We have a department faculty meeting every week. The department’s goals were discussed and developed in the faculty meeting during 1994-95. They are:

1. Students will compare favorably in their knowledge of chemical engineering with students completing similar programs nationally.

2. Graduates will be able to analyze industrial chemical engineering problems and synthesize possible solutions based on their educational background.

3. Graduates will be able to use their baccalaureate background as a springboard to further professional and career development. They will have learned how to learn.

These goals are consistent with College, University and ABET requirements. They are reviewed every year by the department. Minor modifications were made this year as presented later in this report.

In order to match our goals and objectives more closely with those of ABET, we formed a Goals and Objectives committee to collect information from each faculty member and will make more modifications next year.

To accomplish our goals, we identified the desired end of program objectives. These objectives are consistent with those of ABET. After successful completion of our program, our graduates should be able to

1. apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering

2. design and conduct experiments, as well as analyze and interpret data

3. design a system, component, or process for chemical industry

4. work as a chemical engineer or study in a graduate school

5. communicate effectively

6. use computers

7. work in a team

8. work independently

9. acquire new knowledge

10. understand moral, ethical and political issues

These objectives are measured by one or more of the 9 methods listed below. The course grade is a natural assessment tool for individual courses. Each required course has one or more prerequisites in our highly integrated program. Therefore, the course grade determines whether the student can continue or not. Teaching evaluation on the other hand provides valuable feedback for individual courses. The senior assessment test tells us if the students have retained the material of the previous courses required for the capstone design courses, which teach the students to synthesize solutions to industrial problems utilizing all previous knowledge. The design courses are the last hurdles which tell us whether the student can work as a chemical engineer. The four surveys are designed to see if we meet our objectives. The Senior Student Survey and the Alumni Survey are almost identical so that we can compare students’ opinions one quarter before graduation with that two years after graduation.

1. Course grade

2. Teaching evaluation

3. Senior assessment test

4. Capstone design course

5. Senior student survey

6. Alumni survey

7. Employer survey

8. Employment survey

9. ABET - accreditation review

The structure of the assessment process consists of two feedback loops. The first loop is traditionally employed by individual professors to improve individual courses. We use the first two tools to evaluate the course content and teaching method.

The second loop is new. We use the rest of the assessment tools to evaluate the curriculum.

The objectives and their assessments are shown in the table below.

Assessment

Capstone Senior Senior Alumni Employer Employ-

Design Test Survey Survey Survey ment

Objectives (App 1) (App 2) (App 3) (App 4) (App 5) (App 6)

1. Basic Knowledge x x x x x

2. Experimental

design and analysis x x

3. Design x x x

4. Work as a

chemical engineer x x x x x x

5. Communication x x x x

6. Computer x x x x

7. Team work x x x x

8. Independence x x x

9. Acquiring

new knowledge x x x

10. Ethics x

The employment survey was conducted by the Institutional Research in 1995-96. The other activities were carried out by the Assessment Committee during 1996-97. The detailed information is shown in Appendix 1 to 6. There is no plan to make any changes until we collect enough data to establish a reference.

The employment data come from two sources: Career and Further Education Study for 1990 to 1994 Graduates conducted by Institutional Research (Appendix 6) and Alumni Survey for 1993 and 1994 Graduates conducted by the Assessment committee. Since the former study covers a broader range and has a better response, it is used in the analysis. The employment of our graduates

over 5 years shows that 84% of them are employed, 14% are in school and only 2% are not employed and not in school. This is very impressive.

The responses of the Employer Survey (Appendix 5) are excellent. In fact, one employer commented "your graduate is an outstanding asset of this company and your program has to be top-notch." It can be concluded from this Survey that the employers are very satisfied with the education of our graduates.

The results of the Alumni Survey (Appendix 4) are also very positive. They are very happy with their education here. Their concerns are Kinetics, Advising and Computer Service. Since the same Table shows that the alumni from the previous year do not share the same concern, it is questionable whether these are systematic deficiencies in the program. On the other hand, we installed a Chemical Engineering Computer Lab with 25 IBM compatible personal computers two years ago, which should improve the computer service. One weakness with this assessment is that the response rate is very low. Since the Institutional Research typically obtains a response rate three times higher, we worked with them to develop a modified survey so that they can assist us next year. We will also inform our current students of the value of the survey to help us on this.

