january 20, 2006 - ndsu - north dakota state university · web viewthese statements are also...

Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering Department

North Dakota State University

Assessment Report

Submitted to:Dr. Robert Harrold

University Assessment Committee

January 2006

Developed by: Kambiz FarahmandProfessor & Chair

Table of Contents

Introduction..........................................................................................................................3VISION............................................................................................................................3Mission............................................................................................................................3Glossary of Terms............................................................................................................4

ABET Criteria 1. Students...................................................................................................4ABET Criteria 2. Program Educational Objectives.............................................................5

CURRICULUM...............................................................................................................6Continuous improvement model..................................................................................8

Criteria 3. Program Outcome and Assessment..................................................................10Assessment methods......................................................................................................10Assessment of the Industrial Engineering and Management Program..........................14What outcomes we assessed..........................................................................................14Results............................................................................................................................14Evaluation of Results.....................................................................................................14

Graduating Seniors Exit Interview............................................................................14Fundamental of Engineering Exam (FE)...................................................................21Internship/Co-op Evaluation......................................................................................26Formative Assessment...............................................................................................26Alumni and Alumni Employer Survey......................................................................29

Conclusion and Recommendations....................................................................................33Appendix AA - Curriculum Courses VS Program Outcomes...........................................36Appendix BB - Objectives, Outcomes, and Performance Criteria....................................42Appendix CC - IME Exit Interview Surveys and the Correlation with IME Program Objectives, Program Outcomes, and EAC Program Criteria............................................51Appendix DD - Formative Assessment Results................................................................58Appendix EE – Faculty Courses Assessment Report (FCAR)..........................................62

3

Introduction

Attached please find the Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering (IME) Department’s assessment reports for the academic year 2004-2005. I am submitting two (2) reports on behalf of the department: (1) the assessment report for the BS in Industrial Engineering and Management, and (2) the assessment report for the BS in Manufacturing Engineering. These two reports are combined in this document. Some of the assessment tools are targeting the evaluation of the department as one entity and are common between the two programs.

The IME department decided that it is best to start the entire process from scratch since many of the faculty are new to academia. This provided a mechanism to get all faculty and staff on board and sold on the idea of continuous improvement of our educational and academic process. We started by reexamining the vision and mission of the department. This process started during the department retreat. Great care was taken to ensure that the Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering (IME) department’s vision and mission was in line and consistent with the mission of the university and the College of Engineering and Architecture (CEA). The vision and mission statement were presented to our advisory board. The advisory board consisted of alumni, students, and industry leaders from across the country. Feedback was solicited and incorporated into the vision and mission statement of the department after several rounds of discussion and deliberation. These statements are also published on our website for review of our constituents at http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/Vision.htm.

The vision and mission statement of the Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering department is as follows:

VISION IME department will be a dynamic contributor to the local, regional, national, and international community through the development and dissemination of committed and advanced knowledge in the diverse field of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering. We will create a nourishing environment that facilitates the growth of individuals through innovative teaching, imaginative research, and scholarship along with hands on applications and industry involvement.

MissionThe Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering Department has a three-fold educational mission. The teaching mission is to provide high quality undergraduate and graduate programs in industrial engineering and management, and manufacturing engineering. The research mission is to advance knowledge of manufacturing and industrial engineering, strengthen and support industry, and enhance teaching. The service mission is to participate in faculty governance, in the broader community of the engineering profession and its disciplines, and in the land-grant mission of the university through engagement in state, regional and national affairs.

4

http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/Vision.htm

For the purposes of assessment, the constituents of the IME department include; alumni, alumni employers, graduating and current students, and faculty. Assessment instruments were developed to solicit feedback from each constituent group.

Glossary of Terms

For the purpose of the clarity the department also met and decided on a hierarchy of Learning Objectives and a consistent set of vocabulary and definitions for the various processes of assessment and evaluation.

Program Objectives: Broadly stated set of capabilities of our graduates 5 years after graduation

Program Outcomes: Knowledge, skills and behavior of our gradates at the time of graduation

Performance Criteria: Measurable attributes that define each of the program outcomes

Student Learning Outcome: Demonstrable knowledge and skills learned by students from the curriculum taught in each class

Achievement: Student’s accomplishments that allow us to measure program objectives

Assessment: Processes that identify, collect, use and prepare data that can be used to evaluate achievement

Evaluation: Process of reviewing the result of data collection and analysis and making a determination of the value of findings and action to be taken

Success: Measure of student’s achievement

Following the general ABET criteria for basic level programs, the IME department reviews periodically along with its constituents all the curriculum topics to ensure mission and program objective of the department are satisfied.

ABET Criteria 1. Students

5

NDSU evaluates all students admitted to the university using SAT and ACT scores and high school transcripts. Students are evaluated based on their performance and are assigned to mentors and advisors at various stages of their initial career at NDSU. IME department advises many incoming and freshman students and our faculty are actively involved in advising and mentoring students for the department and CEA. The university and IME department also have policies and procedures in place for transfer student’s admission and evaluation of transcript and courses. The institution and the department enforce all admission policies and IME verifies all students joining the program meet the minimum admission requirements.

ABET Criteria 2. Program Educational Objectives

IME department has developed a set of program educational objectives called Program Objectives for both the Industrial Engineering and Management and the Manufacturing Engineering department. These program objectives have been presented to constituents and discussed at various levels among faculty, students, and alumni of the department.

In line with the criterion 2 (a) which requires the detailed published educational objectives that are consistent with the mission of the institution and ABET criteria, the Industrial Engineering and Management Program Objectives are:

Graduates of the Industrial Engineering and Management program will be able to

1. … apply statistical, operations research and simulation tools to solve problems relevant to modern production, commercial, social and/or governmental organizations, with principal emphasis on quality, productivity, continuous improvement and enterprise integration.

2. … design processes and systems to effectively and economically employ and integrate technology and people in organizational environments in industrial, healthcare, logistics, service and/or governmental settings, with appropriate consideration for environmental factors, health and safety, manufacturability and ethical, economic, social and political issues.

3. … engage in effective life-long learning in topics and areas relevant to professional advancement and to enhancing the quality of personal life in today’s global and social context.

4. … participate effectively in multi-disciplinary teams in both leadership and followership roles.

5. … effectively communicate complex technological concepts, issues and professional details to a variety of audiences.

The Manufacturing Engineering Program Objectives are:

Graduates of the Manufacturing Engineering program will be able to …

6

1. … solve problems relevant to modern manufacturing industries, with principal emphasis on process engineering and production engineering, as well as selected aspects of process science and the manufacturing enterprise.

2. … design competitive manufacturing processes and production systems, integrating machinery, technology, people and money, with appropriate consideration for environmental factors, health and safety, sustainability and ethical, economic, social and political issues.

3. … engage in effective life-long learning in topics and areas relevant to professional advancement and to enhancing the quality of personal life in today’s global and social context.

4. … participate effectively in multi-disciplinary teams in both leadership and followership roles.

5. … effectively communicate complex technological concepts, issues and professional details to a variety of audiences.

The vision and mission of the IME department is published and accessible online at http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/Vision.htm. The objectives and outcomes of the Industrial Engineering and Management are published online at http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/industrial_objectives.htm , and the objectives and outcomes for the Manufacturing Engineering programs are published and found online at http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/manufacturing_objectives.htm . The objectives of both programs were designed to address and support the university and the college objectives. The institution and the CEA mission and objectives are published or presented on line at various NDSU web sites.

CURRICULUM

IME department curriculum is shaped and reshaped based on continuous feedback from our constituents. Many of our alumni also serve on the advisory board to the department. This provides for a mechanism of direct feedback to the faculty and department. We use various surveys to solicit feedback from our constituents. The Exit Interview is used to provide feedback from our graduates about our educational outcome and our Alumni Survey and Alumni Employer Survey are used to get feedback about our program objectives. We continuously strive to solicit feedback from the local industries about what they expect from our graduates what new educational skills are required to meet their future challenges. Internship and Co-op Employer Evaluation instruments is used to seek employers opinion about our students and their performance and the Student Evaluation is used to get feedback from students about their internship and/or co-op experience.

All feedback received are used to develop and review department wide objectives and outcomes and more specifically the student learning outcome in each classroom. This process was used initially to develop the department objectives and outcomes. AT the department level input continues to be sought on a systematic basis from our alumni and

7

http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/manufacturing_objectives.htm

http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/industrial_objectives.htm

http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/Vision.htm

their employers, the graduates of our department, the advisory board, our faculty and our students. Understanding that many students coming into our program are transfer students, Formative Assessment tool was developed to assess student’s capability at both junior and senior level. This helps gauging our student’s progress until their graduation. Table 1 illustrates the assessment tools used and the program outcomes targeted using each tool.

IME curriculums and course descriptions are found at http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/abet_accreditation.htm . The curriculum was analyzed by identifying various program outcomes and to the degree they are covered in each course and the results are depicted in Appendix AA.

Table 1. Assessment Tools vs. Program Outcomes Program

Outcomes a b c d e f g h i j kAssessment Tools Alumni Survey X X X X X X X X X X XAlumni Employer Survey X X X X X X X X X X XExit Interview X X X X X X X X X X XFormative Assessment X X X X X X X X X X XInternship/Coop Evaluation Student's Perf. Eval X X X X X X X X X X X Employer Evaluation X X X X X X X X X X XCapstone Project Evaluation Company's Eval. of Project X X X X X X X X X X X Presentation/Report Eval. X X XFE Exam Results X X X X X XFCAR (Faculty Course Assessment Report) X X X X X X X X X X X

8

http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/ime/htmls/abet_accreditation.htm

IME department has identified the program outcomes in line with the ABET a-k outcomes. These are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. IME Program Outcomes a. an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering b. an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret datac. an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic

constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability

d. an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams e. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problemsf. an understanding of professional and ethical responsibilityg. an ability to communicate effectivelyh. the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a

global, economic, environmental, and social contexti. a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learningj. a knowledge of contemporary issuesk. an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for

engineering practice

or in short;a. Applications of mathematics, science, and engineering b. Design, experimentation, analysis, and interpretation of data c. Design of system, component, and process d. Teamwork e. Engineering Problem Solving f. Professional and Ethical Responsibility g. Communications.h. Broad Education i. Life Long Learning j. Contemporary Issues k. Techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools

Each faculty member has prepared the syllabus for their courses following a consistent format department wide. They are also identified the Student Learning Outcome for their courses on the syllabus. The faculty members are then asked to collect student portfolios to show evidence of presenting and teaching towards achieving those Student Learning Outcomes.

Faculty have identified the program outcome covered in each course using a learning matrix. They are also asked to measure student learning in each area. How each course contributes to the overall outcome is included in next section.

Our educational program and our curriculum is designed to prepare our students to attain the above program outcomes and to ensure that our student’s accomplishments are consistent with the department objectives. The process of continuous improvement based

9

on our ongoing evaluation and assessment to ensure program objectives and outcomes are attained and our students are better prepared to meet the challenges of their careers.

A summary matrix of the objective and related outcomes and educational performance criteria is presented in Appendix BB.

Continuous improvement model

We have developed a model to guide the continuous improvement process used by the department. Figure 1 depicts the Continuous Improvement Model fro IME.

The model outlines the process of assessment and evaluation and how feedback from the various constituents is incorporated into the educational process and curriculum. We believe that these processes will insure a self correcting mechanism for improvement providing our student with a better curriculum leading to a better overall educational experience.

The university Assessment committee is used as a valuable resource in developing systematic assessment techniques and approaches in both direct and indirect assessment methodology. University Academic Affairs provide online instrument for Formative Assessment to enhance learning and teaching. The information Technology Services provide statistical consultant in evaluating assessment results.

10

Figure 1. Continuous Improvement Model

NDSU Mission

CEA Mission

IME Mission

Program Objectives

Program Outcomes

Educational Strategies Technique

Measurable Performances Criteria

Evaluation of Evidence/ Analysis of

Assessment data

Assessment: Collection of Evidence

Feedback from our Constituents

EducationalObjectives

Assess &Evaluate

Feedback forContinuous

Improvement

Department and College

Curriculum Committee

Relationship between PO & SLO

Relationship between P Objectives & Outcomes

11

Criteria 3. Program Outcome and AssessmentEach of the program outcomes were developed by faculty as being important to the achievement of the program objectives. Table 3 illustrates the relationship between program objectives and outcomes. Each of the program outcomes have multiple performance criteria that have been developed by the faculty and are used as the basis for assessing objectives.

For each of the eleven (11) program outcomes we will describe the following in more detail:

a. Performance criteria for the outcome (See Appendix BB)b. Curriculum map identifying where in the curriculum students are given an

opportunity to learn, apply, demonstrate the outcome (See Appendix BB)c. Description of assessment methods with copies of instrument used to collect

data on the outcomed. Example of resultse. Summary of findingsf. Description of actions taken as a result of evaluation

Assessment methods

IME faculty understand that assessment is a critical element in the continuous improvement process of the department. The assessment methods used to assess program learning outcome vary somewhat from one outcome to another; however, a common set of methods were used in many cases. The methods include:

Senior Exit Survey/Interview Alumni Survey Alumni Employer Survey Student Survey Faculty Survey FE Exam results Student’s Portfolios Internship/Coop Evaluation survey Capstone Project Evaluation Survey Advisory Board Reviews

Table 4 shows the data collection and the data points collected, assessment mechanism, and the review calendar.

