published online curriculum as well as catalog descriptions ofthe courses. Most of our analysis comes from that data. In several cases where the softwarecontent of a course was not clear from a catalog, we contacted the department chair by email orphone.We compared our results with the data from the version of the Curriculum Guidelines forUndergraduate Degree Programs in Computer Engineering published by the Joint Task Group onComputer Engineering Curricula Version 2015 October 3.We provide a summary statement but we make no recommendations. We believe thisinformation will be useful to anyone developing a new computer engineering program or to thosewho are in the process of curricular revision.IntroductionThe ABET website currently lists 250
student artifacts used in the assessment, courseinformation such as syllabus and course grades, and the instructor’s assessment of thecompetencies being measured in that course, including a discussion of any in which targets arenot met. An example of the reports produced, which also include a file listing of relevant artifactsand course information, is given in the appendix. These files were stored on CDs, and wereevaluated by the computer engineering assessment committee at the beginning of the followingsemester. Any recommendations for improvement, either from the course instructor or from thecommittee, were documented in the meeting minutes, which were stored with the other ABETassessment files.This process was developed and some assessment
and to gobeyond scores on an exam or homework assignment. Adams et al. utilized Schon’s reflectivepractitioner theory as a lens to understand and measure reflective practitioner behavior inengineering students engaged in design activities.1,16 Chen proposed using online tools such asWikis and Weblogs and a technique called Folio Thinking, to support reflective learning in anintroductory engineering design course.17 Folio Thinking is a pedagogical approach wherestudents create learning portfolios, with the end goal being to enhance students’ self-awarenessof their knowledge by making it explicit and visible for themselves as well as for others. Turns etal. specifically focus on reflection on experience as an intentional thinking process.1 They
concepts.This online assignments have video based coaching problems, tutorials with hints to guidestudents to learn the electrical circuit concepts and regular text book end of chapter homeworkproblems. As part of the course requirement, students are assigned to do the conceptual problemsto self-learn and to do more advanced problems to master the concepts. This mandatory requisitemakes them learn the chapter-materials in more in-depth. The aim of this study was to determinewhether this tool will indeed help students to learn the course materials to their own as well as totheir instructors’ satisfaction.This report will present information about the Mastering Engineering approach used in oursections and the weekly workload assigned to students. The
081 was that the instructor, who read and replied to the extra credit journal entries, addedtokens to the students stash (a column in the online grade center) whenever they earned a newtoken. The teaching assistant removed tokens whenever the students requested to use them, as wellas took care of all report grading. Without a trusted, well-organized and consistent teachingassistant who understands the educational value of this grading system with whom communicationis open and honest, this system will become difficult.IV. Implementation Changes in Future Course OfferingsEven though specs grading was positively received and succeeded in achieving the hoped outcome,some students (three) raised the issue of perceived performance pressure and
thebranch that contains the earliest instance of that file), but experience has shown that this structuregreatly facilitates the overall management of the course. Some simple automated scripts havebeen developed to help manage this structure and organization, keeping content synchronizedacross branches, as well as to perform some automated checks on the Courseware (e.g.,compliance to coding standards, integrity of internal cross-reference links, etc.).Courseware DeliveryEach week of the course addresses a new concept or technology with a lecture, including live-coding demonstrations, and accompanying Courseware including the assignment for the week(see Course Syllabus, below, for details). Courseware, including the solution for the previousweek and
was almost identical to one of the homework problems (numberschanged and sometimes slight changes in topology). The laboratory activities were unchangedand still included a mix of lab work and group problem solving. A midterm exam and a finalexam were given. Shown in Figure 1 is an excerpt from the course syllabus describing themethod of instruction. Method of Instruction: 1. Lecture classes will be a mixture of in class instruction and recorded lectures. Students will be responsible for checking the course management system classroom for recorded lectures that they must watch before attending class. Time will be allocated for in-class group problem solving
, Morgan State University Dr. J. ’Kemi Ladeji-Osias is Associate Professor and Associate Chair for Graduate Studies in the De- partment of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Morgan State University in Baltimore. She teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in computer engineering. Dr. Ladeji-Osias earned a B.S. in electrical engineering from the University of Maryland, College Park and a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Rutgers University. She is the Principal Investigator for Doctoral Scholars in Engineering. Dr. Ladeji-Osias’ involvement in engineering curricular innovations includes outcomes-based articulation and online delivery of undergraduate engineering degrees. In addition to conducting research on
well-written justification for identifiable key assignments as reported in [4] is used. The idea is to setin place the process of “plan-teach-assess” in every core course. A well-constructed syllabus isthe planning stage. During teaching is when the course portfolio with supporting evidence iscollected. Finally, the FCAR is the assessment stage of the course. Figure 5 illustrates theassessment process that involves each faculty not only at the course level, but also to call themeeting for the SO that he/she is responsible for based on the courses listed in the PVT. Figure 5: SO assessment process using FCAR methodologyIn this case, we adopted EvalTools® [18], which is the only online tool that facilitates the FCARassessment
institutions require a syllabus or acontract between the student and faculty supervisor with the contract required to specifydeliverables. The student must understand the expectations of what the faculty supervisor willprovide and what they will need to develop. Before the start of the project, the faculty supervisormust also determine if the student has the appropriate training and experience to carry out theproject. Common assessments include weekly report out meetings and interim or final reports.Unlike in a regular course, there is no one to compare the student with and it is tough to predictwhat the outcome will be, and thus grading tends to be arbitrary.At York College of Pennsylvania an independent study can be between 1-6 credits and has
organized fairly consistently across departments. Faculty memberstake on one or more teams and supervise them through a year-long experience to projectcompletion. The projects, spread across two semesters, earn the students 4 credits and arerequired to involve construction of a novel device/system which meets appropriate engineeringstandards and multiple realistic constraints. Over the course of the academic year, students honetheir skills through team meetings, brainstorming sessions, designing, simulating, fabricating andassembling their concepts as well as reviewing, researching and validating their designs. Projectsin the Electrical and Computer Engineering department are organized along broad categoriesincluding Computer Engineering (Advanced