| Action Review for Outcome (d) Function well on teams |
| 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| •
There were no Curriculum Actions Needed for 2004. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
Students are performing very well in teams. |
| •
There is no Curriculum Action Needed for 2005 |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
| N |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| •
Seeking better instruments for Outcome (d) were suggested as an Assessment
Process Action at the end of 2003 for Outcome (d) during 2004. Instruments
were the specific target, not metrics. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
The instruments for Outcome (d) seem to be functioning adequately at the end
of 2003. There remains an interest in
moving to more objective (relative to faculty assessment) measures of student
performance perhaps using student's self-reported teaming experience. |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| A |
Better
Assessment of Outcome (d) |
Develop
student-reported score assignment instruments of team experience to assess
Outcome (d). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| •
There were no 2005 Curriculum Actions stated for 2006. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
Student performance improved slightly but likely within the range of expected
uncertainty in performance measurement for Outcome (d). |
| • No Curriculum Action is needed. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
| N |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| •
The Assessment Process Actions for Outcome (d) for 2005 was the general
action that all faculty members consider producing metrics that provide for
more reliable measures of student achievement. For Outcome (d) this has taken the form of
using self assessment to determine the students' team experience in design
courses. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
The current cadre of instruments appears to be good tools for assessing
Outcome (a). |
| •
The faculty are again asked to continually seek better measures of student
performance. |
| •
The self assessment procedure is an excellent assessment instrument for this
objective (faculty play no role in determining the assessment score) results
are obtained. |
| • A Senior Exit Exam would also be an
improvement in that it would yield objective results in which the faculty
would play no role in determining the assessment scores. |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| A |
Develop a
Senior Exit Exam |
A
Senior Exit Exam is needed to achieve better Assessment of Outcome (d). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| •
There were no 2006 Curriculum Actions stated for 2007. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
Student performance improved slightly but likely within the range of expected
uncertainty in performance measurement for Outcome (d). |
| • No Curriculum Action is needed. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
| N |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| A
need for an improved Assessment Process for Outcome (d) in the form of a
Senior Exit Exam is an ongoing process improvement. Dr Howard will assume responsibility for
coordinating this effort. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
The current cadre of instruments appears to be good tools for assessing
Outcome (d). The faculty are again
asked to continually seek better measures of student performance. |
| •
The current Assessment Processes should be continued to assess Outcome (d),
but other objective assessment data are needed. |
| •
A Senior Exam should be developed as was recommended last year. |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| A |
Local Senior
Exit Exam |
Develop
a Senior Exit Exam to be administered to seniors as they near graduation so
as to gain objective assessment results specifically covering as many metrics
as possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| •
There were no Curriculum Actions Needed for 2007 for Outcome (d) |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
The drop in Outcome (d) assessment scores from 2005 and 2006 may be related
to different reviewers as faculty turnovers occur. These scores are mostly determined by
student input so are not as sensitive to faculty input and training as are
other outcomes. |
| •
Nevertheless, faculty training in the Continuous Improvement Process is
essential and should continue. |
| •
The new Senior Exit Exam is attempts to use several metrics to assess Outcome
(d). |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
| A |
New Faculty
Continuous Process Training |
New
faculty will be trained in the program's Continuous Improvement assessment
processes and practices. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| •
The 2006 Assessment Process Actions Needed called for the development and
implementation of a Local Senior Exit Exam, now termed the Local Exam given
to all seniors as they near graduation (usually during their last few weeks
of course work). This action was completed during the year and is used for
many Outcomes including Outcome (d).
It is an excellent objective measurement. |
| •
As noted for other outcomes, there is a general need for the new faculty to
be trained in the Continuous Improvement Process and mentored in the
curriculum interfaces. Variations in
either of these items could explain the noted declines in outcome scores and
so are noted here and in the Assessment Process review. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
The drop in scores from 2005 and 2006 may be related to different reviewers
as faculty turnovers occur. Faculty
training in the Continuous Improvement Process is essential and should
continue with renewed emphasis. |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| A |
New Faculty
Continuous Process Training |
New
faculty will be trained in the program's Continuous Improvement assessment
processes and practices. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| •
As suggested for 2007, new faculty have undergone training in the program's
Continuous Improvement assessment processes and practices. |
| •
Faculty training in the Continuous Improvement Process is now an ongoing
departmental process and will no longer be mentioned specifically. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| •
Student performance continues to decline.