12

Table 3: IE&M Program Objectives vs. Outcomes

Industrial Engineering & Management Program Objectives

Outcomes appl

y st

atis

tical

, ope

ratio

ns re

sear

ch a

nd s

imul

atio

n to

ols

to s

olve

pro

blem

s re

leva

nt to

mod

ern

prod

uctio

n, c

omm

erci

al, s

ocia

l and

/or g

over

nmen

tal

orga

niza

tions

, with

prin

cipa

l em

phas

is o

n qu

ality

, pr

oduc

tivity

, con

tinuo

us im

prov

emen

t and

ent

erpr

ise

inte

grat

ion.

desi

gn p

roce

sses

and

sys

tem

s to

effe

ctiv

ely

and

econ

omic

ally

em

ploy

and

inte

grat

e te

chno

logy

and

pe

ople

in o

rgan

izat

iona

l env

ironm

ents

in in

dust

rial,

heal

thca

re, l

ogis

tics,

ser

vice

and

/or g

over

nmen

tal

setti

ngs,

with

app

ropr

iate

con

side

ratio

n fo

r en

viro

nmen

tal f

acto

rs, h

ealth

and

saf

ety,

m

anuf

actu

rabi

lity

and

ethi

cal,

econ

omic

, soc

ial a

nd

polit

ical

issu

es.

enga

ge in

effe

ctiv

e lif

e lo

ng le

arni

ng in

topi

cs a

nd

area

s re

leva

nt to

pro

fess

iona

l adv

ance

men

t and

to

enha

ncin

g th

e qu

ality

of p

erso

nal l

ife in

toda

y’s

glob

al a

nd s

ocia

l con

text

.

parti

cipa

te e

ffect

ivel

y in

mul

ti-di

scip

linar

y te

ams

in

both

lead

ersh

ip a

nd fo

llow

ersh

ip ro

les.

effe

ctiv

ely

com

mun

icat

e co

mpl

ex te

chno

logi

cal

conc

epts

, iss

ues

and

prof

essi

onal

det

ails

to a

var

iety

of

aud

ienc

es.

Applications of mathematics, science, and engineering XXX XXX Design, experimentation, analysis, and interpretation of data XXX Design of system, component, and process XXX XXX Teamwork XXX Engineering Problem Solving XXX XXX Professional and Ethical Responsibility XXX Communications. XXXBroad Education XXX XXX Life Long Learning XXX Contemporary Issues XXX XXXTechniques, skills, and modern engineering tools XXX XXX

13

Table B.3.1 – MfgE Program Objectives vs. Outcomes

Manufacturing Engineering Program Objectives

Outcomes solv

e pr

oble

ms

rele

vant

to m

oder

n m

anuf

actu

ring

indu

strie

s, w

ith p

rinci

pal e

mph

asis

on

proc

ess

engi

neer

ing

and

prod

uctio

n en

gine

erin

g, a

s w

ell a

s se

lect

ed a

spec

ts o

f pro

cess

sci

ence

and

the

man

ufac

turin

g en

terp

rise.

desi

gn c

ompe

titiv

e m

anuf

actu

ring

proc

esse

s an

d pr

oduc

tion

syst

ems,

inte

grat

ing

mac

hine

ry,

tech

nolo

gy, p

eopl

e an

d m

oney

, with

app

ropr

iate

co

nsid

erat

ion

for e

nviro

nmen

tal f

acto

rs, h

ealth

and

sa

fety

, sus

tain

abili

ty a

nd e

thic

al, e

cono

mic

, soc

ial

and

polit

ical

issu

es.

enga

ge in

effe

ctiv

e lif

e lo

ng le

arni

ng in

topi

cs a

nd

area

s re

leva

nt to

pro

fess

iona

l adv

ance

men

t and

to

enha

ncin

g th

e qu

ality

of p

erso

nal l

ife in

toda

y’s

glob

al a

nd s

ocia

l con

text

.

parti

cipa

te e

ffect

ivel

y in

mul

ti-di

scip

linar

y te

ams

in

both

lead

ersh

ip a

nd fo

llow

ersh

ip ro

les.

effe

ctiv

ely

com

mun

icat

e co

mpl

ex te

chno

logi

cal

conc

epts

, iss

ues

and

prof

essi

onal

det

ails

to a

var

iety

of

aud

ienc

es.

Applications of mathematics, science, and engineering XXX XXX Design, experimentation, analysis, and interpretation of data XXX Design of system, component, and process XXX XXX Teamwork XXX Engineering Problem Solving XXX XXX Professional and Ethical Responsibility XXX Communications. XXXBroad Education XXX XXX Life Long Learning XXX Contemporary Issues XXX XXXTechniques, skills, and modern engineering tools XXX XXX

14

Table 4. IME Data Collection, Assessment, and Review Calendar

(Revised KF-1/23/06) Industrial Engineering Data Collection, Assessment & Review Calendar S01 SU01 F01 S02 SU02 F02 S03 SU03 F03 S04 SU04 F04 S05 SU05 F05 S06 SU06 F06 S07IE Alumni Survey n=35 IE Alumni Employer Survey n=9 IE Exit Interview n=5 n=8 n=1 n=8 n=4 n=7 n=6 Internship/Coop Evaluation IE Student Evaluation n=1 n=6 n=11 n=3 IE Employer Evaluation n=1 n=6 n=11 n=3 Capstone Project Evaluation Company's Eval. of Project Presentation/Report Eval. FE Exam Results Industrial n=8 n=1 n=6 n=3 General IE n=1 n=1 FCAR

Formative Assessment 430/480

461/472/431

461/472/431

Advisory Board Review

Department Review of Findings

15

Table 4 cont. IME Data Collection, Assessment, and Review Calendar

(Revised KF-1/23/06) Manufacturing Engineering Data Collection, Assessment & Review Calendar

S01 SU01 F01 S02 SU02 F02 S03 SU03 F03 S04 SU04 F04 S05 SU05 F05 S06 SU06 F06 S07

ME Alumni Survey n=1

ME Alumni Employer Survey n=0

ME Exit Interview n=5 n=8 n=1 n=8 n=4 n=7 n=2

Internship/Coop Evaluation

ME Student Evaluation n=3 n=2 n=1 n=2

ME Employer Evaluation n=3 n=2 n=1 n=2

Capstone Project Evaluation

Company's Eval. of Project

Presentation/Report Eval.

FE Exam Results

Manufacturing n=2

General MA n=1 n=6

FCAR

Formative Assessment 430/480

461/472/431

461/472/431

Advisory Board Review

Department Review of Findings

16

Manufacturing Engineering SPRING 2006-2012 SUMMER 2006-2012 Fall 2006-2012

ME Alumni Survey ME Alumni Employer Survey ME Exit Interview Internship/Coop Evaluation ME Student Evaluation ME Employer Evaluation Capstone Project Evaluation Company's Eval. of Project Presentation/Report Eval. FE Exam Results Manufacturing/General FCAR (Faculty Course Assessment Report) Formative Assessment IME 461/472/431 IME 430/480

Advisory Board Review Department Review of Findings

17

Assessment of the Industrial Engineering and Management Program IME faculty understand that assessment is a critical element in the continuous improvement process of the department. Since the vision, mission, objectives, and outcomes were modified, the IME department began assessing the outcomes. We have used some old data and some new data in the process of assessment to provide some continuity and for comparison purposes.

What outcomes we assessedAll eleven outcomes were assessed along with additional criteria which we found important to gauge either as part of formative assessment or the program outcome assessment using Exit Interview tool. A summary of the data and assessment tools used is presented in Table 4.

ResultsEach set of data is examined for accuracy and verified for consistency. The raw data was summarized and combined in cases where two departments overlapped. Only the summary data or plot of the data is presented in this report. The analysis of the data included identifying key elements that show need for improvement or potential areas of opportunity for continuous improvement of the educational process at the department or classroom level.

Evaluation of Results

Graduating Seniors Exit Interview

From 2001 until 2003, a general assessment instrument was used to interview the graduating seniors fro the IME department. This instrument assessed the following five categories:

1. Quality of Instruction 2. Curriculum 3. Department Resources 4. Capstone Experience5. Overall Educational Experience

Table 5 shows the summary data for the exit interviews from 2001-2003. The graphical presentation of the data and the five questions are shown in Figures 2-5. Quality of Instruction as shown in Figure 2 is rated 3 or better which is “Good”. This also holds true for Curriculum rating as shown in Figure 3. Department Resources for the most part are ranked less than 3 (Figure 4) which signifies the need for more educational resources. Figure 5 shows the rating for Capstone Experience which is close to Good or Excellent. Figure 6 depicts the rating for Overall Educational Experience which is “Good” across the board.

18

Table 5. Summary data for the Graduating Seniors Exit InterviewsExcellent = 4Good = 3Needs Improvement = 2Not good = 1

F - 01 (n=5)

S - 01 (n=8)

SU - 01

(n=1)F - 02 (n=8)

S - 02 (n=4)

S - 03 (n=7)

Quality of Instruction 3.40 3.13 3.00 3.00 3.50 3.15Curriculum 2.60 2.38 3.00 2.63 2.75 2.57Department Resources 2.60 2.63 3.00 2.38 2.75 2.71Capstone Experience 3.20 2.75 4.00 2.88 3.25 2.88Overall Educational Experience 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00

Exit Interview Re sultsQuality of Instruction

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

F - 01 (n=5)

S - 01 (n=8)

SU - 01 (n=1)

F - 02 (n=8)

S - 02 (n=4)

S - 03 (n=7)

Se m ester Graduated

Rat

ing

(1-4

)

Excellent = 4Good = 3Needs Improvement = 2Not good = 1

Figure 2. Quality of Instruction

19

Exit Interview ResultsCurriculum

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

F - 01 (n=5)

S - 01 (n=8)

SU - 01 (n=1)

F - 02 (n=8)

S - 02 (n=4)

S - 03 (n=7)

Sem ster Graduated

Rat

ing

(1-4

)


Figure 3. Curriculum

Exit Interview ResultsDepartment Resources

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

F - 01 (n=5)

S - 01 (n=8)

SU - 01 (n=1)

F - 02 (n=8)

S - 02 (n=4)

S - 03 (n=7)

Sem ester Graduated

Rat

ing

(1-4

)


Figure 4. Department resources

20

Exit Interview ResultsCapstone Experience

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

F - 01 (n=5)

S - 01 (n=8)

SU - 01 (n=1)

F - 02 (n=8)

S - 02 (n=4)

S - 03 (n=7)

Sem ester Graduated

Rat

ing

(1-4

)


Figure 5. Capstone Experience

Exit Interview ResultsOverall Educational Experience

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

F - 01 (n=5)

S - 01 (n=8)

SU - 01 (n=1)

F - 02 (n=8)

S - 02 (n=4)

S - 03 (n=7)

Sem ester Graduated

Rat

ing

(1-4

)


Figure 6. Overall Educational Experience

A new exit interview instrument was developed as part of the continuous improvement process at the IME department. This new instrument has three parts to it. The first section would gauge student success in job search, the second would gauge the program outcomes which are common between Industrial Engineering and Management and Manufacturing Engineering programs, and the third section would be program specific for each of the two programs. The correlation for the questions presented in the third section of the Exit Interview Surveys with IME Program Objectives, Program Outcomes, and EAC Program Criteria is shown in Appendix CC.

21

The following Figures (7-12) show the results of the new exit interview survey for fall 2005 semester for each of the programs. All of our graduating seniors are getting more than one interview and are offered employment usually more than 2 jobs offers as shown in Figure 7 for IE students and Figure 10 for ME students. This actually is a very strong feedback from the employers as to the caliper of our students and what they are looking for at the time of hiring.

The Program Outcomes are gauged in Figures 8 (IE students) and Figure 11 (ME students). The IE student’s lowest rating of 3.5 was for “knowledge of contemporary issues” and the ME student’s lowest rating of 3.5 was for “an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.”

Figures 9 and 12 gauge the program specific for the Industrial Engineering and Management and the Manufacturing Engineering program respectively. The lowest rating of 3.3 was given to effective and efficient solution related to Operations Research by the IE students and the lowest rating of 2.0 was given by manufacturing students to “design effective and efficient manufacturing processing solutions for formed plastic parts.” The elements rated low in these surveys will be addressed in the courses impacting these outcomes the most. The changes and improvements made will be tracked in the Faculty Courses Assessment Report (FCAR).

Industrial Engineering Exit Interview - F05

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

How many Jobinterview s you have

had?

Do you have anyoffer(s)?

If yes, how many? Are you member of anyprofessional societies?

Questions

Rat

ings

1 - Yes0 - No

1 - Yes0 - No

Figure 7. Fall 2005 IE Exit Interview Results - Section 1

22

Industrial Engineering Exit Interview

00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

5

IE Program Outcome Questions

Rat

ings

(1-5

)


Industrial Engineering Exit Interview

00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

5

Program Specific Questions

Rat

ings

(1-5

)


23

Manufacturing Engineering Exit Interview

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

How many Job interview syou have had?

Do you have anyoffer(s)?

