The Story Behind SPEET: Why We Started This Project

Let’s be honest: we didn’t just wake up one day and decide to build an engineering student tutoring project; it was born from a frustrating, shared experience across European universities. We were lecturers, project managers, and former students ourselves, and we kept seeing the same pattern of struggle and untapped potential. This is the real story of how SPEET moved from a common gripe in faculty corridors to a funded Erasmus+ mission.

The Problem We Couldn’t Ignore

Our journey began with a clear, uncomfortable observation: despite the high calibre of students entering engineering programmes, there was a persistent and alarming gap in foundational knowledge. Dropout rates in notoriously challenging core subjects—thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, structural analysis—were a silent crisis. More frustrating was the patchwork nature of the support available. While some institutions had robust systems, many offered only sporadic, often inaccessible, peer tutoring. We heard identical stories from the bustling engineering halls of the University of Manchester to the historic campuses of Politecnico di Milano. A student’s chance of getting consistent, quality tutoring depended entirely on their postcode.

The ‘Post-Exam Exodus’ in Engineering Halls

We named it the ‘Post-Exam Exodus.’ You’d see it every semester: after particularly gruelling core subject exams, a noticeable number of bright, capable students would simply disappear from the cohort. They weren’t lazy; they were demoralised. They had hit a conceptual wall, found the standard lectures insufficient, and lacked a structured, supportive space to work through problems without judgement. This attrition wasn’t just a loss for the students; it was a massive waste of potential for the European engineering sector.

The Patchwork of Peer Support Across Europe

Simultaneously, we saw incredible, isolated successes. Some universities had fantastic peer-led initiatives, but they were often volunteer-run, poorly funded, and limited to specific departments. There was no standardisation, no way to share best practices, and no continuity. A brilliant tutoring model in one country remained a well-kept secret from struggling students in another. This inconsistency meant that the wheel was being reinvented—badly—at institutions across the continent.

Our ‘Eureka’ Moment in Brussels

The vague sense that “someone should do something” crystallised into a tangible plan at an Erasmus+ networking event in Brussels. It wasn’t a single lightning bolt moment, but a series of conversations over coffee that connected the dots.

Connecting Dots at an Erasmus+ Workshop

In a workshop on educational innovation, our team—a blend of UK higher education professionals and European project managers—found ourselves in a breakout group. We started sharing these very frustrations. The UK colleague spoke of the institutionalised support schemes back home, while the partners from Southern and Eastern Europe described the near-total absence of such systems. That’s when it clicked: the expertise existed, but it was siloed. Erasmus+ wasn’t just a potential funding stream; it was the perfect framework to bridge these geographical and pedagogical gaps.

From Frustration to a Formal Proposal

We left Brussels with a napkin sketch of an idea: a collaborative project to create a unified, transferable, and high-quality engineering student tutoring framework. The energy was no longer about complaining; it was about solving. We channeled our shared frustration into a concrete objective: to develop a toolkit, training programme, and community of practice that any European university could adopt to bolster their engineering students’ success.

Building the SPEET Consortium

We knew the project’s success hinged on the strength and diversity of its partners. A homogenous group from similar educational systems would only produce a limited solution. We needed a true European cross-section.

Why Partner Diversity Was Non-Negotiable

We deliberately sought partners from different educational traditions (Bologna-process aligned and others), different sizes of institutions (large technical universities and smaller applied sciences colleges), and different regions. This diversity was crucial to ensure the SPEET framework would be robust and adaptable, not a one-size-fits-all model that only worked in one context. Our consortium needed to mirror the European engineering education landscape itself.

Sheffield Hallam: Our Anchor in the UK

A cornerstone of this strategy was securing a partner with deep, practical experience in successful peer-learning models. That’s where Sheffield Hallam University came in. Their commitment to applied learning and student success made them an ideal anchor. Furthermore, their existing relationship with the British Council and experience in transnational education projects proved invaluable, particularly during the complex Erasmus+ application process. They weren’t just a name on the proposal; they became our practical guide for translating UK-based peer-learning excellence into a European project.

