Accreditation Evaluation of the BS-CSE Program Neelam Soundarajan Chair, Undergrad Studies Comm. CSE Department 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Graduation and Employment: Program Evaluation Using Dr. Michele F. Ernst Chief Academic Officer Globe Education Network.
Advertisements

Assessment Report Computer Science School of Science and Mathematics Kad Lakshmanan Chair Sandeep R. Mitra Assessment Coordinator.
As presented to the Global Colloquium on Engineering Education Deborah Wolfe, P.Eng. October 2008 The Canadian Process for Incorporating Outcomes Assessment.
ABET-ASAC Accreditation Workshop ABET Criteria and Outcomes Assessment
Presentation to CSE Advisory Board Neelam Soundarajan April 25, 2014.
Gateway Engineering Education Coalition Engineering Accreditation and ABET EC2000 Part II OSU Outcomes Assessment for ABET EC200.
ABET Accreditation for Surveying/Geomatics Programs in the US.
ABET PRIMER What is ABET, What Does ABET Do, How Do We Do Well With ABET.
© Copyright CSAB 2013 Future Directions for the Computing Accreditation Criteria Report from CAC and CSAB Joint Criteria Committee Gayle Yaverbaum Barbara.
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology ABET 1Advisory committee of
EECS Faculty Retreat ECE Assessment Report August 22, 2014.
1 UCSC Computer Engineering Objectives, Outcomes, & Feedback Tracy Larrabee Joel Ferguson Richard Hughey.
Accreditation Strategy for the BYU CE En Dept. Presentation to External Review Board October 20, 2000.
Computer Science Department Program Improvement Plan December 3, 2004.
A. ABET Update i. Overview of documents submitted to ABET (Self-Study) EWRE Retreat 8/2/2005 ii. What we need to do between now and ABET visit in November.
Why You Should Care About ABET And how you can help with ABET accreditation of the Civil and Environmental Engineering undergraduate degrees A quick orientation.
Computer Science Accreditation/Assessment Issues Bolek Mikolajczak UMass Dartmouth, CIS Department Chair IT Forum, Framingham, MA January 10, 2006.
Computer Science ABET Visit Update November 8, 2003.
Mohammad Alshayeb 19 May Agenda Update on Computer Science Program Assessment/Accreditation Work Update on Software Engineering Program Assessment/Accreditation.
Industry Advisory Board Department of Computer Science.
Program Improvement Committee Report Larry Caretto College Faculty Meeting December 3, 2004.
ABET Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
Capstone Design Project (CDP) Civil Engineering Department First Semester 1431/1432 H 10/14/20091 King Saud University, Civil Engineering Department.
What is ABET Accreditation and Why Should I Care?
Assessment College of Engineering A Key for Accreditation February 11, 2009.
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology - is a non governmental organization that accredits post secondary educational organizations in : 1)
ABET Accreditation Status CISE IAB MeeertingJanuary 24, CEN program fully ABET-accredited (in 2006) until 2012: no concerns, no weaknesses, no deficiencies.
ABET Accreditation (Based on the presentations by Dr. Raman Unnikrishnan and W. J. Wilson) Assoc. Prof. Zeki BAYRAM EMU Computer Engineering Dept. 14 January.
CHEN Program Assessment Advisory Board Meeting June 3 rd, 2012.
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
JIC ABET WORKSHOP No.4 Guidelines on: II Faculty Survey Questionnaire.
Graduate Program Review Where We Are, Where We Are Headed and Why Duane K. Larick, Associate Graduate Dean Presentation to Directors of Graduate Programs.
OBE Briefing.
ABET’s coming to Rose! Your involvement Monday, Nov 5, 2012.
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING PROGRAM CHEN Program Assessment Advisory Board Meeting May 21, 2013.
Overview of the Department’s ABET Criterion 3 Assessment Process.
CSE ACCREDITATION REVIEW BY CAC & EAC UC Irvine October 2, 2013.
Venue: M038 Date: Monday March 28,2011 Time: 10:00 AM JIC ABET WORKSHOP No.2 Guidelines on: IMapping of PEOs to Mission Statement IIMapping of SOs to PEOs.
Assessment and Evaluation BS-CSE Program Neelam Soundarajan Chair CSE Undergrad Studies Comm.
 Introduction Introduction  Contents of the report Contents of the report  Assessment : Objectives OutcomesObjectivesOutcomes  The data :
Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs Effective for Evaluations during the Accreditation Cycle.
EE & CSE Program Educational Objectives Review EECS Industrial Advisory Board Meeting May 1 st, 2009 by G. Serpen, PhD Sources ABET website: abet.org Gloria.
AASCB The Assurance of Learning AASCB Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business Marta Colón de Toro, SPHR Assessment Coordinator College of.
1 Proposal for Direct Assessment of Program Outcomes (For Faculty Meeting, Nov. 28, ’05)
1 Accreditation Evaluation of the BS-CSE Program: Site Visit Neelam Soundarajan Chair, Undergrad Studies Comm. CSE Department.
CISE IAB MeetingOctober 25, 20071/9 ABET Accreditation Brief, rough history. –1980’s: faculty qualifications sufficed. –1990s: quality of courses, materials,
ABET 2000 Preparation: the Final Stretch Carnegie Institute of Technology Department Heads Retreat July 29, 1999.
Supporting ABET Assessment and Continuous Improvement for Engineering Programs William E. Kelly Professor of Civil Engineering The Catholic University.
ABET is Coming! What I need to know about ABET, but was afraid to ask.
Copyright © 2014 by ABET Proposed Revisions to Criteria 3 and 5 Charles Hickman Managing Director, Society, Volunteer and Industry Relations AIAA Conference.
1 Accreditation Evaluation of the BS-CSE Program CSE Department Ohio State University.
ABET Accreditation Status CISE IAB MeeertingOctober 6, CEN program fully ABET-accredited (in 2006) until 2012: no concerns, no weaknesses, no deficiencies.
CEN Faculty MeetingMarch 31, ABET Accreditation Brief history. –1980’s: faculty qualifications sufficed. –1990s: quality of courses, materials, and.
Gateway Engineering Education Coalition Background on ABET Overview of ABET EC 2000 Structure Engineering Accreditation and ABET EC2000 – Part I.
CISE IAB MeetingOctober 15, ABET Accreditation Brief history. –1980’s: faculty qualifications sufficed. –1990s: quality of courses, materials, and.
Use of Surveys N J Rao and K Rajanikanth
1 Assessment of Undergraduate Programs Neeraj Mittal Department of Computer Science The University of Texas at Dallas (UTD) January 22, 2016.
UGSC: Undergraduate Studies Committee Haiyun Bian, Jay Dejongh, Travis Doom, Natsuhiko Futamura, Prabhaker Mateti *, Eric Matson, Karen Meyer, Michael.
University of Utah Program Goals and Objectives Program Goals and Objectives Constituents U of U, COE, ASCE, IAB Constituents U of U, COE, ASCE, IAB Strategic.
Funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the authors and do.
Educational Quality Assurance Program (EQAP) - 11/14/2009 College of Computing & Information Technology Educational Quality Assurance Program (EQAP) November.
ABET Accreditation College of IT and Computer Engineering
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
Accreditation Evaluation of the BS-CSE Program
Proposed Revisions to Criteria 3 and 5
Department of Computer Science The University of Texas at Dallas
Information Technology (IT)
Accreditation Evaluation of the BS-CSE Program
Assessment and Accreditation
Neelam Soundarajan Chair, Undergrad Studies Comm. CSE Department
Presentation transcript:

Accreditation Evaluation of the BS-CSE Program Neelam Soundarajan Chair, Undergrad Studies Comm. CSE Department 1

Background Undergrad programs in CoE: Accredited by the Engineering Accreditation Comm. (EAC); BS-CSE: Also accredited by the Computing Accreditation Comm. (CAC); EAC & CAC: part of the Accreditation Board of Engineering Tech. (ABET). 2

Background (contd.) Standard term of accreditation: 6 yrs Last evaluation: Au 2005 Hence: Due for re-evaluation in Au 2011 Rest of college also up for re-evaluation 3

To Be Accredited a BS-CSE Program Must: Meet a set of criteria specified by EAC; Meet a set of criteria specified by CAC; Submit a detailed self-study that shows this (done); Host evaluation team for a three-day site visit (Oct ); Enable team to evaluate various aspects of the program/ dept./ college/ university. 4

Warning! It is NOT what you think it is! It is NOT about your ranking or how good your program is or even how good your curriculum is It is all about whether you meet the letter and intent of the EAC and CAC Criteria 5

Our Goal Our goal: Get an "NGR" with no deficiencies, weaknesses, or even concerns And do this during the initial evaluation following the site-visit (rather than in the "due process" as happened last time) 6

The "Problem" Criteria Are related to: Program Objectives Program Outcomes; and, especially: Assessments Continuous improvement Other criteria are about curriculum, advising and other support for students, facilities, etc. 7

