Program Self-Study Document

Transcription

1 Program Self-Study Document Industrial Engineering Option Visit Submitted by California State University East Bay to the Engineering Accreditation Commission Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. June, 2009

2 Engineering Accreditation Commission Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. 111 Market Place, Suite 1050 Baltimore, Maryland Phone FAX WWW: Participating Bodies American Academy of Environmental Engineers American Congress on Surveying and Mapping American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics American Institute of Chemical Engineers American Nuclear Society American Society of Agricultural Engineers American Society of Civil Engineers American Society for Engineering Education American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Institute of Industrial Engineers, Inc. ISA - The International Society for Measurement and Control The Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying National Institute of Ceramic Engineers National Society of Professional Engineers Society of Automotive Engineers Society of Manufacturing Engineers Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc. Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers Society of Petroleum Engineers Affiliate Bodies American Consulting Engineers Council American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers American Society of Safety Engineers Materials Research Society Society of Plastics Engineers

3 Table of Contents A. Background Information... 5 A.1 Degree Title 5 A.2 Program Mode 5 A.3 Actions to Correct Previous Shortcoming 5 A.4 Contact Information 6 B. Accreditation Summary... 7 B.0.3 Department Mission... 8 B.0.4 Preparation for 2009 Visit... 8 B.1 Students 11 B.1.1 Evaluation Process B.1.2 Advising Process B.1.3 Monitoring Process B.1.4 Policies for Accepting Transfer Students/Credits B.1.5 Process to Ensure All Students Meet Program Requirements B.1.6 Incoming Student Quality B.1.7 Assessment results with respect to criterion B.2Program Educational Objectives 25 B.2.1 Objectives and Publication Information B.2.2 Program Constituencies B.2.3 Process to Determine and Evaluate Objectives B.2.4 Involvement of Constituencies B.2.5 Description of the PEOs Assessment Process B.2.6 Educational Objectives Assessment Process and Tools B.2.7 Results of Program Educational Objectives Achievement Evaluation B.2.8 Closing the Assessment Loop on PEOs B.3 Program Outcomes and Assessment 49 B.3.1 Program Outcomes B.3.2 Relation of Outcomes to Program Objectives B.3.3 Program Input to Achieve Outcomes B.3.4 Assessment Process (including measures and tools used) B.3.5 Assessment Results Used to Develop/Improve Program B.3.6 Assessment Results Summary B.3.7 General Education Assessment B.3.8 Assessment Results Mapped to Criterion Outcomes 3(a) through 3(k) B.3.9 Materials Available for Review during Site Visit B.4Continous Improvement 89 B.4.1 Improvements to the Assessment Process and Tools B.4.2 Improvements to the Curriculum B.4.3 Improvements to the Facilities B.5 Professional Component 97 B.5.1 Design Experience B.5.2 Capstone Design Experience B.5.3 Coverage of Mathematics and Basic Sciences B.5.4 Coverage of Engineering Topics Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 2

4 B.5.5 General Education Content B.6 Faculty 104 B.6.1 Faculty Size and How Competencies Cover Curricular Areas B.6.2 Student-Faculty Interaction B.6.3 Student Advising and Counseling B.6.4 University Service Activities B.6.5 Professional Development B.6.6 Interaction with Practitioners and Employers B.6.7 Adequacy of the size of the faculty B.7 Facilities 108 B.7. 1 Classrooms B.7.2 Laboratories B.7.3 Equipment and Tools B.7.4 Computing and Information Infrastructure B.7.5 Laboratory Development Plan B.7.6 Opportunities for Using Modern Engineering Tools B.8Institutional Support and Financial Resources 112 B.8.1 Budget Process B.8.2 Institutional/Financial/Leadership Support B.8.3 Retention and Recruitment of Faculty B.8.4 Planning and Funding of Faculty Development B.8.5 Planning and Funding of Facilities Development B.8.6 Support Services B.9 Program Criteria 115 B.9.1 Curriculum B.9.2 Faculty B.10Copies of Survey Forms/ Industrial Advisory Board Meeting Minutes. 118 Appendix I - Additional Program Information Table 1-a. Basic-Level Curriculum (Current) 153 Table 1-a. Basic-Level Curriculum ( valid to spring 2008) 156 Table 2. Course and Section Size Summary 158 Table 3. Faculty Workload Summary 159 Table 4. Faculty Analysis 160 Table 5. Support Expenditures 162 Appendix II Course Syllabi Appendix III Faculty Vita Appendix IV Institutional Profile I. Background Information Relative to the Institution General Information Type of Control Regional or Institutional Accreditation Faculty and Students Mission Institutional Support Units Computing, Communication and Media Support II. Background Information Relative to the Engineering Unit Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 3

5 1. Engineering Educational Unit Programs Offered and Degrees Granted Information Regarding Administrators Supporting Academic Departments Engineering Finances Engineering Personnel and Policies Definition of Credit Unit Admission and Graduation Requirements, Basic Programs Non-academic Support Units Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 4

6 A. Background Information Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study Report A.1 Degree Title The degree title in Industrial Engineering (IE) is Bachelor of Science in Engineering, Industrial Engineering Option A.2 Program Mode The Industrial Engineering Program is a day-mode program. Some classes are taught in late afternoon and early evening to accommodate students who work in local businesses. All course sections are identical irrespective of when and where they are taught. A.3 Actions to Correct Previous Shortcoming The ABET review team on their visit on October of 2003 cited one weakness in the program. We submitted an interim report in 2005 to ABET that successfully removed the cited Weakness. The following is the summary of the 2005 interim report. A.3.1Program Weakness 1. Criterion 2. Program Educational Objectives Criterion 2(d) requires a system of ongoing evaluation that demonstrates achievement of program objectives. The program has performed some evaluation of achievement of objectives. Evaluation results have been used to improve the effectiveness of the program. The program self-study cited alumni surveys as one instrument in this evaluation, but the first survey was scheduled for fall This is understandable in a new program, but at the same time the system of ongoing evaluation could be strengthened by this information. Further, there has been little opportunity to observe trends in the evaluation, regardless of instrument. The program has had little opportunity to gather information about professional accomplishments of graduates, or to gain confidence in the system of evaluation through analysis of repeated trials. In expanding the evaluation of objectives to include alumni and employers, the program is encouraged to also consider objective measures of performance, such as student placement, professional advancement of graduates, entry into graduate education, and professional licensure. Actions Taken We submitted our interim report in 2005 where we detailed actions taken to remove the weakness. Following the report we received confirmation from ABET that the weakness has been removed. Summary of actions is as follows: Since the ABET visit (October 2003), we have had the opportunity to administer the following assessment tools to collect data for continuous evaluation of achievement of our program outcomes and objectives. Some of these tools are used to assess outcomes and others are for assessment of program objectives. Tools to assess program outcomes (Criterion 3) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 5

7 exit survey/interview with graduating seniors faculty self assessment of courses Tools to assess program educational objectives and outcomes (Criteria 2 and 3) Alumni survey employers survey Profile of our alumni and their current positions and professional achievements. We have used the collected data and considered program changes to assure the achievement of program outcomes and objectives. We have also used the data to evaluate the appropriateness of our program educational objectives. These processes have been repeated since 2003 as indicated in our assessment plan to assure the program quality. A.4 Contact Information Dr. Saeid Motavalli Professor and Chair Department of Engineering, CSUEB Carlos Bee Boulevard Hayward, CA Tel: [email protected] 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 6

8 B. Accreditation Summary California State University East Bay (CSUEB) is a comprehensive Category II Master s institution. City of Hayward is the location of the main campus. CSUEB s Concord Campus is located in central Contra Costa County and mostly offers upper division and graduate instruction. Engineering courses are all offered out of the Hayward Campus. The current enrollment figures for the University is about 10,500 undergraduate, 2,400 graduate students and 600 faculty members. The University is part of the California State University system which, consists of 23 campuses located throughout the state and is the largest university system in the country. The ten buildings of the Hayward Hills campus, on 342 acres, contain over 150 classrooms and teaching laboratories, over 177 specialized instructional rooms, numerous student oriented computer labs and a library, which contains a collection of over one million items accessible through HAYSTAC, its on-line catalog. CSUEB is organized into four colleges: Letters, Arts, and Social Sciences; Business and Economics; Education and Allied Studies; and Science. The University offers bachelor s degrees in 45 fields, minors in 66 fields, and master s degrees in 31 (in addition to Special Majors). The Department of Engineering is part of the College of Science. The Department offers two engineering options, Industrial Engineering and Computer Engineering. The Computer Engineering option is a joint program with Computer Science Department. The Department offers Bachelor s degree programs with options in Industrial Engineering and Computer Engineering. We also offer Master s degree programs in Engineering Management and Construction Management. The graduate programs are joint programs with the College of Business and Economics. The Bachelor s degree in Industrial Engineering is accredited by EAC/ABET. B.0.1 University s Mission University s mission is: To provide an academically rich, multicultural learning experience that prepares all its students to realize their goals, pursue meaningful lifework, and to be socially responsible contributors to their communities, locally and globally. University s values statement is: The University values learning in an academic environment that is inclusive and student-oriented. We value engagement in the Civic, Cultural and Economic life of the communities we serve locally, regionally, and globally. We value critical and creative thinking, effective communication, ethical decision making, and multi-cultural competence. We value the open exchange of ideas and viewpoints. The University s mission statement can be viewed using the following link; B.0.2 College of Science Mission Statement The College of Science, by fostering an environment where students, faculty and staff work collaboratively to expand knowledge in the disciplines of science and mathematics, seeks to provide both majors and non-majors with a science foundation that is appropriate to their career goals and with knowledge and skills that will allow them to function as responsible and 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 7

9 contributing members of society. B.0.3 Department Mission The Industrial Engineering Department at California State University, East Bay provides a quality engineering education that prepares its graduates for employment related to their major and to have an aptitude for continued learning. The program provides students with technical and problem solving capabilities, an understanding of real-world business often through practical work experience, and excellent teamwork and communications skills. It promotes a high rate of student success in completing the program in a reasonable length of time and enables the transfer students to take no longer than native students in completing the upper division portion. Students graduate from the program with a high degree of satisfaction about their education. Faculty maintain a high level of currency in the discipline through a strong program of professional development and interaction with the Industrial Advisory Board. B.0.4 Preparation for 2009 Visit Preparation for the cycle ABET visit began immediately after the last visit in Fall 2003 and has been a continuing effort. We have been regularly collecting assessment data, analyzing them, discussing the results and making improvements to the program resulting from the assessment process. The Department has a well established plan for assessment, evaluation and continuous program improvement. Also, we have a periodic process of evaluating our program educational objectives to assess their validity and appropriateness. ABET criteria serves as our guide in all our assessment, evaluation and program improvement. We have engaged in specific activities to assure our preparedness for the 2009 visit. These include the following: Faculty attended the faculty training workshop offered by ABET at the ASEE conference June We are planning to conduct a Mock review of our program in Winter of 2009 using an experienced ABET program reviewer. The Department Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) is heavily involved in program assessment and activities related to ABET. The Department Curriculum Committee that consists of all faculty members is actively involved in the preparation for the visit. The College has provided us with faculty release time for a faculty to help the department chair develop and organize supporting material required for ABET visit. B Curriculum Committee The Curriculum Committee is in charge of program curriculum revision, assessment, evaluation, and objectives/outcomes revisions. The committee is currently comprised of the following individuals: Dr. Saeid Motavalli(Chair) Dr. Helen Zong 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 8

10 Dr. David Bowen Dr. Farnaz Ganjeizadeh The committee charges are as follows: To initiate curriculum revision. To initiate course revision. To assure course integrity. To provide feedback to course coordinators for corrective action. To propose development/revision of ABET/Institutional assessment criteria/procedures. To coordinate ABET/institutional assessment activities. To assist in preparing ABET documents. To assist in preparing institutional assessment reporting/documentation. To coordinate assessment feedback and implementation of corrective action. B Common Definitions of Terms We will use the following definitions in the development of our program educational objectives, outcomes and other terms related to accreditation. Program (Educational) Objectives (PEOs) Program objectives are statements that describe the expected accomplishments of graduates in the first few years after graduation. Program objectives can be of two types: (a) what all graduates will do, and (b) what some graduates will do. Program objectives should be written to be used as descriptors of the program and should be such that upon reading them, prospective students and employers will have a clear idea of the program. Objectives should do the following: Address external constituencies. Be sufficiently detailed. Be consistent with the mission of the institution. Be consistent with ABET/EAC criteria Differentiate various programs within the same institution. Differentiate one program from similar programs in other institutions. Program Outcomes Program outcomes are statements that describe what students are expected to know and are able to do by the time of graduation. The program outcomes must embrace the (a) through (k) requirements of ABET/EAC Criterion 3. Program outcomes are essentially the knowledge and skill-set that graduating students will have obtained Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 9

11 Program Constituents Constituents are stakeholders. Program constituents are those who would be directly impacted if the program focus is changed drastically or if the program is discontinued. The following groups are referred to throughout this report. They are briefly described below for a common understanding of who they are and what roles they play in the development, evaluation, and assessment of program objectives, program outcomes and curriculum. Curriculum Committee (CC) This is a departmental committee of faculty that is charged to develop, implement, evaluate, and make recommendations about objectives outcomes and curriculum. CC allows faculty involvement in these processes. Industry Advisory Board (IAB) This advisory body comprised of industry representatives is charged to advise and make recommendations concerning the development, evaluation and revision of program objectives and curricular matters. IAB allows alumni, employers, student representatives and industry involvement in these processes Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 10

12 B.1 Students This section describes how students are evaluated, advised, and monitored in a manner consistent with program objectives, as required by EAC Criterion 1. Undergraduate enrollment in Industrial Engineering has had a trend upwards. In Fall of 2007 we had an enrollment of 108 and since then we have witnessed an increase expecting to have larger enrollment in Fall These numbers are students that declared Engineering as their major. Table B.1.1. IE Program Enrollment History Major in Engineering Level Total Fresh Soph Jr Sr 2nd Total Under- MS Bac. Graduate Term STATUS Fall 1997 Full-time Part-time Fall 1998 Full-time Part-time Fall 1999 Full-time Part-time Fall 2000 Full-time Part-time Fall 2001 Full-time Part-time Fall 2002 Full-time Part-time Fall 2003 Full-time Part-time Fall 2006 Full-time Part-time Fall 2007 Full-time Part-time Fall 2008 Full-Time Part -Time B.1.1 Evaluation Process The primary academic evaluation mechanism is course grades from instructors. At California State University East Bay, the following letters may appear in a transcript: A, A -, B +,B, B -, C + C, C -, D +, D, F, W, Au, CR, NC, SP, WU, I and RD. Detailed description of these letter grades can be found in the CSU East bay on-line catalog, Following is a brief explanation of these grades: A Excellent. Grading (quality) points earned= 4.0/credit hour A - Excellent. Grading (quality) points earned= 3.7/credit hour B + Good. Grading (quality) points earned= 3.3/credit hour 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 11

13 B Good. Grading (quality) points earned= 3.0/credit hour B - Good. Grading (quality) points earned= 2.7/credit hour C + Satisfactory. Grading (quality) points earned= 2.3/credit hour. C Satisfactory. Grading (quality) points earned= 2.0/credit hour. C- Satisfactory. Grading (quality) points earned= 1.7/credit hour. D + Poor. Grading (quality) points earned= 1.3/credit hour. D Poor. Grading (quality) points earned= 1/credit hour. F Failing. No points. CR Credit. No points. NC No Credit. No points. Administrative grading symbols SP Satisfactory Progress. No points I Incomplete (authorized). No points WU Withdraw Unauthorized. No points RD Report delayed. No points W Withdrawal. No points AU Audit. No points Grade point average (GPA) is computed by dividing the total number of quality hours (units attempted), whether or not they were passed (but excluding "CR/NC" courses and those in which administrative grades were assigned except for the "U"), into the number of quality (grade) points earned. A 2.00 (C) average in all college/university courses, all Cal State East Bay courses, and all major courses is required for a baccalaureate degree (excluding "CR," "NC," "W," and "AU" grades). All courses required by a major, including those in other departments, must be included in the calculation of the major GPA. The number of quality points earned may affect academic standing on a quarterly basis. If the total number of Higher Education quality points does not equal at least twice the number of Higher Education quality hours, or the number of Cal State East Bay quality points does not equal at least twice the number of Cal State East Bay quality hours, the student will be placed on probation (GPA will be below 2.00). If the student falls short of a 2.0 grade point average, then he/she is said to have a quality (grade) point deficiency. The quality point deficiency is computed as follows: Number of quality points deficient = 2 x (number of quality hours) (quality points earned for those units) If the student has a quality point deficiency either in his/her entire undergraduate record or in his/her Cal State East Bay record, he/she is placed on Academic Probation. Administrative Academic Probation A student can also be placed on Administrative Academic Probation if (a) he/she withdraws or is administratively dis-enrolled from all courses for two consecutive quarters, or any three quarters; 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 12

