Mechanical Engineering Education E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 174

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2012

Beschreibung

Mechanical Engineering is defined nowadays as a discipline “which involves the application of principles of physics, design, manufacturing and maintenance of mechanical systems”. Recently, mechanical engineering has also focused on some cutting-edge subjects such as nanomechanics and nanotechnology, mechatronics and robotics, computational mechanics, biomechanics, alternative energies, as well as aspects related to sustainable mechanical engineering.
This book covers mechanical engineering higher education with a particular emphasis on quality assurance and the improvement of academic institutions, mechatronics education and the transfer of knowledge between university and industry.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Preface

Chapter 1. Quality Assurance in Greek HEIs: Convergence or Divergence with European Models?

1.1.Introduction

1.2.Definitions and fundamentals

1.3.Quality management models in HE

1.4.European focus on quality in HE: a historical perspective

1.5.Quality assurance in Greece: a long and winding road

1.6.Bibliography

Chapter 2. Mechatronics Education

2.1.Introduction

2.2.A brief history of mechatronics

2.3.Definitions and scope of mechatronics

2.4.Examples of mechatronic products

2.5.Review of literature in the area of mechatronics education

2.6.Common doubts regarding the discipline of mechatronics

2.7.Characteristics of mechatronics education

2.8.Incorporating mechatronics in the course structure of undergraduate students

2.9.Mechatronics for postgraduate students

2.10.Planning of a mechatronics program at postgraduate and undergraduate level

2.11.Some examples of mechatronics projects

2.12.Conclusion

2.13.Bibliography

Chapter 3. Mechatronics Educational System Using Multiple Mobile Robots with Behavior-Based Control Approach

3.1.Introduction

3.2.Mechatronics education subsystem I

3.3.Mechatronics educational subsystem II

3.4.Mechatronics educational subsystem III

3.5.Conclusions

3.6.Bibliography

Chapter 4. Knowledge Transfer between University and Industry: Development of a Vision Measuring System

4.1.Introduction

4.2.Measuring system

4.3.Image processing algorithm

4.4.Results

4.5.Conclusions

4.6.Acknowledgment

4.7.Bibliography

List of Authors

Index

First published 2012 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:

ISTE Ltd27-37 St George’s RoadLondon SW19 4EUUKwww.iste.co.uk

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.111 River StreetHoboken, NJ 07030USAwww.wiley.com

© ISTE Ltd 2012

The rights of J. Paulo Davim to be identified as the author of this work have been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2012947348

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication DataA CIP record for this book is available from the British LibraryISBN 978-1-84821-381-4

Preface

Mechanical engineering is currently being defined (nowadays) as a discipline ”which involves the application of principles of physics, design, manufacturing and maintenance of mechanical systems“. Recently, the field of mechatronics has gained importance in mechanical engineering as well as in other modern disciplines. This book on mechanical engineering lays special emphasis on quality assurance and the improvement of higher education institutions, mechatronics education, and transfer of knowledge between university and industry. Chapter 1 discusses the quality assurance schemes applied to Greek Higher Education Institutions (GHEIs) in accordance with the specifications laid down by the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and the European Standards and Guidelines. Chapter 2 covers mechatronics education. Chapter 3 contains information on the system of mechatronics education using multiple mobile robots with a behavior-based control approach. Finally, in Chapter 4, the transfer of knowledge between university and industry is discussed, which has the potential to bring great benefits to both partners; for example, in designing innovative solutions, in the optimal allocation of resources, in motivating students to new challenging tasks, and finally in integrating multidisciplinary teams from both university and industry.

This book can be used as course material for final–year undergraduate engineering students or for study as a discipline for mechanical engineering at the postgraduate level. It can also serve as a useful reference for academics, mechatronics researchers, mechanical and mechatronics engineers and professionals connected with mechatronics education.

The subject matter of this book should prove to be of interest to many institutes and universities throughout the world.

The editor would like to express gratitude to ISTE–Wiley for this opportunity and their support. Finally, I would like to thank all the contributing authors for making themselves available to work on this project.

J. PAULO DAVIM Aveiro, Portugal September 2012

Chapter 1

Quality Assurance in Greek HEIs: Convergence or Divergence with European Models?1

This chapter discusses the quality assurance schemes applied to Greek Higher Education Institutions (GHEIs), in accordance with the context and specifications induced by the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG). Section 1.3 summarizes the quality management models with an emphasis on those applied to higher education, while section 1.4 focuses on quality assurance schemes in the EHEA. Section 1.5 examines the case of Greek HEIs.

