Boise State University Department of Construction Management Quality Assessment Report and Action Plan

Transcription

1 Boise State University Department of Construction Management Quality Assessment Report and Action Plan November 25, 2014

2 Executive Summary The Construction Management program is accredited by the American Council for Construction Education (ACCE). The most recent visit from that body occurred in the spring of As laid out in our data collection plan Program Learning Outcomes 1, 4 and 5 were to be evaluated in the school year. To do this three instruments were used: American Institute of Constructors Level 1 (Associate Constructor) Exam Review of Student Work Graduating Senior Exit Survey Based on the data collected all three Outcomes continue to be met. Some attention needs to be paid to the student perception of how well they understand some of the materials, but their work demonstrates that they actually have a working understanding of the material and are able to apply their knowledge by the time of graduation. During the summer of 2014 ACCE finalized a new set of Student Learning Outcomes that had been under discussion for some time. As a result the Program Learning Outcomes for the Construction Management program are to be revised, and a new schedule of data collection will be put in place starting with the school year. This will also cause the Senior Exit Survey as well as other survey instruments to be revised. i

3 Table of Contents Mission... 1 Vision... 1 Program Outcomes... 1 Program Objectives... 2 Program Quality Assessment... 2 Assessment of Program Outcomes... 4 Assessment of Program Objectives... 5 Summary of the most recent assessment cycle... 5 Program Learning Outcome Program Learning Outcome Program Learning Outcome American Institute of Constructors Level I Exam... 9 Review of Student Work Graduating Senior Exit Surveys Alumni Surveys Additional Assessment Measures Advisory Council Feedback Construction Competition Results Changes to Program Learning Outcomes Attachment 1- Senior Exit Survey ( ) Attachment 2 Proposed New Program Learning Outcomes Table of Figures Figure 1 Program Assessment Process... 3 Figure 2 AIC Results, BSU vs Minimum Score... 9 Figure 3 AIC Results, BSU vs National Average Figure 4 Courses vs Program Outcomes Figure 5 Student Perception of Program Learning Outcomes Fall Figure 6 Student Perception of Program Learning Outcomes Spring Figure 7 Difference between Achievement and Importance of Program Learning Outcomes Figure 8 Perception of Importance and Achievement of Program Objectives by Alumni Table of Tables Table 1 - Program Outcomes Assessment Plan... 4 Table 2- Program Objectives Assessment Plan... 5 ii

4 Mission To provide comprehensive educational opportunities, applied research, and service-oriented outreach for the development of future professional constructors who, through innovation, character and ability are prepared to meet the construction needs of society and provide leadership to the construction industry. Vision To be recognized and respected for providing consistent, creative, high quality, student centric education, applied research, and community focused outreach, with a clear emphasis on ethics, sustainability and leadership. Program Outcomes Program Outcomes are defined as the knowledge and skills we expect our students to possess at the time of graduation. Upon successful completion of the Construction Management course of study, graduates can be expected to demonstrate: 1. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, engineering, business, and economics to solve construction problems. 2. An ability to read and interpret construction plans, specifications and documents to accurately estimate direct and indirect construction project costs. 3. An ability to apply knowledge of construction materials, methods and equipment to safely and effectively plan and sequence construction activities and processes within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, and sustainability. 4. An ability to apply knowledge of procurement practices, regulatory requirements, and construction contract law applicable to construction project management and administration. 5. An ability to function as part of a diverse team, using the techniques, skills, and current technology necessary for professional construction industry practice, to ethically manage a construction project within established constraints of budget, schedule, quality, safety, and regulatory compliance. 6. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility. 7. An ability to communicate effectively. 8. The broad education necessary to recognize economic, environmental and societal impacts of construction projects. 1