If yes, how many? Are you member of anyprofessional societies?

Questions

Rat

ings

1 - Yes0 - No

1 - Yes0 - No

Figure 10. Fall 2005 ME Exit Interview Results - Section 1


00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

5

ME Program Outcome Questions

Rat

ings

(1-5

)


24


00.5

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

5

Program Specific Questions

Rat

ings

(1-5

)


Fundamental of Engineering Exam (FE)

The Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering (IME) department students are not required to take the FE exam; however, some students depending on the future employment goals are inclined to take the FE exam. From these students, some choose the discipline specific test and some the general test. The following tables are a summary of test results for IME students taking the FE exam. Figure 13 shows the FE results for IE students versus the national results. Since 2000, the IE students have performed much better then the national average.

25

Industrial FE Results vs. National Results(Industrial Exam)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

October2000 (n=5)

April 2001 (n=1)

April 2002 (n=8)

October2003 (n=1)

April 2004 (n=6)

April 2005 (n=3)

Year

% E

xam

inee

s P

assi

ng

IENat'l

Figure 13. FE results vs. National results for Industrial Engineering Students

Table 6 shows some of the areas where industrial engineering students have consistently been under performing as comparison to the national average. These areas include: Computers, Ethics, Material Science, Engineering Economy, Industrial Ergonomics, and Simulation. Figure 14 depicts the FE results versus national results for manufacturing students. The data is available only for two students in 2002 and is not sufficient for analysis. Table 7 shows areas where manufacturing engineering student’s performance was less than that of national average.

Figure 15 depicts the FE results for manufacturing engineering students taking the general exam. The manufacturing engineering students performed worst that the national average in 2004. The break down of the data as shown in Table 8 reveals some of the areas where students have been underperforming consistently or two years in a row. These areas include: Engineering Economy, Material Science, Mechanics of Materials, Static, Chemistry, Computers, Dynamics, and Ethics.

26

Table 6. Industrial Engineering FE Exam DataIndustrial Engineering Supporting Data - Fundamental of Engineering (FE) Exam

FE Industrial Exam

October 2003 (n=1)

April 2004 (n=6)

April 2005 (n=3)

IME Nat'l IME Nat'l IME Nat'l

% Examinees Passing 100 67 83 68 100 69

Chemistry 55 49 55 51 55 50

Computers 57 59 64 67 52 62

Dynamics 78 51 37 46 52 42

Elect Circuits 50 41 58 42 28 39

Engineering Econ 80 68 47 53 60 55

Ethics 40 56 57 66 47 56

Fluid Mech 63 36 65 41 42 32

Material Sci/Str Matter 38 53 40 44 29 44

Mathematics 67 62 51 51 60 58

Mech of Material 63 41 35 35 46 46

Statics 42 38 58 41 58 44

Thermodynamics 55 39 45 38 55 41

Indust Cost Analysis 67 61 78 59 56 33

Comput Comp & Mod 0 43 56 49 89 63

Engr Economics 33 41 17 41 56 33

Indust Ergonomics 33 62 67 44 33 41

Engr Statistics 67 57 22 35 33 19

Design of Indust Exp 67 40 22 36 33 26

Facility Dsgn & Loc 67 60 89 73 44 34

Info System Design 100 63 67 43 56 33

Indust Management 100 54 61 48 44 53

Manuf Process 33 43 61 51 100 84

Manuf Sys Design 100 68 89 59 78 41

Mat Handling Sys Dsgn 67 52 61 58 78 54

Math Optim & Modeling 33 27 56 54 56 73

Prod Meas & Managmt 33 36 67 55 56 43

Prod Plan & Sched 67 36 44 41 78 51

Stat Quality Control 100 61 56 41 56 51

Total Quality Mgmt 33 61 72 59 33 43

Queuing Thry & Model 100 43 44 47 22 39

Simulation 0 46 72 60 44 46

Work Perf & Methods 33 47 33 32 33 31

27

Table B.3.14 – Industrial Engineering FE Exam DataIndustrial Engineering Supporting Data - Fundamental of Engineering (FE) Exam

FE Industrial ExamOctober 2005

(n=4)

# of

Questions IE/NDSU Nat'lCarnegie

1Carnegie

2Carnegie

3

% Examinees Passing 100 70 72 61 55

Avg. % Correct

AM SUBJECTS Mathematics 19 62 55 55 53 60Engineering Probability & Statistics 8 56 66 68 63 58Chemistry 11 64 54 55 54 55Computers 8 62 66 69 62 65Ethics & Business Practices 8 66 79 82 65 66Engineering Economics 10 72 72 73 64 75Engr Mechanics ( Statics & Dynamics) 13 50 43 44 41 43Strength of Material 8 44 36 37 33 34Material Properties 8 59 44 43 44 45Fluid Mechanics 8 53 41 43 38 32Electricity & Magnetism 11 27 42 42 37 47Thermodynamics 8 53 44 44 48 45PM SUBJECTS Engineering Economics 9 64 59 60 59 51Probability & Statistics 9 61 55 56 59 49Modeling & Computation 7 68 61 62 60 51Industrial Management 6 71 65 65 62 64Manufacturing & Production Systems 8 81 68 69 66 62Facilities & Logistics 7 75 67 68 66 60Human Factors, Productivity, Ergonomics, & Work Study 7 57 51 52 49 45Quality 7 75 67 68 70 60

28

Manufacturing FE Results vs. National Results(Manufacturing Exam)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

April 2000 (n=0)

April 2001 (n=0)

April 2002 (n=2)

October2003 (n=0)

April 2004 (n=0)

April 2005 (n=0)

Year

% E

xam

inee

s P

assi

ng

MA

Nat'l

Figure 14. FE results vs. National results for Manufacturing Engineering Students

Manufacturing FE Results vs. National Results(General Exam)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

October 2003 (n=1) April 2004 (n=6)

Year

% E

xam

inee

s P

asse

d

MA

Nat'l

Figure 15. FE results vs. National results for Manufacturing Engineering Student

29

(General Exam)

Table 7. Manufacturing Engineering FE Exam DataManufacturing Engineering Supporting Data - Fundamental of Engineering (FE) Exam

FE Manufacturing Exam

April 2000 (n=0)

April 2001 (n=0)

April 2002 (n=2)

IME Nat'l IME Nat'l IME Nat'l% Examinees Passing 100 67

Chemistry 50 45

Computers 43 38

Dynamics 50 41

Elect Circuits 50 39

Engineering Econ 100 80

Ethics 70 53

Fluid Mech 63 54

Material Sci/Str Matter 38 38

Mathematics 63 57

Mech of Material 50 42

Statics 67 56

Thermodynamics 50 39

Indust Cost Analysis 83 78

Comput Comp & Mod 67 56

Engr Economics 50 67

Indust Ergonomics 100 78

Engr Statistics 17 22

Design of Indust Exp 17 11

Facility Dsgn & Loc 50 67

Info System Design 83 67

Indust Management 17 11

Manuf Process 17 33

Manuf Sys Design 50 33

Mat Handling Sys Dsgn 50 33

Math Optim & Modeling 50 44

Prod Meas & Managmt 67 44

Prod Plan & Sched 33 33

Stat Quality Control 33 33

Total Quality Mgmt 83 56

Queuing Thry & Model 50 33

Simulation 67 56

Work Perf & Methods 17 33

30

Table 8. Manufacturing Engineering FE Exam Data (General Exam)Manufacturing Engineering Supporting Data - Fundamental of Engineering (FE) Exam

FE General Exam

October 2003 (n=1)

April 2004 (n=6)

April 2005 (n=0)

IME Nat'l IME Nat'l IME Nat'l

% Examinees Passing 100 70 33 65

Chemistry 55 47 41 55

Computers 71 59 57 73

Dynamics 56 63 52 48

Elect Circuits 42 46 51 55

Engineering Econ 40 62 73 74

Ethics 80 48 60 70

Fluid Mech 63 51 40 49

Material Sci/Str Matter 38 54 52 63

Mathematics 75 70 47 55

Mech of Materials 50 63 40 45

Statics 33 41 38 46

Thermodynamics 55 50 30 40

Electrical Circuits 33 37 36 36

Chemistry 40 54 40 50

Computers 33 40 33 64

Dynamics 20 46 30 46

Engr Economics 33 37 33 48

Ethics 67 70 44 52

Fluid Mechanics 50 40 25 38

Mathematics 67 67 40 53

Mat Sci/Str Matter 33 53 67 54

Mech of Materials 0 33 50 45

Statics 67 62 25 38

Thermodynamics 33 50 36 37

31

Internship/Co-op Evaluation

As a result of on going and strong interaction between the IME department and local and regional industries, the internship and coop programs have flourished. Many of our students do short term and long term internship with companies in North Dakota, Minnesota, and other states as far as California. The survey instrument used before 2004 –2005 academic years is the instrument used by the NDSU Career center office. The department developed another instrument to be used starting Fall 2005. Student’s performance in eight different areas were analyzed and ranked on a scale from 1-5. Table 9 and 10 depict the ranking data and average for each of the eight criteria. All the criterias were ranked 4 (Performance higher than expected) or more.

Formative Assessment

Appendix DD depicts the Formative Assessment results for the two courses IME 430 and 480. The averages for each outcome is summarized and presented in Table 11. The two areas (outcomes) that were ranked below the benchmark of 3.7 are “Professional & Ethical Responsibility” in both classes and “Life Long Learning” in IME 430. Figure 16 shows the program outcomes ranked against the benchmark.

Program Outcomes Assessment

1

2

3

4

5

IME 430 IME 480Courses

Ran

king

a. Applications ofmathematics, science, andengineering b. Design, experimentation,analysis, and interpretation ofdata c. Design of system,component, and process

d. Teamw ork

e. Engineering ProblemSolving

f . Professional and EthicalResponsibility

g. Communications

h. Broad Education

i. Life Long Learning

j. Contemporary Issues

k. Techniques, skills, andmodern engineering tools

Bench Mark

Figure 16. Formative Assessment results shown Against Benchmark

32

Table B.3.6 – Employer’s Evaluation of IE&M Co-op Students (2001 – 2003)5 - Exceptional 4 - Perf. higher than expected 3 - Perf. as expected 2 - Perf less than expected 1 - Perf consistantly fall below expectation Employer Evaluation of IE Coop Outcomes (e) (f) (g) (g) (d) (h)(i) (a)(b)(c) (j)(k) (e) (f)

DatesGraduation

date Employer LocationJob Perf.

Written Comm

Oral Comm

Team Work

Maturity & Confidence

Tech. Knowledge

& Skills

Applied New Tech

Problem Solving

Overall Rating

S 01 May-03 Dakota Growers Carrington, ND 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 4.5

F 01 May-03 CNH Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0S 02 May-03 CNH Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

S 02 May-03 Integrity Fargo, ND 4.8 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.4S 02 May-03 Integrity Fargo, ND 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

SU 02 May-04 CNH Fargo, ND 4.2 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0SU 02 May-03 CNH Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0

F 02 May-04 CNH Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0F 02 Dec-04 IBID Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0

F 02 May-03 Integrity Fargo, ND 3.8 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0S,SU,F 03 Dec-04 Integrity Fargo, ND 3.8 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0

S 03 Dec-04 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0S 03 May-04 CNH Fargo, ND 3.1 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.5

S 03 May-03 Integrity Fargo, ND 4.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.5S 03 May-03 CNH Fargo, ND 4.1 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.5

SU 03 Dec-05 Otter Tail Country Fergus Falls, MN 4.4 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0SU 03 Dec-05 WCCO Belting Wahpeton, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0

SU 03 Dec-04 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0SU 03 May-04 CNH Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0

F 03 May-03 CNH Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0F 03 May-03 Integrity Fargo, ND 4.2 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.2

F 03 May-04 United Defence Fridley, MN 4.2 3.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0F 03 Dec-04 Integrity Fargo, ND 4.3 4.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Averages 4.0 3.5 3.8 4.1 4.1 3.8 3.6 3.7 4.0

% 80 70 76 83 82 77 72 75 80

33

Table B.3.7 – IE&M Student’s Evaluation of their Co-op Experience (2001 – 2003)4 - Strongly Agree 3 - Agree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree Student Evaluation of Coop Experience

(a)(b)(c) (d)(g) (g) (d)(e)(j)(k) (i) (f) (h)(k)

Received Adequate Training

Recieved Feedback

Asked Questions

Developed Skills &

KnowledgeClarify Goals

Challenging Work

Overall Rating

3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.03.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.02.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.53.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.04.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.03.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.02.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.03.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.02.5 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.03.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.03.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.03.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.03.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1.0 2.03.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.03.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.03.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 4.02.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.03.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.03.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.03.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.03.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.04.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.03.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Avg.: 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.1 2.9 3.3Percent: 73 77 86 85 77 72 83

34

Table B.3.8 – Employer’s Evaluation of IE&M Co-op Students (2004 - 2005)

5 - Exceptional 4 - Perf. higher than expecte8 3 - Perf. as expected 2 - Perf less than expected 1 - Perf consistantly fall below expectation Employer Evaluation of IE Coop Outcomes (e) (f) (g) (g) (d) (h)(i) (a)(b)(c) (j)(k) (e) (f)

