University of New York, Farmingdale c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Introducing a New Graduate Degree in Technology Management: Program Overview and Assessment PlanAbstractOffering a new graduate degree requires curriculum development, course scheduling anddeveloping an assessment plan. A proper assessment plan ensures program success andcontinuous improvement. This paper provides the initial assessment plan for a new master’sdegree. The timeline of the proposed assessment activities is shared and the initialimplementation of the assessment plan for the Spring 2019 semester is discussed. Datacollection techniques and assessment benchmarks for the course level and program
]. For example, the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering (FASE) at the University ofToronto (U of T), in partnership with seven departmental and two Faculty-wide studentorganizations, hosts an engineering-specific career fair for graduate students [11]. The Universityof Alberta’s Faculty of Engineering requires graduate students complete a minimum of eighthours of professional development including generating an individual development plan [12]. Uof T and the University of British Columbia tracked employment outcomes of all PhD graduatesincluding engineering alumni [3, 13]. Queen’s University produced Grad Maps to help graduatestudents, including those in the Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, navigate theiracademic milestones and
describes the outcomes of a successful program development and approvalprocess and the planned phasing of its implementation. The development team treated the1 Corresponding Author: M. Dyrenfurth, mdyrenfu@purdue.eduexisting program approval mechanisms, as found in most universities and states, as a staged-gate approval process. This necessitated the development of (1) a conceptual proposal, (2) acompetitive analysis, (3) a detailed program plan, (4) an implementation plan, and (5) aformal proposal with supporting data as required by the state coordinating body for highereducation.The program that evolved from this process was an industry-facing, distance/on-campus-hybrid professional doctoral program permitting extensive tailoring of the
career in information technology to developadditional cybersecurity skills to use in their current position or to prepare them for advancementinto a new position. Alternately, it could serve as a way to demonstrate the knowledge andexperience required to allow someone to switch from a career in a completely different field intoinformation technology and cybersecurity.The suggested completion plan for the certificate is: • CSCI 603 – Defensive Network Security • CSCI 604 – Ethical Hacking • CSCI 609 – Cybersecurity Law and Policy • One additional courseThere are a number of options for the final course. These include, at NDSU: • CSCI 610 – Computer Crime and Forensics • CSCI 669 – Network Security • A computer science
programs. After an overview of the PEGS program, thequalitative analysis tools used and their results are presented. The paper concludes with adiscussion of results and future plans to improve the PEGS21 program and its assessment methods.PEGS21 ProgramThe PEGS21 program at UC Davis seeks to examine the transition from undergraduate to graduatestudy in engineering, extending the research of Gardner (2007), Gardner and Holley (2011) andTate et al. (2014) who identified five following challenges to graduate degree attainment in first-generation students. 1) Breaking the Chain: Low-income, academically-talented, first-generation (LIATFG) graduate students may have to overcome obstacles to enter and persist in graduate study and their
program, degree requirements follow that of a traditional doctor ofphilosophy degree. Students are required to pass the following milestones: establish advisorycommittee, degree plan submission, qualifying exam, internship proposal (in place of a preliminaryexam), internship objectives (in place of a research proposal), a record of study report on theirinternship experience as the dissertation and an oral defense as the final exam. A comparison chartis shown in Table 1. Table 1: Doctor of Philosophy and Doctor of Engineering Comparison PhD DEng Coursework 55hrs min. 80hrs Coursework Research
Commercialization 5X 2X 4. Project Management 1X 6X 5. Legal, Regulatory Issues, IP, and 5X 2X Important and need to Ethics be aware of it but isn’t generally a focus point 6. Strategic Planning 1X 3X 3X 7. Team Management 2X 5X 8. Professional Communications 1X 6X (written/verbal) 9. Entrepreneurship 4X 1X 2X This can be good or
