ABET
Self-Study Report
for the
Electrical Engineering Technology
Program
at
Louisiana Tech University
Ruston, Louisiana
July 1, 2014
CONFIDENTIAL
The information supplied in this Self-Study Report is for the confidential use of ABET and its
authorized agents, and will not be disclosed without authorization of the institution concerned,
except for summary data not identifiable to a specific institution.
1
Table of Contents
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................................... 3
CRITERION 1. STUDENTS ............................................................................................. 9
CRITERION 2. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES ..................................... 20
CRITERION 3. STUDENT OUTCOMES ...................................................................... 26
CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ....................................................... 30
CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM..................................................................................... 65
CRITERION 6. FACULTY …………………………………………………………….80
CRITERION 7. FACILITIES ......................................................................... ….…….. 97
CRITERION 8. SUPPORT……………………………………………….……………110
CRITERION 9. PROGRAM CRITERIA ..................................................................... .133
APPENDIX A. COURSE SYLLABI …………………………………………………139
APPENDIX B. FACULTY VITAE …………………………………………….…
200
APPENDIX C. LABORATORY EQUIPMENT ………………………………..…....215
APPENDIX D. INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT ………………………………………218
APPENDIX E. MISCELLANEOUS FORMS AND DOCUMENTS ………………..229
SIGNATURE OF COMPLIANCE ……………………………………………………..256
.
2
Self-Study Report
Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering Technology
Louisiana Tech University
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Contact Information
Program Chair:
Mr. Glen Deas
P.O. Box 10348
Ruston, Louisiana 71272-0046
Email: gdeas@latech.edu
Telephone: 318-257-2941
Fax: 318-257-4922
Director:
Dr. Sumeet Dua
P.O. Box 10348
Ruston, Louisiana 71272-0046
Email: sdua@latech.edu
Telephone: 318-257-4921
Fax: 318-257-4922
3
B. Program History
The Electrical Engineering Technology (EET) Program is a four-year program leading to the
Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering Technology and is offered on the main
campus in Ruston,. The program is administratively located in the College of Engineering
and Science as indicated below:
Figure 1-1 COES Organization Chart
The Program is designed to provide an alternative for those students who desire a technical
degree but are more interested in a curriculum weighted toward hands-on experiences and the
application of existing electrical/electronic technology. While the subject matter closely
mirrors an Electrical Engineering (EE) curriculum, the EET Program is less rigorous in its
mathematical and theoretical requirements and promotes the application of existing
technologies in designing solutions for electrical/electronic problems. The program was first
offered at Louisiana Tech University in 1973; has been continuously accredited by
ETAC/ABET since 1980; and was last reviewed in October, 2008.
4
The program is respected for the quality of its graduates and its concern for both the
academic and professional success of its students. Although, traditional students comprise
the majority of enrollment, non-traditional students are served as well.
The EET curriculum is designed to expose students to a diversified mix of academic course
work and laboratory experiences. The goal is to produce well-rounded graduates who are
qualified for entry-level technologist positions in a wide variety of electrical/electronic fields.
In order to have confidence in its direction, the Program enlists the help of employers,
alumni, students, and an Industrial Advisory Board (IAB). Being composed of alumni,
employers, and student representatives, the Board is a microcosm of EET Program
constituencies. As a result, the Board is the primary outside participant in various Program
assessment activities. It provides input on prevailing business needs, economic trends, and
generally serves as a ready source of information and support in helping meet Program needs
and goals. Board consideration and input is of utmost importance prior to implementing any
major, non-administrative change within the Program.
As detailed in the 2013-14 University Catalog, the curriculum consists of 120 semester credit
hours (SCH) that include 54 SCH of Electrical Engineering Technology, 12 SCH of
Mathematics, 16 SCH of Physical and Natural Sciences, 27 SCH of Social Sciences and
Humanities, 3 SCH of Speech, 3 SCH of Computer Programming, 2 SCH of Technical
Electives and 3 SCH of Free Electives. Since the last ETAC/ABET evaluation in 2008, the
total number of Program credit hours has decreased from 124 SCH to 120 SCH due to a state
legislative directive. However, no EET hours were lost during this reduction, and the core
curriculum has remained stable. Any curricular revisions that have occurred have been made
to respond to ETAC/ABET issues, address recommendations from the continuous
improvement process, and incorporate student/alumni suggestions.
The University and, by extension, the College of Engineering and Science (COES) has
utilized outcomes-based assessment practices for many years in conjunction with other
university accreditation agencies. Since inception, outcomes-based assessment has become
an essential element of the Program’s philosophy and assessment practices. In 2002, EET
assessment practices were modified and integrated into TAC/ABET requirements as part of
the latter’s migration to outcomes-based assessment. As a result, outcomes and practices are
continually evaluated and modified as required to remain faithful to the ever changing
requirements of both the University and, now, ETAC/ABET. Recent examples of this
process include:
1. A faculty and Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) review that established new
Educational Objectives to more clearly reflect the concept of “future attainment.”
2. Creation of new Student Outcomes to replace existing Program Outcomes.
3. A Faculty curriculum review that streamlined course pre-requisites.
4. Several recommendations arising from annual Program assessment and evaluation.
5
C. Options
The curriculum is designed to provide substantial exposure to a variety of subjects that are
considered fundamental to the study of Electrical Engineering Technology. The general
objective of the program is to produce Bachelor of Science graduates having broad technical
backgrounds who can practice in diverse areas such as electrical utilities, raw materials
processing, general manufacturing, health care, and service sectors associated with these
areas. Although several subjects within the curriculum are covered by sequential courses, the
program has no specifically defined options, tracks, or concentrations. All students are
expected to take every course in the curriculum, and all graduates earn the Bachelor of
Science in Electrical Engineering Technology.
D. Program Delivery Modes
Program Structure
The Electrical Engineering Technology curriculum is delivered during daytime hours on the
Main Campus in Ruston, Louisiana and is delivered in a traditional classroom/laboratory
format. The Louisiana Tech University academic year is based on a quarter calendar in which
course credits are offered on a semester credit hour (SCH) basis. On a quarter calendar, a
lecture course requires 75 minutes of student contact time for each SCH awarded instead of
the traditional 50 minutes found in a semester system. For example, a 3 SCH course at
Louisiana Tech University meets three times a week for 75 minutes per meeting over a
quarter lasting approximately 10 ½ weeks. However, a 1 SCH hour laboratory typically
meets once per week for 2 ½ to 4 ½ contact hours. All Electrical Engineering Technology
laboratories meet once per week for 3 hours and award 1 SCH of credit.
Cooperative Education
Although cooperative work is encouraged, students receive no credit toward a degree for
participation. Actual participation by Electrical Engineering Technology majors in
cooperative work programs is quite low.
Internships/Other Employment
The most common method of “cooperative” education for Electrical Engineering Technology
majors is either through defined internships or simply work related to their field of study.
Students are encouraged to pursue these kinds of opportunities but must seek them out on
their own. If contacted by a company seeking part-time or short-term technology majors, the
faculty will pass along the information to interested students. Again, no credit is awarded for
participation.
6
E. Program Locations
The Electrical Engineering Technology program is offered as day classes on the Main
Campus in Ruston, Louisiana. Main Campus students are almost exclusively traditional
students; therefore there has been little interest in online course offerings.
F. Deficiencies, Weaknesses or Concerns from Previous Review(s) and the Actions Taken
to Address Them
The last evaluation of the Louisiana Tech Electrical Engineering Technology Program
occurred in October, 2008. As a result of that evaluation, the Program was cited for one
Concern:
Criterion 3. Program Outcomes requires that each program demonstrate that graduates have:
3[h] a recognition of the need for, and ability to engage in lifelong learning, 3[i] an ability to
understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities, 3[j] a respect for diversity and
knowledge of contemporary professional, societal and global issues, and 3[k] a commitment
to quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement. While the program outcomes for these
attributes are defined, the documentation provided to support attainment of these attributes is
weak in demonstrating that they are fully met.
All the documentation for the
accomplishment of these attributes resides in the Humanities Department and the Electrical
Engineering Technology program assumed that it was being completed. The Humanities
Department had appropriate courses to provide instruction in the cited areas; they also had an
assessment program and the documentation of student work in these areas. However, that
information was not being shared with the Electrical Engineering Technology program, the
Electrical Engineering Technology program was not assuming responsibility to ensure that
these outcomes were being met, and there appeared to be little cooperation between this
program and Humanities Department in assessment or evaluation of these Criterion 3
attributes. As a result, this program cannot assure that its graduates have attained all the
Criterion 3 attributes. Therefore it is required that the program demonstrate that its graduates
have attained Criterion 3 attributes [h], [i], [j], and [k].
Program Action: To the Program’s knowledge, there has never been any formal or tacit
agreement with the Humanities Department to provide Humanities courses and Humanities
assessment data to satisfy Criterion 3[h], 3[i], 3[j] or 3[k]. The EET Program has always
reserved this prerogative for itself. Regardless, the Program accepts full responsibility for
not providing a clear indication in the curriculum where the above Criterion 3 issues were
addressed and for not providing sufficient documentation to justify that requirements of the
criterion were being met. In order to address these shortcomings, the following actions were
taken:
1. Additional topics were added to ELET 100 (Introduction to Electrical Engineering
Technology) to introduce the issues of Criterion 3 to students upon their initial entry
into the Program. Changes were made effective in the Fall Quarter, 2009-10.
7
2. The course content of ELET 472 (Seminar) was revised to incorporate and emphasize
Criterion 3[h], 3[i], 3[j] and 3[k] material while eliminating many non-related issues.
Changes to course content were made effective in the Fall Quarter, 2009-10.
3. After due consideration, the title of course ELET 472 was deemed too generic for its
primary function.
Consequently, the title was changed from (Seminar) to
(Professionalism and Ethics for Electrical Engineering Technology) to clearly reflect
where the primary discussion and instruction on the issues of Criterion 3[h], 3[i], 3[j]
and 3[k] are addressed. The course name change was made effective in the Fall
Quarter, 2012-13.
The intent of these actions is to use ELET 100 as a venue to introduce new students to
the concept of Student Outcomes and their importance to both students and the EET
Program. This also serves to provide a frame of reference when the term “Student
Outcomes” arises as they matriculate through the Program. Changes to ELET 472 are
intended to perform three functions: place greater emphasis on the topics identified
in Criterion 3[h], 3[i], 3[j], and 3[k]; more clearly indicate the location in the
curriculum where these topics in Criterion 3 are primarily addressed; and provide a
final opportunity to review and re-emphasize their importance just prior to student
graduation.
G. Joint Accreditation
The Electrical Engineering Technology program is not jointly accredited and is not seeking
joint accreditation.
8
GENERAL CRITERIA
CRITERION 1. STUDENTS
A. Student Admissions
Program Enrollment
The Electrical Engineering Technology Program is one of two technology programs in the
College of Engineering and Science and has had relatively consistent enrollment since its last
ETAC/ABET evaluation. As shown in Figure 1-1, current enrollment for the Fall Quarter
2013-14 is eighty-eight (88) students which represents (4%) of the undergraduate enrollment of
the College of Engineering and Science.
NSEN, 50
CYEN, 76
EET, 88
MEEN, 509
CVTE, 98
CHEM, 39
INEN, 60
Other, 545
ELEN, 182
CVEN,
169
CSC, 165
MATH, 44
PHYS, 36
BASIC, 75
BIEN,
CMEN, 220 154
Figure 1-1 - COES 2013-14 Enrollment by Major
Electrical Engineering Technology Freshmen Enrollment and Electrical Engineering
Technology Total Enrollment are shown in Figure 1-2. The entering freshmen enrollment is
typically very low. The Program does not actively recruit students, and the vast majority of
program enrollment is students who have either changed their major after enrolling in the
university or have transferred from other institutions. As indicated by the figure, enrollment
has remained steady since the last program evaluation. During the most recent six-year
cycle, enrollment peaked at ninety-eight (98) students in 2009 and recorded a minimum of
9
eighty-seven (87) students in 2008. Eighty-eight students (88) were enrolled in the Fall
Quarter 2013-14.
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2008
2009
2010
2011
1-st Time Freshmen
2012
2013
Total Enrollment
Figure 1-2 – Electrical Engineering Technology Enrollment Trends (Fall Quarter)
Admission Requirements
Freshman Admission
Applicants for freshman admission and all applicants who have earned fewer than 24
semester hours of college credit must show proof of graduation from an accredited high
school or have successfully completed the General Education Development Test (GED). No
student with an ACT composite less than 15 or SAT less than 710 will be admitted. Students
who meet the following requirements may be admitted:
10
In-State Student Admission Criteria
Completion of 19 units Regents’ Core (Core 4 Curriculum)
AND
Core 4 GPA of 2.5* or greater
OR
ACT composite score of 23/ SAT 1050** or greater
AND
Require no remedial course. A remedial course is not required if your ACT/SAT sub score
is: English ≥ 18/450; Math ≥ 19/460.
*Applicants with less than a 2.0 GPA will not be admitted.
**Applicants with less than a 15 ACT/SAT 710 composite score will not be admitted.
Out-of-State Student and Home-Schooled Admission Criteria
Must meet one of the following criteria:
The in-state requirements listed above.
OR
ACT composite score of 23/SAT 1050 or greater, and a 2.5 grade point average on at least 17
units of the required HS Core 4 Curriculum
OR
ACT composite score of 26/SAT 1170 or greater, and require no remedial courses. A
remedial course is not required if your ACT/SAT sub score is: English ≥ 18/450; Math ≥
19/460.
Information concerning the CORE 4
http://doe.louisiana.gov/topics/grad_reqs.html.
11
curriculum
can
be
found
at
URL
Freshmen applicants who intend to enroll in the Fall should apply by July 1 to be considered
for priority enrollment and have ACT or SAT scores and high school transcripts on file. All
freshmen are strongly encouraged to participate in the orientation program. Orientation
includes testing for placement, the opportunity to meet with a faculty advisor, and
completion of registration for the Fall. Announcements of dates and other information are
sent to the admitted students.
Additional admissions requirements for early admission or concurrent admissions of high
school students are described in the University Catalog and on the University web page for
future students. Louisiana Tech also offers a special cooperative program of registration with
Grambling State University.
Applicants from foreign countries must meet the guidelines set forth in Louisiana Tech’s
International Admission publication. All undergraduates whose first language is not English
must take the TOEFL, and score a minimum of original TOEFL (more than 525 on PBT or
195 on CBT or 71 on iBT) report or 6.5 on IELTS or ESL Level 12 in order to be admitted.
Students who take the TOEFL are not required to take the ACT (except for architecture
applicants), but it is strongly advised for placement purposes. Students from Englishspeaking countries must take the ACT. All students must provide proof of financial support
in accordance with Immigration regulations. All other Immigration and Naturalization
Service requirements must be met for admission. All admitted students must have sufficient
knowledge of the English language to benefit from a program of study.
Applicants from foreign countries must meet the guidelines set forth in Louisiana Tech’s
International Admission publication. Contact the Admissions Office for a copy.
Louisiana Tech University may admit students not meeting all stated requirements. In such
cases, the admission decision will be affected by the student's potential for degree completion
and the need to enhance the University's demographically diverse student population. Some
factors to be considered may include age, experience, ethnic background, and creative talent.
All high school grade point averages are calculated by the Admissions Office under uniform
policies on a 4.00 scale. For scholarships, the University may take into consideration special
designation on high school transcripts, such as honors and advanced placement courses.
Students who meet the University admissions criteria may be admitted to the program of
their choice in the College of Engineering and Science. No separate admissions requirements
are imposed.
B. Evaluating Student Performance
Individual student progress within the Electrical Engineering Technology program is
monitored via classroom performance and quarterly advising. Student performance for the
program as a whole is monitored by several assessment techniques that will be presented in
detail elsewhere in this report. Student performance outside the Program is monitored
through quarterly advising.
12
Classroom Performance
Each faculty member is responsible for monitoring the academic progress of students in
his/her classes and advising them as circumstances warrant. Each course has a set of basic
Course Outcomes (Learning Objectives) and student progress toward these outcomes is
evaluated by homework results, classroom quizzes, special project assignments and other
methods deemed appropriate for the course. While the combination of such tools is left to
the discretion of the instructor assigned to the course, the basic Course Outcomes are
essentially fixed and vary little from quarter-to-quarter. Since course enrollments are usually
small, students having trouble can be easily identified and counseled early by the Instructor.
Quarterly Advising
Information on a student’s overall academic circumstances, both inside and outside the EET
Program, can only be learned through direct contact with the student. This generally occurs
during the required quarterly advising conference. The primary intent of the advising
conference is to assist students in selecting proper courses to pursue in the following
academic quarter. However, the student’s advisor also has an opportunity to query the
student with respect to the student’s performance in all his courses. Unfortunately, the
advising conference occurs very late in the academic quarter, and should a student be in
academic distress, it is usually too late to offer any truly preventative advice or suitable
academic alternatives. Quite often, the only alternative for a student is to formally “Drop” a
course. This is an expensive decision for the student and usually serves to forestall a timely
graduation. For these reasons, students are continually advised to assume personal
responsibility for their academic circumstances and be proactive in seeking faculty
assistance, sooner rather than later.
With respect to the student advising process, each EET faculty advisor maintains a Plan of
Study or, in the College of Engineering and Science, a Curriculum Sheet (CS) on each of
his/her advisees. If the student is a transferee from another academic institution, a Record of
Transfer Credit (RTC) is also maintained. The Curriculum Sheet contains information on
transfer credits awarded; past academic performance; courses in which a student is currently
enrolled; and after advising, courses approved for scheduling during the following academic
quarter. Records are also checked to verify that students meet the prerequisites for the
courses in which they wish to enroll. Students not meeting required prerequisites can seek a
prerequisite waiver by submitting a Student Petition that must be approved by the Associate
Dean of Undergraduate Studies. However, waivers are granted under limited circumstances.
Electronic controls also exist within the University’s registration system to prevent violations
of prerequisite requirements without proper authorization.
C. Transfer Students and Transfer Courses
The Program Chair, or his/her designee, advises transfer students that have selected Electrical
Engineering Technology as a major. The office of the Associate Dean for Undergraduate
Studies advises transfer students that have not selected a major. Advising transfer students is
based primarily on their mathematics background. However, the academic preparation of
13
transfer students is highly variable, and each student is considered on a case-by-case basis. A
maximum of 60 semester credit hours may be accepted as transfer credit from a community
college. Credit from four-year institutions is limited to the extent that twenty-seven of a
student’s last thirty-six semester hours of credit must be earned while he/she is enrolled at
Louisiana Tech University. There are no state-mandated articulation requirements that
impact the program with respect to transfer credits.
Candidates for admission to the Electrical Engineering Technology Program who transfer
from other institutions must submit their academic records from those institutions to the
Admissions Office at Louisiana Tech University. Once received, this information is
distributed to the College of Engineering and Science and ultimately to the EET Program
Chair. The Program Chair, or his/her designee, reviews the academic records of each
potential transfer student and determines which courses are transferrable. These courses,
cross-referenced to their LA Tech equivalents, are recorded on an official Record of Transfer
Credits (RTC) and on the student’s Curriculum Sheet (CS). After approval by the Program
Chair, a copy of the RTC is forwarded to the office of the COES Associate Dean for
Undergraduate Studies for final review and approval. Once approved, the Record of Transfer
Credit is placed in the student's file in the Undergraduate Studies Office. Students must have
an overall grade point average of at least 2.0/4.0 on all courses for which transfer credit is
accepted.
D. Advising and Career Guidance
1. Individual Student Advising – General
Freshmen are advised initially at Summer Orientation or individually by the
Undergraduate Studies Office for their first quarter at Louisiana Tech. Students majoring
in Chemistry, Computer Science, Mathematics, Physics, Electrical Engineering
Technology or Construction Engineering Technology are assigned a faculty advisor in
their program during their first quarter. The faculty advisor handles advising for the
remainder of their undergraduate career.
A Student Success Specialist in the Undergraduate Studies Office provides additional
services related to outreach and retention. In addition, this person is available to talk with
students about a variety of advising, curriculum, and extra-curricular issues.
Special attention is paid to mathematics. Incoming freshmen are placed in appropriate
mathematics courses based on their ACT scores.
Transfer students are placed in
mathematics courses commensurate with their transcript courses and grades. An overall
2.0/4.0 GPA is required for all transfer credits accepted.
Once admitted, each student is assigned an advisor. Prior to quarterly registration, all
students must meet with their advisor and secure written approval of their schedules. To
impose this requirement, a student cannot register without first being electronically
released for registration by his/her advisor or other appropriate University representative.
14
Students are advised for each upcoming quarter during an “early advising period” that
extends over the last month of the quarter in which they are currently enrolled.
In a one-on-one advising meeting, the student and his/her advisor determine the classes
recommended for the following school quarter. This prevents students from missing
critical classes offered only once a year and insures course prerequisites are satisfied.
Prerequisites are also verified electronically within the University’s registration system.
At the student’s first advising session with his/her major advisor, the entire curriculum is
discussed and the purpose and method for maintaining a personal Curriculum Sheet (Plan
of Study) is explained to the student. Following this, a Preliminary Schedule of courses
for the following academic quarter is created. This schedule is signed and dated by both
the advisor and student, and a copy is retained by the advisor for inclusion in the
student’s departmental records. Once a schedule of the proper courses is approved, the
advisor electronically releases the student for registration. At the conclusion of the
advising conference, the student is given a copy of his updated Curriculum Sheet, and
Record of Transfer Credits if he/she is a transfer student. This sheet contains grades for
completed courses and notations of courses approved for scheduling in the next academic
quarter. Students may then register for classes at their assigned registration times using
either an on-line or a manual process. Manual registration procedures are performed in
the Registrar’s Office and are required for those courses requiring “Special Permission”
signatures.
One of the most critical aspects of advising is keeping students on track for timely
graduation. This is particularly true in the Louisiana Tech Electrical Engineering
Technology Program since a large number of students are transferees. These students
very often enter the Program at times that put them out-of-sequence with respect to the
normal schedule of course offerings. Since each Electrical Engineering Technology
course is offered only once per academic year, these students often face scheduling
problems. Every effort is made to have a student take required courses in the curriculum
at the time they are normally offered. However, it is not the intent of the Program or the
University to unduly impose restraints that may greatly extend graduation and cause an
undue financial burden on the student. In those instances where a student has been
unable to register for a particular course that will affect timely graduation, course
substitutions may be permitted. Such substitutions may take one of two forms:
a. Substitution of one EET course for another EET course.
Substitutions are evaluated on a case-by-case basis and are permitted only with
approval of the student’s advisor. Substitutions generally consist of Special
Problems courses that provide a means for the student to gain credit for 1 – 3 SCH
that he/she has been unable to schedule through no fault of his/her own. The
student is assigned to the Instructor who would normally teach the specific course
for which substitute credit is being sought. Assignments consist of those kinds of
tasks that would normally be covered during the regularly scheduled course.
Work is monitored by the Instructor but is primarily self-directed. Assistance and
15
guidance is provided by the Instructor as required. Performance is evaluated on
the same basis as the regularly scheduled course.
b. All other substitutions and waivers.
The student must complete and submit a College of Engineering and Science
Petition for course substitution, prerequisite waivers, and other issues requiring
administrative approval. The student’s advisor, the EET Program Chair, and the
Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies must all approve the request. A
rejection at any level terminates the petition process and renders it void. A copy
of the Student Petition Form is included in Appendix E – Miscellaneous
Documents.
For most engineering programs, the senior design instructor and/or program chair
advises all seniors enrolled in the senior design sequence to ensure that they are
completing all graduation requirements. he Undergraduate Studies Office begins
checking degree completion requirements two quarters before graduation to make
sure that each student meets the criteria for graduation in their chosen major. The
final check is made after the grades are completed the quarter the student is
registered for graduation.
2. Career Guidance
a. BARC - The Bulldog Achievement Resource Center (BARC) seeks to connect
students to Louisiana Tech University by providing them with academic and cocurricular resources, by providing opportunities for involvement in the University and
community, and by helping to equip them to succeed in completing a degree program
while enhancing the overall student experience. The BARC offers writing assistance,
tutoring in chemistry, mathematics and other subjects to all students.
b. University Student Support - The University provides a number of other resources
that support undergraduate programs, including Recruiting, Admissions, Orientation,
Health Clinic, Intramural Center, and numerous sports and entertainment
opportunities.
The College is actively engaged in providing career guidance to students through a
variety of activities, including multiple professional development workshops offered
by the College, engagement with their professors, and professional experiences, such
as summer jobs and internships. Specific assistance is provided in a variety of ways:
• The Louisiana Tech Engineers and Scientists Association - This is the only
organization that represents all of the students in the College. LTESA
sponsors a high school outreach event in the spring called E&S Day, which
brings hundreds of students to Tech for presentations, motivation, and tours of
engineering and science labs and projects. Other activities of LTESA include
the quarterly E&S Magazine; the college-wide fall event called Gumbofest
16
which provides student organizations an opportunity to recruit members; and
the similar college-wide social event in the spring called Spring Release
where outstanding students are recognized.
• The National Academy of Engineering Grand Challenge Scholars Program –
The Louisiana Tech University College of Engineering and Science is one of
only sixrteen institutions in the country to have such a program. In 2004, the
National Academy developed of list of fourteen Grand Challenges in
engineering facing our world in the 21st century. The Grand Challenge
Scholars Program is designed to provide undergraduate students with the
opportunity to engage in a learning experiences relating to interdisciplinary
curricula, research experience, entrepreneurship activities, developing a global
perspective and service learning opportunities that prepare them to solve one
of the Grand Challenges. Students completing this program receive special
designation on their transcript, recognition at graduation, and recognition from
the National Academy. They have been successful in post-graduate endeavors
ranging from securing NSF graduate fellowships to gaining admittance to
medical school and graduate school.
•
Professional Development Workshops - The College offers a variety of
professional development workshops throughout the year designed to provide
students with guidance on employment and further graduate study. Offerings
include the Fall Career Fair Prep Week which features an interviewing
workshop and overview of the Career Fair and interview process; resume
workshops; and a workshop on utilizing the Career Center’s online job
application system, TechLink. All students are also eligible to take the yearlong Leadership Seminar Series that provides training and nurtures
development of leadership skills.
• Career Center - The mission of the university Career Center is to educate and
to serve the students and graduates of Louisiana Tech University in their
career education, planning, and development processes. In support of the
mission of the University, the Career Center functions as a vital component in
the total educational experience of students, primarily in the development,
evaluation, initiation, and implementation of career plans and opportunities.
Career Center services and resources provide assistance to students in the
cultivation and enhancement of skills to explore career options, master job
search techniques and strategies, and research employment opportunities.
The Career Center provides effective and efficient service to employers in
recruitment programs and activities. In addition to continuous support of
students seeking summer internships as well as permanent positions upon
graduation, the Career Center holds two Career Fairs annually where students
gain exposure to a large number of employers in a short time period. The Fall
Career Fair had a record number of employers at the Fall 2013 event. The
College of Engineering and Science further facilitates contacts between
students and employers through an industry reception and numerous student
professional society meetings on the eve of each Career Fair.
17
•
c.
Informational Notification - The College maintains bulletin boards featuring
information on student organization meetings, internships, full-time jobs,
scholarships, research opportunities, fellowship opportunities, and graduate
school opportunities. In addition, all undergraduate students receive a weekly
email update listing all upcoming opportunities for the next two weeks.
Professional Development - Students in the Electrical Engineering Technology
Program actively participate in preparation for their careers through engagement
with their professors, through special class projects, and through professional
experiences such as summer jobs and internships.
E. Work in Lieu of Courses
The College does not grant course credit that can be applied to any of its undergraduate
degree curricula for work completed through internships, co-ops, life experience, military
experience, etc. The College does offer an internship course, ENGR 456, for students
working on an internship or co-op so that they may be enrolled as a student if necessary.
This course credit may not be used toward meeting any of the curricula requirements of the
degree.
Entering freshman students are placed into an appropriate English and mathematics courses
primarily
by
their
ACT
scores
in
English
and
math
(see
http://www.latech.edu/admissions/freshman/testing.shtml for specific score placements).
Depending upon their math ACT score, students may also be eligible to take credit exams
for some of the lower level math courses such as MATH 101 (college algebra), MATH 112
(college trigonometry), or MATH 240 (pre-calculus). Credit exams are also available for
CHEM 100 and 101 and PHYS 201 and 202. During summer orientation, students have the
opportunity to take the credit exams for math (MATH 240) and chemistry (CHEM 100). In
general, very few students attempt the credit exams for CHEM 101, PHYS 201, and PHYS
202.
The university also accepts Advanced Placement exams for some freshman level courses
based upon the AP exam score and the type of AP exam taken (see
http://www.latech.edu/admissions/freshman/advanced_placement.shtml for specific course
credit available). The university also has dual enrollment programs with a number of high
schools in the region. The courses offered through dual enrollment are primarily in general
education areas such as English, history, social sciences, chemistry, and mathematics.
Students with dual enrollment credits from other institutions are handled in the same manner
as transfer credits from those institutions are handled.
F. Graduation Requirements
Before prospective graduates register for classes in their last academic quarter, their advisor
makes a final check of his/her official grade transcripts and proposed class schedule to
determine that all curricular requirements will be met by successful completion of the
18
scheduled courses. This check is reviewed in detail by the Program Chair and, upon
approval, is transmitted to the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies. This office again
audits the student’s record to ensure that all degree requirements have indeed been satisfied
and, upon concurrence, notifies the Registrar’s Office. A list of those students cleared for
graduation is published by the Undergraduate Studies Office prior to the end of the academic
term. This list is circulated to Program Chairs as notification of a student’s preliminary
acceptance for graduation, pending successful completion of currently scheduled courses.
G. Transcripts of Recent Graduates
Transcripts will be provided to the Electrical Engineering Technology Evaluation Team as
requested. Transcript needs will be coordinated through the College of Engineering and
Science’s Undergraduate Studies Office. The need for transcripts should be addressed
directly to that office.
19
CRITERION 2. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES
A. Mission Statement
1. University Mission Statement
UM1 Louisiana Tech University is a comprehensive public university committed to
quality in teaching, research, creative activity, public service, and economic
development. A selective admissions university, it offers a broad range of fully
accredited undergraduate degrees to qualified students in Louisiana, as well as
from the region, the nation, and foreign countries. Integral to the purpose of the
University is its expanding commitment to graduate-level and interdisciplinary
education in its areas of strength. Louisiana Tech offers master’s degrees in a
variety of areas and doctoral programs in areas of specified expertise.
UM2 Louisiana Tech maintains, as its highest priority, the education of its students.
UM3 To that end, it recruits a faculty committed to teaching and advising, a studentoriented faculty dedicated to preparing students to achieve their goals in a rapidly
changing economic and civic environment. The University provides, in a
challenging, yet safe and supportive environment, extracurricular and athletic
programs that foster and enrich the development of its students. In addition, it
provides opportunities for interaction between students and the larger business
and civic community.
UM4 The University encourages its students to regard learning as a lifelong process.
UM5 Recognizing that research and service are fundamental to its mission, Louisiana
Tech recruits and retains a faculty who see research and teaching as intertwined,
complementary, and interdisciplinary and who, through both theoretical and
applied research and creative activities, contribute to the development of new
knowledge, new art, and new technology.
UM6 Louisiana Tech understands its community and civic obligations. Through oncampus learning, through its off-campus presence, through outreach programs and
continuing education, the University will continue to enhance the quality of life
and the economic development of the region, state and nation.
UM7 As a University with a rich engineering heritage, Louisiana Tech has a special
responsibility to integrate advanced technology into teaching and learning. At
Tech, advanced technology supports quality teaching, research, administration,
and service. The University is committed to providing its students with the
20
advanced technological skills that will help to ensure their success both in the
internal environment of the University and in the wider surrounding community.
2. College of Engineering and Science Mission Statement
a. Purpose of the College of Engineering and Science - Building Engineers and
Scientists for Tomorrow
b. Mission of the College of Engineering and Science
CM1 We provide a quality undergraduate {UM2},{UM7} and graduate
education {UM2},{UM5},{UM7} that responds to the needs and
challenges of our ever-changing world {UM3}, includes an international
perspective, and stimulates social and ecological awareness {UM6}.
CM2 We promote the knowledge, skills, ethics, creativity and critical thinking
necessary for professional competence and life-long learning {UM3},
{UM4},{UM5},{UM7}.
CM3 We conduct quality research throughout the college and world-class
research in key focal areas {UM1}, {UM5}.
c. Vision of the College of Engineering and Science
To become the best college in the world at integrating engineering and science in
education and research.
3. Electrical Engineering Technology Mission Statement
We prepare our graduates to respond to the needs and challenges of our ever-changing
world and provide them the knowledge, skills, ethics, creativity and critical thinking
skills necessary for professional competence and life-long learning.
4. Location of Mission Statements
The various mission and vision statements of the University, the College of Engineering
and Science, and Electrical Engineering Technology are published in the University
Catalog and are posted on the University website:
a. University Mission Statement (Online Catalog)
http://www.latech.edu/registrar/bulletin/louisiana_tech_university_catalog_20132014_r3.pdf
21
b. College of Engineering Mission Statement (COES website)
http://coes.latech.edu/about-the-college/mission.php
c. Electrical Engineering Technology Mission Statement (EET website)
http://coes.latech.edu/electrical-engineering-technology/mission-and-data.php
B. Program Educational Objectives
The Educational Objectives of the Louisiana Tech University Electrical Engineering
Technology Program can be found at the following locations:
1. The University Catalog
Chapter 13, College of Engineering and Science, Electrical Engineering
Technology
2. The online University Catalog website.
http://www.latech.edu/registrar/bulletin/select.shtml
3. The online College of Engineering website.
http://coes.latech.edu/electrical-engineering-technology/objectives-andoutcomes.php
Electrical Engineering Technology Educational Objectives
Within a few years of entering professional practice, Electrical Engineering Technology
graduates will:
ELET-EO-01
Secure professional positions in electrical, electronic or related fields
by leveraging their Electrical Engineering Technology skills and
knowledge. {CM1}{CM2}
ELET-EO-02
Receive positive recognition and reward for the productive application
of their skills and knowledge. {CM1}{CM2}
ELET-EO-03
Attain greater professional competence applying principles of
continuous learning. {CM1}{CM2}
ELET-EO-04
Gain personal satisfaction through the exercise of competent, ethical
and socially responsible professional practice. {CM1}{CM2}
C. Consistency of the Program Educational Objectives with the Mission of the Institution
22
As stated above in Section 2.A, the College of Engineering and Science supports the
University mission through each of its own Mission Statements. The Electrical Engineering
Technology program, in turn, supports the COES mission and, by extension, the mission of
the University.
Table 2-1 - Relationships between Electrical Engineering Technology Educational
Objectives and the COES Mission
COES
Mission
Statement
ELET-EO-01
ELET-EO-02
CM 1
X
X
X
X
CM 2
X
X
X
X
CM 3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Electrical Engineering Technology Educational Objectives
ELET-E0-03
ELET-E0-04
N/A – Not Applicable
D. Program Constituencies
Using a SIPOC (Supplier, Input, Process, Output, and Customer) analysis, a list of Program
constituencies, or stakeholders was identified:
1. Students - Students are our primary external stakeholders.
2. Alumni - Alumni, as former students, are also our stakeholders. The program
influences their ability to obtain and hold jobs or to be successful in graduate schools.
3. Employers - Employers are stakeholders as the program is designed to furnish
graduates that will meet their needs.
4. Faculty - Faculty are stakeholders since they play a central role in the educational
process.
5. Industrial Advisory Board - The Industrial Advisory Board is a stakeholder because
they are external advisors to the program and aspects of the program are a direct
result of their input.
6. COES and University Administration - The COES Administration and the University
Administration are stakeholders as success, or lack thereof, is reflected in the
administration.
7. The State of Louisiana - The State of Louisiana is a stakeholder since the University
is partially funded by the state and was established for the use of its residents.
23
Figure 2-1 shows the entities that interact to achieve the Educational Objectives of the
Electrical Engineering Technology Program. Lines in the diagram represent lines of
communication between stakeholders. Those entities on the outer ring (Industrial Advisory
Board, Students, Employers,, Alumni, and COES and University Administration) are
primarily involved in those actions and decisions that require significant discussion,
interaction, and more protracted assessment processes. The inner ring entities (Electrical
Engineering Technology Faculty and Program Chair) identify and implement actions that are
minor in nature; are within the authority of the program; and do not require approval from
other administrative levels.
Industrial
Advisory Board
State of
Louisiana
Students
ELET
Faculty
ELET
Program
Alumni
Employers
COES and
University
Administration
Figure 2-1 - Relationships between the ELET Program
and Stakeholders
E. Process for Review of the Program Educational Objectives
The Program’s Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) is composed of university alumni,
employers, and student representatives from both Electrical Engineering Technology and
Electrical Engineering. Therefore, the Board is composed of the vast majority of the
24
Program’s constituencies as defined in Section 2.D above. Consequently, the EET Program
Chair annually asks the Board to review Educational Objectives as part of the Program’s
continuous improvement process. In addition, to the IAB, Senior EET students are also
asked to review the Educational Objectives and provide their input. Both groups are charged
to evaluate whether the EO’s are relevant, reasonable and attainable.
The Program’s Educational Objectives were recently revised to reflect revisions to
ETAC/ABET criteria. As a result, the IAB was asked to review the revised Objectives
during its annual Fall Quarter 2013-14 meeting (reference IAB Fall 2013-14 Minutes). After
review and subsequent discussion, the IAB approved the new EO’s as being reasonable,
attainable, and consistent with the mission of the College of Engineering and Science and the
University. Senior students were also asked to review the EO’s. After explanation and
discussion of the EO’s intent, these students also approved the revised Objectives during the
Fall Quarter 2013-14.
25
CRITERION 3. STUDENT OUTCOMES
A. Process for the Establishment and Revision of the Student Outcomes
In contrast to long-term Educational Objectives, Student Outcomes are generalized, nearterm abilities the Program expects all students to demonstrate by their date of graduation.
The Student Outcomes are achieved when students successfully master the Course Outcomes
established for each EET course in the curriculum. The LA Tech EET Student Outcomes are
verbatim restatements of the Student Outcomes criteria (a-k) established in Criterion 3 by the
Engineering Technology Accreditation Committee (ETAC) of the Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology (ABET). As such, Student Outcomes are revised by the LA
Tech Electrical Engineering Technology program when these criteria are revised by
ETAC/ABET.
B. Student Outcomes
The Student Outcomes for the Louisiana Tech University Electrical Engineering Technology
program are:
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate:
ELET-SO-01
An ability to select and apply the knowledge, techniques, skills and
modern tools of the discipline to engineering technology activities.
ELET-SO-02
An ability to select and apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
engineering and technology to engineering technology problems that
require the application of principles and applied procedures or
methodologies.
ELET-SO-03
An ability to conduct standard tests and measurements; to conduct,
analyze, and interpret experiments; and to apply experimental results
to improve processes.
ELET-SO-04
An ability to design systems, components, or processes appropriate for
engineering technology problems and consistent with program
educational objectives.
ELET-SO-05
An ability to function effectively as a member or leader on a technical
team.
ELET-SO-06
An ability to identify, analyze and solve engineering technology
problems.
ELET-SO-07
An ability to communicate effectively regarding engineering
technology activities.
26
ELET-SO-08
An understanding of the need for and an ability to engage in selfdirected continuing professional development.
ELET-SO-09
An understanding of and a commitment to address professional and
ethical responsibilities, including a respect for diversity.
ELET-SO-10
A knowledge of the impact of engineering technology solutions in a
societal and global context.
ELET-SO-11
A commitment to quality, timeliness and continuous improvement.
Table 3-1 - Relationships between ELET Program Outcomes and Criterion 3
EET PROGRAM CRITERIA
Components of Criterion 3 Common to Associate
and Baccalaureate Programs
ELET
Program
Outcomes
3a
ELET-SO-01
X
ELET-SO-02
ELET-SO-03
ELET-SO-04
ELET-SO-05
ELET-SO-06
ELET-SO-07
3b
3c
3d
3e
3f
3g
3h
3i
3j
3k
Additional
Baccalaureate
Program
Criteria
1
2
X
3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET-SO-08
X
ELET-SO-09
X
ELET-SO-10
X
ELET-SO-11
X
27
LA Tech Electrical Engineering Technology Student Outcomes are verbatim restatements of
the Outcomes specified in Criterion 3; consequently, they map directly to the individual
requirements of the criterion. EET Programs that offer Baccalaureate degrees have
additional program-specific criteria that must also be met. These additional criteria require
graduates of Baccalaureate degree programs to have the ability to:
1. Analyze, design, and implement control systems, instrumentation systems,
communications systems, computer systems, or power systems.
2. Apply project management techniques to electrical/electronic(s) systems.
3. Utilize statistics/probability, transform methods, discrete mathematics, or applied
differential equations in support of electrical/electronic(s) systems.
As shown in Table 3-1, the additional criteria are covered by one or more of the existing
Student Outcomes that satisfy the General Criteria.
The Student Outcomes are officially documented under “Objectives and Outcomes” in the
Electrical Engineering Technology program on the College of Engineering and Science
(COES) website. The COES website can be accessed at: http://coes.latech.edu/electricalengineering-technology/objectives-and-outcomes.php.
C. Relationship of Student Outcomes to Program Educational Objectives
The relationship of the Student Outcomes to the Program’s Educational Objectives is defined
in Table 3-2 that follows:
Table 3-2 – Relationship of Educational Objectives to Student Outcomes
Student
Outcomes
Program Educational Objectives
ELET-E0-01
ELET-EO-02
ELET-SO-01
X
X
ELET-SO-02
X
X
ELET-SO-03
X
X
ELET-SO-04
X
X
ELET-SO-05
X
X
ELET-SO-06
X
X
ELET-SO-07
X
X
28
ELET-EO-03
ELET-EO-04
ELET-SO-08
X
X
X
ELET-SO-09
X
X
X
ELET-SO-10
X
X
X
ELET-SO-11
X
X
X
As seen in Table 3-2 above:
1. All Student Outcomes support Educational Objectives ELET-EO-01 and ELET-EO02.
All of the Student Outcomes are intended to provide graduates with the skills and
knowledge to obtain professional positions (EO-01). Moreover, utilization of these
skills and knowledge provide opportunities to receive positive recognition and reward
for their efforts (EO-02).
2. Student Outcomes SO–08 and SO-11 support Educational Objective ELET-EO-03.
SO-08 develops an understanding of the need to engage in continuous personal
development which is essential for attaining greater professional competency and
practicing successfully. Student Outcome SO-11 stresses quality, timeliness and
continuous improvement that are attributes of professional competency.
3. Student Outcomes SO-09 and SO-10 support Educational Objective ELET-EO-04.
SO-09 imparts an understanding of the need to address and commit to professional
and ethical responsibilities and respect for diversity. These are all issues that an
Electrical Engineering Technologist will confront in the workplace. Moreover,
he/she must understand these issues and practice accordingly in order to have the
respect of their peers and achieve success and satisfaction from professional practice.
SO-10 emphasizes the need for the practicing EET to understand the impact that the
graduate or the graduate’s employer’s engineering solutions may have, both good and
bad, on the lives of others. Understanding these impacts may help create better, more
socially responsible, engineering solutions that lead to greater satisfaction from the
practice of his/her profession.
29
CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
A. Student Outcomes
1. Assessment Processes
In order to gather assessment data to evaluate attainment of its Student Outcomes, an
Electrical Engineering Technology Assessment Plan was developed. The Plan uses
four assessment methods: Graduating Senior Exit Interviews, Student Course
Outcomes/Student Outcomes Assessments, Industrial Advisory Board Student
Interview Results, and Independent Course Outcomes/Student Outcomes
Assessments. A description of each of these assessment methods follows:
a. Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
This assessment tool is a survey consisting of two parts completed by all
Graduating Seniors in their final quarter.
•
The first section asks students to rate their perceived level of
preparation, on an increasing scale of 1 – 5, to perform a set of
generalized tasks. The first eleven tasks are verbatim restatements of
the Program’s Student Outcomes. The remaining three tasks, 12, 13,
and 14, are additional requirements defined by ETAC/ABET criteria
specific to Electrical Engineering Technology Programs.
•
The second section consists of a number of open-ended questions
related to the student’s experiences in the ELET Program and seeks to
elicit his/her thoughts on likes, dislikes, and areas where
improvements can be made.
The survey is administered in the quarter of graduation and results for all
graduates are averaged at the conclusion of the academic year. This
assessment technique is valuable since the first section is a measure of the
level of confidence Graduating Seniors have in their abilities to apply the
knowledge and skills provided by the Program. The second section is also
valuable, because it provides insight from the student’s perspective regarding
the strengths and weaknesses of the Program. Graduating Senior Exit
Interview results for Academic Year 2013-14 are provided in Table 4-1.
30
Table 4-1 – Graduating Senior Exit Interview Results for 2013-2014
As a result of my La. Tech electrical engineering
technology education, I am well prepared to
demonstrate:
Numerical
Goals
Average
Response
Sample
Size
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.67
24
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.42
24
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.71
24
4.
