New Competences for Physics Graduates Fostering Innovation and Entrepreneurship

New Competences for Physics
Graduates, Fostering Innovation and
Entrepreneurship
HOPE (Horizons in Physics Education) is an academic network project funded within the Life
Long Learning Programme project number 2013‐3710_540130‐LLP‐1‐2013‐1‐FR‐ERASMUS‐
ENW (2013‐2016), whose overall aim is to encourage the best use of results, innovative
products and processes and exchange good practice in order to improve the quality of
education and training in physics at all learning levels. Working Group 2 focusses on ‘New
Competences for Physics Graduates, Fostering Innovation and Entrepreneurship’
http://hopenetwork.eu/
Authors: H. Ferdinande, H. Geurts, M. Grove, W.G. Jones, I. Lopes, V.Nilsen, J.
Rogiers, R.R. Trieling
Editor : N. Witkowski
1

Contents
1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 3
A. Aims and Objectives for WG2 ......................................................................................... 3
B. Conclusions for WG2 ....................................................................................................... 3
2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 4
3 Activities of WG2 ................................................................................................................ 7
4 Data Collection Methodologies ........................................................................................ 10
A. Survey WG2‐A ............................................................................................................... 10
B. Survey WG2‐B ............................................................................................................... 11
5. Results ............................................................................................................................... 14
A. Results of the WG2‐A Surveys ...................................................................................... 14
B. Results of the of the WG2‐B Survey ............................................................................. 17
C. Questions on Entrepreneurial Competences ............................................................... 19
6. Key Findings ...................................................................................................................... 22
A. From the Surveys .......................................................................................................... 22
B. From the Invited Speakers ............................................................................................ 23
7. Good Practices .................................................................................................................. 25
8. Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 26
9. Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 27
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 29
Appendix 1. List of partners ...................................................................................................... 29
Appendix 2. List of talks at meetings with contributors HOPE WG2 Meetings and Fora ......... 30
Appendix 3. Questionnaires ...................................................................................................... 32
2

1. Executive Summary
A. Aims and Objectives for WG2
“To recommend ways by which physics degrees can be enhanced so that the competences
of graduates enable them better to contribute more effectively to new needs of the
European economy and society, particularly through innovation and entrepreneurship.”
This will involve objectives on the analysis and sharing of examples of good practice already
underway or planned by partners including (a) the application of new physics knowledge
and technology transfer to the market economy, (b) integration of physics studies with the
world of work and (c) a better appreciation of how basic physics knowledge underlies and
contributes to technological developments. It will also involve a re‐examination of existing
physics competences (e.g. those from the EU’s Tuning project and EUPEN) (to take account
of innovative teaching methods and new demands placed on physics graduates, and a
reassessment of recently introduced unconventional physics‐based degrees.
B. Conclusions for WG2
Physics alumni – working in sectors outside academia and education – rate a
number of the so called “soft skills” as very important for their job.
Their employers come to a similar conclusion.
Most physics alumni feel that there was not enough emphasis in their degree
course on acquiring “soft skills”.
A minority of physics departments considers the development of
entrepreneurial/enterprise skills as (very) important for their physics curriculum
There are several interesting approaches taken by physics departments to deliver
activities and/or courses to enable students to acquire
entrepreneurial/enterprise skills offered by both physics staff and staff from
other departments or from outside university.
It turned out to be difficult to make comparisons with earlier Tuning/EUPEN
rankings of competences.
3

2. Introduction
Physics education aims to produce graduates who are able to contribute to economic
growth through technological innovation as well as through advancing scientific
understanding. In particular, physics plays a vital role in our responses to the major
challenges facing the world such as climate‐change, electrical energy production and new
technology for health care. Good physics education is the bedrock of a technologically
advanced economy and is vital for producing the highly trained workforce that Europe
needs. And yet, in many European countries physics is not well appreciated by young people
and there are still serious shortages of well‐trained physics teachers and professionals.
Physics university education should better prepare students for the new needs of society
and for present and future economic challenges. The Horizons in Physics Education (HOPE)
project sought to investigate the underlying factors in all of the above and to make
recommendations to improve physics education so that new demands and requirements
are met and to suggest ways to improve the production of well‐trained physicists. The
increasing dominance of physics across a range of business and industries is a strength, but
one which is dependent on the scale of the scientific base. The creation of a skilled physics
workforce has a number of linked elements ‐ inspiring physics teaching by properly qualified
teachers must take place in schools, school leavers must decide to study physics at
university, physics students must be trained in skills that make them widely employable, and
there must be an awareness of physics and its contribution to society among the general
public.
The HOPE network itself was the de facto successor to the Thematic Network EUPEN
(European Physics Education Network) (1996/2003) and the subsequent projects, STEPS
(Stakeholders Tune European Physics Studies) (2005/08) and STEPS TWO (2008/11). Among
other activities, these investigated new teaching methods and student centred learning,
graduate skills sought by industry, physics teacher training and their low numbers in some
countries, and novel degree courses. One of the aims of WG2 was to re‐examine the physics
competences set some 10 years ago by the Tuning Project in the light of recent changes in
economic circumstances with extra emphasis on innovation and entrepreneurship
competences. Indeed, the ‘Tuning Project’, which started in the year 2000 and to which the
above Physics Networks contributed via the Physics Group in Tuning, included an emphasis
on competences as a key aspect of its methodology. HOPE was designed to capitalise on the
previous success and concentrate on the heart of the problem ‐ the physics student ‐ via
inspiration in schools, recruitment to university and competences for employment. HOPE’s
ultimate goal has been to enhance the impact of physics on the European economy and its
visibility and consequence in society in general. Since the project was promoted by its
4

