The Case for Ongoing Student Course Assessment

Most colleges in the United States use end-of-term course assessment as the main feedback mechanism from students. By using this method of summative assessment, students are able to rate the course, the performance of the instructor, and what they have learned in the course, among other things. One drawback of the end-of-term feedback is that the current students are not able to benefit from any improvements in the course that may result from their feedback. To overcome this drawback, the author explores in this paper the use of ongoing assessment of student understanding of course topics throughout the quarter using module surveys. In this paper, the author presents the advantages of the ongoing assessment technique, the survey data from online and on-campus sections of the author?s structural analysis course, and feedback from students regarding the effectiveness of the module surveys. This continuous improvement process has been successfully adopted in the author?s structural analysis, structural steel design and reinforced concrete design courses. The analysis of the data obtained from administering this survey to students in the structural analysis course is presented. Based on the survey data and the students? feedback, it can be concluded that ongoing formative assessment methods enhance student learning and should be adopted in Engineering Technology (ET) courses as one way of satisfying the ?closed loop? continuous improvement process now required by the accrediting agencies

Use Of Ongoing Assessment Of Intended Learning Outcomes To Evaluate Effectiveness Of Online And On Campus Delivery Of A Structural Analysis Course

The ABET TC2K criteria now require proof of continuous improvement similar to the quality assurance programs, such as, the Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) that have long been used in industry. In order to effect continuous improvement in a program or course, ABET requires documentation of the procedure for assessing the course or program, a determination of any areas of weakness, effecting necessary changes to improve the course and then, re-assessing to find out how well the adopted measures worked, thus “closing the loop” on the continuous improvement process. The Civil Engineering Technology (CET) program at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) is preparing for an ABET accreditation next fall. In preparation for the accreditation visit, the author carried out a survey of students in the online and on-campus structural analysis courses to gauge how well the predetermined set of intended learning outcomes (ILOs) were achieved. The students were asked to rate the ILOs for each of the six modules in the course on a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being “very well understood” and 1 being “not understood at all”). The students submit the survey for each module at the completion of each module, thus providing immediate and on-going feedback on student learning that could be used to make mid-course corrections. This paper discusses the results obtained from this assessment, if differences in student learning exist between the online and on-campus sections, and identifies potential areas of improvement

Development And Integration Of A New Course In Structural Loads & Systems In A Civil Engineering Technology Program

One of the Civil criteria in ABET TC2K is that programs “apply current knowledge and adapt to emerging applications of technology,” such as, changes in the building codes. Structural design firms also have the expectation that Civil Engineering Technology (CET) graduates should be able to apply current codes to determine structural loads, required for the analysis and design of structures. While most CET programs expose their students to structural analysis and design using instructor or textbook-prescribed loads, few expose students to the detailed calculation of actual structural loads using current codes. Many jurisdictions in the United States, including New York State, have recently adopted the International Building Code (IBC), which contains the latest provisions on structural loads, including wind and seismic loads for buildings. Prior to 2002, in New York State, the building code only required buildings to be designed for wind loads using a very simple tabular method. Seismic loads were not considered. Under that dispensation, it was possible and feasible to integrate the topic of structural loads, dead, live, snow and wind load, into any one of the structural design courses, all-be-it at an elementary level. However, with the adoption of building codes, such as the IBC 2000, the calculation of structural loads has become complex and time consuming. In order to meet the changing needs in this subject area of the CET curriculum, a new stand-alone course in structural loads and systems has become a necessity. This paper discusses the development and integration of a 2-credit hour required course in structural loads and systems that is offered to 3rd year students in the CET program at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). The topics discussed include: impetus for developing the course, course structure and syllabus, integration into the curriculum, intended learning outcomes, course text development (no available structured textbook exists), typical homework assignments, summary and conclusions

Strategies For Enhancing The Scholarly Productivity Of Engineering Technology Educators

Scholarship is now a requirement for promotion and tenure at most institutions with Engineering Technology (ET) programs. ET faculty that have previously focused only on teaching are now required to demonstrate evidence of scholarly activity on an annual basis. To underscore the importance of the scholarship issue, the Engineering Technology Council (ETC) of ASEE states in its 2003-2006 Strategic Plan’s Goal # 5: “The ETC will develop guidelines and promote appropriate scholarship for engineering technology educators.” Many ET educators sincerely want to engage in scholarly activities, but lack the experience in this arena because of the non-existence of the scholarship culture within many ET programs. It is, therefore, incumbent on the ET community to develop strategies to facilitate the growth of scholarly activities among ET faculty. Indeed, the mantra for the ET community with regards to scholarship should be: “Scholarship, You can do it, we can help!” In a recent paper, the author and his collaborators, as members of the ETC Task Force on Scholarship, developed guidelines for scholarship in ET and proposed a faculty workload model. The current paper focuses on strategies that will encourage, facilitate, and provide support for the growth of scholarship in ET. Some of the “ways and means” for increasing scholarly productivity that are currently being implemented in the College of Applied Science and Technology (CAST) at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) are discussed. These include: developing a college scholarship website, developing a scholarship mentoring program, developing web-based venues of dissemination and peer review, developing grant proposal and scholarly writing workshops, and identification and cultivation of support resources for scholarship. The early results and experiences from implementing some of these strategies at RIT are discussed and recommendations are offered that would be of help to other ET programs interested in cultivating the scholarship culture within their programs

Strategies for Embedding Scholarship in the Educational Experiences of Engineering Technology Undergraduate Students

