Identifying Congruence Between Advanced Manufacturing Two-year Curricula and Employer Needs: Findings from Five Florida State Colleges

Abstract

In this research paper, we report our assessment of the congruence between two-year advanced manufacturing (AM) program syllabi to employer needs expressed in the Department of Labor's (DOL) AM Competency Model. The dynamic AM industry relies on two-year AM technician program graduates from state and community colleges. These program curricula are mandated to reflect state career and technology education (CTE) curriculum frameworks, but the frameworks are not designed to measure graduates' abilities to meet AM employers' current needs. Because this technology-reliant industry changes so quickly, faculty are challenged to source, develop, and implement responsive educational experiences. Through consultation with industry leaders, the Department of Labor (DOL) developed an AM competency model to illustrate and promote workers' necessary knowledge, skills, and dispositions. To determine whether the AM competency model can function as an exit assessment for AM program graduates, we compared AM program syllabi from five rural Northwest Florida state colleges to the DOL AM Competency Model. We text-mined competencies in both syllabi and the AM Competency Model and compared them to identify: 1) frequently addressed topics; 2) verbs guiding course learning outcomes versus the skill depth desired by employers; and 3) overall match between documents. Our findings indicate that despite being developed to reflect the same curriculum framework, the five AM programs' topical and complexity emphases varied widely. Overall, AM Competency Model content reflected higher levels of the Bloom's Revised Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, highlighting industry commitments to fostering analysis, evaluation, and creation. We conclude with implications for educational institutions, AM policymakers, and industry, outline the need for an AM Body of Knowledge, and propose an ongoing assessment model to improve the congruence between what employers want and what is taught in two-year AM degree programs.

Composing a Syllabus via Educational Program Maker: A Web Tool for Academic Documents Creation

“…Which parts should it consist of to meet the needs of teachers, students, and future employers? As claims Elena et al [9], market stakeholders, when hiring fresh graduates, want to know if, during the education, they acquired skills that are -essential for the performance and the modernization of the labor market.‖ Kowligi et al [10] similarly agree on the importance of following market tendencies and suggest that -the [academic course] assessments and evaluations should be tied to … incorporate -real world experiential projects‖.…”

Comparing Florida’s Advanced Manufacturing Curriculum Framework to the Department of Labor Competency Model

“…We then analyzed the text from the AM Framework and the AM Competency Model using a four-step process (illustrated Figure 1) to transform the text into quantifiable frequencies and comparison percentages. Finally, we categorized verbs according to Bloom's Revised Taxonomy [16] to discern the activity complexity (i.e., Bloom's escalating cognitive dimension levels of remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create) inherent in documents.…”

“…Figure 7 provides a visual representation of the percentage of verbs, categorized by Bloom's Revised Taxonomy [16], that are not as apparent in Table 3, between the AM Framework and AM Competency Model. The AM Curriculum Framework is the conceptual foundation for two-year AM programs in Florida.…”

“…The findings of this study can be extended and improved in several ways: DOL, Framework, and Syllabi Alignment. In related work [16], we compared AM program syllabi to the AM Competency Model to assess the alignment between course learning outcomes and employer needs. In our next step, we will triangulate the competencies from syllabi, the AM Competency Model, and the AM Curriculum Framework to chart competency alignment among stakeholders.…”