14 (b) he/she repeatedly fails to make progress toward a degree while enrolled, e.g., earn 23 "NC" units; (c) he/she fails to comply with a routine academic requirement or regulation, e.g., fail to take the Writing Skills Test; or (d) he/she earn only grades of "F," "NC," and/or "U" for two consecutive quarters, or any three quarters. Academic Disqualification A student can be academically disqualified if his/her quality point deficiency is so great that it is unlikely he/she can make it up in the remaining time before he/she completes other degree requirements. Only when a student can provide compelling evidence that he/she will be able to complete a university degree will reinstatement be considered. While on academic probation, a student will be academically disqualified if: With fewer than 90 earned hours of college work completed, he/she falls 32 or more quality points below a 2.0 GPA on either Higher Education quality hours or Cal State East Bay quality hours. With 90 to 134 earned hours of college work completed, he/she falls 23 or more quality points below a 2.0 GPA on either Higher Education quality hours or Cal State East Bay quality hours. With 135 or more earned hours of college work completed, he/she falls 18 or more quality points below a 2.0 GPA on either Higher Education quality hours or Cal State East Bay quality hours. Administrative Disqualification If a student becomes subject to Academic Probation while on Administrative Academic Probation or a student is placed twice on Administrative Academic Probation for the same reason, that student will be administratively disqualified. "CR" and "NC" grades and units are not included in GPA calculation. "SP" and "I" grades and units are not included in GPA calculation. A "SP" or "I" grade becomes an "F" if he/she does not complete the coursework in the specified time frame. The "F" will be included in his/her GPA calculation in the quarter in which the "SP" or "I" changes. "WU" grades are regarded the same as "F's" in his/her GPA calculation. "RD" grades and units are not included in his/her GPA. "W" grades and units are not included in his/her GPA. B.1.2 Advising Process Each student in the Department of Engineering has an assigned faculty member as his/her academic advisor. Upon entering the program, each student is assigned this advisor considering department faculty members advising load. This assignment continues throughout the student s program, thus providing continuity in the relationship between the student and advisor. The student is free to change advisors by simply notifying the departmental secretary so that records can be updated to indicate the new assignment. Before each quarter s pre-registration period, each student is reminded, by , of advising schedules. Every new faculty is mentored by 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 13

15 the department chair on undergraduate advising procedures. Also, at the beginning of each academic year, the advising process is reviewed at a faculty meeting. To assist the faculty advisor and students, the University has a comprehensive electronic student advising system as part of its Computer Management System (CMS). The faculty advisor can view student records through the faculty link at: Students also have access to their records through this system. The system updates student s records as they go through their education. It also includes updates of any transfer courses both G.E. and major courses that have been accepted by the Department. This system is also used by the University to ensure that every student have completed all their program requirements before graduation. In addition to the computerized system, the department keeps student records that include: Graduation check sheet Student s transcript for courses taken at other institutions Record of all transfer courses accepted Comments by the faculty advisor/chair where needed for exceptions. At registration (or pre-registration) each quarter, the student meets with his/her advisor. During this consultation, the student and the advisor have the student's file, the advising sheet, the program requirements, prerequisite structure and the CMS system available. The incoming freshman or transfer students go through an orientation program and a campus tour. During orientation the students meet with a representative of the University Advisement Center (UAC), which is responsible for advising students for their general education requirements. They also meet with their engineering advisor to discuss the engineering courses to take and also to evaluate engineering transfer credits. For each transfer student the department and the student both receive a copy of the transfer evaluation for general education from the UAC office. Engineering students are not able to register for engineering courses until they submit their advising sheet to the department to receive permission numbers. The requirements for the degree are divided into two parts, general education requirements and major requirements. A total of 72-quarter units of coursework are required to meet the general education-breadth requirements. Also two courses in U.S. history (or successful completion of a challenge exam) and an English course (ENGL 1002) are required in addition to the 72 hours. Some of the engineering required courses have been approved by the university to meet general education requirements. Engineering students are using, CHEM1101, ENGR 1011 (2008), ENGR 2060, ENGR 3140, ENGR 3190, ECON 2301, PSYC 1000 and Math 1304 which are program required courses, for general education credit. Table B1.2.1 depicts the general education requirements. Through the use of a computer-generated degree audit and other material in the file, the advisor ensures that the student is obtaining appropriate credit in engineering design, mathematics, basic science, and humanities and social sciences. In addition, before a student enrolls in the first senior design course (ENGR 4610 Senior Design), the faculty advisor checks to ensure that the 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 14

16 student has completed the necessary prerequisites for this course. Also, the department chair performs a graduation check of all seniors in the quarter prior to the expected graduation. A student cannot graduate unless he/she has submitted through the department a completed major graduation check sheet to the university the quarter prior to expected graduation. There is also a parallel system through the CMS where the same check is conducted for general education requirements. The general education evaluation in most part is performed by the University s Student Advisement Center Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 15

17 Table B General Education Requirements Area A. Communication in English Language B. Natural Sciences and Mathematics C. Humanities: Fine Arts and Letters D. Social Sciences Sub-area Minimum Courses A1 Oral Communication 1 4 A2 Written Communication 1 4 A3 Critical Thinking 1 4 B1 Physical Science 1 4 B2 Life Science 1 4 B3 Science Lab B4 Quantitative Reasoning 1 4 B5 Science Elective 1 4 B6 UD Science Elective 1 4 C1 Fine Arts 1 4 C2 Letters 1 4 C3 Humanities Elective 1 4 C4 U.D. Humanities Elect. 1 4 D1 Elective 1 4 D2 Elective 1 4 D3 Elective 1 4 D4 U.D. Social Science Elective 1 4 Minimum Units Sub area Area F. Performing Arts and Activities G1-3 Frosh Activities 3 2 G. G.E. Electives 4 G4 Information Literacy 1 2 Totals Interviews conducted with our graduating seniors and comments added to our graduating student survey forms have consistently mentioned advising and mentoring as examples of program strengths. The faculty are extremely accommodating in allocating time to ensure that every engineering student receives sufficient advising. B Substitutions Substitutions to the requirements may be made only upon the recommendation of advisor and with the approval of the appropriate individual or committee, as explained below. In general, substitutions are made only under those circumstances which will assure that the student's educational experience is equivalent to that which would be obtained with the approved program curriculum. The following policies apply to substitutions: University general education requirements Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 16

18 Exceptions to these must be approved of the University Advisement Center and entered into the CMS database. Lower division courses. The student s advisor, department chair and in the case of the support courses, the department that offers the course must approve the substitution. Upper division courses. The substitution for these courses are done by the advisor and the department chair based on course syllabus, school catalog information and review of the course material by the advisor and the faculty teaching, similar course at CSUEB. If for some compelling reason a student is unable to schedule a required course, a number of possibilities are considered. One of these is to examine whether a course in another department or a nearby accredited institution would provide the student an equivalent exposure to topics in the required course. If no such course can be found, an attempt is made to find a faculty member who would be willing to supervise the student in an individual studies course with equivalent material to the required course. In nearly all cases the advisor (working with the department chair) and the student arrive at a mutually agreeable solution. The approval is documented in the student file. B Advising Resources In order to minimize errors and ensure consistency, the department has developed the advising form, containing the prerequisite structure on the back, the major check sheet, and a sample fouryear plan of study that are depicted in Figures B.1.2.1, B and B respectively. The forms are distributed to faculty advisors and to the student. Copies of these documents are available on the Department web page at: Students must submit a completed, signed major graduation check sheet to the Office of Enrollment Management the quarter before graduation. In addition, The University Advisement Center (UAC) provides academic advisement, campus information, referral service, and general education evaluation services to aid students in their transition to Cal State East Bay. The primary focus of the UAC is to help undeclared majors set realistic, attainable educational goals and identify pertinent academic major/minor study programs. Undeclared students meet individually with an academic advisor to assess their interests and choose appropriate fields of study. UAC also provides new and continuing students with advising on general education and other non-major graduation requirements. Individual assistance is provided to all undeclared majors experiencing academic difficulties. The web site for UAC is at: Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 17

19 California State University, East Bay Hayward Hills Campus Department of Engineering BS Engineering Advising Form IE Option Student Name: Local Phone Number: Address: Net ID: Advisor: Classification: Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior COURSES YOU ARE CURRENTLY ENROLLED IN: QUARTER: Dept & Course Number Title PLANNED ENROLLMENT FOR NEXT QUARTER: QUARTER: Dept Issued Permission Number Dept & Course Number Section Title Units List All Co/Prereq. Are All Coreq/ Prereq. Met? Y N Total Units Overload? Y N Notes: Student Signature Advisor Signature Date Date Figure B Student Advising Form 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 18

20 CSUEB Bachelor of Science - Engineering, Industrial Engineering Option Catalog: Expected Date of Graduation: Name: REQUIREMENTS UNITS GRADE TERM & YEAR CHEM 1601 (or Basic Chemistry (4) 1605) CS 1160 Intro to Computer Sci & Programming (4) ECON 2301 Principles of Microeconomics (4) ENGR 1010 Introduction to Engineering (2) ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics (2) ENGR 2010 Electric Circuit Theory (3) ENGR 2060 Material Science (4) ENGR 2070 Fundamentals of Manufacturing (2) MATH 1304 Calculus I (4) MATH 1305 Calculus II (4) MATH 2304 Calculus III (4) PHYS 1001 Physics I (5) PHYS 1002 Physics II (5) PHYS 1003 Physics III (5) PSYC 1005 (or 1000, 1001, 2004, or 2009) ENGR 3020 ENGR 3140 ENGR 3190 ENGR 3841 ENGR 4100 General Psychology (5) Work Design & Measurement (4) Engineering Economy (4) Human Factors Engineering (4) Operations Research I (4) Production Planning & Control (4) ENGR 4200 System Simulation (4) ENGR 4280 Design & Mgmt of Human Work Sys (4) ENGR 4300 Quality Engineering (4) ENGR 4400 ENGR 4430 Manufacturing Systems Engineering (4) Facilities Planning & Design (4) ENGR 4440 Computer Integrated Manufacturing (4) ENGR 4610 Senior Design I (3) ENGR 4620 Senior Design II (3) MATH 3331 Differential Equations (4) PHYS/ENGR 3101 Statics & Dynamics (4) STAT/ENGR 3601 Statistics & Probability for Sci & Engr I (4) STAT/ENGR 3602 Statistics & Probability for Sci & Engr II (4) STAT/ENGR 4603 Operations Research II (4) ELECTIVES: 4 units from the following : BIOL 3020, 4020; MATH 2101, 3750 Net ID: WHERE COMPLETED IF NOT TAKEN AT CSUH SUBSTITUTION 8 units from the following : CIS/ENGR 3281; ENGR 3090, 3898, 4090, 4180, 4330, 4900, 4990; MATH/ENGR 4841; MGMT/ENGR 3110, 3600; PHYS/ENGR 3280 or other 3000 and 4000 level courses with Department approval. Figure B Major Graduation Check Sheet for Industrial Engineering 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 19

21 Freshman Year (49 units) Fall Quarter(17 units) Winter Quarter(15.5 units) Spring Quarter(16.5 units) General Education A1 COMM 1004 (4) B1/3 CHEM 1601 (4) B4 MATH Calc I (4) G1 GS 1011 (1) G4 LIBY 1210 or 1551 (2) Major ENGR 1010, Intro to Engr. (2) General Education A2 ENGL 1001 (4) B5 ENGR 2060, Engineering Materials(4) F1 ART/DANC/ KPE/MUS Activity (1) G2 GS 1021 (.5) Major ENGR 1420, Engineering Graphics (2) MATH 1305, Calc II (4) Sophomore Year (51 units) General Education A3 Critical Thinking (4) B2 PSYC 1000 (5) F2 ART/DANC/ KPE/MUS Activity (1) G3 GS 1031 (.5) Major ENGR 2070, Manuf. Proc. (2) MATH 2304, Calc III (4) Fall Quarter(17 units) Winter Quarter(17 units) Spring Quarter(17 units) General Education C1 Fine Arts (4) D1 ECON 2301(4 Major ENGR 3020, Work Measurement (4) PHYS 1001 (5) Gen Educ/2nd Comp D2 Social Science (4) 2nd Comp ENGL 1002 (4) Major MATH 3331 (4) PHYS 1002 (5) Junior Year (49 units) General Education C2 Letters (4) D3 Social Science (4) Major CS 1160 (4) PHYS 1003 (5) Fall Quarter(16 units) Winter Quarter(17 units) Spring Quarter(16 units) GE/Other D4 ENGR/ECON 3140, Engr. Econ. (4) F3 ART/DANC/ KPE/MUS Activity (1) Major ENGR 2010, Circuits (3) ENGR 3601, Stat I (4) ENGR 3841, OR I (4) GE/Other C3 Humanities (4) F4 ARTDANC/ KPE/MUS Activity (1) Major ENGR 3101, Statics (4) ENGR 3602, Stat II (4) ENGR 4100, Prod. Planning (4) Senior Year (49 units) GE/Other B6 ENGR 3190, Human Fc. (4) C4 Upper Division Humanities (4) Major ENGR 4300, Quality (4) ENGR 4400, Systems Mod. (4) Fall Quarter(16 units) Winter Quarter(18 units) Spring Quarter(15 units) Gen Educ/Code Code U.S. History/ Government (4) Gen Educ/Code Code U.S. History/ Government (4) Major ENGR 4200, Simulation (4) ENGR 4280, Human Work Sys. (4) MATH/SCIENCE Elective (4) Major ENGR 4350, Reliability (3) ENGR 4430, Facil. Planning (4) ENGR 4610, Senior Dsgn. I (3) ENGR Elective (4) Major ENGR 4440, CIM Systems (4) ENGR 4603, OR II (4) ENGR 4620, Sen. Dsgn II (3) ENGR Elective (4) Figure B B.S. in Engineering, Industrial Engineering Option Roadmap for Students with no Remediation Catalog 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 20

22 B.1.3 Monitoring Process During pre-registration and registration, the student s faculty advisor checks the student s schedule. This check is performed to ensure that the student is following the prescribed curriculum. At the time of advising the faculty advisor has access to the student file that includes the record of any transfer courses or exceptions granted, and to the CMS database. Students often meet informally with the Department Chair or their advisor throughout the year to review their files and assess their progress. As mentioned above, the Department Chair checks each student s records the quarter preceding the graduation date. A meeting is scheduled with the student to discuss which courses and requirements must be taken by the student before graduation. The graduation check sheet, completed by the Department, is signed by both the chair and the student and is included in the student s file. It is then submitted to the Office of Enrollment Management for a final check. This check sheet is used to confirm that at graduation, all program requirements have been completed. B.1.4 Policies for Accepting Transfer Students/Credits Students desiring to transfer into the Engineering Department are evaluated according to CSU East Bay and the Department of Engineering transfer credit policies and practices. A student qualifies for admission as a transfer student if he/she has a grade point average of 2.0 (C) or better in all transferable units attempted (2.4 for non-residents), is in good standing at the last college or university attended, and meets any of the following standards: Lower division transfer 1. The student meets the freshman admission requirements (grade point and subject requirements) in effect for the term to which he/she is applying (see "What are the minimum admission requirements for freshmen?") Or, 2. The student was eligible for admission as a freshman at the time of high school graduation (except for the subject requirements), has been in continuous attendance at an accredited college since high school graduation, and has made up the missing subjects. Upper division transfer Upper division transfer is possible if: 1. The student has a grade point average of at least 2.0 ("C" or better) in all transferable units attempted; 2. The student is in good standing at the last college or university attended, has completed at least 30 quarter units of college coursework with a grade of "C" or better in each course. The CSU East Bay Admissions Office first evaluates the student s record. The admissions office with the help of Student Advisement Center does the determination of general education transfer courses. A form indicating the deficiencies in general education is placed in the CMS that is available to the faculty and the student. The Engineering Department and the supporting departments that offer the transferring courses 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 21

23 evaluate the courses in the student s major. For example the physics courses taken elsewhere are evaluated by the Physics Department but the actual credit will be given to the student by the Engineering Department. The Engineering Department Chair with the help of the Engineering faculty teaching the equivalent of the transferring course determines the appropriateness of a transfer credit. Special attention is given to the accreditation status of the university that courses are transferred from. The documentation regarding any transfer is kept in the student file for later use. Department uses catalog information, course syllabus, and textbook to determine the equivalency of a course. Careful attention is given to prerequisite structure of the offering institution and to an interview with the student. Lower division courses taken in California community colleges are transferred based on the articulation agreement between California universities and community colleges. These agreements are accessible through the website. No more than 131 quarter units can be transferred. B.1.5 Process to Ensure All Students Meet Program Requirements The Department of Engineering Major Check Sheet is used as a guide to make sure a student has satisfied all the requirements for graduation. A copy of this check sheet is kept in each student s academic records folder. Also the Department has developed a sample four-year program of courses and an advising sheet, which lists the prerequisite structure. The University s CMS system contains the student records of all courses taken and what remains to be done. The faculty advisors have access to this system for advising. The academic advisor uses the student file when advising. Also through the CMS, the advisor has access to an electronic copy of the student course work and transfer courses. The students are informed repeatedly during the quarter to see their advisors for approval of their course schedule for the following quarter. Table B summarizes all forms of records/guides available for ensuring that students meet all program requirements. Students are encouraged to be advised by their designated advisor. The Department requires students to submit a signed copy of their advising form before issuing permission numbers to enroll in engineering courses. This ensures that all engineering students complete the advising process before registration. Also, instructors check compliance with course pre- and corequisites at the beginning of their classes and recommend to the students that do not have the prerequisite to drop the course. The Department Chair performs a degree check in the final year of each student. Finally the office of Enrollment Management performs an independent check to assure that the students are satisfying all program requirements Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 22

