Asee peer logo

The Tc2 K Visit Is Done Now What?

Download Paper |

Conference

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Location

Honolulu, Hawaii

Publication Date

June 24, 2007

Start Date

June 24, 2007

End Date

June 27, 2007

ISSN

2153-5965

Conference Session

TC2K Methods and Models

Tagged Division

Engineering Technology

Page Count

10

Page Numbers

12.1474.1 - 12.1474.10

Permanent URL

https://peer.asee.org/2417

Download Count

12

Request a correction

Paper Authors

author page

Nancy Denton Purdue University

author page

Joseph Fuehne Purdue University-Columbus

author page

Henry Kraebber Purdue University

author page

Timothy Cooley Purdue University-New Albany

author page

Joseph Dues Purdue University-New Albany

Download Paper |

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

The TC2K Visit is Done – Now What?

Abstract

The effort to prepare for and execute an engineering technology program evaluation review has always been extensive. In order to comply with the requirements of TC2K, and to benefit from the assessment and evaluation process, faculty expect this effort to continue between evaluation visits. Because the engineering technology accreditation process shift from verification of input conditions to assessment of results represents such a significant process change, national-level resources to ease the transition have been developed. To date, documentation of the program actions following an engineering technology accreditation review is minimal. Questions of sustainability, impact of curricular change on internal program assessment and evaluation, faculty motivation and workload, and long-term effects on student success must be considered.

This paper presents the TC2K follow-up approach taken by four engineering technology programs from one department at three campus locations. These programs encompass associate and baccalaureate levels with one new and three ongoing accreditations. Initial solutions to the sustainable assessment and evaluation challenges and the corresponding workload are discussed. Initial successes in managing ongoing assessment efforts and strategies for maintaining department-wide consistency while supporting unique program approaches are presented. Issues generated by curricular change are also considered.

Department Accreditation Background1

A multi-campus, multi-program engineering technology department went through a total of three accreditation reviews in 2004 and 2005. The programs include “2+2” manufacturing and mechanical engineering technology programs at a large residential campus made up of primarily traditional full-time students (West Lafayette) and two associate degree mechanical engineering technology programs at commuter campuses with a mix of traditional full-time and non-traditional part-time students (Columbus and New Albany). The MET associate degree program is essentially identical at all three campuses, with all courses transferring seamlessly into the baccalaureate MET program. In preparation for their first TC2K-based reviews, the department extended its educational processes to incorporate formal assessment and evaluation of program outcomes and educational objectives. The existing foundation for the department’s education processes included a departmental strategic plan that defines the department’s core values, beliefs, mission, and vision. Core learning objectives, defined as the minimum knowledge to be gleaned from a course, were developed and approved for all major courses. Well-defined faculty-driven curriculum design and review processes have been in place for many years. Faculty members conduct assessment and attempt to improve their courses and the degree program, by modifying teaching techniques, exercises and assignments to maximize learning. This has been an ongoing workload

Denton, N., & Fuehne, J., & Kraebber, H., & Cooley, T., & Dues, J. (2007, June), The Tc2 K Visit Is Done Now What? Paper presented at 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii. https://peer.asee.org/2417

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