WO2001027901A1 - Training method using industry and university collaboration - Google Patents
Training method using industry and university collaboration Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- WO2001027901A1 WO2001027901A1 PCT/US2000/026344 US0026344W WO0127901A1 WO 2001027901 A1 WO2001027901 A1 WO 2001027901A1 US 0026344 W US0026344 W US 0026344W WO 0127901 A1 WO0127901 A1 WO 0127901A1
- Authority
- WO
- WIPO (PCT)
- Prior art keywords
- course
- persons
- curriculum
- training
- director
- Prior art date
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G09—EDUCATION; CRYPTOGRAPHY; DISPLAY; ADVERTISING; SEALS
- G09B—EDUCATIONAL OR DEMONSTRATION APPLIANCES; APPLIANCES FOR TEACHING, OR COMMUNICATING WITH, THE BLIND, DEAF OR MUTE; MODELS; PLANETARIA; GLOBES; MAPS; DIAGRAMS
- G09B7/00—Electrically-operated teaching apparatus or devices working with questions and answers
- G09B7/02—Electrically-operated teaching apparatus or devices working with questions and answers of the type wherein the student is expected to construct an answer to the question which is presented or wherein the machine gives an answer to the question presented by a student
Definitions
- the subject matter of the present invention relates to a method of providing university training which utilizes a collaboration by industry and the universities to provide training for university students and professional engineers employed by industry while simultaneously utilizing a quality assurance program to continuously maintain, among other things, the quality of the courses taught at the universities and the instructors which teach those courses. More particularly, the subject matter of the present invention involves a method of training which utilizes 'collaboration' by industry and the universities to raise the academic standards of training available in industry and to incorporate real-life industrial experiences into the content of courses taught at colleges and universities thereby allowing college and university students to graduate with a multitude of industrial skills in addition to a multitude of academic knowledge. The method of training further includes an on-going 'quality assurance program' to ensure that the novel method of training of this invention will continue to provide high-quality training courses and high-quality instructors for teaching those courses.
- the corporate management focuses on strategic portfolio management of these corporate assets and the corresponding return on investment of these assets.
- the 'asset teams' are empowered to operate the asset, these 'asset teams' making the day-to-day decisions which are necessary to increase the productivity of the asset in the most effective and efficient manner possible.
- the 'asset teams' are faced with an ever increasing need for high tech solutions to meet the demanding complex environments in which they work. Because of the complexity of the technology needed today, most companies can not afford to support the research and development needed to continue to advance these competencies in-house. In fact, most of these technologies are being outsourced to the service sector where they are supported as core competencies. The result is a need for collaboration between the team operating an asset and the technical solution providers who hold the keys to efficient exploitation of the reserves.
- these older reservoir fields previously provided a low risk environment for training younger employees which would allow the younger employees to acquire the experience and practice the skills necessary to become a competent employee.
- these older reservoir fields are being outsourced.
- the younger employees albeit very bright, do not have the experience and the skills necessary to become a competent employee.
- These younger employees straight-out from the university, are placed in the high-risk end of the business (e.g, in the exploration fields) with the expectation that they will perform jobs that they are not competent to perform.
- these companies would send the younger employees away, to in-house training facilities and universities, to be further trained.
- these "asset teams” since these asset teams consist of small numbers of individuals, the asset teams simply cannot afford to send their members away to be trained. The aforementioned 'adverse conditions' impacted the training requirements of these companies.
- NKT Network of Excellence in Training
- NTT 'new training method'
- the "Training Value Model” method of training in accordance with the present invention will meet the needs of Industry for two reasons: (1) the "Training Value Model” utilizes the concept of 'collaboration' between industry and the universities (hereinafter called “the “NExT” partners) for teaching students attending the universities and engineers/new employees employed by industry both skills and competence in addition to knowledge, and (2) the "Training Value Model” includes an on-going 'quality assurance program' for ensuring that the quality of any future courses taught at the universities and the quality of the teachers that teach those courses at the universities will continue to remain at acceptably high levels.
- the courses being taught at the universities and the teachers/professors teaching the courses must both undergo a periodic 'quality assurance' evaluation by a Peer Review Board.
- the Peer Review Board is composed of a combination of industry and university personnel. More particularly, the courses being taught at the universities are periodically audited by the Peer Review Board.
- BDM business development manager
- the "NExT” new training method is designed to train and educate students/potential engineers attending a university and newly employed engineers in industry.
- the universities and industry will collaborate together for the purpose of constructing courses, to be presented at the university and to be presented at an industrial location, that are designed to add 'simulation- acquired' skills to basic subject matter knowledge and to add competence to the newly acquired skills.
- Industry provides real-life industrial simulation scenarios to the universities to allow a student to acquire real-life industrial skills representative of actual real-life industrial experiences in addition to subject matter knowledge acquired by normal course study.
- newly employed engineers at an industrial location acquire a measure of competence through mentoring and the practical application of their acquired skills, and they acquire enhanced productivity at the industrial location through innovation.
- industry and the universities also collaborate together for the additional purpose of providing a 'quality assurance program' at the university level.
- a "Peer Review Board” and an “Industrial Advisory Board” are utilized.
- the Peer Review Board will ensure that the quality of the courses being continuously taught at the universities in addition to the quality of the teachers that teach those courses are continuously maintained at an acceptably high level.
- the Peer Review Board will periodically audit the courses being taught at the universities and it will periodically evaluate the teachers that teach those courses during the audit.
- the Industrial Advisory Board will ensure that the courses being taught at the universities, as well as the courses taught in industry, meet the needs of industry by continuously supervising/evaluating the courses that are stored in the "NExT Curriculum Library” (see numeral 94 in figure 20).
- the "NExT" new training method in accordance with the present invention is illustrated and represented by a Training Value Model illustrated in figure 10b.
- the Training Value Model includes a plurality of progressive training levels.
- the plurality of progressive training levels of the Training Value Model include: technical subject matter development, subject matter to knowledge transfer, knowledge to skills development, skills to competence assurance development, certification accreditation, and a quality assurance program for ensuring that the quality of the courses and the quality of the presenters at the partner universities will always surpass a minimum acceptable level.
- the quality assurance program includes the Peer Review Board and the Industry Advisory Board.
- the "NExT" new training method of the present invention includes the following steps.
- a client approaches training vendor for the purpose of booking a training course for its employees. That client can book a course that is stored in the training vendor's curriculum library, that course being either an accredited course or a non- credit course.
- that client can have a special course specifically developed for its training needs which is subsequently stored in the curriculum library, and that client can then book that special course.
- a 'Course Production Team' will specifically develop that special course for the client.
- the special course can be an accredited course or a non-credit course.
- that client can book an individual course by using the training vendor ' s website or by sending an e-mail message to the training vendor.
- That individual course can be a 'classroom delivery' type of course or a 'distance learning ' type of course, and that individual course can be for credit or for non-credit.
- that client can book a 'closed course complete class' which is a course that is not publicly offered by the training vendor.
- the closed course can be a classroom delivery type of course or a distance learning type of course, and the closed course can be either an accredited course or a non- credit course. If the closed course is not in the curriculum library, the aforementioned 'Course Production Team' will specifically develop that closed course for the client's training needs, and the closed course is later stored in the curriculum library.
- Course Production Team specifically develops a course for the client's training needs, that course is designed such that, when students attend the newly developed course, subject matter is transferred into knowledge through normal course study and knowledge is transferred into real-life industrial skills through the use of simulation scenarios/programs provided to the university by industry.
- the newly developed course must undergo an evaluation or 'quality assurance' audit by a Peer Review Board.
- Those newly developed courses, which successfully pass a set of rigid requirements set forth b> the Peer Review Board are stored in the "NExT" curriculum library.
- potential instructors of these courses must also undergo and successfully pass the 'quality assurance' audit by the Peer Review Board.
- Those potential instructors which pass the 'quality assurance audit' by the Peer Review Board are placed on the 'approved instructor' list.
- An Industrial Advisory Board monitors the courses stored in the "NExT" curriculum library to ensure that the stored courses continue to meet the needs of industry.
- a Program Director (PD) is notified, the PD conducting a 'course feasibility analysis' by contacting the appropriate Director of Curriculum.
