|
What makes
it happen?
The University of
Rhode Island International Engineering Program: Some
Lessons Learned
The first
contribution, for lack of choice at this early stage
of the Web site's existence, will be from the
International Engineering Program at the University
of Rhode Island. In the next lines, we at URI's IEP
will attempt to identify what we have learned in
Rhode Island in the process of developing our version
of international engineering. How did it come about?
What were the necessary ingredients to make it
happen? What are the hurdles? What advice can we give
those persons who would like to develop related or
similar programs? (For further bibliographical
references on URI's International Engineering
Program, click HERE .)
A Word of Caution
Whenever anyone discusses the concept of preparing
young people for careers in the global workplace, the
standard reaction is an enthusiastic nodding of the
head. Yes, technology and business are global; yes,
of course engineers will be working abroad; yes,
America must prepare internationally to remain
competitive. But, in spite of almost universal
endorsement of this very common sense concept,
relatively little is being done in American higher
education to prepare young engineers for a
multicultural, multilingual world. It seems that
universities are slow to change, and that common
sense sometimes has little to do with curricular
modification or new directions for the curriculum.
Much of the conservatism at colleges and universities
rests in deeply seated reward systems, which run
counter to innovative, interdisciplinary curricular
change. As long as faculty continue to be promoted
and rewarded first and foremost for research and
teaching in highly specialized and esoteric areas,
there will be little incentive to seek partnerships
with faculty from other disciplines, which are the
bread and butter of concepts such as international
engineering.
At most higher education institutions today, younger
faculty, who are often the ones to recognize the need
for change, are commonly discouraged from extensive
collaboration across the disciplines. Engineers
working closely with language faculty, and vice
versa, are likely to have less time for their area of
specialization, which will ultimately define their
success or failure as bright young scholars. Creative
cross-disciplinary work, therefore, could
significantly endanger one's ability to remain in the
profession.
Until this structural problem is addressed, until
such time when faculty will be systematically
encouraged to break out of the bonds of their own
disciplines to create new alliances for the timely
and pertinent education of their students, concepts
such as international engineering are at risk - and
likely to remain at the fringe of higher education.
Ingredients Necessary for Success
Given the barriers which stand in the path of
innovation, there are, nevertheless, sufficient
success stories to demonstrate that engineering and
language faculty can collaborate for meaningful
curricular change. Indeed, the University of Rhode
Island boasts a program with over 135 students
enrolled, all of whom are completing degrees in both
engineering and language, and who plan to spend at
least six months in professional internships abroad.
Over 100 students have completed such internships
already and the demand for IEP grads is far in excess
of the supply. What then are the ingredients for this
kind of success?
1. "Chemistry" and
Credibility:
Building cross-disciplinary programs and taking the
curriculum in new directions requires innovation and
collaboration among faculty who are not necessarily
accustomed to working together. For this to happen,
people from disparate ends of the campus, and yet of
similar convictions, need to meet each other, agree
on a common goal, and commit to a great deal of time
and work.
Sometimes collaboration comes about through conscious
effort and a pre-determined decision, and, at other
times, it happens by chance, by circumstance, or by
surprise. However it happens, it is important to
recognize the fact and to take advantage of
opportunities as they present themselves.
At URI, the IEP was launched twelve years ago when
the new dean of engineering, who happened to be
German-born, moved into the house next door to the
head of the German faculty. In their first backyard
conversation, they discussed engineering and foreign
language education, and agreed emphatically that the
new global age called for some kind of creative
collaboration between these two areas. Out of this a
committee was born, a core group of interdisciplinary
faculty became convinced of the value of the idea, a
grant was written, and the concept of URI's IEP was
launched.
Nothing is, of course, that simple. And yet, when two
credible and hard-working people agree on an idea
with a certain level of excitement, that is a
critical ingredient for success. Little will happen
on a long-term basis with ideas supported by just one
or two persons or by one side of two-sided
partnerships, or by persons unable to involve the
interests of influential persons in the campus
community. There must be a spark, a meeting of the
minds, an enthusiasm, an ability to work together,
and the potential for influencing opinion.
2. Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration
and Commitment:
Programs like the IEP face long-standing hurdles and
traditions buried deeply within academia. Language
faculty, after all, tend to see themselves as
humanists with a mission to teach national
literatures to young persons inspired to pursue
advanced degrees in highly specialized areas. Many
faculty in the field believe that teaching language
is secondary and that offering a language and culture
program for engineering students reduces their status
to one of a service entity. For many traditionalists
in the field, an IEP is, therefore, not an
appropriate mission and an actual betrayal of the
field.
