courses and master’s degree are inoverlapping disciplines, and the student earns a B or better in the certificate courses). Theprogressive structure of beginning with a single course, moving onto a certificate, and then theoption to continue onto a full master’s degree provides distance students the opportunity to tryout the UF EDGE Program and pace their continuing professional development with their othercareer and family obligations.5.1 Online Graduate Certificate AreasSpecialty certificates, consisting of 3-5 graduate courses, are an efficient means for those inindustry wishing to participate and earn advanced certification from UF EDGE withoutcommitting to a full master’s degree. Certificate topics are structured around emerging areas
where he is a member of the Teaching Academy and was awarded the Chancellor’s Distinguished Teaching Award. His teaching and research programs are directed at civil engineering materials and structural engineering. He is a registered professional engineering in the State of Wisconsin and a fellow in the American Society of Civil Engineers.Sandra Shaw Courter, University of Wisconsin, Madison Sandra Shaw Courter is Professor Emeritus in the Department of Engineering Professional Development and Wendt Commons: Teaching and Learning Services. Her area of research is engineering education, including assessment of student learning. She taught technical communication courses to undergraduate engineering students and
employees. Once a strategic plan is implemented, Dan regularly meets with corporate partners to assess the impact of the plan and make necessary adjustments to maximize value to corporate partners. Dan currently works closely with companies from the energy, biotech, defense, insurance, and finance industries. Dan enjoys learning more about new technologies and the ways in which those technologies impact existing and emerging industries.Mr. David B. Ortendahl, Worcester Polytechnic Institute David Ortendahl currently serves as Director of Corporate Relations at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) in Worcester, MA. In this role he currently oversees the WPI Career Development Center ”Em- ployer Team” and actively bridges
AC 2011-34: BUILDING A DISTANCE LEARNING HYBRID PROGRAMIN ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIPDr. Mitchell L Springer, Purdue University, West Lafayette Dr. Mitchell L. Springer, PMP, SPHR Dr. Springer is an Associate Professor in Technology Leadership & Innovation and currently serves as the Director of the Purdue University College of Technology, Academic Center for Professional Studies in Technology and Applied Research (ProSTAR) located in West Lafayette, Indiana. He possesses over 30 years of theoretical and industry-based practical experience from four disciplines: Software Engineer- ing, Systems Engineering, Program Management and Human Resources. He sits on many university and community boards and advisory
committees. Dr. Springer is internationally recognized, has authored numerous books and articles, and lectured on software development methodologies, management prac- tices and program management. Dr. Springer received his Bachelor of Science in Computer Science from Purdue University, his MBA and Doctorate in Adult and Community Education with a Cognate in Exec- utive Development from Ball State University. He is certified as both a Project Management Professional (PMP) and a Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR).Gary R. Bertoline, Purdue University, West LafayetteMark T Schuver, Purdue University, College of Technology, West Lafayette, IN Mark Schuver is the Associate Director of the Center for Professional Studies
eclipsed thedeterministic path that had initially been defined by the experts. In subsequent reviews,the same experts fully acknowledge the validity of the changes to their plans.To understand the reasons for the user-driven change process, the historical evolution ofsix courses was analyzed. The courses are: A. Decision-oriented risk management B. Role of the Chief Engineer C. Data acquisition D. Working with data E. A Chief Engineer case study F. How to make a business case.The approximate change made per delivery is shown in figure 5. The course identifiersA – F are defined in the list above. Change means new
ScreenConducting Group BusinessWhen using a Wiki for group business there are a few basic steps. Page 14.1310.4 1. Create the wiki and set up a front page structure that makes sense to the users. 2. Decide on the Wiki policies and features that will be available to the users. 3. Create a set of user rules to be used when there are conflicts, disagreements, or similar sit- uations. The rules below were used for the Wiki described in this paper. a. The purpose of the wiki is to capture, organize, and disseminate manufacturing knowl- edge. b. Contributors are expected to be fair and balanced. c. Personal attacks