An ability to design systems, components, or
processes appropriate for engineering technology
problems and consistent with program educational
objectives. SO-04)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.38
24
5.
An ability to function effectively as a member or
leader on a technical team. (SO-06)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.63
24
6.
An ability to identify, analyze and solve engineering
technology problems. (SO-06)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.63
24
7.
An ability to communicate effectively regarding
engineering technology activities. (SO-07)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.58
24
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.63
24
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.58
24
1.
2.
3.
8.
9.
An ability to select and apply the knowledge,
techniques, skills and modern tools of the discipline
to engineering technology activities. (SO-01)
An ability to select and apply knowledge of
mathematics, science, engineering and technology to
engineering technology problems that require the
application of principles and applied procedures or
methodologies. (SO-02)
An ability to conduct standard tests and
measurements; to conduct, analyze, and interpret
experiments; and to apply experimental results to
improve processes. (SO-03)
An understanding of the need for and an ability to
engage in self-directed continuing professional
development. (SO-08)
An understanding of and a commitment to address
professional and ethical responsibilities, including a
respect for diversity. (SO-09)
10.
Knowledge of the impact of engineering technology
solutions in a societal and global context. (SO-10)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.75
24
11.
A commitment to quality, timeliness and continuous
improvement. (SO-11)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.75
24
12.
An ability to analyze, design, and implement control
systems, instrumentation systems, communication
systems, computer systems, or power systems.
(SO-02)(SO-04)(SO-06)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.42
24
13.
An ability to apply project management techniques
to electrical/electronic systems. (SO-06)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.50
24
14.
An ability to utilize statistics/probability, transform
methods, discrete mathematics, or applied
differential equations in support of electrical /
electronic systems. (SO-02)
≥ 4.0/5.0
4.13
24
31
b. Student Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Assessments
This quarterly survey is an assessment tool used in each ELET course. The
survey requires that students rate, on an increasing scale of 1 – 5, their ability to
perform certain course-specific tasks that require utilization of the knowledge and
skills the course seeks to impart. Each of these specific tasks represents a desired
Course Outcome. Each of the Course Outcomes is also linked to one or more of
the Program’s more broadly defined Student Outcomes. Consequently, this
assessment tool provides information to evaluate student attainment of coursespecific objectives as well as attainment of the Program’s broad-based Student
Outcomes. The Program considers assessment of Course Outcomes to be the
most important component of the assessment process since attainment of Course
Outcomes will automatically insure attainment of the more generalized Student
Outcomes. However, Student Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Assessments
represent student opinions, and while valuable, they are not direct measures of
Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes attainment. As an example of the use of
this assessment tool, Tables 4-2a, 4-2b, 4-2c and 4-2d provide the results of
Student Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Assessment from Academic Year
2013-14. The values for the Student Outcomes associated with a particular course
are averages of the Course Outcomes-to-Student Outcomes links for each Student
Outcome assigned to the course.
Table 4-2a – Student Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Results by Course
Fall Quarter – 2013 - 2014
NO.
COURSE
NO.
SO01
SO02
SO03
1
ELET 100
2
ELET 260
4.56
3
ELET 261
4.17
4
ELET 370
4.42
5
ELET 380
4.92
6
ELET 422
4.81
7
ELET 423
4.72
4.44
8
ELET 460
4.33
4.00
9
ELET 475
4.73
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
AVERAGES
4.58
4.58
SO04
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
3.86
4.86
4.42
4.42
4.86
4.86
4.42
4.42
4.86
4.00
4.04
4.40
4.25
3.50
4.31
4.94
4.91
4.63
SO05
5.00
4.48
4.16
4.37
4.42
4.52
4.68
4.37
4.80
4.20
4.50
4.71
4.76
4.45
4.16
4.68
32
Table 4-2b – Student Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Results by Course
Winter Quarter – 2013 - 2014
NO.
COURSE
NO.
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
1
ELET 170
4.71
4.69
2
ELET 270
3.43
3.25
3
ELET 271
3.98
3.29
3.50
4
ELET 461
4.07
3.74
3.99
4.65
3.78
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
AVERAGES
4.05
3.74
3.75
4.65
3.46
SO08
SO10
SO-09
SO11
3.14
Table 4-2c – Student Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Results by Course
Spring Quarter – 2013 - 2014
NO.
COURSE
NO.
SO01
SO02
1
ELET 180
4.52
4.47
2
ELET 181
4.51
4.63
3
ELET 272
4.28
4.33
4
ELET 273
4.80
5
ELET 374
3.69
3.77
6
ELET 375
3.66
3.69
7
ELET 472
5.00
8
ELET 477
4.96
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
AVERAGES
4.24
SO03
4.63
SO05
SO06
4.63
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
4.80
5.00
4.90
5.00
4.80
5.00
4.90
5.00
3.75
4.50
4.80
4.18
SO04
4.80
4.90
3.66
4.36
3.77
4.65
4.77
4.37
Table 4-2d - Student Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Averages
For the Year - 2013 – 2014
PROGRAM
OUTCOMES
AVERAGE
SO-01
SO-02
SO-03
SO-04
SO-05
SO-06
SO-07
SO-08
SO-09
SO-10
S0-11
4.29
4.18
4.09
4.54
4.68
4.45
4.00
4.83
4.71
4.66
4.93
33
c. Industrial Advisory Board Junior/Senior Student Interviews
Annually, at each spring meeting of the Program’s Industrial Advisory Board, a
panel of Board members is charged with interviewing a group of junior and senior
ELET students. The Board is charged with gathering information from students
regarding their experiences in the EET Program; their understanding of the
Program’s Student Outcomes and Educational Objectives; their perceptions about
the knowledge and skills they have acquired; and their ability to apply the latter.
General direction for conducting the interviews and gathering information is
provided by the EET Program Chair, but Board members use the Program’s
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes as guides to frame their own
questions to gather pertinent information. In an effort to avoid any undue bias, no
faculty members or program leadership sit on the interview panel. Results of the
interviews are shared and discussed with the entire Board, and the entire IAB
renders its opinion with respect to whether Student Outcomes are being achieved.
This information is shared with the Program Chair and discussed at a subsequent
ELET faculty meeting.
d. Independent Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Assessments
This assessment tool is used annually to examine the work of all students in
selected courses. The collected work is from specific tasks associated with the
learning objectives of the course, that is, its Course Outcomes. Since results are
obtained and assayed for all students, this assessment technique is considered a
true measure of the level of attainment of Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes
and is given the most weight in Outcomes evaluation among all other assessment
methods.
Each of the Course Outcomes represents either knowledge and/or skills that
encompass one or more of the Program’s broader and more generic Student
Outcomes.
At the Program level, Student Outcomes are assigned and
documented for each course in a Course-to-Student Outcomes Matrix. At the
Course level, each Course Outcome is assigned to a specific Student Outcome.
The CO-to-SO association is documented on the Student Course Outcomes
Assessment Form for each course in the Program. Consequently, it is possible to
use the results of Course Outcomes evaluation to also yield results regarding
Student Outcomes attainment for each course in the curriculum. When this
assessment technique is applied across the entire curriculum, determinations can
be made regarding Course Outcomes attainment, Student Outcomes attainment,
and the level at which each course in the curriculum is supporting Student
Outcomes attainment. Table 4-3 provideS the results of Independent CourseOutcomes/Student-Outcomes Assessments for Academic Years 2013-14.
34
Table 4-3 - Independent Course-Outcomes/Student Outcomes Assessments
For the Year 2013 – 2014
Academic Year 2013-14
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
SO05
ELET 100 – Introduction to
Electrical Engineering
Technology
ELET 374 – Introduction to
Microprocessors
4.10
4.04
ELET 375 – Introduction to
Microprocessors
Laboratory
3.50
4.0
ELET 380- Printed Circuit
Board Design and
Fabrication
4.57
3.83
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
3.75
4.00
3.00
3.00
4.00
4.60
4.80
4.80
4.60
4.30
3.90
3.90
4.30
3.67
4.96
4.67
ELET 472 –
Professionalism and Ethics
for Electrical Engineering
Technology
ELET 477 – Capstone
Design III
Student Outcome
Averages
4.23
4.06
4.02
3.83
4.96
4.67
3.88
e. Employer Survey
An Employer Survey is commissioned by the College of Engineering and
Science’s Undergraduate Studies Office and is conducted by the University’s
Career Center, usually once during a six-year ETAC/ABET cycle. When the
results of this survey are available, they are reviewed by the Program along with
other assessment data. However, the infrequency of this survey makes it difficult
to use as a tool for measuring results from any changes that may have been
recommended. Consequently, it is used as a source of information but not as an
assessment tool to rate attainment of any of the Program’s Student Outcomes.
For informational purposes, the survey asks employers of program graduates to
respond to five questions. Responses are based on a 7-point Likert scale. A
summary of the average of the responses for the most recent survey is shown in
the following table:
35
Table 4-4 – Evaluation of COES 2013 Employer Survey
EMPLOYER SURVEY QUESTIONS
1. How do Louisiana Tech engineering graduates perform in
your company with regard to applications of general principles of
mathematics, science, and engineering to solving engineering
problems?
Numerical
Goal
Average
Response
≥5.5/7.0
6.48
≥5.5/7.0
6.68
≥5.5/7.0
6.86
4. Are Louisiana Tech engineering graduates in your company
effective in written communication?
≥5.5/7.0
6.43
5. Are Louisiana Tech engineering graduates in your company
effective in oral communication?
≥5.5/7.0
6.46
2. Are Louisiana Tech engineering graduates in your company
effective and productive team members?
3. Do Louisiana Tech engineering graduates in your company
exhibit a high degree of professionalism and ethical
responsibility?
2. Electrical Engineering Technology Assessment Plan
Table 4-6 defines the methods used for evaluating each of the Program’s Student
Outcomes. The table also includes results obtained for each of the last six academic
years for each of the Program’s assessment methods. Although Table 4-6 is
developed for Student Outcomes, the Program did not begin assessing Student
Outcomes until Academic Year 2012-13. Prior to that time, Program Outcomes were
assessed according to the ETAC criteria in place at that time. To compensate for this,
Program Outcomes were mapped to corresponding Student Outcomes to provide data
for Table 4-6 for Academic Years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. The POto-SO Mapping Matrix is provided in Table 4-5. Equivalent Student Outcome values
were derived by using the matrix and either:
a. Choosing a corresponding PO value where only one PO is involved, or
b. Averaging PO values where more than one PO is involved.
The following tables or sections from the Annual EET Program Assessment
Summaries (APPENDIX E ) were used to obtain the required data for the assessment
methods listed:
•
•
•
•
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews – Table 3 (Student Outcome Averages
from Graduating Senior Exit Interviews)
Student Course Outcomes Assessments – Table 7 (Yearly Averages)
Industrial Advisory Board Interviews – Section II.3 - Industrial Advisory
Board Assessment Data or Industrial Advisory Board Spring Meeting
Minutes.
Independent Student Outcomes Assessments – Table 9 (SO Averages)
36
Table 4-5 – Program Outcomes-to-Student Outcomes Mapping Matrix1
PO-01
SO-012
PO-02
X
PO-03
PO-04
X
X
SO-02
SO-033
PO-05
PO-06
X
X
PO-07
PO-08
PO-09
PO-10
X
X
SO-04
X
SO-05
SO-06
X
X
SO-07
X
SO-08
X
SO-09
X
SO-10
X
SO-11
X
1 Apply the matrix relationships to the columns in Table 4-3 for 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 only.
2 (SO-01) = [ (PO-01) + (PO-03) + (PO-04)] / 3
3
(SO-03) = [ (PO-02) + (PO-05) + (PO-06) ] / 3
37
Table 4-6 – Student Outcomes Assessment Plan and Summary of Annual Results
ELET-SO-01
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to select and apply the knowledge, techniques, skills and
modern tools of the discipline to engineering technology activities.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.20/5.00
4.45/5.00
4.60/5.00
4.79/5.00
4.45/5.00
4.67/5.00
4.53
4.00/5.00
4.36/5.00
4.51/5.00
4.46/5.00
4.70/5.00
4.52/5.00
4.21/5.00
4.46
Student
Outcomes
Achieved
Student
Outcomes
Achieved
Student
Outcomes
Achieved
Student
Outcomes
Achieved
Student
Outcomes
Achieved
Student
Outcomes
Achieved
Student
Outcomes
Achieved
Student
Outcomes
Achieved
4.00/5.00
3.90/5.00
4.35/5.00
4.29/5.00
4.10/5.00
Data not
collected
4.03/5.00
4.13/5.00
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 1. (ELET-SO-01)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-01.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-01 for all
courses on the annual Student Outcomes
Evaluation Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
38
ELET-SO-02
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to select and apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
engineering and technology to engineering technology problems that require the application of principles and applied procedures or
methodologies.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.18/5.00
4.50/5.00
4.65/5.00
4.88/5.00
4.42/5.00
4.23/5.00
4.48
4.00/5.00
4.32/5.00
4.53/5.00
4.47/5.00
4.63/5.00
4.59/5.00
4.08/5.00
4.42
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
4.00/5.00
3.86/5.00
4.04/5.00
4.07/5.00
3.76/5.00
4.20/5.00
4.21/5.00
4.02/5.00
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 2, 12 and 14.
(ELET-SO-02)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-02.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-02 for all
courses on the annual Student Outcomes
Evaluation Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
39
ELET-SO-03
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to conduct standard tests and measurements; to conduct,
analyze, and interpret experiments; and to apply experimental results to improve processes.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.32/5.00
4.70/5.00
4.76/5.00
4.82/5.00
4.64/5.00
4.00/5.00
4.42/5.00
4.48/5.00
4.42/5.00
4.74/5.00
4.54/5.00
4.14/5.00
4.46
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
4.00/5.00
3.85/5.00
4.58/5.00
4.53/5.00
4.23/5.00
4.03/5.00
4.21/5.00
4.24/5.00
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 3. (ELET-SO-03)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
4.71/5.00
4.66
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-03.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-03 for all courses
on the annual Student Outcomes Evaluation
Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
40
ELET-SO-04
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to design systems, components, or processes appropriate
for engineering technology problems and consistent with program educational objectives.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.18/5.00
4.50/5.00
4.66/5.00
4.88/5.00
4.41/5.00
4.40/5.00
4.51
4.00/5.00
4.32/5.00
4.53/5.00
4.47/5.00
4.63/5.00
4.39/5.00
4.65/5.00
4.50
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
4.00/5.00
3.86/5.00
4.04/5.00
4.07/5.00
3.76/5.00
Data not
collected
3.5/5.00
3.85/5.00
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 4 and 12.
(ELET-SO-04)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-04.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-04 for all courses
on the annual Student Outcomes Evaluation
Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
41
ELET-SO-05
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to function effectively as a member or leader on a technical
team.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.64/5.00
4.92/5.00
4.71/5.00
4.75/5.00
4.64/5.00
4.63/5.00
4.72
4.00/5.00
4.28/5.00
4.56/5.00
4.61/5.00
4.63/5.00
4.55/5.00
4.75/5.00
4.56
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
3.29/5.00
This
Outcome
not in the
courses
assessed
4.61/5.00
4.69/5.00
3.97/5.00
4.25/5.00
4.16/5.00
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 5. (ELET-SO-05)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-05.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes..
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-05 for all courses
on the annual Student Outcomes Evaluation
Schedule
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
4.00/5.00
42
ELET-SO-06
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to identify, analyze, and solve engineering technology
problems.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.18/5.00
4.50/5.00
4.66/5.00
4.88/5.00
4.54/5.00
4.51/5.00
4.55
4.48
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 6, 12 and 13.
(ELET-SO-06)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-06.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
4.00/5.00
4.32/5.00
4.53/5.00
4.47/5.00
4.63/5.00
4.54/5.00
This
Outcome
not in the
courses
assessed
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
3.76/5.00
This
Outcome
not in the
courses
assessed
3.50/5.00
3.85/5.00
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-06 for all courses
on the annual Student Outcomes Evaluation
Schedule
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
4.00/5.00
3.86/5.00
43
4.04/5.00
4.07/5.00
ELET-SO-07
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to communicate effectively regarding engineering
technology activities.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.46/5.00
4.08/5.00
4.64/5.00
4.82/5.00
4.64/5.00
4.58/5.00
4.54
4.00/5.00
4.28/5.00
4.49/5.00
4.49/5.00
4.62/5.00
4.49/5.00
4.27/5.00
4.44
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
4.00/5.00
4.01/5.00
4.33/5.00
4.43/5.00
4.69/5.00
3.97/5.00
3.88/5.00
4.22
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 7. (ELET-SO-07)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-07.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-07 for all courses
on the annual Student Outcomes Evaluation
Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
44
ELET-SO-08
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an understanding of the need for and an ability to engage in selfdirected continuing professional development.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.41/5.00
4.74/5.00
4.69/5.00
4.88/5.00
4.73/5.00
4.63/5.00
4.68
4.00/5.00
4.51/5.00
4.40/5.00
4.70/5.00
4.50/5.00
4.75/5.00
4.80/5.00
4.61
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
4.00/5.00
4.25/5.00
4.20/5.00
Data not
collected
Data not
collected
Data not
collected
4.00/5.00
4.15
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 8. (ELET-SO-08)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-08.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-08 for all courses
on the annual Student Outcomes Evaluation
Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule
45
ELET-SO-09
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an understanding of and a commitment to address professional and
ethical responsibilities, including a respect for diversity.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.18/5.00
4.59/5.00
4.69/5.00
4.51/5.00
4.64/5.00
4.58/5.00
4.53
4.00/5.00
4.13/5.00
4.75/5.00
4.70/5.00
4.41/5.00
4.63/5.00
5.00/5.00
4.60
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
4.00/5.00
4.00/5.00
3.80/5.00
Data not
collected
Data not
collected
Data not
collected
3.50/5.00
3.77
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 3 (ELET-SO-09)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-09.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all
students in a class, for ELET-SO-09 for all courses
on the annual Student Outcomes Evaluation
Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
46
ELET-SO-10
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate knowledge of the impact of engineering technology solutions in a
societal and global context.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.18/5.00
4.59/5.00
4.69/5.00
4.51/5.00
4.64/5.00
4.75/5.00
4.56
4.00/5.00
4.13/5.00
4.75/5.00
4.70/5.00
4.17/5.00
4.63/5.00
4.90/5.00
4.55
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
4.00/5.00
4.00/5.00
3.80/5.00
Data not
collected
Data not
collected
Data not
collected
3.90/5.00
3.90
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 10. (ELET-SO-10)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO-10.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all students
in a class, for ELET-SO-10 for all courses on the
annual Student Outcomes Evaluation Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
47
ELET-SO-11
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate a commitment to quality, timeliness and continuous improvement.
ASSESSMENT DATA SOURCES
Minimum
Goal
Score
2008-09
Score
2009-10
Score
2010-11
Score
2011-12
Score
2012-13
Score
2013-14
Assessment
Averages
4.00/5.00
4.41/5.00
4.74/5.00
4.69/5.00
4.51/5.00
4.91/5.00
4.75/5.00
4.67
4.00/5.00
4.51/5.00
4.40/5.00
4.70/5.00
4.41/5.00
4.75/5.00
5.00/5.00
4.63
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
Student
Outcomes
Met
4.00/5.00
4.25/5.00
4.20/5.00
Data not
collected
Data not
collected
Data not
collected
4.00/5.00
4.15
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews
Metric
The average score for Question 11. (ELET-SO-11)
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Student Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes Assessments
Metric
The average score across the curriculum of all
Course Outcomes linked to ELET-SO11.
Assessment Freq.
Annually
Industrial Advisory Board Jr./Sr. Interviews
Metric
Board evaluation of student interviews concerning
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes.
Assessment Freq.
Annually at IAB Spring Meeting.
Independent Course Outcomes / Student Outcomes
Assessments
Metric
The average score, using actual work of all students
in a class, for ELET-SO-03 for all courses on the
annual Student Outcomes Evaluation Schedule.
Assessment Freq.
Annually per a predetermined course assessment
schedule.
48
3. Evaluation Procedure
As part of the Program’s continuous improvement procedures, EET faculty examine
Program performance at the end of each academic year to evaluate and document
attainment of the Programs Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes. This
includes a review of Recommendations for Improvement made during the previous
year; the actions taken during the current year on those Recommendations; and the
results derived from those actions. In addition, current year assessment data is
discussed and evaluated, and new recommendations for program improvement arising
from this evaluation are formulated as deemed appropriate. Results of this
deliberation are documented in an “Annual EET Program Assessment Summary” that
becomes part of the Program’s continuous-improvement documentation.
Table 4-6 above is a summary of results from the previous six years of the
assessment/evaluation process. As one should expect, numerical results from each
assessment tool for each Student Outcome differ from year-to-year. While this
information is useful for evaluating yearly performance, it does not provide an
indication of long-term performance. To this end, an annual moving-average is
calculated from these yearly results for each of the assessment methods. This
generates values that provide a convenient means for judging long-term attainment of
each Student Outcome.
Table 4-7 – Student Outcome Average for Each Assessment Method
From the Fall Quarter 2008 through the Spring Quarter 2014
ASSESSMENT
METHOD
Graduating Senior
Exit Interviews
Student Course
Outcomes / Student
Outcomes
Assessments
Industrial Advisory
Board Jr./Sr.
Interviews
Independent Course
Outcomes / Student
Outcomes
Assessments
Composite Averages
for each Student
Outcome
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
4.50
4.53
4.65
4.53
4.73
4.55
4.53
4.69
4.52
4.52
4.65
4.51
4.51
4.52
4.47
4.53
4.50
4.47
4.57
4.52
4.48
4.55
Met
Met
Met
Met
Met
Met
Met
Met
Met
Met
Met
4.16*
3.99
4.24
3.93*
4.14
3.93
4.29
4.23*
3.9*
3.9*
4.23*
4.39
4.34
4.47
4.31
4.47
4.33
4.43
4.50
4.31
4.30
4.48
* Average of available results. By oversight, work not collected from all scheduled courses.
49
4. Analysis of Evaluation Results
From Table 4-7, individual averages resulting from Graduating Senior Exit
Interviews, Student Course-Outcomes/Student-Outcomes Assessments, and Industrial
Advisory Board Interviews easily exceed or meet their Minimum Goals for each
Student Outcome. However, it is recognized these results are based on student and
IAB opinions and are not based on specifics of actual student performance. These
results are useful, because they can help pinpoint potential weaknesses in
instructional methods and information delivery at the course level, but they lack the
certitude of Student Outcomes attainment the Program requires.
On the other hand, the Independent Course Outcomes/Student Outcomes Assessments
use actual student work as a basis for Outcomes evaluation. When this method is
applied, results trend lower and are nearer to observed classroom performance.
Referring to Table 4-6, it is seen the Minimum Goal for all Student Outcomes is
4.00/5.00 on a rating system that ranges from 1.00 – 5.00. Consequently, the
Minimum Goal (4.00/5.00) represents 75% of maximum, an “average” score. When
the results of Table 4-7 are examined for this assessment method, it is seen that most
values exceed the minimum value. Even for those averages that fall below the
desired value, the lowest percentage result is 72.5%, the lower end of the “average”
range. It must be acknowledged, however, that some table results are based on less
than a full set of assessment data for some courses.
Nonetheless, based on the
numbers in Table 4-7 for evaluations derived from Independent Course
Outcomes/Student Outcomes Assessment data, it is concluded the Program’s Student
Outcomes are met, although, near minimum values.
When all forms of assessment data are considered, Composite Student Outcomes
Averages can be determined as seen in Table 4-7. These values lend addition
credence to the conclusion that Student Outcomes are attained. However, the results
from Table 4-6 and Table 4-7 provide neither a complete picture of Program
performance nor a true indication of the detailed processes used in the evaluation of
the LA Tech University EET Program. The emphasis on Student Outcomes
attainment tends to obscure the importance of individual Course Outcomes
attainment. The Course Outcomes provide the underlying support for achieving the
Student Outcomes.
LA Tech believes that each course in its EET curriculum must achieve its individual
Course Outcomes and each course must meet the Minimum Goal for the Student
Outcomes assigned to it. When these occur, individual courses are attaining their
respective objectives as well as contributing their requisite share in helping the entire
Program attain its Student Outcomes. By establishing Course Outcomes, by linking
Course Outcomes to specific Student Outcomes, by assessing Course Outcomes, and
by using Course Outcomes-to-Student Outcomes links to assess Student Outcomes,
the evaluation procedures used by LA Tech permit a comprehensive evaluation of
total Program performance. The details of these evaluation processes are not
apparent in either Table 4-6 and Table 4-7. The specifics of these assessment and
50
evaluation processes are best seen in an “Annual EET Program Assessment
Summary.” As an example, an Assessment Summary from 2012-13 is included in
Appendix E.
The Composite Averages at the bottom of Table 4-7 reveal the following:
• Student Outcomes 3, 5, 7, 8, and 11 indicate the greatest strengths (85 -88 %)
in the areas of tests and measurements, teamwork, communications, and
continued professional development and improvement.
• Student Outcomes 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, and 10 follow closely (82 – 84 %) in the areas
of knowledge and skills, mathematics, design, problem analysis,
professionalism and ethics, and the impact of engineering technology
solutions in a societal and global context.
5. Documentation of Assessment and Evaluation Results
As previously noted, the Program utilizes four principal means to collect assessment data:
Graduating Senior Exit Interviews, Student Course Outcomes/Student Outcomes
Assessments, Industrial Advisory Board Junior/Senior Interviews, and Independent
Course Outcomes/Student Outcomes Assessments. Once this assessment data is
collected, it is summarized and used in various ways to evaluate Program performance.
All of this summarized information and the “Annual ELET Program Assessment
Summary” prepared by the Program Chair is saved in electronic form. This latter
document contains the results of faculty year-end Program evaluation and any
Recommendations for Improvement that result from it. In addition to electronic files,
hardcopies of this information, as well as the raw assessment data upon which it is based,
are also available in Program files.
B. Continuous Improvement
At the conclusion of the Program’s annual evaluation of assessment data, Recommendations
for Improvement may be made as part of the Continuous Improvement Cycle. Once
implemented, the effects of the changes are evaluated during the next academic year.
Yearly Recommendations for Improvement; the actual Actions arising from those
Recommendations; Results ensuing from those Actions; and the rationale for taking certain
steps are all contained within an “Annual EET Program Assessment Summary.”
The
complete summaries will be available for review at the time of the on-site visit. However,
excerpts from those summaries are provided in this Self-Study Report that represent the
Program’s response to “Recommendations for Improvement” arising from the annual
program evaluations.
2008-09 RESPONSE TO 2007-08 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
There were no recommendations for program changes resulting from evaluation of Program
assessment data collected during Academic Year 2007-08.
51
2009-10 RESPONSE TO 2008-09 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
A. Recommendation:
Explore ways to improve the number of responses to the Annual Alumni Survey.
1. Track alumni who have responded.
2. Do a second mailing to non-responders with an additional personal appeal.
3. Directly contact non-responders by email with a personal appeal and attach an
electronic copy of the survey.
4. Do both “2” and “3”.
Action:
In order to try and keep the Alumni Survey straightforward, it was decided that a simple
appeal would be attempted first. More intensive efforts may be tried pending results of
the appeal.
Results:
Using the “appeal approach,” Alumni Survey responses increased from below 10% to
30.1%. This latter figure is believed adequate to provide statistically relevant
information, and this approach will be continued as long as response levels are deemed
sufficient.
B. Recommendation:
Provide instructors results of Table 8 (Student Course Outcomes below the Minimum
Goal - 2008 - 2009) and task them to place additional emphasis on those areas of course
instruction/laboratory work that relate to the particular Program Outcomes cited.
Action:
Although Student Course Outcomes Assessments are not considered direct measures of
Program Outcomes attainment, they may serve as precursors of course delivery
weaknesses. Consequently, this recommendation was implemented as proposed.
Results:
52
The following table provides a comparison of Table 8 Program Outcome values from
2008/09 versus corresponding values for the same courses in 2009/10:
2008 – 2009 PO VALUES
2009 – 2010 PO VALUES
COURSE NO.
PO-01
PO-02
PO-03
ELET 180
ELET 181
PO04
3.99
4.34
3.76
4.25
PO-05
3.91
4.00
3.93
4.42
3.91
4.00
ELET 423
ELET 460
ELET 461
3.79
4.19
PO-07
PO-08
3.13
4.17
3.13
4.17
PO-09
PO-10
3.76
4.25
ELET 273
ELET 374
PO-06
3.64
3.73
3.79
4.19
3.41
4.00
3.63
3.71
3.33
4.70
ELET 472
It can be seen that all of the Program Outcomes that were below the desired goal of
4.00/5.00 in 2008/09 were either met or exceeded in 2009/10, with the exception of PO05 and PO-08 for ELET 460 and ELET 461, respectively.
See Section V
(Recommendations for Improvement) for further comments regarding these shortfalls.
C. Recommendation:
Independent Course Outcomes Assessment is considered a direct measure of Program
Outcomes attainment. Failure to achieve minimum goals for Program Outcomes per this
form of assessment is considered significant. Consequently, instructors responsible for
any course/s listed in Table 10 (Independent Course Outcome Assessments below the
Minimum Goal – 2008 – 2009) are tasked to perform the following:
1. Review the Course Outcomes that link to the Program Outcomes that are not
being achieved and determine if the CO-to-PO relationships are valid.
2. If CO-to-PO links are considered valid, place additional emphasis on those areas
of course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the affected Program
Outcomes.
53
3. If CO-to-PO links are weak or invalid, recommend changes to course instruction
and/or the outcome links.
4. Course changes must be in place for the 2009/10 academic cycle.
Action:
ELET 370
Additional emphasis was placed on applications of the digital devices emphasized in the
course in order to:
1. Provide practical examples of how real devices can be used.
2. More clearly establish a link between device terminal characteristics and function.
3. Demonstrate how theory is related directly to device function and application.
ELET 371
Laboratory exercises were reworked to:
1. Provide a clearer relationship to Program Outcomes.
2. Simplify instructions and provide greater clarity with respect to data to be
collected and the exercise outcomes.
Results:
No formal Independent Outcomes Assessment was performed in 2009/10 since additional
modifications are likely to be made in the next academic term, 2010/11, based on
experiences in the current academic year. No Independent Re-assessment of this course
is planned until 2011/12.
D. Recommendation:
Implement instructional improvements to ELET 472 (Senior Seminar) as previously
outlined in the Program’s response to Concerns noted in the TAC/ABET accreditation
visit of 2008.
Action:
ELET 472 (Seminar) and ELET 100 (Introduction to Electrical Engineering Technology)
are both linked primarily to PO-08 (Ability to communicate effectively), PO-09
(Awareness of the need for lifelong learning and continuous personal improvement) and
54
PO-10 (Awareness of professional, ethical, and social responsibilities). As a result, the
changes indicated below were implemented in each course:
ELET 100
Students entering the Program will be required to:
1. Read Seven Habits of Highly Effective People by Steven Covey.
This book emphasizes principles and behaviors that are considered professional
and ethical.
2. Research and write papers on principles of professional and ethical conduct.
3. Research and write papers that focus on the professional and ethical dilemmas
often created by rapidly changing technology.
4. Write a paper that defines a vision for their educational careers and reflects on the
need for continuous learning.
ELET 472
Students about to graduate will be required to:
1. Re-read Seven Habits of Highly Effective People by Steven Covey from the
perspective of a prospective graduate about to enter professional practice.
2. Define a mission for their professional careers that establishes a plan for
continuous learning.
3. Attend College of Engineering and Science sponsored programs that present
speakers discussing contemporary topics important to professional practice.
4. Participate in a classroom/web-based discussion on a current topic having
professional, societal, and/or ethical implications.
This might include such topics as the British Petroleum Gulf of Mexico oil-spill;
the environmental / safety problems associated with nuclear energy versus the
nation’s need for energy self-sufficiency; job losses / environmental concerns
created by advances in technology; and similar subjects in contemporary society.
e. View video-based material on professional ethics and ethical dilemmas and then
participate in discussions / prepare papers on the subject/s covered.
Results:
55
Data is now being collected that will satisfy TAC/ABET requirements.
2010-11 RESPONSE TO 2009-10 RECOMMENDATONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
A. Recommendation:
Provide instructors results of Table 8 (Student Course Outcomes below the Minimum
Goal - 2009 - 2010). Task them to place additional emphasis on those areas of course
instruction/laboratory work that relate to the particular Program Outcomes cited.
Action:
This recommendation was implemented as proposed.
Results:
The following table lists the courses from Table 8 and the Program Outcomes associated
with each course that did not achieve the minimum acceptable rating of 4.00/5.00. The
values in the table are based on student assessments of outcomes and compare 2009/10
results to 2010/11 results.
2009 – 2010 PO VALUES
2010 – 2011 PO VALUES
COURSE NO.
PO-01
PO-02
PO-03
PO04
ELET 260
ELET 460
PO-06
PO-07
PO-08
PO-09
3.71
?
3.71
?
PO-10
3.80
3.33
ELET 100
ELET 375
PO-05
3.96
4.44
3.92
4.38
3.50
4.42
3.92
4.38
3.73
4.13
ELET 461
? – By oversight, assessment data not collected in 2010-11.
With the exception of ELET 100, all of the Program Outcomes that were below 4.00/5.00
in 2009/10 achieved this goal in 2010/11. By oversight, assessment data was not
collected for ELET 461. Consequently, no conclusions are drawn with respect to PO-08
and PO-09 for this course. The effectiveness of “additional emphasis” in both courses
will be deferred until data is again collected in academic year 2011/12.
B. Recommendation:
Provide instructors with the Independent Assessment results in Table 10 (Course
Outcomes below the Minimum Standard) and task them to:
56
1. Place additional emphasis on those areas of course instruction/laboratory work
that relate to the affected Program Outcomes.
2. Devise and implement changes to course instruction in the impacted areas, as
warranted.
Action:
This recommendation was implemented as proposed. Other than additional emphasis and
attention to the way existing material is presented, there are no major changes for ELET
100 (PO-10) and ELET 360 (PO-04), the courses of interest. The Outcomes ratings for
these two courses (see table above) were 3.80/5.00 and 3.95/5.00, respectively. These
values, while somewhat low, are not considered so extreme that they warrant major
action.
Results:
A review of ELET 100 (PO-10) in Table 4 (Student Course Outcome Assessments – Fall
Quarter – 2010 – 2011) indicates an average of 4.11/5.00 for this Program Outcome
which is well above the 3.80/5.00 average from 2009-10. Additionally, a review of
ELET 360 (PO-04) in Table 5 (Student Course Outcome Assessments – Winter Quarter –
2010 – 2011) indicates an average of 4.35/5.00 for the Program Outcome is also well
above the 3.95/5.00 average for 2009-10. Consequently, the decision to “add additional
emphasis” as opposed to implementing major changes seems valid.
C. Recommendation:
Review the validity of Course Outcomes and Program Outcomes assigned to ELET 460
(Digital Data Communications).
1. Review the Course Outcomes that support attainment of the Program Outcomes
that are below expectations and determine if the CO-to-PO relationships are valid.
2. Where CO-to-PO relationships are considered valid, place additional emphasis on
those areas of course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the affected
Program Outcomes.
3. Where CO-to-PO relationships are considered weak or invalid, implement
changes to course instruction and/or the outcome links.
4. Implement all course changes during the 2010/11 academic cycle.
Action:
After reviewing the above recommendations and discussing the manner in which the
course is offered, faculty concluded that existing links are still viable and that course
57
outcomes adequately reflect what students should know upon course completion.
Therefore, it was decided that placing additional emphasis on certain material and
eliminating non-essential information was more preferable at this time than making
radical changes to course structure.
Results:
Referring to Table 4, it is seen that ELET 460 achieved acceptable Student Program
Outcomes Evaluations in 2010/11 as compared to the previous year. As a result, no
further changes are recommended at this time.
D. Recommendation:
Implement instructional improvements to ELET 461 (Digital Data Communications
Laboratory).
1. Review the Course Outcomes that support attainment of the Program Outcomes
that are below expectations and determine if the CO-to-PO relationships are valid.
2. Where CO-to-PO relationships are considered valid, place additional emphasis on
those areas of course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the affected
Program Outcomes.
3. Where CO-to-PO relationships are considered weak or invalid, implement
changes to course instruction and/or the outcome links.
4. Implement all course changes during the 2010/11 academic cycle.
Action:
The same action was taken for ELET 461 as described for ELET 460 in
Recommendation No. 3.
Results:
Due to an oversight, Student Course Outcomes Evaluations were not administered for
this course during 2010-11. Consequently, the results of changes cannot be measured.
Corrective action for these shortfalls is addressed in Section V.
2011-12 RESPONSE TO 2010-11 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
A. Recommendation: (Carryover from 2009-10)
58
Provide instructors results of Table 8 (Student Course Outcomes Assessments below the
Minimum Goal - 2009 - 2010). Task them to place additional emphasis on those areas of
course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the particular Program Outcomes cited.
Action:
During 2009/10, Student Course Outcomes Assessment data showed ELET 461 failed to
achieve minimum goals for PO-08 and PO-09. By oversight, assessment data was not
collected for this course during the following 2010-11 academic cycle as noted in the
2010-11 Program Evaluation Report. Consequently, the results of course modifications
made in 2010-11 could not be evaluated. This being the case, a recommendation was
made to defer evaluation of the effectiveness of course changes until 2011-12 when
assessment data for ELET 461 would next be due for collection.
Results:
The values in the following table are based on student assessments of Program Outcomes
and compare 2009-10 results to 2011-12 results for ELET 461.
2009 – 2010 PO VALUES
2011 – 2012 PO VALUES
COURSE NO.
PO-01
PO-02
PO-03
PO04
PO-05
ELET 461
PO-06
PO-07
PO-08
PO-09
3.71
4.13
3.71
4.13
PO-10
It can be seen that the Program Outcomes for ELET 461 that were below the desired goal
of 4.00/5.00 in 2009/10 exceeded this goal in 2011-12. Consequently, it is believed that
“additional emphasis” was sufficient to correct the shortfalls in the above course and no
further action is required. All other PO’s associated with ELET 461 were also above the
minimum goal in 2011-12 as shown in Table 5, found elsewhere in this 2011-12 report.
B. Recommendation:
Provide instructors results of Table 8 (Student Course Outcomes Assessments below the
Minimum Goal - 2010 - 2011) and task them to:
1. Review the Course Outcomes that support attainment of the Program Outcomes
that are below expectations and determine if the CO-to-PO relationships are valid.
2. Where CO-to-PO relationships are considered valid, place additional emphasis on
those areas of course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the affected
Program Outcomes.
3. Where CO-to-PO relationships are weak or invalid, implement changes to course
instruction and/or the outcome links.
59
4. Implement all course changes during the 2011/12 academic cycle.
Action:
This recommendation was implemented as proposed. Course Outcomes (CO) for each
course were reviewed. It was concluded they are still relevant for attaining the Program
Outcomes to which they were linked. Consequently, no changes were made to the COto-PO associations. Instead, they recommended that instructors place additional
emphasis on those Course Outcomes that support the Program Outcomes having weak
attainment values.
Results:
The values in the following table are based on student assessments of Program
Outcomes. The table compares 2010/11 results to 2011/12 results for those courses that
did not achieve the minimum acceptable rating of 4.00/5.00 during the prior 2010/11
academic year.
2010 – 2011 PO VALUES
2011 – 2012 PO VALUES
COURSE NO.
PO-01
PO-02
PO-03
PO04
ELET 271
PO-06
PO-07
PO-08
PO-09
PO-10
3.33
4.71
ELET 100
ELET 270
PO-05
3.82
4.70
3.14
4.70
3.82
4.65
3.25
4.68
3.32
4.75
3.25
4.65
3.45
4.60
It can be seen that all of the Program Outcomes that were below the desired goal of
4.00/5.00 in 2010/11 exceeded this goal in 2011/12. Consequently, it is believed that
“additional emphasis” was sufficient to correct any shortfalls in the above courses and no
further action is required. All other PO’s associated with the above courses were also
above the minimum goal in 2011/12 as shown in Table 4 and Table 5, found elsewhere in
this 2011/12 report.
C. Recommendation:
Information required to perform Independent Program Outcomes Assessment is not
being collected consistently and in a standardized manner. It is recommended instructors
be provided with information on a quarterly basis detailing the specific requirements for
performing Independent Program Outcomes Assessments. Information will include the
following items:
1. Quantity of required data.
60
2. Types of required data.
3. Program Outcomes Evaluation Forms.
4. Miscellaneous forms and information, as required.
Action:
This recommendation was implemented as proposed. Examples of the forms to be used
were distributed and discussed. It was emphasized that data collected for the Independent
Program Outcomes Assessment must include the work of all students where possible. As
a minimum, it must contain all student work submitted on a particular task assignment.
It is recognized that on some assignments, such as homework, all students may not
submit an input.
The types of data required were discussed. It was suggested that the types of data
collected could be determined by using the Student Course Outcomes Assessment Forms.
Each of the Course Outcomes is associated with a particular Program Outcome.
Therefore, choosing student work related to a particular Course Outcome ultimately
provides information to assess attainment of a Program Outcome associated with the
course.
Faculty members were also advised that they could be required to perform the evaluation
themselves even though they teach the class. In cases where this occurs, their evaluations
must be audited by others. The Program Chair will be responsible for finding appropriate
auditors to perform this task. It was further explained that only audited assessments or
assessments performed by someone other than the course instructor can be used to
officially evaluate Program Outcomes Attainment within the Electrical Engineering
Technology Program.
Results:
The data collected to perform Independent Program Outcomes Assessments for academic
year 2011/12 was correct and sufficient for all courses involved in the assessment. In
addition, assessments were performed using the correct forms and worksheets. However,
it was recognized that some additional adjustment of forms is required to improve the
process.
Although overall data collection is sufficient to provide indication of Program Outcomes
attainment, there are still problems in getting appropriate and sufficient data from some
courses to perform Independent Program Outcomes Assessments. Additional data is
desirable in order to provide a broader database to draw conclusions regarding Program
Outcomes attainment.
2012-13 RESPONSE TO 2011-12 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
61
A. Recommendation:
Implement the new Educational Objectives submitted and approved at the Spring Quarter
2011-12 Industrial Advisory Board Meeting.
Action:
The recommendation was implemented as proposed.
Results:
The University Catalog and all program documentation were revised to reflect the new
EO’s.
B. Recommendation:
Add a third course to the Capstone Design sequence by incorporating a one semestercredit-hour (SCH) course into the Winter Quarter. Delete ELET 378 (Electrical Projects
Laboratory II) (1 SCH) to gain the required credit.
Action:
The recommendation was implemented as proposed.
Results:
ELET 476 (Capstone Design II) was moved to the Winter Quarter, and ELET 477
(Capstone Design III) was created and added to the Spring Quarter schedule for 2012-13.
ELET 378 was deleted from the curriculum.
C. Recommendation:
Provide instructors with the results of Table 8 (Student Course Outcomes Assessments
below the Minimum Standard) and task them to do the following:
1. For Student Outcomes below expectations, review Course Outcomes that support
their attainment and determine if their CO-to-SO relationships are still valid.
2. For valid CO-to-SO relationships, place additional emphasis on those areas of
course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the affected Student Outcomes.
3. Revise or eliminate CO-to-SO links considered weak or invalid. Outcomes the
course is trying to achieve must strongly relate to the overall Student Outcomes
the program is trying to achieve.
62
Action:
The recommendation was implemented as proposed. The CO-to-SO relationships were
reviewed. CO-to-SO links were still considered strong and valid. Additional emphasis
was placed on the course material that ultimately links to the Student Outcomes scoring
below desired levels.
Results:
ELET 171 showed a decline from 2011-12. ELET 171 is the first course in the ELET
Program that requires laboratory reports, and SO-07 relates to “communicating
effectively.” Additional emphasis on report writing is recommended.
ELET 260 showed substantial improvement with respect to SO-04, designing systems
and components. It is concluded that “additional emphasis” was successful.
2011 – 2012 PO VALUES
2012 – 2013 SO VALUES
COURSE
NO.
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
3.86*
3.38
ELET 171
SO-08
SO09
SO10
S011
3.34
4.64
ELET 260
* - PO-08 from 2011-12 maps to SO-07 in AY 2012-13.
.
D. Recommendation:
Provide instructors with the independent evaluation results in Table 10 (Independent
Student Outcomes Evaluations below the Minimum Standard) and task them to do the
following:
1. For Student Outcomes below expectations, review Course Outcomes that support
their attainment and determine if their CO-to-SO relationships are still valid.
2. For valid CO-to-SO relationships, place additional emphasis on those areas of
course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the affected Student Outcomes.
3. Revise or eliminate CO-to-SO links considered weak or invalid. Course
Outcomes must strongly relate to the Student Outcomes the course is trying to
achieve.
Action:
63
The recommendation was implemented as proposed. The CO-to-SO relationships are
still considered valid. Additional emphasis will be placed on the material related to the
Student Outcomes below the desired levels.
Results:
Assessment data from this course was deemed inadequate to perform a proper
Independent Student Outcomes Evaluation. Evaluation of this course will be deferred
until data can be collected in 2013-14.
