Work in progress: Engaging faculty for program improvement via EvalTools&amp;#x00AE;: A new software model

Eltayeb, Mohammed S.; Mak, Fong; Soysal, Oguz

doi:10.1109/fie.2012.6462443

Cited by 9 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These programmed Excel spreadsheets can be used every semester for a given course with little or no customization. Moreover, the FCAR method of assessing ABET student outcomes can also be easily implemented using a customized software package called EvalTools [10]. Figure 1 shows a plot of the average EAMU scores obtained from Table XVII with respect to the EEET 209 course learning outcomes.…”

Section: Direct Assessment Of Clo's and So'smentioning

confidence: 99%

Using faculty course assessment report for the assessment of an associate degree course in engineering technology program

Faiz

Mansoor

Asad

et al. 2014

2014 IEEE 6th Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we describe our successful experiences of using the faculty course assessment report (FCAR) for the assessment and evaluation of student performance in an associate degree course while preparing for initial ABET accreditation of electrical and electronics engineering technology (EEET) program at Hafr Al-Batin community college (HBCC). This paper describes how the FCAR was used as an effective and efficient tool for monitoring student performance in microcontroller applications course, which is offered every semester by the EEET unit at HBCC. It also discusses how some sections of the FCAR were customized slightly in order to suit the requirements of the course.

show abstract

Section: Direct Assessment Of Clo's and So'smentioning

confidence: 99%

Using faculty course assessment report for the assessment of an associate degree course in engineering technology program

Faiz

Mansoor

Asad

et al. 2014

2014 IEEE 6th Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…EvalTools® 6 [32] is chosen as the platform for outcomes assessment instead of Blackboard® [22] since it is the only tool that employs the Faculty Course Assessment Report (FCAR) and EAMU performance vector methodology [33,34,35,36] . This methodology facilitates the use of existing curricular scores, giving assessments for outcomes measurement and assists in achieving a high level of automation of the data collection process as shown in Figure 11 [37] .…”

Section: Fcar Eamu Performance Vector Methodology and Web-basementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, accreditation was the prime driver for outcomes assessment and the topic of more than 1,300 journal articles between 2002 and 2004 [5] . The indispensable necessity of digital technology to automate and streamline outcomes assessment for accreditation is explained in many research papers [19,20,21,36,37,40] . State-of-the-art digital technology-based outcomes assessment systems would definitely help fulfill accreditation standards and achieve excellent CQI results as well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Engineering Program Evaluations Based on Automated Measurement of Performance Indicators Data Classified into Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor Learning Domains of the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy

Hussain¹,

Mak²,

Addas³

2016 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

He has received specialized Quality Leadership Training at LSI Corporation and received an award LSI Corporation Worldwide Operations Review 1999 for his significant contributions to the Quality Improvement Systems. At LSI Wajid was the PE in charge of the world famous APPLE IPOD 2000-2001 processor WW qualification/production. Over the years Wajid has managed several projects related to streamlining operations with utilization of state of the art technology and digital systems.This has given him significant experience working with ISO standard quality systems.He is a specialist on ABET accreditation procedures and was appointed by the Dean of Engineering, KFUPM, Hafr Al Batin campus to lead the intensive effort of preparing the EEET program for the ABET Evaluators Team site visit in 2013. EEET received excellent comments for the display materials presented by Dr. Subal Sarkar ABET team chair which was managed to completion by Wajid. He is Digital Integrated Quality Management Systems Expert for Automated Academic Student Outcomes based Assessments MethodologyHe has taught several courses on electronics, microprocessors, electric circuits, digital electronics and instrumentation. He has conducted several workshops at the IU campus and eslewhere on Outcomes Assessment best practices, OBE, EvalTools R 6 for faculty, E learning with EvalTools R 6 for students, ABET accreditation process.He is a member of SAP Community, ISO 9001, Senior Member IEEE, IEEE Qatar, ASEE and REED MEP professionals International & Middle East.Dr. Fong K. Mak P.E., Gannon University Abstract: This research references past work which indicates that the major driving force of outcomes assessment initiatives in engineering institutions has been regional and specialized accreditation standards. Continuous quality improvement and accreditation-based activity at various engineering institutions remain as relatively isolated processes, with realistic continuous quality improvement efforts maintaining minimal reference to learning outcomes assessment data measured for accreditation. The lack of utilization of digital technology and appropriate methodologies supporting the automation of outcomes assessment further exacerbate this situation. Furthermore, learning outcomes data measured by most institutions is rarely classified into all three domains of the revised Bloom's taxonomy and their corresponding categories of the levels of learning. Generally institutions classify courses of a program curriculum into three levels: introductory, reinforced and mastery. The outcomes assessment data is measured for mastery level courses in order to streamline the documentation and effort needed for an effective program evaluation. A major disadvantage of this approach is that it does not facilitate early remediation of performance failures because necessary outcomes information related to deficient teaching and learning mechanisms is measured only for mastery level courses. A holistic approach for continuous quality improvement in academic learning would requi...

show abstract

“…EvalTools® 6 [43] is chosen as the platform for outcomes assessment instead of Blackboard® [33] since it is the only tool that employs the Faculty Course Assessment Report (FCAR) and EAMU performance vector methodology [42,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51] . This methodology facilitates the use of existing curricular assignments for outcomes assessment to achieve a high level of automation of the data collection process.…”

Section: Fcar Eamu Performance Vector Methodology and Web-based Softmentioning

confidence: 99%

Specific, Generic Performance Indicators and Their Rubrics for the Comprehensive Measurement of ABET Student Outcomes

Hussain¹,

Spady²

2017 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this research, we present the essential principles of an authentic outcome based educational model related to the development of learning outcomes, performance indicators and their rubrics with a focus on measurement of specific skills related to Bloom's 3 learning domains and their learning levels for engineering specializations. An analysis of culminating ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission student outcomes is made with reference to Bloom's 3 learning domains and their learning levels. A hypothetical model is presented for this analysis. The correlation of ABET student outcomes, course learning outcomes and performance indicators is clearly outlined. The necessity of the use of performance indicators is highlighted especially in reference to the measurement of course learning outcomes, development of assessments, teaching and learning activities. The importance of scientific constructive alignment of learning outcomes, performance indicators, assessments, teaching and learning strategies is discussed. A novel hybrid rubric for accurate assessment and scoring of student performances is also presented. Actual examples of implementation of this theory to program, course and student level performance evaluations using state of the art web based digital technology are shown. In summary, the benefits of specific performance indicators over generic ones are explained in detail with respect to support of authentic OBE principles, scientific constructive alignment, accurate measurement of student performances in specific engineering learning activities, performance failure analysis and continuous quality improvement.

show abstract

Work in progress: Engaging faculty for program improvement via EvalTools®: A new software model

Cited by 9 publications

References 2 publications

Using faculty course assessment report for the assessment of an associate degree course in engineering technology program

Using faculty course assessment report for the assessment of an associate degree course in engineering technology program

Engineering Program Evaluations Based on Automated Measurement of Performance Indicators Data Classified into Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor Learning Domains of the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy

Specific, Generic Performance Indicators and Their Rubrics for the Comprehensive Measurement of ABET Student Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About