was redesigned to be more interactive and engaging, and assignments were developed tohelp faculty develop authentic deliverables that are transferrable into their actual online coursedesign. With the introduction of a full-time instructional designer on staff, faculty wereguaranteed ten hours of consultation time to use at their own discretion with the opportunity formore if the instructional designer’s schedule allows. Completion of the Faculty Institute wasfurther defined to state that the course must be developed and built out to the standards outlinedin a provided document of the university’s best practices for online teaching (Appendix A)before the stipend may be received. An action plan (Appendix B) was re-integrated into theprocess to
. Page 15.638.109. Moskal, P., Dancing with a Bear: One University’s Experience with Evaluating Blended Learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2009. 13(1): p. 65-74.10. Albrecht, B. (2006) Enriching student experience through blended learning. Research Bulletin 2006.11. Vaughan, N. and R. Garrison, How Blended Learning Can Support a Faculty Development Community of Inquiry. Journal of Asybchronous Learning Networks, 2006. 10(4): p. 139-152.12. Danchak, M. and M.-P. Huguet, Designing for the changing role of the instructor in blended learning IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 2004. 47(3): p. 200-210.13. Jones, M.G., S.W. Harmon, and D. Lowther, Integrating Web-based learning
Teaching and Learninghttp://www.vcu.edu/cte/pdfs/OnlineTeachingWhitePaper.pdf5. Wattwod, Britt, Nugent Jeffrey, and Deihl, William (2009). Online Teaching and Learning Resource Guide.http://www.vcu.edu/cte/resources/OTLRG/OnlineTeachingAndLearningResourceGuide.pdf6. Brown, A., Hughes, O., McCue, L.S., Neu, W., and Tretola, B., “Distance learning in the graduate-level oceanengineering curriculum,” ASEE Conference Paper No. AC2007-49, 2007 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Page 15.687.13Honolulu, Hawaii, June 2007.7. McCue, L.S. and Scales, G.R., “Embracing the middle ground: Engaging on- and off-campus students within thesame
assurance in online learning,” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 11-24, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v17i4.402. [Accessed Jan. 4, 2018].[3] B. Brown, S. E. Eaton, D. M. Jacobsen, S. Roy and S. Friesen, “Instructional design collaboration: A professional learning and growth experience,” MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 439-452, Sept. 2013. [Online]. Available: http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no3/brown_0913.htm. [Accessed Jan. 10, 2018].[4] I. T. Chao, T. Saj and D. Hamilton, “Using collaborative course development to achieve online course quality standards,” The International Review of Research in Open and
Paper ID #15423Using Multi-Image Presentations to Enhance Continuing Engineering Edu-cationDr. Charles E. Baukal Jr. P.E., John Zink Co. LLC Charles E. Baukal, Jr. has a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering, an Ed.D., and Professional Engineering License. He is the Director of the John Zink Institute which offers continuing professional development for engineers and technicians. He has nearly 35 years of industrial experience and 30 years of teaching experience as an adjunct. He is the author/editor of 13 books on industrial combustion and is an inventor on 11 U.S. patents.Dr. Floyd B. Ausburn, Oklahoma State University
, thefactors that do not share a letter are significantly different. It is interesting to note thatstudent-centeredness has received the least rating as compared to the other factors. This couldbe due to heavier expectations from faculty by the students. Factor N Mean Grouping Devotion 25 4.5543 A knowledge 25 4.5467 A Discipline 25 4.4649 A Delivery 25 4.4340 A Student Centeredness 25 4.1474 B Table 3: Grouping Information Using Tukey MethodParticipantsWe analyzed the academic performance of students who voted in
first part of the questionnaire was “Do you feel able to...? (a) Give atalk on the topic, (b) Explain the topic to a teammate, (c) Correctly apply the topic in your work,(d) Understand literature or talks on the topic.” This question measured the trainee’s perceptionof his ability to apply the new knowledge studied in the course (i.e., mastery of the topics). Wehad to convert the answers to this multiple-choice question into a 5-point numeric scale in orderto be able to compare them with the answers to the first question. For this, we assigned a value of5 to the “Give a talk on the topic” choice (meaning greater ability), a value of 1 to the “Under-stand literature or talks on the topic” choice (meaning lowest ability), and for the two
