[2018] BSE Kraków

BEST Symposium on Education (BSE) | Final Report

The Power of Education Overthrow the Wall and Build the Better Tomorrow

Krakov, 9th-20th July 2018

Authors Coordinator Balaban, Metin Oktay (Ankara, Turkey)

Content Team Members Kladova, Olga (Saint Petersburg, Russia) Moita, JoĂŁo (Lisbon, Portugal) PĂŠrez Elvira, Raquel (Madrid, Spain)

2

Table of contents INTRODUCTION

7

Definition

7

BSE Krakow 2018

7

2. Facilitators Team

8

3. Experts

9

4. Participants

10

5. Objectives

12

6. Schedule

12

7. Sessions

13

1. Social Components of Universities and Facilities

13

Background

13

Methodology

13

Outcomes

14

A. Free time in University

14

B. “Extracurricular” activities as part of the curriculum

16

C. University Facilities

16

2. Duration of Higher Education

18

Background

18

Methodology

19

Outcomes

19

A. Current structure of defrees in Europe

19

B. Ideal age to enter university

20

C. Ideal age to graduate

21

D. Recognition of bachelor’s degree

21

E. Standardisation of the structure of degrees

22

3. Academical Differences in Engineering Education

23

Background

23

Methodology

23

3

Outcomes A. Spotting Differences

25

B. Pros and Cons

27

4. International Compatibility of Engineering Education in Europe

28

Background

28

Methodology

29

Outcomes

30

A. Current Obstacles

30

B. Impact of Obstacles

31

C. Solutions for Obstacles

32

5. Adaptability and Frexibility of Curriculum

34

Background

34

Methodology

34

Outcomes

35

A. Open sharing

35

B. Group sharing

36

C. Group work

38

D. Percentage meter

40

6. International Summer Universities

41

Background

41

Methodology

41

Outcomes

42

A. General Perception of International Summer Universities

42

B. Importance of aspects

42

C. Problems and areas open to improvement

44

Problems and solutions 7. Sociocultural problems of international students

45 47

Background

47

Methodology

47

Outcomes

48

A. Open sharing

4

25

48

B. Brainstorming

48

C. The prioritization of the problems

50

D. Group brainstorming

50

E. Prioritization all together

51

F. World Cafe

51

8. Online Classes

52

Group discussions

52

What makes you take online classes as of year 2018?

53

Imagine we live in year 2025. How do people learn online?

54

How can one run successful online classes/ meetings?

55

Idea

55

How can one reflect on online classes / online meetings to ensure successful future events?

56

Idea

56

What are the advantages/disadvantages of online classes compared to traditional classes?

57

Idea

57

9. Online Labs

59

Background

59

Group discussions

59

Practical activity

60

Conclusion

61

10. Open Universities

61

Background

61

Methodology

62

Outcomes

62

A. Pros and Cons of Open Universities

62

B. Finding solutions to the weak points of open universities

65

5

11. Effectiveness and Improvements on Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) Background Methodology Outcomes

67 68 69

A. MOOC Development

69

B. Higher Education Institution (HEI) Accreditation

71

C. Improving MOOCs

71

12. The Role of University in Educational Ecosystems

72

Background

72

Methodology

73

Outcomes

73

Group work 13. International Online Projects

73 79

Background

79

Methodology

79

Outcomes

80

A. Students Opinion

80

B. SCORE Introduction

80

C. Strenght and challenges

80

D. Options and responses

82

Effectiveness

85

14. Final Case Study: Designing a Thermodynamics Course

6

67

87

Background

87

Methodology

87

Outcomes

89

8. Conclusion

90

9. Contacts

91

1. Introduction Definition BEST Symposia on Education (BSEs) are events where students gather to discuss, share knowledge and contribute to new ideas on specific education-related topics. BSEs increase Higher Education students’ awareness of educational issues by initiating discussions amongst them and between the other stakeholders of higher education participating in the event: universities, companies, European organisations and other partners of BEST. Students from all over Europe and experts in the field of European Engineering Education (EEE) have a chance to come together and discuss Higher Education-related topics in Europe at different BSEs. The sum of these events and all the related activities, such as surveys, workshops and the dissemination of the outcomes, constitutes the so-called BEST Educational Involvement Programme.

Through its Educational Involvement Programme, BEST strives to encourage and facilitate discussions related to Higher Engineering Education between the stakeholders (universities, companies, student community) in Europe, to gather the students’ input on these issues and, finally, to disseminate the outcomes to other interested and relevant parties, through publications in international conferences and journals.

BSE Krakow 2018 BEST Symposium on Education Krakow 2018 was held by our local BEST group based in AGH University of Science and Technology, from the 9th until the 20th of July, in Krakow.

During the event, 21 STEM students from various universities around Europe had the opportunity to participate in discussions, exchange experiences related to their academical studies and make suggestions on the improvement of Higher Education, with the help of the content team, consisting of volunteers from BEST, as well as invited experts.

7

The topics tackled at the event were “Internationalization of Education in Europe”, “Online Learning” and “Future Universities”. The outcomes of the discussions and workshops were collected by the content team and are hereby presented in this conclusive report, which will be disseminated through our papers and within our network of Higher Engineering Education (HEE) partners in Europe.

2. Content Team Event Coordinator: Metin Oktay Balaban | Middle East Technical University

Facilitators: João Moita | University of Lisbon Olga Kladova | Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University Raquel Pérez Elvira | Carlos III University of Madrid

8

3. Experts Ana Moura Santos University of Lisbon

Tomi Kauppinen

Aalto University School of Science

Pavel Luksha

Moscow School of Management SKOLKOVO

9

4. Participants Surname

University

1

Abdelmalek

Mena

Friedrich-AlexanderUniversity ErlangenNuremberg

2

Ayyildiz

Kerem

Middle East Technical University

3

Balint

Mozes

Technical University of ClujNapoca

4

Berdic

Bojana

University of Belgrade

5

Bondarenko

Stanislav

National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”

6

Carpio

Carolina

Carlos III University of Madrid

7

Dziembowska

Monika

Lodz University of Technology

8

García García

Daniel

Carlos III University of Madrid

9

González

Sofía

Las Palmas of Gran Canaria University

Melina

Friedrich-AlexanderUniversity ErlangenNuremberg

10

10

Name

Graner

11

Istomina

Maria

Bauman Moscow State Technical University

12

Kyriakopoulou

Vasiliki

National Technical University of Athens

13

Leidi

Anna

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich

14

Letsiou

Afroditi

Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

15

Nikolaeva

Daria

Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University

16

Oliveira

Duarte

University of Porto

17

Popolizio

Paolo

Polytechnic Universityof Turin

18

Puig Ruiz

Josep

Technical University of Catalonia

19

Shpiliak

Anastasiia

National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”

20

Temmerman

Sharon

Ghent University

21

Uludoğan

Özgür

Istanbul Technical University

11

5. Objectives The main objectives of this event were the following: • Raise students’ awareness of education-related subjects and gather input from tertiary-level students of technology on various subjects regarding STEM education.

• Participants, individually, have the opportunity to practice and develop several soft skills such as presentation skills, interpersonal and communication skills, as well as improve their international interdisciplinary cooperation and teamwork.

6. Schedule

12

7. Sessions 1. Social Components of Universities and Facilities Facilitators: JoĂŁo Moita and Olga Kladova Background Universities are responsible for providing students not only with technical skills but also with various others that are essential for their lives. The general environment provided by universities is crucial for the development of healthy, social and responsible citizens. Therefore, it is important to improve the curriculum and university facilities to enhance the development of European students.

What should the role of universities in providing a better environment be for students? Which university Facilities are the most relevant for a good learning environment?

The goal of this session was for participants to summarise what components of their university are important for their development as individuals and how these components can be developed to provide a richer experience for students.

Methodology As this was the first session of the event, participants had the chance to present themselves and share some details about their studies. The presentations were followed by a Sharing Session, where they talked about how much free time from studying each of them has and how they are currently using it.

Following the Sharing Session, participants were divided in groups and asked to brainstorm by writing down different activities on post-its about where they could invest their free time in order to develop themselves. After the brainstorming, each group presented its ideas.

13

Afterwards, there was an open discussion about how the balance between workload and free time can influence the students’ studies and their personal lives.

Participants were then divided in two groups in order to start a debate on whether the activities they brainstormed about should be included in the curricula or not. After some time debating and sharing pros and cons, some conclusions were written down on a flipchart.

The second part of the session was focused on university facilities.

There was brainstorming on different kinds of university facilities and clustering of similar facilities. Then, the participants were separated in 2 groups and the facilitators, one in each group, took note of the ranking (from 0 to 10) each participant gave about the current state of each facility in their universities. Also by ranking, participants gave their opinion on the most relevant facilities and the results were presented to everyone.

To finalise the session, participants were divided into 4 groups and assigned the task of designing the perfect campus for a healthy and pleasant working environment.

Outcomes A. Free time in University General students’ perception From the sharing sessions, it was understood that there are many discrepancies between European universities. The main conclusions from the Sharing Session were: • Some participants felt they had more than enough free time while others felt that they didn’t have enough free time to do extracurricular activities; • Most participants (11 out of 17) take part in extracurricular activities, ranging from dance classes to volunteering in student organisations; • In some universities, there is no support for students’ organisations and this kind of activities are discouraged by professors. Other universities have a very good relationship with students’ organisations and promote them to students; • Participants believe there should be an opportunity to take part

14

in activities that support your development as a person and the universities should support them.

How to use free time The results from the brainstorming regarding what kind of activities students can take part in during their free times in order to develop themselves are presented in the following table.

Sport activities

Training workshops on hard and soft skills

Volunteering in student’s organisation

Exchange programs

Engineering competitions

Career events

Language courses

Art activities

Internship

Cultural activities

Online courses

Travelling

Technical student groups

Part-time jobs

Hobby clubs

Open lectures

Volunteering for social causes

Attending conferences

The balance between workload and free time During the discussion, it was again understood that there are significant discrepancies between different universities. The main outcomes from the discussion are the following: • In most universities, if students want to be excellent, it is very hard to have a satisfying social life because they have to spend most of your time studying; • Having a big workload can help students develop their timemanagement skills; • Having a healthy social life helps students develop some softskills, which then helps them becoming better students.

