COOPERATIVE EDUCATION EXPERIENCE AT KING FAHD UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND MINERALS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 39
About This Presentation
Title:

COOPERATIVE EDUCATION EXPERIENCE AT KING FAHD UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND MINERALS

Description:

Title: COOPERATIVE EDUCATION EXPERIENCE AT KING FAHD UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND MINERALS Author: EE Dept Last modified by: biayat Created Date – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:141
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 40
Provided by: eed37
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: COOPERATIVE EDUCATION EXPERIENCE AT KING FAHD UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND MINERALS


1
COOPERATIVE EDUCATION EXPERIENCE AT KING FAHD
UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND MINERALS
  • S.A. Al-Baiyat, M.T. Abuelma'atti, O.A.
    Al-Suwailem,
  • I.M. Budaiwi, S.A.M. Said and M.I. Abd El-Barr
  • King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
  • Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia

2
(No Transcript)
3
UNIVERSITY BACKGROUND
  • KFUPM was established in 1963.
  • With 67 students
  • Current enrollment is over 8000

4
  • The University has the following six in campus
    Colleges
  • 1) College of Engineering Sciences
  • 2) College of Applied Engineering
  • 3) College of Computer Sciences Engg
  • 4) College of Sciences
  • 5) College of Environmental Designs
  • 6) College of Industrial Management

5
COOP PROGRAM
  • Began in 1970.
  • Grown from 34 students in 1970 to over 700
    students in 2005.
  • Part of several Engineering, Computer Science
    Engineering, Industrial Management and
    Architecture Architectural Engineering
    Curricula.

6
Objectives
  • Exposing the student to the real life experience.
  • Familiarizing the student with the work
    environment.
  • Strengthening the students understanding of the
    theoretical background in his field of study.
  • Giving the students a chance to develop the
    required employability skills.

7
  • Teaching the student how to deal with the society
    outside the university.
  • Introducing the employers to the qualifications
    of the future human resources.
  • Giving the employer an opportunity to evaluate
    the students performance.

8
Present Structure
  • Provides 28 weeks placement (equivalent to 9
    credit hours). It will normally be spent with one
    employer.

9
Eligibility
  • Students who have completed 85 credit-hours or
    more of study and earned a major grade point
    average (MGPA) of 2.0 or above will be nominated
    for coop training provided that they have
    completed an English course in report writing and
    a number of other departmental requirements.
  • These requirements are different from one
    department to another.
  • Cooperative work must be completed prior to
    students last semester in the University.

10
Monitoring
  • Students are monitored by the coop program
    department and academic departments through coop
    coordinators and advisors.
  • Each student is assigned an advisor from his
    department His role is to
  • 1. Help the student to identify a set of
    educational objectives and how to achieve them.

11
Monitoring
  • 2. Develop and maintain positive relations with
    employers.
  • 3. Evaluate the learning and performance of
    the student on Coop.

12
Evaluation
  • Each Academic department has its own procedure
  • Normally, the assessment includes the following
    items
  • 1. The student abidance to the deadlines and
    rules set by the department
  • 2. Submission of initial proposed training plan,
    progress reports, final report
  • 3. presentation and company evaluation.
  • The percentage on each of these items varies from
    one department to another.

13
Evaluation
  • The format of assessment also differs. It follows
    one of the following
  • 1. The advisor or Coop Coordinator is given
    a full control on the process.
  • 2. The advisor, and examiner (s), and the
    Coop Coordinator.
  • 3. The advisor, Coop Coordinator, and a
    selected panel of examiners.

14
QUESTIONNAIRES FOR SURVEY
  • The local industry, as a major beneficiary of the
    product of the university education, has a major
    part to play in the development of any higher
    education system.
  • In order to solicit the input of the local
    industry, two questionnaires were prepared and
    distributed to the local industry during the
    academic year 2002/2003.

15
QUESTIONNAIRES FOR SURVEY
  • Another two questionnaires were prepared to
    solicit the input of KFUPM faculty and senior
    students and were distributed during the same
    period.

