Not Rocket Science
I had an unexpected epiphany. A few days ago I met with some of our recent graduates to discuss education and their experience. Now, I always enjoy meeting former students, but I cannot say I expected to learn much. I was wrong. Sort of.
The shape of engineering education is the subject of much fraught debate. What should students learn? What would be valued by employers? How should we improve the 'student experience'? How can we deliver better job prospects? All these are the subject of much concern. But perhaps we ought to angst less. Engineering students and graduates are crystal clear about what they want. They say the same thing whenever asked and the only reason we do not recognise it is because we are not listening.
So what are these messages?
They want a fluency with the fundamentals of engineering science. They need more than a grounding in these fundamentals, they want to have an ease and a comfort with the basics and how they are to be applied. They feel we tend to move on too quickly, to material we judge more interesting, without giving them a sense of assured and practiced confidence in the key tools.
They want more problem-based learning. They consistently describe their best experiences as arising out of immersion in challenging problems that drive their learning.
They want more experience of team work. Employers consistently place teamwork skills at the top of their recruitment agendas. The greatest challenges in the early stages of the world of work arise from learning to work in teams. They want to be well prepared.
They want engagement with employers. They want challenges, projects and lectures from employers that give their studies a strong sense of realism. They want placements and internships and opportunities to enhance their CVs.
They want to understand business context. They want to get a feeling for the ways in which engineering is organised and the commercial and managerial realities that shape the practice of engineering. They really value visits and experiences that cut across the usual run of lectures and tutorials.
They want one-to-one contact with academics. They want to feel that they have an individual relationship with people who care about them and their development. They want an identifiable 'home' and a strong sense of identity with their cohort.
That is it. Not rocket science. It is all too easy to be distracted by more abstract questions of pedagogy, by the requirements of accreditation, by technological developments. Interesting though these may be, they should not be at the forefront of our attention. We have been told what to do, we should do it.