Figure 1. Pilot Implementation and Assessment StepsImplementation of the Self-Directed Learning ModulesPrior to sharing the self-directed learning links with the students, a survey was presented todetermine the most common social network platforms students actively use. The question wasprovided in multiple-choice format as shown: “Do you have accounts with any of the following networks? Please circle all that apply. a. Facebook b. Linkedin c. Twitter d. Other “In an effort to get a better understanding of students’ social network memberships, they wereencouraged to select all that apply. The outcome distribution of the above question is shown inFigure 2
unique set of individuals: 1. Former program participants who volunteer to: a. Create a unique theme and program content b. Manage a budget and schedule c. Recruit and lead volunteer content developers d. Arrange executive speakers e. Solicit and guide volunteer weekend coaches f. Manage communications and logistics 2. Program participants who have agreed to attend a minimum of two weekend retreats 3. Previous program graduates who offer their expertise as volunteer: a. Content developers b. Logistic leads c. Evaluators d. Small team coaches 4. Executive speakers (minimum three per each offsite weekend) 5. Volunteer coaches, speakers, content developers
. Eval., vol. 7, no. 25, pp. 1– 10, 2001.[12] B. M. Moskal and J. A. Leydens, “Scoring rubric development: Validity and reliability,” Pract. Assess. Res. Eval., vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 71–81, 2000.[13] NASA, .[14] H. Ibarra, R. Ely, and D. Kolb, “Women rising: The unseen barriers,” Harv. Bus. Rev., vol. 91, no. 9, pp. 60– 66, 2013.
2006-1862: PROJECT MANAGEMENT TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION FOR APUBLIC SECTOR ENGINEERING ORGANIZATIONJohn Kuprenas, University of Southern CaliforniaElhami Nasr, California State University-Long Beach Page 11.1043.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 Project Management Training and Certification for a Public Sector Engineering OrganizationAs engineers progress through their careers, many engineers perform less traditional technicalengineering and spend more time acting as engineering project managers who perform little orno traditional engineering work. Engineers functioning in both roles, however, are essential tosuccessful
Society (APICS) and a member of the Society of Women Engineers (SWE). She is a licensed Professional Engineer in Kansas.Dr. Cheryl B. Schrader, Missouri University of Science and Technology Cheryl B. Schrader became Chancellor of Missouri University of Science and Technology, formerly the University of Missouri - Rolla, in 2012. Prior to her current leadership position she served as Associate Vice President for Strategic Research Initiatives and as Dean of the College of Engineering at Boise State University. Dr. Schrader has an extensive record of publications and sponsored research in the systems, control and STEM education fields. She received the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and
Page 25.1327.3 their research interest to help solve current problems in industry. 6) Arrangements were made to invite company stakeholders to the oral defense. 7) Company committee members were briefed in a communication session which defined their responsibilities. Expectations of the company committee member are: a. Be available to counsel student as needed in their area expertise b. Assist is providing valid subject matter for topic c. Provide guidance in identification and verification of return on investment (ROI) potential d. Provide consultation during execution of the project (estimate 1 hour per week) e. Evaluate the quality of the result relative to the
course is evident to those who wish to review to program.Periodic evaluation of the program is necessary to ensure quality and that program goals arebeing maintained. We use the thesis/project as one direct measure metric for assessing thequality of the experience. Our MS evaluation rubric is shown in Tables 1 and 2.Table 1: Evaluation criterion for MS Thesis/Project. A) Clearly defines the relevant problem. Document is well organized, clear, and competently B) written. C) Document provides a contribution to the state of the art. D) Document demonstrated originality. Page 13.142.7 E) Shows evidence of technical depth and
Paper ID #10447A MOOC with a Business PlanMr. Eugene Rutz, University of Cincinnati Academic Director in the College of Engineering & Applied Science with academic and administrative oversight of distance learning programs, combined degree programs and high school dual enrollment. Experience as educator, practicing engineer and educational researcher.Jim Tappel, University of CincinnatiDr. BJ Zirger, University of Cincinnati Page 24.71.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014
