بازاندیشی سنوات دورۀ کارشناسی مهندسی در ایران: راه‏ کارها، ملاحظات و الزامات سیاستی

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 ایران- تهران - موسسه پژوهش و برنامه ریزی آموزش عالی- گروه نوآوری آموزشی و درسی

2 ایران- تهران -دانشگاه صنعتی شریف- دانشکده مهندسی شیمی و نفت- دبیر انجمن مهندسی شیمی ایران

3 ایران- تهران - دانشگاه تربیت مدرس- دانشکده مهندسی شیمی

10.22047/ijee.2025.563615.2228
چکیده
در حال حاضر، بازنگری طول دورۀ کارشناسی در دستور کار وزارت علوم، تحقیقات و فنّاوری قرار گرفته است. این مطالعۀ کاربردی با هدف شناسایی راه‏ حل‏ ها، ملاحظات و الزامات مرتبط، با رویکرد کیفی انجام شده است. داده ‏ها از طریق تحلیل اسنادی و نشست‏ های تخصصی گردآوری و با استفاده از تحلیل مضمون، تحلیل شده‏ اند. شرکت‏ کنندگان شامل صاحب‌نظران آموزش عالی بودند که با روش نمونه‏ گیری گلوله ‏برفی انتخاب شدند. یافته‏ ها نشان داد در کشورهای توسعه‏ یافته، تنوع ساختارمندی از مدارک دانشگاهی با کارکردهای متمایز و با هدف افزایش هم‏راستایی آموزش عالی و نیازهای بازار کار وجود دارد. نتایج همچنین نشان داد ارائۀ سه نوع درجۀ لیسانس، یعنی درجۀ لیسانس دانشگاهی چهارساله در دانشگاه‏ ها، و درجه‏های لیسانس سه‏ سالۀ کاربردی و حرفه ‏محور در دانشگاه ‏های مهارتی، امکان انطباق بهتر برنامه ‏های درسی با مسیرهای حرفه ای و دانشگاهی را فراهم می‏ سازد. تنوع ‏بخشی در مقاطع کاردانی، کارشناسی ارشد و دکتری نیز به‏ عنوان گزینه ‏های قابل اجرا مطرح شد؛ بااین ‏حال، ایجاد «چارچوب مدارک تحصیلی آموزش عالی ایران» یک ضرورت راهبردی برای نظام ‏مند کردن این تنوع شمرده می‏ شود. این مطالعه درنهایت نتیجه ‏گیری می‏کند که سنوات استاندارد بین ‏المللی درجۀ لیسانس مهندسی دانشگاهی، چهار سال (۱۲۰ تا ۱۲۵ واحد درسی) است و کاهش آن با مقررات جهانی در تضاد خواهد بود

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

RETHINKING THE DURATION OF THE ENGINEERING BACHELOR’S DEGREE IN IRAN: SOLUTIONS, CONSIDERATIONS, AND POLICY REQUIREMENTS

نویسندگان English

Farhad Ebrahimabadi 1
Vahid Taghikhani 2
Jafar Towfighi 3
1 Department of Educational and Curriculum Innovation- Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education
2 Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering Sharif University of Technology- Tehran- Iran
3 Faculty of Chemical Engineering-Tarbiat Modares University - Tehran- Iran
چکیده English

