[2018] BSE Aalborg

Back to the Future of Education Future of Project Based Learning Continuous Learning and Valuable Working - Employability BEST Symposia on Education Aalborg 3 - 12 August 2018

Prepared for

Educational Involvement Department Board of European Students of Technology

Prepared by

Ioana Neamțu (Bucharest, Romania) Ivona Stojanovska (Skopje, North Macedonia) Marin Malushovski (Skopje, North Macedonia) Melina Bousiou (Patras, Greece)

Table of Contents Acknowledgment

3

Local BEST Group Aalborg

Educational Involvement Department of BEST

3 3

Introduction

4

Board of European Students of Technology (BEST)

4

BEST Symposia on Education

5

Partners of BSE Aalborg

5

Content Team

Objectives

6

6

Participants of BSE Aalborg

7

Schedule

8

Methodology

9

Sessions

10

Traditional Learning Methods opposite to Project Based Learning

10

Student Initiatives in Educational Improvement

13

Problem Based Learning Case Kick-off

17

How will digitalization shape the future (Global and Collaborative) university

19

Introduction to Employability

23

Workshop on Employability and Entrepreneurship

27

Inquiry-Based Learning

31

Competency-Based Learning

35

The Entrepreneurial Mindset

37

Final Presentation: “Projects: Action Plans for Risk Avoidance during Implementation of New Learning Methods in Universities�

Conclusions Contact

40

45 45 2

Acknowledgement BSE “Back to the Future of Education” was held in Aalborg, Denmark from the 3rd of August until the 12th of August 2018.

During the symposium, 24 students from different Universities in Europe had the opportunity to participate in sessions, be a part of discussions and give their input on the improvement of Higher Education in Europe. The outcomes of the discussions and workshops were collected by the content team and are hereby presented in this conclusive report.

The writers of this report would like to acknowledge all those who in the 6-months of hard work of preparing this symposium, made a contribution in the preparations.

Local BEST Group Aalborg Local BEST Groups Aalborg successfully organized BSE Aalborg with the support of Aalborg University (AAU).

Webpage link: https://best.aau.dk/

BSE Main Organizer: Tobias Svarrer

LBG Aalborg President: Emil Bock Nielsen

Educational Involvement Department of BEST The project was initiated and conducted by the Educational Involvement Department of BEST. Educational Involvement Department works in increasing students’ awareness and involvement in educational matters and gathering students’ input on educational matters and disseminate it to relevant Higher Education stakeholders.

Educational Department Coordinator 2017/2018: Hanija Bujas

3

Educational Department Coordinator 2018/2019: Joao Moita

Introduction Board of European Students of Technology (BEST) Board of European Students of Technology (BEST) is a constantly growing non-representative, non-political and nonprofit voluntary student organization, whose mission is to develop students.

One of the core activities of BEST is the organization of BEST courses, which aims to supplement the skills and outlook of European students of technology. Since the founding of BEST in 1989, more activities have been adapted to its vision of empowering students, counting European BEST Engineering Competitions (EBEC), BEST Career Days (BCD) and the BEST Symposia on Education (BSE).

A special unit of BEST is dedicated to connecting students of technology on contemporary educational topics in engineering education. Through the Educational Involvement Department, BEST strives to listen to the students’ ideas on what can be changed in their universities, study programmes and curricula. BEST is eager to be in close collaboration with the stakeholders of higher education, letting them know about innovative solutions, coming from the main receivers of education - students.

BEST is co-funded by the ERASMUS+ Program of the European Union and cooperates with a number of corporate, career support, project and university partners to provide its services.

4

BEST Symposia on Education (BSE) BEST Symposia on Education (BSE) were created to involve students in the process of educational improvement and raise their awareness about the possibility of students being involved in their education. Together with the other stakeholders involved directly or indirectly in educational matters, students discuss a variety of topics. These stakeholders can be professors, educational experts or industry representatives. BEST counts on both participants of the event and stakeholders to provide insights current educational matters in a most active way, in order to influence changes in education across Europe.

In a BEST Symposium on Education, participants are given the opportunity to express their ideas on educational matters through discussions and case studies. The students’ input is then transmitted in educational stakeholders to relevant Institutions dealing with Higher Educational matters, making their voices heard.

Partners of BSE Aalborg BEST, as well as the content team of BSE Aalborg, would like to thank this group of partners which were a part of the symposium and delivered as well as prepared some of the sessions that the participants were a part of: Jens Myrup Pedersen Associate Professor Aalborg University, Department of Electronic Systems

Julian Lo Carlo International Officer, National Union of Students in Denmark (DSF) Tobias Lynghaug President, The Norwegian Society of Engineers and Technology (NITO) Jacob Dronninglund Knudsen Collaboration and Development consultant, AAU Match, AAU Innovation Aalborg University

Jesper Vestergaard Academic Officer, Innovation, Supporting Entrepreneurship at Aalborg University(SEA) Aalborg University

Christian Friis-Nielsen Academic Officer, Study Administration Aalborg University

5

Content Team The sessions of this symposium were researched, prepared, and facilitated on the event by the content team of the event in collaboration with the partners of the symposium.

BSE Coordinator: Ivona Stojanovska Email: ivonastojanovska97@gmail.com BSE Facilitator: Melina Bousiou Email: melina.boussiou@gmail.com BSE Facilitator: Marin Malushovski Email: mmalusovski@gmail.com BSE Facilitator: Ioana Neamtu Email: ioana.neamtu95@gmail.com

Objectives The main objectives of the symposium were: • Raise students’ awareness on education-related subjects and to gather input from Tertiary level students of technology on various subjects, under the umbrella of the main topics of “Future of Project Based Learning” and “Continuous Learning and Valuable Working - Employability” • Realization of the impact students can have in shaping the Future of Higher Engineering Education.

• Students, individually, have the opportunity to practice and develop several soft skills such as presentation, interpersonal and communication skills, as well as improve their international interdisciplinary cooperation and teamwork.

6

Participants Surname

First Name

University

1

Bayens

Mathilde

Université catholique de Louvain

2

Golos

Anna

Warsaw University of Technology

3

Nakalamic

Dunja

TU Vienna

4

Demidova

Daria

Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University

5

Pais

Gavino

TU Graz

6

Helienek

Denis

Brno University of Technology

7

Kacin

Domen

University of Ljubljana

8

Sánchez Durán

Alejandro

UPV Universitat Politècnica de València

9

Muguliuc

Valentina

Politehnica University of Bucharest

10

Yurchenko

Valentin

Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University

11

Velasco de Loro

Daniel

Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

12

Pellizzari

Luca

Polytechnic University of Turin

13

Bermudo

Alba

Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

14

Özmaçin

Beril

Istanbul Technical University

15

Pētersone

Indra

Riga Technical University

16

Savevski

Dragan

Saints Cyril and Methodius University of Skopje

17

Krawczyk

Marta

AGH University of Science and Technology Krakow

18

Jovović

Doris

University of Montenegro

19

Martínez

Mercedes

Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

20

Vitkovski

Filip

University of Ljubljana

21

Brandão

Maria

University of Aveiro

22

Ceglia

Fabrizio

University of Naples Federico II

23

Ciannamea

Francesco

Sapienza University of Rome

24

Roig Rodrigo

Gemma

UPV Universitat Politècnica de València

Table 1: Participants details

7

Schedule

8

Methodology The following facilitation methods were used Here follows a general description of methodology.

during

the

session

of

this

BSE.

Discussion Groups

A discussion group on this BSE is an interactive process in which the general group of people were given a specific topic on which, after a thought process, they got to share their opinions and discuss their views with eachother.The opinions were shared in a systematic way.

Open Space Technology (OST)

Open Space Technology (OST) is a method for organizing and running an assignment, where participants have been invited in order to focus on a specific, important task or purpose.

OST is a participant-driven process whose agenda is created by participants.

