sefi book complete

8/10/2019 SEFI Book Complete

1/385

23-26 September 2012 Thessaloniki, GreeceAristotle University of Thessaloniki Faculty of Engineering

EngineeringEducation 2020:

MEET THEFUTURE

40th annualconference

Conference Proceedings:Keynote Lectures and Extended Abstracts


2/385


3/385


4/385

Proceedings of the 40th SEFI Annual Conference 2012Engineering Education 2020: Meet the Future

Co-organised by SEFI and the Faculty of Engineering of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

SEFI, Brussels, BelgiumSEFI-Socit Europenne pour la Formation des Ingnieurs119, rue de Stassart, B-1050 Brussels

Editor : Aris Avdelas, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

ISBN : 978-2-87352-005-2


5/385

Engineering Education 2020:In this time of change, the Faculty of Engineering of the Aristotle Univer-

sity wishes to express its optimism for the future of Engineering Educa-tion and for the generations of young engineers to come. Facing a mo-ment of transformation, Europe - and SEFI - have set a number of priori-ties to achieve before 2020. They are all related to growth, and engi-neering has of course always been closely connected with growth.

Therefore, in order to better prepare future engineers for this challenge,many aspects of the engineering education have to be adapted, espe-cially as far as teaching and learning methods are concerned.

The objective of the 40th Annual Conference of the European Societyfor Engineering Education - SEFI - is to contribute to the reflection on this

near future and to recommend ways for the implementation of new andinnovative actions.

MEET THEFUTURE

ABOUT SEFISEFI, established in 1973, is the largest network of engineering education institutions and educators in Europe. SE-FIs aims and objectives are to contribute to the development and to the improvement of engineering education inEurope, to reinforce the position of the engineering professionals in society, to provide services to our members, topromote information about engineering education and improve communication and exchanges between teach-ers, researchers and student, to develop co-operation between educational engineering institutions and establish-ments of higher technical education, to promote co-operation between industry and engineering education actors,to be a link between our members and international organizations, and to promote the European dimension in high-er engineering education.SEFI serves as a European Forum to its members, composed of institutions of higher engineering education, aca-demic staff and teachers, students, related associations and companies in 47countries.

The objectives of SEFI are encountered through a series of activities such as the Annual Conferences, Ad hoc sem-inars and workshops organised by SEFIs working groups, Task forces on specific topics, the organization of theEuropean Engineering Deans Conventions, Publications (incl. the European Journal of Engineering Education), Eu-ropean projects, Position papers

A large part of SEFIs activities is dedicated to the cooperation with other major European associations and interna-tional bodies the European Commission, the UNESCO, the Council of Europe or the OECD.

ABOUT THE ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI (AUTh)AUTh has been established in 1925 and is named after the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. Today it is consid-ered the largest university in Greece and in Southeastern Europe. AUTh is an inclusive university with 7 Faculties or-ganized in 33 Schools, 5 single-School Faculties, as well as 4 independent Schools (a total of 42 Schools). AUTh hasan extensive research activity, participating in both European and international projects and research consortia. It isestimated that each year, 600-700 new research projects are starting, with an average duration of three years. Sec-tors in which research projects are currently implemented are: the environment (natural and structured), new materi-als, IT and communications, agricultural research, biotechnology, medical research, architectural research, newtechnologies and nanotechnology, research in social and economic sciences, research in issues of language and

culture, etc. AUTh cooperates closely with Universities, research centres, organisations and companies in Greeceand abroad. Thanks to its large number of Faculties and Schools, as well as its 250 laboratories, it has the capacityto implement research, technological, educational and training projects, as well as Service Provision Projects.


6/385


7/385

Under the Auspices

Major Sponsors

Sponsors

Supporters

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI

The Organising Committee would like to thank its sponsors and supportersfor their contribution to the Conference


8/385


9/385

COMMITTEES

PROGRAMME / SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE

From the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

Prof. Aris AvdelasProf. Charalambos Baniotopoulos

Assist. Prof. Konstantinos Spyridonidis

Prof. Petros Patias

Prof. Zissis Samaras

Prof. Christos Antonopoulos

From the National Technical University of Athens

Prof. Charis Gantes

From the Technical University of Crete

Prof. Georgios Stavroulakis

From SEFI

Dr. Esat Alpay, Imperial College London (UK), Chair WG on Ethics in Engineering EducationProf. Burkhard Alpers, University of Applied Science Aalen (D), Chair WG on Mathematics and Engineering EducationProf. Jos Carlos Quadrado, ISEL (P), SEFI Vice-President, IFEES President-Elect, Global Mobility andInternational CooperationProf. Robin Clark, Ashton University (UK), Chair WG on Engineering Education ResearchProf. Urbano Dominguez, University of Valladolid (E), Chair WG on Curriculum DevelopmentDr. Pieter De Vries, Delft University of Technology (NL), Chair WG on Information and Communication TechnologiesMr. Xavier Fouger, Dassault Systems (F), SEFI Vice-President, Chair Task Force on University-Business CooperationProf. Kamel Hawwash, University of Birmingham (UK), Chair WG on Attractiveness of Engineering EducationProf. Susanne Ihsen, TU Munchen (DE), Chair WG on Gender and Diversity in Engineering EducationProf. Anne-Marie Jolly, PolytechOrlans, TF on Sustainability in Engineering EducationProf. Anette Kolmos, University of Aalborg (DK), Past President, Chair Task Force on Bologna Processand Cooperation with EU InstitutionsProf. Greet Langie, Campus de Nayer (B), Chair WG on Physics and Engineering EducationProf. Francesco Maffioli, Politecnico di Milano (I), Co-Chair Task Force Accreditation Quality AssuranceKirsti Mittienen, Aalto University (SF), Chair WG on Continuing Engineering EducationMs. Marina Sainz Comas (ES), BEST, Chair Task Force Cooperation with the StudentsDr. James Uhomoidhi, University of Ulster (UK), Chair Task Force on Cooperation with AfricaProf. Angela Varadi, University of Miskolc (HU), Co-Chair Task Force Accreditation Quality Assurance

ORGANISING COMMITTEEChair: Prof. Aris Avdelas, Aristotle University of ThessalonikiProf. Wim Van Petegem, KU Leuven, SEFI PresidentMs. Franoise Cme, SEFI Secretary GeneralMr. Jacques Schibler, SEFI Communication Officer

LOCAL ORGANISING COMMITTEEProf. Aris Avdelas

Assoc. Prof. Epameinondas Sidiropoulos

Prof. Georgios Chasapis

Assoc. Prof. Anastasia Zampaniotou

Ms. Pinelopi Ralli

Ms. Alexandra EnglezouMr. Dimitris Zimos (Local BEST Group Thessaloniki)

Ms. Spyridonidou Alexia (Local BEST Group Thessaloniki)


10/385


11/385

REVIEWERS

Name TopicEsat Alpay Ethics in Engineering EducationBurkhard Alpers Mathematics and Engineering Education

Jos Carlos Quadrado Global Mobility and International CooperationRobin Clark Engineering Education ResearchUrbano Dominguez Curriculum DevelopmentPieter De Vries Information and Communication Technologies

Xavier Fouger University-Business CooperationKamel Hawwash Attractiveness of Engineering EducationSusanne Ihsen Gender and Diversity in Engineering Education

Anne-Marie Jolly Sustainability in Engineering EducationGreet Langie Physics and Engineering EducationKirsti Mittienen Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning

Jos Carlos Quadrado Cooperation with the StudentsAngela Varadi Accreditation Quality AssuranceWim Van Petegem The Challenge of 2020: Issues and Actions


12/385


13/385

23-26 September 2012T h e ss a l o n i k i , G re e c e

40th annualconference 11

Keynote Speakers 21

The Antikythera Mechanism:Astronomy and Technology in Ancient Greece, J. H. Seiradakis 31

Keynote Lectures 32

European Engineering Universities as key actors in Regionaland Global Innovation Ecosystems, M. A. Markkula 34

Homo Fabiens Redux: Engineering Education in the 21st Century, D. Evangelou 46

Preparing Students to Accelerate Innovation through simulation-basedEngineering and Science, J. Ryan, A. Tarchini 52

Nowadays Challenges in Engineering Education -The point of view of industry, L. Abraham 57

Turning Engineering Green: Sustainable Developmentand Engineering Education, A. Jamison 60

Attracting Students and making them Stay - The importanceof expectations and experiences in the recruitment and retentionof engineering students, L. Ulriksen 68

"The XXIst Century Da Vinci: A Systems Engineer?", X. Fouger 82

Leonardo da Vinci Medal 90

Attractiveness of Engineering Education 94

025 Responding to the Challenges of Engineering Attractiveness,K. Schrey - Niemenmaa, M. E. Jones 96

028Attracting Students to Science, Technology and Engineering

Higher Education, A. Reis, C. Patrocnio, P. Lourtie 98

040 The Cultivation of Engineering Talent, M. Rabl, G. Hillmer 100

044 General Engineering - Student Motivations towards Flexibilityand Breadth in the Engineering Curriculum, E. Alpay 102

067 Enhancing Engineering Education and its Role into the EuropeanProfessional Scenario, C. Borri, E. Guberti, F. Maffioli, F. Pirr 104