network of over 70 academic institutions, there were four interlinked aims comprising the
basis of the work programme:
Working Group 1: Inspiring Young People to Study Physics
Working Group 2: New Competences for Physics Graduates – Fostering Innovation
and Entrepreneurship
Working Group 3: Improvements in Physics Teaching – Meeting Future Global
Challenges in Physics Higher Education
Working Group 4: Improvements in the Training and Supply of Physics School
Teachers.
The focus of this report is upon the activities of Working Group 2: New Competences for
Physics Graduates – Fostering Innovation and Entrepreneurship, which had the aim:
“To recommend ways by which physics degrees can be enhanced so that the competences of
graduates enable them better to contribute more effectively to new needs of the European
economy and society, particularly through innovation and entrepreneurship.”
One of the primary activities of Working Group 2 (hereafter WG2) was thus to assess if there
exists a gap between the competences and skills acquired by physics graduates at university
and the competences and skills that are more important in industry or any workplace
outside of academia and teaching. Those physics graduates going on to further study or
research were not the focus for this work, even though the competences and skills that
were researched are also important for them. The second key activity objective was to
explore whether there exist any new or emerging competences required in order to prepare
physics graduates for the workplace outside of research, and to explore the perceptions and
attitudes of physics departments towards these. Here, a particular emphasis was upon
obtaining information, including examples of current practice from physics departments on
the specific innovation, entrepreneurship and enterprise competences that they include in
the educational experiences and learning opportunities offered to their physics students.
The approach adopted by WG2 involved the collection of data from project partners and the
dissemination of examples of good practice from work and activities already underway by
partners and relating to:
(a) The application of new physics knowledge and technology transfer to the market
economy;
5

(b) The integration of physics studies with the world of work;
The third relationship planned in the project proposal (“an analysis and appreciation of how
basic physics knowledge underlies and contributes to technological developments“) turned
out to be too complex to be taken into account within the limited time frame and
manpower of this working group.
Recognising that HOPE itself is built upon existing networks and studies, the work of WG2
also provided the opportunity to re‐examine existing lists of physics competences (for
example those from the EU’s Tuning project and EUPEN), to take account of innovative
teaching methods and new demands placed on physics graduates, and to provide
reassessment of recently introduced unconventional physics‐based degrees or innovative
ways of developing professional competences in existing physics programs.
To enhance the employability of physics graduates and hence the contribution they make to
the economy they need a wider range of competences than just academic. These include
the ability to employ critical thinking and in‐depth knowledge to solve a wide range of
different types of problems (not just exam questions!), the ability to communicate
effectively in a variety of ways e.g. oral communication, presentation skills and report
writing, and the ability to use information technology including computer coding. Other
factors which are very important for employability are personal qualities or attributes such
as determination, perseverance, empathy and a care for quality. All these should be
developed or encouraged in degree programmes.
6

3. Activities of WG2
The first meeting of WG2 was held at the University of Lille from 3 rd to the 5 th of April 2014.
29 representatives of HOPE Partner institutions were present as participants of WG2 (see
Appendix 1 for a full list of names and affiliations). From the contributed talks (in Appendix
2) and the preliminary planar discussions two main questions arose from the meeting: What
are the competences and skills society expects from physicists regarding innovation and
entrepreneurship? And: What do physics departments do to develop those competences
which are highly desired by employers and with a particular emphasis upon innovation,
enterprise and entrepreneurship in their students? After an exchange of ideas on each of
these topics amongst the HOPE partners, two working subgroups were composed on a
voluntary basis. Half of those present were assigned to WG2‐A, the other half to WG2‐B.
The task of WG2‐A was to investigate those competences that are perceived to be
important in the world of work outside academia. After an outline discussion, during which
key competences were explored and discussed, the decision was taken to develop
questionnaires for recent alumni and employers to access the relative importance of a range
of different skills and abilities. For WG2‐B, its work was identified as needing to focus upon
how to obtain information from across the HOPE partner network on how physics programs
aim to develop the skills related to innovation and entrepreneurship amongst their learners.
It was agreed that, in the first instance a survey should be undertaken, but this should also
seek to capture examples of particularly effective or innovative approaches in these
programs (summarised here in Section 6).
Although both subgroups identified the use of surveys as the primary tool for collecting
information, it was very much noted that the HOPE network consisted of only a small
sample of Europe’s physics departments and moreover that this sample was not
representative of the physics departments in each country. However, while such limitations
existed, it was felt that this would give a ‘snapshot’ of current practice, and in particular
allow any emerging trends or patterns to be identified. Moreover, it was hoped that the
information and examples of good practice obtained will be of interest to and useful for the
broader community of physics departments across Europe and beyond.
During the forum from August 27 th to 30 th 2014 in Helsinki a short presentation on the
activities of WG2 was held. This provided an opportunity for both WG2‐A and WG2‐B to
engage in dialogue with the representatives from the full range of HOPE partners to refine
and develop their research instruments necessary to collect their data. Following the
meeting, pilot surveys were shared with a number of HOPE members for feedback,
comment and refinement prior their wider release.
7