Brainstorming

Brainstorming is a structured process, which aims to generate a large quantity of ideas in a group setting. All ideas are recorded and no judgements or evaluations are made. Perhaps, it is the most popular technique used in groups to facilitate the thinking process. Brainstorming works on the premise that even crazy and wild ideas should be listed, as they may spark new and practical ideas that would otherwise not have surfaced. Participants in a brainstorming session are encouraged to contribute any ideas, no matter how irrelevant they are, and to build on one another’s ideas.

SWOT analysis

SWOT analysis is a process that identifies the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of an organization. Specifically, SWOT is a basic, analytical framework that assesses what an organization can and cannot do, as well as its potential opportunities and treats. A SWOT analysis takes information from an environmental analysis and separate it into internal strengths and weaknesses, as well as its external opportunities and threats.

Presentations

Within the timeframe of different sessions, participants were asked to sustain their ideas in a presentation, either individual or in groups. In order to prepare a presentation, participants needed to put their ideas in a logical order, so as to be able to share and explain them in front of the audience and to keep their attention and interest.

Case Study

Case study research excels at bringing us to an understanding of a complex issue or object and can extend experience or add strength to what is already known through previous research.

Case studies emphasise detailed contextual analysis of a limited number of events or conditions and their relationships.

Team work

Teams were created individually by the session holder, when group works were needed. Attention was paid towards dividing participants into groups of as much cultural diversity and gender equality at all times, while still ensuring the participants a chance to work among different groups.

9

Sessions Traditional Learning Methods opposite to Project Based Learning Session Description The first session of the symposium was an introduction to the event in general and the topics that were going to be discussed in the whole symposium. It was a 2,5 hours session facilitated by the content team members Ivona Stojanovska and Melina Bousiou. The session was divided in different parts. First, they were given time to openly discuss the topic of Project Based Learning (PjBL) and how familiar they were with that concept.

After, they were given instructions to position themselves on a line depending on how present PjBL is in their university. One end of the line represented “no presence at all” and the other end meant “100% present”.

The last part was a group work, where participants were divided into 4 groups and were given an assignment to discuss the positive and negative sides of both Traditional Learning Methods (TLM) and Project Based Learning (PjBL). Each group had one topic to discuss and after they presented their outcomes, there was an open discussion about their outcomes.

Session Outcomes Part 1: What is Project Based Learning? (open question) • The use of a specific project as a means to learn from • Solving a problem in order to learn the curricula, throughout the process • Learning by doing instead of listening, to have a starting point but also to learn all of the connecting issues • To get hands-on experience • To get to actually use the terms of the subject • Project Based Learning prepares students for academic, personal, and career success, and readies young people to rise to the challenges of their lives and the world they will inherit.

Part 2: Spectrum of Universities - Where is your University between the use of Project Based Learning and Traditional Learning Methods?

Participants were instructed to step on the line on the specific place where they think their university falls on a scale of 0% (no presence of PjBL, the majority of classes are taught through Traditional Learning Methods) to 100% (PjBL is present and always used, there is almost no TLM)

10

1. 0 % Project Based Learning, 100% Traditional Learning Methods

2. 30% Project Based Learning, 70% Traditional Learning Methods

3. 50% Project Based Learning, 50% Traditional Learning Methods

6 participants claim to study at Universities where there is almost no presence of Project Based Learning

6 participants claim to study at Universities where there is presence of Project Based Learning, but the majority of the lessons are taught through the traditional, teacher centered lessons

8 participants claim to study at Universities that have the equal amount of use of both Project Based Learning and Traditional Learning Methods

4. 70% Project Based Learn- 5. 100% Project Based ing, 30% Traditional Learn- Learning, 0% Traditional ing Methods Learning Methods

4 participants claim to study at Universities where the majority of the classes are taught through Project Based Learning

0 participants study at Universities where there is almost no presence of Traditional Learning Methods

Table 2: Percentage of students experience with Project Based Learning based on their Universities

Discussion for why they stood on the specific place on the line: 1. 0 % Project Based Learning, 100% Traditional Learning Methods - Universities claim to be using PjBL but in reality, most of the lessons are traditional, teacher-based lessons.

In some Universities the classes are based on theory and there is almost no use of practice.

2. 30% Project Based Learning, 70% Traditional Learning Methods - Most of the classes are theory based and there are some small tasks that can be presented as a project, but not nearly enough.

3. 50% Project Based Learning, 50% Traditional Learning Methods - There is a parallel work of both traditional and project-based learning.

4. 70% Project Based Learning, 30% Traditional Learning Methods - These Universities of Technology use a majority of PjBL because of the sciences that are taught.

Part 3: Positive and Negative sides of both Project Based Learning and Traditional Learning Methods Participants were divided into four groups and each group had a task to discuss one of the following topics: Positive sides to Project Based Learning, Negative Sides to Project Based Learning, Positive Sides to Traditional Learning Methods, Negative Sides to Traditional Learning Methods. These were their outcomes.

11

PjBL

Traditions

Positive sides (Group 1)

Negative Sides (Group 2)

Efficient Individuality Deeper knowledge Time management and responsibility Flexible Applicable Soft skills improvement, critical skills Applying New technology: - With a project students can work with new technologies, because they work with the professors, and can apply their expertise and research while they are making it Companies

Communication need: risk of not working on the overall part of the project, so students don’t risk ending up only focusing on one simple part of it Time consuming and creates time pressure Not an objective grading systems No standardisation No input and information in the beginning Need a lot of guidelines not to risk Risk of “losing” the professors, if they think it is leisure time

Useful for complex basic science (math, e.g.)

Systematic presentation of information Ensures supervision and task accomplishment access to quality sources for information (e.g. experienced professors) Time schedule Cost efficient Easier grading system Trains memory, background knowledge Control of learning outcomes.

No practical skills Less inspiring Memorizing > Learning Studies for exams, and not life Lack of teamwork Standardization Evaluate university experience Learning information only for exam No encouragement of individual experience - After graduation, students need to learn everything again, because the theory might not match reality, people think Universities are not valuable, so doing apprenticeships/internships instead, not to waste time.

Old books, losing track of new technology Lack of soft skills training No encouragement of investments If all the material used consist of books and blackboards, then it is not likely there will be invested in new equipment

Positive sides (Group 3)

Negative Sides (Group 4)

Table 3: Results of the point of view of the participants on the different learning methods

Question: How many of the participants believe that Project Based Learning is the new improved future way of learning? (Open Discussion) Participants agree that the use of the teacher-based learning methods are not going to come to an end anytime soon nor that they should, but teachers/professors need to take into account the new technological wave and everything that it will bring. The students believe that the way the educational system is right now should be reevaluated and there should be a mix between these new methods and the more traditional learning methods.

When it comes to Project Based Learning being the future way of learning, they had a mutual agreement that PjBL is one of the best new ways of achieving positive results in not only higher education, but the educational system in general. It should be researched and developed more, especially in universities all across Europe where this hasn’t been done so far. Students can help by getting involved in the work of the university, outside of the curricula or by trying to get professors to discuss/debate the current problem.

Participants came to the agreement that Project Based Learning should be implemented and it is an improved way of learning.

12

Student Initiatives in Educational Improvement Session Description The second session of the day was a session facilitated by two experts of the symposium, Julian Lo Curlo (Executive Committee Member, National Union of Students in Denmark, DSF) and Tobias Lynghaug (President, The Norwegian Society of Engineers and Technology, NITO).

The session was divided into three parts: The first part was an introduction and discussion on Student-Centered Course Evaluation (SCCE) where, through a presentation, the participants were encouraged to discuss the concept of Student Centered Course Evaluation. The first exercise of this part was an open discussion on the questions: “What is student-centered course evaluation for you?” and “How do you experience course evaluation?”. After that they were divided into two groups to discuss “Why is SCCE important?”.

The second part of the session was about Student-Centered Learning (SCL) where through a presentation the participants were introduced to the topic and also participated in discussions.

The last part was an overall discussion on SCCE and SCL where participants were also divided into groups to discuss SCCE and SCL.

