making a businesscontact to determine educational needs of adult professional learners, the first step is todetermine basic needs or requirements of the target audience; in this scenario, the focus is adultprofessional learners and their respective businesses and industries.In offering graduate education to adult professional engineering and technology learners wefrequently assume one of three basic curriculum positions: (1) offer an existing program, (2)offer a curriculum permutation of existing courses, or (3) offer a permutation of existing andcustomized courses as deemed required by the end recipient (student or organization).This paper examines and extends a most recently evolved study that provides insight into thetarget engineering and
coaches and intentional feedback have on the success of the simulation. Page 23.158.2The Northrop Grumman, Electronic Systems Leadership Training ProgramAs the 21st Century began on January 1, 2000, it was already evident, the “baby boomer”generation was fast approaching retirement age and there would soon be a shortage of engineers,scientists and corporate leaders. In 2003, Northrop Grumman Electronics Systems Engineering& Manufacturing Division at the Baltimore, Maryland location, in partnership with Learning andDevelopment (L&D), developed a unique approach to accelerate leadership development forrecent graduates by creating an
and project management – Page 25.522.2Program and project management as a process has multiple activities. A simple perspective asksa number of questions, around which are processes to further define the specific instantiation ofthe application of the program management methodology. In this scenario, program and projectmanagement has been used as a tool to define a research-based tier 1 university’s organizationfor professional studies.In defining the roles and responsibilities, the basic work definition questions to be addressedfollowing a program management process are1: What is the target organization being asked to do? What
theyseemed to be the most logical candidates for recruitment. However, many students were notacademically prepared to enroll in college STEM courses without remediation, often becauseprevious curriculum choices resulted in limited exposure to math and science in these students’programs of study. Other obstacles include students’ lack of awareness of engineering as apossible career because of unfamiliarity with the profession.1 One natural extension, then, wasto focus projects at the middle school level, where timely interventions would ideally lead toenrollment in classes that would better prepare students for the rigors of college STEM studies.Research, however, is increasingly indicating that that intervention efforts must begin as early
thousand examples every year but there issurprisingly little attention given to either the scope or priority of the drivers for change.The indicators of inadequacy are usually indirect and derived from economic effects 1.For example, academic programs in the sciences and engineering are often accused ofteaching the history of the subject. The result is persistent gap between typical graduateskills and the requirements of current jobs 2, 3. While there may be truth in theseaccusations, change is rarely comfortable or as simple to execute for future technology asit appears with the benefit of hindsight.This paper is concerned with the fresh challenges posed by the rapid developments inengineering systems. They range from the 50 interacting
collection, computing and communications, is continuously making older systems components obsolete, expensive and hard to maintain. Unfortunately, the best time to move to a new technology is usually only evident with hindsight.The current generation of technical leaders learned their craft by dint of persistence,mistakes and living the evolution process. That expensively acquired experience now hasto be passed on rapidly and effectively. However, the technical management pipeline isfully involved with the new technology and focused solutions. The issues are well-recognized and initiatives such as those described by Wright 1 have demonstrated theneed to combine breadth and depth in systems managers.Universities have traditionally
contemporary products and services thatmeet societal needs 1. As Ireland endeavours to be a “Top 5 global economy by 2020”a joint task force of the Irish Academy of Engineering and Engineers Ireland proposea vision for a knowledge-based economy which would place the island of Ireland tothe forefront of global economics. Achieving a growth rate of 4.5% annually is Page 15.273.2predicated by close collaboration between government and relevant educational andprofessional institutions to foster innovation2.The response by this task force also highlights that the entire island (both north andsouth) has fallen behind leading economies in terms of research and
