image18.jpeg
image15.jpeg
image12.jpeg
image1.jpeg
image2.jpeg
image3.jpeg
image4.jpeg
image5.jpeg
image6.jpeg
image7.jpeg
image10.jpeg
image8.jpeg
image9.jpeg
image13.jpeg
image16.jpeg
image14.jpeg
image17.jpeg
image11.jpeg
INMGT 400/600 Individual Project Part A: Personal Insights
Individual Project Insight 4 (self-insight 5.2, p. 153 text)
Assignment Instructions and Requirements
1. FIRST complete Insight 5.2 - print a hard copy of the assigned insight (see last page).
2. Complete the self-assessment questions in the manner directed, and follow the instructions given for ‘scoring’ the assessment.
3. SECOND complete on-line self-assessment (Note: it is best to be connected to a printer before you begin this assessment). Link to the following web page and complete the McGraw-Hill 20-question assessment tool.
http://www.mhhe.com/business/management/buildyourmanagementskills/updated_flash/topic5a/quiz.html
REALLY IMPORTANT – if you are not connected to a printer save screen shots of each of the five summaries of your scoring/results report, otherwise when finished click the Print button to print a copy of your scoring/results report. Include a copy of your printed report or copies of the screen shots with Part B.
4. THIRD reflect (this means take time to really think – refer to graphic ‘How to Reflect’ in Individual Project assignment). Specifically reflect upon both sets of ‘scores’, the interpretation, and what this tells you about yourself as it relates to leadership.
5. Write a short (at least one full page but not less than half a page) summary of your reflections, following the formatting requirements stated below.
a) Title - centered, 12 pt. Times New Roman Bold font, name of assignment (as listed on class schedule unless otherwise noted) followed by your name.
b) Score – left margin aligned heading ‘Insight Score’ in 12 pt. Times New Roman font – name each assessment tool and record the point values for each of the four (or five) components of emotional intelligence.
c) Content – left margin aligned, 12 pt. Times New Roman font, double line spacing – a summary of your reflections regarding what this tells you about you and your leadership abilities.
6. Submit only the reflective summary to the respective drop box before the stated due date and time. Late submissions will receive no credit (0 points)
The following criteria will be used for evaluation:
Criteria
Met expectations
Fell short of expectations
Unsatisfactory
Insight Score
(1 point)
Reported score as instructed
(0 points)
No score reported
Reflective Summary
(3 points)
A clearly written, insightful reflective summary of the assessment.
(2 points)
Summarized results but is not reflective or insightful
(1 point)
Went through the motions – wrote something but is not related to
Professionalism
(2 points)
Followed directions, no formatting errors, no writing errors
(1 point)
Followed directions and less than 3 formatting and/or writing error.
Current Issues Wetland Mitigation_Irow 2009 jlarndt_51
Presents history and current status of wetland mitigation along utility rights-of-way. Presented at the INternational Conference on environmental Concerns in Rights-of-Way Management, 2009, Portland OR.
The Alberta Government is considering amendments to water allocation and water licence transfer systems in the province. This review is being driven by issues of overallocation of water in some areas of the province and the economic and environmental issues that overallocation has caused.
Jason Unger, Staff Counsel with the Environmental Law Centre, presented a summary review of the three reports that are informing the government’s review, as well as issues that arise from a “First in Time, First in Right” (FITFIR) system, such as whether the licence transfer system is equitable and whether transfers and FITFIR adequately address environmental and economic concerns.
How EPA plans will implement Cap & Trade, increase federal spending, negatively impact state/municipal budgets, eliminate jobs, and hurt industry/businesses
image18.jpeg
image15.jpeg
image12.jpeg
image1.jpeg
image2.jpeg
image3.jpeg
image4.jpeg
image5.jpeg
image6.jpeg
image7.jpeg
image10.jpeg
image8.jpeg
image9.jpeg
image13.jpeg
image16.jpeg
image14.jpeg
image17.jpeg
image11.jpeg
INMGT 400/600 Individual Project Part A: Personal Insights
Individual Project Insight 4 (self-insight 5.2, p. 153 text)
Assignment Instructions and Requirements
1. FIRST complete Insight 5.2 - print a hard copy of the assigned insight (see last page).
2. Complete the self-assessment questions in the manner directed, and follow the instructions given for ‘scoring’ the assessment.
3. SECOND complete on-line self-assessment (Note: it is best to be connected to a printer before you begin this assessment). Link to the following web page and complete the McGraw-Hill 20-question assessment tool.
http://www.mhhe.com/business/management/buildyourmanagementskills/updated_flash/topic5a/quiz.html
REALLY IMPORTANT – if you are not connected to a printer save screen shots of each of the five summaries of your scoring/results report, otherwise when finished click the Print button to print a copy of your scoring/results report. Include a copy of your printed report or copies of the screen shots with Part B.
