Professional competency-based analysis of continuing tensions between education and training in higher education

Purpose The education and training of construction graduates are highly influenced by the higher education institutions which produced them and the relevant professional bodies, which set the competencies that guide both academic and industrial learning. Thus, it is important to ascertain what the key stakeholders perceive construction graduates should achieve in competencies. Construction is a practice-oriented collection of professions, thus, this research focussed on the quantity surveying (QS) profession that is responsible for cost control and management of construction projects, and accredited by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. The purpose of this paper is to identify and analyse the expected level of competencies attained by QS graduates, assess the industry perception of the achievement of competencies by QS graduates, and the ranking of competencies in the order of perceived importance. Design/methodology/approach The study adopted three different data gathering phases to include literature review, expert forum, and two surveys – industry and academia. Findings The research revealed unrealistically high expectations by the construction industry of QS graduates achieving a high level of competency in ten mandatory, seven core, and seven optional competencies. The research found that there were significant levels of dissatisfaction with the expected level of achievement of mandatory, core, and optional competencies by the QS graduates. Thus, a perception gap was identified between the academia and the industry. Practical implications This research will provide a benchmarking tool for curricula alignment for the construction degree programmes in higher education. Originality/value The identification of the exact nature of industry competencies requirements and any variations will assist the construction graduates to connect more effectively to the industry. These research findings confirm the need for continued expansion of curricula and diversification of pedagogies

ABET Self-Study Report for the Environmental Resources Engineering Program at SUNY ESF

In 1971, the Department of Forest Engineering at the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF) began offering a BS degree in Forest Engineering (FEG). The BS in Forest Engineering was first accredited by ABET in 1982 and was most recently reviewed by the Engineering Accreditation Commission in 2006. This is the first ABET review for the BS program in Environmental Resources Engineering, which evolved out of the previously accredited BS in Forest Engineering

ABET Self-Study Report for the Forest Engineering Program at SUNY ESF

In 1971, the Department of Forest Engineering at the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF) began offering a BS degree in Forest Engineering (FEG). The BS in Forest Engineering was first accredited by ABET in 1982. This document is the self-study that was submitted during the last Engineering Accreditation Commission review of the FEG program in 2006

Illuminator, Volume 5, Issue 2

October 2022 issue of Illuminator, a monthly publication of ODU\u27s Batten College of Engineering and Technology.https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/engineering_newsletter/1031/thumbnail.jp

Illuminator, Volume 2, Issue 1

September 2018 issue of Illuminator, a monthly publication of ODU\u27s Batten College of Engineering and Technology.https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/engineering_newsletter/1007/thumbnail.jp

Illuminator, Volume 1, Issue 7

April 2018 issue of Illuminator, a monthly publication of ODU\u27s Batten College of Engineering and Technology.https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/engineering_newsletter/1011/thumbnail.jp

Reasons stated by commencing students for studying engineering and technology

Responses were collected from commencing engineering students and an inventory of reasons stated for electing to study engineering was developed. Commencing engineering students were strongly career oriented; they believed that engineering would be an interesting and rewarding career that would offer enjoyment and career options. No difference was found in the principal reasons stated by respondents based on gender or course of study. On-campus students nominated principally career-related reasons for their choice of study (71 percent). While career-related reasons were still important for off-campus students, the most frequent type of responses were related to career upgrading (43.9 percent).<br /

Taking a lifecycle approach: redefining women returners to science, engineering and technology

Measures to support women to return to the science, engineering and technology (SET) labour market have been implemented over the past three decades in response to the overall shortage of SET skills, as well as with the aim of (re)empowering individual women through their improved financial independence and labour market participation. Yet their needs remain poorly analysed and the impact of labour market reintegration measures appears to have been patchy. This paper examines the experiences of women re-entering the SET labour market after a break from employment in the light of assumptions made about them in UK public policy, particularly related to labour market and employment. Drawing on evidence from surveys and interview data from two groups of women returners to SET we conclude that their needs are more diverse and complex than is recognised in much policy thinking and practice, and that these differ at specific points within the lifecycle. These differences include their relationships to the labour market, patterns of employment, reasons for leaving SET and obstacles to re-entry. Our conclusion is that, to respond effectively to the needs and requirements of women returners to SET, UK public policy therefore needs to be considerably more nuanced than it currently appears to be. In particular, policy needs to reflect the diversity and changing situations of women returners over the lifecycle, and needs to provide for a range of interventions that tackle different obstacles to women's return throughout their working lives. It may also be that the very term 'returners' - which tends to evoke a single episode of exit from and reentry to the labour market – will need to be revisited in future scholarly and policy frameworks on women in SET