The second meeting of HOPE WG2 was held in Hanover from 23 rd to the 25 th of April 2015,
with 30 participants representing 26 partners. At this meeting, very useful presentations
were given on the competences needed for employability and entrepreneurship with
examples of specific practice at some of the HOPE Partner universities being shared. These
presentations demonstrated that personal qualities of graduates were just as important as
the teaching of specific competences. The invited speakers were (1) Ove Poulsen, (LORC,
Denmark) who spoke on “Employability: When soft skills become hard”, and (2) Koen de
Bosschere (UGent, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Centre) who spoke on “Dare to
Venture: the student entrepreneurship project at Ghent University”.
At this Hanover meeting, a first analysis of the results from the WG2‐A and WG2‐B surveys
were presented and discussed. Additionally, plans were made for a deeper examination of
key findings through a series of more detailed ‘case studies’ with the view of obtaining
examples of particular practices. Case studies were identified via a secondary questionnaire
and for possible presentation at the September 2015 Coimbra Forum of HOPE.
The Coimbra Forum of HOPE took place from September 9 th to 12 th 2015 and was primarily
devoted to the work done and results obtained by both WG2 and WG3, although shorter
sessions included the work of WG1 and WG4. The WG2 session contained a presentation on
the main themes of WG2 (Hay Geurts) in which he stressed the importance of the talks by
Ove Poulsen (LORC, Denmark) on an industrialist’s view of competences needed to enhance
the employability of physics graduates, and by Mark Richards (Imperial College London) on a
special module on entrepreneurship for final year physics students which was presented at
the opening WG2 meeting in Lille. There were also talks by Vetle Nilsen (CERN) on the
survey of alumni and employers conducted by WG2‐A and by Isabel Lopes (Coimbra) on the
survey of the activities of physics departments in student entrepreneurship and enterprise
as well as an analysis of their opinions of the importance of various competences and
comparisons with Tuning (WG2‐B). There was also a series of short presentations on ‘good
practice’ in fostering and encouraging enterprise and entrepreneurial activity from three
different HOPE Partners. These were followed by a round table discussion of the main
issues. Finally at the Constanta 2016 Forum in Romania a review of the WG2 activities was
presented by Hay Geurts.
To prepare the meetings in Lille and Hanover the leaders of Working Group 2 along with
some members of the HOPE Advisory Board met in Leuven on February 14 th 2014 and in
Ghent on January 23 rd 2015. A discussion meeting in order to prepare this report was held in
Leuven from February 12 th to 13 th 2016 with representatives who had been involved in the
activities of both WG2‐A and WG2‐B.
8

Appendix 2 contains a list of talks held at the different meetings.
9

4. Data Collection Methodologies
Both WG2‐A and WG2‐B identified surveys as the mechanism to obtain more detailed
information about not only the acquired and necessary competences, but also initiatives by
universities to stimulate the acquisition of these competences within their students. Where
appropriate, further follow‐up was undertaken to obtain more detailed case studies or
examples of practice, which were either highlighted (for example within Section 6 of this
report) or used as the basis of presentation sessions at the meetings of the HOPE Network.
A. Survey WG2‐A
The survey undertaken by WG2‐A was established with the following aims:
1. To investigate how important a specific set of competences is for graduates within
the context of their current job, and to then compare this with how these skills were
developed during their studies.
2. To investigate how important this same set of competences is (again within the
context of current roles) but now from the perspective of their employers.
Additionally, the views of the employers themselves were sought relating to the
development of these skills, or perhaps more correctly, the opportunities for specific
skills development within undergraduate physics degrees.
WG2‐A focussed on exploring the possible gap between the competences and skills physics
students acquire at university and what is sought after graduation by both business and
industry. It was decided to consider recent graduates (that is those who graduated within
the last five years), and although it was decided to focus on masters level programmes, the
study did not exclude students acquiring a PhD after their master as long as they graduated
in the last 5 years. Such individuals were identified as the target sample since they had,
relatively recently, transitioned from a university setting to business and industry, and as
such, were felt to be in a better position to be able to estimate how well certain
competences are acquired during academic courses relative to their current needs in the
workplace. Further, as the provision provided by education providers is constantly in
development, it was felt that this approach would allow a better ‘snapshot’ of the current
status of physics education.
10

The questionnaires aimed to highlight the competences needed by a particular business or
industry, and as such, were not targeted towards graduates on an academic track or in an
educational career. To be able to verify if there is actually a gap between the competences
acquired at university and the competences needed in industry in Europe, a dual approach,
involving two related, but different questionnaires (see Appendix 3 for the actual
questionnaires) was used: One questionnaire targeted recent physics graduates themselves
from across Europe, and the second targeted the employers of such graduates. As
employees and their employers might rate the competences needed for a certain job
differently, both questionnaires were created with the same structure, to allow easy
comparison and analysis of results. In both cases, a 5‐point Likert scale was used.
In addition to their evaluation of competences, additional contextual information about the
graduates was collected such as country of current employment, university of graduation,
gender and current position (e.g. engineer, project manager, etc.). The idea was that it
would allow WG2‐A to explore if there were any significant differences in responses with
respect to universities, career paths or gender. Similar contextual data were also collected
for the companies in the employer questionnaire.
The questionnaire was distributed to graduates via the partner institutions of the HOPE
network; the questionnaire was first circulated to all partners and they were asked to
forward on to their alumni. For employers, HOPE partners were encouraged to use their
personal networks to make direct contact as this was felt to yield a higher likelihood of
response. The questionnaires were launched in November 2014 and both were web‐based.
For the graduate survey, after the cleaning and filtering of responses, for example to
remove partial and incomplete entries, 118 responses were received from those employed
in business and industry and 49 from academia. There were 38 responses from employers.
B. Survey WG2‐B
WG2‐B focused upon how physics programmes develop the skills and attributes that are
regarded as important in terms of preparing graduates for employment. Work started with a
brief oral gathering of information from those present at Lille on what their own university
did in this area. This revealed a wide range of approaches including both specific modules
and also ‘internship’ type placements within research laboratories or within industry. It was
decided that a more systematic approach should be adopted to capture this information via
a survey with the aims of:
11

