SJSU Annual Program Assessment Form
Academic Year 2013-2014
Department: Biomedical, Chemical & Materials Engineering
Program:
B.S. Biomedical Engineering
College:
Engineering
Website:
bcme.sjsu.edu
x Check here if your website addresses the University Learning Goals. (Yes)
http://bcme.sjsu.edu/content/bme-abet-program-educational-objectives
The program’s educational objectives, which are consistent with the educational objectives of
the Accreditation Board on Engineering and Technology, are linked to the university’s learning
goals.
Program Accreditation (if any): ABET accreditation visit is planned for Fall 2015.
Contact Person and Email:
Guna Selvaduray; guna.selvaduray@sjsu.edu
Date of Report:
June 27, 2014
Part A
1. List of Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)
The Program Learning Outcomes, which are consistent with the Accreditation Board for Engineering and
Technology (ABET) disciplinary standards and requirements, and the Program Evaluation Components
(PEC) for each PLO, are listed below. The PECs for each PLO was identified and developed to ensure that
the assessment for each PLO would be relevant to biomedical engineering.
The faculty as a group decide and formulate, through several discussions, the specific PECs that are
relevant to biomedical engineering, and the level of mastery required, keeping in mind the requirements
that can be expected to be placed when our students graduate and enter the professional workforce.
The PECs are reviewed annually and modifications made if the faculty as a group think that is warranted.
1. Ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science and engineering
1.1 Identify the basic structural and functional principles of human organ systems including
repair systems
1.2 Apply conservation laws to biological and medical systems to solve biomedical engineering
problems.
1.3 Apply engineering fundamentals and scientific reasoning to model and predict responses at
biological interfaces
1
2. Ability to design/conduct experiments and analyze/interpret data
2.1 Design and analyze appropriate experiments to measure or optimize specific engineering
properties , incorporating statistical procedures
2.2 Analyze and interpret results of specific and mandatory FDA testing
2.3 Solve closed and open-ended biomedical engineering problems using experimental
methodologies
3. Ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic
constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety,
manufacturability, and sustainability
3.1 Demonstrate an understanding of the use of different and biomedical devices in terms of
safety and efficacy
3.2 Demonstrate knowledge of the constraints around process/product design based on FDA
regulations
4. Ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
4.1 Function effectively as both team leader and team member in accomplishing engineering
team projects
5. Ability to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems
5.1 Troubleshoot a biomedical system by dividing the system into subcomponents and narrow
the failure to single subsystem or an interaction
5.2 Simulate the problem by using mathematical modeling tools
5.3 Evaluate the constraints in a biomedical engineering problem and develop solutions
6. Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
6.1 Formulate and address ethical issues which arise in solving engineering problems and in the
workplace
7. Ability to communicate effectively
7.1 Communicate effectively in informal team settings and through formal and informal
presentations, in written and oral formats
8. Understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global/societal context
8.1 Understands consequences of global/societal context of biomedical engineering issues and
policies.
9. Recognition of the need for and an ability to engage in life-long learning
9.1 Conduct a thorough information search, be resourceful in uncovering information, and
critically evaluate information.
2
10. Knowledge of contemporary issues
10.1 Compare and evaluate current and emerging biomedical engineering technologies
11. Ability to use the techniques, skills and modern tools necessary for engineering practice
11.1 Apply appropriate software, modern tools, and techniques for design and analysis of
biomedical systems
2. Map of PLOs to University Learning Goals (ULGs)
Mapping of the PLOs to the University Learning Goals was initially done by the Biomedical Engineering
Program Director, and then reviewed and discussed by the biomedical engineering faculty and
adjustments made. Table 1 contains the mapping that evolved as a result of this collaborative review
process.
Table 1: Mapping of Biomedical Engineering Program Learning Outcomes to University Learning Goals
University Learning Goals →
Program Learning Outcomes
↓
1. Apply knowledge of math,
science, engineering
2. Design/conduct
experiments &
analyze/interpret data
3. Design system,
component or process
within multiple constraints
4. Function in multidisciplinary teams
5. Identify, formulate &
solve engineering problems
6. Professional and ethical
responsibility
7. Communicate effectively
8. Global/societal impact of
engineering solutions
9. Engagement in life-long
learning
10. Knowledge of
contemporary issues
11. Mastery of modern tools
for engineering practice
Specialized
Knowledge
Broad
Integrative
Knowledge
Intellectual
Skills
Applied
Knowledge
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Social & Global
Responsibilities
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
3
3. Alignment – Matrix of PLOs to Courses
The courses in which each Program Evaluation Component is assessed, the semester during which it was
assessed, and the level at which it was assessed, during AY 2013-2014, is shown in Table 2. The
assessment schedule for AY 2014-2015 is expected to be similar to the AY 2013 - 2014 assessment
schedule. The specific schedule and the Program Evaluation Component to be assessed will be finalized
during the Biomedical Engineering Program meeting during Summer 2014.
