groups anddeveloped their implementation plans for the subsequent semester. The first author mentored theworkshop participants over the Skype calls, WhatsApp groups, and emails; while other authorsconducted in-person review sessions.At the end of the semester, we administered a survey to the faculty members, who had submittedtheir implementation plans, to understand their perception of the success of the plan. The instituteadministrators interviewed them to validate the success stories. For the faculty members, whosesuccess stories were validated and who had taught the same course in the earlier year, we comparedthe SETs (Student evaluation of teachings) of the current (post-workshop) and earlier years (pre-workshop), and found statistically
graduates, co-op activities, and potential development ofcollaborative research programs. Unfortunately, adjuncts are marginalized by the academicsystems in place today; and their contributions to the academic process are undervalued. Next,the paper reports on the success story of an adjunct, a practitioner with good credentials, who“teamed-up” with a “full-time” faculty, in an attempt to bring the practice to 4 thyear students in ageotechnical/ foundation engineering class. The success achieved in meeting course objectives,as a result of practitioner’s role, was attributed, in large measure, to proper planning andcoordination that preceded course delivery. Plus, the willingness, experience and abilities of theadjunct in addressing the practice in
workplacelearning along three different dimensions: 1) location, 2) degree of planning, and 3) facilitatorrole. First, location can be either on- or off-the-job. This criterion helps distinguish experience-based learning (e.g., learning through doing) from classroom or training environments. Second,learning events can be structured or unstructured, where structured learning occurs within somekind of planned system. Last, the facilitator may be either active or passive. It is active if thefacilitator drives the learning experience (e.g., a software training program), but passive if thelearner needs to reach out to the facilitator to acquire new information (e.g., asking a coworker aquestion about a work task).Table 1: Initial categories of learning and
throughlectures/lecture notes in an attempt to transfer all the factual material within a prescribed time.Since the legacy course suffered from the sin of coverage, we knew our course needed to beredesigned as logically derived from the results sought, not inferred from the methods, books,and activities with which we are most comfortable. This way, curriculum lays out the mosteffective ways of achieving specific results.We believe that the most effective curricular design is “backward”. Backward design arose intandem with the concept of learning standards, and it is widely viewed as a practical process forusing standards to guide the development of a course. As a strategy for designing, planning, andsequencing curriculum and instruction, backward design
Polytechnic Institute community with regards to the use of instructional technologies in teaching and learning. Kate also collaborates with academic departments concerning the policies, planning, and man- agement of e-learning and blended initiatives on campus.Rachel LeBlanc, Worcester PoIytechnic Institute Rachel LeBlanc is the Executive Director of Corporate and Professional Education at Worcester Polytech- nic Institute. She manages the portfolio of non-traditional academic programs for the University including online programs, corporate education, and professional education. Rachel has over fourteen years of ex- perience working with faculty and industry experts to create education solutions to meet business needs. She
Control Charts for Variable Subgroups/Moving Averages Chapter 7.8 Control Charts for Linear Trend/ Medians Control Charts for Attributes Chapter 8.1-8.9 P, np, c, u, U charts Process Capability Analysis Chapter 9.1-9.7 Capability Indices; Capability Ratio Acceptance Sampling Plans Chapter 10.1-10.8 Standardized Plans Reliability Chapter 11.1-11.4 System Reliability: series and parallel Experimental design Chapter 12.1-12.5 Factorial and additional
rapport in the classroom. An important aspect of the Teaching Circle is that it is aimed for large, lecture-style classrooms, where it is difficult to build rapport. Rapport in a classroom is very beneficial, especially in large lectures [8].• Questions 229 and 230 focus on instructor preparedness. One of the major barriers to bringing active learning strategies cited previously was lack of time to prepare new lesson plans. When transitioning to a new teaching style, faculty may struggle with preparation of new lectures, homework, and other materials. The Teaching Circle aims to mitigate that by providing a support structure where faculty can discuss implementation strategies and have designated time to work
, beta testing and subsequent modificationof the process, based on cyclical feedback requires 6 months.Resources required to complete the above planning process, are yet another budgeted itemcontributing to total planning cost. Once the process is defined, the intent is to create centers ofexcellence attendant to each of the many activities; this, coupled with financial pro formas ofincreased residual gains, act to encourage a university-wide distance education solution, and willbring the many current independent distance education organizations under a centralizedumbrella. In the end, maximum efficiencies and cost savings manifest from a centralized versusdecentralized approach to distance education.On the whole, the 12 months will provide a
, with a combination of asynchronousand synchronous instruction.The proposed certificate program includes plans for four online courses: Engineering CourseDesign, Assessing Learning and Teaching in Engineering, Principles of Engineering Teachingand Learning, and E-learning Course and Training Development in Engineering. Besides thecoursework, the online certificate program will also incorporate a Teaching Internship course,which should give students the opportunity to put their engineering education knowledge intopractical application.IntroductionTo become a professor, instructor, or trainer in engineering, whether in academia or in industry,an individual is only required to have a degree in engineering. In academia, this is generally aPhD (for
, Materials, and Practice; 6. Motivation Theory and Content Relevance andFuture Value to Students; 7. Two-Way Formative Feedback and Reflective Practice by Students andInstructors; 8. Web-Enabled Tools and Resources for More Effective and Efficient Teaching andLearning; 9. Planning for Classroom Innovation in an Upcoming Course”1. Assessment of theimplementation of these principles is conducted through the Reformed-Teaching ObservationProtocol (RTOP), which is an instrument “designed to constructively critique details of classroompractice,” such as cooperative learning and interactive engagement3. This instrument allows for ameasure of effectiveness and faculty fidelity to student-centered teaching in the classroom. TheRTOP evaluation assesses the