1. Revisiting the generic competences made by the Tuning Project for Physics
Graduates to explore whether new competences are required in order to
prepare physics graduates for the workplace outside of research.
2. Investigating the extent to which physics departments (or universities as a
whole) have introduced the development of these new competences and how
they are assessed.
3. Investigating the feedback from physics academic staff on the relevance and
importance and merits of these (new) competences to ensure physics
graduates are prepared for the workplace outside of research.
4. Obtaining information, including (case study) examples of current practice,
from physics departments on the specific innovation, entrepreneurship and
enterprise competences that they include in the educational experiences and
learning opportunities offered to their physics students.
It was decided to base the main part of the questionnaire on the policies and practices of
universities concerning innovative and entrepreneurial competences on a recent
questionnaire developed and used by the UK Government Department of Business,
Innovation and Skills (BIS) which was not just directed to physics departments but to the
University sector as a whole, however, this was adapted as appropriate to make it
applicable to universities across Europe. Sections of the questionnaire (Appendix 3) were
devoted to obtain general information about the physics department responding, but also
the provision and practice of both the department and the institution in relation to how
enterprise and entrepreneurship education is delivered. A further section revisited the
competences defined within the 2007 Tuning project, and asked staff to rank their relative
importance relative to new or additional competences.
In developing the survey, it was necessary for a common definition of enterprise and
entrepreneurship education to be adopted, and one made available by the UK Quality
Assurance Agency for Higher Education was used, namely: “enterprise education is defined
as the process of equipping students (or graduates) with an enhanced capacity to generate
ideas and the skills to make them happen. Entrepreneurship education equips students with
the additional knowledge, attributes and capabilities required to apply these abilities in the
context of setting up a new venture or business.” 1
The questionnaire was launched in September 2014 and delivered through a web‐based
platform at the University of Birmingham. There were a total of 34 responses from HOPE
Partners in 19 European countries. Unfortunately, not all HOPE Partner countries were
1 http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/enterprise‐guidance.pdf
12

epresented and the country distribution was rather uneven. After data cleaning, again to
remove partial, incomplete and duplicate responses, 32 responses were analyzed.
13

5. Results
A. Results of the WG2‐A Surveys
In figures 1 to 3 we graphically represent the appreciation of the selected competences by
alumni in academia, alumni in industry and employers having physics graduates as
employees. The respondents were asked to score each competence from 1 (not all
important) to 5 (very important) as needed for the job and as received/developed. The
discrepancy was calculated as the difference between the two.
Alumni in Academia
Figure 1. The importance of competences in their current job as evaluated by alumni in academia and the
discrepancy between that evaluation and the emphasis the competence received during their studies. The red
and green colour of the discrepancy indicates if the skill had less or more emphasis in the degree respectively.
14

Alumni in Industry
Figure 2. The importance of competences in their current job as evaluated by alumni in industry and services,
and the discrepancy between that evaluation and the emphasis the competence received during their studies.
The red and green colour of the discrepancy indicates if the skill had less or more emphasis in the degree
respectively.
15

Employers of Physics Graduates
Figure 3. The importance of competences needed by their employees’ as evaluated by employers in industry
and services, and the discrepancy between that evaluation and how well the competences developed by the
employee at the start of the employment. The red and green colour of the discrepancy indicates if the skill had
less or more emphasis in the degree respectively.
First we observe from this graphical representation of the data that for all competences and
attributes, except for Theoretical Physics Knowledge, the emphasis on the competence at
the university is perceived lower than the importance of it on the job. For alumni, this
discrepancy is highest for the Organization skills and Project Management even though it
was not ranked very high by neither alumni or employers. This discrepancy is also observed
by employers, although not so strong. Clearly in physics studies more attention should be
devoted to this competence. Student centred learning with a clear definition of objectives
and good supervision of the process could lead to the attainment of this skill.
The competence problem solving and analytical thinking is ranked highest by both
employers and alumni in industry (and second highest by alumni in academia) and because
the discrepancy is negative, it should be given more attention in the study program.
Innovative thinking is considered the second most important competence by employers.
Alumni in industry and academia rank this competence a bit lower, but still very high. It is a
complex competence and many basic competences contribute to it, like theoretical and
technical knowledge, experimental physics competences and IT‐knowledge. The high
discrepancy perceived by all respondents indicates that the importance of the learning of
this skill is strongly underestimated at the university. It is thus important that the
16

acquisition of skills that contribute to innovation receives more attention during the physics
studies.
Another set of competences that ranks very high (larger than 4) contains Teamwork, English
language, Searching for Information, Autonomy, and Oral Communication and Presentation
Skills. In addition, Technological Knowledge and IT Knowledge are also perceived as very
important by employers and alumni in industry. The order of importance given by different
classes of respondents differs slightly, but within the uncertainties, measured by the
standard deviation (SDV) in the table in the appendix, we can consider these equally ranked.
For Oral Communication and presentation skills, Technological Knowledge and Teamwork
the discrepancy is very high for alumni. They strongly feel that the training of these skills at
the university is not well enough developed compared to what they need for their job. The
employers give a lower discrepancy. Oral Communication and presentation skills,
Technological Knowledge and Teamwork should get more emphasis in the physics program.
Even though the data do not allow for drawing firm conclusions, they give some hints from
which competences physics students could greatly benefit if formal training of these skills
were to be included in their studies. In particular organization skills and project
management and skills that contribute to innovative thinking, stand out as skills needed by
everyone, but they seem not to receive enough emphasis at the university physics courses.
No significant gender differences were found.
B. Results of the of the WG2‐B Survey
When asked to list in order the most highly ranked General Transferable Competences that
should be possessed by physics graduates at completion of their first cycle as identified by
the Tuning Survey of 2007, responses by HOPE members are shown in Table 1:
General Transferable
Competence
(From 2007 Tuning Survey)
Ranking in order importance (1=most
important)
(Number of Responses)
Capacity for Analysis and
Synthesis
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11 8 6 4 2 1
Problem Solving 20 5 3 3 1 0
Capacity to learn 7 6 7 4 5 3
Applying knowledge in 6 10 2 4 4 5 1
17

