and non-traditional student programs. Consequently the learning outcomes for thecourse work are of the same rigor and content previously approved by faculty.1 Dyrenfurth, M. J., Newton, K. A., Schuver, M. T. and Elliott, S., ROI: Return on Investment as a Factor in Designing Graduate Research Projects for Mutual Benefit, 2009 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education. (2009) Page 25.1327.5Page 25.1327.6
Mathematics Journal 109 (4). 197- 2113. Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass.4. Kolikant, Y., McKenna, A., & Yalvac, B. (2005). Cultivating a Community of Practice in Engineering Education. ASEE Conference Proceeding, Portland, OR.5. Lueddeke, G. (2003). Professionalising teaching practice in higher education: A study of disciplinary variation and ‘teaching scholarship.’ Studies in Higher Education, 28(2), 213-228. Page 24.1316.136. Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi
strategies), and choregraphing details (how exactly the RBIS may be used). The participants formed teams to reflect on the benefits and obstacles. This structure was based on Henderson et al.’s guide [9]. 4. Reichert and Absher [10] have aptly said that it’s not so much the details of what successful programs do, rather it’s the care with which they do it. Therefore, we emphasized the importance of passion in deploying the RBIS. 5. We then explained the challenges in implementating any new ideas based on Rogers’s work on innovation diffusion[11]. 6. The particiapants chose around three strategies to use in the subsequent semester and organized department-wise discussion on the plans. 7. All the
2012 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference. San Antonio, TX.: American Society for Engineering Education.5 Triola, M. (2010). Elementary Statistics. 11th Ed. San Francisco, CA.: Addison-Wesley.6 College of Technology (2012). 2012 MS Student Handbook. West Lafayette, IN.: Graduate Office, College of Technology.7 Dyrenfurth, M., Newton, K., Schuver, M. & Elliott, S. (2009). ROI: Return on Investment as a Factor in Designing Graduate Research Projects for Mutual Benefit. In Proceedings of the 2009 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference. Austin, TX.: American Society for Engineering Education.8 Springer, M. L., Bertoline, G. R., & Schuver, M. T. (2013
goal-settingexercises. In general, academic institutes do not use the human resource management practicesthat organizational behavior experts prescribe. Many administrators end up declaring a faculty‘pass’ or ‘fail’ and do not think that they can and must optimize their performances. In fact, theyhave to play a major role in optimizing performances of their faculty to increase chances ofsuccess of their organization.AcknowledgementsWe thank all the faculty colleagues who participated in the exercise. We also thank Mr. AbhayJoshi who improved the language of the paper and anonymous reviewers who reviewed andappreciated the paper.References1 L. Johnson, Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., and Freeman, A, 'The Nmc Horizon Report: 2015 K-12
interests and dependent upon the availability offunding campus by campus, as well as on the willingness of others within the system to shareinformation and best practices. Additionally, while there is a Center for ProfessionalDevelopment, not all professional development across SUNY is offered or tracked centrally, soimpact is difficult to measure.In response to the range of challenges being faced, the SUNY Center for ProfessionalDevelopment (CPD) has decided to develop and implement a series of competency-basedcertificate programs to address common and recurring professional development needs for rolesthat exist within targeted CoPs across the system.ApproachBuilding on s successful course development model for online professional master’s
. 2nd ed. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.5 Kerzner, H. (2009). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling. 10th ed. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons (p. 83).6 Blanchard, B. S. & Fabrycky, W. J. (2011). Systems Engineering and Analysis. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall (p. 34).7 Dessler, G. (2011). Human Resource Management. 12th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall (p. 22).8 Seaman, D. F. & Fellenz, R. A. (1989). Effective Strategies for Teaching Adults. Columbus, OH.: Merrill Publishing (p. 8).9 Kasworm, C., Rose, A. & Ross-Gordon, J. (2010). Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education. 2010 ed. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage
assess alternate/misconceptions according tolearner points of divergence from the expected conclusion. Inductive learning “encompasses a Page 15.1215.4range of instructional methods…(that) are...learner-centered…(and)…constructivist” withelements of active learning, most notably cooperative learning (p. 123; emphasis ours).15Project-based learning is the main inductive learning strategy that we use. Participants work inteams of up to 4 members to design, prototype, and test a solution to the challenge(s) identifiedby the facilitators.Our research philosophy is influenced by two approaches to qualitative analysis. For Miles andHuberman, 25 the
. Technologyeducation cannot afford to become complacent; it needs to remain focused onmaintaining a modern syllabus that reflects the technological world, with the need fora sustainable model of CPD that promotes the progression of technological literacyand competency.Bibliography1. OFSTED-UK, Education for a technolgically advanced nation. 2008: London. p. 51.2. Irish-Academy-of-Engineering, E.-I., Engineering a Knowledge Island 2020. 2005, Irish Academy of Engineering: Dublin. p. 66.3. Condon, N., McNaboe, J., Trends in Education / Training outputs, in Monitoring Irelands Skill Supply. 2008, Expert group on future skills needs Dublin. p. 85.4. McGuinness, S., An Evaluation of the Implementation of Technology in the Junior Cycle
