitative and quantitative surveys of the partner universities, of selected departments and professors, of engineering graduates and managers as well as site visits at all ten partner universities result
in extensive data on the quality of engineering education combining the internal and external view. All
in all, 543 professors, 1372 engineers and 145 managers filled in questionnaires; 66 respondents,
including Provosts, Deans and Department Heads at the partner universities were interviewed. The
surveys cover the following main topic areas: University Structure, Education, Internationality, Cooperation, Performance of Engineers and Reputation of Universities.
Successful practices
From the results of the surveys and interviews 95 potentially valuable practices are identified. 30 of
these are analyzed in detail and verified as successful practices. Successful practices aim to initiate a
learning process among the participating universities.
Successful practices focus on important topical aspects of engineering education such as interdisciplinarity, internationality, links with industry, integration of non-core competentences, evaluation, quality
management, attracting female students, integration of new topic areas in engineering curricula etc.
Each successful practice is described using a standard raster covering the following aspects: intent,
objectives, description, methods, results, level of satisfaction, external view, investments, experience,
boundary conditions and future plans.
Results of surveys
By surveying various organizational and structural indicators on a uniform basis, a direct comparison
of partner universities is possible. Some interesting differences were identified thereby:
The US university structure assigns wide decision-making competences and responsibilities to the
President, Provost, Dean and Heads of Departments, while most European universities have a decentralized system ensuring professors a high degree of independence.
The percentage of female students varies widely, and is significantly higher at the American universities (>20%) than in Europe (5-19%).
The partner universities vary considerably in size. The number of students at partner universities
(selected departments) range from about 1300 to 7800.
Survey results among professors, managers and engineers are particularly interesting with regard to
the following aspects:
Professors generally assess the quality of education at their own university higher than engineers
do.
1
The SPINE partner universities were: Carnegie Mellon University, Ecole Centrale Paris, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de
Lausanne, Eigenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich, Georgia Institute of Technology, Imperial College London, Kungl
Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule
Aachen, and Technische Universiteit Delft.
14
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Responses from US university professors and engineers are relatively consistent while the views of
European professors and engineers differ widely. Results for Imperial College are often closer to
those for US than for European universities.
Assessment levels in the USA and Europe differ considerably in part. Assessments of the own
university by American engineers are always significantly higher than those of European engineers.
This cultural effect is also apparent to some extent among the professors.
Quality of professors/teaching staff and quality of infrastructure are regarded as the most important
criteria of the quality of education. Almost as important for engineers and managers are relevance
of education to practices in industry and cooperation with industry, while professors regard the
practice-related aspects of education as less important.
More importance is attached in the USA to specialization/depth of education than in Europe, where
internationality is regarded as more important.
Professors, engineers and managers regard widely applicable skills (problem-solving skills, analysis/ methodological skills) more important than specific engineering know-how (R&D know-how,
specialized engineering proficiency).
Quality of research, quality of programs and success of graduates are considered the most important aspects contributing to the reputation of a technical university. Engineers and managers believe that contacts/collaboration with industry are the most important image forming factors,
whereas professors hold merits, awards (e.g. Nobel prize) to be more important. All agree, however, that ranking by the media and continuing education programs are less important.
SUMMARY
1. Summary
This benchmarking project of engineering education in the USA and Europe focuses for the first time on successful practices in university education. Ten leading
technical universities took part in this study: Carnegie Mellon University (CMU),
Ecole Centrale Paris (ECP), Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL),
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich (ETHZ), Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech), Imperial College London (Imperial College), Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm (KTH), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT),
Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen (RWTH Aachen), and
Technische Universiteit Delft (TU Delft).
A main objective of the study was to identify successful practices, i.e. concepts,
methodologies and tools, in specific areas of engineering education which have
proved successful according to defined criteria. Successful practices were identified from the results of qualitative and quantitative questionnaires to the partner
universities and departments selected for this study, and from Internet questionnaires to professors, engineering graduates and managers on the quality of engineering education in the ten partner universities. Just as important as the questionnaires for identifying successful practices were on site visits to the partner universities with personal interviews.
All in all, 543 professors, 1372 engineers and 145 managers were questioned and
the project team interviewed 66 respondents, including Provosts, Deans and Department Heads at all 10 partner universities. Furthermore, 95 potentially valuable
practices (PVP) were identified (see appendix B), of which 31 successful practices
were verified and analyzed in detail.
It is important to bear in mind during analysis and interpretation of these results
that some of them are subject to a cultural effect: average ratings in the USA are
higher for some items than the European average. This difference is particularly
great with regard to explicit assessment of the own university.
Summarized below according to topic area, are the quantitative survey results,
together with some examples of successful practices identified. A full listing of successful practices is given in chapter 5.
1.1 University structure
The structure and organization of the partner universities vary widely. There are
differences with regard to patronage (private/public), entrance procedures (strict
selection versus wide choice) and tuition fees (high fees versus free study). There
are also differences between universities with regard to organization and management. The US university structure assigns wide decision-making competences and
responsibilities to the President, Provost, Dean and Heads of Departments, while
most European universities have a decentralized system ensuring professors a
high degree of independence.
Another difference between the 10 partner universities is their size. While, for example, the ECP has only about 1’500 students, Georgia Tech has more than
15’000. The number of professors and lecturers varies accordingly. With regard to
15
16
SUMMARY
the number of students, an interesting demographic aspect is the proportion of
women, which while traditionally much lower in engineering than in other disciplines, differs considerably between universities. The proportion of women students at Imperial College in the areas surveyed is 18%, at MIT 27%, while at
RWTH Aachen and EPFL it is only 7% and 5% respectively.
Despite these quantitative differences and the additional cultural and social effects,
all the partner universities have one characteristic in common: they are among the
best engineering education institutions in their respective countries, or even the
best of all.
Successful practices:
Imperial College is making great efforts to motivate more women to study science
and engineering. Since the mid-eighties, IC has been running so-called WISE
(Women in Science and Engineering) courses, which are announced in all 4’700
schools in the UK and are a mixture of sessions with undergraduates, discussions
with students and staff members, laboratory work and socializing. As a result, the
percentage of female students increased between 1985 and 2001 from 16% to
30% (in all disciplines).
Some of the SPINE partner universities have introduced sophisticated quality
management systems in order to maintain or continuously improve their high
training standards. TU Delft has an elaborate external and internal quality management program which works by conducting intensive discussions. The Education
Quality Management Advisory Committee for Quality Evaluation (AKO), consisting
of professors, students and external members, provides a memory and awareness
function for TU Delft’s quality management system. A success factor at MIT comprises so-called external Visiting Committees (VC), which make a decisive contribution to quality assurance. These VCs, each with 18 members, exist for every
academic department and provide an independent assessment of the quality of
activities conducted by the departments which are visited on a regular basis, typically every 2 years. The ETHZ also has a well-defined internal and external
evaluation system, consisting of six modules: peer reviews, departmental selfevaluation, graduate questionnaires, student questionnaires, annual reports, and
administration quality surveys.
1.2 Education / Internationality
Quality of education
Quality of professors/teaching staff and quality of infrastructure are regarded as the
most important criteria for the quality of education. Almost as important for engineers and managers is cooperation with industry, while professors regard the
practice-related aspects of education (e.g. non-core competences) as less important.
More importance is attached in the US to specialization/depth of education than in
Europe, where internationality is regarded as more important.
In general, engineers rate the criteria for the quality of education at their own university rather lower than professors do. Average ratings by European engineers
are lower than those of their US colleagues.
SUMMARY
The percentage of students spending at least one term at a foreign university is
lower among US universities (except Georgia Tech) than in Europe. The highest
exchange rates are at EPFL and ECP, where nearly 30% of students spend at
least one semester abroad.
Successful practices:
The importance of internationality in Europe is also reflected in successful practices: in the eighties ECP implemented a long-term strategy for internationality and
was one of the founders of the TIME network, a double degree program currently
utilized by 34% of ECP students. In recent years EPFL has also undertaken successful efforts on internationalization in research and education, and created a
centre for continuing education, international relations and cooperation (CFRC). In
addition to the CFRC, EPFL has “mobility delegates” and professors responsible
for the individual relationships with foreign universities. ETHZ has a very cosmopolitan and international faculty composition, and offers compensation packages
(containing financial and non-financial elements) which are among the most attractive worldwide. Another example is KTH with its international master programs in
English in order to increase the number of international and Swedish students.
International master programs are also offered at TU Delft. With the new programs
in English, TU Delft was able to increase the number of foreign Ph.D. students, to
extend its international alumni network and to establish new collaborations with
partner universities, e.g. in the US.
Teaching methods
The most highly rated teaching methods are diploma/final projects. All teaching
methods are assessed lower by engineers than by professors, in particular with
regard to lectures and computer-based training. Own universities in the US are
rated higher than in Europe. This effect is more pronounced among engineers than
among professors.
Successful practices:
Notable here is the Distance Learning / Distance Education program developed by
Georgia Tech, a university which has accumulated long-term experience in this
area. Important in this connection is the integration of newer technologies such as
satellite, teleconferencing, and the Internet. The focus on excellent services for the
distance learner is as imperative as the close cooperation of the Center for Distance Learning and the academic units.
At KTH, communication aspects, project work and management skills, which are
usually taught in courses, are integrated into the more traditional studies at an
early stage. For example, education in mathematics has been changed. The math
courses are coordinated with an appropriate engineering course in order to increase the motivation of the students.
Learning environment
The professional competence of teaching staff was rated highest. Support and
counselling for students and pedagogical and didactic skills of teaching staff were
rated lowest. These aspects were considered by engineers as inadequate (<4, on
a scale from 1 - 6; 1=lowest, 6=highest). Infrastructure (tools, student facilities,
17
18
SUMMARY
practical training facilities) was rated on average as fair to good (4.5 – 5). Ratings
by engineers are generally lower than those by professors.
1.3 Cooperation with universities / industry
Most professors reported cooperation sporadically or regularly with other universities over the last two years. The most frequent form of cooperation is joint R&D
projects, and less frequently exchange of lecturers/teachers. The future importance
of cooperation with other universities was estimated as same to increasing. There
are, however, wide differences between universities. 50 - 80% of professors reported cooperating "regularly" with other universities over the last two years in the
form of R&D projects., the highest percentage being among professors at Imperial
College (79%), and the lowest among professors at ECP and CMU (52% each).
In the professors' view, likewise cooperation with industry is most frequently in the
form of R&D projects and less frequently as lectures/teachers from industry. Here
again, there are wide differences between the partner universities. Nearly 90% of
ECP professors cooperated regularly with industry over the last two years in the
form of lecturers/teachers from industry. Likewise, at the ETHZ and RWTH
Aachen, more than 50% of professors indicated "regularly". These percentages at
MIT, CMU, EPFL and Imperial College are below 30%. The managers questioned
indicated cooperation in student and diploma/thesis projects as the most frequent
cooperation form.
In the view of professors and managers, the various forms of cooperation are generally beneficial to them. Professors rate cooperation with industry slightly higher
than cooperation with other universities. Managers see the greatest benefit of cooperation with universities as contact with potential employees.
The number of professors with experience in industry varies between 30% and
67%, with lower percentages at the US universities on average. However, two
thirds of professors at TU Delft and KTH have no industrial experience at all.
Successful practices:
ECP has strong links with industry in funding, teaching and research. Teaching
partnerships with industry, part-time professors from industry and the creation of a
club of multinational companies for international student exchanges are only some
of the aspects of the successful university-industry cooperation.
EPFL offers courses focusing on the basic sciences, but with strong links to industry. In the first year, students are trained to understand the basics of science and
engineering in depth. But every student is required to write a practice-oriented diploma thesis – in a lab at EPFL or in industry (20 – 25% of the students).
A special kind of cooperation with industry exists at Georgia Tech, where in the
early eighties the Advanced Technology Development Center (ATDC) was founded
in cooperation with the State of Georgia. The goal was to create an environment to
promote technological entrepreneurship, to build support groups which help the
development of technology companies and to strengthen the infrastructure necessary to support technology development. The ATDC helps to build or complete the
business plan, understand the markets, and gives technical support to further develop a product.
SUMMARY
1.4 Performance of engineers
Engineering competences
General, widely applicable skills (problem-solving skills, analysis/ methodological
skills) are regarded as more important than specific engineering know-how (R&D
know-how, specialized engineering proficiency). Specialized engineering proficiency is, however, rated more highly in the US than in Europe.
Practical engineering experience is regarded by professors as the least important
competence. Engineers and managers, however, regard practical experience as
more important. Widely applicable problem-solving skills and analysis / methodological skills are rated the highest of all competences at the own university.
There are also general differences in rating levels between universities. Professors
at KTH, for example, rated their university's engineering competences at 3.8 to 4.6
(scale 1 – 6; 1=lowest, 6=highest), while MIT professors returned ratings of 4.5 to
5.5. US ratings are generally higher than in Europe, but there are also differences
in rating levels between European universities
The differences among engineers were more pronounced, with an average rating
of engineering competences at RWTH Aachen and KTH of 4.3, compared with
about 5 at US universities. Ratings among the US universities are particularly high
at MIT and CMU.
Successful practices:
A particularly interesting successful practice has been established at MIT. Engineering education here is broad, fundamental, yet practical, and influenced by the
curriculum, an extensive cooperative program with industry and an industrial connection program to improve MIT’s links with industry. At CMU, an introduction to
engineering courses is offered in the first year in parallel with mathematics and
engineering, in order to give students experience with actual physical systems as
soon as possible in their curriculum.
At RWTH Aachen, students are integrated particularly frequently in research. Virtually every student who has passed the pre-diploma examinations works as an
auxiliary research assistant. Students perform partial activities for scientific projects
and are given small, limited blocks to handle on their own. The selection and continued employment of students as auxiliary research assistants is the most important route for recruiting Ph.D. students.
General professional competences
Universal, widely applicable competences such as communication skills, English
language skills and teamwork abilities are regarded as the most important general
professional competences for engineering graduates. Specialized skills in other
areas such as law, marketing and finance are not regarded as important in engineering education.
Presentation skills / leadership skills are regarded as more important by professors
at US universities than by their European colleagues. Among engineers, the only
difference between the USA and Europe concerns other language skills, to which
US engineers assign an importance rating of only 3 on a scale of 1 to 6.
19
20
SUMMARY
European professors rate the implementation of general professional competences
at their own university higher than engineers. The widest differences are in competences such as leadership skills, social skills and presentation skills.
The importance of general professional competences is rated >4 (on a scale of 1 to
6) on average, but the implementation of these competences at the own university
is rated lower on average (<4). The biggest difference between importance and
assessment is with communication skills, leadership skills and social skills.
With regard to leadership skills the greatest difference are between the AngloSaxon and other universities. Engineers and Professors at MIT, CMU, Georgia
Tech and Imperial College rate their leadership skills between 4 and 5 on a scale
of 1 to 6, while ratings at the other European universities are below 4. One exception here is ECP, with above-average ratings for Europe.
With regard to social skills, there is a difference between the views of professors
(ratings >5) and engineers (<5). The highest ratings among professors are at ECP,
KTH, Imperial College and TU Delft.
Successful practices:
Imperial College integrates project work and teamwork extremely well. Integrated
laboratories where computing is purposely set up as an engineering and not as a
st
scientific discipline, groupwork starting in the 1 year and continuing throughout the
nd
2 year, and interaction between laboratories and groupwork are some of the
components of this successful practice. CMU has established interdisciplinary and
team projects in order to ensure that courses offer a realistic design experience by
associating every project with an actual industrial client. Another objective of
CMU’s education concept is to motivate students to document their results.
1.5 Reputation of universities
Quality of research, quality of programs and success of graduates are regarded as
the most important aspects contributing to the reputation of a technical university.
Ranking by the media and continuing education programs are regarded as less
important.
In the view of engineers and managers, contacts/collaboration with industry are
among the most important image forming factors for a university. Professors regard
this aspect as less important.
Merits, awards (e.g. Nobel prize) and publications by professors are much more
important in the view of professors than of engineers.
Performance-related criteria such as merits/awards for professors, ranking by the
media, publications by professors and success of graduates are regarded as more
important in the USA than in Europe.
The reputations of partner universities are rated with average values between 4.2
and 4.9 on a scale of 1 to 6. Exceptions are ETHZ and MIT, where ratings are
higher than 5.
Professors and engineers rate their own universities above-average in each case.
This particularly applies to engineers in the United States. European professors
and engineers (such as at KTH and RWTH Aachen) rate their own universities
rather modestly by comparison.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2. Project Description
A dynamic modern world in which technology is rapidly changing needs innovative
technical universities and well-educated graduate engineers capable of performing
at peak levels. Evaluation of quality in terms of structures, processes, contents,
methods, etc. in these institutions is of the utmost importance. An international
consortium of 10 leading universities decided in autumn 1999 to carry out a
benchmarking study on “Successful Practices in International Engineering Education (SPINE)”. A special feature of this study is that for the first time, both European
and US universities are analyzed and benchmarked.
The SPINE study analyzes the engineering education provided by the participating
universities with regard to the performance of graduate engineers after 5 to 10
years of experience in their profession. It compares the inside view of universities
with the outside perspective. SPINE focuses on an in-depth analysis of successful
practices identified during the course of the project. Thus, SPINE enables the participating universities to assess their high-level engineering education and learn
from other universities’ successful concepts, methods and processes in engineering education. SPINE is not intended to establish a ranking of best institutions. It is
primarily concerned with the collective learning processes which can be initiated by
identifying successful practices, and the implementation of appropriate organizational changes.
2.1 Partners and project organization
To encourage full participation in the study and wide acceptance of results, the two
Swiss initial partners (Board of the Federal Institutes of Technology, and "Engineers Shape our Future" INGCH, a group of leading companies) established an
international consortium of ten leading technical universities in USA and Europe
(an address listing is annexed to the report). SPINE partners also include:
Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), Pittsburgh, USA
Ecole Centrale Paris (ECP), Paris, France
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich (ETHZ), Zurich, Switzerland
Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech), Atlanta, USA
Imperial College (IC), London, UK
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, USA
Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen (RWTH Aachen),
Aachen, Germany
Technische Universiteit Delft (TU Delft), Delft, the Netherlands
The study was carried out by an independent project team. A Steering Committee,
comprised of representatives from the institutions involved assured financial and
21
22
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
milestone controlling. The Assembly of Delegates with one delegate from each
2
institution was responsible for content, communication and quality assurance.
2.2 Objectives
The main objectives of the project are to evaluate the quality and relevance of engineering education and to identify successful practices, with regard to the following topic areas: University Structure, Education, Internationality, Cooperation/Networks, Performance of Engineers, Strategy/Special Aspects, and Future
Orientation
Figure 1: Topic areas
1. Organization
2. Admission
3. Financing
4. Personnel Resources
5. Student Statistics
6. Infrastructure
1. With industry
2. With universities
3. With alumni org.
4. With student org.
5. Spin offs
4.
Cooperation/
Networks
5.
Performance
of Engineers
1. Generic Professional
Competencies
2. Engineering Competencies
3. Continuing Education
4. Professional Integration
5. Career paths
1.
University
Structure
2.
Education
3.
Internationality
1. Goals
2. Study Programs
3. Continuing Education
4. Special Experiences
5. Quality
6. Evaluation
6.
Strategy/
Special Aspects
7.
Future
Orientation
1. Student Mobility
2. International exchange
3. Compatibility of Degrees
4. International
Recruiting
1. Reputation
2. Recruiting
3. Autonomy
4. Communication
& Information
1. Future Qualification
Profile
2. Implementation of
new contents/areas
3. Teaching Methods
4. New Developments
Successful practices are analyzed in order to initiate a learning process among the
participating universities. The SPINE partners get feedback on their own structures
and practices, and are able to position their own institution and upgrade educational performance.
Further objectives are:
a comparison of educational strategies and methods in the USA and Europe,
an overview of educational concepts in different systems and under different
boundary conditions,
the establishment of a network between the partners to enable continuous improvement.
The implementation of the projects findings was not an objective (details see
chapter 5).
2
For a list of Steering Committee and Assembly of Delegates members see credits at the beginning of
this report.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.3 Benchmarking and successful practices
Benchmarking is the identification, analysis and transfer of successful practices. It
offers two main benefits, mainly, the positioning of one’s own organization compared to the other participants of the benchmarking project and, secondly and even
more importantly, the learning is derived from the transfer of the successful practices discovered.
Positioning is the answer to the “what”-questions (What do the others do? What
levels of success have they achieved?), whereas the learnings are the answers to
the “how”- and “why”-questions (How have the others done it? Why have they
reached such a high level of success?).
The SPINE project aims at giving answers to both positioning and learning type
questions. This is reflected in the project methodology described below: the data
collection phase corresponds to the positioning question and the identification of
successful practices phase to the learning type questions.
Since the term successful practice is rather fuzzy by nature, it is important to have
a clear and common understanding of what comprises a successful practice. This
is the definition used in the SPINE project: A successful practice is a concept,
process, methodology, or tool that has significantly contributed to reaching a university's objectives.
The SPINE project used the following criteria for the identification and selection of
successful practices:
a successful practice must be in the primary focus area of SPINE (this is reflected in the topic prioritization process conducted at the beginning of the project by the participating universities),
a successful practice must be of high interest to the participating universities
(this is reflected in the selection procedure of the successful practices out of a
list of potentially valuable practices, see below),
a successful practice must demonstrate its level of success by having significantly contributed to the respective university's objectives (this is partly reflected
by the evaluation conducted using a number of questionnaires and also by
studies and analyses conducted by the university which owns the practice).
2.4 Methodology
The first phase comprised preliminary analysis and a rough concept for carrying
out an international benchmarking study. This defined the goals, concept, and basic approach. Based on this preliminary analysis, the SPINE project comprised the
following phases
Definition of topic areas
Data collection
Identification, analysis and description of successful practices
Topic areas
Topic areas were defined in three ways:
SPINE project description: this was compiled through active consultation with
the initial partners to define the SPINE study content, goals and methodology.
23
24
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Workshop at the kick-off meeting: at this first meeting of SPINE partners the
project content and orientation were discussed in depth. As a result, agreement
was reached on topic area selection.
Priority listing for questionnaires: topics for the Facts & Figures questionnaires
A + B were selected in order of priority by the partner universities.
Data collection
Data was collected by means of questionnaires sent directly to the partner universities and their departments. The Facts & Figures A questionnaire focused on
quantitative data as shown in chapter 3 and the annex. The Facts & Figures B
questionnaire mainly collected qualitative data, which was used for identifying successful practices. An Internet questionnaire was completed by three target groups:
Professors from the participating universities
Graduate engineers from the participating universities, who were contacted
either through their companies or alumni organizations
Human resource and line managers in selected companies
Professors and engineers in the following engineering areas were questioned:
Mechanical Engineering (incl. Industrial Engineering, Microtechnology, Aerospace engineering)
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science & Engineering
Materials Science & Engineering
Chemical Engineering
The engineers questioned were under 35 years of age and/or graduated not more
than 10 years ago.
The Internet questionnaire results are shown in chapter 4.
By using this methodology, which is described in detail in chapter 4.1, key internal
and external information on each participating university was derived as a basis for
identifying successful practices.
Figure 2: Methodology
Internal View
•
•
Internal view of university´s engineering
education by engineers
Internal view of university´s engineering
education by professors
External View
Successful
Practices
•
Cross-university analysis
to
- identify
- analyze
- describe
successful practices
(concepts, methods,
tools and processes)
•
•
•
External view of
engineers from other
universities
External view of
professors from other
universities
External view of
engineers‘s employers
(line and human
resources managers)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Methodology of successful practices (SP)
Successful practices were identified through the following project stages:
Data collection: both quantitative and qualitative data were collected through the
Facts & Figures questionnaires A + B, and the Internet questionnaires to professors, engineers & managers (human resource and line managers).
Site visits: the project team conducted 66 personal interviews systematically at
all 10 partner universities with Provosts, Deans and Department Heads. All interview notes were passed back to the persons concerned for approval.
Identification of potentially valuable practices (PVP): based on collected data,
the project team compiled a list of 95 PVP which was distributed to all SPINE
partners for setting priorities.
Selection of successful practices from PVP: based on priorities selected by the
universities, three successful practices per SPINE partner could be selected,
i.e. 31 in total.
Verification and description of successful practices by telephone interviews:
based on a systematic criteria listing, successful practices were verified as described in detail in chapter 5.
25
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3. Partner Universities
This chapter gives an overview of the SPINE partner universities, focusing on the
following aspects:
University structure with regard to size, admission requirements and tuition fees;
university structure with specific regard to engineering areas incorporated in the
SPINE survey; university organization and management; key data such as number
of students, number of degrees and other facts and figures.
3.1 Carnegie Mellon University
Structure
Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) is a national research university of about 7’500
students and more than 3’300 faculty and research staff. It was founded in 1900 in
Pittsburgh by industrialist and philanthropist Andrew Carnegie. Admission to this
private, co-educational university is based on high school performance, standardized test scores, an audition review, extracurricular activities, guidance counsellor
and teacher recommendations, an admission essay and a personal statement. The
tuition fee for the academic year is about USD 25’000 per year.
The university today consists of seven colleges and schools, the Carnegie Institute
of Technology (engineering), the College of Fine Arts, the College of Humanities
and Social Sciences, the Mellon College of Science, the Graduate School of Industrial Administration, the School of Computer Science and the H. John Heinz III
School of Public Policy and Management. Two of these colleges are of special
interest for this study: Carnegie Institute of Technology and the School of Computer Science.
Carnegie Institute of Technology is comprised of seven academic departments with
Bachelor's, Master's and Doctor's Degrees available in each:
Biomedical & Health Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Civil & Environmental Engineering
Electrical & Computer Engineering
Engineering & Public Policy
Materials Science & Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Carnegie Institute of Technology is also home for a variety of interdisciplinary research programs, centers and institutes, many of which reflect the close relationship with industry.
CMU's School of Computer Science is comprised of seven divisions:
Computer Science Department
Robotics Institute
27
28
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Language Technologies Institute
Human-Computer Interaction Institute
Center of Automated Learning & Discovery
International Institute for Software Research
Center for Entertainment Technology
Organization
Board of Trustees:
The Trustees bear responsibility for the university, its policies, organization, financing and governance. Two direct responsibilities are the supervision of the
university's finances and the appointment of the President as Chief Executive Officer. Ordinarily, the Trustees do not involve themselves in the everyday affairs of
the university. Rather, operating responsibilities and the authority to act are delegated to the President.
The Trustees have a particular responsibility to mediate between the university
community and the larger society the university serves. It is the duty of the Trustees to maintain the effectiveness and continuity of the board.
Advisory Boards:
The Advisory Boards assist both academic and non-academic university departments in carrying out the university's mission. As a result, each academic department and school at CMU has an advisory board. An Advisory Board may use any
appropriate means to achieve this purpose, important among which are evaluating
the department's goals and directions and providing information and advice to the
President, Provost, Deans and Department Heads.
President:
The Trustees have vested in the President, subject to their control, full responsibility for administering the activities of Carnegie Mellon University. With the approval
of the board, he has the power to appoint, retire and determine the rank, tenure
and other compensation of all members of the faculty.
Provost, Vice Presidents, Deans and other officers:
The President may delegate authority to the Provost, Vice Presidents, the Deans,
Directors or other officers. At present all academic units report to the Provost.
Faculty Organization:
The Faculty Organization comprises the faculty of the university, and its purpose is
to conduct those academic affairs of Carnegie Mellon University that are delegated
to it by the President of the university: it in turn delegates responsibility for conducting the business of the faculty to the Faculty Senate.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 3: Number of students in selected areas at CMU
2500
PhD
2000
518
481
496
1500
Master
292
254
Bachelor
207
1000
1124
500
0
1995
1398
1505
1997
1999
Figure 4: Number of degrees (Master + Bachelor) at CMU, 1999
5%
Electrical & Computer
Engineering
10%
37%
29
Computer Science
59
12%
Mechanical
Engineering
221
75
604
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
220
36%
Figure 5:
Bachelor
*
Facts and figures of CMU for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
1505
22%
11%
430
399
22
–
Master
292
23%
40%
185
205
24
–
PhD
518
15%
54%
97
70
29
–
Total
2315
21%
24%
712
674
–
153
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected areas: Electrical & Computer Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering,
Chemical Engineering and Materials Science.
29
30
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.2 Ecole Centrale Paris
Structure
Founded in 1829 through a completely private initiative, the Ecole Centrale Paris
(ECP) was the first “Grande Ecole” in France destined to educate engineers for
industry. This educational program for the approximately 1’500 students is overseen by 180 teaching staff who are either tenured or under contract, assisted by
1’100 part time lecturers from industry (80 %) and from the university and scientific
community (20 %).
Admission to Ecole Centrale Paris is – as in all other French “Grandes Ecoles” –a
very selective process: of the 400’000 young people who pass each year the Baccalauréat 100’000 take the Baccalauréat S in fundamental sciences. Students who
are awarded with honours can go on to the Classes Préparatoires. After two years
of university level study, 13’000 of them take the entrance examination to Ecole
Centrale Paris. ECP only admits 330 students a year, 85 additional are taken from
scientific universities in several European and overseas countries, 40 students with
a French university previous education are admitted in first and second year. The
admitted students have to pay FF 2’000.- tuition fee per year.
The educational program is based upon an integrated multidisciplinary approach
that blends basic scientific and technical education, technological education, a
solid initiation to the economic, social and human realities of industry as well as a
preparation to the choice of a function for the first job. The study itself is broken
down into:
Two years of common core studies, taken by all students in each class.
One year devoted to both an “Area of Concentration” and a Professional Track
in the final year of studies, there are 8 areas of concentration: Civil, Electrical,
Industrial, Mechanical and Process Engineering, Information Technology, Applied Mathematics and Applied Physics and 5 professional tracks: Company
Start-up, Design, Development and Research, Production and Logistics, Project
Management, Strategy, Marketing and Finance, etc.
The Ecole Centrale Paris awards the following degrees: "Centralien" also known as
"Ingénieur Diplomé de l'Ecole Centrale des Arts et Manufactures" or "Ingénieur
ECP". In addition to the "Ingénieur des Arts et Manufactures" degree, ECP offers
"Specialized Masters Degrees” as well as "Ph.Ds.". ECP also proposes DEA degrees (Diplômes d'Etudes Approfondies) within the framework of doctoral studies.
Organization
The Ecole Centrale Paris is supervised by a Director, who is backed up by management and services teams. The director is assisted by an Academic Council and
a Research Council.The Ecole is administered by a Board of Trustees.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
The organization of Ecole Centrale Paris is in the frame of the general law for
higher education in France and it is set by a specific decree stating the compositions and the roles of the Board of Trustees and of the Academic and Research
Councils. The decree gives the procedure to design the Director.
Board of Trustees:
The Board of Trustees is composed of 32 members. 14 members are appointed by
the Minister for Education, 8 of them being proposed by several structures. 14
members are elected: 4 professors, 3 associate professors, 4 students and 3 persons for the non-teaching staff. 4 are co-opted by the appointed and elected members. The President is elected among the appointed members.
The Board of Trustees meets regularly each trimester and exceptionally if needed.
Academic Council:
The Academic Council is composed of appointed members (10), of the Heads of
Departments ex-officio (20), of elected members (3 seniors and 3 juniors for the
teaching staff, 2 for the non teaching staff, 8 students) and of invited persons.
The President of the Academic Council is the Director and the Council meets twice
a year.
Research Council:
The Research Council is composed of appointed members (10), of the Heads of
Laboratories ex-officio (9), of elected members (3 seniors and 3 juniors for the
teaching staff, 3 for the non teaching staff, 6 students) and of invited persons.
The President of the Research Council is the Director and the Council meets twice
a year.
Director:
The Director is nominated by a decree signed by the President of the French Republic. His name is proposed after a procedure starting with an official publication
calling for candidates. A three Board member commission audits the candidates
and report to the Board of Trustees. The resulting proposition of the Board is
transmitted to the Minister for Education who propose then the person to be appointed to the President. The mandate is five years and is renewable.
31
32
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
Figure 6: Number of students in engineering at ECP
*
2500
Doctorate
2000
Diploma
1500
265
209
168
1169
1195
1266
1995
1997
1999
1000
500
0
Figure 7:
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
Facts and figures of ECP, 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
1266
15%
168
1434
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
20%
444
379
23
–
27%
30%
50
46
27
–
16%
21%
494
425
–
68
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Since there is no division at the ECP into different engineering areas, no separate diploma figures are
given
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.3 Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Structure
Founded in 1853, the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) joined
the ETH-domain in 1968. EPFL is today the second largest engineering school in
Switzerland after the ETHZ (see chapter 0). Approximately 4’700 students, including more than 600 doctoral candidates and over 300 participants in postgraduate
courses, are studying at the EPFL. 210 professors and 2’400 scientific, technical
and administrative staff are responsible for the teaching and research programs.
Admission to EPFL is open to all applicants with a Swiss Matura (advanced level
school leaving certificate) or a recognized certificate from another country. All other
applicants have to pass an entrance examination. An average tuition fee of about
CHF 1’100.- is charged per year.
During the first and second year, education is very structured and focuses on the
basic sciences, e.g. mathematics, physics, etc. During the third and fourth academic years, students can plan their own curriculum within a modular system with
credits. Strongly motivated students may elect to complete a complementary Minor
in an interdisciplinary field of engineering sciences.
The EPFL organises its education and research activities in 12 departments of
engineering and architecture, offering a diploma of engineering equivalent to the
Master and a Doctorate in each of these departments:
Physics
Computer Science
Mathematics
Communication Systems
Chemistry
Civil Engineering
Materials Science & Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Rural Engineering
Micro-Engineering
Architecture
The management of EPFL has decided to restructure EPFL's research activities
into 5 schools (effective as of January 1, 2002). Education is given by the 12
teaching sections listed above.
Organization
Board of the Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology (ETH-Rat):
The Board of Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology (ETH-Rat) is the governing
body of the ETH Domain, a university system comprising two technical universities
(EPFL and ETHZ), as well as four research institutions (PSI, WSL, EMPA and
EAWAG). Based on a performance mandate, the ETH-Rat receives global funding
from the Swiss government. In turn the ETH-Rat allocates the annual budget to the
six institutions based on its own strategic planning. In addition to the allocation of
the annual budgets, the ETH-Rat appoints professors and members of the top
management, proposes the two ETH Presidents and the research institution Directors for appointment by the Swiss government, and establishes or discontinues
teaching and research units.
33
34
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
President:
The management of EPFL consists of the President, Vice President Research,
Vice President Education and Vice President Planning & Logistics. The President
is head of the management and has the over all responsibility.
Vice President Research:
The mission of the Vice President of Research (VPR) is to promote development of
research projects of high academic value. To succeed in fulfilling the mission, the
Vice President of Research targets four principal activities:
Coordination of the works of the departments
Procedure of nominating professors
Evaluation and financing of scientific projects
Technology transfer
In all these domains the VPR is able to call upon his two delegates on the EPFL
research commission and on the future Scientific Advisory Board.
Vice President Planning & Logistics:
The management of EPFL has positioned logistics at the crossroads of teaching
and of research, at the intersection of the sections and departments. The Vice
President Planning & Logistics and his team is responsible for
Contact to industry & political establishment
Budget / Financing Plan
Human Resources
Infrastructure / Maintenance, etc.
Vice President Education:
The role of the Vice President Education is to guarantee a certain uniformity and
the coordination between teaching sections, while respecting intrinsic differences.
He is also a promoter, anticipating the evolution and needs of industry and of research, with the constraint of a 5 to 10 year time constant associated with a study
plan.
This activity rests upon three principal pillars:
The Deans, professors ensuring advice and support in the three essential dost
nd
mains of EPFL education (Dean of 1 and 2 cycle education, Dean of doctoral
education & Dean international relationships and postgraduate education).
The Conference of Section Heads (CCS), which is responsible for the coordination in terms of planning and control of studies.
The office of academic issues, which provides the education logistics, furnishes
education support to the organization and to the life of the students.
Assemblée d'Ecole (AE) :
L’Assemblée d’Ecole is one of the major bodies of EPFL. It is composed of an
equal number of professors, scientific assistants, technical/administrative personnel and students. Among other tasks, it works out proposals with regard to ETHRat and budget decisions, strategic planning and the creation or discontinuation of
teaching and research units. The AE also scrutinizes business reports by the
President, and is consulted prior to decision-making by the management and ETHRat on matters of general interest.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 8: Number of students in selected areas at EPFL
5000
Doctorate
4000
Diploma
3000
458
2000
306
396
1000
1771
1837
1995
1997
0
2185
1999
Figure 9: Number of degrees (diploma) at EPFL, 1999
Electrical
Engineering
17%
23%
Computer Science
39
53
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
229
47
Materials Science
34
15%
12
Communication
Systems
21%
17
27
Micro-Engineering
5%
Figure 10:
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
12%
7%
*
Facts and figures of EPFL for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
2185
4%
28%
584
229
23.6
–
458
12%
58%
145
102
n.a.
–
2643
5%
33%
729
331
–
76
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Materials Science, Communication Systems and Micro-Engineering.
35
36
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.4 Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
Structure
The Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule (ETHZ) was founded by the Swiss
government in 1854 as a Polytechnic and opened its doors in Zurich in 1855. The
ETHZ itself comprises about 330 professorships and around 840 lecturers who
fulfil teaching obligations and conduct research. A staff of more than 7'500 work in
teaching, research and administration. Current statistics of the ETHZ show about
12'000 registered students. Admission to ETHZ is – similar to EPFL - open to all
applicants with a Swiss matriculation (Matura) or recognized certificate from another country. All other applicants have to pass an entrance examination. An average tuition fee of about CHF 1’100.- is charged per year.
A course of study at the ETHZ is short, compact and designed to be completed
within the recommended time. The basic course lasts four semesters and is split
into two parts of two semesters each. It contains a concentrated introduction to the
fundamental elements of the science areas necessary for the subject studied. Each
study block is completed with a preliminary diploma examination. The subsequent
specialized course also generally lasts four semesters and contains a pre-set core,
one or more specialized subjects and more generally chosen subjects.
The ETHZ is divided into departments. Research and education is within the competence of the following 17 departments:
Architecture
Civil, Environmental & Geomatics Engineering
Mechanical & Process Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Computer Science
Materials Sciences
Industrial Management and Manufacturing
Mathematics
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
Applied Biosciences
Earth Sciences
Environmental Sciences
Agriculture & Food Science
Forest Science
Humanities, Social & Political Sciences
ETHZ offers Diplomas both in engineering and in sciences equivalent to Master
and Doctorate degrees.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Organization
Board of the Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology (ETH-Rat):
The Board of Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology (ETH-Rat) is the governing
body of the ETH Domain, a university system comprising two technical universities
(EPFL and ETHZ) as well as four research institutions (PSI, WSL, EMPA and
EAWAG). Based on a performance mandate, the ETH-Rat receives global funding
from the Swiss government. In turn the ETH-Rat allocates the annual budget to the
six institutions based on its own strategic planning. In addition to the allocation of
the annual budgets, the ETH-Rat appoints professors and members of the top
management, proposes the two ETH Presidents and the research institutions directors for appointment by the Swiss government, and establishes or discontinues
teaching and research units (departments).
Executive Board:
The Executive Board of the ETHZ specifies the goals and organization in the areas
of teaching, research and administration. Members of the Executive Board are the
President, the Rector, the Vice President Research and Business Relations and
the Vice President Planning and Logistics.
President:
The President is chairman of the Executive Board and coordinates its activities. He
is responsible for:
Representing the ETHZ and maintaining relations with official and political
authorities and the general public
Information policy
Coordination of activities between the ETHZ and the University of Zurich
Preparation of the election and re-election of professors
Appointment of Heads of Departments and their deputies following proposals
from the departmental conferences
Controlling
Rector:
The Rector is responsible for:
Admission of students to undergraduate, graduate and post-graduate courses
Organization and control of courses and examinations
Approving continuing education courses
Grants & granting of professorial leave
Bestowing the venia legendi and granting teaching contracts
Invitation of guest lecturers and academic guests and their remuneration
Library
Representing the Executive Board on university committees
Cooperation with other universities and Swiss Universities of applied sciences
The members of the Executive Board are supported by their offices, by various
commissions and other institutions within the ETHZ.
37
38
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 11: Number of students in selected areas at ETHZ
5000
Doctorate
4000
Diploma
3000
680
519
560
2280
2284
2536
1995
1997
1999
2000
1000
0
Figure 12: Number of degrees (diploma) at ETHZ, 1999
6%
3%
8
Electrical
Engineering
43%
20
Computer Science
26%
82
Mechanical &
Process Engineering
132
310
Chemical
Engineering
Materials Science
68
22%
Figure 13:
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
*
Facts and figures of ETHZ for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
2536
7%
12%
679
310
25.6
–
680
9%
49%
148
115
31.1
–
3216
7%
20%
827
425
–
87
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical & Process Engineering, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.5 Georgia Institute of Technology
Structure
The Georgia School of Technology (Georgia Tech) opened for classes in October
1888. In 1948, the Board of Regents authorized the institution to be renamed the
Georgia Institute of Technology. About 15’000 students – 11’000 undergraduates
and 4’000 graduates - are following the programs at Georgia Tech. Approximately
2’200 acacademic and research faculty staff fulfill teaching obligations and conduct
research. A staff of more than 2’000 work in teaching, research and administration.
Georgia Tech is a public university and applications can be submitted by graduates
from the junior year of high school. The decision on admission depends on various
aspects and include a leadership and activity record, a personal statement as well
as the results of specialized exams. The tuition fee per year for undergraduates is
for Georgia residents much lower (from USD 3’100 for undergraduate to 3’600 for
graduate) than for students from other states or countries (4 x higher).
Georgia Tech operates on the semester system and offers educational opportunities from over 30 schools and colleges – degrees are offered in the following fields:
College of Architecture
College of Computing
College of Engineering
Ivan Allen College
DuPree College of Management
College of Sciences
The College of Engineering at Georgia Institute of Technology is comprised of nine
schools of instruction and research, and sponsors 37 interdisciplinary and speciality centers. The interests of the faculty and staff members in each of these units
cover a broad range of ideas and disciplines. The Schools of the College are:
Aerospace Engineering
Biomedical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Civil & Environmental Engineering
Electrical & Computer Engineering
Industrial & Systems Engineering
Materials Science & Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Textile & Fiber Engineering
The College of Engineering awards the Bachelor of Science Degree (12 programmes), the Masters (20) and the Doctoral (14) Degree.
Organization
Board of Regents:
The Board of Regents of the university system of Georgia – Georgia Tech is one of
these Universities - is composed of sixteen members appointed by the Governor
39
40
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
and confirmed by the Senate for seven-year staggered terms. One member is appointed from each of the eleven congressional districts and five are appointed from
the state-at-large. The Board of Regents exercises broad jurisdiction over all institutions of the university system of Georgia and establishes policies and procedures
under which they operate. While the Board engages in both policy-making and
administrative functions, each unit of the system has a high degree of academic
and administrative autonomy.
Chancellor:
The Chancellor of the university system, the Chief Administrative Officer of the
System, is appointed by the Board as its Chief Executive Officer and serves at the
Board's pleasure. The Chancellor has broad discretionary power for executing the
resolutions, policies and rules and regulations adopted by the Board for the operation of the university system
President:
The President is the Chief Executive Officer of Georgia Tech and the chief spokesperson of the Institute and has the ultimate responsibility for defining goals, for
taking administrative action, and for creating public understanding. He ensures that
faculty and student views are presented through the Chancellor to the Board of
Regents in those areas and to those issues where responsibilities are shared. The
President is the chairman of whatever legislative bodies the Faculty establishes
and is ex officio a member of all committees, councils, or boards. Recommendations for all appointments, promotions, and dismissals of members of the administration and the core of instruction are made by him or his designees annually to
the Board of Regents. The President identifies and defines the responsibilities of
other members of the administration who, under the President’s discretion, guide
and direct other functions necessary to this complex academic institution. He advises the Institute of organizational changes and shifts in the responsibilities of the
members of the administration.
Dean:
The Deans of the Colleges have authority over the Chairs of the Schools and
Heads of the Departments within their Colleges.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 14: Number of students in selected areas at Georgia Tech
12000
PhD
10000
6000
1170
985
1135
985
5435
5581
1995
1997
Master
1275
1151
8000
Bachelor
4000
2000
0
6389
1999
Figure 15: Number of degrees (Master + Bachelor) at Georgia Tech, 1999
3%
Electrical Engineering
& Computer Science
8%
41%
61
Mechanical
Engineering
151
Chemical Engineering
748
1823
Materials Science
863
48%
Figure 16:
*
Facts and figures of Georgia Tech for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
Bachelor
6389
22%
14%
1369
1253
24
–
Master
1151
16%
35%
467
570
27
–
PhD
1275
19%
52%
150
165
32
–
Total
8815
21%
22%
1986
1988
–
356
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science.
41
42
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.6 Imperial College
Structure
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine is an constituent part of the
federal University of London. Imperial College was established in 1907 as a merger
of the Royal College of Science, the City and Guilds College and the Royal School
of Mines. Over the last decade the College merged with a number of medical institutions and, most recently, with Wye College which was formerly a separate
college of the University which specialised in Agriculture. Imperial College has
more than 10’000 students, 70 percent of whom are undergraduates. The academic staff comprises 1’077 and research staff 1’490 people.
The minimum general entrance requirements for Imperial College are passes in a
recognized General Certificate of Education examination and the course requirements prescribed for admission to the chosen degree course. Candidates who
have obtained examination qualifications, which satisfy requirements for admission
to an approved university overseas may be considered for exemption from the
general and course requirements. All such applications must be approved individually. The tuition fee for undergraduates from UK / EU is GBP 1’075, for postgraduates GBP 2’805 and more – depending on the program. Students from other countries have to pay higher fees (GBP 11’450).
Imperial College consists of 15 Departments, a Medical Faculty and a Management School.
Departments:
Aeronautics
Computing
Agricultural Sciences
Earth Sciences and Engineering
Biochemistry
Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Bioengineering
Materials
Biology
Mathematics
Chemical Engineering and Chemical Mechanical Engineering
Technology
Chemistry
Physics
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Organization
The Charter and Statutes require Imperial College to have three separate bodies,
each with clearly defined functions and responsibilities, to oversee and manage its
activities.
The Court:
The Court is a large, mainly formal body consisting of some 160 members being
appointed by appropriate bodies representing educational, research, international,
regional, local and staff interests. The Court normally meets once a year to receive
the annual report and accounts of the College. In addition, major changes to the
College's constitution require the approval of the Court before they can be submitted to the Privy Council.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
The Council:
The Council is the governing and executive body of the College and is responsible
for the finance, property, investments and general business of the College, and for
setting the general strategic direction of the institution. The 32 members of the
Council include the Rector, Deputy Rector and six representatives of Pro Rectors,
Deans, Principals and Vice Principals, together with 16 lay members.
The Council may delegate any of its functions, powers and duties - other than its
power to make regulations - to committees appointed by it or to its officers. Such
committees and individuals may further delegate unless the Council has provided
to the contrary.
The Senate:
The Senate is the academic authority of the College, responsible to the Council,
and draws its membership entirely from the academic staff and the students of the
College. Its role is to direct and regulate the teaching and research work of the
College. The Senate can establish Committees in engineering studies, in medical
studies and in science studies and such other committees with terms of reference
as it deems appropriate, and may delegate to such committees responsibilities
placed upon it by the Charter and the Statutes of Imperial College.
Officers of the college:
The Rector is responsible for ensuring that the objects of the College are fulfilled,
for maintaining and promoting the efficient and proper management of the affairs of
the College, and for such other duties as may be prescribed by regulation or determined by the Council from time to time. The Rector has the power to delegate
any powers and duties to any person or committee.
The responsibilities of the Pro Rectors are assigned to them by the Rector. One of
the Pro Rectors may be designated Deputy Rector.
Other Officers may be appointed on the recommendation of the Rector who defines their duties.
43
44
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 17: Number of students in selected areas at Imperial College
5000
PhD
4000
Master
Bachelor
3000
425
507
439
1776
1930
2000
1000
0
2168
438
357
313
1995
1997
1999
Figure 18: Number of degrees (Bachelor + Master) at Imperial College, 1999
8%
Electrical
Engineering
16%
27%
Computer Science
50
101
Aeronautics
175
Mechanical
Engineering
644
Chemical
Engineering
122
145
Materials Science
51
19%
22%
8%
Figure 19:
Bachelor
*
Facts and figures of Imperial College for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
–
313
17%
n.a.
108
168
22
2168
17%
n.a.
747
476
23
–
PhD
425
22%
n.a.
151
149
27
–
Total
2906
18%
–
1006
793
–
205
Master
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Aeronautics / Mechanical Engineering,
Chemical Engineering and Materials Science.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.7 Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
Structure
The Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm (KTH) was founded in 1827 and is the
largest of Sweden’s six universities of technology. KTH cooperates with Stockholm
University, other research centers, and with industry. Cooperation schemes are
carried out with a number of regional university colleges, where many of the Master
students may complete their first two years before going to KTH in Stockholm. The
university has 17’000 undergraduate students, 1’500 postgraduate students and a
staff of 3’100 members with more than 200 professors. Students are considered
undergraduate up to the MSc level.
Admission requirements to KTH are the fulfilment of the general entrance requirements, i.e. successful completion of upper secondary education and the specific
entrance requirements. Admission is administered by a central governmental
agency, using a nationally decided set of criteria. KTH does not know tuition fees.
KTH is organized in five Schools, an IT-University and a College of Engineering.
There are a number of departments and each possesses scientific competence for
research and undergraduate education. The Schools are:
School of Architecture (A)
School of Industrial Management, Surveying and Civil Engineering (ILV)
School of Computer Science and Engineering, Electrical Engineering + Engineering Physics (DEF)
School of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology (KKB)
School of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Technology (MMT)
The IT-University (ITU)
KTH College of Engineering (IS)
The Engineering programs, leading to a Master of Science in Engineering (MSc),
have a nominal study time of 4.5 years. Apart from the academic studies at KTH,
the student must also participate in practical training for a period of at least 12
weeks. The final semester of studies is devoted to five months of final degree project work.
The Bachelor of Science in Engineering programs (BSc) have a nominal study time
of three years and consist of two compulsory years, in either of four main engineering areas, and a third year with optional courses. There are approximately
twenty areas of specialization to choose from. For BSc students the practical
training is 8 weeks. The purpose is to acquaint the students with the working environment outside an Institution of Higher Education.
Trainee periods abroad are encouraged and evaluated in the same manner as
those undertaken in Sweden. The ten Master Programs taught in English comprise
1.5 years of study. The programs are divided into nine months of courses and five
months of a final degree project work.
45
46
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Organization
University Board:
This is the highest control organ for university activities. Its tasks include:
Decision-making on important matters of university organization
Supervision of the annual accounts, budget and other financial statements
Implementation of measures required in connection with audit findings
Decision-making on all fundamental matters
The board is appointed by the Swedish government, with strong representation
from politics and industry
President / Rector:
The President of KTH is appointed by the government, after recommendation from
the University board, for a period of maximum six years. The President's deputies
are called Vice President and are appointed by the University Board for maximum
six years. Matters to be dealt with and decided by the President are subject to formal presentation. Unless formally stated otherwise, matters submitted to the President may be delegated to others. Currently, KTH has four Vice Presidents, with
different areas of responsibility including quality development, education development, College of Engineering and the IT-university. The President has the overall
responsibility, but has a specific mandate over the 30 departments, each led by a
Head of Department. The departments create one axis in a matrix organization, the
educational programs being the other axis.
Dean of Faculty:
The Dean of Faculty is chosen among the academic staff. The Dean and a Vice
Dean have a major role in internal decision-making, including distribution of governmental budget. They lead a faculty board, with academic and industrial representatives, and a few task groups. The Dean of Faculty is heading the second matrix axis.
Board Committee:
The Board Committee comprises the President, the Vice Presidents, the Dean and
Vice Dean, together with Deans of each school, the KTH Library Prefect, two student representatives, and the Administration Manager. The Committee discusses
and formally prepares all matters to be decided by the university and faculty
boards.
Training Officers:
The various Training Officers, being academic staff, are responsible for planning
and implementing the training programmes, including research training, within their
respective training areas. The Training Officers within each school form a Board of
School, which decides in matters common to the school.
Faculty Council:
The Faculty Council comprises representatives of KTH academic staff, and is an
independent organ for information exchange, debate and consolidation of KTH
training and research aspects.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 20: Number of students in selected areas at KTH
5000
4000
Diploma
3000
2000
4296
4044
1997
1999
1000
0
Figure 21: Number of degrees (diploma) at KTH, 1999
7%
18%
Electrical
Engineering
Computer Science
59
141
Mechanical
Engineering
27%
210
Chemical
Engineering
791
Materials Science
78
10%
303
38 %
Figure 22:
*
Facts and figures of KTH for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
Diploma
4044
25%
5%
83
791
25
–
Doctorate
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
246
111
32
–
–
–
–
1099
902
–
326
Total
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science.
47
48
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.8 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Structure
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) admitted its first students in
1865, four years after the approval of its founding charter. MIT is independent,
coeducational and privately endowed. 931 faculty members (professors of all
ranks) and a teaching staff of more than 1’500 individuals are responsible for research and teaching. MIT employs about 8’400 persons on campus. Approximately
4’500 undergraduates and nearly 6’000 graduates are studying at MIT.
MIT's admissions decisions are based on evaluations of applications by members
of the admission staff, faculty members and an admissions committee. Evaluations
focus on candidates' grades, the quality of their academic program, standardized
test scores, personal accomplishments, and such characteristics as creativity,
leadership, and love of learning. For the 2001-2002 academic year, the tuition fee
at MIT is USD 26’960.
MIT is organized into five schools that contain 21 academic departments, as well
as many interdepartmental programs, laboratories, and centers whose work extends beyond traditional departmental boundaries.
The five schools of MIT are the following:
School of Architecture and Planning
School of Engineering
School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
Sloan School of Management
School of Science
The School of Engineering consists of the following departments and divisions:
Aeronautics and Astronautics
Mechanical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Nuclear Engineering
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Ocean Engineering
Electrical Engineering and Computer
Division of Bio-eng. and Environ-
Science
Materials Science and Engineering
mental Health
Engineering Systems
In the field of engineering MIT awards the Bachelor of Science (S.B.), the Master of
Engineering (M.Eng.), the Master of Science (S.M.) and the Engineer’s Degree,
which requires more advanced and broader competence in engineering and science subjects than the master's degree. MIT also awards the Doctor of Philosophy
(Ph.D.) and the Doctor of Science (Sc.D.).
Organization
Corporation:
The MIT Corporation is the Institute’s Board of Trustees, over which the Chairman
presides. Its members include approximately 75 leaders in science, engineering,
industry, education, and public service and (ex officio) the Chairman, President,
Treasurer, and Secretary of the Corporation. The Corporation appoints Visiting
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Committees for each department and for certain of the other major activities at the
Institute. These Committees, the members of which are leaders in their respective
professions, make recommendations to the Corporation and the senior administration, and provide counsel to the departments. The Corporation elects the President, who is delegated all responsibility for the Institute.
President:
The President serves as the Chief Executive Officer of the Institute, providing initiative and leadership in shaping the academic and administrative goals, priorities,
and plans for the university. He is personally involved in building and sustaining
relations with the federal government, as well as with industry, alumni and alumnae, and other individual and institutional supporters. The President presides as
senior officer of the faculty at meetings of that body, and chairs several management councils, including the Academic Council, the Administrative Council, and the
Faculty Council.
Provost:
The Provost is the senior academic officer of the Institute and shares responsibility
with the President and the Academic Deans for supervision of the Institute's educational and research program. The academic offices that report directly to the
Provost include the Deans of the Schools and the interdisciplinary centers, laboratories, and programs. The Provost also coordinates educational and research activities such as interdepartmental collaboration among faculty sponsored jointly by
different departments. The Provost, working with the Executive Vice President,
also has responsibility for coordinating the budgeting of the Institute.
Chancellor:
Reporting to the President, the Chancellor and the Provost are the Institute's two
most senior academic officers. The Chancellor has responsibility and overview of
faculty affairs, including quality of faculty life issues, dispute resolution, and broad
policy oversight. He works closely with the faculty governance system. The Chancellor is also responsible for continuing the enhancement and integration of education, student life, and campus community. The Chancellor has oversight responsibility for research policy, strategic planning, campus development, as well as major
educational and international institutional partnerships. He also plays a key role in
some of the Institute's large industrial partnerships.
Dean of Engineering:
The MIT School of Engineering Dean is its most senior administrator, overseeing
the allocation of resources including teaching funds, space, and faculty positions.
He is the motivating force behind a number of innovative educational programs at
the Institute, as well as several major interdisciplinary alliances between MIT and
industry. In addition to supporting new research, these alliances also have significant educational components.
49
50
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 23: Number of students in selected areas at MIT
5000
PhD
4000
Master
3000
824
806
739
2000
769
740
783
1775
1812
1733
1995
1997
1999
1000
0
Bachelor
Figure 24: Number of degrees (Bachelor + Master) at MIT, 1999
6%
Electrical Engineering
& Computer Science
11%
58%
62
Mechanical
Engineering
124
Chemical Engineering
1112
274
Materials Science
652
25%
Figure 25:
Bachelor
*
Facts and figures of MIT for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
–
1733
33%
10%
590
607
22
Master
783
22%
26%
455
505
23.5
–
PhD
739
17%
35%
37
151
29
–
Total
3255
27%
20%
1082
1263
–
223
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.9 Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule
Aachen
Structure
The institution was founded as a polytechnic in 1870. It became a Technische
Hochschule (Institute of Technology) in 1880 and was established in 1948 as
Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen (RWTH Aachen). In the
late 1960s, RWTH expanded into a full university by the addition of faculties of
Medicine, Humanities and Economics, but without changing its traditional designation as a university of technology. About 30’000 students are registered at RWTH
Aachen.