Course Number
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
ELET 272 – Electronic
3.36
3.13
Circuit Theory II
x.xx
x.xx
x.xx – Data from this course was insufficient to perform an Independent Evaluation.
Due to an oversight of this section of the report by the new program chair, a complete set of
homework for all students was not collected. However, all exams were saved and from this
the following Independent Course Outcome Assessments were obtained:
Course Number
SO01
SO02
ELET 272 – Electronic
Circuit Theory II
4.00
5.00
3.62
5.00
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
4.28
5.00
The analysis indicates that students had difficulty with problems that depended on using
concepts learned in their introductory circuits classes.
C. Additional Information
Copies of all assessment instruments will be made available at the time of the on-site
visit; however, typical examples of the assessment documents are included for
informational purposes in Appendix E – Miscellaneous Forms and Documents.
64
CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM
A. Program Curriculum
1. Curriculum Listing
Refer to Table 5-1 (next page) for a listing of all courses contained within the Louisiana
Tech Electrical Engineering Technology curriculum.
65
Table 5-1 Curriculum
Electrical Engineering Technology
Indicate
Whether
Course is
Average
Course
Required,
Section
(Department, Number, Title)
Elective, or a
Last Two
Enrollment
List all courses in the program by term starting with first term of
Selective
Terms the
for the Last
the first year and ending with the last term of the final year.
Elective by R, Math & Discipline General
Course was
Two Terms
Basic
an E, or an
Offered: Year the Course
Specific Education
1
SE2
Sciences
Other and Quarter was Offered
Topics
Year 1 - Fall
F2012/F2013
ELET 100 – Introduction to Electrical Engineering Technology
R
1
10
W/Sp 2014
MATH 101 – College Algebra
R
3
46
W/Sp 2014
ENGL 101 – Composition I
R
3
25
W/Sp 2014
Art/Music Elective
SE
3
varies
Year 1 – Winter
W2012/W2013
ELET 170 – Electrical Circuits I
R
3
17
W2012/W2013
ELET 171 – Electrical Circuits I Laboratory
R
1
17
W/Sp 2014
MATH 112 – Trigonometry
R
3
44
F/W 2014
Computer Programming Elective
R
3
20
Year 1 – Spring
Sp2013/Sp2014
ELET 180 – Electrical Circuits II
R
3
14
Sp2013/Sp2014
ELET 181 – Electrical Circuits II Laboratory
R
1
15
W/Sp 2014
varies
History Elective
SE
3
W/Sp 2014
25
ENGL 102 – Composition II
R
3
Year 2 – Fall
66
Indicate
Whether
Course is
Average
Course
Required,
Section
(Department, Number, Title)
Elective, or a
Last Two
Enrollment
List all courses in the program by term starting with first term of
Selective
Terms the
for the Last
the first year and ending with the last term of the final year.
Elective by R, Math & Discipline General
Course was
Two Terms
an E, or an
Basic
Specific Education
Offered: Year the Course
1
SE2
Sciences
Topics
Other and Quarter was Offered
F2012/F2013
ELET 260 – Electronic Circuits I
R
3
19
F2012/F2013
15
ELET 261 – Electronic Circuits I Laboratory
R
1
W/Sp 2014
37
MATH 220 – Applied Calculus
R
3
W/Sp 2014
72
PHYS 209 –General Physics I
R
3
W/Sp 2014
22
PHYS 261 – General Physics I Laboratory
R
1
Year 2 - Winter
W2010/W2012
14
ELET 268 – Electrical Projects Laboratory I
R
1
W2010/W2012
20
ELET 270 – Instrumentation
R
3
W2012/W2013
21
ELET 271 – Instrumentation Laboratory
R
1
W/Sp 2014
71
PHYS 210 – General Physics II
R
3
W/Sp 2014
26
PHYS 262 – General Physics II Laboratory
R
1
Year 2 - Spring
Sp2012/Sp2014
25
ELET 272 – Electronic Circuits II
R
3
Sp2012/Sp2014
21
ELET 273 – Electronic Circuits II Laboratory
R
1
Sp2012/Sp2014
23
ELET 280 – Electrical Power I
R
3
Sp2013/Sp2014
23
MATH 223 – Applied Calculus for Elect. Tech.
R
3
Year 3 – Fall
F2012/F2013
13
ELET 370 – Introduction to Digital Circuits
R
2
F2012/F2013
13
ELET 380 – Printed Circuit Design and Fabrication
R
3
67
Indicate
Whether
Course is
Average
Course
Required,
Section
(Department, Number, Title)
Elective, or a
Last Two
Enrollment
List all courses in the program by term starting with first term of
Selective
Terms the
for the Last
the first year and ending with the last term of the final year.
Elective by R, Math & Discipline General
Course was
Two Terms
an E, or an
Basic
Specific Education
Offered: Year the Course
1
SE2
Sciences
Topics
Other and Quarter was Offered
W/Sp 2014
76
CHEM 100 – General Chemistry I
R
2
W/Sp 2014
varies
English or American Literature Elective
SE
3
Year 3 - Winter
W/Sp 2014
varies
Social Science Elective - 1
SE
3
W2012/W2013
19
ELET 360 – Electrical Power II
R
3
W2012/W2013
20
ELET 371 – Introduction to Digital Circuits Laboratory
R
1
W/Sp 2014
69
CHEM 101 – General Chemistry II
R
2
W/Sp 2014
22
CHEM 103 – General Chemistry Laboratory
R
1
Year 3 - Spring
Sp2013/Sp2014
21
ELET 374 – Introduction to Microprocessors
R
2
Sp2013/Sp2014
20
ELET 375 – Introduction to Microprocessors Laboratory
R
1
Sp2013/Sp2014
18
ELET 361 – Electrical Machinery Laboratory
R
1
W/Sp2014
varies
Social Science Elective - 2
SE
3
W/Sp2014
25
ENGL 303 – Technical English
R
3
Year 4 - Fall
F2012/F2013
23
ELET 422 – Control Systems I
R
3
F2012/F2013
22
ELET 423 – Control Systems I Laboratory
R
1
F2012/F2013
23
ELET 460 – Digital Data Communication Networks
R
3
F2012/F2013
20
ELET 475 – Capstone Design I
R
1
W/Sp 2014
varies
Technical Elective
SE
2
68
Indicate
Whether
Course is
Average
Course
Required,
Section
(Department, Number, Title)
Elective, or a
Last Two
Enrollment
List all courses in the program by term starting with first term of
Selective
Terms the
for the Last
the first year and ending with the last term of the final year.
Elective by R, Math & Discipline General
Course was
Two Terms
an E, or an
Basic
Specific Education
Offered: Year the Course
1
SE2
Sciences
Topics
Other and Quarter was Offered
Year 4 - Winter
W2012/W2013
22
ELET 461 – Digital Data Communications Laboratory
R
1
W2012/W2013
22
ELET 470 –Control Systems II
R
3
W2012/W2013
19
ELET 476 – Capstone Design II
R
1
W/Sp 2014
varies
Social Science Elective - 3
SE
3
W/Sp 2014
varies
SPCH 377 – Professional Speaking
R
3
Year 4 - Spring
W/Sp 2014
136
BISC 101 – Fundamentals of Biology
R
3
Sp2013/Sp2014
ELET 471 - Control Systems II Laboratory
R
1
21
ELET 472 – Professionalism and Ethics for Electrical
Sp2013/Sp2014
R
1
21
Engineering Technology
Sp2013/Sp2014
ELET 477 – Capstone Design III
R
1
14
W/Sp 2014
Free Elective
E
3
varies
TOTALS
30 Hrs
54 Hrs
36 Hrs 0 Hrs
OVERALL TOTAL CREDIT HOURS FOR THE DEGREE
PERCENT OF TOTAL
120
25.0%
* - All courses are offered on an annual basis.
69
45.0%
30.0%
0.0%
2. Alignment of the Curriculum with Program Educational Objectives
The Program has a broad-based curriculum designed to provide the knowledge and skills
that enable graduates to attain Program Educational Objectives. The curriculum provides
a diverse offering of courses in electrical circuit theory, electronic circuit theory,
instrumentation, control systems theory, digital circuits, microcontrollers, computer
networking, and electrical power. In addition, numerous laboratories provide hands-on
experiences and develop practical skills that serve to complement the theoretical
offerings. The effectiveness of the curriculum in preparing graduates for successful
professional careers is supported by positive feedback on the Program’s annual Alumni
Survey. The manner in which the curriculum supports attainment of Program Educational
Objectives is demonstrated in Table 5-2.
EO-01
EO-02
EO-03
EO-04
Table 5-2 - Relationship between Program Educational Objectives
and Courses in the Curriculum
ELET 100 - Introduction to Elect. Engrng. Tech.
ELET 170 - Electrical Circuit Theory I – DC Circuits
ELET 171 - Electrical Circuits I Laboratory
ELET 180 - Electrical Circuits II – AC Circuits
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 181 - Electrical Circuits II Laboratory
ELET 260 - Electronic Circuit Theory I
ELET 261 - Electronic Circuits I Laboratory
ELET 268 - Electrical Projects Laboratory I
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 270 - Instrumentation
ELET 271 - Instrumentation Laboratory
ELET 272 - Electronic Circuit Theory II
ELET 273 - Electronic Circuits II Laboratory
ELET 280 - Electrical Power I – Industrial Power
Distribution
ELET 360 - Electrical Power II – Electro-mechanical
Power
ELET 361 - Electro-mechanical Power Conversion
Laboratory
ELET 370 - Introduction to Digital Circuits
ELET 371 - Introduction to Digital Circuits Laboratory
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 374 - Introduction to Microprocessors
ELET 375 - Introduction to Microprocessors Laboratory
ELET 380 - Printed Circuit Board Design and Fabrication
X
X
X
X
X
X
Courses
70
X
X
X
ELET 461 - Digital Data Communications Laboratory
ELET 470 - Control Systems II – Analog Systems
ELET 471 - Control Systems II Laboratory
ELET 472 - Professionalism and Ethics for Elect. Engr.
Tech.
ELET 475 - Capstone Design I
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 476 - Capstone Design II
ELET 477 - Capstone Design III
MATH 223 - Applied Calculus for Electrical Technology
EO-04
EO-02
X
X
X
EO-03
EO-01
ELET 422 - Control Systems I – Discrete I/O Systems
ELET 423 - Control Systems I Laboratory
ELET 460 - Digital Data Communication Networks
Courses
X
X
3. Curriculum and Course Prerequisite Structure to Support Attainment of Student
Outcomes
Table 5-3 defines the linkages between the courses in the curriculum and the Student
Outcomes that each course supports. As stated earlier, each course has defined Course
Outcomes that it must achieve. These Course Outcomes link to one or more Student
Outcomes, and it is these course-level Course-Outcomes-to-Student Outcomes
relationships that enable a course to contribute to Student Outcomes attainment.
Although each course does not contribute to every Student Outcome, when the
relationships in Table 5-3 are applied across the curriculum, the curriculum addresses all
of the Student Outcomes. In addition to the CO-to-SO relationships, each course in the
curriculum has defined prerequisites that provide a logical, technical transition from one
course to the next in order to provide a firm foundation of knowledge as students
transitions through the curriculum. This prerequisite structure is depicted in Section
5.A.4 below.
ELET 170 – Electrical
Circuit Theory I – DC
X
X
71
SO-08
SO-09
SO-10
SO-11
SO-06
SO-07
ELET 100 - Introduction
to Elect. Engrng. Tech.
SO-05
SO-04
SO-03
SO-02
Courses
SO-01
Table 5-3 – Relationship of Courses in the Curriculum to the Student Outcomes
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 261 – Electronic
Circuits I Laboratory
X
X
X
X
ELET 268 – Electrical
Projects Laboratory I
X
X
ELET 270 Instrumentation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 280 – Electrical
Power I – Industrial
Power Distribution
ELET 360 – Electrical
Power II – Electromechanical Power
Conversion
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
72
SO-11
X
SO-10
ELET 260 – Electronic
Circuit Theory I
ELET 371 – Introduction
to Digital Circuits
Laboratory
X
SO-09
X
ELET 361 – Electromechanical Power
Conversion Laboratory
ELET 370 – Introduction
to Digital Circuits
X
SO-08
X
SO-07
ELET 181 – Electrical
Circuits II Laboratory
SO-06
X
SO-05
X
SO-04
ELET 180 – Electrical
Circuits II – AC Circuits
ELET 273 – Electronic
Circuits II Laboratory
SO-03
X
ELET 271 Instrumentation
Laboratory
ELET 272 – Electronic
Circuit Theory II
SO-02
SO-01
ELET 171 – Electrical
Circuits I Laboratory
Courses
ELET 423 – Control
Systems I Laboratory
X
X
ELET 460 – Digital Data
Communication
Networks
X
ELET 461 – Digital Data
Communications
Laboratory
X
X
ELET 470 – Control
Systems II – Analog
Systems
X
X
ELET 471 – Control
Systems II Laboratory
X
X
ELET 476 – Capstone
Design II
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 472 –
Professionalism and
Ethics for Electrical
Engineering Technology
ELET 475 – Capstone
Design I
SO-11
X
X
X
X
ELET 422 – Control
Systems I – Discrete I/O
Systems
SO-10
X
SO-09
X
SO-08
X
SO-07
X
ELET 375 – Introduction
to Microprocessors
Laboratory
ELET 380 – Printed
Circuit Board Design and
Fabrication
SO-06
X
SO-05
SO-02
X
SO-04
SO-01
ELET 374 – Introduction
to Microprocessors
SO-03
Courses
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 477 – Capstone
Design III
X
73
4. Course Prerequisite Flow Chart
ELET
100
MATH
101
MATH
112
MATH
220
MATH
223
ELET
170
ELET
180
ELET
260
ELET
268
ELET
171
ELET
181
ELET
261
ELET
272
ELET
270
ELET
273
ELET
271
ELET
470
ELET
471
ELET
370
ELET
371
ELET
374
ELET
422
ELET
375
ELET
423
ELET
380
ELET
280
ELET
460
ELET
461
ELET
360
ELET
361
ELET
472
SENIOR
STANDING
ELET
475
PERMISSION
SENIOR
STANDING
74
ELET
476
ELET
477
5. How the Program Meets the Curricular Areas of Table 5.1
a. Math and Basic Sciences [30 SCH]
Math Courses [12 SCH]:
The language in Criterion 5 that governs baccalaureate programs requires the
curriculum to contain math courses above algebra and trigonometry that are
appropriate to meet program Student Outcomes and Educational Objectives.
As seen in Table 5-1, the LA Tech EET Program requires MATH 101
(College Algebra) [3 SCH], MATH 112 (Trigonometry) [3 SCH], MATH 220
(Applied Calculus) [3 SCH] and MATH 223 (Applied Calculus for Electrical
Technology) [3 SCH]. These courses meet the requirements of the criteria.
Science Courses [14 SCH]:
Criterion 5 requires the Basic Science component of the curriculum to contain
either Physical or Natural Science courses that are appropriate to the
discipline.
The LA Tech EET Program requires BISC 101 (Biological Sciences) [3 SCH],
CHEM 100 (General Chemistry I) [2 SCH], CHEM 101 (General Chemistry
II) [2 SCH], CHEM 103 (General Chemistry Laboratory) [1 SCH], PHYS
209 (General Physics I) [3 SCH], PHYS 261 (General Physics Laboratory I)
[1 SCH], PHYS 210 (General Physics II) [3 SCH] and PHYS 262 (General
Physics Laboratory II) [1 SCH]. These courses provide the necessary Natural
Science, Physical Science and Laboratory experiences to fulfill the
requirements of the criteria.
b. Discipline-Specific (Technical) Topics [54 SCH]:
Criterion 5 requires the Technical Content of a program’s curriculum to:
• Focus on applied aspects of engineering and science,
• Constitute at least 1/3, but less than 2/3, of the total credit hours of the
program,
• Contain a technical core that prepares students for increasingly complex
courses later in the curriculum, and
• Develop student competency in the use of equipment and tools common to
the discipline.
An examination of the respective syllabi for the Science and Electrical
Engineering Technology courses listed Table 5-1 (Program Curriculum) will
show that the content of these course places significant focus on the application of
75
engineering and science. On this basis, the curriculum meets this requirement of
Criterion 5.
From Table 5-1 it is also seen that the Discipline-Specific (Technical) component
of the LA Tech EET Program is 54 credit hours that represent 45% of the total
hours in the Program. This value is greater than 1/3 (33.3%) and less than 2/3
(66.7%) and thus meets the requirement of Criterion 5.
A review of Section 5.A.4 (Course Prerequisite Flow Sheet) shows there is a
logical progression of courses, from left-to-right, representing increasing levels of
course complexity. It is also seen that ELET 170 (Electrical Circuit Theory I –
DC Circuits), ELET 180 (Electrical Circuit Theory II – AC Circuits), and ELET
260 (Electronic Circuit Theory I) form a triumvirate of EET coursework that
represent the “core courses” in the curriculum. With the exception of ELET 270
and ELET 280, all courses in the curriculum require ELET 260 as a prerequisite.
Other prerequisite requirements also exist for a few of the more complex courses.
The fact that core courses and a prerequisite structure exists indicates compliance
with Criterion 5.
Finally, Table 5-1 lists twelve laboratory courses. Although ELET 380 (Printed
Circuit Board Design and Fabrication) and the three Capstone Design courses,
ELET 475, ELET 476 and ELET 477, do not contain “laboratory” in their titles,
these courses are taught in a laboratory format. In total this represents eighteen
SCH of laboratory credit. In fact, almost all of the lecture courses in the LA Tech
EET Program have a companion laboratory where the validity of theory is
verified. These laboratories also form the venues where students develop
competency in the use of the tools and equipment common to the discipline. This
latter aspect allows the curriculum to meet the last requirement of Criterion 5.
6. How the Capstone Design Course Helps Student Outcomes Attainment
The EET Program has a series of three Capstone Design courses: ELET 475 (Capstone
Design I), ELET 476 (Capstone Design II) and ELET 477 (Capstone Design III). The
courses are offered in consecutive academic quarters beginning in the fall. Each course is
considered a laboratory and is taught in a three-contact-hour format. One SCH is
awarded for successful completion of an individual course.
The course sequence challenges students to perform a number of tasks that require
critical thinking and execution of typical engineering problem solving techniques.
Specifically, students:
•
•
•
•
•
Select a project for development,
Evaluate alternative methods for achieving the desired results of the project,
Evaluate any environmental, social, and ethical implications of the project,
Present a technical proposal for the design of the project,
Determine and procure the necessary equipment to fabricate the project,
76
•
•
•
•
•
•
Construct and test a prototype of the project design,
Troubleshoot and correct design flaws,
Collect performance data and analyze system performance,
Modify system design, if necessary, to meet performance goals,
Present an oral presentation that describes project development, and
Submit a formal report that documents all phases of project development and
provides a technical description of project design and operation.
Execution of the above tasks elicits knowledge and skills that are components of virtually
all of the Program’s Student Outcomes. In the LA Tech EET Program, the Capstone
Design process is not specifically designed, nor intended, to help students attain these
Outcomes. Rather, the Capstone Design process is a culminating activity, and by this
time, the Program expects students to have already attained the Student Outcomes. This
design series is actually intended as an assessment of the Program itself and how well it
has performed in meeting its objectives of delivering the knowledge and skills necessary
for students to attain the desired Student Outcomes. The Program uses feedback results
to improve the Capstone Design sequence and help determine areas of Program growth.
7. Cooperative Education
The Program does not have a formal cooperative education component.
8. Display Materials and Their Relationship to the Student Outcomes
The Course-to-Student Outcomes Matrix provides the relationships that will enable
evaluators to relate individual materials to the Student Outcomes.
a. Course Syllabi
Course syllabi for all courses are included in the Self-Study Report and will be
available at the time of the site visit. Each course syllabus contains references to the
Student Outcomes supported by the course, but the Course-to-SO Matrix is the most
efficient means to quickly identify a course(s) supporting a specific Student Outcome
and access specific syllabi.
b. Textbooks
Textbooks will be affixed with labels to identify the courses they support. Using the
Course-to-SO Matrix, an evaluator can easily determine the Student Outcome(s)
associated with that particular textbook.
c. Sample Student Work
All student work will be contained within binders having a label that identifies the
course number with which the work is associated. Again, using the Course-to-SO
77
Matrix, the Student Outcomes supported by that particular body of student work can
be easily identified.
d. Annual EET Program Evaluation Summaries
A binder containing all six of Annual Evaluation Summaries will be made available
for ease of reference. These contain information associated with all of the Student
Outcomes.
B. Course Syllabi
The reader is referred to Appendix A for all required syllabi. All sections of all required
courses in mathematics, science, and the Electrical Engineering Technology courses use a
common syllabus specific to the particular subject involved.
C. Advisory Committee
The Advisory Committee is referred to as the Electrical Engineering and Electrical
Engineering Technology Industrial Advisory Board, or simply IAB, and is composed of LA
Tech alumni, employers of EET graduates, and both EET and EE students. Due to this
composition, it is considered a microcosm of the EET Program’s constituency as shown
above in Figure 2-1. At full strength, the IAB is composed of eighteen members. The
constitution for the Board requires that one-third of this membership represent Electrical
Engineering Technology and two-thirds represent Electrical Engineering. The ratio is based
on historical values of undergraduate student enrollment numbers in both programs.
However, there is no requirement that either group hold degrees specific to the areas they
represent; although, the Board endeavors to achieve the representation by having members
elected along degree lines. Regardless of actual program representation, the entire Board
acts on matters relating to either the EET or EET Programs.
The Constitution of the Board recommends that the composition of the Board be diverse in
terms of industrial representation and extent of professional experience. As a result, the IAB
is represented by the electrical power industry (generation, transmission and distribution),
consulting engineering firms, the aerospace industry, and owners/partners in technical
businesses. Member experience ranges from three years to several decades.
The IAB also has non-voting representatives from Electrical Engineering Technology, EE
Undergraduates and EE Graduate students. From an employment standpoint, the EET
Program has graduates working in each of the above industrial sectors.
It is important to note that the IAB is a completely autonomous body, by design. Both the
EET and EE Programs believe that the IAB must be free of Program and Faculty bias if it is
to provide meaningful input. Although, the Program Chairs for both EET and EE act as
consultants and advisors to the Board, they cannot hold Board positions or vote on Board
matters by virtue of constitutional exclusion. In addition, the Programs have no control over
Board membership. New Board members are elected by sitting members from a list of
78
nominees proposed by existing Board members, the Program Chairs, EET and EE Faculty,
interested University groups and alumni of the programs.
IAB meetings are held bi-annually with one in the Fall Quarter and a second in the Spring
Quarter. Board meetings cover a broad spectrum of topics that concern the two Programs.
Typical subjects are Board membership, Outstanding Alumni nominations, reading and
approval of Board minutes, program updates by EE/EET Program Chairs, and miscellaneous
items that may come before the Board. When requested by the respective Program Chairs or
upon its own initiative, the Board conducts curriculum reviews, Educational Outcomes
reviews, and Student Outcomes reviews.
As a part of the annual Fall Meeting, the Board conducts a seminar for EE and EET students
that centers on “Industry’s Expectations of New Graduates.” This meeting provides
opportunities for Board members to directly interact with students as well as incorporate
information about the Educational Objectives of both the EE and EET Programs. In the
Spring Meeting, Board members interview junior/senior level students from both the EE and
EET Programs in order to gather information to enable the Board to make an assessment of
Student Outcomes attainment. The purpose of these interviews is to provide feedback to the
respective Programs regarding the Board’s position on Student Outcomes attainment.
Evidence of the IAB’s participation in the latter two activities can be found in IAB Meeting
Minutes.
All IAB Minutes can be found on the COES Assessment Portal. However, to cite just two
examples of Board participation, the Spring Minutes (2011-12) address both Educational
Outcomes and Student Outcomes for both the EE and EET Programs, and the Fall Minutes
(2013-14) address Educational Outcomes for both Programs. The Board has not been asked
to review the EET Program curriculum recently. During the most recent Spring 2014 Board
meeting special emphasis was given to some of the “soft” topics such as the student’s
understanding of professional and ethical responsibility, the need for lifelong learning, and
the need for a broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in
a global economic, environmental, and societal context. The students who were interviewed
agreed that the ELET 472 Professionalism and Ethics course brought a greater understanding
and awareness of these matters.
79
CRITERION 6. FACULTY
A. Faculty Qualifications
The concise faculty resumes shown in Appendix B show that the members of the Electrical
Engineering Technology faculty are well qualified with education and backgrounds to cover the
curricular areas. The primary emphasis of the Electrical Engineering Technology program is
industrial controls, with a growing secondary emphasis on data communications and network
administration. The following is a brief summary for each of the Electrical Engineering
Technology program faculty:
Mr. Glen Edward Deas is a Visiting Lecturer and Interim Program Chair of
the Electrical Engineering Technology Program. He was the second graduate
from Louisiana Tech University’s (then) Electro-Technology Program in 1974.
He earned his Masters Degree from Rochester Institute of Technology in 1975,
having received an Education Professions Development Act fellowship to train
as a two-year college teacher. He returned to Louisiana Tech in 1978 after
teaching for three years in a 2+2 Electrical Engineering Technology program at
Mohawk Valley Community College, Utica, NY, fulfilling the requirements of
the fellowship. He served on this faculty for nine years. He pursued additional education and
served as adjunct faculty at Arizona State University for one year while doing full time
genealogy research. He worked in the non-medical home care business for six years, then began
a second teaching career at Louisiana Technical College in the Computer and Networking
Support program in 1997. He retired in 2011 after fourteen years of service. He accepted his
current position at the beginning of the Winter quarter, 2013.
Dr. John William Ray, Jr. is an Associate Professor in the Electrical
Engineering Technology program. He earned his Doctorate of Engineering
from Louisiana Tech University in 1999. He has served on this faculty for 27
years and has previously served as the Coordinator for the program from
1989-2002. Dr. Ray’s technical expertise is in the area of computers and
electronics. He has served as a Research Instructor at Louisiana State
University Medical School. He also has eight years experience as a systems
and software engineer at E-Systems, NCR Corporation, and Gamma Products. Dr. Ray continues
to develop expertise in networking to enhance his general background in electrical engineering.
80
Dr. Mickey Cox is a Professor of Electrical Engineering. He has been a
member of the faculty for 25 years. His primary area of expertise is in electric
power systems, with emphasis on power quality, instrumentation and
measurement and energy conversion.. He teaches a wide variety of courses
within the Electrical Engineering program that include ELEN 321 (Linear
Systems), ELEN 481 (Power Systems), and ELEN 406, 407, 408 (EE Senior
Design). Mickey is a registered Professional Engineer in the state of Louisiana
and emphasizes the practical aspects of Electrical Engineering in his interactions with the senior
students. Mickey is also a Senior Member of IEEE.
Dr. Miguel Gates is a Visiting Assistant Professor in the Electrical Engineering Technology
program. He earned his Doctorate of Engineering from Louisiana Tech
University in 2013. He is a recent addition to the Electrical
Engineering/Technology department. Dr. Gates’s technical expertise is in the
area of Micro Aerial Vehicles, Wireless Sensor Networks, and control
algorithms. He still works closely with the Micro Aerial Vehicles and Sensor
Networks (MAVSeN) Lab at La Tech on cooperative control algorithms and
platform development.
Mr. James Eads was the former Program Chair of Electrical Engineering Technology, having
retired at the end of the Fall quarter, 2013. He obtained his Master of Science
degree in Electrical Engineering at Louisiana Tech University in 1978. He has
30 years of experience in industrial controls, including 2 years as an Associate
Engineer at Boeing, Aerospace Division and 23 years at International Minerals
and Chemical Corporation as an Electrical Engineer, Instrumentation and
Electrical Maintenance Superintendent, Instrumentation and Electrical Design
Supervisor, and Senior Electrical engineer. James has served full-time on the
faculty for the past 10 years and previously taught as an adjunct instructor for the program. He is
a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Louisiana and a member of IEEE and the ASEE.
He has personally experienced the rise and development of the programmable logic controller
(PLC) and distributed process control systems (DCS) to their current level of importance. He
provides the students with a strong combination of educational and experiential background in
this area.
81
Dr. Davis Harbour is a Lecturer and currently serves as the Program Chair
for Electrical Engineering. He contributes his time and efforts both to the
Electrical Engineering program and to the College’s freshmen engineering
curriculum. Davis has 18 years of industry experience and 13 years of
academic experience, and he teaches courses in circuits, microprocessors,
and digital design. He has taught ELEN 232 (Digital Design), 242
(Microprocessors), 321 (Linear Systems), 406/7/8 (Senior Design), ENGR
120 (Freshman Engineering), 121 (Freshman Engineering), and 221 (EE Circuits). His
enthusiasm for teaching led him to pursue a Lecturer position, and he enjoys being able to
interact with students from different engineering disciplines.
Dr. Paul Hummel is a full-time faculty member who obtained his Ph.D. in
Engineering at Louisiana Tech University. He has taught full-time for the
Electrical Engineering program for the past five years and has usually
taught 3 courses per term. He has primarily taught in the areas of circuits
and has taught ENGR 221 (EE Circuits), ELEN 223 (Circuits II), ELEN
232 (Digital Design), ELEN 322 (Digital Signal Processing), ELEN 423
(Embedded Systems), and ELEN 406/7/8 (Senior Design).
Dr. Sumeet Dua is the Director of Computer Science, Cyber Engineering,
Electrical Engineering, Electrical Engineering Technology, and Industrial
Engineering programs, and the Upchurch Endowed Professor of Computer
Science. He earned his Ph.D. in Computer Science and M.S. in Systems
Science at Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. His research
interests include data mining and data analytics, associative learning for
information fusion, bioinformatics, and content-based feature extraction for
pattern tracking. He has co-authored/edited five books and has published
over 60 peer-reviewed publications in these areas. His research has been funded by over $5
Million by the NIH, NSF, AFRL, AFOSR, NASA, and LA-BOR. He frequently serves as a
panelist for the NSF and NIH (over 25 panels) and has presented over 25 keynotes, invited
talks, and workshops at international arenas. He has also served as the overall program chair
for three international conferences and as a chair for multiple conference tracks in his research
areas. He is a Senior Member of the IEEE and the ACM, and a member of the AAAS.
B. Faculty Workload
The Electrical Engineering Technology Program currently includes two full-time faculty
members dedicated to the Electrical Engineering Technology Program and two Electrical
Engineering faculty available as subject matter experts as shown in Table 6-1. Error! Reference
source not found. Consistent with other programs in the college, the Electrical Engineering
82
Technology faculty consists of a blend of tenured and tenure-track faculty and non-tenure track
lecturers. Lecturer positions are full-time recurring appointments that have full-time teaching
loads of 27 SCH per year. With the current undergraduate Electrical Engineering Technology
enrollment of approximately 90 students, two full-time Electrical Engineering Technology
faculty and 2 Electrical Engineering faculty who teach part-time in the ELET program, the
student to faculty ratio is approximately 36:1. Class sizes are generally in the 15 – 25 student
range. The average teaching load of the full time faculty was 23 SCH for this past academic year.
83
Table 6-1. Faculty Qualifications
Electrical Engineering Technology
FT or PT4
Govt./Ind. Practice
Teaching
This Institution
Professional Registration/
Certification
Professional
Organizations
Professional
Development
Consulting/summer
work in industry
O
NTT
FT
6
26
9
None
Low
Low
Low
DEng, Computers and Electronics, ASC
1999
T
FT
8
27
27
None
Low
Low
Low
Mickey Cox
PhD, Electrical Engineering, 1986
P
T
FT
2
25
25
LA
Low
Low
Med
Miguel D. Gates
PhD, Electrical Engineering, 2013
O
NTT
FT
3
2
2
None
Low
Low
Low
James W. Eads, Jr (ret)
MS, Electrical Engineering, 1978
O
NTT
FT
30
10
10
LA
Low
Low
Low
Davis Harbour
PhD, Electrical Engineering 2006
O
NTT
FT
18
8
7
None
Low
Low
Low
Paul Hummel
PhD, Electrical Engineering 2008
O
NTT
FT
0
7
7
None
Low
Low
Low
Highest Degree Earned- Field and
Year
Glen E. Deas
MS, Engineering Technology, 1975
John W. Ray, Jr.
Faculty Name
T, TT, NTT
Type of Academic
Appointment2
Level of Activity
Rank 1
Years of
Experience
H, M, or L
Instructions: Complete table for each member of the faculty in the program. Add additional rows or use additional
sheets if necessary. Updated information is to be provided at the time of the visit.
1. Code: P = Professor ASC = Associate Professor AST = Assistant Professor I = Instructor A = Adjunct O =
Other
84
2. Code: TT = Tenure Track T = Tenured
NTT = Non Tenure Track
3. The level of activity, high, medium or low, should reflect an average over the year prior to the visit plus the two
previous years.
4. At the institution
85
Table 6-2. Faculty Workload Summary
Electrical Engineering Technology
Program Activity Distribution3
% of
Time
Devoted
to the
Program5
Faculty Member (name)
PT
or
FT1
Glen E. Deas
FT
ELET 270/3, W13; ELET 271/1, W13; ELET 461/1, W13; 100
ELET 272/3, Sp14; ELET 374/2, Sp14; ELET 375/1, Sp14;
EET 490B/2, Sp14
0
0
100
John W. Ray, Jr.
FT
ELET 100/1, F13; ELET 170/3, W13; ELET 180/3, Sp14; 100
ELET 181/1, Sp14; ELET 260/3, F13; ELET 261/1, F13;
ELET 280/3, SP14; ELET 360/3, W13; ELET 460/3, F13;
ELET 470/3, W13; ELET 471/1, Sp14; ELET 472/1, Sp14;
ELET 490A/1, F-W-Sp 13-14; ELET 490B/2, F-W-Sp13-14;
ELET 490C/3, F-W-Sp13-14
0
0
100
Mickey Cox
FT
ELET 361/1, SP14
90
10
0
20
Miguel D. Gates
FT
ELET 273/1, Sp13; ELET 370/2, F13; ELET 475/1, F13; 80
ELET 171/1, W13; ELET 371/1, W13; ELET 476/1, W13;
ELET 477/1, Sp13
10
10
80
James W. Eads, Jr. (Retired)
FT
ELET 380/3, F13; ELET 422/3, F13; ELET 423/1, F13
100
0
0
100
Davis Harbour
FT
ELET 374/2, Sp13;ELET 375/1,Sp13
100
0
0
20
Paul Hummel
FT
ELET 272/3, Sp13; ELET 273,Sp13
100
0
0
20
Sumeet Dua
FT
0
0
100
20
1.
2.
Classes Taught (Course No./Credit Hrs.) Term and Year2
FT = Full Time Faculty or PT = Part Time Faculty, at the institution
For the academic year for which the self-study is being prepared.
86
Teaching
Research or Other
Scholarship
4
3.
4.
5.
Program activity distribution should be in percent of effort in the program and should total 100%.
Indicate sabbatical leave, etc., under "Other."
Out of the total time employed at the institution.
87
C.
Faculty Size
The Electrical Engineering Technology program is a relatively small program that has an
approximate enrollment of 90 students. The program has a mixture of lecturer and tenured
faculty. Faculty associated with program are listed in Tables 6-1 and 6-2. There are two faculty
fully dedicated to the program (Deas and Ray) and the entire Electrical Engineering faculty
available as subject matter experts. Electrical Engineering faculty listed in Tables 6-1 and 6-2 are
ones who have taught ELET courses in the past academic year. Program leadership is provided
by the Electrical Engineering Technology Program Chair (Glen Deas), Electrical Engineering
Program Chair (Dr. Davis Harbour), and the Director (Dr. Sumeet Dua). The Program Chair
leads discussions about curricular and student issues and sees that resource requests flow
appropriately to the Leadership Team of the college. The program chair has primary
responsibility for updating and assessing the curriculum, coordinating student advising and
recruiting, monitoring retention, assuring that degree requirements are met by graduating
students, and assisting students with placement. Quarterly student advising duties are shared
among the faculty primarily involved in the Electrical Engineering Technology program. The
program chair was selected by the Leadership Team after consultation with the faculty in the
program. The Academic Director is primarily responsible for faculty and staff workload
assignments, budget allocations, and faculty evaluations, as well as strategic direction and
promotion of cross-college interactions with the Electrical Engineering Chair and Electrical
Engineering Technology Program Chair.
D. Professional Development
Professional development of both faculty and staff is strongly encouraged within the COES. The
COES regularly sponsors professional development programs that are generally well attended by
faculty. Recent programs included the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
COES Laboratory Safety Procedures
Automating Student Presentation Grading in Moodle
Moodle Collaboration Tools
Multidisciplinary Design Projects
Solid Edge: A Desirable Simulation Tool for Freshmen?
The Ethics Challenge Game for Classes
The first event of the year for new COES faculty is a half-day new faculty orientation program.
This supplements a New Faculty Academy sponsored by the University’s Center for Educational
Excellence (CEE) that meets weekly during the fall quarter. At the New Faculty Orientation
program, COES administrators and staff personnel present overviews of their respective
functions and services that they provide to faculty. Topics include an overview of the
undergraduate curriculum, graduate student advising and research proposal preparation
procedures, purchasing and travel regulations, and information technology services and support.
88
Further, in depth coverage of these and other topics is provided through subsequent sessions of
the New Faculty Academy.
The COES will pay first year dues for new faculty members who join the American Society for
Engineering Education. Faculty who receive professional development grants as awards,
professorships (~30 in COES) or program chair stipends may use these funds for professional
society membership dues and other similar professional development activities. Faculty who are
registered professional engineers in Louisiana, Alabama or Mississippi are required to participate
in continuing education activities for at least 15 hours per year. Participating in COES programs
helps them meet that obligation. The COES will reimburse the preparation, exam, and travel
costs associated with obtaining registration as a professional engineer.
The Louisiana Tech Center for Academic and Professional Development (CAPD), located
on the 10th floor of Prescott Library, provides on-going professional development opportunities
for University faculty, staff, and graduate assistants. Programs include orientation of new faculty,
training programs for graduate teaching assistants, workshops and seminars on effective
instructional and assessment strategies, staff development programs, and consultations with
individual faculty and staff. Programming is based on data collected from faculty and staff
through surveys, interviews and evaluation of current programs by program participants. The
center houses numerous print, video, and electronic resources on teaching and learning. The
Center for Academic and Professional Development is a division of the Office for Academic
Affairs. The Innovative Instructional Committee, a University committee that includes faculty
representing each of the colleges, advises the work of the center.
The Center for Academic and Professional Development was founded to serve as a resource for
Louisiana Tech University faculty, staff, and graduate assistants. The Center is committed to
supporting faculty in their roles as teachers, scholars, and members of the university community;
providing opportunities for staff to enhance their professional skills; and supporting graduate
assistants as they begin their academic careers. Center activities are designed to promote a spirit
of innovation, collaboration, and love of learning as well as enhance a sense of collegiality
among the university family as they expand their intellectual, professional, teaching, and
personal horizons.
The Center for Instructional Technology (CIT) at Louisiana Tech University provides support
in the development, maintenance, and application of instructional technology systems, both
emerging and existing. Through training, demonstrations, and technical assistance, the Center
provides activities, programs, and resources in an effort to assist faculty members in improving
teaching and scholarship in the traditional and non-traditional classroom. The CIT is a division
of the Office for Academic Affairs.
89
TENURE AND PROMOTION
The Tenure and Promotion Guidelines in COES at Louisiana Tech specifically address the role
of interdisciplinary collaboration. It is important that candidates for tenure and/or promotion
exhibit a sense of shared responsibility for the smooth functioning and betterment of the
University. Clear and honest differences of opinion about academic priorities, resource
allocation, and academic standards need to be voiced without fear of repercussions. Singular
research interests and research styles also need to be respected. However, unwillingness to
accept reasonable program or collegiate responsibilities and a pattern of disruptive interactions
with faculty, staff and students is not acceptable. The College of Engineering and Science
encourages and promotes team research and proposal writing. In judging teamwork on projects
and publications involving multiple investigators and authors, the senior principal investigator
and lead author should be noted. However, the intention is to give multiple credit where it is due.
For example, a co-principal investigator on a proposal or project who fully shares intellectual
leadership, responsibility, and effort should receive as much credit as the senior principal
investigator. To allow this assessment, candidates must document their role in major cooperative
projects and multiple-author refereed papers.
The faculty in the College of Engineering and Science are outstanding. The College of
Engineering and Science views faculty recruiting as the most important strategic activity for the
Dean and administrative staff. The success of our search for new faculty will have the most
significant impact on success of the College strategic plan. The Dean and College Leadership
Team reviews the stats of the individual faculty searches at every weekly meeting. On-campus
interviews follow phone and video interviews, and include both teaching and research
presentations. The Dean personally interviews each on-campus candidate for one hour, providing
an overview of the College administrative structure and strategic goals. We typically receive
over 100 applications for each advertised position and in some cases over 300 applications.
E.
Leadership
Leadership Responsibilities
Beginning in September 1994, the College of Engineering began discussions of restructuring the
college to provide a more integrative and innovative environment. At the same time, the School
of Science, including mathematics and statistics, chemistry and physics, was merged with the
College of Engineering to establish what is now the College of Engineering and Science
(COES). The proposed restructuring plans were discussed several times with the faculty, staff,
College advisory board, and several departmental boards, and a new administrative structure was
established for implementation in 1995. If the traditional department structure had been retained,
the new COES would have one Dean, two Associate Deans, and eleven twelve-month
department heads, for a faculty size of only about 100.
90
The merger and the restructuring have enabled the COES to expand and enhance the degree
offerings, especially for interdisciplinary graduate degrees.
Leadership Team
The Leadership Team, consisting of the Dean, Associate Deans, and five Directors, plus rotating
Associates, works together as a learning, cohesive, decision-making team. The Leadership Team
is responsible collectively for strategic planning, faculty evaluations and hiring, budget, and
resource development.
Faculty
While faculty members hold appointments and earn tenure in specific academic disciplines such
as Electrical Engineering or Physics, they may be involved in one or more curriculum areas
(such as the Integrated Engineering Curriculum Team) or research centers (such as the Institute
for Micromanufacturing.) The curricular areas referred to here include those which bridge
several disciplines, such as the freshman experience, integration of senior design experiences,
development of mechanics courses, laboratories which cross departmental lines, and joint
research projects. Some of these teams continue for years, while others disband when a particular
solution is developed and implemented. Teams are self-forming as clusters of faculty choose to
work on new initiatives or pursue opportunities.
Program Chairs
The academic programs remain the focus of our activity and planning. Each program has a chair,
a person in a non-administrative faculty appointment whose job is very different from that of a
traditional department head. That person is expected to spur discussions about curricular and
student issues, and to see that resource requests flow appropriately to the Leadership Team. The
Program Chairs have primary responsibility for student-related issues, such as updating and
assessing the curriculum, coordinating student advising and recruiting, monitoring retention,
assuring that degree requirements are met by graduating students, and assisting students with
placement. Program chairs are selected by the Leadership Team after consultation with faculty in
the program. They are selected for their demonstrated concern for the students, vision and
knowledge for improving the program as well as the entire college, and communication skills.
Program chairs are provided approximately 20-40 percent release from teaching or other duties
depending on the size of the program (faculty, students, course offerings).
Directors
The Directors are primarily responsible for faculty-related issues such as workload assignments,
budget allocations, and faculty evaluations, as well as strategic direction and promotion of crosscollege collaboration. Directors also lead interdisciplinary teams in accomplishing the College’s
strategic plan. Each Director may be administratively responsible for more than one academic
91
program, and those programs may change periodically, and have done so. This flexible structure
serves to inhibit the development of new “silos” in larger program clusters. Having several
academic programs and faculty teams under one director has effectively reduced many of the
"turf" issues that normally exist in a university environment. The Directors regularly discuss the
performance and workload of all COES faculty (e.g. for merit raise evaluations), the faculty
recruiting needs of the entire COES, and the research/service activities of the faculty. Directors
are chosen primarily for their administrative and communication skills and not for their technical
skills. Consequently Directors do not necessarily supervise faculty from their own academic
discipline.
Associate Deans
The Associate Deans have specific duties (undergraduate studies, research and graduate studies,
respectively). The Dean maintains a coaching role for the Directors, Associate Deans, and
Center Directors and works primarily in development and long-range planning.
Leadership Team Associates
Two or three members of the faculty are invited to serve as Leadership Team Associates each
quarter. This mechanism enhances communication to faculty and understanding of
administrative issues, and also enhances Leadership Team decision-making. LT Associates,
since 1996, have been chosen from among all areas in the COES, including untenured faculty,
senior faculty, instructors, faculty who were supportive of the changes, faculty who resisted the
changes, all disciplines, Center Directors, and even faculty members or administrators from other
colleges at Louisiana Tech.
Center Directors
Each research center in the College is led by a Center Director. The Center Director reports to
the Dean but participates with the faculty in the College by supporting seed projects, managing
specific technical and staff resources, promoting collaboration, setting directives within specific
research concentrations, and assisting with evaluation and support of faculty. All centers are
highly interdisciplinary and faculty members may freely participate in any center.
