Transcript Conditioning of Biosolids: Moving from an art to a science

EWRE Retreat 8/2/2005
a. ABET Update
i. Overview of documents submitted to
ABET (Self-Study)
ii. What we need to do between now and
ABET visit in November
Page 1/89
SELF-STUDY REPORT
Bachelor of Environmental Engineering
Submitted by
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
College of Engineering
University of Delaware
Submitted to
Engineering Accreditation Commission
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
June 2005
Objectives
B.2.
Program Educational Objectives
B.2.1
Mission Statements (University, College, Department)
B.2.2
Constituents (students, employers, alumni, faculty, graduate schools)
B.2.3
Educational Objectives
1. Graduates will be prepared with a solid foundation in mathematics, sciences,
and technical skills needed to analyze and design environmental engineering
systems.
2. Graduates will possess strong written, oral, and graphical communication skills,
and will be able to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
3. Graduates will be familiar with current and emerging environmental
engineering and global issues, and have an understanding of ethical and societal
responsibilities.
4. Graduates will have the ability to obtain professional licensure, and will
recognize the need for engaging in life-long learning.
5. Graduates will have the necessary qualifications for employment in
environmental engineering and related professions, for entry into advanced
studies, and for assuming eventual leadership roles in their profession.
Potential Problem:
CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITING ENGINEERING PROGRAMS
Effective for Evaluations During the 2005-2006 Accreditation Cycle
“Criterion 2. Program Educational Objectives
Although institutions may use different terminology, for purposes of Criterion
2, program educational objectives are broad statements that describe the career
and professional accomplishments that the program is preparing graduates to
achieve.”
B.2.4
B.2.5
B.2.6
B.2.7
B.2.8
B.2.9
Relationship Between Educational Objectives
and Institutional Mission
Relationship Between Educational Objectives
and Accreditation Criteria
How Curriculum and Processes Ensure
Achievement of Objectives
Process Used to Establish, Review, and Revise
Objectives
Ongoing Evaluation of Level of Achievement of
Objectives
Revisions to Objective Assessment Process
Figure B.2.1. Educational Objective Evaluation Process
Fall ‘05
Fall ‘11
ABET
Visit
Fall ‘10
Outcomes
Assessment
Outcomes
Assessment
Ed. Obj’s
Eval/Rev.
Constituent
Com. Mtg
Employer &
Alumni
Survey
Fall ‘06
-2
Year 1
Outcomes
Assessment
-3
-6
-5
-4
Employer
&
Alumni
Survey
Constituent
Com. Mtg
Outcomes
Assessment
Outcomes
Assessment
Outcomes
Assessment
Ed. Obj’s
Eval/Rev.
Fall
‘07
Fall ‘09
Fall
‘08
EBI Alumni Survey Use for Objectives
Table B.2.2(a). Selected EBI Questions to Assess Environmental Engineering Program Objectives
Objective 1: Graduates will be prepared with a solid foundation in mathematics, sciences, and technical skills needed to
analyze and design environmental engineering systems.
Q51
Q49
Q10
Q23
Q25
Q29
Importance/Performance: Degree that your engineering education enhanced your ability to apply knowledge of mathematics
Importance/Performance: Degree that your engineering education enhanced your ability to apply knowledge of science
Extent the engineering degree provided technical skills necessary to succeed
Importance/Performance: Degree that your engineering education enhanced your ability to analyze and interpret data
Importance/Performance: Degree that your engineering education enhanced your ability to design a system, component, or process to
meet desired needs
Importance/Performance: Degree that your engineering education enhanced your ability to identify or formulate engineering problems
Q31
Importance/Performance: Degree that your engineering education enhanced your ability to solve engineering problems
Objective 2: Graduates will possess strong written and oral communication skills.
Q39
Q41