RWTH Aachen does not have a selective admission system. Every holder of a
high-school leaving certificate has the right of enrolling at any german university. A
numerus clausus applies for certain non-engineering courses only, leading to selective admission. German universities do not charge tuition fees - for international
students or German students. There is only a fee, called "social contribution",
which students have to pay to the students’ union. This compulsory fee amounts to
ca. DEM 400 per semester and is not a university fee. It provides eligibility to the
use of numerous services and of the regional public transport systems free of
charge.
The RWTH is divided into 9 faculties, which have a considerable autonomy:
Faculty of Mathematics, Computer Science and Natural Science
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology
Faculty of Architecture
Faculty of Philosophy
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Faculty of Economics
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering
Faculty of Medicine
Faculty of Mining, Metallurgy and Geo-Sciences
The RWTH Aachen engineering faculties offer 5-year courses leading to the degree Diplom-Ingenieur with a wide number of possible specializations. Diplom
holders are eligible for the Doctorate, which is a research activity for which the
candidates are normally employed. Lately the RWTH Aachen also offers courses
leading to the degree Master of Science in engineering and related areas, i.e. in
Automotive Systems Engineering, Chemical Engineering and Computer Engineering.
Organization
Convent:
The Convent, consisting of 43 professors, 14 scientific staff, 14 non-scientific staff
and 14 students, has three main competences: establishing or modifying the university constitution, approving the report of the Board of Directors and electing the
Rector and the three Prorectors according to proposals by the senate.
51
52
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Senate:
The Senate (Rector, 12 professors, 4 scientific staff, 2 non-scientific staff and 4
students) decides on matters of principal relevance concerning research and education. This includes basic aspects of university organization and educational reform; resolutions on university statutes and regulations e.g. concerning study programs, examinations and registration; departmental proposals for the establishment or re-establishment of professorships, etc.
Board of Directors (Rektorat):
The Rektorat comprises the Rector, three Prorectors and the Director General
(Kanzler). It is chaired by the Rector. The Prorectors head the Commissions for
"Structure, Research and Scientific Development", "Budget and Finance" and
"Teaching, Curricula and Study Reform".
As senior executive management organ, the Rektorat is responsible for all university matters as far as no other competence is defined. Its main tasks are the planning, control and coordination of faculty and interdepartmental development, and
the allocation of financial resources to the various disciplines. The Rektorat promotes in this context the internal and extramural communication and cooperation.
Administration departments:
The university administration is headed by the Kanzler (Director General). Its wideranging services include the following among others: academic and student affairs,
international relations, technology transfer and continued education, planning, development and controlling, staff management, public relations, human resources,
budget and financing, technical services, etc.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 26: Number of students in selected areas at RWTH Aachen
12000
1412
10000
Doctorate
1405
1368
8000
Diplom
6000
10074
4000
8414
7866
1997
1999
2000
0
1995
Figure 27: Number of degrees (Diplom) at RWTH Aachen, 1999
7%
Electrical
Engineering
29%
64
Computer Science
265
Mechanical
Engineering
904
472
Materials Science
103
11%
53%
*
Figure 28: Facts and figures of RWTH Aachen for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
Diplom
7866
7%
15%
1414
904
28
–
Doctorate
1368
6%
8%
n.a.
208
30-35
–
Total
9234
7%
14%
–
1184
–
98
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected disciplines: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Science.
53
54
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
3.10 Technische Universiteit Delft
Structure
The Technische Universiteit Delft (TU Delft) emerged from the “Royal Academy for
the education of civilian engineers” which was founded in Delft in January 1842 by
King William II. Since September 1986 the institution is known as Delft University
of Technology, TU Delft. About 13’000 students are studying at TU Delft, and well
over 2’500 scientists work at the TU Delft, including 200 professors.
Students are admitted to the university solely on the basis of their academic qualifications. Admission is not subject to any restrictions related to nationality. The
minimum admission criteria for all courses are a pre-university diploma with
mathematics and physics among the final subjects. The Dutch ‘VWO’ certificate of
secondary education qualifies school-leavers to apply for university entrance in the
Netherlands. The VWO certificate is equivalent to university entrance qualifications
in other west European countries, e.g. the German “Abitur” or the French “Baccalaureat serie S”. Tuition Fee at TU Delft is about 2’900 Dutch Guilder (EUR 1’350)
per year.
The TU Delft has seven faculties and sixteen programs of study. Graduates from
the TU Delft have the right to bear the title Ir (‘Ingenieur’ = engineer), internationally
recognised as Master of Science (MSc) degree. The seven faculties are
Aerospace Engineering
Applied Sciences
Architecture
Civil Engineering and Geosciences
Design, Engineering and Production
Information Technology and Systems
Technology, Policy and Management
The nominal study duration for obtaining the degree of ‘ingenieur’ is 5 years. After
the first year an exam has to be successfully passed (‘Propedeuse’) in order to
continue the study. The TU Delft offers sixteen distinct study programs, two parttime programs, and many post-graduate courses. In 2000, the Master of Science
International Program of the TU Delft offered fourteen engineering courses in English. In order to enroll in the two-year MSc program, the students have to hold a
relevant Bachelor of Science (BSc) degree, or an equivalent degree, in a technical
or an engineering discipline. The graduates hold the title Master of Science (and
also Dutch ‘Ingenieur’). For the MSc program, the tuition fee is EUR 5’900 per year
(which includes extra fees to provide for special facilities for these foreign students).
Organization
Executive Board:
The Executive Board is the highest governing body of the TU Delft. It is responsible
for governing and managing the university and consists of three members, the President, the Rector Magnificus (Vice President) and the Vice President Research.
The members of the Executive Board are appointed by the Supervisory Board.
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Supervisory Board:
The Executive Board is accountable to the Supervisory Board, which is appointed
by the Minister of Education, Culture and Sciences. The Supervisory Board has a
number of specific tasks that are stated by law, such as approving the governing
and management regulations, Institutional Plan, the budget and the annual report.
Operational Committee:
The Operational Committee consists of the members of the Executive Board and
the Deans. In the Operational Committee, the Executive Board consults with the
Deans about matters of strategic importance, partly in relation to the specific interests of the faculties aiming to improve the unity and evolution of the university as
an institution of scientific education and research.
Board of Professors:
The Board of Professors advises the Executive Board about quality management
in relation with its academic staff: the policy for maintaining/improving the quality of
academic staff, the nominations for the appointment of professors, the development of criteria and procedures for promoting and (re-)appointing academic staff,
the development of a high-quality career policy for academic staff, the guarantees
for optimum functioning and rights, the duties and terms of employment of academic staff.
In addition, the Board of Professors advises the Executive Board on the selection
of candidates for the position of Rector Magnificus. It functions as a sounding
board for the Executive Board in matters of institutional importance. The Board of
Professors also reviews the selection of visiting lecturers and research fellows, and
examines proposals for royal honours granted to professors and senior lecturers.
Further institutions within the TU Delft:
Many other Boards or Committees (Advisory Board for Technological Policy, Board
for Doctorates, Educational Quality Management Advisory Committee, etc.) advise
the Executive Committee and guarantee top-level technical and scientific education
in a great number of disciplines
55
56
PARTNER UNIVERSITIES
Statistics
*
Figure 29: Number of students in selected areas at TU Delft
8000
7000
6000
Diploma
5000
4000
6948
3000
6510
6498
1997
1999
2000
1000
0
1995
Figure 30: Number of degrees (diploma) at TU Delft, 1999
3%
58
Electrical
Engineering
16%
9%
18
Computer Science
103
Mechanical
Engineering
4%
30
Chemical
Engineering
649
Materials Science
440
68%
Figure 31:
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
*
Facts and figures of TU Delft for selected areas , 1999
Number
of
Students
Students:
%
women
Students:
%
foreigners
Starting
students
Number
of
degrees
Age at
graduation
Number
of Professors
6498
15%
10%
1264
649
25
–
346
23%
n.a.
92
103
29
–
6844
15%
–
1356
752
–
423
Further figures are given in appendix A
*
Selected disciplines: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Science.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
4. Surveys Professors, Engineers, Managers
4.1 Introduction and methodology
An important part of the overall project concept, summarized in chapter 2, comprises questionnaires among professors, engineers and managers. The primary
goal is to assess education at the participating universities from the three different
standpoints, as explained in chapter 2.
The present chapter explains the methods of the procedure and data evaluation as
well as the response rate for the respective surveys (chapter 4.1). The results are
then presented graphically and commented (chapters 4.2-4.5).
4.1.1 Questionnaires and feedback
Questionnaire concept
The study comprises surveys of the following three sample groups:
Professors from the participating universities
Engineers who have a Bachelor, Master or Diploma degree from one of the
participating universities and who have acquired 5 to 10 years of working experience
Human Resources & Line Managers from companies in the countries where the
participating universities are situated
Included in the survey were professors and engineers from the five selected engineering areas (electrical engineering, computer science & engineering, mechanical
engineering, chemical engineering and materials science & engineering). The survey results commented below thus reflect engineering training assessments from
the points of view of these five important engineering areas, but not as seen by the
university as a whole, which generally also has other faculties (except for ECP,
which is not divided into different faculties).
The questionnaire content is divided into four different topic areas, each divided
into subtopics:
Education/Internationality: Quality of education, job-related experience during
studies, teaching methods, learning environment/infrastructure
Cooperation: cooperation with other universities, cooperation with industry
Performance of engineers: Engineering competences, general competences
Reputation: aspects of reputation, reputation of partner universities
Additional questions are also included which are not directly related to the aforementioned topic areas: importance of a Ph.D., job finding procedure, career benefits of alumni organizations.
57
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
A separate questionnaire form was developed for each of the three sample groups.
However, the question formulation for each topic area is largely identical for all
groups in order to make results comparable.
The questionnaire forms were installed on an Internet platform. Each interviewee
was given a personal code for calling up a personal questionnaire on the Internet.
Sample group selection and response rate
Survey Professors:
Professors were questioned in each engineering area that were included in the
SPINE study. All in all, about 950 questionnaire codes were distributed to the partner universities (see figure 32). 543 questionnaires were filled out by professors.
Referred to the codes distributed to universities, the resultant overall response
quota was 57%. Effectively, this is higher since not all codes were distributed to
professors by the partner universities.
The percentage of responses with regard to all professors in the selected engineering areas at partner universities was about 27%. In other words, the questionnaire was filled out by every fourth professor in each faculty on average. The lowest number of responses was from MIT professors.
73
92
133
72
131 949
Responses
73
36
52
52
90
65
50
20
45
60
Total
134
TU Delft
77
RWTH Aachen
76
MIT
Imperial College
68
KTH Stocholm
Georgia Inst. of Techn.
93
Codes distributed
EPF Lausanne
Codes distributed
Professors:
Ecole Centrale Paris
ETH Zuerich
Figure 32: Professor questionnaire codes distributed to partner universities
Carnegie Mellon Univ.
58
543
Responses (in % of distrib- 78% 53% 68% 68% 67% 89% 54% 15% 63% 46% 57%
uted codes)*
Responses (in % of all pro- 48% 53% 68% 60% 25% 32% 16%
fessors in selected areas)**
9% 46% 14% 27%
* number of responses divided by number of codes distributed
** number of responses divided by number of professors in selected areas (figures 1999, source: see
appendix A)
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
20
23
16
2
12
13
120
Electrical Engineering**
12
-
11
16
21
5
3
4
5
8
87
Computer Science & Engineering
13
-
11
9
7
10
7
4
6
8
77
Materials Science & Engineering
12
-
4
4
9
1
6
2
4
5
51
Chemical Engineering
14
-
3
1
16
17
8
2
5
7
76
Other Departments / no
specification
9
-
16
14
17
9
10
6
13
19
132
Total
73
36
52
52
90
65
50
20
45
60
543
*
**
Total
8
TU Delft
7
RWTH Aachen
ETH Zuerich
-
MIT
EPF Lausanne
13
Responses
KTH Stocholm
Ecole Centrale Paris
Mechanical Engineering*
Professors:
Imperial College
Carnegie Mellon Univ.
Georgia Inst. of Techn.
Figure 33: Questionnaire responses of professors by university and engineering
areas
incl. industrial engineering, microtechnology and aerospace engineering
incl. telecommunication
Survey Engineers:
Engineers were questioned through two channels. On the one hand the alumni
organizations of the partner universities distributed questionnaire codes among
their members. On the other hand companies were asked to distribute questionnaire codes to engineers who graduated at one of the ten universities involved.
6’800 questionnaire codes were sent in total to the alumni organizations and distributed. No company distribution figures can be given, since each company was
responsible for distributing an appropriate number of questionnaires among engineers. Hence no response quota data is available for companies either.
The questionnaires were evaluated, however, in such a way that the project team
knew whether a filled-out questionnaire had been distributed by an alumni organization or by a company. Of the codes distributed via alumni organizations, 1150
questionnaires were filled out and returned, equal to a feedback quota of 17%. In
total 1372 questionnaires were returned: 1150 via alumni organizations and 222
from engineers directly contacted via participating companies. The overall percentage of engineers contacted via alumni organizations was 84%.
59
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Total
TU Delft
RWTH Aachen
MIT
KTH Stocholm
Imperial College
Georgia Tech.
ETH Zuerich
EPF Lausanne
Ecole Centrale Paris
Engineers from
Alumni organizations
Carnegie Mellon Uni.
Figure 34: Engineers questionnaire codes distributed to alumni organizations,
and number of responses
Codes distributed
650 650 650 700 650 700 700 700 700 700
6800
Responses
103 127 128 190
1150
Response rate (alumni 16% 20% 20% 27%
engineers)*
49
112
79
110 103 121
8% 16% 11% 16% 15% 17%
17%
Responses of alumni eng. 93% 79% 88% 71% 82% 93% 85% 92% 65% 88%
in % of all engineers**
84%
* number of responses divided by number of codes distributed (only engineers from alumniorganizations)
** number of responses of engineers from alumni organizations divided by total number of responses
The overall engineer response breakdown is as follows:
Total
TU Delft
RWTH Aachen
MIT
KTH Stocholm
Imperial College
Georgia Tech.
ETH Zuerich
Responses
Ecole Centrale Paris
Engineers:
EPF Lausanne
Figure 35: Total number of questionnaire responses of engineers (distributed
through alumni organizations and companies) by university and engineering area
Carnegie Mellon Uni.
60
Mechanical Engineering*
24
40
29
72
16
18
19
58
61
29
366
Electrical Engineering**
19
9
49
60
20
19
20
2
24
25
247
Computer Science &
Engineering
14
16
2
35
0
5
3
1
3
24
103
Materials Science & Engineering
6
7
22
36
0
4
23
8
12
13
131
Chemical Engineering
25
8
18
21
10
22
20
32
13
22
191
Other departments / no
answer
23
80
25
44
14
52
8
19
45
24
334
Total
111 160 145 268
60
120
93
120 158 137
1372
From alumni
103 127 128 190
49
112
79
110 103 121
1150
From companies
*
**
8
33
17
78
11
8
14
incl. industrial engineering, microtechnology and aerospace engineering
incl. telecommunication
10
55
16
222
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Survey Human Resources & Line Managers:
Manager questionnaire codes were distributed directly via the companies concerned. Since each company was individually responsible for questionnaire code
distribution, no statement can be made on sample size or response quota. Out of
210 companies in the USA and Europe invited to participate in this study, questionnaires were returned by 143 managers from 35 companies. There are two reasons in particular for this relatively low number of responses. Firstly, companies
were less willing than expected to participate in the study, and secondly, only relatively few managers actually took part despite their positive initial attitude. Furthermore, the number of responses varied widely according to country. For this reason
the manager responses were not evaluated by country of origin as for professors
and engineers.
The numbers of questionnaire responses from the two groups - line managers and
human resources managers - were as follows (a list of participating companies is
given on the last page of the report):
Line Managers:
Human Resources Managers:
Total:
86
57
143
4.1.2 Evaluation
Analysis methods: the data shown in chapter 4 was mainly evaluated through average values. Firstly, the averages for professors and engineers at each university
were calculated. These values were then aggregated, with the same weighting for
each university. Additionally, separate averages were calculated for each US and
European universities. Replies from each university were similarly evaluated by
department (Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, etc.).
Results classification: chapters 4.3-4.7 show results for the various topic areas.
The purpose of this analysis is to show up the differences between various topics
and opinions, without giving any direct indications to the reasons for these differences. Each chapter is subdivided into various subtopics, each of which is similarly
structured. First a brief summary of main results is given, followed by the precise
question and details of results with figures. The results are analyzed according to
the following aspects:
Common features and differences between the groups questioned (professors,
engineers, managers)
Differences between the USA and Europe
Differences between individual universities
Differences between departments
In order to establish the significant differences between the three sample groups
(professors, engineers and managers) and the various partner universities, a separate multivariable analyses (ordered logit models) was carried out for each item.
3
The significant differences are indicated with an asterisk in the figures.
3
Ordered logit models were used to estimate the relationship between the ordinal responses and the
two explanatory variables "person" (professor or engineer) and "school". To account for the different
nonresponse rates at different schools, sampling weights were incorporated in the analysis. The effect
of an interaction between "person" and "school"was also tested in all models.
61
62
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Results selection: the figures in chapter 4 were selected to give an overview of the
most important and conclusive results. The various levels of analysis render it impossible to show all possible results in this chapter. Relevant data was chosen
mainly according to the differences between the three sample groups and between
the universities. Since, for example, departmental differences were only seldom,
this aspect will not be elaborated on.
Figure presentation: Results are generally shown in the form of uniform figure
types as follows:
Line figures show the differences between groups (professors, engineers, managers). Individual items within each figure are arranged according to average
ratings by professors: the highest at the top and the lowest at the bottom. This
order is generally maintained for the entire topic area, so that the items are always in the same position.
Bar figures show the differences between professors and engineers in each
university, and between universities.
Normalized averages graph (bar figure) show the differences between Europe
and the USA for professors and engineers. At the top are those items rated
higher by US engineers/professors, and at the bottom those rated higher in
Europe. The differences are based on normalized averages: all averages in
each item of a question are normalized as an equal comparison basis between
Europe and the USA. This was necessary because with some questions (in
particular assessment of the own university), ratings were systematically higher
in the USA than in Europe. (For explanation see figure 38)
Interpretation of answers: the reply rating scale for most questions is 1-6. In the
questionnaire only the extremes 1 und 6 were indicated (1 = very poor, unimportant, low, etc.; 6 = very good; very important, high, etc.). Analysis of the replies
shows that average ratings are hardly ever below 4, and generally between 4.0
and 5.5. The reason for these relatively high ratings is that on the one hand all the
SPINE partner universities are of very high level, and on the other hand that questionnaires in each topic area were restricted to the most important aspects. For
commenting on results, the replies were therefore interpreted as follows: 6 = outstanding/exceptionally important, 5 = good/important, 4 = adequate/not particularly
important, <4 = inadequate/unimportant.
When interpreting results it must be taken into account in the case of engineers,
however, that there may be a certain time lag between answers given in the survey
and the current situation at the partner universities. The replies given by engineers
refer to their studies at least five years ago, so that conditions may have changed
greatly in the meantime.
4.2 General findings
The following is an overview of general findings from the overall results analysis. A
summary and detailed analysis of the individual replies is given in chapters 4.3 4.7.
Differences between professors, engineers and managers:
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
The greatest differences are between the views of engineers and professors. In
most cases the opinions of managers lie somewhere between the two, but
nearer to engineers than professors.
Cooperation with industry and practical relevance of education is regarded by
engineers and managers as more important than by professors.
Professors generally assess the quality of education at their own university
higher than engineers do.
Differences between the USA and Europe:
Responses from US university professors and engineers are relatively consistent while the views of European professors and engineers differ widely in certain respects.
Cultural effect: In general there are in some cases considerable differences in
level between America and Europe, whereby average values returned in the
USA are usually higher than in Europe. This particularly applies to questions
explicitly requesting an assessment of the own university. The difference in
level is bigger among engineers: American engineers assess their own universities 0.5 to 0.6 points higher than European engineers with regard to engineering competences of graduates, general professional competences of
graduates, quality of education, teaching methods and learning environment.
There is a similar phenomenon among professors, but to a lesser degree (0.0 0.4 points). There may be various reasons for these differences: on the one
hand they might indicate a generally higher quality at American universities,
while on the other hand they might merely reflect a more positive or less critical
cultural attitude among American engineers toward their own universities or
training systems.
Statisticfally normalizing this cultural effect largely eliminates differences between the USA and Europe. However, some differences do remain with both
groups (professors and engineers). For example, ratings in Europe both of social skills and internationality were higher than in the USA, but lower for leadership skills.
Results for Imperial College are often closer to those for US than for European
universities. This indicates a difference in some areas between the AngloSaxon and other cultures.
Differences between universities:
The views of professors and engineers differ considerably according to university. These differences are item-specific, however, and must therefore be analyzed on a differential basis as shown in detail in chapters 4.3 – 4.7.
Nevertheless, some general conclusions can be drawn with regard to individual
universities. ECP and RWTH Aachen, for example, returned above-average
ratings on "cooperation with industry". Ratings by the ETHZ and EPFL are very
similar to each other. This also applies to the Anglo-Saxon universities (CMU,
MIT, Georgia Tech, Imperial College). TU Delft and KTH generally returned average ratings, with very few high or low extremes.
63
64
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Differences between departments:
There are hardly any differences between departmental ratings by professors/engineers (Chemical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Materials Science, Computer Science and Mechanical Engineering). Any differences are
mainly between universities or between professors and engineers, rather than
between departments.
4.3 Education / Internationality
Education analysis is one of SPINE's primary topic areas. The main focus is on
goals of education, study programs, continuing education, special experiences,
quality and evaluation.
This chapter reports on quantitative feedback from professors, engineers and
managers on quality of education, job-related experience during studies, teaching
methods and learning environment. Account is taken thereby of internationality
aspects. These results have been taken into account according to the methodical
SPINE concept in selecting the successful practices. Any direct relation to individual successful practices (SP) in chapter 5 or potentially valuable practices (PVP) in
the appendix B is mentioned in each case.
4.3.1 Quality of education
Summary of findings:
Quality of professors/teaching staff and quality of infrastructure are regarded as
the most important criteria of the quality of education. Almost as important for
engineers and managers are relevance of education to practices in industry and
cooperation with industry, while professors regard the practice-related aspects
of education as less important.
More importance is attached in the USA to specialization/depth of education
than in Europe, where internationality is regarded as more important.
The assessment of employment opportunities for graduates is exceptionally
high in each university. Quality of education and cooperation with industry are
also highly rated.
In general, engineers assess their own university not so highly as professors
do. Average ratings by European engineers are lower than those of their US
colleagues.
Twelve different criteria were selected for evaluating quality of education: quality of
professors/teaching staff, interdisciplinarity of education, depth and breadth of education, cooperation with industry, relevance of education to practices in industry,
employment opportunities for graduates, recruitment and admission procedure,
selection process during study, quality of infrastructure, up-to-date curricula and
internationality. The respective questions were answered in two steps in the questionnaire:
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Firstly, professors, engineers and managers were asked to judge the importance of each criterion according to a rating scale from 1 to 6 (1=unimportant,
6=very important).
Secondly, engineers and professors were asked to assess each criterion for
their own university or department (1=very poor, 6=very good).
Importance of criteria
Based on the feedback from question one, this shows the importance of criteria for
professors, engineers and managers (Human resource and line managers) with
regard to quality of education. Firstly, criteria are identified which are regarded in
general by all groups as important or unimportant. Afterwards, specific differences
are identified between professors/engineers/managers, between USA/Europe and
between individual universities. This format sequence is also maintained in the
subsequent chapters.
Question:
"How important are the following criteria for the quality of education?" (same question for professors, engineers and managers).
Most important/unimportant criteria:
All three groups defined the quality of education in a technical university mainly
according to the quality of professors/teaching staff. The second most important
criterion for professors and engineers is the quality of infrastructure, and for managers the relevance of education to practices in industry.
The selection process during study and internationality are regarded by all three
groups as less important.
Differences between managers/engineers/professors:
Engineers and managers rate practice-relevant criteria much more highly than
professors. For professors the criteria relevance of education to practices in industry and cooperation with industry are comparatively unimportant, while for managers/engineers they are in second or third place respectively. On the other hand
recruitment and admission procedure is not so important for managers/engineers
as for professors.
65
66
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 36: Importance of different criteria for the quality of education (professors‘,
engineers‘ and managers‘ view)
Quality of professors/teaching staff*
Quality of infrastructure
Up-to-date curricula*
Specialization / depth of education*
Employment opportunities for graduates*
Breadth of education
Recruitment and admission procedure*
Interdisciplinarity of education
Cooperation with industry*
very
Relevance of education toimportant
practices in industry*
Selection process during study*
Internationality (professors, students)*
1
2
unimportant
Professors
3
4
Engineers
5
6
very important
Managers
* Significance at the 1% level
Differences between USA and Europe:
Quality criteria are rated very similarly by US and European professors. However,
specialization/depth of education are more important for US than for European
professors, who find internationality more important. Auch
Figure 37: Importance of different criteria for the quality of education (European
professors‘ vs. US professors‘ view)
Quality of professors/teaching staff
Quality of infrastructure
Up-to-date curricula
Specialization / depth of education*
Employment opportunities for graduates
Breadth of education
Recruitment and admission procedure
Interdisciplinarity of education
Cooperation with industry
Relevance of education to practices in industry
Selection process during study
Internationality (professors, students)*
1
2
unimportant
Europe
* Significance at the 1% level
3
4
USA
5
6
very important
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
The differences in feedback from engineers are similar to those from professors.
However, US engineers attach greater importance on average to these criteria
than European engineers (Europe 4.6, USA 4.9). Such general differences between Europe and the USA are apparent in the answers to various questions. On a
rating scale from 1 to 6 the Europeans - in particular engineers - consistently select
lower ratings for various answers than their US colleagues (see chapter 4.2).
To compensate for this general difference in rating level, special graphs have been
compiled for the USA/Europe comparison (normalized averages graph). Figure 38
is based on the same data as figure 37, but the levels (=average of all subsidiary
questions) have been equalized for US and European professors. Mathematically,
the average rating for all subsidiary questions has been subtracted as evaluation
level from each individual rating to show the differences between the USA and
Europe. Figure 38 shows the individual items in the USA or Europe which are rated
more highly based on the same evaluation level. The sum rating of the red bars
corresponds to the sum rating of the blue bars, the differences being mutually
compensated. The scale at the bottom of figure 38 shows the point difference between items (in this case, up to 0.8).
Figure 38: Importance of different criteria for the quality of education (European
professors‘ vs. US professors‘ view; normalized averages graph)
higher importance in US
higher importance in Eu.
Specialization / depth of education
Recruitment and admission procedure
Up-to-date curricula
Employment opportunities for graduates
Quality of infrastructure
Interdisciplinarity of education
Quality of professors/teaching staff
Breadth of education
Selection process during study
Cooperation with industry
Relevance of education to practices in industry
Internationality (professors, students)
0.8
0
0.8
Differences between universities:
Specific examination shows that the French and Swiss universities (ECP, ETHZ,
EPFL) rate internationality very highly. This is also reflected in a number of SP at
these universities (ECP: SP 5.3.2, “Implementation of long-term strategy for internationality”, p.139; EPFL: SP 5.4.1, “Internationalization of research and education”, p.153; ETHZ: SP 5.5.1, “Cosmopolitan and very international composition of
faculty”, p.161). Professors and engineers at MIT, Imperial College, Georgia Tech
and CMU rate internationality considerably lower (<4). The US universities consistently rate this aspect lowest.
67
68
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 39: Importance of internationality (professors, students) for the quality of
education (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
2
unimportant
3
Professors
4
5
6
very important
Engineers
Specialization/depth of education are, however, rated higher by the US than the
European universities. The highest ratings (5 or more) are by MIT, CMU and Georgia Tech. Ratings by the European universities are lower, in particular ECP and
RWTH Aachen. ECP regards breadth of education as very important (ECP: PVP
(1) “Education of generalists (industry manager), not specialists”, p.267).
Figure 40: Importance of specialization/depth for the quality of education (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
2
unimportant
Professors
3
4
Engineers
5
6
very important
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Recruitment and admission procedure is regarded by professors at all universities
as significantly more important than by engineers. In general, American professors
and engineers attach more importance to this point than their European colleagues
do, except for the high values returned at ECP among the European universities.
Figure 41: Importance of recruitment and admission procedure (professors‘ and
engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
2
unimportant
3
Professors
4
5
6
very important
Engineers
Assessment of criteria for own university/department
This shows how professors and engineers rate the listed criteria with regard to
implementation at their own universities. Here again, common points are first identified, and afterwards the differences between professors/engineers, USA/Europe
and individual universities are analyzed.
Question:
"Please rate these criteria for …"
Professors: "…your own department"
Engineers: "…your own university/alma mater (when you were a student)"
Highest/lowest ratings:
The highest rated criteria both by professors and engineers for their own universities is employment opportunities for graduates. In second place for the professors
is quality of professors/teaching staff, and for the engineers specialization/depth of
education. Both groups rated selection process during study lowest.
69
70
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Differences between professors/engineers:
On average, professors rate quality criteria for their own universities higher than
engineers, whose attitude with regard to quality of education is more critical.
There are differences between the two groups with regard to Quality of professors/teaching staff, employment opportunities for graduates, cooperation with industry and relevance to practices in industry. Professors rate these criteria for their
own universities around 0.5 points higher on average than engineers. The other
criteria are rated similarly by both groups.
Figure 41 shows ratings by engineers and professors for the individual criteria
which are in the same order as in figures 36 and 37.
Figure 42: Assessment of different criteria for the quality of education (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Quality of professors/teaching staff*
Quality of infrastructure*
Up-to-date curricula*
Specialization / depth of education
Employment opportunities for graduates*
Breadth of education
Recruitment and admission procedure
Interdisciplinarity of education*
Cooperation with industry*
Relevance of education to practices in industry*
Selection process during study
Internationality (professors, students)*
1
2
very poor
very poor
Professors
* Significance at the 1% level
3
4
veryEngineers
good
5
6
very good
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Differences between the USA and Europe:
Ratings by the US universities are generally higher than by the European universities. The differences among professors are only small, but larger among engineers.
On average the US engineers rate their universities about 0.5 points higher than in
Europe.
Figure 42 shows the differences between US and European professors based on
normalized averages (see notes to figure 38). More highly rated by US professors
are the criteria quality of professors/teaching staff, recruitment and admission procedure, and specialization/depth of education. European professors, on the other
hand, rate relevance of education to practices in industry and quality of infrastructure more highly. However, the differences are minimal (maximum 0.5 points).
Figure 43: Assessment of different criteria of the quality of education (European
professors‘ vs. US professors‘ view; normalized averages graph)
higher assassment in Eu.
higher assessment in US
Quality of professors/teaching staff
Recruitment and admission procedure
Specialization / depth of education
Selection process during study
Up-to-date curricula
Interdisciplinarity of education
Internationality (professors, students)
Employment opportunities for graduates
Breadth of education
Cooperation with industry
Quality of infrastructure
Relevance of education to practices in industry
0.5
0
0.5
Differences between selected universities:
The quality of professors/teaching staff is rated particularly highly by Anglo-Saxon
professors and engineers (>5). In this connection a number of SP can be identified
(MIT: SP 5.9.1, “Successful quality assurance by external Visiting Committees”
p.200; Imperial College: PVP (9), “Very elaborate quality management on internal
and external level”, p.283). Ratings at the European universities are lower, except
for RWTH Aachen. Notable at all universities is the lower quality rating by engineers than by professors.
71
72
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 44: Assessment of the quality of professors/teaching staff (professors‘ and
engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
Professors
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Quality of infrastructure is rated particularly highly at the Swiss universities (ETHZ
and EPFL). The ETHZ and EPFL professors rate this criterion at 5.5, as against
ratings below 5 at other universities. Likewise, the engineers at Swiss universities
seem to be very satisfied with the quality of infrastructure at their universities.
(ETHZ: PVP (6),”Well equipped laboratories”, p.275). The ratings in this respect at
ECP, RWTH Aachen, KTH, Delft and Imperial College are rather lower. Notable is
that the Anglo-Saxon engineers rate quality of infrastructure higher than their professors. This difference is particularly great at MIT, where the engineers' rating is
almost one point higher than that of their professors.
Figure 45: Assessment of the quality of infrastructure (professors‘ and engineers‘
view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Regarding cooperation with industry, there are large differences between the
European universities. The highest ratings are by the professors at RWTH Aachen
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
and the ECP. Cooperation with industry is also highly rated in the SP at these universities (RWTH Aachen: PVP (2), “Strong connections with industry”, p.290; ECP:
SP 5.3.3, “Strong links with industry in funding, teaching and research”, p.144).
The US universities show relatively consistent ratings (about 5). Somewhat lower
are ratings by the professors at TU Delft, KTH, ETHZ and EPFL. Ratings by the
engineers are generally lower than those by the professors, except at MIT and
Georgia Tech.
Figure 46: Assessment of cooperation with industry (professors‘ and engineers‘
view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Interdisciplinarity ratings vary widely both among US and European universities.
They are highest among the professors at ECP and CMU (CMU: SP 5.2.3, “Crossdisciplinary approach and team projects”, p.131). ECP rates highest also among
engineers.
73
74
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 47: Assessment of the interdisciplinarity of education (professors‘ and
engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
2
Professors
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Department-specific differences:
Professors were asked to assess the quality of education within their departments.
It is, therefore, interesting to analyze the results for systematic differences between
departments. However, this analysis shows only very slight differences. For example, the Computer Sciences professors rated employment opportunities for graduates particularly highly (5.9), but cooperation with industry lower than the professors of other departments (4.7). Interdisciplinarity was rated particularly highly by
the Materials Science professors.
Assessment and importance comparison
In the above chapters the importance of individual criteria for the quality of education has been analyzed, and how these criteria are rated at each university. Further
conclusions can be drawn by comparing importance and assessment, thus showing how the actual situation (assessment ratings) compares with the ideal (importance). A big difference means that the assessment is either higher or lower than
the actual importance. Items with high importance and low assessment should be
corrected by the universities concerned.
Among the professors and – even more – among the engineers, there is a big difference between importance and assessment of the quality of professors/teaching
staff. In real terms this means that the quality of professors/teaching staff is not
high enough in view of the importance of this item. On the other hand, the professors assess employment opportunities and cooperation with industry more highly
for their own universities than would be justified by the importance of these criteria.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 48: Assessment and importance of different criteria for the quality of
education (professors‘ view)
Quality of professors/teaching staff
Quality of infrastructure
Up-to-date curricula
Specialization / depth of education
Employment opportunities for graduates
Breadth of education
Recruitment and admission procedure
Interdisciplinarity of education
Cooperation with industry
Relevance of education to practices in industry
Selection process during study
Internationality (professors, students)
1
low
2
3
Importance
4
5
6
high
Assessment
From the engineers' point of view, action is required not only with regard to the
above-mentioned quality of professors, but also with regard to relevance of education to practices in industry: Both criteria are regarded by engineers as extremely
important (5.7 resp. 5.0), but assessed at rather lower ratings (4.7 resp. 4.3). Their
assessment of internationality, however, is higher than the importance.
Figure 49: Assessment and importance of different criteria for the quality of
education (engineers‘ view)
Quality of professors/teaching staff
Quality of infrastructure
Up-to-date curricula
Specialization / depth of education
Employment opportunities for graduates
Breadth of education
Recruitment and admission procedure
Interdisciplinarity of education
Cooperation with industry
Relevance of education to practices in industry
Selection process during study
Internationality (professors, students)
1
low
Importance
2
3
4
5
Assessment
6
high
75
76
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
4.3.2 Job-related experience during studies
Summary of findings:
US university students study abroad much less frequently than European university students. The highest percentage of engineers with practical experience
in industry is at ECP, ETHZ and TU Delft.
Industrial cooperation concerning semester projects, diploma or doctorate is
most important for engineers at KTH, ETHZ and RWTH Aachen. For engineers
at RWTH Aachen International teamwork is the most important.
The engineers were also asked about their specific job-related experience during
study:
Question:
„What special experiences did you gain during your studies?“
Some of the successful practices in this respect at universities are of particular
interest:
Study time abroad
Practical experience in industry
Industrial cooperation projects/diploma/doctorate
International teamwork
Figure 50: Special job-related experience during engineering education
Special experiences
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPFLausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon Univ.
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
At least one
term
at a foreign
university
At least one term
practical
experience in
industry
Industrial
cooperation
projects/diploma
/doctorate
International
teamwork
26%
30%
15%
13%
15%
21%
18%
7%
15%
8%
68%
32%
63%
27%
40%
53%
67%
13%
45%
26%
38%
44%
49%
46%
53%
48%
39%
19%
27%
44%
19%
17%
15%
8%
8%
24%
18%
5%
5%
10%
It is notable that students at US universities spend far less study time abroad. The
picture is almost the same if study time at other US universities is included. Only
Georgia Tech has a relatively high student exchange rate among the US universities. The highest exchange rates are at EPFL and ECP, where nearly 30% of students spend at least one semester abroad.
Practical experience in industry is again highest among engineers at ECP, ETHZ
and TU Delft, applying to about two thirds of students. The American universities
(also Imperial College London) returned lower values in this respect than in
Europe. However, particularly in the USA students gain a good deal of their practical experience in summer jobs not directly arranged by their universities, which
therefore do not figure in these statistics.
Links between universities and industry can also be measured by the number of
semester, diploma and dissertation projects realized in cooperation between uni-
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
versities and industry. The highest percentage in this respect is among engineers
at KTH (57%).
24% of engineers at RWTH Aachen had international teamwork possibilities during
their studies (projects with foreign companies or universities), but only 5 percent
each at Georgia Tech and CMU.
When interpreting the results in Fig. 49, it must be borne in mind that replies refer
to a time period at least five years ago. The experiences of engineers in this survey
go back to their graduate days and the conditions applying at that time. Conditions
may have changed greatly since then.
4.3.3 Teaching methods
Summary of findings:
The best teaching methods are rated as diploma/final projects. All other teaching methods are rated very similar (from 4 to 5).
All teaching methods are rated lower by engineers than by professors, in particular with regard to lectures and computer-based training.
Teaching methods at the own universities are rated higher in the USA than in
Europe. This effect is more pronounced among engineers than among professors.
Nine aspects of teaching methods were selected for evaluation by professors and
engineers at ratings from 1 to 6 (1=very poor, 6=very good). These aspects concern teaching methods and means which are directly related to the subject concerned (lectures, seminars, homework/out-of-class assignments, group projects
and computer-based training). Also included in the evaluation were practical aspects (practical training, practical experience in industry) and relevance of written
work (diploma/final projects, written projects/studies). Professors at Anglo-Saxon
universities were also able to rate the various criteria both at Bachelor and Master/Diploma levels.
Question:
"Please rate the following teaching methods …"
Engineers: "…for your own university/alma mater (when you were a student)"
Professors: "…in your own department (on the Master/Diploma level and/or the
Bachelor level, as appropriate)"
Highest/lowest rated teaching methods:
The teaching methods listed were rated similarly. The best teaching method in the
opinion of professors is diploma/final projects and lectures, while homework/out-ofclass assignments and computer-based training were assessed lowest. Likewise
the engineers rated diploma/final projects highest and computer- based training
lowest. Surprisingly, seminars were rated in second last place by engineers.
Differences between professors/engineers:
Engineers rated teaching methods in a similar order to professors, but at a lower
level (engineers: ratings from 3.9 to 4.9, professors: from 4.4 to 5.3). Ratings by
77
78
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
engineers are thus 0.4 points lower on average than by professors (engineers'
average: 4.3, professors' average: 4.7). However, this difference derives exclusively from the lower average ratings by engineers at European universities.
Differences between the USA and Europe:
European engineers are generally more critical of teaching methods than European professors and US engineers. Average ratings by European engineers are
0.6 points lower than by US engineers (difference between professors: 0.2).
Figure 51: Assessment of teaching methods (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Diploma / final projects*
Lectures*
Practical training*
Written projects / studies*
Practical experience in industry / internship*
Seminars*
Group projects*
Computer-based training*
Homework / out-of-class assignments*
1
2
very poor
Professors
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
* Significance at the 1% level
Differences between universities:
Diploma/thesis projects are regarded at all universities as the best teaching
method, with only slight rating differences between them. Professors rated this
criterion at 5.3 on average, and engineers at 5.0. No differences are apparent between the USA and Europe. High ratings (5.7) were returned in particular by professors at MIT and RWTH Aachen, and rather lower (<5) at KTH and Georgia
Tech.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 52: Assessment of diploma/thesis projects (professors‘ and engineers‘
view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
Professors
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Likewise, lectures were rated higher by professors at all universities than by engineers (average rating by professors: 4.8; by engineers: 4.3). However, a difference
is apparent here in both groups between the USA and Europe. The US ratings are
higher in all cases (US professors 5.1 and engineers 4.7; European professors 4.7
and engineers 4.2).
Figure 53: Assessment of lectures (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
There is a particularly wide scatter between universities with regard to homework/out of class assignments. Here again, the US ratings are slightly higher than
in Europe. Notably, the MIT professors and engineers rate this item particularly
highly. At MIT homework/out of class assignments is even rated as second best
teaching method. Rather low by European comparison (<4) are the ratings at ECP
and Aachen.
79
80
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 54: Assessment of homework/out-of-class assignments (professors‘ and
engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
2
Professors
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Department-specific differences:
Since professors rated teaching methods with regard to their own departments, the
results were also examined for department-specific differences. However, no relevant differences were found between departments. Materials science professors
evaluated computer-based training and group projects rather lower than other
professors. Practical training was rated by Computer Science professors relatively
highly.
4.3.4 Learning environment
Summary of findings:
The professional competence of teaching staff was rated highest. Support and
counselling for students and pedagogical and didactic skills of teaching staff
were rated lowest. These aspects were regarded by engineers as inadequate
(<4).
Infrastructure (tools, student facilities, practical training facilities) was rated on
average as fair to good (4.5 – 5.0).
Ratings by engineers are generally lower than those by professors. This is primarily attributable to the generally lower rating level of European engineers than
US engineers.
Within the topic area "education", apart from quality of education and teaching
methods, opinions of learning environment at the own university were also investigated. This aspect is very important particularly from the point of view of students,
since it relates directly to awareness of learning and the university infrastructure.
Professors and engineers were asked to assess a number of learning environment
aspects. These included teaching staff performance (professional competences,
pedagogical/didactic skills, support/counselling), the university infrastructure (tools,
student facilities, practical training facilities, course information), and contact with
industry.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Question:
"Please rate the learning environment…"
Engineers: "for your own university/alma mater (when you were a student)"
Professors: "…in your own department"
Highest/lowest rated criteria:
The criterion rated highest by far among both groups was professional competence
of teaching staff, followed by tools (PC, Labs) and course information. The lowest
ratings (in particular among engineers) were for pedagogical/didactic skills o f
teaching staff and support/counselling for students.
The various criteria ratings are fairly close on average (professors: from 4.6 to 5.3,
engineers: from 3.8 to 4.9). Furthermore, there is not much scatter between universities.
Differences between professors/engineers:
Ratings by engineers were 0.4 points lower on average than those of professors.
The biggest differences between the two groups are with regard to support and
counseling for students, pedagogical and didactic skills of teaching staff and contact with industry.
Figure 55: Assessment of the learning environment (professors‘ and engineers‘
view)
Professional competence of teaching staff*
Tools (PCs, lab instruments, etc.)*
Course information*
Contact with industry*
Practical training facilities (lab., workshop)*
Student facilities (libraries, study halls)
Support and counselling for students*
Pedagogical and didactic skills of teaching staff*
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
* Significance at the 1% level
Differences between USA and Europe:
Similarly to teaching methods ratings, European engineers have a critical attitude
toward learning environment. The big difference between professors and engineers
in all the listed criteria is primarily attributable to the low rating levels of European
engineers, averaging 4.2 for learning environment as against 4.8 among US engineers. No corresponding trend was identified among professors (average 4.8 for
USA and Europe).
81
82
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Differences between universities:
As seen in chapter 4.1, contact with industry is rated particularly highly, above all,
at RWTH Aachen and ECP. The ECP professors even rate this aspect at 5.9 (ECP
SP 5.3.3, “Strong links with industry in funding, teaching and research”, p.144).
Ratings by the other universities are relatively consistent at 4.3 to 4.9. Remarkably
low (3.6) are the ratings by engineers at the two Swiss universities (ETHZ, EPFL).
Figure 56: Assessment of contact with industry (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Support and Counseling for students is rated as inadequate (<4) by engineers at all
universities – except MIT. Ratings by engineers are very consistent, from 3.5 to
4.0, whereby, in this case no major differences between the USA and Europe are
apparent. Professors rated support/counseling from 4.3 to 5.2, much higher than
engineers. ECP and Imperial College returned the highest ratings. It should be
mentioned that by introducing a tutoring system in the meantime, ECP has significantly improved support and counselling for students. This may explain in part the
large valuation difference between professors and engineers.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 57: Assessment of support and counseling for students (professors‘ and
engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
Professors
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Ratings of pedagogical and didactic skills of teaching staff fluctuated considerably
between universities. Ratings by professors were higher in general than those by
engineers (average for professors: 4.6, engineers: 3.8). Ratings by professors
were relatively consistent at 4.2 to 4.7, with the exception of CMU (5.1). Here
again, ratings by engineers at Anglo-Saxon universities were higher than at other
partner universities (Anglo-Saxon engineers >4, others <4). The lowest ratings
(3.1) were by engineers at the ETHZ.
Figure 58: Assessment of pedagogical and didactic skills of teaching staff (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Department-specific differences:
Separate analysis of departmental results shows no great differences. The widest
scatter was with regard to pedagogical and didactic skills of teaching staff and
83
84
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
support and counseling for students. The lowest ratings here were by Computer
Sciences professors.
4.4 Cooperation
Cooperation/networks is one of the main topic areas invested in the SPINE project
among partner universities. The focus here was on cooperation with industry, with
other universities, with student and alumni organizations, and with spin-offs. Professors, managers and engineers were questioned on cooperation with other universities and cooperation/experience with industry.
Summary of findings:
Most professors reported cooperation “sporadically” or “regularly” with other
universities over the last two years. The most frequent form of cooperation is
R&D projects, and less frequently exchange of lecturers/teachers. The future
importance of cooperation with other universities was estimated as “same” to
“increasing”.
In the professors' view, likewise, cooperation with industry is most frequently in
the form of R&D projects and less frequent lectures/teachers from industry.
There are, however, wide differences between universities.
Managers reported cooperation in student and diploma/thesis projects as the
most frequent form of cooperation. The future importance of cooperation with
other universities and industry was estimated by managers and professors as
“same” to “increasing”.
The number of professors with professional experience in industry varies widely
between universities, with lower percentages in the USA. The average number
of years spent in industry also varies widely.
Professors and managers find the various forms of cooperation beneficial in
general. Cooperation with industry is rated somewhat higher in this respect by
professors than cooperation with other universities. Managers see the greatest
benefit of cooperation with universities as contact with potential employees.
4.4.1 Cooperation with other universities
Four different cooperation forms were selected under this topic: Collaboration with
other universities in R&D projects, student and diploma/thesis projects, Ph.D.
/doctoral projects, and exchange of lecturers/teachers.
Question:
"How often has your institute/department cooperated during the last two years with
other universities? Which form of cooperation do you think will be emphasized in
the future?"
Frequency of cooperation
Professors indicated the most frequent cooperation form as collaboration in R&D
projects. Student and diploma/thesis projects, Ph.D./doctoral projects and ex-
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
change of lecturers/teachers are rather less frequent, but still "sporadically“ or
"regularly“. US professors cooperate more frequently in the form of lecturers/teachers, while European professors prefer student and diploma/thesis or
Ph.D./doctoral projects.
Figure 59: Frequency of cooperation with other universities (European professors' and US professors' view)
Collab. with other universities in R&D projects
Student and diploma / thesis projects*
PhD / doctoral projects
Exchange of lecturers / teachers
not at all
sporadically
Europe
regularly
USA
* Significance at the 1% level
A closer examination of the universities shows additional differences. The graphs
below show the percentages of "not at all", "sporadically" and "regularly" replies per
university.
50 - 80% of professors reported cooperating "regularly" with other universities over
the last two years in the form of R&D projects. The highest percentage was among
professors at Imperial College (79%), and the lowest among professors at ECP
and CMU (52% each). At all universities only very few professors (0-15%) indicated "not at all" for this form of cooperation.
Figure 60: Frequency of collaboration with other universities in R&D projects
(professors' view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
15%
33%
8%
ETH Zuerich
26%
66%
32%
68%
Imperial College London 2% 19%
KTH Stockholm
52%
79%
5%
33%
63%
RWTH Aachen 3%
35%
62%
32%
64%
TU Delft
4%
Carnegie Mellon University
5%
Georgia Institute of Techn. 1%
MIT
43%
52%
38%
61%
40%
60%
not at all
sporadically
regularly
85
86
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
The number of professors regularly cooperating in the form of student and diploma/thesis projects is rather lower than in the form of R&D projects. In Europe
higher percentages were noted than in the USA (Europe: 30 - 50%, USA: 15 30%). The highest percentage is at ECP, where more than half of the professors
reported regular cooperation in this form over the last few years.
Figure 61: Student and diploma/thesis projects (professors' view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
15%
8%
TU Delft
12%
33%
45%
43%
51%
14%
10%
Carnegie Mellon University
21%
Georgia Institute of Techn.
19%
MIT
40%
62%
KTH Stockholm 5%
RWTH Aachen
52%
53%
ETH Zuerich 5%
Imperial College London
33%
13%
44%
57%
29%
54%
36%
63%
16%
56%
25%
60%
not at all
27%
sporadically
regularly
Future importance
Professors were also asked how they value the importance of each form of cooperation in future. As shown in figure 61, the importance of all forms was regarded
as “same” to “increasing”. The highest future importance was regarded as collaboration in R&D projects. Ph.D./doctoral projects, exchange of lecturers/teachers and
students and diploma/thesis projects are regarded as rather more important by
European professors than by US professors.
Figure 62: Future importance of cooperation with other universities (European
professors' and US professors' view).
Collab. with other universities in R&D projects
PhD / doctoral projects
Exchange of lecturers / teachers
Student and diploma / thesis
decreasing
same
Europe
* Significance at the 1% level
increasing
USA
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
4.4.2 Cooperation with industry
Another topic area investigated by the SPINE project was cooperation between
universities and industry. Engineers, managers and professors were asked their
opinion about five different forms of cooperation: exchange of lectures/teachers,
cooperation in student and diploma/thesis projects, Ph.D./doctoral projects, R&D
projects and practical training/internship for students (the first four of these have
been already examined in the previous chapter under cooperation with other universities).
Questions:
Managers: "How often has your company cooperated with a technical university
during the last two years, and in what way? Which form of cooperation do you think
will be emphasized in the future?”
Professors: "How often has your institute/department cooperated during the last
two years with industry, and in what way? Which form of cooperation do you think
will be emphasized in the future?" And: „Did you work in industry before becoming
a professor? If so, for how many years?“
Engineers: "How often have you worked with a technical university during the last
two years, and in what way?"
Frequency of cooperation
Differences between professors/managers/engineers:
Professors and engineers cooperate most frequently in the form of R&D projects,
and least frequently in the form of exchange of lecturers/teachers. There is a large
variation in frequency between engineers and professors; engineers usually indicated "not at all“ or "sporadically“, while most professors indicated "sporadically“ or
"regularly“. This difference it not surprising, however, since most engineers in industry tend to work on company-oriented projects and seldom come into contact
with universities. At management level, the various cooperation forms are much
more frequent: ratings by managers are similar to those by professors. The most
important form of cooperation for managers is student and diploma/thesis projects.
Figure 63: Frequency of cooperation with industry/technical universities (professors', engineers' and managers' view)
R&D projects*
Student and diploma / thesis projects*
Practical training / internship for students*
PhD / doctoral projects*
Exchange of lecturers / teachers*
not at all
Professors
* Significance at the 1% level
Engineers
sporadically
regularly
Managers
87
88
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Differences between the USA and Europe:
The differences between European and US professors are similar here to those
mentioned in the previous chapter (cooperation with other universities). Cooperation with industry through student and diploma/doctorate projects and
Ph.D./doctoral projects was more frequent in Europe over the last two years, while
practical training/internships are more frequent in the USA than in Europe.
Figure 64: Frequency of cooperation with industry (European professors' and US
professors' view)
R&D projects
Student and diploma / thesis projects*
Practical training / internship for students*
PhD / doctoral projects*
Exchange of lecturers / teachers*
not at all
sporadically
Europe
regularly
USA
* Significance at the 1% level
Differences between universities:
Cooperation in the form of lectures/teachers from industry differs widely between
universities. Nearly 90% of ECP professors cooperated regularly with industry over
the last two years in the form of lecturers/teachers from industry (ECP SP 5.3.3,
“Strong links with industry in funding, teaching and research”, p.144). Likewise, at
the ETHZ and RWTH Aachen, more than 50% of professors indicated "regularly"
(RWTH Aachen PVP (2), “Strong connections with industry”, p.290). These percentages at MIT, CMU EPFL and Imperial College are below 30%. About every
fifth professor at EPFL, MIT and RWTH Aachen indicated "not at all" for this kind of
cooperation.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 65: Frequency of lecturers/teachers from industry (professors' view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
14%
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
86%
21%
52%
14%
35%
9%
28%
50%
18%
TU Delft
11%
Carnegie Mellon University
13%
Georgia Institute of Techn.
51%
63%
KTH Stockholm 5%
RWTH Aachen
27%
45%
27%
56%
50%
39%
65%
8%
50%
43%
20%
MIT
22%
60%
not at all
20%
sporadically
regularly
Practical training/internship for students is a widely practised form of cooperation
between universities and industry. Nearly 100% of ECP and MIT professors indicated that students are "regularly“ offered internships in industry. High percentages
were also recorded among TU Delft and Georgia Tech professors. Less than 50%
of professors at EPFL, ETHZ and KTH regularly practise this form of cooperation.
Figure 66: Frequency of practical training/internship for students (professors'
view)
Ecole Centrale Paris 4%
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
19%
33%
41%
7%
49%
29%
23%
12%
TU Delft
64%
33%
44%
29%
59%
26%
Carnegie Mellon University 3%
Georgia Institute of Techn. 2%
MIT
47%
11%
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
96%
74%
29%
68%
20%
77%
7%
93%
not at all
sporadically
regularly
Professional experience of professors in industry
An interesting point of the SPINE survey was to analyze the professional experience of professors in industry, and the differences in this respect between partner
universities. The number of professors with experience in industry varies between
30% at MIT and 67% at RWTH Aachen, with lower percentages at the US univer-
89
90
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
sities on average. However, two thirds of professors at TU Delft and KTH have no
industrial experience at all.
Figure 67: Professors with working experience in industry
Professors with working
experience in industry (in %)
University
61%
50%
46%
49%
34%
67%
35%
41%
46%
30%
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPFLausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon Univ.
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
years (ø)
17.5
6.7
7.7
3.8
10.5
11.5
8.9
5.0
6.0
3.5
The average number of working years in industry among professors is highest at
ECP and RWTH Aachen (17.5 and 11.5 years respectively). This relatively long
experience may be attributable to parallel activities (ECP). Professors at US universities not only have below-average industrial experience, but those who worked
in industry only did so for a relatively short time.
Although the percentage of Imperial College professors with industrial experience
is above average, they only spent a few years in industry. The situation at KTH is
exactly the opposite: while only a few professors there have industrial experience,
they spent several years in industry on average.
Future importance
Future importance of all cooperation forms is regarded by managers and professors as "same“ to "increasing“. Managers find some forms (practical training/internship for students and student and diploma/thesis projects) rather more
important in future than professors do.
Figure 68: Future importance of cooperation with industry/with technical universities (professors' and managers‘ view).
Collaboration with industry in R&D projects
Practical training / internship for students*
PhD / doctoral projects
Student and diploma / thesis projects*
Lecturers / teachers from industry
decreasing
Professors
* Significance at the 1% level
same
increasing
Managers
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
4.4.3 Benefits of cooperation
Examining the topic area cooperation it is of particular interest to know what forms
of cooperation professors and managers find most beneficial.
Question:
Professors: "How beneficial has this cooperation been for your institute/ department?"
Managers: "What benefits has this cooperation brought your company? Please
assess the following aspects"
Results:
Professors regard both cooperation with universities and cooperation with industry
as beneficial. They prefer cooperation with industry more than cooperation with
other universities (5.0 and 4.6 rating points respectively)
Managers find contact with potential employees the greatest benefit of cooperation
with technical universities. They also see benefits in improvement of company
reputation and knowledge and technology transfer (ratings between 4.0 and 4.4)
Managers find development of new products/services the least beneficial (3.7).
Figure 69: Benefit of cooperation with industry/universities (professors‘ view)
Benefit of cooperation with universities
Benefit of cooperation with industry
0
1
2
3
4
no benefit
5
6
great benefit
Professors
Figure 70: Benefit of cooperation with universities (managers‘ view)
Contact with potential employees
Improvement of company reputation
Knowledge and technology transfer
Development of new products, services
0
1
2
3
no benefit
4
5
6
great benefit
Managers
91
92
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
4.5 Performance of engineers
Performance of engineers is another main topic area of SPINE. It covers general
professional competences, engineering competences, continuing education, professional integration and career paths.
This chapter examines the quantitative feedback by professors, engineers and
managers on engineering competences and general professional competences.
The results are likewise taken into account according to the methodical SPINE
concept in selecting the successful practices (SP) in chapter 5 and in appendix B
(potentially valuable practices PVP). Any direct relationship to individual SPs and
PVPs is mentioned in each case.
4.5.1 Engineering competences
Summary of findings:
General, widely applicable skills (problem-solving skills, analysis/ methodological skills) are regarded as more important than specific engineering know-how
(R&D know-how, specialized engineering proficiency). Specialized engineering
proficiency is however rated more highly in the USA than in Europe.
Practical engineering experience is regarded by professors as the least important competence. Engineers and managers, however, assess practical experience as more important.
Widely applicable problem-solving skills and analysis/methodological skills are
rated the highest of all competences at the own university. However, no exceptionally highly or poorly rated competences were identified. Individual competence ratings are very similar (from 4 to 5).
