Kuwait University
College of Engineering and Petroleum
Office of Academic Assessment
College of Engineering and Petroleum
Online Course Assessment
For Academic year 2007-2008
July, 2008
(Updated December, 2008)
Table of Contents
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3
Preparation and Implementation of the Process................................................................... 3
Results and Discussion............................................................................................................. 4
Departmental Results ............................................................................................................ 11
Appendix A: Instructor Class Evaluation Form ................................................................. 15
Appendix B: Instructions for the Courses Assessment ...................................................... 18
2
Introduction:
This report presents the results of the online course assessment at the College of
Engineering and Petroleum Instructor conducted during Fall, Spring and Summer
Semesters for the academic year 2007-2008. The online assessment form was developed,
conducted and analyzed by the Office of Academic Assessment (OAA).
Preparation and Implementation of the Process:
The assessment was conducted for the academic year 2007-2008. The form was provided to
the faculty through an online system. Faculty members were able to leave the system at any
time before submitting the form without losing any of the data they entered; they also were
able to view the previously submitted forms. After submitting the form, an instruction page
appears. It contains guidelines on how to prepare a course assessment file to be submitted
to the departmental assessment coordinator.
For the Fall semester, a total response of 87 was recorded out of 168 faculty members who
were teaching courses during the semester (52% response rate). The responses covered 168
different courses.
The table below shows the total number of faculty members who taught courses in Fall
2007-2008 and the number of faculty members participated in the survey according to
departments.
Table 1: Response statistics – Fall Semester
Total
Responses
Unique
Responder
Active
Instructors
Response
Rate
Chemical
19
9
22
36%
Civil
26
15
37
41%
Computer
18
10
22
45%
Electrical
35
19
29
62%
6
3
7
43%
Mechanical
44
20
33
52%
Petroleum
19
10
18
50%
168
87
168
52%
[DEPARTMENT]
Industrial & Management Systems
Total
For the Spring semester, a total response of 69 was recorded out of 169 faculty members
who were teaching courses during the semester (41% response rate). The responses covered
134 different courses.
The table below shows the total number of faculty members who taught courses in Spring
2007-2008 and the number of faculty members participated in the survey according to
departments.
3
Table 2: Response statistics – Spring Semester
Total
Responses
Unique
Responder
Active
Instructors
Response
Rate
Chemical
24
12
22
32%
Civil
15
8
39
21%
Computer
18
9
21
43%
Electrical
22
13
29
38%
2
1
7
14%
Mechanical
40
18
33
30%
Petroleum
13
8
18
28%
134
69
169
41%
[DEPARTMENT]
Industrial & Management Systems
Total
For the Summer semester, a total response of 32 was recorded. The responses covered 48
different courses.
The table below shows the total number of faculty members who taught courses in Summer
2007-2008 and the number of faculty members participated in the survey according to
departments.
Table 3: Response statistics – Summer Semester
Total
Responses
Unique
Responder
Chemical
8
4
Civil
0
0
Computer
7
4
Electrical
11
8
1
1
Mechanical
13
8
Petroleum
8
7
48
32
[DEPARTMENT]
Industrial & Management Systems
Total
4
Results and Discussion
The main results of the online course assessment for the whole college are presented in
Tables 4-5, and Figures 1-2. Table 4 and Figure 1 gives the average ratings and weighted
averages for all courses in the college. In Table 5, student performance in departmental
courses as well as core engineering courses is given in terms of weighted average scores.
The relevance ratings given for each course are used as weights. Since the response rate is
somewhat low, and therefore, some courses are not represented in a balanced way, the
results may not be valid for some programs. In the survey instrument, the first eleven
outcomes are those corresponding to ABET Criterion 3 (a-k) outcomes, and the rest of the
outcomes are program specific. Therefore, the analysis and departmental comparison has
been performed on the first eleven outcomes. More detailed results are presented in the
departmental tables where both relevance ratings and student performance are given for all
outcomes. The departments are encouraged to review the results and mapping tables
carefully and to make necessary adjustments.
As can be seen from Table 5, almost all outcomes except functioning effectively as a team
and (78% - 3.9 out of 5) and using techniques, skills and modern tools for Engineering
practice (78% - 3.9 out of 5) need some improvement. Our goal is to raise the ratings of all
outcomes to above 75%.