- the Director of Curriculum determines if the course resides in the curriculum library. If not, the Director of Curriculum advises the Program Director who contacts the client to determine whether or not to proceed. If yes, the Business Development Manager determines pricing.
- the Program Director also contacts the Peer Review Board (PRB) to conduct an instructor certification process.
- the Director of Curriculum requests the names of candidates for instructors and sends the names to the PRB.
- the PRB audits each candidate. If the candidate meets criteria, the candidate is put on an 'approved instructors list'. If not, an attempt is made to develop the candidate's skills.
- the CPT When the Course Production Team (CPT) develops a course specifically for the client ' s training needs, the CPT must first perform a process known as 'coursework planning and development', and then the Peer Review Board (PRB) must conduct a process known as the 'coursework audit acceptance process'.
- the CPT ensures that the new course is economically feasible and it develops a new course and produces a prototype 'newly developed course'.
- the PRB must either accept or reject the newly developed course. If it accepts the newly developed course, the PRB runs an alpha test on the course and sends the results of the alpha test back to the Director of Curriculum. The Director of Curriculum convenes the PRB to audit the results of the alpha test.
- the newly developed course is stored in the curriculum library and it is published in a sales catalog.
- the Business Development Manager contacts the client to determine if the newly developed course is an appropriate course for "NExT”. If yes, the Program Director is advised. The Program Director conducts a course feasibility analysis. The Program Director contacts the Director of Curriculum to determine if the newly developed course is deliverable (i.e, acceptable for the client's needs). If yes, since the newly developed course is deliverable, the Business Development Manager must now determine the pricing for the newly developed course.
- the 'course type' must be determined, that is, is the newly developed course a 'classroom delivery' course or a 'distance learning' course, and is the newly developed course 'viable'?
- the newly developed course is stored in the "NExT" curriculum library as either a classroom delivery or distance learning type of course. If the newly developed course is a 'classroom delivery' type of course delivery method, the Peer Review Board (PRB) must perform the 'instructor certification process' to determine if the instructors meet established criteria.
- the Program Director looks at the venue for the course and whether it is for credit (accredited) or for non-credit. If for non-credit, the Next Administration Manager must determine if the course is a 'go' or a 'no go'. If for credit, the Director of Curriculum screens the applicant and, if the applicant is acceptable, the Director of Curriculum registers the student for the class.
- figure 1 illustrates one prior art method of training wherein industry trains the graduating students 'in-house ' , at the industrial location, to add skills to their knowledge
- figure 2 illustrates another prior art method of training wherein the universities had sole input/contribution over the content of the university's course content, instructional design, and delivery methods;
- figure 3 illustrates another prior art method of training wherein the students graduating from the universities were sent to industry with knowledge only (no skills or competence);
- figure 4 illustrates one block diagram depicting the new training method of the present invention wherein industry provides an input to the colleges and universities thereby enabling students to graduate with both knowledge and skills;
- figure 5 illustrates another block diagram depicting the new training method of the present invention wherein the industry provides an input to the colleges and universities thereby allowing both the universities and industry to make changes to instructional design and course content and instructor delivery methods, feed back being provided to both the universities and industry;
- figure 6 illustrates how industry can make changes to university course content to add skills to the student's knowledge thereby enabling the students to graduate from the university with both knowledge and skills;
- figure 7 illustrates how students attending the university, when utilizing the new training method of the present invention, can acquire both knowledge and skill in response to input provided to the students by both the university and industry, the graduating students (new employees) acquiring competence and enhanced productivity at an industrial location in response to input provided to the students by industry;
- figure 8 illustrates how the graduating students are now sent to industry with both knowledge and skills
- figure 9 illustrates how skill is transferred into competence at the industrial location by using a 'mentoring' process
- figure 10a illustrates how the new method of training in accordance with the present invention (hereinafter called "NExT” , which is an acronym for a “Network for Excellence in Training”) is easily understood to be a “training value model” that functions as an interface (i.e., a 'collaborative link pin') between the universities and industry;
- figure 10b illustrates the "training value model” of figure 10a, the "training value model” including a forward flow and a reverse or feedback flow, the forward flow illustrating technical subject matter and knowledge transfer and skills development and competence assurance, the feedback flow illustrating certification accreditation and a "quality assurance program" (consisting of the peer review board and the industrial advisory board);
- figure 11 illustrating and explaining the technical subject matter of the training value model of figure 10b;
- figure 12 illustrating and explaining the knowledge transfer of the training value model of figure 10b
- figure 13 illustrating and explaining the skills development of the training value model of figure 10b
- figure 14 illustrating and explaining the competence assurance of the training value model of figure 10b
- figure 15 illustrating and explaining the Peer Review Board of the training value model of figure 10b
- figure 16 illustrating and explaining the Industry Advisory Board of the training value model of figure 10b
- FIGS. 17 through 30 are utilized in connection with the "Detailed Description of the Preferred Embodiment", figures 19 through 30 illustrating detailed flowcharts which depict, in detail, the "NExT” new training method of the present invention, the “NExT” new training method of the present invention including: (1) the concept of 'collaboration' between universities and industry, and (2) a 'quality assurance program', the 'collaboration' in the new training method in figures 19 through 30 allowing students to graduate from the university with both knowledge and skills and enabling the graduated students to acquire competence and enhanced productivity in industry while simultaneously ensuring, via the 'quality assurance program, that the quality of the courses being taught at the university and the quality of the teachers teaching those courses will continuously remain at an acceptably high level, figures 17 through 30 including:
- figure 17 illustrating how the Director of Curriculum, Program Director, and Next Business Development manager are comprised of industry personnel and how the Peer Review Board, the Industrial Advisory Board and the Board of Directors are comprised of a combination of industry personnel and university personnel;
- figure 22 illustrating a modification to figure 19
- FIG 23a illustrating some of the duties of the Program Director 96 in figure 20;
- figure 23b illustrating an output from block 76 in figure 19, which represents the 'Course Production Team' that produces a new course in response to a request from a client, that output from block 76 indicating "Go to subroutine CC in figure 24a" described below;
- FIG. 25 illustrating Subroutine DD which represents the Course Production Team coursework planning/development process
- FIG. 26a. 26b, 27a, and 27b illustrating the primary output from block 76 in figure 19 representing the "NExT" operations process mapping, figures 26a-26b and 27a- 27b referencing and including Subroutines CC, DD, AA, BB, and EE;
- FIG. 28 illustrating Subroutine AA which represents a Marketing/Client interface
- FIG 29 illustrating Subroutine BB which represents a Course Feasibility Analysis
- FIG. 30 illustrating Subroutine EE which represents the Peer Review Board instructor certification process
- FIG. 1 a prior art method of training a student attending a university for the purpose of subsequent employment by industry is illustrated.
- figure 1 at a university represented by block 10, when a person satisfies all the course work required to obtain a college degree, that person has learned certain 'knowledge'. As a result, that person will graduate with knowledge, block 12. When that person is employed by industry, block 14, industry will train the person in-house to add certain 'skills' to their knowledge, block 16.
- the university 18 will decide what particular type of instructional design and course content and delivery method to provide, block 20, when teaching the persons attending the university. Depending upon the results of that particular type of instructional design/course content/delivery method, the university 18 will receive those results, via line 22 in figure 2, and will subsequently decide what other particular type of instructional design/course content/delivery method to utilize.
- FIG. 9 a new method of training for training students and engineers attending a university, in accordance with the present invention, is illustrated.
- the new method of training depicted in figures 4 through 9 (called “NExT” for "a Network of Excellence in Training”) is particularly adapted for teaching and training students attending a university who will be subsequently employed by industry.
- the new method of training depicted in figures 4 through 9 is adapted to teach the students attending the university both knowledge (obtained from a normal course of study) and skills (obtained primarily from 'simulation ' scenarios/programs provided by industry).
- the former students/new employees who have graduated from the university with both knowledge and skills
- those students can more easily adapt themselves to the 'adverse conditions' which exist in industry today.
