Outcome-Based Innovative Engineering Education

Engineering, at its core, is about problem-solving. Therefore, engineering education aims to develop more people who can solve problems in the world. Unfortunately, the universities define their target audience differently. As such, engineering education has stayed stuck for many years in Nigeria.

How we define a problem will greatly determine how we design it. If we define it wrongly, then every activity we undertake will take us away from how it should be.

Recently I sat down and started reviewing the Nigerian engineering curriculum. I believe there have not been many changes since I graduated. Some courses would have been introduced but the outcome they see has not changed.

I recently discussed with a 3rd-year software engineering student from one of the most prestigious universities in Nigeria. I asked him what skills he had learned and he answered. So, I asked if he learned them from school. He replied no. He then went ahead to let me know that the school only taught them the basics of Python programming.

I have also had discussions with engineering graduates who have left engineering for tech. A friend of mine, who was one of the brightest students I know at the University, told me that he had left engineering long ago. That is because the outcome defined by engineering education is faulty. If the right outcome were defined, he would have been trained better.

The present Outcome-Based Education approach defines learning as the outcome of the education. The goal is to achieve specific, measurable learning outcomes. They have to first identify clear learning objectives, structure activities to achieve the objectives and measure whether the learning has been delivered.

This means that certain courses are developed to deliver the kind of knowledge the universities expect them to have. For instance, if the faculty curriculum board decides that Python is better than FORTRAN, they will drop the latter and adopt the first to achieve their defined learning outcome.

There Is A Problem

I am a student of Innovation. I want to see how things can be improved to get better results. If we have been training engineers for more than 50 years yet our country is poor, people are suffering, lack jobs, and are hungry, it means engineering education is broken and needs to be fixed.

Recently, I visited the Council for the Regulation of Engineering in Nigeria (COREN) and the National Universities Commission (NUC) offices in Abuja. To be able to visit three universities and these two places on the same day, I had to use Bolt and optimize my time. What I discovered from meeting people in those places was that they know that the educational system is not producing as they expected (its broken), but no one has the answer.

In the new university curriculum designed by NUC, nothing has changed except that they gave universities the liberty to introduce more programs that are innovative. But as long as the universities still define their outcome the same way they have done, there won’t be any change in the system. If we keep doing things as we have been doing them, we won’t have a different result. However, if we keep expecting a different result while doing the same thing, we are mad to paraphrase Albert Einstein.

Everyone knows that what they have is not working. One of the best universities in Nigeria is thinking of having their students do their industrial placement overseas and get into partnership with Harvard and MIT for the exchange of professors and students. This shows that they have tried everything but it’s not working.

The problem is simply with how we see things. If the university cannot solve its problem, then how can it produce graduates who can solve the problems of the country? We can only give what we have and produce in accordance with who we are. The problem is internal, not external. It has to do with the way we see things.

When we change the way we see and define things, what we come up with and what we do will change. The challenge is for us to change how we are seeing the problem. There is a need to reframe the problem or reframe our thinking. We see with our minds, not our eyes. There is a need for that change. I hope this article stirs up that transformation.

A Case for Outcome-Based Innovative Education

Academics are proud of their knowledge and it's hard to accept they are wrong. They would rather blame others and expect more money to be poured into something that is not working to make it work. More money into something that isn’t working and hasn’t been evaluated by independent minds will only produce more of the results already being produced.

To transform engineering education, we have to first define who the education is for and then what kind of outcome they desire. I have identified three targets of education. Each one comes with its specific outcome.

1. Learning As Target: The outcome here is based on what the university wants. The students and industry have no business in this. The result of this is that students know a lot of theory and may have good grades but don’t have practical experience. Unemployable graduates are the products of focusing on learning outcomes.

2. Students As Target: The outcome here is defined by what the student wants. Most Nigerian universities believe that the students don’t know what they want. As such there is no need to find out. And the assertion is true to a very large extent. The outcome most parents seek is better grades for their children

3. Industry As Target: The outcome here is based on what the industry wants. Universities take time to understand what the industry wants and then develop curricula in partnership with industry to train students to meet the needs of industry. This is innovative. Universities are reaching outside themselves to satisfy the needs of someone. That way they can easily evaluate by asking the industry.

Outcome-based innovative engineering education focuses on developing a curriculum that delivers specific, measurable outcomes for industry and government who will employ or use what they produce. This approach aims to drive innovation and growth in engineering education and build a bridge that links universities and industries.

The learning-based outcome only allows the university to focus on itself and what it is doing. However, the industry-based outcomes will empower the university to empathize with the industry and know what they want and then fashion out a curriculum that enables the industry to achieve the outcome they desire.

Industry-Based Engineering Education Outcome

Universities need to understand that everything an engineer does, has five different aspects to it. Learning outcomes only focus on training engineers in one aspect: technical. The problems engineers encounter in the real world go far beyond the realm of equations and technical know-how which are part of learning outcomes.

To truly excel, engineers need to possess a holistic understanding of the complex interplay between technology, society, and the environment. This is a glaring omission in many engineering curricula. I can recall that my education only trained me in the technical aspects of engineering. This oversight has profound implications for the performance of engineers post-graduation.

When it comes to industry-based outcomes, the universities need to include these aspects in the curriculum:

1. Human Aspect: This aspect deals with the desirability of the solutions. Engineering students need to understand the humans they are solving problems for. This means engineering education should include human needs, psychology, and anthropology. Every design needs to start with the human needs.

2. Technical Aspect: This aspect deals with the feasibility of the solution. Engineering graduates need the technical competence to design and produce the solutions as technology. This is where the university excels. Students should continue to learn how to use engineering mathematics as a modeling tool and manipulate science laws and concepts to develop solutions.

3. Business Aspect: This aspect deals with the feasibility of the solution. Industries are set up to be viable or make a profit. Universities need to train engineers to understand business models marketing and value creation. Instead of Economics for Engineers, a program that takes students into everything about a business should be taught.

4. Legal Aspect: This aspect deals with compliance and regulatory aspects of things. I did a program on contract law as an undergraduate. But I believe there is more to law than just learning about contracts. These are intellectual property rights, patents, adherence to industry standards, and safety regulations.

5. Environmental Aspect: This aspect deals with sustainability. Engineering students need to learn to consider the environmental impact of a product throughout its lifecycle, from material extraction to disposal. Also, the efficient use of materials and energy is essential for reducing costs and minimizing environmental harm. Designing products and systems that contribute to climate change mitigation (reduced carbon footprint) and adaptation is becoming a critical consideration.

It's essential to recognize that knowing all these aspects helps the engineer design better products, technology, and services. For example, a design that prioritizes user needs (human factor) may require additional development time and cost (business factor). A sustainable product (environmental factor) might involve using new materials, which could impact manufacturing processes (technical factor) and increase costs (business factor).

By carefully considering these factors throughout the engineering education process, universities can produce engineers that are not only technically sound but also meet the needs of users, are economically viable, comply with legal requirements, and have minimal environmental impact. This should be an engineering education that creates and delivers value to industry and makes the world a better place.

?

?

?