24 Table B Available Records/Guides to Ensure that Students Meet Requirements. Record Type Content Location Can be Accessed by Electronic CMS and Transcripts University Computer System Faculty Department chair Paper (Academic Records File) Electronic Paper Transfer Credit Transcript Advisor Comments Major Check Sheet Major Check Sheet Advising Form Prerequisite Structure Sample Four Year Program of study Major Check Sheet Advising Form, Prerequisite List, and Suggested List of Technical Electives Engineering Department Department Web page Faculty Offices Department Office Faculty Administrative Assistant Students Faculty Administrative Assistant Faculty Faculty, Students B.1.6 Incoming Student Quality The requirements for admission to the Engineering program are the same as the requirements for the CSU East Bay in general. Upon admission, the students are required to take Entry-Level Mathematics (ELM) and English Placement Test (EPT). These tests are given to assess if students are prepared for college level Mathematics and English courses. If not, they have to register for remedial courses. Students seeking admission as freshmen are required to submit their ACT or SAT scores. An eligibility index based on the combination of the high school grade point average and scores on either the American College Test (ACT) or the SAT (Math and Critical Reading sections only) is calculated. Grade point averages (GPA) are based on grades earned in courses taken during the final three years of high school. Included in the calculation of the GPA are grades earned in all college preparatory "a-g" subject requirements and bonus points for approved honors courses (excluding physical education and military science). Up to eight quarters of honors courses taken in the last three years of high school (including up to two approved courses taken in the tenth grade) can be accepted. Each unit of "A" in an honors course will receive a total of 5 points; "B," 4 points; and "C," 3 points. Up to two 11th grade IB, AP or honors courses with 11th or 12th grade course content taken in 10th grade may also receive bonus points. Score requirements are specified in the on-line catalog at Table represents the ACT scores of incoming students over a four year period Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 23

25 Table B Incoming CSU East Bay Average SAT/ACT Scores and GPA All terms of the Avg. ACT Avg. HS Academic/College Year SAT GPA CY CY CY CY CY CY CY CY CY CY CY CY B.1.7 Assessment results with respect to criterion 1 Some questions in the alumni survey forms relate to students educational experience at CSUEB. The following data demonstrates a high degree of satisfaction with regard to advising and their educational experience. Also students overwhelmingly mention that they are very satisfied with the level of advising they receive. Table B.1.7.1, Response to questions in part II of alumni survey (Rate of answer between 1 to 5 with 1 meaning not at all and 5 meaning very much) I was satisfied with the advising received from the faculty members of the Department I was treated with dignity and respect by the faculty members of the Department # of respondents # of respondents # of respondents # of respondents Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 24

26 B.2 Program Educational Objectives This section of the self-study report provides a detailed discussion of Program Educational Objectives (PEOs), the process by which these objectives have been determined and evaluated, how the program ensures that these objectives are achieved, and the system of ongoing evaluation that leads to continuous improvement of the program, as required by EAC Criterion 2. B.2.1 Objectives and Publication Information The initial draft of program objectives was culled from IIE/CIEADH meeting discussions and publications; faculty, student, and employer perceptions of the essence of industrial engineering; faculty and employer expectations for the program s graduates; and consideration of the Department s responsibility toward fulfilling CSU East Bay s mission. In developing these objectives, the faculty have been guided by ABET s explanation of the term. One explanation of the term suggests that program objectives are statements that describe the expected accomplishments of graduates in the first few years after graduation (our emphasis with italics). Building upon this, the faculty decided that program objectives should be written to be used as descriptors of the program and provide prospective students and employers a clear idea of the program. The faculty s understanding of the characteristics of program objectives, as explained in various ABET publications and presentations, has lead them to believe that program objectives should do the following: Address external constituencies. Be sufficiently detailed. Be consistent with the mission of the institution. Be consistent with EAC/ABET criteria. Differentiate various programs within the same institution. Differentiate one program from similar programs in other institutions. Based on these understandings, the faculty prepared an initial draft of program objectives and distributed them to Industry Advisory Board members in meetings that we had student representative from the IIE Student Chapter (2002). With feedback from these groups as received in advisory board meetings, the faculty revised the objectives. The Program Educational Objectives have gone through a few iterations of assess/evaluate cycles without any substantial change. The last review of PEO s was conducted at our June 2008 IAB meeting. The changes were mostly editorial. The members of the IAB, the faculty, employers and student representatives agreed that the changes are necessary to strengthen our PEO s. Specifically they indicated that our graduates should be able to work effectively as individuals as well as on teams. It is expected that these will remain fairly constant, with modifications made only as necessitated by the reality expressed in the results of the evaluation of the program s effectiveness in achieving these objectives. The educational objectives of the Industrial Engineering program as adopted by 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 25

27 its constituencies are: The Department of Engineering provides a quality engineering education that produce graduates who: 1. Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits 2. Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development 3. Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines 4. Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards Except minor changes adapted in June 2008, these objectives have remained unchanged since adoption in These objectives are published in the online catalog at: and in program informational brochures published by the department, and on the program webpage: Copies of the informational brochure will be made available at the time of the site visit. Table B shows a mapping of program objectives with the institutional mission statements. B.2.2 Program Constituencies One of the first steps in establishing an evaluation/improvement process is to define the constituencies whose interests are paramount to the success and well-being of the program. Faculty of the Department, after extensive discussion, identified the following constituencies. Industrial Engineering Program alumni, Prospective employers of program graduates, and Faculty. Industrial Advisory Board (IAB) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 26

28 Table B Mapping of Program Objectives with Institutional Mission Statements Objectives Mission University: To provide an academically rich, multicultural learning experience that prepares all its students to realize their goals, pursue meaningful lifework, and to be socially responsible contributors to their communities, locally and globally. Graduates who successfully applying learned skills in their professional pursuits Graduates who have an enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development Graduates who can communicate effectively and work well as individual and on teams Graduates who are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards The University values learning in an academic environment that is inclusive and studentoriented. We value engagement in the Civic, Cultural and Economic life of the communities we serve locally, regionally, and globally. We value critical and creative thinking, effective communication, ethical decision making, and multi-cultural competence. We value the open exchange of ideas and viewpoints. B.2.3 Process to Determine and Evaluate Objectives Program assessment of whether objectives are being achieved is performed to ensure that the following occurs: 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 27

29 Objectives are realistic/appropriate and meet ABET guidelines. Any change in University mission is reflected in program objectives. Constituencies have input in the process. The current process for determining and evaluating program objectives is shown in Figure B Many of our Industry Advisory Board (IAB) members are either employers of our graduates or are alumni of our program. Also, selected members of IIE student chapter attend the IAB meetings as student representatives. This evaluation process (steps 2 through 4) is formally repeated on a schedule as described below: Faculty Developed Initial Set of Program Objectives IAB Alumni Survey Employer Survey Faculty Evaluate IAB and faculty deliberate any modifications Faculty approves and implements revisions Figure B2.3.1 Program Objectives Development-Evaluation Process. The IAB meets each fall and spring quarter. Periodically, ABET assessment/evaluation reports are presented (minutes of meetings are in the appendix). As needed, IAB formally approves any change in the program educational objectives or reaffirms to 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 28

30 continue with the current PEOs. Each alternate year, alumni survey forms are mailed by the Department to more recent graduates of the program. We have reproduced electronic copies of alumni and employer surveys that are posted on our website and can be completed and submitted electronically. To encourage alumni and employers to complete and return surveys we contact them either by phone or and make special requests and provide them with a small token of appreciation for completing their surveys. Every other year, the employer survey form is mailed to supervisors of our more recent alumni. We have had low response rate from the employers. We have initiated new procedures to increase the response rate. We are asking our alumni to directly send a request to their supervisors to complete the survey. Also the Department Chair contacts local employers and conducts in person or phone interviews with as many as possible. B.2.4 Involvement of Constituencies The five identified program constituents have been, are, and will remain, involved in the process of program objectives development, evaluation, assessment, and revision. The process for obtaining inputs from the constituencies for formulation and revision of the program educational objectives consisted of the following: faculty meetings, Industry Advisory Board meetings, Alumni Surveys and Employer Surveys. B IAB, Alumni and Employers The Industrial Engineering Industry Advisory Board (IAB) consists of mid- to upper-level executives from major industrial and service organizations in the Bay Area. A number of IAB members are graduates of our IE program. Also student representatives participate in the IAB meetings. The IAB meets formally twice a year (in Fall and Spring quarters) to deliberate on issues directly affecting the program and its curricula. Program graduates and their employers are represented in the same process in three ways: IAB meetings, Alumni Survey, and Employer Survey. The alumni and employer surveys have recently been revised to provide direct feedback about each program objective and outcomes (copies provided in the appendices). Table B lists the current membership of the IAB Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 29

31 Table B Industry Advisory Board Members Engineering Department 2008 Industrial Advisory Board Members First Name Last Name Company Bruno Alvarez (Alumni) CISCO Stephanie Ceguerra-Buquis (Alumni) Leap Frog Company Neal Ely Las Positas College Peter Hladun (Alumni) Artisan Confections Giselle Icabalzeta (Alumni) Peterson Power Marc Komrosky ISE Unlimited Aris Krimetz Wente Vineyards Karen Maxwell NUMMI Rajan Mutialu (Alumni) OSHA Mark Oty UPS Ethan Plotkin GD California John Sabinorio UPS Mehria Saffi (Alumni) UPS Adam Tran (Alumni) Lockeed Martin Jeff Wold (Alumni) Air Liquide B Faculty Faculty members are directly involved on a day-to-day basis with all aspects of curriculum development and delivery. They are also active participants in our advisory board meetings where program appropriateness and assessment of program educational objectives is conducted. Every other year in one of our faculty meetings we discuss the need for any modifications to our educational objectives based on evaluation of assessment data. If any change is warranted we discuss the matter in our next IAB meeting Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 30

32 B.2.5 Description of the PEOs Assessment Process Since 2003, we have been continuously involved in assessment of educational objectives and outcomes. We have made some minor refinements into the assessment process since then. The process as it stands is that each fall the Department chair summarizes the assessment data from the previous year. The faculty then evaluates the data and if needed suggests program modification or occasionally the need to update the PEOs. The evaluation of the assessment data will then be presented at the next IAB meeting, where through extensive deliberations between faculty and IAB members, any modifications to program or PEOs are approved. The Department then implements the curriculum modifications. B.2.6 Educational Objectives Assessment Process and Tools The primary inputs for ensuring that Program Educational Objectives (PEOs) will be achieved are the curriculum and the faculty. The curriculum has been designed with adequate emphasis on general education, communications, mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals, required technical courses, and technical elective courses. The technical courses provide the foundation of discipline knowledge for graduates to be prepared for employment, to pursue lifelong learning, and to be successful in their professional pursuits. In addition, various courses emphasize oral and written communication, design through solving open-ended problems, and teamwork. Many students participate in the cooperative education (co-op) or internship programs in local industries, giving them valuable engineering experience. In addition, students are strongly encouraged to be active in professional societies and participate in the student chapter of IIE. Faculty members, through their teaching and scholarly activities, directly impact the preparation of program graduates to meet the educational objectives. All faculty members have terminal degrees in their areas of specialization and many have other professional certifications and licenses. The primary assessment tools for assessing program objectives are the Alumni Survey, Employer Survey, Profile of Alumni and IAB meetings. Our IAB includes a number of members that are alumni or employers of our graduates Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 31

33 Objective Tool Alumni Survey Employer Survey IAB Meetings Profile of Alumni Table B Mapping Assessment tools to Educational Objectives Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards The direct method for evaluating whether the objectives of the program are being achieved is to obtain the employment history of program alumni to find out the extent to which the program prepared them to be successful in their chosen careers. This information has been obtained indirectly, through the Alumni Survey, direct contact with the alumni, alumni reconnect meetings and the Employer Survey, on a continuing basis. Alumni Survey In our most recent IAB meeting (June 2008) we discussed the analysis of survey data and discussed our program educational objectives and the appropriateness of our assessment tools. As a result of these discussions, although our current Alumni Survey asks about achieving program objectives, we modified the question such that it now has the question for each objective separately. To assess achievement of educational objectives through Alumni Survey in addition to the analysis of the response to the specific question about achievement of PEOs, we developed the following relationship table between the PEO s and other questions in the survey. Table B Mapping Alumni Survey questions to program educational objectives. Objective Survey Question Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development How long have you held an engineering position: Educational degrees received or expected: Have you taken the fundamentals of engineering Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 32

34 exam? How well did your education prepare you for the test? Indicate the professional societies you are a member of: Do you think you have achieved the objectives set out by the engineering program at CSU East Bay Use of knowledge in math and basic science Use of knowledge in engineering science Model and design system and components Communicate effectively in both written and oral formats Communicate ideas and results in drawing and graphics expressions Integrate knowledge and information for engineering problem solving Work effectively in international/global environment Apply engineering professionalism and ethical standards appropriately Obtain needed knowledge and self learn Build teams and facilitate team processes Be aware of socio-economic environment in which engineering is practiced Use appropriate computer hardware and software Collect and analyze data properly We then analyzed the survey data and developed averages for questions with rating responses and summery statistics for others to demonstrate the degree our alumni believe that our program has achieved its educational objectives. The analysis is provided in section B.2.7. Employer Survey As a result of our recent discussions (June 2008) in our IAB meeting and faculty consensus, we modified the Employer Survey form to include direct questions on achievement of each program objective. Our previous survey included several questions that provided the information needed to assess the degree of achievement of our educational objectives. To acquire quantitative data 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 33

35 from the survey responses, we developed the following table linking responses to survey questions to achievement of the program educational objectives. The revised and current survey forms are included in the appendix. Table B Mapping employer survey questions to program educational objectives Objective Survey Question Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards Use of math and basic science in engineering design Design and conduct scientific experiments Analyze and interpret data Modeling and design of systems, components and processes Understand professional ethics Work in multidisciplinary teams Communicate effectively Recognize the need for engaging lifelong learning Overall assessment of CS East Bay engineering graduates Does it appear that CSU East Bay graduates are well prepared for the job? We then analyzed the survey data and developed averages for questions with rating responses and summery statistics for others to demonstrate the degree the employers believe that our program has achieved its educational objectives. The analysis is provided in section B.2.7. Results of this analysis are processed by the faculty and then presented to the IAB who are then involved in evaluation of the outcomes and objectives and program improvements to ensure the achievement of the educational objectives Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 34

36 IAB Meetings We use the IAB meetings as a major tool for the assessment of our program educational objectives. All the mentioned program constituencies are part of the IAB. Therefore it provides a perfect forum for assessment of program educational objectives. Lengthy discussions on program improvements and appropriateness of the educational objectives which, is reflected in the minutes of the meetings, are periodically conducted. In section B.2.7 we provide excerpts of the IAB meeting minutes pertaining to assessment of educational objectives. Alumni Profile Through alumni surveys, alumni reconnect events, and phone contact with the alumni we have a complete profile of more than 50% of our alumni. This data includes information such as job title, company information, years at the job and graduate school attendance. We have been relatively successful in keeping in touch with our alumni. We have created a database that includes the name and current addresses of majority of our alumni. To analyze the achievement of objectives we looked at statistics such as % of alumni that are employed as engineers, attending graduate school, are members of professional organizations, have been involved in continuing education, or have been promoted to higher positions. We also related these statistics to the achievement of PEOs as depicted in Table B Table B Relationship between PEOs and Alumni Profile Objective Percentage of Alumni who Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards employed as engineers members in professional societies attending graduate schools involved in continuing education have been promoted to higher positions The result of this data analysis is presented in section B Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 35

