alexander chuchalin tomsk polytechnic university, russia international cdio standards in russian...

Alexander ChuchalinTomsk Polytechnic University, Russia

International CDIO Standards in Russian Engineering Education

The key factors of engineering education development in the Russian Federation prescribe the need of complex training of faculty staff and university managers to modernization of educational programmes.

Engineering education in Russia

1. Issues of training engineers of a new generation are in the spotlight at Russia. Actions taken to reform engineering education imply:

• the increase in state funding for training of engineering students,

• modernization of laboratories and technical facilities within engineering schools,

• grants for academic mobility programmes and internships,

• updating of education-related legislation.


2. Evolution of the Federal State Educational Standards (FSES) shows the tendencies to extend academic freedom and responsibility of HEIs in ensuring the quality of education.

However:

Universities are not always ready to flex their rights in designing and implementing educational programme in accordance with the stakeholders’ demand.


3. Russian engineering education is proud of its strong fundamentals.

However:

Development of students’ practical engineering skills remains a “sore point” of Russian engineering education. Employers consider that around 40% of newly graduated engineers need to be re-trained immediately.


CDIO Concept is one of the most systematic and comprehensive approaches to design, implementation and modernisation of engineering programmes.

CDIO is based on a commonly shared premise that engineering graduates should be able to: Conceive – Design — Implement — Operate complex value-added engineering systems in a modern team-based engineering environment to create systems and products.

CDIO Concept

The concept was developed within the International CDIO Initiative and is currently being implemented in more than 100 universities around the world.

The CDIO Initiative was developed with input from academics, industry, engineers, and students and was specifically designed as a template that can be adapted and adopted by any university engineering school.

CDIO Concept

The CDIO Initiative aims to reach a consensus between theory and practice in engineering education by setting actual requirements to competences of graduates and creating relevant educational environment.

There are two cornerstones of CDIO:CDIO Syllabus and CDIO Standards.

CDIO Concept

CDIO Syllabus offers rational, complete, universal and generalizable goals for undergraduate engineering education.

12 CDIO Standards are actual requirements to engineering programmes. They serve as a guideline for educational programme reform and evaluation, create benchmarks and goals with worldwide application, and provide a framework for continuous improvement.

CDIO Concept

The CDIO approach to modernization of engineering education is becoming more and more popular in Russian HEIs.

In the period of 2011-2015, 14 Russian HEIs have joined the CDIO Initiative. The objectives of the CDIO Initiative in educating and training of a new generation of engineers correspond exactly to the tasks of modernization of Russian engineering education.

CDIO in Russia

CDIO Academy in Russia

The CDIO Academy is a project aimed at training of managers and faculty staff at Russian HEIs to modernize engineering education using CDIO approach. In frame of the project the professional development programme “Applying CDIO Standards in Engineering Education” was designed by Tomsk Polytechnic University (TPU) and Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology (Skoltech) with assistance of Chalmers University of Technology (Sweden) and other participants of CDIO Initiative.


The Programme consists of 5 modules. It is scheduled for implementation for a period of 16 weeks (one academic semester) and involves 3 face-to-face sessions (interactive lectures and practical classes), 2 internet on-line webinars, and self-guided work of trainees (development of 4 projects).

Module 1

Module 2

Module 3

Module 4

Module 5

webinarface-to-face session

face-to-face session

face-to-face session

webinar


The Programme has strong practical orientation. During the study period the trainees modernize their engineering programmes (modules/courses) by applying the acquired new knowledge and skills.

The topics of Programme sections and projects are designed in compliance with the CDIO model: Conceive, Design, Implement, Operate.


Module 1:Conceive

While studying the sections of the 1st Module the trainees pass through the ‘Conceive’ stage of the engineering programme design: they develop programme objectives and learning outcomes necessary for future professional activity and make them aligned with the key stakeholders (employers) needs.

