RELATIONSHIP OF COURSES IN THE CURRICULUM TO THE PROGRAM OUTCOMES

CRITERION 3. PROGRAM OUTCOMES

D. RELATIONSHIP OF COURSES IN THE CURRICULUM TO THE PROGRAM OUTCOMES

Again, it should be emphasized that our ultimate goal is to utilize these assessment instruments to make ongoing improvements to our program. Course Embedded Assessment represents the “bricks and mortar” of our assessment program. Our experience shows that assignments and exams in individual courses provide immediate and valuable feedback to both the student and the faculty. They allow the faculty to identify any potential problems in related courses, i.e. if the performance of several students in a given exam or assignment indicates that they do not understand a concept they should have acquired in a prerequisite course, that

probably indicates a problem with the related course. For instance, in our junior-level course on electric networks, EEE 117, we assess all the students, including our native freshmen and community college transfers, for proficiency in Circuit Analysis, ENGR 17.

The assessment exam is evaluated by topic and can be quickly analyzed to obtain a snapshot of each student’s level of preparation to succeed in EEE 117. In some instances students are referred to the Circuits or Networks Workshop to remedy inadequate preparation in the prerequisite course. Problems requiring broader interaction are summarized by the Course Coordinator and presented to the faculty for action.

Table III: Strategies to Achieve Student Learning Outcomes through EEE curriculum Strategies Student Learning Outcomes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Knowledge Of Math Knowledge of Engineering Science Application of Math to solve problems Knowledge of E&EE Core Depth in one E&EE Area Knowledge and Appln. Of Probability & Stats. Use Contemporary Tools for Analysis & Design Experimental Work Integration to solve complex design problem Teamwork Written Communications Oral Communications Professionalism Ethics Lifelong Learning Diversity

1. Curriculum Requirements a. Math, Physics and Chemistry

b. Engineering Science

c. Programming ^X

d. EEE Core (Course Embedded Assessment)

EEE 117/117L ^X^X ^{X X} ^X^X^X

EEE 64 ^X^X ^{X X}^{X X}

EEE 108/108L ^X^X ^{X X} ^X^X^X

EEE 161 ^X^X^X ^X

EEE 174 ^X^X ^{X X}

e. Technical Electives (Breadth and Depth)

f. Senior Project ^X ^X ^{X X X}^X^XX X g. Writing

Proficiency Exam

77 Strategies Student Learning Outcomes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

h. Oral

Communication Requirement

i. Professionalism and Ethics

j. Humanities and Social Sciences

X X

2. Industry Liaison Council/EPEI/Coll ege Advisory Board

Recommendations

X X X X X X X

REMOVE THIS

Table IV: Relationship between Course Outcomes and Student Learning Outcomes Courses Student Learning Outcomes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

ENGR 70 – Statics &

Dynamics x

ENGR 17 – Circuit

Analysis X x x x

ENGR 1- Intro. To Engineering

x x x x x

ENGR 120- Probability

and Random Signals X x x x x x

EEE 108- Electronics I x x x EEE 108L-Electronics I

Lab

x x x x x x x

EEE 109-Electronics II Lec & lab

x x x x x

EEE 110-Adv. Analog IC Design

x x x x x

EEE 111-Adv. Analog IC Design Lab

x x x x x x x x

EEE 117-Network Analysis

x x

EEE 117L-Network Analysis Lab

x x x ^x ^{x x x}

EEE 130-Electromech. x x x

79 Courses Student Learning Outcomes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Energy Conv.

EEE 131-Electromech.

Lab

X x X x x x x x x

EEE 145-Power Sys.

Relay Prot.

X x x x x x x x x x x

EEE 141-Power Sys.

Analysis

X x x x x x x x

EEE 142-Energy Sys.

Control & Opt.

x x x x x

EEE 143-Power Systems Lab

X X x x x x x x x

EEE 144-Electric Power Distribution

X x x x

EEE 146-Power Elec.

Controlled Drives

X x x x

EEE 161-Tansmission Lines and Fields

X X x x x x X

EEE 162-Appl. Wave Prop.

