Paper Authors

Abstract

NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

Session 2793

A Model for Faculty Involvement in Closing Outcomes Assessment Loops Franklin G. King, Keith A. Schimmel North Carolina A&T State University

Abstract

Two key questions related to implementing the ABET EC2000 criteria are how to effectively use valuable faculty time and how to effectively evaluate outcomes assessment data to make improvements in a program. An outcomes assessment model to address these issues is presented. In this model, faculty time is limited to the evaluation of courses and the review of summarized results processed by administrators and staff. A critical component of the model is the use of course evaluation committees to oversee and manage each of the courses. These committees, composed of 3-4 faculty members, are charged with maintaining and revising the course learning objectives, assessment instruments, and performance targets for each departmental course. The committees are also charged with preparing the course assessment examination in core courses. The current assessment instruments include course exam questions, employer surveys, alumni surveys, student surveys, faculty surveys, advisory board meeting minutes, and advisory board evaluation of limited student portfolios. Based on the assessment results and performance targets, the course committees evaluate whether course learning objectives and program outcomes have been met. The committees make decisions relating to changes in courses and make recommendations relating to program changes to the department outcomes assessment committee.

I. Introduction

Engineering programs in the U.S. are accredited by the Engineering Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (EAC/ABET)1. In the past, programs were evaluated using a set of criteria that prescribed most of the courses and activities that a program had to offer to be accredited. If a department followed ABET’s recommendations, their programs were generally accredited. Beginning in 2001, all programs are being evaluated based on the outcomes of the programs and the skills of their graduates. Universities have more freedom to offer innovative programs than before, however, they must convince ABET that their graduates have the set of skills and abilities that are required by the EC 2000 criteria. Each program’s outcomes must also be linked to the objectives of the program and the missions of the College and University. In addition to a process for measuring and evaluating their outcomes, Universities must have outcomes assessment (OA) processes in-place to ensure the continuous improvement of the program. The continuous improvement processes must include input from the constituencies that the program serves. This exciting new paradigm in engineering education is presenting many challenges and opportunities for faculty. The assessment challenge was summarized by Denton2 as follows:

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference Exposition Copyright  2001, American Society for Engineering Education

• Citation

• Format
  • APA
  • APA - LaTeX bibitem
  • MLA
  • MLA - LaTeX bibitem
  • Bibtex
  • EndNote - RIS

King, F., & Schimmel, K. (2001, June), A Model For Faculty Involvement In Closing The Outcomes Assessment Loop Paper presented at 2001 Annual Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 10.18260/1-2--9562