DatesGraduation

date Employer LocationJob

PerformanceWritten Comm

Oral Comm

Team Work


Tech. Knowledge

& Skills

Applied New Tech

Problem Solving

Overall Rating

S 04 Dec-04 Integrity Fargo, ND 4.1 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.5

SU 04 Dec-05W.C. Turkeys

Pelican Rapids, MN 3.8 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 4.5 3.0 3.5

F04 Dec-05 Bobcat Bismark, ND 4.8 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0S 05 May-05 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0S 05 Dec-06 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 4.2 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0S 05 Dec-05 Pella IA 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.0S 05 May-06 Goodrich Jamestown, ND 4.4 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0S 05 May-06 Pella IA 3.8 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0S 05 May-07 Infinity Fargo, ND 4.4 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

SU04-S05 May-05 Infinity Fargo, ND 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5SU 05 May-07 Catepillar Mossville, ILL 4.2 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0SU 05 May-05 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0SU 05 May-06 Integrity Fargo, ND 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0SU 05 May-06 Integrity Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.5SU 05 Dec-07 Bobcat Bismark, ND 4.4 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0SU 05 May-06 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 3.8 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0SU 05 May-06 Goodrich Jamestown, ND 4.2 3.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0SU 05 May-06 Bobcat Bismark, ND 4.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0SU 05 Dec-06 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 4.8 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0F 05 May-06 Bobcat Bismark, ND 4.8 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0F 05 May-06 Integrity Fargo, ND 5.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Averages 4.2 4.0 4.1 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.5 4.0 4.2 % 84 79 82 87 84 84 91 79 85

35

Table B.3.9 – IE&M Student’s Evaluation of their Co-op Experience (2004 - 2005)

4 - Strongly Agree 3 - Agree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree

Student Evaluation of Coop Experience

(a)(b)(c) (d)(g) (g) (d)(e)(j)(k) (i) (f) (h)(k)


Recieved Feedback

Asked Questions

Developed Skills &


Challenging Work

Overall Rating

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.04.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0

Avg.: 4.0 4.0 3.7 4.0 3.7 3.3 4.0

Percent: 100 100 92 100 92 83 100

36

Table B.3.6 – Employer’s Evaluation of MfgE Co-op Students (2001- 2005)5 - Exceptional 4 - Perf. higher than expected 3 - Perf. as expected 2 - Perf less than expected 1 - Perf consistantly fall below expectation Employer Evaluation of MfgE Coop Outcomes (e) (f) (g) (g) (d) (h)(i) (a)(b)(c) (j)(k) (e) (f)

DatesGraduation

date Employer LocationJob

PerformanceWritten Comm

Oral Comm

Team Work


Tech. Knowledge

& Skills

Applied New Tech

Problem Solving

Overall Rating

F 01 May-04 Bobcat Gwinner, ND

SU 02 May-04 CNH Fargo, ND 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.5

F 02 May-04Composite America Fargo, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

F 02 May-04 CNH Fargo, ND 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

S 03 May-04Composite America Fargo, ND 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

S 03 May-04 CNH Fargo, ND 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0SU 03 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0SU 03 May-04 Honeywell Bolden Valley, MN 4.2 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0F 04 May-05 Artic Cat River Falls, MN 4.4 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0F 04 May-05 Phonix Int Fargo, ND 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 4.0

SU 05 Dec-07 Bobcat Bismark, ND 3.6 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0F 05 May-06 Bobcat Gwinner, ND 3.8 3.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Averages 3.9 3.5 3.6 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.5 3.8 % 78 71 73 80 78 78 76 71 75

37

Table B.3.7 – MfgE Student’s Evaluation of their Co-op Experience (2001 – 2005)

4 - Strongly Agree 3 - Agree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree Student Evaluation of Coop Experience

(a)(b)(c) (d)(g) (g) (d)(e)(j)(k) (i) (f) (h)(k)


Received Feedback

Asked Questions

Developed Skills &


Challenging Work

Overall Rating

3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0

4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0

4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0

3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.03.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.03.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Avg.: 3.4 3.7 3.4 3.6 3.2 3.3 3.6

Percent: 86 92 86 89 81 83 89

38

Table 11. Summary of Formative Assessment Results

Program OutcomesIME 430

IME 480

a. Applications of mathematics, science, and engineering 3.9 4.2b. Design, experimentation, analysis, and interpretation of data 3.8 3.8c. Design of system, component, and process 3.9 4.0d. Teamwork 4.2 4.2e. Engineering Problem Solving 3.9 3.8f. Professional and Ethical Responsibility 3.4 3.6g. Communications 4.0 4.0h. Broad Education 3.8 3.9i. Life Long Learning 3.4 3.7j. Contemporary Issues 3.7 3.9k. Techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools 4.1 4.3Key:Excellent = 5Good = 4Average = 3Poor = 2No opinion = 1

Benchmark=3.8

Alumni and Alumni Employer Survey

Two surveys were mailed out to alumni to asses the program outcomes and objectives. First survey was for the alumni and the second for the alumni employers. Questions were categorized in four separate areas as shown in Table 11 and 13. Frequency analyses are also shown in Tables 12 and 14 for the survey results. For the most part, the survey results were “Well” or “Very well.” The alumni graduating less then 5 years identified Question 4 “Understanding of professional, ethical, global, societal, and contemporary issues in engineering and management” as marginal.

Table B.3.10 – Alumni Survey Results

39

Q1. Knowledge in scientific and technical areas

5-Verywell 4-Well 3-Marginally 2-Not at all 1-No opinion

Years Graduating# received

% of total Avg. Result

1 0 0 5 or less 2 22 5

10 or less 1 11 5More than 10 6 67 5

Q2. Development of engineering and management experiments, systems, components, or process




1 0 0 5 or less 2 22 4

10 or less 1 11 5More than 10 6 67 5

Q3. Skills in multi-disciplinary teamwork and communication




1 0 0 5 or less 2 22 4

10 or less 1 11 4More than 10 6 67 5

Q4. Understanding of professional, ethical, global, societal, and contemporary issues in engineering and management




1 0 0 5 or less 2 22 4

10 or less 1 11 5More than 10 6 67 5

40

Table B.3.11 – Alumni Employer Survey Results

Q1. Knowledge in scientific and technical areas

5- very well 4-well 3-marginally 2-not at all 1- no opinion

Years Graduating# sent

% return Avg. Result

1 0 0 5 or less 2 22 5

10 or less 1 11 5More than 10 6 67 5

Q2. Development of engineering and management experiments, systems, components, or process




1 0 0 5 or less 2 22 4

10 or less 1 11 5More than 10 6 67 5

Q3. Skills in multi-disciplinary teamwork and communication




1 0 0 5 or less 2 22 4

10 or less 1 11 4More than 10 6 67 5

Q4. Understanding of professional, ethical, global, societal, and contemporary issues in engineering and management




1 0 0 5 or less 2 22 4

10 or less 1 11 5More than 10 6 67 5

41

Conclusion and Recommendations

This report considers assessment of two distinct and yet overlapping programs. Although many issues are similar, some are unique to each program. We have not used the Student Rating of Instruction (SRoI) as an assessment for the classroom teaching in this report. The focus of this assessment report is mainly on curriculum, program outcomes, and objectives of the two programs. We have learned the following:

More feedback and data is needed from the surveys Better survey tools could result in more feedback More resources are needed to develop new labs and expand the capabilities of

current labs Our graduates are getting job offers and their average salaries is one of the highest

in CEA We have “Good” quality of instructions at all levels Curriculum is adequate/good but requires improvements We need to incorporate more about contemporary issues in our lectures in various

courses We also need more emphasis on design and conducting experiments Industrial engineering students need additional help in areas of Operation

Research, Computers, Ethics, Material Science, Engineering Economy, Industrial Ergonomics, and Simulation

Manufacturing engineering students need additional help in areas of Manufacturing Processes, Engineering Economy, Material Science, Mechanics of Materials, Static, Chemistry, Computers, Dynamics, and Ethics

Our alumni rated understanding of professional, ethical, global, societal, and contemporary issues in engineering and management the lowest

At least one lecture in upper level courses must be dedicated to ethical issues and dilemmas for practicing engineers

The Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering department will be assessing various outcomes and performance criteria following a review calendar presented in Table 4. Assessments performed during each semester is highlighted in color blue. For example, during Spring 2006, the IME department will be assessing alumni and alumni employers for 2 and 5 year graduates. We will conduct interviews with graduating seniors and internship and coop participants. A formal questionnaire will also be completed by these students which addresses department objectives and outcomes. We will continue to assess student’s performce in the capstone project class. The students will be assessed on their learning outcomes along with their communication skills (written, oral, and presentation). FE exam results, even though inconclusive, will be evaluated. Formative assessment will be done in selected classes and Faculty Course Assessment Report filed for each course taught in the department.

42

The IME department is utilizing two assessment methodology for assessing classroom teaching and student learning in the classrooms. All courses follow a standard format for presenting the courses syllabus. The syllabus identifies at the least the Student Learning Outcomes of those courses. The first instrument is Formative Assessment survey and the second is the Faculty Courses Assessment Report (FCAR).

For the purpose of assessing both the program outcomes and the Student Learning outcomes we are using a formative assessment survey for a few targeted classes. These classes are selected to assess both the juniors and seniors in the program. The instrument has two portions: (1) to assess general program outcomes (a-k), and (2) program specific outcomes. The courses include IME 430 and 480 for the Fall semester and IME 431, 461, and 472 for the spring semester. The formative assessment raw data for IME 430 and 480 is presented in Appendix DD and the summary data in Table 11. This is an ideal tool for benchmarking program specific learning outcomes as is shown in Figure 16.

The FCAR is used to provide faculty a mechanism for keeping track of classroom performance and to allow for reflection and recommendation for future teaching of that class. FCAR is generated for each class taught in our department starting Fall 2005. A sample of FCARs is presented in Appendix EE.

For next year we will focus on the following:

We must strive to develop more effective assessment tools/surveys to obtain more assessment data as part of continuous improvement effort

The automation lab will be moved to a more spacious area and Human Factors lab will be established

More equipment will be requisitioned for the IME laboratories The curriculum committee will reevaluate all courses in both programs Faculty will reexamine the course syllabus and contents to address topics that

require improvement as identified in this report The department will place special emphasis on the following program outcomes

for the junior and seniors in the program:o Professional & Ethical Responsibilitieso Life Long learning

Table 4 shows the outline of assessment plans for the next academic year. Assessment tools such as exit interview surveys and the internship/coop surveys will be done every semester along with classroom assessments such as faculty surveys and FCAR. Alumni and alumni employer surveys will be done only during spring semesters. FE exam results will be available and analyzed every fall semester and formative assessments will be every fall and spring. Advisory board meeting will be twice per year during fall and spring. Faculty review of assessment results and program performance will be every semester.

43

Appendix AA - Curriculum Courses VS Program Outcomes

44

Table B.3.3 – Curriculum vs Outcomes

Industrial Engineering and Management

Year; Semester or Quarter

Course (Department, Number, Title) Cr. A B C D E F G H I J K

Freshmen Fall CHEM 121, General Chemistry I 3 XX

CHEM 121L, General Chem Lab I 1 XX XX

ENGL 110, College Composition I 3 XX

MATH 165, Calculus I 4 XX

UNIV 189, Skills for Acad Success 1 XX XX

Comp Sci Elect 3

SpringENGL 120, College Composition II 3 XX

IME 111, Intro to IME 1 2 3 4 1 4 3 3 4 5 1

IME 112, Computer/Software Apps 2 3 2 2 1 5 1 5

MATH 166, CalculusII 4 XX ME 212, Fund of Visual Comm 3 XX XX ME 221, Engr Mechanics I 3 XX XX XXSophomore

FallCOMM 110, Fund of Pblic Speaking 3 XX

IME 330, Mfg Processes I 3 5 1 5 4 5 2 2 2 1 4 3

MATH 129, Basic Linear Algebra 2 XX

MATH 259, Multivariate Calculus 3 XX

ME 222, Engr Mechanics II 3 XX XX XX Sci & Engr Elect 3 Spring IME 311, Work/Station Design 3 3 4 4 5 3 1 4 4 4 4 5 IME 440, Engineering Economy 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3

MATH 266, Differential Equations 3 XX

PHYS 252, University Physics II 4 XX PHYS 252L, Univ Physics II Lab 1 XX XX Sci & Engr Elect 3 Junior Fall IME 450, System Engr & Mgmt 3 5 4 5 3 4 1 3 4 3 2 3

