Weber State University   

Computer & Electronics Engineering Technology

Results of Assessment

2006-2007 (submitted 06/04/07)

Notes for reading summary assessment grid (Figure 1) below:
"-" = Middle of the road score, not a weakness or a strength
"+" = Top score, "+1" highest score, "+2" Second highest score, etc.
"-" = Bottom score, "-1" = lowest score, "-2" second lowest score, etc.
"Blank" = not measured

Figure 1.  CEET Program Objectives and Student Outcomes Assessment Grid

Student Learning Outcomes Conclusions and Goals

1.     Demonstrate a fundamental mastery of knowledge and the use of electronic equipment in electrical, digital, and analog circuits.

SLO 1 Technical knowledge was measured by five of our assessment tools.  The senior project design review scored this area (technical merit) as the highest.  The two surveys rated this area as a strength.  The department technical exam scores were relatively low because we tested our students on topics they had 3-5 years earlier.  We have concluded that we our technical education is satisfactory and meets the needs of the community.  We will continue the never-ending task of adding new technologies and knowing what to eliminate.  From the findings of the department exam, we will add a technical review sessions in our curriculum for seniors.  The details have yet to be decided.

2.    Apply current knowledge and adapt to emerging applications.

SLO 2 Adapt and apply was measured using the senior project design review, Employer Survey and Graduate Survey.  The senior project design review scored this area (technical merit) as the highest.  The collected data shows that this SLO is satisfactory because it was not identified as a weakness or a strength.  The high mark received in the senior project review was countered by the perceived weakness in the Graduate Survey.  A "-4" means that it was a weakness, but may not be significant enough to merit a major change.  At a department meeting in the spring, the faculty agreed to offer more opportunities for students to apply their knowledge to real-world applications.

3.    Use computer simulation and design software to conduct, analyze and interpret electrical, digital, and analog circuits.

SLO 3 Computer Tools was measured by three of our assessment tools.  This SLO was one of our weaker areas..  It was not the weakest in any of our measurement tools, but it was consistently weak (-3, -2, -3).  In both the Employer Survey and Graduate Survey, the scores improved slightly between 2003 and 2007.  This area now looks weaker because the other areas have improved significantly.  This is a good sign that we are showing progress at raising scores.  The newly developed rubric for senior projects confirmed our need to re-evaluate our use of computer tools.  For years, we have been using the common software tools for circuit simulation, PCB design, ASIC design, embedded controller design, and automated control.  Employers and students want more emphasis put on computer tools.  Every one of our lab rooms (except the motors lab) has computers at each workstation.  We have discussed adding a special course called software tools, but the logistics of offering it at the right point during their studies has been insurmountable.  We have concluded that particular software tools should be taught in the courses where the topic is being taught.  The problem has been to get our faculty to ease up on course content and shift the emphasis slightly to the education and use of the appropriate computer tools.  The department faculty have agreed to do this, but it has been difficult to measure the shift.  The senior project review revealed a different computer tool weakness, graphics.  We have required the use of PowerPoint for years, but the presentation graphics has not kept up with the latest technologies.   The new senior project review rubric has identified and quantified this weakness and the feedback to the students will hopefully improve their computer skills. 

4.    Understand the fundamentals of creative problem solving and apply them to circuit and system design.

SLO 4 Creative Problem Solving was measured by only two of our assessment tools, Employer and Graduate Surveys.  Both surveys scored this SLO in the middle of the pack, not a weakness or a strength.  We have not yet decided how to measure this characteristic.  Many of our faculty believe that solving electronic problems is a creative process, but we couldn't agree on how to measure it.   Until we figure it out, we have pressed ahead on two fronts.  One, we included creativity as a one-hour discussion in the CEET 2000/4000 Engineering Seminar courses.  Two, will modify the new senior project design review rubric to include creativity.  Until we come up with a measurement tool, we only have two surveys to fall back on.

5.         Function effectively on teams.

SLO 5 Teamwork was measured by four of our assessment tools.  This SLO hit both extremes.  The Supervisor's Evaluation scores teamwork as the weakest (-1) characteristic, while the surveys rank it as the strongest (+1).  The senior project reviewers have found it to be a strength (+2).  We do not know where we are on this one.

6.    Identify, analyze and solve electrical, digital, analog, and embedded controller problems.

SLO 6 Problem Solving was measured by five of our assessment tools.  This SLO is the easiest to measure because it is more quantifiable than other areas.  The senior project review identified problem solving as the students greatest strength.  We are doing satisfactorily in this area.  The department technical exam pointed out to us that our students have problems retaining technical knowledge.   Our average student takes seven years to graduate and retention is a problem.  We have already added a FE Study Preparation course (CEET 4050) to review and prepare students to take the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam.  Our goal is to add review sessions or even a course for seniors.