087 Knowledge Management for Increased Student Interaction,Ir. P. A.M. van Kollenburg, Drs. S. R.G. Kawarmala 106

088 Development, Creation and Implementation of e-learning and Web BasedPrograms for Manufacturing Engineering Teaching, Prof. Dr. Ing. I. Kuric 108

TABLE OF CONTENTS


14/385



090 Knowing our Students - Different Approaches to Student Retention,U. Rintala, A. K. Kairamo, K. Kelly, I. Gonalves, A. Lucas, A. Tabacco 110

093 Footprint: Visualising and Monitoring Student Retentionin Study Programmes across Europe, B. Marklund, A. K. Kairamo, U. Rintala 112

116 Changing the Conversation [1]: A new role for technical communicationin the engineering curriculum, A. Berndt 114

133An Innovative Experience to Make the Universitymore Appealing to Future Students at the Schoolof Design Engineering ETSID, E. Ballester - Sarrias,L. Contat - Rodrigo, J. A. Monsoriu - Serra, L. M. Snchez - Ruiz 116

147 Career Advising in Cypriot High Schools,K. Katzis, C. Dimopoulos, K. Hawwash 118

160A Competence Based Framework for Engineering Education,M. Mo Jakobsen 120

Curriculum Development 122

001 Identifying and Mapping Pivotal Concepts and Critical Skills -Concept mapping a Freshmore Engineering Curriculum,

J. French, D. Shah, J. Rankin, A. Bagiati, L. Breslow 124

007 Learning through Projects in Engineering Education,S. Chandrasekaran, A. Stojcevski, G. Littlefair, M. Joordens 126

009 Emphasizing Soft Skill Learning and Training as partof an Engineering Curriculum Revision, S. Pedrazzini 128

012 Using Hands-On Activities to Engage Studentsin Engineering Mechanics, T. Lucke 130

015 What should we Teach? Defining your discipline to drive

curriculum renewal: an environmental engineering case study,D. G. Dowling, R. G. Hadgraft 132

032An Autodidactic Programming Curriculum Applicationfor Early Education: Pilot Studies and Improvement Suggestions,C. Florou, A. Bagiati, I. Kosmopoulou, E. Houstis 134

045 Curriculum Development for Ph.D. Students to Cultivate Literacyand Competency, Y. Yokono, M Mitsuishi 136

047 Developing a Teaching and Learning Culture - The Case of Facultyof Engineering at Lund University, R. Andersson, P. Warfvinge 138

048 Written and Oral Communication across the Engineering Curriculum -An integrated learning trajectory, L. Versteele, Y. Berbers, E. Londers 140


15/385

23-26 September 2012T h e s s a l o n i k i , G r e e c e

40thannual

conference13

054 Enabling Innovation in Engineering Education by providingFlexible Funds for teaching Staff, N. Friese, C. Terkowsky, D. May,Prof. Dr.-Ing. A. E. Tekkaya, K. Schuster, Dr. phil. A. Richert,Prof. Dr. rer. nat. S. Jeschke 142

061 Making Principled Decisions about Curriculum Development:Outcomes of a Realist Evaluation Across 13 Universities,C. Crosthwaite, L. Jolly, L. Brodie, L. Kavanagh, L. Buys 144

070 Development and Analysis of a Professional-Oriented Clil Modelfor University Level Mechanical Engineering Education, P. Haapanen,D. Erent, H. Eskelinen, J. Wunderlich, J. Varis 146

085 Training Engineers on Communication Skills in English, V. Kazamia 148092 Educating Future Managers in Higher Engineering Education, P. Lappalainen 150

101 Peer Feedback: Quality and Quantity in Large Groups,N. van Hattum - Janssen, J. M. Fernandes 152

119 Finnish Graduate Feedback Survey Results: Employmentand Competencies of the Newly Graduated M.Sc. Engineers and Architects,P. Hyotynen, K. Harmaala, P. Jalasjoki 154

121 The European Higher Education Area.Spanish Engineering Education, U. Domnguez, J. Magdaleno 156

135 Development of an Environmental and ResourcesEngineering Education Framework,E. Caporali, A. Tuneski, C. Borri 158

Engineering Education Research 160

004 Project-based Learning for a Biosciences Laboratoryin an Engineering Curriculum, M. Nrhi, O. Natri, K. Nordstrm 162

008 The Effectiveness of Interventions from the Perspectiveof Teachers and Students in the Field of Engineering Educationat Universities in Germany, W. Schneider, S. Ihsen 164

014 Teaching Symbolic Language to non-native Speakers,J. Bonet-Dalmau, M. Alsina 166

024 Student Competencies in Structural Engineering: Modelling CulturalEnvironment in Qassim University, T. Ucol-Ganiron Jr. 168

026 Examining Perceptions of Engineering Work and Identity acrossGenerations in the USA, M. Pilotte, I. Ngambeki, S. Branch, D. Evangelou 170

027 Impact of Motivation, Language and Social Networkon Learning Process, S. Heikkinen 172


16/385



033 Research in Engineering and Technology Education:Staff Perspectives, J. Chandran, A. Stojcevski 174

037 Comparing Group and Individual Problem Solving: A Case Studyfrom Newtonian Mechanics, M. Berge, T. Adawi 176

038 Prediction of Study Results of first year Engineering Students?A Comparison of Tools, J. Van den Bossche, A. Vermeyen, E. Schyvinck,E. Danckaert, T. Stevens, J. Buijs, G. Desamblanx, A. Lauwers, E. Van Hoof 178

041 Using Models to Promote Scholarly Developmentin Engineering Education, Th. Olsson, T. Rox 180

046 Development and Implementation of a Coaching Model for Project-BasedLearning in Science and Engineering Education, M - C. Peeters, W. Van der Hoeven 182

049 Standards for Quality of Research in Engineering Education -A prolegomenon, J. Bernhard, C. Baillie 184

060 Orientations to Studying in Engineering Educationand their Relations to Study Engagement and Well-being,H. Heiskanen, K. Lonka, K. Keltikangas, J. Korhonen, H. Kettunen 186

069 Developing a Methodological Taxonomy of EER Papers, L. Malmi,E. de Graaff, T. Adawi, R. Curmi, G. Duffy, C. Kautz, P. Kinnunen, B. Williams 188

071A Technical Writing Program Implemented in a first year

Engineering Design Course at Ku Leuven, C. Heylen, J. Van der Sloten 190

075 Study Track Dependent Values and Exam Results for Master Studentsin Engineering Technology, G. Langie, G. Valkeneers, G. De Samblanx,E. Mees, I. De Nil, S. Boukhlal, G.-J. Moons, C. van Tilburg, M. Gastmans 192

077 Evaluating and Developing Project-Based Learning -An empirical approach to evaluating CDIO, R. P. Clark, J. E. Andrews 194

081 Student Understanding of Filters in Analog Electronics Lab Courses,P. Coppens, M. De Cock, C. Kautz 196

082 Construction Safety Simulations and Students Perception of Stress,M. Jaeger, D. Adair 198

086 International Best Practices of Engineering Education -Discussion from student point of view, A. Kauppinen, A. Hiekkanen,N. Kiiskinen, A. Laukia, E. Luttunen, T. Peltokallio, J. Tirkkonen 200

094 On Reinforcing Learning in Engineering Educationby Means of Interactive Pen Displays, J. Fabra, J. Civera,J. R. Asensio 202

095 Conceptual Knowledge and Learning as a Reflectionof Students' Motivation, P. S. Pietikinen, A. M. Mauno 204

096 Rubric for Assessing Epistemological Understandingof Students who are Learning Design, S. M. Chance 206


17/385



098 Effectiveness of Sustainability in Engineering Education:Research Methods, M. Arsat, J. E. Holgaard, E. de Graaff 208

102 Is The Use of Psychological Types Relevant to ImprovingEngineers Innovation Training? R. Bary, L. Morel, M. Tani 210

103 Representing Engineering Practice, B. Williams, J. Figueiredo 212

108 Building Interdisciplinary Collaboration Skills througha Digital Building Project, D. Gnaur, K. Svidt, M. K. Thygesen 214

114 Prediction of Student Performance in Engineering Programs -A case study using entrance information, K. Kelly, C. Patrocnio, C. Marshall 216

118 The Role of four-hour Blocks in Promoting Active Learning Strategies:The impressions of students and teachers, J. M. Nunes de Oliveira 218

136 Educating Building Science Engineers: Links between Geometryand Building Science, A. S. Skaraki, D. F. Fakli, A. A. Aliefs 220