37 B.2.7 Results of Program Educational Objectives Achievement Evaluation Alumni Survey The Alumni Survey instrument has been in use since The survey has been sent to all engineering graduates with current contact information. The Department is actively engaging our alumni. In 2008 we organized an alumni reconnect event where we invited our alumni to come to campus and reconnect and meet with current students. Also we used this event to distribute alumni and employer survey forms, to update our alumni profile and to emphasize the importance of their feedback to the Department. We plan to repeat this event on a yearly basis. The following tables represent the summery of ratings provided by our alumni. The data has been gathered every year to alternating alumni such that each alumnus receives the survey every other year. Table B Alumni responses to questions in Part 1 of the survey Survey Year & Respondents Employer: STI Fall GD California Spring Smith International Spring Flextronics UPS Clarity Medical Sys UPS NCPI/Mission Clay Kibblewhite Precision Machining MACTEC City of Milpitas Consolidated Engr Labs Social Security Administration Smith International Anheuser-Busch UPS Air Products & Chemicals BN-Invest Group Cal OSHA OVISO Mfg UPS Optisolar Plastikon Optisolar IBASE UPS Sonasoft Corp Lockheed Martin Hantel Technologies UPS STI Omron Job title Mfg Scheduler/Planner IE Mgmt Trainee Engr Asst Task Leader Fleet Quality Engr Quality Engr Quality Engr Production Supervisor Mfg Engr IE Supervisor Feeder IE Sup Maintenance Superintendent Cisco Systems Mfg Project Engr Engr Rep IE Mfg Engr IE 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 36

38 Survey Year & Respondents Maintenance Tech II Staff Engr Service Rep Operations Engr Fall Spring Executive Officer Associate Safety Engr Mfg Engr IE Package Planner Spring Sales Application Engr IE Mgmt Trainee Sales Manager Quality Engr Load Planner IE Mfg Process Engr Length of time holding engineering position: Educational degrees received or expected: Fundamentals of engineering exam taken? If yes, how well did your education prepare you for the test? Professional Engineering license? Professional societies: 3.5 months 4 months 3 months 3 years 2 years 2 years BS IE BS IE BS IE BS IE, MBA BS IE BS IE, MS Civil BS IE BS IE, MS ISE IIE IIE American 1.5 years 4 months 9 months 3 months BS IE BS IE, MS ISE BS IE BS IE IIE American Society of Quality 2.5 years 6 years 4 years 7 years 3 years 3 years BS IE BS IE BS IE, MBA BS IE BS IE BS IE, MPH BS IE BS IE, MBA IIE, ASQ, SME IIE, Informs IIE Intern 1.5 years 6 months 7 months 1 year 1 year 1.5 years 10 months 2 years 3 years 3 weeks BS IE, MBA BS IE BS IE BS IE BS IE, MS EM BS IE BS IE BS IE, BS CS BS IE, MS EM BS IE BS IE BS IE, MS ISE Yes Yes Yes Yes Well Very well Well Very well IIE SWE, NSBE 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 37

39 Survey Year & Respondents Were objectives set out by the engineering program at CSUEB achieved? Welding Society ASME, ASCE Fall IIE American Society of Quality Spring Yes Yes Yes Yes IIE Spring Table B Response to the remaining part I alumni survey questions Question for the Respondents: How would you rate your ability in the following areas? (Scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is extremely poor and 5 is extremely well) Table B.2.7.3, Response to part II alumni survey questions Rate of answer between 1 to 5 with 1 meaning not at all and 5 meaning very much We then calculate the average rating for question pertaining to each objective as given in the following table to demonstrate the achievement of program educational objectives Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 38

40 Table B Cumulative average response of alumni to questions pertaining to each educational objective (Scale of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning not achieved and 5 meaning high achievement) Objective rating Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards Achievement of Objectives, Alumni Survey (1 do not agree, 5 strongly agree) Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Figure B Achievement of Objectives, Alumni Survey As the data in Tables B , B and Figure B.2.7.1, demonstrate our Alumni strongly believe that our program is achieving its program educational objectives. We are monitoring this data for continuous program improvement and root cause analysis of any deviation from the achievement of PEOs. Employer Survey The survey consists of three sections. The first gathers general information on the employer. In the second section general questions related to program outcome and educational objectives are asked. In section III of the survey we ask the employers to comment on various attributes of our graduates to ascertain the achievement of program educational objectives. The existing and new survey forms are included in the Appendix I Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 39

41 The Employer Survey instrument was sent to companies who have one or more of our Alumni working for them. To reach more employers we request that the Alumni take the survey to their supervisor. In addition, the Department Chair has been in contact with some of the employers and has completed the survey with them over the phone or through face to face meetings. With all this effort we still feel that we are not receiving enough data. We have created an electronic version of the survey that can be completed and submitted through our website. Some employers are current members of our advisory board where we gather data from them on the achievement of our program educational objectives. Table represents the average response of the employers to questions pertaining to the achievement of each educational objective as identified in the mapping in Table B in previous section. We have been pleased with the employer assessment of our alumni and the program as a whole. A good indicator of satisfaction of employers with our graduates is that following their first hiring they keep returning for more graduates from our program. An example is UPS in Oakland/San Francisco Bay Area where they have hired more and more of our graduates over the years Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 40

42 Table B Employer response to survey questions Scale of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning strongly disagree and 5 meaning strongly agree respond of the following statements T Question Use of mathematics and basic sciences in engineering design Design and conduct scientific experiments Analyze and interpret data Modeling and design of systems, components or processes Understand professional responsibility Understand professional ethics Work in multidisciplinary teams Communicate effectively Recognize the need for and ability to engage in life-long learning Employer Survey Form Part III Number of Respondents Number of Respondents How do CSUEB engineering graduates compare with other engineers working for you? Number of Respondents 2004 Survey 8 Respondents Favorably CSUEB IE engineering graduates are comparable in skills w/graduates from Cal Poly SLO and Cal Berkeley. Not as well prepared in upper level math, but excelling in logistics and organization. Comparable Very well Well 2005 Survey 3 Respondents Very well This is the only one in quality engineering, works well 2007 Survey 1 Respondents Compare well 2008 Survey 2 Respondents Comparable with SLO and Fresno 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 41

43 Very well 2. Does it appear that CSUEB engineering graduates are well prepared for the job? 2004 Survey 8 Respondents 8 Yes Engineer who works in my group was already in job and took engineering degree as part of his continuing education. It has certainly enhanced his performance Survey 3 Respondents 3 Yes 2006 Survey Respondents 2007 Survey 1 Respondents Yes 2008 Survey 2 Respondents Yes, for the most part Yes Yes As prepared as can be for QE 3. What are the strengths of CSUEB engineering graduates? 2004 Survey 8 Respondents Good exposure to IE field at undergraduate level Enthusiastic and willingness to learn Computer/software/technical skills 2005 Survey 3 Respondents Project management Practical problem solving skills Mathematics, statistics 2007 Survey 1 Respondents Simulation, scientific theory, computer skills 2008 Survey 2 Respondents Math, computer programming, process analysis High motivation, good communication, willing to learn, time management. 4. What are the weaknesses of CSUEB engineering graduates? 2004 Survey 8 Respondents Limited exposure to data base creation (MS Access) Prepare the graduates for the interview process as well as how to present oneself professionally (attire, appearance, etc) Understanding of real life work situations Math Thermodynamics Lack of experience 2005 Survey 3 Respondents No Responses 2007 Survey 1 Respondents Oral and written communication 2008 Survey 2 Respondents MS Access, Database design, data mining Experience, but graduate is learning fast 5. What suggestions do you have for us to improve the quality of our graduates? 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 42

44 2004 Survey 8 Respondents Offer class in data mining, data base creation, modification Stress real life scenarios Math skills More physics 2005 Survey 3 Respondents More exposure to QE 2007 Survey 1 Respondents Supplementary electives which will improve writing & speaking skills 2008 Survey 2 Respondents Real world experience, interships 6. Have CSUEB engineering graduates upheld professional and ethical standards? 2004 Survey 8 Yes 8 Respondents 2005 Survey 3 Yes 3 Respondents 2007 Survey 1 Respondents High standards 2008 Survey Absolutely 2 Respondents Yes 7. Given the opportunity would you hire additional CSUEB engineering graduates? 2004 Survey 8 yes 8 Respondents 2005 Survey 3 Respondents 3 Yes 2007 Survey 1 Respondents Yes 2008 Survey 2 Yes 2 Respondents 8. Would you like to become active in the Department of Engineering Industrial Advisory Board? 2004 Survey 3 Yes, 5 No 8 Respondents 2005 Survey 3 Respondents No Reponses 2007 Survey 1 Respondents No 2008 Survey No 2 Respondents No Response 9. Would you be willing to provide internship or co-op opportunities for our students? 2004 Survey 6 Yes, 2 No 8 Respondents 2005 Survey 3 Yes 3 Respondents 2007 Survey 1 Respondents Yes 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 43

45 2008 Survey 2 Respondents 2 Yes 10. Please provide additional Comments/Suggestions Survey 8 Respondents Have screened a prospective employee, Peter Hladun, to work on a Senior Project. Look forward to teaming him up with current CSUEB IE Intern Rock Cearley. I am not certain if I can answer questions 3 and 4 accurately since the individual who works in my group pursued degree program while still working (part time). He has certainly gained and applied knowledge of industrial engineering in his day-to-day job. Noticeable contributions being in continuous improvement initiatives of our organization Survey 3 Respondents No Responses 2007 Survey 1 Respondents Always can count on CSUEB quality IE graduates 2008 Survey 2 Respondents Keep doing what you are doing Table B Cumulative ratings of the achievement of program educational objectives. Objective rating Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards Achivement of objectives, employer survey (1 not agree, 5 strongly agree) Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective Figure B Achievement of Objectives, Employer Survey 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 44

46 The data in table B and corresponding Figure B indicate that employers perceive that our program achieves its educational objectives. Also additional comments of the employers summarized in Table B are another indication of satisfaction of employers with our graduates. Industry Advisory Board Meeting Since 2001 we have regularly conducted our advisory board meetings twice a year, typically in June and December. Since 2007 we moved the December meeting to January to accommodate some concerns raised by board members on how difficult it is for them to meet in December. We canceled the June 07 meeting in preparation for the move to our new facility in VBT building. Our June meetings are typically held on the day of senior design final presentations to give the members of our advisory board the chance to attend student presentations and evaluate student projects. The IAB meetings generally start with the Department Chair s presentation on the state of the Department and current curricular issues and modifications. Also during chair s presentation a summary of analysis of the new assessment data is given. Then the advisory board members discuss the presented information and make suggestions on how to improve the program and how to align the curriculum with current trends in industry. They also discuss the knowledge they desire in new IE hires. Periodically (every other year) the program educational objectives are discussed to assess their appropriateness and their achievements. The last evaluation of program educational objectives was conducted in June of 2008 where some minor modification to the program educational objectives was suggested. In the following paragraphs a summary of minutes of IAB meetings pertaining to assessment of program educational objectives, since our last accreditation visit, is given. December 2003 In this meeting the newly developed alumni survey and employer survey forms were discussed and suggestions were made. Also discussions of how these tools will be used to assess program educational objectives were conducted. We also discussed the process of closing the loop on assessment. June 2004 The hiring of a new engineering faculty, Dr. F. Ganjeizadeh was announced. This hiring was made in response to ABET visiting team recommendation. December 2004 This meeting to large extent, was devoted to the program assessment process. The discussion included their concern of how we are going to assess the objective are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards. It was suggested that employer survey can be used as a tool to assess the achievement of this objective. Also in this meeting the development of a new assessment tool, faculty self assessment of courses, to evaluate achievement of program outcomes was discussed. Also other assessment tools such as alumni survey and employer 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 45

47 survey results were discussed. The board members did not feel the need for making any modifications to program educational objectives. June 2005 In this meeting, besides a discussion of program curricular modifications in response to assessment data a request was made to members who employ our graduates to present their assessment of how our graduates perform with respect to program educational objectives. They mentioned that the performance of our graduates is comparable with other engineers graduated from other programs in the Bay Area. They also mentioned that our students are exceeding others in areas related to professionalism, analytical skills and team skills. They mentioned that we need to strengthen data mining capabilities of our graduates. We have since added data base design to some courses in the program. December 2005 In this meeting discussion was concentrated on new program developments June 2006 This meeting was concentrated on the promotion of new MS in engineering management and BS in computer engineering. January 2007 A major portion of this meeting was spent on analysis of assessment data and program modifications to improve the program. The results of the faculty self assessment of courses and changes made to the program as a result was discussed. Changes to laboratories to improve low rating indicated in survey responses were suggested. We also discussed the current trends in IE and the shift of jobs to service sector. Suggestions were made of how to modify the program to prepare graduates for service sector. No modification to program educational objectives was suggested. January 2008 Again program assessment was a major topic in this meeting. We discussed the department activities in preparation for 2009 accreditation visit. We requested the Alumni present at the meeting to describe their professional successes and evaluate if they believe that the program is achieving its stated program educational objectives. Also in this meeting the board suggested yearly alumni reconnect event to acquire more input on how the program achieves its educational objectives. The first alumni reconnect meeting was held in March June 2008 In this meeting a lengthy discussion of the achievement and appropriateness of program educational objectives was held. The following modifications to objectives were discussed and were approved. The Department of Engineering provides a quality engineering education that produce graduates who: Exhibit evidence of successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 46

48 Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards Besides some editorial changes the major modification was the addition of as individuals or to the third objective. The members felt that it is as important for engineers to work well as individuals as it is to work on teams. A discussion of activities related to 2009 ABET visit was conducted. The board members reiterated their commitment to the program and their willingness to participate in activities related to assessment and ABET team visit. Alumni Profile A direct method for assessment and evaluation of program educational objective is the analysis of the profile of our Alumni. As of the preparation of this document we have 65 Alumni. Since 2003 we have developed a very active approach to reach out to our Alumni. We are regularly in touch with them through and phone conversations. We periodically ask them to update their contact information. We have started organizing yearly alumni reconnect event since 2008, so our alumni have a chance to meet and also for them to meet current students and discuss their success. Through the alumni survey, employer survey and alumni reconnect we have current information on more that 50% of our alumni. The following table is a summary of information on our alumni. Table B Profile of Alumni Alumni # Grad Date Current Employer Job Description 1 6/9/2001 City of Milpitas Engineer 2 12/14/2001 IE Supervisor; UPS senior supervisor 3 6/13/2002 Project Engineer; Peterson Power Systems Project Manager 4 6/13/2002 USSPASCO, Metal Works, MBA Senior engineer 5 6/13/2002 Engineering Rep; NCPI/Mission Clay Engineer 6 6/15/2002 Social Security Administration Systems engineer 7 3/21/2003 MACTEC, MBA Engineer 8 3/21/2003 Air Liquide Senior Engineer 9 6/14/2003 CISCO Systems Systems Engineer 10 6/14/2003 Manufacturing Process Engineer; STI Omron Manufacturing Engineer 11 9/5/2003 Lawrence Livermore Lab Engineer 12 12/12/2003 Leap Frog Company Engineer 13 12/12/2003 Quality Manager; PAX/Metrix Quality Engineer 14 3/19/2004 OVISO Mfg Manufacturing Engineer 15 9/3/2004 UPS IE supervisor 16 6/11/2005 IE; VF Corporation, MBA student IE load planner Graduate 17 6/11/2005 IE Load Planner; UPS school 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 47

49 18 6/11/2005 Ph.D. Student 19 9/2/2005 IE; Artisans Confections, subsidiary of Hershey Industrial Engineer, Industrial Engineer, 20 9/2/2005 IE Package Planner; UPS IE Planner 21 12/11/2005 Executive Officer, Public & Investors Relations Dept; BN- INVEST GROUP Manager 22 6/10/2006 UPS Industrial Engineer, 23 6/10/2006 IronPort Engineer 24 6/10/2006 Quality Engineer; Lockeed Martin, E.M. Student Quality Engineer 25 9/1/2006 Sales Manager; Sonasoft Corporation Technical Sales Manager 26 9/1/2006 IE Management Trainee; UPS Management trainee 27 9/1/2006 IBASE Technology Engineer private 28 12/15/2006 Owner/Manager; Quik Stop business 29 12/15/2006 Systems Project Engineer; Flextronics Engineer 30 12/17/2006 US Navy Engineer 31 6/27/2007 IE; Optisolar, E.M. Student Industrial Engineer, 32 7/5/2007 IE; Optisolar Industrial Engineer, 33 8/7/2007 ERI Industrial Engineer, 34 9/24/2007 Manufacturing Engineer; Plastikon Industries Manufacturing engineer 35 10/10/2007 UPS Industrial Engineer, 36 10/29/2007 Sales Manager; Wah Tian Environmental Friendly Technical Sales Manager 37 1/4/2008 ERI Industrial Engineer, By analyzing this data we can make the following conclusions (Table B.2.7.8): Table B analysis of alumni profile and relation with PEO s Percentage employed as engineers 98%, one is full time graduate student (objective 1) attending graduate schools 7 out of 35 (objective 2) members of professional societies 80% members of IIE (Objective 2) involved in continuing education 7 in graduate schools and majority (Objective 2) participated in training courses have been promoted to higher management 10 out of 37 positions, (Objective 1,3, 4) The data indicates high levels of professional achievement for our alumni given the relatively short period since graduation. We have had very positive feedback from the employers regarding our graduates. Several of our graduates have been promoted to management positions in their 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 48

