SACS IE Report 2007-2008 - Civil Engineering

nothingstockingsΜηχανική

30 Οκτ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 10 μήνες)

62 εμφανίσεις

19208



End
-
of
-
Year IE

REPORT

2007
-
2008






Name of Academic Department
:


Civil Engineering


Degree
(
s
) or Program(s)

covered by this report
:

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering


Date Submitted:

June 15, 2008


Submi
tted by
:

Robert Yuan, Professor and Chair


For each outcome iden
tified in your 2007
-
2008

IE

Pla
n, describe the assessments used to
gather data, summarize the
results (data gathered),
describe
how the results have been
reviewed, and

describe

acti
ons (changes
or improvements) planned
to improve student
learning
.




Outcome 1


State the outcome:



An ability

to apply knowledge of mathematics, science and engineering



Describe a
ssessment(s) conducted:



D
evelop rubrics and dimensions for evaluation:




The categories of rubr
ics range from “exemplary (4),

“satisfactory (3)”, “developing (2)”, to
“unsatisfactory (1)”, and the three dimensions for each category includ
e “applying knowledge of
mathematics”, “applying knowledge of science fundamentals
”, and “applying knowledge of engineering
fundamentals
”.


Summarize d
ata gathered

(complete data may be uploaded to the SACS site in a separate file)
:



A representative seni
or level

course, CVEN 4350
-
Hydraulics Engineering

was selected


for Outcome 1

evaluation. All CE faculty participated in several collective assessment sessions, which

includs

evaluation, discussion, and rating each rubric and dimension.
Class notes, students’ home work,
d
esign projects collected from a group of students in the cl
ass were used for direct assessment. The
average rating results

of
30

students

were documented and presented in the following.




Applying Knowledge of Mathematics




---

3.78



Applying Knowledge of Science Fundamentals



---

3.64






Applying Know
ledge of Engineering Fundamentals

---

3.87


19208


Rubrics and Dimensions for Outcome 1






An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science and engineering






Category/

Dimensions

4

(
Exemplary
)

3

(Satisfactory)

2

(Developing)

1

(Unsatisfactory)


Rating

Applying
knowledge of
Mathematics

Effectively apply
mathematics
knowledge such
as linear algebra,
differential
equations, and
numerical
methods to
develop and solve
equations for civil
engineering
applications

Clear evidence t
o

apply mathematics
knowledge such
as linear algebra
,
difference

equations
,

and

numerical
methods to solve
equations for civil
engineering
applications


Some evidence of
ability to apply

mathematics
knowledge such
as linear algebra
,
differential
equatio
ns, and
numerical
methods to solve

equations for civil

engineering
applications

Not able to apply
mathematics
knowledge such
as linear algebra
,
differential
equations, and
numerical
methods to

solve
equations for civil
engineering
applications

3.80

App
lying
knowledge of
Science
fundamentals

Effectively apply
physics, chemical,
biological
principles to
develop equations
for civil
engineering
applications


Effectively apply
physics principles
to develop
equations for civil
engineering
applications

Have kn
owledge
of physics
principles for the
civil engineering
applications

Have minimum
knowledge physics
principles in the
civil engineering
applications

3.50

Applying
knowledge of
Engineering
fundamentals

Effectively apply
engineering
knowledge such
as static
s,
mechanics of
solids, fluid
mechanics,
material principles
to develop
equations for civil
engineering
applications

Effectively apply
engineering
knowledge such
as statics,
mechanics of
solids, fluid
mechanics to
develop equations
for civil
engineering
a
pplications

Have knowledge
of engineering
knowledge such
as statics,
mechanics of
solids, fluid
mechanics for the
civil engineering
applications

Have minimum
knowledge of
engineering
knowledge such
as statics,
mechanics of
solids, fluid
mechanics for the
c
ivil engineering
applications

3.80







How were results reviewed?


Discussion on the assessment process through faculty meetings suggest
ed

that
the students in the class
have good

background in mathematics, science and engineering fundamentals
. T
he cha
ir and faculty
recognize that the current

adjunct

instructor had done an excellent job to teach those courses.


Was the target met?:

19208


The assessment results for each dimension exceed the satisfactory measure of 3
.00

for Outcome 1.