- the new training method of the present invention utilizes the concept of 'collaboration' wherein the universities and industry will collaborate together for the purpose of teaching students attending the university both knowledge and skills thereby enabling those students to graduate with both knowledge and skills and enabling the students to adapt more easily to adverse conditions which exist in industry today.
- the colleges/universities 30 will receive input from industry 32, via line 33 in figure 4, and, as a result and in response to that input, the colleges/universities 30 will graduate persons with both knowledge and skills, block 34.
- the universities 30 and industry 32 will both decide the appropriate instructional design and course content and delivery method, block 36, for teaching the students attending the university. Certain 'results' will be achieved, when the students attending the university are taught the knowledge and skills 34 of figure 4, in accordance with the selected instructional design/course content/delivery method of block 36 in figure 5. Those 'results' are communicated back to both the universities 30 and industry 32, via lines 38 and 40 in figure 5. Based on those results, which are fed back to the universities 30 and industry 32 via lines 38 and 40, the universities 30 and industry 32 will again jointly change the instructional design and course content and delivery method 36 of figure 5 when the students attending the university are being taught the knowledge and skills 34 of figure 4.
- figure 7 the concept of 'collaboration' is illustrated, this figure illustrating how students attending a university can acquire both knowledge and skill in response to input provided to the students by both the university and industry, the graduating students (new employees) acquiring competence and enhanced productivity at an industrial location in response to input provided to the students by industry.
- the concept of 'collaboration' is again illustrated.
- the transfer of subject matter 50 into knowledge 52 takes place through course study normally provided to students at the university (hereinafter called "transfer of knowledge” 54).
- the transfer of the knowledge 52 into skills 56 takes place through simulation 58 which is taught/provided to the students at the university location, the simulation 58 teaching the students real-life industrial applications. Industry will provide the simulation 58 scenarios; however, the transfer of the knowledge 52 into • skills 56 through simulation 58 is practiced at the university location.
- the latest technology is taught to the students attending the university.
- the latest technology is taught to the students attending the university, 'appropriate delivery methods' are utilized, the 'appropriate delivery methods' including on-line learning, classroom learning, and simulation 58.
- the on-line learning is provided to the students before the classroom learning is provided.
- the simulation 58 which is taking place at the university location, the university students will utilize a 'controlled simulation' of actual real-life industrial experiences provided by industry, the 'controlled simulation' being consistent with the knowledge 54 obtained by the students during the transfer of subject matter 50 into knowledge 52 through the normal course of study.
- the transfer the skills 56 into competence 60 occurs via the practical application of those skills 56 using the concept of 'mentoring' 59.
- Industry provides or teaches the students the skills 56 at a university location; however, industry provides or teaches the former students the competence 60 at an industrial location.
- the students will utilize software programs that a client may want to use or provide; and the students will utilize datasets that a client may want to provide. This enables the transfer of the university student's skills 56 into competence 60 while, simultaneously, allowing the university students to solve real-life business problems for a client.
- a learning environment 66 is established at the university student's new industrial location, that learning environment 66 being provided as a result of a 'mentoring' process.
- the former university student (hereinafter, new employee or 'engineer') 68 will interface with both a supervisor 70 and a mentor 72 at the new employee ' s new industrial location.
- the mentor 72 accompanies the new employee/engineer 68 to courses offered at the industrial location and the supervisor 70 interfaces with the new employee/engineer 68 after the course work is completed.
- a "Training Value Model” which represents and illustrates the novel method steps of the "NExT” new training method in accordance with the present invention, is illustrated.
- the “Training Value Model” utilizes the concepts set forth in figures 5 through 9 which were previously discussed.
- the "NExT" Training Value Model 15 (which represents and illustrates the "NExT” new training method of the present invention) functions as an interface or a 'collaborative link pin' between the universities 17 and industry 19.
- the "NExT” new training method is able to meet the industry training needs through the collaboration of the industry-university partners, combining 'intellectual capital' with
- figure 10b a more detailed construction of the Training Value Model 15 of figure 10a is illustrated in figure 10b.
- the Training Value Model 15 which illustrates and represents the "NExT" new training method in accordance with the present invention, includes a series of progressive training levels. Depending on the desired level of learning, course work can be designed that will ensure academic standards are high yet the course work can be practical in application.
- the Training Value Model 15 which includes a series of progressive training levels, further includes a forward path and a reverse path.
- the forward path of the Training Value Model includes technical subject matter 15a, knowledge transfer 15b, skills development 15c, and competence assurance 15d.
- the reverse path of the Training Value Model includes Certification Accreditation 15e, Peer Review Board 15f, Industry (or Industrial) Advisory Board 15g, and Director of Curriculum 15h.
- FIG 1 1 the technical subject matter 15a part of the Training Value Model 15 of figure 10b involves converting technical information into coursework.
- NexT utilizes a "virtual faculty" which consists of a combination of academia and industry. With this "best-in-class" approach, instructional design is combined with the latest technology and appropriate delivery methods; and the result is improved value in the coursework.
- both academia and industry collaborate together to provide the following five elements for the coursework: (1) proper instructional design, (2) latest technology, (3) practical application (i.e., the simulation 'skills'), (4) delivery methods, and (5) subject matter experts.
- a feedback loop 15al represents a type of 'quality assurance program' which will ensure that academia and industry will, once again, collaborate together to improve upon the above five elements of the coursework.
- the knowledge transfer 15b part of the Training Value Model 15 of figure 10b involves learning and understanding the subject matter through the use of appropriate delivery methods, the use of a virtual faculty, the use of qualified presenters, by screening course candidates, and by controlling the process. Proper management of the transfer of knowledge ensures that the engineer actually learns and understands the subject matter. This requires choosing the appropriate delivery method. Not all coursework needs to be delivered in a class room environment. Distance learning can be just as effective and much more flexible. The coursework presenter must be qualified. Successful presentation takes knowledge of the subject, a desire to teach, and training to be effective. For more advanced subject matter, "NExT" screens candidates who register for the course.
- the skills development 15c part of the Training Value Model 15 of figure 10b involves developing a proficient ability through working applications, and more particularly, through the use of simulation laboratories and predesigned application exercises.
- the "NExT" simulation laboratories are utilized.
- the "NExT” simulation laboratories include a plurality of pre-designed application exercises. The student/enginner, attending the university, can develop a proficient ability by utilizing and working through these predesigned application exercises.
- the competence assurance 15d part of the Training Value Model 15 of figure 10b involves providing solutions through innovative use of the previously acquired skills.
- "NExT” creates a low risk learning environment where skills can be practiced.
- “NExT” includes “mentoring” in some coursework where it is important that the engineer can have skills and provide solutions through the innovative use of those skills.
- “NExT” has created this low risk learning environment through workshops which use relevant data sets and mentor assisted on-the-job application of skills which utilize a three way relationships between the engineer, the mentor, and the engineer's supervisor (as illustrated in figure 9).
- “NExT” has on-line virtual reality programs where distance learning programs can actually provide an acceptable level of competence.
- each Director of Curriculum has a "Peer Review Board".
- the Peer Review Board consists of representatives from all the “NExT” partners, and from industry on an 'ad hoc' basis.
- the mission of the Peer Review Board is: "to provide a uniform, independent and professional quality control for "NExT” courses, programs, instructors, and subject matter experts, ensuring that they meet or exceed both academic and industry approved standards”.
- the "NExT" Peer Review Board will provides one measure of the aforementioned "quality assurance” by auditing the university course work, auditing the presenters (i.e. instructors) of the course work, and by providing a technology watch.
- NExT also provides an Industrial Advisory Board, which provides an additional measure of the aforementioned "quality assurance”.
- the Industrial Advisory Board is composed of "NExT” partner representatives, and several representatives from oil companies.
- the mission of the Industrial Advisory Board is: “to ensure that NExT is a network of recognized excellence in petroleum industry training providing the transfer of leading edge and established technology to the petroleum industry”.
- the Industrial Advisory Board will ensure that the courses stored in the "NExT" Curriculum Library (94 in figure 20) meet the needs of industry.
- the Peer Review Board of figure 15 and the Industry Advisory Board of figure 16 both provide a 'quality assurance' mechanism to ensure that the quality of the courses being taught to students attending the university will continue to maintain a consistently high level.
