PUBLIC PAPER Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience Dr Kenn Fisher
Reengineering engineering: PUBLIC Space, learning and the social experience PAPER Dr Kenn Fisher
The engineering profession has been experiencing a major transformation over the past decade. In part this is due to ever improving technologies and software capabilities, but it is also a result of the increasing complexities associated with the multidisciplinary approach to procuring engineering projects. Infrastructure and other societal engineering issues are now being seen in thematic terms such as water, energy and transport infrastructure. This paper examines the issues identified by the profession itself and explores how this impacts on the physical teaching, learning and research environment, much of which was designed and built in the context of post-war technologies and practices. It concludes with a summary of what an early 21st century engineering faculty might look like.
The University of New South Wales Solar Industrial Research Facility (SIRF)
The University of South Australia, School of Engineering - Future Learning Space 1. From vision to concept plan 2. Audiovisual: events mode
ISSUES IN AUSTRALIAN ENGINEERING EDUCATION In 2006, it was reported that there was a shortfall of approximately 30,000 engineers in Australia (about 15% of practicing numbers)1. Australia has fewer engineers per capita relative to comparable developed countries such as Canada.
Student numbers are likely to grow due to the Gillard Government target of 40% of all Australians between the ages of 20 and 35 to hold a university degree. Current figure is circa 30%.
Engineering schools in Australia awarded 8,000 undergraduate degrees and 3,400 postgraduate coursework certificates in 2006, with 850 research higher degree (RHD) completions. Of these totals, international students comprised 75%, 28% and 31% respectively, with engineering graduates comprising 5.4% of all Australian graduates.
Campus Impact: Massive - radical changes to teaching and learning spaces as illustrated at The University of South Australia.
In Australia, the supply of engineering graduates cannot meet current demands with the proportion of total national graduates falling from 6.1% in 1996 to 5.4% in 2006. In part, the lack of RHD commencements can be attributed to the lucrative Australian mining and infrastructure sectors attracting graduates to those opportunities in favour of pursuing higher degree study.
1990s 2000s WOODSBAGOT.COM
Australian postgraduate statistics can be compared with China and India where: In 2009, China graduated 1.9 million2 young engineers3. However, on closer investigation it was found that of these only 763,635 received an engineering degree-level qualification. With 10% of Chinese engineering graduates considered to be â€˜globally employableâ€™, this equates to 76,400 globally employable engineering graduates. Similarly, in India (2010), the number of engineering graduates was 793,321, of which 497,475 were studying engineering degrees at undergraduate level. Therefore, of the 497,475 engineering undergraduates, around 124,400 (25%) would be considered globally employable4.
King (2008) suggests the Australian plateauing of figures is due to a number of factors. Paradoxically the staff:student ratio for engineering faculties worsened over the same decade from 1:14 to 1:21 with a similar reduction in technical staff numbers. Meanwhile, student numbers have increased. A contributing factor is the ageing of laboratories and equipment inventories, making Australiaâ€™s engineering schools less attractive to international academics. This impacts on international competitiveness in professional training and research.
Figure: The staff:student ratio for engineering faculties worsened over the same decade from 1:14 to 1:21 with a similar reduction in technical staff numbers.
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 4
The University of Melbourne School of Engineering
There is likely to be significant re-engineering of existing engineering schools across Australia. Campus Impact: Significant [all spaces older than 10 years such as the complete overhaul of all years teaching spaces and some labs as illustrated at The University of Melbourne].
Engineering schools should make their presence more obvious to industry by having an outward focus on campus edges. Campus Impact: Significant rethinking of the positioning of engineering faculties on campus.
Of significant concern is the attrition rates which show that on average only 54% of first-degree student commencements graduate from their chosen program. It may be that the new learning hubs such as those established at The University of Melbourne and The University of Queensland are likely to show improvements.
Since the mid-1990s national review of engineering (Changing the Culture6) there has been a stronger emphasis on sustainability, management and the use of problem- and project-based learning. Employers have reported that new graduates now have better skills in teamwork, communications, report writing and in using software-based tools.
