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

Corporate participation in fee-based programs changes over time based on numerous corporate criteria; corporate finances, availability of applicable programs and perception that the available training and educational opportunities provide for a positive return on investment. While we want to attract and serve the needs of professional working adult learners and their respective corporations, we can only do so if we have an advanced understanding of these two entities; professional working adult learners, and, their represented corporate organizations. In an effort to better understand the participants, and needs of our fee-based corporate representative adult learners, it is a requirement to understand, at a macro level, both the demographics of the corporate student and their respective corporations. This paper will focus on a tier 1 research university study of participating corporate students and their respective corporations. This paper will qualitatively assess the top participating organizations and industry sectors, and their professional students of fee-based degree programs. The following hierarchical questions will be addressed to provide the rich and enhanced detail necessary to further understanding:  What are the critical academic success factors for incoming participating corporate students  What is the hierarchy of predominant disciplines of participating corporate students  Relative to represented corporate demographics, what is their frequency of participation  Relative to represented industry demographics, what is their frequency of participation The above hierarchical question collection, from student to representative organization to industry sector, provides valued insight into fee-based student participation and their representative organizations by frequency and industry. From this, a target rich opportunity exists to expand future fee-based offerings through serving the needs of these participating individuals and their representative organizations. Critical Academic Success Factors for Evaluating Admissions Acceptability1 Colleges and universities, especially Tier 1 research universities, use undergraduate Grade Point Average (GPA) and the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE) as key criteria for acceptance of students into Masters’ level education programs. While GPA and GRE are relevant as critical success factors to traditional students, the applicability of these criteria alone becomes skewed when considering potential applicants who are professional working adult learners. Professional working adult learners have additional criteria that more accurately predicts their educational success than the historical undergraduate GPA or GRE. Undergraduate GPA and GRE scores, as admissions criteria, further clouded the discussion by our desire as an academic unit to maintain high standards for admission. Other factors contributing to professional working adult learner success include, but are not limited to, years since last degree, undergraduate field of study, reasons for undergraduate GPA (if low), GPA of classes taken more recently (post-undergraduate), GPA in the first two years versus the last two years, demonstrated application of undergraduate assimilated knowledge through successfully greater career opportunities, recommendations from supervisors and third parties and the potential students statement of purpose. In the final analysis, it is a judgment decision on maturity, based on a collection of factors that support an informed decision on the potential success of an applicant. These many career oriented factors are typically not available when assessing the Master’s applicant who has just completed their undergraduate degree. A 2013 study of professional working adult learners1 shares the quantitative results of a longitudinal study of nearly 400 working professional adult learners, from business and industry, who graduated from a tier 1 research university series of programs designed and developed for professional learners. This cohort-based set of programs employs a hybrid classroom and distance-supported, innovatively-delivered graduate degree (MS) in technology studies2,3. The study explored follow-on considerations in balancing and managing the potential for lowering an academic unit’s overall admissions GPA against weighting undergraduate GPA differently for incoming professional working adult learners. The data of the referenced study is comprehensive and rich in description. The data, in part, has been used for previous attendant tangential studies providing baselines for peer and aspirational future research4,3. Critical to determining undergraduate GPA impact on graduation rates or more specifically graduate GPA, is the definition of success in targeted programs. While statistical significance is certainly applicable and appropriate, it is perhaps more appropriate to examine practical significance; that being “...it is possible that, based on the available sample data, methods of statistics can be used to reach a conclusion that some treatment or finding is effective, but common sense might suggest that the treatment or finding does not make enough of a difference to justify its use or to be practical5...” To this end, current graduate school requirements as well as those of the College of Technology require a minimum of a 3.0 graduating GPA to receive a degree. Through careful qualitative analysis and discussion, it was determined the average recorded GPA of the lowest entry undergraduate GPAs, minus the average recorded GPA of the highest entry undergraduate GPAs would be a consideration in the findings of the practical analysis. If this graduate GPA difference was more than .5, then practically speaking there was enough of a differential to merit further discussion and potentially subsequent undergraduate GPA consideration for entry into the program. Additionally, numerous of the professional adult learners were engaged in an industry focused applied research and development project called simply the Directed Project. The Directed Project is a project agreed upon between the student, student’s company and the faculty advisor. The project is intended to parallel the thesis format and employs applied research and development methodologies to generate a project with potential for significant return on investment to the student’s company. Frequently, a member of the student’s company serves on the student’s graduate committee – while precautions are taken to avoid conflict of interest. The Directed Project results in a document which is essentially equivalent in size and standard to the conventional theses. The university and program faculty implement procedures to guard the confidentiality of the project information where necessary. As a percent of the entire population of this analysis and study, the cumulative value of the Directed Projects were taken into consideration. Critical Academic Success Factor Study Findings There were 27 total programs that formed the basis of the referenced study. For each program cohort, the average undergraduate GPA, MS graduating GPA, chronological age on entry into the program, and years of work experience are:  Average graduate GPA is 3.79  Average undergraduate GPA is 3.19  Average age is 35.85  Average years of work experience is 14.85 Additionally, figure 1.0 depicts:  37%, 178 of the 481 graduating program professional working adult learners have an undergraduate entry GPA less than the required 3.0.  Of those 37% of the professional adult working learners who graduate from the program, their cumulative Directed Project return on investments totaled over $17M. Relative to those potentially entering with less than the required undergraduate GPA of 3.0, there are two influencing factors. First, the standards of the university and the College of Technology require increasingly greater undergraduate entry GPAs, this to accomplish many objectives. Professional working adult learners entering with less than this desired target undergraduate GPA actually create a negative drag on the overall university and applicable college. Second, and to the first topic, those entering with less than the university and college required 3.0 GPA are accepted conditionally6. In comparing the average graduating GPA to the average entering undergraduate GPA, of the program adult professional learners, the difference is .05, well below the .5 determined to be of practical significance. To this end, although the entering undergraduate average GPA of those entering with less than the required 3.0 is 2.65, there does not appear to be a practical significance, as collectively agreed to, in their average graduating GPA. Equally important, and perhaps most leveling, is the return on investment, as determined by a third party, of the students’ Directed Projects on the well-being of the State and their respective employers. A third party verified ROI in excess of $17M is financially significant and a testament to the maturity and professionalism of those adult working professionals who entered the program with undergraduate GPAs less than the required 3.07. In a sample of those students who completed a Directed Project contributing to the cumulative $17M ROI, 40% had less than the required 3.0 undergraduate GPA on entry into the graduate program. Of those with less than the required 3.0 undergraduate GPA only .02% did not complete the program; stated differently, 99.98% did graduate from the program. Figure 1.0 – Average Undergraduate to Graduate GPA, and Directed Project Savings Figure 1.0 depicts the Directed Project ROI of $17M. These 178 students were in programs that required a Directed Project. The 481 students depicted in figure 1.0 were a combination of the 178 students and the remaining 303 students who were not in programs that required a Directed Project, hence the “N/A” in the cell titled “DP Est Savings”. Critical Academic Success Factors Conc

A Tier 1 Research University Study of Fee-Based Corporate Students and Their Representative Business/Industry Organizations