practice
Creativity 4 1 7 5 7 7 1
Teamwork 5 1 4 6 7 9
Table 1: Revisiting the Tuning Competences for enterprise/entrepreneurship education
These skills were identified as appropriate for consideration here since the overall focus of
the survey was upon exploring the extent to which innovation and entrepreneurship skills
are currently fostered, or seen to be important, within physics programmes of the HOPE
partners. Partners, however, had the ability to suggest an additional competency and 8
identified written and oral communication as being important, others were foreign language
skills, organisational skills and perseverance. What the data show overwhelmingly is that
problem solving skills are ranked the most highly followed by the related skills of analysis
and synthesis. The ability to apply knowledge and learn individually (life‐long learning) were
in the mid‐group, whereas creativity and teamwork ranked last overall. This is somewhat at
odds with an innovation and entrepreneurship agenda where creativity is key and
developments often take place through team based activities. As this implies these skills
(creativity and teamwork) are not ranked highly, this has implications upon the extent of the
focus afforded upon their development through the undergraduate curriculum.
Comparisons with rankings (and even listings) of competences in Tuning are fraught with
difficulties and are rather futile. There are several reasons for this. Tuning was a type of
project, very different from HOPE. It involved discussions and investigations spread over
many years and with many different aspects and categorizations of students and
competences. Also the number of respondents to questionnaires was much greater. Thus, in
surveys of the views of academics, typically 20 academics per university responded, and for
alumni typically 40 to 50 per university responded. These numbers are much larger than
those in HOPE. But it is noticeable that the present HOPE survey did not show that newer
competences such as innovation and entrepreneurship figure strongly in the minds of those
responding to the questionnaire.
However, it must also be remembered that particular statements defining competences are
subjective and can be interpreted in different ways and so are not very reliable indicators.
Broad categories such as communication, problem solving and teamwork are less subjective
but hide a great deal of detail of what these competences mean in practice. Thus the
statistical uncertainties are in most cases less important than systematic uncertainties and it
is quite inappropriate to quote confidence levels. Only broad‐brush conclusions can be
relied on.
18

C. Questions on Entrepreneurial Competences
The lack of apparent importance for enterprise/entrepreneurship education within physics
is emerged when 14/34 respondents indicated that while the development of
student/graduate enterprise and entrepreneurship skills was either important or very
important within the aims, objectives and mission of their institutions, only six indicated
that the development of these skills was important within their physics curriculum. There
were, however, an almost equal number of responses (around 40% of the total) indicating
that this was of neutral or no importance within both their institutions and departments.
Further, while 50% of total respondents indicated their department had a strategy for
embedding student/graduate enterprise and entrepreneurship skills, the majority (12/17)
who did so indicated that this was linked to an institutional strategy. Only five departments
indicated they had any sort of strategy of their own in place. However, while the majority of
departments don't indicate the development of student/graduate enterprise and
entrepreneurship skills as being important, almost two‐thirds (22/33 respondents) indicated
they ran activities to help students develop these skills. It is possible that the skills
departments associate with enterprise and entrepreneurship are also those associated with
employability – further work may be required to explore these potentially subtle
differences.
Interestingly, there are a range of approaches taken by physics departments to delivering
enterprise and entrepreneurship skills, with no one single approach being favored for their
delivery (Table 2). Perhaps significantly, delivery ‘through extra‐curricular activities offered
by university’ aligns with the earlier finding that strategies for delivery were typically linked
with institutional aims and objectives. This again appears to contradict the earlier finding
that departments don't rate high the development of enterprise/entrepreneurship skills,
but yet still have ways of exposing students to these skills. It might have been appropriate to
begin this survey by asking respondents to define what we mean by
enterprise/entrepreneurship. Probably respondents had replied with a broader definition of
‘employability’ in mind. However, all respondents were given a very clear and precise
statement from the UK QAA 2 as to what constitutes enterprise/entrepreneurship as a basis
for structuring their responses. A useful future activity would be to survey individual views
and understanding of the terms enterprise and entrepreneurship and then explore these
2 The UK QAA definition of enterprise/entrepreneurship education is: “enterprise education is defined
as the process of equipping students (or graduates) with an enhanced capacity to generate ideas and
the skills to make them happen. Entrepreneurship education equips students with the additional
knowledge, attributes and capabilities required to apply these abilities in the context of setting up a
new venture or business.”
19

elative to a formal definition, perhaps beginning by scoring their agreement (or otherwise)
with the QAA definition used here.
Number of students
participating in
enterprise/entrepreneurship
activities per annum
Through a
dedicated module
in Physics
department
Embedded within
Physics
curriculum
Through extracurricular
activities offered
by university
0 8 7 8
1 – 20 6 8 5
21 – 50 4 2 2
11 – 100 2 1
> 100 2 1
No response/Don’t know 3 4 6
Number of responses 25 25 25
Table 2: Approaches to delivering enterprise/entrepreneurship education
There is a general tendency for enterprise/entrepreneurship to be delivered in Year 3
(13/30 responses) of a Bachelor’s programme, and this perhaps coincides with more
group/team‐based activities which are typical at this level. In terms of actual delivery
methods, the patterns were interesting. Overwhelmingly academic staff were key to
delivery, but of a high importance were representatives from business and industry
becoming involved. Most significantly, physics departments appear to rely upon academic
staff from other subject areas providing expertise in the delivery of
enterprise/entrepreneurship education (Figure 1).
20