139 Learning Experiences of Engineering Students Relatedto Cultural Differences in group work, T. H. Maken, E. de Graaff 222

144 Bibliometric Analysis of Engineering Education Research Publications -A Reference Discipline Approach, P. Neto, B. Williams 224

148 In Search of new Learning Environments in Electrical Engineering,K. Keltikangas, H. Kettunen, J. Korhonen 226

Ethics in Engineering Education 228

011 The Role of Personality Factors in Engineering StudentsEthical Decisions, D. Bairaktarova, D. Evangelou, A. Woodcock, W. Graziano 230

021 Comparison of Plagiarism Rates between oncampusand offcampus Engineering Hydrology Students, I. M. Brodie, L. Hellyer 232

079A Responsibility Diptych - Two workshops on philosophical ethics,J.G. de Zwart MSc MA 234

140 Gap year in French Engineering Curricula Ethical Issuesof a Trendy Educational Device, C. Didier, P. Simonnin 236

The Challenge of 2020: Issues and Actions 238

002Approaching Institutional Transplantation through Faculty Development,A. Bagiati, V. Sakhrani, S. Sarma, R. de Neufville 240

017 Setting up a New Culture of Teaching: Ways of enhancing the qualityin teaching and learning at Technische Universitt Berlin, C. Raue, P. Thurian 242


18/385



050A View on Electrical & Computer Engineering Education: Challengestoward convergence of different disciplines, G. A. Kyriacou 244

051 Train Inventive Engineers for the Future - Invention of new productsas a basis for studying the method of innovation and product developmentfor first year Engineering students, HGM Geraedts 246

157 Higher Engineering Education by 2020 - The world class playeron future economy's stage, A. Sz. Vradi, Gy. Patk, L. Szentirmai 248

Mathematics and Engineering Education 250

019 The Role of Mathematics - In Engineering practiceand in the formation of Engineers, E. Goold, F. Devitt 252

030 Calculation of Partial Derivatives by Using Rooted Trees,Q. D. Gjonbalaj 254

031 Promoting Engineering Students MathematicalModeling Competency, C.H. Huang 256

039 The Mathematical Reasoning Competency for a practice-orientedStudy Course in Mechanical Engineering, B. Alpers 258

056 ViPLab - A Virtual Programming Laboratory for Mathematics and Engineering,Th. Richter, S.Rudlof, D. Boehringer, C. Grninger, C. Rohde, A. Stock 260

122 Model Computer Program for Preliminary Building Plans:An initial design and construction educational tool, A. S. Skaraki,D. F. Fakli, A. A. Aliefs 262

132 Situated Acquisition of Mathematical Knowledge -Teaching mathematics within electrical engineering courses,M. Hennig, B. Mertsching 264

Gender and Diversity in Engineering Education 266

029 Gender Issues in Attracting Students to Science, Technologyand Engineering higher Education, A. Reis, C. Patrocnio, P. Lourtie 268

043 Less is Not More - Female Engineers Career Paths Five Yearsfrom Graduation, A. T. Paloheimo, H. H. Auvinen, P. H. Putila 270

072 The Background and Motivation of first year Engineering Studentsat Ku Leuven in Relation to Gender, C. Heylen, K. Geraedts,I. van Hemelrijck, M. Smet, J. Vander Sloten, C. Creemers, L. Froyen 272

078 Breaking Down Barriers: Teenage Girls Perceptionsof Engineering as a Study and Career Choice, J. E. Andrews, R. P. Clark 274


19/385



111 Gender of Students and Graduates from a USA HBCU Schoolof Engineering, Q. Pang, R. W. Whalin 276

115 How do French Engineers Learn from their International Experience?A Dialogue between Engineers and Researchers, C. Morace, A. Gourvs-Hayward 278

141 Exploring Bourdieu for Engineering Education Research, J. Devine 280

Global Mobility and International Cooperation 282

005 Student Ambassadors: Developing an Older Student Cohort,D. Fisher, A. Bagiati, S. Sarma 284

062 English - medium Instruction - a Friend or a Foe, J. M. Suviniitty 286

068 Virtual Internships, M. Majeri, A. Enea, W. Villerius 288

073Adde Salem Project - Promoting mobility South American -Europe and enhancing the employability at the graduate level through

joint degrees, G. Spinelli, J. A. Paez 290

152 Irish and Chinese Students College ExperienceOn a Joint Engineering Programme, L. McAuley, S. Tiernan 292

Physics and Engineering Education 294

058 Documenting Knowledge to the Undergraduate Educationof Professional Engineers: A Case Study in Microcontroller Education,D. E. Bolanakis, E. Glavas, G. A. Evangelakis, K. T. Kotsis, T. Laopoulos 296

063Attractiveness of Learning Physics by Means of Video Analysisand Modeling Tools, P. Hockicko 298

149 Bragg Sensors in Engineering Education,C. Leito, C. Novo, G. Yang, C. Tang, J. L. Pinto 300

Information and Communication Technologies 302

010 Interdisciplinary Collaboration as Important Success Factorof Technical Innovations in Adaptable Ambient Living Assistance,W. Schneider, K. Scheibl, S. Ihsen 304

097 How to Improve Students Satisfaction Using Mobile Devices,L. Podest, I. V. Shelenkova 306

156An Authentic Learning Strategy for Engineering Students

to Acquire Integrated Management Competences,P. de Vries, R. Kortmann, M. van den Bogaard 308


20/385



Cooperation with the students 310

064 How to Guide Students to make the Right Choices, P. Lahti, K. Vahtikari 312

112 Improving Engineering Students Design Skills in a Project-based LearningCourse by Addressing Epistemological Issues, G. Duffy, S. M. Chance, B. Bowe 314

158 The Benefits of Volunteer Work in Student Unions -The students work readiness, A. af Hllstrm 316

Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning 318

042 Opportunities and Challenges in the Implementationof the Knowledge Triangle, E. Sjoer, B. Nrgaard, M. Goossens 320

099 Laugh your Mistakes Away - Using self-deprecating humour to maskoccasional problems in public speaking, B. A. Andeweg, J.C. de Jong, M. J.Y. Wackers 322

109 Formal - nonformal Learning Acknowledgementto the new Employment Competencies, A. Klmn 324

Sustainability in Engineering Education 326

055 What are the Common Knowledge & Competencies for Educationfor Sustainable Development and for Engineering Educationfor

Sustainable Development? A. Guerra 328

091 Social Responsibility in Engineering Curricula,N. van Hattum-Janssen, M. D. Snchez Fernndez, S. Caires, S. Kahn 330

145 The Role of Engineering Educational Laboratories at a Thesis Level,Z. G. Pandermarakis, A. B. Sotiropoulou, D. S. Passa, G. D. Mitsopoulos 332

Quality Assurance and Accreditation 334

020 Education Assessment Exercise (EAE) - A path to qualityenhancement in engineering education? S. Karlsson, P. Berglund 336

022 European Quality Labels in Chemistry, E. A. Varella 338

124 National Processes to Support Continuous Improvementin Engineering Education in Australia, R. W. King 340

University - Business Cooperation 342

016 Semantic Web Approach for Determining Industry QualificationsDemand on Real-time Bases, S. AbdElall, C. Reise, G. Seliger 344


21/385



018 Design of a new Course Aimed at Increasing the Numberof new Innovative Enterprises, A. M. Jolly, F. Ros, C. Lger, C. Grillet 346

023 Universities and Industry - Experience from the Technology Agencyof the Czech Republic, L. Muslek 348

129 The Birmingham Grand Challenge Project:Enhancing Student Employability Skills across the STEM Disciplines,K. I. M. Hawwash, J. S. Illingsworth 350

151 Exploring Facilities Management - towards Future Campuses,E. Rytknen, S. Krn, S. Nenonen 352

Student Contest 354

1st PrizeInternational Best Practices of Engineering Education -Discussion from Student Point of View, A. Kauppinen, A. Hiekkanen,N. Kiiskinen, A. Laukia, E. Luttunen, T. Peltokallio, J. Tirkkonen 356

2nd PrizeA social web application for learnig, Team BioPojat, P. Risnen, A. Rautiainen 358

3rd Prize

Summer Courses-Contest United Engineering, I. Grauleviit, V. Godviait 360

Workshop: Curriculum design in Russia with reference to Federal Stateand EUR-ACE standards - The TEMPUS ECD-EAST project 362

WS 1 Challenges of Curriculum Design Referring to ExternalQuality and Accreditation Standards, G. Heitmann 364

WS 2 ECD-EAST: Engineering Curricula Design Aligned with EQFand EUR-ACE Standards, O. V. Boev and M. S. Tayurskaya 366

WS 3 Comparison of EUR-ACE and Russian National Standards -Requirements for master degree programmes in computer science, A. I. Surygin 368

WS 4 Curriculum Design Aligned with Russian National and EUR-ACEStandards - Master degree programme in the field of information technologyand computers, A. I. Surygin, E. V. Potekhina, V. V. Potekhin 370

WS 5 Faculty Exchange Effects on the Development of the Curriculaand Modules of Russian Higher Education Institutions - Implementing tempus project.Engineering curricula design aligned with EQF and EUR-ACE standardsNo 511121-TEMPUS-1-2010-1-DE-TEMPUS-JPCR, Dr. D. Dumiuvien 372

Authors Index 374


22/385


MEET THEFUTURE

23-26 September 2012T h e ss a l o n i k i , G re e c e40th annualconference


23/385

Keynote Speakers

23-26 September 2012T h e s sa l o n i k i , G r e e c e40th annualconference

21


24/385



Markku Markkula

Aalto University,Rapporteur of the EU Committee of the Regions

Mr. Markkula is a member of the EU Committee of the Regions, CoR (2010-

2014). He is the Chairman of the EPP/CoR Task Force on Europe 2020. His

CoR role also includes being the rapporteur on the Digital Agenda for Europe,

the rapporteur on the Role of local and regional authorities in achieving the tar-

gets of the Europe 2020 strategy, as well as the rapporteur on the Horizon 2020

(the EU 8th Framework Programme for Research).

