Time: Tuesday, 27/Aug/2024: 13:15 - 14:45 Session Chair: Graça Fernandes |
Location: Room 202 in ΘΕE 01 (Faculty of Pure & Applied Sciences [FST01]) [Floor 2] Cap: 40 |
Paper
Does an Evolving Energy Industry Equal a New Education?
1Department of Energy Resources, University of Stavanger, Norway; 2Department of Energy and Petroleum Technology, University of Stavanger, Norway; 3Department of Education, University of Stavanger, Norway
Presenting Author:The oil and gas industry is expanding and evolving due to climate, societal, and governmental changes (e.g. Doni et al., 2022; Megura and Gunderson, 2022; García-Amate et al., 2023). How do these changes affect the competences and skills needed in the industry? A Norwegian government-funded research project, Defining Future Subsurface Education Needs in Collaboration with the Energy Industry (SUBSET), attempts to answer this question while creating a framework for course co-creation in collaboration with the energy sector in Norway. The methods and findings of SUBSET might be applicable to education and training in the energy sector internationally as well. The University of Stavanger’s staff worked with five industry partners, two labor organizations, and one governmental advisory board to establish relevance with industry and better understand their current and future needs and expectations. By mapping the competences reported by stakeholders in the workforce now and those needed in the future, the project aims to identify which topics and skills should be offered as continuing or life-long education and which should be included in or excluded from formal degree programs. University courses on subsurface science and technology need to be adapted to accommodate the future needs of the energy industry (Arlett et al., 2010). Our research initiative showcases efforts to bridge the gap between academia and industry and aims to contribute valuable insights for the ongoing transformation of the energy sector. Furthermore, it might serve as a model for fostering contextualized, purposeful, and relevant collaboration between higher education and the dynamic demands of the evolving industry.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
SUBSET was organized in three phases: competence mapping, course co-creation, and course offering and evaluation. The first phase aimed to map competences in the oil and gas industry to improve employability and increase work relevant education (Kipper et al., 2021). Competence mapping consisted of interviews and a workforce survey. Interviews were held with each industry partner to understand what management believes are the skills needed now and in the future. The interviews were then analyzed for repeating themes and provided the basis for the survey. The survey provided input regarding what skills the workforce says they have and what they believe they need in the future. These results were also analyzed using descriptive statistics. The second phase, course co-creation, consisted of a series of workshops with the same industry partners and a team of university scientific and administrative staff where we discussed 1) which skills and what courses are needed; 2) which courses and should be prioritized and created, and 3) what course delivery format could be best tofits the targeted the identified audience. The third phase, course offering, required the course descriptions to be formalized and accredited. Then the courses were run as part of the life-long learning program. Each industry partner and participating labor organization and enrolled students in applicable programs were invited to participate in the courses. Successful participants in the courses received formal university credit. After each course's completion, a course evaluation survey is sent and after a 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months workshops are held to evaluate the knowledge transfer, filling knowledge gaps, and the effects of the course experience. At the time of abstract submission, these workshops are not complete because not enough time has elapsed after course completion. This systematic approach ensures incorporation of ongoing feedback and continuous improvement, which helps the university staffus develop a dynamic and responsive pedagogical framework that adapts to the new skills and competences of the industry.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
SUBSET experimented with a thorough yet time-intensive process yielding valuable insights into industry needs for educational and training purposes. Co-creation in the project setupSUBSET facilitated incorporating input from formal managerial and workforce perspectives, while retaining academic independence. Sustained bidirectional input is deemed as vital post-project to nurture ongoing collaboration also post-project. The two primary themesthemes identified for skill development, were carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) and Python programming for skill development. A 10 ECTS fully digital CCUS course, featuring videos and live-streamed instruction, was offered in autumn 2023 and assessed through a project report. Competencies in the field of CCUS were highly rated by the workforce survey as providing increased professional value and development, as well as increasing the competitive edge of the company. Python programming skills were delivered through four micro-courses totaling 10 ECTS, incorporating physical teaching days and hybrid tutorials with each assessed via a programming project. Recognizing the need for digitalization, artificial intelligence, and machine learning in daily workflows, programming emerged as a crucialfundamental future skill. Despite these innovations, traditional subsurface exploration topics remain essential across evolving markets. Maintaining geoscience, petroleum, and reservoir engineering in educational programs is crucial. Balancing this, educational programs must integrate digital and programming solutions and apply subsurface exploration concepts to emerging technologies. As the industry embraces these technological shifts, fostering a versatile and interdisciplinary approach will be crucialcritical for equipping engineers with adaptive skills.