Table 6-3 Administrative Positions in the College of Engineering and Science
Position
Dean (Interim)
Executive Associate Dean for Research
Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies
Associate Dean for Graduate Studies
Academic Director for CSC, CYEN, ELEN, ELET
and INEN
92
Person
Dr. Hisham Hegab
Dr. Bala Ramachandran
Dr. Jenna Carpenter
Dr. James Palmer
Dr. Sumeet Dua
Academic Director for BIEN and CMEN
Academic Director for CVEN, CVTE, MEEN
(Interim)
Academic Director for CHEM, NSEN and PHYS
Academic Director for MATH and STAT
Dr. Eric Guilbeau
Dr. David Hall
Dr. Lee Sawyer
Dr. Bernd Schroeder
Table 6-4 Non-Administrative Academic Service Positions (Program Chairs)
Program
Biomedical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Civil Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Industrial Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Nanosystems Engineering
Construction Engineering Technology
Electrical Engineering Technology
Chemistry
Computer Science
Mathematics and Statistics
Physics
Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering
Ph.D. in Computational Analysis
Modeling
Ph.D. in Engineering
93
Program Chair
Dr. Steve Jones
Dr. Daniela Mainardi
Dr. Jay Wang
Dr. Davis Harbour
Dr. Jun-Ing Ker
Dr. Henry Cardenas
Dr. Sandra Zivanovic
Dr. Norman Pumphrey
Mr. Glen Deas
Dr. Collin Wick
Dr. Jean Gourd
Dr. Bernd Schroder
Dr. Kathleen Johnston
Dr. Eric Guilbeau
and Dr. Weizhong Dei
Dr. Jim Palmer
Table 6-4 Research Center Directors
Research Center
Center for Applied Physics Studies
Center for Biomedical Engineering
Rehab. Science
Institute for Micromanufacturing
Trenchless Technology Center
Center for Secure Cyberspace
Center Director
Dr. Neven Simicevic
and Dr. Eric Guilbeau
COES Budget Manager
Dr. Niel Crews
Dr. Erez Allouche
Dr. Vir Phoha
Ms. Sharon Ellis
F. Authority and Responsibility of Faculty
Proposals for course creation, modification, and evaluation are generated by faculty members in
an academic program. The process for approval is outlined in Louisiana Tech Policy 2301
(http://www.latech.edu/administration/policies-and-procedures). Suggestions for course or
curriculum changes may come from a variety of sources and stakeholders, and based on a variety
of assessment data and processes, as outlined in this report in Criteria 3 and 4. A course change
or addition is thoroughly discussed and approved at the academic program level, prior to
submission for College-level or University-level consideration. Requests for changes are
forwarded from the program by the Program Chair to the Associate Dean for Undergraduate
Studies, who has discretion to forward those requests to the University, or to request Leadership
Team discussion, or to convene an ad-hoc committee. From the Associate Dean for
Undergraduate Studies, by authority of the Dean of the College of Engineering and Science,
requests for changes are sent to the University Instructional Policies Committee (IPC).
The Instructional Policies Committee (IPC) is an examining and recommending body and makes
its recommendations to the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Academic
Vice President reviews these recommendations with the Council of Academic Deans, of which
he is Chairman, and this group makes recommendations to the President. The President of the
University makes all final decisions. New degree programs must be approved by the Board of
Supervisors for the University of Louisiana System, and the Board of Regents for Higher
Education in Louisiana.
POLICY FOR ESTABLISHING A NEW COURSE
Proposals normally should originate with the faculty of a Department under its appropriate
leadership. A course should be thoroughly discussed and approved at the Departmental level
prior to submission for College-level or University-level consideration.
94
The Instructional Policies Committee requests a description and justification of a proposed
course which should be as clear and as specific as possible. While lecture-by-lecture details are
not necessary, the outline should nevertheless plainly indicate the content and the objectives of
the course. The IPC exercises extreme care to avoid needless duplication of instruction on the
same subject at the same level in different Departments (programs in COES) and Colleges.
Major consideration is also given to student needs and to strength of course offerings in related
areas.
Prerequisites specified for a course should realistically delineate the advance preparation
requirement of students entering the course. Prerequisites should not be redundant, but should
specifically list the highest levels of achievement that students entering the course will be
expected to have.
POLICY FOR MINOR CHANGE IN AN EXISTING COURSE
Individual Departments (programs in COES) are authorized to make minor editorial changes in
the catalog descriptions of their courses without formal submittal through the IPC by requesting
approval directly from the Vice President for Academic Affairs via written memo. A minor
change is defined as slight changes in one of the following: course title, prerequisites, or course
description. Changes in course credit or credit hours are never considered minor. If the changes
are not considered minor, they will be returned to the appropriate Unit Head for submission to
IPC.
POLICY MAJOR CHANGE OR DROPPING OF AN EXISTING COURSE
Changes in course numbers, credit hours, number of hours of lecture and laboratory per week,
and substantial changes in course content or prerequisites are considered to be major changes.
A strong effort is made to coordinate changes in existing courses with all academic programs
that have an interest in the course. The IPC will attempt to resolve any lack of Interdepartmental
coordination, but the most desirable procedure is to take care of these matters before submitting
the request for change to the Office for Academic Affairs.
POLICY FOR DROPPING OR CHANGING AN EXISTING CURRICULUM, OPTION,
OR DEGREE PROGRAM
The procedure for obtaining approval for dropping or changing substantially an existing
curriculum, option, or degree program is identical to that for establishing a new curriculum or
option. After approval by the appropriate on-campus bodies, the request will be submitted to the
Board of Supervisors and to the Board of Regents.
95
POLICY FOR ESTABLISHING A NEW DEGREE PROGRAM
Requests to establish new degree programs are developed with input and discussion among
academic program and college faculty with review and approval of appropriate campus units.
Constitutionally, new degree programs are established by approval of the Louisiana Board of
Regents following statewide adopted policies and procedures. The procedure involves
submission of a Letter of Intent to the University of Louisiana System Board of Supervisors and
Board of Regents for initial consideration. If approved, the institution will submit a full program
proposal for consideration by both Boards. External reviews are required for selected
undergraduate and all graduate level programs. Degree programs cannot be initiated until final
proposal approval is granted by the Board of Supervisors and Board of Regents.
SPECIAL TOPICS COURSES
A procedure for approval of college special topics courses has been established by the Council of
Academic Deans to encourage the development and offering of new special topics courses.
Special topics courses may be proposed by faculty with program support. The college dean, if
recommending the offering, will submit a request to offer, including rationale and course
syllabus, to the Council of Academic Deans for approval. If approved, the course offering will be
forwarded to the President for final approval. Special topics courses will be identified with the
college designation, appropriate course numbers (189/194, 289/294, 389/394, 489/494, and
589/594), and topic title. An approved course may be offered two times in the special topics
category. If the department wishes to continue the offering, the course must be submitted and
approved in accordance with IPC (or Graduate Council if graduate course) policy and procedure.
96
CRITERION 7. FACILITIES
A. Offices, Classrooms and Laboratories
The COES is distributed through 10 buildings with approximately 350,000 square feet of space.
The Biomedical Engineering Building (BEC, 52,000 sq. ft.) was dedicated in May, 2007, and the
Trenchless Technology Research Facility (8,000 sq. ft.) was dedicated in December, 2007,
adding another 60,000 square feet. The main engineering building, Bogard Hall, was
constructed in 1939 and renovated in 1982 (central air conditioning provided). Bogard Hall
houses the following academic programs: Chemical Engineering, Civil Engineering,
Construction Engineering Technology, Industrial Engineering and Mechanical Engineering. The
courses in the integrated curriculum are also taught in Bogard Hall. Nethken Hall houses
Computer Science, Cyber Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Electrical Engineering
Technology. It received exterior renovation in the 2003-2004 academic year. Carson-Taylor
Hall houses Nanosystems Engineering, Chemistry and Physics. The Engineering Annex, which
houses the Center for Applied Physics Studies and the Trenchless Technology Center, was built
in 1946.
The COES should begin on a new building in the 2014-2015 academic year, which will include:
Classrooms and laboratories for:
General & Integrated Chemistry (CHEM 100, 101, 102, 103, 104)
Integrated Physics (PHYS 201, 202, 261, 262)
Integrated Math (MATH 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245)
Freshman Integrated Engineering (ENGR 120, 121, 122)
Sophomore Integrated Engineering (ENGR 220, 221, 222)
Multidisciplinary Senior Design
Offices for engineering and science faculty who teach these classes and conduct
educational research
Support areas for equipment storage, preparation of classroom demonstrations,
technical support staff, prototyping lab, and machine shop
Administrative offices for Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies, Student Success
Specialist, and proposed center for E&S education research
Meeting rooms for freshman, sophomore, senior and faculty teams
An open reception area for project displays
When a space need arises (e.g., a new project is funded, a student design project requires
workspace, enrollment grows in a program), a faculty member makes a request through the
Center Director or Director, outlining the specific function and estimated space requirements.
The Director may discuss the space need with the impacted faculty members, other Directors, or
the entire Leadership Team, depending on the scope and scale of the need and the availability or
97
allocation of impacted space. Finally, changes to the current allocation plan are approved by the
Dean and Leadership Team.
•
Major Instructional and Laboratory Equipment
College of Engineering and Science faculty have been successful in obtaining funds
from the Board of Regents Support Fund (Lab Enhancement Program). The Lab
Enhancement Program of the Support Fund considers proposals from engineering,
computer science and engineering technology programs on a rotating basis.
Approximately half of the engineering disciplines are eligible in a given year (on a
three-year cycle: half of engineering one year, half of engineering the next year, no
engineering programs the third year of the cycle). The cycle enables each program to
submit multiple requests but only every third year or in a multidisciplinary category.
During the 2011-12 cycle of funding, the College was awarded approximately
$190,000 in funds for Computer Science, Mechanical Engineering, and Nanosystems
Engineering, enabling purchase of new equipment for a robotics lab, prototyping lab
and a new tabletop scanning electron microscope. During 2012-13, the College was
awarded approximately $200,000 in funds for Civil Engineering Mechanical
Engineering, enabling purchase of new equipment for the structural testing lab,
material testing lab, and a new highway testing lab. For the 2013-14 cycle of funding,
the College has received approximately $200,000 of funding for the Biomedical and
Nanosystems Engineering and Chemistry programs, which will provide funds for new
lab equipment in these programs. During the 2013-14 academic year, the College
acquired a total of $367,239 in new laboratory equipment from a combination of
COES Lab Fees, BORSF enhancement funds, and Student Technology Fee funds. In
the previous year, a total $421,470 was expended for laboratory and classroom
improvements from these same funding sources.
During 2013-14, the COES Lab Fee was used for repairs of a tabletop SEM in
Nanosystems Engineering lab and flexible manufacturing lab repairs in Industrial
Engineering, renovations in Chemistry labs and lecture classrooms, new instructional
equipment for thermodynamics courses for all engineering majors, purchase of a new
3D printer for the freshman engineering curriculum, repairs to MTS testing
equipment for Civil and Mechanical labs, enhancement of a communications lab in
Electrical Engineering, and some general classroom improvements, totaling
approximately $120,000. In the previous year of 2012-13, the Lab Fee was used to
make additional classroom improvements, purchase a new ironworker and band saw
blade welder for manufacturing labs and senior projects, provide new experiments
and equipment for Electrical Engineering labs, purchase additional instrumentation
for physics labs, and provide matching funds for the Board of Regents enhancement
proposals mentioned above.
Students at Louisiana Tech University pay $5 per credit hour per quarter to enable the
University to provide current technology, such as computers and wireless Internet
98
access. Academic programs may make appeals to the University Student Technology
Fee Board (STFB) for specific needs that require current technology. In 2011, the
STFB approved a total of $150,000 in funds for the COES, which enabled purchases
of new computers and equipment for computer science and cyber engineering
programs and a laser cutting prototyping system for student projects. In 2012, the
STFB approved a total of $100,000 in funds for the COES, which enabled the
purchase of computers for molecular modeling for Chemical Engineering and
Nanosystems Engineering programs, and additional computers and software for
chemical analysis to support Chemistry and Chemical Engineering programs. In
2013, the STFB approved a total of $55,000 in funds for the COES, which enabled
the upgrade of two COES classrooms with lecture capture capabilities, including
Nethken Hall Auditorium.
The Electrical Engineering Technology Program is housed in Nethken Hall with
Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, and part of the College and University
Technical Services personnel.
The first floor houses the joint Electrical
Engineering/Electrical Engineering Technology/Computer Science Administrative
Office.
All Electrical Engineering Technology instructional classrooms and laboratories are
located in Nethken Hall. The location of these facilities near faculty offices fosters
opportunities for closer student-faculty interactions both during and after official
contact hours. The Electrical Energy Conversion Laboratory is housed on the first
floor.
The Communications Laboratory, the Electronics and Measurements
Laboratory, the Senior Projects Laboratory, the Circuits Laboratory, the Controls
Laboratory/Printed Circuit Board Fabrication Laboratory, and the EE Controls
Laboratory are all located on the second floor.
All teaching laboratories have adequate floor size and can accommodate from 10
(electrical machinery) to 16 persons (circuits, communications, electronics, controls).
All lecture classrooms are equipped with standard student desks, blackboards, and
overhead multimedia display systems having a computer interface. The Small Group
Learning Classroom (Nethken Hall 122) has group tables to facilitate group activities.
Finally, the auditorium (Nethken Hall 140) has an excellent multimedia display
system and is used extensively by all programs.
The Electrical Engergy Conversion Laboratory (Nethken Hall 100/104) is used as
a teaching laboratory for the required course ELET 361, Electromechanical Power
99
Conversion Laboratory. The laboratory houses transformers, a 15-hp dynamometer,
and electrical machines of various types including synchronous motors/generators,
induction motors, and DC motors. The laboratory also has a variety of digital and
analog instrumentation, including a 3-phase BMI power meter, Tektronix current
probes, an HP low-frequency spectrum analyzer, an SRS SR785 dynamic signal
analyzer and a Valhalla Scientific micro-ohmmeter. The lab also has 8 computer
workstations which run PSCAD, a GUI interface to the EMTDC electromagnetic
transient simulator engine.
The Communications Laboratory (Nethken Hall 200) is used as a teaching
laboratory for Electronics, Communications, and Instrumentation and is equipped as
an 8-station laboratory for Electronics and Instrumentation and as a 4-station
laboratory for Communications. It is equipped with Tektronix 2445 oscilloscopes,
HP 33120A Function Generators, HP 8920A and 8557A spectrum analyzers, Agilent
Technologies N9020A MXA Signal Analyzers, Emona TIMS-301C
Telecommunications Modeling Systems, AOR AR5000 receivers, DVMs, triple
power supplies, protoboards, and Degem communications equipment for 4 stations.
The Electronics and Measurements Laboratory (Nethken Hall 201) is used as a
teaching laboratory for Electronics and Instrumentation (ELET 261, 271, 273, and
371).
In AY 2006 – 2007, National Instruments ELVIS circuit simulation and testing
systems were acquired through an allocation from funds generated by a COES
Laboratory Fee.
Eight associated Dell Optiplex 320 microcomputers are housed in the Electronics and
Measurements Laboratory.
Each microcomputer is equipped with Multisim’s
Electronic Workbench (EWB) simulation software, including the MultiMCU
microcontroller add-on, and Microsoft Office. The ELVIS systems did not produce
the kinds of outcomes that were hoped for, and the upgrades to the systems were too
cost prohibitive. The Multisim EWB programs are being used extensively for circuit
simulation experiments, and the breadboard on the ELVIS systems are still used for
actual hardware circuit fabrication and testing using conventional methods.
The Circuits Laboratory (Nethken Hall 218) is equipped as an 8-station facility and
is used as a general circuits (ELET 171 and ELET 181) and electronics (ELET 271
and ELET 273) laboratory. Each station is equipped with a Rigol DG1022
Function/Arbitrary Function Generators, assorted DVMs, B&K triple power supply,
and a Rigol DS1120E 100 MHz digital oscilloscope.
In addition to this fixed
equipment, access is readily available to generic laboratory devices such as decade
boxes and additional AC and DC power supplies.
100
The Controls Laboratory (Nethken Hall 230) is used for ELET 423 – Control
Systems I and ELET 471 – Control Systems II. It is equipped with fifteen 3 GHz.
computers, five Allen-Bradley 5/20 PLCs, five Allen-Bradley SLC 500 PLCs and the
specialized software required for PLC support. The computers, SLC 500 PLCs and
associated SLC 500 software were obtained in AY 2005 – 2006 with a grant from the
Student Technology Fee Committee using funds generated by a student-assessed
University-wide technology enhancement fee. The Electrical Engineering Technology
program was allocated $15,000 from the COES Lab Fee fund during AY 2013-2014
to purchase 18 Siemens Simatic S7-1200 Compact PLC systems with software which
will be used for the first time during AY 2014 – 2015.
The Printed Circuit Board (PCB) Laboratory (Nethken Hall 230) is used for ELET
380 and shares space with the ELET Controls Laboratory. This laboratory is
equipped with fifteen 3.0 GHz computers used to provide instruction in the use of
Multisim and Ultiboard application software whereby students design and lay out
printed circuit boards. Students in the capstone design courses also use this
laboratory to support their project printed circuit board (PCB) needs. A T-Tech
Quick Circuit 5000 milling table and associated IsoPro software are capable of
producing PCBs for operation in the lower microwave range. When used in
conjunction with Ultiboard PCB layout software, the QC5000 is capable of producing
printed circuit boards with trace widths as small as 4 mils.
B. Computing Resources
The University has approximately one hundred smart classrooms created on campus.
Approximately ten of these are classrooms used primarily by COES students. There
are approximately five different computer laboratories within COES. Additionally,
virtually all COES classrooms that are not included in the university Smart Classroom
project have been equipped with ceiling mounted computer projection systems using
COES Laboratory Fee funds.
The College has a published requirement for all entering freshmen to have a laptop
computer. Licensing and software distribution agreements have been formed with
software publishers so that there is no longer a compelling need for central computer
laboratories. Small laboratories are maintained in each COES building for student
convenience. These are in addition to the three University-maintained computing
laboratories (one of which allows 24/7 access). All COES buildings are equipped
with secure wireless network access. In addition to the University funded access to
Microsoft Office products, COES students purchase Mathcad and SolidWorks at
greatly reduced prices as freshmen. Licensed network access to ANSYS, FLUENT,
and MATLAB is provided on a class-by-class basis.
101
Louisiana Tech is one of the six points of presence on a statewide supercomputing
grid consisting of six 512-core Dell supercomputers located on research university
campuses (including Louisiana Tech) and a 5440-core Dell supercomputer in a
dedicated facility in Baton Rouge. These computers are connected by the highbandwidth (40 Gbps) Louisiana Optical Network (LONI), which is in turn tied to
national high speed networks (Internet 2). The Board of Regents has allocated $8M
in FY 2014 for upgrading LONI’s high-performance computing hardware. Current
plans call for increasing the computing capacity of LONI from the current ~80
TFLOPS (trillion, or 1012, floating point operations per second) to ~2 PFLOPS (1015
floating point operations per second) by early 2015.
These various computing facilities and resources are adequate to meet the scholarly
and professional activities of the students and faculty in the COES.
C. Guidance
The Louisiana Tech University Office of Environmental Health and Safety
(http://www.ltadm.latech.edu/envirosafety/) is responsible for providing guidance and
direction to all university departments regarding environmental and safety matters for
employees and students. The Louisiana Tech University Laboratory Safety Manual is
distributed to all deans, directors, and department heads and is available for download
from the above mentioned website. This manual provides safety guidelines for all
types of laboratory equipment and materials. Every student registered in a laboratory
course is required by the University to sign a “hold harmless” agreement at the
beginning of the course, and every laboratory instructor is required to provide a safe
laboratory environment for faculty and students and to conduct appropriate laboratory
safety training prior to engaging in laboratory activities.
The chemistry program provides safety training through required reading of safety
instructions (http://www.latech.edu/~deddy/LabSafety.html), viewing a safety
training video, and completing a brief quiz on chemical and lab safety topics.
Chemical laboratory safety training begins in the Chemistry Laboratory sequence
(CHEM 103 and 104). Students are given training on Biological Safety as they begin
the freshman biology sequence (BISC 130 and 131). In addition, students are
required to attend a Biological Safety lecture when they begin the Animal Physiology
Laboratory course (BISC 321). Students are not allowed to access to laboratory
facilities in the Biomedical Engineering building if they have not attended this
lecture.
No student may work in shop areas alone, and nobody is permitted to work in shop
areas after hours unless a responsible faculty member is present and monitoring the
activity. When a scheduled laboratory is in progress, only students and class
instructors are allowed in the laboratory / shop area. Non-compliance with safety and
use procedures will be reported to the appropriate Director and/or Dean of the
College. In addition to safety, another key issue addressed by these procedures is
maintenance (regular clean up). Safety and training for individual laboratory / shop
102
areas is handled by the instructor(s) who teach those courses. Safety rules are posted
in all laboratory areas.
D. Maintenance and Upgrading of Facilities
For the past sixteen years, the University has collected a student approved technology
fee of $5/semester hour ($60 maximum per quarter) to be used for enhancing student
related technology on campus. The fee generates over $1 million per year and is
expended in response to proposals coming from the colleges, student service units,
and the Student Government Association. Customarily the largest awards go to
proposals for enhancement of “smart” classrooms, computer laboratories, and
infrastructure (servers, wireless networking, Internet bandwidth, etc.). Virtually all
COES classrooms that are not included in the university Smart Classroom project
have been equipped with ceiling mounted computer projection systems using COES
Laboratory Fee funds described below.
COES LABORATORY FEE
The costs of maintaining current laboratories for students in engineering and science
have increased dramatically. Student experiences in College laboratories and classes
must model the current technology used by employers of our students. This
technology goes beyond basic computing and instructional technology and includes a
wide variety of analytical, test, processing and characterization instrumentation. The
COES and the University as a whole have undertaken very specific strategic plans to
increase our national reputation, and our actual capability, in engineering and science.
Keys to recent successes have been the recruiting of students with strong academic
credentials, curricular innovations, and the hiring of outstanding faculty. Enrollment
increases have resulted in over 2000 students in the College, seeking undergraduate
degrees in eight engineering programs, two engineering technology programs, and
four science programs, or seeking graduate degrees in most of these areas, plus
interdisciplinary degrees at the master’s and doctoral levels. To capitalize on these
developments and to maintain our momentum, the University approved a COES
Student Laboratory Fee of $40 per quarter per student in 2005.
Funds from this fee are used to enhance instructional laboratories and to meet other
technology-related needs in the College and will meet a large portion of the actual
needs. Our faculty and our alumni obtain the additional funds through grants and
donations from industrial partners.
103
Lab Needs and Developments: The College received approximately $200,000 in
funds from the Board of Regents Support Fund (BORSF) during 2011 to purchase
new laboratory equipment in support of instructional laboratories in Biomedical
Engineering, Nanosystems Engineering and Computer Science. In addition,
approximately $200,000 in needs were met from funds provided through the student
laboratory fee ($40 per student per quarter) during 2011. In the 2012-13 academic
year, the College acquired $421,470 in new laboratory equipment from a combination
of COES Lab Fees, BORSF enhancement funds, Student Technology Fee funds, and
competitive grants programs. In 2013-14, total funding of new equipment and
lab/classroom improvements from these sources were $367,239.
COES Student Lab Fee – Allocation Process
There are three local stakeholders in this process: (1) students, (2) faculty, and (3)
administration. Each of these groups may have different views of how the available
funds should be spent. However, since the fee is born by the student body for
improving lab facilities, the following guidelines are used when making spending
decisions.
•
A team of students, faculty and administrators develop the allocation policy for
the lab fee. The team consists of the elected officers of the Engineering and
Science Association, one faculty member from each building housing
instructional laboratory equipment (Bogard Hall, Nethken Hall, Carson-Taylor
Hall), and the Dean of the College.
•
All expenditures are summarized in an annual report made available to all the
stakeholders. The system is transparent so that it’s clear where all of the money is
spent. The laboratory needs that have been identified by the faculty and by the
students are represented in a comprehensive COES Lab Needs listing, containing
information about the needed equipment, its purpose, its location, academic
programs which may benefit, approximate cost and approximate priority. The list
also indicates needs that have been met and the source of funds.
•
The lab fee is used for improving undergraduate and graduate classrooms and labs
as all students pay these fees. Items to be purchased include things like laboratory
supplies and equipment, laboratory furniture, software, and equipment calibration
and maintenance. The funds are used for instructional laboratory support (e.g.
additional technical staff), and renovation of buildings or rooms.
•
The majority of the funds are applied toward major initiatives, such as matching
money for laboratory enhancement grants or for purchasing costly lab and
classroom items. Student approval for these initiatives is mandatory. Examples of
such initiatives are purchasing desks for classrooms, purchasing a tensile testing
machine, or equipping a classroom with new data acquisition capabilities.
COES Technician Support
104
COES Technical Support Staff are listed below:
COES Technical Support Staff
Position
1. Technical Supervisor
2. Network Engineer
3. LA-SiGMA IT Technician
4. Specialized Technician/Machinist
5. COES Webmaster
Person
Ray McKinney
Bill Jones
Abdul Khaliq
Jimmy
Cook
Brandy McKnight
1. Technical Supervisor (Ray McKinney), principally dedicated to operation and
maintenance of the machine shop including safety and student/faculty training and
supervision.
2. COES Network Engineer (Bill Jones) located in Bogard Hall for computer support.
3. LA-SiGMA IT technician for maintaining Nanosystems Modeling Laboratory and HDPolycom communication systems, from external grant.
4. Specialized Technician/Machinist (Jimmy Cook) responsible for all machining and
mechanical maintenance functions in the COES.
5. COES Webmaster (Brandy McKnight) located in Bogard Hall.
Institute for Micromanufacturing Technical Support Staff
Position
Person
Associate Director of Operations
Philip Coane
Specialized Technician
Deb Wood
Senior Research Engineer
Ji Fang
Asst. Professor Research
Alfred Gunasekaran
University Technical Support Staff which also helps COES
Position
Person
LAN/UNIX
Network
Danny Schales
Administrator
IT Coordinator
Chris Womack
Director Technical Services
Chris Henderson
Systems Engineer
Michael Watson
The responsibility for all computer and projection services in Nethken Hall computer labs
falls to the University Technical Services Department (which is also housed in Nethken
Hall). This seven-person team is led by Chris Henderson.
105
Areas of Need
Computer Support
Network
Passwords
Software Installations
Student Computer Labs
Upper level software
Computer Support
Hardware Problems
Printers
Specialized Computer Support
Access Grid
Grids & Clusters
Web Page - Design Maintenance
Inventory Control
COES Chemical Stockroom
Student Project Support
Training
Supervision
General Administrative Support
Simple Repairs
Clean-up
Moving
Car Maintenance
Machining
Issuing Building Keys
Supervision
Technical Staff)
(Who
manages
Assigned Responsibility
COES Network Engineer - Bill Jones
University Technical Services - Chris
Henderson
LA-SiGMA IT Technician (supported by
external grant – Abdul Khaliq)
Brandy
McKnight
and
COES
Media/Graphics Specialist - Estevan Garcia
COES Inventory Supervisor – Jim Palmer
Property Custodian named for each building
Danny Eddy (currently serving Chemistry)
Technical Supervisor - Ray McKinney
Specialized Technician/Machinist - Jimmy
Cook
Ray McKinney
Ray McKinney, reporting to David Hall
E. Library Services
Prescott Memorial Library provides a wide array of resources and services, including
an increasing number of services that are delivered electronically. Traditional library
resources include 460,000 books, 570,000 microforms, and 2000 periodical
subscriptions. The library is a U.S. Government Documents Regional Depository, one
of only 51 in the nation, a U.S. Map Depository, and a State of Louisiana Documents
Historical Depository. The library houses over 2,600,000 government documents. In
addition to these traditional materials, the library has numerous electronic resources
available in the library or through its web page at http://www.latech.edu/library
106
Library services are available to provide access to additional resources in several
ways. The Interlibrary Services department provides rapid response to requests by
using a web request form. Digital technologies are used to provide Internet document
delivery, and a statewide courier service provides book delivery. The ScienceDirect
database of journals is available to faculty, staff and graduate students and has
monthly limitation amounts. The time between an Interlibrary Loan Request and the
receipt of printed material is 1-3 weeks, while digital materials may be available
within 48 hours from a link in an email.
The Louisiana Tech University Library subscribes to the American Library
Association’s Inter-Library Loan Code, which makes virtually every major College
and University library available to Tech’s faculty and graduate students. The Library
is a member of OCLC. Through this organization the library can request materials for
interlibrary loan from over 2,000 libraries electronically.
The Louisiana Tech Library is a member of LaLINC, Louisiana Academic Library
Information Network Consortium, representing the academic libraries of Louisiana.
LaLINC is the sponsor of LOUIS, Louisiana Online University Information Systems,
an online network of library catalogs. A LaLINC Borrowing Card may be requested
to use other state academic libraries. Materials must be picked up and returned to the
owning library.
The Library also provides bibliographic instruction, reserved book services, book
ordering, special class assignment instruction, and thesis binding.
An increasing emphasis is being placed on electronic books and media. A survey of
COES faculty has shown that electronic versions of serials are much preferred over
paper copies. The library is working to convert as many serials to electronic
subscription as possible. Since 2004, the library has offered an extensive electronic
collection of engineering reference and handbooks through the Knovel ebook service.
These ebooks are used in several Electrical Engineering classes.
The following is a list of specialized databases and electronic resources for the College of
Engineering and Science:
ACS Publications - Provides full-text articles of all journals published by the American
Chemical Society beginning with the first issue of publication, as far back as 1879, up until the
present.
107
AGRICOLA – 1970 to date coverage of the literature of agriculture created by the National
Agricultural Library and its co-operators.
Biological Abstracts –Comprehensive life science and biomedical research database
(primarily abstracts) from more than 6,000 journals with coverage from 1969-present.
Computer Science Index - Indexes academic journals, professional publications, and other
reference sources at the highest scholarly and technical levels of computer science. It covers
more than 6,500 periodicals and books with coverage going back to the mid-1960s.
Emerald Journals – Full text articles from 150 peer-reviewed journals dating from 1994.
Subject areas include management, marketing, human resources, operations, economics, library
and information services, information management, training and education, and engineering.
Engineering Village 2 - Comprehensive index to literature in all major fields of engineering.
It provides primarily citations to journal articles, technical reports, books, conference
proceedings, and patents. Covers 1969-present.
IEEE Xplore – Access to IEEE and IET (IEE) transactions, journals, magazines, and
conference proceedings published since 1988 with select content since 1913. All current IEEE
standards are also included.
IMechE Proceedings Archive 1847-1996 Institution of Mechanical Engineers - Provides
direct access to over 200,000 pages of unique material, including technical papers, obituaries,
meeting reports, technical drawings, and editorial comment covering influential and innovative
years of engineering development.
Institute of Physics (IOP) – Provides an electronic table of contents with abstracts and
articles to over 50 journals published by the IOP since 1994. Historic archive extends coverage
on some titles from 1874 to 1993.
Internet and Personal Computing Abstracts - Index for literature related to personal
computing products and developments in business, the Internet, the home, and all other applied
areas of over 400 of the most important trade and professional publications.
JSTOR – An electronic archive of full text of 500 peer-reviewed academic journals in the
areas of the humanities, social sciences and sciences. Complete runs of the journal backfile are
included.
Knovel - Electronic book database which offering access to over 500 scientific and
engineering reference resources including subjects such as Food Science and Bioengineering.
MathSciNet – Produced by the American Mathematical Society, this database offers access
to mathematical reviews and current mathematical publications from 1940 to the present.
108
Medline and Medline with Full Text – Citations and abstracts to international biomedical
literature from over 3,700 journals.
Physical Review Online Archive - Provides full-text access to approximately a dozen
physics journals published by the American Physical Society with coverage from 1893 to 2000.
Project Muse - An online collection of over 3000 scholarly journal titles from 40 university
and society presses. Subjects include art, anthropology, classics, culture and society,
demographics, economics, folklore, history, language, literature, mathematics, medicine, and
health, philosophy, politics, religion, science, sociology and others. Coverage varies according to
title (1993-present)
PubMed – National Library of Medicine web site with over 14 million citations to
biomedical articles.
Science and Technology Collection - Contains over 830 leading journals and more than
1,740 publications covering relevant aspects of the scientific and technical community. Topics
include aeronautics, astrophysics, chemistry, computer technology, geology, aviation, physics,
archaeology, and materials science.
Scopus - Index of scientific, technical, medical, and social science disciplines covering 1966present.
Overall Comments on Facilities
Laboratory Safety
The Electrical Engineering Technology program works as a team with the Electrical
Engineering program which shares most of the laboratory spaces to ensure the facilities, tools,
and equipment used in the programs are safe for their intended purposes. Special needs are
brought to the program meetings periodically and actions, if needed, are taken immediately by
the program chairs communicate and follow up with the program Director.
109
CRITERION 8. SUPPORT
•
Leadership
The College of Engineering and Science’s innovative administrative and leadership structure
was established in order to facilitate the College’s vision “to be the best college in the world
at integrating engineering and science in education and research”. Louisiana Tech embarked
on an experiment aimed at developing a truly interdisciplinary education and research
environment. In 1995, the departments of Chemistry, Mathematics and Physics joined with
the College of Engineering to create the College of Engineering and Science. At the same
time, academic departments, department heads, and departmental budgets were eliminated.
The current administrative structure of the COES is as follows: the major administrative
decisions in the College are made by a Leadership Team (LT) comprising the Dean,
Associate Deans, and Directors which meets once a week. Each Director has administrative
responsibility for the faculty in one or more academic disciplines (tenure, promotion, raises,
grievances, etc.). Student advising and other program-specific tasks are handled by nonadministrative Program Chairs in each discipline. The College budget, formerly divided into
departmental budgets, is now divided into “routine expenses” (copiers, telephones, supplies,
etc.) and “strategic plan budgets.” A staff team monitors routine expenses while faculty
teams make recommendations for the remainder of the budget so as to implement the
strategic plan of the College. In this environment, cross-disciplinary collaboration between
faculty and students is the norm rather than the exception. By eliminating departmental
boundaries and budgets, some of the most insurmountable administrative barriers for
interdisciplinary work have been overcome.
This structure is dynamic, breaking down traditional barriers to innovation and resource use.
As such, the essential elements are in multi-disciplinary teams and interactions, rather than a
focus on specific organizational lines and boxes.
Detailed descriptions of the responsibility of the program leadership (dean, associate dean for
undergraduate studies, director and program chair) are given below.
Dean – responsible for overall leadership and management of the college, representation of
the college on campus, tenure and promotion process and decisions, evaluation of COES
administrators, major research and curriculum development, and external relations,
accreditation and assessment, strategic planning/budget/reporting
Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies – responsible for undergraduate recruiting,
retention, scholarships, undergraduate records management, registration and graduation
issues, undergraduate program review and assessment, coordination of course scheduling,
learning environment and resources, and faculty development for teaching.
Directors - responsible for overall administrative and management of academic program,
resource allocation, faculty and staff assignments and evaluation, faculty recruiting, tenure
and promotion, budget management and approval, and fostering interdisciplinary research
and curriculum collaboration.
110
Program Chair – responsible for coordination of advising, recruiting, retention, scholarships,
curriculum, assessment, placement and degree requirements at the programs level.
The Director, Program Chair and program faculty meet on a regular basis to discuss and
manage the business of the program, including course scheduling, curricular
issues/changes/innovations, accreditation and assessment, facilities, retention, alumni
relations, advisory board and employer interactions, and student professional and honors
organizations.
Table 8-1. Administrative Positions in the College of Engineering and Science
Position
Person
Dr. Hisham Hegab
Dean
Associate Dean for Undergraduate
Studies
Dr. Jenna P. Carpenter
Executive
Research
Associate
Dr. Ramu Ramachandran
Associate
Studies
Dean
for
Dean
for
Graduate
Dr. James D. Palmer
Dr. Eric Guilbeau
Director for BIEN, CMEN
Director for CSCI, ELEN, ELET,
CYEN, INEN
Dr. Sumeet Dua
Interim Director for CVEN, CVTE,
MEEN
Dr. David Hall
Director for CHEM, PHYS, NSEN
Dr. Lee Sawyer
Director for MATH and STAT
Dr. Bernd Schroder
Development Director
Catherine Frasier
Table 8-2. Non-Administrative Academic Service Positions (Program Chairs)
Program
Program Chair
Biomedical Engineering
Dr. Steve Jones
Chemical Engineering
Dr. Daniela Mainardi
111
Civil Engineering
Dr. Jay Wang
Electrical Engineering
Dr. Davis Harbour
Industrial Engineering
Dr. Jun-Ing Ker
Mechanical Engineering
Dr. Henry Cardenas
Nanosystems Engineering
Dr. Sandra Zivanovic
Construction Engineering Technology
Dr. Norm Pumphrey
Electrical Engineering Technology
Dr. Glen Deas
Chemistry
Dr. Collin Wick
Computer Science
Dr. Jean Gourd
Mathematics and Statistics
Dr. Bernd Schroder
Physics
Dr. Kathleen Johnston
Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering
Dr. Eric Guilbeau
Ph.D. in Computational Analysis and Dr. Weizhong Dai
Modeling
Ph.D. in Engineering
Ph.D. in Molecular
Nanotechnology
Dr. James Palmer
Sciences
and Dr. Ramu Ramachandran
Table 8-3. Research Center Directors
Research Center
Center Director
Center for Applied Physics Studies
Dr. Neven Simicevic
Center for Biomedical Engineering and Dr. Eric Guilbeau
Rehab. Science
Institute for Micromanufacturing
Dr. Niel Crews
Trenchless Technology Center
Dr. Erez Allouche
Center for Secure Cyberspace
Dr. Vir Phoha
112
Integrated STEM Education Research Dr. Kelly Crittenden
Center
COES Research Budget Manager
•
Ms. Carrie Kelly
Program Budget and Financial Support
Budget Process
Alignment of the budget to support the overall strategic needs of the organization is done in
industry, but rarely in higher education. More frequently, budgets are distributed to
departments based upon enrollments, numbers of faculty, numbers of classes/laboratories
taught, or other measures. The expenditure plan utilized by the COES provides
approximately 50 percent of college resources for routine supplies. All routine supplies for
all programs are handled centrally through the Accounting and Purchasing Team. The
remaining budget (50 percent) is allocated through the strategic plan and the program faculty.
The programs are allocated funds based on the number of faculty. Program teams (facilitated
by Program Chairs) make decisions based on the unique needs of the individual programs.
Even though the total amount specifically budgeted for each program is relatively small, this
provides some flexibility to meet specific program needs while meeting routine needs and
maintaining the strategic focus of the College. In fact, COES spending for faculty and student
needs has increased proportionally as cost savings associated with bulk purchases and copy
contracts have been passed on.
Strategic Planning
The College uses strategic planning as a tool to focus our improvement efforts. There has
been broad stakeholder participation in development and implementation of these plans. Our
Engineering and Science Foundation (ESF) Board and program advisory boards have helped
us stay on track through active participation in process improvement and through a regular
review of performance metrics. Responsibility for execution of the strategic plan rests with
teams composed of cross-disciplinary faculty, staff and students. In response to
recommendations from the ESF Board, we have aligned the College budget with the strategic
plan to ensure that resources are appropriately aligned with strategic directions, our mission
and vision. Budget allocations are provided to teams. Other operating funds are distributed
according to the strategic plan. A budget for each section of the strategic plan is prepared and
adopted annually. Funds are not necessarily allocated equally among the areas, since each
task does not require the same amount of resources.
Faculty Participation
One of the objectives of the restructuring was to promote faculty and staff participation in
important decision-making processes. Although the Dean and Leadership Team have final
approval on all team recommendations, these recommendations have rarely been reversed.
113
Some teams are responsible for instructional laboratory equipment, graduate studies, research
and economic development, communications and other resources. Accomplishments of these
teams include:
•
•
•
•
A common pool of travel funds to stimulate research productivity (managed entirely by a
faculty team, this is the largest single pool of travel funds in the COES)
A comprehensive listing of graduate courses to balance degree program needs with
faculty workload constraints, resulting in a reduction in low enrollment courses
(developed by a faculty team with participation by all programs)
Policies for graduate assistantship assignments
A faculty workload policy developed by faculty in 1996 that is concise, practical and has
survived regular review.
Each strategic focus area in our strategic plan is managed by a faculty team. The team may
include staff, student members and members from outside COES. The team has complete
authority to manage the funds allocated to it by the Leadership Team. The team is also
responsible for ensuring that the tasks and objectives are accomplished, even though other
faculty teams and individuals may be more directly involved in implementing the tasks. A
member of the Leadership Team serves as a facilitator for each Team, responsible to ensure
that the team meets and reports regularly.
Resource Sharing
There has also been much more of a focus on college-wide resource sharing. For example,
Civil and Mechanical Engineering share materials testing labs, thereby increasing the
availability of equipment and reducing redundancy in new purchases. The Electrical
Engineering and Electrical Engineering Technology program share all of their equipment and
laboratories and computer facilities are often shared with the Computer Science program, as
well. Faculty in these programs have teamed together to write equipment proposals that have
enabled us to provide significant upgrades to the laboratories. We have also moved toward
consolidated computer labs in the college because all engineering freshman are required to
have a laptop computer and it is strongly recommended for all freshman in the College.
These facilities can be scheduled by any instructor or are generally available for all students
otherwise. As demand for these facilities increase, the College allocates resources for
expansion and upgrading. We have considerable sharing of laboratories, space, and
equipment between the sciences and engineering. Chemistry, chemical engineering, civil
engineering and biomedical engineering faculty routinely share chemical test equipment. In
general, our faculty and students are now much more focused toward open access and
sharing than homesteading and protecting.
Staff Support
Staff utilization has also improved by consolidating certain functions. All secretarial and
technician support staff operate as cross-functional staff teams. For example, an Accounting
and Purchasing Team handles most purchasing requests, travel requests, bulk purchases, and
budgeting information for the entire College except for research center activities. Removal of
these responsibilities from the program secretaries provides them with more time to respond
to the needs of program faculty and students. The technicians, who had previously reported
114
to different individual departments, now serve college-wide functions. All of these teams are
fully responsible for managing, planning and improving processes related to their functions.
They report to the Leadership Team through one of the Directors, who has the responsibility
to see that academic program laboratory needs are being met. Some changes have
periodically been made in the staff team organization and processes in response to feedback
or process improvement studies.
Sources of Financial Support
The COES state-funded operating budget, which includes categories of supplies, equipment
(office and laboratory), travel and other operating support, totals $171,125 in 2013-14. In
addition, students in COES pay an enhancement fee of $37 per quarter which generates
approximately $220,000 per year and a laboratory fee of $40 per quarter which generates
approximately $260,000 per year. These funds may be used in general ways to support the
college, including operating support, equipment, and staff. In total, these sources provide
over $650,000 per year of university funds budgeted for support of the 95 faculty, 50 staff
and 2,000 students.
In recent years, the university has implemented purchasing procedures, such as the use of
purchasing cards and no bidding on laboratory scientific research equipment up to $10,000,
which facilitate faculty research. Some purchasing issues remain, however, which hinder
faculty research. One of those is the six-week purchasing moratorium from mid-May through
June, implemented by the university to facilitate end-of-year accounting. During this time
period, faculty cannot use purchasing cards to order resources, unless the item(s) can be
delivered prior to June 30. Faculty can complete purchase requisitions during this time period
but only for items that will not arrive until after July 1. Bid packages can be prepared and
reviewed for ordering during this time frame, but the items cannot actually be ordered until
after July 1. While some items can be anticipated and purchased before the 6-week window
(provided the funds are available during that time period), faculty often do not know they
will need specific items until their research is underway. Because faculty utilize the summer
months to accomplish larger and more intensive research projects, these purchasing
restrictions serve as a serious impediment to research productivity.
The faculty has been active in submitting grant proposals to state and federal agencies that
resulted in approximately $200,000 in funds for lab equipment in 2014 from the Louisiana
Board of Regents Support Fund for Laboratory Enhancement. In 2011-12 and 2012-13
academic years, the College received $190,000 and $200,000, respectively, from the
Louisiana Board of Regents Support Fund for lab enhancements.
Teaching Support
The College has an annual budget of $106,439 for student workers. A significant portion
of this is allocated for student workers to help assist the program offices, but 30% is
allocated to direct support of student workers to assist faculty in helping with
maintenance, operation, and clean up of labs and grading. Additionally, the college has
provided graders from these funds for the freshman and sophomore engineering
courses (ENGR 120-122, 220-222). The College also has a $1M university budget for
graduate assistantships. Graduate students receiving funding from the College’s
115
assistantship budget are expected to work 20 hours/week. A significant number of the
graduate assistants are assigned to support laboratories and grading for the chemistry,
mathematics, and physics programs since these programs have a significant service
component to the university. Several graduate assistants are also assigned to our
engineering and computer science programs where the directors, program chairs, and
faculty assign them specific laboratory and/or grading duties. The Associate Dean of
Graduate Studies, Dr. James Palmer, manages the assignment of assistantships to the
programs. During the 2013-14 academic year, approximately 30 PhD graduate
assistants were assigned as teaching assistants to assist the engineering, engineering
technology and computer science programs within the college.