16
QUESTIONNAIRES FOR SURVEY
  • The replies received are
  • 78 from local employers ,
  • 79 from alumni working with local industries,
  • 99 from KFUPM faculty and
  • 103 from senior KFUPM students.
  • It is believed that the sample is truly
    random.

17
Alumni survey
  • Analysis of the alumni survey shows that
  • 1. The participating alumni are affiliated
    with organizations/companies mainly involved in
    services.
  • 2. The participating alumni are mainly
    involved either in supervisory work or in
    coordination mostly in maintenance, management,
    sales and quality control.
  • 3. While the participating alumni rated the
    adequacy of the amount of laboratory experiments
    as relatively high, the relevance of the
    laboratory experiments was rated much lower.

18
Alumni survey
  • 4. The relevance of subjects like Numerical
    Methods, Probability and Statistics, the
    specialized technical computer packages, core
    courses and elective courses, to the local
    industry needs was rated very low.
  • 5. The adequacy of the amount of Oral and
    Written Communication is rated relatively high
    but rating the oral communication was relatively
    low.

19
Employer survey
  • Analysis of the employer survey shows that
  • 1. The participating employers are mainly
    involved in services in medium size
    organizations.
  • 2. The interpersonal and communication
    skills, computer skills, managerial skills, and
    initiative and perception are the most
    relevant/used skills in the local industry.

20
Employer survey
  • 3. Design skills are the least relevant/used
    skills. Nevertheless, this result should not
    undermine the role played by design in training
    engineering students.
  • 4. The local industry rated the performance
    of KFUPM with coop training higher than those
    without and, therefore, KFUPM graduates with coop
    training are more preferable, for employment by
    local industry, than those without.

21
Faculty survey
  • Analysis of the faculty survey shows that
  • 1. The 9 credits of the coop are high.
  • 2. The coop program should remain with
    improvements especially in the following areas
    interaction between coop advisor and work place,
    employer's awareness of the objectives of coop
    program and placement.

22
Faculty survey
  • 3. Faculty are not satisfied with the practical
    knowledge gained from the coop training.
  • 4. Faculty believe that introducing new
    technical courses, reducing amount of Mathematics
    and Physics, and making technical courses more
    application oriented are possible areas for
    improvement.

23
Senior student survey
  • Analysis of the senior student survey shows that
  • 1. The 9 credit hours of the coop are high.
  • 2. The employers are sufficiently aware about
    the coop program.
  • 3. Students join the coop program either to
    improve the chance of getting a job or to improve
    the GPA.

24
Recommendations
  • Coop Program
  • Possible areas of improvement include
  • 1. Increase awareness about the objectives
    and importance of work-based learning
    (cooperative training)
  • 2. Introduce and develop a 1-credit hour
    pass/fail core course entitled "Professional
    Development" as a required course for all Applied
    Engineering students.
  • 3. Develop a scheme that allows eligible
    Applied Engineering students to take an active
    role in securing coop training placement in a
    work-place

25
Recommendations
  • 4. Every coop student must obtain a detailed coop
    training program for the 28 weeks period not
    later than his second week of joining the
    workplace (preferably before joining if
    possible).
  • 5. The role of the coop coordinators has to be
    well recognized by the concerned department and
    college. Coordinators have to be given the time
    and support to follow and monitor closely and
    effectively their coop students.

26
  • 6. The role of the coop advisors has to be well
    recognized by the concerned department and
    college.
  • 7. Each coop student must be visited at least
    once during the coop period by his coop
    coordinator or advisor.
  • 8. Field trips to coop students must be
    encouraged and supported by the university.

27
  • 9. Coop students communication, report writing,
    teamwork and presentation skills must be at an
    acceptable level before joining the coop program.
  • 10. The coop program evaluation criteria should
    be unified in the college of applied engineering
    departments.
  • 11. Supervisors at the work-places should be
    invited to attend coop presentations.