References
Arlett C., Lamb F., Dales R., Wills L., Hurdle E. “Meeting the needs of industry: the drivers for change in engineering education” Engineering Education 5:2 (2010) 18-25 DOI: 10.11120/ened.2012.05020018
Doni, F., Corvino, A., Bianchi Martini, S. "Corporate governance model, stakeholder engagement and social issues evidence from European oil and gas industry" Social Responsibility Journal 18:3 (2022) 636-662 DOI: 10.1108/SRJ-08-2020-0336
García-Amate, A., Ramírez-Orellana, A., Rojo-Ramírez, A.A. et al. Do ESG controversies moderate the relationship between CSR and corporate financial performance in oil and gas firms?. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 10 (2023) DOI:10.1057/s41599-023-02256-y
Kipper L.M., Iepsen S., Dal Forno A.J., Frozza R., Furstenau L., Agned J., Cossul D. “Scientific mapping to identify competencies required by industry 4.0” Technology in Society 64 (2021) 101454
Megura, M., Gunderson, R. “Better poison is the cure? Critically examining fossil fuel companies, climate change framing, and corporate sustainability reports” Energy Research and Social Science 85 (2022) 102388 DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2021.102388
Paper
How Do Degree Apprenticeships In England Fit In The Widening Access Landscape? A Question Of Social Justice
1Sheffield Hallam University United Kingdom; 2Edge Foundation
Presenting Author:This paper discusses whether the introduction of Degree Apprenticeships (DAs) offered by English higher education providers (at Level 6) is enhancing social mobility by widening access to underrepresented groups, as the UK Government claims (DfE 2021; Halfon 2023) and is based on two pieces of research being carried out by researchers at Sheffield Hallam and the Edge Foundation.
Degree Apprenticeships (DAs) were introduced in England from 2015 for roles including digital, automotive engineering, banking, and construction (Hubble and Bolton 2019) and have quickly expanded to include many more occupational areas from retail management to health and social care. The number of DA starts (at level 6) trebled from 6,400 in 2017/18 to 25,000 in 2022/23 (DfE 2023). DAs provide “an innovative new model bringing together the best of higher and vocational education” (DBIS 2015). The incorporation of a full degree within the degree apprenticeship is “crucial to its ‘brand’” (Reeve and Gallacher 2022, p160). Reflecting that conclusion, Universities UK (2019, p15) noted that “degree apprenticeships are seen as having parity of esteem with traditional degrees, thus helping to raise the appeal of vocational education opportunities more broadly.” Even if parity of esteem is not entirely achieved, the introduction of DA contributes to the improved reputation of vocational and technical education and training.
Only few European countries offer apprenticeships at degree level and Scotland is one that introduced Graduate Apprenticeships. Other countries, such as Germany and Austria have hybrid studies. Consequently, this presentation will generate interest from those countries where policies target the inclusion of students from disadvantaged backgrounds in HE, where diversification of vocational students is of interest.
DAs are integral to the UK government’s strategy of improving economic productivity through enhancing the skills of the workforce whilst also addressing social inequality (see DfE 2021). DAs are, therefore, part of a coherent and comprehensive shift in education policy and funding in relation to the perceived needs of the UK economy.
