Computer & Electronics Engineering Technology
Results of Assessment
2002-2003 (submitted 08/29/03)
The Computer and Electronics
Engineering Technology department is committed to continual improvement.
The department CEET Continuous Improvement Plan was established as a method to ensure an
ongoing process of identifying, evaluating, and improving the Computer
Engineering Technology (CET) and Electronics Engineering Technology (EET) degree
programs. The assessment program is
designed as a simple "problem
identification, evaluation, change, and result" continuous loop that is
described below.
1. Problem
Identification:
How does a department identify problems or strengths?
A number of feedback channels have been created to identify possible
problems and strengths within the CEET program.
These channels were established as a feedback source for determining
whether or not the CEET program is functioning effectively and efficiently.
The established CEET Improvement Plan feedback tools
are:
AT-1
Student Feedback (interviews and surveys)
AT-2 Senior Student Feedback (senior
project, co-op work, interviews/surveys)
AT-3 Alumni Feedback (interviews and
surveys)
AT-4 Faculty Feedback (interviews and
department meetings)
AT-5 Employer Feedback (interviews and
surveys)
AT-6 Advisory Committee Feedback
(meeting minutes)
AT-7 University Feedback (Career
Services, Deans, Provost)
AT-8 National Sources and Standards
(ABET, journal articles, research reports)
AT-9 Standardized Tests (Work Keys)
AT-10
Program completion
2. Identify
Solution:
The CEET department, under the leadership of the
department chair, will constantly monitor the feedback channels in order to
identify emerging problems and recognize program strengths. The department will periodically review the collected
feedback and determine whether or not action is merited.
Action options will be discussed and the best option will be selected.
The department will then establish the procedures for approval and
implementation.
3. Implement
Change:
The CEET department will implement the necessary changes
to obtain the desired outcome. These changes are called Assessment Actions
(AA-1, AA-2, etc.). Change
proposals will be carried forward to the proper authority.
Some changes will require the approval by the dean, department advisory
committee, the Faculty Senate, and the Provost. Minor changes will not require approval outside the
department.
4. Evaluate
Result:
The department will determine the success of the action
and decide whether or not to repeat the process.
5. Goals/Assessment
Table:
The
table below lists each one of the Assessment Tools available for each of the
department goals.
|
#
|
GOALS/ASSESSMENT
|
AT#1
|
AT#2
|
AT#3
|
AT#4
|
AT#5
|
AT#6
|
AT#7
|
aT#8
|
AT#9
|
aT#10
|
|
1
|
CEET
DEPT GOAL #1
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
2
|
CEET
DEPT GOAL #2
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
CEET
DEPT GOAL #3
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
CEET
DEPT GOAL #4
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
CEET
DEPT GOAL #5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
6
|
CET
AAS SLO
#1
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
7
|
EET
AAS SLO
#2
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
8
|
EET
AAS
SLO #3
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
EET
BS SLO #1
|
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
10
|
EET
BS SLO #2
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
11
|
EET
BS SLO #3
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
EET
BS SLO
#4
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
EET
BS SLO
#5
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
CET
AAS SLO #1
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
CET
AAS
SLO
#2
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
16
|
CET
AAS SLO
#3
|
|
|
X
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
CET
BS GOAL
#1
|
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
18
|
CET
BS SLO #2
|
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
X
|
X
|
| 