Importance/Performance: Degree that your engineering education enhanced your ability to communicate using written progress reports
Importance/Performance: Degree that your engineering education enhanced your ability to communicate using oral progress reports
Et cetera…
Results
Table B.2.2(b). Summary of 2001 and 2004 EBI Alumni Survey results of Objectiverelated questions relative to programs at other institutions.
SCORE
2001
2004
Select 6 Carnegie
All 10
Select 6 Carnegie
All 10
UD
UD
Objective 1: Graduates will be prepared with a solid foundation in mathematics, sciences, and
technical skills needed to analyze and design environmental engineering systems.
5.84
5.78
5.77
5.45
5.60
5.55
6.31
6.46
Objective 2: Graduates will possess strong written and oral communication skills.
5.39
5.33
5.45
5.25
4.96
5.02
5.75
5.80
Objective 3: Graduates will be familiar with current and emerging environmental engineering and
global issues, and have an understanding of ethical and societal responsibilities.
5.47
5.20
5.35
4.53
4.93
4.85
5.63
6.03
Objective 4: Graduates will have the ability to obtain professional licensure, and will recognize the
need for engaging in life-long learning.
6.17
6.09
6.18
5.55
5.70
5.66
6.38
6.10
Objective 5: Graduates will have the necessary qualifications for employment in environmental
engineering and related professions, for entry into advanced studies, and for assuming eventual
leadership roles in their profession.
5.37
5.56
5.31
5.25
5.42
5.43
5.96
6.30
Average and standard deviation for all five objectives
6.00
5.65
5.59
5.61
6.14
5.20
5.32
5.30
0.35
0.36
0.36
0.25
0.40
0.36
0.35
0.35
6
(a) Q1-demonstrate a
solid foundation in
math, sciences, and
technical skills as
needed to analyze/
design environ- mental
engineering systems
5
Number of Rankings Out of 8
Employer
Survey
4
3
2
5
0
6
5
5 5
4
4 4
3
3 3
2
2 2
1
1 1
0
0 0
(f) Q6-have the
(d)
Q4-familiar
ability
toanobtain
(e) Q5-have
with
current
professional
understanding and
of
licensure
and
ethical emerging
and
societal
recognize
the
environmental
responsibilities need
for engaging
in lifeengineering
and
longissues
learning
global
1
11
2
22
3
33
4
44
5
55
6
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
5
(b) Q2-possess
strong written
communication
skills
4
1
6 6
6
6
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
0
7
6
6
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
7
0
77
7
(f) Q6-have the
ability to an
obtain
(e) Q5-have
professional
understanding of
and
ethical licensure
and societal
recognize
the
responsibilities need
for engaging in lifelong learning
11
22
33
44
6
1
4
3
2
66
77
3
4
5
6
(f) Q6-have the
ability to obtain
professional
licensure and
recognize the need
for engaging in lifelong learning
5
55
2
1
2
3
4
(c) Q3-possess
strong oral
communiction skills
5
4
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
(g) Q7-have the necessary
qualifications for employment
in environ- mental
engineering, entry into
advanced studies, and
assuming eventual leadership
roles in their profession.
2
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Table B.2.1. Summary of Employer Survey Results
Statement #
1. Math & Sci to Eng
2. Written Communication
3. Oral Communication
4. Engg./Global Issues
5. Ethical/Societal
6. License/Life-Long
7. Employable/Leader
Overall
Avg.
6.14
5.75
6.25
5.14
5.63
6.13
6.50
5.93
95%
CI
0.64
0.97
0.59
0.83
0.62
0.54
0.77
0.24
Objective
1. Math, science
2. Oral and written
communication
3. Current issues/ethical
& societal responsibilities
4. Licensure/learning
5. Employment/leadership
Overall
Avg.
6.14
95%
CI
0.64
6.00
0.51
5.40
0.46
6.13
6.50
6.3
0.54
0.77
0.24
Survey results agree (roughly)
7
Score (1 to 7) .
Employer
Alumni
6
5
4
3
2
1
1
2
3
Objective
4
5
Overall
Outcomes
B. 3.
Program Outcomes and Assessment
33
B.3.1
Program Outcomes
B.3.2.
Process for Producing Outcomes 41
B.3.3
Assessment Process
B.3.4
Application of Results to Program Development and Improvement 51
B.3.5
Results of Assessment and Changes Implemented To Improve Program
B.3.6
Materials Available for Review During Visit
33
41
61
52
Table B3.1 Matrix Showing Relationship Between Program
Educational Objectives and Program Outcomes