In terms of the make-up of current apprentices on DAs, research finds that there are two main groups of students that are attracted to them. The first group of students is young (18 years old), going into a new job role as a degree apprentice rather than university as an undergraduate, either as part of a cohort in a large organisation or an individual joining a smaller organisation (see also Cavaglia et al., 2022). Such DA students, however, do not match the underrepresentation profile of what are considered ‘widening participation’ cohorts in the UK, in terms of social class background, gender and ethnicity (Cavaglia et al., 2022; McCaig, Rainford and Squire 2022). The second group of degree apprentices are existing staff already in employment and DAs are often offered to them as part of ongoing staff development within organisations; hence they are people that have not attended higher education, and to that extent DAs are ‘widening participation’ to some disadvantaged groups (e.g. mature students) albeit as a secondary consideration.
The UK Government has argued that DAs are a suitable replacement for undergraduate degree programmes, mainly on the basis that degree apprentices don’t accrue student loan debt (Cavaglia et al., 2022) (degrees in England and Wales average around £9,00 per year), so represent a better offer for students from low-income backgrounds. 27% of apprentices on L6 and L7 programme came from the most advantaged areas (CSJ, 2020) and only 13 % lived in the most disadvantaged areas of England. Nevertheless, the extent to which DAs offered by HE providers fit their widening access remits is politically contested given that institutional efforts to improve access is regulated by the Office for Students.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
This paper is based on two ongoing pieces of research involving researchers based at Sheffield Hallam University and the Edge Foundation. Thus, the methodology draws on a combination of the different approaches employed.
Project one is Impact of Degree Apprenticeships on Widening Participation Activity by HE providers and employs a case study approach to explore the extent to which DAs overlap with work in the area of widening participation (WP) to HE. It should be noted that HE providers are not mandated to offer DAs (in the UK HE providers are legally autonomous and thus have to be persuaded that provision aligns with their institutional mission and business model) but conversely, they are subject to a regulator (the Office for Students) in relation to access, quality and standards. In this context we are exploring how and in which ways university managers and administrators have pivoted their offer to include consideration of degree apprenticeships in their outreach work. The primary method is semi-structured interviews with key informants (KIs) at two contrasting HE providers offering a spread of provision by DA standards, and secondary data analysis of DA provision. KIs are drawn from a variety of institutional roles, including: employer liaison; marketing and recruitment; outreach; access and participation officers (responsible for compliance with OfS); and programme/course leaders.
Project 2 Degree Apprenticeships in England: What can we learn from the experience of apprentices, employers and HE providers? This research was led by the Edge Foundation and investigated how DAs are perceived and experienced by various stakeholders; their motivations for engaging with DAs, and the challenges and opportunities moving forward, including the extent to which DAs are supporting widening participation into higher learning and contribute to social mobility. The research took a qualitative approach, interviewing 99 stakeholders. Semi-structured interviews were used with policy makers, universities, apprentices, employers and other relevant sector bodies. In relation to widening participation and increasing diversity we have asked questions from participants about, for example, what they aim to achieve via DAs, the characteristics of their apprentices, communications about DAs and recruitment processes. We used thematic content analysis and used NVivo to support data analysis. In order to further increase validity of findings, the research team has regularly discussed individual interviews and themes and sub-themes deriving from them.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
There are two distinct groups of people participating in degree apprenticeships. Firstly, those that have recently left school or college having completed their (usually) A levels with high achievement. They are therefore new, or comparatively new, to the workplace. Secondly, and more frequently, DAs are taken up by existing employees who are already working within and returning to education (often in their mid-20s). In particular DAs were acknowledged for widening participation to university degrees by giving this mature group opportunities that were not available to them first time around at the traditional entry point of university, age 18. A variety of key reasons were given for this, including not being able to afford university, having children or family responsibilities at a young age, having other financial responsibilities (e.g. a mortgage) and broadly considering university was ‘not for them’ at 18. Other reasons participants mentioned they had learning difficulties or the style of learning in HE did not suit their needs.