There are also general differences in rating levels between universities. US
ratings are generally higher than in Europe, but there are also differences in
rating levels between European universities.
The importance assigned to individual competences is usually higher than their
ratings of those competences at the own university. This difference is particularly pronounced with regard to problem solving/analysis skills.
For investigating engineering competences eight different criteria were selected:
research know-how, development know-how, specialized engineering proficiency,
practical engineering experience, basic engineering competences, problem-solving
skills, analysis/methodological skills, and ability to develop own engineering expertise.
The respective questions were answered in two steps in the questionnaire:
Firstly professors, engineers and managers were asked to judge the importance
of each competence according to a rating scale from 1 to 6 (1=unimportant,
6=very important).
Professors and engineers then assessed each competence for their university
graduates (1=very poor, 6=very good). Professors were also invited to answer
each question both at Bachelor and Master/ levels.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Importance of engineering competences
Question:
Professors: "How important to industry are the following engineering competences
of technical university graduates now and in the future?"
Engineers: "How important are the following engineering competences for your
professional career now and in the future?"
Managers: "How important are the following engineering competences of technical
university graduates for your company now and in the future?"
Differences between professors/engineers/managers:
Professors divided the eight criteria into two halves: very important (ratings from
5.5 to 5.7), and less important competences (4.5 to 4.7). Very important are problem-solving skills, analysis/methodological skills, ability to develop own engineering
expertise and basic engineering proficiency. The less important competences include research and development know-how, specialized engineering proficiency
and practical engineering experience.
Like the professors, engineers and managers also rate problem-solving and analytical skills as the most important. Research know-how and specialized engineering competences are regarded by engineers as the least important criteria. Managers rate these criteria similarly to professors, but attach particular importance to
practical engineering competences.
Figure 71: Importance of engineering competences (professors‘, engineers‘ and
managers’ view)
Problem-solving skills
Analysis / methodological skills
Ability to develop own engineering expertise*
Basic engineering proficiency*
Development know-how*
Research know-how*
Specialized engineering proficiency*
Practical engineering experience*
1
2
unimportant
Professors
* Significance at the 1% level
Engineers
3
4
5
6
very important
Managers
93
94
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Differences between the USA and Europe:
US and European opinions in this respect are very similar. The greatest differences
among professors are with regard to specialized engineering competences and
research know-how which US professors find more important than their European
colleagues do. These differences are however quite small (<0.4 rating points).
Figure 72: Importance of engineering competences (European professors' and
US professors' view; normalized averages graph)
higher importance in US
higher importance in Europe
Specialized engineering proficiency
Research know-how
Problem-solving skills
Basic engineering proficiency
Practical engineering experience
Ability to develop own engineering expertise
Analysis / methodological skills
Development know-how
0.4
0
0.4
Differences between Bachelor and Master levels:
Professors at universities with the Bachelor/Master system (MIT, CMU, Georgia
Tech, Imperial College) were also asked to rate the importance of these criteria
separately for Bachelor level. Ratings at Bachelor level are similar to or slightly
lower than at Master level. Specialized engineering competences and research
and development know-how are, however, regarded as less important for Bachelor
level than Master level (except at Imperial College).
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 73: Importance of engineering competences (Bachelor vs. Master level;
only professors‘ view from MIT, CMU, Georgia Tech, Imperial College)
Problem-solving skills
Analysis / methodological skills
Basic engineering proficiency
Ability to develop own engineering expertise
Specialized engineering proficiency
Research know-how
Development know-how
Practical engineering experience
1
2
3
4
unimportant
Bachelor
5
6
very important
Master
Assessment of Engineering Competences
Question:
"Please assess the engineering competences of graduates…"
Professors: "…from your own department"
Engineers: "…from your own university/alma mater"
Highest/lowest rated engineering competences:
Ratings of engineering competences were notably consistent: all competences
were rated at 4 to 5, i.e. no competences were regarded as particularly good or
inadequate. Furthermore, there is a close agreement between ratings by professors and engineers. The highest rated both by professors and by engineers were
analysis/methodological skills, basic engineering proficiency and problem solving
skills. Engineers and professors also agree on the lowest rated competences: development know-how and practical engineering experience.
Differences between engineers and professors:
The only difference between professors and engineers concerned ability to develop
own engineering expertise and practical engineering experience, both of which
criteria were rated slightly lower by engineers. Otherwise ratings were at a similar
level.
Ratings of individual engineering competences also differed only slightly, consistently at 4 to 5 (professors and engineers). On average, no engineering competences were rated very highly or lowly at any universities.
95
96
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 74: Assessment of engineering competences (professors‘ and engineers‘
view)
Problem-solving skills*
Analysis / methodological skills*
Ability to develop own engineering expertise*
Basic engineering proficiency*
Development know-how*
Research know-how
Specialized engineering proficiency
Practical engineering experience*
1
2
very poor
Professors
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
* Significance at the 1% level
Differences between the USA and Europe:
Despite the high consistency of ratings, the analysis of individual universities revealed some differences, not between engineers and professors, but in the general
rating levels between universities. Professors at KTH, for example, rated their university's engineering competences at 3.8 to 4.6, while MIT professors returned
ratings of 4.5 to 5.5. The differences among engineers were more pronounced,
with an average rating of engineering competences at RWTH Aachen and KTH of
4.3, as against 5.0 at US universities.
Here again, there is a marked difference between US and European rating levels.
The average ratings of engineering competences in the USA are about 0.5 points
higher than in Europe. If this effect is cancelled out by normalizing European and
US averages, the differences largely disappear.
Differences between universities:
Evaluation of research know-how reveals a difference between the USA and
Europe which still remains after taking into account the aforementioned difference
in rating levels. Among the US universities, above all MIT and CMU show very high
ratings, while in Europe RWTH Aachen is rated highly. These results are also reflected in the SP/PVP of these universities (MIT: PVP (4), “Excellent research possibilities on undergraduate level”, p.287; CMU: PVP (7), “Undergraduate research”,
p.266; RWTH Aachen: SP 5.10.2, “High involvement of students in research”,
p.212).
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 75: Assessment of research know-how (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
Professors
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Likewise, the criterion specialized engineering proficiency differs widely between
US and European universities. The US ratings are about 0.5 points higher than in
Europe, whereby this is also attributable to the general difference in level between
US and European universities. Among the European universities, RWTH Aachen
was rated the highest and ECP the lowest.
Figure 76: Assessment of specialized engineering proficiency (professors‘ and
engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Basic engineering proficiency is rated by US professors and engineers very consistently from 5.0 to 5.3. The European ratings are slightly lower. This aspect is
rated particularly highly by professors at the ETHZ (5.3).
97
98
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 77: Assessment of basic engineering proficiency (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
Professors
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Ratings of practical engineering experience are particularly notable at ECP and
RWTH. Professors here rated the practical experience of their graduates at 4.8,
above the average for all universities (4.3). In contrast to their professors, engineers at RWTH Aachen rated this aspect no higher than engineers at other universities (3.8).
Figure 78: Assessment of practical engineering experience (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Problem-solving skills were regarded by most universities as the most important
criterion, although ratings varied quite widely between universities. US engineers
and professors always rated their own universities in this respect above 5, as
against 4.5 to 5.0 in Europe. ECP is assessed very highly by European comparison
and is close to US universities .
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 79: Assessment of problem-solving skills (professors‘ and engineers‘
view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Inst. of Technology
MIT
1
very poor
2
Professors
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Department-specific differences:
Analysis by department showed hardly any differences. In particular among professors, the individual departmental ratings are very consistent. The greatest differences applied to problem-solving skills and practical engineering experience.
Among engineers the differences are also slight. Only the Materials Science engineers returned lower ratings on average.
Assessment and importance comparison
As mentioned in chapter 4.1 above, comparing importance and assessment shows
how the actual situation (assessment ratings for own university) compares with the
ideal (importance).
As revealed by this comparison, the importance of nearly all items is for professors
higher than their assessment rating, i.e. the ideal is usually higher than the actual
situation. While the mean deviation between importance and assessment is 0.4,
the greatest differences apply to problem-solving skills and ability to develop own
engineering expertise. Since these are the competences previously identified as
very important, this is where the most remedial changes are required in the professors' view.
99
100
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 80: Importance and assessment of engineering competences (professors‘
view)
Problem-solving skills
Analysis / methodological skills
Ability to develop own engineering expertise
Basic engineering proficiency
Development know-how
Research know-how
Specialized engineering proficiency
Practical engineering experience
1
low
2
3
Importance
4
5
6
high
Assessment
Since engineering competences are rather more important to engineers on average, importance and assessment correspond better here than with the professors.
Since here again the importance of problem-solving skills and analysis/ methodological skills is much higher than the assessment ratings, adjustment required with
these two competences. On the other hand engineers assess specialized engineering proficiency and research know-how highly but find them rather unimportant.
Figure 81: Importance and assessment of engineering competences (engineers‘
view)
Problem-solving skills
Analysis / methodological skills
Ability to develop own engineering expertise
Basic engineering proficiency
Development know-how
Research know-how
Specialized engineering proficiency
Practical engineering experience
1
low
Importance
2
3
4
Assessment
5
6
high
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
4.5.2 General professional competences
Summary of findings:
Universal, widely applicable competences such as communication skills, English language skills and teamwork abilities are regarded as the most important
general professional competences for engineering graduates. Specialized skills
in other areas such as law, marketing and finance are not regarded as important in engineering education.
European professors rate the implementation of general professional competences at their own university higher than engineers.
The importance of general professional competences is rated >4 on average,
but the implementation of these competences at the own university is rated
lower on average (<4). The biggest difference between importance and assessment is with respect to communication skills, leadership skills and social
skills.
Apart from Engineering Competences within the topic area Performance of Engineers, General Professional Competences are also examined. Although these
skills are not essential for engineering studies, they become very important later on
for engineers in business careers, particularly at executive and management levels. They include universal, widely applicable competences such as social skills,
communication skills, leadership skills, project management, teamwork abilities,
presentation skills, ability to develop a broad general education, as well as specific
non-technical know-how such as in marketing, finance, management of business
processes and administration, law, English and other language skills.
As with engineering competences, the respective questions were answered in two
steps in the questionnaire:
Firstly, professors, engineers and managers were asked to judge the importance of general professional competences (1=unimportant, 6=very important).
Secondly, engineers and professors were asked to assess the implementation
of these general professional competences at their own universities or department (1=very poor, 6=very good). In both cases professors were invited to assess both at Bachleor and Master/Diploma levels.
Importance of general professional competences
Question:
"How important are the following general professional competences…"
Professors: "…of technical university graduates for careers in industry now and in
future?"
Engineers: "…for your career now and in future?"
Managers: "…of technical university graduates for your company now and in future?"
Most important/unimportant competences:
The importance ratings of individual competences varied between 3 and 5.5 - more
widely than with engineering competences. About half the selected items were
101
102
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
rated as very important (averaging 5 to 6), those being widely applicable competences such as communication skills, English language skills, teamwork abilities,
presentation skills and leadership skills. Non-technical competences such as in
marketing, finance and other language skills were rated as rather unimportant (averaging below 4); law was regarded by all three groups as the least important
competence (average rating about 3). Medium importance was assigned to items
such as social skills, ability to maintain and develop a broad general education,
and management of business processes and administration.
Figure 82: Importance of general professional competences (professors‘, engineers‘ and managers‘ view)
Communication skills*
English language skills
Teamwork abilities*
Presentation skills*
Leadership skills
Project management*
Ability to develop a broad general education*
Social skills*
Management of business processes+admin.*
Other language skills*
Finance
Marketing
Law*
1
2
unimportant
Professors
Engineers
3
4
5
6
very important
Managers
* Significance at the 1% level
Differences between engineers/professors/managers:
Although very consistent results were returned by all groups, differences were
found in rating: presentation skills, and other language skills. Notably, presentation
skills are rated less important by managers than by professors/engineers. Particular importance is attached by managers to teamwork abilities.
Differences between USA and Europe:
US and European professors and engineers largely agree with their criteria importance ratings. Differences are, however, apparent with some items: presentation
skills/leadership skills are regarded as more important by professors at US universities than by their European colleagues, while other language skills, finance, marketing and law have a higher importance rating in Europe than in the USA. Among
engineers, the only difference between the USA and Europe concerns other language skills, to which US engineers assign an importance rating of only 3.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 83: Importance of general professional competences (European engineers and US engineers)
Communication skills
English language skills
Teamwork abilities
Presentation skills
Leadership skills*
Project management
Ability to develop a broad general education
Social skills
Management of business processes + admin.
Other language skills*
Finance
Marketing
Law
1
2
unimportant
Europe
3
4
5
6
very important
USA
Significance at the 1% level
Assessment of general professional competences
Question:
"Please assess the general professional competences of graduates…"
Professors: "…from your own department"
Engineers: "…from your university/alma mater"
Highest/lowest competence ratings:
It is notable that professors rate all general professional competences at their own
universities higher than engineers. For both groups, the best implemented competences are English language skills and ability to develop a broad general education. The lowest ratings (<3) are assigned to finance, marketing and law. These
competences were, however, rated unimportant in reply to the previous question.
Differences between professors and engineers:
As previously mentioned, professors and engineers assign different values: all
items are rated slightly higher by professors than by engineers. The greatest differences concern universal, widely applicable competences such as leadership skills,
social skills and presentation skills which are always rated higher by professors
than by engineers. The differences with non-technical skills (finance, marketing,
law) are smaller.
103
104
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 84: Assessment of general professional competences (professors‘ and
engineers‘ view)
Communication skills*
English language skills*
Teamwork abilities*
Presentation skills*
Leadership skills*
Project management*
Ability to develop a broad general education
Social skills*
Management of business processes and admin.*
Other language skills*
Finance*
Marketing*
Law*
1
2
very poor
3
4
Professors
5
6
very good
Engineers
* Significance at the 1% level
Differences between USA and Europe:
US and European professors rate most items similarly, and there is no difference in
general rating level. The only differences arise with leadership skills (higher ratings
by US professors) and other language skills (higher ratings by European professors).
Figure 85: Assessment of general professional competences (European and US
professors' view; normalized averages graph)
higher assessment in US higher assessment in Eu.
Leadership skills
Presentation skills
Ability to develop a broad general education
Marketing
Communication skills
English language skills
Management of business processes + admin.
Project management
Teamwork abilities
Social skills
Finance
Law
Other language skills
1.2
0.6
0
0.6
1.2
In the case of engineers, however, there are noticeable differences: all items are
rated 0.5 points higher on average by US than by European engineers (Europe:
3.5, US: 4.0). After eliminating this effect by normalizing, it is clear that US engineers rate skills important in industry (e.g. leadership skills, presentation skills,
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
project management) higher than European engineers, who give a higher rating to
lingual and social competences (other language skills, English skills, social skills).
Non-technical competences such as in law, marketing and finance are rated about
equally.
Figure 86: Assessment of general professional competences (European and US
engineers' view; normalized averages graph)
higher assessment in US higher assessment in Eu.
Leadership skills
Presentation skills
Project management
Communication skills
Management of business processes + admin.
Teamwork abilities
Marketing
Finance
Law
Ability to develop a broad general education
Social skills
Other language skills
English language skills
0.6
0
0.6
Differences between universities:
Communication skills are rated by most professors from 4 to 5, while engineers
rate their communication skills rather lower at 4.1 on average. Ratings at the ETHZ
(3.9 resp. 3.3) are somewhat lower than at other universities, where Imperial College is the highest.
105
106
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 87: Assessment of communication skills (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
Professors
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
English language skills are not rated higher by English-speaking universities than
others. This is certainly attributable to a different interpretation of English language
skills (foreign and mother tongue). English language skills are rated highly at universities such as RWTH Aachen, TU Delft, KTH and ECP. Particularly high ratings
are assigned by engineers in France and the Netherlands (ECP, TU Delft).
Figure 88: Assessment of English language skills (professors‘ and engineers‘
view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Leadership skills ratings differ widely between the Anglo-Saxon and other universities. Engineers and professors at MIT, CMU, Georgia Tech and Imperial College
rate their leadership skills between 4 and 5, while ratings at the other European
universities are below 4. One exception is ECP, with exceptionally high ratings by
European comparison. Engineers at the two Swiss institutions (ETHZ and EPFL)
on the other hand assess their leadership skills with very low ratings of 2.7 resp.
2.8.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 89: Assessment of leadership skills (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
Professors
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
With social skills there is a clear difference between the opinions of professors
(ratings >5) and engineers (<5). The highest ratings are by professors at ECP,
KTH, Imperial College and TU Delft. In this connection a number of SP can be
identified (ECP: SP 5.3.4, “Integration of non-core competences and human sciences”, p.150; Imperial College: SP 5.7.3, “Mastery to provide engineers with a
more holistic education” p.189; KTH: PVP (2), “Integration of lectures, exercises,
and teaching of non-core competences”, p.284; TU Delft: PVP (6), “Good integration of non-core competences in Materials Sciences and Chemical Engineering”,
p.294).
Figure 90: Assessment of social skills (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
Professors
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
Department-specific differences:
Although the scatter among departmental ratings is relatively low, there are certain
differences. For example, nearly all general professional competences are rated
107
108
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
differently by Computer Science department professors. Likewise, Electrical Engineering department professors rate general professional competences rather low.
Among engineers, no systematic departmental differences are apparent.
Importance and assessment comparison
Here again, importance and assessment ratings provide an ideal/actual situation
analysis. As shown in figures 90 and 91, assessment ratings are markedly below
importance ratings both among engineers and professors. The differences among
engineers are much wider than among professors. Both groups (professors and
engineers) rate the importance of general professional competences at 4.7 on average, while assessment of general professional competences at the own university is considerably lower (professors: 3.9, engineers: 3.7). The greatest differences (1 - 1.5 points) concern communication skills, leadership skills and social
skills, where corrective action is, therefore, the most urgent.
Figure 91: Importance and assessment of general professional competences
(professors‘ view)
Mean: 3.9 Mean: 4.7
Communication skills
English language skills
Teamwork abilities
Presentation skills
Leadership skills
Project management
Ability to develop a broad general education
Social skills
Management of business processes + admin.
Other language skills
Finance
Marketing
Law
1
low
Importance
2
3
4
5
Assessment
6
high
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 92: Gaps between importance and assessment of general professional
competences (engineers‘ view)
Mean: 3.7 Mean: 4.7
Communication skills
English language skills
Teamwork abilities
Presentation skills
Leadership skills
Project management
Ability to develop a broad general education
Social skills
Management of business processes and admin.
Other language skills
Finance
Marketing
Law
1
low
Importance
2
3
4
5
Assessment
6
high
109
110
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
4.6 Reputation
SPINE also examined the reputation of universities, on the one hand to identify the
relevant criteria for the reputation of a technical university, and on the other hand to
assess the reputation of the SPINE partner universities. The results set out below
are derived from quantitative survey findings among professors, engineers and
managers.
4.6.1 Important aspects for the reputation of universities
Summary of findings:
Quality of research, quality of programs and success of graduates are the main
criteria for the reputation of a technical university. Ranking by the media and
continuing education programs are not regarded as particularly important.
Engineers and managers regard contacts/collaboration with industry as very
important for the reputation of a technical university. Professors consider this
aspect rather less important.
Merits, awards (e.g. Nobel prize) and publications by professors are regarded
by them as much more important than by engineers.
In the USA much more importance is attached than in Europe to performance
criteria such as merits/awards for professors, ranking by the media, publications
by professors and success of graduates.
Professors, engineers and managers were asked which aspects they find important or unimportant for the reputation of a technical university. They rated nine different criteria on a scale of 1 - 6 (1 = unimportant, 6 = very important): quality of
research, quality of programs, publications by professors, merits/awards for professors, success of graduates from that university, rankings by the media, c o ntacts/collaboration with industry, personal contacts with students/graduates, and
continuing education programs.
Question:
"How important are the following aspects for the reputation of a technical university?" (same question for professors, engineers and managers).
Most important/unimportant aspects:
In the opinion of professors, the reputation of a university primarily depends on the
quality of program and research and on the success of graduates from that university. They regard rankings by the media and continuing education programs as the
least important aspects. Engineers and managers also find quality of program and
quality of research very important, but just as important to them is contact/collaboration with industry.
An interesting detail is that managers regard ranking by the media and publications
by professors as the least important criteria for the reputation of a university.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Differences between professors, engineers and manager:
Opinions here differ relatively widely according to group. The main differences
concern merits/awards for professors, ranking by the media and publications by
professors which for engineers and managers are less important than for professors. In general, the average ratings among professors are higher than among
engineers and managers for all aspects except contact/collaboration with industry
and continuing education programs.
Figure 93: Importance of aspects for the reputation (professors‘, engineers‘ and
managers‘ view)
Quality of research*
Quality of programs*
Success of graduates from that university*
Publications by professors*
Contacts / collaboration with industry
Personal contacts with students / graduates*
Merits/awards (e.g. Nobel prize) f. professors*
Ranking by the media*
Continuing education programs*
1
2
unimportant
Professors
Engineers
3
4
5
6
very important
Managers
* Significance at the 1% level
Differences between the USA and Europe:
US professors attach more importance to performance criteria of a technical university such as merits/awards for professors, ranking by the media and publications by professors. European professors/engineers find continuing education programs more important. In most aspects, however, there are no relevant differences. Engineers returned results similar to professors: performance aspects are
more important to US engineers than to their European colleagues.
111
112
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 94: Importance of aspects for the reputation (European and US professors' view)
higher importance in US
higher importance in Europe
Merits/awards (e.g. Nobel prize) f. professors
Ranking by the media
Publications by professors
Quality of research
Success of graduates from that university
Quality of programs
Personal contacts with students / graduates
Contacts / collaboration with industry
Continuing education programs
0.8
0
0.8
Differences between universities:
Quality of research is regarded by most professors and engineers as very important, whereby average ratings by professors are higher than those by engineers
(5.7 and 5.1). Only ECP returned a rating below 5 in this aspect.
Figure 95: Importance of quality of research reputation (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
2
unimportant
Professors
3
4
5
6
very important
Engineers
Merits/awards (e.g. Nobel prize) for professors is a very important reputation criterion mainly for US universities. This also applies to some European universities,
above all the ETHZ and Imperial College which are above the European average.
The highest ratings among engineers are at MIT, whose professors, however, returned ratings below the US average.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 96: Importance of merits/awards (e.g. Nobel prize) for professors (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
2
unimportant
3
Professors
4
5
6
very important
Engineers
The main finding with regard to publications by professors is the difference in rating
levels between engineers and professors (4.1 and 5). Anglo-Saxon professors
attach more importance than others to this aspect, the highest ratings being returned by Imperial College. Publications by professors are also important, however,
to professors at Swiss universities (EPFL, ETHZ). Here again, the MIT engineers
returned higher ratings than other universities.
Figure 97: Importance of publications by professors (professors‘ and engineers‘
view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
2
unimportant
Professors
3
4
Engineers
5
6
very important
113
114
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
4.6.2 Reputation of universities
Summary of findings:
The reputations of partner universities were rated similarly at 4.2 to 4.9. Only
the ETHZ and MIT returned higher ratings. MIT has the best reputation of all
universities among professors and engineers.
Professors and engineers rate their own universities above average in each
case, particularly US engineers. European professors and engineers (e.g. at
KTH and Aachen) rate their universities rather modestly.
Department-specific differences are also apparent. For example, Computer
Sciences professors rate CMU higher than other professors, and KTH is particularly highly rated by Chemical Engineering professors.
In order to determine the reputation of each university in the opinion of the others,
professors and engineers were asked to rate the other universities – with regard to
their particular engineering area (discipline) – on a scale of 1 - 6 (1 = very poor, 6 =
very good). They also rated their own universities or departments.
Question:
"Please assess the reputation of the following universities in your discipline (please
include your own university/alma mater in the assessment)" (same question for
professors and engineers).
Differences between professors and engineers:
In general, professors and engineers rate the reputation of the various universities
similarly, varying between 4.2 and 4.9. Ratings by professors are usually rather
higher than those by engineers. Above-average ratings were returned for the ETHZ
(professors: 5.1) and MIT (professors/engineers: 5.6).
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 98: Reputation of universities (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich*
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft*
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
2
Professors
3
4
5
6
very good
Engineers
* Significance at the 1% level
Rating of own and other universities:
Rating results for own universities are interesting. Professors/engineers at all universities rated the reputation of their own universities higher than those at other
universities. Self-ratings by own professors average 5.3, or about 0.7 points above
ratings by professors at other universities. This trend is more pronounced among
engineers than among professors. The difference between own and other ratings is
also particularly marked among the Anglo-Saxon universities. Engineers and professors at Imperial College, Carnegie Mellon and Georgia Tech rate the reputation
of their own universities a whole point higher on average than those at other universities. Self-ratings in the USA average 5.7, as against 5.1 in Europe. Selfratings by professors at KTH and TU Delft were particularly modest (4.6 - 4.8).
By interpreting these results it must be taken into account that here again, the
variations between universities are partially attributable to general rating level differences. Ratings returned by professors at TU Delft, for example, averaged 4.5,
while Imperial College professors rated both their own and other universities higher
(average 5.1).
Differences between USA and Europe:
In this case there are no systematic differences in the sense of general level differences between the US and European universities. Ratings of other universities
were about the same in the USA and Europe. There is no sign of European professors/engineers rating European universities higher than in the USA, or vice-versa.
The only difference between the two continents lies in the higher self-ratings of US
universities.
115
116
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 99: Reputation of universities (own professors‘ and other professors‘ view)
Ecole Centrale Paris*
EPF Lausanne*
ETH Zuerich*
Imperial College London*
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen*
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University*
Georgia Institute of Techn.*
MIT*
1
very poor
2
3
other professors
4
5
6
very good
own professors
* Significance at the 1% level
Figure 100: Reputation of universities (own engineers‘ and other engineers‘
view)
Ecole Centrale Paris*
EPF Lausanne*
ETH Zuerich*
Imperial College London*
KTH Stockholm*
RWTH Aachen*
TU Delft*
Carnegie Mellon University*
Georgia Institute of Techn.*
MIT*
1
very poor
2
3
other engineers
4
5
6
very good
own engineers
* Significance at the 1% level
Departmental differences between various universities
The analysis of department results reveals various differences. This is particularly
important since professors and engineers were asked to rate the reputation of their
own specific department rather than of the university as a whole. For this reason
they were also questioned about their engineering areas. It must, however, be
taken into account in interpreting these results that a good many professors were
not able or willing to return ratings for other universities, and that the following
graphs are only based on limited data. These results, therefore, give only an indication.
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Professors in all engineering areas rate MIT with the best reputation among all
universities.
CMU is particularly highly rated by Computer Science & Engineering professors.
TU Delft, RWTH Aachen, ETHZ and Georgia Tech are rated higher by Electrical
Engineering professors than by professors in other engineering aeras.
Imperial College and EPFL were rated highest by Materials Sciences professors.
ECP was rated higher by Mechanical Engineering professors than by others.
KTH was rated particularly highly by Chemical Engineering professors.
Figure 101: Reputation of universities (professors from Electrical Engineering
and Computer Science & Engineering)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
4
Professors Electrical Engineering
Professors Computer Science & Engineering
5
6
very good
117
118
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 102: Reputation of universities (professors from Mechanical Engineering,
Chemical Engineering and Materials Science & Engineering)
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPF Lausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon University
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
1
very poor
2
3
4
5
6
very good
Professors Mechanical Engineering
Professors Chemical Engineering
Professors Materials Science & Engineering
4.7 Additional Results
Summary of findings:
Professors find a Ph.D. more important than managers do, and it is the least
important to engineers.
While in Europe engineers usually find their first job themselves, engineers are
recruited in the USA through on-campus events and direct company recruiting.
The career benefits of alumni membership are regarded very differently according to university. Depending on the main activity focus of the respective
alumni organization, the main benefits are either with respect to job finding or
knowledge transfer.
Importance of a Ph.D.
Professors, engineers and managers were asked how important they regarded
Ph.D./doctorate degrees with regard to career possibilities and engineering competences.
Question:
"How important do you consider a Ph.D./doctorate to be: a) for the competences of
an engineer, b) for the career possibilities of an engineer?" (same question for
professors, engineers and managers)
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
The importance of a Ph.D./doctorate was rated by the various groups between 3.4
and 4.4 (scale 1 - 6). Professors find a Ph.D. more important than managers do,
and it is the least important to engineers. The importance of a Ph.D./doctorate for
career possibilities and engineering competences is rated very similarly.
Figure 103: Importance of a Ph.D./doctorate (professors‘, managers‘ and engineers‘ view)
Importance of a PhD/Doctorate ...
... for the career possibilities of an engineer
... for the competencies of an engineer
1
2
unimportant
Professors
3
4
5
6
very important
Managers
Engineers
Job-finding procedure
Question:
"How did you find your first job after graduation?“ (please only one answer)
Engineers were asked to choose among the following replies:
Through my own initiative (contacting companies, placing ads, etc.)
By answering job ads in newspapers, magazines, internet, etc.
Through family/colleague's connection
Via internship experience in industry
With the help of professor/lecturer
Executive search company
Direct company recruiting
On-campus events with industry representatives
Other
The closely related categories "Direct company recruiting“ and "On-campus events
with industry representatives“ were integrated into a single category. The categories "With help of professor/lecturer“ and "Executive search company“ were summarized under "Other" due to the low percentage of choices. Multiple choices were
not allowed.
119
120
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 104:
Job-finding procedures
Ecole Centrale Paris
40
EPFLausanne
9
9
45
ETH Zuerich
15
39
Imperial College London
12
19
5
17
Georgia Institute of Techn.
15
4
MIT
15
6
0
10
21
9
13
13
20
7
9
40
13
19
10
6
17
5 2
8
16
10
5
19
14
43
11
30
9
38
13
12
12
17
24
10
14
8
8
38
Carnegie Mellon Univ.
6
13
45
13
8
40
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
8
23
34
KTH Stockholm
19
12
35
50
60
21
70
80
90
100
in %
Own initiative
Internship experience
Job ads
Direct recruiting / On-campus events
Connections
Other
About two thirds of engineers in continental Europe found their first job by answering job ads and through family/colleague's connection. While job-finding through
industry representatives (partially on-campus) is rather exceptional in Europe, in
the USA this is very frequent.
As clearly shown by results: while engineering graduates in Europe mainly find
their own jobs, in the USA they are offered jobs through on-campus events and
direct company recruiting.
Alumni membership
Engineers were asked what career benefits alumni membership, if any, had
brought them so far.
Question:
"Has your alumni membership supported your career? If so, in what way?“
SURVEYS PROFESSORS, ENGINEERS, MANAGERS
Figure 105:
Career benefits of alumni membership
Career support
Alumni
yes
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPFLausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon Univ.
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
40%
6%
5%
4%
0%
22%
2%
17%
13%
30%
The reported career benefits of alumni membership varied widely between universities. 40% of engineers at ECP and 30 % at MIT reported that alumni membership
had benefited their career, followed by 22% at RWTH Aachen and 17% at CMU.
Engineers at KTH and TU Delft saw practically no career benefits from their alumni
membership.
Four career benefit factors of alumni membership were evaluated in particular:
Help for job search
Benefit for product sales/acquisition
Help for problem-solving
New knowledge
Figure 106:
Career benefit factors of alumni membership
Alumni
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPFLausanne
ETH Zuerich
Imperial College London
KTH Stockholm
RWTH Aachen
TU Delft
Carnegie Mellon Univ.
Georgia Institute of Techn.
MIT
Help for job
search
Product sales
/contract
acquisition
Help for problem
solving
New
knowledge
31%
5%
1%
1%
0%
8%
0%
2%
6%
11%
4%
1%
1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
4%
3%
3%
3%
0%
0%
1%
0%
14%
0%
2%
3%
5%
6%
0%
3%
1%
0%
17%
2%
4%
6%
9%
Alumni membership advantages and services vary according to main activity focus.
Members of the ECP alumni organization find it very helpful for job-finding, likewise
the MIT alumni members. Most useful in the opinion of members for general and
technical problem-solving and for gaining new knowledge is the RWTH Aachen
alumni organization. Only few engineers find alumni membership very useful for
product sales or the acquisition of contracts.
121
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5. Successful Practices
5.1 Introduction and methodology
The main object of the SPINE Project was to identify and describe a number of
successful practices in the education of engineers. This chapter of the final report
contains an overview of the topics, an explanation of the procedural approach and
a detailed description of the successful practices selected by the universities.
5.1.1 Overview of topics
Here we assign the successful practices to the individual topic areas of SPINE. A
summary of the practices can be found in chapter 1. As a result of the selection
made by the universities, the topic areas do not each contain the same number of
successful practices.
Performance of
engineers
Cooperation with
universities, Industry
Education,
Internationality
Successful practices per topic area (overview)
University
Structure
Figure 107:
5.2
Carnegie Mellon University
5.2.1
Introduction to engineering courses in parallel
with mathematics and science
X
X
5.2.2
Broad undergraduate studies with high flexibility
for students
X
X
5.2.3
Cross-disciplinary approach and team projects
X
5.3
Ecole Centrale Paris
5.3.1
Restructuring of final: combination of professional and scientific approach
5.3.2
Implementation of long-term strategy for internationality
5.3.3
Strong links with industry in funding, teaching,
and research
5.3.4
Integration of non-core competences and human sciences
5.4
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale Lausanne
5.4.1
Internationalization in research and education
5.4.2
Focus on basic sciences in combination with
strong links to industry
5.4.3
Integration of new, important topic areas in
engineering curricula
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
123
124
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Figure 106: (continued)
5.5
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule
Zürich
5.5.1
Cosmopolitan and very international composition of faculty
X
5.5.2
Well defined internal and external evaluation
system
X
5.5.3
Mechanical Engineering: strong focus on project
orientation
5.6
Georgia Institute of Technology
5.6.1
Interdisciplinary research centers
X
5.6.2
Strong entrepreneurial program
X
5.6.3
Excellent Distance Learning / Distance Education Program
X
5.7
Imperial College London
5.7.1
Integration of project and teamwork into curriculum
5.7.2
WISE (Women in Science and Engineering)
program to attract female students
5.7.3
“Mastery” to provide engineers with a more
holistic education
5.8
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
5.8.1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Integration of lectures, exercises, and teaching
of non-core competences
X
X
5.8.2
Creation of international master programs
X
5.8.3
High level of interdisciplinarity
X
X
5.9
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
5.9.1
Successful quality assurance by external Visiting Committees (VC)
X
5.9.2
Innovative way of creating new units
X
5.9.3
Education: Broad, fundamental, yet practical
X
X
5.10
Rheinisch Westfälische Technische
Hochschule Aachen
5.10.1
High number of interdisciplinary activities and
research areas
5.10.2
High involvement of students in research
X
X
5.10.3
Students with broad view and deep fundamental
knowledge
X
X
5.11
Technische Universiteit Delft
5.11.1
International MSc Program
5.11.2
Elaborate external and internal quality management
5.11.3
Highly innovative program in Electrical Engineering
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5.1.2 Methodology
The subjects of the analysis were:
the topic areas and issues prioritized by the universities,
the individual departments (Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering,
Computer Science, Materials Science, Chemical Engineering, and others) and
the senior administrative functions (Department Heads and Dean, Rector, Provost or President).
As a first step, 66 interviews were conducted with 72 faculty and staff members.
The distribution of interviews was as follows:
Mechanical Engineering: 10
Electrical Engineering: 9
Computer Science: 6 (please note that at several universities, Computer Science is combined with Electrical Engineering)
Materials Science: 8
Chemical Engineering: 8
Other engineering areas: 9
University administration: 16
Most interviews lasted 1.5 hours and all took place on site with the people concerned. A questionnaire was used which was structured according to topic area
and mainly comprised open questions. The interviewees were given copies of the
interview reports in order to check the correctness of their content.
In a second step, the project team analyzed the interview reports and compiled a
list of 95 practices. The number of practices varied from seven to twelve, depending on the university.
The third step consisted of selecting three practices per university. For this purpose
each university was asked to sort all the practices of the other nine universities.
The main sorting criterion was interest and the assumed learning potential which
the practice might offer the university making the selection.
This selection gave rise to a total of nine sorted lists per university. The order of
these lists was consolidated and the first three practices per university were selected. This resulted in a total of 30 practices for further analysis.
The nature of this selection process meant that it was not possible for all the priorities of the selecting university to “assert” themselves in the consolidation process.
In this case the picture was as follows: on average, each selecting university
achieved 60.5% of its priorities (minimum: 52%, maximum: 67%, standard deviation: 5.8%).
In a fourth step the project team performed a detailed analysis of the 30 practices
selected. The universities put forward the people who were best able to describe
their three selected practices. The project team interviewed these key people in
personal telephone interviews (lasting between 60 and 90 minutes). The results of
this analysis are the successful practices described below. They were submitted to
the interviewees following the telephone conversations, who then checked their
content for correctness.
These interviews were conducted with a structured interview guideline consisting of
the following questions:
125
126
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Intent: What was your initial situation and why did you want to change? What
was your initial intent when initiating the practice?
Objectives: What objectives did you aim to achieve with this practice?
Description: Please describe the practice (e.g. by elaborating on organizational
structure, process steps, or organizational requirements).
Methods: What methods or tools have you used to implement this practice?
Results: What results have you obtained so far due to this practice?
Level of satisfaction: How satisfied are you with the results you have achieved?
External view: Have you participated in or conducted studies that give indications of the level of success of this practice? Where do you see potential for improvement?
Investments: What was the resource expenditure (finances, personnel) required
to implement this practice? What are the annual costs for running and supporting this practice?
Experience: What were the barriers you encountered during implementation of
the practice? What has helped to implement the practice (enablers)? What advice would you give another university wishing to implement this practice?
Boundary conditions: Are there boundary conditions that are crucial to the working of this practice?
Future plans: What are your future plans regarding this practice?
5.2 Carnegie Mellon University
5.2.1 Introduction to engineering courses in parallel with mathematics and science
Intent
Prior to the introduction to engineering courses, students were required to take a
series of mathematics and science courses before their first engineering course. It
was found that students lost interest in their studies.
Therefore, the intent was to create introduction to engineering courses that taught
students the engineering mindset. In the old curriculum, mathematics was predominant and students thought of engineering as an application of mathematics.
However, it is more appropriate to think of mathematics as a tool that assists in the
various tasks of engineering.
The introduction to engineering courses are an important part of the philosophy of
how to educate students, i.e. to educate rather than train them. The curriculum
mainly consists of electives, and no two students have received exactly the same
education when they graduate. Students can custom-tailor their curriculum.
Objectives
The introduction to engineering courses should only require high-school
mathematics.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
It is usually the case that today’s students no longer have any practical experience in engineering (such as repairing radios or the like). For this reason it is
important to give them experience with actual physical systems as soon as possible in the curriculum.
Description
Each of the seven engineering areas offers an introduction to engineering course,
and each engineering student must take two in the first year of study. The introduction to engineering courses are taught concurrently with the mathematics and science courses that support them. The main course is the introduction to engineering
course while the mathematics and science courses are built around them. A student who chooses an introduction to engineering course in Chemical Engineering,
for example, will take chemistry as a science course. Similarly, a student who is
taking Electrical and Computer Engineering will take a programming course to
support it. Students still take the same amount of science courses, but they now do
so in the order that supports their engineering courses.
The introduction to engineering courses are also used to market the specific engineering programs. This is important because at Carnegie Mellon University, students are admitted to the college and not to the major specific department.
The introduction to electrical and computer engineering course is a combination of
lectures and laboratory courses that run concurrently. The course uses 13 laboratory stations, and students build part of a robot at each station.
The Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering was the first to offer an
introduction to engineering course. The other departments then developed their
own introductory courses with laboratories. This type of introduction course has
been adopted at other universities world-wide.
Methods
The introduction to engineering courses use teaching in context. For example,
whatever is taught in the introduction to Electrical and Computer Engineering
course is in the context of building a robot. This requires particularly close coordination between laboratory sessions and lectures.
Results
The introduction to engineering courses are very popular with the students. Retention increased from 70% to 90% between the first and second years of study. Students are clearly better prepared when they take the more detailed engineering
courses. They also understand mathematics as a tool (and do not see engineering
as an application of mathematics).
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The level of satisfaction is very high.
The courses are continually improved, and there is no need for major changes.
External view
All the evaluations have yielded very positive results.
127
128
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Investments
The introduction to engineering courses are very costly to operate. Only the best
faculty members teach these courses. The courses involve small groups and laboratory-intensive content, which increases the teaching load of the departments. In
addition, about 5-10% of the students might be non-engineering students.
The department pays for part of the material. In the new introduction to Electrical
and Computer Engineering course, for example, students build a GPS. Students
are teamed up in pairs. The department pays for one GPS kit, while the students
pay for the other. At the end of the course, students keep both kits.
Experience
Barriers:
There were no barriers. One professor had the vision of the introduction to engineering courses and taught them for the first two years. Other faculty members
then took over.
Enablers:
The only enabler is that the Department Head has to make the necessary resources available and assign the best teachers to teach them.
Advice:
The advice is to talk to people who have experience with this kind of course. The
courses will then need to be adapted to your own circumstances. They cannot be
copied but must be customized.
Boundary conditions
The only boundary condition is the commitment of the faculty.
Future plans
The departments intend to keep on changing the laboratory components, e.g. from
building robots to building a GPS system.
5.2.2 Broad undergraduate studies with high flexibility for students
Intent
4
Back in the late 1980s, the College of Engineering was reconsidering its curriculum. At that time, the prevalent mindset in engineering education was that the college “had the students for four years and had to teach them everything the faculty
knew”. Also, the college never reacted negatively to a department’s request to add
new fields to the curriculum.
4
Applies to undergraduate program
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
The new idea was to reduce the content material and teach more process knowledge (e.g. how to learn) with the intent of making the curriculum much more flexible.
Description
In late 1989 and early 1990, the college initiated discussions with the departments
to broaden the content of the undergraduate program. The departments took these
requests very seriously and the discussions went on for about a year.
In 1990, the whole faculty (about 100 people) was invited to an off-campus workshop, including representatives from the science and liberal arts colleges. The
workshop arrived at a format for an undergraduate curriculum that was far less
structured and much more flexible than before.
The curriculum had always required about 20% (8) of the courses to be in humanities (English, history, modern languages, philosophy), social sciences (psychology,
economics, social and decision science), or fine arts. In addition to these 8
courses, each of the departments had – prior to the introduction of the new curriculum – only one course that a student was free to choose. In the new curriculum,
each department introduced at least 5 totally unrestricted courses.
In the past, 80% of the undergraduate curriculum was engineering, science and
mathematics. This percentage has dropped to 65-70%. The rest of the courses are
in humanities, fine arts, or social sciences.
This offering makes it possible for students with multiple interests to take suitable
courses. It recognizes the diversity of the students as they enter the college and
also as they enter their professional life. Thus, engineering students at Carnegie
Mellon University are able to enjoy a non-traditional engineering education while
maintaining the core courses in their engineering field.
The School of Engineering comprises five primary areas: Chemical Engineering,
Civil Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Mechanical Engineering,
and Material Science and Engineering. In addition to this, there are two other programs that need to be combined with one of the five primary areas. They are Biomedical and Health Engineering, and Engineering and Public Policy.
Part of the new curriculum includes the introduction to engineering courses in the
first year. Each of the seven areas offers such a course. The introduction to engineering courses are taught concurrently with the mathematics and science courses
that support them. The main course is the introduction to engineering courses and
the mathematics and science courses are built around them. For example, a student who chooses an introduction to a course in Chemical Engineering would first
take a chemistry course as a science option. Similarly, a student who takes Electrical and Computer Engineering would take a programming course to support it.
Students still take the same amount of science courses, but in the order that supports their introduction to engineering courses.
The introductions to engineering courses are also used to market the specific engineering programs. This is important because at Carnegie Mellon University, students are admitted to the college rather than to a particular course.
129
130
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Results
One possible effect (although not intended) of the increased flexibility was an increase in the number of women in engineering from around 16% to about 22%
(27% in 2001).
In addition to this, the college was able to retain students and lower the drop-out
rate. Mainly because of the introduction to the engineering course, 90% of the students who begin in engineering return in the second year (before: 70-80%).
The total number of graduates (bachelor’s degrees) increased from a figure which
was previously as low as 60% to 80% of the entering class. This increase can
partly be attributed to the new curriculum but also to the fact that Carnegie Mellon
University has increasingly become the first choice for new students.
The fact that students are introduced to engineering from the first day they arrive
on campus means that they become more connected with engineering faculty and
upper class students.
The college did not consider the effects of students taking courses in other parts of
the university. It is sometimes the case that other departments outside engineering
are not able to provide the courses the engineering students would like to take.
The curriculum is no less difficult than before, but certainly less stressful. Students
can choose the courses in the order most suitable to them, which creates a feeling
of freedom.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The college is very satisfied, and so are the students. The college has surveyed all
the graduating classes in exit interviews. The curriculum has been rated very
highly. A survey of the first graduates after a five-year period yielded very positive
responses.
Both at graduation and five years later students seem to feel that the program was
not as flexible as the college thinks it is. The problem seems to lie in the availability
of courses in other colleges of the university rather than in the course offering itself.
The college’s own graduates and employers indicate that the graduates’ written
and verbal communication skills could be improved.
Some departments might still be too sequential in teaching their courses. Students
should be able to move through the curriculum without having to follow the springfall sequence of courses. Departments may want to decouple and/or run courses
concurrently. One example of this is the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, where students take only 3 mandatory courses (introduction to Electrical
and Computer Engineering in the first year, and Computer Engineering and Electrical Engineering in the second year). All the other seven courses are electives.
External view
Annual questionnaires go to the alumni and a pool of employers.
Investments
The introduction to engineering courses is costly to operate. Only the best faculty
members teach these courses. They involve small groups and laboratory-intensive
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
courses, which increases the teaching load of the departments. In addition, about
5-10% of the students might be non-engineering students.
Experience
Barriers:
There were no barriers because dissatisfaction with the old curriculum was high
and the commitment from the top down and back was strong from the outset. Once
the process had been initiated, it moved very smoothly.
Enablers:
Early faculty buy-in was extremely important: the new curriculum was never a topdown mandate.
There was general buy-in and enthusiasm.
Finances were not an issue at all: faculty were told from the beginning that when
designing courses, finances did not need be considered. This eliminated psychological constraints.
Advice:
There must be genuine faculty buy-in.
Faculty must be convinced that the teaching model is as important as the content
which is taught.
Boundary conditions
Carnegie Mellon University has been an institution that has always thought of itself
as an interdisciplinary and cross-boundary institution. This makes it is easy for a
college to incorporate other “pieces” of the university into its curriculum.
Future plans
The curriculum is constantly under review. Now that the structural aspects of the
curriculum are in place, the college is looking to broaden opportunities for the students, e.g. by offering more joint programs or more minors.
5.2.3 Cross-disciplinary approach and team projects
Intent
Traditionally, Carnegie Mellon University has been, and continues to be, highly
interdisciplinary in its approach to research. This practice describes a number of
activities that transfer this interdisciplinarity to the education of students.
One of the reasons that interdisciplinary activity thrives at Carnegie Mellon University is the long-held belief that many important problems cross several disciplines.
As a result, the budgeting process at Carnegie Mellon University does not penalize
departments for participating in interdisciplinary activity. There is no direct correlation between the number of research projects in a department and the depart-
131
132
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
ment’s budget. This makes it easy for faculty members to participate in research
proposals that are submitted by another department or institute.
The Institute for Complex Engineered Systems (ICES) is a strategic initiative for
pursuing multidisciplinary research on Complex Systems both within the College of
Engineering and across colleges at Carnegie Mellon University. The ICES vision is
"to develop enabling technologies and systems that seamlessly connect people
with their physical and information environments." To accomplish this vision, research within ICES is based on the following themes: connecting people to people
through information; connecting computers to computers; and connecting computers to the world.
Several courses illustrate the efforts being made by the College of Engineering at
Carnegie Mellon University to offer interdisciplinary design experiences to their
students. In the early 1990’s, faculty from Mechanical Engineering, Industrial Design and the Business School explored an interdisciplinary approach to product
design and conducted several courses together. This led to the Integrated Product
Design (IPD) courses that were started in the mid 1990s. Engineering and Design
students are put in interdisciplinary groups. They work on different aspects of a
problem that is presented by an outside company (e.g., Ford: product for Ford pickup trucks to enhance the vehicle).
In 1998, ICES began a number of interdisciplinary design courses that brought
together students from all of the engineering areas and from other colleges, industrial sponsors, and an interdisciplinary faculty to explore engineering product design projects.
Objectives
The objectives for ICES course:
Ensure that the course offers a realistic design experience by associating every
project with an actual industrial client.
Offer projects that encourage interdisciplinarity and having representatives from
a number of disciplines.
Motivate students to document their results. This is done by providing a course
duration of two semesters. Students can take only one semester of the course,
so the previous group has to document its work for the following group. Some
students might choose to participate in the second part, others in the first part of
the course only.
The objectives for the IPD course are for the students to learn:
A state-of-the-art design course.
How to work on interdisciplinary teams.
Where innovation comes from.
To represent and communicate their process.
Description
The ICES course is offered to graduate students (MS and Ph.D. students), seniors
(4th year), and juniors (3rd year). The course is overseen by one faculty member.
Four to five different companies contribute specific problems to the course. A student group is set up for each problem and is supported by a faculty member. A
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
group consists of 4 to 6 students from various disciplines and schools (for example,
there are technical writing students from the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Mechanical Engineering students, Civil and Environmental Engineering,
etc.). Each group solves a company’s problem in close collaboration with employees from the company concerned. One example of a problem is the exploration of
a deicing system on guideways for Bombardier Transportation Systems.
Students meet as a group once a week and work on the project between meetings.
At the beginning of the ICES course, there is a series of lectures on the design
process. Faculty give a certain number of introductory lectures, then students learn
about aspects of the design process and present them to the class with specific
examples from their projects.
The Integrated Product Development course is offered to engineering, industrial
and communications design and MBA students each Spring. The course is in its
13th year at CMU having gone through different forms. Over the past 7 years a
true integration between disciplines has led to a unique and popular course that
presents a design methodology based on emerging industry practice. The course
focuses on the very early stages of the design process taking the student teams
through the process of identifying product opportunities, understanding those opportunities, conceptualizing potential solutions, and realizing those solutions to the
point where a company would commit to program approval and intellectual property protection.
The course is structured around a combined lecture and studio format, with faculty
presenting integrated lectures one class period and re-enforcing the lecture
through extensive team meetings on the second class of the week. Written and
oral presentations at the end of each phase document the progress of the teams,
and demonstrate typical stages in the early product development process.
The course has provided a platform for the engineering (Cagan) and design (Vogel) faculty to pursue a major research agenda in Integrated New Product Development with a new book by Cagan and Vogel, called Creating Breakthrough Products: Innovation from Product Planning to Program Approval, recently published
by Financial Times Prentice Hall in the Fall 2001.
Methods
The ICES course uses an on-line document sharing system (LIRE, which stands
for Living Repository) which has been developed by researchers in ICES. It has
been tailored to web and features a very simple definition of access rights and
groups. Furthermore, a project group can easily decide which parts of documents
can be viewed publicly.
The ICES course uses the following textbook on the design process: Clive L. Dym
and Patrick Little, Engineering Design: A Project-Based Introduction, John Wiley &
Sons, New York, 1999.
The IPD course uses the book Creating Breakthrough Products, by Cagan and
Vogel (Financial Times Prentice Hall, 2002). The book uses state-of-the-art methods based on industry best practices and primary research from the faculty to
help teams research and understand product opportunities and user groups. Additional focus is on understanding and overcoming perceptual gaps in diverse teams.
133
134
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Results
The objectives of the ICES courses have been reached:
Each semester, there are 3 or 4 companies which sponsor projects and offer
students access to their employees.
Groups tend to be different from one semester to the next, so there is a need to
use the documentation system.
Some of the companies are exploring options for following up the results obtained by the group.
The interdisciplinarity is very high, even beyond the engineering barrier.
For the IPD course, the course consistently produces patentable products. In the
most recent year the course was sponsored by Ford Motor Company and resulted
in the sponsor patenting 3 of the 6 concepts. Teams using the methodology integrate and become high performing, productive teams.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
For the ICES course, the level of satisfaction is very high. The ICES projects are
rewarding for both faculty and students.
While Carnegie Mellon University could certainly offer more of these types of experiences to students, these courses are rather faculty-time intensive. However, the
groups should not be extended in terms of student numbers.
For the IPD course, many students who take this course state that it is the best
course/experience they have had at CMU. The course is under constant refinement and improvement based on ongoing research into industry best practices,
primary research from the faculty, and faculty analysis and evaluation of the course
after each semester it is taught.
External view
The ICES course tends to be highly appreciated by the students. They identify it as
a challenging but rewarding experience. Anecdotal evidence shows that students
often use this course as an example in job interviews (see chapter 4.3.1, p.73).
The IPD course is internationally recognized as a leader in product development
courses. The Corporate Design Foundation recognizes the achievements of the
course. Further exposure from the recent book is enhancing the course’s reputation.
Investments
An ICES course requires one faculty member to oversee it, and one faculty member associated with each project. The participating industrial partners invest a
modest amount of money (USD 15,000) for a two-semester course. The majority of
the funds are made available to the students, some goes to the faculty as discretionary funds, and some goes to cover expenses in administering the course.
Experience
Barriers:
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Because the ICES course is interdisciplinary and faculty come from different departments, the course usually has to be taught in addition to their normal course
load.
An ICES course requires a great deal of work up front. Students have to be assigned to projects and the faculty have to find industrial partners with suitable
problems.
Enablers:
The interdisciplinary nature of Carnegie Mellon University and the drive of the faculty have acted as enablers. Most faculty knew each other from joint projects prior
to the ICES courses.
Advice:
Start modestly and expand the course from a small number of interdisciplinary
projects.
The dynamics of the small project groups are very important. It is ideal to keep
the groups small (4-6 students).
Boundary conditions
There has to be a bias towards interdisciplinarity in both research projects and
undergraduate education. Faculty must truly value interdisciplinary education. Interdisciplinarity does not mean taking a course from an other department but designing a course which forces interaction between different disciplines in order to
solve a given problem.
Future plans
The idea would be to make the ICES and IPD courses larger and offer a more integrated set of services. The central question is the role of the ICES course in the
framework of extended activities. For example, a large research project could generate a number of ICES course projects and an ICES course project might be a
seed for a larger research project.
5.3 Ecole Centrale Paris
5.3.1 Restructuring of final year: combination of professional
and scientific approach
Intent
While ECP did not have any problems with its previous organization, it decided to
change in anticipation of future developments on the job market. These developments became apparent through discussions with industrial partners.
135
136
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Objectives
Better visibility of new job markets: ECP’s educational project needs to be better
equipped to meet the requirements of new and growing industrial sectors. Examples are bio-technology or micro and nano-technology.
Better preparation of engineers for their jobs: Nowadays, engineers change their
jobs quite frequently. In the past, companies accepted the idea that a young engineer had to be given additional training before he was in a position to start his actual function. Today, however, companies are no longer willing to make these additional investments. One example is IBM, who closed their special school for
training young engineers. They were no longer prepared to educate engineers who
ultimately only stay for a short time and change jobs frequently.
Development of a program equivalent to an MSc for foreign students: Having an
internationally accepted MSc program would increase the number of reciprocal
students needed by ECP to complete its double-degree system in the long term.
ECP hopes to increase the inflow of English-speaking students in particular.
Description
A: The Change Process
The first attempt to introduce change was not successful, mainly as a result of internal resistance. In February 2000, it was decided to call in external support from
the consultancy McKinsey.
McKinsey was given the objectives and all the information concerning the previous
organization. McKinsey asked ECP to assign a professor without any responsibilities in respect of the third year. The professor concerned then constituted a team
comprised of other professors and some students who were to work with McKinsey. This team worked for about 6 months as an internal team of consultants, with
no intervention on the part of the school’s management.
The team completed three studies:
A comparative study of the job market,
an internal study to collect and qualify all the propositions and requirements of
professors and students,
an international benchmarking exercise with other technical universities.
In September 2000 a series of principles were proposed for the new organization:
vertical scientific areas and horizontal professional tracks for the third year,
an extension of third year studies to cover a period of 16 months and
additional recommendations for the first two years (the “common core”) in order
to prepare students for their final year.
In October and November 2000 the director of ECP presented these recommendations to the staff and the students. Feedback was collected and reviewed. It was
then decided that the reorganization should go ahead and that the restructured
third year should commence in September 2001. As a second step, 13 professors
were selected to design the new horizontal and vertical structures. Thirdly, it was
decided to conduct additional studies for the first two years (not all of these studies
have yet been implemented).
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
At the beginning of November 2000 the professors set about their task. In February
2001 the group presented their suggestions. During this phase, McKinsey accompanied the process and participated in a "steering committee" with the ECP management team.
McKinsey contributed three crucial areas of experience:
The external view,
a great capacity to manage evolutionary change,
complementary international benchmarking. The management was responsible
for the decisions, whereas staff and students contributed suggestions.
B: The Result
The final year is to be organized as a matrix structure of eight scientific areas and
five engineering / professional tracks, starting in September 2001. Students will
choose one scientific area and one professional track.
The main goals are that students should orient themselves towards a specific field
(industrial or disciplinary), and discover the different functions of an engineer.
The eight scientific areas (“vertical program”) are:
Industrial Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Process and Environmental Engineering
Applied Mathematics
Software and Information Technology
Electrical Engineering (without Computer Science)
Applied Physics
Civil and Environmental Engineering
The five professional tracks (“horizontal program”) are:
Manufacturing and Logistics
Conception Development and Research
Finance, Marketing and Consulting
Entrepreneurship
Project Management
Duration: 8 months of courses and 7 months in industry (diploma thesis). This extension of studies facilitates the proposition of a master’s degree to foreign students.
Students start the third year with courses from September to April. They embark on
their diploma thesis in industry from April to December. Some of the courses in the
professional tracks are given during the diploma thesis as students are expected to
have gained some industrial experience.
Methods
The main method was to initiate a commonly supported collective process involving all staff and students.