1.1. Introduction

A core component of higher education reform is the systematic quality assurance and improvement of the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). The “Communiqué of the Conference of Ministers Responsible for Higher Education” in Berlin on 19 September 2003 establishes that the quality of higher education has “proven to be at the heart of the setting up of a European Higher Education Area”. Assuring quality in teaching and learning is no longer a matter only for the higher educational policy programs or broad international professional discussion. Quality development and assurance have for a long time played a central role in strategic higher educational planning and in the everyday work of HEIs [SPA 08].

In many countries and many cultures, the issue of quality management has been firmly on the agenda of HEIs for quite some time. Higher education for the masses and a growing climate of increased accountability are frequently cited as rationales for a greater emphasis on quality [ERI 95, BEC 06]. Other reasons include the greater expectations and diversity of students as consumers, their demand for increased flexibility in provision and increasing levels of competition within and across national borders. The role of HEIs in stimulating national economic growth and the value of international students to national economies, emphasize the need to ensure quality within Higher Education (HE). These forces demand that quality assurance processes are both rigorous and transparent, and that quality enhancement initiatives are firmly embedded in any quality management program.

This has led to the emergence of a debate on the applicability of quality management principles, methodologies and tools for the HE sector. A study of the literature on higher education indicates that a number of researchers support the non-applicability of those management theories, especially because they are derived from industry and have nothing to do with the higher education ethos [HAR 95; PRA 10]. Other authors have given a more balanced view on the subject, claiming that although HEIs are not companies, some of the basic principles and tools could be applied, as long as they were instruments at the service of institutions and their governance and management boards, subject to the academic mission, goals and strategies of the institution [WIL 93, DIL 95, SPA 08].

Although this is an old debate, no firm conclusions have been arrived at so far. It seems, nevertheless, that in Europe, due to the developments on quality assurance schemes following the Bologna Declaration, HEIs are now being “forced” to implement internal quality assurance systems based on the European standards and guidelines (ESG); see [ROS 12].

1.2. Definitions and fundamentals

In quality management, it is vital to study the meaning of quality in the situation under examination. In the area of higher education, the concept of what constitutes quality has not been thoroughly addressed, although some interesting studies exist; for an overview see [LAG 04, VEN 07]. Furthermore, there is the vast field of general research into quality management in services. The extent to which this research is applicable to the higher education sector also needs to be analyzed.

There are various well-known definitions of quality. Crosby (1979) defines quality as “conformance to requirement” while Juran and Gryna (1980) define quality as “fitness for use”. Deming's (1986) definition of quality as “a predictable degree of uniformity and dependability at low cost and suited to the market” is more concerned with quality in operation. Many organizations found that the old definition of quality — “the degree of conformance to a standard” — was too narrow, and have consequently started to use a new definition of quality in terms of “customer focus” [SPA 08].

As far as total quality management (TQM) is concerned, there are a number of researchers who have proposed frameworks and/or models for quality improvements; it is not the scope of the present chapter to present them critically. In general, it is agreed that TQM consists of two main notions — continuous improvement and the tools and techniques/methods used. In general, TQM encompasses many management and business philosophies while its focus shifts, based on a scenario where TQM is applied. Whether it is in industry or in higher education, TQM philosophy revolves around the customer [SPA 08].

Quality in higher education is even more difficult to define than in most other sectors. Frazer [FRA 94] argues that a first important step would be to agree internationally on terms such as levels, standards, effectiveness and efficiency. Such agreement on basic factors is also an objective for the so-called “Bologna process” of integration currently taking place in Europe. Discussing quality in higher education, Harvey and Green [HAR 93] proposed five discrete but interrelated ways to think about quality:

1) Quality as exceptional. Quality is regarded in terms of excellence, which means something special or exceptional. High standards are exceeded.

2) Quality as perfection or consistency. The focus is on processes and specifications that are aimed to be perfectly met. Excellence, in this case, means “zero defects”, i.e. perfection.

3) Quality as fitness for purpose. Quality has meaning only in relation to the purpose of the product. In traditional quality management, the “fitness for purpose” notion was related to the customers; an idea originated by Juran. In higher education, however, a number of researchers view quality as “meeting customer requirements” to be problematic due to the contentiousness of the notion of “customer” and the difficulty for students for example to specify what is required.

4) Quality as value for money. Quality is equated with the levels of specifications and is directly related to costs.

5) Quality as transformation. The process should ideally bring about a qualitative change, a fundamental change of form, such as the phase transition when water transforms into ice as the temperature is lowered. This view can be found in the thinking of major Western philosophers, as well as in Eastern philosophies. In education, the transformation can take the form of enhancement and empowerment.