28
  • Thank you

29
APPLIED ENGINEERING PROGRAM
  • Students in applied engineering are expected to
    take a program designed to prepare them for
    actual field work. The emphasis is on application
    rather than theory.
  • The curricula include a solid background in
    mathematics, computer programming, general
    exposure to topics in basic sciences and a
    comprehensive program in communication skills and
    a core program in engineering and a specialty
    program in the selected major.

30
APPLIED ENGINEERING PROGRAM
  • Methods of instruction are based on studying
    practical examples from which necessary theory is
    derived rather than studying theory and then
    proceeding to practical examples.
  • Students are expected to spend three times as
    many hours in industrial design and process
    laboratories as will his engineering science
    counterpart.
  • Emphasis upon industrial experience in
    conjunction with academic training is manifested
    by spending 28 weeks working in industry under
    the cooperative training program.

31
Current Status
  • Since its establishment in 1970, the Applied
    Engineering program went through a number of
    revisions. Going through these revisions, the
    difference between the Engineering Science and
    the Applied Engineering programs was narrowed
    down to the cooperative education program and the
    summer training program.

32
Applied Engineering Programs
  • 1. There is a real need to make a distinctive
    difference between the programs of Engineering
    Science and Applied Engineering.
  • 2. While in both programs care must be taken
    to incorporate the local industry needs, special
    emphasis must be paid to the Applied Engineering
    programs as they are the most preferable by the
    local industry.
  • 3. While many approaches can be adopted to
    achieve this goal, we present here some scenarios
    and we understand that the door is open for many
    others.

33
Scenario 1
  • Make significant changes in course contents and
    structures of both programs, starting from
    freshman year, to make distinctive difference
    between them. Such option may require additional
    financial resources.

34
Scenario 2
  • Keep the majority of the required courses common
    between the two programs. However, some of the
    required core courses, especially the more
    theoretically oriented ones, may be dropped from
    the Applied Engineering. Replaced courses as well
    as elective courses for Applied Engineering must
    be more practically oriented. The Coop program
    will remain a mandatory requirement for the
    Applied Engineering program.

35
Scenario 3
  • Keep all the required core courses common for
    both programs, with major changes in elective
    courses. It is expected here that the elective
    courses will be more practically oriented for the
    Applied Engineering and more theoretically
    oriented for the Engineering Science. The Coop
    program will remain a mandatory requirement for
    the Applied Engineering program.

36
Scenario 4
  • Merge the two programs. This automatically leads
    to the existence of one program with the Coop
    program becoming optional. In this scenario the
    unified program contents must be responsive to
    the needs of the local industry as indicated by
    the survey results.

37
Scenario 5 (Master of Engineering )
  • None of the above mentioned scenarios tried
    to accommodate the request of the local industry
    to include more managerial, ethical,
    communication, presentation and other needed
    skills.
  • Addition of such courses inevitably requires
    extension of the program to cover 5 years instead
    of the current 4 years.
  • Extension of the program must be accompanied
    by some incentive. One possible way is to offer a
    comprehensive program that leads to a B.Sc. plus
    a Master of Engineering.
  • The proposed extended program must be
    flexible so that a student can terminate his
    studies after 4 years obtaining a B.Sc. or
    continue for another year getting a Master of
    Engineering.

38
Scenario 6
  • In both the Applied Engineering and Engineering
    Science programs, some of the required technical
    courses may be dropped and replaced by new
    courses addressing the industry needs for
    example managerial, ethical and interpersonal
    communication courses. This approach avoids the
    extension of the program to 5 years.

39
Conclusions
  • Employer and alumni surveys clearly indicate
    that there is a real need to improve the Applied
    Engineering and the Engineering Science programs
    to make them more responsive for the needs of the
    local industry.
  • Engineering programs must enhance students
    preparedness to real life experience and further
    develop their communication, managerial and work
    ethics skills.
  • To address these needs six different scenarios
    have been proposed. Each scenario has its pros
    and cons.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com