Figure 1: Who delivers enterprise/entrepreneurship education?
However, the involvement of employers with delivery appears to be contradicted by a
subsequent question which asked departments about whether employers had a role in
contributing to the design, development and delivery of their enterprise and
entrepreneurship activities. Here 18/34 respondents indicated they weren’t, with six
responses indicating they didn't know. Again, a possible reason for this apparent paradox is
a ‘blurring’ of the definition of enterprise/entrepreneurship with employability education.
How employers were involved in the actual delivery of these skills varied, and a range of
practices were identified by respondents. The most common involved consulting with
employers over changes made to the curriculum and even going so far as to agree these
with them in advance of implementation. In other instances, employers were able to either
propose modules, or components of modules, and deliver these for free as part of the
curriculum. Employers also contributed to the curriculum in other ways, either by
contributing speakers to enterprise and entrepreneurship activities, or allowing small
projects to be run at their companies. The teaching and learning methods used in providing
enterprise and entrepreneurship skills were varied, with delivery via a variety of formats,
however interestingly, most popular was the lecture(!), followed by the use of case studies,
project based activities and company visits.
When asked whether departments monitored the range of activities undertaken to aid the
development of enterprise/entrepreneurship skills to ensure they were effective, the most
common (17 responses) involved meeting with current students and recent graduates. Very
few (4 responses) formally assessed the skills whose aim it was to develop. The implication
is here that such activities are extra‐curricular, which aligns with a response to an earlier
question regarding how these were delivered, or they formed part of a wider set of physics
related activities, for example group‐based projects. However, this latter conclusion is
somewhat contradictory with the response to the previous question on delivery methods,
where the lecture was most commonly cited as a means of developing these skills.
Departments were asked to rate how important they considered a series of graduate
competencies associated with entrepreneurship and enterprise education but for physics.
These were adapted from those defined by the UK QAA 3 (Table 2).
3
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/enterpriseguidance.pdf
21

Short Name of the
Enterprise and
Entrepreneurship Specific
Competences
Ranking in order importance
(5=most important)
(Number of Responses)
1 2 3 4 5
Ranking
Goals and ambitions 0 0 6 19 8 4
Self‐confidence 0 1 10 16 6 7
Perseverance 0 0 7 14 12 2
Internal Control 1 7 9 13 3 12
Action Orientation 1 4 8 14 6 9
Innovation and Creativity 0 0 5 10 18 1
Persuasion and
Negotiation
0 2 10 18 3 8
Approach to Management 1 1 13 17 1 11
Decision Making 0 0 10 14 9 5
Responsibility 0 1 5 15 12 3
Networking 0 2 6 18 7 6
Opportunity Recognition 0 4 13 11 5 10
Financial and Business
Awareness
Market and Commercial
Awareness
1 6 16 9 1 14
2 5 15 9 2 13
Table 2: Importance of enterprise/entrepreneurship skills as perceived by physics departments
While there were some issues with the ranking process used by respondents, comparing
these to the review of the Tuning competences reveals some general trends. Creativity was
ranked as one of the lowest of the six within Tuning, but is ranked highest here. This implies
that while such enterprise/entrepreneurship skills are indicated as being important, they are
ranked lower than what might be termed the traditional skills of problem solving. Perhaps
not surprisingly, this continues to place the emphasis of physics departments upon
developing skills associated with their discipline (for example, problem solving) above skills
associated with enterprise/entrepreneurship.
6. Key Findings
A. From the Surveys
22

In physics programs competences like Problem Solving, Analytical Thinking and
competences leading to innovative thinking are trained well, even though alumni and
employers suggest that improvement of this training is welcome. This is typical for physics:
fundamental scientific reasoning to understand nature and pave the road to new
developments. Striking is that for the employability of physicists in sectors different from
academia, a lot more attention should be paid to soft skills as Teamwork, English language,
Searching for Information, Autonomy, and Oral Communication and Presentation Skills.
Even though the surveys of the working field done by WG2‐A are restricted to the partners
in the HOPE network and their relations with companies, we believe that in most physics
programs more attention should be given to these competences.
Whilst more work is needed to explore all the findings emerging from the survey of WG2‐B,
and in particular to ensure that responses encompass a clear distinction between
enterprise/entrepreneurship and the more familiar area of employability, the following
conclusions from the survey can perhaps reasonably be drawn:
Enterprise/entrepreneurial education is being driven by the institutions themselves
and not by physics departments. This is evidenced by the fact that strategies exist at
an institutional level (but not within departments), and that in many instances,
approaches to delivery rest outside of the physics departments themselves.
Enterprise/entrepreneurial skills are identified as being important, perhaps
increasingly so, but not more important than traditional physics skills such as
problem solving.
There are examples of employers making a contribution to the curriculum, but it
seems likely from the evidence that this is more related to employability than
enterprise/entrepreneurship education.
There are increasing examples of practice in the delivery of
enterprise/entrepreneurship skills, some of which may merit more details case
studies to form examples of good practice.
B. From the Invited Speakers
For the meetings in Lille, Hannover and Coimbra we invited several speakers from
companies and universities. Those from the universities presented excellent examples of
ways to prepare physics students for an entrepreneurial environment: see chapter 6 on
“Good Practices”.
The speakers from industry (J. Peeters, Capricorn Venture Parnters, O. Poulsen, Lindoe
Offshore Renewables Center, P. Pereira da Silva, Renova) had a physics background
23