IME 460 Evaluation of Engr Data 3 5 5 3 1 5 2 1 2 1 1 4

Gen Ed Elect 3 Gen Ed Elect 2 Sci & Engr Elect 3 Technical Elect 3

45

Table B.3.3 Cont. – Curriculum vs Outcomes

Industrial Engineering and Management



SpringIME 461, Quality Assurance & Cntrl 3 4 5 2 2 5 3 3 3 3 4 5

IME 470, Operations Research I 3 5 1 4 2 5 3 1 2 1 5

IME 472, Simulation Bus & Indl Sys 3 3 2 4 2 5 1 5

Gen Ed Elect 3 Technical Elect 3 Senior

FallENGR 402, Engr Ethics Scoc Resp 1 XX

IME 462, Total Quality in Indl Mgmt 3 2 2 1 2 1 4 1 2 2 3 2

IME 480, Production & Inventory Cntrl 3 3 3 3 3 4 1 3 1 1 2 3

IME 482, Automated Mfg Systems 3 5 5 3 4 2 1 3 5

Sci & Engr Elect 3 Technical Elect 3

SpringIME 456, Program & Project Mfmt 3 3 4 5 5 5 3 5 3 3 3 4

IME 485, Indl & Mfg Facility Design 3 3 4 5 5 5 2 4 4 3 3 4

Gen Ed Elect 3 Gen Ed Elect 3 Technical Elect 3

46

Table B.3.3 – Curriculum vs Outcomes

Manufacturing Engineering



Freshmen

FallCHEM 121, General Chemistry I 3 XX

CHEM 121L, General Chem Lab I 1 XX XX

ENGL 110, College Composition I 3 XX

MATH 165, Calculus I 4 XX

UNIV 189, Skills for Acad Success 1 XX XX

Comp Sci Elect 3

SpringENGL 120, College Composition II 3 XX

IME 111, Intro to IME 1 2 3 4 1 4 3 3 4 5 1

IME 112, Computer/Software Apps 2 3 2 2 1 5 1 5

MATH 166, CalculusII 4 XX ME 212, Fund of Visual Comm 3 XX XX ME 221, Engr Mechanics I 3 XX XX XXSophomore

FallCOMM 110, Fund of Pblic Speaking 3 XX

IME 330, Mfg Processes I 3 5 1 5 4 5 2 2 2 1 4 3

MATH 128, Intro to Linear Algebra 2 XX

MATH 259, Multivariate Calculus 3 XX

ME 222, Engr Mechanics II 3 XX XX XX Sci & Engr Elect 3 Spring IME 311, Work/Station Design 3 3 4 4 5 3 1 4 4 4 4 5

IME 440, Engineering Economy 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3

MATH 266, Differential Equations 3 XX

PHYS 252, University Physics II 4 XX

PHYS 252L, Univ Physics II Lab 1 XX XX

Sci & Engr Elect 3 Junior Fall IME 380, CAD/CAM for Mfg 3 5 5 2 4 2 3 4

IME 460, Evaluation of Engr Data 3 5 5 3 1 5 2 1 2 1 1 4

IME 430, Process Engr 3 Gen Ed Elect 2 Gen Ed Elect 3 Technical Elect 3

47

Table B.3.3 Cont. – Curriculum vs Outcomes

Manufacturing EngineeringYear;

Semester or Quarter


SpringIME 461, Quality Assurance & Cntrl 3 4 5 2 2 5 3 3 3 3 4 5

IME 431, Production Engr 3 ME 331, Engineering Materials I 3 Sci & Engr Elect 3 Technical Elect 3 Senior

FallENGR 402, Engr Ethics Scoc Resp 1 XX

IME 432, Composite Materials Mfg 3 5 5 2 4 1 2 4 4

IME 480, Production & Inventory Cntrl 3 3 3 3 3 4 1 3 1 1 2 3

IME 482, Automated Mfg Systems 3 5 5 3 4 2 1 3 5

Gen Ed Elect 3 Technical Elect 3

SpringIME 456, Program & Project Mfmt 3 3 4 5 5 5 3 5 3 3 3 4

IME 489, Mfg Engr Capstone 3 3 4 5 5 5 2 4 4 3 3 4 Gen Ed Elect 3 Gen Ed Elect 3 Technical Elect 3

48

Appendix BB - Objectives, Outcomes, and Performance Criteria

49

Appendix BB. IE’s Objectives, Outcomes, and Performance CriteriaIndustrial Engineering & Management Program Objectives (Revised KF-11/23/05)

Program Outcomes

Learning Outcomes Relevant Required Curriculum Components

Assessment Method

Performance Criteria

Evaluation & Feedback

1. apply statistical, operations research and simulation tools to solve problems relevant to modern production, commercial, social and/or governmental organizations, with principal emphasis on quality, productivity, continuous improvement and enterprise integration.

a. an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering

1. Students will be able to apply the knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering to the analysis of various problems and issues related to their field 2. Students will be able to formulate an engineering problem 3. Students will be able to outline a systematic approach to problem solving

IME 311, 335, 380, 411, 440, 450, 453, 460, 462, 480, 482

1. Student's Transcript 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey

1. Average "B" grade in science & math classes 2. Above national average in related science & math questions 3. Successful career in science & engineering

e. an ability to

identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems

1. Students will be able to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems, using a system approach that includes people, materials, equipment, facilities, energy and information 2. Students will be able to describe the problem solving process 3. Students will be able to use innovative approach in solving integrated engineering problem

IME 111, 112, 311, 330, 335, 380, 411, 450, 453, 460, 462, 480, 482

1. Student's Transcript 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey 4. Student's Portfolio

1. Average "B" grade in related engineering courses 2. Above national average in field specific questions 3. Successful career in science & engineering 4. Material is covered in portfolios

50

k. an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice

1. Students will be able to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools 2. Students will prepare and design a real world project using latest technical tools and software

IME 111, 112, 311, 330, 335, 380, 411, 440, 450, 453, 460, 462, 480, 482

1. Student's Transcript 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey 4. Student's Portfolio 5. capstone Evaluations

2. design processes and systems to effectively and economically employ and integrate technology and people in organizational environments in industrial, healthcare, logistics, service and/or governmental settings, with appropriate consideration for environmental factors, health and safety, manufacturability and ethical, economic, social and political issues.

b. an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data

1. Students will be able to design and conduct scientific and engineering experiments, and interpret the results for analyzing alternative designs or problem solutions 2. Students will be able to develop a hypothesis and construct a plan to investigate 3. Students will be able to compare alternative design and identify optimum solution

IME 335, 411, 450, 453, 460, 462, 480

1. Capstone Evaluations 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey 4. Student's Portfolio 5. Student's Assessment

c. an ability to

design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs

1. Students will be able to apply various tools, techniques, and philosophies to design productive systems, components, and processes that meet desired needs 2. Students will understand the concept of productivity 3. Students will be able to implement a process or a system

IME 111, 112, 311, 330, 380, 411, 450, 453, 462, 480, 482

1. Capstone Evaluations 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey 4. Internship/Co-op Evaluations

51

f. an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility

1. Students will have an understanding of professional and ethical responsibilities 2. Students will understand the need for a code of ethics 3. Students will recognize ethical and professional responsibility

IME 411, 450, 462, 480, ENGR 402

1. Internship/Co-op Evaluations 2. Student's Transcript 3. Alumni Employer Survey

j. a knowledge

of contemporary issues

1. Students will have the knowledge of contemporary issues including world events, emerging technologies, productivity tools and techniques, and human and environmental safety and welfare 2. Students will identify societal impact on engineering solutions

IME 111, 112, 311, 330, 335, 411, 440, 453, 462, 480

1. Exit Interview 2. Student's Transcript 3. Internship/Co-op Evaluations

3. engage in effective life long learning in topics and areas relevant to professional advancement and to enhancing the quality of personal life in today’s global and social context.

h. the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and social context

1. Students will have the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions on societies, including environmental, economical, humanitarian, and legal implications

IME 311, 411, 450, 453, 462, 480


i. a recognition

of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning

1. Students will be able to recognize the need for, and an ability to engage in continuous professional self-improvement and lifelong learning 2. Students will develop a career plan that identifies a requisite learning 3. Students will join a professional society

IME 111, 112, 380, 462, 480, 482


52

4. participate effectively in multi-disciplinary teams in both leadership and fellowship roles.

d. an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams

1. Students will be able to function on multi-disciplinary teams and will be able to manage projects 2. Students will share responsibilities and duties, and take on different roles when applicable

IME 311, 330, 411, 450, 453, 462, 480

1. Exit Interview 2. Student's Transcript 3. Internship/Co-op Evaluations 4. Alumni Employer Survey

5. effectively communicate complex technological concepts, issues and professional details to a variety of audiences.

g. an ability to communicate effectively

1. Students will be able to communicate effectively in oral and written forms and an ability to use technology for enhanced communications to express ideas and findings 2. Students will provide content that is factually correct, supported with evidence, explained with sufficient detail, and properly documented 3. Students will submit work with a minimum of errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar

IME 111, 112, 380, 450, 460, 462, 480, 482, ENGL 100, 120, COMM 110


53

ME’s Objectives, Outcomes, and Performance CriteriaManufacturing Engineering Program Objectives (Revised KF-11/23/05)

Program Outcomes

Learning Outcomes Relevant Required Curriculum Components

Assessment Method Performance Criteria

Evaluation & Feedback

1. solve problems relevant to modern manufacturing industries, with principal emphasis on process engineering and production engineering, as well as selected aspects of process science and the manufacturing enterprise.

a. an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering

1. Students will be able to apply the knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering to the analysis of various problems and issues related to their field 2. Students will be able to formulate an engineering problem 3. Students will be able to outline a systematic approach to problem solving

IME 311, 335, 380, 411, 440, 450, 453, 460, 462, 480, 482

1. Student's Transcript 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey

1. Average "B" grade in science & math classes 2. Above national average in related science & math questions 3. Successful career in science & engineering

e. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems

1. Students will be able to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems, using a system approach that includes people, materials, equipment, facilities, energy and information 2. Students will be able to describe the problem solving process 3. Students will be able to use innovative approach in solving integrated engineering problem

IME 111, 112, 311, 330, 335, 380, 411, 450, 453, 460, 462, 480, 482

1. Student's Transcript 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey 4. Student's Portfolio

1. Average "B" grade in related engineering courses 2. Above national average in field specific questions 3. Successful career in science & engineering 4. Material is covered in portfolios

54

k. an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice

1. Students will be able to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools 2. Students will prepare and design a real world project using latest technical tools and software

IME 111, 112, 311, 330, 335, 380, 411, 440, 450, 453, 460, 462, 480, 482

1. Student's Transcript 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey 4. Student's Portfolio 5. capstone Evaluations

2. design competitive manufacturing processes and production systems, integrating machinery, technology, people and money, with appropriate consideration for environmental factors, health and safety, sustainability and ethical, economic, social and political issues.

b. an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data

1. Students will be able to design and conduct scientific and engineering experiments, and interpret the results for analyzing alternative designs or problem solutions 2. Students will be able to develop a hypothesis and construct a plan to investigate 3. Students will be able to compare alternative design and identify optimum solution

IME 335, 411, 450, 453, 460, 462, 480

1. Capstone Evaluations 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey 4. Student's Portfolio 5. Student's Assessment

c. an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs

1. Students will be able to apply various tools, techniques, and philosophies to design productive systems, components, and processes that meet desired needs 2. Students will understand the concept of productivity 3. Students will be able to implement a process or a system

IME 111, 112, 311, 330, 380, 411, 450, 453, 462, 480, 482

1. Capstone Evaluations 2. FE Exam 3. Alumni Employer Survey 4. Internship/Co-op Evaluations

55

f. an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility

1. Students will have an understanding of professional and ethical responsibilities 2. Students will understand the need for a code of ethics 3. Students will recognize ethical and professional responsibility

IME 411, 450, 462, 480, ENGR 402

1. Internship/Co-op Evaluations 2. Student's Transcript 3. Alumni Employer Survey

j. a knowledge of contemporary issues

1. Students will have the knowledge of contemporary issues including world events, emerging technologies, productivity tools and techniques, and human and environmental safety and welfare 2. Students will identify societal impact on engineering solutions

IME 111, 112, 311, 330, 335, 411, 440, 453, 462, 480


3. engage in effective life long learning in topics and areas relevant to professional advancement and to enhancing the quality of personal life in today’s global and social context.

h. the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and social context

1. Students will have the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions on societies, including environmental, economical, humanitarian, and legal implications

IME 311, 411, 450, 453, 462, 480


i. a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning

1. Students will be able to recognize the need for, and an ability to engage in continuous professional self-improvement and lifelong learning 2. Students will develop a career plan that identifies a requisite learning 3. Students will join a professional society

IME 111, 112, 380, 462, 480, 482


56

4. participate effectively in multi-disciplinary teams in both leadership and fellowship roles.

d. an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams

1. Students will be able to function on multi-disciplinary teams and will be able to manage projects 2. Students will share responsibilities and duties, and take on different roles when applicable

IME 311, 330, 411, 450, 453, 462, 480


5. effectively communicate complex technological concepts, issues and professional details to a variety of audiences.

g. an ability to communicate effectively

1. Students will be able to communicate effectively in oral and written forms and an ability to use technology for enhanced communications to express ideas and findings 2. Students will provide content that is factually correct, supported with evidence, explained with sufficient detail, and properly documented 3. Students will submit work with a minimum of errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar

IME 111, 112, 380, 450, 460, 462, 480, 482, ENGL 100, 120, COMM 110


57

Appendix CC - IME Exit Interview Surveys and the Correlation with

IME Program Objectives, Program Outcomes, and EAC Program

Criteria

58

Appendix CC – IE Exit Interview Surveys and the Correlation with IME Program Objectives, Program Outcomes, and EAC Program Criteria (9 – High correlation, 3 – Medium correlation, 1 – Low correlation)

Exit Survey Questions Program Objectives General Criteria Outcomes

Program Criteria Proficiencies1 2 3 4 5 a b c d e f g h i j k 1

a1b

1 I feel confident in my ability to define, analyze and solve problems in process engineering relevant to modern industries.