137
138
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Another method was the use of an intranet platform to facilitate intensive communication. Students contributed significantly and showed a high level of interest. One
reason for this was the short project schedule: the proposed changes affected
many students.
ECP used a global quality construct to satisfy the needs of two types of customers,
namely companies and students.
Results
Redesigned third year
Ideas regarding the common core (first two years)
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The satisfaction of the the school’s management is high because ECP succeeded
in achieving results within a very short time with the support of professors and students. It was only a very small percentage of the professors and students who did
not become actively involved. The process has created a common spirit and culture of working together, which has laid a very valuable foundation for the future.
Today, all the students who enter their final year have chosen their scientific and
professional area. The distribution largely corresponds with job market statistics.
The external view is positive, too: in March 2001, the new organization was presented to industrial partners. All the companies judged this change to be highly
positive.
In view of the speed with which the new organization was developed, the role of
the industrial partnerships has not had time to adapt. As yet there are no industry
clubs for the professional tracks.
There are only five professional tracks. Four functions (with the exception of entrepreneurship) have a large number of students and might be broken down further in
order to alleviate the workload involved in supporting the students.
External view
Industrial partner companies responded very positively.
Investments
McKinsey provided their services free of charge. One reason is that McKinsey has
been a long-term partner of ECP. In addition, McKinsey wanted to prove that their
change methodology could be applied to higher education. ECP was chosen because of its relatively small size, its strong links with industry, and because all the
professors were convinced that change was necessary.
The professors did the supplementary work in addition to their normal workload.
The new organization will only cost a little more. The rise is mainly due to a twomonth increase in lectures.
ECP needs additional competences for the horizontal professional tracks. This is
going to involve moving chairs from scientific to organizational departments.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Experience
Barriers:
The announcement that external consultants were to be called in came as a surprise. Some professors thought that this would not be successful.
Enablers:
Change methodology mastering by McKinsey.
The manager responsible at McKinsey was an alumnus of ECP and had worked in
a scientific environment for ten years.
Everybody at the school was convinced that ECP had to change.
ECP had experimented with a special industrial project management program for
four years. This gave allowed them to gain the experience required for designing
the horizontal professional track programs.
For some 6 years ECP had experimented with special courses relating to human
and social sciences in the common core. These courses increased students’
knowledge of their own personality, the economy, and the functions they could
choose after finishing university. The new organization of the third year builds
heavily on this experience.
Advice:
Make sure you have a strong and in-depth exchange with the job market so that all
the professors understand what changes are taking place there.
Engage in global quality action. This means working collectively with clear objectives and knowing exactly what the customers want.
Benefit from the external view and methodology of consultants.
Future plans
Various organizational aspects of the third year will in all probability be adapted.
The common core needs to be changed. This will be the next large project upon
which ECP will embark.
5.3.2 Implementation of long-term strategy for internationality
Intent
In the 1970s only 8% of students came from abroad. Most of them were drawn
from the former French colonies in North Africa, some from Central Africa. At the
same time, signs of globalization were evident on the horizon and the European
Union was being formed. There was a clear perspective of Europe becoming unified. ECP needed to adapt to these changes. (Interestingly enough, ECP was very
th
open in the 19 century, a characteristic that had since been lost).
There was also a need to anticipate the emerging needs of the job market: students nowadays have to be able to integrate anywhere in the world. The intent was
to prepare students for these needs.
139
140
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Objectives
First, ECP is a rather small institution, which was not well known internationally.
The goal was therefore to increase international visibility and to secure a prominent place for ECP on the world scene.
Second, the goal was for roughly 15% of the students in a class acquiring a
double degree. Each country has its value system which is well known to the
population (but not usually made explicit). It is important for a young person to
realize that there is not just one (French) reality, but that other realities also exist and these are important for understanding and conducting business. The
double degree system is more demanding than simply taking a series of
courses and obtaining various credits at another university. It means assimilating the culture of another language.
Description
The way people are being trained as engineers in other countries differs in various
aspects. These differences should be used constructively to improve the education
of a student. ECP therefore compared the education offered at different universities
and picked out the best features of each institution.
ECP requires local and foreign students to complete its common core (the first two
years at ECP, which are the third and fourth years of higher education). This enables students to benefit from ECP's greatest strength, i.e. a broad scientific and
engineering base, which means they are very well equipped to specialize in a particular area. ECP sends the students away to another university in the final year.
There, students have to fulfill the requirements to get the local degree and specialize in a specific sector or discipline. Students who go abroad to end their studies
should acquire more than the qualifications they would have achieved at ECP during their final year, as specialization is the best practice abroad Compared to
ECP'S general engineering education. When the students get their foreign degree,
they simultaneously get ECP's degree.
ECP has founded the TIME (Top Industrial Managers for Europe) network, a network composed of 34 technical universities from 15 European countries.
In addition, ECP has created two other networks working with universities using the
bachelor/master system. ECP has bilateral agreements with these universities. In
the first network, ECP sends final year students to follow a master’s course and
when they obtain their master’s degree they are also awarded ECP’s degree. From
the other institution, ECP receives students with bachelor’s degrees. These students are conferred a "Mastère Spécialisé", which is a special ECP degree (not the
usual ECP degree) with a label of the French Conférence des Grandes Écoles.
The second network includes other bachelor/master universities in China, Singapore and Brazil. ECP accepts students for the common core after two years of
higher education. Then they return home to pursue a master’s course. When they
obtain their local master's degree, ECP awards them its engineering degree.
Methods
In 1980 a full-time professor at ECP was released from his teaching and research
responsibilities. The professor in question (Bernard Marin) was given the mission
to travel around and visit other universities all over the world. This survey took
three years.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
From the outset, the strategy was to exchange students on a bilateral basis regardless of their previous education, but with the proviso that they should achieve
outstanding results in their studies and that those studies should be sciences. Students’ level of education of was not questioned and the idea, stated in a short
charter, was to accept that institutions of the highest standards in their own country
should be considered as equal from one country to another.
A (successful) test was conducted with a German student in 1986.
In October 1988 15 organizations signed the charter and participated in the TIME
(Top Industrial Managers for Europe) network.
Another important condition was to win support from companies, in view of the fact
that as recruiters they constitute the customers for our “product”, i.e. a graduate!
Industry expressed interest and was asked to provide financial assistance. An industrial supporting club, the TIME Plus club, was founded in early 1989. The club
is mainly composed of French companies, with some foreign multinational companies.
Results
Today, 25% of the students in a class at ECP are foreign and hail from 25 to 30
different countries. That is three times more than before the initiative.
Currently, 34% of ECP’s students obtain a double degree. This is far more than
ECP was aiming for. The split between French and foreign students is roughly
fifty:fifty. (It should be noted that not all of ECP’s foreign students try for a double
degree, most of our African students in particular do not candidate to this option.)
ECP’s foreign students include many Europeans. Germany accounts for the highest number of students.
Another result is recognition by other world class institutions.
Graduates report that understanding another culture enables them to adapt to
many different cultures.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
ECP is highly satisfied as the double degree program is very efficient. It is particularly interesting to note that foreign universities are very open to this approach because they do not lose their students to ECP: for them it is a win-win situation.
They “lend” students who subsequently return with an added value and are
awarded both degrees. This differs from other (e.g. U.S.) universities who visit
foreign countries to attract good graduates away from their home universities.
ECP has about 10 years of experience with double degree graduates. The graduates all express great satisfaction with their experience and are strongly in favor of
promoting it.
Industry is very pleased with the profile of double degree graduates.
An area with potential for improvement might be the extension of the TIME-like
double degree approach, presently working with Brazil, China and Singapore, to
other countries, such as India, Argentina, Mexico, etc.
141
142
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
External view
Compared to other French institutions, ECP is streets ahead where internationalization is concerned (see chapter 4.3.1, p.67).
60% of the double degree graduates start their professional activities in their home
countries. A high percentage of about 40% start work in a foreign country. Of these
40%, 25% work in their host country and 15% in a third country.
Investments
It was decided that the policy of internationality should be implemented throughout
the school. This involved the cost of the full-time professor who designed and
launched the system as well as his secretary, costs of travel and so on.
ECP has a dedicated international education office, composed of four full-time
staff. This office tracks 400 to 500 students at any one time.
ECP has a language center offering lectures by full-time native speakers. It is exceedingly important to use native speakers because they fulfill the important role of
motivating French students to go abroad. They also act as efficient interface between ECP and higher education institutions of their native country.
The TIME Plus contribution of FF 1.5m is contributed by 25 companies (increasing).
The professors in charge of the respective areas of specialization follow the progress of students abroad.
Extra funding is available for student exchanges between France and Germany
(about FF 1m from both sides).
Additional support is provided by the Socrates program and various individual organizations such as Rotary clubs scholarships and so on.
Experience
Barriers:
At the beginning, a great emphasis was placed on a student’s language skills
(good French). Today, this has been dropped, with selection focusing entirely on
the students’ scientific capabilities. Students are selected in May or June. If they do
not speak French, they are asked to spend their summer holidays in France. Interestingly enough, the scientific language is not difficult to understand: sentences are
simple and the professors define the technical terms.
People coming from very far afield (China, India, etc.) stay in special centers for
2.5 months, where the full focus is on speaking French. These students stay with
French families and attend lectures the whole day.
One barrier was to convince excellent students to participate in this program. It is
not easy for good students to “start from scratch” again in a foreign place. On the
other hand, this experience teaches students a certain amount of modesty, which
is a valuable asset.
ECP has not succeeded in having TIME Plus clubs at each foreign university.
Enablers:
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
The success of the initiative relies heavily on the fact that Bernard Marin was able
to convince people to commit themselves fully within their local institutions. The
next task was then to convince people working in administration (both university
and government).
It is important to have industries that contribute money because this is an indication
to students that a double degree increases their value on the job market.
Advice:
The first condition is to be patient because it takes time to establish the differences
between any two institutions. Knowledge of these differences is crucial to designing the best program for the students.
It is better to build up relationships one by one, do not attempt to do everything at
once.
Boundary conditions
First, it is important to be aware of the untold cultural behavior of higher education in foreign countries. Literal translations have different meanings. For example, engineer and "ingénieur" are quite different, the first receives an applied
education while the second will start their education with a strong scientific basis. Thus, the second enjoys a much more vaunted position in their national society than the first. The direct consequence of this is a huge impact on the academic potential of students engaged in engineering education, which is decisive
when it comes to establishing successful exchanges.
Second, there must be an entry selection procedure. Not every student is capable of completing a double degree program. Students need to be able to adapt
very quickly to new teaching methods and subjects.
Third, an alumni association is very helpful. This enables a university to keep in
touch with its graduates. Their level of satisfaction and career can be tracked,
which provides valuable information for improving the program.
Future plans
ECP is endeavoring to spread the double degree approach to other universities.
Today, people are convinced that this approach is positive. It delivers synergies
and gives the students added value.
ECP is developing a worldwide alumni network. This has a snowball effect: graduates keep in touch and feed back helpful information, pointing out prospective
companies (internships!) and requirements.
The double degree approach is for students with a basic 5-year engineering education program. However, European institutions must be competitive at the master’s level. TIME is developing a TIME master’s program for overseas students with
a bachelor’s degree. It will be based on at least two foreign universities. The program is to be finalized in October 2001 and is to be open to students as from September 2002.
143
144
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5.3.3 Strong links with industry in funding, teaching, and research
Intent
ECP has a long tradition of working with industry. From the time when the school
was founded, the intent has always been to have strong links with industry. An
important reason for strengthening these links was the very rapid increase in the
number of students in higher education in France (now 60% of each age group).
As a consequence, state funding per student is rapidly decreasing. ECP needed to
source more money from industry in order to maintain and enhance the quality of
its projects in education and research.
Their intention was to develop new cooperations and, where necessary, to create
specific structures to enable these cooperations in teaching and research.
Objectives
Increase the number of companies who contribute to ECP through the "taxe
d'apprentissage" and increase the amount of money collected by this means.
The “taxe d'apprentissage” is a mandatory state tax imposed on companies. It
can either be paid to the state or contributed to a specific educational institution.
Increase contractual research with industry by creating a subsidiary of ECP
dedicated to the management of these research contracts.
Create new long-term teaching partnerships with industry.
Maintain the quality of faculty members recruited from industry.
Create new long-term partnerships with industry in the area of international
exchanges.
Description
1. Taxe d'apprentissage: ECP’s intention was to have more specific relationships
with industry with the purpose of convincing companies to attribute their "taxe d'apprentissage" to ECP. In order to achieve this goal, ECP set up a special organization run by students in 1992. Students work in their free time and use telephone
marketing to call companies. They receive moderate payment for their services.
2. Managing contract research: In 1986, ECP created a company called Centrale
Recherche S.A. (CRSA) with the objective of managing contract research performed for industry. French public institutions have to comply with public regulations in respect of financial management. These regulations offer little flexibility and
are not well understood by industrial partners. For this reason, conducting contractual research through Centrale Recherche S.A is advantageous to both the
university and the companies concerned.
CRSA is responsible for the commercialization, management and economic development of contractual research activities. The shareholders are ECP, Association
des Centraliens (ECP’s alumni association) and Société des amis d’ECP (equivalent of a foundation). The manager of the company is also ECP’s director of research.
One concrete example of how CRSA facilitates research is the following: instead of
having to specify exact objectives in an initial research contract (as required by
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
public regulations), ECP and the partner company can now specify overall goals.
This greatly facilitates adaptations during the project.
3. Teaching partnerships with industry: Although there have always been interactions between ECP and industry, there was no formal institutionalized partnership
system until 1990 when ECP created a system where each specialization in the
final year of studies (concentration) has a number of associated companies who
support it. These groups of companies provide a given sum of money with the
overall goal of increasing the quality of education. They also contribute general
objectives in respect of engineering education from an industrial point of view. On
the other hand, industry is offered opportunities for interaction with students and
faculty, e.g. companies can have a number of meetings with professors and students.
The main benefits for companies are that they become more visible to students
and faculty, and thus enhance their recruiting opportunities. Approximately 90% of
diploma theses are industry-based. Companies with a partnership enjoy certain
priorities where diploma theses are concerned. Statistics show that a company with
a partnership increases its chance of being assigned a student for a diploma thesis
threefold. This often leads to recruitment of the students concerned.
Another benefit for students is the early interaction with people from industry. The
“cycle d'intégration”, a practice initiated in 1994, has been designed to familiarize
students with industry’s requirements and possibilities (e.g. the different functions
an engineer can perform in a company). Starting in the first year, students meet
representatives from industry. Although these meetings are open to all companies,
experience shows that the participants are mainly drawn from the partnership
companies.
A private organization, Société des Amis de l'Ecole Centrale, manages the industrial partnerships. As in the case of contract research management, the management function for industrial partnerships has been externalized. One benefit of this
externalization is increased flexibility in financial management.
Continuing education is also offered to industry. However, ECP has not been completely successful in this endeavor. Continuing education is managed by Centrale
Recherche SA.
4. Composition of teaching staff: Half of ECP’s professors are employed full-time,
the other half are part-time professors recruited from industry. Full-time professors
have special competences in research, whereas part-time professors contribute
industrial experience. They all contribute equally: when it comes to electing the
board of ECP, for example, the rule is "one man, one vote".
Part-time professors manage parts of the curriculum. Some of them are responsible for specializations in the third year (including curriculum definition and teaching
assignments). Their outside perspective also means that they are very helpful in
advancing the educational project. They work on a five-year, renewable contract.
ECP’s education project offers education in all engineering areas. As its size does
not allow ECP to have research activities in each area of teaching, the school
maintains a number of cooperations with other universities. These cooperations
make it possible for each teaching area to have corresponding research activities.
5. International industrial cooperation: ECP created a club of multi-national companies for international student exchanges. These cooperations offer opportunities for
students on the double-degree program. The companies also provide financial
support for scholarships.
145
146
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Methods
1. Taxe d'apprentissage: Telephone marketing by about 20 students.
2. Managing contract research: The main tool was to explain to companies why
ECP had created CRSA. In addition, it was important to secure a high level of visibility for CRSA.
3. Teaching partnerships with industry: For each area of specialization, the club of
industrial partners holds at least two meetings with the professor in charge and his
staff: one at the beginning and one at the end of the academic year.
Each company holds meetings (included in the curricula) with the students, either
on campus or at its industrial sites: the company presents its job opportunities and
the diploma theses topics it proposes.
At the end of the academic year ECP’s managment organizes a meeting with all
the companies. During this meeting the results of the program and its future are
presented and discussed.
Canvassing for new partners is performed by a specific team (close to ECP’s management) in close cooperation with the professors.
4. Composition of teaching staff: The main tool is maintaining a high-quality relationship with industry. ECP compiles a profile for each vacancy and sends out between 50 to 100 letters to companies and other research institutions. This is followed by specific contacts with the organizations concerned for the purpose of
screening the best candidates. The final selection of professors is carried out by
specific commissions and by the board of ECP.
5. International industrial collaboration: The club of industrial partners has specific
meetings with the students involved in double-degree curricula, either at ECP or at
foreign universities. The method is similar to that employed for teaching partnerships. The companies participate in at last two annual meetings with ECP’s management.
A specific team is responsible for promoting the club whose name is "Club TIMEPLUS".
Results
1. Taxe d’apprentissage: About 200-400 companies contribute their “taxe
d’apprentissage” to ECP. The amount of money collected is constantly increasing
(over FF13m in 2001).
2. Managing contract research: Today, about 90% of ECP’s contract research is
managed by CRSA. The annual volume of research contracts has increased from
approximately FF10m to FF25m over the last ten years. The increase has now
become smaller due to the saturation of capacity at ECP’s research laboratories.
3. Partnerships with industry: When launching the program in the early 1990s,
ECP had fewer than 50 industry partnerships. ECP has since increased this number to a steady 90 companies and 130 partnerships (one company can belong to
more than one partnership). More than 90% of companies renew their partnerships.
4. Composition of teaching staff: Approximately 50% of the professors are parttime professors from industry.
5. International industrial collaboration: the club of industrial partners encompasses 25 companies.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Viewed globally, the total resources of the "ECP group" (FF190m) include 58%
public funding and 42% non-public (mainly industrial) funding.
After deducting the salaries of civil servants (faculty members and other employees), the remaining resources for operations and investments include 25% public
funding and 75% non-public funding.
Industrial funding has notably increased the total volume of resources. Decisions
regarding the use of all these resources are the responsibility of the ECP management team which represents all three units (ECP, CRSA and Société des Amis
de l'ECP). Any surplus resources which could not be allocated in the budget for the
current the year are put into a central pool. ECP’s management decides how to
invest this money, e.g. in buildings, scientific or IT investments. An annual report is
produced to provide transparency on the use of funds for the partner companies.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
Level of satisfaction:
1. Taxe d’apprentissage: The level of satisfaction for ECP and for students is very
high. Students find this to be a very fruitful experience because it enhances their
knowledge of companies. ECP also recognizes the pedagogical value for students.
Moreover, the synergies achieved from teaching industrial partnerships are increasing.
2. Managing contract research: There is a clear increase of the volume of contractual research.
3. Teaching partnerships with industry: Satisfaction is very high. This program has
been a great success for ECP. Up to now, continuous education was not a priority.
The quality of industrial partnerships will help us to promote this activity.
4. Composition of teaching staff: Having part-time professors has become more
difficult during the last few years. Industrial partnerships are one of the key drivers.
5. International industrial collaboration: The partner companies offer interesting
opportunities for students. Moreover, their advice is very useful when it comes to
defining future ECP international policy.
6. In global terms these cooperations bring three main areas of satisfaction:
First, they attract additional resources and provide the opportunity to enhance
the quality of ECP's projects: this was our first objective.
Second, they have promoted day-to-day exchanges between ECP and industrial customers. These exchanges and cooperations are a fundamental tool for
anticipating the evolution of the job market and associated requirements. They
form the basis for ECP's global quality process as illustrated by the recent reorganization of the third year.
Third, the quality of cooperation promotes a deep knowledge of ECP's processes on the part of industrial partners who actually become pedagogical partners. Some of ECP’s innovative pedagogical experiments would not have been
possible if these partnerships had not existed.
Potential for improvement:
1. Taxe d’apprentissage: It is very difficult for ECP to improve in this area. The
students who conduct telephone marketing need to receive special training and to
develop a team spirit. ECP has currently reached the training limit (about 20 stu-
147
148
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
dents have to be trained). We hope to achieve a continuous increase in the number of small and medium-sized companies.
2. Managing contract research: The number of companies in the databases is increasing every year. Here again there is probably some potential for improvement
where middle-sized companies are concerned.
3. Teaching Partnerships with industry: Potentially, ECP could have a larger number of small and medium sized companies in the partnerships. This number is increasing, but only slowly. Another aspect is that up to now, the number of foreign
companies in the industry partnerships is low at 5%. The main difficulty in increasing this number is that foreign companies are used to research cooperation but not
to the concept of teaching cooperations. The main companies targeted to
strengthen foreign partnerships are large organizations in other European countries, e.g. in Germany, the UK, USA, etc.
4. Composition of teaching staff: We must maintain the quality and the diversity of
teaching staff.
5. International industrial collaboration: Here again the potential for improvement
relates to other French companies (including medium-sized companies) and foreign companies.
External view
The loyalty of around 90% of partners provides an indicator (see chapters 4.3.1,
p.73; 4.3.4, p.82; 4.4.2, p.88).
Investments
1. Taxe d’apprentissage: After an initial investment in telephone marketing tools,
the annual costs are low and relate to funds (2% to 3% of the total amount collected) for remuneration of the students involved and various lectures given free of
charge to prepare the students.
2. Managing contract research: CRSA employs four people who are in charge of
managing the partnerships.
3. Partnerships with industry / 5. International industrial cooperation: A special
service, known as the "Direction du Développement et des Relations Extérieures"
(DDRE), reports directly to the director of ECP and performs a dual function: coordination of partnerships and canvassing of new partners. It consists of five people
and cooperates with faculty members on a daily basis.
4. Composition of teaching staff: This is the responsibility of the ECP management
team with the help of DDRE.
Experience
Barriers:
1. Taxe d’apprentissage: No formal barrier but strong competition between higher
education institutions.
2. Managing contract research: In contract research, the main barrier was the
saturation of capacity at ECP’s laboratories.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
3. Teaching and international partnerships with industry: In order to create partnerships with industry, ECP had to mobilize all the professors. Fortunately, this
was not very difficult because of ECP’s tradition of working with industry and the
fact that everybody at the school agreed on the necessity of finding private funding.
Where teaching partnerships are concerned, there is no real barrier but a need to
increase the diversity of the partnerships. At the present time, ECP has almost
reached saturation point for industrial collaboration in respect of teaching partnerships.
4. Composition of teaching staff: Bright people in companies are very often "overloaded" and we have to convince these companies that it is in their interests to
propose good candidates. This is easier with partner companies.
Enablers:
The main enabler was the participation of all the professors and the important fact
that all the professors agreed with the objectives.
Advice:
First, do not embark upon such an action unless you are sure that all the staff are
in agreement on the objectives!
Second, when creating partnerships, avoid individual forms of cooperation. Cooperations should be established on the basis of the university as a whole and not at
department level. The only authority that can decide on partnerships should be the
school management. This is very important if mutual benefits are to be achieved.
Third, it is important to mention that the relatively small size of ECP was helpful. In
the case of large universities departmental collaborations might be more appropriate.
Boundary conditions
A common agreement throughout the university and the constant objective of satisfying the partner (partnership is not fund-raising).
Future plans
As far as research cooperations are concerned ECP’s plan is to use the research
networks of the laboratories and to encourage other laboratories to practice common contract research. ECP has already initiated these activities. One example is
a joint laboratory for industrial engineering in conjunction with the three other
Ecoles Centrales. A joint laboratory would concentrate the research potential of all
four schools. There would be joint management of the research contracts and only
one link with industry.
This kind of research cooperation would not only help to overcome the problem of
saturation, but would also offer better research opportunities for companies.
ECP is considering additional types of partnerships, especially in the area of
teaching cooperations. The most likely scenario would be for these partnerships to
apply to the first two years.
We also propose to use Information Technologies intensively in order to increase
cooperations more.
149
150
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5.3.4 Integration of non-core competences and human sciences
Intent
ECP has always tried to anticipate the evolution of the engineering profession. In
the 1960s, when teaching was only technical, ECP offered some courses in human
and social sciences. All the courses were optional. The main drawback was that
the courses were visited by the students who needed them least.
In 1993, ECP conducted benchmarking and consulted industrial partners about the
plus and minuses of its graduates. The result showed that the technical skills of the
graduates were high, but they were lacking in social and communication skills.
Objectives
The main goal was to ensure that students were better prepared for their profession when they graduated. This is even more important because industry tends not
to train young graduates any more.
Description
The first step towards integrating human and social sciences was to create a group
of ten people from outside, accompanied by an ECP professor. The group met
about 12 times during a period of 6 months. The main recommendations of the
group were simple:
help students to become aware of themselves,
help students to become aware of the corporate world,
help students to become aware of the environment.
The main difficulty when changing the curriculum was that many faculty members
were scientists who thought that human and social sciences were "soft" subjects
and "not serious”. To overcome this obstacle, a group thinking process was initiated. Human scientists and technical scientists worked together in groups to build
up a common understanding of the different recommendations. It took about two
years before the majority of the technical scientists involved were convinced and,
surprisingly enough, the groups ended up making recommendations similar to
those initially presented to them.
About 30-40 professors who were fully convinced then started with the implementation of human sciences. A road map (“carnet de route”) was built up and given to
each professor and student. This contained the following 7 objectives, one being a
scientific and technical objective, the remaining six social objectives.
Sound scientific and technical knowledge
Mastering the complexity of technical systems
Understanding the basics of the corporate world and the engineering profession
Development of initiative and innovation
Personal development and cultural learning
Communication skills (written, oral, and teamwork)
International knowledge.
Implementation was commenced in 1996, and the students were evaluated against
these objectives. There are about 20-25 such evaluations in the common core (the
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
first two years). This means that all students and also all teachers are involved.
Each student has a track record showing his or her progress. Students must fulfill
the objectives in order to be successful in their studies.
At the beginning, it was feared that many teachers would only devote minimum
attention to these evaluations. Therefore, two additional activities were introduced:
First, each professor tutors 6 students for 2 years on a voluntary basis (there are
meetings at least once every 3 months). Up to now about 80% of the professors
have participated in tutoring. The second step was based on the idea that the professors who had first been convinced should inform the other professors in workshops lasting two to three days.
In 1998, when the first pilot had been conducted, the system was improved. This
was done with the help of the students who had completed the program and the
third year professors. In addition, assistance was also provided by graduates. The
main goal was simplification and clarification.
This endeavor only succeeded because of the (lengthy!) process of convincing the
professors. Additional support came from industry which said that the engineering
profession was changing.
In addition to this, the third year is now being changed (see also practice 5.3.1).
One reason that enabled the rapid change of the third year was probably the process previously initiated in 1994.
Two student activities form an important part of the process:
There is a short period of study in the first year: As the backbone for the tutoring
activities, ECP initiated “golden thread" studies (20-30 hours per student). Two
tutors follow a group of 12 students. The group typically contains foreign students, female students and non-typical students from universities (and not only
from preparatory classes). Students are to discover what industry is like by
working on a complex industrial "object" with the help of engineers. Example:
one group visited Renault and had to study a newly introduced engine. Although
the students were not expected to delve very deeply into the technical subject,
they did have to understand the whole process of product development and
manufacturing.
There is a large team project in the second year: Students work in groups of 510 (students choose the group). This project has to achieve both a technical
and a social goal. Although results must be obtained, the main emphasis is on
how they are obtained. 1) students must have a contract with a customer, 2)
they must follow a structured process (tools are provided), 3) they must maintain a positive attitude both individually and within the team (ethics, respect for
the contract, good internal and external communication, work efficiently as a
team). In this program, ECP tries to attract as many customers as possible from
outside (this is a great way of getting in touch with small and medium sized
companies, which ECP usually finds difficult to work with).
Methods
The whole process of integrating human and social sciences starts in the first year
and culminates in the third year with an industrial internship:
1st year: preparation by learning basic human and social abilities
2nd year: large project, where students first experience the need to integrate into
a team as an individual
151
152
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
3rd year: the final step (to start in September 2001) with professional education
and long-term (7-month) internship
Results
The process is working. It is increasingly felt to be useful and even indispensable.
For the most part, companies are reporting to ECP that the university is on the
right track.
Faculty members from different disciplines now talk, work and think together.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
ECP is highly satisfied because the educational objectives are on their way to being reached and the spirit of entrepreneurship has been increased among the staff.
The implementation of the third year will add additional credibility to this system
and convince the students even more of its necessity.
The system can be simplified!
External view
Professors in the third year find that students have changed in the last years. Part
of this change might be attributable to the change in the curriculum. (see chapter
4.5.2, p.107).
Investments
The additional costs were very low. Most of the courses were already in place. One
example of an additional direct cost was a business simulation game (FF 500’000
p.a.).
The biggest workload is the tutoring, which adds about 50 hours a year to a professor’s workload for each tutor group (some tutor two groups, one in each age
class). In each year, there are 34 groups tutored by 68 professors. Professors do
not receive additional payment for this work. They do it for nothing because they
are dedicated to the school's project.
An estimation of the running costs in addition to tutoring is about 15’000 teaching
hours (out of an annual total of 80’000 teaching hours at ECP).
Experience
Barriers:
The main difficulty that still exists is that students are not convinced of the need for
social and human sciences when they start at ECP. Their first reaction when presented with the curriculum is that “this is rubbish”. One reason is that the communication of the core competences is very simple (e.g. “know how to communicate”).
Students think that they understand, unless they are put in a special situation
where they see that they must develop these capabilities. Usually, students change
their attitudes as follows: when they arrive, they might even laugh. Then, especially
in the second year, they realize that non-core competences help them in their
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
work. Finally, they use them in industry (first during their internship) and know that
they really need them.
The main barrier was initially cultural. Professors with a scientific background had
to be convinced that their students needed additional capabilities in the area of
non-core competences and human and social sciences.
Enablers:
Time, patience, teamwork and training by people who are convinced about what
they are doing helped a lot.ECP started long ago and progressed slowly. In addition to this, the large number of part-time professors with jobs in industry helped
convince the others.
Advice:
If you cannot convince the professors, everything else will fail.
Don’t go too fast, be patient. Start with a few people who are attracted by the notion of non-core competences. Initiate a few experiments in small groups of students. Then diffuse the information in training sessions.
Future plans
The transformation of the third year.
5.4 Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
5.4.1 Internationalization in research and education
Intent
The main reason for wishing to internationalize is that EPFL recruits from a relatively small area. As a result, EPFL needs to attract more foreign students. The
university wanted to grow large enough to justify a basic, quality infrastructure.
One idea was to bring students together with foreign students in order to increase
the motivation to go abroad.
Objectives
EPFL wanted to increase its external visibility and hence attract better students
and researchers. Visitors from outside will come if they have an attractive environment to look forward to.
Description
Ten years ago, EPFL decided to create a center for continuing education, international relations and cooperation (CFRC). Three full-time people and several parttime professors were involved.
The reasons for integrating these three aspects were:
153
154
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
All of EPFL’s post-graduate programs are run in collaboration with international
partners.
The north-south relationship has an international dimension, and EPFL is sometimes able to offer post-graduate programs in Africa.
The CFRC was also in charge of the mobility program for EPFL’s students. CFRC
is not responsible for the administrative side, but for the “creative” aspects, such as
organizing new programs with new partners. Alongside the CFRC, there is an administrative office linked to the student secretariat where students can register.
Methods
In addition to the CFRC, EPFL has “mobility delegates” and professors responsible
for the individual relationships with foreign universities:
EPFL has a “mobility delegate” in each department. This role is assumed by an
academic member of staff who also acts as the main contact for the students.
EPFL maintains a number of cooperations with international partners. A professor is assigned to foster a link with a professor from a foreign university, for example one professor is responsible for Georgia Tech and another one for Carnegie Mellon University.
CLUSTER: EPFL is a member of the CLUSTER network, which comprises 11
European technological universities. About 40% of the European student exchanges take place within the CLUSTER network. Furthermore, EPFL has CLUSTER chairs for hosting academic partners for several months at a time.
EPFL belongs to the TIME network and offers second degrees for top students
who are prepared to spend more time (1-1.5 years) on their studies at another
institution.
To support these exchanges EFPL holds an annual meeting offering an exchange
of views between students who intend to go abroad, foreign students and students
who have already participated in these programs.
Results
Close to 50% of EPFL’s professors appointed in the last 10 years came from
abroad.
More than 58% of EPFL’s Ph.D. students come from abroad.
About 30% of EPFL’s students come from abroad.
Every year, EPFL sends around 100 students abroad and receives some 200
students from other countries. Exchanges normally take place during the 3
th
year or sometimes even during the 4 year (diploma year).
rd
EPFL runs a large number of cooperation programs involving both students and
researchers. As an example, many diploma students spend a term in a southern country to enhance their experience.
The high percentage of foreign students has a very positive impact on local
students and professors at EPFL. It gives them an international cultural background.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
EPFL is reasonably satisfied. The university could send out more students, but
needs to achieve a balance between students who go out and students who stay.
While only excellent students can be sent away to foreign institutions, the professors at EPFL are also keen to have a substantial number of good students. For this
reason the university does not wish to maximize the number of students participating in exchanges.
Several Eastern European universities could provide a number of excellent Ph.D.
students for EPFL. As well as offering students who are very highly educated,
these universities are willing to send their students to Switzerland as they are likely
to return to their home country. At the moment Eastern European countries offer
their students even better opportunities for exchanges than Asian countries.
External view
EPFL has not conducted specific studies, but continuously tracks the number of
students.
Employers from industry indicate that scientific criteria are the number one priority
when hiring future employees. International experience does not seem to be valued as highly. This finding might be influenced by the fact that the survey was conducted among local companies. The result is different when multinational companies are asked for their opinion: they state that salaries can be increased by up to
25% (see chapter 4.3.1, p.67).
Investments
The available budget for EPFL’s maintaining International Relations Department to
create new programs is close to CHF 200’000. Scholarships amount to at least
CHF 300’000. However, there are many hidden costs, as a large number of people
work in the area of International Relations. As an example: about 70 full-time staff
are involved in the international cooperation projects. Some of the funding stems
from the Swiss government (cooperation agency).
Experience
Barriers:
Besides the normal resistance to change, there was resistance on the part of some
professors who did not like the idea of their best students going abroad. Some
professors even reasoned that EPFL’s curriculum was excellent so there was no
need to send them away.
Another obstacle is that some foreign students give their local counterparts the
impression that other institutions are not as highly equipped as EPFL. This clearly
influences their decision to go abroad.
Enablers:
Only students who have actually gone away themselves can convince other students to follow suit. Professors are not that convincing. Students who have already
been abroad pass their positive experience on to today’s students and are able to
convince them to participate.
155
156
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Internal communication is used very frequently. The messages need to be repeated several times per year.
Advice:
Involve students in promoting exchange programs as much as possible.
Motivate the student association to support the program.
Create a highly decentralized organization which has permanent access to students.
Boundary conditions
EPFL tends to have “simple curricula and a simple credit system” to facilitate exchanges.
EPFL only sends its best students out. The policy is to be extremely strict in the
choice of students and then to be extremely flexible in acknowledging the credits
they have achieved at a foreign university.
Future plans
EPFL wants to send more Ph.D. students abroad. An important condition is that
the two professors involved know each other and have converging goals regarding their Ph.D. student.
Send out post-doc people as well.
The number of partner universities in the U.S. is to be increased. So far, the
experience with Carnegie Mellon University has been excellent. Similar agreements will be arranged with other top-grade partners. The CLUSTER network
can help in this matter.
EPFL is extending the offer of post-graduate programs in English.
EPFL is planning to have a graduate school for Ph.Ds in English.
5.4.2 Focus on basic sciences in combination with strong links
to industry
Intent
The initial intent was to meet the requirements of both industry and students.
Traditionally, EPFL always had many professors (approx. 60%) with industrial employment experience. This has enabled the students to profit from their knowledge.
Nowadays, however, this is not enough. When a company is considering the recruitment of a freshly graduated engineer, any outside experience the candidate
can offer is definitely an asset (e.g. a year spent at a university abroad, a diploma
thesis written in industry, or internships in industry).
Objectives
There are multiple objectives:
The first objective is to educate young engineers who are not only specialized in
their subject areas but are also used to work in groups and teams.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Second, graduates should be open-minded and should have experienced different cultures.
Third, students should have a solid background in basic sciences tailored to the
long-term needs of industry and society.
Description
In the first two years, students are trained to understand the basics of science and
engineering in depth. The focus on a specific discipline with the right balance between theory and practice is confined to the final year of studies and the diploma
thesis. Physics, mathematics, chemistry, etc. are important parts of all engineering
areas.
Every student at EPFL is required to write a practice-oriented diploma thesis over a
period of 4-6 months. About 20-25% of the students carry out the work for their
diploma thesis in industry under the supervision of an EPFL professor. This work is
based on an agreement between the student, the company and the professor. In
many cases the company recruits the student later on. The percentage of students
who are interested in working on their diploma theses in industry is increasing.
To promote internships in industry, EPFL maintains a web site that acts as a platform for the companies and students who are interested in taking part. Companies
can post their job offers and students also have the possibility of indicating their
individual requests.
Some enterprising professors with an extended international network use their
connections to open up new possibilities for their students in Japan, Korea, India,
etc.
EPFL is very industry-focused. As already mentioned, about 60% of the professors
have an industrial background. In addition, one third of EPFL’s teaching staff is
external, which means they are mainly employed by a company and teach one or
two lectures at the university.
Methods
The most important method is direct and indirect information of students and companies through the web site, newspapers, etc.
The web platform seems to be the most important tool for facilitating exchanges
between industry and students.
Results
Students graduating from EPFL are used to teamwork, possess better language
skills and are usually very open-minded. EPFL has received positive feedback from
industry on all these aspects.
Eight years ago, EPFL launched a communication systems course in Sophia Antipolis, France. Under this program, all students perform the practical work for their
diploma theses in industrial undertakings around the globe.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The level of satisfaction is high.
There is nevertheless still room for improvement in the system.
157
158
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
EPFL is currently in the process of revising its credit transfer system (ECTS). This
should make it easier for students to study during one or two semesters in another
university. Internships in industry might be accounted for. A credit system during
the first years might allow extending education in basic sciences over a longer
period of time, if required.
Biology is actually introduced among the basic sciences.
External view
EPFL conducts graduate surveys on an annual basis. Further information is provided by alumni surveys and studies comparing graduates from different universities. EPFL also conducts reviews in which industry is asked to indicate their level of
satisfaction with the knowledge of the former EPFL students.
Investments
There are 1.5 persons directly involved in the mobility program and another person
with a 70% involvement in internship and employment aspects.
Additionally, there are distributed resources in the teaching sections, essentially
through contacts by professors and via administrative staff.
Experience
Barriers:
The main barrier was the credit transfer system that still needs improvement.
Enablers:
The companies mainly welcome graduates with outside experience. This information is filtered back to the students and affects their decision to participate in the
program.
Advice:
The best approach is to establish a system of this kind progressively.
Boundary conditions
Everybody must be convinced. You will always find some professors who do not
appreciate the thought of “losing” a student to industry who could have been excellent for dissertation work.
Future plans
EPFL wants to continue with this practice and improve it. New diplomas will be
offered by 2003: biomedical engineering, life sciences, and management of technology. The university also wants to find a better system to help the students to
find excellent jobs after graduating or after completing their PhDs.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5.4.3 Integration of new, important topic areas in engineering
curricula
Intent
Back in early 1990, EPFL identified a need for education in communication systems (an area between Electrical Engineering and Computer Science). This new
area was and continues to be both a professional domain (industry recognizes the
need for professionals in this area) and a scientific area (the scientific community
considers the topic as research-worthy).
Objectives
To bridge the gap between Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.
To educate engineers to understand the fields of telecommunications, signal
processing, networking, and real-time computing (in the meantime, security and
information systems have been added).
To develop a 5-year curriculum.
Description
In 1990, a new professor in Electrical Engineering happened to come from industry. He recognized the value and potential of a new area in communication systems
and developed a proposal to initiate a new curriculum.
Initially, EPFL worked together with Telecom Paris. They jointly set up a subsidiary
in the South of France called Eurocom. The contact with the French partners
helped to shape the curriculum.
The new curriculum was first implemented in 1992. It has been highly successful
since its introduction. Today, it ranks as first or second choice for new students.
th
Initially, the curriculum began in the 5 semester (after the pre-diploma) and only
th
th
three semesters (5 to 7 ) were taught on campus. Semesters 8 to 9 were held at
th
Eurecom. The 10 semester is reserved for the diploma thesis, which is written in
industry.
In 1997, communication systems offered a full program, starting with the first semester.
In January 2000, a new department of communication systems was created.
In March 2001, communication systems started to offer semesters 8 to 9 on campus. Today, very few students go to Eurecom. The reason for this is that oncampus semesters help to avoid gaps between students and professors and to
keep students for Ph.Ds.
Communication systems founded a graduate school in 1997. The intent was to
reduce the deficit in terms of Ph.D. students in communication systems. The
graduate school was to attract students world-wide by offering fellowships which
cover the basic study costs and living expenses. These students arrive in October
and stay for one academic year. They work closely with academic staff. After this
year, the department tries to recruit some of these students for Ph.Ds. The program is able to attract a high number of nationalities mainly in Asia and Eastern
Europe (greatest competition: US universities). The program is conducted in English.
159
160
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Results
Communication systems currently has about 150 freshman students (from high
school).
The graduate school now receives around 100 applications. About 25 of these are
eligible and the school retains about 20.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
EPFL is very happy with the results. First, the curriculum in communication systems is extremely popular among the students. Second, industry has responded
very well and students receive several offers even before they graduate.
The graduate school is running well. At the same time, it is very challenging because of the diversity of student nationalities and backgrounds.
In terms of content, the curriculum has been reworked almost every year to make it
as attractive as possible. The department has almost doubled the faculty in communication systems in the last two years. This was helpful when introducing new
subjects.
External view
An audit by the ETH-Rat has been conducted in late 2001.
Investments
Operating costs are currently in the region of CHF 20 million. The Department of
Communication Systems has 100 employees: 14 faculty members, Ph.D. students,
and administrative staff. EPFL has a total of 2’500 employees and a budget of CHF
400 million.
In addition to the department’s budget, there are contributions from general departments (such as mathematics or physics) and the central administration.
Experience
Enablers:
The EPFL management was very supportive. In addition, industry was very much
in favor of the new study program.
The most relevant fields were clearly identified and communicated right from the
beginning.
When the curriculum was developed, the existing IEEE communication system
community helped to identify the relevant subjects.
There was clear demand from industry.
The collaboration with Telecom Paris and Eurecom was very helpful in identifying
weaknesses in EPFL’s own curriculum (such as the preparation of students in
mathematics).
Advice:
Go for it! And try to define where the core competence of the curriculum should be
located.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Boundary conditions
One important requirement is to make the national educational system as comprehensible as possible to the international community.
Future plans
One plan is to strengthen the graduate school, extend its scope, and possibly run it
jointly with Computer Science.
The board of EPFL has decided to restructure EPFL’s 12 departments into 5
schools (effective as of January 1, 2002). Communication systems will be in the
School of Information and Communication Sciences together with Computer Science.
5.5 Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
5.5.1 Cosmopolitan and very international composition of faculty
Intent
The original situation is that the ETHZ has always recruited internationally. Needless to say, the university intends to continue this practice.
Objectives
ETHZ wants to attract the best professors worldwide. This is irrespective of where
the professors come from.
A consequence of this practice is that good professors also bring an excellent network with them, which in turn benefits ETHZ.
Moreover, having the right people will strengthen ETHZ’s international competitive
position. As an example, a professor’s international network will also lead to the
recruitment of outstanding Ph.D. students.
Description
On the one hand, posts are advertised internationally. At the same time, ETHZ
practices a form of headhunting. This is achieved by activating the networks of
existing professors. The appointment committee always looks at the question of
the best people worldwide.
Over 50% of the full-time professors came to the university as a result of a targeted
action rather than a spontaneous application. This percentage is on the increase.
At the level of assistant professors, spontaneous applications continue to be the
rule. As a consequence of this situation, the appointment committees are having to
become more and more actively engaged.
161
162
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Methods
The appointment committees, comprising roughly 12 members, are the most important tool. The committee chairmen are specially selected persons of trust who
report directly to the President of ETHZ and work closely with him.
ETHZ can offer first-class packages which rank in the top league internationally.
As far as salaries are concerned, ETHZ lags slightly behind the USA (due to the
exchange rate). In comparison with Germany, ETHZ is only at a slight advantage if
purchasing power is considered. There are clear advantages over Germany where
the infrastructure is concerned (laboratories, equipment and frequency of laboratory refurbishments), with the exception of specialist areas such as Mechanical
Engineering. ETHZ is also less bureaucratic. In addition, new professors have
good human resources at their disposal.
The professors who are given posts have partners. Their partners continually experience problems with work permits. ETHZ has set up a Dual Career Office which
assists the partners of newly appointed professors to find a suitable job. This service is highly appreciated. It probably does not enter into the equation when selecting the first choice of university but certainly comes into play when taking up the
appointment.
Appointment processes at ETHZ are very quick, particularly in comparison with
German universities. This speed is a major factor in practically eliminating intervention on the part of other universities once an applicant has shown interest.
Success breeds success: many departments have succeeded in building up an
intellectual environment which acts as an incentive for a lot of good people to come
to ETHZ.
Results
ETHZ has been repeatedly successful in attracting top league people to Zurich.
Around 50% of newly recruited faculty come from abroad. Time and again the university has made appointments which have evidently caused a stir among the US
academic community.
On average, ETHZ makes 15-25 appointments a year (upward trend, with 30 assistant and full professorships in the first half of 2001).
The appointment process takes approximately two to three years.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
Generally speaking, the level of satisfaction is very good.
The potential for improvement lies clearly in public funding for education and research, which continues to fall behind in Switzerland. In comparison with US and
German budgets, which were increased over the past few years, the ETH budget
has been cut. This is eroding ETHZ’s competitive position in the area of recruitment.
A liberalization of the work opportunities for partners is urgently required. Greater
liberalization is also vital for the recruitment of international Ph.D. students.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
External view
No systematic studies have been performed to date. Informal feedback indicates
that ETHZ’s recruiting practice is successful (see chapter 4.3.1, p.67).
Investments
Recruitment costs a lot of time, especially where the members of the appointment
committees are concerned. The chairmen of appointment committees (delegates
for the selection of professors), who number around 25, chair on average one to
two appointment committees a year.
ETHZ has around 50 appointment processes in progress at any one time.
The President’s staff includes five people who provide full-time support for appointment processes. In addition, there are various members of staff required for
refurbishment and procurement following appointments.
Experience
Barriers:
Internally, it is primarily the time resources of the people involved which are limited.
Externally, there is the problem of the political framework (especially in respect of
job opportunities for partners) and the completely dried out market.
Enablers:
The recognition of the fact at all levels of ETHZ that recruiting top-class people is
the core business of a university and is crucial to its future.
Advice:
The Dual Career Office has made valuable contributions to implementation.
Boundary conditions
Language could be a handicap. However, at ETHZ faculty are very international
(English-speaking), and Switzerland, in particular Zurich, is very cosmopolitan.
Being able to put an applicant in contact with an ethnic group can be a decisive
advantage.
Future plans
ETHZ will continue as before and intensify its efforts. Nonetheless, only gradual
improvements will be possible.
5.5.2 Well defined internal and external evaluation system
Intent
The first parts of the quality system, namely the peer review and student survey,
were introduced some time ago (1989 and 1992). This was the direct consequence
163
164
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
of a requirement on the part of the ETH-Rat for new forms of accountability and
quality control. During the course of the last six years the quality assurance system
has been extended considerably through the addition of comprehensive evaluations.
Before expanding the quality system, the three possible objectives which in principle could be achieved with the aid of evaluations were analyzed:
Evaluation for quality improvement. The quality system is primarily for use inhouse.
Evaluation for quality control as an approach which is mainly practiced on a topdown basis.
Evaluation as a management tool with financial consequences in terms of future
budgets for those affected.
Even if it is clear that in most cases all three aspects will play a certain role, ETHZ
decided in favor of placing the emphasis on the first objective of quality improvement. The main reason for this was that the evaluation methods on which a quality
system is based are in general highly controversial. Evaluations sometimes represent an attempt to summarize very complex facts in a simple fashion. This always
involves inaccuracies and distortions. The philosophy of evaluation as quality improvement goes a long way towards reducing discussions and disputes. The
measured indicators are not used as control factors but as pointers to areas where
it might be necessary (e.g. in the case of low quantitative values) to look for possible causes and remedies. As the evaluation does not pose an immediate “threat” to
those who are evaluated, they are generally willing to cooperate and personally
interested in the results.
ETHZ consciously employs a whole palette of different modules as a single module
is unlikely to provide the “whole truth”.
Objectives
As a general objective, ETHZ wants to assert its position in the face of international
competition in the areas of research and teaching, and to rank among the leading
institutions.
Where research is concerned, this means that all research assistants can really
devote their energy to research and work on contemporary issues. PR work (publications in recognized journals, invitations to major congresses as key note speakers, invitations as guest lecturers, etc.) also plays an important role.
On the teaching side, ETHZ’s prime objectives are for their graduates to be sought
after by industry and for graduates’ expectations of the course to be fulfilled. In
addition, potential employers should be satisfied with graduates’ education. Graduates should still experience a sustainable effect from their education 10-20 years
after graduating. This will promote ETHZ’s reputation as a top place of learning and
teaching, and will make the university attractive to the best students.
Efficient management and administration of ETHZ support the two principal concerns of research and teaching. The goal is to offer good administration and efficient management with limited means.
As a public educational establishment ETHZ wants to command a high level of
autonomy and responsibility while offering public accountability for its activities and
the exercise of those activities. Proof of an effective quality monitoring and improvement system represents a major contribution towards achieving that goal.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Description
It lies in the nature of quality systems that subjective opinions are always called for
and objectivity is virtually impossible. Subjective opinions vary and do not remain
constant over time. A further source of uncertainty is due to the fact that there is
certainly no unanimous view on what is good or bad in teaching, while the same
often applies in research. This explains the rationale of having a series of modules.
Module 1: The first step towards a quality system was taken in 1989 with a peer
group evaluation of the mathematics and mechanical engineering departments.
Today, ETHZ organizes evaluations of two departments by peer groups on an annual basis. A peer group comprises roughly 8 to 10 experts from around the globe,
from other universities, from the world of business and from administration. The
peer group comes to Zurich for a week (from Sunday to Friday evening) in order to
look at all possible aspects of the department to be evaluated. The peer group
draws up a report which first goes to the university administration. They then submit it to the department for comment and request proposals for the measures to be
adopted. The university administration in turn decides the necessary steps and
reports to the ETH-Rat.
Module 2: A department carries out a self-evaluation in preparation for the external
evaluation. For this purpose the current situation is presented, own strengths and
weaknesses analyzed and plans for the next few years explained. This process
takes about a year.
Module 3: In preparation for the peer review an extensive survey is also conducted
among former students (three, four or fives years on from graduation) in the subject area. The questions asked cover among other things the graduates’ careers,
their opinions on course content and quality, and what they remember about individual lecturers.
The three modules described above are closely related to one another.
Module 4: Student survey at the end of the semester: This survey is carried out
across the board at time intervals which ensure that winter and summer semesters
are looked at alternately. This survey consists of 4 sections:
Three questions from the rector: These are identical for all courses and are
merely aimed at identifying particularly outstanding performance and problem
cases. Students are asked to rate the following statements: 1) The lecturer
showed enthusiasm for the subject matter; 2) The lecturer explained the subject
matter in a clear and comprehensible manner; 3) The course was meaningfully
documented (lecture notes, textbook, handouts, etc.). In one department a correlational analysis of the rector’s questions and the department’s detailed questions was carried out. The correlation in respect of the general quality assessment was almost 100 percent.
Questions formulated by a department’s teaching committee. Professors, nonprofessorial teaching staff and students are represented equally on this committee. The replies to these questions go to the teaching committee and the
Department Head but not beyond.
Questions put by the lecturer her/himself. These questions are specific to the
course. The results only go to the lecturer concerned.
The fourth section provides space for any comments the students wish to add
and these go to the lecturer only.
165
166
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
The survey is performed during a lecture towards the end of the semester (response rate almost 100%). Separate question and answer sheets ensure confidentiality. The answers to the first three sections are provided on computerreadable sheets. A central office evaluates the data collected within a few days
with the aid of software, and generates graphics. The lecturer can (and must) discuss the results with the students during the next or next but one lecture.
The replies to the third and fourth blocks remain with the lecturer and within the
class, the results of the first two sections are published within the department and
discussed by the teaching committee. Only the results of the first section go as far
as the rector. Each level investigates whether measures are required. If necessary,
these are discussed with the Head of Department and the person concerned.
From a legal point of view, ETHZ as an employer is entitled to conduct surveys on
employees but because of statutory data protection requirements may not simply
publish them. ETHZ has placed the onus on the lecturer to take action if he or she
wishes to prevent publication within the department. This arrangement is generally
considered to be sensible as the alternative to the ETHZ’s own evaluation would
be one performed by the students. Student surveys would not be covered by the
data protection act.
Module 5: Another module is the annual report, in which each lecturer is asked to
provide evidence of research and teaching activities, as well as teaching performance (dissertations, doctoral theses, number of hours of lectures delivered).
Module 6: Some time ago ETHZ conducted a very comprehensive survey on the
quality of their administration as a further module. This survey led to major
changes. It is not performed on a regular basis due to the great deal of time and
effort involved.
Surveys on the job situation for graduates are carried out to ascertain the “employability” of graduates. This survey also shows whether graduates are working in the
areas taught.
Methods
The evaluation system comprises the modules described above.
Results
It is difficult to provide a general reply to the question of results. The time scales
are too short to allow a systematic analysis and there are external factors which
also play a role.
However, even without systematic evaluations it can be said that the quality of
lectures and also publication activities has improved in many departments.
The invitations to give presentations on the quality system at other institutions are
an indirect indicator.
Student organization representatives are in agreement with the measurement of
teaching quality.
The peer reviews are repeated every eight to ten years. In some cases it is the
same people who return, which allows indirect feedback.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The level of satisfaction is good.
Needless to say, quality systems always need to be improved. However, this leads
to a conflict of aims: the system should not be changed too often, otherwise comparability will be lost. Moreover, a certain level of stability in the system is important
for those affected. The time and expense required for the quality system must also
be kept within acceptable limits.
A quality system should never become an end in itself! The goal is a high quality
end product and not the perfect evaluation system.
External view
The ETH-Rat commissioned a meta evaluation. The outcome was very positive.
Investments
Investments include the hours worked by staff, members of the university administration, the pro-rectors, the didactics center and the departments (Heads, secretaries, committees, professors).
Generally speaking, evaluations are expensive. The self-evaluation and the subsequent one-week peer review in a department with around 20 professors and 900
students required over 50 person-months and over CHF 100’000.
Experience
Barriers:
There were fears among the lecturers that a large and time-intensive apparatus
would be put in place which produced incorrect or meaningless results.
It was necessary to establish a basis of trust. It is important to maintain the interest
of those who are evaluated. A crucial function of management is to make it clear
that they fully support the quality of the system: “Evaluation is a matter for the
boss”.
Enablers:
The most important point was a clear discussion and definition of the objectives of
the quality system. The goal was a clear improvement in quality and not the creation of a monitoring tool which ultimately just creates problems for those who are
monitored.
Advice:
As far as the methodology is concerned it is very important to state precisely who
will see the results (and who will not), who decides how they are used and who is
responsible for conclusions and consequences - before the evaluation takes place.
Boundary conditions
The first boundary condition is the existence of a relationship of trust between the
management bodies and the professors, staff and students.
167
168
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
The second boundary condition is the availability of the means to ensure a high
level of professionalism.
The third boundary condition is a high level of autonomy at the various levels.
Those concerned are then in a position to take matters into their own hands and
make decisions.
Future plans
A new bibliometric analysis which is to be systematically introduced in one department is currently being investigated.
A direct survey of personnel managers is planned but a good solution is yet to be
found.
5.5.3 Mechanical Engineering: strong focus on project orientation
Intent
A subject included in the Mechanical Engineering curriculum in semesters one
through four is “product development”. This should incorporate knowledge of processes, methods, engineering, IT and tools. Another important feature is the integration of meta competences which include presentation techniques, documentation techniques, teamwork and the ability to realize projects in practice. Students
should not only acquire purely factual knowledge but also develop capabilities such
as creative and innovative thinking, and entrepreneurism.
Many of these competences are extremely difficult to teach by means of conventional lectures. For this reason a different pedagogical approach was sought, which
was to be used alongside the existing lectures and exercises. This approach is the
innovation project.
Objectives
To apply processes learnt in conventional lectures in the real world
To apply acquired knowledge of tools to a concrete case and thus intensify that
knowledge
To train a capacity for synthesis (application of mechanics, physics and other
subjects learnt theoretically)
To apply all material science and manufacturing process know-how
To introduce all meta competences
Window to industry: work with industry for the first time
Description
The innovation project was first introduced in the fall of 1996. It relates to the first
four semesters of “product development” in Mechanical Engineering.
In the first semester twelve teams of approximately 15 students are formed at random. These teams remain constant up to the end of the fourth semester.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
In the second semester there is a competition. The teams put forward ideas on
what could be done in the innovation project. This gives rise to around 20 reasonable ideas. A steering committee comprised of research assistants, participating
partners and the professor select the most suitable idea. Suitability criteria include
the students’ level of knowledge, the divisibility of the project among various people
and a realistic assessment of feasibility.
The project team is supplemented by partners. A partnership currently exists with
the University of St. Gallen whose students are responsible for developing a business plan, and the School of Design which contributes industrial design aspects.
The selected idea is translated into an abstract task description which extends the
system limits. A market requirement is described, rather than a product. As an
example, an assignment would not be to develop a new desktop telephone but to
develop a means of mobile communication which fulfills modern needs.
