1) Assure that graduates are adequately prepared to enter and continue the practice of Civil Engineering.

2) Provide opportunities for students to participate in basic and applied research in order to discover, disseminate and apply new knowledge.

3) Encourage new and innovative approaches to improve civil engineering education.

4) Communicate the purpose and performance of the civil engineering program to public, industrial, and governmental sectors.

* Educate students to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.

* Educate students to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.

* Provide students with the opportunity to function on multi-disciplinary teams.

* Inform students of professional and ethical responsibilities.

* Increase and enhance computer applications, skills, and techniques in the curriculum.

* Strive to improve written and oral communication skills of students.

* Increase the number of undergraduate students participating in research.

* Strive for all faculty in CE to obtain Professional Engineer (PE) registration.

* Develop innovative teaching methods.

* Collaborate with other Universities in graduate education.

* Recruit high academically qualified students to the graduate program.

* Maintain undergraduate student enrollments.

CE seniors reported in the senior survey that over 50% of the faculty have expressed the importance of continuing their education by self study, obtaining advanced degrees, and attending seminars, short courses, and conferences. The percentage is the same from student data taken from the MS Student Survey.

Teaching evaluations provide the department with input on areas that need teaching improvement. The teaching ability of the department faculty is directly related to how adequately graduates from the program are prepared to enter and practice Civil Engineering. Evaluations are conducted in the fall, winter, and spring for each course taught in the college. Of the fifteen questions asked in the evaluation, ten questions are related to teaching performance and are statistically compiled. These questions are 1) Organization and Presentation Effectiveness; 2) Answering Questions; 3) Use of Examples; 4) Presentation/Text Material; 5) Assignments; 6) Exam Content; 7) Grading; 10) Overall Quality of Instruction; 11) Amount of Learning; 12) Level of Difficulty. The teaching evaluations for the department in 1997-98 show an increase for all the questions asked to the students compared to 1996-97.

Results from teaching evaluations for the past two years for the department and the college are summarized in Table 1. Data show that the department faculty have improved on all aspects of teaching over the past year. The department results for 1997-98 are very similar to the 1997-98 college results with the exception of a few questions. Question 5, related to assignments, was higher for the department as compared to the college. However, exam content (question 6) for the department was lower than that for the college. Question 7 related to grading was also lower and reflects the departments’ stance on strict grading policies. The overall level of difficulty of CE courses is addressed in question 12 which is significantly higher than the college results. Review of teaching evaluations for prior years back to 1992-93 (not shown) reveal the level of difficulty for CE courses to be consistently higher than the college’s mean.

Table 1: Means of Questions from Teaching Evaluations for Civil Engineering

In the spring 1997 FE exam, CE seniors answered on average 50% of the math related questions correctly compared to state and national averages of 60% and 61%, respectively. These results could be caused by any of the following reasons or combinations thereof: (1) students do not retain information from math courses required for the program, (2) the subject material is not reviewed intensely enough in courses later in the academic program, or (3) students do not learn enough material in the math courses. It should also be stated that other engineering programs (chemical, mechanical, and industrial systems) within the Russ College of Engineering and Technology have also shown similar less than average performance. The department of CE will evaluate several methods to address this problem. These methods include: discussion with mathematics department to see that all subject areas needed by engineering students are covered; introduction of applied mathematics course in CE; more math related problems in junior and senior year; review of math in FE review with senior students.

The only science related subject students are tested on in the FE exam is in chemistry. CE seniors scored higher in the spring 1997 FE exam than the national average by 1% and were near the state average. This is likely due to the high number of CE students focusing on the environmental engineering aspect of CE as reported in the senior survey.

The spring 1997 FE exam revealed the following results for the engineering education of CE seniors. Seniors did better than the national average by 7% in structural design, by 4% in water purification and treatment, and by 3% in environmental engineering. Comparison to the state averages showed that CE seniors excelled in the structural design area by exceeding the state average by 7% and in the environmental engineering area by exceeding the state average by 2%. Areas of weakness in the CE program revealed by the FE exam include construction management, computers and numerical methods, and surveying. The poor performance in the construction management area is due to the nonexistence of courses on this subject and faculty to teach these courses. This issue will be reviewed by the department to determine a means to address this difficulty. The weakness in computers and numerical analysis is addressed in the objective related to computers. The poor performance of seniors in the surveying area is baffling, but may be attributed to a lack of retention of the subject matter by students. The surveying course is taken during the first or second year of the students’ academic study. This weakness could be addressed through re-emphasizing the material in junior or senior level courses.