50 organization. With regard to professionalism and ethics, we have continuously received positive feedback from those members of our advisory board who employ our graduates. We will continuously monitor the career of our alumni to assess how our program achieves its educational objectives. In section B.4 we will discuss how these assessment methods have been used to close the loop between assessment and program improvement. B.2.8 Closing the Assessment Loop on PEOs The Alumni and Employers Survey are administered every other year, and IAB meets twice a year. Both Alumni Survey and Employer Survey can be submitted on-line at the Department website. The survey forms have recently been modified and include direct question on the achievement of individual program educational objectives. Based on the analysis of assessment data by the program constituencies the following modifications to curriculum and educational objectives have been implemented: Laboratories have been upgraded and also we have eliminated the use of traditional machine tools and moved towards CAD/CAM approach in manufacturing. Curriculum has been modified to reflect the shifting of job opportunities to service industry. Data mining tools have been added to the curriculum to better prepare students for their professional careers. Program educational objective have been modified to reflect the will of program constituents. The analysis of assessment data reflects a positive trend in the program s ability to achieve its educational objectives. The PEO assessment and evaluation has become systemic and integrated into our assessment process. B.3 Program Outcomes and Assessment This section of the report describes the assessment process, documented data, and evidence that results are being applied to further the development and improvement of all outcomes important to the mission of the institution and objectives of the program, as required by Criterion 3. To ensure the achievement of program outcomes, they are observed as attributes of program graduates. The desired outcomes were initially developed by the faculty with follow-up input from the IAB and student representatives. These outcomes have since been replaced by a new set that essentially replicates Outcomes (a) through (k) of Criterion 3 of ABET. This change brings the program s outcomes in a direct one-to-one relationship with those of ABET and makes it easier to measure the accomplishments of the two without duplicating efforts. In developing program outcomes, the following explanation of the term provided by ABET has provided guidance: Outcomes are statements that describe what students are expected to know and are able to do by the time of graduation. The program outcomes must embrace the (a) through (k) requirements of Criterion 3 (our emphasis with italics). After the level of achievement of the outcomes has been assessed, any deficiencies are remedied by revision of the curriculum or course contents, development/reorganization of laboratory or other facilities, and reallocation of financial resources. The tools used for assessment and their efficacy in assessing the outcomes are discussed in the next section Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 49

51 The main instrument by which the program can ensure the achievement of desired outcomes is the curriculum. Appropriate faculty, facilities, and financial resources are the tools required to ensure effective impartation of knowledge, skills, and experience as intended in the curriculum. As detailed in a previous section of this self-study report, the curriculum aims to equip students with a broad general education, requisite mathematics, science and engineering fundamentals and core industrial engineering principles and skills. In addition it provides an opportunity for specialization or added breadth through technical electives. As detailed in the following sections, the requisite faculty, facilities, financial resources and courses to ensure effective implementation of the curriculum have been structured. In addition, as shown in course descriptions, clear objectives have been developed for each of the courses such that achievement of these objectives should enable graduates to achieve program outcomes. Inclusion of industrybased projects and plant tours in courses and industry-based capstone projects in the curriculum are the means by which the Metropolitan Advantage of CSUEB is used to provide students with a better appreciation for real-world engineering. An informal indication of the success of the curriculum is reflected in the success and desirability of our students and graduates. We receive more requests for student interns from industry than we can accommodate. Our graduates on the average receive more than one job offer. Also several of our students are in reputable graduate programs or have completed their graduate degrees. B.3.1 Program Outcomes Following is the list of the current B.S.I.E. program outcomes selected as attributes that its graduates will attain at the time of graduation: a) Ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. b) Ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data. c) Ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability. d) Ability to function on multidisciplinary teams. e) Ability to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems. f) Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility. g) Ability to communicate effectively. h) Broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context. i) Recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in, life-long learning. j) Knowledge of contemporary issues. k) Ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice. These are the same Outcomes (a) through (k) of Criterion Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 50

52 B Process for Input/Evaluation/Revision of Program Outcomes Figure B shows a flow diagram of the process for input, evaluation, and assessment of program outcomes Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 51

53 This process is repeated every year Program Outcomes - Ability to apply knowledge in math, science, and engineering - Ability to design and conduct experiments - Ability to design system, component, or process - Ability to function in teams - Ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems - Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility - Ability to communicate - Ability to secure a broad education - Ability to engage in life-long learning - Knowledge of contemporary issues - Ability to use techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools Program Tools used to Achieve Outcomes - IE Curriculum with core area courses, breadth of topics covered, and technical electives for depth of understanding - Two industry-based capstone projects - Designated courses with open-ended, industry-based projects and plant tours - General education component - Laboratory experience - Competent faculty - Opportunities to be involved in professional societies - Opportunity to participate in internship and co-op experience Approved changes are implemented Assessment Tools - Course prerequisite quizzes in selected courses (each quarter) - Course portfolio (each quarter) - Faculty self assessment of courses (each quarter) - Senior Exit Survey (each quarter) - Senior project evaluation by industry sponsors and Industry Advisory Board (each year) - Co-op evaluation by students and supervisors (as available) - Program evaluation by Advisory Board (every year) Curriculum Committee analyzes assessment data and suggests curricular resource or other changes necessary. Approved changes by the faculty are discussed in the IAB meeting and approved. The approved changes are implemented. Figure B Process for Input, Evaluation, and Revision of Program Outcomes 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 52

54

55 B.3.2 Relation of Outcomes to Program Objectives Table B shows how the program outcomes map to program objectives and IE Program criteria. Table B Mapping of Program Outcomes to Program Objectives and IE Program Criteria Program Objectives IE Program Criteria Program Outcomes Successfully apply their learned skills Enthusiasm for continuous learning Work well as an individual and on teams Recognized as qualified engineer with high ethics 8a. Design, develop, implement, and improve integrated systems 8b. Receive instruction in the use of analytical, computational, & experimental tools a) Ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. b) Ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data. c) Ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability. d) Ability to function on multidisciplinary teams. e) Ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems. f) Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility. g) Ability to communicate effectively. h) Broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context. i) Recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in, life-long learning Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 54

56 j) Knowledge of contemporary issues. k) Ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice. B.3.3 Program Input to Achieve Outcomes The following is a list of inputs that the program uses to enable the students to achieve program outcomes. The curriculum will have the following: Courses that teach the core areas of industrial engineering. Industry-based capstone projects (ENGR 4610 and 4620) that emphasize teaming, oral/written communication skills, and professional/ethical considerations. Breadth of IE topic coverage in both required and elective courses to provide a broad knowledge base for its graduates as well as meet special program requirements (Criterion 8). Technical elective courses to allow opportunities for increasing student s depth or breadth of knowledge. A general education component including courses in humanities and social/ behavioral sciences. The Department will do the following: Develop and maintain laboratories necessary to allow appropriate laboratory experiences to be used in selected courses to ensure hands-on experience. Ensure that faculty will have appropriate academic credentials and professional experience in topics they teach and will encourage them to maintain currency through involvement in research. Encourage students to become involved in professional societies and participate in co-op and internship experiences. Table B shows how these inputs and curriculum are expected to affect the program and Criterion 3 outcomes Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 55

57 Table B Mapping Program Inputs and Curriculum to Program and Criterion 3 Outcomes Program and Criterion 3 Outcomes (a) Apply math/science engineering (b) Design/conduct experiments (c) Design system/ component/process (d) Function on multidisciplinary (e) Solve engineering problems (f) Understand professional/ ethical responsibility (g) Communicate (h) Understand global/ societal (i) Recognize life-long learning (j) Know contemporary issues (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools IE Program Criteria PROGRAM INPUTS Core Courses Capstone Design Industry-Based Projects General Education Courses Laboratories Faculty Professional Societies/Co-op Courses in the Curriculum General Education Mathematics Natural Sciences Engineering Core ENGR 1011 Engr. an Intro. ENGR 2010 Electric Circuits ENGR 2060 Material Sceince ENGR 3101 Statics and Dyns. Program Required Courses CS 1160 Intro. to CS & Prog. ECON 2301 Microeconomics ENGR 1420 Engr. Graphics ENGR 2070 Fund. Of Manuf. ENGR 3020 Wk. Dsgn., Meas. ENGR 3140 Engr. Economy ENGR 3190 Human Factors ENGR 3601 Stat. for CS/Engr. I ENGR 3602 Stat. for CS/Engr. II ENGR 3841 Operations Res. ENGR 4100 Prod. Planning ENGR 4200 Simulations ENGR 4280 Design and Mgmt. Human Work Systems ENGR 4300 Quality Engr. ENGR 4350 Reliability Engr. ENGR 4400 Manufacturing Systems Engineering 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 56

58 Program and Criterion 3 Outcomes (a) Apply math/science engineering (b) Design/conduct experiments (c) Design system/ component/process (d) Function on multidisciplinary (e) Solve engineering problems (f) Understand professional/ ethical responsibility ENGR 4430 Facilities Plan. ENGR 4440 CIM ENGR 4603 Operations Res II ENGR 4610, 4620, Senior Design I, II (g) Communicate (h) Understand global/ societal (i) Recognize life-long learning (j) Know contemporary issues (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools IE Program Criteria B Curriculum The Bachelor of Science in the Industrial Engineering Option requires the completion of 204 quarter hours of course work. Students may select 12 hours of technical electives including 4 hours of math or basic science elective and 8 hours of other electives to emphasis their interest in industrial engineering, business, math/computer science or statistics. Specific requirements for the IE Program are given in Table B Table B IE Curriculum Topical Area Course Engr. Science Engr. Design Credit Hours General Education (includes 20 units of required courses) 72 Communication in English 12 Natural Sciences and 20 Mathematics(includes, Chem 1101, Math 1304, Engr 2060, Engr 3190) Humanities and Fine arts and Letters 16 Social Sciences (includes Engr 3140) 16 Performing Arts and Activities 4 G.E. Electives 4 U.S. and California History (can be tested out) 8 University Writing Skills Requirement 4 Mathematics/Statistics 28 Math 1304 Calculus I 4 Math 1305 Calculus II 4 Math 2304 Calculus III 4 Math 2101 Linear Algebra 4 Stat/Engr 3601 Statistics for CS and 4 Engineers I Stat/Engr 3602 Statistics for CS and 4 Engineers II 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 57

59 Topical Area Course Engr. Science Engr. Design Credit Hours Math/Basic Science Elective 4 Natural Sciences 25 Phys 1001 Physics I 5 Phys 1002 Physics II 5 Phys 1003 Physics III 5 Chem Basic Chemistry 5 Psyc 1005 Psychology 5 Engineering Core 14 Engr 1011 Engineering an Introduction 3 Engr 2010 Electric Circuits Theory 3 Engr 3101 Statics and Dynamics 4 Engr 2060 Material Science 4 Program Required Courses 65 CS 1160 Introduction to Computer Sci. 4 Econ 2301 Principles of Microeconomics 4 Engr 1420 Engineering Graphics 2 Engr 2070 Fundamental of Manuf. 2 Engr 3020 Work Design & Measurement 4 Engr 3140 Engineering Economy 4 Engr 3190 Human Factors 4 Engr 3841 Operations Research I 4 Engr 4100 Production Planning &Control 4 Engr 4200 Simulation 4 Engr 4280 Design and Management of Human Work Systems 4 Engr 4300 Quality Engineering 4 Engr 4350 Reliability Engineering 3 Engr 4400 Manufacturing Systems Engineering 4 Engr 4430 Facilities Planning and Design 4 Engr 4603 Operations Research II 4 Engr 4610 Senior Design I 3 Engr 4620 Senior Design II 3 Other Technical Electives 8 The first two years of the curriculum focuses on developing basic communication skills as well as competencies in mathematics, basic sciences, and some engineering sciences. Several engineering courses are taken in the first two years. Students are advised to take CS 1160 Introduction to Computer Science, ENGR 1011 Engineering an Introduction, ENGR 1420 Engineering graphics, ENGR 2060 Material Science, and ENGR 2070 Fundamentals of Manufacturing, as soon as they have completed the appropriate prerequisites Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 58

60 The technical elective courses that students can take are shown in Table B.3.4. Students can take courses outside of these suggested courses with prior approval from their advisor. College Engineering Business Science Table B Technical Elective Courses Courses ENGR 3898 Co-Op Education ENGR 4180 Product Process Design ENGR 4900 Independent Study ENGR 4990 Special Topics MGMT 3600 Theories of Management BIOL 3020 Genetics, Evolution and Humanity BIOL 4020 Contemporary Human Biology MATH 2101 Linear Algebra MATH 3750 Numerical Analysis B.3.4 Assessment Process (including measures and tools used) The flow diagram previously shown in Figure B summarizes the assessment and evaluation process for program outcomes. The following assessment tools are used for the evaluation of outcomes achievement: 1. Prerequisite exams, some key courses (each quarter) 2. Course portfolio, all engineering courses (each quarter) 3. Faculty self assessment of courses (each quarter) 4. Senior Exit Surveys of graduating seniors (every year) 5. Senior Project evaluation by faculty/sponsors/iab (every year) 6. Co-op evaluation by advisor and the employer (as available) 7. Table B shows the mapping of assessment tools and measured outcomes Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 59

61 Table B Mapping of Program Outcomes and Assessment Tools Program Outcome Assessment Tool (a) Math/Sc/Engr Knowledge (b) Design/Experiment (c) System Design (d) Teaming (e) Problem Solving (f) Professionalism/Ethics (g) Communication (h) Global/Societal Context (i) Life-Long Learning (j) Contemporary Issues (k) Engineering Practice Prerequisite Exams Course Portfolios Faculty Self Assessment of Courses Senior Exit Survey Senior Project Evaluation by Faculty, Industry Sponsors, and IAB Co-op Evaluation by Employer and advisor Prerequisite Exams For key IE courses such as Simulation, Production Planning, Facilities Planning, and Quality Engineering offered in any quarter, the instructor prepares a short quiz based on relevant prerequisite course topics. This quiz is offered during the first two weeks of the quarter, and its grade may have some impact on the final course grade (e.g., equivalent to a homework). Student performance on the quiz is analyzed by topic area to assist in evaluating student preparation for the program courses and guide the instructor in presenting review material. The instructor s evaluation of student preparation for the course is discussed in the curriculum committee. Feedback Mechanism: The curriculum committee assesses exam results for trends and, when needed, suggests corrective actions to appropriate instructors teaching prerequisite courses. Course Portfolios Each engineering course that is required for undergraduate credit (numbered 1000 to 4999) maintains a portfolio that includes the course outline used by the instructor, a record of communications skill development activities (written reports, oral presentations, poster/powerpoint material), and samples of tests/homework assignments. The program outcomes that are assessed in each course are identified. The faculty 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 60

62 teaching the course is responsible to demonstrate the achievement of indicated outcomes by relating them to special activities in the course. Portfolio material is organized using a standard format for all courses. Feedback Mechanism: Faculty self assessment of courses is the feedback mechanism. The curriculum committee discusses self evaluation forms and suggests corrective actions that are required to assure the achievement of related program outcomes. The approved changes are then discussed in the IAB meeting and then implemented. Faculty Self Assessment of Courses For every engineering course the faculty performs a self assessment of the courses they taught the previous quarter. The assessment is based on student evaluations and comments, faculty assessment of activities in the course, achievement of related program outcomes and review of course portfolio. The course self assessment form is depicted in Figure B Feedback mechanism: the self assessment forms are evaluated by the curriculum committee and corrective actions are approved. The approved changes are then implemented Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 61

63 Faculty Engineering Course Self-Assessment Instructor Course Term Enrollment Text Course Summary Summary of student course performance: Summary of student comments and course evaluations: Summary of faculty experience & observations: Evaluation of Program Outcomes Program Outcome(s) associated with this course: Measurement Instrument(s) and results: Recommended Changes Recommended changes based on student evaluations, comments & course performance: Recommended changes based on faculty experience & observations: Recommended changes based on measurement of Program Outcomes: Summary of Recommended Changes hange No change Change No change Prerequisites Course equipment/apparatus Syllabus Course field trips/site visits Text Guest speakers Homework Pacing and relative emphasis Laboratories Course materials/handouts In class exercises Blackboard & lecture notes Exams Grading Projects Other Other Other Figure B.3.4.1, Faculty Course Self Assessment Form Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 62

64 Senior Exit Survey Each spring quarter, all graduating seniors fill out the Senior Exit Survey form (a copy is provided in the appendix). Results are summarized by the department chair and reported to the Curriculum committee and IAB. Feedback Mechanism: The curriculum committee assesses results and makes recommendations. The recommendations are discussed in the IAB meeting and changes are implemented. Senior Project Evaluation Each year, project sponsors, faculty, students, and the instructor teaching senior design, evaluate all capstone design presentations. o Presentations are evaluated by faculty and sponsors using a standard form depicted in Figure B o Written reports are evaluated by the instructor using a standard rubric shown in Table B o Teamwork is evaluated by peers and the instructor. Feedback Mechanism: The instructor assesses the results and presents any concerns to the curriculum committee where changes are suggested. Approved changes are then implemented in the following year 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 63

