1 UCSC Computer Engineering Objectives, Outcomes, & Feedback Tracy Larrabee Joel Ferguson Richard Hughey.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
For AS 229 (Environmental Technology). 1. A competent environmental technologist with strong understanding of fundamental scientific and technological.
Advertisements

Curriculum Maps Margaret Kasimatis, PhD VP for Academic Planning & Effectiveness.
Assessment of Undergraduate Programs Neeraj Mittal Department of Computer Science The University of Texas at Dallas.
ABET-ASAC Accreditation Workshop ABET Criteria and Outcomes Assessment
1 A pupil from whom nothing is ever demanded which he cannot do, never does all he can. John Stuart Mill.
Accreditation Strategy for the BYU CE En Dept. Presentation to External Review Board October 20, 2000.
Computer Science Department Program Improvement Plan December 3, 2004.
ABET Introduction of ABET to CE 203 Tim Ellis, Ph.D., P.E.
Outcomes-Based Accreditation: An Agent for Change and Quality Improvement in Higher Education Programs A. Erbil PAYZIN Founding Member and Past Chairman.
ABET Engineering Criteria 2000 To maintain ABET accreditation, Engineering Departments must demonstrate that all of their graduates have the following.
DIPOL Quality Practice in Training at İstanbul Technical University Maritime Faculty Dr.Banu Tansel.
ABET Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
Capstone Design Project (CDP) Civil Engineering Department First Semester 1431/1432 H 10/14/20091 King Saud University, Civil Engineering Department.
Assessment College of Engineering A Key for Accreditation February 11, 2009.
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology - is a non governmental organization that accredits post secondary educational organizations in : 1)
ABET Accreditation Status CISE IAB MeeertingJanuary 24, CEN program fully ABET-accredited (in 2006) until 2012: no concerns, no weaknesses, no deficiencies.
ABET Accreditation (Based on the presentations by Dr. Raman Unnikrishnan and W. J. Wilson) Assoc. Prof. Zeki BAYRAM EMU Computer Engineering Dept. 14 January.
CHEN Program Assessment Advisory Board Meeting June 3 rd, 2012.
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
A Decade of Experience On Outcome Based Accreditation: Still a Long Way To Go A. Erbil PAYZIN Bülent E. PLATIN Chair, MÜDEK Executive Board Member, MÜDEK.
OUTCOME BASED LEARNING- CONTINUES IMPROVEMENT. Motivation  PEC??  Continues Improvement.
OBE Briefing.
ABET’s coming to Rose! Your involvement Monday, Nov 5, 2012.
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRAM CHEN Program Assessment Advisory Board Meeting May 21, 2013.
Overview of the Department’s ABET Criterion 3 Assessment Process.
ABET Student Forum September 20, Review of the criterion Criterion 2: Objectives Criterion 3: Outcomes Criterion 5: Curriculum.
Implementing Outcomes Assessment: An Approach Based on Competencies Steve Mickelson Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering.
GLOBAL ACCREDITATION TRENDS Russel C. Jones. Ph.D., P.E. World Expertise LLC USA and UAE.
1 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MDR (18 th -27 th November 2013) -MDR Deliverables clearly defined? -Individual team member MDR deliverables.
 Introduction Introduction  Contents of the report Contents of the report  Assessment : Objectives OutcomesObjectivesOutcomes  The data :
Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs Effective for Evaluations during the Accreditation Cycle.
EE Program Student Advising Prof. Michael Green These slides can be found at:
ABET 2000 Preparation: the Final Stretch Carnegie Institute of Technology Department Heads Retreat July 29, 1999.
EENG 4910/4990 Engineering Design Murali Varanasi September 02, 2009.
1 A pupil from whom nothing is ever demanded which he cannot do, never does all he can. John Stuart Mill.
Incorporating Engineering Standards in the Major Design Experience William E. Kelly Department of Civil Engineering The Catholic University of America.
Supporting ABET Assessment and Continuous Improvement for Engineering Programs William E. Kelly Professor of Civil Engineering The Catholic University.
Cross Cutting Initiatives - Education William E. Kelly Professor of Civil Engineering The Catholic University of America.
ABET is Coming! What I need to know about ABET, but was afraid to ask.
CEN ABET Mini- Retreat March 4, CEN ABET Mini-Retreat Agenda: –State of the Assessments –Discussion on loop closings. –CSE Program Objectives/Outcomes.
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MDR Report.
Copyright © 2011 by ABET, Inc. and TMS 1 December 2, 2008 ABET Update UMC Meeting April 6, 2015 San Francisco, CA Chester J. Van Tyne
Copyright © 2014 by ABET Proposed Revisions to Criteria 3 and 5 Charles Hickman Managing Director, Society, Volunteer and Industry Relations AIAA Conference.
ABET Accreditation Status CISE IAB MeeertingOctober 6, CEN program fully ABET-accredited (in 2006) until 2012: no concerns, no weaknesses, no deficiencies.
HU113_Assignment31 HU113: Technical Report Writing Prof. Abdelsamie Moet Teaching Assistant: Mrs. Rana El-Gohary Fall 2012/13 Pharos University in Alexandria.
CEN Faculty MeetingMarch 31, ABET Accreditation Brief history. –1980’s: faculty qualifications sufficed. –1990s: quality of courses, materials, and.
Engineering Standards in Capstone Design William E. Kelly Department of Civil Engineering The Catholic University of America Washington, DC ASEE.
Gateway Engineering Education Coalition Background on ABET Overview of ABET EC 2000 Structure Engineering Accreditation and ABET EC2000 – Part I.
CISE IAB MeetingOctober 15, ABET Accreditation Brief history. –1980’s: faculty qualifications sufficed. –1990s: quality of courses, materials, and.
Preparing for ABET visit Prof. Dr. Lerzan Özkale Management Engineering Head of Department November 2010.
ABET Accreditation Criterion 4: Continuous Improvement Direct Assessment of Learning Outcomes Dr. Abdel-Rahman Al-Qawasmi Associate Professor EE Department.
ENGINEERING ANALYSIS. WHAT IS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS? ABET Required Program Outcomes: (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
1 Assessment of Undergraduate Programs Neeraj Mittal Department of Computer Science The University of Texas at Dallas (UTD) January 22, 2016.
UGSC: Undergraduate Studies Committee Haiyun Bian, Jay Dejongh, Travis Doom, Natsuhiko Futamura, Prabhaker Mateti *, Eric Matson, Karen Meyer, Michael.
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING POLICIES THE WHAT, HOW AND WHY.
University of Utah Program Goals and Objectives Program Goals and Objectives Constituents U of U, COE, ASCE, IAB Constituents U of U, COE, ASCE, IAB Strategic.
Assessment of Industrial Internships Karyn Biasca.
Engineering programs must demonstrate that their graduates have the following: Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) ETP 2005.
ABET ACREDITATION By: Elizabeth Rivera Oficina de Acreditación.
Funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the authors and do.
1/11/ Overview MAJOR QUALIFYING PROJECTS ABET ACREEDITATION BIM UNDERGRADUATE COURSE AND PROJECTS CONCLUSIONS 1/11/
ABET Accreditation College of IT and Computer Engineering
Continuous Program Improvement
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
Class Agenda Capstone Design Project Process 10 min
Proposed Revisions to Criteria 3 and 5
Department of Computer Science The University of Texas at Dallas
Development of ABET Syllabus
Assessment and Accreditation
CE 220 Professionalism A pupil from whom nothing is ever demanded which he cannot do, never does all he can. John Stuart Mill.
Presentation transcript:

1 UCSC Computer Engineering Objectives, Outcomes, & Feedback Tracy Larrabee Joel Ferguson Richard Hughey

2 ABET Criterion (abbreviated) Criterion 1. Students –The program must evaluate student performance, advise students regarding curricular and career matters, and monitor student’s progress to foster their success in achieving program outcomes, thereby enabling them as graduates to attain program objectives. –Transfer student policies…. Criterion 2. Program Educational Objectives –Each program for which an institution seeks accreditation or reaccreditation must have in place: –(a) published educational objectives that are consistent with the mission of the institution and these criteria –(b) a process that periodically documents and demonstrates that the objectives are based on the needs of the program's various constituencies –(c) an assessment and evaluation process that periodically documents and demonstrates the degree to which these objectives are attained.

3 Computer engineering focuses on the design, analysis and application of computers and on their applications as components of systems. The UCSC Department of Computer Engineering sustains and strengthens its teaching and research program to provide students with inspiration and quality education in the theory and practice of computer engineering. The UCSC CE Objective

4 ABET Criterion (abbreviated) Criterion 3. Program Outcomes –Engineering programs must demonstrate that their students attain the following outcomes…(next page)…. –Program outcomes are outcomes (a) through (k) plus any additional outcomes that may be articulated by the program. Program outcomes must foster attainment of program educational objectives. –There must be an assessment and evaluation process that periodically documents and demonstrates the degree to which the program outcomes are attained. Criterion 4. Continuous Improvement –Each program must show evidence of actions to improve the program… Criterion 5. Curriculum –…. Various credit and area requirements…. –Students must be prepared for engineering practice through a curriculum culminating in a major design experience based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work and incorporating appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints. Criterion 6. Faculty; Criterion 7. Facilities; Criterion 8. Support; Criterion 9. Program Criteria

5 The UCSC CE Outcomes A.An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering B.An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data C.An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability D.An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams E.An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems F.An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility G.An ability to communicate effectively H.The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context I.A recognition of the need for, and the ability to engage in, life-long learning J.A knowledge of contemporary issues K.An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work and incorporating appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints.

6 Outcome A: an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering 1.Quantitative: 90% of the CE121 students will have previously passed Physics 5C/N and EE70. 2.Quantitative: 90% of CE students will complete CE123b on first taking it. 3.Quantitative: 80% of CE students will complete CE121 on first taking it. 4.Subjective: The exit survey results on Question 1: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

7 Outcome A: an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering

, 2008: 93% of CE students taking 121 had completed EE70, P5C. One only missing 70L. The 2 of 3 that co-took physics 5C failed Goal 90% pass 123B first time. 3. Goal 80% pass on 121 first time.

