INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (IAC) ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, SIUC

Transcription

1 AGENDA INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (IAC) ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, SIUC April 26, 2011, 10:00 am -4:30 pm, Wabash Room, SIUC Student Center 1) Introduction of board members and faculty (5 min.) 2) State of the Department (Mandara Savage) (10 minutes) 3) Review of significant program changes and events since last meeting (20 min.) a) Lab Improvements and New Delivery Methods i) New power supplies for electronics lab ii) LabVIEW/MultiSIM departmental license (Garth) iii) Replaced CRT s with flat panel displays D106, D122 (1) More modern look iv) Online Delivery of Manufacturing Systems MS degree (1) Course delivery starts this fall (2) ET faculty to participate (3) Technology Department leading college (4) New course management tools and techniques (Mandara) b) College Dean Search Update c) Faculty Achievements for 2010 (15 min) i) Dave Williams ii) Garth Crosby iii) Carl Spezia 4) Program Enrollment trends ( 5 min) a) University trends b) College trends c) Program trends 5) Enrollment Improvement Results and Strategies (25 min.) a) Recruiting Efforts and Tools i) Associates of Science in EET developed at JALC/RLC ii) Technology included in Introduction to Engineering Course (Dave/Garth) iii) Summer camps and bridge programs (Dave) iv) Alumni letters IT/ET v) Community College advisor letters b) Recruiting at community colleges i) Regular Visits Suspended (1) Identified key schools and maintained contact c) High school recruiting (Dave) i) Visits to local schools ii) Internal recruiting d) Other markets and methods? 6) Employment Outlooks for EET Graduates (25 min) a) What are permanent employment outlooks for IAC member industries? b) What are coop and internship outlooks for IAC member companies? Spring 2011 IAC-EET2011.doc

2 LUNCH (90 min.) 7) Review of program and undergraduate courses (75 min.) a) Review program educational objectives i) Evaluate: discuss changes if required ii) Vote on program educational objectives b) Review of ET 150 proposed syllabus i) Discuss learning objectives ii) Impact on enrollment iii) Vote on accepting syllabus c) Progress In Online Course i) Impacts on enrollment ii) Actions taken since last meeting (1) Lab video instruction (2) Sample lectures online (3) Epen evaluations (Dave) (4) Course management software d) Current and future courses for program i) What action should be taken to improve technical courses? ii) Is the balance of courses correct for current job markets? BREAK 8) Assessment (75 min.) a) Review of program assessment i) Results of Spring 2010 Assessment (1) Interpretation of results b) Suggestions for improvements c) New course management tools may include assessment features d) SME EET National Assessment test scheduled for i) Eight students taking exam e) Tour of EET labs and facilities Meeting Ends: 4:30 pm Spring 2011 IAC-EET2011.doc

3 ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of Meeting April 26, 2011 Members Present: Garth Crosby, Steve Lazorchak, Ron Marusarz, Kerick Meyer, Bill Nielsen, Les Ray, Mandara Savage, Carl Spezia. Absent: Dave Williams, Mike Abba, David Short, Eric Rossi. The Board members and faculty met at the SIU Student Center Wabash Room from 10 AM until 2:30 PM. IAC members toured the department and witnessed demonstrations until 4:00 pm at which time the meeting dismissed. Meeting called to order at 10:00 am. The meeting started with faculty and IAC member introductions and opening comments. A new member of the ET IAC, Eric Rossi of EMAC Inc. had agreed join the committee but could not attend due to business conflicts. D. Short and M. Abba were absent due to work conflicts. D. Williams was ill. State of Department. M. Savage reported on the state of the department. The graduate program has internal approval to start online delivery in fall We are currently waiting for external approval. The programs current enrollment is 20 students. Both the thesis and non-thesis option now require only 30 credit hours to complete. M. Savage discussed the budget for the online courses and how faculty would be compensated. ET faculty will be able to develop courses and deliver content for the program. IT program discussed. The program has 59 students in good standing on campus with 191 off campus for a total of 260. There will be 16 graduates on campus and 72 off campus. The ET program will graduate five students this spring. The number of students admitted to SIUC and expressing interest in the ET program as of the meeting date is 63. These would all be entering as freshmen. There is discussion on how many of these students will eventually enroll in classes. The group discusses strategies for enhancing conversion of student admits to enrolled with a yield campaign, M. Savage discusses the current budget situation. Department faced 2% reduction in funding last year. 13% of OTS money lost. State of Program C. Spezia reported on the new hardware acquired during the last year. G. Crosby reported on the acquisition of LabVIEW/Multisim from a funded undergraduate equipment grant. We partnered with ECE to acquire the software. We will share the software with ECE and they will cover maintenance costs. K. Meyer asked if we were still going to use pspice. Faculty explained that students were free to use whatever tool the liked, but we were introducing them to this software so that they could then transfer skills to other simulation packages. C. Spezia reviewed progress in dean s search. Administration plans to have new dean in place by July 1, Faculty present briefly reported their on-going work and achievement from Spring of 3 ETIAB_minutes11.doc

