Student Outcome Assessment and Course Continuity for Programs With Moderate Faculty Turnover

Abstract

In today's academic environment of outcome based assessment, there is an increased need to maintain course continuity to ensure attainment of learning objectives and student outcomes. This is especially important for institutions that offer ABET-accredited programs, where they are required to address ABET Criterion #4 -Continuous Improvement. This can be especially challenging for schools that experience moderate faculty turnover, and/or heavily rely on adjunct instructors. In this paper we present a relatively simple End of Course Review (EOCR) process as the means to achieve these ends. More importantly however, the EOCR process instills a culture of assessment into all of our instructors, both junior and senior faculty.

Transitioning to the New ABET Student Outcomes: Architecture Development for a Systems Engineering Degree Program

“…These comments, along with subsequent discussion, dispositioning, and actions are documented as one part of the SE Program's effort to comply with ABET Criterion 4, Continuous Improvement [1, p. 4]. This process is similar to that proposed by Crilly and Hartnett of the U.S. Coast Guard Academy for maintaining continuity of assessment in programs with moderate faculty turnover, a condition applying to the Air Force Academy [12]. Another example approach for addressing Criterion 4 as a design exercise has recently been offered by Fowler [13], and additional Criterion 4 considerations have been provided by Garry [14].…”

Work in Progress: Transformational Change in a Masters-level Integrated Capstone Design Course that Partners Industry and Academia

“…Nevertheless, the combination of outsourcing a large part of the course design and implementation to external partners and the shifting ownership over this capstone may have, unintentionally, resulted in a deviation from the intended path. This problem of maintaining continuous improvement in a culture of turnover has motivated other evaluative efforts in the literature [6]. In this particular case it raises the question of what is the appropriate balance of industry involvement that will guarantee both a professional practise framework and an adequate learning environment.…”