“Automobile Transport” Professional Master study program in “Automobile Transport”
IV The management and support of the studies
Download 159.85 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Comment: Increased research activities and in particular participation in EU projects is strongly recommended.
- Comment: Other relevant professional Master´s programs at RTU – FTM-Faculty are available in “Transport Systems Engineering”.
- (6 main aspects and 14 questions)
- Comment: ……… II The content and organization of the studies. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………
- Comment: ……… III Assessment of teaching and learning. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………
- IV The management and support of the studies
- Comment: ……… VI Quality assessment and mechanisms to ensure it Assessment: 3 Comment: ………
IV The management and support of the studiesAssessment: 3 Comment: An improved curriculum structure with fewer and larger courses is recommended, as well as more PBL in the applied engineering courses. However the co-operation with Latvian automotive and transport industry is good, e.g. for practical placement. A thorough planning of practical placement will be required though, to focus on relevant industrial problems for the students to solve. This is particularly valid for the Bachelor program, where the practical placement amounts to 26 CP. 8. Respect of the principles of democracy, clear definition of the relations among representatives of the administration, academic staff and students; Assessment: 4 Comment: There seems to be friendly relations between students and staff. Students have good access to the teaching staff, directly or via Internet. Student´s motivation to enter the program is often high, particularly considering many student´s interest in automotive technology. 9. Cooperation with other higher education establishments, research institutions, international organizations; exchange of staff and students with other higher education establishments. Assessment: 3 Comment: Staff is active internationally, with placements as guest researchers e.g. in UK and Sweden. Increased participation in international conferences, and European research projects is strongly recommended though.Student exchange has so far not been implemented. Insufficient knowledge of foreign languages seems to be a problem for many students. Improved co-operation with other Institutes within RTU and within the TMF faculty is strongly recommended, e.g. by sharing laboratory resources and equipment, as well as by including courses e.g. in within IT and informatics. 10. Methodological, informational and technical resources and facilities of the study programmes. Assessment: 2 Comment: Teaching methodology is based on a relevant distribution between lectures, exercises, laboratory work. However, more PBL based on real industry problems, would be preferable in the applied subjects.Laboratory facilities comprise much of the basic equipment needed, but should in many cases be upgraded to more modern equipment. Possibilities for co-operation with industry for use of modern laboratory equipment should also be investigated. V Research (creative) activities of the staff and the students 11. Involvement of the academic and general staff in the research (creative) activities, up to date character and connection with the content of the study programme. Assessment: 3 Comment: Increased research activities and in particular participation in EU projects is strongly recommended.VI Quality assessment and mechanisms to ensure it Assessment: 2 Comment: Written examinations are used in all courses, and requirements for “passed” of exercises and laboratory work. No specific means or methods for quality assurance of the program were mentioned, besides the self-evaluation report.12. Annual self-assessment of the study programmes, evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses, changes, plans and possibilities for the development, continuously action of the system of self-evaluation and quality improvement. Assessment: 3 Comment: A comprehensive self-assessment for the program, covering many important aspects, was presented to the evaluation commission. The development plan was focused on renewal of staff and laboratory equipment, as well as increased number of students.13. Successful work of graduates according to their qualification. Assessment: Comment: The program was established in 2005, no students have been graduated so far. 14. Opportunities to continue studies and financial guarantees in the case of closure of the programmes, their re-organization and other changes. Assessment: 4 Comment: Other relevant professional Master´s programs at RTU – FTM-Faculty are available in “Transport Systems Engineering”.Summary and recommendations, “Automobile Transport”: SWOT: Strengths: Competent staff, good relations to both Latvian and international industry, staff international exchange Friendly relations with the sudents, individual approach Weaknesses: High age of staff, insufficient research – in particular EU - projects, no mobility of students, student´s lack of language skills, old laboratory equipment Modern methods for environmental consideration and sustainability missing Too little of theoretical subjects (mathematics, theoretical mechanics – solid and fluid) especially in the Masters program Opportunities: Participation in EU projects, participation in student exchange programs. Threats: High age of staff, difficulties to recruit PhD students and younger teaching staff. I recommend: Professional Master study program “Automobile Transport” accreditation for 6 years Professional Bachelor study program “Automobile Transport” accreditation for 6 years 2006-07-03 Jan-Gunnar Persson Team leader, expert commission Questionnaire and Individual Report by Evaluation Commission Expert Arunas Lukosevicius for Higher School Professional Bachelor study program in “Automobile Transport” The scale for the assessment: 4 (excellent), 3 (highly satisfactory), 2 (satisfactory), 1(unsatisfactory) I The assessment of study programmes (6 main aspects and 14 questions)I Aims and objectives1. Possibility to understand, to reach and to control the aims and objectives defined by the study programme. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………II The content and organization of the studies. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………2. Complying with the professional and education standards, legislation of the Republic of Latvia and with the requirements and standards of the European Union. Assessment: 4 Comment: ………3. Consistency of the study programme and its parts with the demands to create the common European education space, including the comparison with at least two study programmes from EU countries. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………4. Qualification and professionality of the academic staff members. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………III Assessment of teaching and learning. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………5. Modern methodology of teaching, a clear statement of results to be expected, problem solving, use of computers, internet, audiovisual and multi media equipment. Assessment: 2 Comment: ……… 6. Counselling and guidance for students, academic supervision and consultations of the teaching staff, increasing of the students' motivation to study. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………7. Methods to assess the knowledge, skills and attitudes, their objectivity use to improve the studies. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………IV The management and support of the studiesAssessment: 3 Comment: ……… 8. Respect of the principles of democracy, clear definition of the relations among representatives of the administration, academic staff and students; Assessment: 4 Comment: ………9. Cooperation with other higher education establishments, research institutions, international organizations; exchange of staff and students with other higher education establishments. Assessment: 2 Comment: ………10. Methodological, informational and technical resources and facilities of the study programme. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………V Research (creative) activities of the staff and the students 11. Involvement of the academic and general staff in the research (creative) activities, up to date character and connection with the content of the study programme. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………VI Quality assessment and mechanisms to ensure it Assessment: 3 Comment: ………12. Annual self-assessment of the study programme, evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses, changes, plans and possibilities for the development, continuously action of the system of self-evaluation and quality improvement. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………13. Successful work of graduates according to their qualification. Assessment: 3 Comment: ……… 14. Opportunities to continue studies and financial guarantees in the case of closure of the programme, its re-organization and other changes. Assessment: 4 Comment: ………Individual report Since automobile engineering has a long lasting traditions in Latvia, program is well suited to the needs of industry and employers. Facilities and laboratories are legacy of former programs and are rather old fashioned. They have a value, but need for updates, especially in the advanced electronics, computer assisted aids. Program also should find it’s own more clear profile within other mechanic-based programs from one side and with transport system engineering program from another. On my opinion bachelor program should be the basis for students to enter other related programs, not only master program on automobile transport. Therefore it should be basic, have more maths and other general subjects. Staff is qualified enough, students are satisfied with teaching and learning facilities. Although many of them work at workplaces related with management and sails, knowledge obtained is useful. Problems with staff aging, international collaboration, language, students mobility would be recommended. On my opinion that the programs meet the requirements, ATI staff is able to run the programs well and have a potential to improve it further with regards of commission recommendations. I agree with joint recommendation of six-year accreditation of the professional Bachelor study programme “Automobile Transport”. Expert
Prof. Arunas Lukosevicius Questionnaire and Individual Report by Evaluation Commission Expert Arunas Lukosevicius for Higher School Master study program in “Automobile Transport” The scale for the assessment:
(6 main aspects and 14 questions)I Aims and objectives1. Possibility to understand, to reach and to control the aims and objectives defined by the study programme. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………II The content and organization of the studies. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………2. Complying with the professional and education standards, legislation of the Republic of Latvia and with the requirements and standards of the European Union. Assessment: 4 Comment: ………3. Consistency of the study programme and its parts with the demands to create the common European education space, including the comparison with at least two study programmes from EU countries. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………4. Qualification and professionality of the academic staff members. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………III Assessment of teaching and learning. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………5. Modern methodology of teaching, a clear statement of results to be expected, problem solving, use of computers, internet, audiovisual and multi media equipment. Assessment: 2 Comment: ……… 6. Counselling and guidance for students, academic supervision and consultations of the teaching staff, increasing of the students' motivation to study. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………7. Methods to assess the knowledge, skills and attitudes, their objectivity use to improve the studies. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………IV The management and support of the studiesAssessment: 3 Comment: ……… 8. Respect of the principles of democracy, clear definition of the relations among representatives of the administration, academic staff and students; Assessment: 4 Comment: ………9. Cooperation with other higher education establishments, research institutions, international organizations; exchange of staff and students with other higher education establishments. Assessment: 2 Comment: ………10. Methodological, informational and technical resources and facilities of the study programme. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………V Research (creative) activities of the staff and the students 11. Involvement of the academic and general staff in the research (creative) activities, up to date character and connection with the content of the study programme. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………VI Quality assessment and mechanisms to ensure it Assessment: 3 Comment: ………12. Annual self-assessment of the study programme, evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses, changes, plans and possibilities for the development, continuously action of the system of self-evaluation and quality improvement. Assessment: 3 Comment: ………13. Successful work of graduates according to their qualification. Assessment: 3 Comment: ……… 14. Opportunities to continue studies and financial guarantees in the case of closure of the programme, its re-organization and other changes. Assessment: 4 Comment: ………Individual report Since automobile engineering has long lasting traditions in Latvia, program is well suited to the needs of industry and employers. Facilities and laboratories are legacy of former programs and are rather old fashioned. They have a value, but need for updates, especially in the advanced electronics, computer assisted aids, advanced design and simulation instruments, especially valuable for master studies. Master program also should find it’s own more distinguishing features from bachelor program, also from other mechanic-based programs from one side and transport system engineering program from another. Professional master program should be the basis for students to enter PhD programs in future which are not automobile oriented, therefore it should be directed for education of future leaders, creative and active specialists. Program should have be more more fundamental background and general subjects. Professional profile of the master programs shouldn’t mean a narrow specialization on things which are today, but rather deep knowledge of the issues needed for the future development of the field. Staff is qualified enough, students are satisfied with teaching and learning facilities. Although many of them work at workplaces related with management and sails, knowledge obtained is useful, but I’m not sure if anywhere master level education is really needed. Problems with staff aging, international collaboration, language, students mobility would be recommended. On my opinion that the programs meet the requirements, ATI staff is able to run the programs well and have a potential to improve it further with regards of commission recommendations. I agree with joint recommendation of six-year accreditation of the professional Master study programme “Automobile Transport”. Expert Prof. Arunas Lukosevicius Directory: zinojumi zinojumi -> Self-evaluation Report zinojumi -> Self-evaluation report zinojumi -> Department of sociology and psychology zinojumi -> Teacher speech therapist Download 159.85 Kb. Share with your friends:
|