The hallmark of Engineering Technology (ET) programs is its student-centered curriculum and hands-on approach to teaching. Many institutions with ET programs now require scholarship of their ET faculty in addition to their teaching duties. In many institutions that have always emphasized scholarship and research, undergraduate student education has often times taken a back seat to research. The question that arises for ET programs as we begin to engage in scholarly activities is: how do we insure that ET scholarship is student-centered similar to ET teaching and curriculum? The benefits of scholarship to ET students include enhancement of their critical thinking, innovative, lifelong learning skills, skills that many ET employers today are looking for in our students. In this paper, the author examines issues relating to the importance of scholarship to ET undergraduate students, barriers to ET student scholarship, mechanisms for embedding scholarship in the ET curriculum, resources required to facilitate ET student scholarship, and feedback from ET student scholars who recently worked on a scholarly project with the author. The author concludes that embedding scholarship in the ET curriculum is very desirable and suggests some ways and means to facilitate and nurture student scholarship in ET

A Web-Based Distance-Learning Course in Structural Analysis

There are some asynchronous web-based courses available in the civil engineering technology field but to the author’s knowledge, very few courses exist in structural analysis and design. The advantages of web-based online learning include flexibility and the ability to accommodate various learning styles such as visual and auditory learners, with the visual learning style being the most common among people of college age and older. The Civil Engineering Technology program at RIT recently developed a suite of web-based courses as part of the new Certificate in Structural Design. The online courses available include Structural Analysis, Timber Design, Reinforced Concrete Design, Structural Steel Design, and Applied Mechanics. The web-based course management software used to create the e-learning environment is the Prometheus (or myCourses at RIT) platform developed at the University of Washington. This platform includes an integrated e-mail list, discussion boards, live chat rooms and an online grade book. The purpose of this paper is to present a simple and effective approach used by the author in teaching a structural analysis distance-learning course. Structural analysis is a very analytical course that involves a lot of problem solving, diagrams and figures; consequently, a combination of web-based and text-based delivery formats was used in this course. The course was divided into several modules with each module having its own Intended Learning Outcomes (ILO’s). The course modules serve as a benchmark and compass to guide and measure student learning throughout the quarter. After the completion of each module, the students were asked to provide quantitative feedback on the ILO’s for that module to the instructor, thus enabling the instructor to reinforce any concept that may not have been fully grasped by the students. Student-toinstructor interaction was maintained through the use of the discussion board in myCourses and by e-mail. The syllabus, course modules, homework assignments and other pertinent information were posted on the course web site. Weekly homework was assigned and the students submitted their homework to the instructor by fax. A proctor that was pre-approved by the RIT Office of Online Learning proctored all the tests and the final exam in this course in the student’s locality. In this paper, the author discusses the organization of the course, the course modules and ILO’s, student-to-student and student-to-instructor interactions, feedback and guidance, and students’ responses and lessons learned. Based on the student feedback and performance in this course, we conclude that the structural analysis course has been successfully delivered via a combination of web-based and text-based delivery formats

The Scholarship Horizons in Engineering Technology: Choosing the Best Path

The issue of scholarship in Engineering Technology (ET) is becoming an important topic of discussion within the ET community due to the evolving missions of many institutions that host Engineering Technology programs. Many of these institutions now require some form of documented scholarship from their ET faculty for promotion and tenure purposes, and it is incumbent upon the ET community to support these faculty by defining not only the meaning of scholarship in ET, but also the yardstick by which such scholarship will be assessed. This issue is pertinent to ET because our programs are traditionally of an applied nature with a focus on practice-oriented education. It is therefore logical to expect that ET scholarship should take on an applied flavor and involve our constituencies (students and industry) in meaningful ways. To define ET scholarship from within the ET community and to develop an appropriate ET faculty workload model, the Engineering Technology Council (ETC) formed a Task Force on ET Scholarship at the ETLI Conference in October 2002 in Norfolk, Virginia. The group was charged to report back to the ETC by June of 2003 at the ASEE Annual Conference in Nashville. In this paper, the authors will discuss what ET scholarship involves, the importance and relevance of ET scholarship, appropriate Evaluation of ET scholarship, Faculty Workload (teaching, scholarship and service) Model(s), and the Challenges and Opportunities of ET scholarship. A web-based literature survey is carried out to determine the faculty workload policy that currently exists at various colleges and universities across the country, and this information is used in developing the proposed ET faculty workload model presented in this paper

Assessing the Impact of the Concrete Canoe and Steel Bridge Competitions on Civil Engineering Technology Students

The new accreditation criteria (TC2K) of the Technology Accreditation Commission of ABET require an assessment of Program Intended Learning Outcomes. Some of the learning outcomes required by the “a” through “k” and the Civil criteria of TC2K include leadership skills, teamwork skills, project management skills, communication skills, and design and construction skills. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the American Institute for Steel Construction (AISC) sponsors regional and national concrete canoe and steel bridge competitions on an annual basis. The Civil Engineering Technology (CET) students at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) have participated in these competitions for the past nine years. These competitions give students a chance to apply what they have learned in the classroom. To assess the impact of the concrete canoe and steel bridge competitions on student learning and development, the authors carried out a survey of current students and graduates of the CET program at RIT who have been members of the concrete canoe and steel bridge teams. The issues addressed in our survey include the following: impact of these activities on leadership skills, communication skills, teamwork skills, design and construction skills, project management skills, confidence levels, students’ enthusiasm for the profession, and a positive image and exposure for students and CET programs. In this paper, we discuss the results of this survey and some of the challenges to student participation in these non-credit activities at RIT, and present some suggestions for enhancing the level of student participation