X X x x x x

EEE 163-Traveling Waves Lab

x x x x

EEE 165-Optical Engineering

x x x

Courses Student Learning Outcomes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

EEE 166-Physical Electronics

x x x

EEE 167-Electro-Optical Eng. Lab

x x x x x

EEE

174-Microprocessors

X x x x

EEE 180-Signals and Systems

x X x x

EEE 181-Digital Signal Processing

x x x x

EEE 182-Digital Signal Processing Lab

x x x x x x

EEE 183-Digital and Wireless Communication sys. design

x x x x x x

EEE 184-Feedback Control Systems

x x x x x x

EEE 185-Modern

Communication Systems

x x x x x

EEE 187-Robotics x x x x x x x x x EEE 186-Comm. Systems

Lab

x x X x x x

EEE 188-Digital Control x x x x

81 Courses Student Learning Outcomes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Systems

EEE 189-Control Systems Lab

x x x x x

EEE 192A-Electrical Power Design Project I

x x x x x x x x x x

EEE 192B-Electrical Power Design Project II

x x x x x x x x x x

EEE 193A-Product Design Project I

x x x x x x x x x x

EEE 193B-Product Design Project II

x x x x x x x x x x x

EEE 194 Career Development in EE

x x x x x

CpE/EEE 64-Logic Design

x x x x x

CpE 151-CMOS & VLSI Design

x x x

CpE 138- Data Communications

CpE 166-Advanced Logic Design

x x x x x x x x

CpE 186-Computer Hardware Design

x x x x x x

Courses Student Learning Outcomes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

CpE 187-Embedded Proc.

Sys. Design

X x x x x x x x

83 E. Documentation

The EEE department has prepared student learning outcome binders illustrating successful achievement of the Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs 1-15) for the EEE Program.

Material in these folders includes relevant documentation drawn from the Course Folders, analysis of the data to gauge level of achievement of the outcomes, and recommendations for change when appropriate. These folders are organized as follows:

1. Top of folder, a. summary,

b. assessment plan and

c. student learning outcome evaluation matrix (includes performance criteria, classes involved, course outcomes selected, rubrics, where, when and by who was the SLO evaluated, target level of achievement) 2. Results from the previous assessment loops

3. Performance indicators (rubrics) for the student learning outcome 4. Data collection

5. Discussion of level of achievement – direct measures

6. Discussion of level of achievement – indirect measures (triangulation) 7. Actions to improve program

8. Results of actions

Further evidence for ABET visit

The following materials are available for review by ABET during the accreditation visit:

• If the ABET evaluator would like to see detailed information about work in specific classes that contribute to a SLO, the EEE department has prepared course binders that include course outlines, syllabi, course materials, manuals and handouts, course embedded assessment reports (as appropriate), and examples of student work that demonstrate successful achievement of the course outcomes. These folders are organized as follows:

ABET Course Outline – TAB 1

Course Syllabus (supplemental) – TAB 2

Samples of examinations, graded student papers, graded projects, samples of laboratory handouts and graded students’ laboratory reports (if applicable) – TAB 3

Samples of graded homework/quizzes (if applicable) – TAB 4 Samples of class notes/handouts – TAB 5

• EEE Industry Liaison Council Charter, Agendas and Meeting Minutes.

• Copy of Orientation package

• Advising manual

• Binder with all conducted surveys

• Binder with Office of Institutional Research Data

• Binder with online test results.

• Binder with FE results

• Grade distribution folder

• Industrial Visits minutes

• CSUS Catalog

• Student Advising Files

• University level annual assessment reports

For each Student Learning Outcome, EEE assessment committee has prepared individual SLO binder. Binders have the following sections.