The students receive the task description at the beginning of the third semester. All
teams are given the same task description. They analyze the task description and
go through the complete development process including project organization.
The project begins in October and ends two semesters later, in July of the following
year. The students have a time budget of approximately 200 days. The goal is to
present a working prototype on an exhibition stand. The students also write a report of around 150 pages and give a 15-minute presentation.
A sophisticated marking concept was developed to assess achievement. The team
is awarded a team mark. Together with the students, the research assistant draws
up a scale of achievement for the individual students. The team mark is individually
adapted on the basis of this scale. The assessment mark varies by +/- 0.5 within
the teams. This mark counts towards the pre-diploma.
The requirements of industry are not yet considered at the moment. The project is
purely pedagogical in nature. However, it has often been the case that industrial
products have followed on from the prototypes.
The students are given a budget of CHF 3000, which is not sufficient to produce a
prototype. They receive additional funding from sponsors or industrial partnerships.
In the case of sponsoring, a wide range of companies are asked to contribute. As a
rule, this approach is not very successful and is not encouraged. The favored and
proven approach is to establish a partnership with a manufacturing company. This
is where an existing network of around 100 companies is helpful. Apprentices’
workshops in particular show a keen interest in cooperations.
Methods
The projects are run in accordance with a clearly defined and standardized innovation process. Each sub-process incorporates efficient methods to ensure high
quality.
The students know these methods but as a rule have not yet had the opportunity to
apply them in practice prior to the innovation project. The students employ these
methods where appropriate.
The students have access to an ultra-modern CAD system. They have a Virtual
Reality Center at their disposal which is used in part. A joint communication platform is also available. In some cases, calculation tools (e.g. finite elements) are
used.
Patent research is another method.
169
170
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
A web-based learning environment is a recent addition.
Results
The fulfillment of pedagogical goals is excellent.
However, students require a great deal of time to carry out the project and in many
cases reach their capacity limits.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The level of satisfaction on the part of the teaching staff is very high. The students
are also satisfied but have to invest a high level of effort.
The potential for improvement lies in reducing the workload while still achieving the
pedagogical objectives.
External view
An annual survey is carried out among the students, which, however, does not
represent an objective measurement of the pedagogical achievement. No external
evaluation has been performed to date.
Investments
At the beginning, a great deal of courage and pragmatism was necessary. The
organization was established quite rapidly. A sponsor was found in the first year
who contributed CHF 20’000. From the second year onwards, additional sponsoring of CHF 50’000 was paid every year by a foundation. Teaching assistants are
also used to tutor the students.
Experience
Barriers:
There were no actual barriers. The previous exercises were abandoned in favor of
the innovation project. The university was able to overcome the financial hurdles.
One hurdle was the way in which marks were awarded to students, making it necessary to modify the assessment system.
The team mark shows a continuous increase from one year to the next. The reason for this is that students analyze which teams have achieved good results in the
past with which presentations and reports, and structure their work accordingly.
Enablers:
The professor’s experience in industry
Market-oriented rather than only design-oriented thinking
Industrial network
Links with other universities
Good support from other professors
Advice:
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Don’t start off too big: take your first steps with manageable projects and don’t aim
too high with your objectives.
The individual phases and the necessary monitoring functions on the part of the
teaching staff must be precisely thought through.
Boundary conditions
One important boundary condition is that the other professors must actively support the innovation project.
A good infrastructure is a must if students are to be able to work efficiently.
Future plans
One aim is to look for subjects which will reduce the complexity and workload of
the innovation projects.
Further networking with meaningful partners (other universities and manufacturing
companies) is to be sought.
It may be possible to use an industrial problem (with full sponsoring from industry)
as a project. However, this should not be too ambitious as the students are still
undergoing their basic education.
5.6 Georgia Institute of Technology
5.6.1 Interdisciplinary research centers
Intent
Research is the precursor to discovery. University research is the intellectual driver
for economic development and a major vehicle for educating students. Over the
last 30 years Georgia Tech has recognized that the “real-world” problems in the
scientific and technical arenas which address issues of economic development are
at the interface of the classical disciplines. Therefore, in order to address these
“real-world” problems Georgia Tech has developed policies and physical infrastructures to lower the barriers between disciplines in order to foster cooperative
multidisciplinary research.
Objectives
Georgia Tech has created a variety of interdisciplinary centers by clustering researchers from different disciplines under particular scientific and technical umbrellas. The objectives are:
to foster cooperative research to solve “real-world” problems, and
to provide a vehicle for students to (a) understand their particular discipline in
light of companion disciplines and (b) provide an environment to foster the principle of “team-work” between different disciplines.
171
172
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Description
While the interdisciplinary centers at Georgia Tech cut across many classical disciplines, the individual Schools are the homes for the faculty and students are involved in these centers. Students are educated in their particular engineering area
but are exposed to and interact with other areas in the multidisciplinary research
environment.
Like many other research universities Georgia Tech created interdisciplinary centers as umbrella organizations which would bring together different disciplines. This
action, in itself, lowers some of the barriers. Georgia Tech has gone a step further
by constructing new buildings and laboratories in which different engineering areas
are co-located into “research neighborhoods”. Thus, in our Institute for Biosciences
and Biotechnology building, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, biologists,
chemists, chemical engineers, etc. are co-located in the same laboratory working
together on related problems. The result is that interactions between each of the
area is augmented.
The larger research centers consist of a center director, assistant director, and
staff. The smaller centers also have directors but staff support usually comes from
the Dean’s office or from a school chair. Depending on the engineering areas involved in the particular center, the director can report to the Vice Provost for Research or to one of the Deans or to one of the school chairs. Many of the centers
have executive committees, advisory committees, steering committees, etc. to help
formulate center policy issues. The composition of these committees vary from
representation from the participating schools, administrators (VP for Research,
Deans, etc.) and external participants.
The formation of centers is usually “faculty driven” and usually results from the
recognition that by bring together different disciplines in a particular research area
the research faculty will be able to perform research and educational activities that
were not previously accessible. The formation of a center also allows the faculty to
access federal or industrial research funding which they would not receive if they
operated separately.
The graduate students usually choose the faculty member with which he/she will
work and the particular research project presented by the faculty member. This
project may or may not be one of an interdisciplinary nature.
Methods
The faculty initiate the formation of interdisciplinary centers and the administration
(VP for Research, Provost, Deans, Chairs, etc) attempts to facilitate the faculty
interactions both administratively and, when possible, through co-location.
Results
The research awards for FY’01 amounted to USD 237 million and the research
expenditures are estimated to be USD 325 million for the same period of time. The
industrial funding component of the research awards was approximately USD 60
million. Centers represent an important driving force for this level of research activity.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
Georgia Tech is very satisfied.
As a potential for improvement, Georgia Tech is currently reviewing policies and
procedures in order to evolve a smoother process for contract development with
industry.
External view
Georgia Tech uses the following metrics to indicate the level of success of its
pratices:
Proposal Development
Research Funding
Students participating in interdisciplinary projects receiving masters and Ph.D.’s
Industrial funding of research
Technical publications and patents
Invited presentations at technical meetings
Investments
During FY’00 the research expenditures at Georgia Tech were USD 305 million. In
FY’01 the research expenditures were approximately USD 325 million. There has
been a clear increase in research funding for the faculty participating in the centers
over the last few years.
The costs for the building where the researchers are located are not included.
Experience
Barriers:
The major barriers were mostly physical. If researchers working on an interdisciplinary project are located in different parts of the campus, communication is much
more difficult than if they are in the same building or specifically in the same laboratory. The research buildings of the 21st century will address this issue as far as
possible.
Enablers:
The faculty are the drivers in the creation of multidisciplinary centers. It is critical
that they be proactive.
The State of Georgia has provided large amounts of funding to help these centers
grow and prosper.
The federal government and industry have also been critical enablers. Industry, in
particular, has been a major driver for the growth and prosperity of multidisciplinary
centers. They see great advantages in having these centers in addressing the
“real-world” problems with which they are associated.
Advice:
The “grass root” faculty researchers should be the drivers for the formation of centers. The faculty should be the group that sells the center idea to the administration
173
174
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
who, in turn, should facilitate the formations and growth of the center. In particular,
the administration should facilitate the relationship between industry and the licensing and contract office at the university and the center.
Boundary conditions
Students who are educated at the interface of several disciplines wind up, in most
cases, being shallow in these disciplines. Georgia Tech makes specially efforts in
making sure that students receive an in-depth education in a particular classical
discipline and experience interdisciplinary collaboration within the framework of
their research. This model allows the student to learn and understand how different
disciplines contribute to the overall research project. In addition, the student also
learns about the value teamwork in problem solving.
Future plans
Georgia Tech wants to further increase its research collaboration with industry.
5.6.2 Strong entrepreneurial program
Intent
(The following practice refers to Georgia Tech’s Advanced Technology Development Center, ATDC.)
In the early 1980s, the State of Georgia had only a small base of companies who
provided employment for technology graduates. Graduates usually found employment outside of the State. There was a strong interest on the part of alumni, faculty
administration, and state government leaders to broaden the technology base by
creating a technological environment and employment opportunities. This led to the
foundation of the ATDC in 1980/81.
Objectives
Create an environment to promote technological entrepreneurship.
Strengthen the infrastructure necessary to support technology development.
Strengthen the investment community.
Build support groups who help the development of technology companies.
The official mission statement is “to increase the technology business base in
Georgia by:
accelerating the formation and growth of advanced technology start-up companies,
supporting technology commercialization, and
supporting state economic developers in attracting technology companies.”
The more recent objectives include:
Commercialize technology deriving from the university
Provide educational programs to faculty members in technology commercialization
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Follow a much more proactive approach directed towards the faculty
Description
Initially, Georgia Tech held venture capital conferences and helped to form organizations of parties interested in promoting technological entrepreneurship.
The ATDC was founded as a university-based incubator based on the results of a
study commissioned by the NSF. In 1985 two buildings were constructed to house
the incubator. In 1991, ATDC opened another incubator in Warner Robins in middle Georgia, and in 1996 opened an incubator on the fourth floor of the Georgia
Centers for Advanced Telecommunications Technology (GCATT) building, Georgia’s center for telecom research.
The ATDC has facilities on the campus and a staff of experienced entrepreneurs.
All the staff have been involved in the startup of a technology company in some
capacity. They advise companies and identify potential businesses that could be
accepted into the ATDC program.
A company interested in joining the ATDC program applies for membership. The
ATDC applies the following set of criteria:
Clearly defined technology product that differentiates itself in the marketplace
(uniqueness)
Significant and large market for the product
Availability of management team
Plan for funding the first 6 months of operations.
Here are the updated criteria on which we consider applications:
Proprietary advanced technology concept or prototype. This should provide the
start-up with a sustainable competitive advantage in its desired technology market.
Commercial product, process, or service. Ask: can you sell it? Will someone
else buy it? Can someone else sell it? How many someones are there?
Qualified management team. Experience, talent, drive and commitment are
keys for the management team. The first three help (a lot); the fourth is essential. Founders must be committed to the company, and at least one member of
the management team must be working full-time for the company.
Distinct market opportunity. The low hanging fruit has all been picked. Can you
be sure that your idea isn't part of somebody else's lunch?
Company growth potential. Bigger is always assumed to be better, but credible
and realistic both have important places at the table where and when growth is
discussed.
Start-up funding. In the current environment, angel funding is almost impossible
to find. Founders must have sufficient personal/friends/family funding to carry
them for at least six months, or until they can raise their first round of funding.
Potential investor attractiveness. The values that were important several years
ago have returned - ideas can no longer obtain funding. In addition to a large
and growing market, strong management team and proprietary technology, investors seek companies with clear paths to profitability and customers/reference accounts.
175
176
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Strategic business plan. In order to create these list items, then to be able to
articulate them, and then to keep them going forward in the future, they really
should be written down. That's the business plan.
Applicants do not usually have any “formal” funding (except for private funding) and
do not have the necessary contacts in the community. Acceptance into the ATDC
program is often seen a quality mark by the investment community.
After acceptance, the company is assigned to a consultant. The ATDC works with
these people to build or complete the business plan, understand the markets, and
gives technical support to further develop the product (if needed). The ATDC can
also establish contacts with potential investors.
Support can include:
Housing in the ATDC on campus
Support from staff (venture catalysts)
Technical support from Georgia Tech
Education programs (there are regularly scheduled “Brown Bag Lunch” programs each week focusing on the needs of entrepreneurs, e.g. company valuation, marketing to specific market segments, experience shared by successful
entrepreneurship)
CEO roundtables each month where CEOs in ATDC can discuss their problems
and areas of interest
Preparation of companies about to give presentations to venture capitalists
Providing an environment that encourages and supports companies and their
officers
Mentoring opportunities through the entrepreneur-in-residence program
Connections to specialized support services in the local business community
ATDC offers two kinds of space:
Two buildings house entrepreneurs in start-up companies
Another facility, which is located inside a research facility, is focused on telecommunications, wireless activities, and broadband communication. ATDC has
a floor in this building which hosts 6 companies that are in the same technology
area. This creates mutual opportunities between companies and research areas. New companies have been formed as a result of this activity. This approach has been successful and will possibly be used more often.
A company goes through a process of membership and graduation. After being
accepted as a member company of ATDC, it is eligible for all the programs. Once a
company reaches a certain level, it graduates and usually moves out of the facilities (growth reasons). On average, a company stays between 6 months and 1.5
years in the ATDC.
Currently, about 36 companies are housed in the ATDC facilities. There are 81 (not
all are still in business) companies that have graduated and are no longer inside
the ATDC facilities After graduation, companies can still participate in all the educational programs and can belong to the founders club (an organization that helps
to mentor companies in ATDC).
A person who has sold a successful company may stay in the ATDC as an entrepreneur in residence. This person spends one to two days in an office at ATDC
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
where they provide support for member companies and assist faculty members
who want to found companies and participate in educational programs.
Currently, the ATDC consists of:
7 people involved as catalysts
3 entrepreneurs in residence
14-16 support staff (meeting support, public relations, and other administrative
support for the companies)
Faculty involvement: There has been an evolutionary process over time: in the
early years and up to 5 years ago, about 20% of the companies at ATDC were
university related and 80% of the companies came from the community. Today,
about half of the companies originate from (mostly Georgia Tech) university research.
Consequently, the program is expanding and a Georgia Tech Venture Lab is being
developed. This program will focus entirely on faculty. Here the ATDC will work
with faculty members who are already at the idea stage. An idea will then be developed in cooperation with ATDC staff, addressing issues such as intellectual
property or product positioning.
Venture fellows are successful business people in whom the investment community has already invested. They will be matched with the opportunities created together with faculty. The goal is to create more companies where faculty is involved
and for these companies to be run by experienced business managers. This will
increase the chances of funding and the probability of success. This activity is being supported by a board of advisors.
Faculty Research Commercialization Program: In the FRCP program, the ATDC
asks faculty to submit proposals around a certain technology which faculty thinks
could be a business. The ATDC evaluates these proposals in respect of market
opportunities. It awards grants ranging from USD 30’000 to USD 100’000 directly
to faculty members in the form of contracts to perform certain tasks (e.g. proof of
concept). 6 companies have been founded in ATDC on this basis. In addition, several licensing opportunities have emerged from the FRCP.
Results
81 graduated companies
In 2000: 4’600 employees (of both member and graduate companies), annual
revenues approaching USD 0.75 billion, investments of about USD 0.5 billion
Companies have been successful and are going to be successful even in the
current situation. ATDC will be much more involved in finding partners (customers, companies interested in mergers or acquisitions)
15:1 return on investment rate for the state (taxes generated by companies on
investments in ATDC)
Success rate of 85% (today probably in the 70% range due to the higher failure
rate of the dot-com companies). Success is measured as being in business after five years.
Level of Satisfaction / Potential for improvement
Overall, the level of satisfaction with the success of the program is high.
177
178
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Early stage faculty involvement: The ATDC wants to see more commercialization
coming out of the university.
The FRCP should be expanded so that more resources are invested in the early
stages of technology development.
In addition, more basic services could be provided for member companies, such as
basic bookkeeping or accounting, (turn-key approach).
Investments
State funding of USD 3 million p.a. (operational money)
Investment pool: The State of Georgia provides a seed capital fund targeted at
a large number of technologies. It is administered by the ATDC and used for investments in companies where the ADTC acquires equity in return. There is a
requirement of a 3:1 ratio of private to public sector funding. At the moment the
state is focusing on the telecommunications sector. So far, USD 5 million have
been invested in early stage telecom companies. For USD 1 million from the
fund, it was possible to achieve USD 20 million from private sector funding. The
next focus for the state will be an investment fund for bio-tech.
Experience
Barriers:
The ATDC uses public funds to finance its activities. About 1.5 years ago, the university formed a not-for-profit organization which gave additional flexibility.
In the early days, faculty did not show a great deal of interest. The main impetus
came from graduates. This has changed substantially.
Enablers:
The fact that the ATDC activities are directly linked to Georgia Tech has been a
major enabler. The university must be convinced that it is important to commercialize technology and help foster a technology environment.
The support groups in the community are enablers that help make the ATDC work.
These include specialized and more general organizations.
The ATDC has strong support from the government which gave the ATDC a great
deal of freedom.
Having an investment community and expanding this community is a major prerequisite.
Working together with people who have been through an entrepreneurial experience.
Advice:
A university should focus on the technological areas where it can contribute most.
In addition, it should try to provide a supportive environment for companies and for
the faculty. For faculty in particular, there needs to be a clear and easy process for
getting questions answered. This also involves defining clear policies (covering
issues such as conflicts of interest, etc.).
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Boundary Conditions
A privately supported university might have more flexibility than a publicly supported university. On the other hand, a private university might not receive public
funds.
Universities do not always have a reputation for being places which act quickly.
However, when it comes to licensing technology and creating new companies,
decisions must be made very fast.
Future Plans
(see also above under “Description”)
The ATDC has been approached by a large company with the goals of
bringing more technology into the company by setting up an incubator model
focusing on areas of interest to this company,
identifying technology opportunities for spin-offs and licensing at the company,
and
looking for gaps in the company’s technology base.
This model might be extended to other large companies.
Georgia Tech has teaching collaborations in France and Singapore. ATDC international is exploring opportunities to identify companies in these countries that are
interested in coming to the US. The ATDC could provide market research and
analysis for the products of these companies.
5.6.3 Excellent distance learning / Distance education program
Intent
(Note: the following information was gathered from the director for distance learning and the associate chair for Mechanical Engineering.)
Georgia Tech experimented with distance learning education back in the late
1960s. In 1977, the Georgia Power Company came to Georgia Tech and expressed the need to provide master’s degree courses for their engineers who were
located throughout Georgia. Georgia Tech responded to that need by creating a
program which offered a master’s degree in Electrical Engineering with a power
systems option. At the time Georgia Tech also started a distance learning program
in Mechanical Engineering.
Although these early initiatives were successful, the program faltered in the late
1980s. In the early 1990s, Georgia Tech revived its distance learning program by
increasing its marketing efforts and by adding new master’s programs. Georgia
Tech’s goal was to improve connections with industry and to become the world’s
leading high-end provider of master’s degrees in engineering areas.
Today, Georgia Tech’s goal is to achieve statewide, national and international recognition for the quantity and quality of its distance learning programs. In order to
achieve this goal, Tech has made the quality of its distance learning program the
same as for its campus-based master’s programs. The Center for Distance Learning and the academic units provide excellent services for the distance learner, a
factor that is often ignored by institutions just beginning distance learning pro-
179
180
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
grams. Another goal is to provide excellent services for the faculty involved in the
program and to recognize their efforts and contributions in building an outstanding
distance learning program.
Distance learning students are excellent students. After graduation, they might
pursue careers that take them to the level of Vice Presidents and CEOs. This contributes to a high-quality alumni base.
Objectives
To be an international leader in using the latest educational technologies (including streaming media over the Internet).
To enhance the world-wide reputation of Georgia Tech.
To make distance education easy to use.
To improve campus instruction: campus students have the same access to the
web-based material as the distance learner and can interact with distance students forming an asynchronous learning network.
To ensure that faculty see the benefits of the distance learning program.
To provide high-quality degrees. The admission requirements and the curriculum requirements for degrees are the same as the on-campus degrees. The
distance learning program does not provide “watered-down” degrees.
To serve the working professional, especially Georgia Tech alumni.
Distance learning is a long-term investment, and should not be begun with the
goal of making money immediately.
Description
When Georgia Tech revitalized its distance learning program in the early 1990s, it
relied heavily upon its experience with video tape-based distance learning, but
moved quickly into the newer technologies such as satellite, teleconferencing and
the Internet. The focus on student services is imperative: many universities in the
United States fail in their distance learning efforts because they cannot provide
their students with the necessary services. Needless to say, a university’s brand
name is an important part of any distance learning initiative.
Georgia Tech’s center for distance learning reports through a Vice Provost directly
to the Provost. A staff of 18 full-time people has been set up to provide services to
students and faculty members. This center works directly with the academic units
which provide the material for distance learning. One of the most important functions of the center is to provide services to students. The services support tasks
such us registration, access to the computer network, obtaining material from the
library, etc.
Faculty participation in distance learning is voluntary. A high percentage of engineering faculty at Georgia Tech participate in distance education. One reason for
this is that there is a high level of professional support for distance learning. Having
a course online also allows faculty to be at the forefront of their own academic field.
A lot of faculty see this as an important means of improving their professional visibility in high level graduate education that will allow them some interesting opportunities as an expert in their field of specialization.
As Georgia Tech expanded this program, faculty were granted some release time
(reduction in teaching load in the previous semester) to develop the course. Each
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
course is different and requires a different amount of development and/or maintenance time.
Some faculty members already had a good portion of their courses online and are
very familiar with the tools needed to develop online courses.
Making the courses available online is truly a team effort. Five units of the campus
are involved:
Academic unit
Center for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning
Center for Distance Learning
Information Technology
Office of Assessment.
Admission: Students are admitted in fall, spring, and summer semester. Just-intime admission has to be possible throughout the year because only highly flexible
programs are competitive.
Methods
Online programs are structured and produced in modules. The first step is to identify the course objectives and the concepts that need to be learned. Each module is
then developed around a concept. It is frequently the case that faculty come into
distance learning by gradually putting more and more content online until at some
point in time all their material is online.
Georgia Tech uses a large number of tools for distance learning: video tapes, satellites, Internet, video-teleconferencing, the world-wide web, etc. In all probability
these technologies will all converge to the desktop by using web-based technologies. The basic premise is that if you use all the electronic tools, you will have an
excellent environment for distributed learning.
The use of the Internet opens up a whole world of technologies. Some of these
include branching to other URLs, simulation (e.g., MathLab), access to the Georgia
Tech computer network and the library on the Internet, or animations. Electronic
bulletin boards are used to make announcements and enable asynchronous discussion groups.
Results
Nowadays, Georgia Tech offers five online programs. The university is planning to
add other programs in the near future, possibly in Computer Science and Civil Engineering. A program is only made available online after thorough market research.
Needs are determined by surveys among graduates, people who recruit engineers,
personal telephone interviews with CEOs, etc.
Georgia Tech now has more than 400 distance learning students in the program.
As an example, there were no students in Mechanical Engineering in 1991. In 2000
there were 80, and in 2001 there are now 110 students.
The number of students enrolling has been increasing at a healthy “quality” growth
rate over the last few years.
181
182
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The level of satisfaction is high. Progress has been significant.
There are continual surveys among the students and constant improvements to the
program.
External view
All students on distance learning programs are surveyed regularly. So far, no study
has been conducted among distance learning graduates in industry. Georgia Tech
is constantly being reviewed internally and externally; all reviews have been excellent.
Investments
The overall annual budget is USD 1.65 million for the entire distance learning program.
Setting up the online Mechanical Engineering program required funding of USD
675’000 and involved 24 courses. On average, it costs between USD 30’000 and
USD 40’000 to put one course online.
Incentive for faculty: USD 115 / semester credit hour are transferred to the professor’s academic unit which is responsible for the use of these funds. For example,
the School of Mechanical Engineering allows the faculty member to use the first
USD 5’000 and splits the remaining funds with the faculty member. The department uses the money to support program development and maintenance.
Experience
Barriers:
Student self-discipline (Students need to have a high level of discipline to complete a distance learning program)
Communication with faculty must be provided
Library and computer resources must be provided
Student services (cannot be over-emphasized)
Logistics system to handle the homework and examinations
Faculty buy-in
Highest quality courses must be ensured
Copyright issues
Provide faculty recognition
The market in engineering education is limited to individuals who are younger
than 30 to 32 years (This market is considerably smaller than the market for
MBAs)
The two largest markets, China and India, have no cash.
Online programs: streaming (bandwidth issues)
Faculty release time
Faculty pedagogical concerns
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Enablers:
Georgia Tech has a very entrepreneurial faculty.
There is a feeling that a technological institution should also use the latest technology in teaching.
Good support, starting at the level of the President.
Distance learning greatly enhances the reputation of a university.
Advice:
It is a long-term investment: don’t do it for the money!
It’s hard!
You must have buy-in at all levels: from faculty, administration, and the university.
Online distance learning needs to be compatible with the university’s strategic
plan.
Be absolutely sure you can provide the student support and make sure you
provide the quality.
Future plans
The strategy is to go for quality growth. Traditionally, the distance learning program
has grown by marketing to individuals and by enrolling one student at a time. To
increase the growth rate, partnering with companies is needed. The next step will
therefore be to look for companies who are serious about employee education and
to create partnerships with them.
Georgia Tech wants to expand the program to international markets. The focus is
on the European market. Although China and India are the world’s largest producers of bachelors degrees in engineering, they do not (yet) have the financial resources.
Georgia Tech will look into collaborative arrangements with other institutions (and
companies) that make sense for Georgia Tech.
Georgia Tech should develop a new set of hybrid degrees to combine business
with engineering. This is planned for 2002/2003.
Georgia Tech is working hard to expand its distance learning professional education program by offering non-credit courses and certificate programs. The vision is
to develop just-in-time education for the working professional.
Georgia Tech strives to be considered the world-wide standard in distance learning.
With the help of the Georgia Tech Foundation, Tech is building a global learning
center which will open in the summer of 2003. This new facility will allow Georgia
Tech to conduct both its continuing education and distance learning programs in
one of the most advanced centers in the world.
183
184
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5.7 Imperial College London
5.7.1 Integration of project and teamwork into curriculum
(Note: this practice is common to all of the engineering departments at Imperial
College. The specific details are based on an interview with a member of the computing department.)
Intent
Generally speaking, the type of person who intends to go into engineering is not
people-centered. In industry, however, being able to deal with people is an essential skill, otherwise graduates run the risk of trying to solve the wrong problems.
For this reason, Imperial College wants students to learn how to work together and
how to solve problems in a team as part of their education. People-centered skills
have to be an explicit part of the course. If this is not the case, students will be left
with a gap in their education.
Objectives
Imperial College has two main objectives. On the one hand, students should learn
how to identify customers’ problems, on the other, students should learn how to
work together to solve a specific problem.
Description
Integrated Laboratories:
Computing is purposely set up as an engineering and not as a scientific discipline.
Like other engineering areas, the Computing Department has integrated laboratories. This is something that is not normal practice in computing. Every week the
students have to complete about six hours of lab work.
Highly trained lab organizers run all the practical work. They usually have master’s
degrees and are working on their Ph.Ds. There is a different lab organizer for each
year. Labs are software rather than hardware-oriented. Integrated labs are separated from the main course. The lab organizers are responsible for designing exercises in cooperation with the academics. These exercises cover the subjects included in the courses. Once a year the lab organizers sit down with the academics
to define the program.
Groupwork:
Over the years, the number of group activities has increased dramatically. Imperial
st
College now has groupwork starting in the 1 year and continuing throughout the
nd
rd
2 and 3 years. The scheme for project and teamwork in Computing is as follows:
At the end of the 1st and throughout the 2nd year, all the projects are handled in
groups of three. The students can choose who they want to work with. Groups
of three are large enough to solve bigger technical problems and small enough
to avoid management problems. This means that students can focus on devel-
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
oping technical skills and do not (yet) have to concern themselves with group
dynamics.
1st year: There are two group activities in the first year (a research-oriented
project and the development of a graphics program). After completing their
projects, students present the results on a web page.
2nd year: There are three larger group exercises in the second year: Students 1)
build a compiler, 2) implement a small part of an operating system, 3) build a
multi-user web-based game.
3rd year: The primary activity in the 3rd year is a group project. By filling out
forms indicating subject preferences, students can choose from about 20 projects put forward by the professors. Imperial College makes every effort to give
students one of their choices. The timetable for this groupwork is 8 weeks. People from outside are always amazed to see what a group can accomplish in
such a short time. The project is carried out in groups of 6 or 7. Imperial College
creates the groups. This allows them to try to make sure that the groups are
balanced and that stronger and weaker students are mixed. Groups of friends
are not considered desirable. While working in this bigger group, students get
used to solving management problems in addition to technical problems. Each
project is put forward by an engineer/member of the academic staff who goes to
see the group once a week and offers advice. The students are also required to
keep logs. If they cannot solve a problem, they have to discuss it in the group.
Failure to arrive at successful collaboration might result in losing marks. Occasionally a group falls apart. In any 20 groups, there will be one that works really
badly, about 2 or 3 that have problems, while the rest work well together.
4th year: There is no group project in the fourth year, and students work on their
individual projects.
Interaction between Laboratories and Groupwork:
Groupwork forms part of the laboratory exercises. The lab organizers decide on the
exercises in consultation with the academic staff.
Methods
There are software tools for “working together” (revision control systems).
rd
In the case of the larger projects in the 3 year, students use tools to support requirements analysis during the design phase. Imperial College uses commercial
tools available on the market, e.g. Rational Rose. Students can choose which they
prefer.
At least one presentation is required a year:
A poster session covering the content of the students’ research projects in the
st
1 year. Students also have to prepare a quiz. Imperial College considers this
quite useful, as the questions foster understanding of the subject.
In the 3rd year, students prepare a technical presentation as well as a management presentation. Students find it very difficult to formulate presentations to
non-technical people because they do not know what non-technical people think
or know.
rd
The 3 year includes a course in presentation techniques in association with the
group project, which sets out to teach students how to communicate verbally with
185
186
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
technical people and management. Students take this very seriously. In addition to
the presentations they have to write a one-page management executive summary.
Results
rd
During their 3 year, students go out into industry for 6 months. These industrial
placements are highly successful and more places are offered than Imperial College has students to fill them. When Imperial College started to bring students into
industry, companies complained that 6 months was not enough to train people.
Nowadays, students know how to work and perform from the first day.
Students know how to seek help and work with other people. This is a result of the
teamwork training. Furthermore, when students are working on their individual
projects they ask one another when they have problems. This is an indicator for
social competence.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The level of satisfaction in project and teamwork at Imperial College is high.
Imperial College never realizes very large projects with 20 students or more in a
team. Projects are not multi-layered as they might be in industry. This means that
programming is aimed at the medium rather than at the large scale.
It would be useful for some of the projects to be proposed by industry. That way,
projects would be more like the real world. However, this is not done due to the
huge coordination effort it would entail.
Investments
Some, but not a large proportion of the software run by Imperial College costs
money. A lot of the software is sponsored.
The major resource is manpower:
During the first two years: two people (lab organizers) for one day per week
3rd year projects: one day for twenty members of staff for eight weeks
Experience
Barriers:
Groupwork is labor-intensive. Academics have research commitments to honor.
Teaching a large class is more efficient than small groups of students. This means
that Imperial College needs adequate numbers of staff to supervise projects. It is
interesting to note that new members of staff tend to take on this task because they
like to see the effects of their teaching.
Group projects are immensely time-consuming for the students and leads to a
certain number of complaints.
Enablers:
The demand for students from Imperial College to work in industry has certainly
helped and is a desirable development.
Professional societies stress groupwork in education
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
In the first two years there is a decrease in the marking load because students
help one another.
Advice:
First of all, it is important to hire people who devote their time entirely to practical
work and are not required to do it alongside their academic work (e.g. lab organizers).
It is also desirable to have people with enhanced social skills. This makes them
easier and better to work with them.
Another piece of advice from Imperial College is to balance the students’ workload
carefully and to integrate laboratory work into all teaching.
Boundary conditions
Hardware and software are required as well as adequate time for the students plus
a reasonable staff-to-student ratio.
Future plans
Imperial College wants to keep the level of project and teamwork stable, with no
extension planned for the immediate future.
5.7.2 WISE (Women in Science and Engineering) program to
attract female students
Intent
Imperial College initiated the program in 1985, based on the awareness that the
percentage of female students was only in the region of 16% – 20%.
Objectives
The first objective in starting WISE was to increase the number of female students
at Imperial College and to change IC’s reputation as a male-dominated university.
The second objective was to give women a better general insight into what science
and engineering are all about.
Description
In the first two weeks of the summer vacation Imperial College organizes 8 two-day
WISE courses. The different departments are free to choose whether they participate in these courses. While participation is very high, it can happen that one or
two courses are not available. Four departments are involved in a two-day course,
e.g. biochemistry, chemistry, mathematics and computing. Students may elect to
attend two sessions in different departments. The content of the sessions is determined solely by the participating department. The entire organization of the
courses is taken care of by IC’s administration, through the Schools Liaison Office.
Imperial College uses a detailed form to advertise the WISE courses in all 4’700
schools in the UK, and there is an online application form. The students (16 – 17
years) can apply once they receive the form. Up until this year the courses had
187
188
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
always been oversubscribed. If that is the case the organization team has to select
students on the basis of academic criteria. Each course take up to 60 students.
On day one of their course, the students arrive for lunch. They attend a session
with undergraduates, male and female students, who are to act as their mentors for
the next two days. There is one mentor for every 10 students. Before lunch female
scientists or engineers give presentations, and then join the students for lunch. In
the afternoon the students spend 2.5 to 3 hours working in laboratories of the departments of their choice. In the evening the Imperial College organizes a social
event, again with the presence of staff members from the different departments. To
get an idea of campus life at Imperial College the students stay overnight. The next
morning the WISE participants spend another half a day in the laboratory with the
second department of their choice. At the end of the morning staff members from
all departments answer students’ questions and queries. This is followed by lunch
and the end of the WISE course.
The WISE course is planned by the Schools Liaison Office which is located in
Central Administration. They report to Professor Tim Clark, Pro-Rector (Admissions).
Methods
In 1985 the rector of Imperial College set up a fairly high level working party to
discuss the problem of the low percentage of female students at Imperial College.
They created WISE and decided that this is the most effective way to attract more
female students.
Each year a member of this working party evaluates the effectiveness of the program.
Results
Imperial College has succeeded in increasing the percentage of female students:
1985
16% – 20%
2001
30%
Students participating in the WISE course find it very stimulating and some even
change their minds in favour of Imperial College. Usually 1/3 of WISE course participants apply to Imperial College.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
Imperial College is very satisfied with the program.
Rather than identifying any great need to improve the current WISE course, Imperial College is actually starting to see a requirement for action where the intake of
male students is concerned. The improvement would thus be to offer a similar
course to male students in the 16 – 17 age group.
External view
Imperial College has not participated in or commissioned any studies.
At an informal level, the growing interest in their program is viewed as a positive
external feedback.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Investments
In 1985 the budget amounted to GBP 16’000. This included accommodation, catering and administration. The departments do not charge for their activities during
the days of the course.
Today, the cost of running the program is GBP 40’000 (incl. accommodation, catering and administration).
Experience
Barriers:
The biggest barrier encountered was convincing the departments of the importance
of this program.
Enablers:
On the other hand, some departments were major drivers of this project. The fact
that there were academics who firmly believed in the necessity of WISE meant that
they were able to convince other departments to participate in this program.
Advice:
Get the academics on your side!
Boundary conditions
In order to conduct a program like WISE, the departments must contribute the facilities and the commitment.
Future plans
Imperial College is considering a course for male students as well. In the future
there might well be a joint WISE course – for both male and female students.
In addition, the university wants to target a younger age group of girls in the 10 to
11 age range. Imperial College currently offers Year 9, 13/14 year-old girls a
course called GETSET: Girls Entering Tomorrow's Science, Engineering and
Technology. This course has been run many times and focuses on a residential 3day problem-solving activity. The program takes the form of a competition,
whereas WISE does not.
5.7.3 “Mastery” to provide engineers with a more holistic education
Intent
First of all, the Department of Chemical Engineering (CE) felt that a large number
of their students had built up expertise in answering very well-focused examination
questions. Students knew how to tackle an examination and were able to develop
a strategy for passing them. However, when it came to practical projects, where it
was not clear which engineering tool to use, students did not perform as well.
189
190
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
CE therefore took the decision to design an examination where students were required to select and combine the elements from their store of knowledge.
The second issue was that students tended to forget the content of previous
courses. The concept of mastery ensured that examinations tested the students’
knowledge of previous courses.
Objectives
The objective was to ensure that students did not compartmentalize their studies.
A (very secondary) objective reflects the university’s general policy that students
who come into the university should be able to learn how to control their own study
patterns (contrary to the learning experiences at school). First-year students hand
in their solutions to Mastery exercises (but no other homework) throughout the
year; this represents a good way of gently introducing this objective.
Description
CE started with the pilot run in 1994. All the first-year students were given a mastery-type exercise before the examination (the exercise did not count). They were
asked to solve an integrated problem which touched on all the subjects they had
learnt in the first year. The result was that students failed miserably, although they
did beautifully in their individual exams. This confirmed the objectives of introducing a mastery examination.
In 1995, CE introduced mastery to the first-year students. In the following year, it
was introduced to first and second-year students, and so on (wave system).
Students who do not pass the mastery examination cannot move on to the next
year.
Mastery does not cover all the subjects but only the engineering basics (such as, in
the case of Chemical Engineering: fluid mechanics, heat transfer, thermodynamics,
process analysis). Subjects such as mathematics, organic chemistry, etc. were
excluded.
In the second year, more subjects are introduced. In the third and fourth years, no
further subjects are introduced – mastery covers all the basic subjects and is of
higher complexity than in the previous years.
In the first and second years, mastery is conducted in two parts. The first part covers the basic concepts of engineering, and students are told the subject areas. In
the second part, students are given an integrated problem without being told the
subject area. In the third and fourth years, mastery is completely integrated (students are not told the subject).
Students are prepared for the mastery examination in the first and second years
only. Here, students are given about 10-12 exercises with both types of questions.
Between 10%-15% of students fail the first two attempts at the mastery examination. About half of them have usually failed in the individual subjects, too, so they
are not given a third chance. Only about 1-2 students per year fail at the third attempt.
Organizational requirements: Each year of the course, one member of the academic staff is responsible for the year’s teaching and learning. This person is also
responsible for organizing the mastery examination and exercises for that year,
and coordinates with various lecturers involved. Whereas the lecturers are respon-
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
sible for the individual subject questions and the exercises, this person is responsible for preparation of the integrated part of the mastery.
Methods
The exercises that are given to the students throughout the year.
CE hires several post-graduate students for one to two hours per week to give
tutorials on the mastery exercises (this applies only to the first and second years).
Results
Students appreciate the importance of retaining basic knowledge and understanding concepts from one year to the next. Their retention of material from previous
years has improved somewhat.
In the final year project, students are much better at integrating information than in
the years before the mastery. Further evidence is that students no longer ask “stupid” questions that show that they do not understand how the subjects fit together.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
On the whole, CE is highly satisfied. However, there is still a lot of room for improvement.
In the second year, the submission rate for the exercises drops to 50%-60%. The
reasons for this are currently being analyzed.
Imperial College has a policy of circulating all examinations to the students, with
the exception of the mastery. As a result, Imperial College tended to recycle questions from one year to the next. This was not really effective as students copied
down the questions and passed them on.
There is some complacency among faculty when it comes to developing integrated
questions. Integrated questions require a high level of (time-intensive) creativity.
At the same time, students are becoming a little complacent and the pass marks
achieved are not as high as in previous years.
Externals view
(see chapter 4.5.2, p.107)
Investments
Chemical Engineering conducts an annual teaching load survey. This shows that in
the first two years, each member of the academic staff needs to spend about 15
hours on dealing with the individual mastery subjects. This amounts to about 120
academic hours per year plus about 30 hours on the part of the person coordinating the mastery.
Post-graduate students for tutoring.
Experience
Barriers:
Everybody thought that the mastery concept was a good idea and highly desirable,
so there were no barriers. This is also true for the students.
191
192
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Enablers:
Initially, CE had a mastery team (four people) who designed the concept. This
group did a lot of the groundwork. When mastery was introduced to further years, it
was then possible to utilize the group’s experience.
Advice:
Don’t try to implement mastery in one go, it is better to implement it in waves.
Have the individual departments decide if this is a good idea. Don’t implement this
concept in a top-down manner.
Boundary conditions
Mastery cannot possibly work if there is a truly modular system in engineering, e.g.
if students can do anything they like in the order they like. If this is case, it will be
exceedingly difficult to come up with integrated questions.
Future plans
Future plans mostly relate to implementing the improvements mentioned above.
5.8 Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
5.8.1 Integration of lectures, exercises, and teaching of noncore competences
Intent
The following practice is essentially based on the new curriculum in Electrical Engineering.
Within Electrical Engineering at KTH, too many students were failing (despite the
fact that they had the capacity to complete their studies). Students simply showed
a lack of interest and motivation.
The situation was that students needed to be more motivated to pursue a long and
demanding education.
Objectives
KTH wanted to make its program more attractive and more interesting without
compromising the content, particularly where the more theoretical elements of the
studies were concerned.
Communication aspects, project work, and management skills, which are usually
taught in courses, should also be integrated into the more traditional studies at an
early stage. This ought to increase the motivation of the students.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Description
First, KTH introduced a second semester project course with built-in project management. To accomplish this, KTH took the project management part of a last semester project management course, streamlined it and applied it to the new course
in the second semester. Students are put into groups of 4-5 and have to conduct a
practical engineering project (e.g. measuring the energy consumption of an electrically powered automobile, measuring the efficiency of the human body, constructing a high-power amplifier for music). They are required to apply their project management skills to these projects. Students have to keep written reports, give verbal
presentations, design posters, and fulfill different roles in the team. The course
load is not as heavy as in real project work, but still demanding, e.g. in terms of
time restrictions. The project planning, written report, verbal and poster presentations are marked, and the final mark is the average of the marks awarded for each
part of the course. Most of the projects are based on normal high-school knowledge with the addition of first and second semester knowledge in mathematics,
mechanics and electronics.
Second, KTH uses a special project management booklet. Students follow the
booklet to conduct the project management courses in the second and later semesters.
Third, KTH changed the education in mathematics. In the first semester, there are
two fundamental courses. The rest of the compulsory courses are given between
the second and the fifth semesters. The advantage of not having all mathematics
courses in the first two years is to make it more interesting for the students. It creates space for more engineering-related courses early on in the course without
losing the mathematical depth. The math courses are coordinated with an appropriate engineering course, i.e. differential equations and transforms are coordinated with signals and systems.
Fourth, KTH integrated engineering-like subjects in the first semester. KTH wanted
to increase the amount of practice-oriented courses early on in the studies. One of
the very first courses in Electrical Engineering is Digital Electronics.
Methods
The main method was to mix theoretical and practical subjects and use the project
form to implement these practices.
Results
KTH has obtained a high degree of successful examinations, e.g. in mathematics,
more students are taking the examination and achieving better results.
It has been possible to reduce the number of early drop-outs in Electrical Engineering from 25-30% to about 10%.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
So far, the level of satisfaction is high.
The level of satisfaction on the part of students and teachers is important. The
short term goal is to maintain the level KTH has reached.
193
194
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
External view
This new curriculum has not yet been evaluated externally.
Investments
The project course is the most expensive course. There are about 35 teachers
involved in some way. In the first year, KTH invested about SEK 1 million to educate the teachers and prepare the project. In the second year (now running), no
additional funding is necessary.
The participating institutes now receive regular grants for running the courses.
They are highly motivated to demonstrate good performance to the students.
Experience
Barriers:
At the very beginning, some teachers had to be convinced to give the project
course as much as 5 credits (40 credits annually)
The fact that the institutes are paid little for the project course was a minor obstacle.
Enablers:
The group of positive (often young) teachers who were convinced.
The need on the part of the students.
Advice:
You have to be a little illogical and not put all the subjects into their strictly logical
sequence. Instead, make sure you consider the needs of the students and what it
takes to increase their motivation.
Boundary conditions
The student groups must not be too large. KTH’s Electrical Engineering program
has about 150-175 students. If the program becomes too large, e.g. 300 students,
it might be difficult to obtain the necessary time from the teachers.
Future plans
KTH aims to have at least one major project in every study year, which creates a
good balance between classical and modern teaching. Each project should be
conducted using the project management methodology.
5.8.2 Creation of international master programs
Intent
(Note: the following mainly applies to the international master’s program in scientific computing.)
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
At KTH, students can choose from a number of different programs (competence
branches) in the fourth year. About five years ago the program in scientific computing only attracted few students.
One intent in creating an international master’s program was to increase the number of (international and Swedish) students interested in scientific computing.
Another intent was to make use of the financial resources offered by the central
office at KTH to develop an international master’s program.
A third reason was that one professor, who is also a professor at UCLA, probed his
international contacts and found that the timing to start such a program was ideal.
Objectives
One of the objectives was to use the financial support to create new courses for
the international master’s program. The department was able to develop three
extra courses (computational physics, advanced numerical analysis, fluid dynamics).
Another objective was to use the attractiveness of the international master’s program for the recruitment of Ph.D. students in scientific computing. Increasing the
number of master’s theses was also a goal.
Description
The department developed its international master’s program in scientific computing in 1996. The first students started in 1997. The financial resources only allowed
the university to take ten students in the first year. The objective was to increase
this number to 25-30.
Currently, KTH offers 13 different master programs.
The international master’s program starts in autumn at the same time as the regular programs. It runs for 1.5 years. In the first year students take about 50% of
compulsory courses. They are free to select the rest of the courses. In the last
semester, students write their master’s thesis.
Students do not have to pay for this program. They only have to pay for travel,
accommodation, study material, and contribute a small fee to the student union
(applies for all master programs). Some program coordinators feel that a small fee
should be charged to make the program more attractive. However, only about 20%
of the international students receive scholarships from the Swedish authorities.
The international master’s program courses belong to KTH’s regular program. International master’s program students take these courses together with Swedish
students, which is attractive for both student groups. All the courses are taught in
English (this also applies to textbooks, web material, etc.).
The department offers social events for international students.
Each program has a program coordinator. The program coordinator has mainly
administrative duties. However, some coordinators feel that it is also their role to
enhance the program, initiate cooperations with other departments, trigger the
development of new courses, and compare their own program with those of other
leading universities.
Student selection: Incoming students should have a bachelor’s degree from a recognized university. Academic grades are the most important selection criterion
195
196
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
(applies for all master programs). At NADA we also try to make sure that there is a
good mix of nationalities and male/female students. There are about 6 applications
for each study place.
The final selection of students is completed six months before the program starts.
However, the list of selected students changes quite a lot because students withdraw their applications (the main reason is the financial situation). There is a reserve list of about 10 students. In the last month prior to the start of the program
there are a great many changes.
The program is open to students from all over the world. The scientific computing
program attracts students from virtually every continent. So far, however, no student from Australia has applied for the program. Most of the students come from
China.
Students apply directly to the department. There is a local organization at the department responsible for recruitment and selection. In addition, a central office at
KTH checks the details of the student applications selected by the department.
Another central organization takes care of student accommodation (applies to all
master programs).
Methods
All courses are taught in English. Other than this, it was not necessary to develop
any extra methods or material.
The students evaluate each program at the end. The department relies heavily on
these evaluations to improve the program. One example of an improvement is a
two-week programming course in C offered before the program starts.
Results
More than 80% of the international master program students in scientific computing
have graduated. About 30-40% of the graduates have continued their studies with
a Ph.D.
The number of students has steadily increased (1997: 8; 1998: 14; 1999: 14; 2000:
16; 2001: 20). Currently, there are about 6 applications for each study place. It
would be ideal to have 25-30 students. This would optimize the financial situation
of the program.
There is also a positive effect on Swedish students: the number of master’s theses
in scientific computing has increased significantly from three in 1997 to 30 in 2001
(15 by regular and 15 by international students).
The program has been very important for the development of courses and the
reputation of the department from the students’ point of view.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
There is a high level of satisfaction. The experiences have been very good (department and development of courses).
The department has the possibility of developing more courses, which would increase the choice for the students.
In addition, collaboration with other departments could be enhanced. This would
give students more choice as to where they write their master’s thesis.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
External view
The international master programs have been evaluated by one of the scholarship
institutions.
In a few weeks’ time, there will be a national evaluation of the scientific computing
program.
Investments
To start the program, the department received special funding of 0.5 million Swedish crones. This covered the development of three new courses and the costs of
recruiting students for the first time.
As yet, the department does not generate revenues from the program. The reason
is that the student group is not large enough (30 students would yield an economic
benefit).
Experience
Enablers:
The department (professors and administrative staff) was convinced that the international master’s program was the next step in the development of scientific computing.
Advice:
It is important to have one person who is responsible for the program (the program
coordinator).
It is also important for the students to have a number of courses they can choose
from.
Some courses should be offered in special subjects where the department has a
strong research focus.
Boundary conditions
The degree offered to students is important. KTH gives students a Swedish title
which, in English, is translated as a master’s degree. So far, this title has been
accepted by other universities when students want to study for a Ph.D (applies to
all master programs). This situation is not ideal, KTH would like to give an international degree.
The President of KTH is very keen on the international master’s programs. The
departments receive no specific financial support for the programs from KTH, but
there is a working infrastructure (accommodation, office, international office, international branch at the student union, etc.) which is a prerequisite for international
master programs (applies for all master programs).
Future plans
In the future, the adoption of the 3-5-8 system in Sweden might be possible. This
would have the consequence of developing a two-year master for the students.
197
198
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5.8.3 High level of interdisciplinarity
Intent
(The following practice describes two initiatives to integrate interdisciplinary subjects at both the curriculum level and at the individual course level.)
Mechatronics: The idea of moving in the direction of increased interdisciplinarity
first took root over 20 years ago. KTH created the mechatronics curriculum about
15 years ago as KTH’s answer to industry’s need to hire mechanical engineers
with a broader background in related areas.
Industrial economics: Another initiative, which was launched with the aim of integrating business administration and other non-core competences, culminated in
the industrial economics program.
Integration into technical courses: There is a trend towards integrating nontechnical subjects into technical courses in order to offer more practical teaching.
Objectives
One objective is to move away from separate courses on environmental issues
(and other disciplines, e.g. fundamental issues) and integrate them into existing
courses.
Another objective is to make these subjects more relevant to the students. This can
be realized through problem-oriented teaching.
These objectives can be applied to the following areas: environmental issues,
management skills, economics skills, IT skills (CAD, programming, simulation).
Description
Mechatronics: In addition to the integration of several interdisciplinary (technical)
subjects, KTH needed to create interdisciplinary research areas to support these
activities. Interdisciplinary research gives rise to new research problems and also
new approaches to solving existing problems. In order to achieve the interdisciplinarity, KTH established cooperations with other disciplines both within the university and outside it.
Industrial economics: The industrial economics program, which began in 1990, is a
curriculum that is similar to Mechanical Engineering. The new approach was to
integrate economics and management into the technology courses. Before, students took one or two separate courses in economics and management. Students
achieve depth by specializing in a technical field and obtain a broad education in
management and economics.
Integration into technical courses: Today, the aim is to integrate interdisciplinary
subjects, such as environmental issues, rather than having separate courses. A
number of new courses have been started (e.g. environmental design or energy
and environment) that are given in collaboration with different departments. Production Engineering courses, which integrate issues related to the working environment, are another example.
This is a process which involves resource shifts in teaching load between departments. As a consequence, there need to be negotiations with the course administrators of the different departments.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
In the case of project-based courses, a certain amount of effort is involved in putting the teams together. Simple psychological tests are used to classify the students, for example. Teams are selected so that they have a good chance of succeeding. This is done in the specializations (e.g. in advanced courses in mechatronics). A team of teachers and instructors from the department perform the task.
As an alternative to testing students, some projects “advertise” different positions
for which students can apply (e.g. “project manager”, or “technical specialist for
software”).
In order to be able to give these courses, it is essential to organize a team of people who are able to cooperate. It also requires time to develop case studies and
find interdisciplinary problems. The danger is having only one person in an interdisciplinary program – if that person then leaves, continuity is jeopardized. Thus,
developing and sustaining the team of lecturers is a crucial issue.
Methods
One important aspect of interdisciplinarity is backing it up with a mixed team in the
department or collaborating with other departments. In the courses themselves, the
approach is to integrate interdisciplinarity in the form of problem-based projects.
While solving problems, students realize that they need additional technical or nontechnical competences. The design of a robot’s mechanical system, for example, is
very closely related to its control system. In addition, there are environmental issues which need to be considered such as the use of lead for the counterweight,
which can be eliminated through other designs.
Results
One interesting result is the way students are tackling problems in courses that
integrate interdisciplinary aspects. Students’ approaches to solving problems tend
to be more open-ended and diversified. Students see that it is okay to have different perspectives, and project work has become more interesting. In earlier
courses, all the students had to perform the same calculations. Today, students
have to define their roles and develop different ideas and objectives.
The fact that the integration of a non-technical subject into a technical course leads
to more up-to-date teaching is another interesting result. Whereas a separate
course is more general, an integrated course addresses situations (e.g. in respect
of environmental issues) that exist in industry today.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
KTH is very satisfied with the results achieved.
A good deal of this integration, and the interdisciplinary and holistic approach to
engineering problems has been established in the specializations during the final
year of education. It is planned that in the envisaged 3-5-8 system, there will be
new programs with even more approaches to interdisciplinarity.
Investments
Project-related teaching methods are more costly than traditional lectures. KTH is
allocating more money to these courses.
199
200
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Experience
Barriers:
The integration of microcomputer technology, microelectronics, software, etc.
initially created a lot of skepticism among the faculty.
Starting up interdisciplinary research led to initial confusion about concepts and
terminology. It took quite some time before a common level of communication
was established.
Even today, interdisciplinary research often leads to initial difficulties of acceptance, funding, and publishing.
Enablers:
One strong professor who acted as a driver and other committed professors were
the main enablers.
Advice:
It is very important to consider the discrepancy between what the university might
want you to do to attract more students and the financial support that is available.
To run an interdisciplinary group you must have a professorship and a research
group. Allocate resources and create a subject!
Future plans
To prepare for a possible 3-5-8 system, the curricula of Mechanical Engineering,
Material Engineering, and Vehicle Engineering have been looked at to see how
they could be updated and modified. Much of the work has been in the direction of
interdisciplinarity in the sense of integrating new subjects into existing topics. Furthermore, the integration of basic science and applied sciences has been considered. This means integrating some mathematics courses into more applied
courses and computer-based courses into earlier courses.
5.9 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
5.9.1 Successful quality assurance by external Visiting Committees (VC)
Intent
The structure of MIT in terms of governance is such that the members of the Corporation (the governing board of MIT) bear full legal and moral responsibility for the
operation of the institution. They discharge this responsibility in large measure by
electing a President and supervising the activities of the institution in a general
sense. The visiting committees clearly represent a very important link in that process. They provide a means by which members of the governing board and other
committee members can be informed about activities in research, education, and
support organizations. Visiting committees have been in place at MIT since 1875.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Objectives
There are two principal objectives:
1. To provide an independent assessment of the quality of activities conducted by
the enterprises, which are visited on a regular basis, typically every 2 years.
2. To provide this information to the governing board in a way that enhances their
knowledge of the activities of these enterprises.
It is also important to note that the assessment itself is of immediate value to the
unit assessed.
Description
Structure of the visiting committees: There are some 31 visiting committees. A
visiting committee exists for each academic department and for certain support
activities (e.g. libraries, office for sponsored programs, department of athletics).
Members of the visiting committee are selected by the governing board for overlapping terms. Members usually experience two meetings of the committee, more if
they are elected to a second term. This overlap ensures continuity and follow-up on
the implementation of the recommendations made by the previous meeting: a visiting committee meeting usually begins with a review of what action has been taken
regarding the recommendations of the last report.
A typical visiting committee consists of 18 members, six from each of the following
three groups:
First: members of the governing board (the Corporation). The chair of the VC is
always a member of the governing board.
Second: individuals who have broad and genuine experience in the field assessed. These are typically people from industry or academics (not from MIT).
These members are proposed by the administration, invited by the President,
and elected by the governing board.
Third: graduates from MIT, often from the department assessed, with some
professional experience. They are proposed by the alumni association and
elected by the governing board.
Consequently, the visiting committee consists of people with subject matter expertise and familiarity with the unit assessed.
All the members of the committee are volunteers.
Process: The dates for a visiting committee meeting are typically set one year in
advance. The chairman of the visiting committee will consult with the Department
Head about the agenda of the meeting two to three months beforehand. The Department Head prepares some written background material (regarding enrollment,
research activities, background of presenters, etc.) which is sent to the members a
month ahead.
The visiting committee meetings last one and one-half to two days. At the end of
the meeting, the members have a few hours to consider the elements of their report. They then meet for an hour with officers from the administration (Chairman of
the Corporation, President, Provost, Chancellor, respective Dean). At this meeting,
the visiting committee presents an oral report on their principal findings.
At the next meeting of the governing board, the chairman of the committee makes
an oral report and answers questions. Within three months of this meeting, the
visiting committee chair prepares a written report. This report is formally addressed
201
202
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
to the governing board, and is approved by the Executive Committee before copies
are sent to Academic Council members, members of the committee, and to the
Department Head. (The report might not be made available to the Department
Head if the visiting committee suggest a change in the leadership of the department, which has happened in the past.)
The advice of the visiting committee is taken very seriously at all levels.
A typical meeting of a visiting committee starts with a meeting with the Department
Head who provides an overview. This is followed by presentations on educational
and research activities. During the course of the meeting, the visiting committee
will meet separately and privately with faculty (tenured and non-tenured) and students (undergraduates, graduates, and post-docs). The interviewees are usually
self-selected by invitation from the Department Head.
