Degree Program Assessment Reports : View Reports

Unit: Mechanical Engineering
Program: Mechanical Engineering (BS)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Fri Nov 20, 2020 - 2:02:33 pm

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

1. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve complex engineering problems by applying principles of engineering, science, and mathematics

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

2. an ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors

(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)

3. an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences

(2c. Communicate and report)

4. an ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments, which must consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts

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

5. an ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives

(1a. General education, 2c. Communicate and report)

6. an ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation, analyze and interpret data, and use engineering judgment to draw conclusions

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

7. an ability to acquire and apply new knowledge as needed, using appropriate learning strategies

(1a. General education, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth)

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

Department Website URL: https://me.hawaii.edu/programs/

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/me.htm

Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:

Other:

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

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2020:

File (11/18/2020)

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 November 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020?

Yes

No (skip to question 17)

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period November 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020? (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)

Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 8)

Other:

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place since November 2018.

SLO assessment data were collected from the ME faculty in Fall 2018, Spring 2019, and Fall 2019. Based on the analysis of this data, improvements were needed in our design courses, which were documented and made in Spring 2020. We have had one IAB meeting in May 2019 where the PEO's were discussed, but they were not changed.

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.

Assessment was done for all of the students in our undergraduate core courses.

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 from the evaluation, analysis, interpretation of evidence (checked in question 12). For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

We assess with rubrics on a 4 point scale. The breakdown for the percentage of students who achieved each SO for each course:

ME 213: SO2: 69% SO5: 73%

ME 271: SO1: 78%

ME 311: SO1: 64%

ME 322: SO3: 73% SO6: 74%

ME 331: SO1: 70%

ME 341: SO4: 80% SO6: 70%

ME 371: SO1: 66%

ME 372: SO1: 95%

ME 374: SO1: 70%

ME 375: SO3: 88% SO6: 95%

ME 422: SO4: 80% SO7: 86%

ME 481: SO2: 64% SO4: 60% SO5: 69% SO7: 73%

ME 482: SO1: 69% SO2: 62% SO3: 79% SO5: 73%

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 its findings/results.

Improvements were needed in our design courses to "close the loop." Specific changes were implemented such as:

Improvements in ME 482 section 1

1. Each team presentation will include an introductory slide that states the problem being addressed by the team's project and how it can help address social and cultural issues. In some cases, the direct connection might not be obvious, but ME 482 is training future engineers who can make major impacts to our society, and we are providing the training for them to be conscious of these issues in their professional careers.
2. Each team written report will also include an introductory section on the problem being addressed by the team's project and its affect on society, as they did in ME 481.

Improvements in ME 482 section 2

Stress the significance of the social and cultural impacts of the students’ designs during lab sessions and regularly encourage discussion on the potential issues;
For final presentations, explicitly require the students to discuss the social and cultural issues they have considered with their designs and the approaches to avoid or remedy the issues;
During Q&A for the student’s final presentation, verify that the student’s designs have successfully avoided or addressed potential social and cultural issues.

Improvement in ME 213

The project in ME213 incorporates issues of safety throughout the design as the objective is retrieving an uncooked egg in a remote location and returning, unharmed, to the starting point. Similar to the needs of a remote rover to rescue a stranded astronaut, students must consider the effectiveness and efficiency of their design while maintaining the safety fo the egg throughout.

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.

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

1. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve complex engineering problems by applying principles of engineering, science, and mathematics

2. an ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors

3. an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences

4. an ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments, which must consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts

5. an ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives

6. an ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation, analyze and interpret data, and use engineering judgment to draw conclusions

7. an ability to acquire and apply new knowledge as needed, using appropriate learning strategies

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

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 November 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020?

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period November 1, 2018 and October 31, 2020? (Check all that apply.)

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place since November 2018.

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 from the evaluation, analysis, interpretation of evidence (checked in question 12). 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 its findings/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.