Mr. Markku Markkula works within Aalto University as the Advisor to Aalto Pres-

idents, focusing on European strategic issues. He is a former member of the

Finnish Parliament (1995-2003) with the membership roles in the Committee for

Education, Science and Culture and the Committee for the Future.

In Finland his role has included memberships in the boards of several compa-

nies and other organizations, among others Tekes, the Finnish Funding Agency

for Innovation and Technology. He is the Chairman of the Espoo City PlanningBoard and has been the Chairman of the boards of the Finnish Association of

Graduate Engineers TEK and the Finnish Information Society Development

Centre TIEKE.

Having an engineering professional career with a focus on change manage-

ment Mr. Markkulas special competence areas are lifelong learning, innova-

tion, knowledge management, as well as science, technology and innovation

policy. Mr. Markkula has published several books and given hundreds of confer-

ence presentations.

He is the SEFI Fellow and he has been the chairman of the SEFI Working Group

on Continuing Education. As a tribute to his achievements he was in 2008 elect-

ed to the International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame.


25/385



Demetra Evangelou, PhD

Purdue University

Prof. Evangelou is credited with introducing the concept of developmental engi-

neering, a new area of research and education that explores engineering and

human development. In 2011 she was awarded by President Obama the Presi-

dential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE) which is the

the highest honor bestowed by the US Government on Science and Engineer-

ing professionals in the early stages of their independent research career. The

award citation read for outstanding research into how early experiences canlead children to pursue engineering later in life and for working with teachers

from diverse schools to develop new teaching materials and methods that can

help students become innovative and more technologically literate.

Prof. Evangelous group is actively involved in research into early childhood an-

tecedents of engineering thinking, developmental factors in engineering peda-

gogy, technological literacy and human-artefact interactions. Their research is

cross-disciplinary involving active collaborations with colleagues from Educa-

tion, Psychology and Engineering. Prof. Evangelou has served on the faculty ofAristotle University and the University of Thessaly. She holds a PhD from the Uni-

versity of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana and is a member of several scientific and

professional societies, including the Sigma Xi Science Honor Society. In 2009

she was awarded the prestigious NSF CAREER Award.


26/385



Alessandro Tarchini

EMEA EDU Business and Market DevelopmentMathWorks

Born in Genova in 1962, since 1982 he has worked in ICT, initially developing

firmware for numeric control systems, then spending three years at the comput-

ing data center "Sergio Borgogno", developing Finance applications for the

public administration.

From 1985 to 1990 Alessandro Tarchini worked in Stratos a company provid-ing services to Aerospace and Defense, as a consultant to aerospace compa-

nies, representing Italy in international project teams defining and developing

processes for the engine management in the civil aviation business.

In 1992, after moving to Teoresi, he expanded his interests to software systems

for number crunching, modelling and simulation; since 1993 Tarchini has

worked in favor of advanced numerical analysis techniques facilitating the adop-

tion of MATLAB in Italy. In 2002, when the Italian operations of MathWorks Inc.

were opened, Tarchini was appointed as the managing director of the new com-pany.

After managing MathWorks Italian operations for 10 years, Alessandro has now

moved to the role of EMEA EDU Business and Market Development.


27/385



Lszl Csaba brahm

General Manager, National Instruments Hungary Ltd.

Dr. Lszl Csaba brahm graduated at Budapest University of Technology

and Economics as an electrical engineer, and then in 1979, he got a communi-

cation engineer degree on postgraduate qualification. Along with this, he has a

PhD on Television Signal Processing. He started his career at Videoton as an en-

gineer, then he became a Team Lead, then the Technical Director and later the

Deputy CEO. He was the Managing Director at JSCH Kft. from 1991. He

worked as a Production Manager at IBM from 1995 and from 1998 he led the

ARTESYN company successfully. He has been the General Manager of Nation-

al Instruments-Hungary Kft. since 2001. His role was to start up the factory in

Debrecen where the hardware units of the virtual instruments are produced on

the SMT production lines representing cutting edge technology. More than

90% of the production of the corporation is manufactured by more than 1000

employees with great efficiency and excellent qualitative index. NI Hungary Kft.,

besides the production, gives place to several office centers and also employs

graduate employees at different kind of departments such as Finance, IT, Legal

and linguistic fields. Mr. Abraham was the Manager of the year 2008. Besides

governing the company, he is committed to the next generation that is why he

takes role in several areas connected to education. He created an SMT course

book hand in hand with the AmCham where he is the chairman of Electronic

Manufacturers Committee. He also takes part in the local business life, he is a

member of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Hajdu-Bihar county.


28/385



Andrew Jamison

Aalborg UniversityBorn August 22, 1948

Education/Degrees

B.A. in History and Science, magna cum laude, Harvard University, 1970.Ph.D. in Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg, Sweden, February 1983

Positions/Appointments

Lecturer, Science and Society, University of Copenhagen, 1976-1984Visiting associate professor, University of California, Los Angeles, 1985-86

Associate professor, Research Policy Institute, University of Lund, 1988-1996Course director, Graduate Program in Science and Technology Policy, 1986-1995Professor, Technology and Society, Aalborg University, 1996-Guest professor, Environmental Science, Malm University College, 2003-2008Coordinator, PhD Program in Planning and Development, 2011-

Selected Publications

Books

The Making of the New Environmental Consciousness, co-author with Jacqueline Cramer and Ron Ey-

erman (Edinburgh University Press, 1990)Social Movements. A Cognitive Approach, co-author with Ron Eyerman (Polity, 1991)Music and Social Movements, co-author with Ron Eyerman (Cambridge University Press, 1998)The Making of Green Knowledge. Environmental Politics and Cultural Transformation(Cambridge Uni-versity Press, 2001)Hubris and Hybrids. A Cultural History of Technology and Science, co-author with Mikael Hrd (Rout-ledge, 2005)

A Hybrid Imagination: Science and Technology in Cultural Perspective, co-author with Steen HyldgaardChristensen and Lars Botin (Morgan & Claypool, 2011)

Articles

Technology's Theorists: Conceptions of Innovation in Relation to Science and Technology Policy, inTechnology and Culture, July 1989(with Aant Elzinga) Changing Policy Agendas in Science and Technology, in S Jasanoff, et al, eds, Hand-book of Science and Technology Studies. Sage 1995

The Shaping of the Global Environmental Agenda: The Role of Non-Governmental Organisations, in SLash, B Szerszynski, and B Wynne, eds, Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology,Sage, 1996Science, Technology and the Quest for Sustainable Development, in Technology Analysis and Strate-gic Management, nr 1, 2001

Participation and Agency: Hybrid Identities in the European Quest for Sustainable Development, in RPaehlke and D Torgerson, eds, Managing Leviathan, Broadview Press, 2005In Search of Green Knowledge: A Cognitive Approach to Sustainable Development, in S Moore, ed,Pragmatic Sustainability. Routledge, 2010


29/385



Lars Ulriksen

University of Copenhagen2007- : Associate professor at the Department of Science Education,

University of Copenhagen, Denmark.

2005-2007: Associate Professor at the Danish University of Education, Den-mark.

1999-2005: Associate Professor at the Roskilde University.

1996-1999: Assistant Professor in educational studies at Roskilde University.

1995-1996: Research Assistant in educational studies at Roskilde University.

1995 : Ph.D. in Educational Studies from Roskilde University.

1991: Master in Danish and Communication Studies from Roskilde Uni-versity, Denmark.

Research

Lars Ulriksens research focuses on the encounter between the students and

the educational programmes they enter, mainly within science and engineering.

