1. Progress in Graduate Attribute Assessment in Mechanical Engineering at McMaster University M.F. Lightstone July 2014 1

2. Organizational Structure Faculty of Engineering Grad. Attributes Comm. – Formed in early 2010 to develop strategy/guidelines for graduate attributes assessment – 1 member from each department – Fall 2010: set of ‘indicators’ for each attribute were developed Mech Eng Departmental Grad Attributes Comm. – Formed in early 2011 – Mandate: assist faculty with curriculum mapping, measurement of indicators, continuous improvement, rubric development and documentation of measurements. 2

3. Mech. Eng. Progress – Early 2011 Curriculum mapping of indicators was performed based on 2010/11 calendar. For each course and indicator, instructor assessed: 0 - indicator not covered 1 – mentioned 2 – taught and graded 3 – significant part of the course Revealed areas for continuous improvement: – Technical communications – Professionalism – Ethics – Teamwork – Conflict resolution – sustainability 3

4. Mechanical Engineering Progress: Continuous Improvement (2011/12) Major changes made to curriculum (2011/12): – New course MECH ENG 2A03 (“Design Communication”): has module on technical communication. Also added AUs for CEAB input based assessment. – ENGINEER4A03 (“Engineering & Social Responsibility”): includes professionalism and ethics. Now a required course. 4

5. Mechanical Engineering Progress Continuous Improvement (2011/12) Capstone design course (MECH ENG 4M06): Incorporated additional lectures on: – Professionalism and ethics (Ross Judd) – Library research (Andrew Colgoni, McMaster Library) – Teamwork/conflict resolution/emotional intelligence (Sonia Hawrylyshyn, Manager, Employee Career Services, Human Resources McMaster) – Success in the Workplace (Dr. John Mackinnon, Vice- President Engineering, AMEC-NSS) – Students were tested on lecture content. 5

6. Measurement – 2011/12 – Trial Year MECH ENG 4M06 – Capstone design: – Introduced rubrics for assessment of presentations (2 per year) and final report (April 2012). – Rubrics were carefully written to incorporate ‘indicators’ associated with: engineering design communication sustainability economics and project management – Created web-based survey to assess indicators associated with “individual and team work” 6

7. Measurement (2011/12 - TRIAL) (con’t) Knowledge base for engineering: (Indicator: “competence in engineering fundamentals”) Measure in core courses, span years 2-4: MECH ENG 4V03 “Thermo-fluids Sys. Des”(fall – 2011) MECH ENG 3F04 “Numerical Methods” (fall – 2011) MECH ENG 2W04 “Thermodynamics”(winter – 2012) MECH ENG 4R03 “Control Systems” (winter – 2012) Method for measurement: performance on specific questions on tests/exams 7

8. 2011/12 – What did we learn? Professors were unclear as to how to do measurements Training the faculty on how to actually do GA measurements was critical Needed a step-by-step method that would remove the “fuzziness” and also provide some background information on “jargon” used. 8

9. Workshop on GA Measurement – April 2012 Ken, Carlos and Marilyn worked on developing a faculty wide workshop on how to actually do GA measurement. Includes: – Background on GA, indicators, Learning Outcomes, Bloom’s Taxonomy,… – How to create a rubric – How to do the measurement – the logistics and examples – What to include in the final report – Importance of continuous improvement First workshop given on April 25, 2012. Has been repeated numerous times at both Faculty of Engineering level and to individual departments. 9

10. At the Department Level Measurements are essentially done at the departmental level and organized by the Department GA Committee (but with some guidance from Faculty level committee). In Mechanical Engineering – measurements are done for all CORE courses. Key point: ALL professors are expected to participate! Departments responsible for: – Developing a “Measurement Plan” for each academic year – Reviewing the quality of the reports that each professor submits (checklist provided) – Creating “year-end” report that integrates the measurements taken from individual courses The importance of sharing documentation and processes between departments Organizing all the material: Marilyn developed website that facilitated sharing of key documents and processes 10

11. Summary of TimeLine Fall 2010 – Developed indicators (Faculty level) Early 2011 – Indicator mapping (Dept level) 2011/12 – Trial Year – Addressed gaps in mapping (Dept level) – Trial measurements in a few courses (Dept level) – GA measurement workshop (Faculty level – April 2012) 2012/13 – Nearly Real Measurements – Measured indicators for 6 attributes for all core courses – Instructors are still learning, so not all reports at same quality – GA measurement workshop given again + presentations by each dept (May 2013) – Summer 2013 – Faculty streamlined indicator list, dept did a remapping – Note that Marilyn was on sabbatical that year 2013/14 – Real Measurements – Measured indicators for other attributes for core courses (plus “Knowledge Base” measured every year) – Help from Minha on teamwork and communication 2014/15 – CEAB Evaluation year – Bring in “stakeholders” into Department GA committee – Prepare for site visit in fall of 2015. 11

12. Important Points Need to provide clear training to professors on how to do the measurements Sharing of documentation, rubrics, processes, between departments is critical Document measurement results and store documents centrally Check for continuous improvement (have professors made changes identified in previous measurement) 12

13. Documents that U. Guelph might want to see: GA measurement workshop presentation Checklist for GA reports Sample measurement report Sample ‘checklist’ for reviewing GA reports GA – suggested management structure document by Marilyn 13