5 Program Objectives Program Objectives are defined as the abilities we expect our alumni to exhibit three to five years after graduation. Students who are granted the Bachelor of Science in Construction Management will demonstrate knowledge and understanding in the following areas: 1. General Education - Graphic, oral and written communications, and the understanding of human factors. 2. Math and Science Principles of mathematics, statistics and physics in order to appropriately anticipate the behavior of the materials, equipment, and methods used in construction. 3. Business and Management The demands of working in a global environment including: knowledge of sustainability, accounting, finance, business regulations, contract law, labor law, and marketing practices. The fundamentals of contemporary management and business practices appropriate to the construction profession. 4. Construction Science The contribution of other professional disciplines to the construction process. The ability to lead, coordinate, communicate and interact with professionals in various disciplines to solve project challenges. 5. Construction The total project process including: concept, design, procurement, construction, and delivery of the functioning project. The constructor s professional responsibility as a leader and member of a multi-disciplinary team, working in diverse environments, assessing risks, and showing definitive progress, all while maintaining priorities in safety, sustainability, purpose, business, and societal issues. 6. Life-Long Learning An appreciation of the need for, and the value of, leadership, collaboration, productivity, and professionalism in sustaining or developing one s own career growth. Program Quality Assessment The Construction Management department has an established process of assessment and improvement, as depicted in the figure below. Each course offered by the department has established a series of Course Outcomes that are measurable learning outcomes specific to each course. Course Outcomes must support the Program Outcomes and Objectives. In turn, the Program Outcomes and Objectives must support the Mission and Vision of the program. 2

6 Student s Goals: Program Outcomes & Objectives Mission & Vision Review by Faculty Review by Faculty Curriculum Assessment Plan: Are the Course Outcomes Achieved? Review & Comment by Constituent Groups Review & Comment by Constituent Groups: Students Alumni Industry Advisory Committee Graduates Assessment Plan: Are the Program Objectives Achieved? Review & Comment by Constituent Groups Assessment Plan: Are the Program Outcomes & Objectives Appropriate? Figure 1 Program Assessment Process Performance of our current students and graduates is measured in a number of ways, including: results of the comprehensive American Institute of Constructors (AIC) Exam; review of student work; graduating senior exit survey; alumni and industry surveys; and input from the program s industry advisory board. This assessment information is compared to our desired performance, which is articulated in the Program Outcomes and Objectives. Any gap or discrepancy between our actual and desired performance indicates that a modification is needed, either within the curriculum, or to the Program Outcomes or Objectives. This process is driven by program faculty both directly (through day-to-day involvement with course design, delivery, assessment, and evaluation), and indirectly (through the influence of service and research). 3

7 Assessment of Program Outcomes The table below lists our planned assessment methods for each Program Outcome listed previously (page 1). Table 1 - Program Outcomes Assessment Plan Assessment Measure: American Institute of Constructors Level 1 (Associate Constructor) Exam This comprehensive exam, which covers all aspects of construction project management, is required to be taken and passed with a score of 70% or better by all students in our program. Review of Student Work This is a review of student performance on tests and assignments relative to the stated learning objectives for every CMGT course. This is an ongoing assessment. Graduating Senior Exit Survey These questionnaires are designed to evaluate the level at which graduating seniors believe they have achieved the CM Program Outcomes. Industry/Employer Surveys These questionnaires are designed to evaluate the relevance and achievement of CM Program Outcomes with respect to current industry requirements. Outcomes Addressed: (list by number) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 All All All How is the information used Scores are an assessment of student learning in the test subject areas in comparison to national averages. Scores equal to or higher than national averages indicate the learning goals are being achieved. Scores below the national averages or indicating a weakness lead to a faculty review of the curriculum to identify classes where course content can be revised to address the weakness. Faculty review student performance on selected assignments, projects or exams to measure whether the program outcomes are being achieved and at what level. Faculty address weaknesses by revising content or course objectives as appropriate. Faculty review questionnaires completed by graduating students to identify areas in the curriculum which the students feel are not being addressed to their satisfaction. Faculty address weaknesses by revising course objectives or content as appropriate. Faculty review questionnaires completed by Industry and Employers to identify areas in the curriculum which members of industry feel are not being adequately taught based on graduate knowledge and job performance. If the Respondent does not employ Boise State CM grads, they may provide feedback about the relevance of the Program Outcomes. Faculty address weaknesses by revising program outcomes, or course objectives or content as appropriate. Timeline Twice per year (November and April) The 8 Program Outcomes are reviewed on a 3-year cycle At the end of every semester Every three years. Last conducted Fall 2012 Next survey - Fall