Engineering faculty, in a related manner,
traditionally see little value in language learning.
What is primary to most engineers is technology, and,
if more work is to be done by their students, it
should be in that area. After all, as discussed in
the Rationale statement above, the American
view persists that the whole world speaks English,
and that there is, therefore, no need for us to
concern ourselves with language learning.
At URI we were fortunate to have capable faculty in
both engineering and languages who were enthusiastic
about the idea of an international engineering
program, who could bring specific skills to the
effort, and who were not bound by traditional
paradigms. The program was begun in German because
there were several engineering faculty with German
language skills and/or valuable relationships with
industry and higher education in German-speaking
countries. Another major factor was the eagerness of
the German language faculty to work with new
audiences and develop applied language programs such
as the IEP. Indeed, the German language program at
URI has built a curriculum and a research agenda
around this pedagogical direction which has become a
major factor in the program's now substantial
reputation in language as well as engineering
circles.
URI's successful establishment of the IEP came about
because of commitment and determination on the part
of faculty in BOTH language and engineering
disciplines. The faculty leadership involved in this
project realized the importance of working together,
and of capitalizing on each other's strengths. The
likelihood of doing serious language work, which is,
after all, absolutely necessary if one hopes to send
students to study engineering abroad or to carry out
internships with companies in non-English-speaking
environments, could not be done without the
involvement of language faculty. On the other hand,
there was no way to convince engineering students to
study language in depth, or to develop internships
abroad, or to design a new international curriculum
without the commitment and participation of
engineering faculty.
3. A "Win-Win" Situation:
At URI, faculty from engineering and languages
consider themselves close colleagues today, and are
equally proud of the program which has evolved.
Underlying this happy union is the fact that the IEP
has become a fact of life at URI to the benefit of
all parties. The IEP is a drawing card for both
languages and engineering at URI. All faculty are
equally aware of the fact that the distinctive IEP
curriculum is often the factor that makes the
difference as good students choose URI over other
institutions. Bright young students interested in
engineering are inevitably accepted by five or six
schools, all of which can provide a good engineering
education. Many of these excellent students select
URI, however, because URI offers the opportunity to
study a language and culture alongside engineering,
and to do an internship with a company abroad.
Both language and engineering faculty have
"profited" from their common program. Just
as engineering faculty now often find larger numbers
of brighter and stronger students in their
classrooms, so too do language faculty. In a time
when German enrollments have languished at colleges
and universities throughout the United States, the
German program at URI has grown, and now boasts more
undergraduate majors than practically any other
institution in the country.
4. An Entrepreneurial Spirit:
Academia must learn to be responsive to societal
needs and must continually ask itself if its
curriculum is indeed in line with the requirements of
the workplace and the demands of a continually
changing and evolving economy. Too often university
faculty rest on the traditions imparted to them in
graduate school, and on their long-standing
perceptions of what it is important to know.
Many would argue that certain fields and certain
contents have an inalienable right to be a part of
the curriculum of a university, and that no force or
budgetary analysis or student opinion shall ever be
able to alter this. Unfortunately, this attitude is
not in line with today's fiscal realities, and
neither German departments nor electrical engineering
departments, to take two examples, will necessarily
survive in the absence of students, or in the absence
of good programming.
Faculty, therefore, must look at themselves and their
programs critically, and ask to what extent they are
meeting their students' and their constituencies'
needs, and to what extent they are competitive when
compared with neighboring higher education
institutions. Yes, technology is important; yes,
languages and the humanities are important. But,
neither has the right to remain, if not responsive to
the needs of students and society.
International engineering, as an interdisciplinary
response to the demands of today's global workplace,
is a good example of academic entrepreneurialism.
From an idealistic level, IEP students receive a
broader and more liberal education, and yet, from a
practical perspective IEP students are also more
competitive in the world marketplace. The German
program at URI, as an example, is doing well today
not by any inalienable right, but because its faculty
adapted their program to the needs of their
institution and the needs of its regional and
national constituencies.
5. Partnership with the Private
Sector:
The Rhode Island IEP could not exist without close
collaboration with business and industry, i.e., with
those persons and organizations for whom the students
will intern and ultimately pursue their international
careers. For this reason, the IEP faculty worked from
the beginning to establish relationships with
subsidiaries of foreign firms in the Rhode Island
area, and with American firms heavily involved
abroad. Because global work is the reality of
business today, finding internationally involved
companies was not a problem. Also, because the
success of global companies is dependent upon
reliable cross-cultural and cross-lingual
communication, there was little problem in finding
firms which recognized the importance of the goals of
the IEP.