Process for Acquiring, Maintaining, and Upgrading Facilities, Equipment
There are multiple sources that the program and faculty can submit requests for
acquiring, maintaining, or upgrading infrastructure to support the academic program.
As previously mentioned, each program within the College has a small discretionary
budget allocated each year that could be used for minor maintenance needs. A College
laboratory fee was established in 2005 that provides approximately $260,000 per year
for acquiring and maintaining equipment and lab facilities. The dean solicits requests
for the use of these funds on a regular basis from the Program Chairs who coordinate
requests from their program faculty. These requests include a brief description of the
equipment/facility request, its intended purpose, cost estimate, courses and degree
programs impacted, point of contact for implementation, and priority level. These
requests are maintained in the COES lab needs spreadsheet, which is also available
through the College intranet site. Twice a year, the COES Lab Fee Team composed of the
Dean, faculty representatives, and student members meets to review the
comprehensive list of lab needs and make allocations of these funds. These funds are
also used to provide matching resources for equipment proposals submitted to state
and federal agencies that target equipment and facility upgrades to teaching
laboratories. The table below provides a listing of equipment and maintenance projects
that have been funded by the COES Lab Fee for the past three years. When combined
with external grants from state funding, over $1.1M in equipment and infrastructure
improvement projects have been supported using these funds during the past three
years.
In addition to the COES Lab Fee, the University has a Student Technology Fee Board
(STFB) that is charged to all students and accepts proposals each fall to fund projects to
enhance technology across the campus. Any academic program may submit a proposal needs
that require current technology. In 2011, the STFB approved a total of $150,000 in funds for
the COES, which enabled purchases of new computers and equipment for computer science
and cyber engineering programs and a laser cutting prototyping system for senior projects. In
2012, the STFB approved a total of $100,000 in funds for the COES, which enabled the
purchase of computers for molecular modeling for Chemical Engineering and Nanosystems
Engineering programs, and additional computers and software for chemical analysis to
support Chemistry and Chemical Engineering programs. In 2013, the STFB approved a total
of $55,000 in funds for the COES, which enabled the upgrade of two COES classrooms with
lecture capture capabilities.
116
Table 8-1 COES Laboratory Equipment Acquistions Through Student Technology Fee
Equipment
Purpose
Approx.
Cost
Match for NMR and UV
CHEM 253-254
spectrometers BOR enhancement and 353-354
grant
Raman inspection system
NSEN
303,
406-408
Particle analyzer
Building
(Location)
$70,000
CTH
$86,100
BOGH
Programs
Affected
Priority
(A, B, C, D)
CHEM,
CMEN, BIO
BoR
Lab Fee
2014
BoR
Lab Fee
2014
BoR
Lab Fee
2014
BoR
Lab Fee
2011
Lab
2013
NSEN,MEE
N
Grant
Match
Grant
Match
BIEN, NSEN
$49,947
BEC
BIEN,
NSEN
PHYS 416, 417,
418, 419
$60,000
CTH
PHYS
BIEN 425
$2,519
BEC
BIEN
BIEN 426
$3,000
BEC
BIEN
Lab
2013
Fee
Repair of Tabletop SEM in
NSE 201, NSE
micro/nano lab
senior design
$3,500
BOGH 104
NSE
Lab
2013
Fee
Flexible manufacturing
repairs
$4,000
BH 118
Lab
2013
Fee
Modern
enhancements
Physics
Lab
LabVIEW,
version
update
current
MATLAB licenses for BIEN
Lab
repair
machining
NC
117
INEN
530,
413,
Grant
Match
Grant
Match
Fee
Renovation
for
Chemistry Laboratory
Organic
CHEM 253-254
$4,560
CTH
$10,000
BOGH
ENGR
Lab
2013
Fee
$10,000
GTM
MATH
Lab
2013
Fee
ENGR
120
(impeller printing),
ENGR 122, senior
design projects
$11,000
BOGH
All
Engineering
Lab
2013
Fee
Siemens Compact PLC's with
Upgrade PLC
Displays
lab
to
current
technology
MTS
Testing
Machine
Restore
Review/Repair
function of the two
servo-hydraulic
controlled materials
testing
machines
supporting research
Optical Fiber communications
ELEN 461, 469,
enhancements
463
$15,000
NH 230
ELET
Lab
2013
Fee
$10,000
115 BOGH
CVEN,
MEEN
Lab
2013
Fee
$15,000
NH
ELEN,
CYEN
Lab
2013
Fee
Upgraded
Thermodynamics
Enhance
and
Instructional Equipment
strengthen
initial
Thermoscience ed.
experience
Computers/tablets for MATH
MATH courses
instructors/lecturers
Stratsys 3D printer
118
CHEM,
Lab
CMEN, BIEN, 2013
NSEN
Fee
$10,000
renovate
chemistry lecturer
rooms (CTH 322,
328)
Civil Environmental Lab
Environmental
$10,000
lab needs for ABET
Visit
150 kip vertical actuator for
Subjecting of
$126,25
7
dynamic load applications
cementations,
metallic
and
thermoplastic
specimens
to
dynamic
loads.
CVEN 202, CVEN
427, CVEN 343,
CVEN 450, CVEN
506
The LFE-500 (Life, Fatigue,
MEEN
361,
$33,007
Endurance) testing machine
MEEN 462, CVEN
202, MEMT 206,
MEMT 577
Chemistry lecturer
(1) Rolling Thin Film Oven
RTFO
will
(RTFO) - $8040, (2) Pressure simulate
high
Aging Vessel (PAV) - $14950, (3) temperature
Vacuum Degassing Oven - $3780
oxidative
aging
(hardening) during
asphalt
concrete
mixing. PAV will
simulate
pressurized
oxidative aging by
the vehicles. Used
$26,770
119
CTH 322,
328
BOGH116
all majors
Lab
2013
Fee
CVEN
Lab
2013
Fee
C
LTU
Structural
Laboratory
BH
CVEN,
MEEN
BoR Grant
Lab Fee Match
2013
CVEN,
CETH, MEEN
BoR Grant
Lab Fee Match
2013
BH M116J,
CVEN
BH 117
CET
and
BoR Grant
Lab Fee Match
2013
Bending
(BBR)
Beam
Rheometer
Upright
laser
scanning
multiphoton
microscope
($170,000; requesting 15%)
Ironworker and a band saw
blade welder
in
CVEN202,
CVTE
373,
CVEN332,
CVEN333,
CVEN414/514, and
CVEN427
Flexural Creep
Stiffness test for
low
temperature
cracking
susceptibility
of
asphaltic materials.
(CVEN202, CVTE
373,
CVEN332,
CVEN333,
CVEN414/514, and
CVEN427)
BIEN
573,
BIEN 57, BIEN
533, BISC 590,
MSNT (proposed
course)
MEEN
381,
481, 482; senior
projects, SAE and
Eco projects
ENGR
220,
221, 222
new
projectors,
screens,
storage,
and
electrical
reconfiguration
$2.0k for an enclosure for the
ENGR labs and
laser cutter (to help with safety and projects
venting); $8.0k for an ultrasonic
(plastic) welder; $0.5k tooling and
$22,626
BH 117
CVEN
CET
$25,500
BEC
BIEN,
MSNT
Lab
2012
Fee
$24,000
BH
MEEN
Lab
2012
Fee
$15,000
BH
305
ENGR
Lab
2012
Fee
$12,500
BH
ENGR
Lab
2012
Fee
120
304,
and
BoR Grant
Lab Fee Match
2013
upkeep on the smaller equipment
in the lab
potentiometers, arduino, digital
general physics
storage,
miscellaneous
parts, labs maintenance/
storage, and 8 computers
upgrade for PHYS
102, 103, 262, 418
additional Biopaq ergonomics
human factors
setup
labs; EMG; EEG;
INEN 414
vacuum systems to replace
Organic
aspirator pumps
Chemistry Labs
service
call
for
NMR
instrument
RLC
bridge
for
lab
ELEN
229,
measurements
ELEN 406-408
Laboratory boards for circuits
ENGR
221,
experiments
ELEN 229, ELEN
242, ELET 374/375
software upgrades for lean
"work study",
manufacturing
"work planning",
project
management; INEN
408, 409, 414, 511,
510, 5557
$11,000
BH
$10,000
BH
$9,493
Lab
2012
Fee
INEN
Lab
2012
Fee
CTH
CHEM
Fee
$9,300
CTH
CHEM
Lab
2012
Lab
2012
$6,000
NH
ELEN
$5,000
NH
ELEN,
ELET
$2,600
BH
INEN,
E&TM
121
PHYS,
COES
Lab
2012
Lab
2012
MS-
Lab
2012
Fee
Fee
Fee
Fee
Multi-purpose (Field or/and
enhance all the
Laboratory)
thermal
Needle geotechnical
System for Thermal Resistivity / courses
(CVEN
Conductivity measurement of Soils 324, CVEN 325,
CVEN 440, CVEN
510 and CVTE
475) ; sustainable
and renewable geothermal
energy
extracted
from
traditional pile and
mat
foundations
and
retaining
structures.
bench top SEM
NSEN
201,
303, 406, 407, 408
thermal properties analyzer
materials
characterization,
ENGR 530, new
course
Thermal Imaging Camera
testing
and
analysis
of
structures
and
systems
Carbon nanotube furnace, for
NSEN
201,
NSE 201, 303, 406-408, $25,000, 303, 406, 407, 408
Priority A
Computer Networking Lab (8
CSC
450,
CISCO router bundles, switches ELEN new courses
and computers)
in networking
Computer Forensics Lab
forensics
teaching
and
$14,750
BH108 or
CVEN
BH109
CET
$80,000
BH
$36,000
BH
$33,000
BH
$20,000
BH
$20,000
NH
$20,000
NH
122
and
BoR Grant
Lab Fee Match
2012
NSEN
BoR Grant
Lab Fee Match
2012
CVEN (TTC
Lab
Fee
will
provide 2011
$8K)
MEEN,
MSEN
Lab
2011
Fee
NSEN
Lab
2011
Fee
CSCI,
ELEN, ELET
Lab
2011
Fee
Lab
2011
Fee
CSC, Cyber
research
rotary evaporator
extract
and
recover
asphalt
(recycled and warm
mix),
undergraduate and
graduate courses
fluid dynamics equipment MEMT
313,
Pitot tubes, Venturi meters, augmenting
expansion/contraction tubes
existing
test
apparatus
and
adding
new
experiments
Control Systems Lab - new
ELEN 479
PCs,
updated
softwarem
LABView, MATLAB
tooling, maintenance, cabinets,
prototyping lab,
software upgrade, new support multiple use
computer
Android-based cell phones,
new integrated
introductory (new) freshman CS approach for CS
courses
and CYEN majors
MATLAB licenses for NH
Lab
2011
Fee
MEEN,
CVEN
Lab
2011
Fee
NH
ELEN,
ELET
Lab
2011
Fee
$10,000
BH
ENGR
Lab
2011
Fee
$7,500
NH
CSC, CYEN
Lab
2011
Fee
$6,000
NH
ELEN
Fee
313,
$4,600
CTH
Precision Balance of Higher
CVEN
332,
Capacity
333, 427, 414:
Preparation of Hot
Mix
Asphalt;
CVTE 475: Soils
$3,800
BH
Lab
2011
CHEM.
Lab
CMEN, NSEN, 2011
BIEN
CVEN,
Lab
CVTE
2011
parts to repair Differential
CHEM
Scanning Calorimeter
314, 466
$12,500
BH
$12,000
BH
$10,000
123
CVEN
Fee
Fee
Lab
Forced Air Convection Oven
CVEN
332,
333, 427, 414:
Preparation of Hot
Mix Asphalt
computer upgrades ($20K)
CSC 120, 122
and open, heavy
use
machine
vision
system,
quality
computer, microscope camera, and engineering
gauge sets
laboratory,
freshman
and
senior level projects
Communication systems ELEN 469
TIMS modules
$3,000
BH
CVEN
Lab
2011
Fee
$20,000
NH
CSC
Lab
2011
Fee
$10,000
BH
INEN
Lab
2011
Fee
$10,000
NH
ELEN
Lab
2011
Fee
124
Adequacy of Budget
The College of Engineering and Science implements a shared budget system that
allocates funds budgeted by the university as well as foundation gifts and earnings
strategically based on the jointly developed priorities of the College. Thus, traditional
budget lines for “departmental expenditures” do not exist in the COES. As a
consequence, the programs are freed from concerns about routine expenditures such
as instructional or office supplies, copiers, telephones, etc. The small discretionary
allocation to the program based on student enrollment generally covers the unique
needs of the program. Foundation accounts have been used in recent years to
supplement laboratory development and faculty recruiting/travel. The program has
benefited from purchases made possible by the COES Laboratory Fee and Student
Technology Fee program. A fair characterization would be to say that while funds are
not available to enhance the program to the extent that the faculty and administration
would desire, adequate funds are available to operate a high quality program that
adequately serves our students.
•
Staffing
Adequacy of Staff and Institutional Services
Each program has an administrative assistant who provides support for the program,
faculty, students, director, program chair, alumni, and employers.
Other
administrative and technician support staff are organized into cross-functional staff
teams. For example, an Accounting and Purchasing Team handles most purchasing
requests, travel requests, bulk purchases, and budgeting information for the College,
with some assistance from program administrative assistants, with the exception of
research center activities. Removal of these responsibilities from the program
administrative assistant provides them with more time to respond to the needs of
program faculty and students. Technician support staff also serve college-wide
functions. All of these teams are fully responsible for managing, planning and
improving processes related to their functions. They report to the Leadership Team
through one of the Directors, who has the responsibility to see that academic program
laboratory needs are being met. Some changes have periodically been made in the
staff team organization and processes in response to feedback or process
improvement studies.
In addition to the program administrative assistant, student workers also support the
clerical needs for faculty in each program. Faculty also heavily uses the Moodle
course management for electronic distribution of handouts, syllabi, etc. Institutional
service offices (physical plant, university research, career center, library, etc.)
typically offer peripheral support, as needed.
Computer software and hardware maintenance is handled by the advanced technology
or CTECH team. Technician support consists of the shared IT support provided by
the CTECH team, a shared technician position, and several student workers.
125
Technician support is adequate for items that can be scheduled in advance. COES
students, faculty and staff generally enjoy convenient access to recent generation
computing equipment having network and Internet access. The campus intranet
infrastructure is robust and quite reliable. Campus Internet access was enhanced
dramatically in 2007 with the installation of the LONI statewide high speed optical
network and the addition of a DS-3 line through AT&T as a backup. The major
source of recurring campus technology funding is the Student Technology Fee that
provides about $1.1 million annually. The fund is administered by a joint
student/faculty/administration committee that funds proposals submitted by any
recognized campus entity. The college actively competes for funds for technologyrelated student laboratory equipment from the University Student Technology Fee
Program. This program, funded by a $5/SCH student fee, has been instrumental in
keeping student computer facilities and “smart” classrooms in the College up to date.
The Program has also funded creative technology projects such as rapid prototyping
systems and large format projection systems for real-time data projection in
laboratories. The Student Technology Fee Program also funds technology
infrastructure programs such as the campus secure wireless network, Moodle course
management system, email servers and some personnel costs associated with the
online registration system.
COES Student Success Specialist
While the student’s academic advisor is the primary contact regarding curricular and
career matters, additional services are provided at the college and university levels.
The College has a professional staff person dedicated to retention and outreach
programs. COES Student Success Specialist Ms. Allie DeLeo, with a BS in
Mechanical Engineering from Tech, greatly expands our efforts to enhance the
success of every student in the college.
Other Institutional Services
Library
Prescott Memorial Library provides a wide array of resources and services, including
an increasing number of services that are delivered electronically. Traditional library
resources include 460,000 books, 570,000 microforms, and 2000 periodical
subscriptions. The library is a U.S. Government Documents Regional Depository, one
of only 51 in the nation, a U.S. Map Depository, and a State of Louisiana Documents
Historical Depository. The library houses over 2,600,000 government documents. In
addition to these traditional materials, the library has numerous electronic resources
available in the library or through its web page at http://www.latech.edu/library
Library services are available to provide access to additional resources in several
ways. The Interlibrary Services department provides rapid response to requests by
using a web request form. Digital technologies are used to provide Internet document
delivery, and a statewide courier service provides book delivery. The ScienceDirect
database of journals is available to faculty, staff and graduate students and has
monthly limitation amounts. The time between an Interlibrary Loan Request and the
126
receipt of printed material is 1-3 weeks, while digital materials may be available
within 48 hours from a link in an email.
The Louisiana Tech University Library subscribes to the American Library
Association’s Inter-Library Loan Code, which makes virtually every major College
and University library available to Tech’s faculty and graduate students. The Library
is a member of OCLC. Through this organization the library can request materials for
interlibrary loan from over 2,000 libraries electronically.
The Louisiana Tech Library is a member of LaLINC, Louisiana Academic Library
Information Network Consortium, representing the academic libraries of Louisiana.
LaLINC is the sponsor of LOUIS, Louisiana Online University Information Systems,
an online network of library catalogs. A LaLINC Borrowing Card may be requested
to use other state academic libraries. Materials must be picked up and returned to the
owning library.
The Library also provides bibliographic instruction, reserved book services, book
ordering, special class assignment instruction, and thesis binding.
An increasing emphasis is being placed on electronic books and media. A survey of
COES faculty has shown that electronic versions of serials are much preferred over
paper copies. The library is working to convert as many serials to electronic
subscription as possible. Since 2004, the library has offered an extensive electronic
collection of engineering reference and handbooks through the Knovel ebook service.
These ebooks are used in several Electrical Engineering classes.
Computing Center
The Louisiana Tech Computing Center provides administrative and academic
computing and network support to the campus community. The Computing Center
operates an IBM mainframe system for administrative services support and student
records and a suite of information servers and networking equipment to support the
educational and research needs of the students, faculty, and staff. Computing Center
staff provide technical support for centralized campus IT services such as network
access (wired and secure wireless), web services such as BOSS (our online
registration system), email, hardware, software, and user support for three campuswide computer laboratories (one of which is operated 24/7).
Career Center
The mission of the Career Center is to educate and to serve the students and graduates
of Louisiana Tech University in the career education, planning, and development
processes. In support of the mission of the University, the Career Center functions as
a vital component in the total educational experience of students, primarily in the
development, evaluation, initiation, and implementation of career plans and
opportunities. Career Center services and resources provide assistance to students in
the cultivation and enhancement of skills to explore career options, master job search
techniques and strategies, and research employment opportunities.
The Career
127
Center provides effective and efficient service to employers in recruitment programs
and activities.
The Career Center serves students and graduates of Louisiana Tech University
through their career development by providing a wide array of resources over the
course of ones’ academic and professional career. The Career Center staff assists
students and alumni as they explore major and career options; guides students and
alumni as they master internship and job search strategies fit for today’s economic
climate; and supports students and alumni as they uncover internship, co-op, and fulltime opportunities through the use of an online career services management tool,
called TechLink, and by participating in on-campus interviews and recruiting events
that directly connect industry partners with the candidates they are targeting.
BARC
The Bulldog Achievement Resource Center (BARC) seeks to connect students to
Louisiana Tech University by providing them with academic and co-curricular
resources, by giving them opportunities for involvement in the University and
community, and by helping to equip them to succeed in completing a degree program
while enhancing the overall student experience. The mission for the programs
aligned under the BARC is to provide opportunities for academic, developmental, and
co-curricular experiences through interactive, dynamic, and collaborative initiatives
in a technology rich environment. Inherent in the process is an emphasis on fostering
connections essential to student transition. As a partner in the educational process the
programs promote a culture of engagement, enthusiasm, and empowerment, leading
toward student success and graduation.
BARC Goals
1. Instill the trust and confidence of applicants to the University through
communicative collaboration between and among BARC staff and other units in
Student and Academic Affairs
2. Employ technology to measure student participation and engagement and
develop predictive models for persistence
3. Develop and implement programs to identify, recruit, and welcome the transfer
student population
4. Provide opportunities for students to develop and demonstrate core
competencies vital to future success, both in the academic setting and in the
workforce
5. Foster a sense of belonging to the Tech family for new students through
opportunities for engagement in student organizations, leadership positions, and other
co-curricular programs
128
6. Provide academic support resources including tutoring, composition assistance,
advising students in Basic and Career Studies, supplemental academic consultation
for all students, and deploying early alerts for academic deficiencies
7. Enhance opportunities for students to develop appreciation for diversity and
cultural differences
8. Contribute to student developmental through participation in the residential
community
9. Enable first-year students to better identify obstacles to academic and social
success through a holistic curriculum orientation course
10. Assist students with disabilities in applying for and receiving accommodations
for which they are eligible under ADA
11. Serve as clearinghouse for resource information for students, faculty, parents, and
visitors to the University
Specific services available through the BARC include:
Grammar Hotline: Student can call the grammar hotline (257-4477) any time during
normal business hours to get answers to urgent questions. For questions requiring
longer answers, students can come by the Writing Center in person.
One-on-One Writing Consultation Sessions: Student can schedule an appointment
(257-4477) or drop in on the WC at 325 Wyly Tower (third floor on the presidential
elevator). Learning assistants at the WC help with all kinds of problems:
brainstorming for ideas, organization, forming thesis statements, developing
arguments, grammar, punctuation, syntax, or style.
The Writing Center Coordinator is available as a consultant in designing writing
intensive courses and in use of the Writing Lab in specific classes, especially for
instructors not in the humanities.
Computers: The Writing Center at Tech has four computers equipped with Word and
internet access. A computer lab is also conveniently located down the hall from the
WC that has a printer as well.
Study and Consultation Rooms: Two rooms (325 Wyly Tower) are available for quiet
study and consultation about writing. These rooms are ideal work space. Students
are encouraged to either work quietly or ask for assistance from the facilitators when
necessary.
In addition to services available through the BARC, the University provides a number
of other services that support undergraduate programs, including Recruiting,
129
Admissions, Orientation, Health Clinic, Intramural Center, and numerous sports and
entertainment opportunities.
•
Faculty Hiring and Retention
Process for Hiring of New Faculty
The College Leadership Team meets during the summer and decides how to allocate
the available faculty positions, based on program needs, enrollment, research needs,
etc. Input is obtained from the program, Dean, Associate Deans, and relevant
research centers. Advertisements are prepared during the late summer/early fall and
placed in the appropriate online and print venues. A search team is formed for each
position/group of positions. The team reviews applications and narrows them to a
small list with which the team conducts phone interviews. Usually 2 – 3 faculty
candidates per position are invited for on-campus visits. These visits include a
presentation, opportunities to visit with faculty and administrators in the program,
tours of the relevant research facilities, campus and local community. Students are
required to attend the candidate presentation and provide feedback. The team selects
the final candidate(s) recommended for the position(s).
Strategies for Retaining Current Qualified Faculty
Louisiana Tech University offers a variety of benefits to faculty members, including
health insurance, dental insurance, life insurance, tax-deferred annuities, long-term
care insurance, and access to campus recreational and sports facilities. All
unclassified employees participate in the Teachers Retirement System of Louisiana,
or may choose an optional retirement plan.
The University does not employee a uniform policy for establishing or evaluating
faculty salaries. In the College of Engineering and Science, new faculty hires are
offered competitive salaries, considering similar offers at peer universities, and also
considering the generally lower cost of living in Ruston, Louisiana. Evaluations of
faculty performance are made annually. Raises in salary are based primarily on
merit. Faculty in COES received an average salary increase of 5% in 2006, (with no
minimum raise required) and an average salary increase of 10% in 2007 (with a
minimum raise of 3%). Because of state budget reductions, there have been no salary
increases since 2007.
Raises in COES are based on performance during the evaluation period of teaching,
research, service, and teamwork. Teaching evaluations consider the student
evaluation of teaching as well as the Director’s evaluations. Research evaluations
consider number of proposals submitted, funding obtained, financial support for
graduate students and publications (with consideration given for the different
disciplines within COES). Service evaluations consider performance on teams and
committees in the college, and advising students. Teamwork evaluations consider
collegiality and leadership in helping the college and its units accomplish strategic
130
goals. These evaluations are completed by the Directors, but then shared with the
entire Leadership Team. All faculty in COES are discussed before evaluations, and
raise recommendations, are finalized. This helps assure objective and consistent
evaluations throughout the college.
•
Support of Faculty Professional Development
Faculty professional development support comes from four sources. New tenure-track
faculty hires are provided support for professional development through startup
funds. This can be in-kind support through reduced teaching load and in-cash support
for graduate student funding, laboratory equipment, travel to conferences, etc. A
second source of support for professional development comes through professorships.
Approximately 20 professorships are awarded to COES faculty. Annual stipends from
professorships can be used for any of a variety of professional development activities.
Recent stipend amounts have ranged from $2,500-$3,000. The two remaining sources
of support for professional development lie in the professional development programs
of the College and the University, respectively. Both of these offer regular
opportunities for faculty training and access to resources through the on-going
programs of the Center for Educational Excellence at the University level and the
Undergraduates Studies/ADVANCEing Faculty Program at the college level. For the
last five years, the latter has sponsored professional development programs that are
well attended by faculty. These programs feature national level experts on a variety of
professional development topics of interest to faculty. Programs included the
following:
•
•
•
•
•
Executive Leadership – Dr. Sandra Shullman, EDG and COACh
Breaking the (Implicit) Bias Habit – Dr. Molly Carnes and Dr. Jennifer Sheridan,
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Mentoring and Worklife Effectiveness – Dr. Donna Dean, Retired, NIH, AWIS
Networking 101 – Dr. Jenna P. Carpenter, Associate Dean, Louisiana Tech
Getting the Recognition You Deserve – Tricia Berry, 825 Basics
The first event of the year for new COES faculty is a half-day new faculty orientation
program sponsored by the Undergraduate Studies Office. This supplements a New
Faculty Academy sponsored by the University’s Center for Educational Excellence
(CEE) that meets weekly during the fall quarter. At the New Faculty Orientation
program, COES administrators and staff personnel present overviews of their
respective functions and services that they provide to faculty. Topics include an
overview of the undergraduate curriculum, graduate student advising and research
proposal preparation procedures, purchasing and travel regulations, and information
technology services and support. Further, in depth coverage of these and other topics
is provided through subsequent sessions of the New Faculty Academy.
The faculty of the program may also opt to use annual discretionary program funds or
foundation funds to provide support for individual or group faculty development
activities. Combined with the other sources mentioned above, faculty generally have
131
the opportunity to participate in sufficient activities to support their on-going
professional development needs.
132
CRITERION 9. PROGRAM CRITERIA
Objective
An accreditable program in Electrical/Electronic(s) Engineering Technology will prepare
graduates with the technical and managerial skills necessary to enter careers in the
design, application, installation, manufacturing, operation and/or maintenance of
electrical/electronic(s) systems. Graduates of associate degree programs typically have
strengths in the building, testing, operation, and maintenance of existing electrical
systems, whereas baccalaureate degree graduates are well prepared for development and
implementation of electrical/electronic(s) systems.
Outcomes
Graduates of baccalaureate degree programs must demonstrate knowledge and hands-on
competence appropriate to the goals of the program in:
a. the application of circuit analysis and design, computer programming, associated
software, analog and digital electronics, and microcomputers, and engineering
standards to the building, testing, operation, and maintenance of electrical/electronic(s)
systems.
b. the applications of physics or chemistry to electrical/electronic(s) circuits in a rigorous
mathematical environment at or above the level of algebra and trigonometry.
c. the ability to analyze, design, and implement control systems, instrumentation systems,
communications systems, computer systems, or power systems.
d. the ability to apply project management techniques to electrical/electronic(s) systems.
e. the ability to utilize statistics/probability, transform methods, discrete mathematics, or
applied differential equations in support of electrical/electronic(s) systems.
The following table lists the technical courses in the ELET curriculum and the
specific Electrical Engineering Technology Program criteria satisfied by each course:
Table 9-1 - Relationship of ELET Technical Courses to Specific
ELET 100 - Introduction to Electrical Engineering
Technology
133
PC
–03
PC
–04
PC
–05
Courses
PC
–02
PC
–01
Program Criteria (PC)
ELET 170 – Electrical Circuit Theory I – DC
Circuits
ELET 171 – Electrical Circuits I Laboratory
X
PC
–03
PC
–04
PC
–05
PC
–02
PC
–01
Courses
X
X
ELET 180 – Electrical Circuits II – AC Circuits
X
ELET 181 – Electrical Circuits II Laboratory
X
ELET 260 – Electronic Circuit Theory I
X
ELET 261 – Electronic Circuits I Laboratory
X
X
X
ELET 268 – Electrical Projects Laboratory I
X
ELET 270 - Instrumentation
X
ELET 271 - Instrumentation Laboratory
X
ELET 272 – Electronic Circuit Theory II
X
ELET 273 – Electronic Circuits II Laboratory
X
ELET 280 – Electrical Power I – Industrial Power
Distribution
ELET 360 – Electrical Power II – Electromechanical Power Conversion
ELET 361 – Electro-mechanical Power Conversion
Laboratory
ELET 370 – Introduction to Digital Circuits
ELET 371 – Introduction to Digital Circuits
Laboratory
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 374 – Introduction to Microprocessors
ELET 375 – Introduction to Microprocessors
Laboratory
ELET 380 – Printed Circuit Board Design and
Fabrication
ELET 422 – Control Systems I – Discrete I/O
Systems
ELET 423 – Control Systems I Laboratory
ELET 460 – Digital Data Communication Networks
ELET 461 – Digital Data Communications
Laboratory
ELET 470 – Control Systems II – Analog Systems
134
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELET 471 – Control Systems II Laboratory
PC
–03
PC
–04
PC
–05
PC
–02
PC
–01
Courses
X
ELET 472 – Senior Seminar
ELET 475 – Capstone Design I
X
X
ELET 476 – Capstone Design II
X
X
ELET 477 - Capstone Design III
X
X
MATH 220 – Applied Calculus
X
MATH 223 -Applied Calculus for Electronics
X
Computer Programming
X
Achievement of Program Criterion 1
Two core courses in the curriculum, ELET 170 and ELET 180, concentrate on the
analysis and design of basic circuits. ELET 170 (Electrical Circuit Theory I) deals with
the study of DC circuits and ELET 180 (Electrical Circuit Theory II) treats AC circuits.
Both courses extensively cover techniques such as mesh current analysis, nodal analysis,
superposition, Thevenin’s Theorem, Norton’s Theorem and other special topics. Circuit
design is covered as an adjunct topic of analysis. The companion laboratories to these
two courses, ELET 171 (Electrical Circuits I Laboratory) and ELET 181 (Electrical
Circuits II Laboratory), provide the venues for students to gain experience in building,
testing, and demonstrating proper operation of circuits. Maintenance and the use of test
equipment are introduced as a corollary aspect of testing and operation.
All students are required to take a computer-programming course as well as learn the use
of special application software specific to certain courses. The curriculum instituted in
the Fall Quarter 2007 – 2008 requires that students take either CSC 100 or INEN 101.
The Computer Science course deals with basic computer programming techniques and
program construction. The Industrial Engineering course teaches the use of application
programs such as Excel and Access while also providing an introduction to Visual Basic
programming. In addition to the required programming course, ELET 171 and ELET
181 give instruction in application software such as Electronic Workbench’s (EWB)
Multisim schematic capture and circuit analysis software. ELET 380 (Printed Circuit
Board Design and Fabrication) utilizes EWB’s Ultiboard and T-Tech’s IsoPro to provide
students with additional skills using application-specific software to, respectively, layout
and isolate printed circuit board (PCB) designs prior to fabrication. Students also gain
specialized programming experience in ELET 422 (Control Systems I) and its associated
laboratory ELET 423 (Control Systems Laboratory). These courses in discrete I/O
control systems teach the use of Allen-Bradley’s RSLogix5 and RSLogix500 software
used for creating control programs for programmable logic controllers (PLCs).
135
Analog and digital electronics are addressed in ELET 260 (Electronic Circuit Theory I),
ELET 272 (Electronic Circuit Theory II), and ELET 370 (Introduction to Digital
Circuits). ELET 260 and ELET 272 both present analysis and design techniques
associated with analog electronic circuits. ELET 260 emphasizes the operation of the
junction diode, bipolar junction transistor (BJT), and the junction field-effect transistor
(JFET). The concept of DC-biasing and the quiescent operating point are introduced
followed by presentation of some of the fundamental biasing designs.
Analysis
techniques required in determining bias parameters are also developed. Biasing concepts
are followed by introduction of AC signals and development of the small-signal, AC
equivalent circuit. ELET 272 continues to develop analysis techniques through
implementation of mathematical models for electronic devices while also introducing
frequency response considerations. ELET 370 concentrates on developing digital circuit
skills and introduces the student to Boolean algebra, combinational logic, and the
construction and operation of a vast array of special-purpose digital circuits and
integrated devices. Each of the above courses also has an associated laboratory. ELET
261 and ELET 273 support the analog electronic lecture courses and provide
opportunities for students to design, built, test, and operate analog electronic circuits.
Circuit maintenance is addressed as part of test and operation. ELET 371 provides
similar opportunities with respect to digital circuits.
Microcomputers are presented in ELET 374 and its associated laboratory ELET 375.
Assembly language, C/C++, and other language programming of microcomputers is
treated using different microcontroller platforms depending on the instructor. During the
past two years the course has emphasized the open-source and inexpensive Arduino
boards which use the Atmel AVR chip. The student is able to purchase a learning system
at low cost, and to take the system home to work with outside of class / lab time. A vast
amount of information is available for this system online that the student can access. The
lecture course introduces the micro-device and presents the programming protocols,
whereas the laboratory provides the hands-on experience required to build, program, and
test circuits.
As stated above, laboratory experiences are provided with essentially all courses to give
students the hands-on experiences important to skill development. A capstone experience
is also provided via ELET 475, ELET 476, and ELET 477 in which the student is given
the opportunity to autonomously develop a project to demonstrate his acquisition of the
knowledge and skills presented in the curriculum. Although engineering standards are
not addressed as a specific topic in the ELET courses, many of the courses do address, at
least to some degree, several of the considerations such as environmental impact, health,
and safety. As an example with the capstone design course, it would be pointed out that
the student may be using readily available, off-the-shelf components in their prototype
design, but the use of an uncertified consumer grade component would be unacceptable
in an actual medical device. Several of the courses will mention, albeit briefly, some of
the standards organizations such as the International Standards Organization, the
American National Standards Institute, the Institute for Electrical and Electronic
Engineers, Underwriters Laboratories, and the National Electrical Code, among others
who develop standards for cabling, wiring, and networking..
Achievement of Program Criterion 2
136
CHEM 100 (General Chemistry I) and PHYS 209 (General Physics I) discuss the atomic
structure of atoms and molecules. ELET 170 (Circuit Theory I) and ELET 180 (Circuit
Theory II) utilize these concepts in discussions of the physical models of resistors,
capacitors and inductors. ELET 260 (Electronic Circuit Theory I) and ELET 272
(Electronic Circuit Theory 2) also use these concepts to explain operation of diodes and
various kinds of transistors. In addition, PHYS 210 (General Physics II) includes a
section on electrical theory and also introduces the fundamental concepts of magnetic and
electric fields. The magnetic field is used in describing the operation of inductors, and
the electric field is used in describing the operation of capacitors and field-effect
transistors. The pre-requisite for Physics 210 is MATH 112 (Trigonometry). Since the
pre-requisite for MATH 112 is MATH 101 (College Algebra), the minimum mathematics
requirements for physics are satisfied for this criterion.
Achievement of Program Criterion 3
The Electrical Engineering Technology curriculum is a broad-based curriculum that
addresses all of these areas. ELET 422 (Control Systems I – Discrete I/O Systems),
ELET 423 (Control Systems I Laboratory), ELET 470 (Control Systems II – Analog
Systems) and ELET 471 (Control System II Laboratory) cover control system theory,
application, and implementation. ELET 422 emphasizes the use of the programmable
logic controller to control systems monitored by discrete measurement devices (inputs)
and controlled by discrete output devices (outputs). An essential aspect of this process is
the ability to analyze systems and design control programs to affect a desired solution.
ELET 423 provides the laboratory environment for gaining experience with designing
and implementing discrete control systems. ELET 470 develops analysis and design
techniques for systems having analog (time-varying) parameters that must be monitored
and controlled in an autonomous manner. ELET 471 provides the laboratory
environment for gaining experience with designing and implementing analog control
systems. ELET 270 (Instrumentation) examines the different kinds of sensors and
actuators required to affect both discrete and analog control while ELET 271
(Instrumentation Laboratory) provides experience in using and applying sensors and
actuators. ELET 272 (Electronic Circuit Theory II) develops the skills required for
analyzing and designing analog circuits. It specifically examines the operational
amplifier and many specialized circuits common to analog control systems. ELET 460
(Digital Data Communication Networks) teaches the fundamentals of networked
computer systems while ELET 461 (Digital Data Communication Laboratory) provides
hands-on experience with Windows - based server network communications. ELET 374
(Introduction to Microprocessors) and ELET 375 (Introduction to Microprocessors
Laboratory) teach interfacing hardware and software for microcontroller systems. ELET
280 (Industrial Power Distribution) teaches the fundamentals of power distribution
systems and incorporates use of the National Electric Code (NEC) in electrical design.
ELET 360 (Electrical Power II) and its companion laboratory ELET 361 (Electromechanical Power Conversion Laboratory), provide the theoretical and application bases,
respectively, for applying transformers, generators, and motors.
Achievement of Program Criterion 4
The software applications taught in ELET 422 (Control Systems I) and ELET 423
(Control Systems I Laboratory) provide the capability to not only design and implement a
137
control strategy but to also document many aspects of that endeavor. Learning to utilize
these capabilities teaches the student how to manage the design of an industrial control
system. ELET 460 (Digital Data Communication Networks) teaches the student to
install, implement and manage networked computer systems. ELET 268 (Electrical
Projects Laboratory I), ELET 378 (Electrical Projects Laboratory II), ELET 475
(Capstone Design I), and ELET 476 (Capstone Design II) all provide opportunities for
learning and applying project management techniques to electrical and electronics
projects.
Achievement of Program Criterion 5
Students are introduced to ordinary differential equations (ODE) and transform methods
in MATH 223 (Applied Calculus for Electrical Technology). Here they first encounter
the various mathematical techniques required to solve linear differential equations,
including LaPlace transformation techniques. Inverse LaPlace transformation methods
are introduced as well. ELET 470 (Control Systems II – Analog Systems) builds on these
experiences and teaches students to analyze linear systems that can be described
mathematically by differential equations. Students are then taught how to analyze these
same kinds of systems using LaPlace transform methods to replace the differential
equations. Inverse transformation techniques utilizing partial fraction expansion methods
are heavily emphasized. Discrete mathematics, particularly differentiation, is also
utilized in a number of instances, particularly the creation of certain forms of Routh
Tables used when examining control system stability.
138
Appendix A. Course Syllabi
139
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 100
CREDITS: 1 SCH
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
HRS:
TITLE: Introduction to Electrical Engineering Technology
1.25
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: None
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
7 Habits of Highly Effective People; Stephen Covey, Fireside/Simon
and Schuster, New York, New York, 1989.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
Topics are surveyed to introduce the student to the profession,
department and curricula. Basic computer tools and concepts of
electrical science are introduced.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Lab report writing
2. Curriculum overview and academic planning
3. Program Educational Objectives
4. Program Student Outcomes
5. Professionalism
6. Ethics
Demonstrate their understanding of the need for effective planning of an academic and
professional career. [S0-08][SO-11]
Demonstrate their understanding of the competitive global economic environment relative to
their career path. [SO-09][SO-10]
Prepare a lab report using laboratory data. [S0-07]
Demonstrate understanding of the Program’s Educational Objectives. [SO-08]
Demonstrate understanding of the Program’s Student Outcomes. [SO-08]
Demonstrate an understanding of the concept of professionalism. [SO-09] [SO-11]
Demonstrate an understanding of the concept of professional ethics. [SO-09] [S0-11]
140
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 170
CREDITS: 3 SCH
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
HRS:
TITLE: Electrical Circuit Theory I – DC Circuits
3.75
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: MATH 101
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Introductory Circuit Analysis; Twelfth Edition, Robert Boylestad,
Pearson/Prentice-Hall, 2010.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Basic electrical units (volts, amperes, ohms, watts).
2. Simple series circuits.
3. Simple parallel circuits.
4. More complicated resistive circuits
5. Ohm’s Law and Kirchhoff’s Laws.
6. Mesh Analysis, Nodal Analysis, Superposition, Thevenin’s
Theorem.
7. Capacitors, Inductors and DC transients.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
Introduction to DC circuit theory: mesh and nodal analysis, network
theorems, Kirchhoff’s Laws, single time-constant transients and
Thevenin’s and Norton’s equivalents for DC circuits. A minimum grade
of “C” is required.
141
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Identify voltage sources, current sources and resistors in circuits. [SO-01]
2. Calculate the total resistance in a single source problem. [SO-01]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
3. Use the voltage divider rule (VDR) and the current divider rule (CDR) in circuits where
appropriate. [SO-01]
4. Use “reduce and return” to calculate voltages and currents in single-source problems.
[SO-01]
5. Convert a voltage source to an equivalent current source. [SO-01][SO-02]
6. Convert a current source to an equivalent voltage source. [SO-01][SO-02]
7. Use mesh analysis to solve for circuit voltages and currents. [SO-01][SO-02]
8. Use nodal analysis to solve for circuit voltages and currents. [SO-01][SO-02]
9. Use superposition analysis to solve for circuit voltages and currents. [SO-01][SO-02]
10. Find the Thevenin’s equivalent circuit and use it to solve for circuit voltages and currents.
[SO-01][SO-02]
11. Calculate the power dissipated across a resistor and supplied by a power supply. [SO-01]
[SO-02]
142
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 171
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Electrical Circuits I Laboratory
CREDITS: 1 SCH
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 170 (Co-req)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 170 text used as a reference as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
Breadboarding skills development.
Power supply and DMM use.
Series, parallel and series-parallel circuits.
Superposition and Thevenin's Equivalent.
1.
Exercises that demonstrate and reinforce theoretical DC circuit 2.
concepts.
Skills in component recognition, component value 3.
identification and proper test equipment usage are emphasized.
4.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
1. Breadboard a DC circuit from a schematic using discrete components and the NI-ELVIS
voltage source. [SO-03]
2. Measure resistances, voltages and currents using a digital multimeter (DMM).
[SO-01][SO-02][SO-03]
3. Simulate a DC circuit using Multisim software. [SO-01]
4. Work effectively with a lab partner to implement circuits. [SO-05]
5. Effectively communicate technical results in a written laboratory report using a prescribed
format. [SO-07]
143
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 180
CREDITS: 3 SCH
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
HRS:
TITLE: Electrical Circuit Theory II – AC Circuits
3.75
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 170, MATH 112
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Introductory Circuit Analysis, Twelfth Edition, Robert L. Boylestad,
Prentice Hall, 2010.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Resistance, inductance, and capacitance as components of AC
circuit impedance.
An extension of concepts developed in ELET 170 to include
sinusoidal steady-state analysis of alternating current circuits. A 2. AC waveforms, properties of sinusoidal waves, phasors.
3. Complex numbers – rectangular form, polar form, conversion
minimum grade of “C” is required.
between forms, and operations with complex numbers.
4. Circuit analysis – mesh analysis and nodal analysis methods.
5. AC Network Theorems – superposition, Thevenin’s Theorem and
Norton’s Theorem.
6. AC Power Concepts – real power, reactive power, apparent power,
the power triangle, power factor and power factor correction.
7. Resonance – series, parallel and series-parallel.
8. AC Filters.
9. Polyphase Systems.
10. Magnetic Circuits and Transformers.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
144
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Identify AC voltage sources, AC current sources, capacitors, inductors and resistors in
circuits. [SO-01]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Calculate the total impedance in a single source problem. [SO-01]
3. Use mesh and nodal analysis to solve for circuit voltages and currents in an AC network.
[SO-01][SO-02]
4. Use superposition analysis to solve for circuit voltages and currents. [SO-01][SO-02]
5. Find Thevenin’s equivalent circuit and use it to solve for circuit voltages and currents in an
AC circuit. [SO-01][SO-02]
6. Calculate real, reactive and apparent power in an AC network. [SO-01][SO-02]
7. Solve for the resonant frequency in an RLC network. [SO-01][SO-02]
8. Design a series resonant network for a given frequency. [SO-01][SO-02]
9. Solve for voltages, currents and reflected impedances for an ideal transformer.
[SO-01][SO-02]
145
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 181
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Electrical Circuits II Laboratory
CREDITS: 1 SCH
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 180 (Co-req)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 180 text used as a reference as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
Exercises that demonstrate and reinforce theoretical AC circuit
concepts. The proper use of AC test equipment is emphasized.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2.