This encounter represents a meeting between the students expectations and

the expectations of the institutions. These institutional expectations are ex-pressed through the curriculum, through the teaching and learning formats,

through the values and cultures, and by the teachers. When the students have

entered the programmes they need to balance their expectations and their ex-

periences of the educational context they are entering. This act of balancing is

crucial for the students persistence.

He has been the leader of the Danish work package in the EU FP7 research proj-

ect IRIS (Interests and Recruitment in Science) (2009-2012). The work package

focuses on retention of students who had entered higher education in the fieldof science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). There was a par-

ticular focus on the transition of students from high school to STEM university

studies, and how the students strive to cope with their experiences in the new in-

stitutional context.

Also, he was leading a research project about students, learning and learning

environment at htx (an upper-secondary school programme with an emphasis

on technology and where many students move on to engineering programmes)

(2006-2008). The study provided insights, inter alia, in the need for a more com-plex understanding of boys and girls attitudes to science and technology.


30/385



Selected Publications

- Holmegaard, HT, Madsen, LM & Ulriksen, L (in prep). The process of choos-ing what to study. A longitudinal study of upper secondary students identitywork when choosing higher education. Holmegaard, Ulriksen, Madsen.Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research.

- Ulriksen, L, Madsen, LM & Holmegaard, HT (2011), ' Hvorfor bliver de ikke?:Hvad fortller forskningen om frafald p videregende STEM-uddan-nelser? ', MONA: Matematik og Naturfagsdidaktik, vol 2011, nr. 4, s. 35-55.

- Ulriksen, L, Rump, C & Hansen, HW (eds.) (2011), Improving UniversityScience Teaching and Learning: Pedagogical Projects 2010 Improving Uni-

versity Science Teaching and Learning, vol. 3, nr. 1. Institut for Naturfa-genes Didaktik, Kbenhavns Universitet, Kbenhavn.

- Ulriksen, L, Madsen, LM &Holmegaard HT (2010). What do we know aboutexplanations for drop out/opt out among young people from STM highereducation programmes? Studies in Science Education 46 (2), 209-244.

- Ulriksen, L. (2009): The Implied Student. Studies in Higher Education 34 (5).August. (517-532)


31/385



Xavier Fouger

Program Director, Global Academia,Dassault Systemes

Xavier Fouger created Dassault Systemes Academy, the corporate organiza-

tion supporting skills in Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) and 3D applica-

tions by means of global and local education and certification programs through

a network of partners and thousands of academic institutions worldwide.

He works with educators to sustain the attractiveness of engineering profes-sions, faster align curricula with employability requirements, and invent educa-

tional practices which involve virtual laboratories, search-based applications,

community-based teaching and learning, gaming technology and 3D engineer-

ing software. As an early supporter of GEDC, he organized the councils found-

ing meeting in May 2008 and supported the proliferation of the councils inaugu-

ral statement, the Paris declaration.

Working with policy makers in various countries, he provides expertise in build-

ing educational programs to serve socio-economical objectives.

He graduated as industrial engineer at Ecole Centrale de Lille, served as Attach

for Science and Technology at the French embassy in Vienna and as vice-presi-

dent of the International Federation of Engineering Education Societies (IFEES).

He is vice-president of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI)

and of the Cartagena Network of Engineering.

He provides lectures on Innovation Management in several world class educa-

tional institutions.


32/385



John H. Seiradakis

Aristotle University

John Hugh Seiradakis was born in Chania, Crete. He obtained his degree in

Physics from the University of Athens. His postgraduate studies were undertak-

en at the Victoria University of Manchester (Jodrell Bank): M.Sc. (1973) and Ph.D.

(1975).

From 1975 to 1985 he worked as a Post Doc researcher at the Max-Planck-In-

stitute for Radio Astronomy, Bonn, Germany, at the University of Hamburg, Ger-many and at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), U.S.A. In 1985 he

was elected as Associate Professor at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki,

Greece and in 1996 as full Professor, a position that he holds until today.

His major scientific interests in Astronomy focus on neutron stars (pulsars), neutral

hydrogen modelling in nearby galaxies, the centre of our Galaxy, flare stars, the

Moon and Archaeoastronomy. He has written 3 course books and has published

more than 100 articles in refereed (mainly) and other scientific journals, volumes or

conference proceedings. He has also written popular astronomy books and pub-lished a few tens of articles in newspapers or popular magazines.

He has supervised PhD Theses, has participated in several international confer-

ences and represented Greece in international resolutions. He has also partici-

pated in or chaired several Evaluation Committees of research projects or pro-

grammes and represented Greece in large European networks (OPTICON, IL-

IAS, CRAF, etc)

In December 2005, the highest EU prize Descartes was awarded to the neutron

stars research network, PULSE, in which he is a one of the founding members.

He is a member of the Antikythera Mechanism Research Group. Since 2005, he

has given more than 100 lectures, public or scientific, in Greece and around the

world for the Antikythera Mechanism.

Finally he has served as Member, Chairman or Director in several Committees in

the University of Thessaloniki. He is a Member in several national or international

scientific organizations. He has served as Member, Secretary or Chairman of

the Greek National Committee for Astronomy and Secretary or President of the

Hellenic Astronomical Society.


33/385



T

he Antikythera Mechanism was a portable (laptop-size), geared mechanism, built ca. 150100

BCE, which calculated and displayed, with high precision, the movement of the Sun and the

Moon on the sky and the phase of the Moon for a given epoch. It could also predict eclipses and

calculate the dates of the Olympic Games. It had one dial on the front and two on the back. Its 30, pre-

cisely cut, gears were driven by a manifold, with which the user could select, with the help of a pointer,

any particular epoch (at the front dial). While doing so, several pointers were synchronously driven by the

gears, to show the above mentioned celestial phenomena on several accurately marked annuli. It con-

tained an extensive users manual. The exact function of the gears has finally been decoded and a large

portion of the manual (~3000 letters) has been read after 2000 years by a major new investigation, using

state of the art equipment.

No complicated geared instruments are known before the Antikythera Mechanism and for several cen-

turies after. Therefore, this astronomical device stands out as an extraordinary proof of high tech in an-

cient times.

The Antikythera Mechanism:Astronomy and Technology in Ancient Greece

J. H. Seiradakis

Aristotle University, School of PhysicsLaboratory of Astronomy, Thessaloniki, Greece

[email protected]


34/385


MEET THEFUTURE

23-26 September 2012T h e ss a l o n i k i , G re e c e40th annualconference


35/385

33

Keynote Lectures

23-26 September 2012T h e s sa l o n i k i , G r e e c e40th annualconference


36/385


INTRODUCTION

The Europe 2020 strategy is both an overarching structural reform plan and a crisis exit strategy.

In addition in the light of the EU Annual Growth Surveys, it encompasses a wider set of objectives

and more integrated economic governance. [1]. The role of universities has always been not

merely to educate people and offer solutions to problems, but especially to tackle the grand societal

challenges by introducing new openings from different perspectives to the dialogue between science

and society, by defining targets and priorities for research to meet the societal change needs, as well as

by making the desired changes happen by creating innovations. As in todays reality, the challenges are

more complex and more global with enormous cultural varieties, European universities seem to have

lost their strong societal role. This presentation will highlight the recent EU policy developments and in-

tegrate to this the need for action at universities.

Brave leaps forward must be taken on a practical level, giving all levels of government throughout Eu-

rope local and regional as well as central greater ownership and involvement among the stakehold-

ers. What could and should the role of universities be in this? In addressing this, I will link my long univer-

sity experience to my political roles and responsibilities at city, national and EU levels. Special depth to

this comes from my role as the EU Committee of the Regions rapporteur on Horizon 2020, the new

framework programme for renewing the European research and innovation policy.

The EU Committee of the Regions encourages regions to develop regional innovation platforms, which

act as demand-based service centres and promote the use of international knowledge to implement

smart specialisation, European cooperation according to the interests of regions, and the Europe 2020

strategy. For this to happen, we need to apply the new dynamic understanding of regional innovation

ecosystems, in which companies, cities and universities as well as other public and private sector ac-

tors (the "Triple Helix") learn to work together in new and creative ways to fully harness their innovative

potential. [2]. In all of this, universities are the drivers for success.

European Engineering Universities as key actorsin Regional and Global Innovation Ecosystems

M. A. Markkula

Advisor to the Aalto PresidentsAalto UniversityEspoo, [email protected]

Keywords: innovation, ecosystem, Europe 2020, change



37/385


1 OPEN INNOVATION AND INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS

Professor Martin Curley, Director of Intel Labs Europe, challenged the readers of the EU Open Innova-

tion Yearbook 2012 with his message: Open Innovation 2.0 could be defined as the fusion of Henry

Chesbroughs open innovation concept and Henry Etzkowitzs triple helix innovation concept. Triple

Helix is about achieving structural innovation improvements through proactive collaborations between

industry, academia, and government. The impact of this collaborative innovation goes well beyond the

scope of what any organisation could achieve on their own. [3].

