Assessing Outcomes Using Program Assessment Portfolio Approach
Publication: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 130, Issue 4
Abstract
The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology has developed and implemented new criteria for accrediting engineering technology programs in the United States. The new criteria, Technology Criteria 2000 (TC2K), have changed the way that engineering technology programs conduct their business. In order to survive in the future, each program has to develop a strategy to meet the new requirements specified in the TC2K. The Department of Engineering Technology at Texas Tech University has developed a program assessment portfolio (PAP) to assess the department performance toward the attainment of TC2K Criterion 1. This paper presents 12 assessment methods within the PAP. Particularly, it demonstrates how to develop and implement one of the assessment methods, pre- and postcourse assessment, to a senior-level course. Data collected from the implementation has been analyzed and results indicate that pre- and postcourse assessment provide valuable information regarding student learning. Furthermore, the information can be used to continue improving effectiveness of teaching.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Bakos, J. D., Jr. (1999). “Outcomes assessment: Sharing responsibilities.” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 125(3), 108–111.
2.
Banta, T.W., Lund, J.P., Black, K.E., and Oblander, F.W. ( 1996). Assessment in practice, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
3.
Lee, V. S., and Schechter, E. (2000). “Assessing teaching and learning.” Emphasis Teaching and Learning, Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning, North Carolina State Univ., N.C.,10(1), 1–4.
4.
Mazurek, D. F. (1995). “Consideration of FE exam for program assessment.” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 121(4), 247–249.
5.
Nirmalakhandan, N., and White, K. (2000). “Course refinement through outcome assessment: A case study.” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 126(1), 27–31.
6.
Pigott, R., and Karr, B. ( 2001). “Are we doing what we claim?: A portfolio approach to program performance assessment.” Proc., 2001 ASEE Ann. Conf. and Exposition, American Society for Engineering Education, Washington, D.C., Session No. 1608, 〈http://www.asee.org/conference/search/00043_2001.pdf〉 (August 15, 2002).
7.
Technology Criteria 2000 (TC2K). ( 2001). Technology criteria 2000: Criteria for accrediting engineering technology programs, Technology Accreditation Commission, Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Baltimore.
8.
Wicker, R. B., Quintana, R., and Tarquin, A. (1999). “Evaluation model using fundamentals of engineering examination.” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 125(2), 47–55.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 130 • Issue 4 • October 2004
Pages: 246 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 ASCE.
History
Published online: Oct 1, 2004
Published in print: Oct 2004
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.