managingtheir time. These students described struggling with scheduling time for work relating degreeprogress, balancing multiple responsibilities such as teaching or service, and planning theiractivities adequately for progress success. The fourth category was students that experiencedsocial isolation within their program and/or their institution. These students expressed in theirapplication struggling with specifically with being an ethnic and/or racial minority in adominantly white space.Year 3: As we plan for year three, we intend to continue having participants and advisors self-diagnose struggles as this approach has provided us with valuable information for tailoring theDI to incoming participants. Such information has allowed us to have a
more of our graduate programs inthe college. Most recently, we were asked to create a plan for the university. As changescontinue, we will evaluate outcomes and impact within the college and across the university overtime, which we hope will inform best practices for improving completion of graduate degreesand diversity of graduate programs.IntroductionFor decades, graduate programs have evaluated students for admission based in considerable parton the standardized graduate record examination (GRE) and grade point average (GPA). Thesemetrics, however, have limited correlation to success in graduate school. Moreover, based on a2008 Council of Graduate Schools study, only about 50% of PhD students in science completetheir degree in seven years
more approachable to the middle school or high school students. Thesepresentations were practiced for the group during weekly seminars. After receiving feedbackfrom peers and educators, the pairs updated their presentations and took them to classrooms toshare with students. Grad Student STEM Share program provided several leadershipdevelopment opportunities of specific and translatable skills including communication, teaching,coordination of meetings and events, follow-up, teamwork, planning, presentation skills, andnetworking, as well as optional leadership coaching. Detailed feedback from the graduatestudents and the teachers whose classrooms they visited was positive and will be presented inthis paper, as well as details on the pilot year
Open Days at theuniversity presented their work to other companies that were not directly involved with theirown sponsors. (iv) Connecting to your purposeIf any organisation defines itself by its mission, vision and values, its’ business plan is howthese are implemented. In order to instil a sense of ownership of the student’s PhD anddevelopment journey we have used the metaphor of letting them become the CEO of theirown small company, ‘My PhD Ltd’. Both as an identity definer as well as an impetusforwards, they worked on a business model for the company for a number of months, usingthe template provided in [24] adapted to ‘Business Canvas You’, updating the differentaspects of their ‘company’ (e.g. suppliers, customers, communication
the College Classroom, 3rd Ed. (2010), and Mapping the Range of Graduate Student Professional Development. (2012). Studies in Graduate and Professional Student De- velopment 14. and has been PI or Co-PI on many grants, including U.S. Department of Education Fund for Improvement of Post-Secondary Education and Ohio Board of Regents. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Outcomes-based Design of a New Graduate Program: A Case StudyIntroductionGraduate curricula (i.e., requirements for plans of study leading to masters or doctoral degrees)are important elements of graduate programs. Numerous graduate curricula have been designedand implemented, including graduate curricula for post
were initially offered only on campus to students currently enrolled in Ph.D.engineering programs at the Purdue University. All of the courses relied upon extensive student-student and student-faculty interaction. Students read assigned materials, discussed them inclass with the instructor, and then used information gleaned from the reading and discussions tocomplete assignments that would be useful in performing their duties as faculty members.Some examples of assignments are a syllabus and materials for a course in the student’stechnical field, an interactive presentation of course materials, a detailed teaching philosophy,and a plan for mentoring graduate students. Students often peer reviewed materials prepared byclassmates, and faculty
Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.The training is to be applicable to all types of GTA contexts: lab, discussion, and lecture. Becausemany of our engineering students’ career goals are within non-academic settings, students oftenhave little natural motivation to develop effective pedagogical skills. As explained in our previouspaper 1 , the team made a strategic decision to combine the teaching of leadership skills and peda-gogical skills in order to appeal to GTAs who plan to go into non-academic careers. In this paper,we will present our logic model for the iELITE program, which has four categories of inputs:GTAs, Engineering Faculty, Administration (College and Departments), and External Partners (in-dustry sponsors
