 |
|
| |
|
Employer Representation on
University Committees Malcolm Farrow
(University of Sunderland) Contents
Introduction
Purpose
Advantages
Limitations and difficulties
Conclusions
Introduction
Since some of my remarks might reflect my particular background
and experience, it might be helpful to say what that is. I
have taught statistics at the University of Sunderland (formerly
Sunderland Polytechnic) since 1984. Before that I taught at
Leicester Polytechnic (now De Montfort University) for three
years following two years teaching at the University of Hull.
Before going to Hull I was a "CASE" research student at
the University of Newcastle upon Tyne in collaboration with Alcan
Lynemouth Ltd. That gave me a little experience of industry.
Since then I have continued to be involved with the world outside
of Academia through consultancy, research collaboration, student
placements and projects etc.
My involvement with employer representation on university committees is not confined to the management of statistics courses. Some of what I say will reflect experience of committees concerned mainly with other subjects but I think it is possible to apply that experience in the case of statistics. In particular, much of my experience has been with one M.Sc. course which is only partly statistical.
It may help those who are unfamiliar with university committees if I give a little explanation. Indeed, not all universities are the same. There is a variety of structures. For example, differences are likely to be found between the "old" and "new" (i.e. post 1992) universities. The "new" universities tend to have a management structure which differs from those in the "old" universities and, in their academic course management, may still show traces of the old CNAA model. Most of my experience has been with "new" universities or polytechnics as they were.
There is a certain amount of jargon. Many universities
have adopted a "modular" system, at least for
undergraduate teaching, often involving a "credit
accumulation and transfer scheme." So, for the purpose of
this discussion:
For the purpose of this discussion, there are, I think, two main types of committee work where employer representatives are involved.
There are also representatives of outside organisations on, e.g., governing bodies but I do not move in such exalted circles and it is perhaps better if 1 do not attempt to comment.
Quite a lot of my experience in these matters has been with a succession of M.Sc. programmes, each of which replaced its predecessor. The present course is called "M.Sc. in Decision Support Systems" and I am its Programme Leader. Its predecessor was "M.Sc. in Computer Based Modelling and Simulation" and, before that, "M.Sc. Mathematical Modelling and Computer Simulation" takes us back to the early 1980s. These courses have always had, at least in theory, employer/industrial representatives on the Board of Studies. We are very happy with the present incumbent. He is a good attender and very helpful in many ways. He is now a partner in a statistical consultancy based a few miles from the University. Before that he was Head of Mathematics and Statistics at a large industrial establishment to which we sent many students on placements. As well as the Board of Studies he now also attends meetings of our Decision Support Systems Research Group. The M.Sc. course does contain a strong element of statistics, probability and decision analysis but it is not primarily a statistics course as such.
The word "employer" perhaps requires a comment.
We sometimes talk about "industrial" representatives
but this may be misleading as we might not think of, e.g., the
Civil Service or the NHS as "industry." On the other
hand, it will usually be unreasonable to expect to find a
representative of an organisation which is likely actually to
employ more than a very small number of graduates from a
particular course. I will comment further on this later.
back to top
Purpose
What are we trying to achieve with employer representatives?
Personally, I dislike the use of words such as "customer"
in the context of education. Relationships in education are
rather different, I hope. However it may clarify things a
little here to consider for whom universities are working.
I have not listed "industry" among higher education's paymasters because, of course, it is not, at least not usually in a direct sense. Although "Industry" does not (usually) actually pay us to teach students in the way students and the Government do, both students and Society/the Government are likely to want us to take account of the views of employers. Nevertheless it is sensible and in the interests of our students, I think, to bear in mind the indirectness of this reasoning. We are not actually in a contract with "Industry" to supply graduates of a particular type. (However employers are, of course, entitled to expect that when we award a degree this means something).
Having said this, "employability" on graduation
might well be something a student takes seriously. There
are also other reasons why it is desirable that employers are
pleased with our graduates. It is in the interests of
graduates generally that graduates have a good reputation with
employers. This is also in the long-term interest of the
university sector itself. In the shorter term a good
reputation for the graduates of a particular department can lead
to links which may be useful in many ways.
back to top
Advantages
1. For the University
These days many university folk do actually try quite hard to
work closely with industry and other employing sectors.
Having employer representatives is one way we can be seen to be
doing this. It is easy to identify in reports, grant
applications etc. In funding applications it is often
necessary to show that we have done so-called "market
research" and our friends outside the university can help us
with this. In some cases, such as the development of short
courses, the "market research" really is market
research. I have recently been busy with an application for
support for a short course and it does require good contacts in
companies and other outside organisations.