3.
4.
5.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Basic AC circuit analysis.
2. Resonant circuits.
3. Power topics.
Breadboard an AC circuit from a schematic using discrete components and the NI-ELVIS
function generator. [SO-03]
Determine the magnitude and phase differences of sinusoidal voltages using and
oscilloscope and digital multimeter (DMM). [SO-01] [SO-02] [SO-03]
Simulate an AC circuit using Multisim software. [S0-01]
Work effectively with a laboratory
partner to implement circuits. [SO-05]
Effectively communicate technical results in a written laboratory report using a prescribed
format. [SO-07]
146
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 260
CREDITS: 3 SCH
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
HRS:
TITLE: Electronics Circuit Theory I
3.75
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 180
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Electronic Devices and Circuit Theory; Eleventh Edition, Robert
Boylestad and Louis Nashelsky, Pearson/Prentice-Hall, 2013.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
An introductory treatment of solid-state devices emphasizing the
junction diode, bipolar junction transistor and the field effect transistor.
A minimum grade of “C” is required.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Diode devices and their applications.
2. Diode circuit analysis.
3. Bipolar Junction Transistors (BJT) and their applications.
4. BJT circuit analysis.
5. Field Effect Transistors (FET) and their applications.
6. FET circuit analysis.
Identify diodes, bipolar junction transistors and field effect transistors in circuits. [SO-01]
Calculate the voltages and currents in general diode circuits. [SO-02]
Recognize rectifier circuits and calculate the expected DC voltage output. [S0-01][SO-02]
Describe the output from various clipper and clamper circuits. [SO-01]
Calculate the DC biasing voltages and currents in various transistor designs. [SO-02]
Calculate the two-port AC parameters of various transistor designs. [SO-02]
Design a BJT transistor amplifier to meet DC biasing specifications. [SO-04]
147
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 261
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Electronic Circuits Laboratory I
CREDITS: 1 SCH
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 260 (Co-req)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 260 text used as a reference as required.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Multisim application software.
2. Diode circuits, including rectifier and clipper circuits.
3. Transistor biasing and the quiescent operating point.
4. Single and two-stage amplifier design.
Breadboard an electronic circuit from a schematic using the NI-ELVIS function generator and
discrete components. [SO-03]
Build and evaluate the DC and AC characteristics of a transistor amplifier circuit. [SO-03]
Simulate an AC circuit using Multisim software. [SO-01]
Work effectively with a lab partner to implement circuits. [SO-05]
Effectively communicate technical results in a lab report format. [SO-07]
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
Exercises demonstrating theoretical electronic circuit concepts.
Skills are developed in component identification and specification,
circuit assembly, schematic interpretation, test equipment usage and
troubleshooting.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2.
3.
4.
5.
148
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 268
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Electrical Projects Laboratory
CREDITS: 1 SCH
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 260
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Component identification -Color codes, standard values, voltage
ratings, power ratings, packaging.
Introduction to project development concepts via assigned and
student-selected topics. Soldering, troubleshooting and the practical use 2. Soldering fundamentals.
of test equipment are emphasized.
3. Basic electrical troubleshooting using a digital multi-meter and
oscilloscope.
4. Project development fundamentals – engineering problem-solving
techniques.
5. Team projects – assigned and/or team-selected.
149
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Identify various types of resistors, capacitors, and integrated electronic components. [SO-01]
2. Use technical literature to determine values, operating characteristics, and connection
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
requirements of various electrical and/or electrical components. [SO-01]
3. Use Multisim software to simulate electrical and/or electronic circuits. [SO-01]
4. Prepare a soldering iron for use. [SO-01]
5. Properly use a soldering iron to construct electronic circuits. [SO-01]
6. Breadboard electrical and/or electronic circuits. [SO-01]
7. Use a Digital Multimeter, Oscilloscope, and other basic laboratory instruments to measure
various circuit parameters. [SO-03]
8. Use basic laboratory instruments and acquired theoretical knowledge to troubleshoot and
diagnose problems in malfunctioning circuits. [SO-01][SO-03]
150
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 270
CREDITS: 3 SCH
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
HRS:
TITLE: Instrumentation
3.75
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 180
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Modern Control Technology; Third Edition; Christopher T. Kilian,
Cengage Learning, 2006.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Introduction to control systems.
An introduction to measurement methods and the principles of operation of 2. Operational amplifiers and signal conditioning.
sensors and actuators used in open-loop and closed-loop control systems.
3. Switches, relays, and power-control semiconductors.
4.
4. Sensors – Position, angular velocity, proximity, load and force,
pressure, temperature, flow, and liquid level.
5. Actuators – Leadscrews, solenoids, linear electric motors, hydraulic
actuators, pneumatic actuators.
6. Integral, derivative, proportional, and cascade control.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Demonstrate recognition of the configurations of inverting and non-inverting amplifiers, summers,
integrators, and differentiators. [SO-01]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Apply the mathematical relationships unique to inverting and non-inverting amplifiers, summers,
integrators, and differentiators to compute any parameter contained in the specific relationship, given
requisite data. [SO-02]
3. Explain the operation and use of the instrumentation amplifier circuit. [SO-01]
4. Identify open-loop and closed-loop control systems and explain the functional differences between the two.
[SO-01]
5. Apply the mathematical functions describing the input/output relationships of various types of sensors to
compute values of interest. [SO-01] [SO-02]
6. Explain the basic principles of operation of major sensor types and know the appropriate areas of
application for those sensors. [SO-01]
7. Explain the basic principles of operation of major output actuator types. [SO-01]
151
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 271
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Instrumentation Laboratory
CREDITS: 3 SCH
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 270 (Co-req)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 270 text used as a reference as required.
Topic-specific supplementary materials provided as required.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. The integrated operational amplifier.
Exercises that reinforce measurement concepts and demonstrate 2. Basic operational amplifier circuits.
instrumentation characteristics and application requirements.
3. Comparators.
4. The instrumentation amplifier.
5. PN junction materials as temperature sensors.
6. Thermistor temperature characteristics.
7. Preparation of laboratory reports
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Identify integrated circuit operational amplifiers and use manufacturer‘s literature to
determine package pin function and other amplifier specifications. [SO-01] [SO-03]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2.
Use Multisim software to simulate operational amplifier circuits that act as inverters,
summers, comparators, integrators, and differentiators. [SO-01]
3. Physically construct and verify the input/output characteristics of various operational
amplifier circuits such as inverters, summers, comparators, integrators, and differentiators.
[SO-01] [SO-03]
4. Use Multisim software to simulate an instrumentation amplifier circuit having “zero” and
“span” capability. [SO-01]
5. Create measurement system calibration curves by plotting output data versus input data from
an instrumentation amplifier circuit. [SO-03]
6. Demonstrate the thermal sensing characteristics of a thermistor by collecting and graphing
152
data from laboratory tests. [SO-02] [SO-03]
7. Present the results of laboratory exercises in laboratory reports. [SO-03] [SO-07]
153
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 272
CREDITS: 3 SCH
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
HRS:
TITLE: Electronic Circuit Theory II
3.75
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 260
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Electronic Devices and Circuit Theory; Eleventh Edition, Robert
Boylestad and Louis Nashelsky, Pearson/Prentice-Hall, 2013.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Bipolar junction transistor (BJT) and field-effect transistor (FET)
Continuation of ELET 260. The study of semiconductor devices
small-signal analysis techniques.
and circuits; applications of these circuits in practical situations.
2. Two-port AC models of BJT and FET systems.
3. Frequency response of BJT and FET systems.
4. Compound transistor circuit configurations.
5. Operational amplifier theory.
6. Power amplifiers.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Construct low frequency equivalent transistor circuits and determine their frequency
characteristics. [SO-01][SO-02]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Construct high frequency equivalent transistor circuits and determine their frequency
characteristics. [SO-01][SO-02]
3. Solve for the output values of operational amplifier circuits such as inverting and noninverting amplifiers, summing amplifiers, integrators, and differentiators. [SO-01][SO-02]
4. Use basic operational amplifier circuits to solve application problems. [SO-04]
5. Recognize Class A, B, C, and D amplifier configurations and describe their basic
characteristics and uses. [SO-01]
6. Recognize RC phase shift, Wien Bridge, Colpitts, Hartley, and crystal oscillator circuits and
determine their frequency of oscillation. [SO-01]
154
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 273
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Electronic Circuits II Laboratory
CREDITS: 1 SCH
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 272 (Co-req)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. M. D. Gates
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 272 text used as a reference as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Bipolar junction transistor (BJT) and field-effect transistor (FET)
Exercises that demonstrate and reinforce electronic circuit concepts.
small-signal analysis techniques.
Further development of skills in electronic circuit construction, 2. Two-port AC models of BJT and FET systems.
component identification and troubleshooting.
3. Frequency response of BJT and FET systems.
4. Compound transistor circuit configurations.
5. Operational amplifier theory.
6. Power amplifiers.
1.
Build
and
analyze
frequency
response of low pass and high pass filters. [SO-01] [SO-03]
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT
2. Design and build low pass and high pass filters to meet specific frequency requirements. [SOOUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
01] [SO-03]
3. Build and analyze gain of simple operational amplifier based circuits. [SO-01] [SO-03]
4. Design and build simple operational amplifier circuits to meet specific gain requirements.
[SO-01] [SO-03]]
5. Build and analyze gain and frequency response of active, first-order, low pass and high pass
filters using operational amplifiers. [SO-01][SO-03]
6. Demonstrate the ability to work effectively as a member of a laboratory team. [SO-05]
155
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 280
CREDITS: 3
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
HRS:
TITLE: Electrical Power I – Industrial Power Distribution
3.75
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 180
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Electrical Machines with MATLAB; Second Edition; Gonen,
Turan; CRC Press, 2011.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Magnetic circuit fundamentals – Ampere’s Law, magnetomotive
force (MMF), reluctance, and magnetic flux.
Electrical power distribution systems used primarily in industrial
installations. Distribution equipment requirements and characteristics. 2. Faraday’s Law and Lenz’s Law.
Design fundamentals of typical industrial electrical installations. A 3. Force induced on a current-carrying wire in a magnetic field.
4. Voltage induced on a wire moving in a magnetic field.
minimum grade of “C” is required.
5. Voltage, current and power relationships in three-phase AC circuits.
6. Fundamentals ideal transformers - power rating, turns ratio, voltage
ratio, current ratio, and per unit impedance.
7. The non-ideal transformer – the transformer equivalent circuit,
short-circuit test, open-circuit test, voltage regulation.
8. The rotating magnetic field in AC motors.
9. The equivalent circuit of induction motors.
10. Equivalent circuits of synchronous generators and synchronous
motors.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
156
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1.
2.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
3.
4.
5.
Calculate voltages and currents in circuits using Kirchhoff’s and Ohm’s laws. [SO-02]
Calculate power dissipated in circuit resistances. [SO-02]
Calculate power absorbed in circuit reactances. [SO-02]
Calculate the total apparent power in a circuit by totaling real and reactive power. [SO-02]
Calculate total apparent power in a circuit using applied voltage and total circuit current.
[SO-02]
6. Calculate each component of a Power Triangle given appropriate information. [SO-02]
7. Identify whether reactive power is due to inductive or capacitive elements. [SO-02]
8. Identify whether Power Factor is leading or lagging based on information in a Power
Triangle. [SO-02]
9. Identify whether Power Factor is leading or lagging based on voltage and current phase
angles. [SO-02]
10. Determine voltage, currents and phase angles in balanced three-phase power circuits. [SO-02]
11. Calculate phase-voltages from line-voltages or line-voltages from phase-voltages in balanced
wye connections. [SO-02]
12. Calculate phase-currents from line-currents or line-currents from phase-currents in balanced
delta connections. [SO-02]
13. Calculate transformer primary and secondary full-load currents from nameplate apparent
power and voltage ratings. [SO-02]
14. Calculate the magnitude of transformer impedance from nameplate %Z information. [SO-02]
15. Calculate transformer complex impedance from nameplate %Z and X/R ratio values.
[SO-02]
157
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 360
CREDITS: 3
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
HRS:
TITLE:
Conversion
3.75
Electrical Power II – Electro-mechanical Power
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 180
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Electrical Machines with MATLAB; Second Edition, Turan Gonen,
CRC Press, 2011.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Magnetic circuit fundamentals – Ampere’s Law, magnetomotive
The theory of operation and equivalent circuits of transformers; DC
force (MMF), reluctance, and magnetic flux.
generators and motors; AC synchronous generators and motors and AC 2. Faraday’s Law and Lenz’s Law.
induction motors.
3. Force induced on a current-carrying wire in a magnetic field.
4. Voltage induced on a wire moving in a magnetic field.
5. Voltage, current and power relationships in three-phase AC circuits.
6. Fundamentals ideal transformers - power rating, turns ratio,
voltage ratio, current ratio, and per unit impedance.
7. The non-ideal transformer – the transformer equivalent circuit,
short-circuit test, open-circuit test, voltage regulation.
8. The rotating magnetic field in AC motors.
9. The equivalent circuit of induction motors.
10. Equivalent circuits of synchronous generators and synchronous
motors.
158
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Calculate values of reluctance for magnetic materials from their geometry and magnetic
properties. [SO-02]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Calculate MMF, flux, and reluctance in series, parallel, and series-parallel magnetic
circuits.[SO-02]
3. Apply the magnetic force equation to calculate the force induced on a current-carrying wire in
a magnetic field. [SO-02]
4. Apply the induced voltage equation to calculate the voltage induced on a coil of wire moving
with respect to a magnetic field. [SO-02]
5. Apply the primary / secondary turns-ratio (voltage ratio) of a transformer to calculate
voltages, currents, and reflected impedance of ideal transformers. [SO-02]
6. Calculate equivalent circuit parameters for non-ideal transformers from open-circuit and
short-circuit test data. [SO-02]
7. Calculate transformer equivalent reactance (approximate equivalent impedance) from
transformer nameplate values of voltage, apparent power, and percent impedance. [SO-02]
8. Calculate equivalent circuit parameters for AC induction motors from no-load, blocked-rotor,
and DC resistance test data. [SO-02]
9. Use the equivalent circuit and power flow diagram of a three-phase AC induction motor to
calculate machine performance for various operating conditions. [SO-02]
159
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 361
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Electro-mechanical Power Conversion Laboratory
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 360 (Prereq.)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 360 text used as a reference as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Magnetic circuit fundamentals – Ampere’s Law, magnetomotive
Exercises that demonstrate and reinforce the operating
force (MMF), reluctance, and magnetic flux.
characteristics of power transformers; AC and DC motors; AC and DC 2. Faraday’s Law and Lenz’s Law.
generators, and solid-state power conversion equipment.
3. Force induced on a current-carrying wire in a magnetic field.
4. Voltage induced on a wire moving in a magnetic field.
5. Voltage, current and power relationships in three-phase AC circuits.
6. Fundamentals ideal transformers - power rating, turns ratio, voltage
ratio, current ratio, and per unit impedance.
7. The non-ideal transformer – the transformer equivalent circuit,
short-circuit test, open-circuit test, voltage regulation.
8. The rotating magnetic field in AC motors.
9. The equivalent circuit of induction motors.
10. Equivalent circuits of synchronous generators and synchronous
motors.
160
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Measure and analyze experimental data on power transformers and rotating machines.
[SO-03]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Function effectively in small teams in conducting experiments, collecting data, and preparing
written reports. [SO-05][SO-07]
3. Compare theoretical models to experimental results for practical power transformers,
induction motors, and synchronous machines. [SO-05][SO-07]
4. Understand and apply standard safety practices used in power engineering laboratories.
[SO-03]
161
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 370
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Introduction to Digital Circuits
CREDITS: 2
CONTACT HRS: 2.5 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 260
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Dr. M. D. Gates
Digital Fundamentals; Tenth Edition, Thomas
Pearson/Prentice-Hall, 2009.
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
L.
Floyd,
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
An introduction to digital circuit fundamentals: binary numbers, 1. Mathematical operations using binary, octal and hexadecimal
Number systems.
Boolean algebra, truth tables, combinational logic and logic
minimization. Operation of logic circuits and sequential digital circuits. 2. Logic gates – inverter, AND, OR, NAND, NOR, XOR and XNOR.
3. Boolean algebra and logic simplification – Boolean algebra rules,
DeMorgan’s Theorems, Truth Tables and the Karnaugh map.
4. Combinational logic – logic implementation using AND, OR, NOT,
NAND and NOR gates; logic implementation using universal
logic gate properties of NAND and NOR gates.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Count and write numbers in binary, octal, and hexadecimal bases. [SO-01][SO-02]
2. Add, subtract, multiply, and divide in the binary number system. [SO-02]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
3. Create 1”s complement numbers from binary numbers. [SO-01][SO-02]
4. Create 2’s complement numbers from binary numbers. [SO-02]
5. Draw the symbols and construct the Truth Tables for all of the basic logic gates: AND, OR,
XOR, NAND, NOR, and XNOR. [SO-01]
6. Construct Truth Tables knowing the number of input variables and the logical combinations
of those variables that result in a desired output. [SO-02]
7. Write Sum-of-Product (SOP) Boolean algebra logic equations from Truth Table outputs.[SO01][SO-02]
8. Write Product-of-Sum (POS) Boolean algebra logic equations from Truth Table outputs.
[SO-01][SO-02]
9. Simplify logic equations using various identities from Boolean algebra. [SO-01][SO-02]
10. Apply DeMorgan’s Theorems. [SO-02]
11. Construct logic circuits from Boolean logic expressions and Truth Tables. [SO-04]
162
COURSE: ELET 371
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Introduction to Digital Circuits Laboratory
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 370
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. M. D. Gates
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 370 text used as a reference as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
Electronics Workbench computer application software.
Integrated circuit configurations for the basic logic gates.
Boolean logic expressions and logic circuits.
Combinational logic circuits.
1.
Exercises that demonstrate the operation and use of basic logic 2.
circuits and an assortment of sequential digital circuits. Solid-state, 3.
integrated devices are emphasized.
4.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Use integrated circuit logic gates to develop the Truth Tables for NAND, NOR, AND, OR,
and NOT logic. [SO-01] [SO-03]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Use integrated circuit logic gates and Boolean algebra expressions derived from Truth Tables
to construct functional control circuits. [SO-01] [SO-03]
3. Use Multisim software to design, construct, and test various circuits having logic gates,
encoders, and output displays. [SO-01]
4. Present the results of laboratory exercises in written laboratory reports. [SO-03] [SO-07]
163
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 374
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Introduction to Microcontrollers
CREDITS: 2
CONTACT HRS: 2.5 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 260; ELET 375 (Coreq.)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. Course handout material provided by Instructor.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Microcontroller architecture.
Introduction to microcontroller organization, operation, data 2. Microcontroller peripheral components.
manipulation, programming, register level operations and device 3. Programming microcontroller instructions using “C.”
interfacing.
4. Timer operations.
5. Interrupts.
6. Interfacing input and output devices.
7. Troubleshooting microcontroller software and hardware problems.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Identify and explain the internal architecture for a typical microcontroller. [SO-01]
2. Read, write, and assemble programs for a typical microcontroller. [SO-01]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
3. Explain how the microcontroller is used in electronic control and instrumentation. [SO-01]
4. Interface microcontrollers to common input and output devices. [SO-01]
5. Debug and correct problems with microcontroller software and hardware. [SO-02]
164
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 375
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Introduction to Microcontrollers Laboratory
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 374 (Coreq.)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. Course handout material provided by Instructor.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
Practical exercises in microcontroller data manipulation, program 1. Microcontroller program development.
development using “C,” and device interfacing.
2. Interfacing to input and output devices.
3. Debugging software interfaces.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Write and assemble programs for a selected microcontroller. [SO-01][SO-07]
2. Interpret input from peripheral devices and apply information to various output devices.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
[SO-01][SO-03]
3. Debug and correct problems with microcontroller software and hardware. [SO-01]
[SO-02][SO-03]
165
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 380
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Printed Circuit Board (PCB) Design and Fabrication
CREDITS: 3
CONTACT HRS:
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 260
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
No textbook is required. User’s manuals for Multisim, Ultiboard
and IsoPro software are used as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
1.
An introduction to PCB layout software and the milling machine 2.
hardware used to fabricate prototype PCBs.
3.
4.
COURSE TOPICS:
Schematic capture using Multisim.
Printed circuit board layout using Ultiboard/Ultiroute.
Gerber files and NC drill files.
Printed circuit board fabrication using IsoPro and the QC 5000
printed circuit board milling system.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Input a schematic diagram using Multisim schematic capture software. [SO-01]
2. Design a printed circuit board component layout using Ultiroute PCB layout software.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
[SO-04]
3. Use Ultiroute to create printed circuit board traces automatically. [SO-01]
4. Use manual trace routing to modify circuit board trace routing. [SO-01]
5. Use Ultiboard to create the Gerber files required for PCB fabrication. [S0-01]
6. Use Ultiboard to create the NC Drill files required for PCB fabrication. [SO-01]
7. Use IsoPro software to import Gerber files and NC Drill files for isolation. [S0-01]
8. Use IsoPro software to create the isolation files required for PCB fabrication. [SO-01]
9. Operate the laboratory mechanical milling equipment to fabricate a finished PCB. [SO-01].
10. Work co-operatively and effectively as a team member in the operation of the laboratory
mechanical milling equipment. [SO-05]
166
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 422
CREDITS: 3
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
HRS:
TITLE: Control Systems I – Discrete I/O Systems
3.75
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 370; ELET 423 (Coreq.)
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Programmable Logic Controllers; Second Edition, James A. Rehg
and Glenn J. Sartori, Pearson/Prentice-Hall, 2009.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Relay and PLC ladder logic, PLC components, and PLC types.
Application of the programmable logic controller (PLC) as a control 2. Binary and octal numbering systems, PLC memory structure, I/O
addressing, internal relays, input and output scan time, and
device in two-state input/output control systems. Relay ladder logic
fundamentals of digital logic.
programming is emphasized.
3. Fundamental PLC programming instructions: Examine If Closed,
Examine If Open, Output Engergize, Output Latch, and Output
Unlatch
4. PLC timers, timer attributes, and programming with timers.
5. PLC counters, counter attributes, and programming with counters.
6. PLC Program Control instructions: Master Control Reset, Jump,
Label, and Immediate I/O instructions.
7. Subroutine instructions and programming with subroutines.
8. The Sequencer Output instruction and programming with sequencers.
9. Arithmetic and Move Instructions.
167
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1.
2.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Convert a decimal number into a binary number. [SO-02]
Convert a decimal number into an octal number. [SO-02]
Convert a binary number directly into an octal number. [SO-02]
Convert an octal number directly into a binary number. [SO-02]
Address PLC inputs and outputs for the Allen-Bradley PLC-5 system. [SO-01]
Use Allen-Bradley RSLogix5 PLC programming software to design PLC programs. [SO-01]
Apply XIC, XIO, OTE, OTL, and OTU instructions as appropriate to solve control problems.
[SO-04][SO-06]
8. Apply TON, TOF, CTU, CTD, and RES instructions as appropriate to solve control
problems. [SO-04][SO-06]
9. Apply MCR, JMP, and LBL instructions as appropriate to solve control problems.
[SO-04][SO-06]
10. Design ladder logic programs using JSR, SBR, and RET instructions to solve problems.
[SO-04][S0-06]
11. Successfully download and run programs in the PLC-5 PLC. [SO-01]
168
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 423
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Control Systems I Laboratory
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 422 (Coreq.)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 422 text used as a reference as required.
Allen-Bradley RSLogix5 Instruction Set Manual
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
Introduction to Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) hardware.
Introduction to PLC software programming tools.
Creation of general ladder logic programs via PLC software.
Interfacing input devices to a PLC.
Interfacing the PLC to output devices.
1.
An introduction to programmable logic controller (PLC) hardware 2.
and programming software. PLC programming and application skills 3.
4.
are developed through practical exercises.
5.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Address PLC inputs and outputs for the Allen-Bradley PLC-5 system. [SO-01]
2. Use Allen-Bradley RSLogix5 PLC programming software to design PLC programs. [SO-01]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
3. Design ladder logic programs that correctly use the XIC, XIO, OTE, OTL, and OTU
instructions to solve discrete control problems. [SO-04][SO-06]
4. Design ladder logic programs using TON, TOF, CTU, CTD, and RES instructions to solve
discrete control problems. [SO-04][SO-06]
5. Design ladder logic programs using MCR, JMP, and LBL instructions to solve discrete
control problems. [SO-04][SO-06]
6. Design ladder logic programs using JSR, SBR, and RET instructions to solve discrete control
problems. [SO-04][SO-06]
7. Successfully download and run programs in the PLC-5/20 PLC. [SO-01]
8. Effectively function as a team member to help design ladder logic control programs. [SO-05]
9. Analyze the function of PLC ladder logic programs and use results to troubleshoot and
169
correct design flaws. [SO-03]
170
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 460
CREDITS: 3
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
HRS:
TITLE: Digital Data Communications Networks
3.75
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 260
Network+ Guide to Networks,
Thompson/Course Technology, 2012
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
The study of systems used in communicating digital data. LANs
and WANs.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6th
Ed.;
Tamara
Dean,
COURSE TOPICS:
1. OSI seven layer model for network communications.
2. Practical applications of digital communications.
3. A study of a currently used network for digital communications.
Identify and discuss the OSI seven-layer model. [SO-01][S0-07]
Identify and discuss common TCP/IP protocols. [SO-01][SO-07]
Identify common communication issues and propose solutions. [SO-06]
Work with others to develop network designs. [SO-05]
Use common TCP/IP protocol analysis tools. [SO-01][SO-03]
171
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 461
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Digital Data Communication Networks Laboratory
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS:
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 460 or ELET 460 (Coreq.)
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
The textbook used for ELET 460 is used as a reference
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Network operating system installation.
2. Network operating system configuration.
3. Adding peripherals to a computer network.
Practical exercises that demonstrate and reinforce classroom
material. Installation and administration of a LAN.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1.
2.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
3.
4.
5.
6.
Demonstrate acquired skills in a Windows-based server environment. [SO-01] [SO-03]
Add and delete network users. [SO-01] [SO-03]
Identify common communication issues and propose solutions. [SO-02][SO-03]
Work with others to implement network designs. [SO-05]
Use common TCP/IP protocol analysis tools. [SO-01][SO-03]
Communicate technical issues and solutions verbally and written to team members and
instructor. [SO-07]
172
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 470
CREDITS: 3
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
HRS:
TITLE: Control Systems II – Analog Systems
3.75
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 272; MATH 223
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
Control Systems Engineering, Sixth Edition, Norman S. Nise, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2011.
1.
An introduction to linear feedback control systems including 2.
transient response analysis, stability, steady-state error analysis and 3.
system response modification.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
173
COURSE TOPICS:
Categories of engineering drawings.
Attributes common to all engineering drawings
Engineering Change Orders
Piping and Instrumentation Drawings (P&ID)
Instrument Loop Diagrams
Electrical Schematic Diagrams
Electrical Wiring Diagrams
Creating Parts Lists from the Schematic Diagram
Selecting appropriate electrical/electronic parts
10. Creating Schematic and Wiring Diagrams.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Identify open-loop and closed-loop control systems by applying basic definitions to system
configurations.
[SO-01][SO-02]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Use Laplace Transform Theorems and Laplace Transform Tables of specific time functions
to convert differential equations from the time-domain to the complex frequency domain (splane). [SO-01] [SO-02]
3. Create partial fraction expansions of problem solutions that are complex functions of “s.”
[SO-01] [SO-02]
4. Use partial fraction terms and Laplace Transform Tables to make Inverse Laplace
transformations. [SO-01] [SO-02]
5. Use pole locations in the complex frequency domain to identify control system time
responses as undamped, underdamped, critically damped, or overdamped. [SO-01][SO-02]
6. Compute the time constant, rise time and settling time for first order systems using
information obtained from the system equivalent transfer function. [SO-01][SO-02]
7. Use the damping ratio and natural frequency determined from the equivalent transfer
function of a second-order system to compute its Percent Overshoot, Settling Time, and Peak
Time. [SO-01] [SO-02]
8. Determine the equivalent transfer function for a closed-loop control system given the transfer
functions of individual elements within the system. [SO-01] [SO-02]
9. Create a Routh Table from the equivalent transfer function of a closed-loop system. [SO01][SO-02]
10. Apply Routh-Hurwitz criteria to a Routh Table to determine control system stability. [SO01][SO-02]
11. Determine the value of KP for a Proportional mode controller used in a compensated closedloop system when the equivalent transfer function of the compensated closed-loop system is
known. [SO-01][SO-02]
12. Determine the values of KP and KI for a Proportional-Integral mode controller used in a
compensated closed-loop system when the equivalent transfer function of the closed-loop
system is known. [SO-01][SO-02]
174
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 471
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Control Systems II Laboratory
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: ELET 470
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. ELET 470 text used as a reference as required.
Supplemental materials are made available as class handouts
when required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
Practical laboratory exercises that investigate the time responses, 1. General process control terms and control system components.
stability, and controller tuning of first- and second-order physical 2. Types of control system – two-position, proportion only (P),
systems.
Proportional plus integral (PI), and proportional plus integral plus
derivative (PID).
3 Controller tuning.
4. Software simulation and analysis of process control systems.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Recognize a first-order response from graphical data and compute the time constant, rise
time, and settling time. [SO-01] [SO-03]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Apply proportional compensation to alter the output response of a first-order system to
achieve more desirable control system performance. [SO-01][SO-03]
3. Apply proportional and integral compensation to alter the output response of a system to
achieve more desirable control system performance. [SO-01][SO-03]
4. Mathematically and experimentally demonstrate how proportional gain and integral time alter
the peak time, settling time, damping factor, and frequency of oscillation of process systems.
[SO-01][SO-03]
5. Use Multisim or Pspice software to simulate first and second order processes. [SO-01]
6. Use Multisim or Pspice software to develop process compensation schemes. [SO-01]
7. Use Multisim or Pspice software to simulate and tune a compensated second-order system for
a desired response. [SO-01]
175
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: 472
CREDITS: 1
REQD/ELECT: Required
CONTACT
hrs/wk
HRS:
TITLE:
Technology
1.25
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. J. W. Ray
Dr. M. D. Gates
Mr. Glen Deas
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: Senior Standing
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
7 Habits of Highly Effective People; Stephen Covey, Fireside/Simon
and Schuster, 1989.
Topic-specific handouts are provided as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Cultural issues in the workplace.
2. Contemporary social diversity issues.
3. Ethics and ethical practice.
4. Professional behavior.
5. The current job market.
An introduction to cultural and social diversity issues; professional
behaviors, and ethical standards applicable to professional practice. The
current job market and other employment related topics are also
addressed.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
Professionalism and Ethics for Electrical Engineering
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Communicate effectively through short written communications. [SO-07]
Elaborate a plan for continued learning after entering professional practice. [SO-08]
Identify ethical frameworks for analysis and discussion. [SO-10]
Elaborate an understanding of professional and ethical responsibilities. [SO-09] [SO-11]
Understand the impact of technology on global-social frameworks. [SO-10]
176
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 475
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Capstone Design I
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: Senior Standing; Permission of Instructor
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. M. D. Gates
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. Topic-specific handouts provided as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
Students apply program-acquired knowledge and practical skills to a
problem-solving/project-management scenario. A minimum grade of
“C” is required.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1.
2.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
COURSE TOPICS:
1. The general project development process.
2. Identifying a problem requiring solution.
3. Defining performance specification.
4. Evaluating of project alternatives.
5. Creating a written description of the problem.
6. Preparing a schedule.
7. Creating a Parts List.
Identify a problem requiring an engineering solution. [SO-06]
Analyze the problem and determine solution performance specifications. [SO-06]
Use performance specifications to identify solution alternatives. [SO-06]
Create written documentation to describe the problem, propose a solution, and justify a
project to implement the solution. [SO-07]
Use engineering and project management skills to design, plan, and implement an
electrical/electronic project. [SO-01] [SO-04]
Create written documentation to show the schedule for project development and completion.
[SO-07]
Create written documentation to describe the theory of operation of the project design. [SO07]
Use technical knowledge and skills to develop a parts list for the project. [SO-01]
177
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 476
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Capstone Design II
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: Senior Standing; Permission of Instructor
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. M. D. Gates
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. Topic-specific handouts provided as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Using measurement skills to collect data to assess system
performance.
A continuation of ELET 475. A self-directed student project
2.
Using test and troubleshooting skills to identify problems with
incorporating practical skills and technical knowledge derived from the
system
performance.
entire curriculum. A minimum grade of “C” is required.
3. Using theoretical knowledge to analyze and solve technical
problems.
4. Evaluating data to determine potential improvements in system
performance.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Use measurement skills to collect data to evaluate operation of an electrical/electronic
system.
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
[SO-03]
2. Use test and troubleshooting skills to identify technical problems in an electrical/electronic
system. [SO-03]
3. Use knowledge of electrical theory to analyze and solve technical problems in an
electrical/electronic project. [SO-03]
178
COURSE SYLLABUS: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
COURSE: ELET 477
REQD/ELECT: Required
TITLE: Capstone Design III
CREDITS: 1
CONTACT HRS: 3 hrs/wk
PRE-REQS/CO-REQS: Senior Standing; Permission of Instructor
INSTRUCTOR/COORDINATOR:
Dr. M. D. Gates
TEXTBOOK/SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS:
None. Topic-specific handouts provided as required.
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
COURSE TOPICS:
1. Using measurement skills to collect data to assess system
performance.
A continuation of ELET 476. A continuation of ELET 476. The
2.
Using test and troubleshooting skills to identify problems with
terminal capstone course in which students apply program-acquired
system performance.
knowledge and practical skills to a student-directed problem solving /
3. Using theoretical knowledge to analyze and solve technical
project management scenario.
problems.
4. Evaluating data to determine potential improvements in system
performance.
COURSE OUTCOMES / [STUDENT 1. Prepare and deliver an oral presentation that effectively utilizes visual media; demonstrates a
technical understanding of project subject matter; and holds audience attention. [SO-07]
OUTCOMES ADDRESSED]
2. Prepare a formal written report that is of acceptable form, visually well-crafted, accurate in
technical content, and has well-reasoned recommendations and conclusions. [SO-07]
179
CHEM 100
GENERAL CHEMISTRY
(Required)
1. Course number and name: CHEM 100: GENERAL CHEMISTRY
2. Credits and contact hours: 2SCH, 2.50 contact hours per week
3. Instructor’s name: Danny H. Eddy
4. Text book, title, author, and year:
Principles of Chemistry: A Molecular Approach, 2nd Ed., Nivaldo J. Tro,
2013, Pearson
5. Specific course information:
a. Catalog description: Fundamental principles of chemistry: Chemistry and
measurement, atomic symbols and chemical formulas, stoichiometry, and gases.
Prerequisites: MATH 101.
b. Required course in the Program (Yes)
6. Specific goals for the course:
a. Specific outcomes of instruction: The student will be able to
1) Achieve the ability to make connections between the macro-scale and nano-scale
realms of chemistry. (Explain the observed behavior of matter on the atomic or
molecular level.)
2) Be able to convert a measurement expressed in one unit to a new unit.
3) Given a set of data, be able to report the answer of a mathematical operation in
the appropriate number of significant digits.
4) Given the mass and volume of a substance, be able to calculate the density; or
given the volume and density, calculate the mass.
5) Given the number of protons and neutrons in a nucleus, be able to write the
nuclide symbol of an element.
6) Be able to calculate the atomic mass of an element from its fractional
abundances and its isotopic masses.
7) Have the skills to derive name of a simple compound (binary ionic compound,
ionic compound containing a common polyatomic ion, binary molecular
compound, or acid) or derive the formula from the name of a simple compound.
8) Have the knowledge to classify typical chemical reactions and predict their
products. (exchange, replacement, decomposition, acid/base, etc.)
9) Given the mass of a compound, be able to calculate the number of molecules.
180
10) Have the skills to calculate the quantity of a product formed in a chemical
reaction given specific amounts of reactants. (stoichiometry, percent yield,
limiting reagent calculations)
11) Be able to apply the ideal gas law to calculate gas densities and molar masses.
b. Criterion 3 student outcomes addressed by the course:
SO-01 (ABET 3a). An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
science, and engineering.
SO-08 (ABET 3h). The broad education necessary to understand the
impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and
societal context.
Brief list of topics to be covered:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Matter and measurement
Atoms and elements
Molecules and compounds
Writing and balancing chemical equations
Chemical reactions in aqueous solutions
Gases
181
CHEM 101
GENERAL CHEMISTRY
(Required)
7. Course number and name: CHEM 101: GENERAL CHEMISTRY
8. Credits and contact hours: 2SCH, 2.50 contact hours per week
9. Instructor’s name: William C. Deese
10. Text book, title, author, and year:
Principles of Chemistry: A Molecular Approach, 2nd Ed., Nivaldo J. Tro,
2013, Pearson
11. Specific course information:
a. Catalog description: Continuation of CHEM 100: Atomic and molecular
structure, theories of molecular bonding, liquids, solids and solutions.
Prerequisites: CHEM 100.
b. Required course in the Program (Yes)
12. Specific goals for the course:
a. Specific outcomes of instruction: The student will be able to
12) Understand the nature of energy and introductory thermodynamics.
13) Predict the exchanges of energy of a system with the surroundings.
14) Understand standard calorimetry experiments.
15) Understand enthalpy, changes in enthalpy and apply Hess’s law.
16) Understand the nature of light and how it interacts with matter.
17) Describe the quantum mechanical model of the atom and apply the four
quantum numbers to predict the electronic structure of atoms.
18) Write electronic configurations, orbital diagrams and relate them to the
periodic table.
19) Use the periodic table to predic common periodic trends.
20) Describe the types of chemical bonds, draw Lewis structures and know
relationships to bond order, bond strength, and bond lengths.
21) Use Lewis structures to predict molecular geometries.
22) Describe bonding using valence bond theory and basic molecular orbital
theory.
23) Determine whether a molecule has dipole-dipole forces and/or hydrogenbonding.
24) Understand phase changes and energy associated with each.
182
b. Criterion 3 student outcomes addressed by the course:
SO-01 (ABET 3a). An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
science, and engineering.
SO-08 (ABET 3h). The broad education necessary to understand the
impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and
societal context.
Brief list of topics to be covered:
7) Thermodynamics
8) Quantum-mechanical model of the atom
9) Electron configurations
10) Molecular geometry
11) Intermolecular forces
12) Periodic trends
13) Chemical bonding
14) The states of matter
183
CHEM 103
GENERAL CHEMISTRY
LABORATORY
(Required)
1. Course number and name: CHEM 103 GENERAL CHEMISTRY LABORATORY
2. Credits and contact hours: 1 SCH, 4.25 contact hours per week
3. Instructor’s name: Danny Eddy
4. Textbook, title, author, and year: Laboratory Manual General Chemistry 103 & 104
5. Specific course information:
a. Catalog description: Laboratory practice in general chemistry.
b. Prerequisites:
Corequisite: CHEM 101
c. Required course in the Program (as per Table 5-1)
6. Specific goals for the course:
a. Specific outcomes of instructions: The student will be able to
1) Identify simple materials from an experimentally measured density
value.
2) Determine a percent hydration of an ionic hydrate from data obtained
from the weighing of a crucible to a constant mass.
3) Perform stoichiometric calculations using the data collected in the
laboratory.
4) Use data collected in laboratory to experimentally determine a value of
the ideal gas constant, R.
5) Predict products from metathesis reactions (double displacement) and
write chemical equations including phases.
b. Criterion 3 student outcomes addressed by the course:
SO-01 (ABET 3a). An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
science, and engineering.
184
SO-02 (ABET 3b). An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well
as analyze and interpret data.
SO-04 (ABET 3d). An ability to function in multidisciplinary teams.
SO-07 (ABET 3g). An ability to communicate effectively.
7. Brief list of topics to be covered:
1) Basic measurements in a chemistry lab
2) Determination of the percent water in an ionic hydrate
3) Determination of the percent yield of a reaction
4) Determination of the ideal gas constant
5) An investigation of common metathesis chemical reactions
6) Qualitative analysis of cations and anions
185
MATH 101: COLLEGE ALGEBRA
Section: _____
__________
Quarter, 201__
INSTRUCTOR: ____________________ Office: GTM _____
Office Hours:
Classroom: GTM _____
Phone: __________
__________________________________________________________
E-mail: ____________________
MyMathLab Course ID: ____________________
COURSE PREREQUISITES: Math ACT score greater than or equal to 22, or Math SAT score greater than or
equal to 520, or Placement by Exam
COURSE GOALS: The instructor will present and test a subset of these topics: rational exponents; rational
expressions; radical expressions; complex numbers; miscellaneous equations; inequalities; functions; conics; graphs;
inverse, exponential, logarithmic functions; applications; systems of equations and inequalities.
TEXTBOOK AND RESOURCE MATERIALS: College Algebra (5th ed.) by Dugopolski packaged with
MyMathLab. The use of MyMathLab is mandatory. A scientific calculator may be used in this course, but the use
of graphing calculators is prohibited.
ATTENDANCE REGULATIONS: Read the “Class Attendance” section of the Tech Bulletin which says in
part that “Class attendance is . . . an obligation . . . and all students are expected to attend regularly and
PUNCTUALLY.” Excuses for absences must be submitted within three class days after return to class.
Respectfully pay attention for the entire period. Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers before entering the
classroom.
HOMEWORK POLICY: Homework will be obtained from student’s progress with MyMathLab and any
graded daily assignments. Assignments on MyMathLab will include homework exercises similar to the textbook
problems. Quizzes on MyMathLab may also be included as part of the homework grade.
GRADE DETERMINATION PROCEDURE: The instructor will schedule 4 tests worth 100 points each
and a 150 point comprehensive final. Homework will count at most 50 points. In the event of a question regarding
an exam grade or final grade, it will be the responsibility of the student to retain and present graded materials
which have been returned for student possession during the quarter.
GRADE SCALE:
90-100% A, 80-89% B, 70-79% C, 60-69% D, 0-59% F
LATE HOMEWORK/MISSED EXAMS: No make-ups will be allowed for homework or in-class work.
Make-ups will be allowed for exams only in the case of an excused absence (generally a doctor’s excuse which I
have called and verified or an official university excuse). The student must contact me by the class meeting
following a missed exam to discuss the reason for missing the exam and to determine the possibility of a make-up
exam. Make-ups will be another exam or the comprehensive final exam as specified by me.
STUDENTS NEEDING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: Students needing testing accommodations or
classroom accommodations based on a disability must discuss the need with me as soon as possible. For more
details on the Office of Disability Services, refer to www.latech.edu/ods.
HONOR CODE AND ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT POLICY: In accordance with the Academic Honor
Code, students pledge the following: Being a student of higher standards, I pledge to embody the principles of
academic integrity. If it is determined that academic misconduct has occurred, the penalty may range from dismissal
from the University to a failing grade in the course. For more details on the honor code, refer to
http://www.latech.edu/documents/honor-code.pdf.
186
EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM: All Louisiana Tech students are strongly encouraged to enroll
and update their contact information in the Emergency Notification System. It takes just a few seconds to ensure
you're able to receive important text and voice alerts in the event of a campus emergency. For more information on
the
Emergency
Notification
System,
please
visit
http://www.latech.edu/administration/ens.html. For emergency notifications please visit http://ert.latech.edu
MATH 101
Course Outline and Suggested Assignments
Secti
on
P.3
Topic
Assignment
Rational Exponents and Radicals
5-99 (odd)
P.4
Polynomials
49-75 (odd)
P.6
Rational Expressions
7-37 (odd), 51-99 (odd)
P.7
Complex Numbers
5-77 (odd), 87-95 (odd)
1.1
Equations in One Variable
9-47 (odd), 63-103 (odd)
1.2
5-13 (odd), 29, 39, 43, 45, 50-54 (all),
57, 65-73 (odd), 77-80 (all)
9-89 (odd)
1.4
Constructing Models to Solve
Problems
Equations and Graphs in Two
Variables
Linear Equations in Two Variables
1.6
Quadratic Equations
1.7
Linear and Absolute Value Inequalities
5-14 (all), 15-27 (odd), 35-59 (odd),
65-73 (odd), 81-97 (odd)
7-89 (odd)
2.1
Functions
17-29 (odd), 43-75 (odd), 83-87 (odd)
2.2
Graphs of Relations and Functions
3-13 (odd), 29-32 (all), 49-55 (odd)
2.3
2.4
Families of Functions and
Transformations
Operations with Functions
11-21 (odd), 27-34 (all), 45,
47, 55, 57, 59, 81-91 (odd)
3-61 (odd), 81-85 (odd)
2.5
Inverse Functions
5-33 (odd), 41, 43, 51-87 (odd)
3.1
Quadratic Functions
9-51 (odd)
3.4
Miscellaneous Equations
1-81 (odd)
4.1
9-37 (odd), 63-95 (odd)
9-45 (odd), 59-109 (odd)
4.3
Exponential Functions and
Applications
Logarithmic Functions and
Applications
Rules of Logarithms
4.4
More Equations and Applications
1-47 (odd), 57
1.3
4.2
9-87 (odd)
5-61 (odd), 77-83 (odd)
187
5.1
5.2
5.5
Systems of Equations in Two
Variables
Systems of Equations in Three
Variables
Inequalities and Systems of
Inequalities
7-13 (odd), 23-53 (odd), 59-71 (odd)
7-15 (odd), 33, 35, 39, 41
1-17 (odd), 31-41 (odd)
188
Math 112 Trigonometry Syllabus Fall 2014
Instructor:
Office:
Phone:
email:
Office Hours:
Class Time/Location
MyMath Lab Course ID:
Course Prerequisites: Math 100, or Math 101 or Math 111 or placement by exam or Math
ACT score is greater than or equal to 26 or Math SAT score is greater than or equal to 590.