themselves and although their presentations represented their personal view as an
employer, it was striking that their message was a fairly common one: Entrepreneurship
requires a spirit of ‘Dare to Venture’ and a large amount of initiative. The difference
between an entrepreneur and a manager lies in the fact that entrepreneurs starting a
business puts at risk part of their personal financial resources. Qualities of a good
entrepreneur include: leadership, the ability to adapt quickly to new situations, the will to
take reasonable risks, the ability to attract good partners, to motivate people, … . This
requires amongst others excellent communication skills. The academic environment is
secure in the sense that almost no risk is involved. Students have to learn to leave this
comfort zone. Therefore, competences including all aspects of communication are essential
for success. Knowledge of ‘hard’ physics is of course an excellent base for leading
technological projects, but these have to be supplemented by soft skills as the ability to
interact with colleagues and clients including strong listening skills, the ability to plan and
think strategically and personal attributes like perseverance, reliability, and strong self and
time management skills. One might conclude that to the opinion of those employers
physics graduates in general are less well prepared for the entrepreneurial job market than
from the providers (= universities) viewpoint.
Important “soft” skills (no ranking) needed:
• Capacity to communicate in teams and networks
• Excellent written and verbal communication skills
• Strong self management and time management skills
• Ability to plan and think strategically
• Reliability
• Flexibility.
In the Coimbra forum dr Allen presented results from a European vignette‐study on the
employability of Higher Education Graduates in Europe 4 (not restricted to science
graduates) from the employers’ perspective. The outcomes of this study were that
employers consider the following skill domains as the most relevant for the graduates they
want to recruit:
Professional expertise ( determined by field of study – in combination with grades ‐
and work experience)
Social and organisational skills
Innovative and creative skills
4 From the presentation by Jim Allen; report “The Employability of Higher Education Graduates: The
Employers’ perspective”
24

Commercial and entrepreneurial skills
International orientation
Flexibility
As one can see, the “soft” skills from this study match to a large extent the skills, mentioned
by the specific employers above.
7. Good Practices
A number of case studies, each providing details of different approaches to developing innovative
and entrepreneurial competences were received. For convenience they are summarised below.
a. Institutional initiatives:
• Institutional initiative to support students develop own business venture (TU Dresden,
Germany)
• Statute for student‐entrepreneurs which allows more study flexibility to combine easier
studying with launching a start‐up enterprise (Ghent University, Belgium)
• The Kepler Society (Alumni Association) organises regular meetings between last‐year
students, alumni and employers (Johannes Kepler Universität Linz, Austria)
• Students receive training in the management of all aspects of innovation, including
patenting and other forms of IP protection, R&D planning, product life cycle management,
market research, production and selling (University of Strathclyde, UK)
b. Faculty of Science/Departmental initiatives:
• Enterprise Awareness Module and Enterprise Internship (Université Lille, France)
• Student Entrepreneurship: a compulsary 4th year course (Imperial College London, UK)
• Masters students make a choice for either research, teaching, or entrepreneurship in this
latter case 5 courses of 6 ECTS each (Universiteit Antwerpen, Belgium)
• Workshops held by Physics graduates now working in different companies (Università degli
studi di Pavia, Italy)
• A program LCIE Entrepeneurship Academy (15 ec) (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium)
• A Master Specialisation: Science, Management and Innovation (SMI) (60 ec) (Radboud
University , Nijmegen, Netherlands)
25

8. Conclusions
Physics alumni – working in sectors outside academia and education – rate a
number of the so called “soft skills” as very important for their job. This rating
(on a scale of 0‐5) for the skills (>4) is:
- Problem Solving and analytical thinking
- Searching for information
- Oral communication and presentation skills
- Teamwork
- English language
- Innovative thinking
- Autonomy
- Organization skills/project management
- Technological knowledge
- Interdisciplinary communication
Their employers come to a similar conclusion.
Physics alumni feel a negative discrepancy with the emphasis on acquiring these
skills/competences during their study.
A minority of the physics departments considers the development of
entrepreneurial/enterprise skills as (very) important for their physics curriculum
For the majority of departments who consider this development as (very)
important, their strategy is linked to an institutional strategy
There is a number of interesting approaches by physics departments to deliver
activities and/or courses to acquire entrepreneurial/enterprise skills offered by
both physics staff and staff from other departments or form outside university.
Invited speakers from industry during the HOPE WG 2 activities stress the
importance of “soft” skills (as supplementary to the traditional “hard” physics
skills) such as:
- Capacity to communicate in teams and networks
- Excellent written and verbal communication skills
- Strong self management and time management skills
- Ability to plan and think strategically
- Reliability
- Flexibility.
26

A European wide navette‐study on employment of academic graduates resulted
in the following important skill domains (from employers’ perspective):
- Professional expertise ( determined by field of study – in combination
with grades ‐ and work experience)
- Social and organisational skills
- Innovative and creative skills
- Commercial and entrepreneurial skills
- International orientation
- Flexibility.
9. Recommendations
From the conclusions it is clear that in the skills and competences needed for the job market
outside academia and education, and certainly in an entrepreneurial environment, “soft”
skills have become more important over recent years and will be part of the “skills for the
future”. As a large percentage of the physics graduates will look for a job outside
academia/research and education it is necessary that universities prepare the students for
this type of jobs. To the opinion of employers, (physics) graduates are – in general ‐ less well
prepared for this job market than from the universities perspective. However, there is a
growing awareness in universities of this and this is shown by various examples of good
practice in different countries: innovative teaching methods and activities that promote the
acquisition of these “soft” skills and competences.
Recommendations:
a. Formulate a vision as a physics department of how you would like to prepare
your students better for the future job market with respect to the acquisition of
“soft” skills. Ideally this should be derived from a vision on university level.
b. Investigate if and how “soft” skills (mentioned above) are acquired inside the
physics curriculum at this moment.
c. If improvement is needed:
- Use the examples of good practice as inspiration
- Try to work together with other departments in your university: they
might have the expertise which is not present in the physics department
- Try to integrate acquisition of “soft” skills in meaningful projects (not
isolated)
- Involve your own alumni and employers of alumni.
27