The CDIO approach to engineering education.1.1. Engineering activity and engineering education.1.2. The system of the CDIO Standards.1.3. CDIO Standard 1. The CDIO approach in the context of engineering education.1.4. CDIO Standard 2. Intended learning outcomes based on the CDIO Syllabus.Module project (P.1): Planning the learning outcomes for particular engineering programme (module, course) based on the CDIO Syllabus.


Module 2:Design

Projects of the 2nd and 3rd Modules are focused on the ‘Design’ and ‘Implement’ stages of engineering programme and its elements: design of integrated curricula implying progressive sequential development of professional, personal and interpersonal competencies of students by means of project-based learning technologies.

Design of engineering programme based on the CDIO approach.2.1. CDIO Standard 3. The integrated curriculum design. 2.2. CDIO Standard 4. The module “Introduction to engineering”.Module project (P.2): Designing particular engineering programme (module/course) based on the CDIO approach.


Module 3:Implement

Organization of the teaching and learning processes based on the CDIO concept.3.1. CDIO Standard 5. Organization of the students project work and innovation activities.3.2. CDIO Standard 6. Workspace for students engineering activities.3.3. CDIO Standard 7. Technology of integrated education.3.4. CDIO Standard 8. Active learning methods.Module project (P.3): Development of project and innovation topics for the students engineering activity within particular engineering programme (module/course).


Module 4:Operate

At the ‘Operate’ stage, the trainees develop assessment methods and criteria of students learning outcomes achievement, as well as evaluate their engineering programme for its compliance with CDIO Standards.

Assessment of learning outcomes and evaluation of the engineering programme.4.1. CDIO Standard 11. Assessment of the students learning outcomes.4.2. CDIO Standard 12. Evaluation of the engineering programme.Module project (P.4): Development of indicators and assessment methods aimed at learning outcomes achievement within particular engineering programme (module/course).


Module 5:C-D-I-O

The Module 5 is dedicated to discussion and elaboration of the systematic plans and models that enhance faculty competences in providing of modernized engineering programme.

Training faculty staff to implement the CDIO concept.5.1. CDIO Standard 9. Faculty staff development for CDIO implementation.5.2. CDIO Standard 10. Enhancing faculty staff competency for teaching.


Two rounds of the Programme were completed. In the framework of Programme pilot implementation (January – May, 2014) the system of its quality monitoring was launched and tested.

The feedback from various stakeholder groups was obtained:

• administrative staff and managers responsible for CDIO implementation at Russian universities,

• Programme instructors,

• Programme trainees.

What are the key results of the survey amongst Russian CDIO members?

1. The results of the survey showed that CDIO approach is implemented for modernization of wide variety of programmes. This concerns different levels of education (research oriented and practice oriented bachelor and master studies) and various fields of study (engineering sciences, management and humanities).

Such dispersion of programmes where CDIO is applied causes some difficulties both among the trainees and instructors themselves. However it reveals the innovative experience of Russian Universities and will contribute to differentiation of requirements (Standards and Syllabus) imposed on various CDIO programmes.


2. Basic reasons preventing implementation of CDIO approach at Russian HEIs are:

Response

% of responses / number of respondents

Lack of experience / insufficient faculty staff qualification

74%

Weak cooperation between various university departments

63%

Lack of methodological resources 54%

Lack of financial resources 52%

Low motivation of faculty staff to change something 48%

Poor involvement of employers into the educational process

39%


3. All universities whose representatives participated in the CDIO Academy use teaching and information materials of the Programme as methodological support for providing educational reforms.

As a rule, the Programme materials are adjusted to peculiarities of educational process at the universities.


The Programme sections, the materials of which were the most frequently implemented by the participants for providing educational reforms (percentage of HEIs):

2.1. CDIO Standard 3. The integrated curriculum design 83%

4.1. CDIO Standard 11. Assessment of the students learning outcomes 74%

3.1. CDIO Standard 5. Organization of the students project work and innovation activities

71%

1.4. CDIO Standard 2. Intended learning outcomes based on the CDIO Syllabus

71%

3.3. CDIO Standard 7. Technology of integrated education 64%

3.4. CDIO Standard 8. Active learning methods 64%

5.2. CDIO Standard 10. Enhancing faculty staff competency for teaching 41%

What are the main remarks of the Programme instructors?

