June 24, 2007
June 24, 2007
June 27, 2007
12.997.1 - 12.997.13
Keeping from Reinventing the Wheel: Some Lessons Learned from a Successful TC2K Program
The Department of Engineering Technology at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNCC) has developed a comprehensive program leading to an academic environment of continuous improvement consistent with the ABET Technology Criteria 2000 (TC2K).1 Experts have long debated the pros and cons of assessment at the course level versus program level assessment and the potential for linking student achievement directly to program outcomes2,3,4,5,6 This paper details a systemic approach to assessment that links program outcome assessment to course assessment that is currently fully implemented and functioning at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNCC) in the Department of Engineering Technology. This methodology provides a mechanism that synchronizes and integrates the actions between the college, the department, and individual faculty. As the primary student interface, faculty provide the foundational student performance assessment data by participating in the Individual Course Assessment Process (ICAP).7 This process reviews performance criteria in selected courses in light of their mapped support to specific program outcomes. Nevertheless, assessment employs multiple techniques and methods to “triangulate” performance. This article presents a program of student assessments and performance-oriented teaching based on clear, published course learning objectives. It describes practical techniques to effectively sustain and enhance ABET accreditation criteria for engineering technology (TC2K) within the Department of Engineering Technology at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. It documents the systematic implementation of assessment strategies that cross-reference program outcomes to courses in the curriculum to identify specific targets of opportunity for assessment. This paper catalogues some of the specific successful practices that continue to support an integrated, comprehensive infrastructure for assessment, evaluation, and improvement. Specific items of discussion within the paper will approach TC2K from two levels:
• Program Level: Evaluating Outcomes at the program level where multiple inputs integrate to develop a collective view of the state of the program in order to plan and affect future improvement. • Course Level: o Integrating course outcomes into Program Outcomes. o Assessment and evaluation within the classroom.
These best practices will address policies, procedures, and associated infrastructure to accurately describe the operational parameters that are an integral part of success.
Cottrell, D. (2007, June), Keeping From Reinventing The Wheel: Some Lessons Learned From A Successful Tc2 K Program Paper presented at 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii. 10.18260/1-2--3015
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: © 2007 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