Analyzing curriculum structure in Industrial and Management Engineering Courses: implications for teaching and learning

European Higher Education institutions have witnessed a great deal of change over the last decade (2000-2010). Most of the changes related to the Bologna Process demands: new structures and tools, quality assurance, social dimension, student mobility, lifelong learning and employability (EACEA Eurydice, 2010). These principles have a strong impact on policies and practices in the universities, not only on staff and students performance, but also on the curriculum design, content, resources, methodologies and assessment. In Portugal, at University of Minho the most significant changes, with a clear impact on teaching and learning methodologies, occurred at two levels: a) assessment methods; b) adjustment of graduate study programmes. The new regulation for assessment of students’ performance suggests a diversity of evaluation strategies for each course unit and the possibility of doing it throughout the semester (continuous assessment). Currently, all the University of Minho’s study programs, both at graduate and post-graduate levels, are already adjusted to the Bologna paradigm. The curriculum structure of the Integrated Master Degree of Industrial and Management Engineering (MIEGI) includes two cycles organized by the European Credit Transfer System (ECTS), according to the Portuguese Decree Law nº 42/2005. In this context, this paper aims to analyze the structure and rationale of curricula in Industrial and Management Engineering (IME) courses. The main research questions were: 1) How is the curriculum is structured?; 2) What are the key areas that are promoted in each curriculum course?; 3) What kind of professional profile is defined? A document analysis was undertaken. Through an online directory, a list of universities offering IME programs was analyzed. This list has 127 programs from universities and polytechnics in Europe (Germany, Spain, Russia, UK, Sweden, The Netherlands, Poland, Norway, Italy, Ireland, Greece, France, Denmark, Finland, Austria and Portugal). In order to identify European trends, a total of 127 programs were selected. In this paper, three variables will be analyzed: practicum, length and profile. Only universities were chosen for this analysis. A number of differences and similarities were identified, namely: - Most of programs' designation is different in each university. For instance, Engineering Design and Production, Industrial Engineering, Industrial Management, Manufacturing Engineering Management, Industrial Project Management, and so on. However, all programs are related to IME area because this is the main criterion for the analysis. - The curriculum organization shows that all programs have Math and Physics in year 1. These are considered the basic sciences in Engineering. In some countries the first cycle of study for Engineering is common. Only in the second cycle students have a specialization of knowledge (e.g. Mechanical, Computer Science, Production, etc.). - The programs selected are different in their length. A few programs are open and flexible, where student choose the courses that he/she want to do. Implications of the findings for teaching and learning in Higher Education will be discussed. This will be the basis for the development of the second phase of data collection