3 9 3 3 9 9 1 3 1 9 1 1

2 I feel confident in my ability to define, analyze and solve problems in production engineering relevant to modern industries

3 9 3 3 9 9 1 3 1 9 1 1

3 I understand how to design …

3.1

… industrial/manufacturing facilities

3 9 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 3

3.2

… workstations and production cells

3 9 3 1 1 3 1 1 3 3

3.3

… complex engineering and management systems

3 9 3 1 1 3 1 1 9 3

4 I can analyze a product and determine which parts/system should be out-sourced and which produced in a factory.

3 9 3 1 3 3 1 9 3 1 3 3 9

5 I can create analytical, schematic, process flow and computer models of industrial/manufacturing processes and production systems that can be

9 9 3 9 9 9 3 9 3 9

59

manipulated to provide information to support design decisions.

6 I am confident that I can design effective and efficient solutions related to …

6.1

… operations research 9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 3 3

6.2

… economic feasibility of engineering projects

9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 3 3

6.3

… systems engineering and management

9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 3 3

6.4

… data analysis and evaluations

9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 3 9

IE Exit Interview Surveys and the Correlation with IME Program Objectives, Program Outcomes, and EAC Program Criteria (9 – High correlation, 3 – Medium correlation, 1 – Low correlation)



a1b

6.5

… quality control and total quality assurance

9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 3 3

6.6

… production and inventory control

9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 3 3

6.7

I feel confident that I can use simulation to model industrial/manufacturing scenarios for the purpose of optimization.

9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9

7 I can design an industrial/manufacturing processing or production system solution that is cost-effective for my company.

3 9 1 1 9 3 1 9 1 9 3 1

8 I can determine effective and efficient staffing for an

3 9 1 9 9 1 1 1 1 9

60

industrial/manufacturing processing station or workcell or for a complete production system.

9 I understand the environmental, health and safety and sustainablility factors in an industrial/manufacturing processing or production system design.

3 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9

10 I understand the ethical, economic, social and political implications of industrial/manufacturing process and production system designs.

3 9 1 3 9 3 9 1 9 1

11 I believe that I am equipped with the understanding, capabilities and insights necessary to independently attain new knowledge for my continuing professional and personal development.

3 9 1 3 9 3 9 1 9 1

IE Exit Interview Surveys and the Correlation with IME Program Objectives, Program Outcomes, and EAC Program Criteria (9 – High correlation, 3 – Medium correlation, 1 – Low correlation)

Exit Survey Questions Program Objectives General Criteria OutcomesProgram Criteria Proficiencies1 2 3 4 5 a b c d e f g h i j k 1

a1b

12

I can design experiments to investigate industrial/manufacturing

9 3 3 9 1 9 3

61

situations and obtain the data needed to reach effective engineering judgments.

13

I am confident in my ability to identify, select and search out the necessary data for designing industrial/manufacturing processing and production systems solutions.

9 3 9 1 3 1 9 9 9 3

14

I can function as an effective team member in either leadership or fellowship roles.

3 3 9 3 3 3 1 3 9 1 9

15

I can write an effective and focused engineering report.

9 3 9 3 1 9 1 3 9

16

I am confident in my ability to prepare and deliver a professional presentation on an engineering subject.

9 3 1 9 1 1 9

17

I can write a focused report on engineering subjects that will effectively inform a non-technical audience.

9 3 1 9 1 1 1

18

I am confident in my ability to prepare and deliver a presentation on engineering subjects that will effectively inform a non-technical audience.

9 3 1 9 1 1 9

19

I can function as an effective team member in either leadership or fellowship roles.

9 3 1 9 1 1 1

62

ME Exit Interview Surveys and the Correlation with IME Program Objectives, Program Outcomes, and EAC/SME Program Criteria (9 – High correlation, 3 – Medium correlation, 1 – Low correlation)



a1b

1c

1d

1e

2a

2b

2c

2d

1 I feel confident in my ability to define, analyze and solve problems in process engineering relevant to modern manufacturing industries.

3 9 3 3 9 9 1 3 1 9 9 3 3 9 3 3 3 3

2 I feel confident in my ability to define, analyze and solve problems in production engineering relevant to modern manufacturing industries

3 9 3 3 9 9 1 3 1 9 3 3 9 9 9 9 9 3

3 I understand how discrete products are developed and produced in …

3.1

… discrete metal hardgoods 3 9 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 9 9 3 3 3 1

3.2

… plastics and composites 3 9 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 9 9 3 3 3 1

3.3

… electronics 3 9 3 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 9 9 3 3 3 1

4 I can analyze a product and determine which parts should be out-sourced and which produced in my factory.

3 9 3 1 3 3 1 9 3 1 3 3 3 3 9 9 9 3 1

5 I can create analytical, 9 9 3 9 9 9 3 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1

63

schematic, process flow and computer models of manufacturing processes and production systems that can be manipulated to provide information to support design decisions.

6 I am confident that I can design effective and efficient manufacturing processing solutions for …

6.1

… machined metal parts 9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9 1

6.2

… formed metal parts 9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9 1

6.3

… welded assemblies 9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9 1

6.4

… parts formed from composite materials

9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9 1




a1b

1c

1d

1e

2a

2b

2c

2d

6.5

… formed plastic parts 9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9 1

6.6

… printed circuit boards 9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9 1

6.7

… packaged microelectronics

9 3 9 9 3 9 1 9 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9 1

64

7 I feel confident that I can select specific machine tools and tooling for effective and efficient processing of a defined part.

3 9 1 1 9 3 1 9 1 9 9 9 3 9 9 3 9 1

8 I can design a manufacturing processing or production system solution that is cost-effective for my company.

3 9 1 9 9 1 1 1 1 9 9 3 9 3 9 9 9 1

9 I can determine effective and efficient staffing for a manufacturing processing station or workcell or for a complete production system.

3 9 9 3 3 1 3 1 9 1 3 1 3 3 1

10

I understand the environmental, health and safety and sustainablility factors in a manufacturing processing or production system design.

3 9 1 3 9 3 9 1 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

11

I understand the ethical, economic, social and political implications of my manufacturing process and production system designs.

3 9 1 3 9 3 9 1 9 1 1 3 1

12

I am equipped with the understanding, capabilities and insights necessary to independently attain new knowledge as necessary for my continuing professional and personal development.

9 3 3 9 1 1

65


Exit Survey Questions Program Objectives General Criteria OutcomesProgram Criteria Proficiencies

1 2 3 4 5 a b c d e f g h i j k 1a

1b

1c

1d

1e

2a

2b

2c

2d

13

I can design experiments to investigate manufacturing situations and obtain the data needed to reach effective engineering judgments.

9 3 9 1 3 1 9 9 3 1 9

14

I am confident in my ability to identify, select and search out the necessary data for designing manufacturing processing and production systems solutions.

3 3 9 3 3 3 1 3 9 1 9 1 3 3 3 3

15

I can function as an effective team member in either leadership or followership roles.

9 3 9 3 1 9 1 3 9 1

16

I can write an effective and focused engineering report.

9 3 1 9 1 1 9 1 3 3

17

I am confident in my ability to prepare and deliver a professional presentation on a complex engineering subject.

9 3 1 9 1 1 1

18

I can write a focused report on a complex engineering subject that will effectively inform a non-technical

9 3 1 9 1 1 9 1 3 1

66

audience.19

I am confident in my ability to prepare and deliver a presentation on a complex engineering subject that will effectively inform a non-technical audience.

9 3 1 9 1 1 1

67

Appendix DD - Formative Assessment Results

68

Appendix DD – Formative Assessment Results

Program Outcomes & Performance CriteriaIME 430

IME 480

a. Applications of mathematics, science, and engineering 3.9 4.2How would you rate your overall NDSU educational experience in applications of math, science, and engineering 3.7 4.2How would you rate the opportunities provided by IME program to apply knowledge of math, science, and engineering 4.0 4.3How would you rate your ability to employ general principles, theories, concepts, and/or formulas from mathematics, science, and engineering in the solution of a wide range of problems related to their engineering program 4.2 4.1b. Design, experimentation, analysis, and interpretation of data 3.8 3.8How would you rate the overall NDSU educational experience in promoting your ability to design and conduct experiments 3.8 3.5How would you rate the IME program in providing opportunities to increase your ability to design and conduct experiments 4.2 4.0How would you rate the level of preparation you receive to independently design and conduct experiments 3.8 3.6How would you rate the laboratory experiences in increasing your ability to design and conduct experiments 3.5 3.2How would you rate your ability to measure, record and present raw and summary data and analyze those data for the purposes of understanding and explaining the data 3.7 4.2How would you rate your ability to define variable types (pertinent dependent and independent), and determine how many and where to take measurements based on a thorough understanding of accuracy and precision 3.8 4.0c. Design of system, component, and process 3.9 4.0How would you rate your ability to engage productively and creatively in the design process 4.3 4.0How would you rate your ability to conduct projects i.e. the student is able to: identify the project goal; define the project scope; and search for alternatives for achieving the outcome 4.3 4.5How would you rate your ability in conducting projects i.e. your ability to use various engineering tools to choose among possible solutions 4.0 4.1How would you rate your ability to conduct and document economics analysis of proposals for alternative solutions 3.2 3.7How would you rate your ability to design experiences offered through program courses 3.8 3.5d. Teamwork 4.2 4.2How would you rate the opportunities provided by IME program to work in teams 4.8 4.7In general, How would you rate the opportunities provided to work in a team in all of the undergraduate courses 4.0 4.4How would you rate the opportunities provided by IME program to interact with other disciplines 4.3 3.4How would you rate the opportunities provided by IME program to have a conceptual understanding of group dynamics and team project experiences along with skills and strategies that will make any future teamwork successful 4.2 4.4How would you rate your ability to participate effectively as member of multi-disciplinary team, working with people who bring different skills, expertise, and perspectives to a project 4.2 4.3How would you rate the instruction and guidance in teamwork received from professors in IME department 3.7 3.9e. Engineering Problem Solving 3.9 3.8How would you rate the opportunities provided by IME program courses and laboratories to solve engineering problems 4.0 3.5How would you rate your ability to define a program-related problem by specifically describing the problem conditions—what is known or given, and what the unknowns are 3.8 3.9

69

How would you rate your ability to apply the appropriate program-related principles to find the unknowns and arrive at correct and effective solutions to the problem 4.0 3.9f. Professional and Ethical Responsibility 3.4 3.6How would you rate the level of student membership in the professional societies in Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering field 3.7 3.0How would you rate the level of encouragement provided by the IME faculty to join the professional society 3.3 3.4How would you rate the Ethical considerations covered/addressed in some of the engineering courses 3.7 4.0How would you rate the adequacy of the coverage of topics related to ethics 3.5 3.7How would you rate student's ability to become familiar with the applicable professional codes of conduct for their engineering program 2.8 3.7g. Communications 4.0 4.0How would you rate the opportunities provided by the IME program to help you improve your communication skills 4.0 4.2How would you rate the program's emphasizes on the importance of lab/project reports in helping to improve communication skills 4.3 3.9How would you rate the program's ability to offer many opportunities to help with communication skills 3.8 4.0How would you rate the opportunities provided outside the IME courses to help with communication skills 4.0 3.7How would you rate your ability to understand the kinds of writing and speaking you will be asked to do as professional engineer 4.2 4.0How would you rate your ability to develop professional documents appropriate such as laboratory reports, progress reports, technical reports, technical presentations, etc. 4.0 4.1How would you rate your ability to summarize technical material (mathematical solutions, charts, graphs, figures, tables, design drawings, etc) in ways appropriate to a particular audience 4.0 4.2How would you rate the level of guidance and instruction received from faculty in writing and speaking 3.8 3.8h. Broad Education 3.8 3.9How would you rate your individual contribution to the profession and it's impact on society 3.5 3.6How would you rate your ability to recognize and understand the nature of and significance of the vital interactions among science, technology, and social values 4.0 4.1How would you rate your ability to understand the influence of science and technology on civilization and of the way science and technology have been applied to the betterment of humankind 4.2 4.1How would you rate the overall education at NDSU and it's contribution to your understanding of the global issues relating to engineering and the societal context of engineering as a profession 3.8 3.9How would you rate the opportunities provided by the IME department and/or program in shaping your understanding of their responsibilities 3.7 3.9How would you rate the overall influence in your thinking about the role of engineering in society by the humanities and social sciences courses that you have taken 3.5 3.7i. Life Long Learning 3.4 3.7How would you rate your level of participation in lecture(s) in the field of engineering that was not part of the curriculum 3.2 3.4How would you rate your ability to browse the internet or search the library for engineering information that was not related to classes 4.2 4.2How would you rate your engineering assignments, and their involvement beyond the assignment just because it was interesting 4.0 3.9How would you rate your willingness to read technical article(s) just for fun 3.0 3.3

70

How would you rate your ability to understand the need for further education and self-improvement 4.2 4.1How would you rate your involvement in student organizations and/or engineering societies 3.0 3.5How would you rate your understanding of the value of membership in an appropriate professional organization 3.2 3.8You are or have plan to become a full member in an engineering society 2.5 3.6j. Contemporary Issues 3.7 3.9How would you rate your ability to use of periodicals, both technical and non-technical to learn about contemporary issues 3.5 3.6How would you rate your ability to read topics outside of the IME field and related to contemporary issues 3.8 4.0How would you rate your ability to take advantage of available facilities and media to learn about the contemporary issues 3.5 3.9How would you rate your ability to recognize and understand the various modes of inquiry into human nature and experience, organization and change in human societies, and the nature of the world relevant to your field of engineering 3.8 4.0k. Techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools 4.1 4.3How would you rate your level of comfort with computers as a tool of engineering 4.3 4.6How would you rate your ability to use application software for engineering purposes 4.2 4.3How would you rate the level of emphasis by IME curriculum in programming for engineering applications 3.7 4.1How would you rate the level of emphasis by IME department or curriculum in the use of internet as a tool of engineering 4.2 4.2How would you rate your ability to make extensive use of the internet as a tool of engineering 4.3 4.2

71

Appendix EE – Faculty Courses Assessment Report (FCAR)

72

Faculty Course Assessment Report IME 330 – Manufacturing Processes I – 3 credit

Fall 2005 – Valery Marinov

Catalog Description: Traditional manufacturing processing methods as employed in contemporary practice. Includes: properties of materials, machining, casting, forming, and fabrication techniques. Several experiments will be conducted on various manufacturing processes in the laboratory.