- the Peer Review Board of figure 15 will periodically audit the coursework being taught at the universities, and it will also audit the teachers/professors that teach these courses at the universities to ensure that the quality of the courses and the teachers and professors teaching the courses will continue to maintain a consistently high level.
- the Industrial Advisory Board of figure 16 will monitor the content of the courses stored in the "NExT" Curriculum Library (94 in figure 20) to ensure that these stored courses will continue to meet the needs of industry.
- Competence the successful on-the-job application of skills, is the real objective of effective training. All companies strive to have a competent work force for the job at hand. This is when the training structure becomes important. The learning environment, management commitment and training delivery methods are all essential elements in creating the competence that is needed. Few companies have developed full scale Competence Assurance programs. Companies that do have full scale programs, usually have applied it strategically where the operational situation is critical, and a lack of competence could result in a catastrophic incident. Industry trends are affecting our ability to train and develop competence in our engineering staffs.
- Coursework must include hands-on simulation.
- Competence assurance needs to be attained to a defined skills level objective.
- Training providers must ensure that their program's underlying technology is current and up to date. 'Collaboration' between universities and industry ' s leading practitioners of modern technology, with a link to research and development, is essential. Training providers should inco ⁇ orate Peer Review systems that combine expertise from these different organizations.
- the Peer Review Board (PRB) must maintain a technical watch within it's defined field of expertise.
- the Peer Review Board must not only function as an audit process assuring that academic standards are met but also insure the practical needs of industry are inherent in the subject matter of all course work to be used in training.
- Peer Review Board members should approve audited coursework for certification. Certification can include accreditation as part of the curriculum within a university degree program. To certify coursework as Continuing Education Units (CEU)- required to retain professional standing, the instructors and the course content must successfully pass an academic review process.
- CEU Continuing Education Units
- Integrating processes through collaborative teamwork will have as large an influence on engineering success in challenging environments as the knowledge and technology to which engineers have access. Learning to effectively align goals, manage the interfaces, and utilize the expertise of all the team members on a project, is where the power to overcome risk lies.
- the team must include all members of a project including the operator, service companies, drilling contractors, and critical third party suppliers. The behavioral changes and skills necessary for effective integrated team work can only be achieved through training and a commitment by management to develop collaborative teams as a work place standard.
- Course delivery methods are currently being re-examined by virtually all organizations involved in training. A decision as to the best delivery method for a particular course will depend on the subject matter and the situational requirements. Whether the delivery is classroom based or distance learning, the delivery process in industry training needs to be a threaded conversation. The common thread links new information with a knowledge transfer process between students and subject matter experts that results in demonstrated competence assurance. The skill to transform text into an educational format, then to deliver the coursework ensuring a transfer of the knowledge, is a professional process.
- Course work production through a "course production team", has several elements where each element may require a separate or a combination of individual expertise.
- Production teams are needed that combine instructional designers, subject matter experts, graphics artists, programmers, and a quality control function. Some production staff members may be able to perform multiple roles on the team. However, to develop the most effective coursework, all elements must be addressed.
- the decision to maintain production teams in- house or to outsource parts or all of the elements of the team is a strategic decision that a training provider has to decide.
- Pre-course study can be a very important component to classroom based courses where more advanced subject matter is being taught. Participants need to reach a certain level of knowledge, prior to attending the course. Without the participants having the prerequisite level of understanding, successful classroom interactions will be difficult. Through the use of distance learning, the course will start with a more intellectually homogeneous class.
- CBT Computer Based Training
- Effective training has to require attendance, participation, and a demonstration either through examinations and/or project presentations that the knowledge was transferred.
- training is attempted without inco ⁇ orating an immediate feed back loop, the actual transfer of knowledge can be impeded or not achieved at all.
- Many companies pay large tuition fees and incur other expenses to send engineers to courses that make no significant impact on the employees' post training technical behavior and problem solving process.
- hands-on simulation should be included within the course work.
- Many companies that require training for their employees want to incorporate their own data sets and preferred software systems into the course work. This is a practical way to base the training around a familiar environment with the tools the engineers actually use.
- Dedicated simulation exercises can also be used to solve immediate asset unit business problems. Through hands-on simulation in a problem solving exercise, the knowledge transfer is demonstrated, and competence is assured through application in solving a problem. As discussed below, the inclusion of hands-on simulation has an impact upon the course design
- Training must be flexible in terms of technology, format, time and location.
- Course work should be designed around a modular format, where data sets can be inserted into an overall learning matrix, linked either with a software package provided by the training organization, or specific software provided by the client.
- a certain degree of up-front course work design is needed, in consulation with the client, prior to the start of the class.
- Competence assurance is verified, at least to a certain skill level, and will have an immediate impact on the asset unit's productivity.
- the key premise is that knowledge can be converted into competence through simulation. In dedicated training situations, designing coursework using client's software and real data sets can produce the additional bonus of solutions to real problems.
- Training must be segmented into modules combining self study modules, based either on line or on CD ROM, and supplemented through shorter "lunch and learn" sessions, weekend retreats, or evening classes.
- the content of the modules can be designed in an accumulative sequence, providing a complete program over a period of time. While these programs do exist today, the need for such flexibility and integration with the work place will be even more important in the future.
- Mentoring is another component of training that has become unavailable or is grossly under utilized.
- Guild societies and apprenticeship programs have existed for hundreds of years as effective ways to train craftsmen in their trade. While realizing that throughout history much of this was nothing more than extended indentured servitude, the more modern concept has been an effective way to pass wisdom within companies from one generation to the next.
- the mentor role focuses on ensuring that the proper environment will exist for the employee to be able to transform the technical knowledge gained at a formal class into competence, demonstrated by application under the guidance of, and witnessed by, the employee's supervisor.
- the program's sequence is as follows:
- Phase I a mininmal desired level of conceptual knowledge is established. This is accomplished by sending each student CD-ROM-based, self-study, self-paced, pre-course study material. Competency level is evaluated at the beginning of the classroom setting.
- Phase II is a four week course in a classroom setting with students in residence at a learning center. Each lecture has specific learning objectives. Knowledge transfer is validated through testing at various stages during the four weeks. Teams are formed to participate in a well engineering simulation program that includes various facets of conceptual well design, detailed well planning and well programs. Each team simulates the well construction based on their own well program.
- the final Phase which immediately follows the four week course, is a five month mentor assisted program of on line self study to further some of the concepts introduced at the course.
- the student must complete and formally present to his supervisor and mentor, the results of a practical project.
- the student/engineer must also maintain an on-line log book and credit point system to track his/her progress, and finally, must pass an exam in order to receive a university underwritten certificate of completion.
- the mentor arrives at the learning center with the engineers to start the four week course.
- the mentor is an industry professional dedicated fully to the mentoring role, and will not participate in the course delivery.
- the mentor starts developing a relationship with each of the engineers.
- the mentor needs to know the course curriculum, how each engineer progresses through it and their individual personalities.
- the mentor will also act as an informal feedback loop between the class and the lead instructor. During this time the mentor will contact each engineer's supervisor, located at the sponsoring company.
- the supervisor is sent an information packet that contains a general description of the course, outlines the on-line credit point system, and presents information regarding the expected competency level of the student.
- the mentor explains the course objectives, how the engineer is progressing, and reviews the information packet clarifying what the curriculum will be for the next five months following the course.
- the mentor and supervisor work together to identify a project the engineer can complete once he or she arrives back to work.
- the main role of the mentor is to create a three-way relationship between the engineer, the supervisor and the mentor, to ensure that the correct environment will exist for the engineer to demonstrate to the supervisor, the skills learned during the course. Through this the engineer can assure the supervisor of his or her competence and the ability to assume more responsibility, making a positive contribution to the asset unit performance.
- the mentor will be in constant communication with the engineer via email, telephone and fax.
- the mentor will visit with the engineer and his supervisor at least once during the five month period, a second time to attend the formal presentation of the project by the student and finally, to administer the final exam and present the certificate of completion.
- the Director of Curriculum and the Program Director and the Business Development Manager are each comprised of industry personnel.
- the Peer Review Board and the Industrial Advisory Board and the Board of Directors are each composed of a combination of industry and university personnel.
