Program: Computer Engineering (BS)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Sun Nov 29, 2015 - 3:43:12 am
1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
1. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research)
2. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research)
3. An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability.
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3c. Stewardship of the natural environment)
4. An ability to function on multidisciplinary teams.
(2c. Communicate and report, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3d. Civic participation)
5. An ability to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems.
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research)
6. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
(3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3d. Civic participation)
7. An ability to communicate effectively.
(2c. Communicate and report)
8. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context.
(1a. General education, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3c. Stewardship of the natural environment, 3d. Civic participation)
9. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
(3a. Continuous learning and personal growth)
10. A knowledge of contemporary issues.
(2b. Conduct research, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3c. Stewardship of the natural environment, 3d. Civic participation)
11. An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research)
12. A knowledge of discrete mathematics.
(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively)
2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.
Student Handbook. URL, if available online:
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number: http://www.catalog.hawaii.edu/schoolscolleges/engineer/ee.htm
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:
Other:
Other:
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.
1-50%
51-80%
81-99%
100%
5) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015?
No (skip to question 16)
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.)
Collect/evaluate student work/performance to determine SLO achievement
Collect/analyze student self-reports of SLO achievement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups
Use assessment results to make programmatic decisions (e.g., change course content or pedagogy, design new course, hiring)
Investigate curriculum coherence. This includes investigating how well courses address the SLOs, course sequencing and adequacy, the effect of pre-requisites on learning achievement.
Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7)
Other:
7) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place in the last 18 months.
The assessment goal was to assess SLOs through the following mechanisms:
Courses
The following courses were targeted to directly assess the level of achievement in SLOs by performance in selected homework, quizzes, exams, and lab reports.
Course | Semester | Enrollment | SLOs measured |
EE 160 | F14 | 82 | 2 |
EE 324 | F14 | 77 | 1 |
EE 371 | F14 | 80 | 1 |
EE 496 | F14 | 48 |
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
EE 323L | S15 | 85 | 2 |
EE 367 | S15 | 16 | 2, 12 |
EE 367L | S15 | 15 | 4, 8, 10 |
Industrial Advisory Board
The Department has an Industrial Advisory Board whose members are practicing engineers, and many are alumni. The Board meets annually and provides a report of their evaluation of the undergraduate program for electrical and computer engineering students. At the Fall 2014 meeting they made an indirect assessment of SLOs 1-12 via a survey.
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)
Artistic exhibition/performance
Assignment/exam/paper completed as part of regular coursework and used for program-level assessment
Capstone work product (e.g., written project or non-thesis paper)
Exam created by an external organization (e.g., professional association for licensure)
Exit exam created by the program
IRB approval of research
Oral performance (oral defense, oral presentation, conference presentation)
Portfolio of student work
Publication or grant proposal
Qualifying exam or comprehensive exam for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation (graduate level only)
Supervisor or employer evaluation of student performance outside the classroom (internship, clinical, practicum)
Thesis or dissertation used for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation
Other 1:
Other 2:
Indirect evidence of student learning
Alumni survey that contains self-reports of SLO achievement
Employer meetings/discussions/survey/interview of student SLO achievement
Interviews or focus groups that contain self-reports of SLO achievement
Student reflective writing assignment (essay, journal entry, self-assessment) on their SLO achievement.
Student surveys that contain self-reports of SLO achievement
Other 1:
Other 2:
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)
Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc.
Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.)
Other 1:
Other 2:
9) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.
Courses
Direct assessments for 7 courses were collected based on the course enrollments shown in the table in Question #7. These are required courses, spanning freshman through senior levels.
Industrial Advisory Board
Thirteen IAB members submitted surveys at their Fall Meeting in Oct. 2014 assessing the BS EE program SLOs.
10) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)
Faculty committee
Ad hoc faculty group
Department chairperson
Persons or organization outside the university
Faculty advisor
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)
Dean/Director
Other:
11) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)
Scored exams/tests/quizzes
Used professional judgment (no rubric or scoring guide used)
Compiled survey results
Used qualitative methods on interview, focus group, open-ended response data
External organization/person analyzed data (e.g., external organization administered and scored the nursing licensing exam)
Other:
12) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 6. For example, report the percent of students who achieved each SLO.
Percentage of students (rounded to nearest 5%) who attained "satisfactory" or above ratings in each of the SLO's are as follows:
SLO 1: 60%
SLO 2: 80%
SLO 3: 80%
SLO 4: 90%
SLO 5: 70%
SLO 6: 95%
SLO 7: 80%
SLO 8: 100%
SLO 9: 85%
SLO 10: 95%
SLO 11: 90%
SLO 12: 70%
13) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)
Course changes (course content, pedagogy, courses offered, new course, pre-requisites, requirements)
Personnel or resource allocation changes
Program policy changes (e.g., admissions requirements, student probation policies, common course evaluation form)
Students' out-of-course experience changes (advising, co-curricular experiences, program website, program handbook, brown-bag lunches, workshops)
Celebration of student success!
Results indicated no action needed because students met expectations
Use is pending (typical reasons: insufficient number of students in population, evidence not evaluated or interpreted yet, faculty discussions continue)
Other:
14) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.
Policy Change: Blanket C Prerequisite Grade
Direct quantitative assessments for SLO 1 led to the conclusion that students were not well prepared in their prerequisite courses (especially math) to take follow-up courses. At a faculty meeting in Spring 2014, the faculty voted to change to make a blanket policy to change the grade for pre-requisite courses from C- to C. This was approved by the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs in Summer 2014 and appeared in the UHM catalog in Fall 2015. This prerequisite grade policy is consistent with that used in the Math and Physics Departments.
Curriculum Change: ICS 141 became a pre-requisite for EE 367 in Fall 2014.
In Spring 2012, direct quantitative assessments were done in EE 367 to measure the level of achievement of SLO 12 (discrete math). Two of the performance criteria, “understands graphs, graph theory, and graph algorithms” and “understands counting and discrete probability”, had results that were less than the desired threshold of 75%. In Spring 2013, the results of the assessments were discussed by the CENG subcommittee of the ABET Committee, and it was concluded that the level of achievement of SLO 12 should be improved. A shortcoming of the curriculum was that EE 367 did not have any pre-requisites of discrete math. Therefore, it was proposed that ICS 141 Discrete Math for Computer Science I become a pre-requisite which was subsequently approved by the ABET Committee. In Fall 2013, a request to have ICS 141 become a pre-requisite for EE 367 was submitted to the university and it became official in Fall 2014.
Introduction of EE 362 Discrete Math for Engineers and plans of future curriculum change:
A new course EE 362 has been approved, and will be offered in Fall 2015. It is planned to replace ICS 141 in the curriculum. To further improve the level of achievement of SLO 12 (discrete math), it was decided to introduce EE 362. This course will cover more material than ICS 141 by also covering the material in ICS 241 Discrete Math for Computer Science II. In Fall 2014, EE 362 was proposed to become a new course, and has been approved by the OVCAA in Spring 2015. Its first offering is in Fall 2015. It is also planned that EE 362 will replace ICS 141 as a requirement in the curriculum and as a pre-requisite for EE 367. The application for the change is planned to be completed in Fall 2015.
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.
We discovered a need to improve our assessment map so that assessment, analysis, and change occurs in a systematic way for each SLO. The proposed plan involves assessing all of the SLOs within a year, followed by evaluation in the following year and implementing the necessary changes in the year after that. This is shown in the table below where A = assess, E = evaluate, C= change, shows such a map for a period of 6 years starting from academic year 2015-2016.
SLO | 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 |
1-12 | E | C | A | E | C | A |