IEEE Standards EducationReport on 2015 Funded Speakers Bureau Events

1. NESC SeminarIEEE Panama SectionJohn DagenhartAugust 2015NESC

2. ICES 2015Seoul, KoreaKishik ParkAugust 2015Competency Requirements for Standards Professionals

3. Case Western Reserve UniversityCleveland, OhioHoward WolfmanSeptember 2015Technical Standards Workshop

4. IEEE Africon 2015Addis Ababa, EthiopiaSri ChandraSeptember 2015Green Innovation for African Renaissance

5. Biomedical Engineering Society Tampa, FLTricia GerdonOctober 2015Engineering Standards Panel Session

6. Texas State UniversityAustin, TexasPaul NikolichSteve CarlsonJeffry HandalNovember 2015Standards Education Workshop

1

7. ICCVEShenzen, ChinaMihir TrivediNovember 2015

8. Prairie View A&M UniversityTexasDonald FedykNovember 2015

____________________________________________________________________________________

1. NESC SeminarIEEE Panama SectionJohn DagenhartAugust 2015NESC

It was a great session. Everyone was very friendly and helpful. The language was somewhat of a challenge, but I was able to cope. We had an interpreter and audio system on the day I talked helped a lot. There was no interpreter for the other sessions. I sat in on some and was able to follow along with the slides. The others talked about the NESC as well and I’ve taught those parts so much I knew what they were talking about. Sue, I think one of the persons talking about substations is an NESC subcommittee member. I’ll try to get an agenda to confirm. On the questions: 1) Is the NESC itself used in Panama? How is it used? Is the entire Code used, or just parts? If Parts, which ones? Yes. It is used in Panama. It is required by law for distribution, as I understand it. But not for generation or transmission. 2) Is use voluntary? What regulations are in place in Panama? Do they have other documents or specifications instead, or does nothing exist? Do they prefer the use of IEC standards? If so, which one(s)? I do not know what exact regulations are in place for the use of the NESC. They also use NFPA standards as well. I understand their use of these standards is for several reasons. First, they are already available. Second, many engineers have been educated in the US and are familiar with them. 3) Is the NESC translated in any manner for use in Panama? Would a translated version be useful, or not? I don’t think the entire NESC is translated into Spanish for use in Panama. I’m not sure a translated version would be useful but an exploration of doing that is probably still worthwhile. However, there are hurdles to get over when doing this. For example, they have a special version of Spanish here that has a lot of English words mixed in. They call it “Spanglish.” On important point is that they say there is no different word for “should” and “shall.” That causes a huge problem for them. In some cases there is no proper Spanish word for some things. I’ve often heard this from other engineers from such countries. Keep in mind also that Spanish is different in different countries, as I understand it. I ran into someone in Puerto Rico who was trying to make a dictionary of engineering terms from English to Spanish and ran into that problem. It’s not that it’s impossible, just a challenge.

2

4) What is the utility landscape? Government-owned or private, one large utility or multiple smaller ones, etc? The transmission system is 100% government owned, as I understand it. Not sure about the generation. But distribution is majority owned by the government. Private ownership of distribution is minority. In Panama, it seems there are at least 2 different distribution companies. 3 if you count the division of one into two distinct sections. 5) Can you learn anything about use of the NESC in other countries in South America, using the same questions above? See the answer to #2. I think it is used in Costa Rica, since one presenter does a lot of work there and had slides that spoke about it being used in Cosa Rica. John Dagenhart, PEPresidentDagenhart Consulting Services,PC andClapp Research Associates, PC1058 W. Club Blvd., Suite 220BDurham, NC 27701Office: 919-908-0227Cell: 919-247-4236j.b.dagenhart@ieee.org

_____________________________________________________________________________________

2. ICES 2015 (10th Annual) “Competency Requirements for Standards Professionals”Seoul, KoreaDr. Kishik PARK, IEEE SEC Member & SA BOG Member 24-26 August 2015Location: Courtyard by Marriot Seoul Times Square, Seoul, South KoreaHost & Organizer: Korean Standards Association (KSA)Sponsors: KATS, IEEE, SPRING Singapore, ASTM International, SSSParticipants: about 60 incl. Korean domestic attendees

Goals of Participation:- Represent IEEE for the event as a sponsor organization- Presentation of IEEE Activities on standards Education for panel discussion- Small Group meeting with relevant delegates incl. Spring Singapore- Various interactions with ICES participants representing IEEE, etc.