Ecosystem is a buzzword we see often in todays media. A natural ecosystem is defined as a biological

community of interacting organisms together with their physical environment. In the same way, a busi-

ness ecosystem is "the network of buyers, suppliers and makers of related products or services to-

gether with the socio-economic environment, including the institutional and regulatory framework. A

digital ecosystem is a self-organising digital infrastructure aimed at creating a digital environment for net-

worked organisations that supports the cooperation, the knowledge sharing, the development of open

and adaptive technologies and evolutionary business models. [4].

Professor C.K. Prahalad gave a clear message also to universities by defining three critical aspects of in-

novation and value creation: 1) Value will increasingly be co-created with customers. 2) No single firm has

the knowledge, skills, and resources it needs to co-create value with customers. 3) The emerging mar-

kets can be a source of innovation. And one of his main conclusions should be taken into particularly thor-

ough consideration in creating the new role for universities: The competitive arena is shifting from a prod-

uct-centric paradigm of value creation to a personalized experience-centric view of value creation. [5].

What is this phenomenon that has changed the global business logics so thoroughly? Digitalisation and

globalisation have changed the business world in a few years. Companies and other organisations cre-

ate value through networks in which they cooperate and compete simultaneously. Such extended net-

works with changing number of different actors and their customers, sub-contractors and competitors

are called business ecosystems. The world is moving towards an era of true value network competition

and advantage, where innovation and knowledge brokering will take place in increasingly open, shared

settings. The future success of innovation ecosystems is measured increasingly in innovation actors

abilities to connect and manage their talent, partnerships, clusters and practical innovation processes -

in integrating the local knowledge base into the global innovation power grid. Active networking relation-

ships with global top-runner environments boost local abilities to attract a continuous flow of global play-

ers. [6]. The dynamic nature, especially the intuitive reaction speed of an innovation ecosystem needs

to be increasingly emphasized.

This complexity is reviewed by the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation Tekes, in an-

alyzing the success of building capabilities for Finnish innovation system. The study describes the ongo-

ing globalisation:



38/385



- Ecosystems link one firms competences or resources to those of other firms to draw on a broader

range of competences, to acquire desired competences more quickly, or to extend the reach of cur-rent competences into new competitive domains.

- For a firm to sustain superior performance in an open economy with rapid innovation and dispersed

sources of invention, innovation, and manufacturing capabilities, it must shape the rules of the

game within the ecosystem. This is the result of co-evolution and complex interaction between the

ecosystem participants and involves learning, interpretation, and creative activity.

- The business model is under constant re-evaluation, as the environment in which the firm exists is

dynamic. For the firm, customers represent an immediate contact with the external environment.

Other actors within the value constellation, such as co-suppliers or competitors also provide thefirm with feedback information, based on which the firm will consider a possible redesign of its busi-

ness model. [7].

The conclusions include several recommendations focusing especially on the global nature of ecosys-

tems, as well as the orchestration capabilities to be properly built in the ecosystems.

Modernizing the Triple Helix concept will not take place on its own. Strong commitment to collaborative

change, together with the prioritisation of appropriate measures is needed. Good methods needed for

the implementation will be developed and the use of necessary instruments will be partly financed throughthe EU Cohesion Policy Funds. Transferring the scope of the Digital Agenda for Europe, one of the seven

EU Flagships, on a local and regional level is an obligatory step to be taken. Local Digital Agendas based

on Smart Specialisation are needed, as well as good conceptualisation and orchestration. This includes a

definition process to enable decision-makers to recognise grand societal challenges, to translate them to

regional and local priorities, and commit to the renewal often radical renewal that is required.

Interlinking the Aalto University bottom-up activities to the strategic targets of the surrounding region,

we have understood the significant development needs of mental models, working practices and a

culture of partnerships. The key to success is to work in all these in close collaboration between the po-litical decision-makers, private and public sector stakeholders, as well as with researchers and stu-

dents. This is accomplished especially:

- with the help of testing and implementing demonstration projects related to sustainable develop-

ment: studying, piloting, demonstrating and verifying new models;

- in collaboration with the significant businesses, universities, and research institutions of the region:

partnerships to create a working culture, innovative concepts and methods to support them;

- by developing the decision-making processes needed to address societal challenges: using the

best international knowledge and collaboration expertise, developing the required competencies

and methods to support decision-makers. [8].


39/385


2 EUROPEAN TRANSFORMATION THROUGH THE REGIONS

Globalisation has placed new issues at the top of the European policy agenda. Humankind has began

to recognise and accept the growing need to react fast to tackle such major societal challenges as sus-

tainable development and access to clean water. At the same time, however, fundamental questions

about our European culture and mentality have become more pressing than ever: are we in Europe

ready to bear global responsibility for issues such as climate change? Do we have the will and the means

to develop and share European prosperity, and to take care of fellow citizens in our communities and re-

gions across Europe and to certain extent also around the globe? Attitudes and culture are of decisive

importance: we need to encourage hard work and create a community-minded approach and team

spirit; we need to be able to, and have the courage to, make tough choices to achieve the targets of

smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The richness of European culture should also be stressed, i.e.

the cultures of different European regions complement each other and encourage each other's devel-

opment through innovation, at the same time valuing the past. The cornerstone of a solid future for Eu-

rope is high level education, and in relation to that, the motivation to sustain high level personal profes-

sional skills and competencies. Learning is what drives change and the quality of life.

The key questions include: will regions include RDI as an essential part of their core policy agenda, and

will Horizon 2020 create the conditions in which local and regional governments will actively promote in-

novation, take risks and invest in the practical application of research?

The outcomes of the CoR Forum "EU research and innovation: What role for regions and cities after

2013?" are extremely useful when looking for answers to these questions. The Forum's presentations

and debate included several key statements on the role of Horizon. CoR President Mercedes Bresso

(CoR) called for regions and cities to become the living labs of the Horizon programme. She also called

for a 46% increase in funding for research and innovation to be primarily devoted to putting regions and

cities at the centre of the new research and innovation policies. Director of Policy Coordination at DG Re-

gional Policy, Rudolf Niessler, confirmed that Horizon 2020 has strong synergies with other policies.

Michael Kitson, senior lecturer at the University of Cambridge and member of the Innovation Research

Centre, UK, urgently stressed the need to focus more on knowledge-using locations, and pointed out

that the impact would be much greater in terms of employment and output than if the focus was simply

on knowledge generation. At the closing plenary debate, Director-General Robert-Jan Smits (DG Re-

search and Innovation) emphasised the importance of regional innovation strategies and the crucial role

of regions in Horizon. He defined the focus of Horizon as European excellence and the focus of cohe-

sion policy as capacity-building, and noted the strong synergies between these two. [9].

The desired development means an enormous challenge for universities: the Knowledge Triangle col-

laboration model that accentuates the synergy between universitys different functions (research, edu-

cation and innovation), needs to gain ground. Dialogue between different actors is needed because co-

learning takes place through sharing. The Knowledge Triangle should become a culture of "trialogue",



40/385

meaning there are three perspectives and even more actor roles which need to communicate effectively

together and create a new multidimensional knowledge co-creation atmosphere and environment. Thisis more difficult to facilitate and execute than the traditional research-education dialogue, which is, al-

ready in many cases, challenging enough.

3 HORIZON 2020: NEW CHALLENGES FOR UNIVERSITIES

3.1 Synergy between horizon 2020 and cohesion funds

The name of the EU's new funding programme for research and innovation Horizon 2020 reflects the

ambition to deliver ideas, growth and jobs for the future. Horizon 2020 brings together all existing Union

research and innovation funding, including the Framework Programme for Research, the innovation-re-

lated activities of the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme and the European Insti-

tute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). [10].

The alignment of Horizon 2020 and cohesion policy, by creating strong synergy between the EU's vari-

ous programmes and financial instruments, is absolutely appropriate. To quote from a report by the Ex-

pert group that assessed the scheme as a whole: In order to promote greater synergies between edu-

cation and research/innovation programmes, the Lifelong Learning Programme as well as the Euro-

pean Social Fund (ESF) should become more innovation-oriented and should support more strongly

skills for innovation, entrepreneurship, cooperation between universities and economic actors as well

as multidisciplinary education conducive to innovation." [11].

Universities have been the key actors using the EU funding of the framework programmes and different

cohesion funds to help in achieving the EU strategic development targets. Their role will be even more in-

strumental when the funding schemes are renewed for the EU programme period 2014-2020. Accord-

ing to EU policy guidelines, the cohesion funding will be targeted especially for capacity building and in-

novation and one of the major targets in Horizon 2020 is to obtain more innovation out of research.