State University, Fullerton Yong Seok Park is an assistant professor in mechanical engineering at California State University Fuller- ton. He earned his Master’s degree at George Washington University and his Doctorate at the Virginia Tech. Prior to joining California State Fullerton, Dr. Park was a postdoctoral research associate at Arizona State University. His research interests lie in undergraduate STEM education research and engineering design education.Ms. Bethany B. Smith, Arizona State University Bethany Smith is currently a master’s student in materials science and engineering at Arizona State Uni- versity. She has been involved in STEM education research since 2012 under the direction of Professor
throughput ofhydrocarbon fluids. These heater adjustments are the responsibility of the plant operators andunderscore the need for proper training and experience. The photos in Figure 5 show how properadjustments improve flame quality. Training gives operators a clear physical understanding as towhy these certain adjustments make the desired improvements. A better understanding of thewhy can help operators and engineers maintain peak performance over a broader range ofoperating conditions and allow them to better troubleshoot problems and plan for maintenanceand equipment upgrades. (a) (b
0.752 29.68 30.20 02.365 a IDEA Identity Exploration 0.830 3.33 3.21 8.687 ** b Experimentation/Possibilities 0.782 3.50 3.36 5.741** b Negativity/Instability 0.785 2.77 2.80 2.650 * a, b Other-Focused 0.628 2.63 2.55 5.875** a Self-Focused 0.654 3.44 3.34 3.625 ** Feeling "In-Between" 0.768 3.09 2.77 20.502 ** a, b EBAE Certainty of knowledge 0.501 4.47 4.62 0.409 Simplicity of knowledge 0.472 7.45 7.36
evaluations are completed online voluntarily by the student before the grades are final.The evaluation questions vary from class to class, but every course has four required questionsand multiple other questions chosen by the faculty, department, and college. Students use arating scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) for all questions. For our analysis, weselected 12 questions that: (a) we believed measured the outcomes associated with the TeachingCircle and (b) had sufficient responses amongst all groups for use in the analysis. Thesequestions are listed in Table 1.We selected these 12 questions for the following reasons:• Question 1 gives an overview of what students thought of a course.• Question 2 is tied directly to our
consortium of engineering education).Prof. Jayantrao Bhaurao Patil, R. C. Patel Institute of Technology, Shirpur, India Jayantrao B. Patil is working as the Principal at the R. C. Patel institute of Technology, Shirpur, India and holds appointment as a Professor in the Department of Computer Engineering. He is also serving as a Dean, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Member of Senate, Member of Academic Council, and Chairman of Board of Studies in Computer Engineering & Information Technology at the North Maharashtra University, Jalgaon, India. Jayantrao’s research interests include Web caching, Web Prefetching, Web data mining, Biometrics, and digital watermarking. He is the author/co-author of over 10
Paper ID #33791Professional Development of Secondary School STEM Educators inSub-Saharan Africa: A Systematized Literature ReviewMr. Moses Olayemi, Purdue University, West Lafayette Moses Olayemi is a doctoral student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He is passionate about the professional development of STEM educators as change agents in the educational landscape of Sub-Saharan Africa. He aspired to leverage research-based empirical evidence to influence education policies.Mr. Collins N. Vaye, Florida International University Collins N. Vaye is a first-generation graduate student and a
Springer, M. L. (2010). Project and Program Management: A Competency-Based Approach. West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press.2 Strauss, W., Howe, N. (1991). Generations. New York, N.Y.: William Morrow and Company.3 Smith, J.W., Clurman, A. (1997). Rocking the Ages. New York, N.Y.: Harper Business4 Zemke, R., et al. (2000). Generations At Work. New York, N.Y.: AMACOM.5 National Science Foundation (NSF). (2006). National Science Board, Science and Engineering Indicators 2006, 30-31, 2-11.6 Goldberg, B. (2000). Age Works: What Corporate America Must do to Survive the Graying of the Workforce. New York: Free Press.7 OECD. (2011). Pensions at a Glance 2011: Retirement Income Systems in OECD and G20 Countries
the business curriculum a financial management example,” J Bus Ethics, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 105–110, Feb. 1994.[39] D. Stone, B. Patton, S. Heen, and R. Fisher, Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most, 10 Anv Upd edition. New York: Penguin Books, 2010.[40] P. Aubusson, S. Fogwill, R. Barr, and L. Perkovic, “What happens when students do simulation-role-play in science?,” Research in Science Education, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 565–579, Dec. 1997.[41] S. L. Sullivan, “A Software Project Management Course Role-play-team-project Approach Emphasizing Written and Oral Communication Skills,” in Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, New York, NY, USA, 1993, pp. 283