8 Assessment of Program Objectives The table below lists our planned assessment methods for each Program Objectives listed previously (page 1). Table 2- Program Objectives Assessment Plan Assessment Measure: Alumni Surveys These questionnaires are designed to evaluate the achievement of CM Program Objectives (at 3 to 5 years postgraduation). Objectives Addressed: (list by number) All How is the information used Faculty review questionnaires completed by alumni to identify areas in which the graduates, upon exposure to industry requirements, feel did not adequately prepare them for employment. Faculty address weaknesses by revising course objectives or content as appropriate. Timeline Every three years. Last conducted Fall 2014 Next survey - Summer 2017 Summary of the most recent assessment cycle During the most recent assessment cycle Program Learning Outcomes 1, 4 and 5 were to be assessed. In order to do that data was collected using the following instruments: American Institute of Constructors Level 1 (Associate Constructor) Exam Review of Student Work Graduating Senior Exit Survey The Industry/Employer survey was not used since it is next scheduled to be deployed in the Fall of The following sections provide a summary presentation and analysis of data collected during the most recent assessment cycle, first by Outcome then by instrument. 5

9 Program Learning Outcome 1 Summary An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, engineering, business, and economics to solve construction problems. AIC Exam (BSU Score vs. AIC Minimum Score normalized values shown, see Figure 2) Category Fall 2013 Spring Engineering Concepts Management Concepts Budgeting Cost Controls Student Work (I = Introduce, R = Reinforce, E = Emphasize) Course CMGT 320 Construction Equipment & Methods Homework Assignment Midterm Exam Problem 1 CMGT 350 Mechanical & Electrical Installations Test #3 Question #17 CMGT 410 Concrete Formwork Construction Quiz #1 Question #1 Quiz #2 Questions # 1, 2 & 3 Quiz #2 Question #7 Strength of support (I, R or E) R R, E R, E Achievement of Outcome (/N) CMGT 420 Reinforced Concrete & Steel Construction Test #1 Question #1 Test #3 Question #1 R, E N Senior Exit Survey (1 to 5, 5 high) Question Be able to apply knowledge of mathematics and engineering to solve construction problems. Be able to apply knowledge of business and economics to solve construction problems Fall 2013 n = 8 Spring 2014 n = 16 Importance Achievement Importance Achievement After review of several courses as well as data from the other instruments used to evaluate this 6

10 Outcome it is seen that the students understand this material and feel that they are achieving what they need in these areas for their careers. This may be seen by how well the students continue to do on a nationally normed test. There was a potential issue in one of the classes used to evaluate this Outcome, but additional evaluation in the same course seems to indicate the problem may have been with that specific question and not the concepts. Overall it is felt that Outcome 1 continues to be met by the construction management program. Program Learning Outcome 4 Summary An ability to apply knowledge of procurement practices, regulatory requirements, and construction contract law applicable to construction project management and administration. AIC Exam (BSU Score vs. AIC Minimum Score normalized values shown, see Figure 2) Category Fall 2013 Spring Management Concepts Project Administration Student Work (I = Introduce, R = Reinforce, E = Emphasize) Course CMGT 385 Construction Contracts & Law Homework Assignment Homework Assignment Final Exam CMGT 475 Construction Project Management Homework Assignment Strength of support (I, R or E) R, E R, E Achievement of Outcome (/N) Senior Exit Survey (1 to 5, 5 high) Question Be able to apply knowledge of procurement practices, regulatory requirements, and construction contract law applicable to construction project management and administration. Fall 2013 n = 8 Spring 2014 n = 16 Importance Achievement Importance Achievement This Outcome, while our students are able to demonstrate their understanding of the concepts both in class and on a nationally normed test, is one our students are not as comfortable with as they are with many others. The perceived level of achievement is one the faculty will need to work on with the students. 7

11 Overall it is felt that Outcome 4 continues to be met by the construction management program. Program Learning Outcome 5 Summary An ability to function as part of a diverse team, using the techniques, skills, and current technology necessary for professional construction industry practice, to ethically manage a construction project within established constraints of budget, schedule, quality, safety, and regulatory compliance. AIC Exam (BSU Score vs. AIC Minimum Score normalized values shown, see Figure 2) Category Fall 2013 Spring Management Concepts Budgeting Cost Controls Planning Schedule & Control Construction Safety Project Administration Student Work (I = Introduce, R = Reinforce, E = Emphasize) Course CMGT 374 Construction Operations & Improvements Homework Assignment CMGT 385 Construction Contracts & Law Homework Assignment CMGT 475 Construction Project Management Homework Assignment Strength of support (I, R or E) R R, E R, E Achievement of Outcome (/N) Senior Exit Survey (1 to 5, 5 high) Question Be able to function as part of a diverse team. Be able to ethically manage a construction project taking into account budget, schedule, quality, safety, and regulatory compliance Fall 2013 n = 8 Spring 2014 n = 16 Importance Achievement Importance Achievement The components that make up this Outcome are viewed by the students, as well as the faculty, as 8