The overall satisfaction indicated by the Senior Student Survey (Appendix 3) is 65% compared to 75% the previous year. This may not be a statistically significant difference. We don’t have enough data to establish the reference and the variation from year to year. The Survey indicates the majority of the current seniors do not think they have learned sufficient material in chemical engineering calculations, chemical engineering experimental design, computer programing, technical writing, oral presentation and process control/lab. However, the seniors from the previous year do not think this way. Checking the results from both years, the only deficiency consistently cited is with chemical engineering experimental design. This is a new required course which is still evolving. The instructor has changed the course content and the text book. We will continue to monitor this course. We are also integrating computer programming into every major course. One weakness here is that different computer skills are taught in different courses by different instructors. It is hard to know the progress of each student. This problem will be solved by conducting a student self assessment every year to monitor his progress. (Appendix 8).

The report (Appendix 1) from the capstone course, at this time, is subjective and qualitative. As the instructor stated, students come to the design course with an understanding of a few basic concepts from each of their previous courses but very little practical computational skill. Their practical competence is limited by an inability to identify applicable theories or models, an inability to correctly identify relevant terms in the analysis, and an inability to complete mathematical manipulations (mostly algebraic) required to generate a solution.

The Senior Assessment Test (Appendix 2) confirmed the above observation quantitatively. An average of 85 percent of the current seniors understand various basic concepts but only 41 percent calculate correctly. Apparently, we have done a good job in teaching the basic concepts. However, the students need more practice to improve their algebra skills. The weakness in this assessment is that we did not complete the tests on all subject areas. We will improve the format and cover all the courses next year.

As far as service is concerned, the Senior Student Survey shows that 61% are satisfied with the computer services. 75% are satisfied with the library services. 78% are satisfied with the advising. The Advising Evaluation (Appendix 7) also shows that 81% of the students felt that their advising was either very good or excellent.

The main evidence that we are accomplishing our first goal-students will compare favorably in their knowledge of chemical engineering with students completing similar programs nationally- is that we received maximum accreditation from ABET in 1992. In addition, the Employment Survey (Appendix 6) shows that on the average, 84% of our graduates are employed, 14% are in school and only 2% are not employed and not in school. The Employer Survey indicates that the employers of our graduates are 95% satisfied. In fact, one employer commented "your graduate is an outstanding asset of this company and your program has to be top-notch." The Senior Assessment Test (Appendix 2) and the Capstone Course Report (Appendix 1) show that we are doing a good job, however, we still need to improve the students’ computation skills.

The Senior Student Survey (Appendix 3), the Alumni Survey (Appendix 4) and the Employer Survey (Appendix 5) provide evidence that we are accomplishing our second goal-graduates will be able to analyze industrial chemical engineering problems and synthesize possible solutions based on their educational background. Statement 27 of the Senior and Alumni Survey is "I am confident in my ability to solve chemical engineering problems." A total of 72% of the current seniors and 100% of the 1994-95 graduates agree. Similarly, statement 3 of the Employer Survey is "he/she has adequate problem solving skills." 100% of the employers agreed.

All four Surveys provide evidence that we are accomplishing our third goal-graduates will be able to use their baccalaureate background as a springboard to further professional and career development. They will have learned how to learn. The Employment Survey (Appendix 6) shows that on the average, 84% of our graduates are employed, 14% are in school and only 2% are not employed and not in school. When asked about "satisfaction with present position," 97% are satisfied. About 96% of these alumni think that Ohio University prepare them well for their career and 100% think that we prepare them well for additional academic work. Statement 28 of the Senior Survey (Appendix 3) and the Alumni Survey is "I am confident in my ability to acquire new skills on my own." A total of 100% of the seniors and the 19934-95 graduates agree. Similarly Statement 5 of the Employer Survey is "he/she is able to acquire new skills as needed for his/her job." 100% of the employers agreed.

The recommendation for the academic program is to coordinate the teaching of the computer skills and to use a student self assessment to monitor student’s progress in computer skills.

The recommendation in the department assessment plan is to make a minor modification on the goals:

1. Goal 1 is modified to read "student will compare favorably in their knowledge and skills with students completing similar programs nationally."

