Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration January 24, 2006
-
Upload
violet-pope -
Category
Documents
-
view
21 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration January 24, 2006
Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration January 24, 2006
Developing a Corporate Feedback System for Use in Curricular ReformThe Use Process Stability Principles in the analysis of Engineering Curricula based on Cooperative Education
Kettil Cedercreutz, Associate Provost and Director
Cheryl Cates, Associate Director
The UC FIPSE Project
Part One
OverviewCo-op at UC
F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S
Freshmen Sophomore Pre-Junior Junior Senior
Progressive Learning Objectives
Foundation
Exploration
Professional Contribution & Change Generation
51 2 3 4
5/6
1 2 3 4
6Section
I
F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S
Freshmen Sophomore Pre-Junior Junior Senior
Section II
Alternating Sections
DAAPEngineering
Arts and Sciences
Business
Applied Science
One Stop Structure
1,500 Companies
Professional Practice
Academic Division
Professional Practice24 Faculty
Feedback and Continuous Improvement
F W S S
1 2
F W S S
3 4
F W S S
5 6
F W S S F W S
Freshmen Sophomore Pre-Junior Junior Senior
Employer Feedback
1 2 3 4 5 6
Continuous Improvement
Reporting
Other Feedback
Curriculum & Pedagogy
Gathering the Data
Photo Courtesy of Nokia
Assessment Instrument I
Assessment Instrument II
Assessment Instrument IIIFocus Groups
Measured Parameters (AI I):
Developed in Relation toABET a…k
A COMMUNICATION:
- Speaks with clarity and confidence - Writes clearly and concisely - Makes effective presentations - Exhibits good listening and questioning skills
B CONCEPTUAL/ANALYTICAL ABILITY: - Evaluates situations effectively - Solves problems/makes decisions - Demonstrates original and creative thinking - Identifies and suggests new ideas
C LEARNING/THEORY AND PRACTICE: - Learns new material quickly - Accesses and applies specialized knowledge - Applies classroom learning to work situations
Measured Parameters (AI I):
D PROFESSIONAL QUALITIES:
- Assumes responsibility/accountable for actions - Exhibits self-confidence - Possesses honesty/integrity/personal ethics - Shows initiative/is self-motivated - Demonstrates a positive attitude toward change
E TEAMWORK: - Works effectively with others - Understands and contributes to the organization’s goals - Demonstrates flexibility/adaptability - Functions well on multidisciplinary team
F LEADERSHIP: - Gives direction, guidance and training - Motivates others to succeed - Manages conflict effectively
Measured Parameters (AI I):
Measured Parameters (AI I):
G TECHNOLOGY: - - Uses technology, tools, instruments and information - Understands complex systems and their interrelationships - Understands the technology of the discipline
H WORK CULTURE: - Understands and works within the culture of the group - Respects diversity - Recognizes political and social implications of actions
I ORGANIZATION/PLANNING: - Manages projects and/or other resources effectively - Sets goals and prioritizes - Manages several tasks at once - Allocates time to meet deadlines
J EVALUATION OF WORK HABITS: - - Professional attitude toward work assigned - Quality of work produced - Volume of work produced - Attendance - Punctuality
Photo Courtesy of Nokia
Assessment Instrument I
Assessment Instrument II
Assessment Instrument II Objectives:
A Questions by discipline
C Questions focused on curricular issues
D Questions asked before and after curricular change
B Questions asked only for short period
Photo Courtesy of Nokia
Assessment Instrument I
Assessment Instrument II
Assessment Instrument IIIFocus Groups
Assessment Instrument III Objectives:
A Focus Groups by discipline
C AI II data provides focus group direction
D Provides direction to departments
B Questions focused on curricular issues from AI II
Embarking on a New Paradigm
Input
Outcome
Action
Output
Input
Outcome
Action
Output
Process Development
Cycle
Operational Cycle
Adaptive Cooperative Education
Discussion Where are you on your campus?
Update on Results
Part Two
ProcessStability Analysis
GradingScale
Un
satis
fact
ory
1
Go
od
4
Sa
tisfa
cto
ry
3
Po
or2
Exc
elle
nt
5
IndicateProblem
AcceptablePerformance
3 4
Section I
F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S S F W S
Freshmen Sophomore Pre-Junior Junior Senior
Change
Δ Learning
Results Lost in Noise !!!