Session Description Part 1: Student Centered Course Evaluation (SCCE) When students were asked what is student-centered course evaluation for them, and how do they experience course evaluation the participants came to the following conclusions: • It should be taken into consideration that students are different and thus work differently. One scale or system of evaluation is not the most authentic and might not work for every student.

• Students should be gathered in smaller groups, have the questions written in a specific way beforehand so that they can evaluate what they liked or didn’t like.

• The evaluation should develop into a debate, because otherwise evaluations might turn into a survey with a couple of clicks.

Q: Why is it important? (4 groups) Participants were divided into four groups where they had to discuss the importance of the course evaluation. They had the following outcomes:

13

Group 1 Improvement for future students Students are the main stakeholders - important that the voices are heard Student Centered Course Evaluation (SCCE) Help to raise educational standards - if the professor knows they are getting evaluated, it will motivate them to do a better job Consider multiple opinions

Group 2 Reflecting on the course help them consolidate their knowledge Helps with the student moral - incentive to work harder to feel included Helps improve relations between students and professors.

Makes professors accountable for what they do.

Tracking of teachers’ progress, incentive for improvement.

Progressions of courses Constructive criticism Helps expose issues to higher (executing) bodies, so they can be solved.

Group 3

Group 4

Improvement - Information received will be improved Equality - Both (teachers/students) get important point when it comes to education Communication - Both apply knowledge to generate better education for future generations.

New generations - Tips and tricks through a cycle.

Shortens generation gap - Each age is different, students try to explain how they feel, teachers adapt Good feedback - Teachers should look into applying the feedback Brings students closer to teachers - Equality of opinions of students - Personal meeting with the teachers will make more impact compared

Table 4: Participants perception on the importance of course evaluation

Part 2: Presentation “Student centered learning (SCL) » Some principles of SCL • Teaching needs continuous reflection on its methods • There is no “one-size-fits-all” solution • Students have different learning styles • Students have different needs and interests • Students have different experiences and backgrounds • Students should have control over their learning • Learning needs cooperation between students and staff » • • • • • •

Why is it important to have SCL? Makes students an integralpart of the academic community Increased motivation to learn Due consideration for different students needs Better retention rates in higher education Continuous improvement of teaching methods Higher individual knowledge retention rates

14

Picture 1: Included in the PowerPoint, expressing the Average Retention Rate

Overall: • Increases quality in education • Makes education more accessible to everybody • Increases student well-being Participants had an open discussion on the mentioned topic with the following outcomes: • SCL is about making sure education adapts to the need of students • Maturity is important, it is important for students to trust the teachers because students might later discover they were wrong and the teachers were right. Collaboration is important, the dialogue is important after the feedback, levels of communication based on trial and fails, because teachers might as well make mistakes as students • SCL should happen be over time, teachers need to be prepared for changing towards SCL • SCL doesn’t give the full power to the students, they are not the only actor. Instead, it is about • basing it on the need of students. There should be a combination of Teacher Centered • Learning (TCL) and SCL. Part 3: SCCE & SCL Student-centered course evaluation (SCCE) is fundamental for the existence of SCL. Knowing the importance of SCL in our education reflects how important is to have good SCCE. Good SCCE means good implementation of SCL, which can lead to better education, at a holistic level.

Q: Why does it happen, that the methods for evaluation are not the most effective? (4 groups) Participants were divided into four groups and were supposed to discuss the barriers to why the current methods of evaluation are not effective and present ideas which can be effective in the future.

15

Group 1

Group 2 Group 3 Students are disillusioned with the system, their voice is not The easiest way often heard anyway, so why done completely Selfish students, don’t should they fill in the effortless. see the bigger picture, survey.

Often not specific for don’t want to spend Apathy cycle: Students one subject. 20-30 30 min. to fill in the questions which do not survey. don’t care, because make sense because teachers don’t care, they are generalized.

Little influenced: because institutions Barriers Filling out responsibil- don’t care. No one feel Feedback for the ity, we need to have a significant enough to make changes. feedback: students survey to have one want to see change, because otherwise Awareness of Students really try to information, students make changes, but they they will not be motivated to invest might not know about give up because the time in giving feedsystem doesn’t listen. their rights. back, if it is useless Older students destroy all the hope of younger students

Ideas

Course evaluations should be done more than once per semester: first for expectations towards the course, results, etc. Midterm evaluation for making adaptations of the course by the professors. Lastly in the end, where improvements for next year would be possible based on the feedback.

Clear set of rules Making teachers accountable for what happens, mandatory check-up

Group 4 Professors might have passive attitude: “why should I change?”, might be hard to find a replacement so a negative feedback would be tough to change into concrete actions.

Too much time to see the change, improvement will be too long for the students to keep them motivated Open questionnaire: it is not concrete feedback when you can only answer Good, medium, bad.

Introducing concept in universities: email professors, explain with presentations what needs to change and why, to make them understand.

Use your voice, go to the supervisors etc.

Many times there are solutions to be found, External supervising which can be found by body which checks if involving students as Mix of generic (for things are changing. the first person (drivstatics between subjects er). e.g.) and specific Maybe there should be a questions for each motivational system for Positiveness is key to subject (for More open and students to make them make the change. Not targeted action). personal questions for more attractive. let last year students individual pick down the Healthy discussion: improvement More continuous motivation of the protected by peers by process, perhaps twice younger students. common feedback, Round table a year there will be professors then get discussion with feedback which shows notification by their professors/faculty/ progression. department to change. administration to talk about the course for changes, as an alternative to surveys.

Table 5: Outcomes from participants from the discussion on the barriers that current evaluation methods and ideas for improvement for the future

16

Problem Based Learning Case Kick-off Session Description The first session of the second day, Problem Based Learning, was facilitated by Melina Bousou, Marin Malushovski and Ioana Neamtu. The session was 3,5 hours long and it was held in three parts. The first part was the explanation of Problem Based Learning (PBL), what it is, and why it is important.

There was an open discussion about the differences between Project Based Learning and Problem Based Learning and the advantages and disadvantages of Problem Based Learning.

The second part was about evaluating PBL, how the participants perceived its concept, by what standards the evaluation should be judged, should these criteria be universal or not.

The last part was a rubric assignment. A rubric is an assessment tool that clearly indicates achievement criteria across all the components of any kind of student work, from written to oral to visual. It can be used for marking assignments, class participation, or overall grades. During this assignment, the participants were divided in 3 groups and worked on the outcomes within the group.

Session Description Part 1: Introduction to Problem Based Learning What is PBL? Participants were supposed to write what they think and read it. The most common answers were: • Learning by solving real-world problems.

• Gathering the necessary information to solve a specific problem • Finding innovative solutions Learning by inquiry • Learning centered around solutions.

PBL

is

on

a

post-it

Is PBL useful?

• Students might need additional information in order to use PBL so it might not be a complete method • PBL is already implemented in most of the assignments in higher education and it is not seen as a stand-alone method • Students learn more by solving a problem than by listening to traditional lectures What is the difference between PBL and PjBL? The participants had an open discussion about the differences between Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Project Based Learning (PjBL), based on two definitions. The discussion was intense and they hardly reached a conclusion.

Project Based Learning can be defined as a method that involves a dynamic classroom approach in which the students acquire a deeper knowledge through active exploration of real-world challenges.

Problem Based Learning is a method where students learn through solving a problem.

17

The points they reached were: • Problems are more specific than projects and can be solved outside of a project as well • Projects should end with a product • While working on a project, many problems might need to be solved Part 2: Evaluation in PBL

Evaluation in PBL is different from evaluation in traditional learning methods, as there are many criteria to consider: the final result, the process, teamwork. Also, the evaluator may be subjective. In order to solve this issue, the participants suggested to have more evaluators who give different grades, in order to grade each student according to his/her work. Another idea mentioned was self-assessment of the work and the team.

What is more important: the process or the result?

80% process, 20% result - 4 participants 60% process, 40% result - 2 participants 50% process, 50% result - 3 participants 35% process, 65% result - 4 participants 10% process, 90% result - 5 participants 0% process, 100% result - 1 participants 6 participants were not able to give a percentage.