Case study analysis found that despite universities having a strong commitment to widening participation in higher education of students from under-represented groups, this doesn’t always translate to practices in relation to recruitment of DAs. DAs are primarily recruited by employers; employer prerequisites take precedence over the university’s desire to widen access. As a result, some university respondents discussed the need to engage more with schools and colleges to provide information and guidance on DAs. Some (mainly larger) employers strategically consider their social responsibilities included in their activities elements of WP, usually with a focus on underrepresented groups. Findings indicate an increasing number of school leavers who wish to pursue DAs, but there are not enough opportunities available to them, in part because opportunities are often offered internally to existing employees
References
Cavaglia, C., McNally, S., and Ventura, G. (2022) The Recent Evolution of Apprenticeships: Apprenticeship pathways and participation since 2015. London: The Sutton Trust. Available at https://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/The-recent-evolution-of-apprenticeships.pdf
CSJ (The Centre for Social Justice) (2020). How to reboot apprenticeships and kick-start the recovery. London: The Centre for Social Justice
Department for Education (DfE) (2021). Skills for Jobs: Lifelong Learning for Opportunity and Growth Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/601980f2e90e07128a353aa3/Skills_for_jobs_lifelong_learning_for_opportunity_and_growth__web_version_.pdf
Department for Education (DfE) (2023). Academic year 2022/23: Apprenticeships and traineeships. Published 30 November 2023. Available at: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/apprenticeships-and-traineeships
Halfon, R, Rt Hon (2023) Ministerial speech to the Higher Education Policy Institute annual conference, 26th June 2023
Hubble, S. and Bolton, P. (2019) Degree Apprenticeships House of Commons Briefing Paper 8471 Published 18 December 2019. Available at: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8741/CBP-8741.pdf
McCaig, C, Rainford, J and Squire, R (Eds) (2022) The Business of Widening Participation: policy, practice and culture, Emerald Publishing ISBN 9781800430501
Reeve, F and Gallacher, J. (2022) A New Approach to Providing Higher Vocational Qualification: Higher/Degree Apprenticeships and Graduate Apprenticeships, in E. Knight, A.-M. Bathmaker, G. Moodie, K. Orr, S. Webb & L. Wheelahan (eds) Equity and Access to High Skills through Higher Vocational Education Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave MacMillan, pp145-167.
Research by the Edge Foundation and Sheffield Hallam on widening participation and DAs: https://www.edge.co.uk/research/current-research/impact-of-degree-apprenticeships-on-widening-participation-activity-by-he-providers/
Universities UK (2019) The Future of Degree Apprenticeships. Universities UK https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/sites/default/files/field/downloads/2021-07/future-degree-apprenticeships.pdf
Paper
Higher Education in the Post-COVID-19 Era: The Case of the University of Latvia
University of Latvia, Latvia
Presenting Author:The COVID-19 pandemic challenged higher education (HE), university teachers, and students around the globe in 2020. Overnight, COVID-19 brought sudden changes and unexpected shifts to remote teaching and learning, putting teachers and students in an extraordinary situation. Although much research (e.g., Badiozaman et al., 2023; Bajaj et al., 2021; Baker et al., 2022; Leal Filho et al., 2023) has been conducted across different sectors, universities, countries, and continents involving different actors since COVID-19, there are indications that much more research is needed (Baker et al., 2022; Imran et al., 2023).
Our study departs from and complements the existing literature in multiple ways. Firstly, due to the cultural context, the research tries to determine the pandemic’s implications in the post-COVID era in Latvian HE. Secondly, the research considers the perspectives of both students and teachers using the case of the University of Latvia (UL). Thirdly, although quite a few studies have been conducted about HE during the COVID-19 period in Latvia, none have yet been published about Latvian HE in the post-COVID-19 period. Finally, although the challenges that every university faces are different, the results will be useful for all HE institutions in Latvia and other post-Soviet European countries.