King (2008) further suggests that the engineering industry tends not to utilise the advanced programs offered in engineering schools. It appears that they are not willing to support their own practising staff in higher degree training with many of the postgraduate courses taken up by international students as noted earlier (75%). The defence industry is one organisation, however, that does make significant use of Australian engineering schools in postgraduate programs, with a significant number of defence employees moving into higher degree options.
There are also new programs in selected Australian universities which include double, combined and dual degree programs pairing engineering with science, management, law and arts. These can also include extensive industry placements that can lead to additional awards or give credit for defined industry engagement. Such programs also integrate and articulate to masters programs, a scenario which is likely to increase significantly.
Other models are being explored to increase engagement in the engineering industry. These include fast-track re-entry, qualifications upgrading and rapid acquisition of engineering qualifications by graduates of cognate disciplines. Strategies are also being explored for a closer relationship with the VET (Vocational) sector. In responding to the Bradley Review of Higher Education5, the Australian Council of Engineering Deans (ACED) noted that professional accreditation bodies are now concerned about graduate outcomes rather than auditing content as it is thought that this encourages greater innovation.
Overall curriculum innovations are increasing and opportunities are being sought for engineering students to study alongside those of other disciplines such as business7. The International Engineering Alliance8 - which incorporates the Washington, Sydney and Dublin educational accords - has agreed on a system of professional competencies to allow international transfer. The signatories include the national accrediting bodies of the USA, Canada, Japan, Korea, the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, and Australia. This also provides a powerful tool for international benchmarking.
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 6
The University of Melbourne, School of Engineering (videoconferencing suite)
The following table profiles the spectrum of formal and informal learning activities that contribute to an effective learning experience and should be enabled in the physical and virtual learning environment:
––access internet resources
––small group discussion
––watching teacher presentation/lecture
––presenting to class
––individual computer-based activity
––small group project work
––individual project work
––individual computer-based activity
––watch movie / DVD / multimedia
––revise content - invididual / small group
––listen to music
––teacher or student presentation ––problem solving ––whole class teacher-led discussion ––whole class interactive discussion ––small group discussion ––small group project work ––individual project work ––taking notes
––small group computerbased activity ––watch movie / DVD / multimedia ––software training ––test / examination
––access internet resources ––reading ––brainstorming
––small group computerbased activity
––socialise ––eat / drink ––rest ––sleep
Industry placements will see some learning spaces being established within industry similar to teaching hospitals for medicine.
Some universities (such as Queensland University of Technology) are considering making the curriculum more authentic by engaging with current industry practices. This has resulted in a push to develop graduate competencies and an outcome-based curriculum.
Campus Impact: Upgrade of facilities to match industry standards. Teaching hospitals provide a model such as this video conferencing suite to connect campus to industry so that all of the activities [formal and informal] can be covered.
This approach requires a shared understanding between the three stakeholder groups (students, academics and industry) and this has resulted in a design-based engineering curriculum. Such a designbased curriculum encourages the development of the â€œthree-dimensionalâ€? graduate: one who has technical, personal/professional, and systemsthinking/design-based competence as illustrated in Figure 19.
Spaces and places for industry engagement with student projects but also product launches, book launches, collaborative research projects. Campus Impact: Include spaces for industry, alumni and translational research programs.
This concept was supported by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC, now the Office of Learning and Teaching of DEEWR). This ALTC-funded project revealed industry willingness to develop the engineering curriculum to enhance authentic learning experiences as noted earlier. The project concluded that: Engineering schools must develop best practice engineering education, promote student learning and deliver intended graduate outcomes. Curriculum will be based on sound pedagogy, embrace concepts of inclusivity and be adaptable to new technologies and interdisciplinary areas10.
The graduate attributes consist of a tripartite set of skills which require a more integrated approach to pedagogy and an active experiential and authentic learning modality.
Figure 1: The 3D Graduate. Source King et al, 2008
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 8
CDIO is ‘Conceive, Design, Implement and Operate’ and was first developed at MIT. Graduate attributes require a variety of pedagogical settings as illustrated below in this CDIO arrangement in the Engineering Faculty at The University of Melbourne. Campus Impact: Rethink locations of discrete and disaggregated learning spaces in faculties.