15

B.“Extracurricular” activities as part of the curriculum For this debate, participants were asked to focus on: • Sport activities; • Art activities; • Soft skill training sessions; • Engineering competitions; • Volunteering at NGOs. After presenting the pros and cons of including these kinds of activities in the university curriculum, the main outcomes were summarised on a flipchart. Both these outcomes and relevant points from the discussion are listed below.

• Having soft skill training as a mandatory part of the curriculum (everyone agreed); • Volunteering at NGOs shouldn’t be included in the curriculum; • If the current extracurricular activities are mandatory to be taken at university, students may miss some good opportunities outside of it; • Regarding Sports, Arts and Engineering competitions, most participants (13 out of 17) agreed that they should C. University Facilities Brainstorm on facilities The outcomes of the brainstorm and clustering/cleaning of the results are the following: • Gym • Music Facilities/instruments • Co-working • Sleeping rooms • NGO’s office • Concert halls • Multimedia rooms • Church/Praying rooms • Smoking areas • Gaming rooms • Canteens • Psychological help

16

Current situation at European universities Even though the most relevant goal of this exercise was for participants to better understand each other’s realities, some conclusions can be taken from it. The fact that only a few universities were represented in the event should be taken into account when analysing this report.

• Gyms and Canteens are in general good quality at most universities; • Even though it is not very common, some universities are adopting new kinds of facilities such as gaming rooms, sleeping rooms and co-working areas.

Prioritisation of facilities Participants had to choose, from the brainstormed facilities, 3-5 that they considered most relevant. The number of students who chose each facility for their top facilities is presented below.

Co-working

15

Canteens

12

NGO’s office

11

Gym

7

Psychological help

5

Multimedia rooms

1

Music Facilities/instruments

1

Gaming rooms

1

The perfect university campus For the last exercise, the 4 groups had some time to discuss and prepare a presentation of the ideal campus of a university in their point of view. The facilities that each group would include in their perfect university campus are listed below.

17

Group 1 • Lots of open spaces; • A gym that can fit many different sports activities; • Canteen; • Coffee bar; • NGOs offices; • Music facilities; • Multiple religion facilities; • Bike road connecting all parts.

Group 2 • Canteen; • Quality classrooms; • Gaming room; • Park (big open space); • Co-working space; • Swimming pool – connected with concert hall; • Library; • Bar; • NGO offices; • Church; • Dorms.

Group 3 • Park (open space); • Dormitory; • Medical centre; • Concert hall; • Working space; • Sports area; • Classrooms; • Canteen.

Group 4 • Parking; • Subway stop; • Open spaces (green areas); • Gym; • Sleeping area; • Pool; • Canteen; • Amphitheatre.

2. Duration of Higher Education Facilitators: João Moita and Olga Kladova

Background The duration of the degrees varies from country to country across Europe. The Bologna Process played a very important role in unifying the format of degrees in different countries but some discrepancies are still noticeable. The framework adopted consists of 3 cycles: typically, the first cycle lasts from 3 to 4 years, the second one 1-2 years and the third cycle length is highly dependant on the discipline. The duration of the programmes are highly dependant on the age of the students. It determines the time for a person to join the labour market and it deeply influences the development of one’s personal life.

18

The aim of this session was to understand students opinions regarding the duration of their degrees and what the perfect structure in terms of length would be. Participants pointed out pros and cons of different possibilities and reflected on their implications in the European panorama.

Methodology This session started with an introduction of the topic and with a presentation about the Bologna Process.

The first activity for participants was a Sharing Session on how the structure of the degrees is at their own universities and countries.

Then there was a world cafe about the ideal age to start the studies, where the participants were divided into 3 tables and each table tackled pros and cons of entering university at different ages (1617, 18-19 and 20-22). Every team spent some time in each table discussing pros and cons and adding their opinions to the previous team’s input.

For the next exercise, the participants were divided in 4 groups.

Each group had to discuss what they considered to be the ideal age to finish the studies and to enter the job market and then present the outcomes of the discussion to the others.

The Group Discussion was followed by another Sharing Session, where each participant had to explain the differences in recognition by employers between having a bachelor and a master degree.

To finalise the session, there was a debate on whether the duration and structure of degrees should be standardised or not.

This debate had 3 parts: should it be standardised country-wide; should it be standardised in Europe; and should it be standardised everywhere. Pros and cons were analysed and final conclusions were written down in a flipchart.

Outcomes A. Current structure of degrees in Europe Most relevant input collected is summarised below. The fact that

19

only a few universities were represented at the event should be taken into account when analysing this report.

• All universities use ECTS or an equivalent system; • Bachelor’s degrees are designed to last 3 or 4 years; • Master’s degrees are designed to last 1 or 2 years.

B. Ideal age to enter university Each table of the World Cafe had a flipchart where pros and cons were written down by all the groups. The results can be found in the following 3 tables.

From 16 to 17 years old Pros Cons Earlier career

Little background knowledge

More time to change the path

Hard to make a weighted decision

Still young for degree

Easily influenced Lack of maturity Too early to leave home

From 18 to 19 years old Pros Cons Changing point in life

Hard to make a weighted decision

Good timing to leave home

Combined with all the changes in life may be overwhelming

Enough background

From 20 to 22 years old Pros Cons More mature decision Longer youth

Less flexibility and passion in learning Not getting money can be demotivating to start the studies Depending on the famility for too long Less competitive as an employee

20

The conclusion of this exercise was that there are distinct advantages and disadvantages in the different options but the most balanced one is to start university at the age of 18-19 years.

C. Ideal age to graduate The participants were divided into 4 groups and each group agreed on the ideal age to finish university. The groups also discussed some implications and consequences of finishing university at different stages of life. The outcomes are presented by the groups.

Group 1 - 23/24 y.o.

Group 2 - 25 y.o.

• Being open to learn; • Being flexible; • Having enough maturity and experience; • Still having time for further development; • Having energy and motivation to work.

• Being open to learn; • Being flexible; • Having enough maturity and experience; • Having a better planned path.

Group 3 - 22/23 y.o.

Group 4 - 24/25 y.o.

• Being stable psychologically; • If one has the opportunity to study longer, the better; • Coming back to studies after being employed is more difficult.

• Knowing the value of money; • Being able to take responsibilities independence; • Having experience in social skills; • Being flexible.

Even though the ages discussed by each group were slightly different, the relevant factors and the ideas discussed converged to similar conclusions.

D. Recognition of bachelor’s degree The main outcomes of the discussion about the recognition of bachelor’s degree are summarised in the following list.

• The recognition of a bachelor’s degree is highly dependant on the field of studies; • In some countries, bachelor’s is enough for computer science (programming);

21

• In most countries the degree of an engineer is only obtained after the master’s.

E. Standardisation of the structure of degrees For this debate, some pros and cons were presented as well as some conclusions were reached. The outcomes are presented in the tables below.

Should the structure be standardised by country?

In favour Against People should be able to work everywhere in the country, so it makes sense that they have the same system

There are huge countries with very big differences by region Really hard to implement changes when there are big cultural differences

Everyone agreed that the structure should be the same by country

Should the structure be standardised in Europe?

In favor Against We live in an European labor market, so it makes sense that Standardisation disables universities follow the same innovation and improvement system Flexibility can allow a stanThe opportunities in Europe are dardised system to still be innonot the same, so it doesn’t make vative much sense to standardise The agreed solution was a standardised system in Europe, but with some free space (for innovations and developments)

Should the structure be standardised everywhere?

In favor Against Many different political, social and cultural differences The conclusion was that the effort would not compensate the for advantages of having a standardised system worldwide

22

3. Academical Differences in Engineering Education Facilitators: JoĂŁo Moita and Olga Kladova

Background As the world develops faster in terms of technology, more engineers with high potential are needed. Around 20% of students in Europe study an engineering degree. The availability of degrees, the specific requirements, the different subjects, the way of teaching or even evaluating differ considerably between universities and countries.

What are the differences between the universities, between the similar faculties of different universities and different systems?

Also, what are the the advantages and disadvantages of each system and differences?

Methodology The session was designed as 2 main blocks. In the first block, the differences between similar degrees are tried to be spotted. In the second block pros and cons of the differences spotted in the first block were discussed.

Participants were divided into groups of 3-4 students based on their degrees. Students from similar degrees were tried to be put as together as possible. The first 3 groups were considered groups with students from enough relation such as mechanical and aerospace engineers together or students in the fields related to IT and computer science. Other 3 groups formed by other students from random fields of studies as there were not enough students to form a group with related and similar fields.

All of the groups were asked 6 questions in total. After the second and fourth questions, the groups are mixed to form 4 groups, but this time fully randomized regardless of their fields.

23

The asked questions were the followings: 1. • What are the differences in your curricula?

• How general/specialized are your degrees/ departments in your university?

2. How theoretical/practical are the ways of teaching in your degrees?

Group re-division 3. • How are the evaluation methods and criteria?

• How tolerant is your university/degree for failing a course?

4. How is the workload of your university and specifically your degree?

Group re-division 5. •

How are the degrees of graduation at your universities?

• How are the acceptance levels of degrees for engineers in your countries?

6. • How is the acceptance/entry system to university?

• How is the system for changing to another degree at your university?

In the first question round, the first question “What are the differences in your curricula?”, was asked only to the Groups 1, 2 and 3 while the second question, “How general/specialized are your degrees/departments in your university?”, was asked only to the Groups 4, 5 and 6. All the other questions were asked in/to all of the groups.

After every two question rounds, groups were asked to present their results. Their names in the groups were noted and their flipcharts are collected.

In the second block, the same groups for every question were reformed and they are given their flipcharts. This time, for the same questions asked in the first block (except the first 2 questions), they

24

are asked to discuss pros and cons of every difference they have spotted. Then groups were asked to present their results again.

Outcomes A. Spotting Differences What are the differences in your curricula?

The following differences in curricula were stated by the groups: • Duration of Bachelor degree is changing country by country, which for some countries is 3 years and for some countries it is 4 years • Possibility to choose subjects is different. For some countries and universities, one can’t choose subjects but for some countries and universities it is possible.