Part 3: Rubric Assignment The participants were divided into 3 groups and were assigned to create a rubric that would assess a project. A rubric is a coherent set of criteria for students’ work that includes descriptions of levels of performance quality on the criteria. These are the results of their work: Team 1: • 9 criteria: presentation, cost efficiency of the solution, time management, bibliography, feasibility, completeness, originality, teamwork • 4 levels of performance for each criterion Team 2: • 6 criteria: investment analysis, level of innovation, environmental impact, efficiency, presentation, individual involvement • 4 levels of performance for each criterion Team 3: • 5 criteria: team work & organization, research & bibliography, presentation, solution to the problem, problem solving process • 3 levels of performance for each criterion

18

How will digitalization shape the future (Global and Collaborative) university Session Description The session was facilitated by Jens Myrup Pedersen, Associate Professor, Aalborg University, Department of Electronic Systems. The session was 3 hours long divided in two parts. The first part was a presentation by the facilitator, on what digitization is, a specific description of the goals and ideas of the session. The second part was group work. There were four questions given to the participants: “What opportunities do you see in further digitization of education?”, “What pitfalls or threats do you see?”, “What actions should universities take to realize the opportunities while minimizing pitfalls and risks? And what roles do students play?” and “Do you have more contributions?”.

Participants were divided into groups and were given 20 minutes per question to discuss it and present the outcomes afterwards.

Session Description Part 1: Presentation on The Future of Digital University What is the purpose of the session?

The following data was given by the presenter of the session: • Creating the future university it is something that will need time, research and effort to be achieved • Universities are often traditional • Research-focus - Universities focus more on research than teaching.

• Legislation - Legislation kind of prevents changing from lectures and don’t take into account other ways of learning.

• All stakeholders should be involved, and students are important -Students are the customers and • their opinion should be heard. They are more tech-oriented. Video lecture might not take • over the social part of learning, but digitalization can • How can digitization contribute to the future of education?

- Students are given real life problems from companies, organizations, communities. First thing they need to do is understand the problem, identify it, then what tools are needed to solve it. When this is known, it is possible to learn about how it works. When students are sitting and need to find out how to do something (synchronizing databases with poor internet connection). By making the material available just when is needed, it can be applied and used to help solve problems. Digitalization also means that we can access a lot of different resources, from inside and outside the university.

- Another thing that was covered during the presentation was how flexibility is a great thing, students are accessing the resources even after the course is finished. Those who fail the course exam have high chance of passing the re-exam if they have online classes / quiz and get instant feedback, it’s a very flexible solution. It’s also useful for people who are working or travelling. There are many online resources, but that cannot replace the collectivity of learning with other people, since a part of learning is about our need to socialize.

19

• What are the downsides / threats / pitfalls of digitalization?

- Social interaction is crucial, if people are sitting at home in front of their computer it’s not making things better: digitalization should increase interaction between students, not decrease it. Digitalization can increase the distance between people. People have to be careful how we are using the data, both about the students and the staff. Digitalization is not a goal itself and it’s not always the most efficient.

Some people that are really good are preparing traditional classes and they would have a hard time making online materials. There is a balance that should be reached between digitalization and classical.

• There needs to be the good mix between virtual and physical learning spaces. We should avoid digitizing for the sake of digitalization and accept that it’s not a panacea.

Part 2: Group Work - What are your perspectives?

Q: What opportunities do you see in further digitization of education?

The participants were divided in 6 groups, these were their outcomes.

Group 1 - More convenient way of studying in many levels (easier to get things online, take tests online, be active and have discussions online, bureaucratic things, downloading materials) - Globalized education (materials from university all over the world would be accessible to every student) - Faster transition of education - More flexible way of exchanging material (less paper), using tablets, easier to exchange, downloading books - Building bridges between universities (communicate with students from other universities)

Group 2 - New opportunities for people who live far away from big cities, allow people to study from home - Online study materials, minimize the time spent moving around the city - The access for education becomes much cheaper (thanks to platforms like Coursera people who don’t have money for uni can learn things) - Possibility to adapt the knowledge for everyone - People have their own way of learning, the flexibility suits these people.

Group 3 (different approach to the question, how to apply digitization that hasn’t been applied yet) - Artificial intelligence (it might completely transform education, it might make universities fairer.

Universities struggle with objectivity, AI is something that can solve this problem) - Student centered technology: devices targeted towards students, limit paper waste, make it cheaper for students.

Group 4 (same approach as group 3) - Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality, it makes learning more attractive; traditional lectures are boring and they don’t retain the knowledge but that it is more interactive and more easy to understand.

- Anonymous questions, people can just write the question on their phone and that can help people express themselves - Kahoot quiz

Group 5 - Online education can be equal education: every student can access the same materials - Flexibility in time and space, students can choose when they work in order to improve their productivity - Problems can be solved in a collaborative way - Cheaper to have online course than going to the university.

Group 6 - It saves time by creating platforms that can make the work of students’ easier - Online education helps people who have mobility problems - Online opportunities for bachelor external education, online communication. Extend education to other fields.

- Make a bridge with people from different universities. It’s an easy and fast way to meet people.

- Online platforms. Calculating GPA for the semester or online books from the university

Table 6: Outcomes on participants group discussion on further digitization of education

20

Q: What pitfalls or threats do you see?

The participants were again divided into 6 groups, and after that presented their outcomes: Group 1 - Professor’s unwillingness to use technology - Lots of online courses leads to lack of socializing, people won’t discuss a lot, not improve their soft skills. It’s also harder for a professor when he’s not providing the lecture live to get feedback.

- Motivation of students: when they have to come to university, they are more focused, more attentive, they participate in the classes. When they do stuff online they can postpone it.

- Security: students may hack the system and download the exam’s answers, change their grades, data leakage.

- Health: sitting in front of a computer for many hours can be dangerous for the health of the eyes.

Group 2 - Loss of people contact: students will be in front of a computer at home, and social interactions become more difficult.

- Troubles in communication: it’s easier to understand an explanation eye to eye. It would be more difficult to develop communication skills in digital environments.

- Universities teach more than just subjects. There are social abilities, soft skills.

- If you’re doing a test at home, it’s easier to cheat if no one is supervising you.

- Health problems: due to staying for a lot of hours in front of a screen.

Group 3 - Education might become impersonal, if professors are answering questions on a forum, the degree of interaction is lower.

- Distraction: students may start browsing the internet instead.

- Some people may lose interest in achieving real life goals, there is no spark anymore. Healthy competition helps keep interest, if you’re just sitting in front of a screen you’re not talking with people - It might shorten the attention span.

- Losing data: having data stored on phones or devices that might crash and result in losing it - Misuses

Group 4 - Time consumption: making all the digital materials (videos, lecture, quizzes) takes a lot of time.

It takes time to learn new things, if there is a new technology and there are people who don’t know it, it can take a lot of time to learn it.

- Cheating factor - No personal contact - Additional cost & investment - Maintenance of the technology & devices. Every 5 years you’ll have to replace your equipment or things can be broken.

- Health problems - Technical problems

Group 5 - Most important is the loss of social interactions, universities are not only about hard skills or soft skills, they’re also about development.

- Stable internet connection.

- Transparency: taking a test online can be easier to cheat or behave incorrectly.

- Security dependency: students get dependent on the device and it can be hacked.

- Investments to build the infrastructure, real or virtual, it takes money. It’s not always sure that countries or governments or universities are ready to pay the money.

Group 6 - Some courses simply cannot be conducted online (arts, physical education, languages). Digitalization may cause the quality of courses to drop.

- Power cut & internet access - Concentration problems, students cannot be concentrated for more than 7 minutes so long courses are difficult.

- Lack of verbal communication, it’s very important to have relations with other people.

- Lack of interpersonal relationships, it can cause problems and social anxiety. Also non verbal communication is a very important part of culture that students can learn through Interactions.

- Missing the university experience.

Universities have societies that are part of it, most students move out when going to university, it kind of discourages independence.