CDIO - ‘Conceive, Design, Implement and Operate’ - is a form of engineering pedagogy which has evolved to satisfy these more integrated modalities11. First developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) for the teaching of aeronautical engineering, CDIO has now been adopted by hundreds of engineering schools around the world. Put simply, CDIO collocates these four activity typologies so students can move seamlessly between spaces within a three hour session to carry out the tasks the spaces are designed to support. This method enables a wider set of graduate attributes to be addressed simultaneously rather than in separate timetabled periods in disaggregated learning spaces.
In the above mentioned ALTC supported series of workshops with student, academic and industry participants, a number of categories were identified as critical to engineering education: ––social awareness ––breadth of knowledge base ––practical experience ––environmental awareness ––effects of globalisation ––scale or scope of engineering problems ––research/teaching dilemma ––mobility, transfer-ability of skills and qualifications ––changing engineering definition ––changing academic demographics ––pathways to engineering ––increased specialisation ––engineering systems ––professionalism ––changing student demographics ––lifelong learning ––changing curriculum ––communication. –– In addition, the following categories were identified that imply a spatial impact on engineering education: ––depth of learning and authenticity ––public perception ––design ––engagement ––rapid changes in technology ––changing engineering problem focus.
The University of Melbourne, School of Engineering (CDIO spaces)
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 9
Campus Impact: There will be unique spatial responses such as:
–– Authentic learning spaces –– Public visibility of engineering (event spaces, galleries etc) –– Design studios –– TEAL spaces –– Engagement spaces –– Problem based learning settings –– Creation of CDIO spaces such as at The University of Melbourne, with CDIO labs linked to TEAL spaces.
The workshop also ranked the Top 6 Graduate Capabilities as represented by the CDIO12 and Engineers Australia: % Graduate capabilities CDIO/Engineers Australia 1
Personal skills and attitudes/professional attitudes
Communication - ability to communicate effectively
Designing - proficiency in engineering design
Teamwork - ability to function effectively as an individual and in multidisciplinary and multicultural teams
Systems thinking - ability to use a systems approach to complex problems and are designed and operational performance
Conceiving and designing engineering systems - ability to utilise a systems approach to complex problems
Industry participants reflected their own firms’ trends towards outsourcing, requiring specialist knowledge in order to remain globally competitive, and the consequent risk that this poses to the company. Global trends in engineering include the growth of China, India and Russia; the inter-connectedness of all economies; the reliance on outsourcing; a diversification of clients (including multicultural and multi-disciplinary aspects); and, of course, cheap labour. The ALTC study found that industry also had a strong preference (45%) for improved personal and interpersonal skills and attitudes, as well as a broad range of communication skills. The workshop group ranked these categories as emerging trends and responses to change, illustrating the key drivers in transforming engineering curricula in the early 21st century (below).
G TRENDS IN G R E M E 6 TOP % Category 1 22 2 21 3 18 4 18 5 13 6 13
lobalisation Impacts of g ss tal awarene Environmen ase nowledge b Breadth of k systems Engineering ology ges in techn Rapid chan ma aching dilem Research/te
Graduates often swiftly move to a management role, involving coordination of large teams and communicating with the team through a range of mediums. This supports the findings of other studies which examine what engineers actually do in industry, where a far broader range of knowledge and skills are needed across communication and coordination. Additional engineering competencies identified included systems and holistic thinking; framing and solving complex problems (designing) and teamwork “suggest a curriculum that is likely to be unrecognisable by academics and students within Australian universities today”13.
TOP 6 RESPONSES TO CH ANGE % Theme 1 29 Changing curriculum 2 18 Practical experience 3 18 Impacts of globalisation 4 12 Research/Teaching dilemma Navigation 5 12 (pa thways to engineering) 6 11 Breadth of knowledge base
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 10
The University of New South Wales Solar Industrial Research Facility (SIRF)
The University of New South Wales Solar Industrial Research Facility (SIRF)
TEACHING AND LEARNING
Campus Impact: Arguably the teaching, learning and research spaces are likely to be very different to what we see today. For example, research spaces will have additional areas for undergraduate and post graduate students to be involved.
In the past decade, the engineering profession has moved towards focusing on design for a sustainable society. As a result, some of the key graduate competencies in students include the requirement to:
In this model, students merge theory and practice and indeed seek to undertake problem- and project-based learning with industry, offering true authentic experiences throughout the learning program.