1. When fulfilling practical tasks and projects the majority of the trainees used best practices and creative ideas of educational programmes reforming available at their universities.

The problem is that these innovative experiences exist separately from each other (as a practice of a particular university or even as a technology of a particular course). Thus, the instructors view one of the Programme’s important task as identification and discussion of these innovative experiences and their wide distribution.

What are the main remarks of the programme instructors?

2. One of the biggest difficulty that the instructors faced on is that the majority of the trainees do not clearly define their role in the process of educational programme modernization at their universities. They do not see the area of their responsibility for educational programme outcomes.

It results in poor readiness and low motivation of faculty staff ‘to go beyond the field of their subject’ for collaboration and alignment of actions with other departments of an university.

What are the main remarks of the programme instructors?

3. As Рrogramme instructors noticed, the most discussed and crucial questions were:

• how to involve industry representatives into educational process at all stages of engineering programme life cycle (design, implementation and evaluation)?

• how to motivate faculty to change its teaching and learning methods?

• how to define the start points of modernization process?

Results of Programme evaluation done by the trainees

1. The trainees identified the Programme sections that should be considered in more details, with demonstration of examples and master-classes, because the subjects of them are particularly challenging for the Russian engineering education: • CDIO Standard 3. The integrated curriculum design

(45% of trainees),

• CDIO Standard 7. Technology of integrated education (34% of trainees),

• CDIO Standard 2. Planning intended learning outcomes based on the CDIO Syllabus (27% of trainees),

• CDIO Standard 5. Organization of the students project and innovation activities (27% of trainees),

• CDIO Standard 8. Active learning methods (25% of trainees).


2. The trainees marked issues of educational changes which are considered as the most difficult to apply:

• identification of institutional requirements to the quality of educational programmes,

• design and assessment of learning outcomes, which traditionally were not considered ‘engineering’ ones, however become important when engineering graduates competencies are concerned: personal and interpersonal skills, leadership, entrepreneurship and teamwork,

• organization and mentoring of project- and problem based courses.


3. The CDIO experience and practice of foreign partners (Chalmers University of Technology, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Aalborg University, Technical University of Denmark, Massachusetts Institute of Technology) that were the most valuable for the Programme participants:

Planning and management of educational changes

Integrated curriculum structure and content

Case studies on active and integrated learning

Organisation and mentoring of project- and problem based courses

Models and methods of system interaction with industry

Faculty staff development and motivation

Development of the Programme

On the basis of integration of feedback data obtained from various stakeholder groups after pilot implementation of the Programme, it was substantially modernized.

Changes covered 3 aspects of the Programme:

• content of Programme modules and project tasks,• technology of Programme implementation,

application of learning methods;• system of educational process assessment.

Changes in the Programme’s content

In compliance with stakeholder’s demands the following topics were included into the Programme:

• comparison of requirements of the Russian FSES with international standards of engineering education (CDIO, EUR-ACE, WA);

• HEI joining the CDIO Initiative: objectives, tasks, application submission procedure, programme modernization results, cooperation of universities within the CDIO Network;

• strategy and tactics of engineering programmes modernization on the basis of CDIO Standards, definition of the scope of transformations and resources needed.

Changes in the Programme’s content

We tried to provide the trainees with a lot of examples of implementing the CDIO approach into the educational process of Russian universities taking into account requirements of the Russian legislation, including development of institutional regulatory documents.

In frame of the Programme 7 Russian CDIO members shared their best practices on how to adapt CDIO approach for modernization of educational programmes and process.