12 BSU Ave Min Score 1 being very important. Based upon student performance both in the classroom as well as on the AIC exam our students are grasping this information and are able to use it. Even the students feel that they are achieving a significant understanding of this material, but not to the extent that they would like. These results will continue to be monitored to see if adjustments can and should be made in the area of perception on the part of the students. Overall it is felt that Outcome 5 continues to be met by the construction management program. American Institute of Constructors Level I Exam The bar charts below show the results of the November 2013 and April 2014 AIC Level I Exams. The values shown in the first chart are based on a comparison of the average score obtained by Boise State students compared to the scores that AIC considers to be the minimum acceptable using the following relationship: BSU Average 1 Minimum Score Using this relationship all 10 sections of AIC Level I Exam are normalized to zero. Scores greater than zero mean our students are performing above the minimum acceptable value, and scores below zero means our students are performing below the minimum acceptable value. 1. Communication Skills 2. Engineering Concepts 3. Management Concepts 4. Materials, Methods & Project Modeling 5. Bidding & Estimating 6. Budgeting Cost Controls 7. Planning Schedule & Control 8. Construction Safety 9. Construction Geomatics 10. Project Administration Figure 2 AIC Results, BSU vs Minimum Score When reviewing the data from the AIC exam it was noted that the relevant portions of the exam for the three Program Outcomes under consideration this year all show that our students, on average, are scoring above the minimum required score. Those areas are: 2. Engineering Concepts 3. Management Concepts 6. Budgeting Cost Controls 7. Planning Schedule & Control 8. Construction Safety 10. Project Administration In the fall of 2013 there were 16 students who took the test, with nine passing. All nine of those passing the test were taking the test for the first time. In the spring of 2014, 26 students took the test with 20 passing. Of those 20, 18 were first time test takers. Even with only 69% of our students passing the exams the ability to answer questions in the sections relevant to this year s Outcomes clearly demonstrates that this material is understood by our students. 9

13 BSU Ave Nat. Ave 1 When looking at the results of the entire test although Boise State Construction Management students consistently perform above the minimum scores in most areas covered, scores in the content areas of 1. Communication Skills, 4. Materials, Methods and Project Modeling, 5. Bidding and Estimating and 9. Construction Geomatics fall below the AIC minimum acceptable score on at least one test for the year under review. The majority of these issues arose with those students taking the test in the fall. The areas of 1. Communications Skills, 4. Materials, Methods and Project Modeling and 5. Bidding and Estimating all made very strong gains by the spring exam. There were also significant improvements on several other areas in the spring compared to the fall. Figure 3 AIC Results, BSU vs National Average 1. Communication Skills 2. Engineering Concepts 3. Management Concepts 4. Materials, Methods & Project Modeling 5. Bidding & Estimating 6. Budgeting Cost Controls 7. Planning Schedule & Control 8. Construction Safety 9. Construction Geomatics 10. Project Administration When comparing the work of Boise State students to the National Average it is seen that even in the areas of concern listed above Boise State students outperform the National Average significantly in most areas. 9. Construction Geomatics continues to be an area of concern, both at Boise State as well as nationally. It should be noted that the November 2013 test is the only time in the last six tests that Boise State has fallen below the national average in Geomatics. Follow-up Action The results of the AIC exam, both those relevant to this year s Program Outcomes as well as all the other sections were reviewed by the faculty on October 6, The significant improvement from the fall to spring was noted. It was also observed that the test itself is in the process of changing. Section 1. Communications Skills is to be significantly different starting this fall. Additionally the test is to be reorganized to align it with the new Student Learning Outcomes that have been created by ACCE (see p. 14). Overall the faculty felt the results did not prompt any need for change, but further monitoring of the problem areas listed above will be done. The faculty did feel that we should be looking at the breakdown between first time takers and those who take the test more than once and see if that yielded any useful data. 10

