Browsing by Author "White, J."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Fundamentals for Assessment Success: A Sustainable Data Organization Strategy Within a Construction Management Technology Program
    (American Society for Engineering Education, 2015-06) White, J.; Ray, Veto; Cooney, Elaine; Department of Engineering Technology, Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI
    Few events within a successful academic program are as administratively demanding as an onsite accreditation assessment visit. It is a particularly stressful period where a program must fully account for itself by presenting evidence to external evaluators that its students, faculty, alumni, administrators, curriculum, policies, resources, and facilities satisfy a rigorous criteria established by an accrediting body. To accomplish this, the program must retrieve all of the relevant data, compile it into a prodigious report and organize it in a manner that is both profoundly clear and obvious while simultaneously complying with the report format requirements prescribed by the accrediting institution. Anyone who has experienced an on-site accreditation visit is very familiar with these daunting challenges. A number of factors seem to conspire against the successful execution of this documentation process. One of the most fundamental is the complexity associated with the ongoing, sustainable, semester-to-semester compilation of data from a myriad of different sources. Of these various sources, faculty is one of the most critical. It is the faculty after all, that is the origin of the assessment data that forms the bedrock of any program’s assessment regimen. This challenge is compounded if the program is heavily dependent on adjunct faculty. Many educational institutions that offer a technology-based curriculum are particularly reliant on adjunct faculty. Clearly adjunct faculty is highly valued in technology programs for its course – specific expertise and industry correlation. However this faculty is typically teaching as a supplement to a separate full time career and therefore does not have the resources available to devote to a protracted or confusing assessment routine. In order to compile a successful assessment report, a sustainable assessment program must be established that distills the complex requirements into components that can be easily and efficiently executed by its faculty. The reporting system must be sufficiently clear and unambiguous such that it becomes a part of the semester close-out routine. Additionally, a reporting system must be developed that efficiently captures crucial assessment data, making it available for systematic review at the conclusion of every semester and ultimately for inclusion in the accreditation report. This paper documents the process of a construction management technology program as it developed its own ultimately successful assessment structure by focusing on the methods and the tools. The tools described include: Simplified, unambiguous forms that capture assessment data A reporting system to facilitate data dissemination A formalized process that ensures collaboration through the utilization of the captured data on a regular, end-of-semester routine Implementation of an assessment routine that clearly links course data to outcomes to program.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Recommendations for standardized pathological characterization of residual disease for neoadjuvant clinical trials of breast cancer by the BIG-NABCG collaboration
    (Oxford University Press, 2015-07) Bossuyt, V.; Provenzano, E.; Symmans, W. F.; Boughey, J. C.; Coles, C.; Curigliano, G.; Dixon, J. M.; Esserman, L. J.; Fastner, G.; Kuehn, T.; Peintinger, F.; von Minckwitz, G.; White, J.; Yang, W.; Badve, Sunil; Denkert, C.; MacGrogan, G.; Penault-Llorca, F.; Viale, G.; Cameron, D.; Breast International Group-North American Breast Cancer Group (BIG-NABCG) collaboration; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, IU School of Medicine
    Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) provides the unique opportunity to assess response to treatment after months rather than years of follow-up. However, significant variability exists in methods of pathologic assessment of response to NAST, and thus its interpretation for subsequent clinical decisions. Our international multidisciplinary working group was convened by the Breast International Group-North American Breast Cancer Group (BIG-NABCG) collaboration and tasked to recommend practical methods for standardized evaluation of the post-NAST surgical breast cancer specimen for clinical trials that promote accurate and reliable designation of pathologic complete response (pCR) and meaningful characterization of residual disease. Recommendations include multidisciplinary communication; clinical marking of the tumor site (clips); and radiologic, photographic, or pictorial imaging of the sliced specimen, to map the tissue sections and reconcile macroscopic and microscopic findings. The information required to define pCR (ypT0/is ypN0 or ypT0 yp N0), residual ypT and ypN stage using the current AJCC/UICC system, and the Residual Cancer Burden system were recommended for quantification of residual disease in clinical trials.