As part of their thesis research, almost all CE graduate students conduct experiments and analyze and interpret the data obtained from these experiments. The experiments require using both standard procedures and development of innovative procedures, and are conducted in the laboratory and field environment. As an example some of the experiments performed by graduate students are in collaboration with the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). These may include the Falling Weight Deflectometer and Dynaflect tests, which involve dropping a known weight at a predetermined location on the roadway. Students then use sensors that are installed within and under the pavement to determine the response. Several students have used these tests and the associated data to perform research on flexible pavement, rigid pavement, and dowel bars. The use of Ohio Research Institute for Transportation and the Environment (ORITE’s) Cone Penetrometer Truck (CPT) and the Automated Dynamic Cone Penetrometer have allowed students to investigate the base and subgrade beneath pavements. In the area of noise abatement, graduate students have designed experiments and interpreted the data to evaluate various traffic noise abatement systems. Graduate students in the environmental area have designed experiments and reviewed the data to evaluate acid mine drainage and design components of landfills. The MS student survey showed the research activities performed by the students were more important than any other category in acquiring skills and knowledge necessary for their future jobs.

Undergraduate students perform a wide range of experiments in the required laboratory courses. These courses include CE 223 Strength of Materials Laboratory, CE 341 Fluid Mechanics Laboratory, and CE 371 Soils Laboratory. After performing the experiment,

students interpret the data and write a report based on the experiment and their results. The senior survey showed that over 42% of the students were either very satisfied or extremely satisfied with these undergraduate laboratory facilities. Less than 15% were not at all satisfied with the equipment in these three labs. Undergraudate students are also

assisting graduate students and faculty in research projects, which allows them same opportunities as the graduate students.

CE seniors answered structural design questions in the spring 1997 FE exam at a 7% higher rate than the state and national averages. These results show that CE students are well prepared in structural design.

One of the senior survey questions asked students if any courses, skills, or experiences at OU were well received by employers during interviews. Approximately 1/3 of the respondents to this question said that the experience gained in CE 491A Senior Design - Land Use and Development was something prospective employers appreciated most. (The survey is carried out during the winter quarter before CE 491B Senior Design - Environmental and Water Resources and CE 491C Senior Design - Structures and Foundations are completed by students.) Responses also revealed the strength in the CE program in the area of design.

The senior capstone design courses (CE 491A,B,C, and D) are formulated so that undergraduate students are presented with an engineering problem and they must work in teams to identify possible solutions, select the optimal solution approaches and then solve the problem with a comprehensive design. These include projects such as laying out a subdivision, designing a wastewater treatment facility, or designing the foundation and structure for a exercise facility and an attached parking garage.

The ASCE student chapter competes in several design competitions with other Universities. One competition involves students designing, building, and assembling a steel bridge to scale. The bridge spans approximately 20 feet and University teams consisting typically of four students are judged on weight of their design (economy), speed in constructing the bridge, aesthetics, and stiffness. The OU team competed in regional competition at Cleveland State University during spring break. The team placed first in stiffness and aesthetics and second overall in the regional competition. The second overall finish allowed the team to compete in the nationals at Colorado State University in Fort Collins, Colorado. The team finished tenth in aesthetics and thirteenth in stiffness. The team ended up 29^th overall. Quite a feat considering approximately 200 ASCE chapters compete at the regional level. This demonstrates that OU students learn the necessary skills to formulate and solve engineering problems.

Graduate students often find themselves working in teams with individuals from other disciplines to complete a project or task. They consult with electrical engineers on data acquisition systems and computer programmers on setting up data retrieval. They work with electrical and mechanical technicians to develop testing devices and apparatuses. Graduate students have also worked with geologists in acid mine drainage.