3.2 Horizon 2020 focus on real life impacts

The programme architecture of Horizon 2020 is based on three pillars: Excellent science in Europe, in-

dustrial leadership, and societal challenges. The goal will be more than ever to bring excellent research

results to the market by cutting red tape, by strengthening innovation, by reversing the brain drain, by

closing the research and innovation divide in Europe, and by developing industrial leadership and com-

petitiveness, including for SMEs.

The Committee of the Regions CoR has stressed that the key issues throughout Europe address ways

of speeding up the implementation of the most relevant flagship activities, and ways of learning to ex-

ploit existing research knowledge by sharing best practices and other relevant knowledge. CoR is chal-

lenging both the Commission and the regions themselves to get the most out of Horizon 2020. Local

and regional authorities face the challenge of developing cross-territorial and pan-European coopera-




41/385

39

tion. In particular, they need to be able to develop joint platforms, such as innovation forums and test-

beds for cooperation by integrating real and virtual worlds, to foster open innovation and regional inno-vation ecosystems, see figures 1 and 2. Active European cooperation would result in economies of

scale and the creation of wider markets for local businesses and other local developments. Smart spe-

cialisation as the key guiding principle both of Horizon 2020 and of cohesion policy is opening up

new avenues to all this. [12].

Fig.1. CoR Regional Innovation Ecosystems Fig.2. CoR EU Pioneering Region

In order to increase the regional impact of European research, development and innovation RDI activi-

ties, CoR points out several key issues:

- raising public awareness of innovation and the impact and scalability of RDI;

- the development of value metrics to help in increasing regional collaboration to tackle grand societal

challenges and in creating and running joint platforms for open innovation and public-private-people

partnerships;

- encouraging the dialogue between science and society, and through that, deepening the under-standing of the systemic nature of innovation and foresight;

- defining the role of RDI in renewing the traditional public-sector processes, including decision making;

- increasing the relevance and usability of the outcomes of EU flagship initiatives and based on that,

speeding up the implementation of these activities;

- learning to exploit and market existing research and innovation knowledge through public-private

partnerships and by sharing best practices and other relevant knowledge. [13].

Horizon 2020 has a clear target to obtain more innovation out of research, by resorting to the innovation

potential. It is therefore essential that already before the new programme period starts regional poli-




42/385

cy-makers and locally-based universities and research institutes begin to actively develop joint regional

innovation strategies and implementation programmes that are strategically based on smart specialisa-tion and jointly funded from different sources, including municipal budgets, business contributions and

a number of EU financial instruments. It is important in this connection for the European research and in-

novation agenda and national and regional innovation strategies to be coordinated. However, the driv-

ers of improvement should clearly be the universities themselves.

The Smart Specialisation Platform has published a guide named "Regional innovation strategies for

smart specialisation" (RIS3). This maintains that many regional innovation strategies suffer from a lack

of international and transregional perspective, i.e. the regional innovation and economic system is often

considered in isolation. Strategies are not in tune with the industrial and economic fabric, and not suffi-ciently driven by business. A sound analysis of a region's assets is often lacking. In addition, there is a

"picking winners syndrome": priorities are often identified and best performers simply copied. [14].

The universities are the key actors in the Smart Specialisation process, since the policy guidelines are

clear. According to the EU RIS3 Guide: Smart Specialisation links research and innovation with eco-

nomic development in novel ways, such as the entrepreneurial process of discovery and the setting of

priorities by policy makers in close cooperation with local actors. Another important set of criteria

stems from the fact that the regions are forced to be ambitious but realistic about what can be achieved

while linking local assets and capabilities to external sources of knowledge and value chains. [15].

3.3 Horizon 2020 three pillars

The three-pillar structure of Horizon 2020 creates opportunities to achieve the EU 2020 strategic targets.

In terms of evaluation and funding criteria, the emphasis is on global excellence; all activities draw from

scientific expertise. It should be highlighted, however, that each pillar needs to have its own criteria of ex-

cellence: in the first, it should be scientific excellence; in the second, the excellence of industrial innova-

tions and business renewal; and in the third it should be the excellence and impact of societal innovations.

Horizon 2020 focuses on the EU-level RDI and one of its key targets is to catalyze RDI in the Member

States and regions. CoR has urged the Commission to emphasise in different pillars the following, which

all have a strong message also to universities when they are preparing for the new programme period:

a) In the Excellence Science priority pillar, increasing emphasis should be placed on the significance of

the multidisciplinary nature of Future and Emerging Technologies. The impact assessment criteria

should include, in addition to scientific publications and patents, also other forms of knowledge flows

between the various actors from knowledge creators through knowledge users to final beneficiaries.

b) In the Industrial Leadership pillar the emphasis should strongly be on combining several technolo-

gies in RDI to increase the growth potential of European companies, particularly SMEs. This could

include promoting SMEs participation in public-private consortia. Tackling industrial complexities




43/385

41

also requires increasing RDI agility, thus necessitating increased SME participation. Technologies

should be viewed as enablers of fast development, even on the level of radical change, whichstresses that the main emphasis should be on integrating digitalisation, human behavior, and mar-

ket dynamics.

c) In the Societal Challenges pillar the emphasis should be on combining the best European expertise

to large-scale co-creation projects, allowing Europe to implement large system-level structure-re-

newing changes over traditional boundaries. Discipline-centred research is not sufficient to create

knowledge to solve grand societal challenges. Focus should be directed to multidisciplinary RDI ac-

tivities that yield concepts and components needed in these system-level structure-renewing

changes. At the core of research lie experimentation and piloting. A good example is the extensiveSmart City operating field. An essential part of all this is scalability of results in different conditions

throughout Europe. [16].

4 MORE FOCUS ON SMART CITIES AND SMART REGIONS

When setting the target for Europe to become a global leader in tackling the grand societal challenges,

as already stated in Horizon 2020, the research, development and innovation activities need to have a

strong regional dimension based on a deep understanding of innovation ecosystems. The laboratories

for innovation are no longer traditional university facilities, but regional innovation ecosystems operating

as test-beds for rapid prototyping of many types of user-driven innovations: new products, services,processes, structures and systems, which need to be of transformative and scalable nature.

A change of mindset is required in order to reach the set goals. CoR calls for pioneering regions to form

European consortiums integrating different capabilities to create ground-breaking societal innovations

for Europe-wide use. It also calls for increased performance capabilities of regions and cities to benefit

from Horizon 2020 and other similar initiatives. The focus should be, in particular, on making full use of

digitalisation and new key enabling technologies to modernise regional innovation policy. Furthermore,

CoR encourages the regions to move towards open innovation, within a human-centred vision of part-

nerships between public and private sector actors, with universities and other knowledge institutionsplaying a crucial role. [17].

Good examples of this are the smart city and smart region developments. Several activities have been

started around Europe. To speed up the desired change we need new kind of innovation platforms to

enable demonstrations and rapid prototyping. These can boost quality and more efficient public and

private spending, thus creating significant potential to create new growth and jobs.

The smart city concept needed is strongly based on integrating the three factors which political decision

making is facing in trying to tackle the grand societal challenges: a) Society with people and their human

potential and choices being the core driver or preventer of change; b) Technology and economy impact-

ed by the digitalization that enables new approaches and new business concepts creating prerequi-




44/385

sites and conditions for the desired well-being development; c) The environment with limited tolerance

and requiring much more attention than in the past. [18].

All of this is strongly characterised by digitalisation. The European political, cultural and economic model is

based on diversity, subsidiarity, collaboration, and pervasive creativity across all of society. All the key ele-

ments exist that are needed for creating the European Open Innovation Ecosystem to become a source of

profitable and fast business growth. Therefore, European distributed innovation should be the basis for a

new smart and sustainable economic model underpinned by open architectures and standards for In-

ternet-connected environments that allow interoperability, governed privacy, and data portability. [19].

Francesca Bria has proposed a synthetic model that can help to understand the evolution of theInternet ecosystem and to encourage a productive conversation on the possible models and strate-

gies for Europe to exploit the technological and commercial opportunities in the digital economy, while

fostering societal innovation. The model Future Internet Ecosystem for Smart Cities and Regions is

based on the frame of five layers describing a holistic approach with not only the technological require-

ments and developments, but also regulatory, social and business issues: constituencies, governance,

applications, cloud platform, and ICT Infrastructures. European development and potential can be un-

derstood by dividing the frame into these layers. The first and second layers of constituencies and reg-

ulations are structurally coupled with the technology and business infrastructure layer and the

application layer. Due to the impact of the Future Internet-enabled services on the life of citizens, citiesand regions should therefore be fully involved in the process of governance related to the deployment

of digital infrastructures and Internet-enabled services. They represent a critical mass, able to scale up

and reuse the new applications and services developed. [20].

The general attitude and work culture towards success can be characterized by orchestrated collabo-

ration, knowledge sharing and co-use of resources. As an example, in the Helsinki Region we recognize

phenomena such as Venture Garage Mindset and Regional Innovation Ecosystem within the multi-

disciplinary research-based Aalto University where new approaches and manifold preconditions to en-

courage new forms of innovation and entrepreneurship have been created. To stress the mindset weuse the metaphor of gardening, see figure 3.