Organizations” is to improve atechnical professional’s ability to contribute to a business organization through improvement innon-technical skills. The course was specifically developed to facilitate interpersonal skilldevelopment in the context of a technical organization so the examples, topics and discussionswould be relevant to this specific population.The course is presented in four distinct modules.Module 1 - Assessment of skills and aptitude. This module includes these topics: Page 15.170.2 ≠ Learning styles1 ≠ Leadership traits ≠ Personal characteristics that aid or detract from interpersonal effectiveness ≠ Development of personal
deliver engineering courses.Moving graduate engineering courses onlineThe Sloan Foundation 2008 Report on Online Education in the United States reports that highereducation online enrollments have shown significant growth, from 1.6 million in 2002 to 3.9million in 2007, and comparable growth in the number of institutions offering online programs 1.Of the eight disciplines examined, business, liberal arts and sciences (generalstudies/humanities), health professions (and related sciences), education, computer andinformation sciences, social sciences and history, psychology, and engineering; engineering isthe only discipline where the number of online programs lags significantly behind otherdisciplines. It should be noted though whereas public
members do not requireexternal awards for their motivation, they are far fewer in number. We argue that majority ofthe faculty members move up the ladder of motivation only when they receive externalrewards. We verified this premise by conducting a survey of 22 faculty members at aworkshop on engineering education. We asked them to rate the statement, ‘A proper rewardand recognition system must be developed at colleges’ on the Likert scale of 1 to 5 andreceived the rating of 4.54, which underlines the desperate need for an award system.Richardson, et al. conducted a study to find the factors that influence faculty motivationwherein they spoke to 26 faculty members at a college across ranks, genders anddepartments. The found that 19 of the faculty
with majornational and international corporations to deliver customized professional engineering andmanagement trainings. In this paper, the authors discuss the strategies they have used in (1)understanding an organization’s strategic initiatives that strengthens its competitive advantage,(2) developing tailored curriculum based on the organizational learning needs and anorganization's existing and future projects, and (3) modifying the training portfolio andtechnology-enhanced delivery methods as corporate learning strategies changed withglobalization. Three long-standing collaborations with three organizations -- an engineering,consulting and construction company, an aircraft manufacturer and a flight control componentsmanufacturer -- with
goodstewards of taxpayer dollars and student tuition, two colleges opened discussions oncollaboration. The manifestation of these many earlier discussions culminated in a more focusedand targeted series of meetings to determine areas for collaboration and how that collaborationmight look. Primary areas for collaboration, a result of these many meetings, centers on space,distance infrastructure and the engineering-technology educational continuum.This paper details the organizational platform for bringing two tier 1 research university collegestogether for a common purpose; that being the continuing education of professional workingadult learners.MethodologyDetermining the potential for gain through collaboration is minimally a function ofunderstanding
13 page delivery in response to Dean specific questions. 2013, March 9, Sticking a Fork in It – Dean announcing intent to benchmark ProSTAR 2013, April 19, Evolution of ProSTAR – Delivered a 44 page document to benchmarking committee kick-off meeting1 2013, July 22, Final committee report sent to Dean2 2013, Aug 1, Dean improvement request 2013, Aug 6, 19 page improvement response to Dean3 2013, Sep 16, Meeting on ProSTAR improvements with Dean 2013, Sep 21, Addendum (13 pages) submitted to Dean; full combined 96 page document submitted4 2013, Oct 14, Final Dean actions and recommendations meeting5AnalysisThe first delivery to the benchmarking review committee was a 44 page document
journey their efforts led toencouraging their peers to volunteer as well. A small group of developing leaders becamethe inspiration for others to follow. They were challenged to "think out of the box" andhave carried the journey down the road and across the country.LTP DevelopmentEric Pearson was faced with a difficult task; how to identify 3 out of every 100 volunteerleadership participants who would stand above the rest from within a program that wasalready designed to be highly selective in its participants. After examining currentlyexisting Leadership Programs in highly respected Fortune 500 companies, an Offsiteweekend on the Catoctin Mountain was planned for April 2003. The weekend wouldconsist of 2 nights, 1 full and 2 half-day
