Bridging diverse institutions, multiple engineering departments, and industry: A case study in assessment planning

Journal of Engineering Education, Apr 1998 by McMartin, Flora, Van Duzer, Eric, Agogino, Alice

The planning process begun in the spring of 1996 was completed and ready to implement by the following fall semester (see Figure 1. for a timeline of the process.) The time between deciding what, how, and whom to assess was very quickly followed by the implementation of pilot testing. As a result, the relationship between the tools and the abilities they were supposed to assess was still fresh and clear to the faculty. The vitality of the process and the feeling that something concrete was being accomplished reinforced faculty commitment and participation to the overall effort.

As the plan developed it became clear that the abilities faculty wished to assess related closely to ABET learning outcomes criteria 3 (e.g., ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams; ability to communicate effectively, and ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems). The assessment team reviewed the plan, tools and processes to make sure that all Synthesis assessment efforts were designed to further campus efforts to address the new ABET 2000 requirements. The dual focus of the assessment efforts thus served to illustrate for the participants how assessment can be linked to assessment and continuous improvement efforts of their individual campuses.

Since the associate deans for the schools of engineering on each participating campus were key to implementing the new ABET study requirements, they were identified and sought out to be key partners in implementing the Synthesis plan. As ABET moves to include faculty in the accreditation process through the assessment of student learning outcomes, the associate deans and the Synthesis Coalition will collaborate to reinforce the role of assessment as a responsibility of the teaching profession.

Departments must identify the kinds of assessment activities required by their institution as well as by their regional and professional accreditation associations. Assessment processes and procedures can be designed to meet the needs of multiple constituencies. As the Synthesis Coalition's assessment planning process has modeled, collaboration between faculty, administration, and their major stakeholders will lay the groundwork for successful implementation of assessment at the department level.

VII. LESSONS LEARNED

Building commitment to the assessment process began by negotiating a common understanding among the participants. This effort evolved into a process of continuous involvement by the faculty, students, and MIB members. The relevance and utility of the stakeholders' work, in combination with a well defined and understandable process, led to their strong level of commitment to assessment. By creating tools which fit neatly into existing course work and limiting the demands on faculty, the core assessment tools promoted cooperation. Finally, by providing the campuses with a comprehensive picture of their courses and curriculum so that they could assign specific assessments to appropriate courses, the Synthesis Coalition insured that the process was sensitive to campus differences and linked assessment to the faculty most interested in pursuing it.