- the term "university" refers to a plurality of universities, one located in the United States, one located in Scotland, and others located in other countries.
- FIG. 19 a detailed flowchart is illustrated which depicts, in detail, the "NExT” new training method of the present invention that utilizes the concept of 'collaboration' between the universities and industry.
- the new training method of the present invention in figures 10a and 10b allows students to graduate from the universities with both knowledge and skills before acquiring competence and enhanced productivity at an industrial location. This enables the graduating students to more easily adapt to the adverse conditions that exist in industry today.
- the acronym “NExT” is used. This acronym refers to a “Network of Excellence in Training (NExT)", which is the project name for the new method of training in accordance with the present invention.
- industry 32 provides an input to the colleges/universities 30 for influencing a change in the instructional design and course content and delivery methods, block 36, in the courses taught to the students attending the university. Recall in figure 5 that the academia 30 and industry 32 jointly influence that change 36. Feedback 38 and 40 to academia 30 and industry 32 will influence further change 36 in the course instructional design and course content and course delivery methods. In figure 19, industry 32 (from figure 5) will influence that change 36 by providing an input to the "Course Production Team" block 76 in figure 19 (see the block 76 in figure 19 entitled "Course Prod Team - subject matter expert - instructional design - graphic artist - programmer - QA").
- the Course Production Team will actually develop a course if that course, requested by the client, is not stored in the Next Curriculum Library.
- Industry 32 provides assistance to that Course Production Team by providing subject matter experts or instructional designers or graphic artists or programmer or quality assurance, as discussed below.
- the course that is developed by the Course Production Team will implement the steps shown in figure 7; that is, the students will transfer subject matter into knowledge through normal course study, and transfer knowledge into skills through simulation provided by industry 32.
- the Business Development Manager 84 will determine if the training need that the client 80 requests is a proprietary service or product belonging to industry 32 (such as a fracturing fluid or a logging technique or software).
- the Business Development Manager 84 for industry 32 will refer that client 80 back to the appropriate business segment for industry 32, block 88 in figure 19 (where block 88 is entitled "SL Business Segment"). That business segment 88 for industry 32 will then develop the training for that client 80 relating to industry's proprietary service or product.
- the business development manger 84 can proceed. First, depending upon the subject matter which the client 80 wants to develop, the Business Development Manager 84 for industry 32 will contact an appropriate Director of Curriculum (recall that each Director of Curriculum has his own unique subject matter expertise). In figure 19, note that block 90 represents the Director of Curriculum for Well Engineering and Operations, and block 91 represents the Director of Curriculum for Petroleum Engineering and Geoscience. In this case, assume that the Business Development Manger 84 contacts the Director of Curriculum for Well Engineering and Operations, block 90 in figure 19 (block 90 being entitled "Director of
- block 90 will be referred to as "Director of Curriculum 90".
- the Director of Curriculum 90 will determine if a course has already been developed that is appropriate for the client's needs by referring to block 92 in figure 19 entitled “Next Curriculum Retrieve Developed Course Work", block 92.
- the Director of Curriculum 90 in figure 19 will identify that course, that has already been developed, which resides in the "Next Curriculum library", block 94 in figure 20. Then, the Director of Curriculum 90 will notify the Program Director, block 96 in figure 20.
- figures 20 and 21 refer to the decision triangle 98 in figure 21.
- the Program Director 96 in figure 20 will examine that course, that has already been developed and which resides in the Next Curriculum Library 94 of figure 20, and, referring to the decision triangle 98 in figure 21 , the Program Director 96 in figure 20 will determine if that course is either accredited (i.e., credit will be given if that course is taken) or non-credit (i.e., credit will not be given if that course is taken). If that course is accredited (see element numeral 100 in figure 21), the Program Director 96 in figure 20 will go back to the Director of
- the Director of Curriculum 102 will screen the applicant, block 104 in figure 21. If the applicant is not qualified to take an accredited course (i.e., the applicant is not academically qualified or the applicant has a language problem or low computer skills or not enough industry experience), then the applicant is rejected for the class, block 106 in figure 21. However, if the applicant, after being screened, meets the needs for the coursework, then the Director of Curriculum 102 advises the "NExT" Administrator, block 108 in figure 21. The NExT Administrator 108 registers the student in the course, invoices the company who is sponsoring the student, and reserves a place for the participant or student in that 'course', block 1 10 of figure 21. Recall that this 'course' is one which has already been developed and which resides in the NExT Curriculum Library 94 of figure 20.
- the above description relates to classroom delivery based courses.
- the client 80 in figure 19 may want to book an 'individual course' via the website of industry 32 or via an e-mail connection between the client 80 and industry 32. Therefore, in figure 19, the client 80 may book a 'classroom based delivery' type of 'individual course' via the website or e-mail by contacting the NExT Administration Manager, block 1 12 of figure 19. In figure 20, locate decision triangle 1 14 entitled "course delivery method".
- the NExT Administration Manager 1 12 of figure 19 has a decision to make: will the individual course be a 'classroom delivery' type of course, or will it be a 'distance learning' type of course, decision triangle 1 14 of figure 20. If the individual course is a 'classroom delivery' type of course (element numeral 1 16 of figure 20), the NExT Administration Manager 1 12 of figure 19 notifies the Program Director 96 of figure 20. At this point, the Program Director 96 of figure 20 repeats blocks 98, 102, 104, 106, 108, and 1 10 as previously discussed. That is, the Program Director 96 determines if the course is accredited.
- the Program Director 96 notifies the Director of Curriculum 102 who screens the applicant 104.
- the Director of Curriculum 102 either rejects the applicant 106 as being unqualified or, if the applicant is qualified, advises the NExT Administration 108 who then reserves a place for the participant or student 1 10.
- the Program Director 96 of figure 20 notifies the NExT Administration Manager, block 1 18 in figure 21.
- the NExT Administration Manager 1 18 of figure 21 registers the student, invoices the student, retrieves the material from the NExT Curriculum Library 94 of figure 20, and reserves a place in the class for the student, block 120 in figure 21.
- the above paragraph describes a 'classroom based delivery' type of 'individual course' that the client 80 wants to book via the website or e-mail of industry 32 (see element numeral 122 of figure 19).
- the Director of Curriculum for Distance Learning 126 of figure 20 must decide if the 'distance learning ' course is an accredited course (numeral 130 in figure 21) or a non-credit course (numeral 132 in figure 21). If the 'distance learning course' is accredited 130, that type of distance learning course could be a masters degree course at a university.
- the Director of Curriculum 126 will screen the applicant, block 134 in figure 21 , to determine if the applicant can become a student in the masters degree program in the university. If the Director of Curriculum 126 determines that the applicant cannot become a student, the applicant is rejected, block 136 in figure 21.
- the Director of Curriculum 126 determines that the applicant does, in fact, meet their requirements and the applicant can become a student in their masters degree program (for example)
- the course material will be retrieved from the NExT Curriculum Library (94 in figure 20), block 138 in figure 21 , the student is registered and invoiced, and the coursework is dispatched to the client as a distance learning package, block 140 in figure 21.
- the screening process (which is depicted in block 134 of figure 21) is skipped, the non-credit 'distance learning' course is retrieved from the NExT Curriculum Library (94 in figure 20), block 142 in figure 21 , the student is registered and invoiced, numeral 144, and the non-credit 'distance learning' coursework is dispatched to the client (80), block 146 in figure 21.
- the Business Development Manager (BDM) 84 determines if the course requested by the client 80 is a valid "NExT" course offering (in block 86 "Course Content and Objectives") by determining if the course is stored in the "NExT" Curriculum Library 94 of figure 20. If the requested course is stored in the "NExT" Curriculum Library 94, the Business Development Manager 84 notifies the appropriate Director of Curriculum, such as the Director of Curriculum for Well Engineering and Operations Engineer, block 90 in figure 19.
- the Business Development Manager 84 notifies the appropriate Director of Curriculum, such as Director of Curriculum 90 in figure 19, who is responsible for putting together a "Course Production Team", block 76 in figure 19.
- the Course Production Team 76 consists of subject matter experts, instructional designers, graphic artists, programmers, and quality assurance, block 76 in figure 19.