Navigating the Erasmus+ Grant Labyrinth

Transforming our consortium’s enthusiasm into a funded project was our next monumental challenge. The Erasmus+ application process is rigorous, demanding extreme clarity on impact, sustainability, and dissemination.

Writing the Winning Proposal

We spent months crafting our proposal. The key was moving beyond a simple “we’ll run tutoring sessions” plan. We had to demonstrate:

• Tangible Intellectual Outputs: A full curriculum for tutor training, open-access digital resources, and a quality assurance handbook.
• Measurable Impact: How we would track improvements in student pass rates, retention, and confidence.
• True European Added Value: Proving that this project would create something no single country could develop alone.
• Long-Term Sustainability: A clear plan for how universities would continue and fund the SPEET model after the grant ended.

Every claim was backed by data from our partners, including the troubling dropout statistics that had sparked our mission.

From Approval to First Project Meeting in Porto

The approval email was a moment of pure elation, quickly followed by the sobering reality of responsibility. Our kick-off meeting in Porto was electric. For the first time, the entire consortium—from Portugal to Poland—sat in one room. That meeting shifted the project from an abstract proposal on paper to a shared mission. We were no longer just applicants; we were collaborators.

Our Core Philosophy: Tutoring, Not Just Teaching

At the heart of SPEET is a fundamental belief that engineering students need something distinct from traditional teaching or casual peer help. It’s about fostering a structured environment for collaborative problem-solving and building resilience.

Why Engineering Needs a Different Approach

Engineering concepts are cumulative and applied. You can’t memorise your way through statics; you have to learn how to *think* through a problem. Traditional lectures often don’t provide the safe space for the iterative, often messy, process of engineering problem-solving. Students need to be allowed to fail, to ask “stupid” questions, and to see multiple solution paths modelled by someone who recently sat in their exact seat.

Adapting UK’s PAL Success for a European Context

We drew significant inspiration from proven models like the University of Bournemouth’s Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) scheme. Its strength is in its structured yet informal approach, where senior students facilitate rather than lecture. However, we weren’t copying and pasting. Our task was to adapt these principles for a multilingual, multicultural European context. This meant creating materials and training that accounted for different academic calendars, assessment styles, and even classroom cultures, ensuring the core philosophy of “students supporting students” remained intact and effective everywhere.

FAQs

What makes SPEET different from other tutoring projects?

SPEET isn’t a one-off service; it’s a comprehensive, standardised framework designed for transferability across Europe. We focus on training students to become effective tutors and facilitators, building a sustainable culture of peer support rather than providing temporary academic crutches. Our resources are co-created by a diverse consortium to ensure they work in multiple educational contexts.

Is the SPEET model only for top-tier universities?

Absolutely not. In fact, a core goal of SPEET is to level the playing field. The framework is specifically designed to be adaptable, whether for a large research-intensive university like the University of Manchester or a smaller university of applied sciences. The toolkit provides scalable solutions to fit different institutional resources and needs.

How does the Erasmus+ funding work for a project like this?

Erasmus+ Key Action 2 funding supports strategic partnerships for innovation. The grant covers consortium management, the development of intellectual outputs (like our training curriculum), transnational project meetings, and pilot testing activities. It’s a grant, not a commercial investment, focused on creating open educational resources for the public good.

Can my institution get involved or use the SPEET resources?

Yes! A fundamental requirement of our Erasmus+ project is that all core outputs are made freely available as Open Educational Resources (OERs). Upon completion, any European higher education institution will be able to access the SPEET tutor training handbook, session plans, and quality assurance guidelines via our project website to implement or adapt within their own engineering departments.

Ultimately, the SPEET story isn’t just about creating another educational resource. It’s a testament to believing in the power of shared student knowledge. It started with a common frustration but grew into a collective conviction that by systematically harnessing the experience of those who have just navigated the toughest paths, we can build a stronger, more supported, and more resilient generation of European engineers.