5 PIONEERING REGIONAL INNOVATION ECOSYSTEMS

Europe needs pioneering large-scale programs like Finlands Energizing Urban Ecosystems (EUE) re-

search program. The duration of the EUE is 4 years with the estimated research volume (both industrial

research and academic research) of 20 Million. The EUE research work will be carried out by about

twenty industrial and research partners. The activities are demonstrated in the Helsinki Metropolitan Re-

gion, especially in Espoos Innovation Triangle Area Otaniemi-Keilaniemi-Tapiola (T3); this area of five

square kilometres is already the largest concentration of science, innovation and related businesses in

Northern Europe. An aerial overview of T3 including some infrastructural plans can be seen in figure 4.




45/385

43

Fig. 3. EUE the gardening metaphor Fig. 4. Innovation Triangle T3-Area

The EUE is one of the research programs operating under the Strategic Centre for Science, Technology

and Innovation for Built Environment (RYM). The program realizes the Centres strategic research agen-

da through far-reaching, collaborative and multidisciplinary research work accomplished jointly by com-

panies, universities and research centres.

The EUE research program advocates fundamentally new approaches in addressing the comprehen-

sive challenge of planning, designing and managing the future urban ecosystems. It is built on progres-

sive visions and key notions on the development of future urban ecosystems, which will enable proac-

tive and effective planning, designing and managing of ecologically sustainable, digitalized and inno-

vative living environments with respect to local site conditions, values and culture. The program focus-

es on studying the core elements of pioneering urban ecosystems, which can combine advanced

technical solutions (engineering, digital, mobile and processes) and complementary social systems

(for innovation, learning and accumulation of knowledge) that result in competitive business models

and solutions. [21].

The future urban ecosystems are viewed as combinatory assemblies of intelligent sub-systems and ar-

chitectures (e.g. housing, mobility, energy, water, services, community, security), which can be put to-

gether to create the functional, urban whole. They transform to function as mutually complementing

ecosystems where collaborating actors seek for optimal balance between 1) urban economic activities,

2) a comfortable, invigorating and human-scale living environment and 3) complementing innovation

processes for continuous renewal. In this way, the future urban ecosystems can be seen in a much

broader context than before, as orchestrated platforms for testing the emerging concepts and techno-

logical solutions for sustainable tomorrow. Essentially, the key question is: How to develop novel, holis-

tic concepts, solutions and architectures that meet the future urban living needs and requirements in an

ecologically sustainable and digitally empowered way? And then: How to turn the accumulating know-

how into competitive and successful business models, processes and operations?




46/385

Consequently, the EUE research approach promotes the interdisciplinary themes of mixed-use urban

systems and communities; urban infrastructure asset management and value development; sustain-

able lifestyles, work-life balance and people flows; as well as smart, emission-free regional energy and

communication systems. The future urban ecosystems are seen as core platforms for mutually comple-

menting innovation activities and processes, which can develop regional competitiveness and pioneer-

ing competencies for complementary product/solution development in the global markets.

6 SUMMARY

The complex challenges of digitalisation and globalisation are reshaping the local value creation mech-anisms. Increasing productivity and systemic innovativeness have been of primary importance for Eu-

rope public sector organisations as well as private industries for years. The reality is that they are no

longer measurable with traditional methods and concepts. Decisive for the economic foundations of

business success and general well-being are the intangible capital of citizens, work communities, and

especially societys capacity for co-creation and renewal. The key question is how to increase intangible

capital in practice.

The importance of renewal capital as an essential part of intangible capital is growing. It is an instrumen-

tal success factor also in societal policy making. We the university communities should get the deci-sion makers throughout Europe to commit on foresight issues and on developing their own strategic

agility capabilities with special emphasis on motivating organisational innovativeness. This means fo-

cusing more than so far on innovation ecosystems, mindset change and shared ownership on key de-

velopment activities.

The challenges we are facing can be described by the key program-level research questions which have

been defined in the Energizing Urban Ecosystems research program:

1) What kinds of elements and processes are critical in creating dynamic, sustainable, energetic and

evolving urban ecosystems, to meet and respond to the complexities of ever-changing needs andbehavioural patterns of urban actors?

2) What are the mechanisms to increase the renewal capital in our society and especially in the work

communities? And in order to make this to happen in practice, how to maximize the potential value

of the available and emerging enablers for modern urban development, such as advanced techno-

logical solutions, gradually converging public-private-partnerships intelligence and accumulating

design competencies?

To conclude, linear thinking is not the solution to the challenges of a complex, non-linear, world. The key

set of success factors for regions to reach the global leadership in competitiveness for a better quality

of life is, most likely, comprised of enablers helping create the favourable conditions for systems think-




47/385

45

ing and increasing the renewal capital within the region. The main criterion in measuring the renewal is

the spirit of becoming forerunner individuals and communities with open and enthusiastic mindsets to-

wards societal innovations.

REFERENCES

[1] European Commission, (2011), European Semester and Annual Growth Survey (COM(2011) 11), pp. 2-10.

[2] EU Committee of the Regions, (2011), Opinion CdR 72/2011 fin, The role of local and regional authorities inachieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy.

[3] Curley M, (2012), Introduction, Open Innovation Yearbook 2012, European Commission, p.5.[4] European Commission, www.digital-ecosystems (30.8.2012).

[5] Prahalad C K, Krishnan M S, (2008), The New Age of Innovation, McGraw-Hill, pp. 1-25.

[6] Launonen M, Viitanen J, (2011), Hubconcepts the Global Best Practice for Managing Innovation Ecosystems andHubs, Hubconcepts Inc., Helsinki, p. 331.

[7] Wallin J (ed.), (2012), Capabilities for innovation activities, Impact study, Tekes, pp. 10-11.

[8] Markkula M, Kune H, (2012), Pioneering regions and societal innovations as enablers for the Europe 2020 strategy,Open Innovation Yearbook 2012, European Commission, p. 56.

[9] Forum of the Committee of the Regions 13 December 2011, Brussels.

[10] European Commission, (2011), Horizon 2020 The Framework Programme for Research and Innovation,COM(2011) 808 final.

[11] European Commission, (2011), Synergies between FP7, the CIP and the Cohesion Policy Funds, Expert Group ofDG Research and Innovation, (2011), p. 5.

[12] EU Committee of the Regions, (2011), Opinion CdR 402-2011, Working Document on Horizon 2020 by theRapporteur Markku Markkula.

[13] EU Committee of the Regions, (2012), Opinion CdR 402-2011 fin, CoR Opinion on Horizon 2020, pp.4-5.

[14] European Commission, (2012), EU Guide to Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisations (RIS 3),Smart Specialisation Platform, May 2012, p.11.

[15] European Commission, (2012), EU Guide to Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisations (RIS 3),Smart Specialisation Platform, May 2012, pp.15-16.

[16] EU Committee of the Regions, (2012), Opinion CdR 402-2011 fin, CoR Opinion on Horizon 2020, pp. 5-6.

[17] EU Committee of the Regions, (2012), Opinion CdR 402-2011 fin, CoR Opinion on Horizon 2020, p.7.

[18] Markkula M, (2011), Pacts for Europe 2020: Good Practices and Views from EU Cities and Regions, unpublishedpaper, EU Committee of the Regions Territorial Dialogue 22.2.2011, Brussels, p.3.

[19] Bria F, (2012), New governance models towards a open Internet ecosystem for smart connected European citiesand regions, Open Innovation Yearbook 2012, European Commission, p. 70.

[20] Bria F, (2012), New governance models towards a open Internet ecosystem for smart connected European citiesand regions, Open Innovation Yearbook 2012, European Commission, p. 64-66.

[21] RYM, (2012), Energizing Urban Ecosystems, not publicly available research plan.




48/385

INTRODUCTION

Homo Fabiens is the engineer of the 21st Century, it is the fusion of the two distinct, in equiv-

alent and yet converging notions: Homo Sapiensand Homo Faber. This is the Century of

their convergence, the Century of a new Engineer, one that integrates technology with the

humanities, scientific thinking with literature, gadgetry with art, and infrastructure with economic and

social thinking.

1 ENGINEERING IS A FUTURE ORIENTED ACTIVITY

Engineering is at crossroads. During the last couple decades, the end of the Cold War and the massive

relocation of manufacturing and to a lesser but significant degree engineering design in emerging mar-

kets has led to a precipitous decline in demand for engineering positions in the developed world as well

as reduced interest for Engineering Education amongst the young.

The dissertation work of Mary Pilotte at Purdue University states that:

In the United States, over 10,000 people a day are retiring from the workforce, leaving with years of accu-

mulated institutional understanding. For industry, this presents the real threat of losing competitive advan-

tage over competitors. For the practice of engineering, t

sefi book complete

Documents