School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

Assessment Report

1997-98

1. Introduction

Assessment activities for the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science are coordinated by a joint assessment committee that was formed in February of 1997. The committee is composed of seven faculty members including the school chair and assistant chair. Members were selected to include a cross-section of faculty ranks, primary emphasis (teaching, research and service), and industrial experience.

The purpose of the Assessment Committee of the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science is to identify, collect, and suggest the application of information that the faculty can use to help promote the desired educational outcomes in our students.

2. Program objectives

The following are the mission statement and objectives of the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. They were developed by the assessment committee in spring of 1997 and were adopted by the faculty in the fall. The items underlined are those that are most pertinent to the undergraduate program.

• Provide outstanding undergraduate and graduate educational programs to students in electrical engineering, computer science, and computer engineering.
• Contribute significantly to the discovery of new knowledge and methods that enhance the theory and practice of electrical engineering, computer science, and computer engineering.
• Provide service to the community, Ohio University, and the Russ College of Engineering and Technology via programmatic offerings, governance, and outreach programs.
• Provide leadership and expertise for the enhancement of economic conditions in Southeastern Ohio.

• Graduates of the undergraduate programs will have the theoretical, practical, and professional knowledge necessary for them to be immediately productive upon entering the workforce or advanced study.
• Graduates of the master’s degree programs will have the theoretical, practical, and professional knowledge to enable them to be immediately productive at an advanced level upon entering the workforce and to enable them to assist in supervised research activities.
• Graduates of Ph.D. programs will have the theoretical, practical, and professional knowledge that will enable them to independently pursue the discovery of new knowledge and methods that enhance the theory and practice of electrical engineering, computer science, and computer engineering. Ph.D. graduates will be qualified for entry level academic positions.
• Produce graduates of the undergraduate programs that have the analytical, experimental, and professional skills needed throughout their careers to identify, formulate, and solve problems. These skills are of sufficient range to allow graduates to address the technical, business, societal, and ethical aspects of problem solutions and include:

• the design, development, and integration of systems and products,
• interpersonal and professional communication,
• teamwork and leadership,
• the ability to use the computer and other technologies effectively, and
• the ability and motivation to continue learning by both formal and informal means.

• Graduates of the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science will exhibit professional and personal integrity, cultural awareness, and ethical behavior in their practice of the professions of electrical engineering, computer science, and computer engineering.
• All tenured and tenure track faculty will engage in significant research programs, as evidenced by publication of research results in prestigious journals, external sponsorship, authorship of books, presentations at high quality refereed national and international conferences, or other forms of recognition at the national and international levels.
• Achieve national and international recognition of EECS faculty by service to professional organizations, election to the highest grade in professional organizations, by the receipt of prestigious awards, or other evidence of significant recognition.
• Engage in regional workforce training by establishing regular course offerings and certificate programs at the regional campuses via real-time video links and videotape.
• Establish undergraduate feeder programs at the regional campuses.
• Establish outreach and recruiting programs at local and regional elementary and secondary schools and provide the necessary expertise to expand mathematics, computing, and science curricula and establish and maintain computer networks.
• Continue to offer service to Ohio University and the Russ College via such means as course offerings in computing education, the role of technology in public policy, and the introduction to engineering and technology. Encourage faculty to develop courses applicable to general education requirements at Ohio University.

1. Assessment Activities and Results

In 1997-98 the school of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science was involved in two substantial assessment activities. The first was the completion of a seven-year review for the University Curriculum Council and the second was the preparation of the "Self-Study Questionnaire for Review of Engineering Programs", Volume II, for the Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET). While neither of these assessment activities was specifically oriented toward student outcomes, they did consume a majority of the resources that the school could devote to assessment. The reaccredidation process will be completed next year, so results are not yet known. The report from the UCC based on the seven-year review included the following highlights:

1. Both the quality of the instruction and the quality of scholarly and creative activity in the school were rated "exceeds expectations".
2. All other ratings were "meets expectations".
3. Ways to improve advising should be developed.
4. The number of courses in the EE undergraduate curriculum should be reduced.

Most of the routine assessment activities of the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science have focused on inputs to students rather than outcomes. The starting point was a determination of the body of knowledge and skills required for an electrical engineering or computer science graduate as identified by the faculty. Using this information and the accreditation criteria, a sequence of required and elective courses was developed so that the knowledge and skills of the students are developed in an organized fashion. Student outcomes are mainly assessed at the course level through graded work. Students are required to demonstrate mastery of material through passing (or in some cases obtaining a grade of C or better) before they could proceed to the next course. In addition, an average grade of C or better is required for all courses within the Russ College of Engineering and Technology, and in electrical engineering and computer science. Students completing the required courses are given a diploma.