Conference Theme:- Can we develop competency requirements of standards professionals? (national/international occupation standards, personnel certification)- What are current situation and challenges of the job market?- What are expectations of companies and standards-specialty organizations?

Key Topics of the conference: The conference focused on discussing roles, jobs, and competency of standards professionals in terms of standards education, based on real jobs in commercial and non-commercial organizations, which included the following issues:

3

- Reviewing and analyzing practical tasks and roles of standards professionals in real jobs in companies and standards-related organizations- Discussing competency requirements and qualification framework for standards professionals in terms of standards education- Browsing career paths/models or best practices for standards education

Some Important attendees for IEEE: Mr. Toshiaki Kurokawa (ICES Founder), Mr. Jeffrey Strauss (CTIM), Mr. Yun-Baek Yoo (Executive Director of KSA), Mr. Fei LIU (Chief Representative / ASTM China Office), Ms. Soi Min LOH (Director / Spring Singapore), Ms. Crystal Neo (Manager / Spring Singapore), Dr. Knut Blind (Berlin Univ. of Technology / Chair of Innovation Economics)

IEEE Presentation in Panel III:“IEEE University: IEEE SA’s Commitment to the Future of Standards Education” by Dr. Kishik PARK (IEEE SA) Member of IEEE SA Board of Governors; IEEE SA Education Committee

Presentation by SPRING SINGAPORE“Future Plan and Challenges for Standards Education and HRD: SPRING Singapore’s perspective” by Ms. LOH Soi-Min Director for Policy and Promotion, SPRING (Singapore):- Ms. Loh introduced details on standards education in Singapore in terms of HRD. Some of those activities are published in their bi-monthly standards magazine “Good To Go”.- She also expressed some difficulties they are facing for promoting standards education including lack of support from Singaporean Ministry of Education.

Lunch meeting with Singaporean delegatesAttendees:Ms. Soi Min LOH (Director / Spring Singapore),Ms. Crystal NEO (Manager / Spring Singapore)Prof. Pui Mun LEE (Professor / SIM Univ. in Singapore)Prof. KukJin CHUN (IEEE R10 Director-elect / SNU Korea)Dr. Kishik PARK (IEEE Representative / ETRI Korea)

Meeting Summary:- IEEE’s Standards Education Committee (SEC)’s initiatives:- SEC’s collaborations with NSBs and universities:- IEEE-SA’s Technology Policy Education- IEEE’s funding of standards education:- Effectiveness of IEEE Standards Education Grants- Comments from Prof. Chun: Hoping to have more close collaboration with IEEE headquarters on standards education considering that R10 is quite large among IEEE Regions in terms of its population.- Kishik asked Ms. Loh if she wants to be involved in IEEE standards education related activities more actively. She answered she didn’t have clear idea about that.

Dinner meeting with the Chairman of Prime Minister’s Gov. 3.0 Committee:Attendees:Prof. Hee-joon SONG (Chairman, Gov. 3.0 Committee)Prof. Joon Soo KIM (Chonnam National Univ.))Dr. Kishik PARK (IEEE Representative / ETRI Korea)

4

Meeting Summary:- Brief introduction of ICES 2015 including IEEE presentation (Kishik) for Dr. Song and Dr. Kim.- Kishik also emphasized the importance of business-oriented and open standardization strategy which is being considered by IEEE SA.- Not only as a professor but as the Chairman of Gov. 3.0 Committee, Dr. Song showed his interest in IEEE Standards Educational activities incl. standards MOOC and IEEE Standards University.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

3. Case Western Reserve UniversityCleveland, OhioHoward WolfmanSeptember 2015Technical Standards Workshop (first ever at CWRU)

Event included representatives of six standards organizations (Association for the Advancement of Medical Instruments; ANSI; ASTM; CSA Group; IEEE; and UL), along with CWRU faculty, staff, and students. Goal was to raise the awareness of standards education within the campus community.

The event drew over 150 attendees (mostly undergraduates, along with graduate students and faculty) and provided an interactive forum for a wide variety of majors to learn about standards and ask questions about the impact of standards in their education and daily lives.