- the Course Production Team 76 will develop the new course requested by the client 80 and that new course will be saved and stored in the "NExT" Curriculum Library 94 in figure 20.
- Industry 32 provides an input to the Course Production Team 76 by providing, as necessary, the subject matter experts or instructional designers or graphic artists or programmers or quality assurance.
- the new courses being developed by the Course Production Team 76 will allow students attending the university of figure 7 to transfer the subject matter 50 into knowledge 52 through normal course study, and to transfer the knowledge 52 into skills 56 through the use of simulation programs 58 which are provided to the university by industry 32.
- the Program Director 96 in figure 20 has access to that new course for performing the processes in the blocks of figure 21.
- the Program Director 96 notifies the Director of Curriculum 102 in figure 21 for ultimately reserving places for students in that new course pursuant to block 110 in figure 21.
- the direct open courses are those which are being offered by "NExT” .
- the client 80 can book, via the website or e-mail 122, the open courses which are being offered. However, if the client 80 wants industry 32 to develop a specific course for its students which is not a course being offered by "NExT” , that specific course that is not being offered by NExT is called a 'closed course'.
- the "NExT" Administration Manager 152 in figure 19 will look at the 'course delivery method' for the closed course, block 154 in figure 20. It could be a 'classroom delivery' type 156 of course delivery method 154 or it could be a 'distance learning' type 158 of course delivery method 154.
- the program director 96 in figure 20 will determine if the closed course is accredited or non-credit, figure 21.
- the Director of Curriculum 102 of figure 21 could be notified (if the closed course is accredited) for reserving a place for the entire new closed course, block 1 10 in figure 21.
- the "NExT" Administration manager 118 of figure 21 is notified (if the closed course is for non- credit) for reserving a place for the entire new closed course, block 120 in figure 21.
- the Director of Curriculum for Distance Learning block 160 of figure 20 is notified. If the 'closed course' does not exist in the "NExT" Curriculum Library, the Director of Curriculum for Distance Learning 160 must work with the Director of Curriculum of the appropriate technology, block 162 of figure 20 to develop the course (see 'develop course' output from block 160 in figure 20).
- the Director of Curriculum of the appropriate technology 162 must actually produce the course via the Course Production Team, block 164 of figure 20, in the same manner as discussed above with reference to block 76 "Course Production Team", wherein industry 32 provided an input to the Course Production Team 76 by providing subject matter experts or instructional designers or graphic artists or programmers or quality assurance.
- that 'closed course distance learning course' is saved and stored in the "NExT" Curriculum Library 166 in figure 20 (which is the same as the Curriculum Library 94 in figure 20).
- the course is retrieved from the "NExT" Curriculum Library (94), block 183 of figure 21 , the student is registered and invoiced, and the coursework is dispatched to the student/applicant, block 185 in figure 21.
- the Program Director 96 is also responsible for organizing the 'course venue'. Therefore, the Program Director 96 can either organize the course venue at the client location for remote course delivery, block 168 of figure 20, or the Program Director 96 can organize the course venue at either a university location or a "NExT" location for course delivery, block 170 in figure 20.
- the new method of training discussed above with reference to figures 19 through 21 addresses distance learning, classroom delivery, and distance learning again where there are individual bookings in closed course situations.
- FIG. 22 a modification to a part of the flowchart of figure 19, which depicts the "NExT" new training method of the present invention, is illustrated in figure 22.
- the Business Development Manager 84 reviews the course content and objectives, block 86, requested by the client 80 and either notifies the appropriate business segment 88 of industry (if the requested course relates to a proprietary service or product already used by industry) or, if the course requested by the client 80 is not a proprietary service or product, the Business Development Manager 84 notifies the appropriate Director of Curriculum (having the subject matter expertise requested by the client 80) at one of the universities in one of the countries in figure 18.
- the Business Development Manager 84 will, instead, notify the Program Director 96, block 21 in figure 22, who will then conduct a "course feasibility analysis" (referring to subroutines BB and AA in figure 29) by contacting the appropriate Director of Curriculum, blocks 23 or 25 in figure 22, at the appropriate university (in figure 18) with the client training request.
- figure 29 which represents subroutine BB, start with block 27 where the Program Director 96 contacts the appropriate Director of Curriculum 23 or 25 (of figure 22) with the client's training request.
- the appropriate Director of Curriculum, block 29 in figure 29, determines if one of the deliverable courses, stored in the "NExT" Curriculum Library 94 in figure 20, are acceptable for the client's needs, block 31 in figure 29. If no (one of the deliverable courses stored in the "NExT" Curriculum Library 94 are not acceptable), the Director of Curriculum advises the Program Director 96, block 33 in figure 29, and, at this point, refer to figure 28 for "subroutine AA", which represents the "marketing/client interface".
- the Program Director 96 advises the Business Development Manager (BDM) 84, block 43 in figure 28, and the BDM 84 contacts the client 80, block 45 in figure 28.
- the client 80 must make a business decision whether or not to proceed, block 47 in figure 28.
- the Business Development Manager 84 will determine the pricing of the course stored in the Curriculum Library 94, block 35 in figure 29. If the price is acceptable, block 37 in figure 29, the Program Director 96 is advised, block 39 in figure 29; and, if not, any flexibility in the price is examined by the Business Development Manager 84, block 41 in figure 29. If there is flexibility in the price of the course, the Business Development Manager 84 determines that new price, block 35 in figure 29, and, if the new price is acceptable, block 37 in figure 29, the Program Director 96 is advised, block 39 in figure 29.
- FIG 23a we have already discussed, with reference to figures 22 and 29, how the Program Director 96 in figure 20 (and block 21 in figure 22) conducts a course feasibility analysis (referring to subroutines BB and AA in figure 29) by contacting the appropriate Director of Curriculum (blocks 23 or 25 in figure 22) at the appropriate university (of figure 18) with the client's training request.
- the Program Director 96 of figure 23a also arranges to contact the Peer Review Board for conducting an instructor certification process prior to determining if the course 98 of figure 21 is accredited 100 or non-credit and prior to screening the applicant 104 of figure 21.
- FIG 30 for a flowchart of the Peer Review Board's instructor certification process.
- the Peer Review Board instruction certification process is illustrated.
- the Director of Curriculum requests instructor candidates from the "NExT” partners, such as industry, block 49 in figure 30.
- the "NExT" partners and/or industry sends a list of their potential instructor candidates, block 51 in figure 30.
- the Director of Curriculum circulates 'information' regarding the names of potential instructor candidates to Peer Review Board members, block 53 in figure 30.
- the Peer Review Board then performs its audit of each of the instructor candidates listed in the circulated information in accordance with a set of specifications set forth in a course work presenter requirements document, block 55 in figure 30. Does each candidate meet the criteria, block 57 in figure 30?
- the Program Director 96 is advised, block 59 of figure 30, the Program Director 96 issues a certification letter, block 61 of figure 30. and the Program Director updates the approved instructor's list, block 63 in figure 30. If no, is candidate development possible, block 65 of figure 30? If not, that particular instructor candidate's consideration is terminated, block 71 of figure 30. If yes, however, the Peer Review Board will advise that particular instructor candidate regarding what additional skills are required, block 67 in figure 30, that instructor candidate undergoes a Presenter Development Program, block 69 of figure 30, and then that instructor candidate's name is placed among the other names on the 'information' circulated by the Director of Curriculum to the Peer Review Board members, block 53 in figure 30.
- the Peer Review Board will audit the content of the newly developed course, block 77 in figure 24a.
- the Peer Review Board will either accept the newly developed course, or it will reject the newly developed course, block 79 in figure 24a. If the Peer Review Board rejects the newly developed course, the Peer Review Board revises the course proposal, block 81 in figure 24a, and a subject matter expert makes revisions to the newly developed course for the Peer Review Board, block 83 in figure 24a. If the Peer Review Board accepts the newly developed course, in figure 24b, they run an alpha test of the newly developed course (i.e., members of industry are present when the alpha test is performed), block 85 of figure 24b.
- an alpha test of the newly developed course i.e., members of industry are present when the alpha test is performed
- the Peer Review Board will then send feedback information (i.e., the results of the alpha test) back to the Director of Curriculum, block 87 of figure 24b.
- the Director of Curriculum convenes the Peer Review Board to audit the 'results of the alpha test' (in the feedback information), block 89 in figure 24b. If any changes are required in the 'results of the alpha test', block 91 in figure 24b, those changes in the 'results' go back to the Course Production Team, block 93 in figure 24b.
- Subroutine DD in figure 25 once again, a second alpha test is performed, and, hopefully, no further changes are required in the course.
- Block 95 of figure 24b (“Advise Next Business Development Manager") is the same block as block 95 of figure 26a ("Point A Next Business Development Manager").
- FIG 26a and 28 referring initially to figure 26a, locate the Business Development Manager (BDM) 95 in figure 26a and note that the next step from the BDM 95 is block 99 in figure 26a ("To Subroutine AA") which appears in figure 28.
- the BDM (43 in figure 28) communicates with the clients, block 45 in figure 28, to determine if the newly developed course is an appropriate course for "NExT".
- a business decision must now be made, block 47 in figure 28, whether the newly developed course is an appropriate course for "NExT”. If the decision by the client is "no", the newly developed course is not an appropriate course for "NExT" and a reference is entered into a client database indicating that the client has requested this type of course, for future reference, block 103 in figure 28.
- Program Director 105 (96 in fig 22), block 33 in figure 29, and, at this point, refer to figure 28 for "subroutine AA", which represents the "marketing/client interface”.
- the Program Director 105 or 96 advises the Business Development Manager (BDM), block 43 in figure 28, and the BDM contacts the client, block 45 in figure 28.
- the client must make a business decision whether or not to proceed, block 47 in figure 28. If yes, enter block 101 in figure 28 (product line of NExT Course) which is the same block as block 101 in figure 26a. Block 101 in figure 26a leads to the "Program Director" in block 105 of figure 26a.
- the Business Development Manager will determine the pricing of the course stored in the Curriculum Library 94, block 35 in figure 29. If the price is acceptable, block 37 in figure 29, the Program Director is advised, block 39 in figure 29. If not, any flexibility in the price is examined by the Business Development Manager, block 41 in figure 29. If there is flexibility in the price of the course, the Business Development Manager determines that new price, block 35 in figure 29, and, if the new price is acceptable, block 37 in figure 29, the Program Director is advised, block 39 in figure 29. The Program Director, at this point, is the "Program Director" 105 in block 105 of figure 26a.
- figures 26a, 26b, 27a, and 27b refer initially to figure 26a and locate block 105, the Program Director 105.
- the next block to consider is block 109 in figure 26a, that is, the "course type” 109.
- the Program Director 105 must decide the 'course type' of the newly developed course, block 109 in figure 26a; that is, is the newly developed course a 'distance learning' type of course or is the newly developed course a 'classroom delivery' type of course.
- the Program Director block 133 in figure 27a, has the responsibility for setting up coursework that is distance learning or classroom coursework.
- the Program Director 133 must decide what type of 'course delivery method' is being used, block 139 in figure 27, i.e., is it a 'classroom delivery' or is it a 'distance learning' type of course delivery method? If it is 'distance learning', is it a 'degree curriculum" course, block 141 in figure 27a. If it is a 'degree curriculum' distance learning course, the Director of Curriculum for distance learning is notified, block 143 in figure 27a. If it is not a 'degree curriculum' distance learning course, the 'on-line registration and delivery' method is implemented, block 145 in figure 27a. If it is not a 'distance learning' type of course delivery method, we must now enter Subroutine EE of figure 30, block 147 in figure 27a, Subroutine EE representing the Peer Review Board instructor certification process.
- the Director of Curriculum requests the names of coursework presenters/instructors from the "NExT" partners or from industry.
- the Director of Curriculum then sends the names of the candidates to the Peer Review Board, where the Peer Review Board will audit these potential candidates as presenters/instructors.
- the Peer Review Board will determine if the candidate meets the designated criteria. If the candidate does meet the criteria, the Peer Review Board will advise the Program Director, telling the Program Director the name of the candidate and indicating that the candidate will be the instructor of the course.
- the Program Director gives the candidate a certification letter indicating that he has met the criteria of the 'quality assurance' checks in the audit process, and the Program Director updates the approved instructor's list.
- the Program Director 133 must decide, via block 151 in figure 27b, whether the course is accredited or non-accredited. If the course is non- accredited, the NExT Administration Manager 153 registers and invoices the student, block 153 in figure 27. Then, is the course a go/no go, block 155 in figure 27b. If the course is a no-go (a certain number of students must be present, otherwise, the course is a no-go), reschedule the student or refund any charges, block 157 in figure 27b. If the course is a 'go', retrieve the course from the "NExT" Curriculum Library, block 159 in figure 27b, and reserve the student's place in the course, block 161 in figure 27b.
- the above referenced student will be taught the knowledge 52 and, in addition, the student will also be taught real-life industrial skills 56 as noted in figure 7.
- the knowledge 52 will be taught by using normal course study; however, the skills 56 will be taught by way of a plurality of simulation scenarios or programs which are provided by industry, as noted in figure 7. That is, industry will provide a plurality of simulation programs/scenarios to the university, and these simulation programs will be used during the performance of the course.
- the simulation programs will provide the student with real-life industrial experiences. As a result, the student will be taught "skills" in addition to "knowledge".
- the student When the student leaves the university setting, having learned the knowledge 52 and the skills 56, the student will be employed by industry, at which time, the former student/new employee will transfer his/her skill 56 into competence 60 by applying the newly acquired skills and by using a mentor. That is, a mentor will be assigned to the new employee when he/she is hired by industry, and the mentor will interface with the new employee and with the new employee's supervisor. The role of the mentor has already been discussed in detail the aforementioned 'Summary of the NExT new training method of the present invention'.
- phase 1 is a CD-Rom based self study
- phase 2 is a four week course at a learning center
- phase 3 is a five month mentor assisted program.
