Asee peer logo

Closing The Loop: Assessing, Evaluating, And Improving A Tc2 K Quality Program

Download Paper |

Conference

2004 Annual Conference

Location

Salt Lake City, Utah

Publication Date

June 20, 2004

Start Date

June 20, 2004

End Date

June 23, 2004

ISSN

2153-5965

Conference Session

Course/Program Assessment

Page Count

8

Page Numbers

9.314.1 - 9.314.8

Permanent URL

https://peer.asee.org/13135

Download Count

8

Request a correction

Paper Authors

author page

David Cottrell

Download Paper |

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

Session 3650

Closing the Loop: Assessing, Evaluating, and Improving a TC2K Quality Program

David S. Cottrell Pennsylvania State University at Harrisburg

Introduction

This paper describes an ongoing process: the integration of the new ABET accreditation criteria for engineering technology (TC2K) into the School of Science, Engineering, and Technology at the Pennsylvania State University at Harrisburg. Currently three technology programs – Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Structural Design and Construction Engineering – are implementing outcomes based assessment processes that will lead to an atmosphere of continuous improvement and quality education. This paper documents the deliberate planning and the subsequent execution of a comprehensive plan designed to successfully link established program outcomes, classroom instruction, assessment and evaluation processes, and process improvement initiatives. Building on course assessment as a foundational linchpin, the methodology effectively integrates input from alumni, employers, industry advisory panels, faculty, and students. Iterative techniques incorporate multiple reviews during the education process and subsequently provide timely opportunities for implementing education initiatives and creating a positive, conducive environment to accommodate continuous improvement.

This paper addresses specific, deliberate actions taken by the School of Science, Engineering, and Technology to establish and sustain a comprehensive program of assessment and evaluation consistent with an academic environment of continuous improvement that demonstrates compliance with the technology Criteria 2000 (TC2K).4 The primary objective and ultimate end-state for this plan was to affect a transition to a student-focused academic environment of excellence. This plan encompassed specific actions considered essential for establishing an academic format of continuous improvement envisioned by the TC2K executed in four phases as depicted in Figure 1. Phases include (1) Awareness Training For Senior Key Personnel, (2) Internal Organizational Assessment and Outcome/Objective Development, (3) Team Building For Process Control And TC2K Implementation, and (4) An Action Phase Designed To Perpetuate the Program. To date, the first phase has essentially been accomplished and phases 2 3, and 4 are being implemented with a certain degree of overlap as the iterative nature of the plan provides an avenue for continuously improving the implementation process. This paper reports the current status of the plan, citing specific examples on outcome development, assessment, and evaluation and on tracking process improvement initiatives.

“Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright  2004, American Society for Engineering Education”

Cottrell, D. (2004, June), Closing The Loop: Assessing, Evaluating, And Improving A Tc2 K Quality Program Paper presented at 2004 Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah. https://peer.asee.org/13135

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: © 2004 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