During the course of a visiting committee meeting, there is a dinner at which faculty
members have the opportunity to meet with the visiting committee members on an
informal basis. This is mainly to refresh personal contacts and for networking opportunities. Students typically meet with committee members during the day’s
agenda.
Results
The participants in the visiting committee activities (both the department and the
administration) regard the visiting committee as a very important vehicle for longterm quality control (which is somewhat difficult to quantify).
Visiting committees have led directly to changes in Department Heads or commitments by the administration to provide funding (e.g. construct a new building).
They have also helped make changes in curriculum, strategic planning, etc.
The reports provide officers of the institution with an excellent means of keeping up
to date with the institution’s activities.
Preparation by the department entails a valuable degree of introspection.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The level of satisfaction is very high. The conviction, which prevails within the institution and among those who serve on the visiting committees, is that this practice constitutes an important function and service for MIT, and contributes to the
Institute’s sustained excellence.
External view
(see 4.3.1, p. 67)
Investments
Typically, there are 15-16 visiting committee meetings each year. This costs
about USD 120’000 p.a. for direct support (communication, transportation,
meals, material, etc.).
Travel expenses: USD 79’000 for members who need reimbursement.
Staff to support the visiting committees: 2 persons, about USD 150’000 p.a
from the MIT Corporation Office.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Experience
Advice:
The most crucial feature of this system of long-term quality evaluation and maintaining governing board involvement is the direct and personal contribution of the
institution’s senior officers (Corporation Chairman, President, Provost, Chancellor).
This is crucial to promoting immediate action.
Boundary conditions
The nature of the governance structure is important when considering whether a
visiting committee system of this kind is useful. There should be a governing board
which bears the ultimate legal and moral responsibility for the institution. If this
system exists, a visiting committee would be useful.
It is important not to lose sight of the fact that the underlying purpose is to provide
an independent assessment of people with expertise and to make that assessment
accessible to those who are responsible for decisions in the institution.
Future plans
The structure and process of visiting committees will continue, perhaps with minor
changes over time.
5.9.2 Innovative way of creating new units
Intent
Before 1998, the school of engineering at MIT had eight academic departments. As
MIT wanted to create new curricula in bio-engineering and systems engineering,
the choice was whether to create new departments, do nothing, or do something
different. MIT felt that creating a new organizational structure, rather than simply a
new department, would signal that active, interdisciplinary synergy among traditional disciplines was an important educational an research goal.
Objectives
To create new educational curricula and research initiatives.
To hire new faculty which otherwise would not have been recruited at MIT since
the traditional departments had a narrower view of what kind of faculty they
wanted.
Description
In 1998, MIT created two divisions in bio-engineering (today: about 30 faculty
members) and systems engineering (today: about 30 faculty members). The process of creating the new divisions took about two years. The main decisions were
made by the dean of engineering and the provost, and were followed by full faculty
approval.
Divisions are led by division heads, a function that fully corresponds to that of department heads.
203
204
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
The main difference between divisions and traditional departments is that in divisions the dominant mode of faculty appointments is shared appointments (usually
50% in a traditional department and 50% in a division). The only other difference is
that divisions do not offer undergraduate major curricula, although this is not necessarily ruled out.
Results
The results are very positive. MIT has accomplished the two main objectives (creation of new interdisciplinary research programs and curricula, and hiring of new
faculty). Students are very interested in the new educational programs.
Level of Satisfaction/Potential for Improvement
The level of satisfaction is very high.
The main thing is to make sure that the divisions are able to hire the faculty.
External View
There have been visiting committee meetings for each of the divisions so far, and
both were very favorable.
Investments
The main expenditures were hiring new faculty, supporting new graduate students,
and the development of new courses.
Experience
Barriers
The main barrier was uncertainty because people were a little afraid of the new
type of structure.
Enablers
There was a tremendous amount of goodwill on the part of the faculty and very
strong leadership by the dean and the provost.
Advice
Divisions are a very good thing but they are difficult in terms of administration. The
heads of the divisions have to interact with all the other department heads in a very
synergistic way. This means that a division head has to consider the effects of his
or her decisions on the other departments – something a department head does
not need to do.
Boundary Conditions
The intellectual reasons for this course of action have to be well articulated.
In addition, strong administrative leadership is needed to overcome some of the
inertia.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Future Plans
The plan is to strengthen the existing divisions. If new areas come along, it would
be important for MIT to consider divisions as a possible structure (no new divisions
are currently planned).
5.9.3 Education: Broad, fundamental, yet practical
Intent
The broad, fundamental, yet practical education that MIT offers in its program is
influenced by the curriculum and the co-op program with industry and the industrial
connection program. These three aspects will be discussed below with a special
focus on their implementation in the Department of Electrical Engineering and
Computer Science (EECS).
Description
Broad curriculum: MIT follows a philosophy that emphasizes breadth in education.
This philosophy is a common denominator which influences many decisions made
at MIT. It applies not only to EECS, but also to many other fields.
The notion of related breadth in the teaching at EECS means that students should
be able to see a connection between subjects and their careers. Experience shows
that there has to be an explicit effort to help students see these connections. For
example, students who were particularly interested in Computer Science did not
see why they needed to learn Electrical Engineering. The argument is that much
that is taught in Electrical Engineering courses is of a general nature, e.g. ways to
model physical worlds. And much of what graduates will do later on will involve
building models in order to understand the physical world. Another example is the
transfer of applications to other subject areas, e.g. from an application in Electrical
Engineering to a model of the flow of blood in the human body.
The philosophy of related breadth is mainly implemented by the careful choice of
lecturers. Earlier courses in particular are often taught by lecturers not directly involved in this field. As an example, a Computer Science professor sometimes lectures the introductory circuit course in Electrical Engineering. Another, more common, means is having a course taught by two lecturers. The recitation instructors,
typically faculty members, also play an important role in the larger subjects.
Students learn more mathematics than is typical at other US universities (this is
especially true for Computer Science). Students should understand that mathematics is a broadly applicable tool and that there are many types of mathematics.
For this reason the department exposes students to different kinds of mathematics
such as calculus, linear algebra, probability, or discrete mathematics.
In addition, the department decided to run its own probability course. This course
has a much more applied character than the one taught by the mathematics department. It is the most popular probability course on the campus, taken by many
students from all over MIT. Furthermore, EECS teaches its own discrete mathematics course (occasionally in cooperation with the mathematics department). This
course is more applied and places a greater emphasis on issues such as algorithms.
205
206
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Industrial co-op program: MIT has had an industrial co-op program for over 80
years. In 2001 major changes were introduced to this program.
Historically, students applied to a number of carefully reviewed companies that
belonged to the program. Students joined in their sophomore year and stayed with
the company until graduation. They alternately stayed at the companies (for which
they received academic credit) in the summer and returned to MIT in the fall. They
wrote their master’s thesis in industry (with some help from a faculty member) and
received a combined bachelor/master degree.
Today, it is still possible to do the program according to the old scheme. However,
there was a need for greater flexibility in the program:
Students expressed the wish to experiment with working at different companies.
Graduates used to work for large technology-based companies. Today, they
also join smaller companies, found start-ups, or work for other industries (e.g. in
the financial sector).
MIT therefore made the following changes to the program:
Students can change companies and leave the program after any assignment.
Companies are not required to invite a student back the following year if they
are not satisfied with the student’s performance.
Students can join later than in their sophomore year (latest: senior year).
The companies interview the students and name those they would accept.
Similarly, the students name their three favorite companies. The department
makes the matches.
Industrial connection program: The industrial connection program was initiated in
January 2000. The main reason for this program was that the department decided
that it wanted improve its links with industry. The industrial connection program
offers a much broader kind of network than the co-op program. Moreover, its focus
is not on education (such as the co-op program), but on offering recruitment opportunities by exposing students to companies and vice versa. The program is not
in any way integrated into the curriculum and has no connections with research.
Companies are invited to come to MIT and provide information in the form of a
careers fair. They are also given the opportunity to come to the university individually. Here, companies provide information to students in an evening session. The
next day they conduct recruitment interviews.
Results
Broad curriculum: The most frequent tangible results are the positive feedback the
department receives from alumni regarding the breadth of the curriculum. Furthermore, the exposure to many different subjects gives students the confidence that
they can quickly learn new subjects and thus accomplish tasks they had not been
able to do beforehand.
Co-op program: For the first time in five years, there has been an increase of student interest in the program:
Number of students applying / entering / total:
1996: 161 / 80 / total sophomores: 367
2000: 73 / 41 / 363
2001: 107 / not available / about 360
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Industrial connection program: Although students have reacted very positively,
growth is not as high as expected because of the current slow economy. Company
participation grew from 0 in 2000 to 20 in 2001. The target range is 30-35 companies. The department wants to keep the program small enough so that it can still
be managed.
Level of Satisfaction/Potential for Improvement
Broad curriculum: Although the overall satisfaction is high, there is always improvement potential. For example, the curriculum does not evolve fast enough (this
might be due to the very large classes of up to 300 students). There is also a need
to offer more advanced courses.
Co-op program: There used to be some dissatisfaction because the program had
not changed with the times. Today, it is too early to gauge results from the new
program.
Industrial connection program: This program is only two years old. Right now, the
department is quite happy with it.
Investments
Broad curriculum:
Co-op program: There is one full-time staff member and one faculty member who
is a director of the program and devotes one third of his time to the program. Each
company has a faculty member as liaison officer. Every thesis has a supervisor on
campus. Companies pay students and pay for being a member of the MIT program.
Industrial connection program: The program is run by one full-time person. Industry
has to pay a certain amount of money.
Experience
Advice
Co-op program:
Understand the objectives
Survey best practices
Don’t move too quickly
Understand your students and address companies who would be attracted by
your students. There should be a fit: it is important that companies understand
the objectives of the program (they shouldn’t be just looking for summer internships!). The co-op program works best when companies have MIT graduates
working at the company.
Industrial connection program: MIT has contacted many other universities to understand what other universities are doing. The advice is:
Start slowly
Make sure you have a good working relationship with a small number of companies.
Understand the purpose (which is helping students to find jobs where they are
happy, whereas the co-op program’s main purpose is education)
207
208
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Future Plans
Broad curriculum: The department intends to look carefully at how technology can
be used to enhance the teaching experience on campus.
5.10 Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule
Aachen
5.10.1 High number of interdisciplinary activities and research
areas
Intent
The specific quality of RWTH engineering graduates is portrayed by those who
successfully integrate research experience within their educational career. Students both in the Diplom programs and at the post-Diplom level are able to make
use of this widespread option due to the numerous activities of the RWTH research
units. These units need the students as their scientific work force – in particular the
ones aiming for a doctoral degree – but on the other hand also effectively raise the
level of quality in engineering education by offering thesis opportunities, within the
framework of their projects, and courses dealing with the state-of-the–art of science and technology in their domain. In view of the general shortage of financial
resources in the German higher education sector the quality of engineering education - in terms of the competencies to be acquired by the graduates - depends substantially on the research engagement of the faculty.
Specific efforts have therefore always been undertaken to support the research
capability of the RWTH science and engineering departments. The formation of
alliances called “Forum” in the late Eighties has been a particularly successful initiative of that kind. Professors of all disciplines were offered to join interdepartmental networks in order to promote communication on research and advanced education issues across the borders of disciplines. The expectation was
that they would develop common interdisciplinary research projects and new educational programs and modules with an interdisciplinary focus.
Objectives
The general objective of the RWTH Forum system is to link the potentials of the
various disciplines in order to achieve synergetic effects beyond those which can
be achieved by a single unit. The bigger a university the higher the need to actively
promote communication and co-operation between the disciplines. This is essential
for an institution seeking to respond to the growing complexity and interdisciplinary
nature of scientific questions, and can also be understood as the revitalization of
the universal scientific approach of a university.
The concrete objective of the RWTH Forums is to initiate interdisciplinary research
groups which launch interdisciplinary research projects and successfully apply for
respective financial resources as offered e.g. in form of the German Research
Council’s (DFG) program for Collaborative Research Centers (SFB) or private
partners or grants awarded by the European Union.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
In terms of educational innovation the Forums are engaged in the development of
new study programs encompassing teaching contributions from the different
RWTH faculties.
As an educational by-product, which is at the same time the core substance of the
scientific activities initiated by the Forums, numerous new opportunities for project
work of students and doctoral candidates with a new component of transdisciplinary team work are created.
Last but not least the Forum members develop innovative modules within the
framework of continued education concepts.
The long-term vision of the originators of the RWTH Forum concept is the establishment of virtual interdisciplinary research centers.
Description
A Forum is an informal network of professors from a variety of disciplines, one of
them acting as the Speaker, supported by a Scientific Secretary. The Forums are
not embodied in the constitution of RWTH. Each Forum is headed by an Executive
Board which meets four times a year and organizes the Annual Assembly of the
Members.
The Rector has appointed a Co-ordinator of the Forums who chairs the Annual
Assembly of the Forum Speakers.
At present there are five Forums dealing with following topics:
Materials
Environment
Space and Space Based Research
Informatics
Technology and Society
The Scientific Secretaries of the Forums have the following responsibilities:
planning and co-ordination
management of Forum budget
management of information
event management
external links
public relations activities
reports
The fact that they are doctoral candidates devoting part of their time to a research
project makes them ideally suited to the job.
Methods
The Forum organization strictly respects the autonomy of the researchers and their
units. A professor joins voluntarily and can be a member of more than one Forum.
To date about 50% of the RWTH professors are member of at least one Forum.
There are regular meetings, but electronic tools have proved to be the most rapid
and comfortable means of communication and information. The Scientific Secretaries primarily secure the flow of information, internally as well as to and from external partners.
209
210
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Each Forum issues an annual report which is published in a comprehensive annual
RWTH Forum Report. It is evident that these reports have an effect of mutual
stimulation.
At the smallest scale Forum-driven activities are initiated by just two professors,
large projects such as SFB are based on the interaction of seven to fifteen professors, with guaranteed funding and a duration of up to 15 years.
Results
A more or less direct result of the co-operation in the Forums are twelve DFGfunded RWTH Collaborative Research Centers (SFB) with a financial volume of ca.
30 Million US$ and three RWTH Graduate Colleges with a volume of ca. 5 Million
US$. Various EU-funded projects, new DFG-funded research teams and working
groups also owe their existence to the Forums. Numerous study and final thesis
projects pursued by students and doctoral dissertations are an outcome of this
initiative .
Three complete study programs are a direct outcome of the Forum system:
Environmental Science, a graduate program
Waste Management, a Diplom program
Materials Science, the first RWTH study program with a Bachelor/Master structure
The Forum Technology and Society has stimulated the discussion on the role of
the engineer in the present and future society significantly, with an evident educational effect on the students, documented in a number of seminars and theses
referring to this topic.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The level of satisfaction is high. It has become evident that the informal organization of the Forums is perfectly suited to the expectations and views of the participating professors and provides the necessary flexibility to adapt the focus of the
forums to scientific and sociological developments. Proposals have been made to
create further Forums. The vision is to transform them into virtual interdisciplinary
research centers.
External view
The Forum system has been explicitly welcomed by the government of the State of
Nordrhein-Westfalen and the Federal Ministry of Education and Science despite its
unique organizational form.
Public lectures and discussions dealing with topics such as “Technophobia”, “Fascination of Technology” and “Technology and the Arts” organized by the Forum
Technology and Society have met with considerable interest amongst the citizens
of Aachen and resulted in the City authorities expressing their appreciation.
Investment
The main investment are the funds to cover the salaries of the Scientific Secretaries, each amounting to around 40 000 US$ per annum, in total 200 000.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
There are annual fees for the individual membership of a professor, ranging from
€ 75,-- (Forum Technology and Society) to € 550, -- (Forum Materials). The fees
are used to cover the costs of events and PR activities.
Office space for the Forum secretariats is provided free by the RWTH.
Donations of private sponsors play a growing role in the funding of the RWTH Forums.
Experience
Barriers
Some of the better established professors expressed the greatest reluctance to the
Forum concept fearing it would lead to a curtailing of their privileges. As is well
known one of the principles of the RWTH is the strong support for the autonomy
and individuality of the individual professors.
It also took some time to convince the RWTH budget committee and the university
administration of the need to allocate funds for the posts of the Scientific Secretaries.
Enablers
Forceful personalities are essential to launch any innovative co-operation in the
given structure of a German university. This was also the case with the Forum
concept. Once high-profile members of the university became involved, others
followed.
Advice
CEOs at the central university level should be systematically involved in the management and promotion of each Forum. At RWTH Aachen a Pro-Rector has this
function.
Boundary conditions
Financial resources should be available in order to secure appropriate funding of
staff and activities. The funding conditions should permit great flexibility. The funding situation of the RWTH Forums requires that the participating departments have
their own solid financial basis.
It should be a criterion of appointment that newly-appointed professors understand
the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration and declare their willingness to support initiatives like the Forum concept.
Future plans
RWTH Aachen will further evaluate the effects achieved through the Forums and
investigate the possibility of applying this model to new areas of interest. One task
is to continuously adapt the orientation of a Forum to scientific and sociological
developments by incorporating new disciplines and shifting the focus upon current
issues.
211
212
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5.10.2 High involvement of students in research
Intent
As outlined in chapter 1.2.1 the principle of RWTH is to enrich the essence of study
programs in engineering by offering the students involvement in activities of
RWTH-integrated and associated research institutes. In the German higher education system the conditions of study and examinations are subject to a number of
framework regulations meant to secure what is called the “studybility” of the programs and the equivalence of the degrees, which effectively serve as barriers to
facilitating highest quality education. Schools wishing to generate engineers with
above-average qualifications are therefore urged to offer their students a range of
options through which they can acquire competencies not catered for in the standard education.
RWTH has implemented this principle by offering students e.g. involvement in research. The term research has a wide meaning in this context and the students
involved in such research can have differing roles which have a number of educational benefits. It is the general intent of the principle to enhance the development
of students above and beyond the usual standards.
Objectives
Modern accreditation schemes explicitly require that the competencies of an engineering graduate must reach far beyond the knowledge taught in lectures and assessed in examinations. The ability to apply knowledge is as important as the acquisition of knowledge, and situations in which the students can experience and
develop their respective skills, properly mentored by senior engineers, are an indispensable element of good engineering education. By being integrated in a research activity of an RWTH unit the engineering student is exposed to a situation
which challenges and promotes his or her respective abilities, e.g. the following
ones
applying scientific knowledge to engineering practice
working in a team, possibly with international participants
working target oriented and time scheduled
solving technical problems in the framework of scientific experiments
understanding problems, context related and trans-disciplinary
communicating, reporting, presenting
understanding the process of technology transfer between university and industry
To what extent students gain such qualification attributes through work in a RWTH
research unit depends, of course, on the intensity and duration of the work phase,
the kind of placement and the methodology and spirit of the institute.
Description
There are various options for RWTH students to become involved in research:
Option A: pursuing a study project; one or two are required as an integral part of
the RWTH engineering study programs.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Option B: in the form of final thesis work, a compulsory element of all Diplom
curricula, usually a segment of a larger project pursued by a doctoral candidate
Option C: as a doctoral candidate
Option D: as a student assistant
Option E: as a assistant scientist .
Concerning Options A and B:
According to the principles of academic freedom and responsibility it is up to the
students to decide upon the topic and choice of professor for their study or final
thesis project. The professor himself may offer the student the choice between a
more or a less practice-orientated topic. To get access to a real research project a
student must usually undergo an informal individual assessment by a senior engineer.
The size of project work included in the curricula is fixed by study regulations which
differ from study program to study program.
A study project in Mechanical Engineering: 200 hrs; a study project in Electrical
Engineering: 120 hrs
A final thesis project in Mechanical Engineering: duration 2 – 4 months, time
investment approximately 400 hrs; a final thesis project in Electrical Engineering: duration 6 months, time investment approximately 600 hrs
Concerning Option C:
According to the respective regulations (Promotionsordnung) the German doctorate is a procedure that assesses only the results of a scientist’s work and his or her
level of competence. No regulations exist concerning the duration, the time frame
or the contents of doctoral projects.
The typical RWTH doctor candidate in engineering is employed in the position of a
scientific employee. Some may be paid as assistant scientists - Option E - or may
be fellows of a national or international scholarship organization. Those who work
as full-time employees naturally also gain the greatest educational benefit in terms
of the qualification attributes mentioned above - regardless of the scientific character of the project which they pursue.
Concerning Option D:
German universities offer students part-time employment as so-called student assistants. The working hours amount to up to 19 hours per week. Numerous students make use of this opportunity. At RWTH the average weekly working time of
student assistants is currently (December 2001) 8 hours.
Regulations require that student assistants are to be assigned to jobs related to
their studies, which may comprise an activity in teaching or research. Engineering
research units employ student assistants within the framework of research activities in order to support their researchers and research groups.
Engineering students often combine an assistantship relevant to their project and
thesis work, although some faculties (e.g. Electrical Engineering) strictly forbid
payment for work credited within the framework of the study plan.
Concerning Option E:
213
214
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Graduates aiming for a doctoral degree might be employed as an assistant scientist for a period of probation before they are offered the full position of a scientific
employee.
Methods
Option A and B are embodied in the respective study regulations which were
agreed upon by the Federal Assemblies of the German Faculties of Engineering
and also apply to RWTH Aachen.
The students either ask the professors or chief engineers for project work or they
apply for project-related jobs advertised by institutes on public notice boards or the
web.
The willingness of graduates to accept an employment as a scientist with the prospect of achieving the doctoral degree at one of the RWTH engineering research
units (Option C) varies considerably according to job market opportunities. Professors recruit doctoral students from those students who completed thesis work under their supervision and / or worked in the institute as a student assistant. International graduates aiming at the doctoral degree are usually placed in an RWTH research unit through initiation by the organization that grants their scholarship.
Results
Employers highly value the fact that a graduate has worked in an RWTH research
institute. The RWTH Aachen largely owes its image as an institution which successfully practices engineering education to the research assistant system from
which the Doktor-Ingenieur emerges as a top engineer ready for professional activity in key positions.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
The RWTH units which engage the students and the students themselves are
highly satisfied with the practice of involvement of students in research. They report that even when their work as an assistant is not credited in the framework of
the curriculum, the resulting extended study-period is compensated by the extra
knowledge, experience and contacts gained .
Job opportunities at home with good salary conditions can pose a problem keeping
students from applying for international mobility scholarships. On the other hand
the professors do provide support for their assistants if they wish to spend a study
or internship period in another country. It is a desire of the RWTH International
Office that the professors emphasize this possibility more than they are doing at
present.
The question of paying the students for curriculum relevant project work requires
an all-embracing answer.
In order to facilitate the access for international students to the special tuition
through assistantship the installation of a support program for these students would
make sense.
External view
As already mentioned companies have a high regard for graduates who have
worked as research assistants. This is reflected in their recruitment practice and in
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
several prizes which private companies awards to students for outstanding final
thesis work.
Investments
Assistantships according to Option D and E may be funded from the budget of the
Land or from contract funds linked to research projects.
Experience
Barriers:
The success of the assistantship concept depends on a strong team spirit of both
sides, the students and the senior staff. It is indispensable that the senior research
assistants are familiar with the principles of guiding and instructing people.
Enablers:
The concept is strongly supported by the Ministry of Higher Education, and also in
use by private partners co-operating with RWTH research units.
Advice:
See Boundary conditions
Boundary conditions
Only institutions which emphasize the close interconnection of education and research and thus actively support the engagement of its professors in internationally
competitive research are able to provide the necessary opportunities and funding
for this model.
Future plans
The concept is successful and is to be continued in its present form.
RWTH Aachen has joined a campaign by the German government to actively recruit international students in particular for research-related graduate engineering
education programs.
5.10.3 Students with broad view and deep fundamental knowledge
Intent
The German institutes of engineering education have been faced with an ongoing
discussion regarding engineering education. The engineering associations (e.g.
VDI) have developed new models of programs and courses and specific networks
dealing with this issue have been established. Governmental committees have set
up general reform principles for study programs intended to reduce the study duration of the individual student, this being a serious problem of the German system.
Nevertheless the consistent view of the RWTH faculties of Engineering has been
that the type of university level engineer they intend to educate requires a sound
215
216
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
education in the Sciences, knowledge of wide range of subjects, practical technical
as well as research experience, and a pronounced approach to interdisciplinarity.
Objectives
5
RWTH wishes to generate engineers with “the ability to push the limits” of their
field. This requires firstly a sound knowledge of the general sciences, in particular
in Mathematics, Physics, and Chemistry, and - as subject of increasing importance
- Biology.
Furthermore engineering students should gain an understanding of the principles
of Economics and Business Administration.
In order to develop the awareness of the future engineers with respect to societal
conditions it is highly desirable that RWTH engineering students pursue additional
subsidiary studies in subjects in Humanities.
A traditional objective of RWTH engineering education and – in the view of the
faculties still a requirement today – is to equip the student with an understanding of
the technical practice at working level .
Familiarity with the organization and operation of research, in particular of applied
research in an industrial environment, is a competency which - as described in
chapter 1.2.2 - RWTH engineering students should acquire as one of the RWTHspecific characteristics of their qualification.
Finally RWTH engineering students should be prepared for professional activities
with an international dimension. These may arise in a German company with international business relations or in occupations in another country. Secure command
of the English language, knowledge of a second foreign language, and a positive
attitude with regard to the learning of new languages and the adaptation to other
cultures are seen as indispensable features of the modern engineer and thus prime
objectives of the RWTH educational strategy in engineering.
Description and Methods
The German university system is in principle still organized according to the visions
of Wilhelm von Humboldt, the politician who founded of the University of Berlin in
1810. Students and teachers have the privilege of the so-called Academic Freedom, which means with reference to education, that the students are given a lot of
freedom, but are at the same time responsible for the organization of their educational career themselves, deciding on both the focus, and also the studies they will
pursue beyond the statutory requirements defined by the so-called study plan
(Studienplan). The latter contains a number of options and permits to earn credits
in subjects, other than those offered in the core discipline. German study plans
also permit an almost limitless transfer of credits from other German or international universities.
This is the reason why the curricula do not refer precisely to all of the objectives
described in the previous paragraph. The RWTH Board of Directors, the faculties,
the counseling and administrative services have a clear shared understanding of
the RWTH-specific education mission, which they impart to the students whenever
possible, but the achievement depends on the individual students. As outlined in
chapter 1.2.1 the overall framework regulations of the German university system
5
Expressed in this way by a committee of the IDEA network
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
do not permit quality engineers as envisaged by the RWTH Aachen to be systematically generated in a strictly controlled process.
Courses and examinations in Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, and Biology for
engineering students are provided by professors of the RWTH Faculty of Mathematics, Science and Informatics. Due to the absence of any selection at entry level
almost 50% of the newly enrolled engineering students drop out within the first two
years of the study programs, mainly because they fail in Mathematics during their
intermediate examinations.
In order to motivate and prepare engineering students for a study period in a Grande Ecole RWTH offers French taught courses in Mathematics and Mechanics.
Courses in Economics and Management are offered by the RWTH Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
The RWTH Faculty of Arts serves as a rich fund of courses in areas such as Literature, Languages, Politics, Social Science, History, open also for interested engineering students.
Industrial internships are compulsory for all RWTH engineering students, and are
regulated by guidelines set by the respective engineering faculties. According to
these guidelines students undergo a practical work experience both in the manufacturing sector and at the engineering and management level.
After the intermediate examination, students choose a specialty and take advanced
and in-depth courses in and related to their major subject. This is the phase in
which the student is encouraged to undertake activities of research (see chapters
1.2.1 an 1.2.3).
The current study regulations permit a student to earn about 10% of recognized
credits in other disciplines. It is possible for the student to take more transdisciplinary courses, but these would not lead to more credits towards their degree.
The period after the intermediate examination is also the phase in which the students should spend a study period abroad. They take up the opportunity by seeking either access to one of the RWTH international mobility programs or by making
use of the contacts of their professor to international partners. Quite a few engineering students organize their international study period in form of course work,
an internship or an assistantship themselves and can receive recognition upon
application when they submit the credits the gained abroad to their home faculty.
Results
Students who succeed in passing the barrier of the intermediate examination and
make the best possible use of the available options in terms of specialization, interdisciplinarity, internship, research work, and international experience satisfy the
ambitious demand of the RWTH Aachen that the students have a broad view and
deep fundamental knowledge and thus also represent the engineer able to move
the limits of his field beyond current practice.
One problem is the high drop-out rate and the actual long duration of studies of the
individual student. It is a fact that the engineering education system of the RWTH
Aachen is rated very highly in the views of parents, managers and professors, but
is rated rather low in the view of students and potential students. It is evident that a
system that practices a form of natural selection is not too popular with those who
are expected to undergo the process. RWTH therefore makes considerable effort
to awake pupils interest in higher education in science and engineering by demon-
217
218
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
strating the thrill of technology and the value of the qualifications that can be
gained.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
Employers praise the graduates of RWTH Aachen as engineers well equipped for
work in industry. In particular those holding the Dr.-Ing. degree perform extraordinarily successfully in top industrial positions or when managing their own companies. Key figures of RWTH refer to this fact when expressing their satisfaction with
the system.
Nevertheless it has become evident that efforts have to be undertaken to generate
the highly qualified engineer more systematically and in a shorter period of time.
There is the need to reduce the failure rate of the beginners and generally improve
the organization of the study programs including the support services in form of
tutoring and counseling. Evaluation and quality management has to be established
as an integrated feature of the study programs.
Student participation in trans-disciplinary courses should be increased by extending the possibility of earning credits through these activities.
A large part of the potential for improvement lies beyond the sphere of influence of
a university. Secondary school education must prepare and motivate pupils better
for higher studies in science and engineering. A selection system that prevents
less qualified and unmotivated students from entering engineering education must
be established. Appropriate funding must be provided to secure the availability of
staff to teach and support the students, particularly during the first two years of the
study programs. Furthermore the university education system in general, and engineering education in particular, must be freed from the heteronomy of administrative regulations. Special activities must be launched to attract more women to engineering study programs. A good approach to this problem is an industrial scholarship scheme, now available for female engineering students at the RWTH
Aachen.
External view
The international and national reputation of RWTH Aachen as a provider of engineering education is excellent.
Approval has been expressed by the government, in particular the State Ministry of
Higher Education as far as the output in terms of qualified engineers is concerned.
Nevertheless high drop out rates and extended study periods worry the Higher
Education Minister.
In general the appreciation of the engineer and engineering education has decreased in German society. There is currently a rather vague perception that first
class engineers are needed to secure the present standard of living.
Investments
RWTH Aachen is a public university under the supervision of the Ministry of Higher
Education. The budget of the RWTH for education is approved by the Parliament of
the Land Nordrhein-Westfalen and amounts to 13 000 US$ per student and year
for the study programs in engineering.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Experience
Barriers:
Barriers are already described in the paragraph dealing with the potential for improvement.
Enablers:
Industry has a key role as enabler by underlining the importance of the engineering
profession for society and offering an insight into the functions of engineers in their
companies.
The companies should co-operate more systematically with the universities by
providing internship and project opportunities.
The training of schools teachers for science subjects must be increased effectively
and the teachers themselves must be better prepared to motivate and train pupils
for technical education. This must be facilitated by the government of NordrheinWestfalen.
Private sponsors increasingly fund Chairs of Technology at the RWTH and actively
participate in special education programs, as is the case e.g. in the UNITECH International program.
Advice:
Within the context of the Bologna discussion it is of primary importance that the
universities which are perceived internationally as the key providers of good engineering education adhere to the principle that their degrees must guarantee high
professional competence of the degree-holders. The introduction of a Bachelor
degree at the end of the first cycle study programs must therefore be carefully discussed in domain-specific committees at an international level. The RWTH faculties of engineering are convinced that a rapid change from the proven Diplom system to a Bachelor/Master system, without essential renewal of the curricula, would
negatively affect the quality of the qualifications.
Boundary conditions
State legislation, which reflects political objectives, and administrative conditions
are still obstacles to the establishment of a consistent quality-driven engineering
education system in Germany .
Future plans
RWTH wishes to benefit from the international strategic co-operation with first class
universities, with a particular focus on the quality oriented development of engineering education. IDEA and SPINE are seen as the most important platforms to
move in this direction.
219
220
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
5.11 Technische Universiteit Delft
5.11.1 International MSc Program
Intent
The increasing importance of the globalization process and the international cooperation and collaboration, which it engenders, led to a requirement for the university to offer international degrees. TU Delft offers a 5-year curriculum in the Dutch
language leading directly to an engineering degree, which is internationally recognized as a Master of Science degree. Traditionally, TU Delft had a large inflow of
foreign students, but the need to learn Dutch prolonged the time required for their
studies.
The internationalization of the labor market gave rise to a need for an international
dimension in higher engineering education. For TU Delft it was essential to attract
more foreign students with bachelor degrees. This meant developing an international curriculum taught in English that in content, level and quality would be
equivalent to the Dutch degree of “ingenieur” of TU Delft. A program of this nature
commits a university to achieving high standards in educational quality.
Objectives
The whole issue of internationalization is clearly of strategic importance to TU
Delft. As a result of its international orientation, the university wanted to transform
the structure of its education into an international program and to create an international study environment. Unique characteristics and contents were used to develop an international program at the same high quality level as the Dutch degrees.
The new course setup in English provided a clearer insight in and created more
transparency on the quality of the education program which TU Delft offers on an
international level.
All this was necessary to meet another objective, i.e. to increase the number of
foreign Ph.D. students at TU Delft.
Furthermore, TU Delft wanted to extend its international alumni network.
In addition, the international orientation was to provide an important stepping-stone
th
th
to the introduction of English in all the 4 and 5 year courses.
Description
In the summer of 1996 TU Delft appointed a project leader responsible for developing an International MSc program at TU Delft. This project leader reported directly to the rector. On the basis of a market study, a number of possible study
programs were established. The project leader ensured cooperation from the
Deans of the faculties in this matter through intensive discussions. The next step
was to draw up a business plan covering all the details in respect of teaching, legal
requirements, market aspects, etc. The business plan was accepted by the board
and implementation commenced in September 1997.
The university set up an MSc office to look after the daily affairs of the international
students on a professional level. It dealt also with issues related to the social integration of the international students within the TU Delft community. Each partici-
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
pating faculty nominated an MSc coordinator who liaises between the MSc office
and the incoming students.
Methods
The rollout of this program took place on two levels at the same time. A distinction
was made between policy development and operational implementation. Policy
development had to take place at the highest level within the faculty, which in practice meant by means of a committee. When it came to the operational implementation, on the other hand, the project leader needed access to faculty members and
other people actively involved in the implementation.
During the implementation phase, policy development was concentrated within a
committee of four Deans, the Rector and the project leader. Nowadays there is a
committee of MSc coordinators. The representatives are mostly directors of studies
from the participating faculties.
The development of new selection criteria for foreign students was very challenging. Deans and directors of studies were involved in this discussion. At the same
time, the student admission office also needed a new procedure for international
applicants.
Once a year the project leader together with the head of the MSc unit discusses
the current situation with the Deans and directors of studies of the faculties that
participate in the International MSc Program and then report findings to the Executive Board. TU Delft actively involves students in this annual process by asking
them to complete questionnaires.
Close collaboration with the marketing group is necessary so that the new programs can be advertised.
TU Delft offers enrolled students a one-month introductory course prior to commencing their studies. The goal of this course is to prepare foreign students for
their two-year stay at the university. The Introductory Course, of which an essential
part is an interdisciplinary engineering project, also focuses on multicultural teamwork, study and presentation skills, intercultural differences, language skills and
cultural information. This course is highly successful and greatly appreciated by the
students.
Throughout their stay, all students have a personal mentor. In addition, the MSc
office organizes various social events to help the students integrate into their new
environment.
Due to a strict study schedule, every year in August a special graduation ceremony
is organized for the MSc students. The tools, which the university used to ensure
efficient communication, are, amongst others, the web, brochures and email. For
marketing purposes, to a limited extent, the university also participates in Student
Education Fairs.
Results
The program has achieved a high level of acceptance within TU Delft. Because of
this, the initial hesitation of some faculties has changed favorably so that they now
want to participate in the MSc program. Moreover, with respect to the developments in the field of European Higher Education, in relation to the Bologna Declaration, this whole exercise has proved for TU Delft to be an excellent means of
221
222
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
paving the way for installing the bachelor/master structure in Delft, which will be
realized as per September 2002.
The number of MSc students increases each year. The target numbers have always been exceeded:
Year
Target
Effective number of students
1997
10
13
1998
25
30
1999
50
60
2000
75
82
2001
100
120 (out of approx. 600 applications)
When TU Delft started the International MSc Program in September 1997, it offered students a total of 6 courses. Now there are 14 courses to choose from and
TU Delft expects to be able to offer 15 to 16 courses by this fall.
Up to now the MSc students were drawn from 49 different nations. The number of
self-paying students increased from 0% in 1997 to 60% in 2001. The university
also succeeded in achieving a higher percentage of female students (40% in 20002001) than in the regular Dutch program (21%).
The newly defined selection criteria have been working well. 30% of MSc students
who have graduated so far qualify cum laude and some of these students have
decided to stay on for a Ph.D. study.
Working with international students has significantly increased the positive acceptance of and commitment for the internationalization process throughout the university (e.g., more course descriptions and other information material is now available in English, ECTS - European Credit Transfer System – is used for credit
points, etc.). It has also greatly reduced the objections against teaching in English.
Even Student Councils ask for lectures in English at the Masters level.
The availability of English curricula offers new strategic collaborations for the university, e.g. with partner universities in the U.S.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
Overall, for the Executive Board, the faculties, the level of satisfaction is very high.
The information flow in respect of internal processes requires improvement due to
the increased size of the program as well as the growing number of participating
students.
Further initiatives should be developed for structural international marketing in order to obtain a stronger position at an increasingly international and competing
higher education market that is now mainly dominated by English speaking countries. The possibilities for attracting new target groups, for instance from South
America and India, should be explored. The number of self-paying students still
needs to be increased and the possibilities for student accommodation improved.
Also, efforts to encourage the integration of international and Dutch students is an
ongoing process, which requires constant improvement.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
External view
All courses are evaluated and accredited according to internal and external quality
systems. In addition, the university receives very positive feedback from the alumni
and the scholarship organizations.
Investments
To a larger extent, (for instance with respect to the input of personnel), the project
was financed out of the regular budget covering the overall organizational costs for
the university. An additional budget of 3.5 million NLG (1'588’230 EUR) was made
available from September 1996 to January 2001 to implement the MSc program.
In 2001 the operational costs are around 1.1 million NLG (499.158 EUR) which are
covered by the tuition fees. As part of the TU Delft internationalization policy the
Executive Board has established a Scholarship Program of about 0.8 million NLG
(363.024 EUR), that offers grants to a selected number of highly qualified students.
Experience
Barriers:
Top-down implementations are not easy to realize in the academic environment.
Initially, though English in research is of longstanding tradition and therefore fully
accepted by the academic staff, this was not yet so for teaching. Implementation
also meant an increased workload for the staff despite a high number of ongoing
changes in higher education. It was very difficult to explain the need for the MSc
office as a special unit. Another difficulty the project leader experienced was the
development of an international marketing strategy.
TU Delft also experienced a financial barrier: the lack of scholarships at the beginning. The number of good applications outweighed the number of student places
and only a few scholarships (covering both tuition fee as well as living expenses)
were available. The tuition fee per year is 13’000 Dutch guilders (EUR 5’899).
Enablers:
Using existing study programs as the basis for the pilot courses in English made it
easier for people to identify with them and hence commit to them, and helped to
create greater tolerance towards mistakes in the beginning. The high level of
commitment on the part of the executive board and the rector was a particularly
important enabling factor.
In addition, people came to realize that this change was a necessary step towards
the overall implementation of a bachelor/master structure in Europe.
223
224
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Advice:
Bear in mind that an international program is a long-term investment; do not expect
success too quickly. It is essential to maintain your quality standards and develop
an international marketing strategy. Staff need to be well prepared for the change.
They need to be trained in English and on international cultural issues. On the
other hand it is essential to ensure the social integration of foreign students.
Boundary conditions
English has to be the second language. The country supports cultural diversity.
Internationalization should be considered as of great strategic importance for a
university. Within the university, it must be accepted that tuition fees and scholarships for international programs are higher than usual. The commitment of the
executive board is crucial to the success of the project. After the executive board,
you must have strongly committed and enthusiastic people.
Future plans
As per September 2002 TU Delft will have implemented the new bachelor/master
structure. By then the international MSc program will be fully integrated into the
regular bachelor/master program and in fact will be the basis for an expanding
English curriculum at Master level at TU Delft. In addition, the MSc program will
serve as a role model for the students to help to reduce the average study duration
for the regular Dutch courses.
Another important step envisaged for the future will be for TU Delft to extend their
marketing focus to South America.
5.11.2 Elaborate external and internal quality management
Intent
TU Delft’s quality management started in the mid 80s as a government initiative
(VSNU). All universities are periodically visited and evaluated by committees looking at specific disciplines. Initially, TU Delft had no internal quality management
system.
The intent was to focus on improving the internal situation and put TU Delft in a
better position to prepare for external, national evaluation.
Objectives
From the outset the objective was to establish a very lightweight quality management system. In the case of TU Delft, lightweight means not having many new or
additional forms or procedures.
The idea was to supplement the six-year external quality assessment with an extra
internal regulatory mechanism.
The philosophy of quality management is not to define processes and prescribe
them to everybody. No-one tells scientists how to organize their work, but they
should be able to explain the systems they use. And if they cannot answer the
questions, they will need to design their own structures. It is therefore quite possible for different departments to have different quality management structures. The
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
important issue is whether they are able to answer all quality management related
questions when asked by a specific committee.
Description
There needs to be a common understanding of quality. TU Delft uses a very simple
definition: Quality is doing what you promise.
In 1996, TU Delft set up the AKO Education Quality Management Advisory Committee for Quality Evaluation. The AKO consists of professors, students and external members. This committee provides a memory and awareness function for TU
Delft’s quality management system.
The procedure used was to interview faculties and departments rather than asking
them to provide a lot of written information. Some of the questions asked were:
How do you handle the external feedback from VSNU and others (in terms of
procedures and content)?
What are your strategic goals?
What kind of projects and additional funding are needed in order to improve?
It is not the committee’s prime task to define responsibilities for quality management, but the committee does seek to understand the procedures and processes,
and the responsibilities of the various actors. The implementation of feedback
loops are also analyzed.
All the faculties and all the programs were analyzed on this basis. This information
formed the memory of the quality management system. In addition, the information
was used to provide feedback and served as TU Delft’s collective awareness of
quality management.
In order to achieve this objective, the committee talked to the curriculum committees and the directors of studies, each of whom has a formal position and responsibility under Dutch law.
Furthermore, there is an external user group to discuss strategic development for
each curriculum. The user group consists of external experts from education, business and government. They examine and compare reports on the quality of education for the previous two years.
Methods
The quality system works by conducting intensive discussions rather that producing a lot of paper.
The questions asked by the committee give the interviewees a wide understanding
and help them to answer questions asked by external organizations, such as
VSNU or ABET. The role of the committee is not to command, but to hold up a
mirror.
There is a training program for new members of staff. Each lecturer must meet
basic qualifications. The training is provided as a set of courses on how to deal
with large classes, development of course materials, etc. In addition, senior staff
members act as mentors for new teaching staff. This program was accepted by the
board because it was suggested by the AKO.
225
226
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
There are a number of additional, internal quality tools:
During the first three years, the student association designates a number of students who are required to monitor the courses closely and provide feedback.
The programs are subjected to a formal internal evaluation on a quarterly basis.
This process is executed and monitored by program directors and advisory committees.
There is a portfolio management system for evaluating education. This tool is used
by Deans and professors for staff assessments.
Students wield considerable influence through the medium of the student association which publishes an annual “student consumer guide” with explicit comments
on each course.
Study progress monitoring system: Since the mid 90s, this university-wide system
has monitored the study progress of one group of students per degree course in a
given year.
TU Delft is also planning to monitor the progress of individual students.
Results
In general terms, the quality management system provides a good overview of the
status of education quality.
Secondly, TU Delft was able to develop a set of standards. While the standards are
not considered sacred, they can be seen as guidelines for faculty development and
as such are very helpful providing that they are accepted.
Thirdly, the quality management system has been widely accepted.
Fourthly, the quality management system is helpful for external evaluation purposes.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
TU Delft is fairly satisfied with the results achieved in the last four years. The quality management system is lightweight and reasonably effective at the same time.
The efforts to date have succeeded in making the structures and processes of the
quality management systems clear. Today, the potential lies in further development
of the standards and qualification profiles for teaching staff and bachelor/master
curricula.
Investments
There is the AKO committee comprising 6 members of staff from the university, 3
students plus support staff. The total personnel investment is about half a person
year per annum.
The investment in quality improvement projects is about 2 to 3 million guilders per
annum, which is about 0.2% - 0.3 % of the university’s budget.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Experience
Barriers:
The main quality issue is cultural change. People have to believe in quality. Quality
must become a very natural part of all activities. The fundamental question is how
to convince people that their (explicit or implicit) investment in quality makes them
and the students happier.
Enablers:
The very pragmatic approach of helping to clarify responsibilities (and not prescribing how to implement the quality management system).
The funding of the improvement projects.
Advice:
Be pragmatic.
Don’t expect too much from structural changes.
Take small steps.
It is essential to have a committee that is there to improve processes and not to
serve the board of the university.
Boundary conditions
It is essential to have the full support of the university’s board. In addition, the
committee must have a large amount of freedom. Furthermore, the work of the
committee must be in line with the work of the national quality organization (the
VSNU).
Future plans
First of all, TU Delft wants to increase the amount of publicity given to the work
being done on improving quality in education within the university. Every 18
months, the AKO organizes a symposium for teaching staff and students (e.g. on
academic values, the role of education committees, etc.). These events show the
progress of activities in quality management.
Secondly, the committee wants to increase the collaboration with the IDEA league
partners.
5.11.3 Highly innovative program in Electrical Engineering
Intent
Originally, in the early 90s, TU Delft’s program for electrical engineers was very
conventional, starting with mathematics and physics in the first year before actually
entering into the field of electrical engineering or electronics. At that time it was a
highly fragmented program. Students had to take 18 different courses in the first
year, each of which culminated in its own separate examination. The relationships
between courses were not clear to the students, with hardly any attention devoted
to design and very little to engineering practices or to the scientific aspects of engineering.
227
228
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
Improvements were mainly initiated in the early 90s while some were included in
the 5-year program TU Delft started in 1995, which involved a changeover from a
4-year to a 5-year program. The current improvements started in 1999.
TU Delft wanted to launch an initiative to improve this situation by redesigning the
curriculum and creating a core curriculum in Electrical Engineering common to all
students. This was to provide the grounding for all electrical engineers, whatever
their specialization. There was to be no open end in the program in the sense that
any theoretical subject that TU Delft covered would lead to an electrical engineering application and successive courses.
TU Delft wanted to have a greater electrical engineering content, even in the first
year. However, this was at the expense of some of the fundamental courses in
physics and mathematics, which then had to be postponed until the second or
even the third year. TU Delft then decided to aim for 6 integrated courses rather
than 18 conventional courses in one year. This also meant that students would
consequently only have 6 examinations. Another of TU Delft’s aims was to come
up with a more creative program. In view of the fact that they are training engineers, it was felt that the students should be producing something. The eLab was
to be the backbone of the entire curriculum. TU Delft therefore defined laboratories,
working groups and projects. The teaching courses are mainly intended to give the
students the theory required for their practical work.
Objectives
TU Delft wants to ensure that the kind of engineers that they are producing are
equipped for the modern world. They want them to be highly competent and flexible. After three years, students should be given the opportunity to specialize on the
basis of the core curriculum.
In addition, they hope that this curriculum will attract more students, help to keep
the students in the curriculum, decrease the drop-out rate and improve efficiency
so that students can really complete the course in 5 years.
Students should become aware of life-long learning.
Description
st
1 year: The students have four main courses and the laboratory track. Part of the
laboratory track is the system of first-year student mentoring groups. All the group
assignments are handled in these groups. Another of their functions is to integrate
the theoretical material from the courses into large practical assignments, reports
or similar. These groups of students not only act as mentoring groups, but also as
monitoring groups, in the sense that each group has an experienced professor as
mentor who also gauges students’ development. The groups consist of 10 students
and are selected by the university. Before the academic year starts, there are introductory groups where friends stick together, which is not necessarily conducive
to optimal monitoring for mentoring groups.
2nd year: TU Delft has five main courses and again the laboratory. The laboratory
now includes a number of interesting features. There are three projects. One is a
Measurements Laboratory where students are given assignments involving measurement problems taken from the complete field of electrical engineering (low frequency, high frequency, low power, high power, etc.). Secondly, there is a group
assignment related to engineering practices in respect of safety issues. Students
also receive training in communication and learn how engineers communicate with
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
one another. The third element, which is certainly the most interesting, involves a
very big design laboratory. The students are divided into groups of 16, and each
group is given an assignment to develop a chip with specified functions. The only
thing TU Delft does is to tell the students the required structure of the chip and to
provide the software tools to be used in chip design plus the laboratories for the
basic designs. Students spend one “quarter” (half a semester) going through the
process of transforming the specified requirements into the first basic designs. The
required chip is so complex that the students themselves have to divide the groups
of 16 into smaller working groups. This means that they will be confronted with
other problems such as group communication. TU Delft is in the fortunate position
of having its own chip production facility. Students design the chip in the first quarter, it is then produced in the second quarter and in the third students come back to
test their chip against the required functionality. Students are very happy with this
system. They are required to provide both oral presentations and written reports at
the end of the exercise. Each of the students has to be able to report on the project
as a whole and not merely on those aspects which he or she has worked on.
rd
rd
3 year: There are again five main courses during the 3 year. TU Delft is currently
rd
in the process of introducing a new 3 year. As with the lower years, it features a
laboratory track that now includes group assignments covering ethics and societal
aspects. There is a laboratory assignment, similar to the one on measurement
issues in the second year, but this time dealing with signal process issues, again
taken from the whole spectrum of electrical engineering and not specifically related
rd
to any of the chairs. The most interesting part of the 3 year is the integrated design projects towards the end of the year. Students can sign up in pairs and select
their topic from a long list of options. The professor that proposed the topic is the
client, and the university assigns a supervisor to monitor the process. The students
operating in pairs act like a small engineering company. It is not a real situation,
but the professor assumes the role of the client and formulates the product specifications for a student project, based on the kind of functionality requirements encountered in practice. The students have to develop a real product. In these projects, the degree of difficulty is chosen on the basis of the level of ability which
students should have attained by this stage. They have to go through the whole
process of transforming the requirement formulated by the client into a solution. At
the end of the year the students then have to implement their solution and make a
real product for a ‘live demonstration’, a software presentation is not enough. As
this is meant to be a real-life situation where students have their own design company, a number of the resources are limited. Students may request assistance
from the staff, but they have to “pay” for it. Both the number of hours at their disposal and their contacts with the client are limited.
Methods
In 1990, TU Delft started on the redesign of the core curriculum. The approach
they adopted took the departments by surprise in the sense that it was applied
from the top down with the aid of a small taskforce. It was this taskforce who developed all the plans and discussed them with the Dean and the senior staff of the
university. These plans were then presented to the departments. All of a sudden
there was a new curriculum to contend with. The result was a win or lose situation
which caused a lot of problems. From then on TU Delft opted for a totally different
approach, developing many of the elements mentioned in the description as separate projects. Each of these projects comprised of a small taskforce (3 or 4 people
at the most) and a larger development group of staff members. The development
229
230
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
groups were responsible for the new part of the curriculum. In most of the project
groups, at least 1 or 2 people worked full time. This meant that TU Delft needed a
lot of external funding in order to achieve their goals.
One “educational expert” was appointed and became involved in all these projects.
As a result, the whole process of running all the projects was supported. In some
cases, external educational experts were hired as well.
Results
Students are very enthusiastic about what TU Delft is doing.
TU Delft has arrived at a significantly higher degree of involvement on the part of
staff. Over the past 8 years there has been so much movement in the world of
education that this has also engendered an atmosphere of enthusiasm amongst
the staff. At the same time, it reflects the general increase in the focus on aspects
of education worldwide.
Level of satisfaction / Potential for improvement
TU Delft considers itself to be reasonably successful. They feel they are on track to
realizing many of the goals they set out to achieve.
TU Delft sees potential for improvement in a number of areas:
The traditional 4 or 5 main courses from the old program are now being integrated into the new larger entities. Integration has not yet been fully implemented throughout. Some of these new main courses are simpler than others,
and some combinations are more straightforward than others (e.g. combining a
course on electronics with one on integrated systems is easier than combining a
course on linear algebra with one on network theory).
Main courses end with an integrated examination. The questions asked in these
examinations do not yet fully integrate multiple subjects, although this is necessary if students are to experience the problems of multi-disciplinary questions.
TU Delft has found that some members of staff, while fully aware of the goals of
the new curriculum, do not actually “live” them. They participate, rather than actively contributing towards achieving these goals.
At Delft, and particularly in Electrical Engineering, the number of hours that are
scheduled for the students is extremely high. Although 32 hours per week are
scheduled in classes, they actually work a 40-hour week. This leaves hardly any
time to study.
External view
As part of their regular quality control, TU Delft operates an internal quality control
system in all departments. It is based on a system of sending out questionnaires to
the students, followed by a review performed by groups of professors and students. The entire operation is monitored by the evaluation process. In the first few
years TU Delft had a separate evaluation committee, but that has since been dissolved.
Last year, TU Delft commissioned an external study on the initiative of the university board. The purpose of the study was to look at the relationship between the
study program and the length of time it takes students to graduate, as well as how
successful the program has been in achieving its objectives. Many of the recom-
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
mendations which emerged from the study coincide with the plans TU Delft already
had in mind.
TU Delft is accredited by the American organization ABET.
Investments
The entire change project was divided into various subprojects. Each of these projects had its own budget, the prime purpose of which was to cover the costs of
hiring external project personnel. The total budget for setting up the program,
viewed over a period of 6 years, was in the region of 1 million EUR.
The annual costs for running the program total approx. 2.5 million EUR.
Experience
Barriers:
Some of the older, more conventional members of staff are still not making a full
contribution to the new system and the new goals.
The process needs a high level of management and monitoring to ensure continuous momentum, otherwise it would come to a halt.
Enablers:
The presence of a number of very young professors, the support of a large proportion of the students and the role of the educational experts helped to secure the
implementation of this practice.
The financial support of 1 million EUR provided by the central university board was
another enabler.
Advice:
State your goals very clearly and stick to them (political process).
Get the staff members personally involved in the process of designing and implementing new elements in the curriculum.
Divide the big project into smaller projects.
Do it now and not next year!
Boundary conditions
Coordination is the most important boundary condition. As soon as you incorporate
new courses in your curriculum, you will need to build up a whole network of coordinators.
Future plans
TU Delft wants to achieve genuinely integrated exams and to arrive at a reduction
in the number of contact hours/scheduled hours for the students.
The university is currently in the process of introducing the bachelor and master
structure.
231
FINAL REMARKS
6. Final Remarks
Stephan Bieri, CEO ETH Board
With the publication of its final report the SPINE project finishes after two and a half
years. The ambitiousness and comprehensiveness of the undertaking to benchmark engineering education of ten very different universities are reflected by the
size of the report (close to 300 pages) and a mass of statistical data. The methodical design of the study, however, guarantees astute analyses and an intelligent
presentation.
SPINE is a first-timer concerning focus, scope and method: It is the first European
benchmarking project focussing on teaching, it is the first benchmarking project
including both European and U.S. universities, and it is the first project of this scale
to combine quantitative and qualitative surveys.
Apart from the innovative presentation, do the results justify the undertaking? I
believe they do:
The SPINE report offers information, data and analyses referring to engineering
education of a set of renowned technical universities which can be compared.
Some of the results of the surveys – among professors, alumni (engineers), employers (managers) – may be judged predictable: neither the cultural differences
between the USA and Europe nor the differences in judgment between professors
and engineers/managers come as a surprise. Yet, thanks to SPINE these and
other intuitions have now become hard facts. On the whole the results of the quantitative surveys provide a wealth of material for reflection and improvement to be
made use of by the partners.
The successful practices, which were chosen by the partner universities for full
analysis, are not all of the same interest and/or specificity to engineering education. However, most of the time they are original, with a potential of interest to the
partners, who are invited to adapt them to their own context.
Maybe more important than the published results is the fact that ten internationally
renowned technical universities have worked together through their representatives
over a period of two and a half years. While being competitors they learned to exchange information and to learn from each other. I hope that as a result of SPINE
these contacts – far from being a strategic cooperation or alliance – will be continued, contributing to the future development of the SPINE partners.
Now that the SPINE study is finished and published, the partner universities will
have to make use of the final report and its results for their quality assurance management – the latter being the ultimate justification for such an undertaking. This
transfer marks the limit of the SPINE partnership: Since quality assurance is part of
managing a university and thus specific to every single university, the SPINE results must be incorporated individually. In the end the success of the transfer and
thus the justification of SPINE depends very much on the degree of integration of
SPINE into the individual universities’ quality assurance management.
233
APPENDIX A
Appendix A: Data Collection
Facts and Figures – Quantitative Questionnaire
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA
Ecole Centrale Paris, Paris, France
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, USA
Imperial College, London, UK
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge/Boston, USA
Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany
Technische Universiteit Delft, Delft, the Netherlands
235
236
APPENDIX A
Carnegie Mellon University
Selected areas: Electrical & Computer Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering,
Chemical Engineering and Materials Science
1
Students (selected areas)
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1124
1398
1505
207
254
292
496
481
518
1827
2133
2315
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
502
552
254
133
64
1505
122
83
44
20
23
292
141
231
36
71
39
518
765
866
334
224
126
2315
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
414
478
430
138
167
185
119
115
97
671
760
712
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
150
127
92
43
18
430
18
126
25
3
13
185
15
51
7
14
10
97
183
304
124
60
41
712
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
337
346
399
150
172
205
98
106
70
585
624
674
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
132
155
54
46
12
399
89
65
21
13
17
205
23
26
4
11
6
70
244
246
79
70
35
674
Electrical &
Computer
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Women's share (Bachelor)
15%
20%
24%
40%
38%
22%
Women's share (Master)
10%
53%
5%
40%
9%
23%
Women's share (Ph.D.)