4 C. Spezia reported on the program enrollment trends over the last 11 years. Current enrollment is nearly the same as in This was compared to college and university trends. College enrollment is off 27% from University enrollment is down 1.9%. This is a contributing factor to fiscal problems. IAC members reviewed proposed AS in EET being developed at JALC. Faculty will increase articulation efforts with local community colleges. IAC members approved these actions. IAC members reviewed and commented on alumni and community college advisor letters. B. Nielsen suggested we target large community colleges around Chicago for recruiting. IAC members reviewed and commented on revised program summary sheet. Sheet was approved. C. Spezia reported on ET recruitment efforts at local high schools, community colleges, and within the college. IAC members suggested we try to determine how students find our program and concentrate efforts in most productive areas. Program Assessment Meeting reconvened after lunch to review program objectives, assessment results and new course offering. IAC members review the existing program education objectives. After review, IAC members approved the existing eight program educational objectives. The IAC members reviewed the student outcomes for the program and approved of all 10 items as written. The committee members and faculty review results from last spring s SME sponsored assessment exam. The results were explained to the committee members. Since test scores were low, faculty and IAC members discussed how to interpret results and improve the scores. The results of the discussions were: We need to see how SIUC EET faired against other schools who took exam. Students may not be taking test seriously We need better connection between our course content and what is on the assessment test. Give sample tests to students to help them prepare. Give students a review on basic concepts prior to exam date. Old material is lost if not used. R. Marusarz suggested that students might not be well versed on taking computerized, multiple choice timed exams. They may need practice tests. C. Spezia is developing a web-based online testing tool that could be used for practice tests. L. Ray suggested that test may be presented to students as a way to test how competitive they will be in the job market. This would help motivate them to review items and improve scores. S. Lazorchak noted that while scores were low, the standard deviation was small in some areas. Student performance was consistent. C. Spezia noted that performance on SME assessment paralleled performance in courses. Faculty grading seems consistent. R. Marusarz suggested that this test or a similar test be given more often. Cost is an issue here since exam costs $80/student. R. Marusarz suggested EET faculty should take test for experience. C. Spezia agreed. The board and faculty decide on the following: Faculty should review ASEE literature to find paper summarizing how other institutions faired on SME assessment. Develop in-house sample assessment test for practice testing. Empower students to prepare for exam by tying their performance to relative success in job market. Spring of 3 ETIAB_minutes11.doc

5 S. Lazorchak asked about development of technical math class for EET. He offered to prepare solutions to Math 111 and 150 problems for posting on website as study aid to EET students. Faculty members noted this and will consider his offer. There was discussion on the change of math requirements from the sequence MATH 111, MATH 150, MATH 250 to MATH 111, MATH 150, MATH 282. This was implemented with course name changes and description revisions. Faculty believe that this sequence will satisfy the needs of students and ABET-TAC. New Tech Math class discussed in 2010 meeting is placed on hold pending ABET-TAC review. This course was to teach required math concepts through mathematical software such as Matlab and MathCAD. IAC members reviewed proposed educational objectives and draft course outline for ET 150. Comments were made on course outline. R. Marusarz commented that we should make the course fun by focusing on lab projects not theory. He suggested using parts kits that include light pressure and other sensors so that students can see applications of electronics and electricity early in the course. C. Spezia and a Graduate assistant will develop the course for fall 2011 delivery. Course developers propose to use pre-recorded lectures to deliver some content so that we can maximize the lab time for the students. IAC members acknowledged that we have troubleshooting topics in the course and will apply them practically. Course lab experience will culminate with the assembly and testing of a electronics kit. IAC members approved the learning objectives of ET150 and the draft course outline. R. Marusarz offered to help brainstorm laboratory project ideas at a later date. Meeting adjourned to tour the Technology department labs and classrooms and view demonstrations of online teaching developments for EET. IAC members saw example of screen-captured video presentations for various courses. Faculty discussed the tools used to create and post the materials online. IAC members supported continued development in these areas. IAC and faculty brainstormed on how is use instructional technology to remotely engage students in labs. G. Crosby suggested pairing on-campus students with remote students via webcam. This concept was supported by IAC members particularly R. Marusarz. Meeting concluded at 4:00 pm. Minutes prepared by Carl Spezia Spring of 3 ETIAB_minutes11.doc