––problem solve ––communicate in multiple modes ––think critically ––collaborate and work in teams ––undertake interdisciplinary design ––take civic responsibility ––follow ethical practices14.
Problem- and project-based learning has necessitated the design of new learning environments which combine theory, practice and industry collaboration in three modalities:
The professional training of students to achieve these outcomes has required a significant shift in teaching practice. These shifts are recognised by the engineering accreditation body ABET15 and the engineering collaborative pedagogical association CDIO. The ABET17 framework provides students with an education that focuses on engineering fundamentals set in the context of ‘Conceiving Designing - Implementing - Operating’ real-world systems and products. Throughout the world, CDIO initiative collaborators have adopted CDIO as the framework of their curricular planning and outcome-based assessment. The need for engineering students to be trained as designers18 from the inception of their undergraduate courses has necessitated a significant shift away from didactic instructional models of teaching to a more collaborative, self-directed and problem/project-based form of learning.
––Mode one (teacher centred eg lecture theatre) ––Mode two (learner centred eg collaborative flexible learning centres) ––Mode three (social or informal learning spaces). All three modalities need to be accessible at all times during the campus-based face-to-face experience. Students also need excellent opportunities for collaboration with industry in project-based learning, in research collaborations and career opportunities. Furthermore, a blended model of learning is now critical so that students can combine the face-to-face experience with an online capability in Technology Enhanced Active Learning (TEAL) studios. This approach is being used at The University of New South Wales (UNSW), The University of Melbourne and The University of South Australia in engineering schools designed by Woods Bagot. Such concepts are also being introduced into Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) school programs to ensure that prospective engineering students are already exposed to the concepts being used at university.
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 12
Second Year Engineering Classroom
y: 36 per person: 5.5sqm
Teaching & Learning Narrative
– The classroom is divided in 2: – A senior teacher coordinates and For example, as noted above, the supervises the learning episode – desk and Research-led working arealearning is also emerging Campus Impact: Australian Science and Mathematics as a critical factor as new developments – Students are provided some – large open floor space nce: Considerable investment 19 School is a year 10-12 senior appear over the timespan of courses. instruction on the activity to be – Generous space between student mic andand Student-centred transformation in secondary school developed to introduce New materials, technologies, techniques, undertaken (theoretical concepts group settings, to help prevent er is a facilitator and guide; he/ the teaching of new sciences to the applications and indeed new engineering engineering faculties would have been introduced in a distractions and manage acoustics secondary school system in Australia. disciplines are emerging constantly. oes not are dominate the learning preceding lecture) now evident at The – 6Table settings of 6 students, to Biomechanics, nanotechnology, robotics e – Students undertake the activity in University of Queensland, of 3 or are 6 all increasingly Located on the Flinders Universityaccommodate and groups ‘new sciences’ stitutional small groups of either 3 or 6 2 computers are on each table The University of New campus, students spend part of– their multi-disciplinary disciplines. – Teacher roam classroom to discuss – students can work as a group of 3 time in the school, part in the university South Wales and The t Skills: issues with students and help where laboratories and part in the community This concept has been demonstrated in at either end of the table University work and collaboration of Melbourne necessary working on ‘real’ projects and problems. the UNSW Engineering Design Centre – or the computers can be pushed as illustrated. s of issues / problem solving – Students may or may not year be required They take first university subjects 100 fourth year computing to the sidewhich and has student can work to report back at the end of class,school to response during their secondary years. students collaborating with across thescience table as a group of 6 share findings 30 doctoral students in a space which ntation - both visual and verbal – Each table has wall space for writing The school was an A$1 includes a gallery and function space for – What the students DO is of recently primaryawardedand group brainstorming. million grant to install two aircraft flight industry interaction. importance in this scenario; teachers re & Equipment: – Students able to move around freely simulators within a CDIO teaching suite. do not dominate proceedings , chairs (on castors) The furniture is fixed - adaptability is The suite demonstrated not only– CDIO Added to this is the emergence of crossology is fixed in the table design supported by the technology which but also TEAL and the use of educational disciplinary global issues or themes. allows for the sharing of ideas and ble wall surfaces technologies and e-learning modules These include, but are not restricted to, knowledge board for group presentations which of course students can access water, environment, energy, resources, – The large floor space allows for the anywhere at any time. infrastructure, transport and materials. open space for gathering whole group to gather as one either Thus pedagogy can include collaboration ssly enabled to accommodate for presentation on smartboard or with historians, geographers, scientists, nt-owned devices alternativelyplanners, as another workspace geologists, marine scientists and other disciplines20. ,( J J < < _! `/Ra:;:< ;=:< >a! =U b 4? Ia! 04MAL ! ( aF 1I3Q;Y3? 8 a:;:< ;=:< >&PQP 83QANQ J =;< K;< K KRJ c ! F
Clearly the engineer of today requires a very different learning experience to those of the 19th and 20th centuries. But of course much of Australia’s engineering educational infrastructure was built in those two centuries, requiring a significant re-calibration and repurposing of institutional infrastructure for engineering education and research.