Table 2: Matrix showing specific courses, semesters, and levels at which Program Evaluation
Components are assessed.*
Semester
Course
F 13
BME
115
1
2
1
2
Sp 14
BME
117
2
2
2
Sp 14
BME
173
Sp 14
BME
174
F 13
BME
177
2
F13
ChE
162
F13/Sp14
BME
198A&B
Program Evaluation Component
1.1
1.2
3
1.3
2
3
2.1
2
3
2.2
2
3
2
3
2.3
2
3
3.1
2
2
3.2
1
2
2
4.1
1
1
2
5.1
1
2
5.2
1
1
2
5.3
1
2
3
6.1
1
3
3
7.1
1
1
2
2
3
8.1
2
2
3
9.1
1
2
2
3
10.1
1
2
2
2
11.1
1
1
1
1
2
* Relationship to Bloom’s Taxonomy: Level 1 in this table corresponds to Bloom’s Levels I
& II, Level 2 corresponds to Bloom’s Levels III & IV, and Level 3 corresponds to Bloom’s
Levels V & VI.
4. Planning – Assessment Schedule
The assessment schedule that was followed in AY 2013 - 2014 was shown in Table 2. This was our first
assessment cycle. The Biomedical Engineering Program was approved by the CSU Chancellor in October
4
2011, and the first intake of first time freshmen and undergraduate transfers was in Fall 2012. As this
program is still relatively new, a multi-year assessment plan has not been fully developed at this time.
The focus of the program faculty at this time is to prepare the necessary assessment documentation in
preparation for an accreditation visit by ABET in Fall 2015. A multi-year assessment plan that describes
actions taken as a result of assessment activities, to improve achievement, will be an integral part of the
preparations for the ABET visit.
The specific assessment tasks that were undertaken and completed during AY 2013-2014 were:
-
BME 115 – Program Learning Outcomes 1.2 and 2.1 at Level 2; Fall 2013
BME 117 – Program Learning Outcomes 1.2 and 1.3 at Level 2 and 5.2 at Level 1; Spring 2013 and
Spring 2014
BME 173 – Program Learning Outcomes 3.1 at Level 2 and 6.1 at Level 3; Spring 2014
BME 174 – Program Learning Outcomes 3 at Level 2 and 5 at Level 1; Spring 2014
BME 198A & B - Program Learning Outcomes 4.1, 10.1 and 11.1 at Level 2, and 2.1, 2.3, 5.3, 7.1
and 9.1 at Level 3; Fall 2013 and Spring 2014
Reports detailing the assessment procedure, analysis of the data, and findings/lessons learned are not
included in this report, in the interest of brevity; they are available upon request. The tools used for
assessment consisted of a combination of assignments, quizzes, midterm and final examinations,
including take-home portions for the final examination, and written reports and class presentations.
The general finding, which is not surprising, is that students who completed and submitted their
assignments performed better in achieving the PECs in the examinations.
In addition to assessment of mastery of the PECs, the students in BME 198A&B (Senior Project) are also
assessed by the Industry Advisory Committee during the Senior Project Final Presentation, also referred
to as Student Conference Day. The criteria used for this evaluation by external industry professionals,
and the average rating, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest, is shown in Table 3. The
correlation between the Student Conference day evaluation criteria and the PECs is shown in Table 4.
The ratings for all of the evaluation criteria employed during Student Conference Day are around 4, with
Criterion 3, “Research and properly apply fundamental engineering relationships” being at 3.88. These
results indicate that the BME Program faculty have to pay more attention to preparing the students to
perform better, with the target being that the average rating should be 4.5 or higher.
5
Table 3: Rating of Senior Project Presentations by External Industry Professionals
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Student Conference Day Evaluation Criterion
Communicated the biomedical relevance of project or
topic
Demonstrates thorough understanding of project
background, places project in the context of current
biomedical technology
Research and properly apply fundamental engineering
relationships (conservation equations, engineering
models, etc.)
Develop an experimental design appropriate for testing
the chosen parameters, including appropriate statistical
analysis of data
Demonstrate clear understanding of engineering/design
constraints. Apply constraints to project, product, or
protocol design
Demonstrate understanding of the relevant regulatory
protocols (FDA, IRB, IACUC)
Effectively communicate multidisciplinary topics to a
broad audience
Analyze the impact of project outcomes on the local,
national, and/or global community
Give an effective oral presentation
Rating
4.19
4.02
3.88
4.05
4.08
4.06
4.11
4.03
Table 4: Correlation between PECs and Student Conference Day Evaluation Criteria
PEC
4.1
5.3
7.1
9.1
ABET Description
Function effectively as both team leader and team member in
accomplishing engineering team projects
Evaluate the constraints in a biomedical engineering problem
and develop solutions
Communicate effectively in informal team settings and through
formal and informal presentations, in written and oral formats
Conduct a thorough information search, be resourceful in
uncovering information, and critically evaluate information.
