Szatmary, A. C. (2018, June), Critical Analysis of the Validity of the Fundamentals of Engineering Mechanical Exam  Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah. 10.18260/1-2--30239

\bibitem{asee_peer_30239}
  Szatmary, A. C. (2018, June), \emph{Critical Analysis of the Validity of the Fundamentals of Engineering Mechanical Exam}
  Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah.
  10.18260/1-2--30239

Alex C. Szatmary.  "Critical Analysis of the Validity of the Fundamentals of Engineering Mechanical Exam".  2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah, 2018, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2018.  https://peer.asee.org/30239 Internet.  18 Sep, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_30239}
  Alex C. Szatmary.
  "Critical Analysis of the Validity of the Fundamentals of Engineering Mechanical Exam".
  \emph{2018 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah, 2018, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2018.
  https://peer.asee.org/30239 Internet.  18 Sep, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_30239
author = "Alex C. Szatmary"
title = "Critical Analysis of the Validity of the Fundamentals of Engineering Mechanical Exam"
booktitle = "2018 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition "
year = "2018"
month = "June"
address = "Salt Lake City, Utah"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/30239}
number = {10.18260/1-2--30239}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - The purpose of the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam (FE) is primarily to ensure that Engineers in Training possess at least minimal competency on a broad range of engineering subject matter. It is secondarily used in curricular assessment; for this purpose, it has been suggested that it has particular value as the only nationally-normed exam on engineering. Here, I argue that the FE is not suitable for curricular design or assessment. The FE has not been shown to be a valid instrument and there is evidence in the literature that it is not. Furthermore, it is unclear, from the Exam Specifications alone, what content the exam actually assesses. To clarify how competency in subjects is operationally defined on the FE Mechanical, I wrote learning objectives based on questions from the FE Mechanical Practice Exam on Computational Tools, Fluid Mechanics, and Mechanical Design and Analysis. I show that the practice exam is not content valid with respect to the exam specifications or the FE Reference Handbook. Furthermore, the questions are posed at a low cognitive level and are mostly an exercise in applying simple formulas so performance on the FE may have more to do with motivation, test-taking skills, and familiarity with the handbook than competency in engineering. Furthermore, the FE is poorly aligned with ABET student outcomes; in addition to the poor validity of the exam, evidence of student performance on the exam is too coarse to be useful for continuous improvement.
AU  - Alex C. Szatmary
CY  - Salt Lake City, Utah
DA  - 2018/06/23
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Critical Analysis of the Validity of the Fundamentals of Engineering Mechanical Exam
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/30239
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--30239
ER  -