• Grading systems show difference.

• An Internship is for some countries compulsory and for some countries it is not.

• There are English courses in some countries while some do not have them.

• In some countries and universities, there are elective courses for social sciences while for some there are not.

How general/specialized are your degrees/departments at your university?

Almost all participants answered that subjects are very general at the beginning of the degree. For most countries, it is same until the end of bachelor. Few participants (Germany, Italy) stated it is becoming more specific after the first year. Some participants stated it is becoming more specific in the last year of bachelor and it is general until then. All participants stated it is specific when it comes to masters.

How theoretical/practical are the ways of teaching in your degrees?

Participants from all countries except Russia and Germany answered it is very theoretical at bachelor. Participants from Germany answered it is very practical and participants from

25

Russia it is practical only at the last year. Most of the participants answered that studies becomes more practical in masters, while few participants answered that it is still theoretical or that it depends on the program.

How are the evaluation methods and criteria?

How tolerant is your university/degree for failing a course?

All of the participants from all countries answered evaluation methods are highly dependant/focused on exams.

Even though the evaluation methods are very similar, the tolerance level varies heavily. For some countries such as Serbia and Italy, you can fail as many times as you want and you can enter the exams many times in a year. There are also others like in Turkey where you can not attempt more than 1 time per semester or year, depending on the university. For some other countries such as Spain and Romania, if you fail a couple of times, you are paying for additional exams. For some others, you are automatically dismissed for failing several times such as the case in Germany.

There are also countries like Turkey where you have a maximum number of years of studies until you are dismissed from the university.

How is the workload of your university and specifically your degree?

All of the participants without exception answered that workload is excessive for STEM programs.

How are the degrees of graduation at your universities?

How are the acceptance level of degrees for engineers in your countries?

Most of the participants have different systems, varying between 3+2, 4+2, 5 years (integrated studies), 6 years and also different combinations in the same country for different programs.

The acceptance level of graduation also varies. It is noticeable that for more developed countries, such as Belgium, Germany or Italy, masters are necessary in order to find good jobs. For countries like Ukraine, Serbia or Romania, Bachelor is enough. For

26

some countries such as Russia and Turkey, sometimes masters is necessary but you can do OK with bachelor degree.

How is the acceptance/entry system to university?

How is the system for changing to another degree at your university?

About half of the participants answered that the entry system is based on additional exams, though the exams differ. For some countries, it is an exam of the university and for some there are global exams, such as in Turkey. There are also countries like Ukraine, Russia, Portugal or Greece where you are evaluated with your high school performance. There are also few countries such as Belgium and Germany where it is very easy to enter universities of your choice.

Changing department varies heavily. For most countries that were not in the Eastern Bloc, changing department is easy, especially if the subjects are compatible - with the exception of Spain. However, for countries such as Romania, Ukraine, Russia and Poland, it is hard to change.

B. Pros and Cons The most emphasized pros and cons of the session are summarized below: • Changing the university easily is found almost not having any cons, as it is naturally seen as an obvious advantage.

• High workload is found to be beneficial for learning, but with a high price. Many participants found it to be too stressful and depriving students of their free time. Also, as it causes less flexibility, students can’t do any other academic activities or activites that would help their soft skills. However, workload due to many exams and tasks seem more fair.

• Having so much tolerance for failing is good for having less pressure and having more flexibility in life. One can plan his/ her years and have a better time management. However, it also leads to laziness. After so many failures, students may not find enough motivation to finish the program. Limited time of attempts and less tolerance are more reasons for motivation.

• Having university degrees that last longer helps students to

27

experience student life more. However, it may also make some students feel “stuckâ€? at university. The 3+2 system is good as it also motivates you for masters and also helps to change the specialization after 3 years if one wants to. Economically, longer university also has negative consequences. • Easy acceptance to universities helps students to have less pressure. However, it may also lead to laziness. Having so many students at university is also not a good consequence. Hard acceptance simply gives students more reasons to study in high school.

4. International Compatibility of Engineering Education in Europe Facilitators: Oktay Balaban and Olga Kladova

Background The STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) Education in Higher Education in Europe is approached differently depending on the country. While there are efforts to increase the compatibility of universities between countries (such as the Bologna Process in EU), there are still too much difference and compatibility problems. Russian STEM education is very different than the ones in France. While EU countries show more similarities, Turkey follows more the US system in HE. The variation is not bad, as evolution taught us that the variation is actually a good thing, to a degree. However, it is also needed to have harmony and compatibility. Because of the differences, the collaboration becomes harder between the universities. The people who graduate from these universities also meet with obstacles when they start to work internationally, even to a degree of recognition problems of their diplomas.

What are the areas where these differences create problems?

What can be the solutions to overcome the obstacles? How could universities and their respective faculties be more compatible and collaborative?

28

Methodology After short warming up questions, participants were divided into 4 different groups. Then the groups were asked “What are the current obstacles preventing universities/departments from collaborating with each other?” Groups have written their results in post-its as “1 post-it =1 obstacle”. Then they presented their results.

After every group presented their results, all of the post-its are collected. Then all participants are asked the prioritize the obstacles on a scale without talking and come with a consensus.

After 10 minutes, participants reached a consensus and placed all the obstacles written on post-its on the scale.

For the third activity of the session, 4 groups are formed again.

Groups were asked to select obstacles written on post-its and try to come up with solutions. Then they have presented their solutions.

Outcomes

29

A. Current Obstacles The table below summarized the categories of the problems according to the times they have been stated by the groups.

Obstacle category

Times stated

Different Systems

9

Financial

5

Lack of Motivation and Vision

4

Professors/University

2

Different Standards/Quality

2

Political Reasons

2

Geographical Distance

2

Language

1

Bureaucracy

1

Other Reasons

3

The obstacle category which was stated most is “different systems� which is stated 9 times in total. It consists topics such as different educational approaches and systems of countries and universities, different curricula etc.

The second most stated category is financial obstacles, mostly about funding of international projects and programs.

Lack of motivation and vision for international collaboration follows them, which consists both the lack of motivation and vision of the students and also professors for such projects.

Political reasons, geographical distance, problems regarding universities and professors and rivalry of countries are also stated

30

2 times for each of them. There are also other isolated reasons which were found holding minor importance according to the participants such as religion. Bureaucracy and Language barriers, even though stated only once, is put independently as they have been found being bigger obstacles which is illustrated in the next outcomes section.

B. Impact of Obstacles

Impacts of Obstacles 1

2 Religion

3 Political Reasons (2)

Geographical Distance (2)

6 Different Systems (5) Different Standards/ Quality(2) Importance of Networking Professors/ University

7 Lack of Motivation/ Vision (3)

4 Rivalry( 2) Prestige

8

9

Bureaucracy

Financial (4)

5 Different Systems (3) Profossors/ University (2) Lack of Motiation/ Vision 10 Language

Different Systems

Financial

31

Language, even though stated by only 1 groups, is found to be the most impactful obstacle between the compatibility of Engineering Education. After that, financial obstacles found the most impactful, stated 5 times and being rated 4/5 of them as 9/10. Bureaucracy is also stated as a big obstacle, again even though only stated by 1 group.

The most stated obstacle group, different systems, is rated between 5-7, differentiating by the exact obstacle. For example, while different needs of countries/universities found to be the most impactful barrier, different systems of grading found not to be that much impactful. Lack of motivation should also be highlighted, as it is stated 3 times and rated 7/10.

Other obstacles are holding less importance, as being both stated less and found to be less impactful comparing the ones which are stated above.

C. Solutions for Obstacles Group 1 Group 1 had selected “Old Fashioned Professors”, “The Lack of Funds”, “Bureaucracy”, “Timing of the Curricula” and “Different Grading Systems”.

“Old Fashioned Professors”, Group 1 suggested taking the responsibility away from them and put more open-minded individuals. Also, they have suggested, if they are willing, educate them in order to make them more involved in the international area.

“The Lack of Funds”, Group 1 suggested collaboration with companies could be a good idea. Profitable researches could especially be a very nice idea connected with the companies. Also, certain grants can be checked.

“Bureaucracy”, Using more online tools is suggested in order to speed-up the process with bureaucracy. Also, simplification of procedures could be a solution.

“Timing of the Curricula”. For this obstacle, Group 1 thought if

32

universities could be more flexible, it would be a solution.

“Different Systems of Grading”, Group 1 suggested if the grades would be converted in percentages, it would solve this problem.

Group 2 Group 2 had chosen “Language Barrier”, “Different Standards” and “Economical Reasons” in order to brainstorm for the solutions in order to overcome these obstacles.

“Language Barrier”, Group 2 suggested to create university programs which has their education language in foreign language.

Also, they suggests certain programs should be developed in order to encourage students to learn the language of the country where they are currently/going to studying.

“Different Standards”, Group 2 suggested putting the ECTS system to all universities in Europe. Also, countries should work more on the compatibility of their education programs.

“Economical Reasons”, Group 2 suggested raising the budget, as a trivial solution, for international projects. They suggested the governments should be enlightened more about the priority of internationalization of education.

Group 3 Group 3 had chosen “Lack of Vision”, “Insufficient Fundings”, and “Different System” in order to come with solutions.

“Lack of Vision”, Group 3 suggested sharing testimonials who went abroad or worked in an international project would increase the vision of students.

“Insufficient Funding”, Similar to what Group 2 had suggested, Group 3 also suggested a change in priorities is needed for governments to fund more.

“Different Systems”, Group 3 suggested there should be statistical research on the problem in order to implement a system which could be feasible on a larger scale. They also stated, similar to Group 1, curricula should be more flexible.

33

Group 4 4th Group had chosen “Language Barrier” as their only obstacle.

“Language Barrier”, Group 4 suggested free language courses could be beneficial. They thought especially courses for students by students would be efficient. Also, they have suggested making English as the language for certain conferences could be also a nice idea. Universities can also ask for English Certificate at the end of students’ studies.

