Report by Group 3NEW LEARNING AND TEACHING METHODS

Report Group 3

• Mihaly BenedictUniversity of Szeged, HU

• Hans Joerg JodlUniversity of Kaiserslautern, GE

• Ivan Ruddock• University of Strathclyde, UK

• Elena Sassi• University of Naples Federico II, IT

• Robert Sporken• University of Namur, BE

• Sonja Feiner-ValkierEindhoven University of Technology NL

Main activities during 2006/2007, page 1

• General questionnaire

– More detailed information on new teaching methods differentiated on Bachelor and Master, regarding categories and quantity

– Information on tools, scientific software and programming languages in Bachelor and Master

Main activities during 2006/2007, page 2

• Alumni questionnaire among alumni: universities from all the EG-members of the STEPS-project on:– Information company, institution– Position of alumni and other

physicists– Technical/scientific software, tools

and programming languages– Soft skills

Main activities during 2006/2007, page 3

• Selection of MM on Solid State Physics and Elementary Particles: – MPTL-workshop Wrocław next week

• Evaluation of MM-material in universities from EG3- members:– 7 responses, 4 of them positive, all 4 used

MM as demonstrationmaterial in lectures;– Other 3: no time, not appropriate

General questionnaire: new methods

• Inventory on courses and ECTS credits, for Bachelor and Master:– Distance- and Blended learning– Problem based learning, project oriented

learning– Student centered learning, Peer Instruction

General questionnaire, 62 universities

Bachelor: Distance and Blended Learning22 responses

51-60 ECTS; 18%

41-50 ECTS; 9%

31-40 ECTS; 9%

21-30 ECTS; 14%

11-20 ECTS; 18%

0-10 ECTS; 32%

Master: Distance and Blended Learning14 responses

51-60 ECTS; 21%

41-50 ECTS; 0%

31-40 ECTS; 0%

21-30 ECTS; 14%

11-20 ECTS; 7%

0-10 ECTS; 57%

General questionnaire, 62 universities

Bachelor: Problem Based Learning and Projects, 34 responses

31-40 ECTS; 9%

51-60 ECTS; 12%

41-50 ECTS; 3%

21-30 ECTS; 6%

11-20 ECTS; 59%

0-10 ECTS; 41%

Master: Problem Based Learning and Projects, 45 responses

51-60 ECTS; 20%

41-50 ECTS; 20%

31-40 ECTS; 2%

21-30 ECTS; 18%

11-20 ECTS; 16%

0-10 ECTS; 24%

General questionnaire, 62 universities

Bachelor: Student Centred and Peer Instruction: 19 responses

51-60 ECTS; 11%

41-50 ECTS; 21%

31-40 ECTS; 5%

21-30 ECTS; 16%

11-20 ECTS; 0%

0-10 ECTS; 47%

Master: Student Centred and Peer Instruction:

22 responses

51-60 ECTS; 9%

31-40 ECTS; 0%

21-30 ECTS; 14%

11-20 ECTS; 18%

0-10 ECTS; 50%

9%

General questionnaire: tools

• Use of:– Modelling environment– Sensor based (real time) lab– Remote virtual lab– Video analysis

• Use of:– Software (matlab, origin, labview,…)– Programming Languages (C++, Java,..)

General questionnaire, 68 universities

Bachelor: Technical software - data analysis

Matlab38%

Origin22%

Labview31%

Others9%

Master: Technical software - data analysis

Matlab35%

Origin21%

Labview36%

Others8%

General questionnaire, 68 universities

Bachelor: Technical software - symbolic maths packages

Mathcad6%

Maple33%

Matematica59%

Others2%

Master: Technical software - symbolic maths packages

MathCad6%

Maple32%

Matematica62%

General questionnaire, 68 universities

Bachelor: Programming languages

C++37%

C9%

Java22%

Fortran27%

Others5%

Master: Programming languages

C++34%

C9%

Java18%

Fortran32%

Others7%

Conclusions General questionnaire, page 1

• New teaching and learning methods:– Difficult to interpret data: great variety of

methods; few universities have completely novel approach;

– Bachelor: more PBL & projects– Master: more Distance and Blended learning– Student Centered & Peer Instruction:

very few and no big difference

Conclusions General questionnaire, page 2

• Software, math-packages and programming languages:– No significant difference between Ba and Ma– Matlab, Labview and Origin– Mathematica, Maple– C++, Java, Fortran

INFORMATION ALUMNI questionnaire

• Date & year of graduation• Main activity company/institution• Position of alumni in company/institution• Type of tasks for physicists in company/institution• Standard technical/scientific software in your field• The same for advanced techniques• The same for tools to collect information• The same for programming languages • Importance of soft skills

Main activity company institution

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

AT BE FI FR GE GR NL RO

Phys Based IndustryIT companyUniversityResearch CenterHospitalSec SchoolConsultancy

Position alumni in company/institution

Development &Engineering

Research

Teaching

IT

Consultancy&Counselling

Manager

Sales

Type of tasks for new physicists in co/inst

Development &Engineering

Research

Teaching

IT

Consultancy &Counselling

Manager

Sales

Standard technical/scientific software

Phys based Industry, University and Research Center: NO difference:

• Matlab: 36%

• Labview: 20%

• Origin: 11%• All others, about 35, only once or twice mentioned.

Information tools and programming languages

• Research Based Industry, University and Research Center: NO difference:

Google: 33%

Wikipedia: 20%

Specialized Databases: 13%

Journals: 10%

C++ and Java, no Fortran in industry

SOFT SKILLS ALUMNI

Grouping in 8 new categories; importance measured in 1-5 scale.

Teamwork, Social skills, Networking

Independent working, Self-leadership

Result-oriented attitude, Time management

Analytical thinking, Problem solving

Flexibility, Self-learning potential

Initiative

Oral and written communication

Focus on customers, Financial aspects, Quality vs. Quantity

Average score total group 4,1

Physics based industry 4,7

Score on 1-to-5 scale on

TEAMWORK, SOCIAL SKILLS, NETWORKING

University 4,0

Average score total group 3,9

Physics based industry 4,1

Score on 1-to-5 scale on

INDEPENDENT WORKING, SELF-LEADERSHIP

University 4,0

Average score total group 3,8

Physics based industry 4,3

Score on 1-to-5 scale on

RESULT ORIENTED ATTITUDE, TIME MANAGEMENT

University 3,6

Average score total group 3.9

Physics based industry 4,2

Score on 1-to-5 scale on

ANALYTICAL THINKING, PROBLEM SOLVING

University 4,5

Average score total group 4,3

Physics based industry 4,1

Score on 1-to-5 scale on

FLEXIBILITY, SELF-LEARNING POTENTIAL

University 4,3

Average score total group 4,3

Physics based industry 3,8

Score on 1-to-5 scale on

INITIATIVE

University 4,0

Average score total group 4,0

Physics based industry 3,8

Score on 1-to-5 scale on

ORAL & WRITTEN COMMUNICATION

University 3,8

Average score total group 3,1

Physics based industry 4,1

Score on 1-to-5 scale on

FOCUS ON CUSTOMERS, FINANCIAL ASPECTS, QU - QU

University 2,8

Conclusions alumni questionnaire

• Hard to get sufficient data from various countries; mostly due to difficulties in contacting alumni

• No contradiction between data alumni and data from universities on tools, scientific software and programming languages

• Soft skills in general very important; small differences between industry and university

Outlook on future

• Continuation of MM- evaluation among the steps members

• Selection on good practice examples in new methods

• Further work on data from 2 alumni questionnaires

• Multimedia evaluation by MPTL:– Publication in 2008, Jodl and Mason, 4-6

years