<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:dcq="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"><records count="1" morepages="false" start="1" end="1"><record rownumber="1"><dc:product_type>Conference Paper</dc:product_type><dc:title>Identifying Congruence Between Advanced Manufacturing Two-year Curricula and Employer Needs: Findings from Five Florida State Colleges</dc:title><dc:creator>Kowligi, Pallavi R.; Prajapati, Priyanka; Jones, Faye R.; Mardis, Marcia A.</dc:creator><dc:corporate_author/><dc:editor/><dc:description>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.</dc:description><dc:publisher/><dc:date>2020-01-01</dc:date><dc:nsf_par_id>10172289</dc:nsf_par_id><dc:journal_name>ASEE annual conference  exposition</dc:journal_name><dc:journal_volume/><dc:journal_issue/><dc:page_range_or_elocation/><dc:issn>2153-5965</dc:issn><dc:isbn/><dc:doi>https://doi.org/</dc:doi><dcq:identifierAwardId>1700581</dcq:identifierAwardId><dc:subject/><dc:version_number/><dc:location/><dc:rights/><dc:institution/><dc:sponsoring_org>National Science Foundation</dc:sponsoring_org></record></records></rdf:RDF>