14 Review of Student Work For the years between ACCE visits student work is reviewed by Program Outcome on a 3-year cycle. The data is collected from selected courses and is then analyzed by the instructor of the course and presented to the faculty as a whole to determine if the Outcomes have satisfactorily been met, and if any adjustment in these courses or the rest of the curriculum are necessary to better meet these Outcomes in the future. If issues were raised in pervious reviews concerning a certain Outcome, these will also be addressed. Figure 4 Courses vs Program Outcomes Data was collected from several courses for each of the Program Outcomes under review this year. Students were deemed to have met the Outcome in a given assignment if the majority of the students participating in that assignment received a grade of at least 70%. The results of this analysis may be found in the Outcome Summaries on pages six to nine above. All but one course assignment was found to successfully demonstrate that the students were able to do work related to a specific Outcome. The one assignment in question, from CMGT 420, was found to potentially be an issue with how the question and information was presented. A later assignment was used in the same course to evaluate the same outcome which the students were able to successfully complete. Follow-up Action This data was reviewed by the faculty on October 6, The faculty felt this was an appropriate method for gaining an overview of the various Outcomes in the program were functioning, and that the frequency of this analysis did not need to be increased. It was noted that if this method of analysis lead to the conclusion that a given Outcome was not being met, the same Outcome could be reviewed again the following year. 11

15 Graduating Senior Exit Surveys At the end of each semester graduating seniors are polled by questionnaire to assess student perception of their achievement of the Program Learning Outcomes. In 2012 the Program Learning Outcomes were revised. Along with that revision a new survey was devised and executed in the Fall of Eight surveys were completed for Fall 2013 and sixteen surveys were completed in the Spring of Below is the list of questions the students were asked that directly relate to the Program Learning Outcomes. The Figures 5 and 6 present the results of these questions where the students were asked how important they felt the Program Learning Outcomes are, and how well they were able to achieve them by the time of graduation. The surveys used a five point scale, with one being low and five being high. 1. Be able to apply knowledge of mathematics and engineering to solve construction problems. (PLO 1) 2. Be able to apply knowledge of business and economics to solve construction problems. (PLO 1) 3. Be able to read and interpret contract plans, specifications and documents. (PLO 2) 4. Be able to accurately estimate direct and indirect construction project costs. (PLO 2) 5. Be able to apply knowledge of construction materials, methods and equipment to safely and effectively plan and sequence construction activities. (PLO 3) 6. Be able to take into account realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, and sustainability when planning a construction process or sequence. (PLO 3) 7. Be able to apply knowledge of procurement practices, regulatory requirements, and construction contract law applicable to construction project management and administration. (PLO 4) 8. Be able to function as part of a diverse team. (PLO 5) 9. Be able to ethically manage a construction project taking into account budget, schedule, quality, safety, and regulatory compliance. (PLO5) 10. Be knowledgeable of the necessity for professional integrity and ethical responsibility. (PLO6) 11. Demonstrate a proficiency in all forms of communication. (PLO 7) 12. Recognize the impact of economics, the environment and society on construction projects. (PLO 8) Importance Achievement Figure 5 Student Perception of Program Learning Outcomes Fall

16 Importance Achievement Figure 6 Student Perception of Program Learning Outcomes Spring FA13 SP14 Figure 7 Difference between Achievement and Importance of Program Learning Outcomes Both groups felt strongly that all of the Outcomes were important to their education. Figure 7 above presents the difference in perception of the students between Importance of the Program Learning Outcomes and the Achievement of those same Outcomes. It can be seen that the spring graduates, with twice as many responses, felt that they had better been able to achieve the Outcomes. When reviewing this data the faculty expect there to be a difference between how significant the students feel an Outcome to be and how well they achieve it. Generally values on Figure 7 greater than 0.4 will be seen to warrant close scrutiny. Question 5 (PLO 3), to be able to apply knowledge of construction materials, methods and equipment to safely and effectively plan and sequence construction activities, was felt equally by both groups to not have been achieved as well as they would like. Other questions, especially as reported by the spring graduates, were achieved or nearly so. Follow-up Action This data was reviewed by the faculty on October 6, Concern was expressed at the sample size (n = 8) from the fall survey, and that a single student could skew the results. For the Outcomes under review this year the results were felt to be acceptable. It was noted that the Program Outcomes themselves may be too large and need to be streamlined. This is to happen in response to actions taken by ACCE (see below). 13

