Education and Knowledge Exchange

  • Edward Crawley
  • John Hegarty
  • Kristina Edström
  • Juan Cristobal Garcia Sanchez


How does education prepare talented graduates to be stronger contributors to knowledge exchange and innovation?

Education develops the potential of the students to lead fulfilling, productive lives. As they leave the university, they become talented graduates, able to contribute to knowledge exchange, innovation, and more broadly to society.

The outcomes of their education that they carry into the next phase of their lives include deep working understanding of established fundamentals and emerging knowledge, essential life and professional skills, approaches and judgment, as well as know-how in research and innovation.

Knowledge is exchanged when students work as interns, and when they leave the university for employment or to start new ventures.

We have identified four educational practices that prepare students to be talented graduates:
  • Implementing an integrated curriculum, an educational plan for preparing students in disciplinary fundamentals, and with life and professional skills.

  • Engaging students in active, experiential and digital learning, for deeper conceptual understanding, self-efficacy, and self-learning.

  • Promptly introducing emerging and cross-disciplinary thought from research into the curriculum as new disciplines or interdisciplinary programs.

  • Offering courses within the curriculum in leadership, management, and entrepreneurship to better prepare students for innovation.


Education Learning Talent Graduates Contributors Knowledge exchange Innovation Fundamentals Skills Approaches Judgement Knowhow Research Integrated curriculum Teaching Emerging thought Leadership Management Entrepreneurship 


  1. 1.
    Seely B (2005) Patterns in the history of engineering education reform: a brief essay. In: National Academy of Engineering, Engineer of 2020: National Education Summit. National Academies Press, pp 114–130Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Crawley E, Malmqvist J, Östlund S, Brodeur DR, Edström K (2014) Rethinking engineering education: the CDIO approach, 2nd edn, Springer ChamGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    MIT (1949) Committee on educational survey. Report to the Faculty of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (The Lewis Report). Technology Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barrie SC (2006) Understanding what we mean by the generic attributes of graduates. High Educ 51:215–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Edström K (2018) Academic and professional values in engineering education: engaging with history to explore a persistent tension. Eng Stud 10:38–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wankel LA, Wankel C (2016) Integrating curricular and co-curricular endeavors to enhance student outcomes. Emerald Group Pub Ltd, BingleyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Feisel L (1986) Teaching students to continue their education. In: Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education. Arlington, TexasGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Biggs J, Tang C (2011) Teaching for quality learning at university. Open University PressGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marton F, Säljö R (2005) Approaches to learning. In: Marton F, Hounsell D, Entwistle NJ (eds) The experience of learning. Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh, pp 36–55Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boud D, Falchikov N (2007) Rethinking assessment in higher education: learning for the longer term. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kolb DA (2014) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development, 2nd edn, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, Smith MK, Okoroafor N, Jordt H, Wenderoth MP (2014) Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111:8410–8415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mazur E (1996) Peer instruction: a User’s manual. Pearson EducationGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roediger HL III, Karpicke JD (2006) The power of testing memory: basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspect Psychol Sci 1:181–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. Worth PublishersGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Siemens G, Conole G (2011) Connectivism: design and delivery of social networked learning. Special Issue International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. Accessed 2 Jan 2020
  17. 17.
    Ambrose SA, Bridges MW, DiPietro M, Lovett MC, Norman MK, Mayer RE (2010) How learning works: seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boud D, Molloy E (2013) Feedback in higher and professional education: understanding it and doing it well. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H, Schwartzman S, Scott P, Trow M (1994) The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Roberts EB (1991) Entrepreneurs in high technology: lessons from MIT and beyond. Oxford University Press, New York, NYCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Christensen CM, Roth EA, Anthony SD (2004) Seeing what’s next: using the theories of innovation to predict industry change. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Byers TH, Dorf RC, Nelson A (2015) Technology ventures: from idea to enterprise. McGraw-Hill, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dodgson M, Gann DN, Phillips N (2014) The Oxford handbook of innovation management. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Burlgeman RA, Christensen CM, Wheelwright SC (2009) Strategic management of technology and innovation. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nohria N, Khurana R (2010) Handbook of leadership theory and practice. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hill LA, Brandeau G, Truelove E, Lineback K (2014) Collective genius: the art and practice of leading innovation. Harvard Business Review Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ancona D (2005) Leadership in an age of uncertainty. MIT Center for eBusiness 6:1–4Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ancona D, Bresman H (2007) X-teams: how to build teams that Lead, innovate and succeed. Harvard Business Review Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Snook S, Nohria NN, Khurana R (2011) The handbook for teaching leadership: knowing, doing, and being. Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McKee A, Boyatzis RE, Johnston F (2008) Becoming a resonant leader: develop your emotional intelligence, renew your relationships, sustain your effectiveness, kindle Edi. Harvard Business Review Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Graham R, Crawley E, Mendelshon BR (2009) Engineering leadership education: a snapshot review of international good practice. White Paper sponsored by the Bernard M Gordon-MIT Engineering Leadership ProgramGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edward Crawley
    • 1
  • John Hegarty
    • 2
  • Kristina Edström
    • 3
  • Juan Cristobal Garcia Sanchez
    • 1
  1. 1.Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Trinity College DublinDublinIreland
  3. 3.KTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations