CESAER Seminar. Evaluation of Highly Integrated Programmes (Joint and Double Degrees) with US Institutions. Torino, October 20, 2011

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "CESAER Seminar. Evaluation of Highly Integrated Programmes (Joint and Double Degrees) with US Institutions. Torino, October 20, 2011"

Sherilyn Green
8 years ago
Views:

1 CESAER Seminar Torino, October 20, 2011 Evaluation of Highly Integrated Programmes (Joint and Double Degrees) with US Institutions

2 Highly integrated curricula Joint Degrees Dual Degrees Double degrees....

3 They were originally designed as elite programmes (for overperforming students). A typical example is the Double Degree of the T.I.M.E. Association implemented since 1988)

4 Today the scenario is very different Almost every European institution offers double, or joint degrees. Many similar transatlantic programs based on integrated curricula and higher education collaborations between the E.U. and U.S. exist, but not as widespread as in Europe.

5 Very often, speaking of quality in international exchanges, we quote: Number of double or joint degrees agreements. Number of students involved. Are these two parameters really relevant?

6 The job market could provide a feedback, but its time constant is too big (many years long).

7 Feedback Design of the integrated international program Students enroll, follow the program and graduate Initial career Influence on the enrolment of new students in the program

8 We require the opinion of stakeholders already when designing those programmes.

9 EVALUATE-E EU-US ATLANTIS project supported by FIPSE and EACEA Europe Politecnico di Milano, Italy TU Wien, Austria, Lund University, Sweden U.S.A. Virginia Tech University of Kentucky

10 Objective Systematic feedback on transatlantic double and joint degrees in engineering.

11 Stakeholders Actual and Potential Students of Double Degrees Alumni Faculty and Administrators Employers

12 Actions Survey questionnaires Working conference Focus Groups Dissemination

13 Survey Design Areas Engineering-specific skills, General academic skills, Reflections on programme, Likert-scaled items. Four surveys (one for each stakeholder group).

14 The skeleton of the questionnaires was designed by professors of engineering, but the methodology, the wording of the questions, their order and the scales for the answers were decided by expert sociologists

15 Studies and Stakeholders DD Students Faculty Employers DD Alumni Potential DD students Survey Survey FG Milan Yes Yes Yes Yes FG Lund Yes Yes Yes Yes FG Vienna Yes Yes Yes

16 The Analysis of the preliminary data from the Questionnaires and from the Focus Groups have already been published.

17 Culver, S.M., Puri, I.K., Spinelli, G., DePauw, K.K., & Dooley, J.E.: Collaborative Dual-degree Programs and Value Added for Students: Lessons Learned Through the Evaluate-E Project (2011) to appear in Journal of Studies in International Education. Another article is under preparation by Prof. Per Warfvinge

18 Let us only see few examples of outcomes

19 Why students enroll in DD programmes

20 Why alumni enrolled in DD programmes

25 Let me outline some criticalities that I think should be taken into account in future studies on the subject

26 Very often employers do not know what a double degree or a joint degree is. Obviously they know even less of the difference between the two kinds of degrees. This happened even with employers that have already hired some of those alumni!

27 On the issue of extra workload the answers of the employers is very important. In my opinion it still looks quite contradictory.

28 Length of degree program In the survey the following question was asked to the employers. If a term is four months long, what is the extra time you believe would be appropriate for a dual-degree program at either the masters or doctoral level?

29 The amazing (and reassuring) answers: None (9%) One term (13%) Two terms (28%) Three terms (38%) Four terms (13%)

30 Quotations from the External Evaluation of the Project 30 Unforeseen Outcomes Language used to describe and label collaborative programs can influence responses of those involved in the research. Limitations Number of respondents to surveys and participants in focus groups are small and may not be a representative sample Only indirect data was collected (participants provided perceptions and opinions) Some issues were checked in formative assessment phase These limitations do not question the authenticity of findings nor the implications of this project.

31 Summary of the external evaluation 31 Study provided significant contributions to research on collaborative degrees Not so much questions that were answered but questions that arose The exploration of unexpected findings and questions from this study will provide important evidence that could be used to continuously improve collaborative programs

32 What next? ADDE SALEM project ERASMUS MUNDUS Action 3 Duration 3 years

33 European Universities Politecnico di Milano (leader) Lund University Faculty of Engineering Universidad Politecnica de Madrid Instituto Superior Tecnico de Lisboa Ecole Centrale Paris Ecole Centrale de Lille Ecole Centrale de Nantes Budapest University of Technology and Economy

34 South American Universities Argentina Instituto Tecnologico de Buenos Aires Universidad Austral Brazil Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Universidade de Sao Paulo Chile Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Santiago de Chile Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria, Valparaiso Colombia Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotà

35 Purpose Enhancing attractiveness of highly integrated programmes with Europe avoiding brain drain. The core of the project is a study of the needs of the South American job market and a feedback on designing new integrated programmes.

36 Thank you very much for your attention.

Erasmus Mundus External Cooperation Windows. EU-BRAZIL STARTUP Call for applications outcome 08/02/2010

Erasmus Mundus External Cooperation Windows. EU-BRAZIL STARTUP Call for applications outcome 08/02/2010 L15a0900007 L15a0900027 L15a0900041 L15a0900051 L15a0900057 L15a0900080 L15a0900081 L15a0900084 L15a0900088 L15a0900090 L15a0900093 L15a0900095 L15a0900096 L15a0900099 L15a0900106 L15a0900107 L15a0900115