2. Goal 3 is modified to read "graduates will be able to use their baccalaureate background as a springboard to further professional and career development."

The following text details a subjective assessment of the capabilities of chemical engineering undergraduate students in the senior class as demonstrated by their performance during the two-quarter design course occurring in the fall quarter of 1996 and the winter quarter of 1997. Capabilities addressed are those developed during the students' education prior to the design courses, primarily stressing chemical engineering courses taken in the sophomore and junior years. The review is categorized according to these previous courses. The results represent the opinions and goals of the design course instructor. Lack of performance in some areas may reflect differences between the goals of the design instructor and the goals of the previous course instructors. This potential discrepancy should be addressed by developing and publishing a set of course goals for each course in the curriculum. All quantitative information has been estimated based upon general recollection.

This report was constructed by editing the version generated last year. The capabilities of the average student in the class of 1997 are similar to those of the class of 1996; however, a general impression is that the new class has a larger fraction of students with excellent capabilities and a larger fraction of students with poor capabilities. As a whole, the new class did not accept the philosophy of the design class (open-ended problems, learning material outside of class, student responsibility for developing solution strategies) as well as the previous class did.

Essentially all students are familiar with the basic concepts of heat and material balances. The can all chant the familiar law "in minus out plus generation equals accumulation." However, only about half of them can be expected to accurately define the relevant equations and solve them when presented with a typical problem. A minority of students does not understand the concept of steady-state operation. A similar fraction of students does not understand the difference between enthalpy changes associated with temperature change and enthalpy changes associated with phase change.

Quantitative aspects of this subject are rarely required in the design course and so cannot be reviewed here. Almost all students understand the basic concepts of laminar and turbulent flow. Only about half of the students have any useful knowledge about how to select a type of pump or valve for a given application. Few students are familiar with the interaction between height and pressure.

Most students understand the basic processes of conduction and convection. Most can recall Newton's Law of Cooling and correctly identify the relevant terms in it. A significant minority of students cannot accurately complete calculations in this area because they make fundamental errors associated with improper identification of driving forces, physical properties, and unit conversions.

Most students do not understand the operation or purpose of staged separation processes; most believe that a mixture of liquids can, in general, be separated into pure components in a single equilibrium stage. Completion of specific calculations associated with this course are not required in the design course and so cannot be reviewed here.

Essentially all students have a general familiarity with the concepts of work, enthalpy, entropy, and phase equilibria; however, the familiarity is only general. For example, few students have a functional understanding of the difference between vapor-liquid-equilibrium models.

Essentially all students understand the difference between ideal reactor types and can write a reaction rate expression based on an elementary mechanism. Few students have working knowledge that enables them to specify reactor performance or interpret kinetic data. As part of the design course this year, several students attempted to model chemical reactors for a specific reaction without using any rate or equilibrium information specific to the reaction.

The use of calculus and differential equations is not required as a part of the senior design course. About one fourth of the students have regular difficulty performing basic algebraic manipulations.

About one quarter of the students have difficulty balancing chemical reactions. A similar fraction does not recognize common organic structures such as esters or carboxylic acids or common molecules such as xylene. Almost no students have any recollection of IUPAC nomenclature or common classes of chemical reaction. Concepts from physical chemistry are rarely used in the design course.

Writing skills are highly variable. About three quarters of the students have adequate grammar skills combined with an ability to organize their thoughts and generate a logical and informative report. The rest are not prepared to write a technical report worth reading. Although the later quarter fails in both the grammar and development areas, the inability to organize their thoughts in a way that demonstrates a concept or leads to a conclusion is perhaps the most concerning problem. Coming into the senior year, only about ten percent of the students have any familiarity with the basic mechanical details of how to format a table, figure, or reference. Only about one third of the students understand the purpose of citations, know when to use citations, or have a complete understanding of the concept of plagiarism.

Most students have adequate to good skills in this area. They can organize a talk into appropriate sections, create effective visual aids, and deliver their message.

Students come to the design course with an understanding of a few basic concepts from each of their previous courses but very little practical computational skill. Their practical competence is limited by an inability to identify applicable theories or models, an inability to correctly identify relevant terms in the analysis, and an inability to complete mathematical manipulations (mostly algebraic) required to generate a solution.