2. Communication skills
3. Env. engg. & global issues;
ethical responsibility
4. Licensure & lifelong
learning
5. Employment, grad. school,
leadership























12. Communication

11. Teams

10. Lic&LLL
6. Prob. Based Exp.

9. Contemp Issues
5. Design

8. Ethics & Resp
4. Modern Tools

7. Prof. Prac
3. Experiments
1. Foundation in math,
science, etc
2. Formulate & Solve
Educational
Objectives
1. Math & Science
Environmental Engineering Outcomes




Table B3.2 Relationship of UD Environmental Engineering Outcomes to ABET “(a)
through (k)” Criteria and Environmental Engineering Program Criteria
ABET (a)-(k)
a.
b.
c.




e.
f.
g.



h.
i.
j.
k.
Other (see text)
12. Communication

d.
Env. Engineering
Program Criteria
(See Table B3.4)
11. Multidisc. Teams
10. Lic&Life Long Learng
9. Contemporary Issues
8. Ethics & Responsibility
7. Prof. Practice Issues
6. Prob. Based Exp/Desgn
5. Function and Design
4. Modern Eng’g Tools
3. Experiments/Analysis
2. Form & Solve Probs
1. Math & Science/Engg
UD Environmental Engineering Outcomes
















Table B3.3 Parsed Version of the Program Criteria for Environmental Engineering
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
mathematics through differential equations
probability and statistics
calculus-based physics
general chemistry
1. Proficiency
an earth science relevant to the program of study
a biological science relevant to the program of study
fluid mechanics relevant to the program of study
advanced principles and practice relevant to the program
objectives
2. Introductory level (a) environmental issues associated with air, land, and water
systems and associated environmental health impacts
knowledge
(a) conduct laboratory experiments
(b) critically analyze and interpret data in more than one major
3. Ability
environmental engineering focus area*
(c) perform engineering design
(a) professional practice
(b) roles and responsibilities of public institutions and private
4. Understanding
organizations pertaining to environmental engineering
* Focus areas water supply and resources, environmental chemistry, wastewater
management, solid waste management, hazardous waste management, atmospheric
systems and air pollution control, and environmental and occupational health.
AAEE Environmental Engineering Program Criteria
Proficiency
Introductory
level
knowledge
Ability
Understanding
3b.
3c.
4b.

2a.

3a.

1a.
  
1b.



1c.



1d.



1e.





1f.





1g.



1h.














4a.









12. Communication
11. Multidisc. Teams
10. Lic&Life Long Learng
9. Contemporary Issues
8. Ethics & Responsibility
7. Prof. Practice Issues
6. Prob. Based Exp/Desgn
5. Function and Design
4. Modern Eng’g Tools
3. Experiments/Analysis
2. Form & Solve Probs
1. Math & Science/Engg
Table B3.4 Relationship of UD Environmental Engineering Outcomes to
AAEE Environmental Engineering Program Criteria
UD Environmental Engineering Outcomes






