Degree Program Assessment Reports : View Reports

Unit: Molecular Biosciences & Biosystems Engineering
Program: Biological Engineering (BS)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Fri Nov 16, 2018 - 2:37:17 pm

1) Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs)

1. A. 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. B. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 2b. Conduct research)

3. C. 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)

4. D. An ability to function on multidisciplinary teams.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth)

5. E. 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. F. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth, 3c. Stewardship of the natural environment, 3d. Civic participation)

7. G. An ability to communicate effectively.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2c. Communicate and report)

8. H. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context.

(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3c. Stewardship of the natural environment)

9. I. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth)

10. J. A knowledge of contemporary issues.

(1a. General education, 1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 1c. Understand Hawaiian culture and history, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture, 3c. Stewardship of the natural environment, 3d. Civic participation)

11. K.An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2b. Conduct research, 2c. Communicate and report)

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update asneeded.

Department Website URL:

Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://cms.ctahr.hawaii.edu/ugstudies/Home/Major-Handbooks/Biological-Engineering

Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:

UHM Catalog. Page Number: 351

Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:

Other:

3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2018:

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) Does the program have learning achievement results for its program SLOs? (Example of achievement results: "80% of students met expectations on SLO 1.")(check one):

Yes, on some(1-50%) of the program SLOs

Yes, on most(51-99%) of the program SLOs

Yes, on all(100%) of the program SLOs

6) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2015 and October 31, 2018?

Yes

No (skip to question 17)

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2015 to October 31, 2018? (Check all that apply.)

Create/modify/discuss program learning assessment procedures (e.g., SLOs, curriculum map, mechanism to collect student work, rubric, survey)

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)

No (skip to question 17)

Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7)

Other:

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.

In June of 2015 a self-study report was submitted to the Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) of ABET as part of the Biological Engineering program's application for reaccreditation. The program also hosted a site visit in November of 2015 by an assessment team and responded to several inquiries prior to and after the site visit. Program and student assessment were significant components in the self-study report and site visit.

During the 2016 - 2017 and 2017 - 2018 academic years student work was collected for assessment for the two year cycle. Student work was assessed during summer and fall of 2018 by teams of faculty members and recommendations were made for improvement. Continuous improvement measures were implemented for two of the outcomes during the Fall 2018 term based on assessment results.

EAC-ABET has changed the required student learning outcomes for engineering programs beginning in the 2018 - 2019 academic year. The faculty have begun writing new assessment rubrics for the new outcomes.

9) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 7? (Check all that apply.)

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

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

Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc.

Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.)

Other 1:

Other 2:

10) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

A total of 34 students were assessed. All students submitting evidence were assessed.

11) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)

Course instructor(s)

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:

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

Used a rubric or scoring guide

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:

13) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 7. For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

Each SLO contains several performance indicators and a summary is presented in the table below. The target for each performance indicator is a level of "proficient" and the program has a goal of 75% of students at a level of "proficient" at the time of graduation. The same target level is applied regardless of the student's position within the curriculum. The results are an aggregate of the work collected over the 2016 - 2017 and 2017 - 2018 academic years.

	Sophomore/Junior	Senior
Outcome a - Knowledge
Math	53	-
Science	53	-
Engineering	53	-
Outcome b – Experimentation
Conduct	71	79
Design	64	79
Statistics	64	79
Interpret	50	79
Outcome c – Design constraints
Economics	-	100
Safety	-	100
Manufacturability	-	100
Environmental	-	43
Outcome d – Teamwork
Dialog	-	100
Shared responsibilities	-	100
Outcome e – Engineering problems
Identify	54	100
Formula	46	100
Solve	39	100
Outcome f – Professional and ethical responsibility
Code	-	50
Ramifications	-	50
Outcome g – Communication
Organization	50	100
Support with facts	50	100
Integrate feedback	39	100
Written work	57	100
Outcome h – Engineering impacts
Engineer’s role	93	-
Impacts	50	-
Outcome i – Lifelong learning
Recognition of need	-	100
Engagement	-	100
Outcome j – Contemporary issues
Societal challenges	50	100
Current events	100	50
Outcome k – Modern engineering tools
Graphics	100	100
Solutions	100	100

14) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)

Assessment procedure changes (SLOs, curriculum map, rubrics, evidence collected, sampling, communications with faculty, etc.)

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:

15) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.

Student performance in Outcome 'e' at the junior level does not meet the program's target goal of 75% of students meeting attaining the proficient level, although that specification is at the time of graduation. Still the faculty feel performance here can still be improved and serve as a foundation for subsequent courses. Although the performance of students in their capstone project final report was assessed as proficient, during that course itself and other senior level courses with a design component, students are not applying and communicating a consistent approach to the engineering design process. Primarily this involved not developing a set of problem requirements to solve early in the project that guides the planning and execution of task to meet those requirements. This observation matches the assessment of the performance of junior level students. In response, the faculty created a engineering design process curriculum and began developing a new rubric to guide the assessment of student performance and communication of the design process to students.

The other two outcomes that are a major focus are 1) 'b' designing, conducting, and interpreting experiments and 2) 'g' communication. Again, it was decided that performance at the junior could be improved even as it was observed that targets have been met by the time of graduation. For the outcome 'b', it was determined in part that low assessed performance is impart due to the documentation collected. In the future, the experimental procedure written by students prior to the laboratory experiment will be collected along with the laboratory report to more accurately assess the ability to design and conduct experiments.

Regarding outcome 'g' which assesses communication, the faculty will address whether requiring revisions for reports in BE courses will be required. For the 2018 BE 350L course, mandatory revised report submissions are required for all except for the final report. The faculty want to encourage student to implement feedback in their writing submissions in order to further develop their writing skills rather than to simply be made aware of these suggestions.

16) 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.

There has been a greater realization among the faculty that the assessment activities and continuous improvement efforts can be greatly improved through collaboration. Efforts such as improving the instruction and demonstration of the engineering desing process, ethical and professional responsibility, communication, and experimental design in particular have been identified as the initial efforts to pursue. The faculy haave already started planning and implementing a new engineering design curriculum at the junior level in the Fall 2018 with plans to evaluate the results in the next term and plan implementation in sophomore and senior level courses.

With the accreditation body prescribing new student learning outcomes for the Biological Engineering program, new assessment rubrics are in the process of being written. The faculy are considering a different focus to the rubrics to focus more on assessing development through the curriculum rather than one that focuses on judging errors in student work or places a large emphasis on the final product.

1) Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs)

1. A. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.

2. B. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.

3. C. 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.

4. D. An ability to function on multidisciplinary teams.

5. E. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.

6. F. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.

7. G. An ability to communicate effectively.

8. H. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context.

9. I. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.

10. J. A knowledge of contemporary issues.

11. K.An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update asneeded.

3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.

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) Does the program have learning achievement results for its program SLOs? (Example of achievement results: "80% of students met expectations on SLO 1.")(check one):

6) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2015 and October 31, 2018?

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2015 to October 31, 2018? (Check all that apply.)

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.

9) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 7? (Check all that apply.)

10) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

11) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)

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

13) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 7. For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

14) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)

15) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.

16) 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.

17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.