Paper Authors

Abstract

NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

Session 1608

A Systematic Approach to Satisfying EC2000 Debra L. Hawker-Schreiner, Charles E. Glatz, Richard C. Seagrave & R. Dennis Vigil Department of Chemical Engineering, Iowa State University

Abstract

When considering the requirements of EC20001, it rapidly becomes apparent that a large amount of data is going to be produced, and that it must be used. Additionally, the data required must be obtained from different constituencies and there may not be significant additional resources to maintain long term monitoring. These facts were considered when beginning the process to satisfy EC2000 in the Chemical Engineering Department at Iowa State University (ISU). The solution followed four basic rules. 1) Ensure that all of the assessment techniques used have a common basis. Thus, the data obtained from various techniques can easily be compared and common trends noted. 2) Do not reinvent the wheel, if a mechanism or an assessment technique is already in place, use it. Modify it, if necessary, instead of starting from scratch. One of the major benefits of this approach is that those involved are already familiar with the mechanism or technique. 3) Use the data from each assessment technique to the fullest. This has a twofold benefit: there is less data manipulation required and each constituency is not plagued by repetitive requests for data. 4) Do not obtain unnecessary data. The trick here is that it first must be determined what is necessary. By following the four rules, the program was able to develop mechanisms and assessment techniques that are useful, satisfy EC2000 and can be maintained. Specifically, data is collected using the following assessment techniques: student course evaluations, instructor course feedback forms, course portfolios, senior survey, junior survey, alumni survey and an annual placement analysis. These data are used to improve the program via the following mechanisms: industrial advisory committee annual meeting, annual program review, annual department retreat, department committees, direct distribution to faculty and faculty meetings. Any program changes are noted in the process improvement log.

I. Introduction

Preparing for accreditation under EC2000 is different from preparing for past accreditation visits. Previously the process involved ascertaining that the program satisfied the strictly outlined requirements, correcting any problems that had been noted previously, and then documenting how the program satisfies the requirements in the self-study and collecting materials for the accreditation visit. Now, instead of a set of strictly outlined requirements, there are some strict requirements but also a set of general criteria that are to be interpreted by the program, depending on the unique needs of the program. Engineers tend to look for “the solution” or “the approach” to the problem, in this case the problem being how to satisfy EC2000. Part of the

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright  2001, American Society for Engineering Education

• Citation

• Format
  • APA
  • APA - LaTeX bibitem
  • MLA
  • MLA - LaTeX bibitem
  • Bibtex
  • EndNote - RIS

Seagrave, R., & Vigil, R., & Hawker-Schreiner, D., & Glatz, C. (2001, June), A Systematic Approach To Satisfying Ec2000 Paper presented at 2001 Annual Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 10.18260/1-2--9838