Next, in order to set the complete stage, some additional definitions are needed. Quality assurance is defined in the ISO 9000:2005 standards as “part of quality management focused on providing confidence that quality requirements will be fulfilled” while quality management is defined as “coordinated activities to direct and control an organization with regard to quality” [ISO 05]. Note that quality assurance has been defined most broadly in [GRA 09] as “…systematic management and assessment procedures adopted by a higher education institution or system to monitor performance and to ensure achievement of quality outputs or improved quality”. On the other hand, [SCH 04a] defines a quality assurance scheme or quality assurance system as “accreditation and evaluation systems together” by defining accreditation as “institutionalized and systematically implemented evaluation schemes that end in a formal summary judgment that leads to formal approval processes regarding the respective institution, degree type and/or program”. Within this concept, accreditation is the element of quality assurance schemes that set the standards for granting the “right to exist” within the system. In turn, evaluation activities are defined as “institutionalized and systematically implemented activities regarding the measurement, analysis and/or development of quality for institutions, degree-types and/or programs”.

The terms assessment and evaluation are often used synonymously, denoting both means, i.e. techniques, procedures, instruments and methods for measurement and analysis used to monitor performance and, ends, “to ensure achievement of quality outputs or improved quality”. Accountability is another term that has been associated with such a definition and denotes a responsibility or answerability to external audiences [GRA 09].

The linking of accreditation, evaluation or assessment and accountability in higher education Quality Assurance (QA) schemes causes considerable tension because of their historical, philosophical, political and social background. Understanding this background can help us, first, to appreciate how the quality assurance movement arrived at where it is today and, second, how development in the future should be guided; see for example [GRA 09, ROS 12].

1.3. Quality management models in HE

1.3.1. Overview

While there has been considerable interest in issues concerning how quality could be defined [HAR 93, SPA 08], in the design and relevance of various national quality assurance schemes in higher education [SCH 04b] as well as in the outcomes and effects of such quality assurance processes throughout the world [STE 08], the analysis of models or approaches of quality assurance at the institutional level is rarely addressed. In [BRO 07] a summary of research on quality management at the institutional level has been presented. It points out that the introduction of quality management concepts in higher education are mainly an externally-driven process related to increased demands for accountability and efficiency in the sector. They also found that much attention has been given to quality management models developed for business and industry, and there is a concern that such models may add little to the improvement of teaching and learning, although they might have advantages for improving accountability.

The review indicates that a range of quality management models developed for industry have been adopted or proposed for adoption within HE institutions on a global basis. Internationally, the model most frequently drawn upon, see for example [MOT 97, CRU 03], is TQM defined as “a management approach of an organization, centered on quality, based on the participation of all its members and aiming at long run success through customer satisfaction and benefits to all members of the organization and to society” [WIN 03, SPA 08].

As the definition implies, TQM has the potential to encompass the quality perspectives of both external and internal stakeholders in an integrated manner. It thereby facilitates a comprehensive approach to quality management that will assure quality, as well as change and innovation. Other models that were tested emulate TQM and concentrate on developing systematic business processes that are required to achieve measurable quality outputs. For example, the balanced scorecard requires the identification of appropriate performance indicators, and the European Framework for Quality Management (EFQM), performance enablers and results. The one exception is SERVQUAL, a model that focuses on the assessment of quality solely from the consumer perspective. Table 1.1 identifies and defines the different models that have been applied internationally in HEIs. The application of these models within HEIs, have been summarized in [BEC 08, THA 12]. In a similar manner, a recent review paper, see [ROS 12], examines which of the several methodologies concerning quality management and improvement in organizations could also be implemented in HEIs and concludes that “the ISO 9000 standards, the Balanced Scorecard and the EFQM excellence model deserve to be noticed due to their international recognition and previous validation”; see also [BEC 08].

Table 1.1. Quality management models applied in HEIs

Model

Description

ISO 9000series

International standard for generic quality assurance systems. Concerned with continuous improvement through preventive action. Elements are customer quality and regulatory requirements, and efforts are made to enhance customer satisfaction and achieve continuous improvement.

TQM

A comprehensive management approach which requires contributions from all participants in the organization to work toward long-term benefits for those involved and society as a whole.

EFQM excellence model

Non-prescriptive framework that establishes nine criteria (divided between enablers and results), suitable for any organization to use to assess progress toward excellence.

M. Baldridge award

Based on a framework of performance excellence, which can be used by organizations to improve performance. Seven categories of criteria: leadership; strategic planning; customer and market focus; measurement, analysis and knowledge management; human resource focus; process management; and results.