Table 7: Outcomes of participants group discussion on the threads of digitization of education

21

Q: What actions should universities take to realize the opportunities while minimizing pitfalls and risks? And what roles do students?

This time the participants were divided into 5 groups and presented their outcomes: Group 1 - Professor’s unwillingness to use technology - Lots of online courses leads to lack of socializing, people won’t discuss a lot, not improve their soft skills. It’s also harder for a professor when he’s not providing the lecture live to get feedback.

- Motivation of students: when they have to come to university, they are more focused, more attentive, they participate in the classes. When they do stuff online they can postpone it.

- Security: students may hack the system and download the exam’s answers, change their grades, data leakage.

- Health: sitting in front of a computer for many hours can be dangerous for the health of the eyes.

Group 2 - Loss of people contact: students will be in front of a computer at home, and social interactions become more difficult.

- Troubles in communication: it’s easier to understand an explanation eye to eye. It would be more difficult to develop communication skills in digital environments.

- Universities teach more than just subjects. There are social abilities, soft skills.

- If you’re doing a test at home, it’s easier to cheat if no one is supervising you.

- Health problems: due to staying for a lot of hours in front of a screen.

Group 3 - Education might become impersonal, if professors are answering questions on a forum, the degree of interaction is lower.

- Distraction: students may start browsing the internet instead.

- Some people may lose interest in achieving real life goals, there is no spark anymore. Healthy competition helps keep interest, if you’re just sitting in front of a screen you’re not talking with people - It might shorten the attention span.

- Losing data: having data stored on phones or devices that might crash and result in losing it - Misuses

Group 4 - Time consumption: making all the digital materials (videos, lecture, quizzes) takes a lot of time. It takes time to learn new things, if there is a new technology and there are people who don’t know it, it can take a lot of time to learn it.

- Cheating factor - No personal contact - Additional cost & investment - Maintenance of the technology & devices. Every 5 years you’ll have to replace your equipment or things can be broken.

- Health problems - Technical problems

Group 5 - Most important is the loss of social interactions, universities are not only about hard skills or soft skills, they’re also about development.

- Stable internet connection.

- Transparency: taking a test online can be easier to cheat or behave incorrectly.

- Security dependency: students get dependent on the device and it can be hacked.

- Investments to build the infrastructure, real or virtual, it takes money. It’s not always sure that countries or governments or universities are ready to pay the money.

Group 6 - Some courses simply cannot be conducted online (arts, physical education, languages). Digitalization may cause the quality of courses to drop.

- Power cut & internet access - Concentration problems, students cannot be concentrated for more than 7 minutes so long courses are difficult.

- Lack of verbal communication, it’s very important to have relations with other people.

- Lack of interpersonal relationships, it can cause problems and social anxiety. Also non verbal communication is a very important part of culture that students can learn through Interactions.

- Missing the university experience.

Universities have societies that are part of it, most students move out when going to university, it kind of discourages independence.

Table 8: Outcomes on participants group discussion on their ideas of what should universities do to realize the opportunities while minimizing pitfalls and risks of digitization of education

22

Introduction to Employability Session Description The session “Introduction to Employability” happened on the third day of the symposium. It was a 3,5 hours long session facilitated by Ioana Neamtu, Melina Bousou and Ivona Stojanovska.

The first part of the session was an introduction to the topic of employability. The goal was to introduce the participants and to also see how familiar they were with the concept of employability, what comes to their mind and which skills are important in order to be more employable and to afterwards officially define the term and explain everything that was not clear before.

After that, they were given 30 minutes of Open Space Technology (OST). OST is a method for organizing and running a meeting or multi-day conference, where participants have been invited in order to focus on a specific, important task or purpose. OST is a participant-driven process whose agenda is created by people attending. At the end of each OST meeting, a document is created summarizing the work of the group. Three flipcharts were placed around the classroom with separate of the following topics on each: “Why is employability important to students?”, “Why is employability important to academics/professors?” and “Why is employability important to Universities as institutions?”. The participants were given 30 minutes to walk around the classroom and place their opinions on each topic, after what they were presented.

The next part was a group work, participants were divided into 4 groups, to discuss which in their opinion are employability skills and what their importance is, after which there was an open discussion about those skills and how Universities develop them. At the end, they were again divided in 4 groups to discuss improvement points for Universities and how they could initiate a positive change in the development of Employability from Universities.

Session Description Part 1: What is Employability?

Participants were asked to describe three skills they associated with employability, which had the following results: • Practical experience • Teamwork • Presentation skills • Ambition • Motivation • Commitment • Communication • Time management • Creative thinking • Technical skills • Flexibility • Responsibility • Critical thinking • Confidence • Goal oriented These results started a discussion on what employability can be, with the conclusion that: • Possibility to get a job and to develop yourself, is connected to attitude and effort.

• Employers are looking for people who will adapt to the company - you need to develop inside the job.

23

Part 2: Open Space Technology (OST) Q: Why is employability important: • To students?

• To professors/academics?

• To university as an institution?

Students

- Survival: they need to work to be able to make a living - Students want to get employed - Purpose of what they study - Develop multitasking: working in teamwork and adapt.

- Earning money eventually.

- Create their own career path - Students have the chance to complete as individuals - Get contacts of important people in the industry.

- Efficient at work after graduation - Job is important to fit in society and be happy: to have a position (not to have an equal position with everybody) - Meet different people and share with them your experience and mind.

- Students are the future of society, and practical experience helps understand/support this theory.

Academics

- Raising the level of university: produce better graduates - Getting the best possible grade for the students: Students who don’t have the best grades but have good social/soft skills, it is important in the end to be of value to the company.

- Ensure that future employees are well prepared.

- Help universities enrich the curriculum - Help them develop more effective teaching - Teachers are models to students, they can/prepare students - Prepare future colleagues - Market needs - Contribute to their field - Getting feedback, how are their methods/content compared to the markets needs.

- Learn about new methods.

University as institutions

- High employability of graduates can lead to stronger tie between HEI and industry - Students want to study there - Developing more competent students will lead to higher respect.

- Further partnership with companies - Higher ranking of university of employment within 6 month count - Increased income for the uni to produce more graduates Can join university staff with acquired skills from education - Alumni clubs: Get feedback from graduates to develop the university itself, and opens up other opportunities. Connection with the university spreads the word to build the image.

- Organize time for students to experience the daily routine of working life.

- Increase standards with well employed students, more preferable.

- Universities should prepare students for their future - More dynamic ambient in it (environment) - A way of attracting potential students and improve their image

Table 8: Outcomes on participants group discussion on their ideas of what should universities do to realize the opportunities while minimizing pitfalls and risks of digitization of education

24

Part 3: What are the most important skills for employability and why? (Group work - 4 groups) Group 1 Group 3 • Self-promoting • Social communication skills and team work • Personal marketing • Presentation skills • Being proactive • Adaptability • Continuous learning and being capable of • Having hard skills depending on your position constant learning • Motivation • Critical thinking • Organization skills- time management • Flexibility and being able to adapt to • Efficiency new ideas and working environment.

• Quick learning Group 2 • Matching the values of the company • Charisma Group 4 • Adaptability and flexibility • Adaptability- the ability to adapt themselves • Leadership • to different conditions • Ability to apply knowledge in the workplace • Availability • Time management skills • Time management • Being self-organized • Multi-tasking • Self-development • Team-work • Empathy • Self confidence • Capable of problem solving • Communication skills • Respectful and showing respect to the ones around you.

