SECCM Assessment Plan - Roger Williams University
SECCM Assessment Plan - Roger Williams University SECCM Assessment Plan - Roger Williams University
Bloom’s taxonomy and derived from several sources including Bloom et al. (1956) 1 McGourty, Besterfield-Sarcre and Shuman (1999) 2 and Besterfield-Sarcre et al. al (2000), 3 as well as from each faculty member’s own contributions. The outcomes assessment form was designed using Adobe Acrobat Professional form features. Although the process of filling out each form is somewhat time-consuming for each faculty member, it allows a systematic evaluation of our outcomes that quickly identifies any areas where process improvement might be implemented. It also allows us to review student material associated with each outcome to begin the process of determining student competency associated with the outcome. Table 2.11, Sample of Outcomes Worksheet, shows the cover page of the outcomes worksheet and one page from outcome a. This sample is for the course, Engineering 210, Engineering Mechanics. Each faculty member fills out one complete set of these forms for each of a-k outcomes for each of his or her courses. 1 B. S. Bloom, M. D. Englehart, E. J. Furst, W. H. Hill, and D. R. Krathwohl (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain . New York: Longman. 2 J. McGourty, M. Besterfield-Sarcre and L. Shuman (1999) “ABET’s Eleven Student Learning Outcomes: Have We Considered the Implications” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education National Conference. 3 M. Besterfield-Sacre, L. Shuman, H., C. Atman, J. McGourty, R. Miller, B. Olds, and G. Rogers (2000) “Defining the Outcomes: A Framework for EC-2000.” IEEE Transactions On Education, Vol. 43, No. 2. 27
Table 2.11 Sample of Outcomes Worksheet 28
- Page 1 and 2: School of Engineering, Computing an
- Page 3 and 4: Section 4 - Assessment Plan for the
- Page 5 and 6: Correlation of SECCM’s Goals and
- Page 7 and 8: Figure 1.1 Assessment Plan Interrel
- Page 9 and 10: Program Educational Objectives and
- Page 11 and 12: Table 1.2 Instruments and Materials
- Page 13 and 14: • Course Assessment Report One of
- Page 15 and 16: • Student enrollment trends • F
- Page 18 and 19: Section 2 Assessment Plan for the E
- Page 20 and 21: The Engineering program was origina
- Page 22 and 23: 6. Core Education Courses These cou
- Page 24 and 25: Table 2.7 RWU Engineering Program E
- Page 26 and 27: Relationship between Engineering Cu
- Page 28 and 29: Seminar Business elective Engineeri
- Page 33 and 34: Table 2.12 Course Mapping to Expect
- Page 35 and 36: Outcome Courses ENGR 300 Mechanics
- Page 37 and 38: Outcome Courses ENGR 424 Digital Si
- Page 39 and 40: Outcome Courses CORE 103 Human Beha
- Page 41 and 42: Metric Goals for Each a-k Engineeri
- Page 43 and 44: Table 2.15 Outcome “c” Metrics
- Page 45 and 46: Table 2.18 Outcome “f” Metrics
- Page 47 and 48: Table 2.20 Outcome “h” Metrics
- Page 49 and 50: Table 2.23 Outcome “k” Metrics
- Page 51 and 52: Table 3.1 General Program Breakdown
- Page 53 and 54: Table 3.5 Concepts of Programming L
- Page 55 and 56: Senior Capstone Sequence The hallma
- Page 57 and 58: Computer Science Program Outcomes C
- Page 59 and 60: Table 3.12 Sample of Outcomes Works
- Page 61 and 62: Table 3.12b Sample of Outcomes Work
- Page 63 and 64: Table 3.12e Sample of Outcomes Work
- Page 65 and 66: Table 3.12g Sample of Outcomes Work
- Page 67 and 68: Metric Goals for Each a-g Computer
- Page 69 and 70: Table 2.16 Outcome “d” Metrics
- Page 71 and 72: Table 2.19 Outcome “g” Metrics
- Page 73 and 74: Table 4.1 General Education Courses
- Page 75 and 76: Table 4.5 Construction Course Numbe
- Page 77 and 78: Table 4.8 Alignment and Mapping of
- Page 79 and 80: Table 4.9 Construction Management P
Bloom’s taxonomy and derived from several sources including Bloom et al. (1956) 1 McGourty,<br />
Besterfield-Sarcre and Shuman (1999) 2 and Besterfield-Sarcre et al. al (2000), 3 as well as from each<br />
faculty member’s own contributions.<br />
The outcomes assessment form was designed using Adobe Acrobat Professional form features.<br />
Although the process of filling out each form is somewhat time-consuming for each faculty member, it<br />
allows a systematic evaluation of our outcomes that quickly identifies any areas where process<br />
improvement might be implemented. It also allows us to review student material associated with each<br />
outcome to begin the process of determining student competency associated with the outcome.<br />
Table 2.11, Sample of Outcomes Worksheet, shows the cover page of the outcomes worksheet and<br />
one page from outcome a. This sample is for the course, Engineering 210, Engineering Mechanics.<br />
Each faculty member fills out one complete set of these forms for each of a-k outcomes for each of<br />
his or her courses.<br />
1 B. S. Bloom, M. D. Englehart, E. J. Furst, W. H. Hill, and D. R. Krathwohl (1956) Taxonomy of Educational<br />
Objectives: Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain . New York: Longman.<br />
2 J. McGourty, M. Besterfield-Sarcre and L. Shuman (1999) “ABET’s Eleven Student Learning Outcomes: Have<br />
We Considered the Implications” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education National<br />
Conference.<br />
3 M. Besterfield-Sacre, L. Shuman, H., C. Atman, J. McGourty, R. Miller, B. Olds, and G. <strong>Roger</strong>s (2000) “Defining<br />
the Outcomes: A Framework for EC-2000.” IEEE Transactions On Education, Vol. 43, No. 2.<br />
27
Change language