Final Report Summary - NANOEIS (Nanotechnology Education for Industry and Society)
Executive Summary:
NanoEIS studies show that the state of nanotechnology teaching in the EU is not satisfactory. Secondary schools – outside of some islands of good practice – do not teach nanotechnology; despite the fact that their students are all using products depending on that technology. We suggest that nanotechnology could be a leading way for teaching STEM subjects as a whole. In university studies, many subjects tend to be missing that are expected by futures employers, including health, safety, regulation, standardization, environmental issues and communication. These topics have nano-specific aspects, so it should be ensured that university students at all levels are learning these skills that are important both for individual careers and for supporting the success of European companies.
Project Context and Objectives:
The introduction of nano-enabled products into a multitude of markets has led to a strong demand for a highly qualified workforce in industries producing or using nanomaterials. Many universities have responded to this development by setting up curricula on nanotechnology or other nanosciences. The question is, are the students learning the skills that are in demand in the job market? This issue was investigated by the NanoEIS and the key results are now available on the website of the project (www.nanoeis.eu).
Project Results:
It is expected that universities do not really train perfectly for a job – a university has other goals and merits – so a gap just has to exist. It is surprising, however, that this gap resembles the Grand Canyon. The match between curricula contents and job skill demands is indeed poor. University studies put a strong emphasis on traditional, research-driven subjects like characterization/metrology, nanoelectronics and nanostructures/composites. This is in agreement with the role of universities to provide research-guided teaching on a tertiary level and it also fits into the existing connections between industry and university researchers, with usually pursue specific scientific projects. In the case of nanotechnology, however, it means that the gaps in knowledge needed to address novel nano-specific issues are not well covered.
The nanotechnology industry, including both large companies, and SMEs, identifies health/safety issues as the most important area where recruitment is expected both now and in five years. Regulation and standardization as well as environmental issues are also near the top of the wish list. The data thus show that the industry is well aware that nanomaterials incur specific problems and challenges regarding safety, so safety and health are the area in which most industry stakeholders polled expect to recruit people. The strong interest in expertise on regulation also reflects high awareness in industry that nanomaterials cannot be fully covered by existing regulations on chemicals and on larger particles. The surprisingly high interest in environmental issues is likely to reflect the fact that concepts like life cycle analysis and cradle to cradle production have reached the industrial stakeholders. However, where will the experts desired by the nanotechnology industry come from? Health and safety appear to be low priorities in university training. Of 35 investigated representative European programs (on bachelor, master and PhD level), only 17 claim to include any content on health and safety in their curricula. Regulation is addressed by 7 programs and the NanoEIS consortium has failed to find a single European university program on nanotechnology or related issues where environment/disposal/recycling are addressed at all. The situation in other parts of the world is unlikely to be much different.
What can be done? Direct involvement of industry in teaching has been identified as the most effective means to achieve a smooth transition into industrial employment. Indeed, this is also what students suggest when they are polled about how their studies could be improved. Students also correctly identify some of the subjects mentioned above as missing but presumably desired later on in their jobs.
NanoEIS has produced model curricula for bachelor, master and doctoral studies that can be used to check contents of existing study offers and to help structure new ones. These model curricula combine the hard core subjects needed in this area with other skills that are in demand by industrial and non-industrial employers. With industry and students both arguing for a stronger consideration of more general topics like health, safety, regulation and environment, the ball is in the court of university teachers and administrators. Curriculum reform is notoriously difficult, since while nearly everybody in a faculty is in favour of modernization, few are equally supportive when this means to sacrifice credits from their own special area. Nevertheless, a shifting of attention will be necessary, since new contents cannot be simply attached to a study program, but need to be embedded in the mainstream of teaching. There are certainly many ways to achieve this and we don’t expect one single best practice model to emerge, but rather many different solutions will have to be developed depending on the profile of a specific study program.
Other means to better integrate the relevant subjects into training efforts can be research projects involving young scientists, workshops and summer schools, or well-designed online courses, all of which can be used both in academic training and on-the-job. It is to be hoped that universities and employers rally behind such efforts, because otherwise we may well train highly motivated and qualified people towards unemployment, while industry is looking for expertise that is not there.
Potential Impact:
The studies on industrial and non-industrial employer needs and their comparison with university study contents have been disseminated by publications, talks and other presentation to different stakeholders. Phrasing the correct questions and providing robust data to back them up is critical to raise awareness and thus stimulate action. The identification of very different but successful models of good practice on the secondary school and university levels provides practical examples to educators looking to implement reforms. The developed model curricula can be useful to integrate missing subjects in on-going or new study programs. All the results derived from NanoEIS are fully public (with the exception of confidentiality for industry and university representatives that were willing to be our interview partners). Dissemination has already been substantial and will continue beyond the lifetime of the project.