65 California State University East Bay Engr 4620: Senior Project Please evaluate the oral presentation using the following form. Your evaluation will be used to: (1) provide feedback for the instructor; (2) grade the oral presentation and; (3) provide feedback to the department for course assessment and improvement. EVALUATOR: Project sponsor, IAB member, Industrial reps, Student, Faculty, Other. About the Presentation Rating (Write in Letter A through F) Please rate the following characteristics of the presentation using the following to describe LEVEL of ACHIEVEMENT A = Distinguished B = Superior C = Average D = Below Average F = Failing Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Group 6 Group 7 Was the organization of the presentation clear? Were the project objectives and results clearly presented? Were the technical analysis and solution development clearly stated? Were the visual aids clear and appropriate? Did the speaker(s) emphasize key points? Did the speaker(s) maintain eye contact? Was the delivery effective? How were the responses to questions? Your overall rating for this presentation We need your feedback about the project itself (mainly for future senior project planning). Please answer Yes or No by circling Y or N for each Group. Was the topic appropriate as a senior project of industrial engineering? Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Do the analysis and results indicate that the students fulfilled the senior project objectives? Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Special feedback to the instructor: The best or strongest aspect of each presentation was The part of each presentation that most needs improvement is I think each presentation can be improved by ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Figure B Senior Design Presentation Evaluation Form 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 64

66 SENIOR PROJECT EVALUATION Project Name: Evaluator Name: Circle the number below each criterion that represents the level of competence demonstrated by the project team in their presentation. Criterion Level of Confidence System Design/Redesign Ability to Work in Teams Analyzing and Solving Engineering Problems Professionalism & Ethics Oral Communication Graphical Communication Global/Societal Context Life Long Learning System was not designed/re-designed. System design/ redesign was minor with unclear impact. System design/ redesign was substantial with at least some positive impacts Group did not exhibit any ability to work as a team. Group did some work as a team, but mostly seem unaware/ uninvolved in some aspects of the project. Group did most work as a team and are knowledgeable in most aspects of the project Minimal analysis was performed. Analysis tools were used but incorrectly applied or interpreted. Analysis was performed, but opportunities for increased insight was missed Group displayed unethical and unprofessional behavior. Group exhibited some degree of professionalism and did not explicitly address ethical issues. Most group members exhibited professionalism and mentioned at least one relevant ethical issue Little of the oral presentation was clear, and it was generally confusing. Some of the oral presentation was clear, but there were significant lapses. Most of the oral presentation was clear and added significant content Many slides, charts, and graphs were not legible or were misleading. Some slides, charts, and graphs were clear but did not add significant content. All slides, charts, and graphs were clear but did not add significant content Group exhibited no understanding of project s global or societal context. Group exhibited very limited understanding of project s global or societal context. Group exhibited informed understanding of project s global or societal context Group did not use any resources beyond those learned in previous classes. Group sought and utilized at least one resource. Group sought and utilized multiple resources Substantial system design/redesign with clearly positive impact. Group did all work as a team and are knowledgeable in all aspects of the project. The problem and information were effectively analyzed using multiple engineering analysis tools. All group members exhibited professionalism and awareness of relevant ethical issues. All of the oral presentation was clear and added significant content. All slides, charts, and graphs were clear and added significant content. Group exhibited very complete and insightful understanding of project s global or societal context. Group sought and utilized multiple resources from multiple sources (e.g., library, professors, web, professional or trade organizations, etc.). Ability to Apply Engineering Techniques Tools, and Skills (Engineering Practice) No engineering tools, techniques or skills were applied by the group. Some engineering tool, technique or skills were applied by the group at an elementary level. Some engineering tools, techniques or skills were appropriately applied by the group Table B Rubric used for evaluating senior design project reports Multiple engineering tools, techniques and skills were appropriately applied by the group Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 65

67 Co-op Evaluation Students who are participating in the cooperative education program have to select a faculty advisor and report to him/her on their progress. At the end of their co-op period they have to deliver a final report to their advisor and ask their sponsor to complete an evaluation form depicted in Figure B The faculty advisor uses these results and the evaluation of the written report to assess achievement of related outcomes. The advisor presents the results of his evaluation and makes suggestions to the curriculum committee. Feedback Mechanism: The curriculum committee assesses results and, when needed, proposes corrective actions. Mock Evaluation by External Reviewer Every six years, typically the year before the ABET team visit an experienced external ABET program reviewer is invited to campus to perform a complete review of the program in a format similar to actual ABET visit. The findings of the external reviewer is then discussed in the Curriculum Committee and presented to the IAB meeting. The department chair summarizes the results. Feedback Mechanism: The curriculum committee assesses results and, when needed, discusses possible actions and implements corrective measures. Approved changes are discussed in the IAB meeting Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 66

68 Figure B Cal. State East Bay, Co-Op Evaluation Form 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 67

69 B.3.5 Assessment Results Used to Develop/Improve Program Each fall, Curriculum Committee evaluates/analyzes the assessment data collected using the above mentioned tools and prepares recommendations for revision/improvement. The faculty then discuss and make a final decision concerning changes to be made. The results of the assessment are also presented and discussed in the IAB meeting. The faculty responsible for course implements curricular changes. The chair and curriculum committee ensure the implementation of all approved changes. Please note that the faculty have decided to use 70 percent or better as the target achievement rate. Achievements significantly below this or consistent low levels would warrant corrective actions. Also keep in mind the statistical nature of the data, which means that occasional ups and downs are expected. B.3.6 Assessment Results Summary Senior Exit Survey Table B represents charts and tables produced using the data gathered by administering the Graduating Senior Survey since This survey is completed by all graduating seniors every year. Based on this data we can make the following conclusions: 1. Student s confidence on their level of knowledge and ability to perform tasks related to program outcomes a-k has increased such that the data indicates that the average rating are all in the range of confidant to extremely confidant (above 3.5 on the scale of 1-5). 2. Students perceive most of their required courses in the curriculum to have high value. However there are some courses that are not perceived as having high value by many of the students. We have identified the following courses for further analysis and corrective actions, Chem Chemistry, CS 1160 Intro. to Computer Science, PSYC 1000, Introduction to Psyc., ENGR/STAT 4603 Operations Research II (Stochastic Processes), and Math 3331 Differential Equations. 3. More than 40% of students perceive the laboratory facilities to be of high quality or stateof-the-art. We have made changes in our laboratory setups and the utilization of labs to improve these ratings. The actions will be discussed later. 4. Overwhelming majority of students assign very high value to senior design projects Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 68

70 Self-evaluation of Student s Knowledge and Ability The number of Responses for the Graduating Senior Exist Survey 2008 is 15. Scale, 1 no confidence, and 5 extremely confidant Context of Engr Practice Team Work Engr Principles/Ethical Design Principles Engineering Science Probability/Statistics Mathematics Basic Science Engineering Students' Confidence in Performing Tasks Scale 1 no confidence, 5 extremely confident Work in International/Global Env Locate Needed Knowledge/Self-Learn Build Teams/Facilitate Team Processes Communicate in Drawing and Graphics Communicate in Writing Communicate Verbally Synthesize Knowledge/Info Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 69

71 Evaluation of Engineering Courses Taken at CSUEB Percentage of Respondents Indicating High or Very High value p indicates percentage and n is the number of respondents indicating high or very high value percentage and number of respondents indicating high or very high value Required Courses percent number percent number percent number CHEM 1601 General Chemistry 36% 11 13% 1 33% 5 CS 1160 Intro to Computer Science 46% 13 25% 2 27% 4 ECON 2301 Principles of Microeconomics 71% 14 50% 4 60% 9 ENGR 1010 Introduction to Engineering 67% 15 50% 4 53% 8 ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics 80% 15 75% 6 67% 10 ENGR 2010 Electric Circuit Theory 67% 15 38% 3 40% 6 ENGR 2060 Materials Science % 6 60% 9 ENGR 2070 Fundamentals of Mfg 86% 14 88% 7 73% 11 MATH 1304 Calculus I 92% 13 75% 6 73% 11 MATH 1305 Calculus II 92% 13 75% 6 67% 10 MATH 2304 Calculus III % 6 47% 7 PHYS 1001 Physics I 79% 14 75% 6 67% 10 PHYS 1002 Physics II 79% 14 63% 5 67% 10 PHYS 1003 Physics III 71% 14 63% 5 60% 9 PSYC 1000 General Psychology 67% 12 63% 5 33% 5 ENGR 3020 Work Design & Measurement 94% 16 88% 7 87% 13 ENGR 3101 Static and Dynamic 81% 16 75% 6 60% 9 ENGR 3140 Engineering Economy 93% 15 88% 7 80% 12 ENGR 3190 Human Factors 94% 16 88% 7 80% 12 ENGR/STAT 3601 Statistics for CS & Engr I 80% 15 75% 6 80% 12 ENGR/STAT 3602 Statistics for CS & Engr II 93% 14 63% 5 73% 11 ENGR 3841 Operations Research I 88% % 13 ENGR 4080 Systems Engineering 67% 9 63% 5 60% 9 ENGR 4100 Production Planning and Control % 7 73% 11 ENGR 4200 System Simulation % 13 ENGR 4280 Des Mgmt of Human Work Sys 78% % 10 ENGR 4300 Quality Engineering 92% % 11 ENGR 4350 Reliability Engineering 63% 16 75% 6 67% 10 ENGR 4430 Facilities Planning and Design 88% 16 88% 7 73% 11 ENGR 4440 Computer Integrated Mfg 67% 12 63% 5 47% 7 ENGR/STAT 4603 Operations Research II 73% 11 63% 5 40% 6 ENGR 4610/4620 Senior Design I & II 81% 16 63% 5 53% 8 MATH 3331 Differential Equations 50% 14 63% 5 33% Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 70

72 CSUEB Engineering Laboratory Evaluation Evaluation of Engineering Laboratory at CSUEB : Percentage of Respondents indicating equipment is Mostly High Quality or State of the Art Survey year Number of respondents Computer lab. 67% 57% 66% CIM Lab. 50% 75% 44% Manufacturing 50% 75% 38% Major Laboratory Improvement was initiated in Computer/CIM 38% 50% 72% Lab. Human 80% 28% 53% Performance measurement Lab. Quality testing lab. 38% 50% 50% Evaluation of Industry Based Projects Evaluation of Engineering Industry based projects at CSUEB : Percentage of Respondents Indicating High or Very High value Total number of Responses Value Rating of Industrybased Project Experience Prerequisite Exams Figure B Data collected from Graduating Student Survey forms Prerequisite exams have been administered in some key courses such as ENGR 4100, Production Planning and Control, 4200, Systems Simulation, 4300, Quality Engineering, 4430, Facilities Planning. The faculty members who administer prerequisite exams in their courses report the results to the curriculum committee. These reports are qualitative in nature and are based on the median performance of undergraduate students taking the quiz in a specific class. Typically, there are additional comments providing their interpretation of student preparedness. Multiple objectives are addressed through these quizzes. The first is to assist the teaching faculty in determining how much and what to review of prerequisite material in order to enhance student learning in the course. A second objective is to provide feedback to faculty teaching the prerequisite course. This informs them of both the topics to be emphasized and the level of retention. A general trend has been noted with the deterioration of retention as time passes between taking a course and its prerequisite (samples are provided in course portfolios) Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 71

73 Senior Project Evaluation As mentioned before the engineering faculty, the sponsors, peers and selected members of IAB are involved in evaluating the final projects presentations. The faculty teaching the course then summarizes the student performance as applied to outcomes and presents the results to Curriculum Committee. Results from 2007 senior projects are summarized in Figure B Generally, all recent project teams have performed at or above the 70 percent level set as target. Project reports are graded using a new rubric that was implemented in Again, senior design instructors in collaboration with the curriculum committee are adjusting the content of senior design to emphasize the skills addressed in the rubrics. As indicated in the table below there are only a few students that performed below 70% target related to outcome (d) team work, and outcome (f) understand professional/ethical responsibilities. Since 2007 we have increased the coverage of ethics and team work to ENGR 4610, Senior Design I, and in ENGR 1011, Engineering an Introduction. We are closely monitoring this data to make corrective actions as needed. The data in table B represents the 2008 data. This data is summarized as an average of student performance on written report, presentation and technical contents. We have noticed improvements in achieving many of outcomes related to this course. Program Outcome Assessment Tool Student Team Performance (c) Design system/component/process Final Presentation & Report Max=87.5 Ave=83.9 Min=75 (d) Function on multidisciplinary teams Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=83.9 Min=50 (e) Solve engineering problems Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 (f) Understand Professional/ ethical responsibilities Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=82.1 Min=62.5 (g) Communicate Final Presentation & Report Max=87.5 Ave=82.1 Min=68.8 (h) Understand global/ societal context Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=82.1 Min=62.5 (i) Recognize life-long learning Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 Figure B Senior Project Evaluation by Faculty Faculty Self Assessment of Courses/Course Portfolios The Department collects materials on various engineering courses each quarter. In addition to sample student work this data includes faculty self assessment of each course. These forms include a section where the faculty summarizes the quantitative data on the results of exams, quizzes, homework, projects, etc. that are designed to assess the outcomes related to the course. These will be available at the time of the site visit. Table B shows the average performance of all students in exams, projects, etc. in various courses (which were identified to assess the achievement of outcomes (3a) through (3k)). Since this assessment was introduced in fall 2007, data for all courses are not available. The averages were calculated based on self assessment documents from various courses offered in a specific quarter. These averages are monitored over time to identify trends and make course content adjustment to improve the degree of outcomes achievement. We have found the course self assessment to be a valuable tool in outcomes assessment Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 72

74 Table B Results of Assessment of Criterion Outcomes 3(a) through 3(k), (percent) Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 a. Apply math/sc./engr. knowledge b. Design/conduct experiments 87.5 Not Assessed 76 c. Design system/comp d. Function on teams 75 Not Assessed 80 e. Solve engr. problems f. Professional/ethical responsibility Not Assessed Not Assessed 82 g. Communicate h. Global/social context Not Assessed Not Assessed 82 i. Life-long learning 72 Not Assessed 88 j. Contemporary issues 79 Not Assessed 94 k. Engineering practice Co-op Evaluation We are using two mechanisms to evaluate co-op assignments, student reports to their advisor and the completed supervisor evaluation form that is administered by the University co-op office as depicted in Figure B The following outcomes are assessed using co-op reports and supervisor evaluations. (a) Apply Math/Sc/Engr. Knowledge (c) Design system/comp (d) Function on teams (e) Solve engineering problems (f ) Professional/ethical responsibility (g) Communicate effectively (i) Life-long learning (k) Engineering Practice The following table shows the mapping of the questions in the supervisor evaluation form to program outcomes. The evaluation forms will be available for review by the program evaluator during the visit. Table B.3.6.2, Mapping of Co-op evaluation form question to outcomes Outcomes Co-op evaluation Quality of work Application to work Ability to learn Judgment Relation to others Dependability Ability to communicate (a) Apply Math/Sc/Engr. Knowledge (c) Design system/comp (d) Function on teams (e) Solving engineering problems (f ) Professional/ethical responsibility (g) Communicate effectively (i) Life-long learning (k) Engineering Practice Using the mapping in Table B.3.6.2, we calculated the averages as depicted in Table B Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 73

75 Table B summery co-op evaluation of outcomes (scale 1-5 where 1 indicating poor and 5 meaning exceptional) (a) Apply Math/Sc/Engr. Knowledge 4.7 (c) Design system/comp 4.7 (d) Function on teams 5 (e) Solve engineering problems 4.7 (f ) Professional/ethical responsibility 4.6 (g) Communicate effectively 4.7 (i) Life-long learning 4.7 (k) Engineering practice 4.5 Also the reports generated by students are evaluated by their faculty advisors and results on all four students are well above the 70% threshold for achieving all the outcomes related to co-op. B.3.7 General Education Assessment In the following paragraphs we summarize the assessment of G.E. courses and the engineering outcomes related to them. Table B maps the approved Cal. State East Bay G.E. outcomes to program outcomes. Table B Mapping of General Education Outcomes to Program Outcomes G.E. Outcomes Program outcomes Communication skills: reading, writing, quantitative reasoning, critical thinking and speaking skills; Ability to communicate Problem solving competencies including the ability to define and analyze problems and synthesize and use information for the resolution of problems in an environment in which the student is working well with others; Ability to function in teams Information competency; Ability to engage in life-long learning Connected and integrated learning; Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility Ability to secure a broad education An awareness of issues of cultural, racial, ethnic, and gender diversity. Knowledge of contemporary issues The G.E. learning outcomes supports the University s mission, To provide an academically rich, multicultural learning experience that prepares all students to realize their goals, pursue meaningful lifework, and to be socially responsible contributors to their communities, locally and globally. The freshman general education program was designed to address these issues by linking writing, speaking, and critical thinking to an integrated curriculum in the freshman 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 74

