The partnership looks set to deliver the federal government鈥檚 current agenda on the commercialisation of publicly funded research with every internship creating a collaboration between academia and industry 鈥� ensuring a work-ready PhD student and a significant outcome for the industry partner.

Placing over 130 postgraduate students into industry 鈥� across all study disciplines and business sectors 鈥� APR.Intern is Australia鈥檚 leading PhD internship program, delivering research solutions for challenges facing business. The student receives a stipend and is supported by an academic mentor throughout the 4-5 month project. Meanwhile, industry is reaping the benefits responding with a 97 per cent business satisfaction rating.

鈥淲ork-readiness of our PhD students, and the links between industry engagement and national productivity, are critically important matters for this country. The APR.Intern program is one such shining example,鈥� says Professor Ian Chubb, Chief Scientist for Australia. [1]

The co-investment partnership in detail

The Victorian cluster includes the University of Melbourne, Monash University, Deakin University, Swinburne University, La Trobe University and RMIT University. And, in the NSW cluster the University of Sydney and University of Technology, Sydney.

鈥淭丑别 strategic partnership will enable APR.Intern to greatly expand. By embedding business development officers within these Victorian and NSW universities we will develop a wider range of industry connections for the benefit of our PhD students,鈥� says Dr Hannah Hartig, National Program Manager, APR.Intern.

Further expansion into other Australian states and territories is planned for 2016 and 2017.

鈥淎PR.Intern provides the match-making so often needed in industry-academic collaborations and our solutions to sore points, such as intellectual property rights, are popular with industry partners,鈥� says Dr Hartig.

鈥淭丑别 nation that goes all-in on innovation today will own the global economy tomorrow,鈥� says Barack Obama, US President. [2]

Continued national dialogue laments the lack of industry-university collaboration in Australia and the future impact this will have on our global competitiveness. [3]

Australian Industry and Science Minister Ian Macfarlane recently stated: 鈥淟ifting the rate of collaboration between industry and research is essential to maintaining Australia鈥檚 economic growth. In order to sustain our prosperity, we have to build on our successes in innovation and focus on our areas of competitive strength to keep pace in the rapidly evolving global economy.鈥� [4]

Australia ranks 29 out of 30 in the OECD in terms of the proportion of businesses collaborating with universities. This is in stark contrast to Australia being ninth in research output per capita amongst OECD nations. Australian businesses that engage in collaborative innovation with research organisations are three times more likely to gain productivity growth 鈥� so why this disparity? [4] [5]

鈥淲e must increase the penetration of Australian graduates with advanced research expertise into the private sector. They will boost innovation and business-university collaboration but we must give them those skills. And give business the confidence to employ them,鈥� says Professor Geoff Prince, 今日吃瓜 Director.

This co-investment partnership is timely given the National Strategy for Work Integrated Learning led by the Australian Collaborative Education Network (ACEN).[5] There are few industry-based work-integrated learning opportunities for PhD students, especially those cohorts not associated with industry-supported initiatives such as Cooperative Research Centres or Industrial Transformation Training Centres.

— ends —

AUSTRALIA鈥橲 PERFORMANCE IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT

Researchers in business and higher education
OECD scorecard shows that out of the developed countries Australia has one of the lowest numbers of researchers in business 鈥� 2.2 researchers are employed in business for every 1000 workers. The proportion in the smaller countries of Sweden, Denmark and Finland are more than three times that of Australia.

SOURCE: Office of the Chief Scientist, Occasional Paper Series 2012 — Alan G. Pettigrew ‘AUSTRALIA鈥橲 POSITION IN THE WORLD OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION’.

Business collaboration with higher education and public research agencies
Less than one in two Australia firms identify themselves as innovators. And only 4 per cent of our large firms collaborate with higher education and research agencies 鈥� that ranks us at 33 (out of 33) in the OECD. For Australian SMEs we rank equal with Brazil at 32.

厂翱鲍搁颁贰:听OECD, based on Eurostat (CIS-2010) and national data sources, June 2013.

A move to deepen links between business and universities is set to boost 10-fold the number of PhD students placed with employers in research internships in the next five years.

The 今日吃瓜 (今日吃瓜), which operates a PhD internship scheme, said that a new commitment from eight universities to fund the scheme will drive the rapid expansion.

