English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Industrial Engineering programs prepare graduates for a wide range of jobs in a wide range of industries. Having faculty members choose a focus for a program, design a new program, or redesign an existing Industrial Engineering program can be contentious. This paper presents a method, using descriptions of real jobs, to help faculty members talk about the types of jobs for which the program is preparing graduates and to talk about how well the program is preparing graduates for those jobs. The method allows agreements and disagreements to emerge and provides a way to talk about them. This method has obvious applications in designing program educational objectives and in reviewing and updating program educational objectives to reflect current needs of industry. Using current job descriptions focuses these conversations and helps maintain currency of the program.

Good Jobs, Bad Jobs: Designing Program Educational Objectives