Percentage of universities that incorporate these employability skills: Participants were asked to share their opinion on how much they think these skills are present in their University: Sapienza University of Rome

25%

TU Vienna

90%

Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

70%

UPV Universitat Politècnica de València

40%

Université catholique de Louvain

50%

TU Graz

90%

Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University

65%

Saints Cyril and Methodius University of Skopje

70%

AGH University of Science and Technology Krakow

80%

University of Ljubljana

70%

Istanbul Technical University

65%

University of Naples Federico II

80%

Warsaw University of Technology

75%

Brno University of Technology

85%

Riga Technical University

70%

Politehnica University of Bucharest

30%

Polytechnic University of Turin

60%

University of Montenegro

35%

University of Aveiro

70%

Table 10: Percentage presented by participants on the experience of employability skills in each of the Universities

25

• Part 3: How can Universities improve Employability? (Group work - 4 groups)

Group 1 - Financial support - Free courses - Opportunities for internships

Group 2 - Recognize that soft skills exist - Company visits for a practical understanding of real life - Give more time for practice versus theory - Possibility of yearly internships - Soft skills workshop open for everyone - Good use of technology, all laboratories can work in the best way possible

Group 3 - Raising awareness - Organize extracurricular activities, optional.

- Certain number of workshops that improve soft skills.

- Diverse teaching methods (PBL, etc.)

- Careers office: professionals who can advise on different issues

Group 4 - Mandatory internship: best way to learn employability skills.

- Include soft skills in syllabus: should be included in every subject - Guest lectures: people from companies explain their methods - PBL implementation - Job fairs: according to the needs of the students.

- Creating public image: be able to present themselves, impress employer - Career department: Job opportunities at unis.

Table 11: Participants outcomes on a discussion on ideas to improve Universities approach to employability skills

26

Workshop on Employability and Entrepreneurship Session Description The workshop on Employability and Entrepreneurship was facilitated by 3 of the partners of the symposium: Jacob Dronninglund Knudsen (Collaboration and Development consultant, AAU Match, AAU Innovation), Jesper Vestergaard (Academic Officer, Innovation, SEA) and Christian Friis-Nielsen (Academic Officer, Study, Administration). The goal of the session was to engage students in developing a problem formulation and plan for a project. The session was designed to be a real test for the students to work with problem-based learning on the topic of employability.

During the session, participants discussed aspects and challenges of working in groups, entrepreneurial mindset and value in working with the selected problem, and creative thinking to challenge the problem formulation. The students would also be challenged on how to present their problem formulation and plan for the project. The session was rounded off with perspectives on employability.

The workshop consisted of the presentation by the facilitators and by the group work of the participants.

Session Description Presentation: PBL vs PBL • Project- and problem-based learning -> Both are elements of the Aalborg model for problem-based learning • The Aalborg model for problem-based learning also builds upon a foundation of group work -> But not all problem- and project-based learning is group-based

-> The benefits of group work are immense, though; feedback, translocutionarity, food for thought, understanding perspectives • PBL criteria: - The problem as point of departure - Projects organized in groups - The project is supported by courses - Collaboration – groups, supervisor, external partners - Exemplarity - Student responsibility for learning • Teamwork in PBL

- Definition of creativity and innovation: “the production of ideas or outcomes that are both novel and appropriate to some goal” “the successful implementation of creative ideas within an organization” (Amabile, 2012) • Definition of entrepreneurship ” Entrepreneurship is when you act upon opportunities and ideas and transform them into value for others. The value that is created can be financial, cultural, or social.”

(FFE-YE) • Definition of team “a small group of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals and approach for which they are mutually accountable” (Katzenbach,1993)

27

Fig. 2: Included in PowerPoint, explaining the components of creativity

Introduction of DiSC: • What is DiSC? -> A tool for reflection -> Neither a cause nor an effect -> Provides a vocabulary • DiSC ‘rules’ -> All behavior styles are equally valuable -> All people ‘are’ all styles – to variable degrees Be critical – and make constructive use of what you can recognize in yourself -> Don’t judge other people by their profile -> Use your own profile to know some of your own potential blind spots

28

Fig. 3: Included in PowerPoint, used to introduce the concept on DiSC

The participant used this tool in the group work.

29

Fig. 4: Included in PowerPoint, used to introduce the concept of Feedback System on Edward de Bono’s six thinking hats

Introduction of Feedback System on Edward de Bono’s six thinking hats

Outcomes: • The problem as point of departure - Identifying a problem and creating a problem statement - Structurally analogous to solving tasks in a future job • Projects organised in groups - Forming groups and working with a problem in a group - Communicating internally • The project is supported by courses - We’ve worked within a certain theme (obviously, it’s a bit hard to simulate a whole course) • Collaboration – groups, supervisor, external partners - The six thinking hats - Value for others - External communication • Exemplarity

- The elements of the project can all be translated into different contexts and be combined

in different ways

- E.g. the same problem statement can be answered in many different ways • Student responsibility for learning - The process is centered around the student’s logic, not a set curriculum – hence making more sense!

30

Inquiry-Based Learning Session Description The first session of the fourth day, Inquiry Based Learning was facilitated by Ioana Neamtu, Marin Malushovski and Melina Bousiou. The session was 3.5 hours long and it was divided into 2 parts. The first part of the session aimed to engage the participants with the topic,to provide them with some basic knowledge on what Inquiry Based Learning (IBL) is and what the different levels of it are. The first step was watching 3 videos with examples of IBL from a Harry Potter movie and then discussing them and later on, by presenting and explaining the four (4) levels of Inquiry Based Learning. Later on, the participants were divided into 4 teams, with each team having to find the pros and cons of one of the levels.

The second part was about doing a SWOT Analysis for the application of IBL in Higher Education. We started that part by explaining what a SWOT Analysis is and how we can use it as a tool. Afterwards, the participants went back to their teams and had to work on a SWOT Analysis on Including IBL at European Universities. After they finished, they had to present their work and we took some time to ask questions and further discuss.

Session Description Part 1: Introduction to Inquiry Based Learning Teams had to discuss and then gather pros and cons for each IBL level.

• Team 1 - Confirmation

Pros

cons

• Knowing the end results makes the process run smoothly • Latter methods make students get lost • It is the first step of the process • It ensures that minimal standards are fulfilled

• • • •

Lack of independent thinking Lack of creative and critical thinking Spoon feeding It is standardized

Table 12: Outcomes from the first group of participants discussion on the confirmation level of Inquiry Based Learning

• Team 2 - Structured

cons

Pros • It is more exciting • It is time efficient • It is easier for beginners

• Less creative • Repetitive

Table 13: Outcomes from the second group of participants discussion on the structured level of Inquiry Based Learning

31

• Team 2 - Guided

Pros

cons

• Students are free to experiment • Students are not lost • Encourages proactivity

• Results can be useless • Time consuming • Can get dangerous

Table 14: Outcomes from the third group of participants discussion on the guided level of Inquiry Based Learning

• Team 2 - Open

cons

Pros • • • • •

Boosts confidence Deep knowledge Unbounded creativity More flexible process Improving of self-management skills

• • • • •

Students are left on their own Time consuming Can get stuck and lose motivation Risk of failing Tough to find the initial question

Table 15: Outcomes from the fourth group of participants discussion on the open level of Inquiry Based Learning

Is there an ideal level of IBL to implement?

Different ideas were expressed by the participants: • For Higher Education should be something between Guided and Open.

• It’s better to include all 4 levels, starting with Confirmation and ending with Open.

• It depends on the level of education and the different preferences of the students.

• Primary and Secondary Education can cover the first two levels, so by Higher Education • students will be mature enough for the structured level.

• Mixing all 4 is the best way, while keeping a balance.

• The Open level is the most difficult to implement but it is very important.

Part 2: SWOT Analysis for using IBL in Higher Education Team 1:

strengths

Weaknesses

• Hands on experience, doing real stuff • Teaching how to think, not only to memorize • Knowledge is retained • Creates curious students who are experimenting • Improves creativity

• More exhausting for the professor • More exhausting for the students who are participating actively • More expensive than traditional methods • Insufficient introduction to the subject, there is no lecture • Not standardized, grading it is very subjective

32

oPPortunities

threats • More time consuming for the professor • Choosing the type of inquiry-based learning • Students can lose motivation if they don’t see results • Professor can abandon the students if he doesn’t have time / doesn’t want to help • Students can obtain “bad” advice from professors, their project can go wrong based on these failures

• • • •

Exciting and motivating (can be) Can improve soft skills Better preparation for future work Opportunity to start change at the university • Can make use of new technology • Content is new every year • More student oriented

Table 16: Outcomes of the first group analysis on the inclusion of Inquiry Based Learning in Higher Education

Team 2:

strengths

Weaknesses

Accessible Combinable with PBL Time efficient More dynamic than traditional, put theory in practice • Develop skills • Diversity: Includes many different fields

• Conservative mindset, They don’t want to make the change • Students might not adapt to the learning methods • “One size fits all”, they might not consider that all study fields have very different needs, and it’s not possible to standardize the implementation of IBL.

oPPortunities

threats

• • • •

• Students will be more prone to failing, if teachers don’t provide them with the proper information.