9 Outcome B: an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data 1.Quantitative: 90% of CE students must pass CE123A on first taking. 2.Quantitative: Enrollment statistics for CE121: 90% of enrolled students must have passed Physics 5C/N and EE70. 3.Subjective: The exit survey results on Question 1: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

10 Outcome B: an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data

11 Outcome C: an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability 1.Quantitative: 90% of the CE121 students will have previously passed Physics 5C/N and EE70. 2.Quantitative: 90% of CE students will complete CE123b on first taking it. 3.Quantitative: 80% of CE students will complete CE121 on first taking it. 4.Subjective: The exit survey results on Question 1: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

12 Outcome C: an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability

13 Outcome A: an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering , 2008: 93% of CE students taking 121 had completed EE70, P5C. One only missing 70L. The 2 of 3 that co-took physics 5C failed Goal 90% pass 123B first time. 3. Goal 80% pass on 121 first time.

14 Outcome D: an ability to function on multi- disciplinary teams 1.Quantitative: 123B projects: 70% of the projects must have members from more than one program, and 90% of the projects must have members from more than one program concentration. 2.Quantitative: The Senior Portfolio: 100% of each year's portfolios must describe multi-disciplinary team experiences. 3.Subjective: The exit survey results on Questions 5 (function as a part of a team) and 9 (communicate with team members): An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

15 Outcome D: an ability to function on multi- disciplinary teams 2009: 86% of the 123a students (123b in Spring) come from more than one program.

16 Outcome E: an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems 1.Quantitative: 123A: 90% of the CE students taking CE123a must have their proposals approved by the faculty. 2.Quantitative: The Senior Portfolio: Students passing 123b receive an average of 4 out of 5 on the Problem Forumulation component of the Senior Portfolio evaluation. 3.Subjective: The exit survey results on Question 6: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

17 Outcome E: an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems 2009: 100% of the 123a proposals were approved by the faculty.

18 Outcome F: an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility 1.Quantitative: 80E: 90% of enrolled CE students pass the course. 2.Quantitative: Incidents of Academic Dishonesty: Fewer than 2% of CE students violate academic integrity each year; 0% have second occurrences. 3.Subjective: The exit survey results on Question 10: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

19 Outcome F: an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility : average of 5.5 incidents of academic dishonesty per year. 3 of total are second incidents (1 of the 3 left program, 2 of 3 readmitted and graduated) : pass rate of CE students in 80E is 94%

20 Outcome G: an ability to communicate effectively 1.Quantitative: The SOE Alumni and Industrial collaborators at the CE123B design contest must give an average of 4 for criteria G to all design teams containing CE members. 2.Quantitative: 123B grades in oral and written communication: 100% of the CE students receive passing grades in these two aspects of the course. 3.Quantitative: The Senior Portfolio: students receive an average of 4 out of 5 on the Communication component of the Senior Portfolio evaluation. 4.Subjective: The exit survey results on Questions 7 (written), 8 (oral) and 9 (intra-team): An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

21 Outcome G: an ability to communicate effectively

22 Outcome H: the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context 1.Subjective: WASC Accreditation: UCSC maintains WASC accreditation 2.Quantitative: The SOE Alumni and Industrial collaborators at the CE123B design contest must give an average of 4 for criteria H to all design teams containing CE members. 3.Quantitative: 123B: 100% of the students consider the impact of their projects on society and the environment. 4.Subjective: The exit survey results on Question 8: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

23 Outcome H: the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context

24 Outcome I: a recognition of the need for, and the ability to engage in, life-long learning 1.Subjective: 123A: 100% of CE students analyzed the knowledge and skills that were needed at the beginning of the project and developed strategies for acquiring the missing knowledge and skills. 2.Quantitative: In 2009 we added a new question to the Senior Portfolio summary questions: "To what extent was it necessary to learn new information or skills not taught in a previous course in order to complete your project. An average of 3.5 out of 5 must be maintained on this question. 3.Subjective:The exit survey results on Question 11: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

25 Outcome I: a recognition of the need for, and the ability to engage in, life-long learning

26 Outcome J: a knowledge of contemporary issues 1.Subjective: WASC Accreditation: UCSC maintains WASC accreditation 2.Quantitative: The SOE Alumni and Industrial collaborators at the CE123B design contest must give an average of 4 for criteria J to all design teams containing CE members. 3.Quantitative: 123B: 100% of the students consider the impact of their projects on society and the environment. 4.Subjective:The exit survey results on Question 12: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

27 Outcome J: a knowledge of contemporary issues

28 Outcome K: an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work and incorporating appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints. 1.Quantitative: The Senior Portfolio: Students receive an average of 4 out of 5 on the Methods and Tools component of the Senior Portfolio evaluation. 2.Quantitative: The SOE Alumni and Industrial collaborators at the CE123B design contest must give an average of 4 for criteria K to all design teams containing CE members. 3.Subjective: The exit survey results on Question 9: An average of 4 out of 5 must be maintained.

29 Outcome K: an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work and incorporating appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints.

30 Discussion