. David S. Greenburg, The Citadel Dr. Greenburg is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Leadership and Program Management (ELPM) in the School of Engineering (SOE) at The Citadel. He served over 20 years of active military service, achieving the rank of Lieutenant Colonel, United States Marine Corps. During his military career he served in a variety of progressively responsible command and staff and leadership positions in Infantry, Logistics, Acquisition, and Human Resources; with peacetime and combat experi- ence. Upon completion of active military service, Dr. Greenburg served in program leadership positions at Eagan McAllister Associates, and Science Applications International Corporation until
Paper ID #10265A Faculty Learning Community to Improve Teaching Practices in Large En-gineering Courses: Lasting ImpactsDr. Olivia S Anderson, University of Michigan Dr. Olivia S. Anderson is a postdoctoral research associate at the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching at the University of Michigan (CRLT). At U-M, she earned a Masters in Public Health in Hu- man Nutrition, a Registered Dietitian (RD) credential, and a PhD in Environmental Health Sciences. Her teaching experience began as an undergraduate teaching assistant for a Biology Lab, she was later on involved in patient education as an RD for kids, teens
Laboratory. He has a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from Carnegie-Mellon University and a master’s degree in civil engineering with an emphasis in regional planning from Northwestern University. Wayne is a frequent speaker and author on continuing education for engineers, and is a member of the College of Engineering’s Education Innovation Committee. For more information about UW-Madison’s Master of Engineering Management degree see https://epd.wisc.edu/online- degree/master-of-engineering-management/Dr. Jeffrey S. Russell, University of Wisconsin, Madison Dr. Jeffrey S. Russell is the Vice Provost for Lifelong Learning and Dean of the Division of Continuing Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. In his
Paper ID #14162Building opportunities for College Completion in the U.S.: The Arizona StateUniversity and Starbucks PartnershipMr. Jeffrey S. Goss, Arizona State University Jeffrey Goss has served as the Executive Director for the Office of Global Outreach and Extended Education and Assistant Dean in the Ira A Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University for the past seven years. Mr. Goss has more than 18 years experience in professional and executive education collectively at University of Maryland, George Washington University, University of Michigan, and Arizona State University. At ASU’s Fulton
with a number of Boston Public Schools in integrating engineering activities into their curriculum.Dr. Shawn S Jordan, Arizona State University, Polytechnic campusDr. Nadia N. Kellam, University of Georgia Nadia Kellam, Associate Professor in the College of Engineering at the University of Georgia, is co- director of the interdisciplinary engineering education research CLUSTER. In her research, she is inter- ested in understanding how engineering students develop their professional identity, the role of emotion in student learning, and synergistic learning. She designed the environmental engineering synthesis and design studios and is now developing the design spine for the new mechanical engineering program. She is
(1) (2) PlannerDepartmental Responsibility P SBudget Responsibility P SLiaison with Outside Interests P SResearch Administration S PGraduate Program Conceptualization P SGraduate Program Concept Development P S SDistance Hybrid Program Development S P SPhD Program P SDistance Learning P SDistance Learning Programs
each year were surveyed. Participants were also asked for their CEE preferencessuch as which types of courses (technical, management, EH&S, legal, other) they would prefermore of and what was their preferred delivery format (face to face, hybrid, online). Thisinformation should be invaluable to those developing curricula and designing and deliveringcontinuing professional development for engineers.IntroductionThe need for CEE has been well-documented [1]. Continuing education is critical for workingengineers because of the breadth of processes and equipment they design and use and because ofrapid changes in technology [2]. For example, plant engineers take courses to learn how tooperate different types of equipment specific to their
toidentify the particular activity of talent management (attracting, development, retention, and,general management) that each article stressed. Whereas in phase 2, sub-themes under each ofthese activities/categories were identified inductively. 4Figure 1. Literature review selection processTable 1. Priority table for inclusion/exclusion of full text records Author(s) High Medium Low Beyer [10] ❖ Bhatnagar [11] ❖ Bhatnagar [12] ❖ Bredin and