Actions

recommended
for

learning

improvement
:


The faculty provided some recommendations to further improve the quality of knowledge provided

to the students in the class and help each exemplary assessment measures.


(1) It is recommended that
the department needs a full
-
time fac
ulty to teach courses in Water Resources
Engineering so the students would have access to contact faculty
all the

time.


(2) It is recommended that the
equipment in the Hydraulics Lab needs to be renovated, and new design
project or new experimental work s
hould be implemented in the lab to enhance students’ hands
-
on
experiences.












Outcome 2



State the outcome:


“An ability to design, conduct experiments, and interpret data



Describe a
ssessment(s) conducted:


Develop rubrics and dimensions fo
r evaluation:


Four categories of rubrics and five dimensions were used for evaluation. The category of rubrics range

from “exemplary (4)”, “adequate (3)”, “marginal (2)”, an
d “unacceptable (1)”. The three

dimensions for

each category of rubrics include
“i
dentify required experimental components based on a prescribed
objective
”, “design the procedure and perform experiments
”,
and “analysis results of experiments”.









Summarize d
ata gathered

(complete data may be uploaded to the SACS site in a separate

file):


A junior level course, CVEN 3310


Water Chemistry in Environmental Engineering
, was selected for
Outcome 2

evaluation. All CE faculty members participated in several collective assessment sessions,
which included evaluation, discussion, and ratin
g each rubric and dimension. Class notes, students’ home
work, and experimental project and reports collected from a group of students in the class w
e
re used for
19208

direct measurement.
The ratings were

averaged

25

students
’ work in the class,

the results are
shown in
the following.






Identify required experimental components based on a prescribed objectives

---

3.25



Design the procedure and perform experiments





---

3.25



Analysis of experiments









---

3.5




Rubrics and Rating Results

for Outcome 2



An ability to design, conduct experiments, and interpret data

.



Category/

Dimensions

4

(
Exemplary
)

3

(Satisfactory)

2

(Developing)

1

(Unsatisfactory)


Rating

Identify
required
experimental
components
based on a
prescribed
objective

Identify all the
req
uired
components of
experiments and
understand the
need of all
required
components for
the prescribed
objective

Identify major
required
components of
experiments and
understand the
need of the
identified
components for
the prescribed
objective

Miss one

or two
required
components in the
experimental
design to meet the
prescribed
objective

Do not understand
the experimental
objective and the
need of performing
experimental
investigation

3.25

Design the
procedure
and perform
experiments

Lay out a clea
r
step
-
by
-
step
procedure and
perform the
designed
experiment that
facilitate collection
of empirical data


Lay out a rough
procedure that
provides
guidelines for
successfully
performing the
designed
experiment for
data collection

Miss one or two
major step
s in the
designed
experimental
procedure that
may lead to data
collection
problems

Have no capability
of describing the
procedure for the
desired
experiments

3.25

Analyze
results of
experiments

Collect all the
required
experimental data
and draw logical
c
onclusion to
thoroughly address
the objective of the
experiment based
on the analysis of
the collected data

Collect the key
experimental data
and draw
conclusion to
address the
primary objective
of the experiment
based on the
analysis of the
collected d
ata

Collect the key
experimental data
but have one or
two flaws in the
data analysis that
miss the
experimental
objective

Have no capability
for data collection
and analysis

3.5


How were results reviewed? (update if subsequent review occurs)
:


All CE ful
l
-
time and adjunct faculty

members

participated

in several

collective assessment

sessions

through
CE department meetings, which included evaluation, discussion, and rating each rubric and
dimension.


19208






Was the target met?


Several

projects
and reports

were evaluated, t
he assessment results for each dim
ension were tabulated
,

The results indicated that all students in the class have achieved

the
target rating which is above 3.0 for
Outcome 2.


Actions

recommended

for
learning
improvement
:


(1) Based on t
he score (3.25/4.0) of the assessment dimension “identify required experimental components
based on a prescribed objective”, it appears that there is room for improvement in terms of communicating the
required experimental components to the students in a m
ore clear fashion. We suspect that this is caused by the
fact that the CE students are not particularly well versed in the laboratory equipment and chemicals, and
somewhat lack of experience in a typical wet chemistry laboratory for water and wastewater an
alysis. To
achieve the improvement, we implement one additional laboratory project to introduce the apparatus, chemical
and general procedure in water/wastewater analytical laboratory to the students.