While the course-by-course assessment of student outcomes remains central to the assessment of our students, the school is developing other means of assessing student outcomes. Ohio University’s Office of Institutional Research performs a survey on graduates five years after graduation. The committee examined the competencies needed and developed as reported by our alumni in the document "Five-Year Educational Outcomes: Survey of Alumni." In one section of the survey, graduates report their need or perceived importance of a skill, knowledge or attitude and the effectiveness or level of satisfaction of their preparation. By plotting the importance versus the satisfaction those attributes of the program that are important but exhibit a weakness can be visualized graphically. Figure1 shows graphs that plot the 1986-1991 electrical engineering alumni’s average response when asked about the need for each competency versus their perception of the school's effectiveness in preparation. Figure 2 shows the same data for computer science alumni. Lines are drawn at the average ratings for all items. As can be seen from the plot, in general most competencies appear in the upper right hand corner. That is, the school is effectively preparing its graduates for the tasks they have found to be most important for them to perform their jobs. Items in the upper left quadrant are the competencies that are important but the alumni feel that they were the least prepared. The two items in that quadrant, and thus in need of the most attention, for electrical engineering alumni are sensitivity to the feelings and perceptions of others and ability to organize an supervise the work of others. Similar results were found for computer science alumni.

Institutional Research also measures 61 other attributes of electrical engineering and computer science students and graduates. The assessment committee identified the twenty measures deemed most important and selected quantitative criteria which they felt that the school should achieve. In Table 1 each of the measures is listed with its rank (1 being most important), criteria specified by the assessment committee and measured student outcome. The 5-year data is for 1990 and 1991 graduates, the one year data is from a survey of 1995 graduates, the longitudinal data is for 1995 seniors, and the COMP data is a rolling average of 1993 through 1995 seniors. As can be seen, seventeen of the twenty criteria are met or exceeded. From Table 1, the most significant problem is dissatisfaction with the advising in the program. Also, electrical engineering students are not meeting the school’s objectives for pursuing graduate study, but this is probably due to students taking advantage of the strong demand by industry for graduates.

A comprehensive transcript review of EE graduates from 1995 to present has been started. The time and terms it took students to obtain a degree is being determined. From data recorded thus far (56 students) the mean and median time-to-degree has been 5.0 years. Only 5.4% percent of the graduates completed their degree in 12 terms as called for in the curriculum.

Formal and informal discussions between faculty and current students have been initiated. These have produced useful comments such as perceived overlap in course content, desire for more courses that bridge the fields of computer science and electrical engineering, and a lack of preparation for areas of the Fundamental of Engineering exam.

Exit surveys have been given to all graduates but information for the most recent

group has not been complied yet.

1. Improvements

A limited number of improvements were made to the program based on the results of the assessment activities. In the assessment process last year it was discovered that there was a problem with students not knowing it was advising week. In response to this, increased advertising was performed this fall. As a result, 143 of the 233 advisees (61%) in the electrical engineering program picked up their DARS report from their advisors. This is compared to only 23% of the students picking up their schedule in the winter of 1997. Of the remaining students, 27 (12%) indicated that they were sure of their schedule and did not need advising, 17 (7%) indicated that they would see their advisor at a later date, 20 (9%) never picked up their forms. 26 students (11%) checked the other box. 13 of these were graduating, changing majors, cooping, or not taking courses in the winter. Only 3 students claimed to not know it was advising week. This is down from 10% of the students last year. Others did not get the mailing in time and did not have time for advising. Two students indicated dissatisfaction with their advisor as their reason for not going to see them. In another effort to improve advising, the computer science faculty began a quarterly advising party for students. This meeting allows for the distribution of DARS reports, announcement of the latest advising information and a chance for students and faculty to socialize.

2. Plans for future development

Using our current assessment techniques our graduates appear to be achieving the stated objectives. However, because of the difficulty in responding to changes called for by the indicators mentioned above and a change in the accreditation expectations, the school has decided to completely scrap the current EE undergraduate curriculum. We are in the process of redesign not only the courses but also the entire educational environment of the program. The following objectives of the process have been identified:

1. Improve the education environment for our students.
2. Make the curriculum compliant with the EC 2000 criteria with particular attention to the non-technical criteria (d-j).
3. Imbed the assessment of learning objectives into the curriculum.
4. Make more efficient use of faculty resources in the delivery of the curriculum.
5. Make the curriculum more adaptable to changes indicated for by the assessment process.
6. Make the curriculum more accommodating of differing student pre-college preparation and career goals.
7. Reduce the number of credit hours and actual time-to-degree.

This process was begun in June with a faculty and student retreat in which 24 characteristics we would like to see in our graduates were identified. Based on these characteristics, new objectives will be specified and strategies will be developed to achieve them. In addition to this, means of assessing each objective will be decided and incorporated into the program near the beginning of the process. This process will first be started in the undergraduate EE program and as results begin to be determine the process will be applied to the CS and graduate programs.

Back to Assessments