talks, and completing a mentor profile assignment. While the SciComm program expanded graduate students’ understanding of variousSTEM careers, only three graduate students (21.4%) indicated their career intentions shifted as aresult of the SciComm program. Most graduate students still maintained their intended careerintentions (n=8, 57.1%). Two graduate students’ (14.3%) career plans changed over the 2017-2018 academic year, but indicated the SciComm program did not impact this change.SciComm Program Perceptions Based on inductive coding of the qualitative data, it appeared that participants had bothpositive perceptions of the program and suggestions for improvement. Further, participants citedadditional benefits from the program
/W1siZiIsIjIwMTQvMDgvMDEvMTJf MzBfNTRfNDI0X0hNU19Db2RlYm9vay5wZGYiXV0/HMS_Codebook.pdf.[21] K. Kroenke, R. Spitzer, & J. Williams, “The PHQ‐9: validity of a brief depression severity measurem,” Journal of general internal medicine, 16(9), pp. 606-613, 2001.[22] T. Henderson, “Exploring the Post-graduation Benefits of High-Impact Practices in Engineering: Implications for Retention and Advancement in Industry,” in ASEE: Proceedings of the 124th Annual Conference and Exposition 2017, Columbus, OH, USA, June 25-28, 2017.[23] T. Henderson, K. Shoemaker and L. Lattuca, “Early-career Plans in Engineering: Insights from the Theory of Planned Behavior,” in ASEE: Proceedings of the 125th Annual Conference and Exposition 2018
Total 526 118 417 1,061answers, respectively. (Note that these intentional interactions do not preclude spontaneous en-gagement by the instructor.) Table 3 shows the number of interactions that are designed into eachof the courses offered in the program. There are over a thousand opportunities for students to en-gage. Note that while “raise hand” only engages one or a few students, “poll” and “short answer”engage every student through the learning management system. Of course, individual instructorsmight deviate slightly from the instruction design by skipping planned interactions or adding theirown spontaneous activities.The very high levels of interactivity that is designed into the
major barrier to adoption of AM. Similarly,these problems can be identified as key obstacles to generate talent in Additive Manufacturing: (1)The Millennial generation’s negative perception of the manufacturing industry; (2) Lack ofinterdisciplinary STEM skills; and (3) Lack of practical hands-on or on-the-job training.Such an acute shortage of human labor calls for a systematic plan to address the workforceshortage. In an effort to address the problem, The National Science Foundation held a workshopin 2015 to discuss the educational needs to equip the industry and academic system for Additivemanufacturing. A unique cohort of individuals from academia, industry, and governmentformulated the way forward to inculcate AM in education at all levels
term project by completing several intermediate writing anddiscussion assignments. Intermediate writing assignments are brief, typically requiring fewerthan three pages. The goal is to encourage direct, specific responses to the assignment, makingthe student’s thinking as clear as possible. Development of more expansive text in the style of ajournal article comes later (primarily in Course 2). Typical assignments include the following: 1.Develop a list of preliminary readings and keywords; 2. Write and present a 1-page descriptionof the specific topic of the planned literature review; 3. Post, for class discussion, a recentresearch paper, and analyze it using the critical thinking framework; 4. Prepare and presentcritical summary and
Skills (primarily aimed at sophomores and seniors) • Creating Your Unique Personal Development Plan: Explore Your Options (primarily for sophomores) • How to be an Effective Sophomore (primarily for sophomores) • Effective Oral/Written Communication (primarily aimed at juniors) • Developing Research Skills in Engineering and Science (primarily for juniors) • Writing and Presenting an Engineering-Based Business Case (primarily aimed at juniors) • “Good Enough for Government Work?” Ethics and Professionalism in Research (primarily aimed at juniors) • General Graduate School Information and Where to Find It (primarily for juniors/seniors) • Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (primarily aimed at seniors
models of study abroad including co-op and research abroad and established meaningful connection for research and attraction of funded international graduate students. Maria started working at Texas A&M in 2005 as Assistant Director for Latin American Programs and in 2009 she was promoted to Program Manager for South America in the same office. During her time at the Office for Latin America Programs she created, managed and developed projects to enhance the presence of Texas A&M University in Latin American and to support in the internationalization of the education, research, and outreach projects of the university. She was charged with the development and implementation of a strategic plan for Texas A&M