(2) Based on the score (3.25/4.0) of the dimension

“design the procedure and perform experiments“, it appears
that the students’ experimental design capability can be further enhanced. This is probably due to that the
majority of experiments are designed by the instructor to save class time. To improve th
e students’ experimental
design skills, we will gradually increases the number of experiments that require students to perform the
experimental design,
and observe if such a change will improve the score or this dimension in future
assessments. The assessm
ent results will be reported in the next assessment cycle.








Outcome 3



State the outcome:


“An ab
ility to function on multi
-
disciplinary teams




Describe a
ssessment(s) conducted:


Develop rubrics and dimensions for evaluation:


Four

categories of
rubrics and five

dimensions were used for direct measurement. The rubric for

assessing Outcome 3 has five

dimensions includi
ng “participation in team planning and decision
making”, “collaboration/performance of the duty assigned
”,

“team communication”, co
nflict
management”, and “team planning and collaboration”

The category of each dimensions ranges from
“exemplary (4)”,

“satisfactory (3)”, “developing (2)”, to “unsatisfactory (1)”.


19208




Summarize d
ata gathered

(complete data may be uploaded to the SACS sit
e in a separate file)
:


A representativ
e senior level course, CVEN 4212
-
CE Systems Design Project

was selected for Outcome 3
evaluation.
Two team projects were presented on December 3, 2007. Based on the recommendation for
improvement (Fall 2006) industria
l practitioners were invited as mentors to guide the students
throughout the project. The project titles and mentors information are as follows.


(1)

Office Building Project


Ken Weatherford


Project Manager


ENGlobal Engineering, Inc.


(2)

Pipe Rack Crossin
g Project


John Shackelford


President, Neches Engineers


All CE faculty

and two industry professionals

participated in several collective assessment sessions, which

included evaluation, discussion, and r
ating each rubric and dimension
. The final rating
was averaged

from two groups of 12

students,

and the
r
esults are summarized in the following.





















Results of Evaluation from










Faculty Mentors Students



Participation in team plannin
g and decision making


3.7 3.5

3
.9



Collaboration/performance
of the duty assigned



3.8 3.7 3.9



T
eam communication






3.7 3.8 3.9



Co
nflict management






3.6 3.7 3.9



Team planning

and collaboration





3.7

3.7 4.0





Rubrics and Rating Results

for Outcome 3












An ability to function on multi
-
discipli
nary teams”


Course: CVEN 4212





Semester: Fall 2007



Category/

Dimensions

4

(
Exemplary
)

3

(Satisfactory)

2

(Developing)

1

(Unsatisfacto
ry)

Ratings

F M S

Participation in
team planning
and decision
making

Contributes
ideas to team
planning and
fully participates
in decision
making to insure
a well
developed plan.

Participates in
team planning
and decision
making. Does
not identify

and
try to fix any
failings in plan.

Let others do
the planning.
Provides
minimal input
only.

Does not
participate in team
planning and
decision making at
all.

3.7,3.5,3.9

19208

Collaboration/

performance of
the duty
assigned

Performs all
duties of
assigned
team
role. Does not
miss any
meetings and
accommodates
others time
constraints.


Performs nearly
all assigned
duties. Does not
miss any
meetings.

Performs very
few assigned
duties. Misses
at most one or
two meetings.

Does not perform
any duties of
assigne
d team
role. Misses most
meetings.

3.8,3.7,3.9

Team
communications

Listens and
speaks fair
amount.

Listens, but
sometimes talks
too much.

Usually does
most of the
talking


rarely
allows others to
speak.

Is always talking


never allows
anyone else to
spe
ak.

3.7,3.8,3.9

Conflict
management

Recognizes
interpersonal
issues and does
solve them.

Recognizes
interpersonal
issues and tries
to solve them.

Recognizes that
interpersonal
issues occur
and should be
addressed, but
does not try.

Does not deal with
inte
rpersonal
issues. Always the
other person’s
fault.

3.6,3.7,3.9

Team planning
and
collaboration

Project planning
and tasks
performed
indicate
excellent
collaboration
among team
members.

Project planning
and tasks
performed
indicate good
collaboration
amon
g team
members.

