Engineering Technology Course Assessments for ABET Criterion 3: Students Outcomes
- Conference
- Location
-
Vancouver, BC
- Publication Date
-
June 26, 2011
- Start Date
-
June 26, 2011
- End Date
-
June 29, 2011
- ISSN
-
2153-5965
- Conference Session
-
TAC/ABET Related Outcome Based Assessment Methods and Models
- Tagged Division
-
Engineering Technology
- Page Count
-
8
- Page Numbers
-
22.605.1 - 22.605.8
- DOI
-
10.18260/1-2--17886
- Permanent URL
-
https://216.185.13.174/17886
- Download Count
-
385
Paper Authors
Nripendra N. Sarker Prairie View A&M University
Dr. Sarker is currently a Lecturer and Program Assessment Coordinator in the Department of Engineering Technology of the Prairie View A&M University, TX. Previously he worked at universities in Bangladesh and Japan and at UT, San Antonio. He received his first Master’s degree from AIT, Thailand and a second Master’s and a Ph.D. degree from the Texas A&M University. He is the Assessment Coordinator of Engineering Technology department and a member of the College ABET/SACS Committee at PVAMU.
Mohan Ketkar Prairie View A&M University
Dr. Ketkar is an Associate Professor and coordinator of the Electrical Engineering Technology program at the PVAMU, TX. He received M.S. and Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His research areas include communication electronics, instrumentation, and numerical methods. He is senior member of IEEE, and professional member of ASEE and Sigma-Xi. He is a member of the College Committee for ABET at PVAMU. He has presented and published several papers in the area of Engineering Education.
Cajetan M. Akujuobi Alabama State University
Dr. Akujuobi is currently the Dean and Professor, College of Science, Mathematics, Technology and Engineering at Alabama State University. Prior to his current position, he was the founding Director of the Center of Excellence for Communication Systems Technology Research (CECSTR) at Prairie View A&M University (PVAMU). He was also the founding Director of the Analog Mixed Signal (AMS), DSP Solutions and High Speed (Broadband) Communication Programs. He was a Professor of Electrical Engineering and Head, Engineering Technology Department at PVAMU. Dr. Akujuobi was the Texas Instruments University Relations Manager at PVAMU. He belongs to many professional organizations such as IEEE (Senior Member), ISA (Senior Member), ASEE, SPIE, and Sigma XI, the Scientific Research Society.
He has over 28 years experience in engineering education, research and development. His current research interests include mixed signal systems, DSP Solutions, High-Speed (Broadband) communication systems, signal and image processing using such tools as wavelet and fractal transforms. Dr. Akujuobi has published extensively and has taught as a university faculty and researcher in numerous private and state universities. He was a participant and collaborative member of ANSI T1E1.4 Working Group which has the technical responsibility during the development of T1.413, Issue 2 ADSL Standard.
Abstract
Engineering Technology Course Assessments for ABET Criterion 3: Student OutcomesAbstractToo much assessment may become over-killing for the instructors but yet may not be enough tosatisfy the ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology) evaluators. This paperdeals with making assessment less involved and yet improving the quality of assessmentdocuments on student outcomes. The key elements for neat presentation of assessmentdocuments are i) selecting appropriate courses of a program to assess student performances andii) presentation of the documents in a way that the evaluators feel comfortable and seamless inassessing the outcomes. To document student performance assessments, each course may bemapped (designated) to measure only a few specific outcomes. Each instructor of a course isthen entrusted to measure the mapped outcomes. However, the major hurdle may be in thedesign of appropriate assessment rubrics and developing assignments to reflect the specificoutcome measures. Assessment itself is considered as an extra burden on the shoulders ofinstructors. As a result, the instructors may find less time and energy in improving the quality ofteaching. In addition, a fatigue condition may prevail resulting in obscure documentation whichmay cause dissatisfaction to the evaluators. For easy and successful accreditation, theassessment process may be designed with two objectives in mind, such that i) it does not exhaustthe instructors, and ii) the evaluators find the assessment process transparent and seamless. Thispaper focuses on ABET expectation on assessment and produces some examples to makeassessment less involved and create an environment of pleasant experience for the evaluators ingranting accreditation for a maximum number of years.
Sarker, N. N., & Ketkar, M., & Akujuobi, C. M. (2011, June), Engineering Technology Course Assessments for ABET Criterion 3: Students Outcomes Paper presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC. 10.18260/1-2--17886
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2011 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015