Graduate Engineering Program.Rosalyn Hobson, Virginia Commonwealth University Dr. Rosalyn S. Hobson is the Associate Dean for Graduate Studies and Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia where she joined the faculty in 1996. She also serves as the Director of the VCU - University of KwaZulu Natal International Partnership. She received her B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical Engineering from the University of Virginia. She served as a Science and Technology Diplomacy Fellow at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) as a Higher Education Science and Technology Specialist and provides leadership for
scenarioscan and do create spaces for workplace learning. Moreover, the examples they provided arelargely idealized and do not account for the full range of experiences newcomer engineersencounter. Thus, analysis included working recursively through the data, literature, and examplesto develop operational definitions of each variable. We deconstructed the examples provided byJacobs and Park (2009) to develop functional criteria that could be applied to journal entries todetermine the location, structure, and role of facilitator(s) within each entry, as described below.Determining location of learningJacobs and Park (2009) define on-the-job as learning that occurs “near or at the actual worksetting,” but also emphasize experienced-based learning in on
wish to thank T.J. Nguyen for his work on the CyberAmbassadors project. We alsoappreciate the support and engagement of the many organizations partnering with theCyberAmbassadors project, including Tau Beta Pi, ACI-REF, CaRRC, the Carpentries, NRMNand CIMER. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundationunder Grant No. 1730137. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe National Science Foundation.References[1] H. Neeman et al., “The Advanced Cyberinfrastructure Research and Education Facilitators Virtual Residency: Toward a National Cyberinfrastructure Workforce,” in Proceedings of the
reuse. These lessons can guide professionaldevelopments for not only K-12 teachers, but also for engineering educators in cybersecurity andcomputer science.Funding:This work was supported by the Wyoming Department of Education (WDE) and theNational Science Foundation (NSF) through the CS for All: RPP - Booting Up ComputerScience in Wyoming (WySLICE Award #1923542) and Sustaining Wyoming’s AdvancingReach in Mathematics and Science (SWARMS Award #1339853). Any opinions, findings, andconclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of NSF.ASEE 2021 ReferencesAbramovich, S. (2016). Understanding digital badges in higher education
interest. While technologically it can be done, it needs to bemanaged efficiently and effectively. Profiling the learner, the needs of the learner, and thelearner’s preferred style of learning are all important in offering a flexible and multidimensionalperspective of the subject.Bibliography 1. New Learning and Teaching Strategies in Distance Education—Theory and Practice. Toth, P.; Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training, 2005. ITHET 2005. 6th International Conference on 07–09 July 2005. Page(s):T3B-1–T3B-6. 2. Using Learning Style Theory To Improve Learning and Teaching in the Engineering Classroom. Terry, R. E.; Harb, J. N.; Frontiers in Education Conference, 1993. Twenty-Third Annual Conference
(CAM), and Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) [1]. The riseof digital manufacturing and the reliance on these technologies to reduce development timewhile improving product design and quality has been exponentially increasing over the past fewyear [2]. The reliance on digital manufacturing by industry has grown as high performancecomputing technology evolves. Recognizing the far reaching implications of this technology onresearch, several government programs in the 1980’s and 1990’s promoted the growth of highperformance computing. Today, programs such as XSEDE promote the use of high performancecomputing to conduct research in multiple fields such as engineering by supporting scholars andresearchers in using these computational resources [3
paper.Bibliography1. Fuentes, A. A., Crown, S., Freeman, R., Vasquez, H., Villalobos, C., Gonzalez, M., and Ramirez, O., “IncreasingStudent Access, Retention, and Graduation Through and Integrated STEM Pathways Support Initiative for the RioSouth Texas Region”, Proceedings of the 2009 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Austin, Texas, June 14-17(2009).2. Freeman, R., Fuentes, A., Vasquez, H., Crown, S., Villalobos, C., Wrinkle, R., Ramirez, O., and Gonzalez, M.,“Increasing Student Access, Retention, and Graduation Through an Integrated STEM Pathways Support Initiativefor the Rio South Texas Region – Year One Activities and Results”, ASEE Annual Conference, Louisville,Kentucky, 2010.3. Crown, S., Fuentes, A., and Freeman, R., “A Successful Plan for