5

_____________________________________________________________________________________

4. IEEE Africon 2015Addis Ababa, EthiopiaSri Chandra15 September 2015Green Innovation for African RenaissanceAfricon was attended by about 200-250 people. Sri’s presentation was part of the ad hoc (a parallel track to the main conference), which was attended by about 65-70 people.

As part of the IEEE Adhoc Committee on Africa, IEEE Standards Association took part in a joint workshop along with the Adhoc committee at Africon 2015, held in Addis Ababa. IEEE-SA highlighted the importance of standards engagement, participation and development by the engineering community in Africa through a presentation titled "Why Standards Matter?". This talk highlighted the importance and impact of standards to economic growth, Industry engagement in Standards and also highlighted important projects and focus of IEEE-SA with government bodies and national standards bodies across the world including countries in Africa. The talk concluded by giving a brief overview of IEEE-SA Standards development process, and how the community can participate in our open standards development process and the benefits of participating in standards for the individual.

6

_____________________________________________________________________________________

5. Biomedical Engineering Society Tampa, FLTricia GerdonOctober 2015Engineering Standards Panel Session

I thought the panel session was great. I myself learned a lot more about ABET and how the Universities are developing their programs. Very interesting. Our part of the panel session flowed nicely. Jay and Bob both had great presentations that talked about their programs and how they incorporate standards into their curricula. I finished up with all the great things we do at IEEE and what we have to offer. They were impressed and unaware of all the things we have to offer. It was great exposure for the IEEE.

One of the biggest take-aways for me that I heard was the cost of obtaining standards for the professor and students to use. Not all Universities have the money to invest in the full IEEE Xplore package or the Tier pricing. I was not sure how much the standards select would cost a University, if they had to purchase a bunch for the various student projects. They were very interested in the get program. I explained it was only on selected standards. Several people explained that the cost is a challenge.

It got me thinking about how can we help to offset this cost and get more standards into the classroom? Bob mentioned that there was another SDO that offers $10.00 standards. I was wondering if we thought about a program where industry would help fund for low cost or no cost standards for Universities and future engineers?

We know the benefits of having engineering students understand something about standards before entering the workforce and how valuable they would be to these companies. Maybe this could somehow also be tied to IEEE student membership, so they get exposed to IEEE early on. This could lead to bringing in more of the younger generation to our working groups that we so desperately need to help develop standards in the future.

7

The IEEE and industry would essentially be investing in our future. Do you know if we have considered this or already approached industry about something like this? They are essentially funding future employees and we already know that having that type of knowledge is valuable to those organizations. It could also be a cost benefit in that they would not have to invest in training those future employees on standards and the impact they have on what they do. In Bob's presentation he talked about his great program and how his students contact him after getting into the real world with appreciation for all that his program taught them.

Patricia A. GerdonStandards Education ManagerIEEE – Standards Activities445 Hoes LanePiscataway, NJ 08854p.gerdon@ieee.org +1 732 562 3811_____________________________________________________________________________________

6. Texas State UniversityAustin, TexasPaul NikolichSteve CarlsonJeffry HandalNovember 2015Standards Education Workshop

EMAIL FROM DEAN OF ENGINEERING AT TEXAS STATE:

Jennifer, Jeffry, Paul, and Steve -

Many, many thanks for conducting the IEEE Standards Workshop at Texas State University today. We missed David Law, but hope that he had a great snooze in the hard chairs at Love Field in Dallas (ouch!). A big shout out also to Larry Larson for helping make this happen from our end.

The Workshop was, in my humble opinion, a rousing success. An outstanding format, with excellent presenters and compelling content. A bit noisy, but that's because everyone was engaged!

I am especially interested in hearing more about a possible "modular format" for this content that could be integrated with our curriculum. I can certainly see such a module being easily incorporated into a Senior Design course, and checking a *number* of important boxes for accreditation. Below is the list of "checkable boxes" .. some required by ABET, some optional .. for which we gather data to maintain accreditation. I've highlighted the ones that I think would be affected by a curriculum module on standards:

a. an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineeringb. an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data

8

c. an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, public health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability

d. an ability to function on multidisciplinary teamse. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems

a. an understanding of professional and ethical responsibilityb. an ability to communicate effectively

f. the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context

a. a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learningb. a knowledge of contemporary issues

g. an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice

h. a knowledge of probability, statistics, and mathematics through differential and integral calculus, differential equations, linear algebra, complex variables, and discrete mathematics

i. a knowledge of sciences and engineering topics (including computer science) necessary to analyze and design complex electrical and electronic devices, software, and systems containing hardware and software components.