• Professor authority might be lost, students may stop asking professors for their opinion • Outcomes being useless

• Universities might be eager to adopt it and implement it • Motivated students

Table 17: Outcomes of the second group analysis on the inclusion of Inquiry Based Learning in Higher Education

33

Team 3:

Weaknesses

strengths • Practical knowledge • Critical and creative way of thinking • Encourages students to be more active to learning which increases independent research • Theoretical knowledge can be memorized easily.

• • • • • •

Bigger transition Not standardized Lack of biggest picture Lack of theoretical background Time consuming Incorrect outcomes and results

oPPortunities

threats

• Creates more efficient workforce • More scientific research • Open doors to SCL, since the professors are not in the center

• Lack of institution support • Professors might reject the idea of changing methods • Professors may not adapt to change effectively • First generation in the method could get lost easily.

Table 18: Outcomes of the third group analysis on the inclusion of Inquiry Based Learning in Higher Education

Team 3:

Weaknesses

strengths • • • •

Thinking Process Triggers curiosity Involves a lot of practice Improves questioning skills

• Less theoretical background • Risk to formulate not the proper question • Drowning in information

oPPortunities

threats • Lose the overview of the problem • Methods could be executed wrongly

• Students create the products • Supports scientific research • Applies to almost every field

Table 19: Outcomes of the fourth group analysis on the inclusion of Inquiry Based Learning in Higher Education

34

Competency-Based Learning Session Description Facilitated by Ioana Neamtu and Ivona Stojanovska, the session of Competency Based Learning was 1.5 hours long. First, the participants were introduced to this learning method and afterwards they were supposed to discuss the pros and cons of it being implemented. Depending on the results of that discussion, they were supposed to discuss and develop ideas of how it could be incorporated in future educational systems. The goals of the session were to indirectly compare this method to the other learning methods and to see how useful it would be to be implemented in the future. At the beginning of the session, the terms “competence” and “Competency Based Learning” were defined and then the participants discussed the implementation.

Session Description Part 1: Defining the terms “competence” and “Competency Based Learning” Competence - Ability to do something successfully or efficiently Competency Based Learning (CBL) - focusing on the student’s demonstration of desired learning outcomes as central to the learning.

Through discussions participants realized that a small concept of what is defined as CBL is already implemented in their Universities but not to its full potential. Flexibility was defined as one of its strong suits, however some of its weaknesses were further discussed more deeply in the next part.

Part 2: Positive and Negative sides to Competency Based Learning and should it be implemented in Universities in Europe?

The students identified the following to be the positive sides to CBL: • It is individually based • Focuses on one concept • It can be defined as a simple concept • Easier for students • More efficient While the following were defined as the negative sides: • Process can end up being too long (time-consuming) • Overwork for teachers • It can miss on the big picture • It discourages creativity • Risk of not being defined properly which can lead to bad implementation Q: how should it be implemented?

On the question of how it should be implemented, the students had the following input: • Gamification • Providing tutors • Organizing group works - coworking • Providing tools/laboratories • Providing flexible curriculum

35

However, the students were focused on the pros and cons throughout the whole session and to the question of whether it should be implemented, the outcomes were the following.

Fig. 5: Outcomes on whether Competency Based Learning should be implemented in Higher Education

36

Competency-Based Learning Session Description The session The Entrepreneurial Minds was facilitated by Marin Malushovski and Melina Bousiou and was 1,5 hours long. The goal of the session was to introduce the participants to the concept of “Entrepreneurship”, they were supposed to define the skills that are important to having the “entrepreneurial mindset” and learn how to use them in key situations. As a conclusion the participants got into the current situation of entrepreneurial education in the universities.

The first part of the session was a group discussion about what it means to be an entrepreneur.

After that they were divided into groups to discuss and present the skills of an entrepreneur. In the next part of the session, they were asked, on a scale of 1 to 5 to present what the current state of entrepreneurial education in their universities is. The last part of the session was an open discussion where the participants shared their input .

Session Description Part 1: Who is an entrepreneur?

After a long discussion, the participants came to the following conclusions: • Someone who takes risks in order to gain something better • Person who can see opportunities in the market and analyze them, take initiatives, keep it balanced.

• The one who wants to change the world in a specific field.

• Ambitious person • Innovative and creative person • A person who satisfies consumers’ expectations • Courageous • Someone who can get the defined profit at the end Part 2: What are the skills of an entrepreneur?

Participants were divided into 4 groups, discussed the specific skills and presented their outcomes:

Group 2

Group 1 Creativity Discipline Responsibility Need of self-development Ambition Passion Empathy Attitude focus Self-esteem Self-confidence

Perseverance Originality Self-control Being objective Open-mind Competitive Having different points of view Looking at the big picture

Organized Leadership Open to new ideas Time management Flexible Powers of perception Charisma Eloquence

37

Multidisciplinary skills Psychology skills Pragmatism Persistent Creativity

Group 4

Group 3 Creativity Solution-focused Time management Self-confidence Patience Being wise Adoptability Patience Courage Empathy Vision Leadership Innovative Persistence

Being analytical Organizational skills Being practical Holistic approach Realistic Flexible Hardworking Open-mindset Communication skills Proactivity Risk taking Strategic Ambition

Leadership Creativity Open-minded Sharp Analytic Communicative Hard working

Charming Time management Stress resistant Determinated Emotionally intelligent Understanding

Table 18: Results from the discussion from participants on the skills and entrepreneur should have.

Part 3: How much and does your university support entrepreneurship?

On a scale from 0 (not at all) to 5 (universities support entrepreneurship), participants were supposed to discuss and rank the current level of university support.

Universities: TU Vienna, UPV Universitat Politècnica de València, TU Graz, University of Ljubljana, Brno University of Technology, University of Naples Federico II, Saints Cyril and Methodius University of Skopje, Politehnica University of Bucharest, University of Montenegro, Sapienza University of Rome, Charles III University of Madrid, Université catholique de Louvain Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, AGH University of Science and Technology Krakow, Istanbul Technical University, Warsaw University of Technology, Riga Technical University, Polytechnic University of Turin, University of Aveiro

Fig.6: Scaled universities based on their support of entrepreneurship

38

Part 4: What can we do next?

At the end, participants had one last discussion and gave their input on how this can improve: • Implementing different teaching methods • Encouraging teamwork and leadership • Creating incubator for real projects • Lecture on entrepreneur • Practical work • Idea launchers place for startups • Field trips • More financial support • Startup competitions • Courses about technology • Project simulation • Group projects • Case study • Networking

39

Final Presentation: “Projects: Action Plans for Risk Avoidance during Implementation of New Learning Methods in Universities” Session Description Context Students have voiced a general concern about the risk of universities to fail in implementing modern learning styles. Especially, students are afraid of the consequences of missing experience at a number of universities and how this will increase their own risk of failing learning outcomes with these methods without the proper amount of guidance. The case studies investigate failure risks and their consequences for students, with the goal of generating specific action plans addressing the different risks.

Universities often voice an interest in knowing exactly HOW to implement best practices, and student input on these practices are highly interesting for professors who are the ones implementing them.

Timeline of the project: • Participants were divided in groups at the end of the fourth working day. Groups get time to agree on which learning method they would like to discuss 1) Traditional Learning Methods: risks of not acting, or maybe universities don’t act 2) Problem/Project Based Learning 3) Inquiry Based Learning 4) Entrepreneurship • Groups should formulate their problem statement which they would like to answer in their project.