It is difficult to draw a conclusion for some of the departments because the responses were
low. It was noticed that recognizing applying mathematics, science, and engineering scores
low in chemical, computer and mechanical departments. It was interesting to note that
petroleum scored above 70% in all outcomes. Industrial Management System Engineering
scored high at using the techniques, skills and modern engineering tools outcome (90%).
5
Table4: Students Performance – College
O
Outcome
2
1
0
Average
Weighted
Average
28 134 119 19
1
49
3.6
3.5
72%
70%
3.6
3.7
72%
74%
3.5
3.7
70%
74%
3.8
3.9
76%
78%
3.6
3.6
72%
72%
3.4
3.5
68%
70%
3.5
3.6
70%
72%
3.5
3.6
70%
72%
3.5
3.6
70%
72%
3.4
3.5
68%
70%
3.8
3.9
76%
78%
5
4
3
a Apply mathematics, science, and engineering
8% 38% 34% 5% 0% 14%
b
Design and conduct experiments and analyze and
interpret data
20
45
55
6
1
223
6% 13% 16% 2% 0% 64%
29
86
92
19
1
123
c Design a system, a component or a process
8% 25% 26% 5% 0% 35%
29
85
51
5
0
180
d Function as an effective team member
8% 24% 15% 1% 0% 51%
30 111 103 21
Identify, formulate, and solve engineering
e
problems
0
85
9% 32% 29% 6% 0% 24%
12
44
83
9
2
200
f Understand professional & ethical responsibilities
3% 13% 24% 3% 1% 57%
25
96
94
16
2
117
g Communicate effectively
7% 27% 27% 5% 1% 33%
12
72
89
12
0
165
h Understand the impact of engineering solutions
3% 21% 25% 3% 0% 47%
9
68
68
11
1
193
i Recognize the need for life-long learning
3% 19% 19% 3% 0% 55%
13
42
67
15
1
212
j Know the contemporary issues
4% 12% 19% 4% 0% 61%
k
Use the techniques, skills and modern engineering
tools for engineering practice
6
58 125 75
10
3
79
17% 36% 21% 3% 1% 23%
Figure 1: Student performance – College
7
Weighted
Average
core
petroleum
mechanical
ims
electrical
computer
Outcomes
civil
L
chemical
Table5: Students Performance (weighted Averages) – comparison among programs
a Apply mathematics, science, and engineering 66% 80% 66% 74% 72% 68% 74% 70%
70%
Design and conduct experiments and analyze
70% 76% 64% 78% 78% 74% 78% 72%
and interpret data
74%
b
c Design a system, a component or a process
70% 84% 84% 74% 80% 68% 78% 62%
74%
d Function as an effective team member
80% 86% 84% 72% 82% 72% 82% 70%
78%
e
Identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
68% 78% 84% 72% 78% 68% 78% 72%
72%
f
Understand professional & ethical
responsibilities
68% 72% 78% 68% 64% 72% 72% 66%
70%
72% 74% 84% 74% 84% 66% 76% 70%
72%
Understand the impact of engineering
solutions
68% 68% 72% 68% 76% 72% 76% 72%
72%
i Recognize the need for life-long learning
70% 74% 84% 72% 70% 66% 72% 72%
72%
j Know the contemporary issues
64% 72% 78% 66% 72% 72% 76% 68%
70%
76% 86% 76% 76% 90% 78% 74% 80%
78%
g Communicate effectively
h
k
Use the techniques, skills and modern
engineering tools for engineering practice
8
Figure 2: Students Performance (weighted Averages) – comparison among programs
Part 1 (Outcomes from 1 to 6)
9
Figure 2: Students Performance (weighted Averages) – comparison among programs
Part 2 (Outcomes from 7 to 11)
10
Departmental Results:
Civil Engineering Program
Fall Semester:
RELEVANC
Course
Number
0620-201
0620-201
0620-271
0620-310
0620-311
0620-311
0620-350
0620-366
0620-373
0620-401
0620-411
0620-411
0620-412
0620-476
0620-476
0620-493
0620-493
0620-497
E
Course Name
Introduction to Design
Introduction to Design
Structural Analysis I
Fluid Mechanics
Water Resources
Water Resources
Soil Mechanics
Transportation Engineering
Reinforced Concrete I
Coastal Engineering Fundamentals
Water and Wastewater Treatment
Water and Wastewater Treatment
Open Channel Hydraulics
Computer Applications in Structural
Engineering
Computer Applications in Structural
Engineering
Construction Engineering Design
Construction Engineering Design
Structural Engineering Design
PERFORMANCE
Course
Course Name
Number
0620-201 Introduction to Design
0620-201 Introduction to Design
0620-271 Structural Analysis I
0620-310 Fluid Mechanics
0620-311 Water Resources
0620-311 Water Resources
0620-350 Soil Mechanics
0620-366 Transportation Engineering
0620-373 Reinforced Concrete I
Coastal Engineering
0620-401
Fundamentals
0620-411 Water and Wastewater Treatment