Changes in implementation technology

Changes in implementation technology refer to reinforcement of active and integrated learning methods:

• discussions on issues and problems related to CDIO application,

• master-classes and trainings on using active learning methods and organization project- and problem-based academic activities,

• case-studies, including examples of applying the CDIO approach in Russian and foreign universities,

• practical tasks for teamwork of trainees, which ensure peer learning and sharing experience.

Additions to the methods of assessment

The basic change in the system of programme evaluation is introduction of peer assessment method. This contributes to trainees learning about the experience and ideas of each other and promotes active discussions among them.

Besides, the active forums on the basis of LMS Moodle are supported. They are used to consult the trainees, to get feedback and exchange opinions regarding relevant topics.

Results

For every section of the Programme the trainees were offered to evaluate from 1 to 5 (5 is the highest on the scale) the levels of following aspects:

• relevance (to what extend the subject of the section is relevant for modernization of engineering programme),

• practical importance (to what extend the materials of the section and acquired knowledge and skills will be used),

• novelty (to what extend the content of the section systematizes and enlarges the knowledge of Programme participants in corresponding fields).

Results

The overall score for relevance of the 1st round of the Programme was 4.51 out of 5, and 4.61 is the overall score of the 2nd round.

1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 2.1. 2.2. 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 4.1. 4.2. 5.1. 5.2.

Round 1

4.5 4.44 4.78 4.67 4.67 4.22 4.33 3.89 4 4.56 4.67 4.67 5 4.78

Round 2

4.5 4.8 4.7 4.9 4.6 4.2 4.6 4.2 4.3 4.8 4.9 4.8 4.6 4.7

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Results

The overall score for novelty of the 1st round of the Programme was 4.16 out of 5, and 4.37 is the overall score of the 2nd round.

1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 2.1. 2.2. 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 4.1. 4.2. 5.1. 5.2.

Round 1

3.835 4.555 4.57 4.415 3.955 4.18 4.055 3.72 4 3.975 4.195 4.32 4.385 4.015

Round 2

3.8888888888888

9

4.8888888888888

9

4.3333333333333

3

4.8888888888888

9

4.2222222222222

2

3.8888888888888

9

4.4444444444444

5

3.8888888888888

9

4.4444444444444

5

4.5555555555555

6

4.5555555555555

6

4.5555555555555

6

4.2222222222222

2

4.3333333333333

3

2

3

4

5

Results

The overall score for practical importance of the 1st round of the Programme was 4.39 out of 5, and 4.43 is the overall score of the 2nd round.

1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 2.1. 2.2. 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 4.1. 4.2. 5.1. 5.2.

Round 1 4.125 4.5 4.43 4.485 4.485 4.36 4.67 4.415 4.21 4.33 4.21 4.5 4.455 4.335

Round 2 4.1 4.6 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.1 4.7 4.1 4.3 4.9 4.5 4.4 4.45 4.5

2

3

4

5

Conclusion

The proposed model of Faculty Development programme provides complex preparation of the trainees to go through all stages of educational programme improvement: starting with setting learning outcomes to evaluating its quality.

CDIO has served as an effective framework for Russian faculty staff training to be able to implement system changes of all elements of engineering programmes: learning outcomes, content and structure, teaching, learning and assessment methods.

Conclusion

The Programme evaluation shows that the respondents gave high scores to all Programme’s sections (the overall score for all sections of the 1st round was 4.35 out of 5, and 4.47 is the overall score of the 2nd round).

The involvement of wide range of stakeholders into Programme evaluation allowed to reveal the issues which are particularly challenging for Russian HEIs as well as to identify the faculty skills which are mainly wanted to develop.

Results

According to the opinion of respondents the biggest success of the Programme is the fact that it develops Russian teaching community, which in its turn is motivated and interested in developing the engineering education.

Many Thanks !

alexander chuchalin tomsk polytechnic university, russia international cdio standards in russian...

Documents

reform engineering education

engineering graduates

engineering schools

cdio conceptthe cdio

cornerstones of cdio

university engineering

quality of education

international cdio initiative