5. Adaptability and Flexibility of Curriculum Facilitators: Oktay Balaban and Olga Kladova

Background Most of the universities nowadays offer a specific study program for each speciality that usually doesn’t change since you start your first course. The problem is, the world does change. Specialist required today are not only good in basics of their field of study, but also flexible enough to foresee and meet the current trends.

Also, most of the time, students face with an inflexible curriculum and can not find so many options in their education.

Methodology The session started with an open question about how responding to the current needs do the participants find their curriculum. The purpose was to set their mind to the topic and to see the general situation.

Afterwards, they were divided into 4 groups for a sharing session.

In each group, 1 by one they answered the questions about the situation in their universities. The answers were captured on the flip charts and then presented to everyone in the room.

Next activity was an individual scaling from 1 to 10 of variety of choice of courses in their universities. Based on this, they were divided into 4 balanced discussion groups.

34

First, each group discussed the reasons that make universities and degrees less flexible. After, they needed to propose the possible short-term solutions and improvements. Then again a presentation round.

In the end, we made a percentage meter to check the balance of participants who believe that study program should be more specified or more general. As it was unbalanced, we cut the debate on this issue.

Outcomes A. Open sharing Question: How responding to the current needs do you find your curriculum?

Ukraine: Our curriculum is not responding, but in the computer science department first years are good, they lay a valuable foundation for a programmer, but the last years lack the relevance to the current needs.

Poland: For the computer science it’s ok, a lot of projects, team-based tasks, classes with professionals from companies, requirement to do an internship with university helps to find a place to do so. However, some projects are on to basic level.

Turkey: Our curriculum is not really responding. The university lacks money to upgrade the equipment. We learn stuff that is no longer actual Portugal: Agree on that.

35

B. Group sharing

Can you select subjects you want to pick up?

Spain

Italy

Germany

Turkey

36

There are some courses to choose from at the last year of bachelor’s, also some courses to choose from in master’s.

Technically, there is no specialization choice in bachelor’s, but you can mix specializations in master’s Depending on the department and field of studies, you can specialize (in a minority of fields you cannot).

Usually on the 3rd year of studies.

There is some flexibility, you can take some from other branches You can choose some courses on 4th year of bachelor’s and on master’s

Does the university offer enough options to choose of?

Yes

Not that much of a choice

Very much

No

Russia

No choice both for bachelor’s and master’s curricula

No

Greece

It differs between universities. In the 4th year you choose a path out of 3 possible, but you can mix your path with some others.

Not enough

Ukraine

In theory, there is a choice, but in reality there is no choice of subjects

No

Romania

You cannot choose during bachelor’s, but you can choose in master’s your specialization

No

Switzerland

A lot of different choices

Yes

Serbia

Belgium

Portugal

Poland

In bachelor’s, there’s no choice. In master’s, 90% of courses are the same and obligatory, but depending No on the specialization sometimes you can choose 10% Some fields offer a broad choice, Depends on the others not really. You can choose department courses from different departments.

We have a choice, but we’re tied to engineering subjects and not able Not enough to take other ones from the other fields There are Depends on the university. Some different pools allow it, others don’t. Sometimes, of subjects to you can choose even in the first choose from year. with different importance.

37

What are the pros and cons of having a choice here?

Cons Pros • an increase in the motivation in learning – you learn what you like • an increase in the quality of learning – you specialize faster so you get better • you choose what you want, so you are more eager to learn it • it gives you the opportunity to explore different topics and fields of study • you study with different groups, different people

• loss of focus, not going in one direction • lack of recommendation, as no curriculum is the same • if you don’t really know what to do, your curriculum can have really low quality, as you cannot really build it properly • you may lack basics, as you may skip essential knowledge, not knowing it’s actually essential • choice creates administration problems from the authorities (as you get a nonstandardized degree)

C. Group work What are the reasons that make universities and degrees less flexible?

Bureaucracy

Lack of professors

38

What could be the short-term solutions/ improvements?

Digital platforms for the document flow Need more investments.

Influence of business in the academic field, their opinion on the matter can be addressed to encourage universities. Also, experts from companies can provide some courses

Overstadarization - universities push too hard to have everything Student council with some degree coherent of power can be the driver of No one takes action – everybody changes accepts the situation and is not willing to change it Old-fashioned teachers Difficulty in changing the system

Hard to regulate changes

Wish to control the students Old-fashioned professors

More online courses Making step-by-step changes, slowly progressing towards the goal Making clear explanations of a system to the student - it’s easier to regulate changes if they understand the changes.

Making a student association for each chair Bringing new professors Training the professors

Proper information delivered to Fear for high failure rate students so they can choose their subject with good efficiency Administration don’t feel the Involve administration in an interneed for changes national symposia Keep basic standards and internal Overregulated existing standards regulations Strict requirement by laws Hard to monitor students curriculum Logistic issues - there might be not enough competent professors

Invite professors from other universities

39

Financial problems A lot of bureaucracy

Lack of quality control

Cooperation with companies brings money, which can be invested in new equipment, better staff and all in all increase the quality of the university.

Companies also can create curriculum that is relevant for the needs of the market, which leads to increasing the demand for the university graduates, which directly makes the school more prestigious

D. Percentage meter On a scale from 1 to 8, how general / specified study programs should be?

40

6. International Summer Universities Facilitators: Raquel Perez and Oktay Balaban

Background Summer Schools have a broad offer variety in terms of countries, institutions, subjects areas, and intensity of the programme. They have a broad variety of duration, can be of just a couple of days up to eight weeks, depending on country, institution and course. This is an excellent opportunity to gain academic, cultural and social experience.

There are around fifteen different topics that this courses covers, such as law, science or journalism. In more than 60 countries, which makes a total of more than five thousands courses available for students all around the world that are interested in those topics.

Although International Summer Universities may look really attractive and with a lot of programs. Only a few students had experienced this kind of summer universities.

Methodology This session started with a small introduction about what international summer universities. An estimation of how many people knew about it was about 4-5 people from a total of 22 participants. So this introduction was really needed. An open sharing was done with the experience of those who had done something similar and how did they like it.

Afterwards, participants were divided into two groups in order to evaluate the strong points that these kind of programs could have. Some guides were given to students, as evaluation of the importance of aspects while going to the summer university, such us economics, facilities of the university, type of course, city, or time and duration.

The groups presented their outcomes, and after a coffee break, 4 other working groups were made. And students were asked what are the current problems and areas open to improvement and what can be done more.

41

The session finished with a small presentation of each group outcomes.

Outcomes A. General Perception of International Summer Universities Open sharing Three students shared their experience in International Summer Universities or similar programs. They pointed out how internationally they are and how many different people you get to know. They assure that there were not stressful events, as you also had time for getting to know the city, and do social activities.

Strong points that can be seen in general As main ideas, came out the language diversity, diverse experience, soft skills, chance to discover ourselves as you are in a different environment, discover other learning methods, to spend summer life useful, get to know new topics, social involvement, practical experience, etc.

B. Importance of aspects Brainstorming and analysis Students were asked to make an evaluation in the importance of aspects while going to international summer universities.

The main factors that came up to students, were: • Economics: Money is always a big worry especially to students.

If a course is very expensive, then it’s not for everyone, and the selling point that they have about “available for every student” stops making that much sense.

• Topic of the course: It is great to have such broad options to choose the topic of course, and for sure you will be able to find something you really like. It is important to take this factor into account, as you are not going to go to learn about something you don’t like.

42

• Time and Duration: it is also important as people may have some limitations in terms of job, exams or other activities, so some courses would not fit or would be too long.

• Location: it is another factor that students may take into consideration when applying to a course.

• Facilities and university: when thinking about it, it seems such an interesting aspect that most students said they would like to know, but in reality, there is no much information about that, and when choosing they don’t know about it, so it doesn’t affect their decision. The only few that do look for it, they assure it’s hard to find that information about how the laboratories are, or the clases, etc.

• Social activity: while going to a course like this, it is important to know how much effort is going to take you, how much academic time you will have, how much free you will have, and if there will be opportunities to have fun, sightseeing, etc. But this aspect will not be as important as the others when choosing. Related to location, you can go to a place which is not interesting, but when organisers make an effort to provide you with quality social activities, you can still spend time interesting.

• Learning method: this aspect is not taken into too much consideration when deciding. But it’s interesting to know if the classes will be practical, if you will learn things you do not know, if there will be discussion groups, etc. Also here, we covered the importance of language and how international is the course.

43

Evaluation of these factors

This image represents the importance students gave to the different aspects there were mentioned before. As a conclusion, economics and the type of the course were the most important aspects to take into consideration when deciding between different International Summer Schools. Having time and duration in third position.

Although the other aspects were also really important, students considered that they are not the ones responsible to make you decide between courses, but to see if the course really fits on what you are looking for.

C. Problems and areas open to improvement Problems found by the different groups Once all these aspects were evaluated and students had the opportunity to see the hot topics, they were asked to discuss the current problems and areas open to improvement. They were divided in four different groups, and the following main problems came up:

44

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

High price

X

X

X

Poor promotion

X (database)

X

X

Academic content

X (low qualificate professors, not collaborations)

Bureaucracy

X (regulations)

Application method

X (different preparations)

Balance among schedule activities Collects expectations and final comments Time and duratin

X (different background knowledge)

X

X (social, low content)

X

X (evaluation)

X

Lack of diversity

X

Low recognition

X

X

Problems and Solutions To all those problems, groups started to find solutions to them, and the general outputs were the following:

45

PROBLEMS

High price

Poor promotion

Academic content

Bureaucrazy

Application method Balance among schedule activities Collects expectations and final comments Time and duration

Lack of diversity Low recognition

46

SOLUTIONS Increase budget, finding sponsors and partners, look for grants for the courses, have companies sponsoring, offer scholarships to students, give some discounts, provide travelling refund, provide food, accommodation and free social activities, have international collaborations.