• Solutions may very well cover aspects of increasing employability, the use of SCCE (Student Centered Course Evaluation) session, applying digitalization, and the entrepreneurial mindset.

Expected outcomes: Students feel empowered to generate a change in education based on their opinions.

They will gain insight into executive processes and change management, which can be used to improve the dialogue with universities, when they might be reluctant to change.

The presentations should work around all topics addressed during the BSE to complement the outcomes of sessions with a holistic approach.

40

Session Description TEAM 1: Traditional Learning Methods: Evolution not Revolution The first team started by presenting the SWOT Analysis that they had done on the topic:

Weaknesses

strengths • • • •

Deep theoretical Background Experts provided Clear objectives Individual Attention

• • • • •

oPPortunities

Long, boring lectures Lack of feedback Poor involvement of students Too big working groups Unfair evaluation methods

threats • PBL getting more common • TCL methods getting old • Changing student needs

• Recorded lessons • New technologies • Supporting programs Table 19: First groups analysis on the Traditional Learning Methods

Through their work they discussed and suggested their improvement points: • Improving the soft skills and digitalization of the teachers by mandatory courses for them.

• Promoting equity and flexibility with the programs.

• Good connection between theory and practice.

• Access to all the materials and working places all the time.

• Promoting participation of students in cross-disciplinary team projects.

• Creating classes with less students.

• Promoting internships and workshops.

And also defined what should be taught and what should be removed from the educational system:

What to teach?

What shouLD Be reMoVeD? • Repetitive lessons.

• Unfair evaluation system.

• Mandatory and compulsory subjects.

• Alumni feedback.

• Focus on the students’ needs.

Table 20: First groups outcomes on their discussion on what should be implemented and reduced in the educational system

41

TEAM 2: Project/Problem Based without problems … but one can try

Learning:

One

can’t

have

problem-based

learning

Q: How can PBL be incorporated in higher education?

• Current situation: Problem based learning is being executed to a point where it’s there but unsatisfactory, most lectures are in the old school one, students don’t feel like they’re getting practical knowledge from their education. How to fix that? » Implement PBL in education, it’s important to do it step by step. Students cannot be thrown into water without learning how to swim. If the professors are not able to guide them, the students will not learn or will have a hard time doing so. It’s important for professors to be guided, to receive supplementary education on how to conduct Project BL. • Balance: PBL is important but it cannot replace the TLM, it can supplement them. It’s important to see in which field of study, for which sort of people is PBL fit for. It’s very important to evaluate where PrBL may be applied then work from there to achieve balance with TLM, PBL, and other ways.

• Constant Reevaluation, we should constantly collect feedback from the students and the professors and evaluate the situation. If the method is not working for everyone one we can change, there are many ways. There is not only one solution that fits every purpose.

• Skills Learning: students learn stuff by doing it, through trial and error • Teamwork: Encouraging it for the problem / project is going to be solved in a team, it’s important for soft skills, communication within the team. Useful in future life, it’s not just about the end result but also the feelings of team members. Working in a team means caring about each other.

• Grading: Final projects should end with a presentation, develop presentation skills, there are 2 points of focus: result and process of learning, working, both should be evaluated.

TEAM 3: Inquiry Based Learning: Action and Risk Avoidance Plan The students of the third team took an approach of discovering the pros and cons to IBL, by that discovering the risks and after that creating an action plan to avoid those risks.

Pros • • • • • • • •

cons

Practical Knowledge Knowledge Retention Independence and Creativity Critical way of thinking Non field related skills Self-management Flexibility Excitement

• • • • •

Resource and time consuming Not standardized Lack of bigger picture Lack of theoretical background Not enough or too much information

Table 21: Third groups results on the discussion on the positive and negative sides on Inquiry Based Learning

42

The three main risks that were defined were: - Unwillingness to adapt to change • Change management: steps to go through change so everyone can adapt to them • Gradual transition: IBL has different steps, the 1st one is quite similar from TLM so TLMcan be a good starting point for IBL • Best Practices and Case Studies: There are universities that have implemented IBL, they can share their knowledge • Getting lost in the process • Educate students in the methodology of doing research and methods of working in a project so they know how to deal with obstacles, work with project, so they don’t have problems • Providing starting points, it’s good to have a point to start thinking, get some background • Suitable guidance: require tutors, they have to be available and knowledgeable, provide feedback regularly • Encouraging students, it’s all about asking questions, we ask and we think we know the answer, we make an experiment and don’t get the expected result and it can be very frustrating.

• Peer review: talk with other students. Students have a lot of their own experience, they know how to get information, it’s crucial to make them collaborate.

- Time management • Lectures on the topic of time management and self-organization so students are able to cope with their problems and teachers receive tools to help their students • Use of the Gantt chart, make students place objectives within deadlines they set themselves, work can be assessed.

• Minimal number of mandatory checkups, meetings with the professor so he can assess them.

TEAM 4: Entrepreneurship: ENTREPRENEUR ANALYZING UNIVERSITY Entrepreneur: someone that exercise initiative and takes benefit of opportunities. Most of it involves a specific mindset that involves that responsibility, personality, being open minded and self-confidence. Also requires soft skills: leadership, control of your speech, manage your time, notion of financial management.

Why is this important?

• Innovation • Development of society Fig.7: Current situation of entrepreneurship in the universities the participants • Success were students of Every part of the society would be improved, you can do a better and more successful society but also improve students and raise the level of education. More aspects of the society would be improved.

The participants that were a part of the team presented the current situation of the universities that they are students of:

43

What are the most common threats?

• Mentality - Sometimes institutions and persons are afraid of changing their habits and traditions, mostly if they lasted for decades or centuries relying on the same concepts.

• Lack of investments - Usually, there is not enough money for every investment a university should do, then it could happen that they would go to the safest ones.

• Lack of acquirement of soft skills - Lack of different educational methods focusing on tradition education which does not promote the development of this set of skills.

Shortage of project opportunities and support.

How to reach the goal?

• Soft skills exist; • Creating financial support opportunities; • New and different education methods; • Incorporating mandatory subjects on entrepreneurial mindset and soft skills; • Promoting practice with workshops, discussion groups; • Entrepreneurship Project Simulation; • Further development of the opportunities in the mentoring programs; • Startup competitions; • Network between students, university, companies; • Creating alumni networks; • Supporting NGOs that develop entrepreneurial activities.

Why in universities?

Universities are small incubators of the next generation of leaders, knowledgeable people.

It’s important to have this mindset and to be able how to apply the knowledge and qualities. IF you can combine creativity, knowledge of the market, braveness, risk taker, you’re creating powerful people who can solve problems and improve society.

44

Conclusion The goal of the BEST Symposium of Education “Back to the Future of Education” - Aalborg was to bring together around 20 students from all over Europe and gather their input and opinions.

During the sessions, the participants had the opportunity to get involved, discuss, share their opinion and their input on the topics of: • Future of Project Based Learning • Continuous Learning and Valuable Working - Employability A wide variety of methods were used in the sessions in order to gather the participants’ input on those specific matters and a number of possible improvement points were assessed through the work of the students during the event. These outcomes are presented in this document as a report, with the hopes that it will help improve Higher Education in Europe and develop the way universities teach STEM students.

The facilitators team hopes that this work will bring interesting insights and that it will be built upon the results here presented, to further develop the topics approached.

The content team would as well want to again thank the hosting Local BEST Group Aalborg for their care and effort and as well the University of Aalborg for the support we received. The team would also like to thank the amazing group of partners who helped us prepare this symposium and also offer advice.

It is an honor being a part of such a project, one that offers a variety of students the possibility of a positive change in the education of the future.

Contacts Ivona Stojanovska Coordinator of the BEST Symposium on Education Aalborg (2018) ivonastojanovska97@gmail.com João Moita Coordinator of the Educational Involvement Department of BEST (Mandate 2018-2019) joao.moita@BEST.eu.org

45