SERVEQUAL

Instrument designed to measure consumer perceptions and expectations regarding quality of service in five dimensions: reliability, tangibles, responsiveness, assurance and empathy and identifying where gaps exist.

Balance scorecard

Performance/strategic management system that utilizes four measurement perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth.

Business process reengineering

System to enable redesign of business processes, systems and structures to achieve improved performance. It is concerned with change in five components: strategy, processes, technology, organization and culture.

Quality management in HEIs has been reviewed in a number of publications; see for example [HAR 95, BRE 00, PRA 10]. It is, in general, agreed that after the first wave of attempts to copy private-sector models in higher education, more attention has been directed toward the development of quality management models that would take into consideration the specific characteristics of HEIs.

Table 1.2. Categorization of quality management approaches for HEIs [BRE 00]

Type 1 – Academic

Subject focus — knowledge and curriculaProfessorial authorityQuality values vary across institutions

Type 2 – Managerial

Institutional focus — policies and proceduresManagerial authorityQuality values invariant across institutions

Type 3 – Pedagogic

People focus — skills and competenciesStaff developers/educationalist influenceQuality values invariant across institutions

Type 4 – Employment focus

Output focus — graduate standards/learning outcomesEmployment/professional authority Quality values both variant and invariant across institutions

An important framework for the taxonomy of quality management models is provided in [BRE 00]. According to this, the choice of an approach to quality management, as well as quality assessment, depends on “quality values” and “conceptions about what constitutes high quality in higher education”. Furthermore, the authors also differentiate between four main types of quality values stressing different focuses in approaches to quality management. These are academic, managerial, pedagogic and employment focus (see Table 1.2). In the first approach (academic), the focus is on the subject field, which is associated with professorial authority and where the academic values are of great importance. “Conceptions” of quality are based on subject affiliation and vary across the institution, which has limited scope to define and assess quality. In essence, a quality management system should be decentralized, focusing on disciplinary characteristics and applying different quality standards. The managerial type has institutional policies and procedures as the main focus of assessment, underlying good management practices as the key factor of quality production. The characteristics of quality are considered as being “invariant” across the HEI. Here, centralization is seen as an essential characteristic of a quality management system, along with the coupling to institutional strategies and more coherent quality standards. The third type, described as “pedagogic”, focuses on people and pedagogical aspects of the process, i.e. teaching skills and methods, staff training and development. The characteristics of quality are regarded as invariant, across the whole institution. Unlike the first type, a lot of attention is paid here to a more standardized delivery process rather than the content in education. The “employment focus” approach focuses on learning outcomes, standards and output characteristics of graduates. This approach deals with customer requirements, where the customers are often regarded as being the employers of graduates. It tends to take into account both subject-specific and core characteristics of high quality education. Quality characteristics are seen as both invariant and variant, depending on a specific subject. The invariant dimensions could in this approach be linked to the generic skills often identified in national qualification frameworks.

These four categories offer a simple but efficient way of identifying the key characteristics and focus of a given quality management model and can be used as a heuristic tool for further analysis, although it should also be mentioned that the four dimensions may appear quite stylized and not capable of capturing the complexities of different approaches to quality management [PRA 10].

1.3.2. Implementation of ISO 9001 in HEIs

The ISO 9000 series standards emerged in 1987. These standards were subsequently revised in 1994, 2000 and 2008. Right from the release of these standards, the ISO 9000 certification has been implemented at a fast pace [SIN 06, VAX 06]. Today the ISO 9001:2008 standard sets the requirements for implementing a quality management system in an organization, independently of its dimension or type of activity, including educational institutions [HOY 09].

The primary benefit of obtaining an ISO 9001 certification and implementing the criteria of quality awards is to achieve global competitiveness by infusing a higher degree of quality in products, processes and services. A large number of industrial organizations have implemented the requirements of clauses and criteria of these quality models [SIN 06]. However, this kind of progress is not discernable in engineering educational institutions (EEIs).

The ISO 9001:2008 standard specifies the minimum requirements to set up a management system. It is organized in five main blocks: quality management system, management responsibility, resource management, product realization, and measurement, analysis and improvement; see Figure 1.1.

According to the ISO 9000:2005 standard, developing and implementing a quality management system include a succession of discrete phases that are as follows:

– Determining the needs and expectations of customers and other interested parties.

– Establishing a policy for quality and the organization's quality goals.

– Defining the processes and responsibilities needed to attain the quality goals defined.

– Determining and making available the resources needed to attain the quality goals defined.

– Establishing the methods to measure the efficiency and efficacy for each process.