76 learning communities; by specifically addressing issues of living and working in a diverse society and increasingly small world in the general studies courses and the required course focusing on the contributions of cultural groups and women to U.S. culture and history; and by requiring that upper-division G.E. courses include activities to support continued skill development. Upper-division humanities courses must contain significant writing and speaking activities that require critical thinking; upper-division social sciences must include significant opportunities for students to present ideas in writing, to build their competencies finding and using information effectively, and to use those skills to apply research data to analysis of problems of contemporary importance; and the upper-division science course must support students numeracy or quantitative reasoning skills, demonstrate advanced information literacy, and critical thought. The well developed assessment process has been implemented that measures the achievement of each outcome for the G.E. program Communication Skills Student writing is the most thoroughly assessed component of general education. Pre-test measures include the English Placement Test (EPT), required for admission to the CSU unless SAT verbal scores are 550 or above or the ACT verbal scores are 24 or above, a freshman survey to assess student perceptions of writing competencies, and the writing skills essay test given in the Fall quarter to all freshmen enrolled in any composition course. Quantitative Reasoning All students entering a California State University are required to take Entry Level Math (ELM) or SAT to measure their abilities to reason quantitatively. These measures provide baseline data for freshmen. Because of the wide range of courses students take to satisfy the GE requirement, MATH 1100, the Nature of Math, MATH 1130, College Algebra, Statistics 1000 or 1001, MATH 1180, Math for Business, and others, assessing students quantitative reasoning skills at the end of year one. According to data in Table B.3.7.2, students report gains similar to their national counterparts in their abilities to reason using mathematical concepts and methods on the College Student Experiences Survey (given at end of first year) Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 75

77 Table B Acquisition of Quantitative Reasoning through G.E. Student Experiences & Perceptions of Gains in Quantitative Reasoning Norm Very often or often memorized formulas, 66% 63% 68% 57% 58% 61% 64% 66% definitions, technical terms and concepts Used mathematical terms very often or 52% 54% 52% 49% 48% 43% 53% 57% often to express a set of relationships Thought they had made very much or 45% 53% 45% 48% 49% 51% 50% 40% quite a bit of progress in analyzing quantitative problems Information Literacy At the beginning of the Library course, students are given a pre-test, designed by the CSUEB librarians, to measure their information competencies. The test is given at the course s end and the percentage improvement in correct answers is one measure of learning. Those data are reported below. Fundamentals of Information Literacy Pre-test Post-test % Improvement The improvements in the pre-test scores of the entering freshmen are likely due to increasing emphasis in the high schools on information literacy skills. CSUEB librarians are actively involved in helping the high school librarians and teachers in our communities develop instructional strategies to assist students in developing competencies in locating, evaluating, and using information. Humanities Students will demonstrate through oral and written works how foundational works in the humanities illuminate enduring human concerns and the intellectual and cultural traditions within which these concerns arise, including both classical and contemporary artists and theorists Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 76

78 Table Humanities assessment data Indicator 1: Ability to identify points of engageme between foundational works in the humanitie enduring human concerns Superior Sufficient Developing Student consistently is able to correctly id Student usually correctly or reference identifies points of engagement between points of engagement between foundation foundational works in humanities and in humanities works in the enduring human concerns presented in th & enduring human concerns humanities and enduring course materials and lectures. human concerns presented in course materials and lectures Student usually/sometimes is able to write/talk accurately Student consistently writes/talks accurate about points of engagement about points of engagement between foun between foundational works and endurin tional works humanities & human concerns enduring human concerns presented in course materials & lectures i presented in course materials & lectures i his/her own words. his/her own words. Student rarely correctly identifies points of engagement between foundational w presented in materials and lectures. Student rarely is able to identify & summarize ideas and concepts accurately and effectively and/or in writing. Student addresses few or none of the points contained in course materials. (spring revision) Student cannot write/talk about points of engagement between foundational works and enduring human concerns presented in the c materials and lecturers in his/her own words Indicator 1: Total number of artifac evaluated: 425 Win #: 83 Spring #: 46 Win # 117 Spring #: 83 Winter #: 53 Spring #: 43 Total number: 129 Total number: 200 Total number: 96 Win% 35.9 Sprg %: 26.7 Win %: 50.6 Spring %: 51.3 Win#: 13.4 Spring %: 25 Indicator 2: Able to identify intellec and cultural traditions influence production an reception of foundation works in the humanitie Total Percentage: 30.3 Total Percentage: 47.1 Total Percentage: 22.6 Student usually correctly identifies the ma Student rarely correctly identifies the major intellectual and cultural traditions presen intellectual and cultural traditions presented the course materials and lectures. course materials and lectures. Student consistently correctly identifies o references the major intellectual and cult traditions presented in the course materia and lectures. Student consistently is able to write/talk accurately about the major intellectual an cultural traditions presented in the cours materials and lectures in his/her own wo Student usually/sometimes is able to writ accurately about major intellectual and cu traditions presented in the course materia lectures in his/her own words. Student cannot write/talk about major intelle and cultural traditions presented in the cours materials and lecturers in his/her own words Indicator 2: Total number of artifac evaluated: 239 Win #: 35 Spring #: 32 Winter #: 35 Spring #: 79 Winter #: 15 Spring #: 43 Total number: 67 Total number: 114 Total number: 58 Win %: 41.2 Sprg %: 20.8 Win %: 41.2 Spring %: 51.3 Win %: 17.6 Spring %: 27.9 Total Percentage: 28.0 Total Percentage: 47.7 Total Percentage: 24.3 As was seen in the sciences, most students demonstrate the learning described in the rubric for the learning outcome assessed. Social Sciences Students must demonstrate, orally and in writing, basic recognition of the application of disciplinary concepts derived from the social or behavioral sciences in the study of human behavior, individually and in society Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 77

79 Table B Social Sciences outcome assessment Indicator 1: Theories And Models Superior Sufficient Developing The student is frequently limited to non-essential terms in descriptions of the major components of two standard theories or models of the discipline and, in either oral or written descriptions, can only infrequently use his or her own words rather than the words of the lecture or text The student, with consistent accuracy, describes the major components of two or more standard theories or models of the discipline and, in either oral or written descriptions can consistently use his or her own words rather than the worlds of the lecture or text. In either oral or in written work, the student demonstrates comprehension of two or more standard theories or models of the discipline and can apply them to novel situations. In either oral or written work, the student demonstrates limited understanding of two standard theories or models of the discipline. The student is unable to describe the major components of standard theories or models of the discipline, or offers definitions that have consistent and major errors and cannot provide accurate descriptions without quoting the lecture or text. The student is unable to describe the major components of standard theories or models of the discipline, or offers definitions that have consistent and major errors and cannot provide accurate descriptions without quoting the lecture or text. SCORE 1 Total scores: Percentage: 38.8 Percentage: 34.2 Percentage: 27 Indicator 2: Key Disciplinary Terms The student consistently accurately defines key disciplinary terms and consistently uses his or her own words rather than the worlds of the lecture or text when defining terms, either orally or in writing. The student can infrequently use key disciplinary terms and must occasionally rely on the lecture or text when defining terms, either orally or in writing. The student cannot define key disciplinary terms and is unable to provide accurate definitions either orally or in writing, without quoting the lecture or text. SCORE 2 Total scores: Percentage: 54.1 Percentage: 27 Percentage: Indicator 3: Professional Applications Orally or in writing, the student can accurately identify a range of real world situations and professional employment contexts in which key theories and terms can be applied No spring change Orally or in writing, the student can identify a limited number of real world situations and professional employment contexts in which key theories and terms can be applied. The student cannot, orally or in writing, identify real world situations and professional employment contexts in which key theories and terms can be applied SCORE 3 Total scores: Percentage: 37.9 Percentage: 41 Percentage: 21.1 As with the sciences and humanities, most of CSUEB students acquire the knowledge the faculty describe in the student learning outcome Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 78

80 B.3.8 Assessment Results Mapped to Criterion Outcomes 3(a) through 3(k) In this section assessment results are summarized for each of the outcomes. Please note that the target is to achieve at least 70 percent in all assessment results. Achieving substantially below 70 percent and/or a downward trend of achievement would warrant an investigation to find a root cause. Outcome a ABET 3(a): Ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. This outcome is measured using the following tools: Exit survey of graduating students Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Co-op reports and supervisor evaluations Prerequisite tests Results from the Senior Exit Survey indicate that, on average, the confidence in ones own knowledge in the areas of basic science, mathematics, probability/statistics, and engineering science ranged above 3.5/5 meaning that they are confident or highly confident of their knowledge in these areas as was shown in Figure and depicted below. Context of Engr Practice Team Work Engr Principles/Ethical Design Principles Engineering Science Probability/Statistics Mathematics Basic Science This outcome is evaluated in the majority of core courses as indicated by the mapping in Table B and depicted here. The results indicate the average achievement score for this outcome is 79%. The average is calculated by finding the mean of performance evaluations in all courses assessment tools that are used to assess this outcome. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 a. Apply Math/Sc/Engr. Knowledge Co-op report reviews and assessment of student co-op projects by their supervisors as shown in Table B indicate that outcome 3(a) is fully satisfied by all students participating in co-op 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 79

81 projects (Apply math/sc/engr. knowledge, average rating 4.7 out of 5). Course prerequisite tests indicate that in some cases students lack the required prerequisite knowledge for the course. In these instances, faculty use the first week of class to review the prerequisite material. Also the conclusion that can be drawn from these results is that student achievement on this outcome is meeting the target and is acceptable, but there is scope for improvement (test samples are available at the time of the review). Action(s) Taken Course instructors have developed sets of prerequisite topics relevant to key courses. We plan to implement the prerequisite tests to more core courses in the curriculum. Outcome mapping and learning objectives for all required engineering courses have been developed, beginning in Fall Course self assessment forms have been modified to specifically address the achievement of outcomes using appropriate rubrics and suggest corrective actions needed, beginning in Winter Outcome b ABET 3(b): Ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data The following tools are used to assess this outcome: Senior Exit survey Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Graduating senior survey results indicate high confidence levels in design and probability/statistics, above 70% (3.5 out of 5). Context of Engr Practice Team Work Engr Principles/Ethical Design Principles Engineering Science Probability/Statistics Mathematics Basic Science Results from the in-course assessment of outcomes (Table B.3.6.1, depicted here) show a level of achievement above 70%. However it indicates lower average in Spring 08 compare to Fall 07. The trend is being carefully monitored for possible future actions. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 b. Design/conduct experiments 87.5 Not Assessed Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 80

82 Based on the available data, the conclusion is that the program is meeting the target for this outcome. However, as noted below, actions have been taken to improve the achievement of this outcome. Action(s) Taken Discussions with Statistics Department are conducted to improve the student s level of achievement of this outcome. A review of statistics course material is conducted in courses such as simulation, production planning, and others where the knowledge of statistics is required. Outcome c ABET 3(c): Ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability. The following tools are used to assess this outcome: Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Senior exit survey Senior design evaluation Co-op reports and supervisor evaluations In-course assessment of this outcome (see Table B and depicted here) shows a score of percent over the last two years. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 c. Design system/comp Senior exist survey results (Figure B.3.6.1) indicate that there has been a marked improvement on achievement of this outcome over time. The level of achievement is above 4 out of 5 on this outcome. Context of Engr Practice Team Work Engr Principles/Ethical Design Principles Engineering Science Probability/Statistics Mathematics Basic Science Senior design evaluation indicates an average level of 83%. Co-op assessment of this outcome 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 81

83 indicates an average rating of 4.7 out of 5. This rating was calculated using supervisor evaluation of co-op projects and mapping of the relationship between evaluation form questions and this outcome as shown below. However, to improve the level of achievement of this outcome the following actions have been taken. Outcomes Co-op evaluation Quality of work Application to work Ability to learn Judgment Relation to others Dependability Ability to communicate (c) Design system/comp Action(s) Taken Design is introduced in ENGR Course based assessment has been implemented since 2007 Senior design projects have been expanded in terms of credit unit and coverage of system design issues. Outcome d ABET 3(d): Ability to function on multidisciplinary teams. This outcome is assessed using the following tools: Senior Exit Survey Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Senior design evaluation Co-op project supervisor evaluation Senior Exit Survey results (Figure B.3.6.1) indicate an achievement level of more than 4 out of 5 for this outcome. It also indicates improvement on the level of achievement of this outcome over the past years. Context of Engr Practice Team Work Engr Principles/Ethical Design Principles Engineering Science Probability/Statistics Mathematics Basic Science Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 82

84 The in-course assessment of this outcome (Table B.3.6., depicted here) shows an average level of achievement of 75%-80% over the past two years. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 d. Function on teams Senior design evaluation indicates an average of 84% using the rubrics for written report and presentation evaluations. And co-op evaluation indicates a perfect score of 5 out of 5 on this outcome using the following mapping. Outcomes Co-op evaluation Quality of work Application to work Ability to learn Judgment Relation to others Dependability Ability to communicate (d) Function on teams Note that students participate in team projects in ENGR 4200 and 4400, and 4440 and the two senior design projects ENGR 4610 and In ENGR 4610 and 4620, there is peer assessment of team performance, in addition to assessment by the instructor. Many of these projects are multi-disciplinary in nature in that students have to work with people from various disciplines in industry while conducting their capstone and other industry-based projects. They also participate in teams in several of their laboratory assignments. Sample reports will be available at the time of the site visit. Based on the available results, it can be concluded that this outcome target is being met. To improve the achievement of this outcome the following actions have been taken: Action(s) Taken Participation on team projects have been increased to ensure achievement of this outcome. More attention have been given to peer evaluation and team participation in senior design Outcome e ABET 3(e): Ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems. This outcome is assessed using the following tools Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Senior Exist Survey Senior design evaluation Co-op project evaluation In the in-course assessment of this outcome (Table B.3.6.1), the achievement level is between 83-85% over the past two years. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 e. Solve Engr. Problems Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 83

85 Senior Project Evaluations indicate an average achievement level of 87.5%. In the co-op assessment (Table B.3.6.3), the average achievement level of 4.7 out of 5 is reported. Based on the available data, it can be concluded that this outcome target is being met. Action(s) Taken None Outcome f ABET 3(f): Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility. This outcome is assessed using the following tools: Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Senior exit survey Senior design evaluation Co-op project evaluation General education The latest in course assessment of this outcome (Table B.3.6.1) indicates an average of 82%. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 f. Professional/ethical responsibility Not Assessed Not Assessed 82 In the exit survey of graduating seniors (Figure B.3.6.1), the rated confidence in engineering principles and ethical standards is above 4 out of 5 for the past academic year and it has consistently been above 3.3 out of 5. In co-op assessment (Table B3.6.3), the supervisor evaluations are at 4.6 out of 5. (f ) Professional/ethical responsibility 4.6 The rubric used to evaluate senior projects (Table B.3.4.3) specifically grades students the consideration of the ethical and professional solutions and conducts. In addition regular assessment of understanding of ethical and professional standards is conducted in general education courses. Action(s) Taken These issues have been introduced in the senior design course, and a standardized rubric is used for performance assessment (Table B.3.4.3). Outcome g ABET 3(g): Ability to communicate effectively. This outcome is assessed using the following tools: Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Senior Exit Survey Senior project evaluation Co-op project evaluation General education 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 84

86 The in course assessment of this outcome as shown in Table B indicates that the latest assessment of this outcome is 82%. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 g. Communicate effectively Over the past two years this outcome has been rated at about 90% on the average. Senior Exit Survey indicates a rating of above 4 out of 5 for all forms of communication. This rating has always been above 3 out of 5. Also survey results indicate improvements on the average rating. Senior Design report evaluations indicate an average rating of 82% in Co-op evaluations indicate a rating of 4.7 out of 5. Program Outcome Assessment Tool Student Team Performance (c) Design system/component/process Final Presentation & Report Max=87.5 Ave=83.9 Min=75 (d) Function on multidisciplinary teams Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=83.9 Min=50 (e) Solve engineering problems Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 (f) Understand Professional/ ethical responsibilities Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=82.1 Min=62.5 (g) Communicate Final Presentation & Report Max=87.5 Ave=82.1 Min=68.8 (h) Understand global/ societal context Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=82.1 Min=62.5 (i) Recognize life-long learning Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 Ability to communicate is regularly assessed in several general education courses as indicated before. We are closely monitoring the data trends to make adjustments in the curriculum to increase the level of achievement of this outcome. Action(s) Taken The newly introduced rubric in the evaluation of the senior project final presentation that is used by faculty addresses this issue (see Table B.3.4.3). The course ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics has been changed to use the graphics software SOLID WORKS instead of AUTOCAD. This change improves the ability of students to communicate design information in 3-D solid form. More emphasis in communication skills have been introduced into senior design courses. Outcome h ABET 3(h): Broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context. This outcome is assessed using the following tools: Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Senior project evaluation Senior exit survey General education courses The in-course assessment of this outcome that was performed in senior design indicated an average level of achievement of 82%. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 h. Global/Social Context Not Assessed Not Assessed 82 We are requiring students to include some of these issues in the senior project reports. Senior Exit Survey responses indicate that there has been a marked improvement in level of 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 85