The research questions to be answered are as follows:
RQ1 Since COVID-19, have students and teachers perceived any changes in HE (teaching and learning, e-environment, use of technologies, study modes and design)?
RQ2 Since COVID-19, have students and teachers perceived any positive benefits in the study process?
RQ3 Has the post-COVID-19 era promoted socialization among students?
RQ4 Are there any differences between the two groups of respondents
Previous research indicates that COVID-19 brought both challenges and new advantages to HE (Kalniņa et al., 2023).
The pandemic reshaped the priorities of HE and HE found ways to overcome the COVID-19 crisis through digital transformation technology (Leal Filho et al., 2023). There was hope that this digital transformation would continue in the post-COVID-19 era (Rubene et al., 2021). Furthermore, there was an assumption that HE would be better prepared after COVID-19 to accept and include technology as an essential component of the learning process to make face-to-face learning more flexible and engaging (Benito et al., 2021), thus promoting sustainable development.
Nevertheless, the shift to so-called emergency remote teaching during COVID-19 showed that both teachers and students could adapt to new ways of learning (Baker et al., 2022) and promoted a general sense of flexibility in HE. First of all, this flexibility involved moving into asynchronous modes of pre-recorded lectures, flexible schedules, different paces and engagement with course materials, and hybrid/dual modes (online and in-person delivery of lectures and seminars) (Baker et al., 2022; Siow et al., 2021), simulations, virtual reality, and augmented reality (Chans et al., 2023). Secondly, assessment and assessment policies were modified in order to take barriers affecting students’ learning during COVID-19 into account (Baker et al., 2022; Siow et al., 2021). Thirdly, different engaging activities were provided due to the difficulties of students keeping attention (Kalniņa et al., 2023). Fourthly, students and teachers were supported psychologically and in the study process by providing teachers with support and resources, helping to raise the competencies of educators in online teaching (Siow et al., 2021), and students with additional materials online (Kalniņa et al., 2023).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used
This research adopted an online survey using a quantitative method of data collection. Based on the literature review, the research team developed a structured QuestionPro questionnaire with 37 questions that was then shared with lecturers and students from UL. The questionnaire consisted of four sections. The first demographic section was composed of 10 questions (gender, age, study level, and position at the university). Section two consisted of 15 questions related to the use of artificial intelligence in HE, section three included questions about the self-directed learning experience in HE, and section four included questions related to students’ experience of HE in the post-COVID-19 era.
This paper analyzes only part of the questionnaire related to the research questions and considers the seven questions on students’ post-COVID-19 experiences in HE. Some questions required respondents to answer using a 4-point Likert scale or were simple yes/no questions, and others were open-ended.
The original questionnaire was reviewed by three field experts to ensure content reliability. Slight modifications were made based on their recommendations. Next, a pilot survey was conducted.
Responses were obtained from 1,053 participants. The study followed UL’s research ethics recommendations, and respondents were guaranteed complete anonymity. A convenience sampling method was employed to select respondents based on their availability and willingness to participate.
When the data were analyzed, Rather agree and Fully agree responses were combined as positive answers. In the analysis of each question, it was taken into consideration that some respondents (students) did not answer questions or did not have an opinion about changes due to the fact that they were not studying at the time of COVID-19, so comparisons could not be made, and those answers were filtered out.
Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the survey data, and a Mann–Whitney U test was conducted to test the differences. First, we tested the internal consistency of the measurements of the survey instruments using Cronbach’s alpha. An alpha value of 0.7 is conventionally used as a reliability threshold (Taber, 2018). The reliability of all measurements in the survey was excellent (α=.971).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings
COVID-19 has impacted and will continue to impact the future of HE. Our research revealed that both teachers and students recognize the transformation of HE in the case of UL. Both groups of respondents agree that teachers have demonstrated greater flexibility in the study process since COVID-19 – they are more ready to adapt to students’ requests, different delivery modes are provided during the study process, many more online study opportunities are provided, and more technologies are used. Overall, UL uses different forms of study organization: fully remote, hybrid, and fully face-to-face. At the same time, more than half of the students admitted that the tendency to return to the old normal mode is a reality.