Project planning
and tasks
performed
indicate poor
collaboration
among team
members.

Project planning
and tasks
performed indicate
lacking of
collaboration
among team
members.

3.7,3.7,4.0







How

were results reviewed? (update if subsequ
ent review occurs)
:


All CE faculty

and two industry professionals participated in the

evaluation sessions for Outcome 3
through
students’ presentation and
CE faculty meetings
.





Was the target met?


The evaluation results shown above indicate that civil

engineering graduates perform satisfactory on

all

four

categories of rubrics

and five dimensions

for

Outcome 3



Acti
ons
recommended

for
learning
improvement
:


(1)
Industrial practitioners provided great suggestions, advises and practical experience in

the classroom
for our students. A continuation of inviting project mentors from industry is recommended.


(2)

The ratings from student peer review appear to be higher than those given by the
faculty and project
mentors. M
ore restrictive rating criteria
ne
ed

to be revised for students’ review.



19208



Outcome 4


State the outcome:

“An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems”


Describe a
ssessment(s) conducted:


Development of Rubrics and Dimensions


Four categories of rubrics and fiv
e categories of dimensions were used for direct measurement. Each
rubric assessing Outcome 4 has 3 dimensions including (a) Identify type of problems and design
requirements, (b) Formulate solution methods, and (c) Solve engineering problems.
The category

for each
dimension ranges from “exemplary (4)”, “Satisfactory (3)”, “Marginal”, and “Unacceptable”.




Summarize d
ata gathered
:


A senior level course, CVEN 4380
-
Reinforced Concrete Design, has been selected for Outcome 4
evaluation. Class notes, students
’ home work, exams, class projects were collected

and documented.











Rubrics and Dimensions for Outcome 4



An ability to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems




Category/

Dimensions

4

(
Exemplary
)

3

(Satisfactory)

2

(Marginal)

1

(Unacc
eptable)


Rating

Identify type
of problems
and design
requirements

Clear evidence of
ability to identify
type of problems
and design
requirements
based on problem
statements and
objectives

Some evidence of
ability to identify
type of problems
and design

requirements
based on problem
statements and
objectives

Little evidence of
ability to identify
type of problems
and design
requirements
based on problem
statements and
objectives

No evidence of
ability to identify
type of problems
and design
requireme
nts
based on problem
statements and
objectives

3.50

Formulate
solution
methods

Clear evidence of
ability to formulate
solution methods
based on
mathematical
computations and
engineering
principles


Some evidence of
ability to formulate
solution methods
based on
mathematical
computations and
engineering
principles

Little evidence of
ability to formulate
solution methods
based on
mathematical
computations and
engineering
principles

No evidence of
ability to formulate
solution methods
based on
mathematical
computations and
engineering
principles

3.50

Solve
Clear evidence of
Some evidence of
Little evidence of
No evidence of
3.25

19208

engineering
problems

ability to solve
engineering
problems by
utilizing design
codes and
computer software

ability to solve
engineering
problems by
utilizing design
cod
es and
computer software

ability to solve
engineering
problems by
utilizing design
codes and
computer software

ability to solve
engineering
problems by
utilizing design
codes and
computer software


Reviewer Comments:

The performance has an average evaluation of 3.42 which
meets the criteria of
Outcome (4
). However, additional concentration on software utilization and designing whole structures rather
than individual components can improve the results. This approach wi
ll be implemented in the next academic
year.


Evidence from program product:

*CVEN 4380 Reinforced Concrete Design


How

were results reviewed?


All CE faculty members participated in a collective assessment for evaluation, and rating each dimension.

The a
verage rating results were tabulated for a class of 50 students as follows.


Was the target met?


The results indicated that the senior students in the class had satisfied all four rubrics and three
dimensions in assessment for a score above 3.0.


Actions
recommended
for
learning
improvement
:


(1)

It is recommended that additional concentration on software utilization,

(2)

It is recommended that design needs to emphasize whole structure design rather for individual
component.


















19208



Outcome 5 (optional
)


State the outcome:



Describe a
ssessment(s) conducted:




Summarize d
ata gathered

(complete data may be uploaded to the SACS site in a separate file)
:




How
were results
review
ed? (update if subsequent review occurs)
:




Actions
recommended
for
learnin
g
improvement
: