June 14, 2015
June 14, 2015
June 17, 2015
26.621.1 - 26.621.12
Engineering Economics as a Benchmark Course in the Context of a Sustainable Continuous Improvement Process While ABET has always encouraged program improvement as part of the accreditation process, Continuous Improvement (CI) has emerged as one of the most important criteria for accreditation. The primary inputs to this criterion are the results of assessment and evaluation of Student Outcomes (SOs). Course-embedded assessment plays a major role in the assessment of Student Outcomes. In a sustainable CI process, not all courses are involved in course- embedded assessment. The choice of courses is guided by two criteria: (a) Each SO is assessed with student work in a benchmark course, and (b) Required courses are selected as benchmark courses. Assessment of a benchmark course is conducted with the following in mind: assessment of student work measures the extent to which SOs are being attained, it is not necessary to use all of the student work to assess an outcome, and outcomes assessment is based upon student work and is guided by the grading of that work. EGR 351- Engineering Economics, a required course for all engineering students, was selected a Benchmark Course for the EAC/ABET Student Outcome h, “The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context.” In assessing the student work in EGR 351 to determine the degree to which Student Outcome ‘h’ is attained, the following Performance Indicators were used: Students use comprehensive concepts of engineering economics to address environmental, political, economic and social impacts of many engineering decisions, in both societal (a particular community) and global context. Two elements of these criteria are: Performance Criterion h.1: Students can explain or discuss the global, economic, environmental, and societal context of an engineering problem. Performance Criterion h.2: Students can discuss the political and societal settings of an engineering problem. Student work used in the assessment process includes exam questions and/or homework questions, and student presentations relevant to each of the above Performance Criteria (h.1, h.2). To assess Criteria h.1 and h.2, we used the group presentation format. The students, as a group of five were selected as the economic advisors to the President of the United States. The students made a 10-12 minute presentation and discussed engineering solutions for improving the economy of the country in the context of a global market. The average grade for the student presentations was 3.49 / 4.0 which is a (B+) and indicates students had a good understanding of the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, political or societal context of engineering solutions. The implementation of the course embedded assessment method to a required engineering course, namely Engineering Economics, is presented in this paper. A detailed description of the process, data collection efforts, and analysis of the results in applying course embedded assessment method to the Engineering Economics course are provided.
Yamayee, Z. A., & Takallou, M. B., & Albright, R. J. (2015, June), Engineering Economics as a Benchmark Course in the Context of a Sustainable Continuous Improvement Process Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.23959
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: © 2015 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