G 153D L VG Y+ ! L YV+ F X$Y #-+ ,)H ! EE ( ,F -G $,VG $VG $,Y- '-)V+ - L VF F -G L ,G W % V+ ^ V+ /+ -/! + ,G W $*V/ ( + ! % ,G W$&( VG VY $L ! E- ( + ! % ,G W&
These experiences require engineers to collaborate across multi-disciplinary teams rather than working in isolated silos.
L 1P[0ABM5 % VV( $'! W VY /YH EY( ! 'G \= < < ] ]>J =]\
Engineering and design firms themselves have multi-disciplinary teams of professionals in-house including architects, planners, engineers, psychologists, geographers, designers, urban designers and landscapers who collaborate actively across disciplines to create new generation learning $L *VVE V)-G W ,G --+ ,G W environments. F -E'VX+ G - XG ,#-+ ,$YH + 3C ( 3D40AP5A16
( ? 53
The University of Melbourne, School of Engineering Second Year Engineering Classroom
J G ( H-! + E-! + G ,G W $/! L -$ $L *VVE V)-G W ,G --+ ,G W F -E'VX+ G - XG ,#-+ ,$YH F -E'VX+ G - #,L "! X$Y+ ! E,!
ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿÿÿ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ ÿ ÿ ÿÿ
School of Engineering Page 11 + /E! G Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience)EV |V Dr Kenn Fisher Page 13 ( 0? @A6B 5A5Q3
E-#-E J ( ? 53 B3630? 53I
J =;< K;< K —
At present, the national research measures are narrowly focused and do not provide incentives to support improved pedagogy, curriculum design and program delivery. Indeed research is subsidised from the fees for international coursework students21. In the context of research measures there is an acknowledged lack of engineering research candidates, replicating that of the science postgraduate disciplines - the stipends are too low in comparison with graduates entering industry. This is especially noticeable with the impact of the mining industry and infrastructure development. It has been recommended that there should be better incentives to attract and retain the best doctoral graduates in engineering schools through the development of joint industry appointments.
The current Australian Government National Research Priorities were established in 2003, but a recent consultation paper22 suggested there may be a need for some minor revision. These are, in summary: Promoting and maintaining good health a healthy start to life; ageing well, ageing productively; preventive health care; and strengthening Australiaâ€™s social and economic fabric. An environmentally sustainable Australia - water a critical resource: transforming existing industries; overcoming soil loss, salinity and acidity; reducing in capturing emissions in transport and energy generation; sustainable use of Australiaâ€™s biodiversity; developing deep Earth resources; and responding to climate change and variability. Frontier technologies for buildings and transforming Australian industries - breakthrough science; frontier technologies; advanced materials; smart information use; and promoting an innovation culture and economy. Safeguarding Australia - critical infrastructure; understanding our region and the world; protecting Australia from invasive diseases and pests; protecting Australia from terrorism and crime; and transformational defence technologies.
The proposed National Research Concentrations23 support the notion of creating a critical mass but need to be supported by recalibrating funding strategies. A downside of these centres is that talented academics may be redirected away from teaching. However, such concentrations do provide more opportunities for career pathways through an inter- and intradisciplinary trajectory. This will also require a re-engineering of the physical infrastructure such as that seen in the biomedical sciences through BioHubs.
