Clive Ferguson

Defining the Australian Mechanical Engineer.

The attribute focus in engineering education now adopted by the engineering education accrediting bodies of the US, UK and Australia is based on meeting the assumed needs of professional practice. It is associated with an increasing expectation by employers of work-ready graduates rather than relying on subsequent work-based learning and experience to develop many of the essential professional practice attributes. Yet the scope of the mechanical engineering profession is broad and views of practitioners contributing to debate on attribute requirements are largely influenced by their own often unique professional formation. In addition, the formative development of the profession in Australia has been significantly influenced by 19th and 20th century UK and US practices, although historically the industrial profile of Australia has been strikingly different. An analysis of current industry distribution of Australian, UK and US mechanical engineers presented in this paper shows continuing, although less marked, differences. To develop a clearer perception of the profession in Australia, its educational formation, and operational environment, this paper provides a concise study of the formative development of the profession, and presents a breakdown of the industry sectors in which they are currently employed. The effects of momentous global changes in engineering employment and formation over recent decades are also discussed. Recent changes in engineering employment have included major structural changes to organisations, accelerating technical and educational developments and mounting societal expectations making it imperative that attributes be attuned to the new engineering paradigm as increasing demands are placed on our graduates. This paper provides an essential foundation for ongoing debate and analysis of attribute needs related to this broadly based engineering discipline. Although presented from an Australian perspective, many issues discussed are applicable worldwide.

The Continuous Professional Development of Engineers and Flexible Learning Strategies.

The rapidly changing knowledge and skill requirements in the engineering profession require that engineers educated mainly in the scientific principles of a broad engineering discipline need to dev...

Improving Outcomes-Based Engineering Education in Australia

Summary Graduate attributes are now a ubiquitous feature of higher education in Australia and internationally, and have been part of engineering education for more than a decade. The idea of graduate attributes is an apparently simple concept, focusing on educational outcomes, rather than inputs and process. While there is evidence of some benefits in engineering education arising from the introduction of outcomes-based accreditation, there is also evidence of many short-comings of the graduate attributes approach. There would be significant value in Engineers Australia providing additional, discipline-specific guidance on attribute development. There would be significant value in Engineers Australia simplifying and consolidating the current multi-document accreditation system. A genuinely outcomes-based accreditation system would be based (only) on the demonstrated individual student attainment of appropriate graduate attributes, which might be delivered/gained by a range of means, including distance education. To fully meet the letter and spirit of the law for accreditation, programs will need to adopt some method of certification of individual student attainment of graduate attributes - one such method would be the use of student portfolios.

An evaluation of an online student portfolio for the development of engineering graduate attributes

An online student portfolio was evaluated as a means for engaging students with the concept of graduate attributes, and for documenting student attainment of graduate attributes. Students rated the portfolio system as easy to use, and indicated that it helped them to appreciate the skills and knowledge they had developed.

Delivery and Assessment Strategies to Improve on- and off-Campus Student Performance in Structural Mechanics

This paper considers the delivery and assessment strategies used in two structural mechanics units at Deakin University, a leader in distance education in Australia. The two units have had unacceptably high rates of student failure. Student perceptions of the delivery method were analysed and an investigation was carried out of the performance of 329 (173 on- and 156 off-campus) students enrolled in the two units. An analysis of the assignment, laboratory and examination marks is presented. Consideration is also given to the total marks. The results show that on-campus students performed better in structural mechanics than their off-campus counterparts. Plots of the distributions of student performance for the three assessment methods are provided (for each unit) and high failure rates are linked to low examination marks. Students tended to perform best in assignments and worst in examinations. Parametric statistical tests show a correlation between the marks obtained in continuous assessment and in examinations, and it is therefore proposed that, in order to improve performance, the students must be encouraged to participate fully in all aspects of the course. Many students were unenthusiastic about laboratory practical sessions and did not think they aided their understanding of the theoretical material. Motivation to participate is often dependent on the perceived relevance of a given task and its contribution to the total mark and, thus, to help motivate students to participate fully in the continuous assessment tasks, the authors propose several changes to the delivery methods, as well as to assessment criteria and marking schemes.