28

10. APPENDICES
Appendix 1. List of partners
Nadine Witkowski Université Pierre et Marie curie FR P01
Ivan Ruddock Strathclyde University UK P02
Michelini Marisa Università degli Studi di Udine IT P03
Trippenbach Marek University of Warsaw PL P04
Ferdinande Hendrik Universiteit Gent BE P10
Ruben Trieling Eindhoven University of Technology NL P12
Nadezhda Nancheva University of Ruse "Angel Kanchev" BG P13
Isabel Lopes Universidade de Coimbra PT P15
Caltun Ovidiu Florin Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi RO P16
Focsa Cristian Université Lille 1 Sciences et Technologies FR P18
Prof Maria Celeste do Carmo Universidade de Aveiro PT P19
Joan Borg Marks University of Malta Junior College MT P21
Jarno Salonen University of Turku FI P25
Herbert Pfnür Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover DE P26
Stefan ANTOHE University of Bucharest RO P27
Sandris LACIS Latvijas Universitate LV P28
CHISLEAG Radu University "POLITEHNICA" in Bucharest RO P29
Gareth Jones Imperial College London UK P32
Sperandeo Mineo Rosa Maria Università di Palermo IT P34
Hay Geurts Radboud University Nijmegen NL P35
Pawel Caban University of Lódz PL P38
Mirko Planinic University of Zagreb, Faculty of Science HR P43
GIOVANNI MATTEI Università degli Studi di Padova IT P48
Jenaro Guisasola Universidad del País Vasco – Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea ES P53
Prof. Rogiers Joseph Katholieke Universiteit Leuven BE P61
Michael GROVE The University of Birmingham UK P62
Vetle Nilsen European Organisation for Nuclear Research CH P69
David Lee European Physical Society FR P70
Ovidiu Tesileanu National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering RO PA13
Nicola Vittorio University Roma 2 IT PA16
Dagmara Sokolowska Uniwersytet Jagiellonski PL PA18
Christophe P Rossel IBM Zurich CH PA10
29

Appendix 2.
Fora
List of talks at meetings with contributors HOPE WG2 Meetings and
1. The first Meeting was held at CERLA (Centre Études et Recherches Lasers et Applications)
in Villeneuve d’Ascq/Lille [FR] on 2014‐04‐03/05
Invited speakers
(i)) Hendrik Ferdinande (UGent, Gent BE)
‘How can future European physics studies lead to innovative competences and stimulate
entrepreneurial behaviour’
(ii) Gareth Jones (Imperial College, London UK)
‘Revisiting the competences for physics graduates set by the Tuning Project’
(iii) Mark Richards (Imperial College, London UK)
‘Student Entrepreneurship at Imperial College'
(iv) Jos Peeters (Capricorn, Leuven BE)
‘A Physicist’s Road to Entrepreneurship’
2. WG2 Contribution at first HOPE Helsinki 2014 Forum at Physics Department, Helsingor
Yliopisto in Helsinki [FI] on 2014‐08‐27/30
Thursday 28 th August 2014
Session 1: Introduction to HOPE, WG1 and other WGs
Introduction to Working Group2 by Hay Geurts (Radboud U, Nijmegen NL)
3. The second Meeting was held at Meeting Centre “Werkhof” & Leibniz Universität
Hannover in Hannover [DE] on 2015‐04‐23/25.
Invited speakers
(i) Ove Poulsen (LORC, Århus [DK]) on ‘Employability: when soft skills become hard’
(ii) Gareth Jones on behalf of WG2‐B ‘Investigating New Competences for Physics
Graduates: Fostering Innovation and Entrepreneurship ‐ Results from a Departmental
Survey’
(iii) Vetle Nilson on behalf of WG2‐A ‘New needs of the society and economy ‐ questionnaire
analysis’
(iv) Koen De Bosschere (UGent, EUS, Gent [BE]) on ‘Dare to venture: the studententrepreneurship
project at Ghent University’
4. WG2 Contribution at second HOPE Coimbra 2015 Forum at Department of Physics,
Universidade de Coimbra in Coimbra [PT] on 2015‐09‐09/12
Thursday 10 th September 2015 was devoted to WG2 activities
(i) Report from Working Group 2 of HOPE
H. Geurts: New competences for Physics Graduates, fostering Innovation and
Entrepreneurship
V. Nilsen: New needs of the society and economy – questionnaire analysis
I. Lopes: Investigating New Competences for Physics Graduates: Fostering Innovation and
Entrepreneurship
30

(ii) Session: Physics Studies in an Entrepreneurial Perspective
Guest Speaker: J. Allen, Research Centre for Education and Labour Market, U Maastricht
[NL]
Skills for the Future: Challenges for Higher Education
V. Nilsen, CERN Entrepreneurship Meet‐up
U. Titulaer, Furthering Entrepreneurship at the Johannes Kepler University
R. Florian, Fab labs in the University
(iii) Round table: Where should students acquire professional and entrepreneurial skills ‐ at
university or in employment?
Participants: J. Allen, G. Jones, H. Ferdinande, A. Jensen (Novo Nordisk, DK), J. Basílio (U
Coimbra, PT) J. Paixão (U Coimbra, PT)
5. WG2 Contribution at third HOPE Constanta 2016 Forum in Constanta by H. Geurts:
New competences for Physics Graduates, fostering Innovation and Entrepreneurship
31

Appendix 3.
Questionnaires
1. Questionnaire for Alumni
32

33

2. Questionnaire for Employers
34

35

3. Questionnaire “Investigating new competences for physics”
36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46