. Page 23.1403.3The Northrop Grumman, Electronic Systems Leadership Training ProgramAs the 21st Century began on January 1, 2000, it was already evident, the “baby boomer”generation was fast approaching retirement age and there would soon be a shortage of engineers,scientists and corporate leaders. In 2003, Northrop Grumman Electronics Systems Engineering& Manufacturing Division at the Baltimore, Maryland location, in partnership with Learning andDevelopment (L&D), developed a unique approach to accelerate leadership development forrecent graduates by creating an experiential, eighteen-month Leadership Training Program(LTP). The core curriculum, known as the Foundations of Leadership, was a significant part ofthe experience and was
Support Model for Innovation in Engineering Education and Technology-Enhanced LearningBackground and IntroductionThrough an educational reform initiative at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, faculty andstaff are beginning to transform their undergraduate program. This College of Engineering (CoE)initiative, aptly named Engineering Beyond Boundaries (EBB)1, addresses important shifts inengineering education2 3 4, including the need to “go beyond traditional engineering boundaries”of the classroom and conventional thinking. New technology and multi-media strategies allowfaculty to expand their educational approaches. New ways of thinking about engineeringeducation challenge faculty to reconsider their curricula and
; AppliedScience at the University of Cincinnati created the Accelerated Engineering Degree(ACCEND)1,2 programs in 2002 to provide opportunities for students to complete both aBachelor of Science and Master of Science in engineering disciplines. The programs takeadvantage of the structure of the cooperative education program to provide both experience inthe profession and the opportunity to accelerate degree completion. The ACCEND programsrequire that students meet all the requirements of the undergraduate degree and the graduatedegree, however, students accelerate the completion of both the BS and MS through threemechanisms: 1. Students typically enter the University with advanced placement through participation in AP coursework or Post-Secondary
(ABET). In a project-based learning environment where students are highly motivated, professionalism can be easilyintegrated into the curriculum. Iron Range Engineering, a newly established project-basedprogram, has given considerable attention to professionalism and has incorporatedprofessionalism in the curriculum as a course series. In this paper, we discuss the Iron RangeEngineering program, professionalism activities, ABET outcomes associated withprofessionalism and the integration of professionalism in the curriculum.1- IntroductionSince the publication of Engineer 20201 (and before) and the modification on accreditationcriteria made by ABET, professionalism has been an important subject in the engineeringeducation2,3. The expectations of
and organization, the results of asustainable, value add TCEP will never be fully realized.So, let’s delineate a recipe for success that is founded on the strengths of the General Motors(GM) Technical Education Program (TEP) and over 650 other technical education programscapsulated by nine universities who partner with the organizations that sponsor these sameprograms. These universities who offered insight into the strongest attributes needed by a TCEPto produce a sustainable, value-added contribution are listed below: 1. Carnegie Mellon University 2. Cornell University 3. Indiana University 4. Kansas, University of 5. Kettering University 6. Michigan – Ann Arbor, University of 7. Missouri University of Science
considered for subsequentdevelopment of courses. However, there was no structured workflow for these processes used inthis continuing education unit until 2010, when reusable templates and standardized processeswere established. We will now describe each of these steps that we had taken to establish suchprocesses and how the delivery methods have evolved over the years.Project 1: Reliability and 1309 Design Analysis Computer Based CourseProcess: In 2002, although many universities had already started developing online non-creditprofessional engineering courses1, 2, the staff associated with the development of this computer-based course (the term they used at that time) neither had any formal training for thedevelopmental process nor did they
, Generations (1991), AgePower (1999), Age Quake (1999), Age Works (2000) and Generations at Work (2000)1. Theproliferation of articles and books, on the topic of demographics and understanding the manycohort groups in our workforce, has been substantial.Although we have documented as many as eight individual cohort groups2, in practicality, wehave four primary demographic groups in our workforce today3,4: Page 25.48.2 Veterans (1922-1946; 52 million population) Boomers (1946-1964; 76 million population) o Began turning 65 in January 1, 2011 Gen X (1964-1980; 44 million population) Gen Y (1980-2000; 69.7 million
lecturesThe most widely endearing aspect of the attendance-optional Statics course as reported in studentfeedback surveys was the recorded lectures. The high-quality video and audio recordings coupled withserver-archived lecture library allowed students greater freedom in both time and location in which topartake in the provided material. An example of these videos is shown by a lecture screen-capture in Fig.1.Course management systemThe course management system (in this instance Sakai) greatly streamlined user-authentication issuespertaining to electronic homework submission and video content delivery. The integration of the coursemanagement system with a course grade book allowed for easy dissemination of individual gradeswithout running afoul of