F. Achievement of Program Outcomes

Processes Used to Produce and Assess Student Learning Outcomes

In order to meet ABET Engineering Criteria 2009-2010 with respect to assessment; we use the following assessment instruments in our program:

Assignments and Examinations: Assignments and examinations including homework, reports, mid-terms and finals are required in all courses. In addition, projects and term papers are

required in several classes. We have established a Course Embedded Assessment (CEA) process that focuses on a set of classes in the EEE major. Each course has detailed objectives, specific course outcomes, and indicators that are monitored to ensure successful achievement of those outcomes. In addition, some selected courses, where assessment measures are taken, have developed rubrics to measure course outcomes. For each SLO, we first identified all the courses where these SLO are taught. Then we selected three courses (or areas) where the SLO is

introduced, developed and mastered. Subsequently, one of these three courses is selected to measure the achievement of the SLO, as shown in Table V. Some SLOs are measured only in one course, and some are measured in multiple courses. For example, SLO 2 is measured in two courses: ENGR 17 (labeled as 2A in Table V below) and EEE 187 (labeled as 2B below).For each course where an SLO is measured, student work is collected to evaluate the outcome, faculty who evaluated student work is identified, and the level of achievement (poor,

approaching proficiency, proficient) is measured. The faculty teaching courses covered by CEA present a report to the EEE Department faculty reflecting on student achievement of the specific course outcomes and course topics, whether prerequisites are appropriate, student reaction to the course, and suggested changes if any.

Table V: Relationship between Course Outcomes and Student Learning Outcomes with identified strategies for assessment

SLO 1 SLO 2 SLO 3 SLO 4 SLO 5 SLO 6 SLO 7 SLO 8 SLO 9 SLO 10 SLO 11 SLO 12 SLO 13 SLO 14 SLO 15

ENGR 17 X X, 2A X X

ENGR 70 X

ENGR 120 x x X X X, 6A X

EEE64 X X X X X

EEE108 X X, 4B X

EEE 108L X X X X, 8A X X X

EEE109 X X X, 5A X X

EEE110 X X X X X

EEE111 X X X X X X X X

EEE117 X , 3C X, 4A

EEE117L X X X, 7A X X X X

EEE130 X X, 4G X

EEE131 X X X X X X X X X

EEE141 X X X X X X X X

EEE142 X X X X X

EEE143 X X X X X X X X X

EEE144 X X X, 5D X

EEE145 X X X X X X X X X X X

EEE146 X X X X

EEE161

X, 1B, 1C,

1D 3A, 3B X, 4F X X X X

EEE162 X X X X X X

EEE163 X X X X

EEE165 X X X

EEE166 X, 1A, 1E X X

EEE167 X X X X X

EEE174 X X, 4E X X

EEE180 X X X X

EEE181 X X X, 5C X

EEE182 X X X X X X

EEE183 X X X X X

EEE184 X X X X, 4C X X

EEE185 X X, 4D X X X

EEE186 X X X X X

EEE187 X X X 5B X X X X X

EEE188 X X X X

EEE189 X X X X X

EEE192A X X X X, 9A X, 10A X , 11A X, 12A X, 14A X, 15A

EEE192B X X X X, 9A X, 10A X , 11A X, 12A X, 13A X, 14A X, 15A

EEE193A X X X X X, 9A X, 10A X , 11A X, 12A X, 14A X, 15A

EEE193B X X X X X, 9A X, 10A X , 11A X, 12A X, 13A X, 14A X, 15A

EEE194 X X X X X

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

This process is useful because it enables faculty who are not directly involved in specific courses to get an understanding of these courses and make any adjustments to the courses they are currently teaching. It allows new faculty and part-time faculty to acquire a thorough understanding of the curriculum. Equally important, the CEA report provides the documentation to illustrate how the faculty use assessment results for ongoing program improvement.

For courses that are not part of the CEA group, individual faculty members who teach the course are responsible for course-level assessment. Each course has clearly defined objectives, a set of measurable course outcomes, and contributes to one or more of the program’s SLOs. The faculty member teaching the course is responsible for reporting any major issues that are revealed from outcomes assessment and initiating appropriate changes to ensure that the course objectives are met successfully.

Surveys of Graduating Seniors: Graduating seniors are surveyed at the time of graduation for their perceptions about the program’s EOs and SLOs, our relative success in achieving those outcomes, and suggestions for improvement.

Alumni Surveys: Alumni from our program are surveyed to rank the importance of each of our Program EOs and SLOs in the context of their current professional position and their level of preparation with respect to that objective or outcome.