13%
15%
6%
23%
21%
15%
Foreigner's share (Bachelor)
16%
9%
12%
9%
5%
11%
Foreigner's share (Master)
26%
42%
59%
25%
74%
40%
Foreigner's share (Ph.D.)
69%
45%
72%
41%
64%
54%
% of Ph.D. students1
18%
27%
11%
32%
31%
22%
% of master students2
16%
10%
13%
9%
18%
13%
1995
1997
1999
2
Number of students 1999
Electrical & Computer Engineering
Computer Science
Mechanical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
3
Starting students (selected areas)
1995
1997
1999
4
Starting students 1999
Electrical & Computer Engineering
Computer Science
Mechanical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
5
Degrees (selected areas)
1995
1997
1999
6
Number of degrees 1999
Electrical & Computer Engineering
Computer Science
Mechanical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
7
Students 1999
(selected areas)
Age at graduation (Bachelor)
22
22
22
22
22
22
Age at graduation (Master)
24
24
24
24
24
24
Age at graduation (Ph.D.)
29
29
29
29
29
29
4
1.5
4
1
4
1/2
4
1.5
4
1.5
4
1.3
Program/course duration (Bachelor)
Program/course duration (Master)
1
Ph.D. students in % of all students
2
Master students in % of all students
1 course, 2 projects
3
3
APPENDIX A
8
Professors 1999
(selected areas)
Electrical &
Computer
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
35
65
19
18
16
153
3%
11%
11%
6%
13%
8%
14%
26%
21%
17%
19%
21%
18
10
16
9
5
12
Number of professors4
Women's share
Foreigner's share
Students (Bachelor + Master) per professor
4
9
Ordinary (full) or extraordinary (associate) professors, assistant professors on tenure track
Teaching staff 1999
(selected areas)
Staff teaching + research
Electrical &
Computer
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
52
271
23
32
30
408
57
102
51
72
63
345
5
Teaching students6
10
5
Number of teaching and scientific staff, including lectures and professors (full, associate, assistent, research profs) apart from teaching stud.
6
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
Recruitment/origin of professors7
(selected areas)
Own university
19%
Other national university
58%
Foreign university
13%
Industry
10%
Total
7
11
12
237
100%
Recruitment from last position, estimate for 1995-1999
Electrical &
Computer
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Teaching staff with employment in industry8
3%
0%
4%
0%
0%
Joint semester projects with industry9
0%
5%
0%
5%
10%
Cooperation with industry
Materials
Science
Joint diploma/thesis projects with industry9
20%
0%
16%
0%
15%
Joint doctorates with industry9
20%
10%
14%
30%
30%
in US $
in EURO11
Bachelor
24'620
27'435
Master
23'300
25'964
Ph.D.
23'300
25'964
8
% of teachers mainly or equally employed outside the university
9
% of all semester projects, diploma/thesis or doctorates
Annual fees / tuition10 2000
10
11
Fees = 120$; undergraduate tuition for classes entering prior to fall 2000= 22'830$
Oct 19, 2001
238
APPENDIX A
Ecole Centrale Paris
All engineering areas
1
3
5
7
Students
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
1169
265
1434
1997
1195
209
1404
1999
1266
168
1434
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
393
57
450
1997
403
58
461
1999
444
50
494
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
Starting students
Degrees
1995
323
62
385
1997
398
61
459
1999
379
46
425
Students 1999
Total
Women's share (Diploma)
15%
Women's share (Doctorate)
27%
Foreigner's share (Diploma)
20%
Foreigner's share (Doctorate)
30%
% of doctorate students1
12%
Age at graduation (diploma)
Age at graduation (doctorate)
Program/course duration (diploma)
1
23
27
5.5
Doctorate students in % of all students
Professors 1999
8
Total
Number of professors2
68
Women's share
4%
Foreigner's share
4%
Students (diploma) per professor
2
24
Ordinary (full) or extraordinary (associate) professors, assistant professors on tenure track
Teaching staff 1999
9
6
Total
Staff teaching + research3
Teaching students4
192
9
3
Number of teaching and scientific staff, including lectures and professors (full, associate, assistent, research professrs) apart from teaching students
4
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
APPENDIX A
Recruitment/origin of professors5
10
Own university
25%
Other national university
25%
Foreign university
Industry
Administration
Total
5
11
12
3%
44%
3%
100%
Recruitment from last position, estimate for 1995-1999
Cooperation with industry
Total
Teaching staff with employment in industry6
80%8
Joint semester projects with industry7
n.a.
Joint diploma/thesis projects with industry7
97%
Joint doctorates with industry7
90%
6
% of teachers mainly or equally employed outside the university
7
% of all semester projects, diploma/thesis or doctorates
8
50% full time equiv.
local
currency
in EURO9
Diploma
2'000
305
Doctorate
2'000
305
68'000
10'366
Annual fees / tuition 2000
Mastères specialisées
9
Oct 19, 2001
239
240
APPENDIX A
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical
Engineering, Materials Science, Communication Systems and Micro-Engineering
1
2
Students (selected areas)
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
1771
306
2077
1997
1837
396
2233
1999
2185
458
2643
Number of students 1999
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
Electrical Engineering
239
76
315
Computer Science
429
68
497
Mechanical Engineering
286
42
328
Chemical Engineering
193
89
282
Materials Science
129
72
201
Communication Systems1
488
48
536
Micro-Engineering
Total
1
3
4
524
2643
Starting students (selected areas)
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
356
112
468
1997
419
176
595
1999
584
145
729
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
265
77
342
1997
292
93
385
1999
229
102
331
Starting students 1999
Computer Science
Diploma
36
133
Mechanical Engineering
80
Chemical Engineering
43
Materials Science
6
63
458
Section of Communication Systems since 1991, department founded in 2000
Electrical Engineering
5
461
2185
28
Communication Systems
134
Micro-Engineering
130
Total
584
Degrees (selected areas)
Number of degrees 1999
Diploma
Electrical Engineering
39
Computer Science
47
Mechanical Engineering
27
Chemical Engineering
17
Materials Science
12
Communication Systems
34
Micro-Engineering
Total
53
229
APPENDIX A
7
Students 1999
(selected areas)
Computer
Science
Women's share (Diploma)
1%
2%
3%
9%
5%
9%
2%
4%
Women's share (Doctorate)
4%
15%
2%
17%
13%
15%
14%
12%
Foreigner's share (Diploma)
37%
26%
28%
22%
15%
40%
19%
28%
Foreigner's share (Doctorate)
42%
71%
62%
52%
58%
81%
51%
58%
% of doctorate students2
24%
14%
13%
32%
36%
10%
12%
17%
Age at graduation (Diploma)
23.5
23.5
23.5
23.5
23.5
24.5
23.5
23.6
Age at graduation (Doctorate)
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
5
5
5
5
5
5.5
5
5
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Communication
MicroSystems Engineering
Total
12
11
12
9
7
10
15
76
Women's share
0%
0%
0%
11%
14%
0%
0%
3%
Foreigner's share
0%
25%
55%
67%
44%
71%
50%
41%
20
39
24
21
18
45
31
29
Communication
MicroSystems Engineering
Total
2
8
Number of professors3
Students (diploma) per professor
9
10
Ordinary (full) or extraordinary (associate) professors, assistant professors on tenure track, without "professeurs titulaires"
Teaching staff 1999
(selected areas)
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Staff teaching + research4
190
149
147
189
146
60
184
1065
Teaching students5
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
247
Number of teaching and scientific staff, including lectures and professors (full, associate, assistent, research professors) apart from teaching students
5
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
Recruitment/origin of professors6
(selected areas)
Own university
8%
Other national university
0%
Foreign university
21%
Industry
67%
Other
4%
Total
100%
Recruitment from last position, estimate for 1995-1999
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
Computer
Science
Teaching staff with employment in in
27%
16%
7%
8%
12%
25%
22%
Joint semester projects with industry
10%
10%
n.a.
25%
20%
50%
>50%
Joint diploma/thesis projects with ind
15%
25%
n.a.
35%
30%
100%
>50%
Joint doctorates with industry8
<5%
5%
n.a.
50%
10%
5%
>50%
% of teachers mainly or equally employed outside the university
8
% of all semester projects, diploma/thesis or doctorates
Annual fees / tuition
local
currency
Diploma
1'100
Doctorate
1'200
9
Charged once
10
Oct 19, 2001
in EURO
10
746
9
814
9
Materials
Science
Communication
MicroSystems Engineering
Electrical
Engineering
Cooperation with industry
7
12
Materials
Science
4
6
11
Total
Doctorate students in % of all students
Professors 1999
(selected areas)
3
Materials
Science
Communication
MicroSystems Engineering
Electrical
Engineering
Program/course duration (Diploma)
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
241
242
APPENDIX A
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical & Process Engineering,
Chemical Engineering and Materials Science
1
2
Students (selected areas)
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
2280
519
2799
1997
2284
560
2844
1999
2536
680
3216
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
Electrical Engineering
725
238
963
Computer Science
791
94
885
Mechanical & Process Engineering
794
189
983
42
58
100
184
101
285
2536
680
3216
Number of students 1999
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
3
4
Starting students (selected areas)
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
488
148
636
1997
628
190
818
1999
679
148
827
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
395
103
498
1997
324
159
483
1999
310
115
425
Starting students 1999
171
Computer Science
233
Mechanical & Process Engineering
211
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
5
6
Diploma
Electrical Engineering
Degrees (selected areas)
Number of degrees 1999
Electrical Engineering
9
55
679
Diploma
132
Computer Science
68
Mechanical & Process Engineering
82
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
8
20
310
APPENDIX A
7
Students 1999
(selected areas)
Electrical
Engineering
5%
21%
Women's share (Doctorate)
5%
12%
7%
12%
20%
9%
Foreigner's share (Diploma)
14%
13%
11%
19%
9%
12%
Foreigner's share (Doctorate)
46%
51%
50%
52%
50%
49%
% of doctorate students1
25%
11%
19%
58%
35%
21%
Program/course duration (Diploma)
Professors 1999
(selected areas)
26
26
25
26
25.8
32
33
30.5
31
31-32
5.3
5.4
5.4
5.2
4.8
5.2
Mechanical
& Process
Chemical
Computer
Science Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Electrical
Engineering
2
Women's share
Foreigner's share
Students (diploma) per professor
2
26
32.5
Doctorates in % of all students
Number of professors
24
19
28
6
8
87
0%
5%
0%
0%
0%
1%
58%
63%
46%
50%
75%
56%
30
42
28
7
23
30
Mechanical
Computer
& Process
Chemical
Science Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Full time equivalent, assistant professors not incl.
Teaching staff 1999
(selected areas)
Electrical
Engineering
Staff teaching + research3
Teaching students4
368
125
299
117
179
1088
91
30
102
1
55
279
3
Number of teaching and scientific staff, incl. lectures + professors (full, associate, assistent, research profs) apart from teaching stud.
4
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
Recruitment/origin of professors5
(selected areas)
Own university
Other national university
Foreign university
Industry
Total
5
12
7%
Women's share (Diploma)
5%
1
10
Total
8%
Age at graduation (Doctorate)
9
Materials
Science
4%
Age at graduation (Diploma)
8
Mechanical
Computer
& Process
Chemical
Science Engineering Engineering
243
5%
53%
13%
100%
Recruitment from last position, estimate for 1995-1999
Annual fees / tuition 2000
Diploma
Doctorate
6
29%
Oct 19, 2001
local
currency
in EURO6
1'100
746
350
237
244
APPENDIX A
Georgia Institute of Technology
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical
Engineering and Materials Science
1
2
Students (selected areas)
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
5435
985
1170
7590
1997
5581
985
1135
7701
1999
6390
1151
1275
8816
Number of students 1999
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
3078
444
635
4157
Mechanical Engineering
2600
559
468
3627
662
24
83
769
49
124
89
262
6389
1151
1275
8815
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
963
222
116
1301
1997
943
348
125
1416
1999
1369
467
150
1986
Bachelor
Master
Total
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science1
Total
1
3
4
Including Material Programs in Mechanical Engineering
Starting students (selected areas)
Starting students 1999
Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
754
182
936
Mechanical Engineering
457
234
691
Chemical Engineering
152
9
161
6
42
48
1369
467
1836
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
1126
587
118
1831
1997
1108
480
158
1746
1999
1253
570
165
1988
Materials Science1
Total
1
5
6
Including Material Programs in Mechanical Engineering
Degrees (selected areas)
Bachelor
Master
Total
Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
Number of degrees 1999
499
249
748
Mechanical Engineering
593
270
863
Chemical Engineering
142
9
151
19
42
61
1253
570
1823
Materials Science
Total
APPENDIX A
7
Electrical
Engineering
& Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Women's share (Bachelor)
13%
28%
37%
55%
22%
Women's share (Master)
17%
16%
38%
6%
16%
Women's share (Ph.D.)
16%
21%
31%
19%
19%
Foreigner's share (Bachelor)
18%
10%
12%
4%
14%
Foreigner's share (Master)
35%
39%
38%
15%
35%
52%
Students 1999
(selected areas)
Foreigner's share (Ph.D.)
59%
48%
36%
44%
% of Ph.D. students2
15%
13%
11%
34%
14%
13%
18%
3%
72%
15%
% of master students
3
Age at graduation (Bachelor)
24
24
24
24
24
Age at graduation (Master)
28
27
26
27
27
Age at graduation (Ph.D.)
32
32
29
32
32
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
1
1
1
1
1
Electrical
Engineering
& Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
356
Program/course duration (Bachelor)
Program/course duration (Master)
8
2
Ph.D. students in % of all students
3
Master students in % of all students
Professors 1999
(selected areas)
Number of professors
4
147
145
31
33
Women's share
11%
8%
6%
12%
9%
Foreigner's share
29%
46%
32%
18%
35%
24
22
22
5
21
Electrical
Engineering
& Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Staff teaching + research5
203
180
34
26
443
Teaching students6
251
126
43
0
420
Students (Bachelor + Master) per professor
4
Ordinary (full) or extraordinary (associate) professors, assistant professors on tenure track
Teaching staff 1999
(selected areas)
10
5
Number of teaching and scientific staff, incl. lectures + professors (full, associate, assistent, research profs) apart from teaching stud.
6
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
Recruitment/origin of professors7
(selected areas)
Own university
Other national university
Foreign university
Industry
Administration
7%
67%
3%
13%
1%
Other
9%
Total
100%
7
12
245
Recruitment from last position, estimate for 1995-1999
Annual fees / tuition8
in US $
in EURO9
Bachelor
3'108
3'463
Master
3'590
4'000
Ph.D.
3'590
4'000
8
Out-of-state fees are 4x higher
8
Oct 19, 2001
246
APPENDIX A
Imperial College
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Aeronautics, Mechanical Engineering,
Chemical Engineering and Materials Science
1
2
Students (selected areas)
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
438
1776
507
2721
1997
357
1930
439
2726
1999
313
2168
425
2906
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
140
553
87
780
81
400
60
541
5
262
18
285
69
419
130
618
0
374
81
455
18
160
49
227
313
2168
425
2906
Number of students 1999
Electrical Engineering
Computer Science
Aeronautics
Mechanical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
3
4
Starting students (selected areas)
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
133
626
110
869
1997
121
734
113
968
1999
108
747
151
1006
Starting students 1999
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
Electrical Engineering
40
194
24
258
Computer Science
35
190
20
245
Aeronautics
0
79
9
88
Mechanical Engineering
7
147
58
212
131
Chemical Engineering
0
102
29
26
35
11
72
108
747
151
1006
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
195
448
131
774
1997
186
545
176
907
1999
168
476
149
793
Materials Science
Total
5
6
Degrees
Number of degrees 1999
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
Electrical Engineering
60
115
38
213
Computer Science
33
112
29
174
1
50
8
59
42
80
41
163
125
Aeronautics
Mechanical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
0
101
24
32
18
9
59
168
476
149
793
APPENDIX A
7
Students 1999
(selected areas)
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Aeronautics
Women's share (Bachelor)
14%
14%
15%
12%
Women's share (Master)
14%
14%
15%
Women's share (Ph.D.)
13%
17%
Foreigner's share (Bachelor)
n.a
Foreigner's share (Master)
Foreigner's share (Ph.D.)
% of Ph.D. students1
% of master students2
Materials
Science
Total
28%
22%
17%
12%
28%
22%
17%
17%
15%
38%
41%
22%
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
-
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
-
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
n.a
11%
11%
6%
21%
18%
22%
15%
71%
74%
92%
68%
82%
70%
75%
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
Age at graduation (Master)
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
Age at graduation (Ph.D.)
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Aeronautics
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
37
44
19
50
33
22
205
8%
18%
0%
2%
15%
23%
11%
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
19
11
14
10
11
8
12
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
1
2
3
Ph.D. students in % of all students
Master students in % of all students
4 years for a first degree, 1 year as a graduate degree
Professors 1999
(selected areas)
Number of professors4
Women's share
Foreigner's share
Students (Bachelor/Master) per prof.
4
9
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Aeronautics
Staff teaching + research5
129
114
65
198
114
81
701
Teaching students6
100
74
19
144
90
53
480
6
Number of teaching and scientific staff, including lectures and professors (full, associate, assistent, research professors) apart from teaching students
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
Recruitment/origin of professors7
(selected areas)
Own university
78%
Other national university
13%
Foreign university
0%
Industry
9%
Total
7
11
100%
Recruitment from last position, estimate for 1995-1999
Cooperation with industry
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Aeronautics
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Teaching staff with employment in industr
0%
2%
0%
2%
0%
0%
Joint semester projects with industry9
0%
0%
0%
35%
0%
0%
Joint diploma/thesis projects with industry
0%
0%
30%
0%
75%
0%
Joint doctorates with industry9
0%
0%
15%
45%
25%
0%
8
9
12
-
Ordinary (full) or extraordinary (associate) professors, assistant professors on tenure track
Teaching staff 1999
(selected areas)
5
10
-
Age at graduation (Bachelor)
Program/course duration (Bachelor)
Program/course duration (Master)3
8
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
247
% of teachers mainly or equally employed outside the university
% of all semester projects, diploma/thesis or doctorates
Annual fees / tuition 2000
local
currency
in EURO13
Bachelor
1050
10
Master
1050
10,11
1683
Ph.D./Doctorate
2740
12
4391
10
Outside UK or EU: £11'450
Master of Science: UK or EU: £2'740, else £10'400
12
Outside UK or EU: £9'550
13
Oct 19, 2001
11
1683
248
APPENDIX A
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical
Engineering and Materials Science
1
2
Students (selected areas)
n.a.
n.a.
–
4296
n.a.
–
1999
4044
n.a.
–
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1149
n.a.
–
594
n.a.
–
1298
n.a.
–
Chemical Engineering
623
n.a.
–
Materials Science
380
n.a.
–
4044
n.a.
–
Number of students 1999
Mechanical Engineering
Total
5
6
Total
1997
Computer Science
4
Doctorate
1995
Electrical Engineering
3
Diploma
Starting students (selected areas)
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
829
225
1054
1997
827
258
1085
1999
853
246
1099
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
576
80
656
1997
615
89
704
1999
791
111
902
Starting students 1999
Diploma
Electrical Engineering
248
Computer Science
157
Mechanical Engineering
224
Chemical Engineering
116
Materials Science
108
Total
853
Degrees (selected areas)
Number of degrees 1999
Electrical Engineering
Computer Science
Diploma
210
78
Mechanical Engineering
303
Chemical Engineering
141
Materials Science
Total
59
791
APPENDIX A
7
Students 1999
(selected areas)
Electrical
Engineering
Total
25%
15%
18%
20%
53%
32%
Women's share (Doctorate)
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
–
Foreigner's share (Diploma)
5%
4%
4%
9%
2%
5%
Foreigner's share (Doctorate)
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
–
% of doctorate students1
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
–
26
n.a.
25
n.a.
25
–
31
n.a.
33
n.a.
n.a.
–
6.5
n.a.
5
n.a.
5.5
–
Computer Mechanical
Chemical
Science Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Age at graduation (doctorate)
Program/course duration (diploma)
1
Doctorate students in % of all students
Professors 1999
(selected areas)
Electrical
Engineering
Number of professors 2
91
39
83
71
42
326
Women's share
6%
10%
4%
14%
19%
9%
Foreigner's share
n.a
n.a.
n.a
n.a.
n.a
–
13
15
16
9
9
12
Computer Mechanical
Chemical
Science Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Students (diploma) per professor
2
9
Materials
Science
Women's share (Diploma)
Age at graduation (diploma)
8
Computer Mechanical
Chemical
Science Engineering Engineering
Ordinary (full) or extraordinary (associate) professors, assistant professors on tenure track
Teaching staff 1999
(selected areas)
Staff teaching + research
Electrical
Engineering
3
Teaching students4
90
n.a.
233
n.a.
25
20
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
75
3
Number of teaching and scientific staff, incl. lectures + professors (full, associate, assistent, research profs) apart from teaching stud.
4
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
5
Without educational program "Materials Technology"
11
Cooperation with industry
Electrical
Engineering
Teaching staff with employment in industry 6
Computer Mechanical
Chemical
Science Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
5%
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
4%
Joint semester projects with industry7
n.a.
n.a.
60%
n.a.
n.a.
Joint diploma/thesis projects with industry7
80%
n.a.
90%
n.a.
70%
Joint doctorates with industry7
70%
n.a.
80%
n.a.
50%
local
currency
in EURO
Diploma
0
0
Doctorate
0
0
6
% of teachers mainly or equally employed outside the university
7
% of all semester projects, diploma/thesis or doctorates
12
249
Annual fees / tuition 2000
Total
5
–
–
250
APPENDIX A
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, Chemical
Engineering and Materials Science
1
2
Students (selected areas)
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
1775
769
824
3368
1997
1812
740
806
3358
1999
1733
783
739
3255
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1030
440
356
1826
Mechanical Engineering
343
215
161
719
Chemical Engineering
254
52
144
450
Materials Science
106
76
78
260
1733
783
739
3255
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
609
431
48
1088
1997
587
404
58
1049
1999
590
455
37
1082
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
362
286
15
663
Mechanical Engineering
106
96
13
215
Chemical Engineering
82
45
7
134
Materials Science
40
28
2
70
590
455
37
1082
Number of students 1999
Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
Total
3
4
Starting students (selected areas)
Starting students 1999
Total
5
6
Degrees (selected areas)
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
1995
570
446
174
1190
1997
554
475
164
1193
1999
607
505
151
1263
Bachelor
Master
Ph.D.
Total
Number of degrees 1999
Electrical Engineering & Computer Science
353
299
66
718
Mechanical Engineering
133
141
41
315
86
38
23
147
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
35
27
21
83
607
505
151
1263
APPENDIX A
7
Electrical
Engineering
& Computer
Science
Students 1999
(selected areas)
23%
32%
58%
62%
33%
21%
19%
35%
29%
22%
Women's share (Ph.D.)
17%
7%
25%
22%
17%
Foreigner's share (Bachelor)
12%
6%
8%
4%
10%
Foreigner's share (Master)
20%
31%
29%
38%
26%
35%
Foreigner's share (Ph.D.)
26%
57%
30%
40%
% of Ph.D. students1
19%
22%
32%
30%
23%
24%
30%
12%
29%
24%
2
Age at graduation (Bachelor)
23
22
22
22
22
Age at graduation (Master)
23
24
23
24
23.5
Age at graduation (Ph.D.)
29
30
28
28
29
4
4
4
4
4
1.8
1.8
1
2.5
1.8
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Program/course duration (Master)
1
Ph.D. students in % of all students
2
Master students in % of all students
Electrical
Engineering
& Computer
Science
Professors 1999
(selected areas)
Number of professors3
106
54
30
33
223
Women's share
10%
4%
17%
12%
10%
Foreigner's share
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
14
10
10
6
11
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Students (Bachelor + Master) per professor
3
Electrical
Engineering
& Computer
Science
Teaching staff 1999
(selected areas)
Staff teaching + research
4
5
351
172
127
121
771
110
29
17
11
167
4
Number of teaching and scientific staff, incl. lectures + professors (full, associate, assistent, research profs) apart from teaching stud.
5
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
Annual fees / tuition 2000
in US $
6
in EURO
Bachelor
26'050
29'028
Master
26'050
29'028
Ph.D.
26'050
29'028
6
–
Ordinary (full) or extraordinary (associate) professors, assistant professors on tenure track
Teaching students
12
Total
Women's share (Master)
Program/course duration (Bachelor)
9
Materials
Science
Women's share (Bachelor)
% of master students
8
Mechanical
Chemical
Engineering Engineering
251
Oct 19, 2001
252
APPENDIX A
Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule
Aachen
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical & Chemical Engineering and
Materials Science
1
Students (selected areas)
1412
11486
8414
1405
9819
1999
7866
1368
9234
Doctor candidates as far as registered as graduate students
Number of students 1999
Doctorate
1
Total
1910
321
2231
Computer Science
1605
120
1725
Mechanical + Chemical Engineering
3932
774
4706
419
153
572
7866
1368
9234
Doctorate
Total
Doctor candidates as far as registered as graduate students
Starting students (selected areas)
Diplom
1995
811
n.a.
811
1997
1035
n.a.
1035
1999
1415
n.a.
1415
Starting students 1999
Diplom
Electrical Engineering
275
Computer Science
487
Mechanical + Chemical Engineering
595
Materials Science
Total
Degrees (selected areas)
57
1415
Diplom
Doctorate
1
Total
1995
1546
343
1889
1997
1345
347
1692
1999
904
280
1184
1
6
Diplom
Electrical Engineering
1
5
Total
10074
Total
4
1
1997
Materials Science
3
Doctorate
1995
1
2
Diplom
Doctor candidates as far as registered as graduate students
Number of degrees 1999
Diplom
Electrical Engineering
265
Computer Science
103
Mechanical + Chemical Engineering
472
Materials Science
Total
64
904
APPENDIX A
7
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical &
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
Women's share (Diploma)
4%
10%
6%
16%
7%
Women's share (Doctorate)
3%
8%
6%
15%
6%
Foreigner's share (Diploma)
16%
20%
13%
15%
15%
Foreigner's share (Doctorate)
10%
10%
7%
11%
8%
14%
7%
16%
27%
15%
28
28
28
28
28
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
30-35
5
5
5
5
5
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical &
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
22
14
49
13
98
Women's share
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Foreigner's share
9%
7%
6%
8%
7%
87
115
80
132
80
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical &
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
178
53
264
63
558
83
46
170
35
334
Students 1999
(selected areas)
% of doctorate students
2
Age at graduation (Diploma)
Age at graduation (Doctorate)
Program/course duration (Diploma)
2
8
Doctorate students in % of all students
Professors 1999
(selected areas)
Number of professors3
Students (diploma) per professor
3
9
Professors with tenure
Teaching staff 1999
(selected areas)
Staff teaching + research4
Teaching students5
4
Total number of staff engaged in teaching except for student assistants
5 Total
10
number of graduate and undergraduate student assistants engaged in teaching
Recruitment/origin of professors6
(selected areas)
Own university
Other national university
Foreign university
Industry
0%
12%
1%
47%
Other
40%
Total
100%
6
12
253
Recruitment from last position, estimate for 1995-1999
Annual fees / tuition 2000
local
currency
EURO8
Diploma
400
7
205
Doctorate
400
7
205
7
Incl. public transport ticket
8 Oct 19, 2001
254
APPENDIX A
Technische Universiteit Delft
Selected areas: Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering (incl. Aerospace
Engineering), Chemical Engineering and Materials Science
1
2
Students (selected areas)
Diploma
Doctorate
1995
6948
n.a.
-
1997
6510
340
6850
1999
6498
346
6844
Number of students 19991
Diploma
Doctorate
Electrical Engineering
670
127
Computer Science
803
see El.-Eng.
–
4334
98
4432
Chemical Engineering
427
80
507
Materials Science
264
41
305
6498
346
6844
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
Mechanical Engineering
Total
1
2
3
4
Starting students (selected areas)
–
1995
1091
n.a.
–
1997
1155
n.a.
–
1999
1264
92
1356
Starting students 19993
Diploma
Electrical Engineering
107
Computer Science
213
Mechanical Engineering
884
Materials Science
Total
3
6
Total
2
Academic year 1999/2000
Incl. Computer Science
Chemical Engineering
5
Total
41
19
1264
Academic year 1999/2000
Degrees (selected areas)
Diploma
Doctorate
Total
1995
856
128
984
1997
794
117
911
1999
649
103
752
Number of degrees 19984
Electrical Engineering
Computer Science
Mechanical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Materials Science
Total
4
Academic year 1998/1999
Diploma
103
30
440
58
18
649
APPENDIX A
7
Students 19995
(selected areas)
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
6%
6%
18%
20%
8%
15%
Women's share (Doctorate)
8%6
see El.-Eng.
18%
20%
83%
23%
Foreigner's share (Diploma)
19%
13%
7%
12%
5%
10%
Foreigner's share (Doctorate)
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
% of doctorate students5
16%
see El.-Eng.
2%
16%
13%
5%
Age at graduation (Diploma)
25
25
26
25
25
25
Age at graduation (Doctorate)
30
29
30
29
29
29
6
6.2
6.7
6
6.1
6.2
Electrical
Engineering
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
see El.-Eng.
145
63
31
423
2%
Women's share (Diploma)
Program/course duration (Diploma)
5
6
8
Professors 19997
(selected areas)
Number of professors8
184
Women's share
2%
n.a.
0%
6%
3%
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
8
n.a.
30
7
9
15
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Total
see El.-Eng.
324
119
31
777
40
14
13
22
139
Chemical
Engineering
Materials
Science
Students (diploma) per professor
Academic year 1999/2000
8
Ordinary (full) or extraordinary (associate) professors, assistant professors on tenure track
Incl. Computer Science
Teaching staff 199910
(selected areas)
Electrical
Engineering
Staff teaching + research11
303
Teaching students12
50
13
10
Academic year 1999/2000
11
Number of teaching and scientific staff, incl. lectures + professors (full, associate, assistent, research profs) apart from teaching stud.
12
Number of students (undergraduates, graduates) engaged in teaching
Incl. Computer Science
13
Cooperation with industry
Electrical
Engineering
Teaching staff with employment in industry14
12
9
7
9
11
Total
Doctorate students in % of all students
Incl. Computer Science
Foreigner's share
9
255
Computer
Science
Mechanical
Engineering
3%
6%
28%
7%
14%
Joint semester projects with industry15
50%
85%
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
Joint diploma/thesis projects with industry15
50%
70%
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
Joint doctorates with industry15
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
local
currency
EURO
2'900
1'316
n.a.
–
14
% of teachers mainly or equally employed outside the university
15
% of all semester projects, diploma/thesis or doctorates
Annual fees / tuition 2000
Diploma
Doctorate
16
Oct 16, 2001
16
–
APPENDIX B
257
Appendix B:
Listing of Potentially Valuable Practices (PVP)
Carnegie Mellon University
264
(1) Strategic planning process and strategic positioning
264
(2) Introduction to engineering courses in parallel with mathematics and science
264
(3) Broad undergraduate studies with high flexibility for students
265
(4) Cross-disciplinary approach and team projects
265
(5) External support structure through advisory boards and councils
266
(6) Wireless campus
266
(7) Undergraduate research
266
(8) Interaction with industry, special co-op programs, faculty as entrepreneurs
266
(9) Integrated master’s program to recruit more students
267
Ecole Centrale Paris
267
(1) Education of generalists (“industry managers”), not specialists
267
(2) Restructuring of final year: combination of professional and scientific approach
267
(3) Implementation of long-term strategy for internationality
268
(4) Strong links with industry in funding, teaching, and research
268
(5) Integration of non-core competencies and human sciences
269
(6) Early and motivating preparation for the engineering profession
269
(7) Strong emphasis on campus life and student activities
270
(8) Alumni network used extensively for knowledge transfer
270
(9) Strong encouragement to create spin-off companies
270
(10) Clearly diversified strategy for financing
270
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
271
(1) Internationalization in research & education
271
(2) Focus on basic sciences in combination with strong links to industry
271
(3) Integration of new, important topic areas in engineering curricula
272
(4) Micro-Engineering: excellent skills in systems engineering
272
(5) Innovative courses in programming
273
(6) Communication systems: diploma thesis is carried out in industry
273
(7) Spin-off companies
273
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
274
(1) Cosmopolitan and very international composition of faculty
274
(2) Autonomous department structure with global budgets empowers departments
274
(3) Well defined internal and external evaluation system
274
(4) Strong focus on human and social sciences
275
(5) Special funding for educational projects available
275
(6) Well equipped laboratories
275
(7) Broad program of the Center for Continuing Education
275
(8) Clear increase in the number of spin-offs
275
258
APPENDIX B
(9) Electrical Engineering: start of bachelor / master program in fall 2001 with high flexibility of curriculum
selection
276
(10) Electrical Engineering stresses multi-disciplinarity of education
276
(11) Mechanical Engineering: strong focus on project orientation
276
(12) Materials Science: curriculum revision to adapt to new key profile of graduates
277
Georgia Institute of Technology
277
(1) Interdisciplinary research centers
277
(2) Strong entrepreneurial program
277
(3) Strong international focus
278
(4) Clear “growth program” to attract companies
278
(5) Excellent distance learning / distance education program
279
(6) Innovative way of funding students
279
(7) Successful diversity program
279
(8) Close contact to alumni organization
279
(9) Strong interaction with industry
280
Imperial College London
280
(1) Academic responsibility of deans, management responsibility of Department Heads
280
(2) Integration of project and teamwork into curriculum
280
(3) Elaborate tutoring system on both personal and subject level
281
(4) WISE (Woman in Science and Engineering) program to attract female students
281
(5) “Mastery” to provide engineers with a more holistic education
282
(6) High degree of internationality
282
(7) Cooperation with industry: distinction between university level and individual level of cooperation
282
(8) High number of spin-offs per year
282
(9) Very elaborate quality management on internal and external level
283
(10) Computer Science: rapid and closely monitored introduction to programming
283
(11) Materials Science: continuing education through membership in association
283
(12) Electrical Engineering: industrial elective
283
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
284
(1) Strong emphasis on programs, not departments
284
(2) Integration of lectures, exercises, and teaching of non-core competencies
284
(3) High level of internationality
284
(4) Creation of international master programs
285
(5) High level of interdisciplinarity
285
(6) Recruitment of non-traditional student groups
285
(7) Learning lab in collaboration with Stanford
285
(8) Strong collaboration with industry in project work
285
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
286
(1) Successful quality assurance by external Visiting Committees (VC)
286
(2) Fast decisions and lean management because of decentralized structures
286
(3) Innovative way of creating new units
287
APPENDIX B
259
(4) Excellent research possibilities on undergraduate level
287
(5) Broad range of activities, seminars, etc. to prepare students for the diversity of their professional life
287
(6) Education: broad, fundamental, yet practical
288
(7) Creation of a number of Master of Engineering (MEng) programs
288
(8) Distance education through Singapore-MIT Alliance
288
(9) Chemical Engineering: innovative methods to implement teamwork
288
(10) Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
289
(11) Materials Sciences: high standard of interdisciplinarity and broad education promotes cooperation
between faculty
289
Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen
290
(1) High number of interdisciplinary activities and research areas
290
(2) Strong connections with industry
290
(3) International master programs; internationality
291
(4) High involvement of students in research
291
(5) Students with broad view and deep fundamental knowledge
291
(6) Special motivation course in Mechanical Engineering
292
(7) Encouragement of spin-off companies
292
Technische Universiteit Delft
292
(1) Clearly defined strategic plan and implementation strategy
292
(2) International MSc program
292
(3) Elaborate external and internal quality management
293
(4) Dedicated business services center to manage contract research
293
(5) Highly innovative program in Electrical Engineering
293
(6) Good integration of non-core competencies in Materials Sciences and Chemical Engineering
294
(7) Optimal balance between traditional forms of teaching and project work in Mechanical Engineering
294
(8) Design/synthesis exercise and outstanding research facilities in Aerospace Engineering
295
(9) Special interdisciplinary activities including non-core skills in the study program
295
(10) Innovative selection process in Electrical Engineering
295
Cooperation with
universities, Industry
X
X
Performance of
engineers
Education,
Internationality
APPENDIX B
University
Structure
260
Carnegie Mellon University
(1)
Strategic planning process and strategic positioning
(2)
Introduction to engineering courses in parallel
with mathematics and science
X
X
(3)
Broad undergraduate studies with high flexibility
for students
X
X
(4)
Cross-disciplinary approach and team projects
X
(5)
External support structure through advisory
boards and councils
X
(6)
Wireless campus
X
(7)
Undergraduate research
(8)
Interaction with industry, special co-op programs, faculty as entrepreneurs
(9)
Integrated master’s program to recruit more
students
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ecole Centrale Paris
(1)
Education of generalists (“industry managers”),
not specialists
X
(2)
Restructuring of final year: combination of professional and scientific approach
X
(3)
Implementation of long-term strategy for internationality
(4)
Strong links with industry in funding, teaching,
and research
(5)
Integration of non-core competences and human sciences
X
X
(6)
Early and motivating preparation for the engineering profession
X
X
(7)
Strong emphasis on campus life and student
activities
X
(8)
Alumni network used extensively for knowledge
transfer
X
(9)
Strong encouragement to create spin-off companies
X
(10)
Clearly diversified strategy for financing
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale Lausanne
(1)
Internationalization in research and education
(2)
Focus on basic sciences in combination with
strong links to industry
(3)
Integration of new, important topic areas in
engineering curricula
(4)
Micro-Engineering: excellent skills in systems
engineering
X
X
X
X
X
X
APPENDIX B
X
(5)
Innovative courses in programming
(6)
Communication systems: diploma thesis is carried out in industry
X
(7)
Spin-off companies
X
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule
Zürich
(1)
Cosmopolitan and very international composition of faculty
X
(2)
Autonomous department structure with global
budgets empowers departments
X
(3)
Well defined internal and external evaluation
system
X
(4)
Strong focus on human and social sciences
(5)
Special funding for educational projects available
X
(6)
Well equipped laboratories
X
(7)
Broad program of the Center for Continuing
Education
(8)
Clear increase in the number of spin-offs
(9)
Electrical Engineering: start of program in fall
2001 with high flexibility of curriculum selection
X
(10)
Electrical Engineering stresses multidisciplinarity of education
X
(11)
Mechanical Engineering: strong focus on project
orientation
X
(12)
Materials Science: curriculum revision to adapt
to new key profile of graduates
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Georgia Institute of Technology
(1)
Interdisciplinary research centers
X
X
(2)
Strong entrepreneurial program
X
(3)
Strong international focus
(4)
Clear “growth program” to attract companies
(5)
Excellent Distance Learning / Distance Education Program
X
(6)
Innovative way of funding students
X
(7)
Successful diversity program
X
(8)
Close contact to alumni organization
X
(9)
Strong interaction with industry
X
X
X
X
X
X
Imperial College London
(1)
Academic responsibility of deans, management
responsibility of Department Heads
(2)
Integration of project and teamwork into curriculum
(3)
Elaborate tutoring system on both personal and
subject level
X
X
X
X
X
261
262
APPENDIX B
(4)
WISE (Women in Science and Engineering)
program to attract female students
(5)
“Mastery” to provide engineers with a more
holistic education
X
(6)
High degree of internationality
X
(7)
Cooperation with industry: distinction between
university level & individual level of cooperation
X
(8)
High number of spin-offs per year
X
(9)
Very elaborate quality management on internal
and external level
X
(10)
Computer Science: rapid and closely monitored
introduction to programming
X
(11)
Materials Science: continuing education through
membership in association
X
X
(12)
Electrical Engineering: industrial elective
X
X
X
X
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
X
(1)
Strong emphasis on programs, not departments
(2)
Integration of lectures, exercises, and teaching
of non-core competences
X
(3)
High level of internationality
X
(4)
Creation of international master programs
X
(5)
High level of interdisciplinarity
X
(6)
Recruitment of non-traditional student groups
(7)
Learning lab in collaboration with Stanford
X
(8)
Strong collaboration with industry in project work
X
X
X
X
X
X
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(1)
Successful quality assurance by external Visiting Committees (VC)
X
(2)
Fast decisions and lean management because
of decentralized structures
X
(3)
Innovative way of creating new units
X
(4)
Excellent research possibilities on undergraduate level
X
(5)
Broad range of activities, seminars, etc. to prepare students for the diversity of their professional
X
(6)
Education: Broad, fundamental, yet practical
X
(7)
Creation of a number of Master of Engineering
(MEng) programs
(8)
Distance education through Singapore-MIT
Alliance
(9)
Chemical Engineering: innovative methods to
implement teamwork
X
(10)
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
X
(11)
MS: high standard of interdisciplinarity and broad
education promotes cooperation between faculty
X
X
X
X
X
X
APPENDIX B
Rheinisch Westfälische Technische
Hochschule Aachen
(1)
High number of interdisciplinary activities and
research areas
(2)
Strong connections with industry
(3)
International master programs; internationality
X
(4)
High involvement of students in research
X
X
(5)
Students with broad view and deep fundamental
knowledge
X
X
(6)
Special motivation course in Mechanical Engineering
X
(7)
Encouragement of spin-off companies
X
X
X
X
Technische Universiteit Delft
(1)
Clearly defined strategic plan and implementation strategy
(2)
International MSc Program
(3)
Elaborate external and internal quality management
(4)
Dedicated business services center to manage
contract research
(5)
Highly innovative program in Electrical Engineering
X
(6)
Good integration of non-core competencies in
Materials Sciences and Chemical Engineering
X
(7)
Optimal balance between traditional forms of
teaching and project work in Mechanical Eng.
X
(8)
Design/synthesis exercise and outstanding
research facilities in Aerospace Engineering
X
(9)
Special interdisciplinary activities including noncore skills in the study program
X
(10)
Innovative selection process in Electrical Engineering
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
263
264
APPENDIX B
Carnegie Mellon University
(1) Strategic planning process and strategic positioning
Carnegie Mellon University has introduced a well integrated strategic planning
process on the level of the university and the departments. Results are four clearly
defined thrust areas and criteria to help with the selection of research areas and
the allocation of money for research projects. Furthermore, the clear strategy allows Carnegie Mellon University to position itself as a highly competitive player in a
niche market.
In the strategic planning process, vision, mission, strategy, and goals are discussed. Carnegie Mellon University has identified four goals: 1) broadening our
education, 2) achieving diversity among faculty and students, 3) advancing our
research and education in four thrust areas, and 4) regional economic development.
Especially in the thrust area of biotechnology, clearly more money has flowed in
because of the strategic plan.
Strategic planning has also been successfully applied on the undergraduate
level.
As a relatively small university, Carnegie Mellon University follows a clear niche
strategy with focus on few, future-oriented areas.
The strategy process is highly interactive and considers the needs of the departments as well as the needs of the university as a whole. The process involves input from all levels: faculty, students, administration and external advisory boards.
Carnegie Mellon University uses interdisciplinary research and education as
essential to maintaining excellence because of its small size.
(2) Introduction to engineering courses in parallel with mathematics and science
About ten years ago, Carnegie Mellon University established Introduction to Engineering courses. These courses run in parallel with mathematics and science
courses, and two of the seven courses are required for each first-year student.
Students enjoy a very comprehensive experience, enhance their problem solving
skills, and can more easily decide which major to choose.
All undergraduates take a freshman “Introduction to Engineering” course in
each of the first two semesters. Each program offers an introduction course.
Contrary to introductory courses at many other universities, the courses offered
at Carnegie Mellon University are very challenging and are required for graduation.
The introduction courses teach problem solving explicitly. Student surveys show
that students who have completed the introduction courses feel more comfortable with problem solving than students who have not.
In the introduction courses, students enjoy a very comprehensive experience,
which helps them choose a suitable major.
Introduction courses are run in parallel with Mathematics and xcience (Physics,
Computer Science or Chemistry, depending on the program). Thus integrating
applied and theoretical knowledge.
APPENDIX B
The best professors are chosen to teach these courses.
All introduction courses have laboratory work associated with the course.
(3) Broad undergraduate studies with high flexibility for students
CMU’s students can be admitted to schools, not programs. Additionally, the undergraduate program is very broad and has been adapted to the needs of the students. In some cases, special efforts have been made to recruit female and minority students, and to develop a professional and social climate that is friendly to all.
This results in a comprehensive engineering education which is thought to be very
attractive to all students. Tangible results are a reduction of the drop-out rate and
an increase in female enrollment.
Admission to the school, not program, is required. At the end of the first year the
student selects in which program to major.
The curriculum in each program is flexible. 20% of the curriculum is in humanities, social sciences, fine arts. Furthermore, every student is allowed at least 5
free electives. The electives and the 20% curriculum in humanities amount to
one third of the total curriculum.
Introduction to Engineering courses (see item 2).
Mechanical Engineering: Interactive learning programs and web-based tutorials,
some faculty members use educational software to help students learn specific
subjects, e.g., mechanics and materials.
Computer sciences: A study identified that women have a different understanding of computers than men. CS adapted its programs, and the interest of
women grew. The Computer Science department has provided workshops for
high school guidance councilors with the purpose of educating them to career
opportunities for women in Computer Science. The enrollment of women in the
Computer Science department is greater than 35%.
Carnegie Mellon University reduced the drop-out rate from more than 20% to
slightly less than 10%. Reasons: 1) Carnegie Mellon University now gets more
students that choose CMU as their first choice. 2) Curriculum changes (more
flexible curriculum, introduction to engineering courses in parallel with math and
science in the first year).
(4) Cross-disciplinary approach and team projects
Carnegie Mellon University increased the breadth of its study programs by different
means. As a consequence, students enjoy a broader engineering education and
learn how to work in interdisciplinary teams. Students surveys show an increase in
student satisfaction at graduation time
Carnegie Mellon University shows a high degree of interdisciplinarity. New interdisciplinary programs can be built up quite fast. Engineering curricula are
broader than the curricula from other schools. Students can/must take several
courses at other schools.
The budgeting process is not formula-based and thus supports interdisciplinarity.
Carnegie Mellon University has increased the number of electives, reduced
restrictions on electives, and encouraged minors in other disciplines. As a result, students are more satisfied with their education when they graduate.
There are multi-disciplinary projects with students from different departments
and colleges on one team.
265
266
APPENDIX B
Integrated product design: Students work in multi-disciplinary teams to develop
a product.
Teams work with faculty and with engineers in industry. A company funds the
course and each team has to address the project.
Carnegie Mellon University is experimenting with international design teams in
education, e.g. students at CMU collaborate with students from other universities. The web is used for communication and for exchange of design tools.
Several of our programs have established international internships involving
non-US companies and universities.
(5) External support structure through advisory boards and councils
Carnegie Mellon University has created an elaborate system of advisory boards
and councils at different levels. One effect is the continuous improvement of engineering education with a good balance between inside and outside perspectives.
External advisory boards for the colleges (schools) and departments (programs)
level. Main goals: evaluation, advice, and advocacy.
Additional councils at school level (e.g., College of Engineering Advisory Council, Leadership Council, Dean Student Advisory Network).
(6) Wireless campus
As a result of CMU’s information technology initiative, the whole campus is wireless. This allows Internet-based teaching in the classroom. This infrastructure can
also be used as an experimental setting for future communication. The wireless
capability augments standard hardwired IT infrastructure.
(7) Undergraduate research
Many departments at Carnegie Mellon University encourage undergraduates to
actively participate in research projects. This results in closer collaboration between faculty and students.
Undergraduate research projects: About 40-50% of the undergraduates participate in research projects. Undergraduates are encouraged to participate in
writing publications (e.g., in Materials Science and Engineering).
The university provides small research grants for which undergraduate students
can apply, which stimulates much research.
At the end of the year, there is a symposium ("meeting of the minds”) where
students present their results.
(8) Interaction with industry, special co-op programs, faculty as entrepreneurs
Carnegie Mellon University’s departments show much interaction with industry on
different levels. This leads to a number of opportunities where students can combine theory and practical opportunities in their education.
Carnegie Mellon University has introduced research track faculty, who are fully
supported by external research funds. Criteria for promotion of research faculty
with respect to research accomplishment is the same as for tenure track faculty.
Professors can spend one day per week for consulting activities
Materials Science, co-op program with industry: students spend every other
semester in industry. Also a co-op program in Electrical and Computer Engineering.
APPENDIX B
Chemical Engineering, international exchange programs coupled with summer
internships at companies, and one-year industrial internship programs between
the 3rd and 4th year.
Computer Science, co-op program with industry: students spend one year in
industry and get grades. This results in students who are stronger and have
more practical experience.
Entrepreneurship: faculty can be on unsupported leave of absence for up to two
years to be involved with an established or start-up company. 50% of royalty
benefits derived from intellectual property are given to the inventors.
(9) Integrated master’s program to recruit more students
Several departments offer special integrated five-year master’s programs. Students
are awarded a bachelor’s and a master’s degree. There is no master’s thesis. This
integrated program has helped Carnegie Mellon University recruit more students.
Ecole Centrale Paris
(1) Education of generalists (“industry managers”), not specialists
ECP’s goal is to educate generalists with one specialization and a strong knowledge of how to solve problems in companies. As a result, ECP’s graduates are
highly valued in industry.
The breadth of ECP’s educational program is a “trade mark” and widely recognized in industry.
ECP has no departments, there is a single diploma degree.
The education program contains the concept of Industrial Science with the principal focus on general education, and the concept that every engineer must play
a social role and must contribute to society.
ECP’s goal is to educate top industrial managers. The breadth of the education
allows graduates to either go into a managerial position or into a leading position in a specific technical field.
(2) Restructuring of final year: combination of professional and scientific approach
ECP took the initiative to restructure its final year with the help of McKinsey consultants. The result is a matrix structure. This will allow students to simultaneously
specialize in a scientific topic area and a professional function.
The final year will be organized as a matrix structure of eight scientific areas
and five engineering / professional functions, starting September 2001. Students choose one scientific area and one engineering function.
The main goals are that students orient themselves towards a specific field (industrial or disciplinary), and discover the different functions of an engineer.
The eight scientific areas (“vertical program”) are: Industrial Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Process Engineering, Applied Mathematics, Software and
IT, Electronics and Automation, Applied Physics, Civil Engineering.
267
268
APPENDIX B
The five professional functions (“horizontal program”) are: Manufacturing and
Logistics, Conception Development and Research, Finance, Marketing and
Consulting, Entrepreneurship, Project Management.
Duration: 8 months of courses and 7 months in industry (diploma thesis). The
extension of the studies facilitates the proposition of a master’s degree to foreign students.
(3) Implementation of long-term strategy for internationality
In the 1980s, ECP has reconsidered its strategic position and decided a number of
measures to increase its internationality and global focus. As a result, an international double degree network has been created. Students get significant international experience during their studies.
About 25% of each class are foreigners (15% from the TIME network, 10% from
different origins). 34% of a class get a second degree from a foreign engineering institution (25% in the TIME network, 9% outside the TIME network), simultaneously to an ECP degree.
ECP founded the TIME (Top Industrial Managers for Europe) network, a network composed of 34 technical universities from 15 European countries. 10% of
the ECP students go to the partner institutions. TIME promotes double degrees.
Students have various possibilities to simultaneously get a foreign degree with a
one year extension of their studies.
Students must learn two foreign languages (compulsory). The teaching is done
by native speakers, who also help introduce the idea of going abroad and getting a foreign degree.
Students have a compulsory internship in a company abroad (lasting at least six
weeks, on average 10-12 weeks). This is considered a very effective way of
learning cultural differences.
(4) Strong links with industry in funding, teaching, and research
ECP embarked on special partnerships with industry. This does not only result in
substantial funding, but also in close relationships between students and industry
and the organization of the engineering education to better suit industry’s needs.
ECP’s funding: 42% private resources, 58% public resources.
Industrial partnerships: Each concentration (specialization in the last year of the
studies) has an association with an industrial partner club. The companies in
these clubs pay an annual fee. They have privileged access to the students,
they give their opinion on the programs, they can propose case studies, site
visits, project work, and hire students for their diploma theses. Students get to
know the companies, which often results in job offers.
Each student has many opportunities to meet engineers in industry during the
first and second year.
A substantial part of the funding comes from industry through a special tax on
salaries (tax apprentissage). Every company is required by law to pay a small
part of the salary either to the state or to a university of choice. During the past
years, a growing number of companies have chosen ECP as beneficiary.
ECP has two different kinds of professors: the permanent professors with a
scientific legitimity, and part-time professors (with five year contracts) with an
industrial legitimity. Similarly to full-time professors, part time professors have
full responsibility to organize whole sections of programs (including course se-
APPENDIX B
lection, duration of courses, professor selection, etc.). ECP has 50% part-time
professors.
The diploma thesis is typically done in industry.
(5) Integration of non-core competencies and human sciences
ECP devotes a large part of the teaching in the first two years to the learning of
teamwork, project management, and industry knowledge. This results in students
who are capable of understanding companies’ situations and working in interdisciplinary project teams in order to solve complex problems.
One goal of the teaching of non-core competencies is to make the transition
from highly science-oriented students to engineers who are comfortable with
project and team work. ECP has restructured its first two years by cutting the
number of areas taught by half and by strengthening project activities.
A large transfer program is being introduced. During the first two years, students are offered activities in teams of 5 to 10 totaling nearly 150 hours per year
and per student.
The non-scientific and non-technological subjects take 40% of the planned
schedule of teaching in the first and second year. Much emphasis is placed on
integrating human sciences within the curriculum.
Several pedagogical actions aim at matching the job requirements of an engineer with the wishes of the students. They take 16% of the planned schedule in
the first and second year.
Each students has a personal tutor with regularly scheduled meetings.
Examples: “Etude fil rouge” (first year, 20 hours, assisted by tutor, discovering
the complexity of an industrial project, presentations); company study (problem
based learning, teamwork, project work); seminars in human sciences (group
dynamics); project management; management game.
(6) Early and motivating preparation for the engineering profession
ECP only accepts highly qualified students. These students have a mind set which
is strongly influenced by their experiences in school and preparatory courses. ECP
aims at changing this mind set into one which is more suitable for engineers in
industry.
Integration cycle during which ECP present the students the professional perspectives of work their degree will offer them (including meeting of alumni as
well as conferences and round tables with debates on society and engineering.
The main purpose is to expose students to real world applications of engineering.
Students learn what a company is, which different functions have to be fulfilled
especially by engineers. This helps students choose the right position in agreement with their own personality.
Company study: Students study the way a company works by analyzing companies and producing a written report with an oral presentation.
Industrial partner clubs offer detailed company information to students and are
able to offer high quality recruitment propositions.
Career office run by alumni association.
269
270
APPENDIX B
(7) Strong emphasis on campus life and student activities
ECP puts strong emphasis on the campus life and the integration of students in
extra-curricular activities. This creates a strong feeling of belonging together,
teaches students to take on responsibilities, and builds the foundation for the
alumni network.
Students manage the “Junior Company” with revenues of approx. 0.5 Mio USD.
Students organize job fairs, the ECP Gala, the students’ residence’s computer
network. Because of the latter two activities, students learn important management skills.
Integration cycle: New students are gathered in a holiday village on the first
weekend of their arrival at ECP. They meet alumni and companies and have a
historical presentation of the institution and its goals. Complementary round tables and conferences follow the weekend during the first month.
99% of the students who enter ECP finish their studies at ECP (about 5% have
to spend 4 instead of the regular 3 years to complete the program).
(8) Alumni network used extensively for knowledge transfer
ECP has built a strong alumni network with intensive interaction with the alumni.
Strong interaction between management of ECP and alumni association.
Alumni comment on new subjects / orientations, provide local support and recognition abroad, and help with the recruitment of new professors.
The alumni association employs permanent staff to run a career office, which is
very effective in helping students get their first job.
The alumni association provides a life-long email address, organizes meetings
by classes of graduation / professional sectors / regions and countries, produces regular publications, manages a web site, provides support for graduates
having personal difficulties, etc.
(9) Strong encouragement to create spin-off companies
Entrepreneurship has tradition at ECP. As a result, many students are involved in
entrepreneurial programs and the number of start-ups is relatively high.
In the final year, students can enroll in a company creation program called
“Centrale Entrepreneur”. In 2000 (time of completion of questionnaire), five
companies have been created by students before graduation.
Each year, ECP’s alumni initiate approximately 30 start-up companies (about
six by newly graduated students).
First and second year students started a student club called “Entreprendre à
Centrale” which fosters the start-up spirit among students with different means.
The alumni association has launched a “Centrale start-up group” to allow exchanges of experiences and provide support for creating start-up companies.
ECP is part of a company incubator in the field of biotechnology together with
other organizations.
(10) Clearly diversified strategy for financing
ECP has realized a clearly diversified strategy for financing. Consequently, ECP
has increased its financial independence.
Tax apprentissage (see 4).
Company partnership programs for initial education (see 4).
APPENDIX B
To manage research contracts with industry, a special company has been established for commercialization, management and economic development of
contractual research activities (Centrale Recherche SA CRSA).
Continuous education: as for research, this activity is managed within Centrale
Formation, a branch of CRSA.
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
(1) Internationalization in research & education
Internationality is essential to EPFL. 30% of the students are from abroad, and 15
to 20% of local students spend one or two semesters abroad. The percentage of
foreign professors (43%) is one of the highest of the SPINE partners.
EPFL has several networks for international exchanges, e.g., CLUSTER which
comprises 11 universities.
EPFL is part of the TIME initiative in which students can get a second degree at
a foreign first class university.
Strong exchange programs with India (selected Indian students come for 3
months, diploma theses or PH.D. studies) and other Asian countries, e.g.,
China and Korea
Cooperation with developing countries – more than 70 experts are involved in
these programs. Involvement of students in these programs.
Communication Systems: Joint venture with the French Telecommunications
Schools, in particular ENST Paris, including cooperation in the educational programs offered in Sophia Antipolis
Materials Sciences: More than 50% of the students spend a year abroad in a
German or English speaking country (no French speaking countries allowed).
Different second degree programs: e.g., Electrical Engineering with Politecnico
di Torino, Computer Science with University of Barcelona and KTH (Sweden),
Mechanical Engineering with SUPAERO, Toulouse, etc.
