IAMU News - Special Edition

MARITIME INSTITUTE WILLEM BARENTSZ

Future postgraduate programmes at Maritime Institute Willem Barentsz.

In the Netherlands the system of dual-purpose officer and ratings training has been the standard since beginning of the 80's. Where and when the system of dual purpose started is difficult to distinguish and probably not that important either. However it seems that the first dual-purpose officer training was done in France.

It is of interest though to make a clear distinction between dual-purpose training and dual-purpose shipboard operations, as one does not automatically trigger the other.

Back in 1967 in France the first possibility was offered to choose between a monovalent or dual-purpose training scheme. As there was no sign yet of dual-purpose shipboard operations, the only immediate benefit was for the shipping company's personnel department. An officer could now be sent on board as engineer or mate, whatever that particular ship, at that particular moment, was in need of.

In the USA the need was felt to offer seafarers more and better opportunities in their further (shore based) careers and the dual-purpose programme was seen as a possibility. The ship owners hardly benefited from the system, the seafarers did only to a limited extent, the programme was rather heavy and the mono system still existed alongside of the dual programme. This also started as far back as 1965, but more as an alternative training programme, rather than as a newly structured educational or operational system.

In the Netherlands the first developments came from a few of the bigger shipping companies that wanted more onboard flexibility from their crews. This was achieved by sandwiching another training on top of the existing one in order to acquire the lowest level of competency in the counter discipline. This is late 70's, early 80's.

At the same time though, the whole shipboard organization was being rationalized and therefore the results of any dual training were much more clear and direct than in other countries. As this upgraded mono system seemed to be giving a reasonable output it was thought it could be made more structured and a whole new system of dual purpose training was developed.

At that stage the shipping industry in general was in a recession and it was realized that this dual-purpose system of training and of operating ships could be a welcome way to cut costs by reducing crew numbers.

Based on the ideas and assumptions the dual-purpose system was developed step by step from optional additional teaching modules in the 80's to a fully integrated dual-purpose training programme in the end of the 90's. As the dual system was introduced the mono system was phased out and the only officer-training programme in the Netherlands became dual purpose.

After several years of experience a number of conclusions can now be drawn:

• Due to traditional technology most vessels are hardly fit for reduction in manpower, so little advantage is achieved through the dual trained officers.
• The assumption that students are equally interested in both disciplines is proving to be false and they usually still seem to have a preference and pursue a career in either technical or nautical duties.
• Within the non-degree lower level vocational officer training system, it is proving too heavy a task to fully complete training in both disciplines. Here the monovalent training schemes will be offered again alongside the dual-purpose scheme, as of next academic year.
• On the university level the system will be continued and a Bachelor degree is awarded. The programme fits into the national professional educational system and is thus awarded similarly.
• Where in most countries dual-purpose initiatives have diminished an interesting development is taking place in Denmark, where, just recently, Maersk line introduced the requirement for dual-purpose training and operations.

From an educational point of view the merger of two 4-year programmes into one 4-year programme has required new methods and new teaching tools. These are in place, but obviously there will be an effect of generalization of knowledge and skills compared to the traditional monovalent programmes.

This seems to be the area where the interest and need will develop for further studies within MET. The intention at MIWB is therefore to introduce a Master of Marine Technology programme as well as a Master of Marine Operations programme by means of which a further in-depth knowledge can be acquired to compensate for any lack of knowledge due to the dual-purpose programme.

At present, each year, a number of students seek further studies before starting a seafaring career. Also a number of students take up further studies after a few years of sailing experience. Both cases clearly indicate the need for postgraduate programmes.

As the present Bachelor programmes are of 4 year duration it is envisaged that the Master programme should lead to the required level in 1 year. Such a system will also fit into the EU Bologna framework agreements to expand into the so-called Bachelor-Master structure recognized and interchangeable Europe wide.

As the second beneficiary of higher qualified maritime specialists, the ship owners are sending out mixed signals. On the one hand it is recognized that some staff with higher education is a benefit to the organization as a whole. On the other hand, even the Bachelor status was considered above the level of STCW seafarer officer requirements and some owners do not see the need for further qualifications in the seafaring profession.

In the end it will be the students that make a programme of further education successful, should the industry indicate the needs for such. At MIWB the intentions are to commence the Masters programmes in 2007 or 2008. The first students will then graduate from the fully restructured competence based curriculum leading to both operational and management level certificates of competence.

Stephen J. Cross
Director MIWB