Grade Distribution:

A B C D F W Total 32 38 12 4 2 2 90

Modifications Made to Course (past 1-2 years): 1. The class handouts were published and are now a required text for this class

Student Learning Outcomes: • Define manufacturing and explain its relationship to design and marketing. (h)• Describe the nature of materials including atomic structure, crystalline and non-crystalline structures.

(a, e) • Explain alloys and phase diagrams, stress-strain relationships, and the effect of work temperature on

the material properties. (a, e)• Provide theory of chip formation in metal machining; describe cutting force and temperature

relationships. (a, e)• Select the proper cutting tool material for machining a particular work material. (a, e)• Explain the effect of tool wear on the cutting process; calculate the parameters of Taylor’s tool life

equation. (a, e)• Understand the basics of machining economics; calculate the optimal cutting conditions for minimum

production cost or time. (a, c, e, h, k)• Describe capabilities and limits in terms of size, accuracy, precision, surface quality and production

rate for the conventional material removal operations applied to produce round, prismatic and irregular shapes. (a, c, j, e)

• Explain the basic characteristics and applications of the processes for permanent and non-permanent assembly such as mechanical assembly and various welding operations. (a, c, j, e)

• Explain the principles and select a suitable non-traditional manufacturing process for a particular application. (a, c, j, e)

• Explain the principles, capabilities and limitations of the powder metallurgy process. (a, c, j, e)• Explain different metal casting processes including sand casting, die casting and other expendable and

permanent mold casting processes. Design a sand casting mold for a simple shape metal part. Calculate the total solidification time and the riser’s dimensions. (a, c, j, e)

• Explain fundamentals of metal forming operations such as rolling, forging, extrusion, wire and bar drawing, and sheet metal working operations including cutting, bending and deep drawing. Calculate the basic process parameters for these operations. (a, c, j, e)

• Demonstrate skills in the laboratory project to ensure completion, efficiency and quality of the final results (a, c, d, e, f, g, k)

Communications Component: Students are required to prepare and submit a formal final report on their laboratory project.

Ethics Component: No course component was designed to address this issue.

73

Contemporary Issues Component: The course material covers the latest manufacturing technologies along with the traditional processes.

Student Feedback: Feedback for Course IME330 was sought through the “Formative Assessment for Enhancing Teaching and Learning” tool developed and offered by Dr. Sudhir Mehta, Associate Vice President for Academics, NDSU. The total number of responses was 71 out of 90 students total in the class. Below is the summary of responses:Question #1 - What helps you learn in this class

― The lab sessions are the most useful in learning about the machining processes.― The lecture notes are a very good learning tool― The videos/short clips in the PowerPoint presentations really help a lot

Question #2 - What improvements would you like― Include a tour of some manufacturing facility― Move the class to a later time― Include more videos of the processes

Reflection:

Proposed Actions for Course Improvement: 1. Some of the slides are a little crowded and the size of the words around the figures is a little too

small. Spreading a couple crowded slides over a few more slides will be considered.2. The lecture notes will be published and included in the course pack (now they are offered online)

74

Faculty Course Assessment ReportIME480, Production and Inventory Control - 3 credits

Fall Semester 2005 – Reza A. Maleki

Catalog Description:Planning and controlling of industrial production and inventory: demand forecasting, master scheduling, materials requirements planning, job scheduling, assembly line balancing, and just-in-time production.

Grade Distribution

A B C D F W Total10 13 1 0 0 0 24

Students Assessment of Course Outcome (from attachment A):• Understand the different manufacturing environments and their effects on production and inventory

planning and control systems. Score: 4.08• Become familiar with product demand characteristics and the importance of demand management and

forecasting principles and techniques. Score: 4.04• Understand the role of purchasing function and the important factors to consider for the development of

partnership-type supplier programs. Score: 3.88• Understand the fundamentals of material requirements planning system and execution including

problem domains, basic decision support models and opportunities. Score: 3.96• Apply innovative theories and techniques such as Just-In-Time and Theory of Constraints to design

production systems. Score: 4.00• Understand the system approach to effective management of production and inventory through the

applications of the principles of production and operations management. Score: 3.88• Use productivity assessment tools to evaluate the effectiveness of production and inventory

management policies and practices of a firm. Score: 3.85• Enhance their ability to be effective team members emphasizing contribution, project management

skills, integrity, ethics, diversity, and personal growth. Score: 4.31

Student Feedback:See attachment B.

Reflection:Students highly value the overall educational experience in this course. This is the first time that business/industry projects were made part of student’s course assignment. Many positive comments are made. Some concerns are expressed regarding to team structures. The majority of students like team work and yet, some do not like the idea.

Proposed Action for Course Improvement:This is a mature course that integrates students leaning into their industry mini-projects. Based on the many positive written and verbal feedback I have received, there is no single area that shows weakness. Therefore, I will be focusing to further improve the overall experiences of students with this course and continue incorporating business/industry projects as part of course assignments.

75

Attachment A

Student Survey of Course Outcome - Fall Semester 2005

Course OutcomesU

nder

stan

d th

e di

ffer

ent m

anuf

actu

ring

en

viro

nmen

ts a

nd th

eir

effe

cts o

n pr

oduc

tion

and

inve

ntor

y pl

anni

ng a

nd c

ontr

ol sy

stem

s.

Bec

ome

fam

iliar

with

pro

duct

dem

and

char

acte

rist

ics a

nd th

e im

port

ance

of d

eman

d m

anag

emen

t and

fore

cast

ing

prin

cipl

es a

nd

tech

niqu

es.

Und

erst

and

the

role

of p

urch

asin

g fu

nctio

n an

d th

e im

port

ant f

acto

rs to

con

side

r fo

r th

e de

velo

pmen

t of p

artn

ersh

ip-t

ype

supp

lier

prog

ram

s.

Und

erst

and

the

fund

amen

tals

of m

ater

ial

requ

irem

ents

pla

nnin

g sy

stem

and

exe

cutio

n in

clud

ing

prob

lem

dom

ains

, bas

ic d

ecis

ion

supp

ort m

odel

s and

opp

ortu

nitie

s.

App

ly in

nova

tive

theo

ries

and

tech

niqu

es su

ch

as J

ust-

In-T

ime

and

The

ory

of C

onst

rain

ts to

de

sign

pro

duct

ion

syst

ems.

Und

erst

and

the

syst

em a

ppro

ach

to e

ffec

tive

man

agem

ent o

f pro

duct

ion

and

inve

ntor

y th

roug

h th

e ap

plic

atio

ns o

f the

pri

ncip

les o

f pr

oduc

tion

and

oper

atio

ns m

anag

emen

t.

Use

pro

duct

ivity

ass

essm

ent t

ools

to e

valu

ate

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of p

rodu

ctio

n an

d in

vent

ory

man

agem

ent p

olic

ies a

nd p

ract

ices

of a

firm

.

Enh

ance

thei

r ab

ility

to b

e ef

fect

ive

team

m

embe

rs e

mph

asiz

ing

cont

ribu

tion,

pro

ject

m

anag

emen

t ski

lls, i

nteg

rity

, eth

ics,

dive

rsity

, an

d pe

rson

al g

row

th.

4 5 5 5 4 5 5 55 4 5 4 5 4 4 53 4 4 3 5 3 3 55 5 5 5 4 3 4 33 4 4 5 5 4 3 43 4 4 5 5 4 3 44 4 3 5 4 4 4 34 4 5 3 3 4 4 44 3 5 4 4 4 4 34 3 3 4 4 3 4 43 4 3 3 2 4 4 44 4 3 3 4 3 4 45 4 4 5 4 4 4 54 4 4 3 3 4 3 44 3 3 3 4 3 3 45 5 4 5 4 5 5 55 5 4 4 4 4 3 54 4 4 4 4 3 4 44 3 3 4 4 4 54 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 3 3 4 4 3 3 44 4 4 4 4 4 45 5 5 4 4 5 5 54 4 2 3 4 4 4 54 5 4 5 3 4 4 54 3 4 3 5 5 4 5

4.07692308 4.04 3.88461538 3.96 4 3.88461538 3.84615385 4.30769231

76

Attachment BSummary of Comments Made by Students

Note: The comments were made by students were collected as part of two different surveys. One was “Course Outcome Survey” and the other was “Team Members Performance Appraisal”

Student Survey of Course Outcome

The course was good overall but it could integrate the contents to real world situations better

Like to have more time on J-I-T and TOC in the class

This is an excellent preparatory course for Capstone. It really teaches how to evaluate and improve the production setting at a manufacturing facility, a very worthwhile skill when applied to real-world scenarios.

Good course for preparing for Capstone. A lot of the concepts or ideas will remain with me for longer than material in most other courses

I also agree about perhaps changing the exam format. Perhaps less theory and more applicationThis course gave very good insight on controlling manufacturing sector

Team Members Performance Appraisal

There is very little that I would change about this course. The only thing that I personally would like to see is a more in depth project dealing with TOC. I know that everyone has a shortage of time to be dealing with additional projects, but in my experience this is a very useful topic from day to day. Perhaps performing the same project we have done over the first 8 weeks as we cover the material in the book would be an option and then returning to the companies and doing a TOC analysis along with an implementation plan the last 4 weeks of the semester could be an option.

I value initiative to contribute much more highly than actual ability in a group situation. When I grade group members I usually do it more based on attitude than actual contribution. As far as improving the course:I have different opinions about the value of group work in an educational setting than you do. I would be happy to discuss them with you. Otherwise, I feel the course went fairly well.

I really liked this course.Just, I think that the multiple choice exams should be changed.Shorter exams could work better (Applied exams or to solve production problems.) Not just theory.

When considering group projects for future use, please consider extra curricular activities and class schedule. Our schedules didn’t mesh very well and we had trouble finding meeting times.I think it would have been more motivational if we knew that our suggestions would be used or at least looked into. I would have liked to have seen the ability to implement some of the changes or at least do some studies to prove that they were good ideas. Also, the teamwork idea is not the greatest. I think that it should be based off of GPA. If we think about it, if groups of 2 with similar GPA’s were grouped together, it would eliminate the tendency of the “less motivated” to piggy-back on the individuals who are more motivated. It would put pressure on the less motivated to produce a higher quality paper, I think.

Dr. Maleki this course gave me a good overview of production planning and issues related to PIC. It would have been great if you had some case studies for graduate students. Also, my team never tried to ask me or at least discuss regarding meeting timing, they just call me suddenly and mention the timing. They spent time in the IME lab and meet each other and decide the timing without my involvement and give me random calls regarding the meeting. They never informed me about the meeting unless I asked them. I try

77

to get hold of them after the class but no body cares to meet after the class. Starting from the first plant visit they took it for granted that everyone is available at their convenience.

Give us the ability to go off on our own on some of the topics. At times it seems like we were just following the template and simply answering the questions on the outline.

Questions at the end of the presentation should relate to the topic of the paper and presentation. We did not look at the process flow and bottle necks in the facility so to answer questions about that seems unfitting. I personally believe that if we were to give recommendations we should give recommendation that relate to the paper. For example I think xxxxxx should try to increase there marketing but the question was never asked.

I felt that the guidelines were too tight. I did not feel like the students had much input into the project and were only responsible for the leg work. I did not feel that the recommendations expected were on track with the project. I felt like the recommendations were expected to be about process improvement while the focus of the project was on production and inventory control.

This is a very good course. It forms the base for production control required by every industrial engineer. It should be provided every semester like XXXXXXX can be covered for line balancing and TOC. Though the simulation used was pretty good, industry needs, also need to be taken into consideration.