Our results show that the university’s e-study environment (e-platform) has been improved and is now better adjusted for the students’ needs to study independently, better structured, and better provided with materials for students. Although there was a hope that COVID-19 would bring some changes to HE pedagogies to become more student-centred, inclusive and personalized, our research shows that there is still a long way to go in this regard, despite some initial progress. Regarding the question about students’ socialization, students socialize less than before, although there are some significant differences in how students and teachers responded to this question (students were more positive). In fact, students were much more positive about many aspects analyzed in the current research, and significant differences were indicated between the two groups of respondents in relation to many questions. COVID-19 represented a once-in-a-generation opportunity for the sector to promote long-needed changes to promote changes by enhancing the digitalization, flexibility and inclusiveness of future learning experiences in HE. Thus, we hope that the pandemic’s positive effects will be used to ensure sustainable and more inclusive HE in the future.
References
Badiozaman, I. F. A., Ng, A. & Ling, V. M. (2023). “Here we go again”: Unfolding HE students’ hybrid experience and resilience during post-covid times. Asia Pacific Journal of Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2023.2238324
Bajaj, P., Khan, A., Tabash, M. I., & Anagreh, S. (2021). Teachers’ intention to continue the use of online teaching tools post Covid-19, Cogent Education, 8(1), 2002130. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2002130
Baker, S., Anderson, J., Burke, R., De Fazio, T., Due, C., Hartley, L., Molla, T., Morison, C., Mude, W., Naidoo, L., & Sidhu, R. (2022). Equitable teaching for cultural and linguistic diversity: exploring the possibilities for engaged pedagogy in post-COVID-19 higher education. Educational Review, 74(3), 444-459. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.2015293
Chans, G. M., Orona-Navar, A., Orona-Navar, C., & Sánchez-Rodríguez, E. P. (2023). Higher education in Mexico: The effects and consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 15(12), 9476. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129476
Imran, R., Fatima, A., Salem, I. E., & Allil, K. (2023). Teaching and learning delivery modes in higher education: Looking back to move forward post-COVID-19 era. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(2), 100805. https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.ijme.2023.100805
23.Leal Filho, W., Lange Salvia, A., Beynaghi, A., Fritzen, B., Ulisses, A., Veiga Avila, L., Shulla, K., Vasconcelos, C. R. P., Moggi, S., Mifsud, M., Anholon, R., Rampasso, I. S., Kozlova, V., Iliško, D., Skouloudis, A., & Nikolaou, I. (2023). Digital transformation and sustainable development in higher education in a post-pandemic world. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2023.2237933
Kalniņa, D., Nīmante, D., Baranova, S., & Oļesika, A. (2023). Remote learning during the Covid-19 pandemic: Opportunities in higher education. In A. Visvizi, M. D. Lytras & H. J. Al-Lail (Eds.), Moving higher education beyond Covid-19: Innovative and technology-enhanced approaches to teaching and learning (pp. 67-86). Emerald.
Rubene, Z., Daniela, L., Sarva, E., & Rūdolfa, A. (2021). Digital transformation of education: Envisioning post-Covid education in Latvia. In L. Daniela (Ed.), Human, technologies and quality of education, 2021 = Cilvēks, tehnoloģijas un izglītības kvalitāte, 2021 (pp. 180-196). University of Latvia.
Siow, M. L., Lockstone-Binney, L., Fraser, B., Cheung, C., Shin, J., Lam, R., Ramachandran, S., Abreu Novais, M., Bourkel, T., & Baum, T. (2021). Re-building students’ post-COVID-19 confidence in courses, curriculum and careers for tourism, hospitality, and events. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 33(4), 270-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2021.1963973