0620-411 Water and Wastewater Treatment
0620-412 Open Channel Hydraulics
Computer Applications in
0620-476
Structural Engineering
Computer Applications in
0620-476
Structural Engineering
0620-493 Construction Engineering Design
0620-493 Construction Engineering Design
0620-497 Structural Engineering Design
Weighted Average
11
a b
c
d e
f
1
2
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
1
1
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
2
1
1
3
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
g h
1
2
3
3
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
i
j
3
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
k
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
l
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
1
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
f
k
l
3
3
3
a
b
c
d
e
4
5
4
3
4
4
3
5
4
3
3
4
4
3
5
5
4
4
2
4
5
3
4
4
4
3
3
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
4
3
2
4
3
4
g
4
5
2
4
5
5
3
3
3
h
i
j
5
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
2
4
4
4
5
3
3
5
3
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
3
3
4
3
5
4
4
4
4
2
3
3
4
3
5
4 4 5 5 4 4 4 3 4 5 5
4 4 5 5 4 4 4 3 4 5 5
5 3 5 5 5 3 3 4 4 3 5 4
4 3.94.24.33.93.63.73.53.73.74.24.1
Remarks and Suggestions
Course Number
Course Name
0620-201
Introduction to Design
0620-201
Introduction to Design
0620-271
Structural Analysis I
0620-310
Fluid Mechanics
0620-311
Water Resources
0620-311
Water Resources
0620-350
0620-366
0620-373
0620-401
0620-411
0620-411
0620-412
0620-476
0620-476
Remarks and Suggestions
1. The course is long, need to split and
concentarte on Erath retaining structures
2. Slope stability, dewatering are tought
in graduate courses 3. The number of
students (only 4) need to be increased by
means of involving the faculty more in
presenting their courses
There was four sections for this course
and every instructor taught the course
differently from the others. There should
be coordination between the instructors.
Moreover, the course outline is not well
defined and the textbook does not fit with
the objective of this course..I expressed
my views to two colleagues taching the
same course but no coordination made
between sections.
need more basic principles of statics and
mechanics of materials
This was a girls' section and the
background of the students in
mathematics and basic sciences was
exceptionally good. Most of the students
had a GPA above 3.0 and their English
was very good. Students submitted their
homeworks on time. Their performance in
the tests was above average. The
students participated in the discussions.
This was an 8:00 a.m class and the
attendance was not very good. Some
assignments required team work, and
they effectively contributed. The overall
performance of the class was excellent.
A mixed class of 24 females and 4 males.
Females are far stronger than male
students. The male students were added
to the class due to lake of teaching
faculty in that spring semester.
This is 28 male students of very good
performance
Soil Mechanics
Transportation Engineering
Reinforced Concrete I
Coastal Engineering
Fundamentals
Water and Wastewater
Treatment
Water and Wastewater
Treatment
Students need to strengthen their skills in
reading, writing, and speaking in English.
This is a mixed class with a small numder
of students [ 6 ] which made it easy to
teach and get to know the students
better.
Open Channel Hydraulics
Computer Applications in
Structural Engineering
Computer Applications in
Structural Engineering
0620-493
Construction Engineering
Design
0620-493
Construction Engineering
1. Students seems to already form teams
before the start of the capstone deisgn 2.
Last phase usually not fully-completed
due to last minute work
1. Students seems to already form teams
12
Design
0620-497
Structural Engineering Design
before the start of the capstone deisgn 2.
Last phase usually not fully-completed
due to last minute work
The class size shall not be more than 12.
But I experiance always large class size.
This takes the quality out. The Civil
Engineering Department council has
approved students per class shall not
more than 12, but we face as high as 20.