; Fellenz, R. A. (1989). Effective Strategies for Teaching Adults. Columbus, OH.: Merrill Publishing (p. 8).3 Kasworm, C., Rose, A. & Ross-Gordon, J. (2010). Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education. 2010 ed. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications. (pgs. 35-48).4 Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F. & Swanson, R. A. (2011). The Adult Learner: The Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development. 7th ed. Burlington, MA.: Butterworth-Heinemann. (pgs. 123- 129).5 Land, R. E. (2012). Engineering Technologists are Engineers. Journal of Engineering Technology, Spring 2012, pgs. 32-39.6 Cleland, D., Gallagher, J. & Whitehead, R. (1993). Military Project Management Handbook. San Francisco, CA., McGraw
Business Review, 68,(3), 103-111.Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59-67.Lee, J., & Clery, S. (2004). Key trends in higher education. American Academic, 1(1), 21-36. Available online at: http://www.aft.org/pubsreports/american_academic/issues/june04/Lee.qxp.pdfMiller, D. (2004). Building sustainable change capability. Industrial and Commercial Training, 36(1), 9-12.National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Retrieved May 1, 2009, from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10999. [Also available in print format]Scott, G., Coates, H., & Anderson, M. (2008
as “teaching as research”, the Wendt Commons staff will draw on keyprinciples that advocate for change in the traditional model for classroom instruction. Ratherthan providing an exhaustive review of the literature, the following presents a summary of thekey concepts on which our service model is based.Smith, et al., in their review of classroom-based pedagogies of engagement, point out thatlearning outcomes depend more on students’ approach to learning and faculty delivery ofmaterial rather than the content itself11. Drawing on research from the past 100+ years, theauthors note that active-learning approaches have been developed and injected into engineeringclassrooms since the 1940’s – yet there has been very little actual change in the
can be pushed out to the cell/smart phones of PEs’ registered forcourse(s) without their intervention (e.g., no browsing for information) regardless of the phonemodel, calling plan, or wireless service provider they own.In particular, this paper will discuss the following topics: 1. Existing models of university-company collaboration so as to introduce an atypical university-company collaboration in which the partnering company is a start-up which owns a potentially potent m-outreach technology. 2. Definitions of m-learning in order to better understand the unique educational potential for engineers of the m-outreach tool upon which this university-company collaboration rests. 3. Details of the technology behind the
inenvironmental engineering, transportation engineering and physics department. The entire STEMtrainees reported that the analog devices used during the training session engaged and made themcurious fully in exploring and performing the experiments. The ECP team members became moreconfident in guiding their students to conduct home-based hands-on lab experiment safely andeffectively.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1915614. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. References1. Despain, M. (2020). What does effective virtual training look like? Find
identified five major factors that support the use of the theoretical frameworks tooperationalize andragogy, while identifying discrepancies among their sub-constructs. Studentdifferences have been primarily associated with developmental areas associated with emergingadulthood. These differences can greatly impact the way design educators mentor their studentsand coach them through teaming issues, especially for non-traditional students. Page 24.33.2Adult Learners in Undergraduate EducationArnett 1 has recognized that the classification of adult has changed since the 1970’s. He hasidentified a new life stage named “emerging adulthood” where the
instructor-centered to a student-centered teaching philosophy.One of the most important tools for implementing this philosophy is use of innovativetechnology. Gradually, although controversy does exists (some senior faculty members choose tostay with their traditional in-class lecture delivery), web-based online teaching becomes anintegrated part of the program. Research showed that the online teaching is one of mostinteresting teaching methods that is growing rapidly.1, 2, 3Based on the previously noted issues, NDSU has recently launched a fully online M. S. degree inConstruction Management. Meanwhile, some undergraduate courses were selected, as well, foronline lecture delivery in order to best utilize the online teaching resources in conjunction
fill open positions and aHuman Resources (HR) staffing agent revealed several interesting pieces of information aboutemployment at a government installation. Employability begins when the category of theposition and the skillset(s) needed to fulfill the job requirements are established. As a position’stechnical competence and experience requirement increase, there is less flexibility for hiringmanagers to extend consideration to applicants who do not satisfy all stated criteria, even thoughthey may have the potential to do great in the targeted position. In each of the independentinterviews, the interviewees said this formality is driven by accountability standards establishedat the highest levels of government (personal communication
engineering profession. Furthermore, technology education exposes 1students to open-ended problem solving, a skill required of future engineers. Technology education is often misunderstood – it has undergone a significanttransformation since the mid-1980’s. At the core of this transformation is a transitionfrom education associated with the industrial arts to education associated withtechnological literacy and engineering education in K-12 schools. This transformation ishardly complete, in part, because of stereotypical attitudes held by many. Greg Pearson[4], a Program Officer with the National Academy of Engineering, candidly points tosome of the