This may be the result of the assessed cohort's academic variation
with the academically superior 2005/6 cohort.
This suggests the possible normalization of outcome assessment results
with cohort GPA's; however, that data is not readily available to the program
from institutional databases. |
| •
The most likely cause for performance decline is the recent turnover in
program faculty. |
| •
A watch of performance is warranted.
If improvement is not seen in the coming year, action will be
needed.
• Watch to see if the Senior Exit Exam (Local Exam) results are
considerable different from the other instruments and if it variation is less
than other metrics. Also consider if
cohort GPA is reflected in the Exit Exam results.
• Faculty training and mentoring is an ongoing departmental process
and will no longer be mentioned specifically. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
| W |
Senior Exit
Exam vs. Other Instruments |
Determine
if the Senior Exit Exam agrees with the other Instruments. |
| |
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| The
Assessment Process Action recommended for 2008 was that new faculty would be
trained in the program's Continuous Improvement assessment processes and
practices. This has been adopted as an
ongoing departmental process and will no longer be mention specifically. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| The
assessment process for Outcome (d) has evolved over the last several years
from an assessment largely by faculty to one largely by the students through
surveys. The primary concern at this
time is whether student's opinions concerning the workings of the design
teams are a legitimate measure of teaming skills and the proper balance
between teaming knowledge and skills. This will be watched and further
considered over 2009. |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| W |
Teaming
Experience vs. Skills |
Are
the students knowledgeable about teaming skills and do teaming experiences
measure this? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| Since
the performance of this category had been decreasing, it was decided to
"watch" the results during thid review period to see if the
declination continued. The slight
decrease during the previous two years was attributed to academically
superior 05/06 cohort and the recent turnover of the program faculty. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| The
assessment results increased slightly during this review period indicating
there was a normalization of the outcome assessment from previous cohorts and
the new faculty. |
| N |
No action
required. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| The
primary concern for 2009 was whether the student's opions concerning the
workings of the design teams are a legitimate measure of teaming skills and
the proper balance between teaming knowledge and skills. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| In
the future additional teaming and conflict resolution issues will be
addressed in the design courses by either faculty in the department or by
faculty from other departments. |
| W |
Working well
with others |
Additional
materials to be taught in Design courses. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| The
assessment results increased slightly during this review period indicating
there was a normalization of the outcome assessment from previous cohorts and
the new faculty. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| There
was no appreciable change in year over year assessment results during this
period. No action required. Signifigant decline in assessment results as
compared to previous years. The decline is assessment results are attributed
directly to changes in the assessment process itself. No action required. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
|
| Signifigant decline in assessment results as compared to previous
years. The decline is assessment results are attributed directly to changes
in the assessment process itself. No action required. |
No Action |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| In
the future additional teaming and conflict resolution issues will be
addressed in the design courses by either faculty in the department or by
faculty from other departments. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| No
action at this time. Continue to watch "working well with others". |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| W |
Working well
with others |
additional
materials to be taught in design courses. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| There
was no appreciable change in year over year assessment results during this
period. No action required. Signifigant decline in assessment results as
compared to previous years. The decline is assessment results are attributed
directly to changes in the assessment process itself. No action required. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| Significant
decline in assessment results as compared to previous years. The decline is
assessment results are attributed directly to changes in the assessment
process itself. No action required. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
|
| N |
No Action |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| No
action at this time. Continue to watch "working well with others". |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| A
significant drop in assessment results was observed in 2011. This decline is
attributed to; (1) the lack of student self-evaluation results, and (2) the
use of local exam results as an instrument for assessing "interactive
skills". Both of these changes had a pronounced affect on assessment
results. Continue to watch "working well with others". |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| W |
Working well
with others |
New
material added to design courses and self evaluation removed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| Significant
decline in assessment results as compared to previous years. The decline is
assessment results are attributed directly to changes in the assessment
process itself. No action required. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| Assessment
results showed a marked improvement in 2012. This is primarily due to changes
in the assessment process. No action required. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
|
| N |
no action
required. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| A
significant drop in assessment results was observed in 2011. This decline is
attributed to; (1) the lack of student self-evaluation results, and (2) the
use of local exam results as an instrument for assessing "interactive
skills". Both of these changes had a pronounced affect on assessment
results. Continue to watch "working well with others". |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| A
significant improvement in assessment results was observed in 2012. This
improvement is attributed to discontinuing the use of local exam results as
an instrument for assessing "interactive skills", thus reverting to
the same process as used in 2010.