Micro Engineering: 25% of the students are doing their diploma work at other
universities, mainly in USA – the same amount of students from other universities, mainly Europe, is doing their diploma work at EPFL.
EPFL plans to increase the proportion of courses offered in English (in particular in Materials Sciences).
(2) Focus on basic sciences in combination with strong links to industry
Education at EPFL is based on fundamental knowledge of science. Students are
educated to become engineers with a solid background in sciences (mathematics,
physics and chemistry). At the same time, links with industry are strong. This combination stimulates creativity and spirit of innovation which is strongly needed by
industry and society in general.
In the first year, students are trained to understand the basics of science and
engineering in depth. Focus on a specific discipline with specific balance between theory and practice is confined to the last study year and the diploma
thesis. Physics, mathematics, chemistry, etc. are important parts of all engineering areas.
271
272
APPENDIX B
One third of EPFL’s teaching staff is external (so-called Lehrbeauftragte) and
from industry.
In all departments, professors with industrial backgrounds are strongly represented.
In many instances, diploma theses are done in industry.
(3) Integration of new, important topic areas in engineering curricula
EPFL continually searches for new areas in engineering. An area is judged to be
important if it has the potential to create many new jobs in the future. The creation
of a new curriculum can be realized quite quickly at EPFL.
If an area is judged to be important by a group of professors, they may propose
the creation of a new curriculum (usually in the beginning for students from the
3rd year onwards). If the new curriculum is successful, it will be expanded to the
first & second year and positions for new professors are opened.
A new diploma can be integrated easily in existing structures.
An industrial committee – a group of well-know industrials who meet regularly
with the presidency and other important people – is used as a sounding board
for ideas. This committee brings many ideas that are incorporated in the curricula.
Micro-Engineering: Re-discusses the curriculum every year & major changes
are made every 3–5 years. The integration of new fields is realized through optional courses.
Mechanical Engineering: The process starts at the department level with the
hiring of assistant professors or re-orientation of chairs. The filtering down in the
teaching program is done by proposition of a new professor or collaborator to
th
teach a new course, typically in the 4 year.
Materials Science: In the 3rd and 4t h year, students decide which optional
courses they want to take. If a new course proves to be attractive and remains
actual over a certain period (ca. 3 years), it is integrated in the fundamental
educational blocks. This procedure ensures that new developments are taken
up quickly.
(4) Micro-Engineering: excellent skills in systems engineering
The department of Micro-Engineering at EPFL is known for an education which is
very product-oriented. Students learn better and faster and develop excellent skills
in systems engineering. Researches and professors are highly motivated.
Project work puts emphasis on system integration.
Semester projects & diploma works are also very close to products.
Students learn to integrate different technologies into systems in a way that
these systems work efficiently.
Graduates have the ability for fast prototyping. Within 3 months, they are able
build a prototype of a small system (e.g., a micro robot).
The curriculum is very interdisciplinary and students get in touch with many
different technologies which they learn to integrate.
The department is a mixture of very different institutes and professors – some
are very industry-oriented, some have excellent experiences in research.
APPENDIX B
(5) Innovative courses in programming
EPFL offers a special introductory course to programming to 500 students. The
students take the interactive course on the web, while teaching staff is available for
questions. This results in high interaction with faculty and an improved learning
experience for the students.
“Introduction to programming” is taught to 500 students from different disciplines
in the first semester
The course is taught in an unconventional style: the professor does not stand in
front of the class, but he and his assistants are circulating around in order to
answer questions.
Students have assignments which they have to solve on their computer.
Advantages: students can work at their own pace and ask more questions than
in normal courses.
(6) Communication systems: diploma thesis is carried out in industry
The creation of CS was quite revolutionary at EPFL. From the beginning, the contacts to industry were excellent and very close. A specialty is the diploma thesis
which students have to carry out in industry.
With the close cooperation of Eurecom in Sophia Antipolis in France, CS organizes the realization of diploma thesis in industry. Today, having a large number
of students, other possibilities are also offered.
The diploma work takes 6 month – 2 month to get started, 4 month for the actual thesis work.
Education in business administration is a compulsory part of the curriculum.
The diploma work in industry is an important and valuable experience for students – most of the students start their professional career in the company
where they have done their diploma thesis.
Industry is interested to get students for diploma theses Æ pre-hiring.
(7) Spin-off companies
EPFL offers many activities to foster spin-off companies. As a result, the number of
spin-offs has increased steadily over the last 5 years.
EPFL has a post-graduate program in Management of Technology, which is a
main generator of spin-offs.
EPFL does early stage coaching of start-up projects (business plan preparation,
financial resources strategy, networking, staffing).
EPFL has an on-site Science and Technology Park, which supports start-up
projects and acts as an incubator.
There are seminars given by industrial leaders which are attended by faculty
and students to develop the entrepreneurial spirit.
EPFL has created a chair of innovation and entrepreneurship.
273
274
APPENDIX B
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
(1) Cosmopolitan and very international composition of faculty
The percentage of foreign professors is with 60% the highest of the SPINE partners. ETHZ aims to hire the best professors from all over the world.
ETHZ offers attractive salaries and interesting resources (human resources and
infrastructure).
Government funding largely flows through pre-determined positions. This allows
researchers to focus more on their work instead of doing “grant-hunting”.
The hiring process does not focus on Switzerland. ETHZ looks for new faculty
at the best universities. Professors and researchers have widespread international networks that allow getting in touch with new talents.
ETHZ knows a dual process for the hiring of new professors, which results in an
attractive faculty “mixture”: the university is trying to hire senior professors with
excellent reputations and promising young talents.
(2) Autonomous department structure with global budgets empowers departments
ETHZ allocates global budgets combined with clearly defined performance objectives to each department. This increases the flexibility and degree of responsibility
of the departments.
ETHZ has changed its structure from sections (responsible for education) and
departments (responsible for research) to departments only. Each department
is responsible for one or several curricula. Some departments are divided into
institutes.
During re-structuring, departments were able to choose between high or low
independence.
Departments that chose high independence have a global budget, which they
can allocate themselves. The only restriction is that they have to fulfill clearly
defined performance agreements.
This organization strengthens the position of Department Heads (who are
elected by the department for two or four years).
(3) Well defined internal and external evaluation system
ETHZ knows a very sophisticated evaluation system, which consists of different
levels and feedback groups. This structure allows a broad overview on the quality
of education and research.
ETHZ asks students about their studies 3 to 5 years after graduation. The results are analyzed carefully by the departments.
Students evaluate all classes and the Department Head speaks to the persons
who get the worst results.
Personal contacts, e.g., with alumni from the institutes, are common and one of
the most important instruments in quality management.
Department evaluation in research and teaching is carried out regularly, e.g.,
through peer reviews about every 7 years.
Personal quality assurance: professors are re-elected every 6 years.
APPENDIX B
(4) Strong focus on human and social sciences
ETHZ fully integrates human and social sciences into the curriculum. Goals are to
build up an excellent and known center for advanced studies with a meaning for
Switzerland and to educate engineers who know a lot about humanities, social
sciences and law.
There is a humanities department, which is at the service of all departments at
ETHZ.
Professors are grouped into five topic areas and the focus lies in these – and
only in these – areas. ETHZ offers programs only in these areas.
Students have to select one of these five areas and must follow the whole program.
Students have to get 8 credit points during the study. A credit point is proof of
the work the students have done during their education.
(5) Special funding for educational projects available
ETHZ recently introduced a new mechanism to support educational development.
Professors are highly interested and a number of activities have already started.
In analogy to research proposals, educational projects can also be proposed.
They are evaluated by the standing committee on education.
This has increased the interest in school wide educational activities: Currently,
there are about 25 such educational projects.
(6) Well equipped laboratories
Traditionally, ETHZ offers very well equipped laboratories. This attracts excellent
researchers and offer students possibilities for practical education.
Laboratories are well equipped and have dedicated technical staff (technicians).
Students can enjoy practical education.
ETHZ offers an excellent IT infrastructure.
(7) Broad program of the Center for Continuing Education
ETHZ has identified lifelong learning as an important topic that needs to be addressed seriously. ETHZ has therefore established the Center for Continuing Education, which offers a broad spectrum of services.
The Center for Continuing Education offers a variety of courses and programs.
They include short courses and complete graduate programs.
The Center is responsible for a database for continuing education programs in
Switzerland.
(8) Clear increase in the number of spin-offs
ETHZ has increased the number of start-ups from 6 (1996) to 17 (1999) per year.
ETH Transfer is responsible for the spin-off companies.
Spin-off companies get good starting conditions, either at ETHZ or at Zurich
Science Park.
275
276
APPENDIX B
(9) Electrical Engineering: start of bachelor / master program in fall 2001 with high
flexibility of curriculum selection
Electrical Engineering offers a choice of curricula to students in a newly created
bachelor / master program. This offers much flexibility to students with respect to
curriculum selection.
The basic idea of the new bachelor / master curriculum is to have a diploma
which is equivalent to the master’s degree.
Students have the option between four basic types of curricula:
Integrated curriculum (normal curriculum): integrated bachelor/master program,
leading directly to the master. If the requirements are fulfilled, a bachelor’s degree will be awarded. Students can go for a bachelor, a bachelor and a masters, or a masters only degree.
Students get a bachelor’s at ETH and a master’s at another university.
Hybrid curriculum: bachelor engineering education and two-year MBA program
at another school.
Sandwich curriculum: bachelor’s at ETH and a one to two year loop in industry,
then finishing with a master’s at ETH.
(10) Electrical Engineering stresses multi-disciplinarity of education
Electrical Engineering offers opportunities for students to get an interdisciplinary
education.
So-called MTU-courses (Mensch, Technik, Umwelt – Man, Technology, Environment) as regular 4-hour program with examination at the end.
Starting with the first semester, students participate in project-based courses.
The focus of the projects is not only technical, but also puts fields of specialization in broader contexts. Students are required to make presentations and write
reports.
During the last three semesters, the new curriculum offers a high level of freedom. One third of the courses can be in very different fields, such as bioengineering. This is similar to the US concept of minors.
(11) Mechanical Engineering: strong focus on project orientation
ME at ETHZ has developed a very innovative program which offers students the
possibility to carry out a “real” project and to experience teamwork.
In the first two semesters, students have to work out a project, the so-called
“Innovation Project”.
The best project will be chosen and has to be carried out in the second year by
all students. A competition at the end of the second year makes this project very
attractive.
Within the project students have contacts to industry. Students have to raise
money for the project. The project has to be carried out in parallel to ongoing
courses.
Projects at ME can be carried out in two ways: students can do it alone or together in a group. The groups organize themselves, professors help as tutors
and support problem solving. This way of learning is very industry oriented.
Experts from industry help the students in these projects to carry out the work in
a team. Students are also sent to industry to get valuable information.
APPENDIX B
(12) Materials Science: curriculum revision to adapt to new key profile of graduates
Materials Science has redefined the profile of its graduates and adjusted the curriculum accordingly. Results are increased communication, moving towards fundamentals, and learning of integrating aspects of systems.
Materials Science has revised its curriculum by redefining the role of materials
scientists. A commonly agreed upon definition of the key profile of graduates
has been reached by creating a guideline to formulate the profile in one sentence.
The percentage of classical lectures will be reduced from 60% to 30%. Simultaneously, exercises and seminars will be increased. Students must acquire 10
credits in non-German speaking parts of Switzerland or abroad.
Every new student is assigned to a Ph.D. student to improve communication
between faculty and students.
In the 4th year, students only take subjects from specializations, which are always linked to research.
Georgia Institute of Technology
(1) Interdisciplinary research centers
Georgia Tech has many interdisciplinary centers – the schools are the homes of
the faculty, but the 37 centers cut across disciplines. Schools and centers have
established highly developed interdisciplinary programs where students are confronted with interdisciplinary contents and problems. These programs are often
open to students from different majors and assure an important and fruitful exchange and experience between disciplines as well as a broad education.
The centers are encouraged to develop cross-listed courses which are open to
students from different majors.
Many faculty members lead or participate in the programs of the various interdisciplinary centers, many departments have developed relevant, crossdisciplinary programs, e.g. Biomedical Engineering, Advanced Materials, etc.
Specialty: A lot of schools have faculty with focus in Materials Science and
Electronics, e.g., Electrical Engineering or Mechanical Engineering, which leads
to important interactions.
Transfer between programs is easy because the programs of many schools are
similar in the first and even – to a lesser extent – in the second year
Transfer between programs is easy if the grades are good
Programs require a significant amount of material not often considered to be
ECE, ME, etc.
Design courses require multidisciplinary, team-based projects of all students.
(2) Strong entrepreneurial program
As a state university, the expectation is to do something that is good for the state
and the nation. Georgia Tech interprets that mission as one to help grow a high
277
278
APPENDIX B
tech economy in Georgia. Students have a lot of possibilities to participate in entrepreneurial courses and programs in order to develop entrepreneurial skills.
Program for Engineering Entrepreneurship which educates students to take
over leadership positions early in their career.
Cooperation between College of Engineering and Management College; the
Management College focuses on management of technology, international
business and entrepreneurship.
Fall 2001: Master in Engineering and Management will be offered
Together with the state of Georgia, Georgia Tech creates an environment
where students and faculty can start companies (training programs, lower rents,
legal help, venture capital, etc.). This is conducted on a university based incubator called Advanced Technology Development Center.
Georgia Tech participates in the economic development of the state Æ the university has field offices around the state to support small manufacturing enterprises, engineers from Georgia Tech provide help (initially free, then paid) to
these companies.
(3) Strong international focus
Georgia Tech wants to expand its international range. As US students and faculty
are not so mobile, the university has established a campus in France and programs
with universities abroad. The goal is to send students and faculty from Georgia
Tech to these institutions and to attract more students from abroad. Currently, one
third of Georgia tech engineering graduates have some form of international experience when they graduate.
Strong programs with universities abroad (e.g. strong relationship with Singapore; summer program in Chemical Engineering with University College in London, in which 10% of the students participate).
Establishment of a Campus in Lorraine, France:
For students and faculty to get international experience
attracts students from abroad to Georgia Tech
International co-op programs
(4) Clear “growth program” to attract companies
Georgia Tech defines itself as the technological university of the future. The College of Engineering has the largest number of engineering graduates per year in
the USA. Due to space restrictions and limited growing perspectives in Atlanta,
Georgia Tech founded a new campus in Savannah.
Development of Regional Engineering Program in Savannah to be able to increase the number of engineers (this is a requirement for the attraction of companies)
Degrees are Georgia Tech degrees, but many courses are organized with the
help of the local universities.
Program has strong distance learning component over the internet (controlled
experiment on a virtual campus).
APPENDIX B
(5) Excellent distance learning / distance education program
Georgia Tech has a long tradition in distance learning. The university is very innovative in this field and has developed the first full internet based masters program.
Students and companies can benefit from programs and courses.
The University has a strong focus on enhancing pedagogy through information
technology.
Establishment of the first full internet based masters distance learning program
in Mechanical, Electrical and Computer Engineering. A similar program in Civil
Engineering and Aerospace will be established in 2001/2002.
Courses can be taken by video or internet. The delivery modes can be mixed to
complete the masters degree.
Courses are only offered by internet if they are also offered live on campus in
Atlanta.
Distance courses are synchronized with lectures on campus.
The electronically stored material for the internet courses is also available to oncampus students.
Creation of specific company manuals on the internet which can be purchased
and used (in ECE).
(6) Innovative way of funding students
Georgia Tech has developed interesting methods to help finance the tuition fees of
undergraduate students who come from the state of Georgia (60%). To attract
good students tuition fees are free for those with good grades.
Tuition fees for undergraduate students from Georgia Tech are often paid by
the state. Some income from the Georgia State Lottery goes to education.
Hope Scholarship: Fees for Students from Georgia with grade B above are paid
by they state as long as they keep grade B. If they perform worse, they loose
the scholarship.
(7) Successful diversity program
Georgia Tech has developed a Campus Diversity Strategy and is known for its
innovative initiatives in this field. The university maintains close relationships to
Colleges devoted to educating minorities in order to attract these students. The
increasing number of minorities is a proof of the well defined diversity program.
Mentoring programs present role models
Centralized fund provides financial resources which are used to reach organizations that target females/minorities.
Close contacts to colleges which are devoted to educate African-American students from all over the country.
An incentive grant program generates interest in creating ideas that will benefit
the diversity efforts
Diversity advisory councils serve as key unit for advancing the diversity objectives.
(8) Close contact to alumni organization
Alumni organizations are extremely important for many reasons: funding, assistance in recruiting, membership in advisory boards, etc. Georgia Tech has therefore established close and good contacts to the alumni organization.
279
280
APPENDIX B
Dean and Department Heads spent 20 - 30% of their time for contacts to
alumni.
College of Engineering organizes campaigns to raise money for endowing professor- and scholarships, building facilities, etc.
Alumni are members of the Advisory Boards of the Colleges. Their feedback is
invaluable in providing the best education for our students to enter the
workforce.
(9) Strong interaction with industry
The ties to industry at Georgia Tech are close. Partners are large companies as
well as small and medium sized companies. The departments offer a bundle of
possibilities to establish close contacts between students and industry.
Office for placement which helps to place students in industry and vice versa
ECE: Organizes co-op programs in which 50% of the students participate;
ECE: Research is funded up to 50% by industry
ECE: Forms consortiums which help to carry out industry related research projects
MS: Half of undergraduate students are employed in research projects and get
involved in industry oriented projects
ME: 30-40% of the current faculty has industrial full time employment experience.
CE: Offers internships in industry.
Industry partners can participate in the Georgia Tech Incubator to create Spinoff companies.
Imperial College London
(1) Academic responsibility of deans, management responsibility of Department
Heads
Imperial College has split academic and financial responsibilities. Deans are responsible for cross-departmental academic standards, whereas Department Heads
take care of (financially) managing the departments.
The role of the deans is non-executive. Their function is one of maintaining
academic standards across the faculty. Deans are always full professors, who
have been elected by senior academic staff members for three years.
Department Heads are quite powerful. Departments are very autonomous and
separate cost centers. Department Heads are professors that are appointed by
the rector. They are directly responsible to the rector. Appointment duration is
five years, often it is renewed and Department Heads normally serve for 8
years.
(2) Integration of project and teamwork into curriculum
In all the departments relevant to the SPINE project, the teaching of non-core competencies is achieved through project and team work with presentations and re-
APPENDIX B
ports at the end of the projects. Both project and team work have been extremely
well integrated in the curriculum.
All departments have similar schemes for project and team work. A good example
of this is Chemical Engineering:
1st year: students are put in groups of 6 for the first year / group project on the
first day of studies / well structured design project
2nd year: projects in 2nd and 3rd year aimed at preparation for final year project
/ work in pairs in 2nd year
3rd year: group of 8-10 students project on social and economic implications of
technical innovations / group of 4-5 students project in process synthesis / mechanical design and safety project in groups of eight
4th year: industrial project in pairs in first half of 4th year / large and completely
unstructured design project in groups of 9-10 in second half.
(3) Elaborate tutoring system on both personal and subject level
Some departments at Imperial College have established elaborate tutoring systems
that often distinguish between tutoring on the personal and subject level. Results
are higher motivation and lower drop-out rates.
Tutoring on personal level:
Chemical Engineering: Each staff member gets three new students per year.
Students have the same tutor for all four years.
Computer Science: There is a personal tutor for each student (about 3-4 students per staff member). Students appreciate the tutoring, it helps motivate
them. In the second year, students keep the same tutor (although the function
of the tutor becomes more a social one).
All departments have senior tutors who very closely monitor students’ progress
during the first two years. In Computer Science there is a procedure which has
reduced drop-out rates from about 20% to below 10%.
Materials Science: Good experiences with peer tutoring system where 3rd year
students tutor 1st year students.
Tutoring on subject level:
Chemical Engineering: There are academic tutors, who organize regular meetings of small groups related to specific subjects.
Mechanical Engineering: In the 2nd year course in electronics instrumentation
and control, lectures and experimental work is closely integrated. Exercises are
immediately marked and returned.
Computer Science: in the first year groups of tutees receive weekly tutoring in
mathematics and programming.
(4) WISE (Woman in Science and Engineering) program to attract female students
Imperial College has a relatively large number of female students. The WISE program has contributed to attracting women to Imperial College London.
At Imperial College, women comprise one third of the student body and one fifth
come from outside the EU.
There is a national program called WISE (Women in Science and Engineering):
Just before applying to university, schoolgirls participate in this event. They arrive one day for lunch, spend the afternoon doing experiments in one depart-
281
282
APPENDIX B
ment, and spend the night in college (an important part of the experience!). The
next day, they spend the morning with another department. This is a rolling program over two weeks.
(5) “Mastery” to provide engineers with a more holistic education
Chemical Engineering has pioneered a special form of examination, called mastery. It is a comprehensive examination, spanning multiple subjects. It leads to
more holistic students who have an increased understanding.
Chemical Engineering: The mastery is a special part of each year’s examination. It focuses on the most fundamental aspects of Chemical Engineering. The
questions are relatively simple, but their solution requires a synthesis from different areas. Students need to get 80% of the questions right in order to pass
on to the next year. They have some practice during the year, and they have
three chances to pass the mastery. Chemical Engineering has been doing this
for five years now, and sees the mastery as essential to forming the kind of engineers the department wants.
Other departments are in the process of introducing the mastery examinations.
(6) High degree of internationality
Imperial College shows a high degree of internationality, especially regarding incoming students.
About 30% of the undergraduate population is from overseas (defined as outside of Europe).
Electrical Engineering has the highest proportion of international students (45%
of non-EU students). The department has a good reputation, especially in the
Far East. For every overseas place, there are 9 students that apply (and all
have excellent grades).
(7) Cooperation with industry: distinction between university level and individual
level of cooperation
In addition to the many individual cooperations with industry on the professor level,
Imperial College has initiated a number of cooperations with companies on the
university level. This fosters long-term relationships with selected companies.
On the top level, the college has established strategic relationships with five
companies: ABB, Air Products, BP, Fujitsu, and Glaxo SmithKline (the rector of
Imperial College is Chairman at Glaxo). The objectives of these relationships
are: sponsorship, specific contracts, computing support and use of facilities, donations, specific projects, staff exchanges. The idea is to have a long term relationships and work on issues of common interest.
On the individual level, all academic staff interact with companies on projects.
Academic staff are also encouraged to do consulting.
(8) High number of spin-offs per year
Imperial College has established special structures to help foster spin-off companies. Academic staff get a large part of the equity.
So far, Imperial College has had 45 spin-offs. In 2000, Imperial College London
had an average of one spin-off company per month.
There is a special organization, IC Innovations (about 4 to 5 years old) that
helps foster the creation of spin-off companies.
APPENDIX B
When creating a spin-off, the biggest part of equity goes to the academic staff,
but IC Innovations and the department each get a small part of the equity.
(9) Very elaborate quality management on internal and external level
Imperial College has a number of highly elaborate quality management systems in
place, both on the internal and external level. Departments are often required to be
formally accredited by national professional institutions.
Quality management at college level:
On the college level, Imperial College has a pro rector for educational quality.
An elaborate committee structure looks at these issues.
Quality management at national level:
On the national level, there is the Quality Assurance Association (QAA). They
establish benchmark standards for many subjects in the form of threshold standards. Periodically, they conduct teaching quality assessments.
Most departments are periodically (every 5 years) evaluated and formally accredited by their national professional institutions (e.g., the Institute of Electrical
Engineers assesses the Electrical Engineering department).
All the quality assessment processes include student input. Each department has
an academic council with student representation. There is a staff student committee, which involves regular meetings.
Most departments have advisory boards that involve people from industry. These
boards comment on activities, bring in new initiatives and offer general advice.
(10) Computer Science: rapid and closely monitored introduction to programming
Computer Sciences uses teaching languages and frequent exercises with immediate feedback to reach the goal of educating professional programmers.
Computer Sciences uses teaching languages at the beginning of the studies.
Experience shows that this helps students learn commercial languages faster.
Weekly exercises with very rapid correction loop and immediate feedback: Exercises must be turned in by Monday midnight and are returned on Tuesday
afternoon (with feedback from tutor).
Senior tutor admonishes students that don’t turn in the exercises.
(11) Materials Science: continuing education through membership in association
Materials Science ensures that every student becomes a member of the national
Institute of Materials. The department even pays the membership fees during study
duration. The Institute is quite strong in offering courses in continuing education,
and if graduates renew their membership, they can participate in these courses.
(12) Electrical Engineering: industrial elective
rd
Electrical Engineering offers an industrial elective at the end of the 3 year to
qualifying students. This helps students get important industrial experience.
Electrical Engineering: At the end of the 3rd year, students can choose to take
an industrial elective. They spend 5 months in industry from May to the end of
September. They have to write up their experience in a report. 30% of the
qualifying students take this elective (qualifying = being allowed to work in the
U.K.).
283
284
APPENDIX B
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
(1) Strong emphasis on programs, not departments
KTH has performed a reorganization, which emphasized the program structure.
Results are a clear differentiation between research (in departments) and education (in programs). This structure offers increased flexibility regarding the courses
offered in the study programs. Additionally, new research areas can be more program-oriented.
KTH is organized into 34 departments and 13 programs
A program is a set of courses and a framework for the students’ work. It socially
groups the students.
High-profile professors occupy the newly created posts of program directors.
The program directors have high responsibility.
(2) Integration of lectures, exercises, and teaching of non-core competencies
KTH’s educational programs emphasize the integration of lectures, practical work,
and the learning of non-core competencies. KTH also emphasizes practical application in early semesters. Results are increased motivation of students for the
more theoretical aspects of the studies, and higher teamwork and communication
skills of the students.
Project courses with “built-in” project management are moved from the very last
semesters to the first year.
In Electrical Engineering, there is a special project management booklet used
for projects in the second and third year.
Some mathematics courses have been postponed to later years to increase the
motivation of students to take the courses.
Practical examples increase students’ motivation early on in their studies.
Materials Sciences: good combination of individual and group projects during
studies.
Integration of important communication issues into regular courses.
Mekatronics project (large open-ended project of spectacular nature, e.g. construction of wrestling robots)
(3) High level of internationality
KTH has reached a high level of internationality regarding student exchange and
foreign professors. This results in students that are able to perform in the international job market, have created knowledge networks, and have experience with
other cultures.
Depending on the department, 10 to 50% (average: 26% in analyzed programs)
of the students go abroad.
KTH’s goal is to achieve a balance between incoming and outgoing students.
Currently, there are fewer students going abroad than foreign students studying
at KTH.
Students are allowed to do their diploma thesis work abroad.
High number of partnerships with other universities (national and international).
APPENDIX B
Materials Sciences: 40% of professors born and educated outside of Sweden
A considerable number of required textbooks are in English.
(4) Creation of international master programs
KTH created a number of international master programs. They attract excellent
students from all over the world, which increases the international reputation of
KTH.
Half of the foreign students come from third world countries.
Example from Mechanical Engineering: international master program in Sustainable Energy Engineering with 24 students (60 applications).
(5) High level of interdisciplinarity
KTH has increased the interdisciplinarity of its studies on the undergraduate and
graduate level through a number of measures. The integration of non-core subjects
into normal courses has a positive influence on the breadth of engineering education.
Many specializations are interdisciplinary, e.g., specializations in environmental
/ management / economics, medical technology, media technology, energy
technology, etc.
In many programs, non-core subjects, e.g., medicine in Mechanical Engineering, are integrated into the courses.
Materials Sciences: Doctoral students are encouraged to collaborate with doctoral students from other subjects through extra funding.
There is a requirement for all students to have a certain number of credits in the
non-core subjects.
Although the programs are fairly well defined, students are encouraged to pick
voluntary courses in any subjects on an individual basis. Many students use this
opportunity
(6) Recruitment of non-traditional student groups
KTH offers a special conversion year for high-school graduates with non-scientific
backgrounds. This has increased the number of non-traditional student groups,
especially women.
These activities are aimed at non-traditional student groups. They primarily
attract women. KTH has 35% female students.
There are cooperation projects with high-schools in typical immigrant areas.
The conversion year offers training in mathematics, physics, and chemistry.
(7) Learning lab in collaboration with Stanford
KTH participates in a learning lab initiative with Stanford and three other universities in Sweden. This initiative allows KTH to research new learning environments
and learning processes to improve the education of engineers.
The learning lab is used by researchers and by students.
(8) Strong collaboration with industry in project work
KTH has created strong links between industry, research, and students. This allows students to solve “real-life” problems in their project and diploma work, which
increases the value of KTH’s students in the job market.
285
286
APPENDIX B
About 80% of all diploma theses (duration: 5 months) are conducted in collaboration with industry, even higher in e.g. Mechanical Engineering.
Industry funding of research projects and diploma theses.
Electrical Engineering: Most of the graduate work on Ph.D. level has sponsorship from industry. 5% of the teaching staff has substantial employment in industry.
Many departments have professors who previously worked in industry as fulltime employees.
There is a requirement of practical work for the degree (4 month stage in industry).
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(1) Successful quality assurance by external Visiting Committees (VC)
Visiting Committees are very important at MIT. Every unit at MIT has a VC, which
is comprised of professors and experts from other universities, industry leaders,
members of the government, etc.
The Corporation (Board) appoints the members of the VC.
Departments may suggest members of the VC, but the VC is not under the
control of the units.
The VC typically visits a unit every other year. The visit is managed by the Corporation Office, but the visit agenda is controlled by departments.
The VC meets with students without the presence of professors, with professors
without the presence of the Department Heads, with Department Heads without
the presence of the Dean, etc.
After their visit, the Committee publishes a report to the administration. The
report is typically open to faculty members, at the discretion of the Department
Head.
Members of the VC are leaders in industry, the academic world, etc. They can
influence education and research at MIT. As a positive side effect, they sometimes give money or assistance to support projects or programs.
(2) Fast decisions and lean management because of decentralized structures
MIT is a highly decentralized institution. The departments are the most powerful
units. Management at MIT is a lean process and gives power to those units that are
responsible for education and research.
The important decisions, the planning and realization of most projects in education and research happen in the departments and their faculties.
Departments are quite heterogeneous and very different from one another.
They have their own style, they develop in different ways and have their own
priorities.
The responsibilities of the Dean are appointment and promotion of professors
(which are proposed by the departments), the approval of budgets and space,
and the allocation of new faculty hires. The Dean’s office generally does not directly run academic or research programs.
APPENDIX B
The office of the Dean is a lean unit with only a few people in charge.
Graduate admission is decentralized and is the responsibility of the departments.
(3) Innovative way of creating new units
The school of Engineering at MIT has 8 academic units (departments). To have the
ability to respond quickly to new needs and opportunities, MIT has established a
different organizational form, the so-called “divisions.” This system assures that
MIT can easily establish new important areas of engineering.
Divisions do not have the status of a department and are therefore easier to
form or change.
Almost all faculty members in divisions also belong to an academic department.
The idea of two key (dual) faculty appointments between divisions and departments is established.
This structure gives MIT the ability to focus on new important areas of engineering without the creation of departments.
Example Engineering Systems Division: this unit is looking at different levels of
engineering systems. Traditionally, MIT has been very active in this area but the
activities are not home to a single department. This new unit offers graduate
degrees, but no undergraduate degrees.
(4) Excellent research possibilities on undergraduate level
MIT has established an Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP):
UROP supports undergraduate and faculty collaborations in many areas. Typically,
80 percent of undergraduate students will have done at least one UROP project
during their time at MIT.
Students usually join a faculty member's project, but they may also design their
own and recruit faculty to advise them. They can earn academic credit or pay or
work as a volunteer.
Graduates and undergraduates are partners and do their work together.
The students often engage in research programs for multiple years, sometimes
resulting in senior projects or theses.
Materials Science: MS has moved towards open-ended research and development projects (often at or near the frontiers of knowledge) in upper-level undergraduate laboratories. This has greatly increased students’ educational experience.
(5) Broad range of activities, seminars, etc. to prepare students for the diversity of
their professional life
MIT offers many opportunities for students to engage in activities outside of regular
academic courses. An example is the one month Independent Activities Period
(IAP) in January. Students at MIT may pursue their own educational interests and
goals. Most students remain on campus because there are so many things to do.
They can participate in more than 600 workshops, independent research projects,
intensive subjects and seminars, field trips, lecture series, etc. The IAP offers them
a great opportunity to look at things in a different way.
Each student has four IAPs which serve as a break from their “normal” student
work. They can do something completely different.
Students learn to sample different aspects of life.
287
288
APPENDIX B
IAP offers faculty opportunities to try out innovative educational experiments.
Most faculty are available for informal contact with students.
(6) Education: broad, fundamental, yet practical
MIT offers a broad education with emphasis on fundamentals. At the same time,
there are a number of measures to include practical aspects, be it in courses or in
industry.
FYI: All students have the same curriculum in the first year.
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science:
A distinguishing characteristic of the department is that students get a broader
education than do graduates from many other universities. Students learn more
mathematics than is typical at other US universities (this is especially true for
Computer Science students).
Students get experience through summer jobs, mostly in their field of expertise.
(This is also true for other departments.)
There is a co-op program where students can spend up to three semesters
working in companies. Students receive credit for this.
The department started an “industrial connection program” with the purpose of
connecting companies and students through internships and permanent employment (goal: 40 participating companies).
The above are also true for other engineering departments.
(7) Creation of a number of Master of Engineering (MEng) programs
Responding to the demands of industry, departments have created or are in the
process of creating a number of MEng programs. MEng Programs are typically one
year Masters degrees with less research focus than traditional MS programs.
These programs aim at preparing engineers for work in industry and/or at offering
these courses for continuing education.
Electrical Engineering and Computer Science: EECS has created a five-year
MEng program. The goal is to qualify graduates to become engineers in industry and not for a scientific career.
Materials Science: MS has created a new twelve-month intense residential,
project-based Master of Engineering degree in continuing education.
(8) Distance education through Singapore-MIT Alliance
MIT has created an alliance with two Singapore universities. This alliance offers
numerous opportunities to gain experience with distance education methods and
cooperative teaching at two geographically distant sites.
Distance teaching includes: real-time lecture delivery, time-delayed lecture delivery by videotape, live lecturing and project supervision by MIT faculty in Singapore, travel by Singapore students to MIT.
(9) Chemical Engineering: innovative methods to implement teamwork
Teamwork is very important at the Chemical Engineering department. Therefore,
students are trained professionally to improve their teamwork abilities.
Chemical Engineering has hired a professional who brings teamwork techniques to the laboratory work.
The student teams are created by the faculty and consist of 3 persons.
APPENDIX B
The teams have team training, lectures and workshops.
Team members have to keep a diary and each member must experience the
role of the team leader.
Consequence: Faculty members who decide to integrate teamwork in their education have to be prepared for a big cultural change.
(10) Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Innovative and successful ways to teach big classes: The department of EECS is
the biggest department at MIT. They have to cope with classes of 300 people and
more. Innovative education assures that students have the feeling of being in small
classes.
EECS uses innovative technology to teach large classes.
Lectures, e.g. in Computer Sciences with more than 600 students, are replaced
with on-line material – narrated PowerPoint presentations with interspersed interactive problem sets.
Additionally, there are two recitations with discussions and commentaries, as
well as tutorial reactions.
Technology is also used to shorten the loop between exercises and feedback –
today’s period of one week is considered too long by the students.
Such innovations in teaching and enhancement of education using information
technology are now happening in many departments in many different ways
(e.g., the I-Campus projects and the d’Arbeloff projects).
(11) Materials Sciences: high standard of interdisciplinarity and broad education
promotes cooperation between faculty
MS is highly cross-disciplinary as a unit. As graduates from MS move into very
diverse professional positions, the education has to provide suitably broad options
in the curricula. Students at the MS department learn to communicate with professionals from other disciplines at an early stage.
Nearly all of the departments of the School of Engineering at MIT have faculty
with backgrounds in Materials Science. There are more than 100 faculty performing materials research – and most of them are not part of the MS department.
Interdepartmental programs and divisions which aim to foster interdisciplinary
programs are very important for MS. Many MS faculty have “two key appointments”.
15% of MS graduate students are enrolled in interdisciplinary programs.
Interdisciplinary activities and cooperation is a very common feature of MIT. The
flexible structure and ready way of people working together in a interdisciplinary
context are very strong characteristics in all the departments and units.
289
290
APPENDIX B
Rheinisch - Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen
(1) High number of interdisciplinary activities and research areas
RWTH Aachen has created (and is still creating) a number of interdisciplinary focal
areas. Additionally, RWTH Aachen has five interdisciplinary forums. These activities lead to enhanced communication between different faculties, improvement in
the curricula, and the assignment of 18 special research areas by the national government.
RWTH Aachen has nine existing interdisciplinary focal areas, comprising Materials Science, Energy Engineering, Environmental Science, Process Engineering, Production Engineering, Automotive Systems Engineering, Raw Materials
Engineering, Information Technology, and Architecture and Urban Planning and
Development.
RWTH Aachen is currently developing the following additional focal areas:
Computational Science in Engineering, Life Sciences, Human Communication,
Mobility and Traffic, Water, Microsystems / Nanotechnology, and Medical Technology.
ALSA (Applied Life Sciences Aachen) combines a number of different faculties
and disciplines in the area of life sciences.
RWTH Aachen has five interdisciplinary forums, where professors from different
faculties meet to discuss subjects of common interest.
RWTH Aachen is responsible for 18 special research areas on the national
level.
(2) Strong connections with industry
RWTH Aachen has built strong connections with industry through hiring professors
from industry and conducting joint research projects in close collaboration with
industry. This results in many opportunities for students to learn practical aspects
of engineering during their studies.
RWTH Aachen has 30%-40% of external funding because of its high quality of
research (RWTH Aachen has the leading position in Germany).
The regular funding of a faculty by the university is correlated with the amount
of external funding.
RWTH Aachen has an excellent reputation for their doctoral graduates. Engineers with a doctoral title are very much sought after by industry.
An important concept is that doctoral graduates from RWTH Aachen start their
career in industry and later return to the university as professors (e.g., in Mechanical Engineering, 80% of the professors come from industry).
Many professors in engineering faculties are hired from industry.
Ferrous Metallurgy: Compulsory stage of at least 6 months in industry, following
the chain of industrial production.
RWTH Aachen organizes a yearly information day with large attendance (500
people).
APPENDIX B
Chemical Engineering works closely with an industry association to promote
events that foster personal contacts between high school students and young
graduates.
Electrical Engineering students have a 6-month internship and a 6-month thesis.
A considerable number of diploma theses are written in close collaboration with
industry.
(3) International master programs; internationality
RWTH Aachen has initiated a number of international master programs. As a result, these programs attract highly qualified people from abroad who contribute to
research and help create long-lasting economic connections when they go back to
their countries.
Currently, there are 11 master programs at RWTH Aachen. Master programs
were initially designed for foreign students. A qualification and motivation oriented application is intended to be realized.
Five of the master programs are taught in English, the other six are in German
(with the goal of having English-only programs).
In some departments, students have the possibility to conduct a stage abroad in
order to learn a language (at least 8 weeks). Additionally, they have to write
presentations in the foreign language.
(4) High involvement of students in research
RWTH Aachen has a tradition of involving students into faculty projects. The close
contacts between students and faculty are mutually beneficial and deepen the
educational experience.
In many engineering departments, almost all the students are integrated in faculty projects. This establishes close personal contacts between students and
faculty.
Mechanical Engineering: Many students after the pre-diploma work as research
assistants with contracts from 12 to 19 hours per week. Excellent students are
approached as early as in the second semester.
Chemical Engineering: the lab work is very application oriented.
(5) Students with broad view and deep fundamental knowledge
RWTH Aachen’s education aims at giving the students deep fundamental knowledge. At the same time, they get a broad view of the topic areas in their study directions.
RWTH Aachen teaches many basic lectures in the first two years (mathematics,
etc.).
Generally, students have many specializations to choose from and, in many
directions, there are long internships or industry-related semester and diploma
works.
The study time is relatively long (average: 6.5 years).
291
292
APPENDIX B
(6) Special motivation course in Mechanical Engineering
The department of Mechanical Engineering has created a motivational course to
balance the rather theoretical studies during the first years. Students appreciate the
course.
The “Introduction to Mechanical Engineering” course has been developed to
increase the motivation of students. Student feedback is excellent. However,
the course was expensive (USD 450’000) to develop.
(7) Encouragement of spin-off companies
RWTH Aachen is generally very close to industry (see above) and uses a number
of measures to foster spin-off companies.
RWTH Aachen is involved in a regional technology center with special rates for
floor rent and excellent infrastructure and services support.
Mechanical Engineering sponsors part-time employment: 50% at the institute,
50% in own company.
Electrical Engineering offers a tutoring program to help with business plans and
organization of venture capital.
Technische Universiteit Delft
(1) Clearly defined strategic plan and implementation strategy
TU Delft has a strategic plan that is broken down into measurable objectives on a
yearly basis. A management structure with professional deans facilitates the plan’s
implementation. As a result, significant money streams are closely linked to strategy.
TU Delft’s strategy was documented in a mission statement in 1994 for the first
time.
TU Delft has a mission plan and an operational plan (Institutional Development
Plan 2000-2003) associated with the budget. The implementation plan contains
measurable goals for the current year.
The strategy focuses on being a strong international leader among technical
universities. It emphasizes research – not least because of the need for differentiation between Dutch technical universities and Dutch “engineering colleges /
polytechnics”.
About 70% of the budget is financed by the government. The university allocates the budget to the faculties.
TU Delft has professional deans. Every year, the university signs a contract with
them. The dean acts as a local manager who has to fulfill a commitment.
All decisions by the Supervisory Board are made with involvement of the deans.
This is important in order to convince everybody that a change is necessary.
(2) International MSc program
TU Delft has successfully started a series of international MSc programs. The programs are able to attract highly qualified students from abroad.
APPENDIX B
TU Delft has about 10% foreign students.
The international MSc program started in 1997. Courses are given in English.
Currently, there are 14 courses.
(3) Elaborate external and internal quality management
TU Delft has a long tradition in quality management. There are a number of measures of internal and external quality management which ensure a high quality of the
study programs.
External quality control:
Quality control started in 1980 as a governmental initiative (VSNU): all universities are periodically visited and evaluated by committees looking at specific disciplines
TU Delft is also in the process of ABET accreditation.
Since 1996, there is an Education Quality Management Advisory Committee –
consisting of professors, students and external members. The goal is to supplement the six year external quality assessment with an extra internal regulatory mechanism.
Every two years a Users Group – a committee of external expert authorities
composed of representatives from academic education, business and government – will examine and compare the reports on the quality of education for the
previous two years.
Internal quality control:
During the first three years, the student association designates a number of
students who have to closely monitor the courses and give feedback.
There is a formal quarterly internal evaluation of the programs. Program directors and advisory committees execute and monitor this process.
There is a portfolio management system of the evaluation of education. The tool
is used by deans and professors to evaluate the staff.
Students have great influence through the student association which publishes
a yearly “student consumer guide” with explicit comments on each course.
Study-progress monitoring system: Since the mid-90‘s, this university-wide
system monitors the study-progress of individual students per degree course.
(4) Dedicated business services center to manage contract research
The introduction of a business services center as a central body to manage external contracts has resulted in a better quality of research projects.
TU Delft has introduced a business services center. The center is the link between the university and the outside.
The role of the center is to organize professional contracts and do the respective paperwork.
About 20% of the university’s budget is from contract work (trend: increasing).
Because it is expected that financing by the government will decrease, TU Delft
would like to double the 20% of contract money in the next three years.
(5) Highly innovative program in Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering has introduced a study program which combines theory and
practical aspects. Additionally, the teaching of non-core competencies has been
293
294
APPENDIX B
integrated. As a result, the university considers the introduction of this system in its
other engineering programs.
Educational blocks are taught in combination with examinations (feedback
tests). They are taught in a cumulative way: theory first, then integration.
Students take introductory courses to ethics, philosophy, law, etc. during the
2nd year.
There is a large chip design project during the 2nd year. It is unique and consists of the three phases designing, producing the chip and controlling its function.
There are large laboratory course (16 afternoons) during the 2nd and 3rd year.
During the third quarter of the 3rd year students have a course on product life
cycles.
During the 4th quarter of the 3rd year, students complete design projects as if
they were a small engineering company.
(6) Good integration of non-core competencies in Materials Sciences and Chemical
Engineering
Materials Sciences and Chemical Engineering have introduced a number of curriculum changes to better integrate the teaching of non-core competencies.
Students acquire decision making skills during the first years through special
tasks.
Students conduct a design project in the 4th year.
An Interactive Voting System has been introduced in classrooms, which allows
students to give their opinion anonymously.
Students take mandatory courses in entrepreneurship (finance, management,
etc.) in the 3rd year.
Students can take additional lectures in business administration. This is a sort
of specialization which lasts half a year with an internship done in the field of
business administration).
There is a mandatory internship (3 months) in the 4th year, where students get
clearly defined tasks and have to write a report. Most students do their internship abroad.
The final thesis lasts between 8 and 9 months and is often done in industry.
(7) Optimal balance between traditional forms of teaching and project work in Mechanical Engineering
Mechanical Engineering has found an optimal balance between traditional forms of
teaching and project work. As a result, students are highly motivated and the program is academically challenging at the same time.
Traditional program: lectures, exercises, examinations
New program: Courses with core subjects have lectures, exercices, and weekly
tests.
Combination of lectures and group instruction in mathematics.
During the first three years: 55% traditional teaching, 45% projects and / or internships.
Weekly background lectures during project phases.
APPENDIX B
(8) Design/synthesis exercise and outstanding research facilities in Aerospace
Engineering
Aerospace Engineering offers special design/synthesis exercises that conclude the
bachelor’s phase. Furthermore, the department uses a special campaign to promote the discipline. It also closely integrates its outstanding research facilities in
the educational program.
The so-called Design/Synthesis exercise concludes the bachelor's phase. In
this (ten week long full time) exercise students have to integrate the knowledge
of the first two years to work on a design assignment often provided by industry.
Students regard this 'real life' design assignments as one of the highlights of
their study.
Students, lecturers and non-academic staff cooperate in our promotional campaign, thus creating a clear and coherent image of Aerospace Engineering. The
campaign was developed in cooperation with a professional agency and made
use of different media (advertisements, CD-ROM, etc.).
Aerospace Engineering has outstanding research facilities such as the labs, the
windtunnels and the flight simulator. These facilities are also in use for educational purposes, thus creating a strong link between education and research.
(9) Special interdisciplinary activities including non-core skills in the study program
Several departments have introduced highly innovative programs regarding noncore skills.
Mechanical Engineering: Since 1997, the multidisciplinary approach has been
incorporated in TPE (Thematic Project Education) for the basic level education
– the most important educational reform. In TPE, the student gains knowledge
in the field of applied Mechanical Engineering, puts this knowledge and that of
the theoretical subjects into practice and broadens his view by considering a
number of non-technical subjects like economics, organization, sustainability,
control of the environment and safety. The student also acquires skills like
communication, reporting, people management, etc. The non-technical elements in the General Phase are not presented as separate courses but are part
of the thematic projects.
Chemical Engineering: A common first year has been introduced for students of
three different educational programs (applied physics, Chemical Engineering
and Material Science and Engineering). The most important part is an integrated 3-month course of RCP natural science.
Material Sciences and Chemical Engineering: In the undergraduate studies,
there is an introduction to technology science, and design oriented projects at
the end of each year.
(10) Innovative selection process in Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering has introduced close student monitoring to speed up the
selection process. As a result, unsuitable students leave the program earlier and
on their own.
Comment: see also under background information.
Electrical Engineering has introduced a strong monitoring system, where student advisors talk to struggling students frequently. Frequent feedback tests
have been introduced and the goal is that drop-outs leave the university within
half a year.
295
296
APPENDIX B
Courses have been restructured, so that theory is taught first, then, integration
is performed and examinations are conducted. Strong students appreciate the
system because it is academically challenging, weak students have more difficulties.
TABLE OF FIGURES
Table of figures
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Figure 4:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Figure 7:
Figure 8:
Figure 9:
Figure 10:
Figure 11:
Figure 12:
Figure 13:
Figure 14:
Figure 15:
Figure 16:
Figure 17:
Figure 18:
Figure 19:
Figure 20:
Figure 21:
Figure 22:
Figure 23:
Figure 24:
Figure 25:
Figure 26:
Figure 27:
Figure 28:
Figure 29:
Figure 30:
Figure 31:
Figure 32:
Figure 33:
Figure 34:
Figure 35:
Figure 36:
Figure 37:
Figure 38:
Figure 39:
Figure 40:
Figure 41:
Figure 42:
Figure 43:
Figure 44:
Figure 45:
Figure 46:
Figure 47:
Figure 48:
Figure 49:
Figure 50:
Figure 51:
Figure 52:
Figure 53:
Figure 54:
Figure 55:
Figure 56:
Figure 57:
Figure 58:
Figure 59:
Figure 60:
Figure 61:
Topic areas
Methodology
*
Number of students in selected areas at CMU
Number of degrees (Master + Bachelor) at CMU, 1999
Facts and figures of CMU for selected areas, 1999
Number of students in engineering at ECP
Facts and figures of ECP, 1999
*
Number of students in selected areas at EPFL
Number of degrees (diploma) at EPFL, 1999
Facts and figures of EPFL for selected areas, 1999
*
Number of students in selected areas at ETHZ
Number of degrees (diploma) at ETHZ, 1999
Facts and figures of ETHZ for selected areas, 1999
*
Number of students in selected areas at Georgia Tech
Number of degrees (Master + Bachelor) at Georgia Tech, 1999
Facts and figures of Georgia Tech for selected areas, 1999
*
Number of students in selected areas at Imperial College
Number of degrees (Bachelor + Master) at Imperial College, 1999
Facts and figures of Imperial College for selected areas, 1999
*
Number of students in selected areas at KTH
Number of degrees (diploma) at KTH, 1999
Facts and figures of KTH for selected areas, 1999
*
Number of students in selected areas at MIT
Number of degrees (Bachelor + Master) at MIT, 1999
Facts and figures of MIT for selected areas, 1999
*
Number of students in selected areas at RWTH Aachen
Number of degrees (Diplom) at RWTH Aachen, 1999
Facts and figures of RWTH Aachen for selected areas, 1999
*
Number of students in selected areas at TU Delft
Number of degrees (diploma) at TU Delft, 1999
Facts and figures of TU Delft for selected areas, 1999
Professor questionnaire codes distributed to partner universities
Questionnaire responses of professors by university and engineering areas
Engineers questionnaire codes distributed to alumni organizations, and number of responses
Total number of questionnaire responses of engineers (distributed through alumni organizations
and companies) by university and engineering area
Importance of different criteria for the quality of education (professors‘, engineers‘ and managers‘ view)
Importance of different criteria for the quality of education (European professors‘ vs. US professors‘ view)
Importance of different criteria for the quality of education (European professors‘ vs.
US professors‘ view; normalized averages graph)
Importance of internationality (professors, students) for the quality of education (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Importance of specialization/depth for the quality of education (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Importance of recruitment and admission procedure (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of different criteria for the quality of education (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of different criteria of the quality of education (European professors‘ vs.
US professors‘ view; normalized averages graph)
Assessment of the quality of professors/teaching staff (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of the quality of infrastructure (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of cooperation with industry (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of the interdisciplinarity of education (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment and importance of different criteria for the quality of education (professors‘ view)
Assessment and importance of different criteria for the quality of education (engineers‘ view)
Special job-related experience during engineering education
Assessment of teaching methods (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of diploma/thesis projects (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of lectures (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of homework/out-of-class assignments (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of the learning environment (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of contact with industry (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of support and counseling for students (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of pedagogical and didactic skills of teaching staff (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Frequency of cooperation with other universities (European professors' and US professors' view)
Frequency of collaboration with other universities in R&D projects (professors' view)
Student and diploma/thesis projects (professors' view)
22
24
29
29
29
32
32
35
35
35
38
38
38
41
41
41
44
44
44
47
47
47
50
50
50
53
53
53
56
56
56
58
59
60
60
66
66
67
68
68
69
70
71
72
72
73
74
75
75
76
78
79
79
80
81
82
83
83
85
85
86
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 62:
Figure 63:
Figure 64:
Figure 65:
Figure 66:
Figure 67:
Figure 68:
Figure 69:
Figure 70:
Figure 71:
Figure 72:
Figure 73:
Figure 74:
Figure 75:
Figure 76:
Figure 77:
Figure 78:
Figure 79:
Figure 80:
Figure 81:
Figure 82:
Figure 83:
Figure 84:
Figure 85:
Figure 86:
Figure 87:
Figure 88:
Figure 89:
Figure 90:
Figure 91:
Figure 92:
Figure 93:
Figure 94:
Figure 95:
Figure 96:
Figure 97:
Figure 98:
Figure 99:
Figure 100:
Figure 101:
Figure 102:
Figure 103:
Figure 104:
Figure 105:
Figure 106:
Figure 107:
Future importance of cooperation with other universities (European professors' and US professors' view).
Frequency of cooperation with industry/technical universities (professors', engineers' and managers' view)
Frequency of cooperation with industry (European professors' and US professors' view)
Frequency of lecturers/teachers from industry (professors' view)
Frequency of practical training/internship for students (professors' view)
Professors with working experience in industry
Future importance of cooperation with industry/with technical universities (professors' and managers‘ view).
Benefit of cooperation with industry/universities (professors‘ view)
Benefit of cooperation with universities (managers‘ view)
Importance of engineering competences (professors‘, engineers‘ and managers’ view)
Importance of engineering competences (European professors' and US professors' view;
normalized averages graph)
Importance of engineering competences (Bachelor vs. Master level; only professors‘ view from
MIT, CMU, Georgia Tech, Imperial College)
Assessment of engineering competences (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of research know-how (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of specialized engineering proficiency (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of basic engineering proficiency (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of practical engineering experience (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of problem-solving skills (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Importance and assessment of engineering competences (professors‘ view)
Importance and assessment of engineering competences (engineers‘ view)
Importance of general professional competences (professors‘, engineers‘ and managers‘ view)
Importance of general professional competences (European engineers and US engineers)
Assessment of general professional competences (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of general professional competences (European and US professors' view;
normalized averages graph)
Assessment of general professional competences (European and US engineers' view;
normalized averages graph)
Assessment of communication skills (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of English language skills (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of leadership skills (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Assessment of social skills (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Importance and assessment of general professional competences (professors‘ view)
Gaps between importance and assessment of general professional competences (engineers‘ view)
Importance of aspects for the reputation (professors‘, engineers‘ and managers‘ view)
Importance of aspects for the reputation (European and US professors' view)
Importance of quality of research reputation (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Importance of merits/awards (e.g. Nobel prize) for professors (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Importance of publications by professors (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Reputation of universities (professors‘ and engineers‘ view)
Reputation of universities (own professors‘ and other professors‘ view)
Reputation of universities (own engineers‘ and other engineers‘ view)
Reputation of universities (professors from Electrical Engineering and Computer Science & Engineering)
Reputation of universities (professors from Mechanical Engineering, Chemical Engineering and
Materials Science & Engineering)
Importance of a Ph.D./doctorate (professors‘, managers‘ and engineers‘ view)
Job-finding procedures
Career benefits of alumni membership
Career benefit factors of alumni membership
Successful practices per topic area (overview)
86
87
88
89
89
90
90
91
91
93
94
95
96
97
97
98
98
99
100
100
102
103
104
104
105
106
106
107
107
108
109
111
112
112
113
113
115
116
116
117
118
119
120
121
121
123
Abbreviations
B.Sc.
Bachelor of Science
CMU
Carnegie Mellon University
ECP
Ecole Centrale Paris
EPFL
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
ETHZ
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
Georgia Tech
Georgia Institute of Technology
IC
Imperial College London
KTH
Kungl Tekniska Högskolan Stockholm
MIT
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
M.Sc.
Master of Science
Ph.D.
Doctor of Philosophy
PVP
Potentially valuable practices
RWTH
Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen
SP
Successful practices
TU Delft
Technische Universiteit Delft
Participating firms
1 ABB Ltd.
2 Andersen AG
3 Avesta Sheffield AG
4 AWK Group AG
5 BAE Systems
6 Bayer AG
7 Belimo AG
8 Comsol AB
9 Corus
10 Esec SA
11 Heidrick & Struggles
12 Hilti AG
13 IBM
14 Lockheed Martin
15 Lonzagroup
16 Mannesmann Dematic AG
17 Mannesmann Sachs AG
18 Merck & Co. Inc.
19 Nestec Ltd.
20 Philips
21 PricewaterhouseCoopers
22 Rentenanstalt / Swiss Life
23 Rhodia
24 Rieter Holding AG
25 Sagem
26 Saint Gobain Glass
27 Schlumberger Ltd.
28 Siemens AG
29 SIG Holding
30 Sulzer AG
31 Swiss Re
32 Swisscom
33 UBS AG
34 ZF Friedrichshafen AGText
Partner universities
University
Address
Telephone
WWW
Carnegie Mellon
University
5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh,
PA 15213-3890, USA
1-412-268-2000
www.cmu.edu
Ecole Centrale Paris
Grande Voie des Vignes,
F-92 295 Château-Malabry
33-1-4113-1255
www.ecp.fr
EPF Lausanne
EPFL-Ecublens,
CH-1015 Lausanne
41-21-693 11 11
www.epfl.ch
ETH Zürich
ETH Zentrum,
CH-8092 Zurich
41-1-632 11 11
www.ethz.ch
Georgia Tech
Tech Tower, 225 North Avenue,
Atlanta, GA 30332-0360
1-404- 894 2000
www.gatech.edu
Imperial College
Exhibition Road,
London SW7 2AZ, UK
44-20-7589-4111
www.ic.ac.uk
KTH
SE-100 44 Stockholm, SW
46-8-790-60
www.kth.se
MIT
77 Massachusetts Av, 3-208,
Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USA
1-617-253-1000
www.mit.edu
RWTH Aachen
Templergraben 55, RWTH,
D-52056 Aachen
49-241-80-1
www.rwthaachen.de
TU Delft
Julianalaan 134, P.O.Box 5,
NL_2628 BL Delft
31-15-278 9111
www.tudelft.nl