English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The College of Science and Technology at Fairmont State University provides TAC of ABET accredited 2+2 engineering technology programs leading to associate and baccalaureate degrees in several disciplines. Similarly, the Department of Engineering Technology at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte has recently implemented lower division programs to complement longstanding TAC of ABET accredited +2 upper division programs in multiple disciplines. The authors desire to answer the question: How can course outcomes be consistently measured and evaluated in order for meaningful course improvements to take place? This paper provides a snapshot of a possible answer where a combination of mastery of subject evaluation and traditional evaluation of course outcomes, the Hybrid Evaluation/Assessment Development (HEAD) is initially tested. The authors present a pilot class (at Fairmont State University) to frame future evaluations of the effectiveness of the HEAD Method. A transitional version, extending the pilot class and this study, will be offered at UNC Charlotte next semester. The division between the mastery of subject and traditional methods took place with deriving the Measurable Course Outcomes (MCO). An MCO is a “topic” heading that comprises skill sets found in engineering mechanics and are referenced to ABET criterion and Blooms taxonomy. An example of a low level Bloom’s taxonomy example is seen in quiz #3 as follows: Quiz #3 Measurable Learner Outcome: Understand basic engineering mechanics principals (Blooms taxonomy Knowledge, comprehension; ABET Criterion 1.a) Skill sets required for Quiz #3: 11) Define statics, strength of materials, and dynamics 12) Define force 13) Distinguish scalar and vector quantities 14) Recite Newton’s Laws 15) Define types of forces 16) Define types of force systems 17) Define principle of transmissibility P ge 10708.1 “Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright  2005, American Society for Engineering Education” Higher level, analytical applications are also developed and described in this paper. For this first course in applied mechanics, the authors defined eleven MCOs. The evaluation for each MCO consists of a quiz that is graded pass / fail (by the mastery of subject method). The percent passing on each outcome quiz is the metric for the continuous improvement program. Each student has two chances to demonstrate mastery for each outcome. Traditional evaluation is maintained alongside mastery quizzes to improve student performance and achievement. Traditional evaluation takes the form of homework, mid-term exam and final exam. The paper will address course development, student reactions, student success and improvements to the course. A presentation of the course continuous improvement process when using the HEAD Method will also be included.

Hybrid Evaluation/Assessment Development (Head): Utilizing Mastery Of Subject In Concert With Traditional Methods For Outcome Improvement