7.         Demonstrate professional written, presentation, and graphical communications skills.

SLO 7 Communications was measured by four of our assessment tools.  This SLO has always and continues to be the weakest area for our students.  The interesting thing about this SLO is that the students believe they are good communicators, while the other measurement tools score it as a weakness.  Communications skills were a discussion topic during our last CEET Advisory Committee meeting (April 2007).  We have put more effort into correcting this weakness than any other area.  We have made great progress and the scores have come up significantly, but still end up being a weakness.  The newly created senior project review rubric will help us identify specific communications weaknesses and provide direct feedback to students.  CEET 4010 and 4020 Senior Projects courses require students to make a formal presentation in each class.  This gives us the opportunity to provide feedback during the first presentation and allows students the opportunity improve the second presentation.  An upper-division writing class is required of all our students.  Three years ago, we modified our CEET 3070 Engineering Technology Research course so it now requires each student to make weekly presentations on technical subjects.  We also modified our CEET 2130 PCB Design course so each student must make a formal presentation. 

8.         Understand the need for lifelong learning.

SLO 8 Lifelong Learning is measured by only two of our assessment tools, The Employer Survey and Graduate Survey.  Both surveys score lifelong learning in the middle of the road to where it is not a weakness nor is it a strength.  We have not yet clearly defined what lifelong learning is and especially how to measure it.  In the mean time, we have added this topic to our CEET 2000/4000 Engineering Seminar courses.  The instructor is bringing in guest speakers that have addressed their understanding of lifelong learning.  How do we measure lifelong learning after we graduate our students?  We know what the characteristics of lifelong learning are, but we do not know whether or not our graduates will continue learning after graduation.  This is a defensible argument in support of our use of the Employer and Graduate surveys. 

9.         Understand professional, ethical, and social responsibilities.

SLO 9 Professional and Ethical was measured by four of our assessment tools.  This SLO has two parts that complicate the evaluation process.  Professional and ethical are two distinct characteristics.  For example, the Supervisor's Evaluation measures professionalism and integrity independently, but the surveys mix the two in one answer, so we do not know for sure which characteristic we are measuring.  The Ethics Exam, obviously, only addresses ethics.  The differences between the Employer Survey (+2) and Graduate Survey (-2) are a bit puzzling.  We have concluded that employers believe our students are very professional and ethical, whereas the graduates believe they did not get enough instruction on being professional and/or ethical.  Professionalism and ethics are now topics in our CEET 2000/4000 Engineering Seminar courses.  The Ethics Exam is now given in the Engineering Seminar courses and we have modified the course to include additional instruction on engineering ethics and ethical situations where students may find themselves.

10.       Understand the importance of diversity as it relates to professional, societal, and global issues.

SLO 10 Diversity is measured by only two of our tools.  This SLO is also difficult to define and measure.  The Employer Survey revealed that the diversity scores fall in the middle and are not a weakness or a strength.  The Graduate Survey scored diversity as the weakest area and graduates were disappointed (survey comments) that WSU did little to educate them on the topic.  The CEET chair, Bill Clapp, met with the campus Diversity Director last fall and confirmed this finding.  The required diversity general education courses do little, if anything, to prepare graduates to work with fellow employees from diverse cultures.  Under the guidance of the Diversity Director, the CEET 2000/4000 Engineering Seminar courses now include a one-hour session on diversity.  Our goal is to create an exam, similar to the Ethics Exam, to test the students on acceptable responses to diversity situations. 

11.        Understand the importance of goals, quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement.

SLO 11 Goals, Quality, Timeliness, and Continuous Improvement was measured by three of our tools.  This SLO is scored fairly high, but not quite high enough to call it a strength.  The Supervisor Evaluation asked the immediate supervisor to rate the students on productivity (+4) and that loosely relates to goals, quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement.  The Employer Survey scored this SLO as a +4, whereas the Graduate Survey put it in the middle.  Our goal is to modify the Supervisor's Evaluation and the senior project review rubric to include these four areas.

Program Objective Conclusions and Goals

1.          The ability to design, develop, install and test electronic systems.

PO 1 Design, Build, Install, and Test was measured with only one assessment tool, senior project review.  This PO scored in the middle and is not considered a weakness or a strength.

2.         Prepare the student with oral, written, and computer communication skills.

            See SLO 3 and 7 above.

3.         Desire for lifelong learning at graduation.

            See SLO 8 above.

4.         Prepared to move into supervisory positions or continue with advanced technical work.

PO 4 is nearly impossible to assess.  We are not currently preparing our graduates to be supervisors.  The senior project gives the student team leader supervisory experience, but that assignment is limited to typically one person per team.  As far as the advanced technical work, some of our graduates go on to MSEE or MBA master's programs.  We will review this program objective and determine how we can assess it.

5.         (CET) Acquire knowledge and skills in the areas of programming, and hardware including real-time systems, programmable logic, interface design, computer architecture, current software tools, software design and maintenance, and protocols.

5.         (EET) Acquire knowledge and skills in the areas of advanced circuit design and analysis, engineering design and modeling applications, instrumentation and data systems, digital signal processing, feedback and control systems, communication system design and analysis, and electronic project development.

PO 5 is difficult to assess because it is so encompassing.  Bits and pieces are measured in SLO 1, 2, 3, and 6 above.

6.         Students will learn technical problem solving and management skills.

            See SLO 6 above.

7.         Ethically responsible when solving real-world technical problems.

            See SLO 9 above.

8.         Foster an awareness of diversity and community needs by involving local industry, state government, and academia.

Mission Statement / Student Learning Outcomes / Curriculum Grid / Assessment Plan / Contact Person