Fundamentals(EIF) course was initiated by the Center for Energy Workforce CourseDevelopment (CEWD)1. CEWD is a non-profit consortium of Analysiselectrical, natural gas, and nuclear utilities and their associationsand was formed to help utilities work together to develop solutions Intervention Technology Design Selectionto the coming workforce shortage in the utility industry. The EIFcourse provides a broad understanding of the electric and natural
AC 2012-5259: THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTERDISCIPLINARY BACH-ELOR’S DEGREE COMPLETION PROGRAM IN THE STEM FIELDSDr. Sara Hooshangi, George Washington University Page 25.1288.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 The Development of an Interdisciplinary Bachelor’s Degree Completion Program in the STEM FieldsIntroduction:Much of the economic growth of the twentieth century has been driven by the advancements inthe scientific arena, the applications of engineering principles, and the spirit of entrepreneurshipand innovation.1 As we move forward in the twenty-first century, every aspect of our lives
revised set of guidelines for the DirectedProject Process. The following flow chart (figure 1) defines the various steps and sequence of theproject: Page 25.1327.2Figure 1The recommended Directed Project outline is defined in Attachment A.Several modifications were made to the instructions for each process step in the Directed Project: 1) The selection of the project topic was mandated to be jointly done by the student and his manager with a focus on what would benefit the student’s organization in a measurable way. 2) The advisor matching process was facilitated by a surrogate who had knowledge of research interest of all
prefer flexible schedules on any training needs.Second, effective use of media such as video clips, narrative presentation, web resources, etc. isthe most practical way of delivering training that focuses on practice and application.Part # Topics Activities 1 Introduction to TBL and Limitations of Traditional Quiz 1 Learning 2 Active Learning Quiz 2 3 Group-based Active Learning Quiz 3 4 Team-based Learning Quiz 4 5 Practical Recommendations and Suggestions Quiz 5 Final Project: Write
internal expenses and the remaining 40 percent ($68.5 billion) contributed to external expenses.” Page 25.1472.3 1 Green, Michael & McGill, Erin (2011). State of the Industry Report, 2011. Alexandria, VA: American Society forTraining & Development Research. 2| In 2006, the authors conducted a focus group with multiple corporate attendees from thefollowing industry areas (with emphasis on their engineers): a. Architecture b. Computer hardware c. Computer software d. Energy e. Government f. High tech g
exemplar of an inductiveapproach to teaching and learning”10 and contains a directed sequence of steps that immerses thelearner in the four dimensions of the How People Learn (HPL) effective learning environmentand provides a framework for CBI and the design of associated learning activities11. Thesuggested cycle is illustrated in figure 1 and it is described below from the perspective of thefaculty development program. As described in the literature, the legacy cycle contains steps or Page 25.1030.3activities that appeal to different learning styles10. Furthermore, most engineers relate to thiscycle since most of the activities align
support student learning.1-3 While not unique to faculty in science,technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, it is of particular importance thatSTEM faculty adopt evidence-based best practices in teaching to address challenges with studentretention in STEM and the demand for a STEM prepared workforce.4 Traditionally, STEM faculty members have relied on the use of didactic instruction, alecture and listen format for teaching and learning, as their primary pedagogical method.5-6While it is common for STEM faculty members to become dissatisfied with the level of learningthat their students achieve in lecture-based courses7; as Goldston and colleagues8 report,changing teaching practice is a complex process, particularly
QualityModel.Through a series of FIPSE-EU Atlantis grants and other grants through the EuropeanCommission, the collaboration team worked on developing the IACEE Quality Model. The teamalso conducted extensive testing with a diverse set of CPD directors and practitioners to ensureapplicability to a variety of disciplines and with CE/CPD providers from a wide variety ofdisciplines who offer credit and non-credit programs via distance learning, on-campus, and atcustomer locations.The IACEE Quality ModelThe IACEE Quality Model is described in detail in A Self-Assessment Model for QualityManagement and Organisational Development for Continuing and Professional Education5 andavailable online at http://iacee.org. The model includes the following core elements: 1