Undergraduate students have had the opportunity to work with other engineering students in the layout and design of buildings. This has been done in the past in CE 491D. In the ET280 Engineering and Technology Overview course, students work in teams to solve various engineering design problems.

Most professionals in the civil engineering field believe that becoming a licensed engineer is a professional responsibility. Many positions in the field of civil engineering also require the engineer to be licensed. County engineers in Ohio are required to be licensed engineers and licensed surveyors. The faculty of the CE department stress these important issues in class and during advising sessions. This student advisement is working well as over 90% of the respondents in the senior survey say they plan on taking the FE and the PE examinations. In addition, over 28% of the seniors returning surveys plan on seeking their surveying license by taking the Land Surveyor (LS) exam. This is impressive when considering that students must take approximately two additional quarters of class work beyond their civil engineering requirements to qualify to take the LS exam.

This past year the department of Civil Engineering began incorporating discussions of ethics and professional responsibilities into the senior capstone design courses (CE 491A Senior Design - Land Use and Development, CE 491B Senior Design - Environmental and Water Resources, and CE 491C Senior Design - Structures and Foundations). Students are required to take at least one of these courses. In both CE 491B Senior Design - Environmental and Water Resources and 491C Senior Design - Structures and Foundations, the ASCE Code of Ethics and the Ohio Engineering Code of Ethics were presented in class. In addition, two in-depth sample ethical situations from the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) and example FE ethics questions were reviewed and discussed.

A new elective course CE 490 Engineering Law was also taught for the first time. This course provided students with some of the legal, ethical, and professional aspects of civil engineering. These actions were taken because of the below average performance of CE seniors in the FE exam in the prior years in the areas of Ethics and Legal and Professional Aspects.

In addition, 85% of respondents to the CE senior survey replied that coping with complex moral and ethical issues was necessary to success in future endeavors, while 60% believed the program was not effective in developing this skill in students.

The senior survey data showed only 19% of the respondents indicated that employers expected certain skills and courses that the students did not obtain at OU. The most prevalent skill that employers mentioned during interviews and that seniors did not have was hands-on training with industry software such as AutoCAD. This problem has been addressed with the College’s purchase and implementation of AutoCAD in its courses two years ago. However, since courses utilizing AutoCAD are taught in the first two years of a CE student’s academic career, seniors completing the survey had not benefitted from the software except through self-study. Also, the department purchased CE specific software for areas of Structural, Geotechnical, Environmental, Transportation, and Water Resources Engineering to enhance students’ knowledge, which has been integrated into courses.

The CE senior survey also showed that 95% of students believe that the ability to use the computer as an analytical tool was important to success in their future endeavors. A total of 75% of the respondents believed that the program was effective to somewhat effective in developing this skill.

The CE senior survey also revealed that 50% of the students felt the Department computer facilities and software were not at all satisfactory, while only approximately 14% of the students felt the College computer facilities and software were not at all satisfactory. Similar results were also obtained from the MS graduate survey

During the fall meeting of the CE Advisory Board one of the recommendations was to provide a computer laboratory for CE students. A student presenter during this meeting, representing fellow students, also expressed the need for the department to provide a computer laboratory with hardware/software for CE applications.

The results of the spring FE exam showed that CE seniors performed poorly in the basic area of computers and the advanced area of computers and numerical methods. This weakness in computers and numerical analysis area stems directly from the lack of financial sources in the Department and College to continually maintain and update computer hardware and software. The rapid change of this technically advanced area only magnifies the problem. Improvements have been made to the CE computer laboratory with the purchase of six new computers and a server during the winter intercession. In addition, a CE course is under development in the area of numerical techniques.

Improving communication skills of students has been addressed through increasing oral presentations and written reports in appropriate classes and emphasizing the importance of oral presentations in the senior design courses and others.

Normally all students take a freshman composition course in their freshman year. Students are automatically enrolled in English 151; an opportunity is given to earn a waiver by examination, but less that 1% are granted a waiver. During the junior year, all students are required to take an appropriate composition course; typically for CE students this is English 305J Technical Writing. CE students are also required to take INCO 103 Public Speaking.