Outcome Assessment Tools
(1) Alumni Questionnaire
(2) Educational Benchmarking, Inc. (EBI) senior survey
(3) Student Focus Groups
(4) student sample work
(5) Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam results
(6) Faculty Course Self Assessment (FCSA)
Figure B.3.3. Annual Outcomes Assessment Schedule
September
FE Exam
Group retreat.
Changes to courses
and curriculum are
proposed and
discussed
June
Student sample
work collected
Student sample work and
FCSA forms for spring
semester submitted. Faculty
synthesize all assessment
results
EBI Senior Survey for
mid-year graduates
Student sample work and FCSA forms
for fall semester submitted
EBI Senior
Survey
Student sample
work collected
Alumni Reunion –
Complete
questionnaires
FE Exam
Student Focus Groups
March
December
Annual schedule
Month
Activity
September
Fall semester begins. Implement course, curriculum, and assessment
changes established in the previous year. Faculty begin collecting
outcome-specific student sample work for their assigned outcomes.
October
Fundamentals of Engineering exam.
December
Fall semester ends. Faculty complete FCSA forms and assessment of the
student sample work they have collected. Seniors graduating in December
complete the EBI Senior Survey.
January
FCSA forms and student sample work collected for the fall semester.
February
Spring semester begins. Faculty begin collecting outcome-specific student
sample work for their assigned outcomes.
March
Alumni Reunion is arranged by the UD Environmental Engineering
Student Association. The Alumni questionnaire is completed.
April
Fundamentals of Engineering exam. Student focus groups convened.
May
Spring semester ends. Seniors complete EBI Senior Survey. Faculty
complete FCSA forms and assessment of the student sample work they
have collected.
June
FCSA forms and student sample work collected for the spring semester.
Faculty analyze all assessment results as assigned.
JulyAugust
The Environmental Engineering Faculty Retreat is held. Faculty discuss
assessment results, decide on recommended changes to the curriculum
and assessment process, record results. Implementation is complete.
Metrics Used
Focus Groups
Course evaluations,
FE Exam
Focus Groups,
FE Exam
FE Exam
Table B.3.11.
Curriculum
Modifications
and Supporting
Metrics from
2001-2005.
Focus Groups
(Faculty)
Problem Noted
Changes Effected
When
Developed
Student Attrition
Too many Credit
hours
Student Attrition
Too many Credit
hours
Redundancy in
course topics
Eliminate second
Quantitative Chemistry
course (CHEM120)
Followed
Chem. Engg.
(1999)
Eliminate second Physics
course (PHYS 208)
Nov. 2000
Consolidate CIEG 431,
432 into CIEG 438
1998-2001
Redundancy in
course topics
Consolidate CIEG 441,
442 into CIEG 440
April 2001 Paralleled Civil
Engineering
Add Earth Science requ
July 2001
ABET Program
Criteria
Civil Engineering
changed the course
offerings
Alumni Reunion
Interest in area
Focus Groups,
Alumni Reunion
Fortran outdated.
Replace with C+
MATH 450 no
longer offered
(Faculty)
Course enrollment
trends, Constituent
Committee
Interest in area
Constituent
Committee
Student Attrition
Too many Credit
hours
Constituent
Committee, Focus
Groups, Special
Questionnaire,
Alumni Survey
Constituent
Committee, Focus
Groups, Alumni
Reunion, Special
Questionnaire,
FE Exams
Changed conc. reqs for
Environmental Facilities
Design and Construction
Created conc. in Environmental Biotechnology
Computer Science course
(CISC106  CISC 105)
STAT/MATH450 
CIEG315
Created conc. in Water
Resources and Water
Quality
Reduced CHEM
111,112,119 to CHEM
103,104 for 3 of four
concs.
Academic Year
Effective
2001-2002
Paralleled Civil
Engineering
July 2001
2002-2003
Paralleled Civil
Engineering
Paralleled Civil
Engineering
2004-2005
June-July 2005
June-July 2005
Decreasing use of
programming
languages in
profession
CISC105  CIEG 126
June-July 2005
Student Attrition
Too many Credit
hours
Removed CHEG325 from
3 of four concs.
June-July 2005
2006-2007
at
h
&
Sc
it
Pr
o
En
ob
le
gg
m
Ex
So
pt
lv
s
in
&
g
Fu
A
na
nc
t io
lys
n
is
&
M
D
ul
es
ti d
ig
is
Pr
c
ob
.T n
-b
as eam
ed
s
De
Pr
si
gn
of
Pr
ac
M
tic
od
e
er
n
Et
To
hi
ca
ol
s
l&
R
C
ol
om
es
m
C
un
on
ic
te
at
m
e
p
Li
Is
fe
su
lo
ng
es
Le
ar
ni
ng
M
Score (out of 10) .
Figure B.3.4. Averaged Results for Alumni Questionnaires 2001-2005.
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Importance
How well
0
EBI Senior Survey Results