was developed. The intent ofthe survey was to gather the student’s opinions on the value of the course(s) to them and theorganization, both short and long-term; whether they believed the course(s) helped improve theircommunication and leadership skills and professionalism; whether their problem solving skillsimproved; and whether the course improved their ability to generate creative ideas and solutions.The survey was sent to a sampling of former students – those that completed the CertificateProgram and those that did not – as well as some HQUSACE employees that did not take any ofthe offered courses. Non-students were included in the survey to better understand theirreluctance to take any of the offered courses.The survey was emailed to
AC 2012-5516: PROMOTING STEM FACULTY MEMBERS’ REFLECTIONON THEIR LEARNING PERCEPTIONS AND TEACHING PRACTICESSusan ShadleDr. Louis Nadelson, Boise State University Louis S. Nadelson is an Associate Professor in the College of Education at Boise State University. His research interests include STEM teaching and learning, faculty development, in-service and pre-service teacher professional development, program evaluation, and multidisciplinary research. He has published research ranging from faculty professional development to the impact of inquiry on STEM learning. Nadelson earned a B.S. degree in biological and physics science from Colorado State University, a B.A. with concentrations in computing, mathematics, and
non-traditional in that they are notnecessarily on-campus programs; they may be on-campus utilizing an alternate format; weekend,etc., or, may be off-campus in approved locations. The Graduate School ensures fee-basedprograms do not compete with traditional on-campus programs. This latter point is seldom anissue as most students wishing to participate in on-campus programs are residential andanticipate a traditional experience. Alternatively, most student s who participate in non-traditional weekend programs are already in the professional ranks and not able to participate ina traditional program format. In fact, the greatest single stated advantage to a weekend formatprogram is that it is a weekend format which allows the working
Foundationunder Grant No. 1524527. References[1] Jungst, S., Likclider, L. L., & Wiersema, J. (2003). Providing Support for Faculty Who Wish to Shift to a Learning-Centered Paradigm in Their Higher Education Classrooms. The Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 3(3), 69-81.[2] Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student-centered instruction. College teaching, 44(2), 43-47.[3] Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231.[4] Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student
engineering SCHOOL DEGREE TITLE(S) MAIN FEATURES • Accredited by NCA Higher Learning Colorado Technical Commission Software Engineering University 6 • Online academic library • Courses taught in multimedia format • Offered mainly to industrial partners Michigan Technical • Course delivery includes videotaped Engineering
include serving in the U. S. Army Special Forces in Asia and in the Reagan White House as a policy special assistant. Dr. Jones research interests include adult learning in work and educational systems, social systems effects on leadership, and adult moral development. Page 12.181.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Addressing the Career and Professional Development Needs of Experienced Project ProfessionalsAbstractThis paper presents a new non-degree graduate program in technical project management (TPM)that employs innovative teaching strategies to meet the needs of
support faculty in their attempt toimprove teaching. Next steps for this research is to use continuing data from courses taught thispast year to see if the trends do indeed continue, or analyzing additional evaluation questions.References1. Anderson, O. S., & Finelli, C. J. (2014). A faculty learning community to improve teaching practices in large engineering courses: Lasting impacts. Proceedings of 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN.2. Barr, J., Benton, S., Li, D., & Ryalls, K. (2016). Response to bias against female instructors. IDEA Editorial Note No. 2. Manhattan, KS: Kansas State University, Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development.3. Benton, S. L., & Ryalls, K. R. (2016). Challenging
the literature about thechallenges of advancing innovations from the interest or awareness phase into actualimplementation. When developing professional development programs, people should considerthis challenge. Further, they should include dedicated and structured time for programparticipants to discuss about the particular innovation that the program is focused on, in order tohelp facilitate change of practices.AcknowledgmentThe authors gratefully acknowledge support of this work by the National Science Foundationunder Grant No. 1524527.References 1. Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (1996). Navigating the bumpy road to student-centered instruction. College teaching, 44(2), 43-47. 2. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M