The reconsideration of the duration of engineering bachelor’s degree has recently been placed on the agenda of MSRT in Iran. This applied study aimed to identify solutions, considerations, and requirements by adopting a qualitative approach. Data were collected through document analysis and expert panels, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Participants included higher education experts selected through a snowball sampling method. Findings revealed that, in developed countries, a structured diversity of academic degrees with distinct functions ensures closer alignment between higher education and labor market needs. Results further indicated that offering three types of engineering bachelor’s degrees- namely, the standard 4-year academic degree in universities, and 3-year applied and vocational degrees in Iran’s skill-oriented institutions would allow curricula to be more effectively tailored to professional and academic pathways. Diversification at the associate, master’s, and doctoral degrees also emerged as feasible options. However, the establishment of a National Qualifications Framework for Higher Education in Iran is considered a strategic necessity to systematize this diversity. The study concludes that the internationally recognized standard duration of a full engineering bachelor’s degree is four years (120–125 credits), and reducing this duration would conflict with global regulations.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Bachelor degree
diversity of academic qualifications
engineering
alignment of higher education with labor market
national qualifications framework
Afisa, W. (2025). Comparing the US and UK education systems: Essential guide for American students planning to study in the UK. Abbey DLD Group of Colleges. https://www.abbeycolleges.co.uk/ 2024/11/12/comparing-the-us-and-uk-education-systems/
Allais, S. (2010). The implementation and impact of national qualifications frameworks: Report of a study in 16 countries. Geneva: ILO.
Anwar, A., & Richards, D. (2013). Is the USA set to dominate accreditation of engineering education and profeHssional qualifications?. Proceedings of the Institution Of Civil Engineers-Civil Engineering, 166, 1, 42-48. Thomas Telford Ltd.
Australian Qualifications Framework Council (AQFC). (2013). Australian Qualifications Framework, second edition. 
Authority, V. Q. (2021). Turkish Qualifications Framework.
Barua, L., & Lockee, B. B. (2024). A review of strategies to incorporate flexibility in higher education course designs. Discover Education, 3(127). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44217-024-00213-8
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
British Council. (2024). Study in the UK. https://study-uk.britishcouncil.org/
Bucciarelli, L. L., Coyle, E., & McGrath, D. (2009). Engineering education in the US and the EU. In Engineering in context (pp. xx-xx). Academica. Retrieved November 23, 2025, from https://arrow.tudublin.ie/ahfrcbks/2/
Canadian Information Centre for International Credentials (CICIC). (2025). Learn about the education system in the province of Ontario, Canada- Postsecondary education in Ontario. https://www.cicic.ca/1179/postsecondary_education_in_ontario.canada.
Cedefop. (2022). Finland - European inventory of NQFs 2022. European centre for the development of vocational training. Retrieved from https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/files/finland_-_european_inventory_of_nqfs_2022.pdf
Ebrahimabadi, F. (2024). Evaluation of the Iranian National Qualifications Framework. Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education, Policy Project. [in Persian]
Ebrahimabadi, F. (2025). Investigating the mission and program development strucure of selected colleges and providing suggestions for Iranian vocational universities in order to achieve the performance indicators of the seventh development plan. Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education, Commissioned Research Project. [in Persian]
Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. (2025). 34 CFR § 600.2 - Definitions. U.S. Government Publishing Office. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-VI/part-600/subpart-A/section-600.2
Engineering Council. (2025). Chartered engineer (CEng). Engineering Council UK. https://www.engc.org.uk/professional-registration/our-professional-titles/chartered-engineer-ceng
Engineers Australia. (2025). Engineers Australia accredited programs: October 2025. Engineers Australia. Retrieved from https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/2025-10/engineers_australia_accredited_programs_oct_2025_0.pdf
European Commission. (2025). European credit transfer and accumulation system (ECTS). Education and Training, European Commission. https://education.ec.europa.eu/education-levels/higher-education/inclusive-and-connected-higher-education/european-credit-transfer-and-accumulation-system
European Network for Accreditation of Engineering Education (ENAEE). (2025). About ENAEE. ENAEE. https://www.enaee.eu/about-enaee/
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (2004). Educational research: An introduction (Nassr et al., Trans.). Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press [in Persian].
Gelman, V. (2022). Ways to reduce the duration of study at the university. Modern Education, 4, 18-26. https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8736.2022.4.39381
Ghasemi, E., & Sedighian, M. (2016). Comparative study of the higher education systems of Iran and England. Payam Farhangian Quarterly, 1(1) [in Persian]. Retrieved from https://civilica.com/doc/489271/ 
Gonzalez, R. V. (2025). Engineering education in the UK and the US: A comparative analysis. The complexity of modern engineering. In Adapting engineering education to a rapidly changing world (pp. 1-41). Cham: Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-78908-3_1
Institute of International Education (IIE). (2025). US educational framework credential terminology guide. IEE. https://iee.com/blog/us-educational-framework-credential-terminology-guide/
International Engineering Alliance (IEA). (2025). Qualification checker. International Engineering Alliance. https://www.internationalengineeringalliance.org/for-engineers/qualification-checker
Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK). (2005). Qualifikationsrahmen für deutsche Hochschulabschlüsse [Qualifications framework for German higher education degrees]. KMK. https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/2005/2005_04_21-Qualifikationsrahmen_englisch.pdf
Mohammadizad, S., Azizi, N., & Salehi-Imran, E. (2019). Comparative analysis of Iranian polytechnic higher education with selected countries. Iranian Journal of Comparative Education, 2(4), 496-517. [in Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijce.2020.10500
Perkins, S. A. (2009). A comparative analysis of civil engineering program standards in Canada, the United States and Europe. ITE Journal, 79(5), 44-45.
Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board (PEQAB). (2024). Ontario Qualifications Framework (OQF).
Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO). (2025). Application requirements to become a professional engineer. Professional Engineers Ontario. https://www.peo.on.ca/apply/become-professional-engineer/application-requirements
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). (2024). Frameworks for higher education qualifications of uk degree-awarding bodies, 2nd edition. Southgate House, Southgate Street, Gloucester GL1 1UB.
Shirali, E. (2022). Examining the prevailing educational model to propose a localized model with a focus on undergraduate fields of study. Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education: Collection of short-term policy research projects, 17. [in Persian]
Studying in Germany. (2025). German education system. Studying in Germany. https://www.studying-in-germany.org/german-education-system/
Swenty, B. J., & Swenty, M. K. (2019). Is it time for a three-year accredited civil engineering degree in the United States? A critical review. In 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.
The Association for International Credential Evaluation Professionals (TAICEP). (2022). Global directory of national qualification frameworks. TAICEP. https://www.taicep.org/taiceporgwp/resources/global-directory-of-national-qualification-frameworks-01/
Thornby, K. A., Brazeau, G. A., & Chen, A. M. (2023). Reducing student workload through curricular efficiency. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 87(8), 100015.
Trines, S. (2018). Education in India. World Education News & Reviews. https://wenr.wes.org/education-system-profiles/education-in-india/

  • تاریخ دریافت 11 آذر 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری 09 دی 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش 09 دی 1404
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار 09 دی 1404
  • تاریخ انتشار 01 خرداد 1405