Oral presentations are required in the senior capstone design courses, and some feedback is provided on their presentations. In CE491B for example, the oral part of the design is graded separately to the project. Elective courses which generally have smaller enrollments, also provide opportunities for oral presentations by students.

Writing assignments are important to the program. Civil Engineering faculty members routinely grade written reports required for their courses for grammar as well as content. Students must write laboratory reports, research papers, and memoranda.

Each student is required to develop his/her own laboratory report for each experiment conducted in:

Each report must be typed and generally consists of (1) cover sheet,

CE 452 Water and Wastewater Analysis (4) discussion, (5) conclusions and recommendations, (6) experimental data, (7) sample calculations, and (8) plots and/or tables (9) safety for CE 452 Water and Wastewater Analysis and CE 341 Fluid Mechanics Laboratory. Each report is graded on the basis of grammar, spelling, technical accuracy of the contents, neatness and completeness.

In CE 361 Transportation Engineering and CE 462/562 Traffic Engineering students must complete a series of writing assignments as part of their course project. These assignments include: Problem Statement, Proposal, Progress Reports, Report Outline, and Final Report.

The CE senior survey showed that 85% of the respondents believe that the ability to write well is necessary to succeed in their future endeavors while all respondents believed oral communication skills were necessary to succeed in their future endeavors. The CE survey also asked the effectiveness of OU in developing written and oral communication skills. A total of 70% of the students believed the program was effective to somewhat effective in developing written skills, while 80 % believed the program was effective to somewhat effective in developing oral communication skills. The same questions were asked in the MS graduate survey. All respondents to this survey replied it was important to write well and orally communicate effectively. However, 75% of the MS students believe the program was effective to somewhat effective in developing written skills, but only 50% believed the program was effective in developing oral skills.

Each year the ASCE student chapters from OU and OSU compete in a paper and oral presentation competition. The 1998 competition was held in Columbus and was won by OU student Steven Andrew Rhodes. His topic related to pavement research work that he performed with the assistance of Dr. Sang-Soo Kim.

Ronald R. Mason a senior undergraduate student wrote a paper that was awarded first place in the ASCE Zone II Daniel W. Mead Paper Contest and first place in the ASCE National Daniel W. Mead Paper Contest. The topic of Ron’s paper was related to ethics in engineering.

These results show that the program is doing a good job in teaching written and oral communication skills, but there is room for improvement.

The Career and Further Education Study data for 1996 alumni showed that 24% of the alumni were continuing with their education. The average stipend received by these alumni was $14,667. This is an increase of over 6% from the results of the previous Career and Further Education Study. All the alumni also reported that they felt the program prepared them somewhat well to very well for additional academic work.

Data from the CE senior survey showed that approximately 24% of the students planned to continue their education. Of these students one student planned to seek an MBA while the remaining students planned on pursuing an advanced degree in civil engineering. All the students applied to Ohio University with one application being sent to the University of Kentucky and one to West Virginia University. A total of 80 -100 % of the students plan to continue their advanced education at OU.

Table 2 provides the amount of research funding awarded in 1995-96 and 1996-97 for the Department of Civil Engineering and the Ohio Research Institute for Transportation and the Environment (the unit through which most CE research is conducted). As can be seen, a significant amount of funding is available to provide numerous opportunities for graduate students as well as undergraduate students to work on research projects.

Table 3 shows the number of undergraduate and graduate students participating in funded research projects during the past year.

Equipment in CE and ORITE has been enhanced significantly over the last few years.

MS students reported in their survey that 75% were extremely satisfied and the remaining 25% were very satisfied with the research facilities of the department.

The following summarizes a list of equipment purchased since the 1992 ABET visit, organized by specific laboratory. The cost of the equipment is provided in parenthesis.

The general public also obtains information on the CE program through the news media. Some of the recent articles published in newspapers include:

The faculty of the department attend numerous meetings and conferences throughout the state, the nation, and even occasionally outside of the U.S. to present scholarly work. The faculty are very prolific in publishing in national and international journals, proceedings and other media.