Course goals: To understand the concepts and perform the calculations concerning
trigonometric functions, solving right triangles and general triangles, trigonometric identities and
equations, inverse trigonometric functions, and complex numbers.
Textbook: Trigonometry, 4/e, by Mark Dugopolski, 2015 bundled with MyMathLab.
Calculator: A scientific or graphing calculator is required for this course.
ATTENDANCE REGULATIONS: Read the “Class Attendance” section of the Tech
Bulletin that reads in part that “Class attendance is . . . an obligation . . . and all students are
expected to attend regularly and PUNCTUALLY.” Any student that has 3 unexcused absences
may have their final average drop one letter grade. Any student that has 6 or more unexcused
absences may receive a final grade of F regardless of his/her average. Excuses for absences must
be submitted within three class days after return to class. Respectfully pay attention for the
entire period. Be on time and stay until the class is dismissed. If you are occasionally
unavoidably late, apologize. No hats on test days. Please turn off and put away cellular phones,
pagers, and any other electronic devices not medically prescribed before entering the classroom.
Homework Policy: Homework will be completed and submitted online at mymathlab.com.
MyMathLab access is included in your textbook bundle. You will need the Course ID from the
top of this page. Your homework grade will be no more than 10% of your grade.
Examinations: Three 100-point tests and a 150-point comprehensive final exam will be
given.
MISSED EXAMS: Make-ups will be allowed for exams only in case of an excused absence
(generally a doctor’s excuse which I have called and verified or an official university excuse). If
you must miss a test, tell me ahead of time so other arrangements can be made. If you are ill the
day of the test, contact me BEFORE the next class meeting ready to take the test if possible. If
not possible, with a doctor’s excuse, a makeup will be possible within 3 days of your return to
class. Make-ups will be another exam or the comprehensive final exam as specified by me.
Grade Determination: A ten-point grading scale will be used.
90-100 % A
70-79 % C
Below 60 % F
80-89 % B
60-69 % D
189
STUDENTS NEEDING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: Students needing testing or
classroom accommodations based on a disability should discuss the need with the instructor
during the first week of class. Any issues with accessing technology, which are related to a
disability, should be reported to the instructor as soon as possible.
RETENTION POLICY ON GRADED MATERIALS: In the event of a question
regarding an exam grade or final grade, it will be the responsibility of the student to retain and
present graded materials that have been returned for student possession during the quarter.
EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM: All Louisiana Tech students are strongly encouraged to enroll
and update their contact information in the Emergency Notification System. It takes just a few seconds to ensure
you're able to receive important text and voice alerts in the event of a campus emergency. For more information on
the
Emergency
Notification
System,
please
visit
http://www.latech.edu/administration/ens.html. For emergency notifications please visit http://ert.latech.edu
ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT and HONOR CODE: Penalties for cheating and other
forms of academic misconduct can be found in the Tech catalog. Note the Honor Code
Statement, "Being a student of a higher standard, I pledge to embody the principles of academic
integrity." Students should be aware that "during an exam, referring to information not
specifically allowed by the instructor or receiving information from another student or another
unauthorized source" is a violation of the honor code and can be met with severe sanctions
against the student. For details refer to http://latech.edu/students/judicial-affairs.
190
Math 112 Suggested Course Outline
Date
Section and Assignment
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
2.1 & 2.2
2.3 & 2.4
Review
Test 1 (1.1 -2.4)
3.1 & 3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5 & 3.6
4.1
4.2
4.3 & 4.4
Review
Test 2 (3.1-4.3)
5.1
5.2 & 5.3
5.4
5.5
6.2
6.3
6.4
Review
Test 3 (5.1-6.4)
Review
Comprehensive Final Exam
191
Section
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.2
6.3
6.4
Homework Assignments
Assignment
1 - 111 eoo
1 - 73 odd, 83 - 107 eoo
1 - 31 odd, 33, 35, 39, 40, 42, 47, 49
1 - 93 eoo
1 - 35 odd, 39, 43, 45, 47, 58, 59
1 - 59 odd
1 - 81 eoo
1 - 25 odd, 47, 51
1 - 49 eoo, 51
1 - 49 eoo
1 - 37 eoo, 61 - 73 odd
1 - 73 eoo
21 - 73 odd
1 - 49 odd
1 - 61 odd
1 - 35 odd
1 - 113 eoo, 115
1 - 61 odd
1 - 9 odd, 19 - 49 odd
1 - 81 eoo
5 - 33 odd
5 - 43 odd
1 - 19 odd, 28, 29
15 - 83 eoo, 89
1, 10, 12, 13, 17, 19
17 - 65 eoo
1 - 49 eoo
5 - 57 eoo
eoo = every other odd
192
MATH 223 APPLIED CALCULUS for ELECTRICAL TECHNOLOGY
Section 001
Classroom GTM 307
Winter Quarter 2007-2008
INSTRUCTOR: Countryman
GTM 360
Office Number:
Office Hours (may vary occasionally as necessary): 9:15am-9:30am, 10:45am-12:30pm,
3:15pm-3:30pm MW; 9:30am-12:00 noon TR; 9:15am-9:30am, 10:45am-11:00am F
Other Times by Appointment.
Phone:257-3839 Email: mcountry@latech.edu Web page: http://www2.latech.edu/~mark/
COURSE PREREQUISITES: Minimum grade of C in Math 220 or Math 240-241-242
COURSE GOALS: This course is required by the faculty in your profession. The course is
intended to give you a working knowledge of separable and linear first order differential equations and
higher order linear differential equations with constant coefficients that arise in the analysis of electrical
circuits. It also gives you Laplace transform methods of solving integro-differential equations.
Maclaurin, Taylor, and Fourier series are developed.
TEXTBOOK: Technical Calculus with Analytic Geometry, 4th ed., by Allyn J. Washington,
Addison-Wesley, 2002.
COURSE OUTLINE: The material will be taken from the following sections: 9-5, 10-1, 10-4, 10-5,
13-2, 13-5, 13-6, 13-7, 14-2, 14-4, 14-5, 15-1, 15-2, 15-3, 15-4, 16-3, 16-4, transforms of integrals, and
other information as appropriate
ATTENDANCE REGULATIONS: Class attendance is regarded as an obligation as well as a
privilege and is required by the University of Louisiana System. All students are expected to attend
regularly and punctually; failure to do so may jeopardize a student's scholastic standing and may lead to
suspension from the university. A student shall submit excuses for all class absences to the instructor
within three class days after returning to class.
HONOR CODE AND ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT: Honor Code Statement ABeing a student of
a higher standard, I pledge to embody the principles of academic integrity.@ For details on the honor
code, please refer to: http://www.latech.edu/documents/honor-code.pdf.
EXAMINATIONS: Several (fairly short) weekly tests (25 points each), a midterm examination (50
points), and a comprehensive final examination (50 points) will be given. Calculators may be allowed on
some tests. NO CELL PHONES, PAGERS, PDAs, CD PLAYERS, RADIOS, OR OTHER SUCH
DEVICES MAY BE USED DURING ANY TEST OR EXAM.
GRADE DETERMINATION PROCEDURE: A grading scale with the usual ten point cut-offs
will be used: A=90%-100%, B=80%-89%, C=70%-79%, D=60%-69%, F=59% and below. Your grade
will be computed by dividing the total number of points you earn on tests and exams by the total number
of possible points.
193
EXAMS MISSED: For EXCUSED absences, the instructor may (at his discretion) allow a makeup
test or replace the missed test grade by the grade from the final exam.
STUDENTS NEEDING SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: Students needing testing or
classroom accommodations based on a disability should discuss the need with the instructor
during the first week of class. Any issues with accessing technology, which are related to a
disability, should be reported to the instructor as soon as possible.
RETENTION POLICY ON GRADED MATERIALS AND GRADE REPORTS: In the event of
a question regarding an exam grade or final grade, it will be the responsibility of the student to retain and
present graded materials which have been returned for student possession during the quarter.
EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM: All Louisiana Tech students are strongly encouraged to enroll
and update their contact information in the Emergency Notification System. It takes just a few seconds to ensure
you're able to receive important text and voice alerts in the event of a campus emergency. For more information on
the
Emergency
Notification
System,
please
visit
http://www.latech.edu/administration/ens.html. For emergency notifications please visit http://ert.latech.edu
The following homework problems are to be assigned from the sections given:
Section
Page
Problems
Introduction to additional
1.
integration techniques
9-5
301
1,3,5,11,15
2.
10-1
313
1,3,5,7,11,13
3.
10-4
324
1,3,5,7
4.
10-5
329
9,11,13,15,17
5.
Review
of
Integration
6.
Techniques
Test 1 on Integration
7
Techniques
13-2
391
1,3,5,7
8.
13-5
402
9,11,13
9.
1
13-6
Find Fourier Series for f (t ) = t , − π ≤ t < π
0.
1
13-6
408
1,3,7
1.
1
13-6
408
9,15
2.
13-7
414
13,15
1
Test 2 on Fourier Series
194
3.
1
14-2
424
1,3,7,11,13
1
14-4
429
3,13,17,21
1
14-5
434-5
21,23,25
1
1
15-1
15-2
15-3
443
447
452
1,3
13,17
13,15,21,23
1
15-3
452
29,30,31
2
15-4
458
460
9,11,13,15,17
31
472
1,3
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
0.
2
1.
Test 3
Equations
2
16-3
on
Differential
2.
2
16-3
472
5,7,9,13,15
2
16-3
472
17,19,21,23
2
16-4
476
1,3,5,23,25
3.
4.
5.
2
6.
2
7.
Examples of: L
Transform of the integral
Test
4
Transforms
2
Review
on
Laplace
8.
2
Review
3
Comprehensive Final Exam
9.
0.
195
{∫ f (t ) dt}= F s(s)
Section Number
Title
9-5
Other Trig Forms
10-1
Integration by Parts
10-4
Partial Fractions
10-5
Partial Fractions: Other Cases
13-2
Series [Maclaurin Series]
13-5
Taylor Series
13-6
Fourier Series (3 days, plus section 13-7 on the third day)
13-7
More About Fourier Series
14-2
(ODE) Separation of Variables
14-4
The Linear Differential Equation of the First Order
14-5
Applications
15-1
Higher Order Homogeneous Equations (constant coefficients)
15-2
Auxiliary Equation with Repeated or Complex Roots
15-3
Solutions of Nonhomogeneous Equations (2 days, IVP on second day)
15-4
Applications of Higher Order Equations
16-3
Laplace Transforms (3 days: first, transforms; second, more transforms; third, inverses)
16-4
Solving Differential Equations by Laplace Transforms
Extra
Information
Transform of the integral: L
{∫ f (t ) dt}= F s(s)
A Note to the Instructor:
This is a terminal course for students in the Electrical Engineering Technology field.
[Students from other disciplines will generally never enroll in this course.] It follows Math 220
(Applied Calculus), continuing in the same text.
The sections are organized to be covered on a Monday-Wednesday-Friday schedule
(allowing for tests, reviews, and a final). This can generally be accomplished in fairly good
order. Teaching on a schedule different from MWF will, of course, require some modification.
196
While homework problems are usually the instructor=s business, a few years ago Math and
ET faculty got together and hammered out a problem list for this service course with the
instructions ADo not deviate.@ The problem list above is as close to the original as can be had
from the new (4th) edition of the textbook.
The number of tests, grading (or not grading) of homework, and the weight given to each of
these elements is up to the instructor. While the scenario listed in the syllabus with several
(usually seven or eight) 25-30 minute tests (perhaps dropping the low one of these grades), a 75
minute midterm (comprehensive to that point), and a 75 minute final (covering the whole course
but weighted a bit toward the second half) has been used successfully, a simpler approach would
be to have four 75 minute tests and a comprehensive final. Again, any reasonable testing scheme
should not be a problem.
NOTE: In this class it has been considered appropriate to ALLOW OPEN-BOOK TESTS,
the rationale being that as professional electrical technologists after graduation, the students will
be working at their desks with reference material at hand.
The use of calculators has not been much of a problem in Math 223, so far. However, feel
free to limit calculator usage if there is a concern that some students have an unfair advantage
due to having powerful calculators.
197
PHYS 210
GENERAL PHYSICS II
13. Course number and name: PHYS210 General Physics II
14. Credits and contact hours: 3SCH, 3.75 contact hours per week
15. Instructor’s name: Neven Simicevic
16. Text book, title, author, and year: Physics, Cutnell & Johnson, 9th ed., Wiley and Sons,
NY 2012.
17. Specific course information:
a. Catalog description: A continuation of PHYS209 with emphasis on problems in
electricity and magnetism, optics, and modern physics. State transfer agreement
course. [LCCN: CPHY2123]
b. Prerequisites: PHYS209
c. Required course in the Program (as per Table 5-1).
18. Specific goals for the course:
a. Specific outcomes of instruction: The student will be able to
25) Understand the electrostatic forces, electric fields, potential, and potential
energy. Apply the knowledge in solving corresponding physical problems.
26) Understand the operation and application of basic electrical circuits
including the knowledge of the properties of capacitors and resistors.
Apply the knowledge in solving corresponding physical problems.
27) Understand the properties of the magnetic forces and magnetic fields,
including few examples of their application. Apply the knowledge in
solving corresponding physical problems.
28) Understand the properties of the electromagnetic induction and operation
of transformers. Apply the knowledge in solving corresponding physical
problems.
29) Understand the properties of electromagnetic waves and their relation to
electromagnetic induction and optics. Apply the knowledge in solving
corresponding physical problems.
30) Understand the basic principles in geometrical optics including the
properties of plane mirrors, spherical mirrors, and lenses. Apply the
knowledge in solving corresponding physical problems.
198
31) Understand the basic principles in physical optics including the properties
of polarization, interference, and diffraction. Apply the knowledge in
solving corresponding physical problems.
32) Understand the foundation of modern physics including Heisenberg
principle and particle-wave duality. Apply the knowledge in solving
corresponding physical problems.
33) Apply the basic principles of modern physics on atomic levels and solve
corresponding physical problems.
34) Apply the basic principles of modern physics on nuclear levels and solve
corresponding physical problems.
b. Criterion 3 student outcomes addressed by the course:
SO-01 (ABET 3a). An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics,
science, and engineering.
SO-05 (ABET 3e). An ability to identify, formulate, and solve
engineering problems.
SO-10 (ABET 3j). A knowledge of contemporary issues.
19. Brief list of topics to be covered:
1) Electric Forces, Electric Fields, Electric Potential, and Electric Potential
Energy
2) Electric Circuits
3) Magnetic Forces and Magnetic Fields
4) Electromagnetic Induction
5) Electromagnetic Waves
6) Mirrors, Lenses and Optical Instruments
7) Interference and Wave Nature of Light
8) Particles and Waves
9) The Nature of the Atom
10) Nuclear Physics and Radioactivity
199
APPENDIX B – FACULTY VITAE
200
Mr. Glen E. Deas
Visiting Lecturer, Electrical Engineering Technology Program
Name and Academic Rank
Glen Edward Deas.
Visiting Lecturer, Electrical Engineering Technology
Interim Program Chair, Electrical Engineering Technology
Degree with fields, institution, and dates
M.S., Engineering Technology, Rochester Institute of Technology, 1975
B.S., Electro-Technology, Louisiana Tech University, 1974
Number of years service on this faculty, including date of original appointment
and dates of advancement in rank
9 years of service, original appointment in 1978
1978 - 1987, Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering Technology
2013 – present, Visiting Lecturer of Electrical Engineering Technology
Other related experience—teaching, industrial, etc.
1997 – 2011, Instructor, Computer & Networking Support, Louisiana Technical
College
1991 – 1996, non-medical billing and coding, Office Manager, Safety Trainer
1989, Adjunct instructor, Electrical Engineering Technology, Arizona State
University
1975 – 1978, Instructor, Assistant Professor, Mohawk Valley Community College
1971 – 1973, Field Service Engineer, Special Products Division, Olinkraft Corp
1967 – 1971 Aviation Electronics Technician, United States Navy
Consulting, patents, etc.
None
State(s) in which registered
None
Principal publications of last five years
None
Scientific and professional societies of which a member
American Society of Engineering Education
Honors and awards
Louisiana Tech Engineering Service Award, 1981
Professional development activities in the last five years
Self-study in microcontroller applications
201
Percentage of time committed to the program: 100%
John William Ray, Jr.
Louisiana Tech University
Associate Professor, Electrical Engineering Technology
Name and Academic Rank
John William Ray, Jr.
Associate Professor, Electrical Engineering Technology
Coordinator, Electrical Engineering Technology
Degree with fields, institution, and dates
Grad. Certificate, Information Assurance, Louisiana Tech University, 2013
D.E., Computers and Electronics, Louisiana Tech University, 1999
M.S., Electrical Engineering, Louisiana Tech University, 1980
B.S., Electrical Engineering, Louisiana Tech University, 1978
Number of years service on this faculty, including date of original appointment
and dates of advancement in rank
27 years of service, original appointment in 1987
1987 – 1989, Acting Assistant Professor
1989 – 1995, Assistant Professor and Coordinator of Electrical Engineering
Technology
1996 – 2003, Associate Professor and Coordinator of Electrical Engineering
Technology
2003 – present, Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering Technology
Other related experience—teaching, industrial, etc.
1994 – 2005, Research Instructor, Louisiana State University Medical School
1984 – 1987, Systems Engineer, NCR Corporation
1983, Software Engineer, Gamma Products
1979 – 1983, Systems Engineer, E-Systems
Consulting, patents, etc.
None
State(s) in which registered
None
Principal publications of last five years
None
Scientific and professional societies of which a member
None
Honors and awards
202
Member of Eta Kappa Nu (Electrical Engineering Honor Society)
Member of Tau Alpha Pi (Engineering Technology Honor Society)
Professional development activities in the last five years
Self-study in computer networks
Attended campus-sponsored seminar on Moodle system
Graduate Certificate in Information Assurance
Percentage of time committed to the program: 100%
203
Miguel D. Gates
Louisiana Tech University
Visiting Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering Technology
Name and Academic Rank
Miguel D. Gates
Visiting Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering Technology
Degree with fields, institution, and dates
Ph.D., Engineering, Louisiana Tech University, 2013
M.S., Computer Engineering, Jackson State University, 2008
B.S., Computer Engineering, Jackson State University, 2006
Number of years service on this faculty, including date of original appointment
and dates of advancement in rank
2 years of service, original appointment in 2013
2012 – 2013, Adjunct Professor, Electrical Engineering
2003 – present, Visiting Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering Technology
Other related experience—teaching, industrial, etc.
2009 – 2012, Air Force Research Lab Senior intern, WPAFB, Dayton, OH
Consulting, patents, etc.
None
State(s) in which registered
None
Principal publications of last five years
R. Ordonez, M. Gates, A. Mitra, R. Selmic, P. Detweiler, K. Moma, and G.
Parker, “RF emitter localization with position adaptive MAV platforms,” Proc. 2010
IEEE NAECON, Dayton, July 2010.
R. R. Selmic, M. Gates, C. Barber, A. Mitra, and R. Ordonez “Position-Adaptive
Direction Finding of Electromagnetic Sources Using Wireless Sensor Networks”,
Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation, 2011
M. Gates, R. Selmic, R. Ordonez, “Cooperative Control of MAVs for a Hidden
Emitter Localization,” proc. of SPIE defense, security, and sensing conf., Baltimore,
MD, 2012
Scientific and professional societies of which a member
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE)
National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE)
204
Honors and awards
None
Professional development activities in the last five years
None
205
Dr. Mickey Cox
Professor, Electrical Engineering (ELEN)
1. Name and Academic Rank:
Mickey D. Cox
Professor of Electrical Engineering
2. Degrees with fields, institution, and date:
B.S., Electrical Engineering, Louisiana Tech University, November 1976
M.S., Electrical Engineering, Louisiana Tech University, March 1978
Ph.D., Electrical Engineering, Louisiana State University, May 1986
3. Number of years service on this faculty, including date of original
appointment and dates of advancement in rank
31 years (1980-82 and 1985-present), appointed Assistant Professor, September
1980
Promoted to Associate Professor, September 1989
Promoted to Professor, September 1999
4. Other related experience-teaching, industrial, etc.
Aerosystems Engineer, Antenna Group, General Dynamics Corporation,
Fort Worth, TX, March 1978-August 1980
5. Consulting, patents, etc.
Expert witness for several electrical accidents
6. State(s) in which registered
Louisiana, Registration No. 20461
7. Principal publications of last five years
“Consequences of Net Metering on Electric Utilities,” P.D. Vu and M.D. Cox,
final report, Southwestern Electric Power Company, Shreveport, LA, September
2012.
8. Scientific and professional societies of which a member.
Senior Member – Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
IEEE Power and Energy Society
American Society for Engineering Education
206
9. Honors and awards
Member of Tau Beta Pi and Eta Kappa Nu honor societies
IEEE Power Engineering Society Working Group Award, 1998
Louisiana State University Alumni Federation Fellowship Award, 1982-85
10. Institutional Service and professional service in the last five years.
Faculty advisor for the LA Tech Chapter of Eta Kappa Nu
Faculty advisor for the LA Tech Amateur Radio Club (W5HGT)
Instructor for PE review course taught to SWEPCO engineers
11. Professional development activities in the last five years.
Taught new courses on antennas and propagation (ELEN 557/Spring 2011), random
signals and Kalman filters (ELEN 557/Spring 2012), and RF electronics (ELEN
451/557/Fall 2013), Louisiana Tech University
Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities: 10%
Percentage of time committed to the program: 20%
207
Mr. James W. Eads, Jr., P.E.
Lecturer, Electrical Engineering Technology (ELET) (Retired)
1. Name and Academic Rank:
James W. Eads, Jr.
Lecturer and Program Chair, Electrical Engineering Technology (Retired, Nov. 2013)
2. Education:
BS, Electrical Engineering, Louisiana Polytechnic Institute, February 1968
MS, Electrical Engineering, Louisiana Tech University, August 1978
3. Academic Experience:
Louisiana Tech University, Full-Time Adjunct Instructor of Electrical Engineering
Technology, Dec. 2000 – May 2003
Louisiana Tech University, Full-Time Lecturer in Electrical Engineering Technology,
Sept. 2003 - May 2007.
Louisiana Tech University, Full-Time Lecturer and Program Chair, Electrical
Engineering Technology, Sept. 2007 – Nov. 2013
4. Non-academic Experience:
Koch Nitrogen Company, Senior Electrical Engineer, 1992 – 1998.
Responsible for engineering design, installation and maintenance of all plant
electrical and process control systems.
International Minerals and Chemical Corporation, Engineering Supervisor – Process
Control and Electrical Systems, 1986 – 1991.
Responsible for management of engineering design and installation for all plant
electrical power and process control systems.
International Minerals and Chemical Corporation, Electrical Engineer, 1980 – 1985.
Responsible for engineering design and installation of all plant electrical power
systems.
International Minerals and Chemical Corporation, Superintendent – Instrumentation
and Electrical Maintenance, 1972 – 1979.
Responsible for maintenance of all plant process control and electrical systems.
The Boeing Company, Associate Engineering – Instrumentation Section, 1968 –
1970.
Responsible for design and maintenance of a variety of sensors and measuring
systems on the Saturn S1C moon-launch vehicle.
208
5. Licensures and Certification
Registered Professional Engineer; Electrical Engineering, Louisiana, No. 16369,
1974.
6. Professional Memberships
None.
7. Honors and Awards
None.
8. Department Service
Program Chair, Sept. 2007 – Nov. 2013.
9. Publications
None.
10. Recent Professional Development Activities
None.
Percentage of time committed to the program: (Retired)
209
Dr. W. Davis Harbour
Lecturer, Electrical Engineering
1. Name and Academic Rank:
W. Davis Harbour
Lecturer, Electrical Engineering
2. Education
Ph.D. Electrical Engineering, University of Arkansas, 2006
M.S. Electrical Engineering, University of Oklahoma, 1991
B.S. Electrical Engineering, University of Oklahoma, 1983
3. Academic Experience
2007 – Present: Lecturer in Electrical Engineering, Louisiana Tech University,
full time
2006 – 2007: Instructor in Electrical Engineering, University of Arkansas, full
time
2003 – 2005: Lecturer in Electrical Engineering, University of Arkansas, full
time
2002 – 2005: Network Administrator for Department of Mathematics,
University of Arkansas, full time
2002 – 2003: Graduate Fellow in the GK12 Fellowship Program,
University of Arkansas, full time
2001 – 2003: Teaching Assistant in Department of Mathematics,
University of Arkansas, full time
4. Non-Academic Experience
2000 - 2001 Project Engineer, Controls Group, Sedco Forex (M/D Totco), Houston,
TX
1998 - 1999 Senior Principal Engineer, V-ICIS Group, M/D Totco, Aberdeen,
Scotland
1996 - 1998 Senior R&D Manager, V-ICIS Group, M/D Totco, Cedar Park, TX
1994 - 1996 R&D Manager, Advanced Drilling Applications, M/D Totco, Cedar
Park, TX
1993 - 1994 Sr R&D Engineer, Advanced Drilling Appl, M/D Totco, Cedar Park,
TX
1992 - 1993 Senior R&D Engineer, Sedco Forex (M/D Totco), Montrouge, France
1987 - 1992 Firmware Engineer, Seagate Technology, Oklahoma City, OK
1984 - 1987 Electrical Engineer, R&D, Totco, Norman, Oklahoma
5.
Certifications or Professional Registrations
None
6. Current Professional Organization Memberships
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE)
American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE)
210
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Heads Association (ECEDHA)
7. Honors and awards
COES Outstanding Advisor Award, 2012-2013
COES Outstanding Faculty Award, 2010-2011
COES Outstanding Advisor Award, 2010-2011
Member of Tau Beta Pi and Eta Kappa Nu honor societies
8. Institutional and professional service
Electrical Engineering Program Chair, 2009 to present
IEEE Student Chapter Faculty Advisor, 2007 to present
COES Lecturer Search Committee, 2013
ELET Lecturer Search Committee, 2013
Undergraduate Dean Search Committee, 2012
Innovative High Quality Education Committee, 2011-2012
Math Hours Review Committee Chair, 2010-2011
University Senate, 2007-2010
9. Principal publications and presentations of the last five years
Tims, H., Corbett, K., Harbour, D., Hall, D. “Work In Progress: Application of
the Boe-Bot in Teaching K12 Electricity Fundamentals”, 41st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers
in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD, October, 2011
Harbour, D., Hummel, P., “Migration of a Robotics Platform from a Freshman
Introduction to Engineering Course Sequence to a Sophomore Circuits Course”, 40th
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Washington, DC, October, 2010
Pellegrin, S., Waguespack, R, Harbour, D., Forrest, S., Wilson, C.,
“Nanostructured neutron detectors with on chip integrated circuits for space flight
monitoring”, IEEE Sensors, pp 1334-1338, October, 2009
Swanbom, M., Harbour, D., “A Microprocessor-based Control System Project for
an Integrated Freshman Curriculum”, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition,
Austin, TX, June, 2009
Reed, A., Creekbaum, T., Elliott, M., Hall, D., Harbour, D., “Utilizing Robotics to
Facilitate Project-Based Learning: A Student Perspective”, ASEE Annual Conference
and Exposition, Pittsburgh, PA, June 2008
10.
Professional Development Activities
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Heads Association (ECEDHA)
Annual Conference, Napa, CA, March 2014
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Heads Association (ECEDHA)
Annual Conference, Tampa, FL, March 2010
211
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Heads Association (ECEDHA)
Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA, March 2009
Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities / Percentage of
time committed to program
20% / 20%
212
Dr. Paul Hummel
Lecturer, Electrical Engineering
1. Name and Academic Rank:
Paul Hummel
Lecturer, Electrical Engineering
2. Education
Ph.D. Engineering – Micro/Nano Technology Emphasis, Louisiana Tech University,
2008
B.S. Engineering – Computer Concentration, LeTourneau University, 2003
3. Academic Experience
September 2007 – Present: Lecturer in Electrical Engineering
Louisiana Tech University, full time
4.
Non-Academic Experience
None
5.
Certifications or Professional Registrations
Engineer in Training (passed FE exam April 2003)
6.
Current Professional Organization Memberships
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE)
7.
Honors and awards
8.
Institutional and professional service
9.
Principal publications and presentations of the last five years
Harbour, D., Hummel, P., “Migration of a Robotics Platform from a Freshman
Introduction to Engineering Course Sequence to a Sophomore Circuits Course”, 40th
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Washington, DC, October, 2010
10.
Professional Development Activities
213
Developed and implemented a new digital curriculum based around a Xilinx
FPGA development board and Verilog programming.
Created a new embedded systems course utilizing MicroBlaze on an FPGA for
assembly programming, FreeRTOS, and hardware debugging.
Developed and implemented the circuits sequence curriculum including online
homework with WebWork, labs using a Digilent Explorer board, and design projects
using simulation software Micro-Cap.
Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities / Percentage of
time committed to program
10% / 20%
214
APPENDIX C. LABORATORY EQUIPMENT
ALL LABORATORIES
Manufacturer
Model Number
Description
Qty.
A&D Engineering
Agilent
Allen Bradley
Ametek
B&K Precision
B&K Precision
BMI
CDE
Circuitmate
Dell
Dell
Dell
Dell
Edsyn
Emona Tims
Falk
Fluke
GE
GE
General Electric
General Radio
Company
General Radio
Company
General Radio
Company
General Radio
Company
Heathkit
AD4316
N9020A
n/a
1965
1601
1650
3030A
CDB
FG2
Inspiron 4000
Optiplex 320
Optiplex GX260
Optiplex GX620
9S1SX
Tims-301C
2C2-04C5
8050A
5KW213BD305A
n/a
7471984
Force Meter
Signal Analyzer
PLC
Stroboscope/Tachometer
Regulated DC Power Supply
Tri-Output Power Supply
Power Analyzer
Decade Capacitor Box
Function Generator
Laptop
PC
PC
PC
Soldering Iron
Communications Modeling System
Enclosed Gear Drive
Digital Multi-Meter
AC Motor
Induction Voltage Regulator
Reactor/Inductor
1
2
5
1
3
24
1
3
3
1
16
8
14
1
4
1
11
2
3
3
n/a
Decade Resistor Box
9
W5MT3
Variac/Auto Transformer
1
1657
RLC Bridge
2
1659
3304
1
9
Heathkit
Heathkit
Heathkit
Heathkit
Helipot
HP
HP
ET-3100
ETI-7010
ETI-7030
ETI-710
T-10-A
4108
5314
RLC Bridge
Oscilloscope
Electronic Design Prototyping
Board
Digital Multi-Meter
Tri-Output Power Supply
Digital Multi-Meter
Potentiometer
Analog Voltmeter
Universal Counter
215
8
4
2
1
1
3
3
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
HP
IET
IET Labs
182T
3311A
33120A
3561A
450A
5314A
54600A
54600B
54601B
59306A
853A
8000f
8656B
8920A
RS-200
RCS-500
JPC
Keithley
Keithley
Keithley
Lamda
Magna-Power
Electronics
Matthew
n/a
National Instruments
Pacemaker
Pioneer
TD107
168
178
179
LCS-C-24
Powerace
Quanser
Simpson
Rigol
Rigol
Stanford
Tektronix
Tektronix
Tektronix
Tektronix
Tektronix
Tektronix
103
UPM-1503
260-8P
DG1022
DS1120E
SR785
2230
2402
2445
2430A
TDS-2014
TCPA300
TSA250-120
CVPS-105
n/a
NI ELVIS
CJ2B
3
Spectrum Analyzer
Function Generator
Waveform Generator
Spectrum Analyzer
Amplifier
Universal Counter
Oscilloscope
Oscilloscope
Oscilloscope
Relay Actuator
Spectrum Analyzer
Computers with PSCAD
Signal Generator
Communications Test Set
Decade Resistor Box
RC Box
Electronic Design Prototyping
Board
Digital Multi-Meter
Digital Multi-Meter
Digital Multi-Meter
Regulated Power Supply
1
2
5
1
1
1
4
3
3
6
2
9
1
1
1
3
Variable DC Power Supply
Regulated Power Supply
DC Ammeter
Data Acquisition/Prototyping Board
Motor
All Terrain Robot
Electronic Design Prototyping
Board
Universal Power Module
Analog Multi-Meter
Digital Functiion Generator
Digital Oscilloscope
Analyzer
Oscilloscope
Oscilloscope
Oscilloscope
Oscilloscope
Oscilloscope
Current Probe Amplifier
1
1
13
16
1
2
216
1
3
3
1
2
1
7
10
8
12
1
1
1
3
1
1
4
Tektronix
Tektronix
Tektronix
Telemecanique
Texas Instruments
Texas Instruments
Todd
UTC
Valhalla
Wavetek
Wavetek
Wavetek
Westinghouse
Westinghouse
Westinghouse
Westinghouse
Westinghouse
TCP303
TCP312
TM502A
TSX17
SI-5500
STI1032-1
MCS-24-3.4
n/a
4300C
180
185
182A
106625
63W17
63W18
63W22
63W229
Current Probe
Current Probe
Power Module
Micro PLC
I/O Expander
Sequencer
Regulated Power Supply
Decade Inductor Box
Ohm Meter
Function Generator
Function Generator
Function Generator
Transformer
DC Gen/Motor
DC Gen/Motor
AC Generator
AC Generator
217
2
2
1
5
2
3
2
2
2
8
1
5
3
1
1
1
1
Appendix D – Institutional Summary
1. The Institution
Name: Louisiana Tech University
Address: 305 Wisteria Street
P.O. Box 3178
Ruston, LA 71272
Chief Executive Officer: Dr. Leslie K. Guice
Title: President
Person Submitting the Self-Study Report: Glen E. Deas, Interim Program Chair
Louisiana Tech University is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools
Commission on Colleges to award associate, baccalaureate, masters and doctoral degrees.
2. Type of Control
Louisiana Tech University is a member of The University of Louisiana System, under control
of the Board of Supervisors of the UL System. The Louisiana Board of Regents coordinates all
public higher education for the State of Louisiana, including the UL System, the LSU System,
and the Southern University System, and the Louisiana Community and Technical College
Board.
The responsibilities of the Board of Regents and those of the four management boards are
carefully drawn to ensure a balance and distinction between coordinating, planning and policymaking and management implementation. The 1974 Louisiana Constitution gives the Board of
Regents the following authority:
•
•
•
•
•
To review or eliminate existing degree programs or departments;
To approve, disapprove, or modify proposed academic programs or departments;
To study both the need for and feasibility of new postsecondary institutions as well as the
conversion of existing schools into campuses offering more advanced courses of study;
To formulate and update a master plan for higher education (which must include a higher
education funding formula); and
To review annual budget proposals for the operating and capital needs of each public
institution prior to compilation of the Regents' higher education budget recommendations.
The Board also recommends priorities for capital construction and improvements.
The Constitution provides that all duties and responsibilities not specifically vested in the
Board of Regents be assigned to the respective management boards. This carefully drawn
division of responsibility enables the Board of Regents to chart general academic and fiscal
directions for higher education in Louisiana without becoming unnecessarily entangled in the
day-to-day mechanics of operating college campuses.
218
Thus, in practice, the Board of Regents' determines what academic programs an institution
may offer and assesses the quality and need for those programs, but the management boards
oversee instructional operations; the Regents administer the funding formula and set down
guidelines for preparing campus budgets, but the management boards have the responsibility of
preparing and administering those budgets; the Regents set tenure standards which the university
systems must meet or exceed, but only the management boards may approve campus personnel
actions.
3. Educational Unit
History of Institution
Tech's formal name is Louisiana Tech University, but, when it was founded in 1894, it was
named Industrial Institute and College of Louisiana. Act 68 of the General Assembly called for a
“first-class” school to be located in Ruston designed to educate citizens in the arts and sciences
and in "the practical industries of the age." The school was located on 20 acres of land and in a
single building, both donated by the city of Ruston. By September 1895, with its president and
faculty of six in residence, Tech opened its door to 202 students.
The first degree offered, the Bachelor of Industry, was granted in fields as diverse as music
and telegraphy. The first student to receive the degree was Harry Howard, Class of 1897. Mr.
Howard was not required to go through a formal graduation program. After his qualifications
were examined, Col. A.T. Prescott, the first president, awarded the degree. The first graduation
exercises were not held until the following year, 1898, when ten degrees were awarded in a
ceremony at the Ruston Opera House.
During the first few decades, the institution's name, purpose, and functions were modified to
meet the needs of the people it served. In 1921, the school's name was changed to Louisiana
Polytechnic Institute. The Bachelor of Industry degree was discarded and the degrees standard to
American education were granted. As the college increased its enrollment and offerings,
continual changes were made to meet those additional responsibilities. In 1970, the name was
changed to Louisiana Tech University.
Today, the University continues to prosper with an enrollment of 11,014 and a faculty-tostudent ratio of 1:24. The physical plant has grown to more than 169 buildings and 1790 total
acres.
The focal point of the campus is the Quadrangle, the center of which is a granite fountain
named "The Lady of the Mist." Prescott Memorial Library (named for the University’s first
president), Wyly Tower of Learning, and George T. Madison Hall form the north end of the
Quadrangle. Keeny Hall (named after the University’s sixth president) is at the east side; and the
Howard Center for the Performing Arts (named for Tech's first graduate) frames the south side.
The Centennial Plaza was constructed in 1995. The Plaza’s alumni walkway bears
approximately 72,000 engraved bricks representing all Tech graduates and continues to expand.
The Student Center and Tolliver Hall border the west side of the Quadrangle. Tolliver Hall
renovation provides a spacious, contemporary gathering spot for students replete with a
219
convenience store, cyber café, student association offices, and the Spirit of Tech wall, a 120-foot
art mural showcasing Tech’s past and present.
Hale Hall, built in 1898, has been reconstructed to its original architectural grandeur. This
building houses the School of Architecture, Interior Design and the Office of Undergraduate
Admissions.
The Biomedical Engineering Building was completed and occupied in May 2007. It houses
Tech’s Center for Biomedical Engineering and Rehabilitation Science (CyBERS) and forms the
basis for continued biomedical research with the Institute for Micromanufacturing, as well as
numerous other centers of excellence, well into the 21st century. A recent fourth story expansion
provides additional laboratory and graduate student office space.
Our College reached our private fund raising goal of $7.5M for the new Integrated
Engineering and Science Building this past year. It will house freshman and sophomore
engineering, mathematics, chemistry and physics classes and labs, as well as faculty offices,
collaboration space, re-configurable large group space, and food service. This new building is in
the current capital outlay bill for the state of Louisiana, with a capital outlay request of $30M,
which should give us a 100,000 square foot facility. Plans are to start on the architectural design
of the facility this summer and schedule a ground breaking late in spring or summer of 2015.
Engineering education at Louisiana Tech University began in 1895 with a two-year program
in Mechanic Arts. In 1910 this program was expanded to a Bachelor of Industry degree in
General Engineering. Four-year engineering curricula developed as follows: 1921-BS in General
Engineering; 1927-BS in Mechanical-Electrical and BS in Civil Engineering; 1938-BS in
Mechanical and separate BS in Electrical Engineering; 1940-BS in Chemical Engineering; 1948BS in Petroleum Engineering; 1957-BS in Industrial Engineering; 1972-BS in Biomedical
Engineering; 2005-BS in Nanosystems Engineering; and 2012-BS in Cyber Engineering.
Other BS degrees developed as follows: 1968-Construction Engineering Technology; 1968Computer Science; and 1972-Electrical Engineering Technology.
In 1996 the School of Science, which included Mathematics, Chemistry, and Physics, was
merged with the College of Engineering to form the College of Engineering and Science.
Louisiana Tech University opened in 1894 with a mission to provide technical education to
citizens of Louisiana. For over 100 years, Tech has provided accredited engineering, technology
and science degree programs. In the Fall of 1996 the College of Engineering merged with the
School of Sciences to form the College of Engineering and Science. Immediately after the
merger, the College implemented a major organizational restructure to stimulate significant
reforms in curricula and research. These changes were stimulated by a number of national
reports in the 1990s, which called for organizational change in engineering and science, and by
specific recommendations from the Louisiana Tech Engineering and Science Foundation. The
merger and restructuring are important because these actions have created an environment that is
conducive to change and have promoted strong collaboration between the engineering and
science programs. This has been evidenced by dramatically increased research productivity over
the last several years as faculty have begun to work in interdisciplinary teams.
Major
220
innovations in administration, strategic planning, budgeting, research organization, and curricula
have enabled the COES to achieve its interim goals, primarily through interdisciplinary
approaches to all these core functions. Currently the College has fourteen undergraduate degree
programs including eight engineering programs, two technology programs, computer science,
math, chemistry, and physics. The current undergraduate enrollment in the College is
approximately 1967, with an average ACT of 25.8. Minority students represent 25% of our
enrollment and women represent 16%.
The College offers Master of Science (M.S.) programs in biomedical engineering, as well as
an interdisciplinary M.S. in Engineering that supports chemical, civil, electrical, industrial and
mechanical engineering programs. Interdisciplinary M.S. programs are also available in
manufacturing systems engineering, engineering and technology management and molecular
science and nanotechnology. Doctoral programs include an interdisciplinary Ph.D. in
Engineering, a Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering, and an interdisciplinary Ph.D. in
Computational Analysis and Modeling. A joint Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering/M.D. degree is
offered in cooperation with LSU-Health Sciences Center in Shreveport.
The recent history of interdisciplinary research and curriculum efforts at Louisiana Tech is
best illustrated by a timeline. Major activities since 1996 have had a positive impact on
enrollment and graduation.
1996 – Engineering and Science Merged to Form College of Engineering & Science
Structural Reorganization Within the New COES
Opening of the Institute for Micromanufacturing
1997 – Planning for Integrated Engineering Curriculum (With Support from Local
Industry)
First Integrated Engineering Curriculum (IEC) Pilot Program
1998 – Second IEC Pilot Program
1999 – NSF Action Agenda Funding for Full Implementation of IEC
First Microsystems Courses Offered at Tech
2000 – Continued Development and Improvement of IEC
2001 – Planning for Integrated Science (ISC) Curriculum
2002 – First ISC Pilot Program
2003 – NSF Funding for Expansion of ISC
2005 – Nanosystems Engineering Degree Program
2006 – New Biomedical Engineering Building
2007 – Living With the Lab (LWTL) Freshman Curriculum Full Implementation
2012 – Cyber Engineering Degree Program
Louisiana Tech has a history of developing innovative engineering curricula. Louisiana Tech
was one of the first universities in the country to offer a B.S. in Biomedical Engineering, starting
in 1973 and becoming one of the first six programs to be accredited in Bioengineering by the
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). This program has been sustained
and also offers the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Biomedical Engineering. Louisiana Tech was also
the first university in the nation to offer a B.S. degree in Nanosystems Engineering and has most
recently started a B.S. in Cyber Engineering and a minor in Data Center Engineering, supported
by our Ph.D. programs in Engineering (track in Cyberspace Engineering) and a Ph.D. in
221
Computational Analysis and Modeling. Similar to Biomedical Engineering, the Nanosystems
Engineering program is sustained by M.S. degrees in Engineering, Microsystems Engineering,
and Molecular Science and Nanotechnology, as well as a Ph.D. in Engineering and a Ph.D. in
Molecular Science and Nanotechnology.
Integrated Engineering Curriculum
Specifically related to this current proposal, the collaboration between engineering and
science faculty has led to significant curricular reform that would not have been possible under
our old structure. In 1997, we began a pilot program for an integrated freshman and sophomore
engineering curriculum (IEC). One of the primary goals of the curriculum was to help students
make connections between math, engineering, and science. The curriculum was structured such
that each quarter students take an engineering class that is directly connected to a corresponding
math and science class. The engineering classes were developed to cover fundamental
engineering topics as well as basic communication and computer skills along with a design
project. The topics covered in the engineering classes are closely connected to the topics
covered in math, chemistry, and physics so that all classes reinforce each other. Major revisions
were made in the math and science courses to more effectively align the topics in those classes
with each other and the engineering topics. The pilot program showed a significant increase in
retention from the freshman year to sophomore year and dramatic improvement in student
performance as measured by grades in target courses. Other less direct measures, including
student attitude and faculty satisfaction (based on internal surveys and focus groups), were also
very positive.
The results of the IEC pilot program helped us to obtain NSF funding in 1999 to fully
implement the program and provide training to bring new faculty on board. This curriculum has
continued to evolve and has become one of our primary recruitment tools with prospective
students and parents.