MOOC, the colleges gained significantinsight into the challenges and opportunities associated with the technology and pedagogyassociated with MOOCs. In particular: There are a variety of reasons to offer MOOCs including: marketing / organizational awareness, outreach, providing professional development, support enrollment in “traditional” programs, etc. It is imperative that the goal(s) be clearly established early so that appropriate decisions regarding design and development can be made which support the goals. Very careful attention to content management minimizes issues when the course is offered. Video accessibility issues need to be carefully planned and managed. The visibility and positive attention generated for
.Sheppard S., Macatangay K., Colby A., Sullivan W. M. (2009), “Educating engineers: designing for the future of thefield, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Base3.Felder R.M., Brent R. (2003),” Designing and Teaching courses to Satisfy the ABET Engineering Criteria,” Journal ofEngineering Education, Vol. 92, No 1, pp7-25.4.Thomas, J.W. 2000. A review of research on project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation.5.Savage R., Chen K., Vanasupa L. (2007),” Integrating Project-based Learning. New York, NY: Routledge Publisher6.Blumenfeld, P.C., Soloway E., Marx R.W., Krajcik J.S., Guzdial M, Palinscar A. (1991),”Motivating Project-BasedLearning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning,” Education Psychologist, Vol. 26, pp. 369-3987.Brito C
Bloom’s Taxonomybefore embarking on the course design process. Many if not most instructors are already versedin the taxonomy but it is important to ensure that there is training available for those who are not.It is essential to have this vocabulary in course design.Getting StartedBefore working on the CDM, it is important to get organized: • Organize lectures in sequence • Organize classroom activities in sequence • Organize assignments, projects and exams • Arrange materials into tentative weekly modulesModule Title, Summary StatementThe module title provides the main theme(s) for the module and the summary statement providesa sentence about each topic covered in the module. A sample module title and summarystatement are
evaluating the design using specifications, • refining the design, • creating or making it, • and communicating processes and results.The design process described by Standard 8 is iterative in nature so that students maymake a number of models or prototypes that are tested and refined until the final solution Page 12.1447.3is achieved. One difference between the design process prescribed by Standard 8 andengineering design is the role of engineering analysis in achieving the optimum solution.Technology education is often misunderstood – it has undergone a significanttransformation since the mid-1980’s. At the core of this transformation is a
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 IT t g s n e en
acceptability.There are two starting points to evaluate the parameters of any specified risk. Thedevelopment steps are shown in figure 4. P – S Matrix Hi History probability Lo How it evolves Quantified impact Lo Hi Stakeholder views Severity measure Early indicators Trigger point Action by Responsible Engineering Authority (REA
achieved both professional AND academic credentials equal to or higher than those of the individuals involved in the P&T process. These "Peer Reviewers" serve as "Quality Assurance Evaluators" to insure the standards of the discipline and the academic community are being sustained. By having individuals who are neither professionally and/or academically qualified to serve in a Peer Review process, we would begin to see that the quality of the program(s) and the academic faculty (over time) would become "watered-down" and "ineffective". Furthermore, it would provide our true academic peers with an opportunity to ridicule and denigrate a system that uses outside "experts" as a key component of our
exploring new opportunities to create and sustaintechnology enhanced learning in STEM disciplines. Page 15.1154.15UW- Madison Sponsoring Deans: Dean Paul S. Peercy, College of Engineering Dean Margaret M. Molly Jahn College of Agricultural and Life SciencesUW-Madison Key Contributors Greg Moses, Professor, College of Engineering Robert Kohlhepp, Director, Computer Aided Engineering, College of Engineering Regina Nelson Lead Technology Consultant and Ph.D. candidate, College of Engineering Sandra Shaw-Courter, Director, Engineering Learning Center, College of Engineering, retired. Tim Tynan, Lead Technology Consultant and Ph.D. candidate, College of
faculty members in the Department wanted to follow suit, and began their search for theright type of practitioners, to enrich the academic process by bringing the practice into the classroom. After Foundation Engineering was over, and the final course grade was out, a“questionnaire” was sent to those who enrolled in the class seeking their opinions, evaluations,and any comment(s) they may wish to offer. Twenty six out of a total of 30 students returned the“questionnaire” on time! The opinions expressed and comments made were, by and large,positive to say the least. After regrouping, and rephrasing to correct the English language; thecomments offered by the ex- students, could be summarized as follows: The adjunct was easy to approach
students.Figure 3. Student highlighting text and asking a question in Nb.Piazza is a wiki-style discussion forum that lends itself to the kind of questions with just oneright answer. Each question has a single students' answer that students can contribute to, and asingle instructors' answer that instructors can contribute to. With wiki-style Q&A, when astudent has a question, s/he doesn't need to sift through long threads in a forum to find what theyare looking for, they can read just the single, high-quality question and answer.Figure 4. Piazza Q & A Platform.Perusall is another forum tool for students to annotate and discuss your class readings.Instructors can order and assign textbooks, articles, or PDFs in Perusall. Students annotate
Desktopdeployment options, learningmanagement system applications, andcontent development tools. DOE LMS Page 25.1284.6 Figure 4: Overview of the standards and technology selection process Learning Content Portability StandardsQuestion: Which learning content portability standard(s) would fit our needs?Objectives: (1) ability to move content between various delivery platforms, (2