Better presence in social media, use other channels, have a marketing strategy between all of the courses Top-level professors, make sure participants have the same knowledge on the topic, provide with some pre materials Simplify the procedure for students, improve regulations, have better collaboration between university Lewer requirements, phases of application, choose a criterion different than grades (as it can be Motivational Letters) Involve local students or volunteers in social activities, have no classes over the weekend, have interactive and diverse workshops Surveys Have an average time of working hours, have flexibility, check how much time students usually have to attend the course, have a percentage of attendance mandatory Limit the participants from the same country, have more strict rules Credits, internship opportunities

7.Sociocultural problems of international students Facilitators: Olga Kladova and Raquel Perez

Background International students deal with many academic and social challenges during their University years. These challenges affect their academic achievements as well as their social engagement in many different ways. These main challenges may come from the differences between languages, that could lead to barriers in many aspects, or from the adjustment to a new life, culture, people, etc.

Methodology We started with get-to-know questions about their experience with studying abroad. Then we followed with an open sharing about the number of abroad students in different Universities.

Afterwards, with post-its, we collected answers from everyone in the room about problems they faced or could face if they would study abroad. Then, the facilitators together with the participants united the stated problems into bigger clusters. Next step was to prioritize those clusters and choose the five most important of them.

Having done this, participants were divided into two groups to brainstorm on what bodies can affect those issues. After each group presented their ideas, they prioritized all the entities based on the criteria of the strongest influence, and the top four were chosen.

For the next activity, we did a world cafe. These four bodies were placed in four different tables, and each group of students had to be rotating and were supposed to think from the perspective of that entity to find the solutions for the top 5 problems they pointed out before.

In the end they presented the possible solutions.

47

Outcomes A. Open sharing Question: How many students are allowed to go for programs like Erasmus in your university?

• maximum 20 percent • around 100 students per year • during one semester around 600 students per faculty • in Serbia there aren’t many opportunities, usually they say that there’s no collaboration with a specific university B. Brainstorming What problems did you face or think you may encounter? *Here you can see the problems already united into clusters and all the post-its that went under them • RELIGION • religion compatibility proposed two times • religious differences • religion barrier • BUREAUCRACY • different curriculum, different studies • bureaucracy • not easy procedures (registration, etc) • translate documents, visa stuff, conversion of grades, apostles • CULTURAL • cultural differences proposed three times • DIFFERENT SOCIAL PROTOCOLS • kissing in salutations • invitation for guest to drink something • LANGUAGE BARRIERS • low english skills of some students • language mafia • local language • language barrier proposed five times • communication (language problems) • language (courses are not in english, professors are speaking on their language)

48

• TOLERANCE • racism proposed three times • disrespect towards women • prejudices towards germans (nazi, rich...)

• ECONOMICS • economic problems proposed three times • financial management (expensive life in some countries) • budget expenses • INTEGRATION PROBLEMS • integration problems • closed groups of people • interact with locals • immersion • into student clubs isn’t so easy • non inclusion in new local group of people • lack of integration • MINDSETS • different mentalities proposed three times • OTHER • room sharing -> cultural impact coexistance • problems to socialise (different cultures socialize differently, some are more open) • food culture • not being able to be yourself 100% because of the language barrier • unapproachable locals • adaptation to a new environment • adaptation to a different lifestyle • finding an accomodation • general support • feels different to have common courses • bad communication with professors (they don’t care about international students) • missing your friends and homesick while being away a long time from home • the prejudice of local students • stereotypes prejudice • locals don’t like foreigners • feel lost during first days

49

C. The prioritization of the problems - which are the biggest?

Thus, the most essential issues that foreign students encounter are the following: • lack of integration • different mindsets • language barriers • lack of money • intolerance D. Group brainstorming Which bodies can affect those issues?

- the most important ones are underlined

Group 1 • NGOs • University • Students • Communities • EU • Syndicates • Unions • Professional chambers • Media • Family • Government • Professors • Clubs • Municipality • Student councils

50

Group 2

• Government • Local students • University administration • International organizations • Local people • School • Services providers • Private companies • University clubs • Students organizations

E. Prioritization all together Which are the 4 most influential bodies?

• Government • Local students • International organisations (NGOs) • University F. World Cafe How the most powerful bodies can solve the most significant problems?

Government Local students welcome international students in our university; plan some resist racism activities, when we see teach people Intolerance it; discuss about more and it, make share our campaigns experiences; change our attitude to be tolerant

NGOs

University

sharing sessions, organise discussions, speak up

expand to other cultures

more integrational events, people who provide show aa accurate ask people to tours the Lack of informations speak English; University integration about share rooms, and the cultural food city, recruit activities international students, games, karaoke survival free Language guide, language speak English barrier language courses exchange

encourage students groups to grow, support

language courses, activities in English

51

Lack of money

Different mindset

provide something grants, fundraising, without encourage help with spending people to receiving too much go through part-time jobs discounts, money, all Europe, provide providing discounts for scholarships, free food, tickets free events facilities, scholarships international evening, educate international sharing your cultural professors, education traditions guide, city orientation tours, history courses

8. Online Classes Facilitators: Tomi Kauppinen (Expert) We first checked background of the Aalto Online Learning project and some examples via a slide deck:

Group discussions We continued by group discussions, where every group answered by turns the next five questions. The answers are ranked based on how many votes they got from participants.

52

1. What makes you take online classes as of year 2018?

Which aspects are important when you make a decision to take an online class?

Idea Possibility to adjust the speed, repeat some part, ...

14

Flexible scheduling of individual study hours

10

It allow us to master the topics taught - you can focus more time on your weaknesses

8

Select lectures about specific topics

8

Flexibility and discussion on international level

7

Online classes gives us the ability to experience different levels of expertise when we want

7

You can watch those videos everywhere and every time

7

They’re easily accessible

7

Big range of choices

6

If you don’t understand something you can repeat what you didn’t understood without interrupting the lesson

6

Easier and cheaper way to learn

6

You don’t have to waste time learning either to basic or super off-topic questions Not having everyone judging your questions - more freedom of thoughts Having more availability for doing hobbies Education accessible also for not-students and undeveloped places More comfortable because you do not need to move, you can do it from your home

4

4 4 4

4

53

Learning can be faster

3

Not having to worry about other people questions

3

Lack of some classes in the curriculum

3

Follow the world wide technology tends

3

Having the chance to get to good materials

3

More flexibility

3

Access lectures of other universities

3

Better teaching and specific teachers

2

Not enough time to travel

2

Overload of good videos to find on youtube

1

Time for transportation to university

1

Lack of self-control. It is hard to organize your time by yourself

1

2. Imagine we live in year 2025. How do people learn online?

Is there any changes to year 2018? How about beyond 2025? year 2040? year 2100?

Idea

54

Laboratories through Virtual Reality

8

3D holographic professor, illusion of his total presence not just screen image

8

Use latest technology, VR for examples

7

Virtuals whiteboards - RealTimeBoard

6

Hypnosis or sleeping learning

6

By 2040 brain-computer interfaces. Flow of knowledge directly to your head, and by 2100 - download hard skills

5

Production of small personalized competitions i.e. Kaggle

4

Use Augmented Reality for more deepen understandings

4

Using more multimedia

4

Technical Things - Classic Examination

3

Little competitions during the course

3

Make people work in online teams but with different roles: leadership roles, member roles - practice soft-skills through this

3

Chips in your heads

3

More diverse teaching methods

3

Face-to-face classes should be keeped

3

Gamification in learning

2

Learning with video games

2

3. How can one run successful online classes / meetings?

Think of your own positive experiences. What are the main challenges and how to fix them?

Idea Q&A comments

9

Add video translation with all participants

7

Give everyone the chance to speak up

6

Check that all students have the same background before the course

5

Good quality of the video

5

Engage different senses

5

See the professor and his slides

4

Display live statistics on simple questions to see if everyone got the concepts or not and discuss i

4

Provide an index

4

55

Make use of animations, graphs and images

4

Establishing platform for sharing among students

4

Ensure proper communication and facilitation

4

Updated Materials

3

Technical problems inhibit real time communication

2

If the course is presented as a debate, make sure you put PROS and CONS so others can also vote.

2

Take attendance

2

Send follow-up actions to take and things to reflect upon

2

Differential content and layout of video

2

Structured and clear video

2

An opportunity to ask questions to a lecturer

1

Make a summary of what we achieved

1

4. How can one reflect on online classes / online meetings to ensure successful future events?

How to share insights about what people learnt during the class/ meeting? Should learners write a learning diary?

Idea Send follow-ups after meetings Group feedback with possibility anonymous identity - this propels more interaction Suggestions about the topics that are related and should be in a next course. “IDEAS PARKING LOT” Multiple choice questions during the video, not at the end.

The video pauses and the student gets a question. It’s better to shoot questions during the video because then you know faster whether you’re understanding the lecture or not. And it keeps you more concentrated

56

8 8 6

4

Leave comments in the video (at which time are needed clarifications, mistakes) Make the three phases with opened questions - intro (expectations), middle (how to improve the next sessions - you still have time to improve - emotional feedback as well), and final one In each session, give live feedback, written and discuss upon it

4

4

3

Tests after completing one topic

3

Write a feedback after each block of the subject

3

Have a chat bot to deliver feedback after the meetings

3

Asking questions in the beginning and ending of classes - so you can see differences in your knowledge before lecture and after It’s a good practice when students are free to ask questions and other students or teacher answer them, making clear all the moments that could not be said on video Sometimes it is better not to control all the time... Not do evaluation so often.

Multiple choice questions after each session

2

2 2 2

“Multiple choice testing after each block is not really a good idea, because it is impossible to skip part of the course that you already know if you have tests all the time. After completing the course share its summary to someone else.”

5. What are the advantages / disadvantages of online classes compared to traditional classes?

Think of your own experiences and experiences you have heard from co-learners

Idea No support after exam failure

7

You can be more comfortable if you are at home

5

57

If it’s some medical or engineering stuff where you have to put your hands on, it’s impossible to get needed skills without traditional classes where you can interaction with technic

5

Harder to discuss or ask questions

5

Easy to rewind and look back

5

It’s difficult to do teambuilding and create a funny environment

4

No practical experience

4

Bad influence on health

4

Less efficient concentration because you can always rewind or look the video again Online videos - you can stop and immediately search for topics to complement what you are learning

58

4 3

Easy to learn anywhere anytime

3

You are not working on breaking the wall with the crowd and presentational skills (not developing your personal skills)

3

No interaction.