The University of New South Wales Engineering Design Lab
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 14
STRATEGIES AND CONCLUSIONS
Campus Impact: These research areas are more thematic and crossdisciplinary, resulting in a new pedagogical architecture such as at The University of New South Wales. Engineering schools will also become more visible to community and industry.
The key issues in early 21st century engineering education and research include24: ––curriculum transformation (including breadth of knowledge base) ––practical experience ––research/teaching dilemma in the realm of valid/authentic teaching/ learning experiences, which are not necessarily found in the researcher’s toolbox ––developing key graduate competencies such as working in a team and within disciplinary teams, problem solving, project management, communication in multiple modes and becoming a contributing and ethical citizen.
All three partners in engineering education: academics, industry and students have a transformative role in improving the evolving 21st century educational strategy as outlined in the table below. This summary table suggests radical changes in the structure of engineering education and research. Clearly there will also be significant transformations required in the built environment which supports these initiatives. ‘Constructing projects’ on campus, as suggested earlier, means providing industry collaborative spaces and mini-technology parks associated with engineering schools.
Overall, approximately 70% of the comments in the previously mentioned ALTC workshops focused on needs in the areas of teaching, learning and curriculum. These findings are supported by the literature.
The partners in engineering education - academics, industry and students - all have a changing role to improve the evolving 21st century educational strategy:
academics return to industry to reskill
adjunct lecturers from industry
students attend classes and clinics
engineering acadmics to have five years work experience
Industry lecturers: latitude in teaching negotiate a relevant package
capstone design projects in collaboration with industry
academic placements and industry six-month terms
constructing projects on campus contract provisions for site visits, student training
career guidance at university for students so that they can learn about the different roles of an engineer
no academic owns a course: it is part of a programme
if consistent input and support from industry - licence condition for practising engineering firms
co-op model: two internships, first year - 10 weeks internship, repeated in fouth and fifth year with the same company
mechanism to ensure promotion for teaching only academic appointments
portable: small industry problems posted on website stop academic proposal and student involvement leads to ongoing academic and industry involvement
first year major design project integrated with other first year courses: industry related assessment
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 15
The provision of TEAL and CDIO spaces and related design studios will also see a significant re-engineering of existing spaces and the creation of multi-disciplinary spaces such as the D-School at Stanford University.
The University of New South Wales Faculty of Engineering Master Plan
And a final word on e-Learning. Whilst Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs) are emerging within universities at a rapid pace, they are not likely to provide the sort of educational experience necessary for creating the graduate competencies sought by engineering employers and research bodies.
There is a contemporary focus in supporting the â€˜student experienceâ€™ and reducing attrition rates in engineering. Concepts such as TEAL, including spaces for informal and social connectivity, embracing hybrid multimodal face-to-face and e-learning oncampus experiences have proliferated. The implications of the impact that MOOC will have for the teaching and learning of engineering, both now and into the future is yet to be fully understood.
They can, however, provide a portal for entry to such programs, and the impact of MOOC online learning is observed with great interest.