During fall 1996, we scheduled 7 exams to test 9 chemical engineering courses which student had taken before the senior year. All faculty were assigned duty. Typically, one faculty prepared the test and the other one graded it. However, only 2 tests were carried out. The results for 1 test is reported here. The percentage of students who understand the theory and the computation is reported. The overall average is 62.7%.

(%)

1. Student recognizes need to use stoichiometry

for material balance 100

2. Student calculates composition correctly 74

3. Student recognizes reference state 85

4. Student determines reference states correctly 21

5. Student recognizes ideal gas enthalpy equation 100

6. Student complete gas enthalpy calculations correctly 46

7. Student recognizes enthalpy equation involving

phase change 62

8. Student employs enthalpy equation involving

phase change correctly 44

9. Student recognizes need to use energy balance

for temperature 77

10. Student calculates temperature correctly 18

The Senior Student Survey was conducted in the end of winter quarter, 1995-96. A total of 36 students responded. In order to compare the results with those from previous year, they are listed below side by side. The answers "strongly agree" and "agree" are combined into "agree" and the answers "disagree" and "strongly disagree" are combined into "disagree". The percentage agree and disagree are reported for each year. The total does not add up to 100 because some students chose to answer "no opinion".

In general the results are very favorable. The error between two years is about 10 percent. From a statistical point of view, it takes five years to establish a reference. We are not even half way through it. The results show that our students are happy with their education here. The only concern is probably with CHE408, Experimental Design, which happens to be a new required course in the curriculum. As a result, a significant number of answers is "no opinion." We think it is too early to draw a conclusion and make a recommendation at this time.

Agree(%) Disagree(%)

96-97 95-96 96-97 95-96

A. I learned sufficient material in the following courses before I enrolled in senior courses (design, unit operations lab, control and control lab).

1) Material and energy balances 97 100 3 0

(ChE 200/201)

2) Thermodynamics(ChE 305/306) 58 48 36 45

3) Kinetics(ChE 307/308) 67 88 33 9

4) Fluid flow(ChE 342) 83 88 17 9

5) Heat transfer(ChE 344) 92 94 8 3

6) Mass transfer(ChE 343) 75 81 19 15

7) Chem. Eng. Calculations 28 52 67 45

(ChE 400)

8) Experimental Design(ChE 408) 14 33 78 45

9) Mathematics 92 88 8 12

(Math 263A,B,C,D/340)

10)Chemistry(Chem 151/152/153) 86 94 14 6

11)Organic(Chem 303/305/306/307) 53 70 44 24

12)Physical Chemistry

(Chem 453/454/456/459) 61 57 39 36

13)Physics(Phys 251/252/253) 67 57 28 42

B. I learned sufficient material in the following areas before I enrolled in senior courses.

14)Computer programming/FORTRAN 25 51 72 48

15)Use of software packages 56 88 39 9

(Spreadsheets, etc.)

16)Technical writing 39 76 56 24

17)Oral presentations 31 67 67 33

C. I learned sufficient material in the senior courses to work as a chemical engineer.

18) Design 53 87 44 3

19) Unit operations lab 61 75 31 9

20) Control/Control lab 31 51 64 36

Agree(%) Disagree(%)

95-96 93-94 95-96 93-94

21) I am happy with the list of the technical electives offered in chemical engineering. 56 73 44 24

D. I think the University has provided good support in the following areas.

22) Computer services 61 70 33 27

23) Library services 75 94 22 6

24) Advising 78 70 19 18

Help from professors outside the classroom

25) -ChE professors 89 94 11 3

26) -Other professors 56 70 25 18

27) I am confident in my ability to solve chemical engineering problems after I get a job. 72 76 19 18

28) I am confident in my ability to acquire new skills on my own after my graduation. 100 97 0 3

29) I think I will do a good job working independently.

83 100 17 0

30) I think I will do a good job working in a team.

97 67 3 3

31) Please make additional comments below if you like.

The Alumni Survey was conducted at the end of fall quarter, 1996. A total of 2 out of 28 alumni responded. In order to compare the results with those from previous year, they are listed below side by side. The answers "strongly agree" and "agree" are combined into "agree" and the answers "disagree" and "strongly disagree" are combined into "disagree". The percentage agree and disagree are reported for each year. The total does not add up to 100 because some students chose to answer "no opinion".