Criteria Requirements Program Objectives (ABET definition): Expected short-term career accomplishments of graduates. ("short-term": ~3 years) 8

Our Program Objectives Graduates will be successfully employed in the computing profession Some will be pursuing/have completed graduate studies in computing Will be informed/responsible engineering and computing professionals 9

Criteria Requirements (contd) Program must have: Documented, measurable objectives; A process involving various constituents in which the objectives are determined & periodically evaluated; A process of ongoing evaluation of the extent of achievement of the objectives & use the results to improve the program. 10

Our Process Alumni Survey to get input on appropriateness of objectives; (mostly positive) Alumni Survey also asks respondents how well they have met the objectives; (mostly positive) Obtain input from IAB about appropriateness of objectives; (mostly positive) Recent suggestion: omit "computing" from "graduate studies in computing" These are discussed by UGSC and at the annual undergrad forum Changes are recommended to faculty for approval 11

Criteria Requirements (contd) Program Outcomes (ABET definition): statements that describe what students should know/be able to do by graduation. 12

Some of our outcomes Technical group of outcomes: Students will acquire an – ability to apply knowledge of computing, mathematics,...; – an ability to apply design and development principles in the construction of software systems of varying complexity; – ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for practice as a CSE professional; Professional group: Students will acquire an – ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams; – an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences; – an ability to analyze the local and global impact of computing on individuals, organizations, and society; These are based directly on the EAC/CAC-specified outcomes. 13

Criteria Requirements (contd) Program must have: Outcomes that foster attainment of objectives Assessment process to measure the degree to which outcomes are being achieved Use of assessment results to improve program Faculty involvement in assessment of outcomes, and use of results to effect improvements 14

Our process For technical outcomes: – POCAT: Multiple-choice Exit exam for assessing technical group of outcomes – Offered each quarter – BS-CSE students take the exam close to their graduation – But their performance on the test does not affect individual students in any way nor is this recorded Questions on POCAT are from a range of required courses and several popular electives POCAT questions are designed to assess student understanding of key concepts and identify common misconceptions/problems 15

Process (for tech. outcomes) (contd.) POCAT details: – Faculty responsible for relevant courses suggest questions for POCAT; these are maintained in a question bank – Each quarter, UGSC chair creates the test – Students must sign up for the test – It is administered by the Advising Office on a weekday evening; pizza and pop are served after the test – Students complete the exit survey during the same session 16

POCAT Details (contd.) – Test results are processed by a script and reported in a web page – For each question, information about which answer was chosen by which student (by code known only to the student) – Summary of average achievement of each (technical) outcome (based on the technical outcomes that each question corresponds to) – Recent: information about the discrimination of the various answers to each question 17

POCAT Details (contd.) – Test results discussed by UGSC – Focus on any unusual results – Typical actions: Refine the question to get better information Discuss possible changes in relevant courses Etc. For all such actions, involve relevant faculty 18

Process (for professional outcomes) CSE 601: – Students write a paper on a topic related to social/ professional/ ethical issues – Make a presentation on a similar topic – Assessed by suitable rubrics Capstone design courses: – Students engage in quarter-long team project – Students explore a technology/product/process and write a paper or make presentation about it – Assessed by suitable rubrics Results used by instructors/course coordinators to make changes as needed. 19

**IMPORTANT** state.edu/ugrad/BSCSE_Continuous_Improvement/ contains full details. **Please Read It Carefully** Id/password: assessment/evaluation 20

Details of Site Visit (Oct. 9-11) Team: Bill Dixon, CAC Team Chair (Ernst & Young) Bill Shoaff, CAC Evaluator (Florida Inst. of Tech) Doug Williams, EAC Evaluator (GA Tech) Schedule: Oct. 9 (Sunday): Oct. 10: Presentation by dean; interviews with dean, Xiaodong, faculty, students,... lunch, team meetings (at dinner),... Oct. 11: May be more interviews, team meetings, exit interview (at 2?) 21

In the next few days... Look for mail from Neelam about schedule etc. For faculty who are meeting with the team: It is especially important to go through the assessment/improvements page For new/recent faculty: Look for mail from Neelam about an "advising workshop" 22

***Really, Really Important*** Please do NOT argue with the evaluation team! The team members are volunteers. Please treat them with respect! If you have comments about the accreditation criteria etc., send them to Neelam. Do not challenge the team to defend the criteria. 23

End of presentation I am done for now! 24