Abstract
Description
Claims
Priority Applications (5)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
CA002386781A CA2386781A1 (en) | 1999-10-08 | 2000-09-26 | Training method using industry and university collaboration |
EP00965424A EP1228496A4 (en) | 1999-10-08 | 2000-09-26 | Training method using industry and university collaboration |
AU76144/00A AU780723B2 (en) | 1999-10-08 | 2000-09-26 | Training method using industry and university collaboration |
MXPA02003545A MXPA02003545A (en) | 1999-10-08 | 2000-09-26 | Training method using industry and university collaboration. |
NO20021665A NO20021665L (en) | 1999-10-08 | 2002-04-08 | Procedures for training using collaboration between industry and universities |
Applications Claiming Priority (6)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US15854199P | 1999-10-08 | 1999-10-08 | |
US60/158,541 | 1999-10-08 | ||
US18006300P | 2000-02-03 | 2000-02-03 | |
US60/180,063 | 2000-02-03 | ||
US59086800A | 2000-06-09 | 2000-06-09 | |
US09/590,868 | 2000-06-09 |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
WO2001027901A1 true WO2001027901A1 (en) | 2001-04-19 |
Family
ID=27388192
Family Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2000/026344 WO2001027901A1 (en) | 1999-10-08 | 2000-09-26 | Training method using industry and university collaboration |
Country Status (6)
Country | Link |
---|---|
EP (1) | EP1228496A4 (en) |
AU (1) | AU780723B2 (en) |
CA (1) | CA2386781A1 (en) |
MX (1) | MXPA02003545A (en) |
NO (1) | NO20021665L (en) |
WO (1) | WO2001027901A1 (en) |
Cited By (5)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US8229938B2 (en) | 2008-04-04 | 2012-07-24 | Landmark Graphics Corporation | Systems and methods for correlating meta-data model representations and asset-logic model representations |
US20140186813A1 (en) * | 2012-12-31 | 2014-07-03 | Tata Consultancy Services Limited | Academia industry interface framework |
US9043647B2 (en) | 2013-01-02 | 2015-05-26 | Tata Consultancy Services Limited | Fault detection and localization in data centers |
US10360194B2 (en) | 2009-03-13 | 2019-07-23 | Landmark Graphics Corporation | Systems and methods for real time data management in a collaborative environment |
CN113240562A (en) * | 2021-05-27 | 2021-08-10 | 南通大学 | Method and system for recommending and matching obstetrical and academic research projects based on nlp |
Citations (4)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5813865A (en) * | 1993-06-23 | 1998-09-29 | Iowa State University Research Foundation | Methods and apparatus for teaching science and engineering |
US5977872A (en) * | 1997-01-09 | 1999-11-02 | Guertin; Thomas George | Building emergency simulator |
US6091930A (en) * | 1997-03-04 | 2000-07-18 | Case Western Reserve University | Customizable interactive textbook |
US6149441A (en) * | 1998-11-06 | 2000-11-21 | Technology For Connecticut, Inc. | Computer-based educational system |
-
2000
- 2000-09-26 AU AU76144/00A patent/AU780723B2/en not_active Ceased
- 2000-09-26 CA CA002386781A patent/CA2386781A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2000-09-26 WO PCT/US2000/026344 patent/WO2001027901A1/en active IP Right Grant
- 2000-09-26 EP EP00965424A patent/EP1228496A4/en not_active Ceased
- 2000-09-26 MX MXPA02003545A patent/MXPA02003545A/en not_active Application Discontinuation
-
2002
- 2002-04-08 NO NO20021665A patent/NO20021665L/en not_active Application Discontinuation
Patent Citations (4)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5813865A (en) * | 1993-06-23 | 1998-09-29 | Iowa State University Research Foundation | Methods and apparatus for teaching science and engineering |
US5977872A (en) * | 1997-01-09 | 1999-11-02 | Guertin; Thomas George | Building emergency simulator |
US6091930A (en) * | 1997-03-04 | 2000-07-18 | Case Western Reserve University | Customizable interactive textbook |
US6149441A (en) * | 1998-11-06 | 2000-11-21 | Technology For Connecticut, Inc. | Computer-based educational system |
Non-Patent Citations (8)
Title |
---|
"Accrediting management development: Penguin books' in-house certificate in management", INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS REVIEW AND REPORT, no. 550, December 1993 (1993-12-01), XP002936830 * |
BEDDIE ET AL.: "Building the bridge between industry and universities: The graduates into SMEs project", 1998, XP002936826, Retrieved from the Internet <URL:http://www.ieeexplorer.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/> [retrieved on 20001220] * |
FERGUSON: "Developing a curriculum for IE graduates of today and tomorrow", INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, vol. 23, no. 11, November 1991 (1991-11-01), pages 46, XP002936829 * |
MASI C.G.: "Re-engineerig engineering education", IEEE SPECTRUM, September 1995 (1995-09-01), pages 44 - 47, XP002936825 * |
OTALA: "Industry-university partnership: Implementing lifelong learning", JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN INDUSTRIAL TRAINING, vol. 18, no. 8, 1994, pages 13 - 18, XP002936824 * |
PALDY: "Instructional peer review", JOURNAL OF COLLEGE SCIENCE TEACHING, vol. XXII, no. 2, November 1992 (1992-11-01), pages 73 + 76-77, XP002936827 * |
See also references of EP1228496A4 * |
SIMMS: "American colleges and training for industry", INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING, vol. 21, no. 6, November 1989 (1989-11-01) - December 1989 (1989-12-01), pages 3 - 8, XP002936828 * |
Cited By (7)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US8229938B2 (en) | 2008-04-04 | 2012-07-24 | Landmark Graphics Corporation | Systems and methods for correlating meta-data model representations and asset-logic model representations |
US8554778B2 (en) | 2008-04-04 | 2013-10-08 | Landmark Graphics Corporation | Systems and methods for correlating meta-data model representations and asset-logic model representations |
US10552391B2 (en) | 2008-04-04 | 2020-02-04 | Landmark Graphics Corporation | Systems and methods for real time data management in a collaborative environment |
US10360194B2 (en) | 2009-03-13 | 2019-07-23 | Landmark Graphics Corporation | Systems and methods for real time data management in a collaborative environment |
US20140186813A1 (en) * | 2012-12-31 | 2014-07-03 | Tata Consultancy Services Limited | Academia industry interface framework |
US9043647B2 (en) | 2013-01-02 | 2015-05-26 | Tata Consultancy Services Limited | Fault detection and localization in data centers |
CN113240562A (en) * | 2021-05-27 | 2021-08-10 | 南通大学 | Method and system for recommending and matching obstetrical and academic research projects based on nlp |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
NO20021665L (en) | 2002-06-07 |
AU7614400A (en) | 2001-04-23 |
EP1228496A1 (en) | 2002-08-07 |
EP1228496A4 (en) | 2003-02-26 |
NO20021665D0 (en) | 2002-04-08 |
MXPA02003545A (en) | 2002-10-23 |
CA2386781A1 (en) | 2001-04-19 |
AU780723B2 (en) | 2005-04-14 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
Bielawski et al. | Blended elearning: Integrating knowledge, performance, support, and online learning | |
Levin et al. | Using systems thinking to leverage technology for school improvement: Lessons learned from award-winning secondary schools/districts | |
Félix-Herrán et al. | Challenge-based learning: An I-semester for experiential learning in Mechatronics Engineering | |
Rhema et al. | Reflections on a trial implementation of an e-learning solution in a Libyan university | |
Hsu et al. | A case study of enabling factors in the technology integration change process | |
Brindley et al. | Support services for online faculty: The provider and the user perspectives | |
Grant et al. | Real World Project: Integrating the Classroom, External Business Partnerships and Professional Organizations. | |
AU780723B2 (en) | Training method using industry and university collaboration | |
Hirumi | Chronicling the challenges of web-basing a degree program: A systems perspective | |
Mendenhall | A model and principles for effective internet-based distance education | |
Cifuentes | Course designs for distance teaching and learning | |
Twomey et al. | Teachers as technology leaders: A guide to ISTE technology facilitation and technology leadership accreditation | |
Tan et al. | A case study of classroom experience with client-based team projects | |
Floyd | A model for information technology curriculum | |
Samuels et al. | Selection of field education management software in social work | |
McGhee | Examining the Relationship Between Administrative And Faculty Leadership in the Development and Sustainability of Elearning Programs at Historically Black Colleges and Universities | |
Cotton | Transforming traditional training methods to meet the needs of a modern industry | |
Green et al. | Advocating for experiential learning programs as change agents in higher education: Imagining a justice orientation that centers students and partners while enriching practice | |
Whitehouse et al. | A Step-by-Step Guide for Developing a Microcredentialing Program | |
Gibbs | An online professional development program for K–12 teachers: Measures of effectiveness | |
Freshwater | Employers’ Experiences with Graduates of Industrial Systems Technology Community College Programs in Northeast Alabama: A Phenomenological Study | |
Magruder et al. | A Replicable, High-Touch ID Support Model: Building High Quality Online Programs | |
Macfadyen | A Handbook of Best Practices in the Integration of Learning Technologies into Higher Education. Illustrated with case studies from innovative institutions in Canada and around the world | |
Aaron et al. | It Took a Village: A Demonstrated Need of Institutional Support for Successful Online Teaching. | |
Sirisomboonsuk et al. | Innovation and Improvement of Curricula for OM and IT Majors in Colleges of Business through Industry Engagement |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AK | Designated states |
Kind code of ref document: A1 Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY BZ CA CH CN CR CU CZ CZ DE DE DK DK DM DZ EE EE ES FI FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SK SL TJ TM TR TT TZ UA UG UZ VN YU ZA ZW |
|
AL | Designated countries for regional patents |
Kind code of ref document: A1 Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GW ML MR NE SN TD TG |
|
121 | Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application | ||
DFPE | Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101) | ||
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 76144/00 Country of ref document: AU |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2386781 Country of ref document: CA |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: PA/a/2002/003545 Country of ref document: MX |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2000965424 Country of ref document: EP |
|
WWP | Wipo information: published in national office |
Ref document number: 2000965424 Country of ref document: EP |
|
NENP | Non-entry into the national phase |
Ref country code: JP |
|
WWG | Wipo information: grant in national office |
Ref document number: 76144/00 Country of ref document: AU |