Low n Values ⇒
Coding of Data
U F W S U F W S U F W S U F W S
2007 2006 2005 2004
2003/04Acad. Year:
Class of:
Quarter:
Three Year Stability / Major A / Engineering
2007
U F W S
2006 2005 2004
U F W S U F W S U F W S
03/04
2006
U F W S
2005 2004 2003
U F W S U F W S U F W S
02/03
2005
U F W S
2004 2003 2002
U F W S U F W S U F W S
01/02
Mean Stnd Dev
4.190.73
4.120.75
4.180.76
Statistical Uncertainty ≈
± 0.10
Process
Stable Means: 4.16 ± 0.04
2005
U F W S
2004 2003 2002
U F W S U F W S U F W S
01/02
2007
U F W S
2006 2005 2004
U F W S U F W S U F W S
03/04
2006
U F W S
2005 2004 2003
U F W S U F W S U F W S
02/03
4.31
3.974.03
4.28
MAJOR A / EngineeringThree Year Rolling Average
Sophm. PreJr. Jr. Sr.
N: 612n: 497Ret: 81% Uncert: ≈ 0.10
Mean
88 191 148 70 = Filed Returns
Absolute Needs Relative Needs
Calibration & Linearity Important
Stability Important Linearity Less Important
Approach must not Focus on Minutia
Approach must be Process Oriented
Approach must have Strategic Dimensions
There is no short cut to Quality
ProcessStabilityAnalysis
Analysis Methodology
Hig
hM
ediu
mL
ow
HighMediumLow
Standard Deviation
Mea
n
Process Stability AnalysisMean / Standard Deviation Matrix
I d e a l !!!
Delta Mean Chi STDV Matrix
Systematic Improvement
SerendipitousImprovement
SystematicDeterioration
SerendipitousDeterioration
Decreased STD Increased STD
Incr
ea
sed
Me
an
De
crea
sed
Me
an
Preliminary Findings
3.9
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75
MAJOR A / EngineeringEXIT LEVELMean
Standard Deviation [Chi]
Punc-tuality
Attendance
ConflictMgmntMotiv.
Others
SetsGoals
Integrity
WorksEffectively
Writing
Speaking
Guidance Of others
ProjectMgmnt
3.70
3.90
4.10
4.30
4.50
4.70
4.90
0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6
Series1
Major 1 / BusinessEXIT LEVEL
Mean
Standard Deviation [Chi]
Punc-tuality
ConflictMgmnt
Initia-tive
3.5
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9
0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80
Major A / EngineeringExit Profile
Major A / EngineeringEXIT LEVELMean
Standard Deviation [Chi]
3.5
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9
0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80
Major A EngineeringEntryMean
Standard Deviation [Chi]
Punc-tuality
Attendance
ConflictMgmnt
IntegrityWorks
Effectively
Writing
Speaking
Initiative
TaskMgmt
Motiv.Others
ProjectMgmnt
Guidance Of others
SetsGoals
3.5
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9
0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80
Major A EngineeringEntry / ExitMean
Standard Deviation [Chi]
Major A/ Engineering
Entry Profile
Major A / EngineeringExit Profile
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
3.7
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9
0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
Major A Engineering
[Mandatory]
Major 1Business[Optional]
More Homogeneous Population
More Heterogeneous Population
Specialized Curricular Focus
General Curricular Focus
MeanMean
STDSTD
Exit Profiles
Civ & Env Eng Change
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
-0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10
CHI STD
ME
AN
Series1
Major 1 / EngineeringChange
Decreased STD Increased STD
Incr
ea
sed
Me
an
Civ & Env Eng Change
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
-0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10
CHI STD
ME
AN
Series1Writing
SpeakingConflict Mgmnt
NewIdeas
SetsGoals
Professi-onalism
LearnsQuickly
Major 1 / EngineeringChange
CurriculumInitiatedLearning
StudentInitiatedLearning
Summary:
- All Parameters Go Up
- Approach can be developed into Program Fingerprint
- Apples and Oranges
- Every “Set of Employers” has its specific value system
- Instrument is Relative
- Can be used to Map Best Practices
Discussion Where do we go from here?
CincinnatiApril 23 – 26, 2005
Dean Herman Schneider1872 -1939
University of CincinnatiFIPSE Symposium
CincinnatiApril 25 – 26, 2005
Teams By Invitation Only
Some Funding Available
Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration January 24, 2006
Developing a Corporate Feedback System for Use in Curricular ReformThe Use Process Stability Principles in the analysis of Engineering Curricula based on Cooperative Education
Kettil Cedercreutz, Associate Provost and Director
Cheryl Cates, Associate Director