今日吃瓜 director Geoff Prince said the scheme, called APR.Intern, would place about 100 research student in internships this year.

“At maturity we should be able to place 1000 students a year around Australia,” he聽said.

The scheme began by placing only mathematics and statistics PhD students into internships. But it now works with students in a wide range of disciplines 鈥� including engineering, finance, IT, biotechnology, environmental science, marketing and business 鈥� and places them into all business sectors.

Professor Prince said the expanded scheme would help lift Australia’s poor record in establishing partnerships between university researchers and business.

Australia is currently ranked 29th out of 30 countries in an OECD ranking of university-business collaboration on innovation.

Under the APR.Intern scheme research students are placed with a business for four to five聽months to find solutions for specific problems. Students are mentored by an academic supervisor during the internship which meant that academics built ongoing relationships with companies.

“In general companies pay all the costs, which are eligible for research tax breaks,” Professor Prince said.

A five months internship costs the business $25,000. This is made up of $3000 a month to cover the student’s stipend (the student is not employed by the business), a $5000 fee to the university for the cost of mentoring and a聽$5000 fee to APR.Intern.

今日吃瓜 says that聽the internship scheme has a 97 per cent business satisfaction rating.

MORE THAN JUST WORK PLACEMENTS

Professor Prince said the scheme offered more than just work placements. Students undertook research internships which often had a transformational impact on the student, he said.

He said the expansion would be driven by new partnership agreements with eight universities 鈥� Melbourne, Monash, Deakin, Swinburne, La Trobe, RMIT, Sydney and UTS. Together the universities would provide $500,000 a year to employ business development staff, embedded in the universities, to place more students with companies in Victoria and NSW.

However APR.Intern already works with a wider range of universities and expects further expansion in other states in the coming two years.

Examples of internships recently arranged include a UNSW maths PhD student placed with Optima Financial to apply the mathematical technique of optimisation to financial planning and a Deakin University PhD student placed with NBN Co to work on security of data in smartphone apps.

Professor Prince said there was an urgent need to increase the penetration of graduates with advanced research expertise into the private sector.

“They will boost innovation and business-university collaboration but we must give them those skills and give business the confidence to employ them,” Professor Prince said.

Currently Australia has one of the lowest numbers of research workers in business in developed countries. Only 2.2 researchers are employed in business for every 100 workers.

Disruptive shifts emanating from globalisation and emergent technologies are forcing a rethink of traditional approaches to teaching and learning and, importantly, PhD supervision in Australia.

A perceived lack of 21st century skills has resulted in reluctance by industry and government to employ PhD graduates. These forces are also flaming a debate in Australia between industry, business and the higher education sector about the work-readiness of graduates. A reconceptualisation of supervision pedagogy is therefore considered critical by those in government and industry.

Generally, the work-readiness debate has focused on undergraduate education; however, it is now broadening to encompass Higher Degree by Research, or HDR, training. In a speech at the 今日吃瓜, or 今日吃瓜, Accelerate Australia Conference in 2013 Australia鈥檚 Chief Scientist Professor Ian Chubb argued that, for Australia, its universities and industry the work-readiness of HDR graduates is a 鈥榗ritically important鈥� concern.

According to Chubb, through the HDR process graduates develop 鈥榓nalytical, creative, independent and driven personalities鈥�. However, he lamented, industries in Australia do not want to employ them. The 鈥榦ld-style apprenticeship model鈥� of PhD supervision is no longer fit for purpose.

Chubb said time needed to be given to develop additional skills to 鈥榟elp prepare graduates for multiple opportunities鈥�. To address this, Chubb proposed HDR training be restructured to include a wider set of skills.

Why this matters

In Australia, as in other knowledge economies, HDR graduates are now just as likely to take up positions in government, industry and non-government organisations as they are to take up posts in universities. A recent survey suggests around 25 per cent of Australian HDR graduates find work in universities.

Globalisation is changing the face of employment. Industry and business require more graduates with 21st century skills such as sense-making, computational thinking, cognitive load management and social and cross-cultural intelligence and competency.