Site Visits: Faculty teams visit a company or industry that employs several graduates from our program to meet with a group of our alumni. Typically the alumni include recent graduates (1-5 years out), as well as experienced engineers and managers (6-10 years out, 11 years and over). A set of open-ended questions is distributed to the site prior to the visit to provide a foundation for the participants. A written transcript is also produced and shared with all faculty members. The reports are analyzed and action items with appropriate timelines are developed for implementation.

Industry Liaison Council: The Council is made up of engineers from industry representing all major areas of emphasis in the EEE program. The ILC meets biannually and provides the Department and the faculty with independent feedback on its efforts to achieve the EOs. ILC members also help the EEE Department in evaluation of Student Learning Outcome 9: “The ability to integrate knowledge gained from the core curriculum to solve a complex design problem. This includes the identification, specification, design and implementation of products/components and/or systems that meet desired safety, economic and performance criteria.”

Employer Surveys: The College’s Career and Placement Office periodically surveys employers and provides salary information and relevant information on upcoming trends and opportunities to the programs. In addition, ECS College has engaged Educational Benchmarking Inc. to survey all graduating students, alumni and employers.

Exit Interviews: Faculty conducts exit interviews with graduating seniors in an one-on-one format. The interview is taped and verbatim transcript is made. Subsequently, faculty review the transcript and evaluate student responses.

Fundamentals of Engineering Exam results are used to compare our student performance to performance of students in comparable institutions.

Grade Distribution in lower division courses. Our student’s grades are compared to all students in the course.

Assessment and evaluation process for each student learning outcome

• Level of achievement and evidence provided for E&EE Student Learning Outcome 1:

Knowledge of mathematics through differential and integral calculus, differential equations, physics and chemistry.

Strategies: ENGR 17, EEE 161, EEE166, EEE162, EEE180, EEE183, MATH 30, MATH 31, MATH 32, and MATH 45, PHYS 11A, and PHYS 11C, and CHEM 1A Context for Assessment (Where the data is collected): Course syllabi and student performance in EEE161, EEE166 and ENGR 17.

Performance Indicator: Course objective rubrics developed by instructors in EEE161, EEE166 and ENGR 17.

Measure: Percent of students who are proficient or approaching proficiency based on faculty evaluation of specific course assignment. Faculty set up the target percentage for student performance.

Assessment for Continuous Improvement: Faculty teaching EEE161, EEE166 and ENGR 17 submit and discuss report during department meetings, and suggest topics or areas where improvements can be made. Triangulation data is considered.

Fundamentals of Engineering test data is reviewed. Performance of our students to students in comparable institutions is discussed.

Triangulation:

9 Student, alumni, employers, faculty surveys.

9 Industrial site visits.

9 Student feedback during advising, graduation petition and exit interview.

9 Feedback from industrial liaison council during mock interviews.

9 Distribution of student grades in math, physics and chemistry classes Math 30, 31, 32, and 45, Phys 11A, and 11C, and Chem 1A

Faculty Action: Faculty that teach courses: ENGR 17, EEE 161, EEE166, EEE162, EEE180, EEE183 suggest possible adjustment of their own courses to improve this student learning outcome. Faculty develop recommendations for action. Department chair contacts instructors teaching courses of interest in College of Science Math 30, 31, 32, and 45, Phys 11A, and 11C, and Chem 1A. Report is forwarded to College

Assessment Committee for comparison with other engineering departments.

Level of achievement of SLO 1 – Direct Measures.Discussion of level of achievement of SLO 1 – Direct Measures. Data from EEE161, ENGR 17 and EEE 166 has been evaluated.

a. EEE 161, TAB 2. Students were tested on application of knowledge of:

i. differential calculus. Derive an equation for a gradient of a function in Problem 1a. Integral calculus. Derive the potential for a given electric field in Problem 1b. Vector calculus. Draw a field plot of a given field in Problem 1c. 83% of students are proficient or approaching

proficiency on this problem.

ii. Vector calculus and integral calculus had to be applied to derive the equation for the electric field due to a circular distribution of charge, problem 3. 50% of students are proficient or approaching proficiency.