Of course, some of the specific content and other items might vary a bit from discipline to discipline, but the basic framework would translate very directly. In particular, note items d,f,h,i,j in the list above. These are mandatory and *particularly* difficult boxes to check in the conventional academic environment. As a result, they're often given very short shrift.

So .... I think it might be really interesting to consider "productizing" and "trial-running" something like this at Texas State as part of the curriculum. If we could put together a compelling story here, maybe we could get funding from various places to swing something into perpetual motion .. with a suitably academic twist like "learning outcomes" and similar data-driven perspectives. I can see something like this being especially interesting in ASEE circles.

In any case, I really enjoyed the workshop .. and look forward to doing it again!

ThanksStan.

Stan McClellan, PhD Director, Ingram School of EngineeringTexas State University601 University Dr, RFM 5200San Marcos, TX 78666 tel: 512-245-4125fax: 512-245-7771

_____________________________________________________________________________________

9

7. ICCVEShenzen, ChinaMihir TrivediNovember 2015

Report to come 15 December 2015.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

8. Prairie View A&M UniversityPrairie View, TexasDonald FedykNovember 2015

From Don Fedyk:

I traveled to discuss the standards process and the Administrative and technical Details of building a Standard such as Shortest Path Bridging. I prepared a 1 hour talk based on material I mostly had already.

Christopher Sanderson was an excellent host driving me around to all the venues. Travel from Boston is lengthy. It was great to be chauffeured around. Christopher and I had a good lunch and we discussed various topics around standard. We attended a reception with Dr. Musa and one other IEEE member. The reception was a good opportunity for me to get to know Dr. Musa and vice versa; however, it was lightly attended. Perhaps because it was a holiday week it was lightly attended but we had a good discussion anyway. On Tuesday I traveled to PVAMU and it was good that Christopher drove. PVAMU is a bit off the beaten track! I presented my slides to about ½ the students, Dr. Musa Christopher and The Dept. Head. The talk went reasonably well although I think that the noise in the LAB takes away a bit from the ambiance. We went for lunch and then listened to the students presentations of Shortest Path Bridging. There were 4 well prepared presentations and I was impressed by the Students research. It was interesting to hear what the picked up from where. We tried to make it clear that information in the IEEE is not all vetted and that you have to know the source and the other material to understand what is really going on. Then we had a question and answer session. I spent many an hour working on SPB and I’m glad that some people are looking at it. I have two boys that have just graduated college as engineers so I know it is a bit tough to relate to younger people. At 4:15 PM we left for the Airport and made it with about ½ hour to spare. So it was a good idea to spread over two days given my location. I enjoyed meeting the students, Dr. Musa and Christopher. I hope that the students and Teacher got value out the event. I thank you for recognizing me as an authority on Shortest Path Bridging it brings back good memories.

You asked

Would you recommend that participation in an event like this be pursued again in the future? I think the attendance numbers were on the low side but the one-on-one connection seems valuable. What do you think?

10

In this case because it was targeted at 802.1aq and I was deeply involved I was glad to help. It is good to spread the word to students. Also, do you think there are strengths in the PVAMU program that IEEE Standards Education can support or additional ways we can get involved?

That is a tough one. Standards often involve a deep commitment to get something done. There are current projects that I am somewhat aware about, someone like Glenn Parsons would have a deeper knowledge. I know in the past Glenn has involved Co-ops (students) in tools for the group but it is hard for me to say what would be appropriate for students and benefit the IEEE. That is usually a longer term thing than would be available to a student. Picking a project as was done for SPB is not a bad way to do it. But the overall process is like moving a mountain one rock at a time and people question if you chose the right mountain at many points.

http://sites.ieee.org/houston/2015/12/ieee-pvamu-student-branch/20151124_160404/

11