Building N (Blockhouse) 8,000sqm GFA
Recommended Option 1a Master Plan Buildings B 39,000sqm GFA
Building A Building M (Energy Technologies 3,200sqm GFA The University Building) of Melbourne School15,500sqm of Engineering GFA WOODSBAGOT.COM
Building C New 4,000sqm GFA
Building C-refurbish + 7,000sqm GFA
option 1a The University of New South Wales preferred Plan showing Master Master Plan showing preferred option UNSW, Faculty of Engineering, Accommodation Master Plan | 18 August 2008 | Page 81
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 16
The University of New South Wales Engineering Design Lab
The University of New South Wales Engineering Design Lab
King, R, Johnston, A, Bradley, A & O’Kane, M 2008. Engineers for the Future: addressing the quality and supply of engineering graduates for the 21st century. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. 1
Woetzel, J, Mendonca, L, Devan, J, Negri, S, Hu, Y, Jordan, L, Li, X, Maasry, A, Tsen, G & Yu, F 2009. Preparing for China’s urban billion. Impacts of Urbanisation: Implications for labour and skills. McKinsey Global Institute. 2
Yuan E 2011. Statistical Yearbook Of The Republic Of China, 2010. The Chinese Statistical Association. 3
The term ‘globally-employable’ in this context refers to Farrell D, Laboissiére M, Pascal R, Rosenfeld J, Stürze S & Umezawa F, 2005. Part II: The emerging global labor market: The supply of offshore talent in services, June 2005. McKinsey Institute, which states that global employability refers to engineering graduates that are considered acceptable for employment by the standards of a global company. 4
Bradley, D, Noonan, P, Nugent, H, Scales, B 2008. Review of Australian Higher Education. Final Report. Australian Government. 5
IEAust 1996. Changing the Culture: Engineering Education in the Future, 3 vols: “Report Summary”, “Review Report”, “Task Force Reports”, Canberra, Institution of Engineers, Australia. 6
Hargreaves, D & Boles, W 2005. Reflections on Changing the Culture of Engineering Education at QUT. Proceedings of the 2005 ASEE/AAEE 4th Global Colloquium on Engineering Education, Australasian Association for Engineering Education. 7
Johnston, A & King R 2008. Addressing the Supply and Quantity of Engineering Graduates for the New Century. Carrick Institute. 8
Goldsmith, R, Reidsema, C, Campbell, D, Hadgraft, R & Levy, D 2011. Designing the Future. Technical Paper, Institution of Engineers, Australia. 9
ibid King et al 2008, recommendation 3, page 106 10
CDIO Initiative www.cdio.org
CDIO Initiative www.cdio.org
Goldsmith et al 2011, page 4.
Cameron, I & Hadgraft, R 2010. Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project. Engineering and ICT. Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement. ALTC. 14
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (USA) www.abet.org 15
CDIO Initiative www.cdio.org
Tate, D, Chandler, J, Fontenot, D & Talkmitt, S 2010. Matching pedagogical intent with engineering design process models for precollege education. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 24, 379–395. Cambridge University Press. 18
Australian Science & Mathematics School www.asms.sa.edu.au 19
Woods Bagot has used these concepts in the master plan for the Faculty of Engineering at UNSW. 20
King, R., (2008). Submission to the Higher Education Review. ACED. 21
National Research Priorities 2012 Process to Refresh the Priorities: Consultation Paper Feb 2012. DEEWR. 22
Australian Research Council Implementation Plan For National Research Priorities www.arc.gov.au/pdf/ Implementation_Plan-final.pdf 23
ibid Goldsmith et al 2011
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 18
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Dr Kenn Fisher is recognised as one of the leading educational planners practising internationally. As a consultant of the OECD (where he held the post of Head of the Program on Education Building in Paris in 1997/8) and UNESCO he has practiced in Australia, Asia, the Middle East and Europe. He is multi-skilled in a range of disciplines having practiced in all educational sectors as a teacher and academic/researcher, a strategic facility and campus planner and as a project, facility and design manager. Through his specialist practice in campus master planning and educational facility strategic consulting and architectural briefing, Kenn acts as the prime interface between designers and teachers to co-create learning environments for new and emerging teaching, learning and research paradigms. He has been engaged by more than 30 universities in Australia and overseas, over a dozen vocational training and community college clients, a number of State and National Government Ministries of Education, many school organisations and Government and corporate entities. Kenn is also Associate Professor in Learning Environments in the Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning at the University of Melbourne. He teaches in the Master of Architecture program, supervises doctoral students and is a Chief Investigator on two large ARC and one ALTC grant in the design of learning environments.
ÂŠAll rights reserved. No material may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing. While we have tried to ensure the accuracy of the information in this publication, the publisher accepts no responsibility or liability for any errors, omissions or resultant consequences including any loss or damage arising from reliance on information contained in this publication. Any opinions in this publication are solely those of the named author. The published, editorial panel, other contributors and Woods Bagot do not endorse such views and disclaim all liability arising from this publication. Woods Bagot Research Press Podium Level 1 3 Southbank Avenue Southbank VIC 3000 Australia Telephone +61 3 8646 6600 Facsimile +61 3 9645 8787 www.woodsbagot.com Printed: October 2012 Cover images: UNSW, Solar Industrial Research Facility (SIRF) Stock images: Getty Project images: Woods Bagot
Reengineering engineering: Space, learning and the social experience | Dr Kenn Fisher Page 20