17 Alumni Surveys The most recent alumni survey was conducted in Fall of 2014 of alumni who graduated from the program between the Fall of 2008 and the Spring of 2011 (graduating roughly three to five years prior to the survey). About 15% (n = 7) of those queried responded to the survey. The participants were asked to evaluate the Importance of the six Program Objectives (see page 2) and to then evaluate how well they feel they have achieved those objectives on a scale of one to five, with five being best. The average of all the responses is shown in Figure 8 below Importance Achievement Figure 8 Perception of Importance and Achievement of Program Objectives by Alumni Fall 2014 The average response indicates that our alumni either agree or strongly agree that our Program Objectives are important to the discipline. They also indicate that they feel they have been able to achieve those objectives or are in the process of doing so. The respondents indicated that the majority of them have earned promotions since joining the work force. Most have changed companies at least once since graduation, and approximately half have gone on to earn a second degree, usually in business. Follow-up Action Data indicates the program is in the correct course. The next survey will be conducted during the summer of 2017 of alumni who graduated from the program between the Fall of 2011 and the Spring of In the interim strategies will be discussed and developed to obtain a greater response rate for future surveys. Additional Assessment Measures Advisory Council Feedback In Fall 2011, Construction Management Advisory Council members were tasked with reviewing the course objectives for each CMGT course and providing feedback on importance and relevancy. This is intended to be an ongoing activity, although the cycle frequency has not yet been determined. Follow-up Action The Advisory Council is currently undergoing major revisions, both to its membership as well as to its mission. One of the first tasks that will be asked of the revised Council will be to review the program. This will also be used to help the program move to the new requirements coming from ACCE (see below). 14

18 Construction Competition Results. Boise State Construction Management student teams participating in the annual Associated Schools of Construction (ASC) Region VI competition were competitive with student teams from other construction management programs in attendance. The Heavy Civil team placed 1 st. Success in the student competition requires outstanding performance in teamwork, time management, and oral presentations in front of a live industry judging panel, as well as comprehensive knowledge and understanding of construction materials and methods, drawings, contract documents, cost estimating, scheduling, and project management and administration. Changes to Program Learning Outcomes In the summer of 2014 the American Council for Construction Education (ACCE), the accrediting body for the Construction Management program, formally adopted a new set of Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) that programs will need to meet from this point forward. After review of these new SLOs by the faculty it has been determined that while our current program does achieve the desired results change as to how we evaluate our program is necessary. In the fall of 2014 the program will be working to rewrite the Program Leaning Outcomes (PLOs) to make them more easily seen to align with the new SLOs. This will result in 20 PLOs for the program, although most will be significantly smaller and more narrowly defined than the current eight. This will also cause a shift in what student data is collected which year, and the questions asked on the Senior Exit Survey. The proposed new PLOs, level of achievement by course and student work collection cycle may be found in Attachment 2. 15

19 Attachment 1 Senior Exit Survey ( ) 16

20 17

21 18

22 19

23 20

24 Attachment 2 Proposed: New Program Learning Outcomes Level of Achievement by Course New data collection schedule 21

25 Proposed New Program Learning Outcomes 1. Create written communications appropriate to the construction discipline. 2. Create oral presentations appropriate to the construction discipline. 3. Create a construction project safety plan. 4. Create construction project cost estimates. 5. Create construction project schedules. 6. Analyze professional decisions based on ethical principles. 7. Analyze construction documents for planning and management of construction processes. 8. Analyze methods, materials, and equipment used to construct projects. 9. Apply construction management skills as an effective member of a multi-disciplinary team. 10. Apply electronic-based technology to manage the construction process. 11. Apply basic surveying techniques for construction layout and control. 12. Understand different methods of project delivery and the roles and responsibilities of all constituencies involved in the design and construction process. 13. Understand construction risk management. 14. Understand construction accounting and cost control. 15. Understand construction quality assurance and control. 16. Understand construction project control processes. 17. Understand the legal implications of contract, common, and regulatory law to manage a construction project. 18. Understand the basic principles of sustainable construction. 19. Understand the basic principles of structural behavior. 20. Understand the basic principles of mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems. 22

26 Level of Achievement by Course & Proposed New Data Collection Schedule 23