I hope this can be resolved, so that we
can deliver quality education. Thanks
Spring Semester:
RELEVAN
Course
Number
0620-200
0620-201
0620-201
0620-310
0620-311
0620-371
0620-371
0620-414
0620-425
0620-451
0620-471
0620-476
CE
Course Name
Civil Engineering Drawing
Introduction to Design
Introduction to Design
Fluid Mechanics
Water Resources
Structural Analysis II
Structural Analysis II
Hydraulic Engineering
Computer Applications in Water
Resources and Environmental
Engineering
Foundation Engineering
Steel Design I
Computer Applications in Structural
Engineering
PERFORMANCE
Course
Course Name
Number
0620-200 Civil Engineering Drawing
0620-201 Introduction to Design
0620-201 Introduction to Design
0620-310 Fluid Mechanics
0620-311 Water Resources
0620-371 Structural Analysis II
0620-371 Structural Analysis II
0620-414 Hydraulic Engineering
Computer Applications in Water
0620-425 Resources and Environmental
Engineering
0620-451 Foundation Engineering
0620-471 Steel Design I
Computer Applications in Structural
0620-476
Engineering
Weighted Average
Remarks and Suggestions
Course Number
Course Name
0620-200
Civil Engineering Drawing
0620-201
a b
c
2
2
3
2
3
3
2
3
2
3
1
2
2
2
3
2
3
3
2
3
1
3
2
a
3
5
4
4
3
4
4
b
5
5
4
4
5
4
1
c
d e
f
g h
i
j
k
l
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
3
3
2
2
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
1
2
2
3
1
3
2
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
1
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
4
5
3
5
4
3
5
3
3
3
5
2
5
4
4
4
3
4
3
3
4
3
3
3
2
3
5
4
4
3
4
5
4
4
4
5
5
5
4
4
5
4
5
4
4
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
4
2
3
3
4
3
5
5
4
5
4
4
3
3
4
5
5
3
3
4
4
4 3.54.34.34.13.73.83.33.83.54.4 3
Remarks and Suggestions
It was difficult to motivate the students
on certain ocassions due to their limited
knowledge. It is felt that such a design
course would be more productive at a
later stage. Their command of English
seemed miserably poor, especially their
Introduction to Design
13
0620-201
Introduction to Design
0620-310
Fluid Mechanics
0620-311
Water Resources
0620-371
Structural Analysis II
0620-371
Structural Analysis II
0620-414
0620-425
This is a class of 18 male students of an
above average standing.
The lecture was scheduled from 8 - 9 am
and it was hardly a day when all the
students attended the lecture. There
were numerous students who absented
themselves innumerous times. Many
were habitual late comers. This has
affected the overall performance of the
class.
This is a very strong group of students of
4 girls and 6 boys. They scored very high
marks in all Tests and Final Exam. The
students were very interested in using
the Haestad Softwares. The small number
of class [ 10 students ] allow the students
to have a hand on experience using and
applying the various Softwares [
FlowMaster, WaterCAD and StormCAD ]
Hydraulic Engineering
Computer Applications in Water
Resources and Environmental
Engineering
0620-451
Foundation Engineering
0620-471
Steel Design I
0620-476
writing skills.
The students felt the project very
interesting since they wanted to prove
their understanding of the subject and
they were encouraged to be presented in
a professional way.
It was a design course yet the number of
students was very high. It is
recommended that the number of
students for such a class to be limited to
20 maximum
This is a batch of excellent students-they
are very mature and possess high GPA.
Moreover they are very eager to learn
specially knowing that they are on the
verge of graduating. The students were
given enough confidence to allow them to
attain proficiency in design and
professional issues for employment at an
entry level.
Students are very weak in english
reporting. Most of them resust attempts
to assist them in gaining some technical
writing skills. This aspect should be
followed up by any colleague who teaches
this course in the future.
