June 14, 2009
June 14, 2009
June 17, 2009
14.1212.1 - 14.1212.13
The Electrical Engineering Technology Program Outcomes Assessment Process – Closing the Loop!
Abstract The Electrical Engineering Technology program developed a Program Outcomes (POs) assessment process in response to Accreditation Board of Engineering Technology (ABET) requirements. The EET Program Outcomes capture the desired attributes that the EET program aspires to impart on its students through the curriculum and the academic experience. More precisely, what do we expect our graduates to know upon graduation. This paper details the assessment process developed by the program, as well as the implementation process that took place in the academic year 2007-2008. An interim report submitted to ABET resulted in the resolution of the institutional weakness regarding ABET criterion 3 (Assessment and Evaluation)1.
The program outcomes are identified in line with ABET’s Technology Accreditation Commission (TAC). For each Program Outcome, a combination of direct and indirect assessment tools has been identified in addition to the assessment criteria of each assessment tool. Assessment tools include end-of-semester course assessment, student rating of instruction, senior exit exam, senior project evaluation, and senior exit survey. This paper will discuss the program outcomes, both direct and indirect assessment tools, how these tools are used in the program outcomes assessment process, how frequently data is collected for each assessment tool, who is responsible for data collection, analysis, and how data is used for continuous improvements. The end-of-semester course assessment, student rating of instruction, senior exit exam, and senior exit survey are assessed every semester, while the senior project evaluation is assessed annually.
The average results for each Program Outcome were obtained by using several assessment tools. The results revealed no major shortcomings in the EET students’ achievement, i.e. the overall averaged results were above the targeted achievement levels. However, assessment process did identify areas which might benefit from improvement. Based on this assessment, recommendations are made for the purpose of continuous improvement. This paper provides information on the Program Outcomes assessment process issues and challenges and will be of benefit to engineering technology programs seeking accreditation or re-accreditation.
1. Introduction The curriculum of the Electrical Engineering Technology program covers a broad-based educational experience emphasizing practical, hands-on laboratory work, closely coordinated with theoretical classroom discussion. Students receive a solid foundation of coursework in electric circuits, digital electronics, solid-state electronics, communications, power and electrical machinery.
The Electrical Engineering Technology program has developed a Program Outcomes (POs) assessment process to fulfill ABET accreditation requirements. It is an outcome-based assessment in which the POs should meet the needs of the program constituents. Program Outcomes (POs) capture the desired attributes that the EET program at the School of Technology aspires to impart to its students through the curriculum and academic experience. According to ABET’s definition
Alaraje, N., & Irwin, J. (2009, June), The Electrical Engineering Technology Program Outcomes Assessment Process: Closing The Loop Paper presented at 2009 Annual Conference & Exposition, Austin, Texas. https://peer.asee.org/5285
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: © 2009 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