3

Online meetings - much easier to search during the meeting and share materials right away

2

Distance won’t play any role in our daily life

2

Self-control Problem

2

No social interaction and learning from others

2

Availability of lectures from professors from all over the world

2

Dependence on İnternet

2

Online saves you money from the logistical constraints

1

We are now sitting in our phones and answering by ourselves without any discussion... If we have just one piece of paper for conclusions we have to interact

1

Hard to focus

1

Discussions go much slower than in real life Can’t ask questions simultaneously

9. Online Labs Facilitators: Tomi Kauppinen (Expert)

Background Our next session was on online laboratories. We started by looking at a few examples of new kinds of online laboratories. They are starting to be used in experimental engineering subjects as part of the learning process.

They are like online tasks structured and methodologically developed for any procedure. There is no limitation on online problem solving, just the ones we set. This is a great way for gamifying learning.

Group discussions We then continued by creating lots of possible ideas to fill the gaps in the next sentence: “We believe that ____ will benefit from ____ when doing ____ ” A small discussion was made between participants and experts about the impact that everyone can create by being on their phone.

Some conclusions were that discussion missing, but answering by themselves on their phones, results could improve. An expert noted that it also causes distraction, as people can visit Facebook on their phones, to which students thought that it would make them feel awkward,if everyone is looking at their phones, instead of discussions.

Some outcomes were achieved: • Online learning can be the future of learning • Online learning needs a proper support and explanation, otherwise people will not use it to the fullest • No socialization can be a threat to online learning

59

• There may be cases where use of online learning is not beneficial • These kind of tools could be used in real life • Online learning allows people not to get too emotional during discussions and stay more objective and goal-focused • Finding the balance between online tools and social interaction is crucial to the future of learning

Practical activity Participants were split into 4 groups and each group played the role of a company or start-up, trying to implement online laboratories.

Each company had to select a CEO and a secretary. They created a company motto and came up with reasons for buying their idea.

They had one minute per group for pitching their idea.

The first group presented “AR for tourism”, a city rally with a AR (Augmented Reality) glasses. Another came with “Time machine”, a treasure hunting city rally seeing how the ancient city looked and historic facts. The third team went with “3D models for engineers”, that implemented virtual tools for building and modeling in 3D. The last group came with “Virtual medical simulation”, with tools for future surgeons to perform virtual surgeries.

60

Conclusion To conclude, Tomi was really grateful with the session and wished that all the ideas he gave to the students could be put into practice in real life by students.

10. Open Universities Facilitators: Raquel Perez and Oktay Balaban

Background Although most students go straight to regular universities, it is not the only option to study a university degree. Open universities are open to people without formal academic qualifications, they offer distance education using specific didactics and media. On top of that, the open universities have specific services for disabled persons and for people studying at a home/workplace at their own time and pace.

Speaking about some numbers, in the United States there are 7358 open universities, followed by United Kingdom 2502, in Australia 1905, in Canada 299 and in Germany 87.

61

Methodology As most of the participants didn’t know much about this topic, a small presentation was done at the beginning, explaining what open universities are, how popular they are in some countries, etc.

After that, there was a small talk in two different groups trying to answer the following questions: How prestigious open universities are? What are the reasons people enroll in open universities?

Later they presented their outcomes.

Pros and cons were analysed in four different groups. Later on, we focused on the cons in order to try to find solutions for them.

We divided them in 4 groups. With all the ideas mentioned before, each group had to take 2 or 3 and evaluate them with SMART actions.

These SMART actions stands for: • Specific: target a specific area for improvement.

• Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress.

• Assignable: specify who will do it.

• Realistic: state what results can realistically be achieved, given available resources.

• Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved.

The sessions finished with the presentations of these actions.

Outcomes A. Pros and Cons of Open Universities General students’ perception In general, participants didn’t know much about the topic, but most of them knew that these kind of universities exist in their countries or cities, and have heard about them. Mostly all students had the same opinion. Although they may be recognized, they are not very prestigious for reasons as: lack of successful examples, lack of promotion, and not standardization of evaluation (in terms of acceptance and during the course).

62

Pros and cons of open universities Each of the four groups brainstormed about the strong and weak points that open universities could have.

GROUP 1 Pros

Cons

Adaptable when working

Expensive

Opportunity for disabled people

Unfair

Generally cheaper

Less prestigious

Flexible

No specific specialization

Compatible with travelling

No social interaction

Education for everyone

No practical experience

GROUP 2 Pros

Cons

Adaptable when working

Fraud university / easy to cheat

Opportunity for disabled people

Low professor qualifications

Cheap

Less prestigious

Flexible

No specific specialization general degrees

No problem with distance

No social interaction

Opportunity to do a second degree

No practical parts

No failure /no time-limited

No accurate evaluation

Lower workload

No research

Easier to pass

63

GROUP 3 Pros

Cons

Flexibility

Less knowledge received

Low requirements

No social interactions

Cheaper

No technical curriculum

Committed to teaching / learning

Lack of research

Disabled people facilities

Less recognition in companies

More accessible

“Buying” degree Less coworking

GROUP 4 Pros

Cons

Flexible schedule

Non standardized diploma

Easy boost to career

Soft skills not developed

Suitable for older people

Lack of social interactions

Combining expertise

No technical expertise

As a conclusion two main strong points were repeated almost in every single group: • Flexible: in terms of schedule, as you don’t need to assist class, it is compatible with working, travelling, etc. Also in terms of mobility and individual time management. There is not a strict time to finish the course.

• Education for everyone: as there is not a strict acceptance method, this way is also suitable for older people. And it has a higher support for people with disabilities.

64

B. Finding solutions to the weak points of open universities The results from the brainstorming regarding the weak points were gathered, and students from 4 different groups had to pick few of them, find solutions and make them SMART actions.

Also the weak points were brainstormed, and some of them were also evaluated and participants found solutions to the SMART actions.

Group 1 • No technical experts: • Higher salaries for professors: 10% higher than standard salary within 3 years, financed by government and tuition fees • Develop online and UR labs within 2 years • Introduction of open curricula in traditional universities • Less prestigious • Collaboration with universities: projects that could count ½ point of student’s final grade each semester • Attending scientific events (i.e. conferences), 3 conf./ semester • Raise quality of examination: in class examination, online interview, coding competitions/online coding.

• Increase the placement in rankings (10 positions). And investigate on the following topics: • Can rankings be merged?

• Can normal universities and open universities be seen on the same level if rankings are separated?

• Develop research department to publish 3 papers/semester • No specific specialization • Add 3 subtracks to each program in 1 year • Fulfil actions about “no technical experts” • Collaboration with companies experts, to get specific knowledge (more than one collaboration for each programme, for a total of one year) Group 2 • Easy to cheat in exams • Face to face exams should be for sure in the end of the course • The only trouble would be the different places of students,

65

and the different schedules. So students could be divided in groups and do different exams.

• More secure online tests • Random camera checking you are doing the test • Measure keyboard • No practical classes • Smaller labs versions • Collaboration with usual Universities to use labs in a certain time • Practical projects (that can be done at home) to ensure you got the theoretical part • Less knowledge • Mentor/supervisors to ensure following the program • If you need extra materials, anytime on email contacts, professor with partnerships • Fixed schedule to help sessions • Groups of less than 20 people for online meetings • Sessions before getting new materials Group 3 • Non-standardized diploma • Apply ECTS system, for each year • Soft-skills not developed • Join courses or conferences • Online presentations or group projects • No social interaction • Chat in online platform • Optional labs (gamification) • Motivational Week • Online Coffee Break • One per week mandatory, but could even have one per day • Random selection Group 4 • No social interaction • Create a group of 15 students from the same studies and same course.

66

• They will have 2 online meetings per week and one offline per year, to discuss the course and get to know each other better.

• Supervisor: one of the course professor, and one online mandatory • It should be achieved in one year.

• Less recognition among companies • Empower PR of open universities theory • Having a booth in 2 job fairs • Publish 2 successful stories of graduated students As a conclusion, there is a lot of work that needs to be done in terms of standardization, prestigious stage, and promotion of open universities. But in a future, they could boost internalization, that is implemented in normal universities, or they could be a broad range of alternative education and alternative methods in terms of teaching and learning.

11. Effectiveness and Improvements on Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) Facilitator: Ana Moura Santos (Expert)

Background A massive open online course is an online course aimed for unlimited participation and open access via web. In addition to traditional course materials such as filmed lectures, readings, and problem sets, many MOOCs provide interactive courses with user forums to support community interactions among students, professors, and teaching assistants (TAs) as well as immediate feedback to quick quizzes and assignments. MOOCs are a recent and widely researched development in distance education which were first introduced in 2006 and emerged as a popular mode of learning in 2012.

MOOCs are no more just a trend in education: they came from universities and are now spread all over the world. Besides their power in democratizing the higher education contents, particularly in STEM areas, they can also be used as powerful tools for flipping the class in face-to-face contexts.

67

In the session, following topics had been discussed: a) How MOOCs should be structured in order to foster online learning experiences? b) How MOOCs can promote interaction and communication within the courses? c) Which assessment activities are important in a MOOC? How to cope which participants with different experiences and

expectations? d) Thinking in using a MOOC for flipping the class, what (if something) should be done differently?

The session is prepared and facilitated by Ana Moura Santos from Department of Mathematics in University of Lisbon.

Methodology For the first part of the session, Ana Moura Santos briefly made a presentation in order to explain what are flipped-class and MOOCs to the participants. Before the presentation, the expert asked participants who are already familiar with MOOCs. The ones who are familiar were separated into one group and the ones who are not familiar separated into another.

After the informative first part of the session, the second activity of the session, which is a role-play started. The groups of 4-5 people are formed and they are asked the following questions in every question round: 1. Pretend to be a teacher preparing to have a flipped-class strategy with on-campus students based on a MOOC 2. Pretend to be a member of an agency for HEI (Higher Education Institutions) accreditation aiming to validate a completely online course For the first question, groups have selected courses from the MOOC List, which were: • Autonomous Mobile Robots (edX) • Big Data: Data visualisation (Future Learn) • Discrete Optimization (coursera) • Energy Services (MOOC Técnico) • Drinking Water Treatment (edX)

68

For the second question, participants evaluated and improved their course regarding the following criteria: • Main area of study programme • Number of ECTS credits • Pre-requisites • Certification They were also free to design another course if they thought they messed up in the first part.