List of Websites:
www.nanoeis.eu
Coordinator: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Albert Duschl
University of Salzburg, Department of Molecular Biology
Hellbrunner Strasse 34, 5020 Salzburg
Austria, Europe
albert.duschl@sbg.ac.at
Tel 0043 662 8044 5731
FAX 0043 662 8044 5751
NanoEIS studies show that the state of nanotechnology teaching in the EU is not satisfactory. Secondary schools – outside of some islands of good practice – do not teach nanotechnology; despite the fact that their students are all using products depending on that technology. We suggest that nanotechnology could be a leading way for teaching STEM subjects as a whole. In university studies, many subjects tend to be missing that are expected by futures employers, including health, safety, regulation, standardization, environmental issues and communication. These topics have nano-specific aspects, so it should be ensured that university students at all levels are learning these skills that are important both for individual careers and for supporting the success of European companies.
Project Context and Objectives:
The introduction of nano-enabled products into a multitude of markets has led to a strong demand for a highly qualified workforce in industries producing or using nanomaterials. Many universities have responded to this development by setting up curricula on nanotechnology or other nanosciences. The question is, are the students learning the skills that are in demand in the job market? This issue was investigated by the NanoEIS and the key results are now available on the website of the project (www.nanoeis.eu).
Project Results:
It is expected that universities do not really train perfectly for a job – a university has other goals and merits – so a gap just has to exist. It is surprising, however, that this gap resembles the Grand Canyon. The match between curricula contents and job skill demands is indeed poor. University studies put a strong emphasis on traditional, research-driven subjects like characterization/metrology, nanoelectronics and nanostructures/composites. This is in agreement with the role of universities to provide research-guided teaching on a tertiary level and it also fits into the existing connections between industry and university researchers, with usually pursue specific scientific projects. In the case of nanotechnology, however, it means that the gaps in knowledge needed to address novel nano-specific issues are not well covered.
The nanotechnology industry, including both large companies, and SMEs, identifies health/safety issues as the most important area where recruitment is expected both now and in five years. Regulation and standardization as well as environmental issues are also near the top of the wish list. The data thus show that the industry is well aware that nanomaterials incur specific problems and challenges regarding safety, so safety and health are the area in which most industry stakeholders polled expect to recruit people. The strong interest in expertise on regulation also reflects high awareness in industry that nanomaterials cannot be fully covered by existing regulations on chemicals and on larger particles. The surprisingly high interest in environmental issues is likely to reflect the fact that concepts like life cycle analysis and cradle to cradle production have reached the industrial stakeholders. However, where will the experts desired by the nanotechnology industry come from? Health and safety appear to be low priorities in university training. Of 35 investigated representative European programs (on bachelor, master and PhD level), only 17 claim to include any content on health and safety in their curricula. Regulation is addressed by 7 programs and the NanoEIS consortium has failed to find a single European university program on nanotechnology or related issues where environment/disposal/recycling are addressed at all. The situation in other parts of the world is unlikely to be much different.
What can be done? Direct involvement of industry in teaching has been identified as the most effective means to achieve a smooth transition into industrial employment. Indeed, this is also what students suggest when they are polled about how their studies could be improved. Students also correctly identify some of the subjects mentioned above as missing but presumably desired later on in their jobs.
NanoEIS has produced model curricula for bachelor, master and doctoral studies that can be used to check contents of existing study offers and to help structure new ones. These model curricula combine the hard core subjects needed in this area with other skills that are in demand by industrial and non-industrial employers. With industry and students both arguing for a stronger consideration of more general topics like health, safety, regulation and environment, the ball is in the court of university teachers and administrators. Curriculum reform is notoriously difficult, since while nearly everybody in a faculty is in favour of modernization, few are equally supportive when this means to sacrifice credits from their own special area. Nevertheless, a shifting of attention will be necessary, since new contents cannot be simply attached to a study program, but need to be embedded in the mainstream of teaching. There are certainly many ways to achieve this and we don’t expect one single best practice model to emerge, but rather many different solutions will have to be developed depending on the profile of a specific study program.
Other means to better integrate the relevant subjects into training efforts can be research projects involving young scientists, workshops and summer schools, or well-designed online courses, all of which can be used both in academic training and on-the-job. It is to be hoped that universities and employers rally behind such efforts, because otherwise we may well train highly motivated and qualified people towards unemployment, while industry is looking for expertise that is not there.
Potential Impact:
The studies on industrial and non-industrial employer needs and their comparison with university study contents have been disseminated by publications, talks and other presentation to different stakeholders. Phrasing the correct questions and providing robust data to back them up is critical to raise awareness and thus stimulate action. The identification of very different but successful models of good practice on the secondary school and university levels provides practical examples to educators looking to implement reforms. The developed model curricula can be useful to integrate missing subjects in on-going or new study programs. All the results derived from NanoEIS are fully public (with the exception of confidentiality for industry and university representatives that were willing to be our interview partners). Dissemination has already been substantial and will continue beyond the lifetime of the project.
List of Websites:
www.nanoeis.eu
Coordinator: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Albert Duschl
University of Salzburg, Department of Molecular Biology
Hellbrunner Strasse 34, 5020 Salzburg
Austria, Europe
albert.duschl@sbg.ac.at
Tel 0043 662 8044 5731
FAX 0043 662 8044 5751
