A “truly co-operative educational approach” between the engineering educational institution and employer organisations, reflected by the ‘double-headed arrow’ below the triangle in the figure below, is advocated by Nuninger and Châtelet (2011, 91). The profile (depicted inside the triangle) of the professional production systems engineer in France, serves as the core of the training. The curriculum is altered to meet the demands and needs of the industrial partners. However, the quality is monitored by comparing appropriateness, currency and relevance to the professional reality (Nuninger & Châtelet 2011, 90), and audits are periodically undertaken by the Engineer Title Commission of France.
The knowledge and skill acquisition of the student (apprentice/learner), depicted at the top corner of the triangle in the figure below, is facilitated by both the academic institution (school) tutor and the workplace (company/industry) mentor. This triangle represents the wining-trio, with its three circles of relations (Figure 6 from Nuninger & Châtelet 2011, 93).
The “strong university-industry partnership arises from … [the] decision to establish a board of management (with both industrial and university membership) to oversee the curriculum and because of the shared university/organization mentoring processes” state Nuninger and Châtelet (2011, 88-89). Further benefits derivable are dependent upon the discourse/s and interactions between the university (and higher education as a collective) and the appropriate professional sector argue Nuninger and Châtelet (2011, 93).
Nuninger, W. and Châtelet, J.M. 2011. Work-Integrated Learning for Engineers in Coordination with Industries. In P. Keleher; A. Patil, R.E. Harreveld (eds). 2011. Work-integrated learning in engineering, built environment and technology: diversity of practice in practice (pp. 85-109). Hershey, Pa.: Information Science Reference.
Comments