For the last part of the session, groups are asked for the last time another question. They are asked to pretend as a professional and they want to cultivate their capacity for lifelong learning, to foster independent and original research, to bring the benefits of discovery to the world and change their area of activity. They propose to change the structure of online contents, the communication modes in MOOCs, the assessment/evaluation moments the need for prerequisites in MOOCs. With these in mind, they are developing a new MOOC for a course of their choice. One important thing is that it is 20 years from now on and they can be creative.

After every question, participants made a presentation about their results and ideas.

Outcomes A. MOOC Development Below are the short summary of the groups’ work

GROUP 1 Topic

Drinking Water Treatment

Capacity

50 Students

Approach

First groups approach to the course was full-flipped. 7 weeks out of 14 weeks were online courses. Students were being checked with regular quizzes. There were a group presentation at the end of the semester and also a final examination.

69

GROUP 2 Topic

Autonomous Robotics

Capacity

50 Students

Approach

2nd group’s approach was 50% flipped structure. There were weekly classes and on-class quizzes. There are also group projects and presentations. Midterms and a final examination is present in the course. Still, the online content was also heavy. There were videos and online assignments supporting the subject. After every video, there were multiple-choice questions.

GROUP 3 Topic

Energy Services

Capacity

30 Students

Approach

3rd group’s approach was 50% flipped structure. They were structuring their course as 2 weeks of class and 2 weeks of MOOC throughout the whole semester. There are final examination and 4 midterm examinations every month

GROUP 4 Topic

70

Autonomous Robotics

Capacity

30 Students

Approach

4th group’s approach was 50% flipped structure. Out of 16 weeks, 10 weeks were flipped classes. They were having 4 hours per week class lectures and 4 hours of online lectures. First two weeks were full class with introduction. There are lecture summaries after watching videos by students. Labs and exercises are present in the course.

B. Higher Education Institutions (HEI) Accreditation After students evaluated their courses, they came with evaluation results or Group 1 has sticked to their topic. They put 40% attendance rule, which will be supervised with IP control. Chat-communication check is also present. Also, they decided to supervise the final exam. In the end, they give 4 ECTS. Group 2 also sticked to their topic. They put some relevant prerequisite courses in order to take the course, without stating the courses. They put quizzes and in the examination student needs to explain their answers. They give 4 ECTS. Group 3 didn’t change their topic either. Their course is a masters course and pre-requisite is a bachelor degree in a relevant area.

The exam is going to be supervised with a web-cam. They give 1,5 ECTS. Group 4 did not change their topic either. They found their final examination problematic and didn’t change anything else, stating it is the only lacking part for accreditation. They give 3 ECTS. C. Improving MOOCs Group 1 Group 1 has selected Calculus as their subject. Also it is calculus, it also covers some differential equations and other relevant topics.

They have 50 hours in total. The subject consists 3 parts. First part is lectures by teacher in the class. 2nd part is exercises such as calculation problems. 3rd part is real-world problem solving. There are exams and quizzes. First part of the semester is only lectures and quizzes will take place at the end of the semester. Students who pass the quizzes will enter the final examination.

Group 2 Group 2 approached the subject in terms of online classes in general rather than selecting only 1 subject and develop. They proposed the subjects of online classes should also consist real-

71

life topics, such as cooking and sports. There should be certain feedback channels present and students should evaluate their teachers too. Platforms such as forums should be available for communication and support between students. As it is 20 years from now on, there will be an hologram helping students. This hologram will be there to support, teaching, guiding and also for supervising.

Group 3 Group 3 selected Differential Equations as their subject. They put quizzes as evaluation method. There will be both practical and conceptual quizzes. System also gives you feedback. If you have already prove your knowledge, you can skip more quizzes and even exams. The system also motivates you with various methods. It is for 14 weeks in total. There are animations and online exercises.

Group 4 Group 4 proposed a VR Game. The course is being done with a VR Glass, as it is 20 years from now on. It is a course but consisting different concept for computer science and relevant programs. It is 20 weeks in total and with 4 to 6 hours per week. There are games in order to evaluate students. There is a platform for sharing between students. Structure of the course consists videos and articles. There is also competition among students which is a part of assessment. The main evaluation criteria is a group project which is a kind of a game.

12. The Role of University i Educational Ecosystems Facilitator: Olga Kladova and JoĂŁo Moita Expert: Pavel Luksha

Background The world is changing at an even faster pace than ever before and Education in the future will be very different from what it is today. Some authors put it as Educational Ecosystems, where the learning experience starts at the moment you are born and lasts

72

for your whole life. Education will not only be conveyed by formal means but also by other channels.

Global Education Futures Report - Educational Ecosystems for Societal Transformation

Methodology This session was delivered online via Zoom Video Communications by a professor of practise at the Moscow School of Management SKOLKOVO, the founder of Global Education Futures Initiative Pavel Luksha.

First, he introduced the participants to the topic of educational ecosystems using the slides. After giving an overview of this complex subject, he asked participants to divide into 4 groups and think what can be done to turn universities into a host of educational ecosystem in 5 years?

Outcomes Group work Group 1 First, we’ve tried to imagine how our ecosystem would look like.

You can see the entities involved and the connections between them on the flipchart [below].

73

Action PLAN • 1st year - creating the vision of an ecosystem We decided that first step is to make researching groups in order to learn students’ view on what could the ecosystem look like, taking into account their needs and wishes. It’s important to make a good promotion for that to gather the most input.

• 2nd year – implement in one university Big changes start with small steps. To try the system out and see the weak points, it’s worth to start with one case.

• 3rd year - dissemination of the concept More and more universities will become interested in implementing the concept. It would me more efficient if powerful bodies push them to do so.

• 4st year – add some regulations On a national scale, to make the system work properly it makes sense to add some regulations.

• 5th year - keep the system existing and improving

74

Group 2 This is a mind map that shows our perspective on how an ecosystem could be created and what role it should play.

In our opinion, university should contribute to developing business mindset of students, create serendipity and support continuous learning, not to let machines take our jobs.

Places like open cafes can be serendipity hosts.

In such ecosystem students can work and at the same take some courses to refresh the knowledge To develop business mindset we should mix not only the methods of teaching, but also people from different countries. Competitions like EBEC could serve this aim.

Group 3 Universities should open up to students of different ages and backgrounds and various ways of learning (MOOCs, internships,

75

labs, company visits, etc.).

Another point for improvement is developing collaborations with companies, NGOs, community services.

Besides, it’s essential to create space to grow, such as FabLabs, student organisations (Formula Student, BEST, voluntary tutors for music/art sessions) The ECTS-budget should be flexible to attend classes from other careers or universities.

Having powerful alumni network would bring benefit current students via sharing sessions, establishing contacts with a perspective to find a job.

Students often lack time for personal and career development because they have to work to earn a living. Giving unlimited discounts to those who study full-time could improve the situation.

76

77

Group 4 On the flipchart below you can see our scheme of an ecosystem.

We see universities as starting points in collaboration with other powerful entities.

The important nodes of the network are NGOs, open labs, companies, online frameworks.

But to build this up we need Teachers 2.0, who will be aware of the main necessaries of work marker and new ways to teach people.

78

13. International Online Projects Facilitators: JoĂŁo Moita and Raquel Perez

Background International online projects are collaborative enterprise that is carefully planned to achieve a particular aim. They can be found in International Organizations, in Universities, etc. The work done to achieve these projects is online, and open internationally.

Methodology This session was a really methodic one. Firstly, as most of participants kind of knew what international online projects were, we tried to reach a solution between all the students. Then, we asked some questions to all of them, as if they have them in their university, if they would like to have it included in the degree and/ or evaluated, etc.

SCORE analysis was introduced.

Strengths: strong points it can have Challenges: what you need to overcome to achieve the goals Options: for example, should I invest in a new platform or should I recruit more people?

Responses: risk management scenarios, for example, how the stakeholders will react on this?

Effectiveness: the impact it can have Students were divided in four different groups, and firstly work only on getting the strengths and challenges. Once they had that, they started to work on options and responses, but in order to do so, SMART actions were reminded: Specific: target a specific area for improvement.

Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress.

Assignable: specify who will do it.

Realistic: state what results can realistically be achieved, given available resources.

Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved.

79

The session finished with a world cafe, where students had to go table by table to analyze other groups outcomes and writing down the relevance of others’ work.

Outcomes A. Students Opinion Students stated that they do not have many international online projects suggested by their university. They mostly can find them in students organizations.

They assure that it would be a really great initiative to have these kind of projects with their university, guided by a professor and have it evaluated.

The main benefits are to get to know new people, to try new methods and approaches of work, so share new knowledge from other countries. It’s also good for time management and selforganization.

B. SCORE İntroduction Students were given a certain situation, so the outputs could be somehow a little bit more specific.

“You are a head teacher of a Mechanics subject in your university.

Your university don’t have extra funds for you to invest on new projects. You know Mechanics teachers in USA, in Portugal and in Saudi Arabia. Your university don’t expose many students’ to the international environment and don’t use online as a tool for education, so you want to implement an International Online project as a big part of your subject. You need to be sure that your course satisfies the students’ needs and also that the university still accepts this course.”

C. Strength and challenges Students gathered in four different groups, and brainstormed about different strengths and challenges they could find. As strengths, we tried to reach those existing capabilities and resources that could be found. While for challenges, we spotted weaknesses or issues that needed to be addressed.