Continue to watch "working well with others". |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| W |
working well
with others |
New
material added to design courses and use of local exam instrument modified. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| Assessment
results showed a marked improvement in 2012. This is primarily due to changes
in the assessment process. No action required. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| There
was a significant decrease in performance this year as determined from the
assessment of design reports. Students
demostrated excellent knowlegde of team skills on the Local Exam and very
favorable self-reporting by survey.
Low report assessment may be a hold over from the 2012-13 design year
so no action should be taken until at least after the 2013 results (for 2013
spring design reports) are available. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
|
| W |
Low report
performance |
See
if faculty assessment of team performance improves with new curriculum. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| A
significant improvement in assessment results was observed in 2012. This
improvement is attributed to discontinuing the use of local exam results as
an instrument for assessing "interactive skills", thus reverting to
the same process as used in 2010.
Continue to watch "working well with others". |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| The
system may be a bit too depedant on one subjective assessment (faculty
evaluation of design reports). Perhaps
as students gain a better understanding of new expectations, performance will
improve on final design reports. This
is being watched under curriculum. |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| N |
No Action |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2014 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| There
was a significant decrease in performance this year as determined from the
assessment of design reports. Students
demostrated excellent knowlegde of team skills on the Local Exam and very
favorable self-reporting by survey.
Low report assessment may be a hold over from the 2012-13 design year
so no action should be taken until at least after the 2013 results (for 2013
spring design reports) are available. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| There
has been marginal improvement in team performance with overall scores
impacted greatly by faculty assessment of the final design reports. The current Watch should be continued to
see if students adapt to the more rigorous grading standards and expectations
undoubtedly reflected in the faculty assessments of performance. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
|
| W |
Low report
performance |
See
if faculty assessment of team performance improves with new curriculum as
students adapt to higher standards. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| The
system may be a bit too depedant on one subjective assessment (faculty
evaluation of design reports). Perhaps
as students gain a better understanding of new expectations, performance will
improve on final design reports. This
is being watched under curriculum. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| Continue
as in 2013 watching to see if students adjust to new additional rigor in
curriculum under curriculum above. |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| N |
No Action |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Curriculum Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| There
has been marginal improvement in team performance with overall scores
impacted greatly by faculty assessment of the final design reports. The current Watch should be continued to
see if students adapt to the more rigorous grading standards and expectations
undoubtedly reflected in the faculty assessments of performance. |
| Curriculum
Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| Students
have improved their performance, which indicates the implimentation of higher
standards has been integrated into the students expectations.. No action is needed. All watches
discontinued. |
| Code |
Curriculum Action Title |
Curriculum Action Brief
Description |
|
|
| N |
No Action |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Previous
Assessment Process Action Review Summary |
|
|
|
| Continue
as in 2013 watching to see if students adjust to new additional rigor in
curriculum under curriculum above. |
| Assessment
Process Review Summary |
|
|
|
|
| Working
well. No action |
| Code |
Assessment Process Action Title |
Assessment Process Action
Brief Description |
|
| N |
No Action |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|