I understand that this course is designed for production and inventory control, which is why I felt that researching various manufacturers was truly relevant. However, I feel as though our department often overlooks the application of industrial engineering principles in the service sector. For future projects (in other courses), I feel that a greater emphasis should be placed on the broad application of IE techniques rather than pigeonholing students into a manufacturing setting. Overall, I enjoyed the project, and I applaud the IE department for choosing projects that allow students to examine real world settings. As a transfer student, I can honestly say that I would have never had the opportunity to do a project like this at my former college.

Overall the course was great for advancing knowledge on production and inventory control. However, the only change I would make is to slow down the number of tests to study for, because it will increase the progress of the team projects in the early stages. Initially we were juggling too many things (homework, tests, project, etc.) and in the end everything slowed down, enabling better focus on the project.

I think the course is very good and should help us in preparing for Capstone. One thing that I noticed is that it is often hard to just document someone’s facility without having something in particular that you are trying to change or work on. With this said, I understand that is often how it is in real life, but in the short span we are given, there is a lot of information to try and dive into and document while trying to keep minimal annoyance upon the company that you are trying to work with.

One suggestion I have in this course has to deal with the assignment of clients. I think it would be helpful if you had the clients give you times that would work best for them to meet with a team and then use those times when you are assigning students to a project. This would be helpful in ensuring times that are available to meet with your company. Times that worked with us as a team to meet with our client often did not fit into their schedule.

You had already commented on this but it is my only grievance with the project. There was absolutely no was to personalize the report or the power point. Everything had to be the exact way laid it was out in the template. Also you should possible ask in the beginning who has a form of transportation to visit the companies. That way you could hopefully find more than one person in each group with a vehicle.

The project was a good opportunity to learn the basics on how the company operates. At times though it felt like the project was a bit restrictive, but as explained on Wednesday it should be a good lead into capstone next semester. If I would change anything it would be to put a little more emphasis on what to look for when trying to find recommendations, and how a company can benefit from implementing these

78

changes. We are often taught to theoretically look for things such as bottlenecks and excess WIP, but when it comes to actually doing these things in the real world it is quite a bit more difficult.

Overall everyone put in a great effort on this project. It was a lot of fun, and we learned a lot.

I believe this class is very well organized and instructed. There is a very reasonable amount of homework and graded very fairly. The subject matter is well organized and I feel that I have a greater knowledge of how manufacturing industries operate and maintain their production capabilities.

I felt that many of the multiple choice exam questions were poorly worded and difficult to interoperate, especially since the questions asked were very specific and hard to make a direct relationship to what we were learning.

The group work was very beneficial. It helped us maintain organization and keep focus on the problems at hand. The one difficulty I have with the project is this appraisal form. I feel that it is unfair to rate someone a three when the effort they actually put in was pretty good. I think a scoring scale (1-10) would be better. I don’t have any problems with being honest and harsh for the individuals that did not carry their own weight.

79

Faculty Course Assessment Report IME 335 – welding Technology (sections 01) – 2 credit

Fall 2005 –Charles Choate

Catalog Description: Study of arc (electric) and gas welding technology and related areas. Laboratory includes instruction in welding techniques, skills and processes. One fifty minute lecture, one hour-fifty minute lab weekly.

Grade Distribution:

A B C D F W Total 29 7 1

Modifications Made to Course (past 1-2 years): 1. IME 335 was taught at the welding lab at NDSU in 2004. Fall 2005, the welding equipment was

inadequate and the course and lab were taught at STTC.

Student Learning Outcomes: • Be familiar with both Oxy-acetylene and arc welding safety issues. Meets criteria (h) (k).• Have knowledgeable of basic facts concerning the history and development of welding. Meets criteria

(h).• Explain and apply many basic welding processes. Meets criteria (a), (c), (e), (k).• Perform weld testing, both destructive and non-destructive. Meets criteria (a), (b), (e), (f), (k).• Improved in welding techniques in flat, horizontal and vertical welding positions. Meets criteria (k).

Communications Component: Student will be able to explain the methods and processes used. Students were tested in methodology and new techniques and should be able to communicate information both written and oral.

Ethics Component: No exam questions were used to test retention of this information.

Contemporary Issues Component: New welding technology discussions!

Student Feedback: Students were assessed using a questionnaire.

88% agreed that they are familiar with oxyacetylene and arc welding process, start up and shut down and related safety issues.

Same response related to plasma and flame cutting process was weak. Majority agreed that they are experienced with welding terminology and oxyacetylene and brazing

techniques. Few agreed that they know about non destructive testing and are exposed to basic blue print

welding symbols. Majority agreed that they know about fuel and shielding gases used and they spent about 25 hours

in practical lab.

Reflection: The course went very well. There were no complaints. Grades were reflecting student’s capability in the class.

Proposed Actions for Course Improvement: 1. Secure adequate equipment for the arc welding to bring class back to NDSU.2. Put more emphasis on non destructive testing and plasma and flame cutting.

80

Analysis of Assessment Results

Tables B.3.16 – B.3.27 are used to summarize the assessment data.

Table B.3.16 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (a)

Outcome (a): Applications of mathematics, science, and engineeringMetrics used Target

benchmarkResults Comments

Exit Interview - IE 75% 100%

FE Exam since 2000 - IE 70% 74%

Employer Evaluation of Co-op (01-03) 70% 77%Student’s Evaluation of Co-op (01-03) 70% 73%


Formative Assessment - 430 75% 78%Formative Assessment - 480 75% 84%

Alumni Survey (1 yr) 75%Alumni Employer Survey (1 yr) 75%

Alumni Survey (2 yrs) 75%Alumni Employer Survey (2 yrs) 75%

Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 80%Alumni Employer Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 100%

Recommendation made by department:

None.

Corrective Action:

81

Table B.3.17 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (b)

Outcome (b): Design, experimentation, analysis, and interpretation of data Metrics used Target










Recommendation made by department:None.

Corrective Action:

82

Table B.3.18 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (c)

Outcome (c): Design of system, component, and processMetrics used Target











Corrective Action:

83

Table B.3.19 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (d)

Outcome (d): Teamwork Metrics used Target










Corrective Action:

84

Table B.3.20 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (e)

Outcome (e): Engineering Problem Solving Metrics used Target






Formative Assessment - 430 75%Formative Assessment - 480 75%





Corrective Action:

85

Table B.3.21 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (f)

Outcome (f): Professional and Ethical Responsibility Metrics used Target


Exit Interview – IE 75% 84%

FE Exam since 2000 – IE 70% 74%



Formative Assessment – 430 75% 68% For Outcome (f) the formative assessment results were less that targeted benchmark in both classes

Formative Assessment - 480 75% 72%



Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 60% Affecting 2nd Program Objective & Outcome (f)

Alumni Employer Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 80%

Recommendation made by department:1. FE topics impacted include: Ethics. 2. Place emphasis on professional and ethical responsibilities in each of the higher level courses

(junior and senior).3. Cover ethical issues in all classes.

Corrective Action:

86

Table B.3.22 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (g)

Outcome (g): Communications Metrics used Target










Corrective Action:

87

Table B.3.23 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (h)

Outcome (h): Broad EducationMetrics used Target








Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 60% Affecting 3rd Program Objective & Outcome (h)


Recommendation made by department:1. Incorporate broad education prespective in the IME courses dealing with multi-disciplines and

integration.2. Bring a global prespective to the class room for the senior level classes.

Corrective Action:

88

Table B.3.23 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (i)

Outcome (i): Life-Long Learning Metrics used Target





Formative Assessment - 430 75% 68% For Outcome (i) the formative assessment results were less that targeted benchmark in both classes




Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 60% Affecting 3rd Program Objective & Outcome (i)


Recommendation made by department:1. Place emphasis on life-long learning in the sophomore, junior, and senior level classes.2. Discuss life-long learning and long term career objectives and paths with students.

Corrective Action:

89

Table B.3.24 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (j)

Outcome (j): Contemporary IssuesMetrics used Target


Exit Interview - IE 75% 70% Students felt less adequate in discussing contemporary issues.



Formative Assessment - 430 75% 74% For Outcome (i) the formative assessment results were less that targeted benchmark




Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 60% Affecting 2nd Program Objective & Outcome (j)


Recommendation made by department:1. Discuss contemporaray issues in classes with students at all levels. These issues should be

presented in discussion format and less controvercial topics of discussion should be slected.

Corrective Action:

90

Table B.3.25 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (k)

Outcome (k): Techniques, skills, and modern engineering toolsMetrics used Target











Corrective Action:

Analysis of Assessment Results

Tables B.3.14 – B.3.25 are used to summarize the assessment data.

Table B.3.14 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (a)

Outcome (a): Applications of mathematics, science, and engineeringMetrics used Target


Exit Interview - MfgE 75% 80%

91

FE Exam since 2000 - MfgE 70% 100%FE Exam April 2004 - MfgE General 33% Nat. Pass Avg.= 65%

Employer Evaluation of Co-op/Internship 70% 78%Student's Evaluation of Co-op/Internship 70% 86%





Recommendation made by department:1. FE topics impacted include: Electrical Circuit, Engineering Economy, Material Science,

Statics, Chemistry, Computers, Dynamics, Ethics, and Thermodynamics. 2. Student should be urged to take the discipline specific exam.

Corrective Action:

92

Table B.3.15 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (b)

Outcome (b): Design, experimentation, analysis, and interpretation of data Metrics used Target


Exit Interview - MfgE 75% 70% Students felt less confident in Outcome (b).


Employer Evaluation of Co-op - MfgE 70% 78%Student's Evaluation of Co-op/Internship 70% 86%



Alumni Survey (2 yrs)

75%Alumni Employer Survey (2 yrs) 75%


Recommendation made by department:3. Place more emphasis in design, experimentation, and analysis of data in classes such as

IME 431, 460, and IME 489.4. FE topics impacted include: Electrical Circuit and Thermodynamics.

Corrective Action:

93

Table B.3.16 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (c)

Outcome (c): Design of system, component, and processMetrics used Target










Recommendation made by department:5. FE topics impacted include: Electrical Circuit, Computers, Dynamics, and Thermodynamics.

Corrective Action:

94

Table B.3.17 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (d)

Outcome (d): Teamwork Metrics used Target










Corrective Action:

95

Table B.3.18 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (e)

Outcome (e): Engineering Problem Solving Metrics used Target


2. Exit Interview - 75% 90%


Employer Evaluation of Co-op - ME 70% 71%Student's Evaluation of Co-op/Internship 70% 89%





Recommendation made by department:6. FE topics impacted include: Electrical Circuit, Engineering Economy, Material Science,

Statics, Dynamics, and Thermodynamics.

Corrective Action:

96

Table B.3.19 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (f)

Outcome (f): Professional and Ethical Responsibility Metrics used Target








Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 60% Affecting 2nd Program Objective & Outcome (f)


Recommendation made by department:4. FE topics impacted include: Ethics. 5. Place emphasis on professional and ethical responsibilities in each of the higher level

courses (junior and senior).

Corrective Action:

97

Table B.3.20 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (g)

Outcome (g): Communications Metrics used Target



Employer Evaluation of Coop - MfgE 70% 71%Student's Evaluation of Co-op/Internship 70% 86%






Corrective Action:

98

Table B.3.21 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (h)

Outcome (h): Broad EducationMetrics used Target


Exit Interview - MfgE 75% 70% Students felt less confident in Outcome (h).






Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 60% Affecting 3rd Program Objective & Outcome (h)


Recommendation made by department:3. Incorporate broad education prespective in the IME courses dealing with different multi-

disciplines and integration.4. Bring a global prespective to the class room for the senior level classes.

Corrective Action:

99

Table B.3.22 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (i)

Outcome (i): Life-Long Learning Metrics used Target




Formative Assessment - 430 75% 68% For Outcome (i) the formative assessment results were less that targeted benchmark in both classes




Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 60% Affecting 3rd Program Objective & Outcome (i)


Recommendation made by department:3. Place emphasis on life-long learning in the sophomore, junior, and senior level classes.4. Discuss life-long learning and long term career objectives and paths with students.

Corrective Action:

100

Table B.3.23 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (j)

Outcome (j): Contemporary IssuesMetrics used Target


Exit Interview - MfgE 75% 70% Students felt less adequate in discussing contemporary issues.


Formative Assessment - 430 75% 74% For Outcome (i) the formative assessment results were less that targeted benchmark





Alumni Survey (5 yrs or less) 75% 60% Affecting 2nd Program Objective & Outcome (j)


Recommendation made by department:2. Discuss contemporaray issues in classes with students at all levels. These issues should be

presented in discussion format and less controvercial topics of discussion should be slected.

Corrective Action:

101

Table B.3.24 – Assessment Summary for Outcome (k)

Outcome (k): Techniques, skills, and modern engineering toolsMetrics used Target


Exit Interview – MfgE 75% 90%

FE Exam since 2000 – MfgE 70% 100%FE Exam April 2004 – MfgE General 33% Nat. Pass Avg.= 65%

Employer Evaluation of Co-op – MfgE 70% 76%Student’s Evaluation of Co-op/Internship 70% 89%

Formative Assessment – 430 75% 82%Formative Assessment – 480 75% 86%




Recommendation made by department:7. Bring to class room the latest in techniques, skills, and engineering tools for students to

observe, learn, and use.

Corrective Action:

102

january 20, 2006 - ndsu - north dakota state university · web viewthese statements are also...

Documents