SCD Evaluation
Criteria
7
2, 5
1, 2, 7, 9
2
10.1
Compare and evaluate current and emerging biomedical
engineering technologies
2
11.1
Apply appropriate software, modern tools, and techniques for
design and analysis of biomedical systems
4
6
5. Student Experience
The Program Learning Objectives are consistent with the requirements of ABET. If we are to value ABET
accreditation, there is not much room for making changes to the PLOs. The Program Evaluation
Components (PECs), however, were developed by the program faculty. Consideration of student
feedback in the formulation of the PECs, while being a desired element, can be very difficult to
implement as the students, especially undergraduates, do not have sufficient knowledge of the field,
which is extremely broad, to be able to provide meaningful input. Input from the program's Industry
Advisory Council, has been sought and have been included in the formulation of the PECs. In the future
feedback from program alumni will also be sought and considered in any changes made to the PECs.
The program alumni have yet to gain sufficient professional experience to be able to provide meaningful
input at this time since biomedical engineering is a very new program and the first BS graduate exited
our program in May 2012. We expect to do this in about two years from now, i.e., AY 2016-2017, as by
that time a sufficient number of students would have graduated from the program and also gained
sufficient professional experience to be able to provide meaningful feedback.
The university's program assessment process, the ABET accreditation process, and the ULGs will be
communicated more proactively to the students. This will be done during the Orientation Meeting that
is convened right before the beginning of every Fall semester, and will be repeated in BME 115, the
gateway course taken by all biomedical engineering majors. The ULGs, PLOs and PECs will be posted
more prominently in the department/program website when the website is revised and updated in the
near future. The ABET Program Educational Objectives and University Learning Goals are accessible via
the BCME Department website.
Part B
6. Graduation Rates for Total, Non URM and URM students (per program and degree)
The IEA Office’s website does not include graduation rates for Biomedical Engineering. In fact, there is
no link for Biomedical Engineering. The data provided in Table 3 are based on SJSU’s Commencement
Booklet. URM students and Non-URM students were identified by the author, based on personal
knowledge. The data shown in Table 5 are expected to increase significantly in the future as the
numbers of FTF and UGT have grown significantly. Approximately 40% of the students currently in the
program are females. The data for those who have expressed their intent to enroll in Fall 2014 indicate
that about 60% are females. Thus, the ratio of female/male graduates will rise significantly.
7
Table 5: Graduation Rates for B.S. Biomedical Engineering Program
Academic Year
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
Total # of
Graduates
1
5
9
Female/Male
URM/Non-URM
0/1
1/4
1/8
0/1
1/4
3/9
7. Headcounts of program majors and new students (per program and degree)
Table 6 contains the information for new applied, admitted and enrolled students, both FTF and UGTs.
The data for Fall 2014 was constructed from information provided by Jared Tuberty, Director,
Engineering Student Success Center. Using the Fall 2013 “Enrolled Indicator” as the basis, the number of
new students who intend to enroll increased by 48%.
Table 6: New Applied, Admitted and Enrolled Students in Biomedical Engineering
Applied Admitted Enrolled
Indicator Indicator Indicator
Fall 2012
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
1
410
12
1
311
9
344
0
48
8
71
The enrollment by gender and ethnicity for Fall 2012 and 2013 are shown in Table 7. As can be seen
from the data in Table 7, the increase in enrollment from Fall 2012 to Fall 2013 was substantial, the total
going from 94 to 194; this represents an increase of 106%. Given the fact that 9 students graduated in
May 2014, and that 71 students will be entering in Fall 2014, the Fall 2014 enrollment is expected to
exceed 250.