4. THIRD reflect (this means take time to really think – refer to graphic ‘How to Reflect’ in Individual Project assignment). Specifically reflect upon both sets of ‘scores’, the interpretation, and what this tells you about yourself as it relates to leadership.
5. Write a short (at least one full page but not less than half a page) summary of your reflections, following the formatting requirements stated below.
a) Title - centered, 12 pt. Times New Roman Bold font, name of assignment (as listed on class schedule unless otherwise noted) followed by your name.
b) Score – left margin aligned heading ‘Insight Score’ in 12 pt. Times New Roman font – name each assessment tool and record the point values for each of the four (or five) components of emotional intelligence.
c) Content – left margin aligned, 12 pt. Times New Roman font, double line spacing – a summary of your reflections regarding what this tells you about you and your leadership abilities.
6. Submit only the reflective summary to the respective drop box before the stated due date and time. Late submissions will receive no credit (0 points)
The following criteria will be used for evaluation:
Criteria
Met expectations
Fell short of expectations
Unsatisfactory
Insight Score
(1 point)
Reported score as instructed
(0 points)
No score reported
Reflective Summary
(3 points)
A clearly written, insightful reflective summary of the assessment.
(2 points)
Summarized results but is not reflective or insightful
(1 point)
Went through the motions – wrote something but is not related to
Professionalism
(2 points)
Followed directions, no formatting errors, no writing errors
(1 point)
Followed directions and less than 3 formatting and/or writing error.
Current Issues Wetland Mitigation_Irow 2009 jlarndt_51
Presents history and current status of wetland mitigation along utility rights-of-way. Presented at the INternational Conference on environmental Concerns in Rights-of-Way Management, 2009, Portland OR.
The Alberta Government is considering amendments to water allocation and water licence transfer systems in the province. This review is being driven by issues of overallocation of water in some areas of the province and the economic and environmental issues that overallocation has caused.
Jason Unger, Staff Counsel with the Environmental Law Centre, presented a summary review of the three reports that are informing the government’s review, as well as issues that arise from a “First in Time, First in Right” (FITFIR) system, such as whether the licence transfer system is equitable and whether transfers and FITFIR adequately address environmental and economic concerns.
How EPA plans will implement Cap & Trade, increase federal spending, negatively impact state/municipal budgets, eliminate jobs, and hurt industry/businesses
3 things in 10 minutes: 1- changes to state SW rules for next spring 2- SW Utility District Tips 2- the answer to why stormwater vexes you
You’ve heard about MassDEP’s recharge work You’ve heard about Federal, Sate and Local stormwater rules Third part of my presentation: your expectations
This is what many of us assume a “real” stormwater program would be
This is how stormwater has been described to me quite a few times sicne I started working on Stormwater Environmental activists – who want more protective rules Developers – who want standardization, not different rules in different locations Regulators – who prefer one set of rules
Add these up and you get a lot of different ways in which pollution from stormwater is being addressed at federal, state and local levels This is the way it is Accepting Stormwater on stormwater’s terms Because the world is not made up of point sources and point source programs But the question remains: is stormwater doing the job?
Today’s Meeting is about Stormwater Basics in Massachusetts Federal State Local
Reconvened the Stormwater Advisory Committee Update for Recharge , nor a comprehensive rewrite of the Handbooks Will make corrections Update for recharge based on what we’ve learned in last decade or so Spring publication Recharge Design Subcommittee: More accurate methodology ~ allow more recharge when soils permit Looking at 5 choices of methodologies Dynamic between complexity to mirror conditions and simple for everyday use by various audiences Policy Subcommittee: How to encourage LID How to accommodate specific needs of “ultra-urban” areas BMP Subcommittee: Adequacy of BMPs for WQ and recharge flow Add to guidance additional classers of BMPs Correct Stormwater Advisory Committee will continue its work past the Spring publication deadline
Rain Garden Pembroke
Bioretention Wilmington
Permeable Pavers Hyannis
That depend son what job you expect stormwater programs to do Let’s read through these comments together
They come from a state which recently revised it stormwater rules It’s interesting to see a state say right our front that its program won’t by itself cure the entire problem Point source programs tend to have that kind of expectation
It describes a web of regs and incentives collabortaion of dfederal stete and local levels all occurring over time working synergistically to continually reduce pollution So what state was this from? Maybe the way we do stormwater right now – Einsteinian, relativistically IS the best way to work on stormwater
MassDEP’s newly re-organized web site How to get to the stormwater information My e-mail address for info about stormwater updates