Program: Electrical Engineering (PhD)
Degree: Doctorate
Date: Mon Sep 28, 2015 - 1:16:50 pm
1) Below are your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs). Please update as needed.
The Department of Electrical Engineering adheres to the student learning outcomes of the Graduate Division:
"In general, a student who has successfully complete the graduate degree requirements should be able to
- Demonstrate mastery of the methodology and techniques specific to the field of study.
- Communicate both orally and in writing at a high level of proficiency in the field of study.
- Conduct research or produce some other form of creative work.
- Function as a professional in the discipline."
1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.







3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.
- File (03/16/2020)
4) For your program, the percentage of courses that have course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is as follows. Please update as needed.





5) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015?


6) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2014 to September 30, 2015? (Check all that apply.)







7) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place in the last 18 months.
The advisor of each PhD candidate along with the appropriate committee was asked to assess the candidate at three critical points (qualifying exam, comprehensive exam, defense) with respect to the performance questions
1) SLO1:Theory
2) SLO1:Methodology
3) SLO2:Oral Communication
4) SLO2:Written Communication
5) SLO3:Original Research
6) Overall Assessment.
by using the scoring rubrics
1) Unacceptable
2) Marginal
3) Acceptable
4) Exceptional
5) Not Applicable.
8) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 6? (Check all that apply.)
Direct evidence of student learning (student work products)














Indirect evidence of student learning







Program evidence related to learning and assessment
(more applicable when the program focused on the use of results or assessment procedure/tools in this reporting period instead of data collection)




9) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
We have 20 assessments.
10) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)










11) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)







12) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 6. For example, report the percent of students who achieved each SLO.
Aggregate Assessment Results (19 PhD assessments):
SLO1:Theory
Unacceptable: 0, Marginal: 0, Acceptable: 12.5, Exceptional: 7.5, Not Applicable: 0
Acceptable or better: 100% of 20 applicable assessments
SLO1:Methodology
Unacceptable: 0, Marginal: 0, Acceptable: 7, Exceptional: 13, Not Applicable: 0
Acceptable or better: 100% of 20 applicable assessments
SLO2:Oral Communication
Unacceptable: 0, Marginal: 0, Acceptable: 9, Exceptional: 11, Not Applicable: 0
Acceptable or better: 100% of 20 applicable assessments
SLO2:Written Communication
Unacceptable: 0, Marginal: 0, Acceptable: 4.5, Exceptional: 3.5, Not Applicable: 12
Acceptable or better: 100% of 8 applicable assessments
SLO3:Original Research
Unacceptable: 0, Marginal: 0, Acceptable: 6, Exceptional: 14, Not Applicable: 0
Acceptable or better: 100% of 20 applicable assessments
Overall Assessment
Unacceptable: 0, Marginal: 0, Acceptable: 6, Exceptional: 13, Not Applicable: 0
Acceptable or better: 100% of 19 applicable assessments
13) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)









14) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.
The results show that SLO1, SLO2, and SLO3 are met at an acceptable level or better. The results also show that the overall performance of the EE PhD program is acceptable or better. These results do not raise any red flags in any area, which suggests that no drastic actions need to be taken at this point. The results will be shared with the graduate committee, and discussions will take place to find ways of continually improving the EE PhD program.
15) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries? This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, and great achievements regarding program assessment in this reporting period.
An assessment method for SLO4 ``Function as a professional in the discipline’’ needs to be developed. One of the ILOs (currently being developed by the Graduate Division) is strongly aligned with SLO4. The graduate committee decided to wait until the ILOs are finalized so that the indicators for the ILOs can be used to assess SLO4.
The graduate committee worked on closing the loop from the assessment results to actual actions in order to continually improve the EE PhD program. Accordingly, we are in the process of developing the SLOs for the graduate-level courses.
The assessment questionnaire needs to be updated to clarify the instructions to the faculty.
16) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.
none.