Title:
Energy Systems Technology and Education Center
Facility:
Idaho National Laboratory
Point of Contact: Richard D. Holman, CPT,
208-520-0698,
richard.holman@inl.gov
Brief Description of Best Practice:
Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho State University
and Partners for Prosperity (a not-for-profit agency
chartered with reducing poverty in Eastern Idaho) teamed to
create this market sector driven learning center on the
Idaho
State
University
campus. The
Center is providing 5 Associate of Applied Science degrees
in energy systems in the areas of Instrumentation and
Control, Electrical Engineering Technology, Mechanical
Engineering Technology, Wind Power Technology and Nuclear
Operations Technology (in Fall 2010). Driving forces behind
the Center are providing an energy systems-specific
education and improving workforce diversity in the energy
sector.
Why the best practice was used:
Studies conducted by the Center for Advanced Energy Studies
in 2004 indicated that while engineers would be one critical
shortage in the energy workforce picture, technicians were
even more critical.
Very few educational programs existed nation-wide to
address the impending mass retirement in the energy market
sector. Also
noted was the need to diversify the employee population in
the market sector in both the maintenance and operations
ranks. The Idaho
National Laboratory facilitated the creation of a
partnership with the university and the social service
organization with the express intent of pursuing grants to
create the center and to package one of the curricula for
use by other professional technical institutions.
A Department of Labor Community-based Job Training
Grant and a National Science Foundation Advanced
Technological Education Grant were applied for and
successfully secured.
Further contributions from the State of Idaho, Idaho
State University as well as a host of national and
international industry partners resulted in a Center valued
in the range of ~$30M.
This approach was used to bring industry, government,
academia AND a social service organization to the same table
to create a shared lexicon concerning energy workforce needs
and workforce development resources including the inclusion
of the unemployed, underemployed and under-represented
populations. To
date the program has seen a sharp rise in enrollment and
opportunity for the Hispanic and female demographic.
What are the benefits of the best practice:
The most important benefit is the regional leveraging of
resources to produce a population of energy systems
maintenance and operations technicians that have proven to
perform (according to industry partner accounts) second to
none. The Center
concept, as implemented, provides opportunity with
considerations for culture and educational shortcomings in a
sensitive and respectful manner.
Opportunities for under-represented populations are
real as are the partnerships between the between the
Laboratory, University, Social Service Organization and
Industry. These
are not paper partnerships but face to face, get down to
issues and understanding partnerships.
The best practice puts a solid and successful example
of how to knit together the relationship between education,
employment and economic development.
This approach also creates a well-defined pipeline
for students leaving high school that are not bound for a
traditional 4 year college education to enter an educational
program that provides employment in a market sector paying
high wages and providing good benefits.
This program serves to break the cycle of poverty for
many that enroll.
It also serves the energy industries’ desire to hire
a diverse population.
What problems/issues were associated with the best
practice:
Several issues have arisen in the course of deployment:
-
It is difficult to hire experienced instructional staff
given the significant gap between industry wages when
compared to those in educational institutions.
Pursuing those individuals that are close to
retirement and want to live in Idaho has met with
success but it has been a slow process.
-
Identifying the facility that best allows for hands-on
instruction needs to be committed early and ready for
renovation as funds become available.
Space is always at a premium.
-
Hands-on, laboratory–based instruction while (we feel)
is most effective, is also more costly than a lecture
hall-based approach especially when teaching to specific
high tech equipment.
Instead of a 100 to 1 ratio in lecture,
laboratory requires 20 to 1 at most.
While this makes for a more successful graduate
it is also expensive.
Industry must help with this approach as it will
drive their initial training costs down once they employ
the graduates.
-
Effective articulation of grade levels and connection to
TechPrep Programs is an issue that has to be consciously
addressed. This
means making parents, students, teachers and counselors
aware of the opportunities.
How the success of the Best Practice was measured:
The measures required by the Department of Labor and the
National Science Foundation were used to determine program
success.
Typically these include graduation and placement numbers,
salaries and long-term “promotability” of the students.
These two agency reports are very detailed and
provide an excellent accounting as to program and graduate
success.
Description of process experience using the Best
Practice:
Included in the curriculum is a great deal of safety culture
development including the use of personnel protective
equipment, actual use and maintenance of the lockout/tagout
system in the Center’s laboratory, introduction to error
reduction techniques such as peer check/self check and brief
insights into human error precursors/situational
awareness/attention to detail.
Maintenance and operations curriculum include an overview of
Conduct of Operations and Conduct of Maintenance principles.
