1. Preliminary Assessment of Experimental Sophomore EE Courses James G. Harris and Kena Burke Presentation to EE Department October 15, 2003 Outline: Background Assessment Approach Preliminary results Conclusions to date

2. Background Experimental sophomore year courses –implemented in AY 2001-02 – prerequisite material for the junior year –replaced lower division circuits and electronics courses with DSP first and integrated circuits and electronics courses –currently undergoing assessment

3. Background (continued) Cohort sequence: –EE 112, EE 211/241, EE 212/242, EE 208/248 –14 units - 11 units lecture, 3 labs Experimental sequence: –EE x220, EE x221, EE x222 –12 units - 4 unit studio per quarter

4. Background (continued) EE x220 –DSP First: Georgia Tech developed –introduction to phasors, first/second order –frequency response and z transforms EE x221,x222 –integrated circuits and electronics –followed time allocation of EE 208/248 –resistive circuits, then capacitors, inductors

5. Assessment Approach Choose cohort from Spring 2001 GPA Compare grades in junior year courses CENG assessment office performed data collection - Kena Burke Comparison through Spring 2003

6. cohortsx-students

7. Preliminary Results Compared means and standard deviation of grades in junior courses –table summarizes Reviewing grades below C Retention rate comparison

11. Preliminary Results Retention rate comparison Experimental sequence –55 students started sequence –10 did not continue after EE x220 only 4 did not “pass” with C or better –1 withdrew for coop after EE x221 –4 did not pass after EE x220 –summary: 8/55 did not pass, rest C or better

12. Conclusions to date Retention better –better “impedance match” No harm done Maybe less is better for lower division –less circuits –same electronics –and DSP Also less resources to deliver