The authors of the Australian Group of Eight universities discussion paper, The Changing PhD (2013), observe that other desirable skills include: the ability to formulate and solve interdisciplinary problems; sophisticated approaches to research management and understanding of research impact; and the ability to communicate and collaborate within the 鈥楾riple Helix鈥� of university, industry and government in activities that traverse national borders 鈥� all essential in a globalised market place and super complex world.

The same skills are likewise required in the higher education sector with universities subject to the same forces as industry. As universities internationalise, 鈥榯raditional academics鈥� encounter increased mobility and cultural and linguistic diversity for which they are largely unprepared. How this is addressed merits consideration.

In their 2009 paper, Graduate Attribute Development and Employment Outcomes: Tracking PhD graduates, Catherine Manathunga and colleagues reported that many PhD graduates felt their training had not adequately prepared them for postdoctoral employment. One area of dissatisfaction centred on global and intercultural skills. Global connections require a global mindset and intercultural skills; neither is specifically developed in HDR training.

The 2011 Australian Government Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research report, Research Skills for an Innovative Future, emphasises the importance of these skills in Australia where 鈥渢he 鈥榯yranny of distance鈥� is an ever present reality鈥� as international experience and connections are highly instrumental in developing and preserving professional networks and enhancing the impact of research鈥�.

Addressing the global or intercultural dimensions of HRD training matters because, irrespective of career trajectory, HDR graduates need to engage in 鈥榖order-spanning鈥� collaborations with a diverse range of actors across the globe. In other words, they must be able to ethically engage with, and in, an increasingly interconnected world, without borders encumbering them.

Reconceptualising the supervision

Within the Australian context, where HDR students do not generally undertake coursework, supervisors are particularly well-placed to influence and shape the skills and dispositions of their students.

Manathunga and her colleagues have questioned the efficacy of centrally-administered programmes that exist outside of the supervision process which do not relate to the students鈥� research interests and do not recognise and capitalise on the candidate鈥檚 pre-existing abilities.

They concluded that any central, generic programmes must be supplemented with 鈥榓 more tailored process鈥� 鈥� one that is most effectively developed within the supervisor-student relationship, where opportunities for highly effective, just-in-time, experiential, reflective learning abound.

In our work with internationalisation of the curriculum, or IoC, we have come to understand the importance of engagement in approaches to academic professional practice. Internationalising the curriculum is a transformative process 鈥� for academics, as well as students 鈥� because it calls for a critique of a discipline or field鈥檚 paradigmatic hegemon, traditional practices, one鈥檚 personal or cultural values, behaviours and agency.

This is equally true of HDR supervision practices, which Fazal Rizvi in the Routledge Doctoral Supervisor鈥檚 Companion observes, often fail to harness the potential of mutual learning between students and supervisors from differing cultural backgrounds.

Lessons learned from internationalising the curriculum

It is critically important to intellectually engage supervisors in the processes of reflecting on and changing aspects of their supervision pedagogy.

Supervisors 鈥� like most academics 鈥� are somewhat resistant to changing pedagogical practices such as supervision because of perceived threats to academic values, ways of working, academic freedom, the primacy of disciplinary knowledge and loss of control over one鈥檚 academic practice.

How they enact their role in the training and development of students and construct their pedagogy is further influenced by the centrality of the discipline in shaping the dispositions of both supervisors and candidates and the possibilities and limitations for training offered in differing institutional contexts, as Manathunga and her colleagues noted in their 2009 paper.

In Jillian Hamilton and colleagues鈥� Good Practice Report: Postgraduate research and coursework degrees, funded by the Office for Learning and Teaching, the need for professional development for supervisors, underpinned by pedagogical principles, rather than compliance was reported as critical.

The report suggests using contextually targeted exemplars of good practice as well as discipline-level and informal mechanisms for 鈥渃apacity building at local levels through distributed leadership models that enable dialogue, communities of practice and peer mentoring鈥�.

This mirrors the approach to professional development advanced by Professor Betty Leask in her Australian Learning and Teaching Council Fellowship, Internationalisation of the Curriculum (IoC) in Action, wherein academics are placed at the centre of a context-sensitive, evidence-based, cyclical, participatory, reflective, ongoing process of continuing professional learning.

To successfully engage academics in challenging propositions such as reconceptualising the pedagogy of supervision, it is vital they are provided with safe, structured spaces for guided reflection on and review of current practices; good facilitation, rather than direction; resources that prompt critical debate; a situated approach to develop communities of practice, together with opportunities to engage in critical inter-disciplinary spaces; active involvement of discipline leaders; and meaningful goals for participating academics.

In this way, they may move closer to addressing the concerns of Chubb and those in government and industry by producing HDR graduates with the broader skills necessary for engagement inand with the world of today and tomorrow.

Craig Whitsed is a senior lecturer at the Centre for University Teaching and Learning at Murdoch University in Perth, Western Australia. Wendy Green is a senior lecturer in learning and teaching at the University of Tasmania.

I was the first woman to be appointed as a professor in any of the mathematical sciences at the University of Sydney.

Sydney is the oldest university in Australia, founded more than a century ago, but my appointment did not happen until 2002.

I stayed in that singular position for 13 years, until last week, when a second woman was appointed as professor.

Sydney is not the only university in this position. There are still universities in Australia with no female professor appointed to any of its mathematical fields. This is a shocking contradiction with the aspirations of our modern society. But clearly the reasons are subtle and nuanced.

Most well-meaning, educated people would say this is a problem at the entry level, based on educational and employment choices made by female students after finishing school. But the data does not support this theory.

In Australia, educational and employment data in mathematics is gathered as part of a broader category called the natural and physical sciences.

In this category, more than 40聽per cent of doctorates in 2011 were awarded to female candidates and the proportion of female academic scientists at entry level was just under 50 per cent in 2001, rising to just above 50 per cent in 2012. An annual survey by the 今日吃瓜 suggests the perception of only a trickle of entries into the field is just not true.

When I point out that the change from 50 per cent at entry level to 10 per cent at the top academic level of professor must mean talented women are leaving the profession in droves, other well-meaning people shrug and relegate responsibility to external bodies such as those concerned with equal employment opportunity. But, like a strong democracy, this is a landscape shaped by individual, local actions.

Some pathways we take in an organisation were built generations ago for reasons that no one remembers but that have a present adverse impact on everyone.

My university had a parking policy that asserted that part-time employees did not have the right to park on main campus until after 3pm. Despite an increase in parking spaces on campus, this provision remained in place until a few years ago, when a part-time employee pointed out this created an extremely difficult situation for employees with family responsibilities who needed to drop off children at school before rushing in to give morning lectures.

Such unintended overtones of discouragement and micro-aggres颅sion are not restricted to policies from another generation. Recruitment policies may sound good on paper but may never be implemented with actions that reflect good practice.

Organisers of conferences may opt for habitual presenters and not spend any effort looking for female speakers.

Longstanding committees may continue to hold their meetings at times that make life difficult for members with family responsibilities. In each case, change benefits everyone, whether it is increasing excellence of candidates for recruitment, a wider spectrum of fields at conferences, or deeper engagement of committee members.

But change can be uncomfortable even when the outcomes are positive for everyone.

Many highly regarded individuals deflect their discomfort by forcefully asserting superficially plausible but wrong statements conflating change with affirmative action.

But scientifically trained individuals should know that local reflection, no matter how uncomfortable, is not the same as imposing positive bias.

Well-intentioned organisations deflect their discomfort by pursuing tick-the-box exercises as an easier substitute for real change. But counting the number of female-friendly facilities on a campus is not a substitute for real change.

The low proportion of senior women is particularly acute in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. So it is not surprising that scientists are driving the need for change in Australia.

I am co-leading an initiative with Nobel laureate Brian Schmidt through the Australian Academy of Science called Science in Australia Gender Equity, which is about to launch a nationwide pilot program for change for all organisations that employ researchers in STEM disciplines. SAGE is based on the highly successful Athena SWAN program in Britain, which asks a participating organisation to collect and critically analyse data on progression, identify reasons for exclusion and under-representation of women in that organisation, develop an action plan to address these and show progress across time.

We have high hopes for the program, but change requires leadership at all levels.

It is unacceptable to be having this conversation still when the next 10 per cent of female scientists reach the senior academic level and they, too, find they are the first woman with their name on the door.