Figure B.3.6. Average Score Ratio for all Outcomes, UD/All Respondents.
1.3
UD Score / Mean for All Institutions
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Figure B.3.8. UD Percent Passing the FE Exam
100%
Environmental Engineering FE Exams 2001-2005
87.0%
85.9%
90%
78.7%
80%
Percent Passing .
69.6%
71.4%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
U of D
National
Carnegie I Carnegie II Carnegie III
Figure B.3.9. UD Results for FE Exam by General Subject Area
FE Exam Results by AM Subject
1.80
Average and Range 5002-1002
1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
St
Th
at
er
ic
m
s
od
yn
am
ics
M
ec
ha
ni
cs
M
at
he
m
at
ics
M
at
lS
cie
nc
M
e
ec
h.
of
M
at
ls
Et
hi
cs
Fl
ui
d
yn
El
am
ec
ic
tri
s
ca
lC
En
irc
g'
ui
ts
g
Ec
on
om
ic
s
D
pu
te
r
om
C
he
m
is
try
s
0.00
C
UD Score/National Score
1.60
Engineering Economics vs. Time
FE Results - Engineering Economics
UD Score / National Score
1.4
1.2
1.09
0.97
1.0
0.8
0.6
1.11
0.74
0.80
0.69
0.47
0.4
0.2
0.0
Apr.2001 (5) Oct.2001 (5) Oct.2002 (3) Oct.2003 (4) Apr.2004 (1) Oct.2004 (4) Apr.2005 (1)
Engineering Economics – Sr. Design
Table B3.12 ’05 Senior Design Assessment Results
Instructor
Outcome
Average
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
5
5
3
3
4
4.00
An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems in the following major civil engineering disciplines:
2
structural, environmental, and water resources, transportation,
and geotechnical engineering
5
5
5
5
5
5.00
An ability to use the techniques, skills , and modern tools of
engineering
5
5
5
5
5
5.00
5 An ability to design a system, component, or process
5
5
3
3
4
4.00
An ability to perform civil engineering design by means of
6 problem-based experiences integrated throughout the
curriculum
3
5
3
3
4
3.60
A knowledge of professional practice issues, such as
procurement of work, biding versus quality-based selection
7
processes, and the interactions of design and construction
professionals in executing a project
3
5
3
5
4
4.00
8 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
5
5
5
5
4
4.80
3
5
3
3
3
3.40
9b A knowledge if contemporary issues
5
5
5
5
4
4.80
10 An ability to engage in lifelong learning
5
5
5
3
4
4.40
11 The ability to function on (multidisciplinary) teams
5
5
5
5
5
5.00
12a An ability to communicate effectively (written)
5
5
5
5
5
5.00
12b An ability to communicate effectively (oral)
5
5
5
5
5
5.00
1
4
9a
An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics and science to
engineering
understanding of the impact of engineering in a global
societal context
ER
&
&
&
M
T
ES
N
G
O
VE
RA
LL
ER
W
AS
TE
RC
NG
M
EN
TE
W
AT
HA
Z
W
AS
SO
LI
D
E
AL
IT
Y
RE
SO
U
NC
Q
U
ER
W
AT
SC
IE
W
AT
EN
V
AI
R
UD Score / National
Environmental Engineering Specialty Topics
FE Exam Specialty Results by Subject
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
Environmental Engineering Specialty Topics
UD Score / Reference Score
FE Exam Specialty Results - Overall
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
UD/National
UD/Carnegie I
UD/Carnegie II
UD/Carnegie III
Faculty Course Self Assessment Forms
UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
Faculty Course Self-Assessment (FCSA) Form
Purpose: This document is part of the regular course, curriculum, and program review process. The primary instructor for a course
should complete the FCSA form within one month of the end of the semester. When completed, the FCSA document will be a starting
point for consideration of modifications the next time the course is offered, and will also provide useful information for updating
prerequisites, course sequencing, and curriculum effectiveness.
Instructions: This form should be completed with the aid of the course Outcomes Matrix and Outcomes Matrix Worksheet, and the
results of the student Online Course Evaluation (available online at https://www.mis4.udel.edu/CourseEvaluations/admin, note that is a
secure site address “https”). Transfer the Outcomes, Course Element and Target Learning Levels from the course Outcomes Matrix to
columns (1), (2) and (3) of the form. Record the mean student assessment score from the evaluation results in column (4). Record the
faculty self-assessment score for each relevant outcome in column (5). Complete the sections at the end of the form on Notes,
Assessment results and Suggested Changes.
Course Name/Number: Environmental Eng. Lab/CIEG 337
Instructor: P. Imhoff