8
Table 7: B.S. Biomedical Engineering Enrollment by Gender and Ethnicity
TOT
Fall 2012
UG
F
M
Total
Grad
Black
1
Asian
8
Hisp
3
White
5
Foreign
Fall 2013
Total
UG
Grad
Total
1
1
12
25
13
38
3
9
1
10
3
8
7
9
16
1
6
7
1
8
9
Other
4
2
6
5
3
8
Total
22
15
37
48
34
82
1
1
4
AmInd
Black
2
Asian
18
Hisp
1
2
3
1
4
12
30
38
21
59
3
2
5
10
2
12
White
10
7
17
19
3
22
Foreign
1
1
2
2
7
9
Other
1
1
4
1
5
Total
35
22
57
76
36
112
57
37
94
124
70
194
In addition to FTF and UGTs, the Biomedical Engineering Program has also been receiving requests from
a significant number of SJSU students who wish to transfer into Biomedical Engineering. In the time
period between May 7, 2012 and May 30, 2014, a total of 110 SJSU students applied to change their
major to Biomedical Engineering. Twenty six of the 110 applied to change their major after the Fall 2013
census date, and are therefore assumed not to be included in the Fall 2013 total of 194. Nine of the 26
petitions to change major have been approved while the other 17 students are in the process of
satisfactorily completing their Study Plan for the change of major. If these Change of Majors are taken
into account, the projection is that the Fall 2014 enrollment in the BS Biomedical Engineering Program
will be close to 280.
9
8. SFR and average section size (per program)
The data available from the IEA website provided is shown in Table 8.
Table 8: 2013/14 Course Enrollment (Redistributed) by Semester - FTES
FTES Fall 2013
UD
Spring 2014
Total UD
GRAD Total
BME 15.07 15.07 29.80 9.75
39.55
Total 15.07 15.07 29.80 9.75
39.55
The actual enrollment in BME courses for Fall 2013 and Spring 2014, and the current enrollment for Fall
2014 are shown in Table 9.
Table 9: BS Biomedical Engineering AY 2013-2014 and Fall 2014 Course Enrollment
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Course
Enrollment Course
Enrollment Course
BME 115 Lecture
BME 115 Lab Section 1
BME 115 Lab Section 2
BME 115 Lab Section 3
48
17
16
BME 115 Lecture
BME 115 Lab Section 1
BME 115 Lab Section 2
14
20
15
BME 117
BME 173
BME 174
BME 177
BME 198A
34
35
9
BME 198B
BME 115 Lecture
BME 115 - Lab
Section 1
BME 115 - Lab
Section 2
BME 115 - Lab
Section 3
Fall 2014
Enrollment Wait
List
36
12
12
12
37
23
31
9
10
BME 177
BME 198A
40
20
32
9
9. Percentage of tenured/tenure-track instructional faculty (per department)
The data provided by IEA for this section includes the entire department, which consists of three
programs, i.e., biomedical engineering, chemical engineering, and materials engineering. Separated
data for biomedical engineering does not appear to be reported.
The Biomedical Engineering Program currently has two tenure-track faculty members. Professor
Benjamin Hawkins joined us in Fall 2012 and Professor Folarin Erogbogbo joined us in Fall 2013. It is
expected that Dr. Alessandro Bellofiore will join us in Fall 2014 and be the third tenure-track faculty
member.
BME 174 – Regulatory, Design and Quality Requirements – is taught by a non-tenured/tenure-track
instructor. The nature of the contents of this course requires the instructor to have significant
biomedical engineering industry experience, including FDA compliance experience. As the program
grows and the numbers of courses that are directly relevant to the practice of biomedical engineering
are developed, the number of instructors from industry is expected to grow. We are fortunate in that
Silicon Valley has a very large number of biomedical engineering companies, and a good pool of talented
and highly qualified individuals to teach this class.
Part C
10. Closing the Loop/Recommended Actions
There is no previous program planning cycle or previous annual assessment report as this is a relatively
new program. The most important action that the biomedical engineering faculty are focused on is
accreditation of the program. As stated earlier, the ABET accreditation visit is planned for Fall 2015. AY
2014-2015 will be a very busy year as we continue our assessment activities and write the self-study
report. In addition, actions to both increase the number, and improve the quality, of the students will
continue.
11. Assessment Data
The data collected for this report, and presented in the body of the report, come from several sources:
(a) Assessment of Program Learning Outcomes by the faculty teaching the BME classes, (b) Appropriate
components of the IEA website, as specified in the directions provided for writing this report, (c) New
student enrollment data provided by Jared Tuberty, Director, Engineering Student success Center, (d)
Data for student enrollment in BME classes from PeopleSoft, and (e) SJSU’s Commencement booklet
published at the end of every academic year.
11
12. Analysis
Evaluation of achievement of the PLOs and recommended actions are contained in the individual course
assessment reports. However, these have not yet been discussed in a holistic manner by the entire
faculty, and needs to be. The BME faculty will be meeting during Summer 2014 to discuss and evaluate
the information obtained from the AY 2013-2014 assessment activities. This will be used as the basis for
future improvements to all aspects of the Biomedical Engineering Program.
13. Proposed changes and goals (if any)
Proposed goals and changes will be discussed by the BME faculty during Summer 2014, based on the
analysis of the assessment activities during AY 2013-2014.
12