the actual deployment of the short course(s).Upon completion of the short course(s) all participants are emailed an evaluation request. Theassessment instrument is available electronically for approximately two weeks after each session.At the end of the first week a response rate is provided by the Office of Institutional Research,Planning and Assessment (IRPA) and a secondary email is sent if the response rate is lower than60%. To date our average response rate is approximately 73%.MarketingTo assist in developing a new communicating strategy we returned to our alumni to discuss newservices offered by Continuing and Professional Studies. As previously mentioned, members ofthe Alumni Advisory Board had previously voiced a desire for Rose
). Digital Omnivores, Social Media and Social Capital: Expatriatesinteractions using Smartphones in Stockholm (Doctoral dissertation, Södertörn University).Li, D., & Segal, B. (2012). The Changing Landscape of The Canadian Mobile Audience.International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 7(1).Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2008). Staying the course. Babson Survey Research Group: TheSloan Consortium.Balaji, M. S., & Chakrabarti, D. (2010). Student interactions in online discussion forum:Empirical research from ‘media richness theory’perspective. Journal of Interactive OnlineLearning, 9(1), 1-22.Beck, R. J. (2010). Teaching international law as a partially online course: The hybrid/blendedapproach to pedagogy. International Studies Perspectives, 11
organization are an additional burden against gross revenue thatresults in a reduced profit/residual to the academic department(s); the home department foradministered academic programs.Coupling the need for controlling overhead rates with the theoretical employment vulnerabilitiesof being employed in a self-funded administrative organization, it is even more important thatemployment growth capitalizes on individual knowledge, skills and capacity for growth withineach specific individual context. The manifestation of this theory and practice is twofold: to freesenior employees to perform those many activities requiring their advanced knowledge and skillset, and, to fill open opportunities for employment at the lowest levels of the organization.Filling
– Average age vacation and retirement homes – 65 – Average age for cruises – 70 – Average age for predominance of prescription drugs – 77 – Average age for nursing homes - 84As we chronologically age, our life demands for shelter, transportation, food and clothing all arereduced. These many changes are a reflection in large part to our changing family makeup atdistinct periods in time. From above, it can be construed our U.S. populace generally getmarried in their 20’s. The 30’s are typically a time for the collection of material possessions(cars, homes, furniture, appliances, etc.) Our late 40’s reflect an empty nester’s phase, where ourchildren become, theoretically, independent and move out onto their own; whether this
] Litzinger, T., Wise, J., Lee, S., and Bjorklund, S., 2003, “Assessing Readiness for Self-directed Learning”,Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition[3] Jiusto, S., DiBiasio, D., 2006, “Experiential Learning Environments: Do They Prepare Our Students to be Self-Directed, Life-Long Learners?”, Journal of Engineering Education, July 2006, pp: 195-204[4] Litzinger, T., Wise, J., and Lee, S., 2005, “Self-directed Learning Readiness Among Engineering UndergraduateStudents”, Journal of Engineering Education, April 2005, pp: 215-221[5] Kay, J., 2008, “Lifelong Learner Modeling for Lifelong Personalized Pervasive Learning”, IEEE Transactions onLearning Technologies, Vol.1, No.4, October-December
of our Bachelor’s Degree Completion program as we continue togrow and improve the program. We hope to better serve our metropolitan region and contributeto the overall increase of college graduates within the region. We plan to expand the program inthe future to provide students with a larger number of elective courses and more options forspecialized tracks. Several tracks such as health IT, engineering patent and nanotechnology areunder consideration to be added to this program. 1 S. W. Popper and C. S. Wagner.” New Foundations for Growth: The U.S. Innovation System Today and Tomorrow”. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2002. 2 R.D. Atkinson and M. Mayo, “Refueling the U.S. Innovation Economy: Fresh Approaches to
the challenge and to revise their original ideas are introduced here. Formative instructional events can and probably should occur in each step of the cycle but are of primary usefulness in this step. Knowledge and learner centered. Test your mettle: Summative instructional events are now presented. Knowledge and learner centered. Go public: This is a high stakes motivating component introduced to motivate the faculty/student to do well. This step is where the faculty/student is asked to provide solutions and insights for learning to the next cohort of faculty/students, as well as to the instructor(s) and is termed “Leaving Legacies” and hence the name of the cycle. Learner and community