Criteria 2000 Visit: Harvey Mudd College, October 1997

Harvey Mudd College was one of the institutions visited by ABET in 1997/98 as part of the pilot program to aid in the implementation of Criteria 2000. Our visit took place on October 6th through 8th, 1997. Engineering at Harvey Mudd is non-specialized and characterized by a high level of student-team project work performed for outside sponsors, the Engineering Clinic. As such, the program is classified as non-traditional under Criterion 8. The program is compared to Criterion 2, “Educational Objectives”, and 3, “Outcomes and Assessment”. From the start Harvey Mudd Engineering has been highly structured while responding to clear and long-standing goals. With respect to process, we chose to present the assessment and evaluation program that existed as opposed to creating something for this visit. Our assessment instruments are presented. Finally, the outcomes of our visit are discussed. Because this was a pilot visit, an open discussion is in order. The Institutional Setting Harvey Mudd College (HMC) is a coeducational, undergraduate college of engineering and science with 638 students and 77 full-time equivalent faculty. It is located an hour east of Los Angeles, California in a cluster of five undergraduate colleges organized roughly along the lines of Oxford and Cambridge. The College is young having graduated its first engineering class in 1961. It is highly selective and privately supported. Degrees may be achieved in engineering, computer science, mathematics, biology, chemistry and physics. The entering first-year class contains 183 entrants, just under half become engineering majors, and nearly all will graduate in four years and proceed to engineering practice, graduate school, or a myriad of other endeavors. Program Educational Objectives As set forth in the Catalogue, “Harvey Mudd College seeks to educate engineers, scientists and mathematicians well versed in all of these areas and in the humanities and social sciences so that they may assume leadership in their fields with a clear understanding of the impact of their work on society.” Page 377.1