Computer Applications in
Structural Engineering
14
Appendix A
Instructor Class Evaluation Form
15
Kuwait University
College of Engineering & Petroleum
Instructor Class Evaluation Form
Course Number and Title:
Instructor:
Semester:
Number of times that you taught this course at KU:
EVALUATION
METHOD
GRADING
SYSTEM
_____________
_______
_____________
_______
_____________
_______
_____________
_______
_____________
_______
TOTAL
100 %
GRADE DISTRIBUTION
Weight (W)
A
A–
B+
B
B–
C+
C
C–
D+
D
4.0
3.6
3.3
3.0
2.6
2.3
2.0
1.6
1.3
1.0
F or
FA
Sum
I
W
–
–
–
0.0
No. of Students (N)
ΣN =
N*W
Σ(W*N) =
CLASS GPA = Σ (W* N) / Σ N = ________
CLASS GPA without (F or FA) = ________
16
Performance
Interpretation &
Evidence
Excellent
Very Good
Satisfactory
Weak
Explanation
Activities and Practices
Very Weak
High Relevant
Moderately Relevant
Not Relevant
Program Outcomes
Somewhat Relevant
Relevance
1. Apply mathematics, science,
and engineering
2. Design and conduct
experiments and analyze and
interpret data
3. Design a system, a
component or a process
4. Function as an effective team
member
5. Identify, formulate, and solve
engineering problems
6. Understand professional &
ethical responsibilities
7. Communicate effectively
8. Understand the impact of
engineering solutions
9. Recognize the need for lifelong learning
10. Know the contemporary
issues
11. Use the techniques, skills
and modern engineering
tools for engineering
practice
12. An ability to assume
responsibility at the entry
level in the areas of
specialization that are
important to Kuwait and the
region
Remarks and Suggestions:
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
17
Appendix B
Instructions for the Courses Assessment
18
Kuwait University
College of Engineering and petroleum
Office of Academic Assessment
Instructions for the Course Assessment
Introduction
All instructors at the college should carry out course assessment and submit a course
assessment file to the departmental assessment coordinators at the end of the term. In the
following some guidelines on how to prepare an assessment file are given:
Objectives of Course Assessment
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
To
To
To
To
obtain direct measurements of student performance
assure that students are acquiring the required outcomes
assure that learning experiences are consistent with the outcomes
establish the required feedback loops
The items to be included in the course assessment file
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
A hardcopy of completed instructor class evaluation form (ICEF) submitted online.
A copy of the list of final grades
Course syllabus including the following information as a minimum
ƒ Instructor contact details and office hours
ƒ Textbook and references
ƒ Tentative course outline
ƒ Dates of mid-term and final exams
ƒ Grading policy
A list of course outcomes and their relationship with the college or program outcomes
(Course description and classification)
A copy of final exam and major term project(s)
Summary data and analysis from various assessment tools (e.g., oral and written report
evaluation, teamwork, self evaluations)
Samples of student works supporting the ICEF (e.g., key assignments, homework,
exams, project reports, essays etc)
Any other supporting material demonstrating student achievement (e.g., sample class
portfolios, video recordings, etc.)
Instructor Class Evaluation Form
The main assessment tool used for the course assessment is the Instructor Class Evaluation
Form. This form reports the grade distribution as well as the assessment of Program outcomes
served by the course. First, the instructors are asked to indicate the level of importance of each
outcome as it relates to the course. Normally, this rating should have been already assigned by
the Teaching Area Group using the following guidelines:
H (highly relevant): Demonstrating this outcome is critical for the students to perform
successfully; or the students may benefit significantly from this course toward the outcome
(formal instruction, practice, assessment).
M (Moderately relevant): Demonstrating this outcome has considerable impact on the overall
performance of the student, or the students may benefit moderately from this course toward the
outcome (informal instruction, practice, and assessment).
19
L (Somewhat relevant): Demonstrating this outcome has only minor impact on the overall
performance of the student. However, there are opportunities to observe this outcome (practice
and assessment).
The instructors then evaluate student performance relative to what is normally expected from
them at their level according to the following scale:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Students’
Students’
Students’
Students’
Students’
performance
performance
performance
performance
performance
was very weak
was weak
was satisfactory
very good
excellent
The best method of evaluation of the student achievement is to assess individual students
relative to the outcomes. Then, an average rating can be obtained for the whole class. The rating
should be justified by referring to specific student works or assessment results.
The instructors are also asked to provide feedback on the course content and outcomes,
instructional and assessment methods. They also comment on the achievement of program
outcomes and indicate any deficiencies observed.
Assessment Methods
The assessment methods include but not limited to the following:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Performance Appraisals (e.g., written and oral presentations, teamwork, lab
experiments, artwork etc)
Surveys (Online tools, or custom designed forms seeking student perception of learning
gains, or their opinions on certain aspects)
Traditional assessment methods (Exams, homework, project, etc)
Assessment tools
The following is a list of available assessment instruments to be used in course assessment.
Instructors are encouraged to use standard tools as much as possible to facilitate analysis.
However, these tools can be modified to suit a specific course, or additional tools can be
adopted.
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Written reports
Oral presentations
Lab reports
Teamwork
Term Project
Final Exam
The instructors encouraged to submit summary statistical data in addition to the copies of the
completed forms.
20