First Time Taught:
Most recent semester taught:
Course Outcomes
(1)
Corresponding Course Element
(2)
1. Ability to apply knowledge of
mathematics and science to engineering.
Use algebra and differential equations in
engineering design
2. Ability to identify, formulate, and solve
engineering problems in these areas: water
supply/resources, environmental
chemistry, wastewater, solid waste and
hazardous waste management, atmospheric
systems and air pollution control, and
environmental/occupational health.
Formulate and solve a problem involving
groundwater contamination. This real-world
problem forms the background upon which
the laboratory exercises are based.
Semester/Year Offered: 03S
Number of Students: 11
Date Completed:
Target
Level
(3)
3
3
Learning Level
Student
Faculty
Assessment Assessment
(4)
(5)
3.33
3
3
3
Notes
(6)
Faculty Course Self Assessment Forms
Notes: (faculty comments regarding differences between Target Learning Levels and Assessment Levels)
1. Students currently do not design any experiments. The course should be modified to include experimental design
in future years, perhaps as part of a homework assignment.
2. Students think they know more than they actually do because an almost ideal natural system was selected for the
final project. Real data from an actual groundwater site should be used in the final class project so students gain an
appreciation for the complexity of natural systems.
3. What does N/D mean? A key should be provided.
Assessment results: (a summary of major results of all assessment)
1.
Suggested Changes: (faculty recommendations on course changes)
1. Show and/or incorporate more realistic data into the final group project to give students a better appreciation of
the difficulty in modeling pollutant fate and transport in natural systems.
2. While it may be difficult for students to design experiments that they then conduct, it is relatively simple to ask
students to come up with an experimental design as part of a homework assignment or exam. This should be done
in future years.
Summary (in Steve’s Opinion)
1. Program credentials are extremely good
2. We are shaky on having established “closed loops” with a
regular, cyclical routine
3. Our Objectives may be too much like Outcomes
4. Some outcomes and Objectives are not assessed with much
specificity
5. We have lots of things to do for November
ii. What we need to do between now and ABET
visit in November
B.3.6 Materials Available for Review During Visit
The following materials will be available for review during the site visit:
Outcome Binders: For each environmental engineering Outcome, a binder will be available
that includes samples of student work that tests their level of achievement in that Outcome.
Also included is the faculty assessment of the work. The materials will be broken down
according to semester. For any given semester there will be samples of student work from a
variety of courses and from different years in the curriculum.
Course Binders: For each environmental engineering course, a binder will be available that
includes the course syllabus and samples of student work (from the previous year or the last
time the course was offered). The sample work will typically include homework assignments,
quizzes, exams, project reports and/or laboratory reports. Samples of good, average, and poor
work will typically be provided. The textbook used in the course will also be available with the
binder.
Summaries by Year: Reports will be available for academic years 2002–03, 2003–04 and 2004–
05 that summarize all of the assessment results and findings for the year and changes made to
the curriculum and the assessment process. The supporting data from the various assessment
methods will also be available (Minutes of Student Focus group meetings, etc).
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
Summary (in Steve’s Opinion)
Summary (in Steve’s Opinion)
Summary (in Steve’s Opinion)
Summary (in Steve’s Opinion)
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
Outcomes and
ABET Issues
Outcomes and
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
ABET Issues
Summary (in Steve’s opinion)
1. ABET doesn’t care how good the program is – just whether
you have the process running smoothly
2. We’d better do what we still have to do
3. There are so many details and requirements that any
program is still at the mercy of the program evaluators