Perhaps more interestingly the involvement of employer representatives can influence syllabus change and such changes may serve the purposes outlined in Section titled "Purpose". Here are two examples where an employer representative has been a useful ally. In both cases I wanted to change something but perhaps had not yet won the argument with my colleagues. A few words from someone from the outside can make a big difference.
Of course I can not guarantee that employer representatives will always take my side in debates. The same representative who supported my Bayesian ambitions also suggested the inclusion of neural networks in the course. I had previously opposed this but conceded defeat. The neural networks are there, in the same module as the Bayesian inference.
2. For the Represented Employers
The advantages for the represented employers are perhaps less
easy to identify. There seems to be little in it directly
for our M.Sc. employer representative. He is unlikely to
employ any of our graduates in the near future. I suppose
he does it because he wants to help and he knows it is useful to
us. Perhaps it gives him some satisfaction. Also, of
course, close links can be beneficial to both sides in various
ways. There is an exchange of ideas which works in both
directions. We have also been involved in joint projects
etc.
3. Reality in the Student Experience
I have not, so far, used the phrase "real world." I
prefer to avoid this phrase which can be misleading if abused.
Our work in education is real. The "unreality"
relates, I think, to the student experience which involves
learning through examples and exercises which are necessarily, in
some sense at least, not quite "for real." In some
cases, of course, they may be unreal in more than just that sense.
Here we may be able to use our employer representatives and other
contacts to help us make things as "real" as possible
by using real problems in teaching. Indeed I would claim
that we have achieved some interesting successes with this at
Sunderland. (No doubt others have done this successfully as well).
If you are interested in what we have done at Sunderland, please
ask. Employer representatives are well placed to help in
this way because they gain an understanding of what is needed in
the course.
back to top
Limitations and difficulties
It is probably already clear from what 1 have said so far that if
we are to have an employer representative then we need someone
who is interested, sympathetic to the aims of the course and able
and willing to attend meetings. Otherwise the existence of
the representative, while not necessarily being useless, will be
of limited usefulness. Attendance of external
representatives at meetings is not always good. I have
known boards with "theoretical" industrial
representatives whom we would never see (except, perhaps, at
special occasions). People are, of course, very busy and
there may be travelling involved but, having allowed for that, I
think interest and commitment play a part. Suitable people
may be difficult to find. I should point out again that the
present industrial representative on the board of our M.Sc.
course is an excellent example of a good representative.
There is, I fear, still some ignorance of the other side around on each side of the education-industry divide. Of course I see things from one side but it is not very helpful to have to sit and listen to an invited speaker from industry lecturing us that, "In industry we have to meet deadlines," or, "In industry we are judged on results," or to hear an industrial representative in a meeting tell us (tongue in cheek, perhaps) that a particular number of hours would be "two weeks' work ... or three weeks' if you're in a university." These are all real examples. These things happen. Perhaps universities have an image problem!
Let us consider again the phrase "employer representative." With a few exceptions it would be unrealistic to expect a representative to be from an organisation which is actually going to employ very many graduates from a particular course. There is not a statistics industry as such. Academic members of the audience might reflect on where their graduates actually go (if they know!). The destinations are likely to be many and varied. In fact it might be that education itself is one of the more important sectors in this respect. This does not mean that employer representatives are of little use. It does mean, however, that we may need to avoid being led into a too-narrowly specialised definition of what employers need. Exceptions to this might include specialised courses such as a M.Sc. in Medical Statistics with a close relationship with the pharmaceutical industry or courses in universities located close to large employers of statistics graduates, perhaps the Civil Service in the London area.
The danger of too narrow a focus can become apparent when
employers are represented in course validations. People in
a particular industry or service might have a particular view of
what is relevant. Occasionally we may need to protect our
students against such over-narrowness and make sure they have the
background to enable them to adapt to different areas and new
developments. Of course many representatives will be aware
of this need and will act accordingly. This does illustrate
a point though. Professional statistics lecturers have
responsibilities as such and, while it can be very useful to hear
from representatives of employers, in the end we have to use our
own judgement to decide what is best for the course and our
students.
back to top
Conclusions
I believe the employer influence on our M.Sc. course has been
considerable and very successful. There has not been quite
as much employer input in our undergraduate statistics teaching
at Sunderland. My experience suggests the undergraduate
provision would benefit from more though it might be difficult to
achieve in practice. Therefore I am inclined to think that
it is likely that other courses elsewhere would benefit from such
arrangements but we have to be realistic about what we can expect.
One final thought occurs to me. While, I hope, my
justification of employer representation made some sense in the
context of statistics, it is hard for me to see how it would work
in some other disciplines, for example history. (Perhaps I am
ignorant). Yet students take history courses and the
Government funds them. If this observation means anything
perhaps it means that we can offer our students something extra
which is not possible in all disciplines and that we are
fortunate that, with a little help from our friends, we can do
this.
back to top