The newest version of our Integrated Engineering Curriculum is the NSF-funded Living with
the Lab curriculum. Developed on a pilot basis over the last three years and funded by NSF in
2007, it has been implemented college-wide. Traditional laboratory and shop settings are
effective for creating project-based curricula, but access to required equipment and supplies
make these projects difficult to sustain for a large number of students. Our solution is to put
ownership and maintenance of the “lab” into the hands of the students. Each student purchases a
robotics kit along with a programmable controller, sensors, servos, and software to provide the
basis for a mobile lab and design platform, thereby allowing them to work in the dorm rooms any
time day or night. Prototype development is supported by classrooms/ laboratories equipped
with hand tools, machine tools, test equipment, and a stock of sensors compatible with their
microcontroller. Engineering fundamentals are introduced on a just-in-time basis to provide the
knowledge required to complete the projects.
Student Body
Louisiana Tech University enrolls approximately 11,000 students each fall. Although most
of the students are Louisiana residents, approximately 94%, there are students from all 50 states
and about 64 countries. About 1800 of these students are graduate students. For the last three
years, Louisiana Tech University has been designated a Tier 1, top 200 college and university by
222
US News and World Report. The university has been designated as one of the Top 15 Most
Affordable Colleges in the US by Newsweek and number 1 in starting salaries for recent
graduates for all universities in Louisiana. The COES enrollment has been increasing over the
last few years, most recently with a 30% increase in the freshman class for Fall 2013 and another
23% increase in freshman admits for Fall 2014. In addition, there was a record graduating class
in Spring 2014, both in the COES (218) and the university (970).
The quality of education at Louisiana Tech is outstanding as seen in the high graduation
rates, high retention rates, high (and increasing) average ACT of admitted students, and low
average time to graduation. In Fall 2013, the average ACT for entering freshman in the College
of Engineering and Science was 25.8, with some programs attracting an even higher performing
student. For almost 120 years, the strength of the college, perhaps of the entire university, has
been the high quality undergraduate engineering education. With over 15,000 engineering
graduates, Louisiana Tech University ranks as one of the top engineering schools in the South.
The engineering, engineering technology, and computer science programs are accredited by the
ABET (with the exception of Cyber Engineering which began in Fall 2012 and which will
pursue ABET accreditation under general engineering when its first cohort graduates). The
engineering programs were most recently accredited in 2008 (2010 for Nanosystems
Engineering), 2001, 1995, 1989, and 1983. The next general review is scheduled for Fall 2014.
Electrical Engineering Technology
The Electrical Engineering Technology program is one of two Engineering Technology
programs in the College of Engineering and Science, the other being Construction Engineering
Technology, and it is now in its forty first year. The program is housed in Nethken Hall. The
building also houses the Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, and Cyber Engineering
programs. These programs each have a Program Chair are all under one administrative group
that is headed by a Director who is responsible for most administrative duties. Most of the
classrooms, laboratory spaces, lab equipment, computing equipment, and supplies are shared
with the Electrical Engineering program. The Electrical Engineering program also is able to
supply subject matter experts to teach some courses in the Electrical Engineering Technology
curriculum as the need arises.
Administrative Chain of Responsibility for the Program
An organizational chart is included in Figure 0-1. The administrative chain of responsibility
for the program is listed, below:
Program Chair: Glen E. Deas
Director: Dr. Sumeet Dua
Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies: Dr. Jenna P. Carpenter
Dean: Dr. Hisham Hegab
Vice President for Academic Affairs: Dr. Terry McConathy
President: Dr. Leslie K. Guice
223
4. Academic Support Units
The College of Engineering and Science offers eight B.S. degrees in engineering, two
degrees in engineering technology, a degree in computer science, and degrees in chemistry,
mathematics, and physics.
Chemistry
Program Chair: Dr. Collin Wick
Director:
Dr. Lee Sawyer
Mathematics
Program Chair: Dr. Bernd Schroder
Director:
Dr. Ruth Ellen Hanna
Physics
Program Chair: Dr. Kathleen Johnston
Director:
Dr. Lee Sawyer
5.
Non-academic Support Units
Library
Prescott Memorial Library provides a wide array of resources and services, including an
increasing number of services that are delivered electronically. Traditional library resources
include 460,000 books, 570,000 microforms, and 2000 periodical subscriptions. The library is a
U.S. Government Documents Regional Depository, one of only 51 in the nation, a U.S. Map
Depository, and a State of Louisiana Documents Historical Depository. The library houses over
2,600,000 government documents. In addition to these traditional materials, the library has
numerous electronic resources available in the library or through its web page at
http://www.latech.edu/library
Library services are available to provide access to additional resources in several ways. The
Interlibrary Services department provides rapid response to requests by using a web request
form. Digital technologies are used to provide Internet document delivery, and a statewide
courier service provides book delivery. The ScienceDirect database of journals is available to
faculty, staff and graduate students and has monthly limitation amounts. The time between an
Interlibrary Loan Request and the receipt of printed material is 1-3 weeks, while digital materials
may be available within 48 hours from a link in an email.
The Louisiana Tech University Library subscribes to the American Library Association’s
Inter-Library Loan Code, which makes virtually every major College and University library
available to Tech’s faculty and graduate students. The Library is a member of OCLC. Through
this organization the library can request materials for interlibrary loan from over 2,000 libraries
electronically.
The Louisiana Tech Library is a member of LaLINC, Louisiana Academic Library
Information Network Consortium, representing the academic libraries of Louisiana. LaLINC is
the sponsor of LOUIS, Louisiana Online University Information Systems, an online network of
library catalogs. A LaLINC Borrowing Card may be requested to use other state academic
libraries. Materials must be picked up and returned to the owning library.
224
The Library also provides bibliographic instruction, reserved book services, book ordering,
special class assignment instruction, and thesis binding.
An increasing emphasis is being placed on electronic books and media. A survey of COES
faculty has shown that electronic versions of serials are much preferred over paper copies. The
library is working to convert as many serials to electronic subscription as possible. Since 2004,
the library has offered an extensive electronic collection of engineering reference and handbooks
through the Knovel ebook service. These ebooks are used in several Electrical Engineering
classes.
Computer Center
The Louisiana Tech Computing Center provides administrative and academic computing and
network support to the campus community. The Computing Center operates an IBM mainframe
system for administrative services support and student records and a suite of information servers
and networking equipment to support the educational and research needs of the students, faculty,
and staff. Computing Center staff provide technical support for centralized campus IT services
such as network access (wired and secure wireless), web services such as BOSS (our online
registration system), email, hardware, software, and user support for three campus-wide
computer laboratories (one of which is operated 24/7).
Career Center
The mission of the Career Center is to educate and to serve the students and graduates of
Louisiana Tech University in the career education, planning, and development processes. In
support of the mission of the University, the Career Center functions as a vital component in the
total educational experience of students, primarily in the development, evaluation, initiation, and
implementation of career plans and opportunities. Career Center services and resources provide
assistance to students in the cultivation and enhancement of skills to explore career options,
master job search techniques and strategies, and research employment opportunities. The
Career Center provides effective and efficient service to employers in recruitment programs and
activities.
The Career Center serves students and graduates of Louisiana Tech University through their
career development by providing a wide array of resources over the course of ones’ academic
and professional career. The Career Center staff assists students and alumni as they explore
major and career options; guides students and alumni as they master internship and job search
strategies fit for today’s economic climate; and supports students and alumni as they uncover
internship, co-op, and full-time opportunities through the use of an online career services
management tool, called TechLink, and by participating in on-campus interviews and recruiting
events that directly connect industry partners with the candidates they are targeting.
BARC
The Bulldog Achievement Resource Center (BARC) seeks to connect students to Louisiana
Tech University by providing them with academic and co-curricular resources, by giving them
opportunities for involvement in the University and community, and by helping to equip them to
succeed in completing a degree program while enhancing the overall student experience. The
mission for the programs aligned under the BARC is to provide opportunities for academic,
225
developmental, and co-curricular experiences through interactive, dynamic, and collaborative
initiatives in a technology rich environment. Inherent in the process is an emphasis on fostering
connections essential to student transition. As a partner in the educational process the programs
promote a culture of engagement, enthusiasm, and empowerment, leading toward student success
and graduation. Specific services available through the BARC include:
Grammar Hotline: Student can call the grammar hotline (257-4477) any time during normal
business hours to get answers to urgent questions. For questions requiring longer answers,
students can come by the Writing Center in person.
One-on-One Writing Consultation Sessions: Student can schedule an appointment (2574477) or drop in on the WC at 325 Wyly Tower (third floor on the presidential elevator).
Learning assistants at the WC help with all kinds of problems: brainstorming for ideas,
organization, forming thesis statements, developing arguments, grammar, punctuation, syntax, or
style.
The Writing Center Coordinator is available as a consultant in designing writing intensive
courses and in use of the Writing Lab in specific classes, especially for instructors not in the
humanities.
Computers: The Writing Center at Tech has four computers equipped with Word and internet
access. A computer lab is also conveniently located down the hall from the WC that has a
printer as well.
Study and Consultation Rooms: Two rooms (325 Wyly Tower) are available for quiet study
and consultation about writing. These rooms are ideal work space. Students are encouraged to
either work quietly or ask for assistance from the facilitators when necessary.
In addition to services available through the BARC, the University provides a number of
other services that support undergraduate programs, including Recruiting, Admissions,
Orientation, Health Clinic, Intramural Center, and numerous sports and entertainment
opportunities.
6. Credit Unit
Semester Hour/Quarter Calendar
The Louisiana Tech University academic year is structured around a quarter calendar in
which courses are offered on a semester credit hour (SCH) basis. In order to provide the
required student contact hours of a semester credit hour on a quarter calendar, each class meets
75 minutes instead of the traditional 50 minutes. For example, a 3 SCH course at Louisiana
Tech University meets three times a week for 75 minutes per meeting over a quarter lasting
approximately 10 ½ weeks. A 1 SCH hour lab typically meets once per week for 2 ½ to 4 ½
contact hours.
7. Tables
226
Table D-1. Program Enrollment and Degree Data
CURRENT
Fall 2013
Fall 2012
Fall 2011
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
1st
9
10
7
4
12
10
13
14
17
10
th
5
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
2
1
1
Total
Grad
Enrollment Year
2nd
3rd
4th
8
20
29
1
2
8
19
19
22
4
6
12
19
14
15
3
7
8
9
9
29
5
3
10
7
14
30
3
4
11
d
Academic
Year
2013-14 FT
2013-14 PT
2012-13 FT
2012-13 PT
2011-12 FT
2011-12 PT
2010-11 FT
2010-11 PT
2009-10 FT
2009-10 PT
Total
Undergra
Electrical Engineering Technology
66
22
67
26
60
29
61
34
69
29
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Degrees Conferred **
Associates Bachelors Masters Doctorates
NA
27
0
0
NA
13
0
0
NA
13
0
0
NA
23
0
0
NA
19
0
0
Give official fall term enrollment figures (head count) for the current and preceding four academic years and
undergraduate and graduate degrees conferred during each of those years. The "current" year means the academic year
preceding the on-site visit.
FT--full time
PT--part time
** Degrees Conferred are for Summer through Spring Quarters as this is how the university reports the data. Example (Fall 2010
figures are for Summer 2010-Spring 2011).
227
Table D-2. Personnel
Electrical Engineering Technology
Year1: 2013-2014
HEAD COUNT
FT
1
Administrative2
Faculty (tenure-track)3
Other Faculty (excluding student
Assistants)
FTE2
PT
0.2
6
3.4
1
0.2
Student Teaching Assistants4
Technicians/Specialists
Office/Clerical Employees
Others5
Report data for the program being evaluated.
1. Data on this table should be for the fall term immediately preceding the visit.
Updated tables for the fall term when the ABET team is visiting are to be
prepared and presented to the team when they arrive.
2. Persons holding joint administrative/faculty positions or other combined
assignments should be allocated to each category according to the fraction of the
appointment assigned to that category.
3. For faculty members, 1 FTE equals what your institution defines as a full-time
load
4. For student teaching assistants, 1 FTE equals 20 hours per week of work (or
service). For undergraduate and graduate students, 1 FTE equals 15 semester
credit-hours (or 24 quarter credit-hours) per term of institutional course work,
meaning all courses — science, humanities and social sciences, etc.
5. Specify any other category considered appropriate, or leave blank.
228
APPENDIX E – MISCELLANEOUS FORMS AND
DOCUMENTS
229
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
STUDENT COURSE OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT
ELET 422 – Control Systems I – Discrete I/O Systems
Fall Quarter 2013 – 2014
After completing this course, students will be able to:
1.
Convert a decimal number into a binary number [SO-02].
Strongly Agree
2.
Strongly Disagree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Apply TON, TOF, CTU, CTD, and RES instructions as appropriate to solve control problems. [SO-04]
[SO-06]
Strongly Agree
9.
Disagree
Apply XIC, XIO, OTE, OTL, and OTU instructions as appropriate to solve control problems. [SO-04]
[SO-06]
Strongly Agree
8.
Neutral
Use Allen-Bradley RSLogix5 PLC programming software to design PLC programs [SO-01].
Strongly Agree
7.
Agree
Address PLC inputs and outputs for the Allen-Bradley PLC-5 system. [SO-01]
Strongly Agree
6.
Strongly Disagree
Convert an octal number directly into a binary number [SO-02].
Strongly Agree
5.
Disagree
Convert a binary number directly into an octal number [SO-02].
Strongly Agree
4.
Neutral
Convert a decimal number into an octal number [SO-02].
Strongly Agree
3.
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Apply MCR, JMP, and LBL instructions as appropriate to solve control problems. [SO-04][SO-06]
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
10. Design ladder logic programs using JSR, SBR, and RET instructions to solve problems. [SO-04]
[S0-06]
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
11. Successfully download and run programs in the PLC-5 PLC. [SO-01]
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
230
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
LOUISIANA TECH UNIVERSITY ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
SENIOR EXIT INTERVIEW/SURVEY
Name
Expected Graduation
Please rate your level of agreement with each one of the following statements by checking the number of the appropriate response.
As a result of my La. Tech electrical engineering technology
education, I am well prepared to demonstrate:
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
An ability to select and apply the knowledge, techniques, skills
and modern tools of the discipline to engineering technology
activities. (SO-01)
An ability to select and apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
engineering and technology to engineering technology problems
that require the application of principles and applied procedures or
methodologies.
(SO-02)
An ability to conduct standard tests and measurements; to conduct,
analyze, and interpret experiments; and to apply experimental
results to improve processes. (SO-03)
An ability to design systems, components, or processes
appropriate for engineering technology problems and consistent
with program educational objectives. SO-04)
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5.
An ability to function effectively as a member or leader on a
technical team. (SO-06)
5
4
3
2
1
6.
An ability to identify, analyze and solve engineering technology
problems. (SO-06)
5
4
3
2
1
7.
An ability to communicate effectively regarding engineering
technology activities. (SO-07)
5
4
3
2
1
8.
An understanding of the need for and an ability to engage in selfdirected continuing professional development. (SO-08)
5
4
3
2
1
9.
An understanding of and a commitment to address professional
and ethical responsibilities, including a respect for diversity. (SO09)
5
4
3
2
1
10.
Knowledge of the impact of engineering technology solutions in a
societal and global context. (SO-10)
5
4
3
2
1
11.
A commitment to
improvement. (SO-11)
5
4
3
2
1
12.
An ability to analyze, design, and implement control systems,
instrumentation systems, communication systems, computer
systems, or power systems. (SO-02)(SO-04)
(SO-06)
5
4
3
2
1
13.
An ability to apply project management
electrical/electronic(s) systems. (SO-06)
to
5
4
3
2
1
14.
An ability to utilize statistics/probability, transform methods,
discrete mathematics, or applied differential equations in support
of electrical / electronic(s) systems. (SO-02)
5
4
3
2
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
quality,
timeliness
and
continuous
techniques
231
Please candidly answer the following questions. Only summaries of answers from all graduating seniors will be released.
Names and individual responses will not be divulged. Use the back of this sheet if more space is required.
1. What aspect/s of the Electrical Engineering Technology Program did you personally consider the most positive?
2. What aspect/s of the Electrical Engineering Technology Program did you personally consider the most negative?
3. Of the courses you took in the Electrical Engineering Technology Program, which was the “best.” Why?
4. Of the courses you took in the Electrical Engineering Technology Program, which was the “worst.” Why?
5. In your opinion, what changes could be made that would improve the program.
6. If you have already accepted employment, please answer the following (if you can):
a.
For what company will you be working?
b.
In which state will you be located?
c.
What will you be doing?
d.
What is your starting salary?
232
233
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY INDEPENDENT STUDENT OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT
ELET 380 – PRINTED CIRCUIT DESIGN AND FABRICATION
ELET-SO-01
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to select and apply the knowledge, techniques, skills and modern tools of the
discipline to engineering technology activities.
STUDENT SCORE
As applicable to a specific task, the following general criteria are used to determine a composite “Student
Score” for each student in the cohort.
Very Good
Good
Average
Poor
Very Poor
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
1
Applies acquired knowledge to correctly identify requirements of a task.
2
Selects the specific procedures required to determine all information required to complete a task.
3
Can apply the specific procedures required to determine all information required to complete a task.
4
Can use a scientific calculator, a computer, computer programs and similar tools to facilitate task completion.
ELET-SO-01 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
TASK
NO.
MATERIAL
SOURCE
TASK DESCRIPTION
1
2
3
4
STUDENT OUTCOME AVERAGE
234
AVG. CLASS
SCORE
ELET-SO-04
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to design systems, components, or processes appropriate for engineering
technology problems and consistent with program educational objectives.
STUDENT SCORE
As applicable to a specific task, the following general criteria are used to determine a composite “Student
Score” for each student in the cohort.
Very Good
Good
Average
Poor
Very Poor
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
1
Demonstrates appropriate knowledge of design specifications and required system function.
2
Utilizes design specifications to directly select system components, when applicable.
3
Demonstrates ability to evaluate system design alternatives.
4
Demonstrates ability to relate theoretical properties of applicable system designs to required specifications.
5
Demonstrates ability to use theoretical relationships to determine and select system components.
6
Achieves a system design consistent with specifications and required function.
ELET-SO-04 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
TASK
NO.
MATERIAL
SOURCE
TASK DESCRIPTION
1
2
3
4
COURSE STUDENT OUTCOME AVERAGE
235
AVG. CLASS
SCORE
ELET-SO-05
Electrical Engineering Technology graduates will demonstrate an ability to function effectively as a member or leader on a technical team.
STUDENT SCORE
As applicable to a specific task, the following general criteria are used to determine a composite “Student
Score” for each student in the cohort.
Very Good
Good
Average
Poor
Very Poor
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
1
Functions as a member of a Laboratory Workgroup to execute a laboratory exercise and collect data (Listed in report as a Workgroup member).
2
Functions as a team member to compile and submit a laboratory report (Listed under “Submitted By:” in report).
ELET-SO-05 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
TASK
NO.
MATERIAL
SOURCE
TASK DESCRIPTION
1
2
3
4
COURSE STUDENT OUTCOME AVERAGE
EVALUATED BY:
AUDITED BY:
236
AVG. CLASS
SCORE
ELET 380 - INDEPENDENT STUDENT OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT
Student Outcome Averages
TASK SCORING CODE:
STUDENT
NO.
1
2
VERY GOOD = 5
GOOD = 4
AVERAGE = 3
POOR = 2
VERY POOR = 1
SO-01
SO-04
TASK
TASK
3
4
STUDENT
NO.
STUDENT
AVGS.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
COURSE
AVGS.
COURSE
AVGS.
237
1
2
3
4
STUDENT
AVGS.
SO-05
TASK
STUDENT
NO.
1
2
TASK
3
4
STUDENT
AVGS.
STUDENT
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
COURSE
AVGS.
COURSE
AVGS.
238
1
2
3
4
STUDENT
AVGS.
ANNUAL ELET PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SUMMARY – 2012 - 2013
I. PRIOR YEAR (2011-12) RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
A. Recommendation:
Implement new Educational Objectives submitted and approved at the Spring
Quarter 2011-12 Industrial Advisory Board Meeting.
Action:
The recommendation was implemented as proposed.
Results:
The University Catalog and all program documentation were revised to reflect the
new EO’s.
B. Recommendation:
Add a third course to the Capstone Design sequence by incorporating a one
semester-credit-hour (SCH) course into the Winter Quarter. Delete ELET 378
(Electrical Projects Laboratory II) (1 SCH) to gain the required credit.
Action:
The recommendation was implemented as proposed.
Results:
ELET 476 (Capstone Design II) was moved to the Winter Quarter, and ELET 477
(Capstone Design III) was created and added to the Spring Quarter schedule for
2012-13. ELET 378 was deleted from the curriculum.
C. Recommendation:
Provide instructors with the results of Table 8 (Student Course Outcomes
Assessments below the Minimum Standard) and task them to do the following:
•
For Student Outcomes below expectations, review Course Outcomes that
support their attainment and determine if their CO-to-SO relationships are
still valid.
239
•
For valid CO-to-SO relationships, place additional emphasis on those
areas of course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the affected
Student Outcomes.
•
Revise or eliminate CO-to-SO links considered weak or invalid.
Outcomes the course is trying to achieve must strongly relate to the overall
Student Outcomes the program is trying to achieve.
Action:
The recommendation was implemented as proposed. The CO-to-SO relationships
were reviewed. CO-to-SO links were still considered strong and valid. Additional
emphasis was placed on the course material that ultimately links to the Student
Outcomes scoring below desired levels.
Results:
ELET 171 showed a decline from 2011-12. ELET 171 is the first course in the
ELET Program that requires laboratory reports, and SO-07 relates to
“communicating effectively.”
Additional emphasis on report writing is
recommended.
ELET 260 showed substantial improvement with respect to SO-04, designing
systems and components. It is concluded that “additional emphasis” was
successful.
2011 – 2012 PO VALUES
2012 – 2013 SO VALUES
COURSE
NO.
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO-08
SO09
SO10
S011
3.86*
3.38
ELET 171
3.34
4.64
ELET 260
* - PO-08 from 2011-12 maps to SO-07 in AY 2012-13.
.
D. Recommendation:
Provide instructors with the independent evaluation results in Table 10
(Independent Student Outcomes Evaluations below the Minimum Standard) and
task them to do the following:
240
•
For Student Outcomes below expectations, review Course Outcomes that
support their attainment and determine if their CO-to-SO relationships are
still valid.
•
For valid CO-to-SO relationships, place additional emphasis on those
areas of course instruction/laboratory work that relate to the affected
Student Outcomes.
•
Revise or eliminate CO-to-SO links considered weak or invalid. Course
Outcomes must strongly relate to the Student Outcomes the course is
trying to achieve.
Action:
The recommendation was implemented as proposed. The CO-to-SO relationships
are still considered valid. Additional emphasis will be placed on the material
related to the Student Outcomes below the desired levels.
Results:
Assessment data from this course was deemed inadequate to perform a proper
Independent Student Outcomes Evaluation. Evaluation of this course will be
deferred until data can be collected in 2013-14.
SO01
Course Number
ELET 272 – Electronic Circuit
Theory II
SO02
SO03
3.36
x.xx
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
3.13
x.xx
x.xx – Data from this course was insufficient to perform an Independent Evaluation.
II. EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES ASSESSMENT DATA
A. Annual Alumni Survey Data
Table 1 – Alumni Survey Results – 2012 - 2013
Electrical Engineering Technology majors will:
Minimum
Goal
Average
Response
Sample
Size
ELET-EO-01 – Secure professional positions in electrical,
electronic or related fields by leveraging their Electrical
Engineering Technology skills and knowledge.
≥4.0/5.0 (51%
- 75%)
4.71
24
241
SO11
Electrical Engineering Technology majors will:
Minimum
Goal
Average
Response
Sample
Size
ELET-EO-02 – Receive positive recognition and reward for
the productive application of their skills and knowledge.
≥4.0/5.0 (51%
- 75%)
4.71
24
ELET-EO-03 – Attain greater professional competence
applying principles of continuous learning.
≥4.0/5.0 (51%
- 75%)
4.66
24
ELET-EO-04 – Gain personal satisfaction through the
exercise of competent, ethical and socially responsible
professional practice.
≥4.0/5.0 (51%
- 75%)
4.88
24
Yes
(Number)
No
(Number)
Sample
Size
21
3
24
23
1
24
23
1
24
24
0
24
23
1
24
24
0
24
24
0
24
24
0
24
If you consider the impact your decisions have on
others, does this alter your decisions?
23
1
24
Do safety considerations influence your actions and/or
decisions?
24
0
24
General Questions*
General Questions*
1 Do you work in an electrical, electronic field?
2
5.0
5.1
5.2
6
9
10.0
10.1
11
Did your technical knowledge play a role in acquiring
the position you hold?
Have your job responsibilities increased since you
entered professional practice?
Has the increase in responsibility been professionally
rewarding?
Has the increase in responsibility been financially
rewarding?
Does your current position involve technical design and
problem solving?
Do you stay technically/professionally current by
reading technical literature, attending technical
seminars, using technical video material, attending
vendor-training programs, attending in-house training
programs, or other means?
In performing your job, do you consider the impact,
both positive and negative, that your decisions may
have on others?
242
Yes
(Number)
No
(Number)
Sample
Size
Do environmental considerations influence your actions
and/or decisions?
22
2
24
Do you belong to any organizations that work to
13 improve conditions in society or improve the lives of
others?
12
12
24
8
4
24
23
1
24
If your company does conduct periodic training on its
15.1 policies regarding personal workplace conduct, does it
conduct periodic training on these subjects?
17
6
23
If your company does conduct periodic training on its
15.2 policies regarding personal workplace conduct, does it
vigorously enforce these policies?
21
2
23
23
1
24
If your company does have policies regarding
16.1 professional and ethical conduct, does it conduct
periodic training on these subjects?
18
5
23
If your company does have policies regarding
16.2 professional and ethical conduct, does it vigorously
enforce these policies?
19
4
23
General Questions*
12
If you do not belong to such organizations, do you
support them in other ways?
Does your company conduct periodic training on its
policies regarding personal workplace conduct,
15.0
including discrimination on the basis of age, race, sex
and national origin?
14
16.0
Does your company have policies
professional and ethical conduct?
regarding
* - Question numbers correspond to numbers from the General Survey provided alumni. From
that survey, only questions required to evaluate Educational Outcomes attainment are shown.
B. University Employer Survey Data
The Undergraduate Studies Office within the College of Engineering and Science
initiates an Employer Survey for all Engineering and Engineering Technology
programs on a frequency selected to satisfy ABET requirements. When surveys
are performed, results are evaluated with respect to Electrical Engineering
Technology Program Educational Outcome attainment.
No survey was performed in Academic Year 2011/12; therefore, employer data is
unavailable.
243
III. STUDENT OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT DATA
A. Graduating Senior Exit Interview Data
Table 2 - Graduating Senior Exit Interview Results – 2012 - 2013
As a result of my Louisiana Tech Electrical Engineering
Technology education, I am well prepared to demonstrate:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
An ability to select and apply the knowledge, techniques,
skills and modern tools of the discipline to engineering
technology activities. (SO-01)
An ability to select and apply knowledge of mathematics,
science, engineering and technology to engineering
technology problems that require the application of
principles and applied procedures or methodologies.
(SO-02)
An ability to conduct standard tests and measurements; to
conduct, analyze, and interpret experiments; and to apply
experimental results to improve processes. (SO-03)
An ability to design systems, components, or processes
appropriate for engineering technology problems and
consistent with program educational objectives. (SO-04)
An ability to function effectively as a member or leader
on a technical team. (SO-05)
An ability to identify, analyze and solve engineering
technology problems. (SO-06)
An ability to communicate effectively regarding
engineering technology activities. (SO-07)
An understanding of the need for and an ability to engage
in self-directed continuing professional development.
(SO-08)
An understanding of and a commitment to address
professional and ethical responsibilities, including a
respect for diversity. (SO-09)
Knowledge of the impact of engineering technology
solutions in a societal and global context. (SO-10)
A commitment to quality, timeliness and continuous
improvement. (SO-11)
An ability to analyze, design, and implement control
systems, instrumentation systems, communication
systems, computer systems, or power systems. (SO02)(SO-04)(SO-06)
Numerical
Goals
Average
Response
Sample
Size
≥4.0/5.0
4.45
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.54
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.64
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.36
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.64
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.73
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.64
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.73
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.64
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.64
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.91
11
≥4.0/5.0
4.45
11
13.
An ability to apply project management techniques to
electrical / electronic(s) systems. (SO-06)
≥4.0/5.0
4.45
11
14.
An ability to utilize statistics / probability, transform
methods, discrete mathematics, or applied differential
equations in support of electrical / electronic(s) systems.
(SO-02)
≥4.0/5.0
4.27
11
244
Table 3 – Student Outcome Averages from Graduating Senior Exit Interviews –
2012 – 2013
P. O.
AVGS.
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
S011
4.45
4.42
4.64
4.41
4.64
4.54
4.64
4.73
4.64
4.64
4.91
B. Quarterly Student Course Outcomes Assessment
The following five (5) tables contain Student Outcomes results based on Course
Outcomes Assessments. Each course in the curriculum is expected to create
course-specific skills and knowledge outcomes. The effectiveness of the course
in meeting these outcomes is assessed near the end of the quarter when each
student rates his/her ability to perform certain tasks. Each task requires use of
certain skills and knowledge addressed in that particular course. In addition,
each task is linked to one or more of the program’s Student Outcomes.
Using individual task ratings, it can be determined whether a course is achieving
its course-specific outcomes. By using all of the course-specific outcomes
ratings linked to a particular Student Outcome, an average for that Student
Outcome can be determined for that course. In this manner, it can be judged
whether a specific course is making its requisite contribution to overall attainment
of the program’s Student Outcomes. Moreover, averaging a particular Student
Outcome across all courses in the curriculum for which it is applicable provides
an indication of attainment of that Outcome for the entire program.
Skill ratings are based on a scale of Very Good (5), Good (4), Neutral (3), Poor
(2) and Very Poor (1). Using these values and the above protocol, an average is
obtained for each Student Outcome assigned to a particular course and to the
Program as a whole. The Program’s minimum target level for each Outcome is
4.00/5.00.
Since this data represents student opinions, results derived from this data are not
considered true measures of Student Outcomes attainment. However, such results
are considered important as indicators of general trends and/or course delivery
problems than can ultimately affect outcomes attainment. Such results are used
only in conjunction4.544.41 with other metrics to evaluate actual Student
Outcomes attainment levels.
Table 4 – Student Course Outcomes Results
Fall Quarter – 2012 - 2013
245
NO.
COURSE
NO.
SO01
SO02
SO03
1
ELET 100
2
ELET 260
4.80
3
ELET 261
4.87
4
ELET 370
4.88
5
ELET 380
4.98
6
ELET 422
4.64
7
ELET 423
4.70
4.55
8
ELET 460
4.79
4.71
ELET 475
4.50
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
AVERAGES
4.79
9
4.80
SO04
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
4.63
4.75
4.63
4.63
4.75
4.75
4.63
4.63
4.75
SO09
SO10
S011
4.64
4.61
4.85
4.87
4.70
4.83
5.00
4.75
4.83
SO05
4.88
4.60
4.62
4.32
4.70
4.67
4.64
4.32
4.86
4.71
4.82
4.60
4.47
4.54
4.66
4.81
Table 5 – Student Course Outcomes Results
Winter Quarter – 2012 - 2013
NO.
COURSE
NO.
SO01
SO02
SO03
1
ELET 170
4.83
4.85
2
ELET 171
4.65
4.62
3.81
3
ELET 268
5.00
5.00
4
ELET 270
4.14
4.06
5
ELET 271
4.15
4.12
6
ELET 360
7
ELET 371
4.83
8
ELET 461
4.18
4.40
9
ELET 470
4.42
4.42
10
ELET 476
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
AVERAGES
SO04
SO05
SO06
4.62
SO07
SO08
3.38
4.15
4.29
4.80
4.72
4.83
4.23
4.47
4.33
4.55
4.18
4.75
4.46
4.54
4.56
Table 6 – Student Course Outcomes Results
Spring Quarter – 2012 - 2013
NO.
1
COURSE
NO.
ELET 180
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO08
ASSESSMENT DATA NOT COLLECTED.
246
SO09
SO10
SO11
COURSE
NO.
NO.
SO01
SO02
2
ELET 181
3
ELET 272
4.13
4
ELET 273
3.85
5
ELET 280
6
ELET 361
7
ELET 374
4.49
4.35
8
ELET 375
4.47
4.45
9
ELET 471
4.57
10
ELET 472
11
ELET 477
PROGRAM
OUTCOME
AVERAGES
SO03
SO04
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
ASSESSMENT DATA NOT COLLECTED.
4.25
4.29
3.85
3.86
3.86
4.58
4.75
4.71
4.71
4.48
4.45
4.63
ASSESSMENT DATA NOT COLLECTED.
4.73
4.30
4.41
4.43
4.08
4.29
4.63
Table 7 - Student Course Outcomes Results Averages - 2012 – 2013
P. O.
AVG.
SO-01
SO-02
SO-03
SO-04
SO-05
SO-06
SO-07
SO-08
SO-09
SO-10
S0-11
4.52
4.59
4.54
4.39
4.55
4.54
4.49
4.75
4.63
4.63
4.75
Table 8 – Student Course Outcomes Results Averages below the Minimum Goal –
2012 – 2013
COURSE
NO.
NONE
SO-01
SO-02
SO-03
SO04
SO-05
SO-06
SO-07
SO-08
SO-09
SO-10
SO11
There were no courses for which proper and sufficient data was obtained that failed to meet the Minimum Goal of 4.00/5.00
for their respective Program Outcomes.
C. Industrial Advisory Board Assessment Data
During the Spring Quarter 2012 – 2013 Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) Meeting,
selected Board members met with a group of Electrical Engineering Technology
students. Members were charged with the responsibility of interviewing the
student group and forming a collective opinion regarding ELET Student
Outcomes attainment. Board members were provided with the Program’s
Educational Objectives and Student Outcomes. From this information, they
framed their own questions and used their own methods to elicit data free of any
faculty bias.
247
After reviewing student responses, the Board concluded the Program is
achieving its desired Student Outcomes. Board comments are included in the
minutes of the Spring Quarter 2012 – 2013 IAB Meeting.
D. Independent Student Outcomes Assessment Data
During each academic year, coursework is collected from all students in selected
courses based on a predetermined course evaluation schedule. The schedule is
designed to produce an evaluation of all ten (11) ELET Student Outcomes during
the academic year. During a six-year ABET cycle, all courses in the curriculum
appear in the schedule at least once, and the vast majority appear twice. This
serves to assure that each course in the curriculum is contributing its requisite
share to overall Student Outcomes Attainment.
Assessment consists of scoring selected tasks performed by all students in a
specified course. Each task is directly associated with one or more of the
program’s Student Outcomes. Since the actual work of all students is evaluated,
this method is considered a true measurement of student performance. Results are
calculated by course instructors or by independent evaluators, the latter having no
direct involvement with course delivery. However, results determined by course
instructors must be audited by an independent evaluator. Auditors have both the
authority and responsibility to change an instructor’s evaluations with which they
do not agree. Auditor-certified evaluations must be used to rate Student
Outcomes Attainment. All assessments performed in this manner are considered
Independent Student Outcomes Assessments. This method is the principal metric
for evaluating and determining Electrical Engineering Technology Program
Outcomes Attainment.
Ratings for outcomes are based on various point-weights: Strongly Agree (5),
Agree (4), Neutral (3), Disagree (2) and Strongly Disagree (1). Tables 9 and 10
reflect average values determined for each of the Student Outcomes during the
2012/13 academic cycle.
Table 9 - Independent Student Outcomes Assessments Results – 2012 – 2013
Assessed Courses
ABET Cycle Year No. 5
(2012 – 2013)
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
248
SO05
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
SO11
ELET 260 – Electronic Circuit
Theory I
?
ELET 261 – Electronic Circuits I
Laboratory
?
?
?
?
ELET 268 – Electrical Projects
Laboratory I
4.40
ELET 280 – Electrical Power I –
Industrial Power Distribution
4.00
ELET 361 – Electro-mechanical
Power Conversion Laboratory
?
?
3.97
3.97
4.32
3.73
ELET 472 – Professionalism and
Ethics for Electrical Engineering
Technology
Student Outcome Averages
&
4.20
4.03
&
3.97
?
?
?
?
?
3.97
&
&
&
&
? – No data collected to enable independent course assessment. These cells excluded in determining
averages.
& - Insufficient data collected to compute an average.
Table 10 – Independent Student Outcomes Assessments below the Minimum
Standard – 2012 – 2013
Course Number
SO01
SO02
SO03
SO04
3.73
ELET 361
SO05
3.97
SO06
SO07
SO08
SO09
SO10
3.97
IV. EVALUATION OF ASSESSMENT DATA
A. Educational Objectives Evaluation
Educational Objectives (EO’s) are assessed using information obtained from an
Alumni Survey conducted by the Electrical Engineering Technology Program and
an Employer Survey initiated by the College of Engineering and Science’s
Undergraduate Studies Office. The Alumni Survey is a poll of all ELET
graduates from the preceding five academic years. The Employer Survey is
conducted less frequently for all engineering and engineering technology
programs but on a schedule deemed sufficient to comply with assessment
requirements.
1. Alumni Survey
The Alumni Survey for 2012 – 2013 was based on revised Educational
Objectives and General Questions. The revised EO’s are intended to more
249
SO11
clearly stress the concept of “attainment” and more closely conform to revised
ETAC/ABET requirements. Each of the EO’s had an average response well
over the minimum expectation of 4.00/5.00, and the average for all responses
was 4.74. These results are based on inputs from 24 respondents, and the
results are supported by an examination of data from the “General Questions”
as discussed below:
Program graduates will:
ELET-EO-01 Secure professional positions in electrical, electronic or
related fields by leveraging their Electrical Engineering
Technology skills and knowledge.
In response to General Questions 1, 2 and 6, 21/24 respondents indicated they
were working in an electrical or electronic field; 23/24 stated that their
technical knowledge was a factor in obtaining their present positions; and
24/24 indicated their jobs involved technical design and problem solving.
These results lend credence to the Alumni Survey results of 4.71/5.00 and
substantiate attainment of EO-01.
ELET-EO-02 Receive positive recognition and reward for the productive
application of their skills and knowledge.
In response to General Question 5.0, 24/24 respondents indicated their
responsibilities have increased since first entering professional practice. Of
these, 23/24 indicated they had received additional financial reward for their
efforts. This is interpreted as validation of the Alumni Survey result of
4.71/5.00 and attainment of EO-02.
ELET-EO-03 Attain greater professional competence applying principles of
continuous learning.
With respect to General Question 9, 24/24 respondents indicated they used
one or more of the methods referenced to either improve or maintain their
technical knowledge. Therefore, the response of 4.66/5.00 is considered valid
and supports attainment of EO-03.
ELET-EO-04 Gain personal satisfaction through the exercise of competent,
ethical and socially responsible professional practice.
General Questions 5, 10 – 12, 15 and 16 relate to EO-04. Question 5 queries
increased responsibilities and professional achievement and is viewed as a
measure of professional competence. Questions 10 – 12, 15 and 16 relate to
ethics, social responsibility and societal diversity. It is believed the results of
250
the responses to all these questions, validates the survey response of 4.88/5.00
and indicates attainment of EO-04.
Based on Alumni Survey results from Table 1 and the analysis of alumni
responses to General Questions on the survey, the Program is achieving its
Educational Objectives (EO’s) and no changes to program content or delivery
are recommended.
2. University Employer Survey
No Employer Survey was conducted by the College of Engineering and
Science during the 2012/13 Academic Year. When results from the next
scheduled survey are made available, it will be evaluated with respect to the
Electrical Engineering Technology Program.
B. Student Outcomes Evaluation
Student Outcomes evaluation is based on assessment data from Graduating Senior
Exit Interviews, student assessment of Student Outcomes, Industrial Advisory
Board student interviews, and Independent Student Outcomes Assessments. As
explained earlier, the latter assessment data is accorded the most weight.
Evaluation of data from each of these assessment methods is as follows:
1. Senior Exit Interviews Data Evaluation
Results from Senior Exit Interviews (Table 3) indicate that Graduating Seniors
rate their average attainment of all Student Outcomes as 4.58/5.00. The
minimum value of 4.27/5.00 occurred for SO-02 (An ability to utilize statistics
/ probability, transform methods, discrete mathematics, or applied differential
equations in support of electrical / electronic(s) systems). The maximum
value of 4.91/5.00 occurred for SO-11 (A commitment to quality, timeliness
and continuous improvement). Although this data represents student opinions
and is not a true measure of SO attainment, it suggests that Graduating Seniors
believe they have acquired the skills identified by the Program as necessary
for successful professional practice as an Electrical Engineering Technologist.
Graduating Seniors were also asked several open-ended questions. A review
of the responses to these questions did not reveal any significant problems
requiring program changes.
Based on Graduating Senior Interview results, no changes to program content
or delivery are recommended.
2. Student Course Outcomes Results
251
From Table 7 (Student Outcomes Assessment Averages for All Courses), data
from student inputs indicate that all Student Outcomes are being achieved at
acceptable levels as indicated by a minimum score of 4.39/5.00 for SO-04 (An
ability to design systems, components, or processes appropriate for
engineering technology problems and consistent with program educational
objectives.) and a maximum of 4.75/5.00 for SO-08 (An understanding of the
need for and an ability to engage in self-directed continuing professional
development) and SO-11 (A commitment to quality, timeliness and continuous
improvement).
Based on these opinions, it is concluded that, as a whole,
students in the program believe they are acquiring the skills identified by the
Program as essential to successful professional practice as an Electrical
Engineering Technologist.
Based on Student Outcomes Assessment data, no changes to program content
or delivery are recommended.
C. Industrial Advisory Board Data Evaluation
Based on interviews conducted by members of the Program’s Industrial Advisory
Board in the Spring Quarter 2012-13, there is agreement that the Program is
achieving its Student Outcomes and providing students with the necessary skills
to achieve the Program’s Student Outcomes and, ultimately, its Educational
Objectives. The details of these assessments and subsequent Board evaluation
can be found in the Minutes of the Spring Quarter 2012-13 Industrial Advisory
Board Meeting.
Based on the results of ELET student interviews, no changes in program content
or delivery are recommended.
D. Independent Student Outcomes Evaluation
From Table 9, it is observed that Independent Student Outcomes Assessment data
is unavailable for three (3) of the six (6) courses listed. The reason for the data
shortfall is due to continued misunderstanding of the type and quantity of data
required from the assessments. As a result, data collected from these courses was
judged inadequate for use as a true measure of Student Outcomes.
However, available data from other courses does permit an evaluation for a
number of Student Outcomes.
Based on available data, the Program’s Student Outcomes Averages from Table 9
suggest Student Outcomes are being met. It is seen that, on average, Student
Outcomes SO-02 and SO-03 are both above the minimum standard of 4.00/5.00.
Student Outcomes SO-05 (3.97/5.00) and SO-07 (3.97/5.00), although marginally
below the minimum standard, are considered acceptable. No conclusions are
252
drawn for the remaining SO’s since data required to assess these outcomes is
unavailable.
While Student Outcomes are being met on average, it must be noted that, when
examined on a course basis, ELET 361 (Electromechanical Energy Conversion
Laboratory) has some shortcomings. Of these, SO-03 (An ability to conduct
standard tests and measurements; to conduct, analyze and interpret experiments;
and to apply experimental results to improve processes) is considered
unacceptable.
Based on the above evaluation, the following are recommended:
•
Revise the 2013-14 Independent Student Outcomes Assessment Schedule
to include courses from Table 9 that could not be evaluated due to
inadequate data collection.
•
Review data collection requirements with faculty for courses subject to
Independent Student Outcomes Assessment in 2013-14.
•
Have course instructors place additional emphasis on the elements of SO03. Clearly define what constitutes each of these elements and establish
minimum standards of acceptability.
V. RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY
A. Based on Independent Student Outcomes Evaluation:
•
Revise the 2013-14 Independent Student Outcomes Assessment Schedule
to include ELET 272. A prior year evaluation (2011-12) indicated certain
Outcomes were deficient and changes were instituted. However, data was
not collected in the following academic year to evaluate the effects of the
changes.
•
Revise the 2013-14 Independent Student Outcomes Assessment Schedule
to include ELET 260, ELET 261 and ELET 472. Independent evaluation
of these courses could not be completed due to inadequate data collection.
•
Review data collection requirements with faculty for courses subject to
Independent Student Outcomes Assessment in 2013-14.
•
Have course instructors place additional emphasis on the elements of SO03. Clearly define what constitutes each of these elements and establish
minimum standards of acceptability.
253
B. Based on a recommendation from the Dean of the College of Engineering and
Science, relating to achieving more efficient use of college resources and
facilitating student matriculation through their programs, evaluate:
•
The justification for having each course in the curriculum.
•
The genuine need for the existing prerequisites for each course.
•
Possibilities for cross-listing courses with common content.
254
255
256