The IEP established an Advisory Board in order to
involve companies in the process of building the
program and in order to develop internship and
long-term employment opportunities. The Board is
active today in many ways: advising faculty,
coordinating internships, recruiting students,
raising funds for scholarships, and in other aspects
of program development and support. The Board meets
annually, either at URI, at a company location, and
occasionally at a European location. (For information
on the most recent meeting, click HERE.)
6. Private Sector Outreach Skills:
For anyone establishing a program comparable to the
URI program, which relies on close collaboration with
business and industry for a variety of reasons, it is
essential that the program leadership include persons
with strong development skills. In order to build an
internship program, a university representative must
visit with leadership-level persons in the companies
involved. In most cases this calls for good
presentation skills, and, in the case of visits
abroad, presentations in a language other than
English, with sensitivity to cultural differences.
The IEP corporate liaison must be capable of board
room visits, and feel comfortable in the social
environment of the business world. Annual board
meetings with corporate supporters are likewise
expected, and, here again, the IEP faculty need to be
able to present themselves appropriately.
For faculty who might shy away from this part of the
experience, there may be university officials who can
assume this role for the program. Certainly the deans
should be involved, as should the provost and the
president. Business leaders are happy to play a part
in the university community, but they need to know
that this is recognized and appreciated by the
institution as a whole.
7. Recruitment of Good Students:
Inasmuch as an International Engineering Program
cannot exist without a critical mass of students, and
since the concept of bilingual American engineers is
still relatively new, it cannot be assumed that large
numbers of students will enroll in the IEP without
active encouragement. The IEP, therefore, relies on
an active advertising, promotion, and recruitment
program. Mailings consisting of letters and brochures
go out to high school students, to teachers, and to
faculty. A high school outreach team, made up of
current students and faculty, makes annual visits to
high schools in the Rhode Island area. Newspaper
advertisements, journal advertisements, and even
radio ads are a part of the annual cycle. In the same
spirit, a great deal of effort has been put into the
IEP Web site, of which this page is one part. It is
the strong opinion of the URI faculty involved in
this program that the IEP cannot be taken for
granted, and that recruitment will be ongoing for
years to come.
8. A Long-Term Commitment:
It may sound trite to say that international
engineering programs are not built overnight, and,
yet, as we now complete our twelfth year of program
building, there is still much work to be done. Though
the program is healthy, and though we now have French
and Spanish IEP's alongside the German program, there
is no assurance that the program would survive
without the extraordinary efforts of its key
advocates, its faculty and staff. We say this not to
discourage others, but only to emphasize that such
programs require a long-term commitment and a steady
and sustained effort. Each year, the IEP needs to be
sure that a new group of good students will be
joining the program, each year the faculty need to
work on retention rates, i.e., on motivating and
supporting students, and encouraging them to maintain
their own long-term perspectives. Each year, a new
group of interns needs to be placed with European
companies, each year scholarship funds need to be
generated, and so on.
9. External Funding:
Programs such as the IEP are labor intensive, and
require many activities beyond the normal routine of
the academic year. Faculty need to travel to develop
internships, to maintain relationships with the
private sector, to visit students on site during
their internships, to visit high schools for
recruiting and to develop study abroad opportunities.
A program such as the IEP also requires continual
curriculum review and the creation of specialized
courses such as advanced intermediate German for
engineers. To do this work properly, faculty need
release time and summer course-development stipends.
Expenses such as these are not generally allowable
within the budgetary framework of an institution such
as the University of Rhode Island. It is safe to say,
therefore, that international engineering programs
rely, at least initially, on external funding for
their development. For us at URI, grant writing and
fund-raising have become a part of the routine
academic year, and it is for this reason that we have
begun to categorize potential funding sources for
international engineering programs in the second part
of this resource book.
10. Outreach:
Outreach is a key word which is applicable to any and
all of the categories mentioned above in numbers 1
through 9. If the impetus for reform begins with
language faculty, then this group needs to reach out
to interested colleagues in the engineering
disciplines. Likewise, if the impetus begins with
engineering faculty, they should not undertake
internationalization without the collaboration of
language and international studies faculty. Just as
one group cannot develop a program such as this
exclusively within the university, higher education
as a whole must reach out to the private sector
rather than attempt program establishment internally.
Only by means of a multisided partnership will the
program be successful; only by means of a program,
which is in the interest of all parties concerned,
will the student truly be served.
- Return
to Table of Contents
- International Engineering Education: A
Resource Book
- Return to the IEP Website
File last updated: Tuesday, December 16, 2003
|