From a statistical point of view, this is not a good sample because the number of responses is very low. In fact, it is worse than last year. However, the results are favorable. Our alumni are happy with their education here.

Agree(%) Disagree(%)

94-95 93-94 94-95 93-94

A. I learned sufficient material in the following courses before I enrolled in senior courses (design, unit operations lab, control and control lab).

1) Material and energy balances 100 83 0 17

(ChE 200/201)

2) Thermodynamics(ChE 305/306) 50 67 50 17

3) Kinetics(ChE 307/308) 0 83 100 0

4) Fluid flow(ChE 342) 100 100 0 0

5) Heat transfer(ChE 344) 100 100 0 0

6) Mass transfer(ChE 343) 100 83 0 17

7) Chem. Eng. Calculations 100 83 0 17

(ChE 400)

8) Experimental Design(ChE 408) - 33 - 17

9) Mathematics 100 88 0 0

(Math 263A,B,C,D/340)

10)Chemistry(Chem 151/152/153) 100 100 0 0

11)Organic(Chem 303/305/306/307) 50 67 50 33

12)Physical Chemistry

(Chem 453/454/456/459) 50 50 50 33

13)Physics(Phys 251/252/253) 50 67 50 33

B. I learned sufficient material in the following areas before I enrolled in senior courses.

14)Computer programming/FORTRAN 100 100 0 0

15)Use of software packages 100 83 0 17

(Spreadsheets, etc.)

16)Technical writing 100 83 0 17

17)Oral presentations 100 67 0 33

C. I learned sufficient material in the following senior courses to work as a chemical engineer.

18) Design 100 83 0 17

19) Unit operations lab 100 9 0 17

20) Control/Control lab 50 67 50 33

Agree(%) Disagree(%)

94-95 93-94 94-95 93-94

21) I am happy with the list of the technical electives offered in chemical engineering. 100 100 0 0

D. I think the University has provided good support in the following areas.

22) Computer services 0 100 100 0

23) Library services 100 100 0 0

24) Advising 0 67 100 0

Help from professors outside the classroom

25) -ChE professors 100 83 0 0

26) -Other professors 100 67 0 0

27) I am confident in my ability to solve chemical engineering problems. 100 100 0 0

28) I am confident in my ability to acquire new skills on my own. 100 100 0 0

29) I think I do a good job working independently.

100 100 0 0

30) I think I do a good job working in a team.

100 100 0 0

31) Please make additional comments below if you like.

The Employer survey was conducted in winter, 1997. Because of the low return from the Alumni Survey, we sent only 8 questionnaires to the immediate supervisors of our graduates and obtained 4 responses. The results are listed below. The answers "strongly agree" and "agree" are combined into "agree" and the answers "disagree" and "strongly disagree" are combined into "disagree". The percentage agree and disagree are reported for each year. The total does not add up to 100 because some students chose to answer "no opinion".

The results are very favorable. In fact, one employer stated "Your graduate is an outstanding asset of this company. Your program has to be top-notch." In summary, the employers are happy with the education of our graduates.

Agree(%) Disagree(%)

1a) This employee has a sufficient background in chemical engineering. 100 0

1b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 100 0

Comments:

2a) He/She has a sufficient background in physics, chemistry, and math. 100 0

2b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 75 0

Comments:

3a) He/she is proficient in using computers as an analytical tool. 100 0

3b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 100 0

Comments:

4a) He/she has adequate problem solving skills. 100 0

4b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 100 0

Comments:

5a) He/she is able to acquire new skills as needed for his/her job. 100 0

5b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 100 0

Comments:

Agree(%) Disagree(%)

6a) He/she communicates effectively orally.

75 25

6b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 75 25

Comments:

7a) He/she communicates effectively in writing.

100 0

7b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 100 0

Comments:

8a) He/she works effectively in a team.

100 0

8b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 100 0

Comments:

9a) He/she is an independent worker.

100 0

9b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 75 0

Comments:

10a) He/she copes well with complex moral and ethical issues.

100 0

10b) Compared to graduates from other chemical engineering departments. 100 0

Comments:

11)Other.

Your graduate is an outstanding asset of this company. Your program has to be top-notch.