80

GROUP 1 STRENGHTS

CHALLENGES

International contacts

No fund

Motivated professors

No university support

Motivated students

No previous experience (international / online)

International grants availability

Different standards in education

Interesting projects for companies

GROUP 2 STRENGHTS

CHALLENGES

International contacts

No fund

Learning new skills

No online experience (tools)

Influence (head teachers of subject) International work as new opportunity

No university support Different cultures Different time zones Lack of knowledge Language barrier

81

GROUP 3 STRENGHTS

CHALLENGES

International networking

No extra funds

Head teacher (power) Possibilities to motivated students Students should be interested to be involved into new type of education

International universities policies about online courses Lack of international experienced students Can’t predict student’s needs because there were no such projects before

GROUP 4 STRENGHTS

CHALLENGES

Contacts (professors / international)

Getting money

Professors (power)

Technical problems

Motivation

Being smart about the content

Students opportunities

Language / cultural barrier

Crowdfunding

Change international mindset

Flexibility / creativity

D. Options and responses The other two things that had to be brainstormed were options and responses. For options, students had to think about opportunities that are present, and risks that may arise from them. And for responses, probable or emergent consequences of the actions from stakeholders. Risk-management scenarios.

82

GROUP 1 OPTIONS

RESPONSES

Apply for 2 intern grants

Get some fundraising

Increase the interested network Get more people aware of the at 7 (emails, ‌) project Contact companies in that field of Get money and improve the expertise quality Workshop on online tools with method at the beginning (2 More practical sessions weeks) Conference / Seminar for professors (3 months before the Opportunity to learn from the best minds course to learn about MOOCs and international professors 2 weeks before the course Students will be able to take part expectations form in the project and way of learning Know how compatible can each Negotiate with universities with university be to their actual action plan and goals programme

GROUP 2 OPTIONS

RESPONSES

Do not use contact US

Similar time zones vs different diversity and inputs

Introducing online tools (trainings of 2 hours + at least one working experience )

Students acquire new skills for working online

Starting new trend in university

Collaboration with companies Working in international environment

More international online projects in university. Presentation of outcomes after first course to other professors You get much more money, benefit Learning soft skills, language skills, knowledge about different cultures

83

GROUP 3 OPTIONS

RESPONSES

Shared MOOC from Portugal professor

International project mostly online but with offline part, based on self-funding of interested students.

Try to fundraise money from other companies, fundations, universities, etc.

ASAP contact and check if the course fits needed necessities.

Get access and cooperation (set 2 months before semester).

1. If university allows it, students will like it: benefit 2. If the courses of professors don’t fit, go to another action Develop design task and project plan, also web-platform for communication within 2 months. Also plan it with foreign professors: advertise it before semester starts via mail 1. No interested students on such condition 2. Develop content for both groups who take part into projects and those who don’t Lack of international experienced students

GROUP 4

84

OPTIONS

RESPONSES

Promoting international events: more training sessions

More proactiveness in an international environment More skilled students

Crowdfunding /Getting companies

Money and technical knowledge

Language courses

Smaller cultural barrier

Benchmark nationality

Confidence to the project

Effectiveness In order to evaluate the effectiveness, students did a world café, going group by group and analyzing their results of their output (in terms of options and responses). In order to evaluate the effectiveness, students had to the impact they could have, thinking about if it is efficient (maximises use of resources), reliable (predictable, consistent), elegant (clarity, simplicity), appropriate (supports), integrated (creates), etc.

GROUP 1 OPTIONS

Apply for 2 intern grants

Increase the interested network at 7 (emails, …)

EFFECTIVENESS 1. Grants receive 2. 1 grant received 3. No grants received 4. Probably it is an efficient way to earn money, although it is non reliable 1. Find more partner to share interest with 2. Find more than 2 uni to partner with 3. Find universities 4. It is non-priority

Contact companies in that field of Get 3, 2, 1 or none companies expertise Workshop on online tools with Students learn and understand, method at the beginning (2 or do not weeks) Conference / Seminar for Professors decide to use MOOC professors (3 months before the Don’t use MOOCS but understand course to learn about MOOCs its working methods Don’t use it and don’t like it and international professors 2 weeks before the course 1. Similar expectations expectations form 2. Different expectations 1. University change its mind 2. University don’t change is Negotiate with universities with mind action plan and goals It is good to talk with university about it, as there should not be a surprise after fully planned

85

GROUP 2 OPTIONS

EFFECTIVENESS

Do not use contact US

May or may not affect

Students learn new skills, but should be done in an appropriate Introducing online tools (trainings way. University should teach of 2 hours + at least one working online tools anyways. There are experience ) online tools already developed and easy to implement.

Starting new trend in university

University approves or do not

Collaboration with companies

FR campaign If you get money it’s effective.

If you do not get money it is not

Working in international environment

Not measurable

GROUP 3 OPTIONS

EFFECTIVENESS

Shared MOOC from Portugal professor International project mostly online but with offline part, based on self-funding of interested students.

1. Efficient 2. İnefficient

Try to fundraise money from other companies, fundations, universities, etc.

86

1. Groups don’t like it 2. Not elegant Not clears specific at all If we get fundraise it will be effective, otherwise it would be time lost

GROUP 4 OPTIONS

EFFECTIVENESS

Promoting international events: more training sessions

More skilled which comes with more effective Very unpredictable, should not be the only source Not reliable, has to be planned properly (contracts set years before) Can probably do not get funds

Crowdfunding /Getting companies

Language courses

Get students feel confident

Benchmark nationality

Reasonable but not efficient = time consuming

14. Final Case Study: Designing a Thermodynamics Course Facilitator : Oktay Balaban

Background For the last activity of the event, participants are given a case study, which was also the examination of BSE too. The case study was about designing a course with the things discussed throughout the all event. They are asked to design their courses with online features and also including some international collaboration.

Methodology The participants are divided in 4 groups, depending on their departments. 3 of the groups had at least one mechanical engineering student and one group had two aerospace engineering students. They are asked to design a thermodynamics course.

All of the groups had different features in virtual departments in virtual universities. The groups were as the following:

87

Group 1 Name of the University: Yosemite Sam Technical University Place: Texas, USA Department: Mechanical Engineering Number of Students: 200 Semester Beginning/End: 3rd of September - 18th of January Group 2 Name of the University: University of Coyote Place: Paris, France Department: Mechanical Engineering Number of Students: 400 Semester Beginning/End: 22th of October - 8th of March Group 3 Name of the University: TazMania State University Place: Sydney, Australia Department: Aerospace Engineering Number of Students: 50 Semester Beginning/End : 23th of July - 16th of November Group 4 Name of the University: Tweety Institute of Technology Place : London, UK Department : Mechanical Engineering Number of Students : 1000 Semester Beginning/End : 1st of October - 18th of January The groups are asked the following while designing their thermodynamics courses: Task Design your course and come up with an action plan to integrate online resources into the course in 2 years. • Select which subjects should be included in the syllabus • Structure your course in terms of lectures, online resources,

88

examinations, classes, homeworks, projects, labs etc.

• Decide the timeline of the course (subjects, labs, exams etc.)

• Decide your evaluation criteria • Try to implement online resources and online learning into the course • Your action plan should be SMART. In one hour, participants designed their courses. After 1 hour, facilitators told a new task arrived and now they also have a second task, which was to integrate their courses with more international collaboration. While doing that, groups had the following limits: • Subjects of the courses shouldn’t change.

• There can be only 2 changes in the time-line of subjects and they shouldn’t move more than 1 week.

• The number of exams and quizzes can not change.

• The change in any evaluation criterion can not be more than 5% • The total change of evaluation criteria shouldn’t be more than 15% For 40 minutes, the groups came together to find creative ways to collaborate with each other, where many of them had different course outlines. Besides the limits introduced above, they were free to come up with every creative idea.

After that, all of the groups presented their outcomes.

Outcomes As the session was not a discussion session but a case study examination, not so much outcome came out of it as it was not the purpose. However, some parts are worth to highlight.

• None of the groups found it a realistic approach to put so much online material in the syllabus and the evaluation criteria was very similar to what most courses have in general. Rather, they used online materials as supporting tools, such as online quizzes, online archives etc.

• Most of the syllabus was similar what a regular course is generally. They were consisting a high percentage final exam, labs, quizzes and homeworks.

The creative ideas came mostly from the second part, which was

89

about how the universities could collaborate. All the ideas came from this activity are listed below: • Shared MOOCs between universities • Exchange Programs • Shared Online Lectures • Change of Online Lab Videos • Competitions • Support each other about finding internships with international companies • Online Forums • Random Online Coffee Breaks (students interact with each other) • Common Slack • A collaborated project on a common subject (Carnot Cycle), also giving Certificate of Participation recognized by ASHRAE (The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers) Most of the collaboration was about online collaboration, such as common MOOCs and online interaction. Still, there were still some ideas requiring physical presence, such as competitions and collaborated projects which give credits in case of participation.

As a result, all of the participants have passed the final examination part, with using all of the things they have learnt throughout the event.

8. Conclusion The Event on Education “The Power of Education - Overthrow the Wall and Build the Better Tomorrow” has been a great opportunity for students to discuss important topics on Higher Education and contribute with opinions and ideas to shape the university of tomorrow.

The main topics, “Internationalization of Education in Europe”, “Online Learning” and “Future Universities” were discussed in

90

depth through different subtopics and focus areas. A wide variety of methods were used in order to gather the participants’ input on those matters, which is now presented here in form of a report.

This document will serve as a base for analysis and scientific work, with the goal of improving Higher Education and developing the way universities teach STEM students and prepare them for their future. The content team hopes that this work will bring interesting insights and that it will be built upon the results here presented, to further develop the topics approached.

The content team would also like to thank the hosting Local BEST Group, Krakow, for all their care and effort, and AGH University of Science and Technology for the support received, as well as Professor Tomi Kauppinen, Professor Ana Moura Santos and Professor Pavel Luksha for contributing to this project and the Educational Involvement Department of our organisation, the Board of European Students of Technology, for coming along this path with us and providing advice. Projects such as this, where many different actors join forces to make an impact together, are inspiring. Even more so, when it is all about students are shaping the future of Education!

9. Contacts Balaban, Metin Oktay Coordinator of BEST Symposium on Education Krakow (2018) metin.oktay.balaban@BEST.eu.org Moita, JoĂŁo Coordinator of the Educational Involvement Department of BEST (Mandate 2018-2019) Content Team Member joao.moita@BEST.eu.org Educational Involvement Department of BEST education@BEST.eu.org

91