This is a very difficult problem. This is a comparable result to Spring 2007 when 65% of students were proficient on this topic. In Spring 2007 a problem was identical to a problem in homework, whereas in Spring 2009 the problem on the test was different, and involved more application of knowledge of mathematics. In Spring 2007 the students were asked to find the electric field on the z-axis, whereas in Spring 2009 the students were asked to find the field off z-axis. The field off z-axis is not symmetrical.

iii. Knowledge of physics 11C. Students had to apply Coulomb’s law to find charge so that the electric field in y-direction is zero. 67% of students are proficient or approaching proficiency.

b. EEE 166, TAB 3

i. Application of knowledge of Chemistry in Exam 2. Derivation of equations for the current due to holes in a semiconductor. Exam 2, Problem 1. Application of knowledge of differential equations and chemistry. Exam 2, Problem 2. 90% of students were proficient or approaching proficiency.

ii. Knowledge of concepts introduced in Chemistry applied to Quantum-Mechanics, Exam 1, Part 1. Knowledge of mathematics applied to function graphing concentration as a function of temperature in problem 2. Application of knowledge of chemistry, explanation of results for the drift current density. 92% of students were proficient or approaching proficiency.

iii. Knowledge of chemistry through equation that model semiconductor processes. Final Exam.

c. ENGR 17 TAB 4

i. Knowledge of linear algebra. Find currents in the circuit by solving system of mesh current equations. Knowledge of differential equations.

Find the constants of the differential equation solution through boundary conditions. 62% of students were proficient or approaching proficiency.

d. Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Results.

Level of achievement of SLO 1 – Indirect Measures. (Triangulation)

a. Employer survey, TAB 5, shows that 80% of employers responded in a mostly positive manner (Adequately (3), More Than Adequately (4) or Exceptionally Well (5)) on question:”Performance of CSUS students on Knowledge of the science, mathematics, and engineering principles”.

b. Graduating senior survey shows, TAB 5, that 100% of students responded with moderately or above (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) regarding the questions: “Degree that engineering education enhanced ability to:

Apply knowledge of mathematics”. 0% students responded with 1 or 2 (not at all).

c. Alumni survey, TAB 5 shows that 89% of alumni answered adequately or above on question: “”Please indicate how well the Electrical and Electronic Engineering program helped you to do the following: - Acquire knowledge of science, mathematics and engineering principles needed in your career”. 10 % answered less than adequately or poorly.

d. Faculty survey, TAB 6 shows percentage of that Faculty rated student performance as Fair, Good and Very Good.

i. Chemistry, 77%

ii. Math, 75%

iii. Physics, 100%

e. Grade distribution in lower-division courses, TAB 7. Passing grades of EEE students vs. All students in lower-division classes have been analyzed. Passing rates of EEE students vs. all students are as follows

i. Chemistry I: 58% vs. 57%

ii. Intro to C: 84%. Only EEE students take this course.

iii. Circuit Analysis: 76% vs. 83%

iv. Calculus I: 60% vs. 65%

v. Calculus II: 59% vs. 65%

vi. Calculus III: 67% vs. 78%

vii. Diff. Eq: 72% vs. 75%

viii. Phys 11 A Mechanics: 88% vs. 92%

ix. Phys 11 C Electr and Mag: 73% vs. 76%

Evidence to support achievement of outcome: SLO binder contains all exams, analysis, data collection information as pertained to this SLO.

• Level of achievement and evidence provided for E&EE Student Learning Outcome 2:

Knowledge of basic engineering sciences including statics and dynamics.

Strategies: ENGR 17, ENGR 70, ENGR 142

Context for Assessment: Course syllabi and student performance in ENGR 17 and 70 Performance Indicator: Course objective rubrics developed by instructors in ENGR 17 and ENGR 70.

Measure: Percent of students who are proficient or approaching proficiency based on faculty evaluation of specific course assignment. Faculty set up the target percentage for student performance.

Assessment for Continuous Improvement: Faculty teaching ENGR 17 and ENGR 70 submit and discuss report during department meetings, and suggest topics or areas where improvements can be made. Triangulation data is considered. Fundamentals of Engineering test data is reviewed. Performance of our students to students in

comparable institutions is discussed.

In document Annual Assessment Report. For. Electrical & Electronic Engineering (Page 75-140)