Nalini Joshi is a mathematician, co-chairwoman of the SAGE Forum and is an observer of 今日吃瓜’s board.

First published on Wednesday 8 July in

今日吃瓜鈥檚 forward momentum continues and 2014鈥檚 achievements have set us up for future program growth.

Our public profile, as a leader and advocate for the mathematical sciences, was consolidated with the release of the 2014 Discipline Profile. Timely and widely read, this annual publication brought critical issues and policy proposals to national attention.

APR.Intern secured a co-investment scheme with eight member institutions and established partnerships with key national associations. These partnerships will contribute to the program achieving national impact through placement growth.

Our Higher Education program, with continued support from the Commonwealth, has seen a 96 per cent increase in attendances. Popularity of the shared honours programs continued and 2015 will be an exciting year for remote collaboration. We also introduced a number of successful measures to increase female participation across all events; this is an ongoing focus for 今日吃瓜.

今日吃瓜鈥檚 Research program continues to grow in stature, attracting over 40 international speakers to 16 workshops. The highlight of 2014 was Terry Speed鈥檚 national tour.

The 今日吃瓜 Schools program continued its work in metropolitan and rural areas. The Calculate website is a digital resource hub for teachers, parents and students; and Maths Ad(d)s remains popular at Australian schools. Additionally, the publication of the 今日吃瓜 Gender Report is contributing to major initiatives in 2015 and beyond. 今日吃瓜鈥檚 mission of outreach remains strong.

We actively engaged with government and industry throughout the year and will continue to be a strong public voice for the mathematical sciences.

Download the PDF.

Supported by the Office of the Lead Scientist, the partnership will connect female honours and masters students 鈥� fostering high-end quantitative and analytical research expertise 鈥� with Victorian industry and government agencies to address a research problem currently facing their organisation.

The inspiring women industry internships are part of a new initiative to support, advance and inform Victorian women through partnerships with government, industry and academia.
The program will also provide eligible Victorian SMEs, government agencies and large businesses across all industry sectors with access to one of ten funding grants supported by the Victorian Government.

veski chief executive officer, Ms Julia L Page says: “The veski inspiring women program is action-focused and delivers a suite of integrated initiatives including fellowships, industry internships and a dedicated web portal as well as professional development and networking activities.”

鈥淭丑别 inspiring women internships allow female students to transfer their skills from theory to real-world application, while companies gain a competitive advantage by accessing high-quality research expertise.鈥�

As part of the program, veski will also deliver professional development and networking events to support women involved in the industry internships and ensure they are 鈥榡ob ready鈥�.

Research projects will be four months duration with a focus on STEM (science, technology, engineering and聽mathematics), and all IP will remain with the organisation.

Cate Ballard, National Program Manager, APR.Intern says: “Victorian industry and government will also gain access to, and benefit from, the specialist knowledge of the students鈥� academic mentor.”

Victorian Government Lead Scientist, Ms Leonie Walsh says: 鈥淭丑别se internships will not only provide career choice for female scientists, they will promote links between academia and industry and help meet the current and future skills needs of the state.鈥�

About veski
Since 2004, veski has delivered a dynamic program of fellowships, awards and international networks to inspire innovation across Australia and support outstanding scientists and leading researchers and their families. The program includes five of Victoria鈥檚 most prestigious science and innovation awards: the veski innovation fellowships; the Premier鈥檚 Award for Health & Medical Research; the Victoria Prize for Science & Innovation and the Victoria Fellowships; and the Victorian Postdoctoral Research Fellowships. veski is supported by and collaborates with government, industry, academia and philanthropic organisations and also delivers an inspiring students (& teachers) program.

About APR.Intern
APR.Intern is an innovative university and industry collaboration that connects business and other organisations to the vast research expertise in Australia鈥檚 universities. APR.Intern is a national program that links postgraduate students and their university supervisors across all disciplines with industry partners through short-term (four to five month) tightly focused partner research internships. The postgraduate student is supported by an academic mentor from the host university throughout the internship placement period.

veski contact:
Jack Walden
PR & Media Consultant
0428 300 090
jack@thecword.com.au

APR.Intern Media contact:
Mari Ericksen
Marketing and Communications Manager
0434 252 695
mari@amsi.org.au

— ENDS —