Introduction Contents of the report Assessment : Objectives Outcomes The data : 081 082 091 Continuous improvement :The actions This term

Substantial equivalence to accreditation 1993 and 2001 Main concerns : 2001 visit

◦ Some cooperative and senior project reports reflect heavy emphasis on analysis with very little design

◦ The faculty size should increase◦ Hire full professors ◦ Additional attention to the development of

communications skills◦ Establishment of an advisory committee for its program◦ Consult with the students ◦ Last year extension

Main concerns : 2008 extension◦ The Program Educational Objectives must be modified. ◦ “… put into place a process for explicitly assessing the

appropriateness of its PEOs on a periodic basis”◦ “The process for PO assessment and evaluation should be

modified.”◦ “ develop a clear description of how the assessment

committee integrates input ”◦ “ develop a stronger case for the equivalency of the

senior project and Cooperative assignment alternatives◦ explicitly confirm through outcomes assessment and

evaluation that its graduates have the ability to design, develop, implement, and improve integrated systems

Summary of previous concerns and actions to address them including evidences

Students Objectives and their assessment Outcomes and their assessments Continuous improvements Curriculum Faculty Facilities Support Courses syllabi Resumes Lab equipment Supporting documents

The objectives◦ The Industrial and Systems Engineering program prepares ISE

engineers◦ to be successful in improving systems and solving complex

industrial and systems engineering problems (Objective 1)◦ to communicate effectively and achieve leadership positions

(Objective 2)◦ to engage in lifelong learning and adapt to ever changing

environments (Objective 3)◦ to contribute as ethical and responsible members of the society

(Objective 4) How are they developed How are they assessed and modified Objectives Assessment tools Assessment results 1 2 3 4 conclusion

The percentage of surveyed alumni who rated the satisfaction of this objective as good or better is 85%.

As a measure of the involvement of the program alumni in improving systems and solving complex industrial and systems engineering problems, the number of alumni who hold advanced technical positions is used. The surveys revealed that 61% of our alumni hold leading technical positions (such as leading maintenance engineers, leading quality assurance officer etc).

The faculty, through their interactions with the local industry, indicated that the program objective 1 is satisfied with 86% for a rating of “good” and above.

In recent meetings of the Industrial Advisory Committee, the assessment of the objectives was in the agenda. Surveys were distributed to the members seeking their opinion. However, they elected to give their input verbally, and that was documented in the minutes of the meeting. The IAC members reflected their satisfaction on the level of achievement of this objective.

The percentage of employers who rated the satisfaction of this objective as good or better is 81.8 %.

From the above, it is concluded that all constituencies are satisfied with the level of achievement of the program objective 1.

The percentage of surveyed alumni who rated the satisfaction of the objective as good or better is 86.6%.

As an indication of achieving leadership, it was found that 43.3% of the surveyed alumni hold leading administrative positions.

The faculty, through their interactions with the local industry, indicated that the program objective 2 is satisfied with 93% for a rating of “good” and above.

The members of the IAC reflected their satisfaction on the level of achievement of this objective.

The percentage of surveyed employers who rated the satisfaction of this objective as good or better is 81.8 %.

From the above, it is concluded that all constituencies are satisfied with the level of achievement of the program objective 2.

The percentage of surveyed alumni who rated the satisfaction of the objective as good or better is 93.3%.

The percentage of surveyed alumni who pursued a higher degree among these who graduated over the period 2003-2005 is 5.6%.

The faculty, through their interactions with the local industry, indicated that the program objective 3 is satisfied with 86% for a rating of “good” and above.

The members of the IAC reflected their satisfaction on the level of achievement of this objective.

The percentage of employers who rated the satisfaction of this objective as good or better is 81.8 %.

  From the above, it is concluded that all constituencies are satisfied

with the level of achievement of the program objective 3.

The percentage of alumni who rated the satisfaction of the objective as good or better is 91.6%.

The faculty, through their interactions with the local industry, indicated that the program objective 4 is satisfied with 86% for a rating of “good” and above.

The IAC reflected their satisfaction on the level of achievement of this objective.

The percentage of employers who rated the satisfaction of this objective as good or better is 72.7 %.

From the above, it is concluded that all constituencies are satisfied with the level of achievement of the program objective 4.

The IAC members, the faculty members, the surveyed alumni, and the employers indicated that the objectives of the programs are satisfied with good level of satisfaction. In fact, all constituencies indicated that the local industry is very appreciative of the skills and competence of the graduates of the program. In addition, all are in agreement with the suitability of the objectives of the program.

The outcomes Objectives-outcomes relationship Outcomes-courses relationship Assessment process Assessment tools Outcomes and tools Outcomes-courses-tools courses rubrics Documentation The assessment guidelines results summary Implementation plan

a. The graduates of the program should be able to: b. apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering;c. design and conduct experiments, as well as analyze and interpret

data;d. design and improve integrated systems of people, materials,

information, facilities, and technology;e. function as a member of a multi-disciplinary team;f. identify, formulate, and solve industrial and Systems engineering

problems;g. understand and respect professional and ethical responsibilities;h. communicate effectively both orally and in writing;i. understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and

societal contexts;j. recognize the need for life-long learning, and an ability to engage in

it;k. have a knowledge of contemporary issues; l. use up to dated techniques, skills and tools of Industrial and Systems

Engineering throughout their professional careers

For outcomes where class work and exams are used, the results of the exams and class work are classified to be at one of the following levels:◦ NI: Needs Improvements◦ S: Satisfactory◦ EE: Exceeds Expectations

The classification is based on the percentage of students passing a pre-specified threshold. The threshold for each course is fixed by 2-3 faculty members in the area. The level of achievement of an outcome from a given course is considered “EE” if 80% or more of the students score above the pre-set threshold. The level of the satisfaction of an outcome from a given course will be considered “S” if 60% or more of the students score above the pre-set threshold. Otherwise the level of satisfaction is considered “NI”.

If an outcome is assessed using two or more courses, the percentage of the courses’ results average is used to indicate the level of achievement of that outcome.

Complete Some course file/material missing

Data are complete Courses files..somehow complete Data not analyzed Deadline was Oct 20

Plan from today Questions in exams for outcomes from

faculty Faculty assessment surveys Courses files

Display material Data to be ready Data to be collected Actions to be documented Visit Dec 12-14