87 achievement of this outcome. The latest numbers indicate a rating of above 4 out of 5. In previous years the level was indicated at or above 3 out of 5. It appears that changes to our senior design projects have had a positive effect on achievement of this outcome. Note that in the senior project scoring rubric (Table B.3.4.3), projects are graded on whether they have addressed the global and societal context. Several general education courses are also assessing this outcome. Action(s) Taken New grading rubric has been developed for senior projects to assure that Outcome h issues are addressed (TableB.3.4.3). Outcome i ABET 3(i): Recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in, life-long learning. The following tools are used to assess this outcome: Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Senior Exit Survey Senior design evaluation Co-op evaluation General education The latest in-course assessment of this outcome indicates a level of achievement of 88%. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 i. Life-long learning 72 Not Assessed 88 This is an improvement over our assessment the year before of 72%. Senior exit survey results indicate a level of achievement of more than 4 out of 5 on various communication skills. This rating has improved recently. It was at or slightly above 3 for the previous years. The changes we have made to senior design and introduction to engineering has had a positive effect on the achievement of this outcome. Senior design project evaluations indicated the level of achievement of 87.5% in the latest evaluation. Co-op projects evaluation indicate the level of achievement of 4.7 out of 5 for this outcome. (i) Life-long learning 4.7 This outcome is also assessed as part of the general education assessment. It can be concluded that this outcome target is being met. Action(s) Taken New grading rubrics have been developed for senior projects to assure that Criterion 3(i) issues are addressed (Table B.3.4.3). Outcome j ABET 3(j): Knowledge of contemporary issues. This outcome is measured using the following tools: Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 86

88 On the in-course assessment of this outcome (Table B.3.6.1) is 94% percent. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 j. Contemporary Issues 79 Not Assessed 94 This is an improvement over the previous year s achievement level of 79%. This outcome is measured in some engineering core courses, ENGR 3190 Human Factors, ENGR 4280 Design and Management of Human Work Systems, where contemporary issues in product design and use are discussed. Also some general education courses assess this outcome. Action(s) Taken In-course assessment results will be monitored to see how performance in this area can be improved. Outcome k ABET 3(k): Ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice. The following tools are used to assess this outcome Course portfolios Faculty self assessment of courses Senior Exit Survey Co-op evaluation The average score on in-course assessment of this outcome (Table B.3.6.1) is 82.4 percent. Program Outcome Fall 07 Winter 08 Spring 08 Fall 2008 k. Engineering Practice Senior exist survey indicates an average rating of 3.5 out of 5 on this outcome. As shown in Figure B there has been improvement in the level of achievement of this outcome. We are monitoring the data to ensure that this outcome is being met. Co-op project evaluations indicate a rating of 4.5 out of 5 on this outcome. It can be concluded that this outcome target is being met. Action(s) Taken In order to increase exposure to modern engineering tools, labs have been upgraded and technical elective choices have been increased. In ENGR 1420, Engineering Graphics we used SOLID WORKS instead of AUTOCAD, because local industry uses this tool. It also is more capable for 3-D modeling. Also AI techniques are introduced in ENGR 4400 Systems Engineering, using C5 software. Outcome Assessment Summary The material presented in this chapter indicates that (1) each outcome is being measured in more than one way, (2) the intent of each outcome is being satisfied, and (3) targets for all outcomes are being met. B.3.9 Materials Available for Review during Site Visit Course portfolios, including textbooks and samples of students work. Originals of survey responses, and summary reports Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 87

89 Video of final senior project presentations as well as final reports. IAB meeting minutes Outcome assessment portfolio including documents supporting outcome assessment methods 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 88

90 B.4 Continous Improvement This criterion requires programs to: Describe the available information, such as results from the Criteria 2 and 3 processes, commonly used in making decisions regarding program improvements. Describe actions taken to improve the program since the last general review. Indicate why (the basis for taking action) and when each action was implemented and the results of the implementation. In criteria 2 and 3 above, some actions taken based on the assessment process are identified. In addition, other actions, often based on faculty discussions and/or discussions with students or employers, have been taken. In the following paragraphs we first summarize the program improvements that are implemented as a result of the assessment process and then we will discuss a summary of all actions taken, the reason for each action, the assessment activity that necessitated the change, the date the action was implemented, and improvements resulted from the change. B.4.1 Improvements to the Assessment Process and Tools Senior Project Evaluation Revised the evaluation instrument to collect more appropriate data for outcomes assessment. This has been implemented for 2008 data collection cycle. Use qualitative comments/suggestions from industry representatives. Since almost no industry representative stays through all senior project presentations, it is impossible to obtain consistent quantitative evaluations of all presentations from them. As a result, Curriculum Committee uses only the qualitative comments/suggestions offered by them and tracks the quantitative evaluations. The quantitative evaluations by faculty will be used in the assessment of outcomes. This has been implemented since Course Self Assessment Forms Course Self Assessment forms have been revised to specifically outline what tools are used to assess each program outcome related to the course and explicitly summarize the assessment results and the changes to improve the course. This change has been implemented since academic year Alumni Survey The alumni survey form has been revised to directly inquire about achievement of individual program objectives. This simplifies our assessment process and creates a more direct link between questions and program objectives. B.4.2 Improvements to the Curriculum Since our last ABET visit in 2003 we have developed a systematic process of assessmentevaluation-improvement-assessment (Figure B.3.1.1). This process has resulted in several improvements to the curriculum and other program attributes. The reengineering of the curriculum has increased the level of achievement of program outcomes and has also resulted in better alignment of the curriculum with the shifting career opportunities in industrial 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 89

91 engineering. Table B shows a summary of changes, assessment tools indicating the need for the changes and the improvement resulted from the change. Each change has been described in detail following the Table. Also Table represents a comparison of our latest curriculum to curriculum. Table B Program Improvements since Last ABET Visit Change Date Approved Date Implemented ENGR 4180, Product Process development, description change ENGR 4080 Manufacturing Systems, Discontinued Replaced with ENGR 4400 ENGR 3101Statics and Dynamics, new course, not cross listed with physics Assessment tool/data indicating the need and assessing improvements resulting from the change April 2004 Fall 2005 Alumni survey and IAB meeting May 2005 Winter 2006 IAB comments on shifting careers to service sector February 2006 Fall 2006 Faculty assessment and student comments Improvements resulted Exposure to managing the process of product development, contributing to outcome (c) Streamlined numbering, Students are exposed to more practical problem solving and application Comment This course is a technical elective for the IE program and a required course for graduate program A course number change This is now taught by engineering faculty ENGR 4610, Senior Project I, prerequisite ENGR 1011, Engineering An Introduction, new course to replace ENGR 1010 March 2006 Fall 2007 Faculty self assessment of courses April 2007 Winter 2008 Curriculum Committee and IAB discussions on how to change the course to include, ethics, contemporary issues, outcomes (f) and ( j) The prerequisites were strengthened to assure that students have the knowledge needed to complete their project Students are exposed to engineering software, engineering ethics, and contemporary issues. Also the credit hour is increased We are monitoring the data as become available Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 90

92 ENGR 4400, Systems Modeling, title, description, course credit restriction, prerequisites changed ENGR 4440, Manufacturing Systems Engineering, title, description, prerequisites changed ENGR 2060 Material Science, prerequisites changed ENGR 2070 prerequisites changed ENGR 4603 discontinued ENGR 2070 units changed from 2 to 4 ENGR 3841 title change June 2007 Fall 2008 IAB discussions, Alumni feedback, monitoring career paths in IE June 2007 Fall 2008 IAB discussion, Alumni input. The material traditionally covered in 4400 is transferred here with more emphasis on manufacturing systems rather than automation December 2007 Fall 2009 Required change of prerequisite to match the new Chem. course required in the The emphasis of the course is changed from manufacturing to more broad areas of system modeling, AI techniques, supply chain Students are exposed to manufacturing systems topics for 50% of the course and the other 50% is automation. The change makes the course more in line with IE career opportunities It brings the course in-line with the new curriculum course requirement program December 2007 Fall 2009 To bring the course in-line with new intro to engineering course July 2008 Fall 2010 Graduating Senior Survey indicating low value for the course July 2008 Fall 2010 Faculty self evaluation, and student comments July 2008 Fall 2010 Needed as a resulted of removing OR II Removing the course help the department to add credit to manufacturing processes as requested by students and faculty self evaluation Semi conductor manufacturing techniques have been added to the course material and more extensive lab activity This change will strengthen the achievement of outcome (k), using modern engineering tools Data is being monitored The assessment data will be monitored to track improvements The assessment data will be monitored for tracking improvement 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 91

93 92 Table Comparison of Current Curriculum with the Curriculum at Last ABET Visit I.General Education (60 units) I.General Education (52) I. Lower Division (57 units) I. Lower Division (65 units) CHEM 1601 or Basic Chemistry for the 4 CHEM 1101 General Chemistry Health Sciences CHEM/ENGR Materials Science CS 1160 Intro to CS & 4 CS 1160 Intro to CS & 4 Programming Methods Programming Methods ECON 2301 Principles of 4 ECON 2301 Principles of 4 Microeconomics Microeconomics ENGR 1010 Intro Engineering 2 ENGR 1011 Engineering: An 3 Introduction ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics 2 ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics 2 ENGR 1430 Fundamentals of 2 Manufacturing ENGR 2010 Electric Circuit Theory 3 ENGR 2010 Electric Circuit Theory I 3 ENGR 2060 Materials Science 4 ENGR 2070 Fundamentals of 4 Manufacturing MATH 1304 Calculus I 4 MATH 1304 Calculus I 4 MATH 1305 Calculus II 4 MATH 1305 Calculus II 4 MATH 2101 Elements of Linear 4 Algebra MATH 2304 Calculus III 4 MATH 2304 Calculus III 4 PHYS 1001, General Physics I, II, III 15 PHYS 1001, General Physics I, II, III , , 1003 PSYC 1005 or General Psychology for 5 PSYC 1005 or General Psychology for Healthier Living 1000 Healthier Living II. Upper Division Core Requirements (65) II. Upper Division Core Requirements (65) ENGR 3020 Work Design & 4 ENGR 3020 Work Design & 4 Measurement Measurement ENGR 3040 Strength of Materials 3 ENGR 3101 Statics & Dynamics 4 ENGR 3090 or Industrial Costs & 4 ACCT 3200) Controls ENGR 3140 Engineering Economy 4 ENGR 3140 Engineering Economy 4 ENGR 3190 or Human Factors 4 ENGR 3190 Human Factors 4 PSYC/ENGR 3195 ENGR 3841 Operations Research 4 ENGR 3841 Operations Research 4 ENGR 4100 Production Planning & 4 ENGR 4100 Production Planning & 4 Control Control ENGR 4200 System Simulation 4 ENGR 4200 System Simulation 4 ENGR 4280 Design & Measurement 4 ENGR 4300 or MGMT/ENGR 3626 ENGR 4430 of Human Work Sys Quality Engineering 4 ENGR 4300 Quality Engineering 4 Facilities Planning & Design ENGR 4350 Reliability Engineering 3 ENGR 4400 Systems Modeling 4 4 ENGR 4430 Facilities Planning & 4 Design 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 92

94 93 ENGR 4440 Computer Integrated 4 Manufacturing Systems ENGR 4610 Senior Project 1,1 2 ENGR 4610 Senior Design I 3 ENGR 4620 Senior Design II 3 MATH 3331 Differential Equations 4 PHYS/ENGR Statics & Dynamics PHYS/ENGR Electronics & Semiconductor Mfg STAT/ENGR Statistical Inference II STAT/ENGR Statistics & Probability for Science & Engrs I STAT/ENGR Introductory Statistics & STAT/ENGR Statistics & Probability Probability for Science & Engineering 3602 for Science & Engrs II STAT/ENGR 4401 Introduction to Stochastic Processes III. Electives (12 units) III. Electives (12 units) Select 12 units from the flowing list with advisor s Select 4 units from the following: approval: CIS/ENGR 3281; ENGR 3560, 3898, 4080, 4090, BIOL 3020 Genetics, Evolution, & , 4160, 4180, 4310, 4330, 4350, 4900, 4990; MATH/ENGR 4841; MGMT/ENGR 3110, Humanity BIOL 4020 Contemporary Human 4 Biology MATH 3331 Differential Equations 4 MATH/CS Numerical Analysis Select 8 units from the following or other 3000 or 4000 level course with department approval. ENGR 3898 Co-Op Education 1-4 ENGR 4180 Product-Process Design 4 ENGR 4990 Special Topics 4 MATH 4841 Topics in Optimization 4 MGMT/ ENGR 3600 Theories of Management 4 To summarize the major changes to the curriculum as a result of continuous improvement process we can point to (a) inclusion of material relevant to the shifting of IE careers to service sector in courses such as systems modeling, ENGR 4400, (b) coverage of semiconductor manufacturing in fundamentals of manufacturing ENGR 2070, (c) inclusion of AI techniques in the curriculum, ENGR 4400 (d) more coverage of supply chain management in production planning and systems modeling, ENGR 4100 and 4400 (e) coverage of contemporary tools and techniques in intro to engineering (ENGR 1011), and more extensive coverage of engineering ethics and more opportunities for students to communicate and work on teams. The faculty closely relates the course material and tests to course outcomes to directly measure the program outcomes related to their courses. This has enabled the Department to continuously monitor the achievement of program objectives and outcomes Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 93

95 94 As a result of continuous improvement data we have achieved a marked improvement in achievement of our program outcomes as indicated by the summary of the latest student survey data depicted in Figure B Also comments from the employer s and IAB members indicate that the program is more in line with industry needs. Context of Engr Practice Team Work Engr Principles/Ethical Design Principles Engineering Science Probability/Statistics Mathematics Basic Science Engineering Students' Confidence in Performing Tasks Scale 1 no confidence, 5 extremely confident Work in International/Global Env Locate Needed Knowledge/Self-Learn Build Teams/Facilitate Team Processes Communicate in Drawing and Graphics Communicate in Writing Communicate Verbally Synthesize Knowledge/Info Figure B Improvements resulted for continuous improvement process. B.4.3 Improvements to the Facilities Laboratories: Our assessment data, specifically student exit survey and alumni survey was indicating a lower rating for laboratory experience. This data resulted in discussions among faculty of how to improve lab equipment and utilization. To solve this problem we have made 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 94

96 95 several changes to our laboratories since We have since moved to a new building with ample laboratory space. We have developed a new computer/cim laboratory with 36 stations. We have discontinued the use of machine shop in courses. We are now using table top CNC equipment to familiarize students with machining processes. We have also purchased plastics processing equipment to replace the traditional machines in the machine shop. Our new Human Performance Measurement Laboratory is equipped with task simulator, Segway vehicles, brain wave analysis system, treadmill and other human factors/ergonomics equipment. Our Quality Testing Laboratory is equipped with a CMM and various measurement equipment, table top CNC machines and robotic arms. Laboratory utilization in courses has been increased. The result of these changes has been an overall improvement in the student laboratory experience. The data in Figures B and compare the survey results from 2007 the same results for % 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% PERCENTAGES High Quality or State of the Art PERCENTAGES Adequate for Course Use PERCENTAGES Low Quality or Totally Useless 0% Computer/CIM Laboratory Manufacturing Processes Human Performance Lab Quality Testing Lab Figure B Exit Survey, graduating seniors Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 95

97 96 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% PERCENTAGE of High and State of the Art Percentage of Adequate for Course Use Percentage for Low or Totally Useless 0% Computer/CIM Laboratory Human Performance Lab Material Quality Testing Lab Figure B Exit Survey, graduating seniors 2008 As the data indicates the percentage of student rating laboratory facilities as high quality or state-of-the-art have gone up for computer/cim Lab and for Human performance Lab and has stayed the same for Quality Testing Lab. Also faculty self assessment of courses indicate an improvement in laboratory experience. The assessment-evaluation-change-assessment has become an integral part of our departmental activities. We have developed a closed loop continuous process of assessment-improvement-assessment. This process will continue and program changes will be monitored to assure they have the desired effect on the program. A folder providing material that supports the improvements made by the assessment of this criteria will be provided at the time of the visit Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 96

98 97 B.5 Professional Component This section of the report describes how the engineering faculty assures that the curriculum devotes adequate attention and time to each subject area and describes how students are prepared for engineering practice, as required by ABET Criterion 5. Note that instructional material and student work verifying the proper classification of course content will be provided for the evaluation team at the time of the visit. B.5.1 Design Experience The design experience of the engineering students starts from the freshman year. ENGR1011, Engineering an Introduction is the first exposure of students to engineering. It covers an introduction to the engineering design process. It also introduces elements of sustainability, engineering ethics and other contemporary issues effecting engineering design. Also students are exposed to software packages such as MathCAD and EXCEL that is used for engineering design. Freshman students take ENGR1420, Engineering Graphics, which introduces the concept of mechanical drafting and engineering graphics design. Students become familiar with standards for conveying design ideas to production floor using graphics. Also in Engineering Graphics, students learn CAD software (Solid Works). They design several mechanical components and facility structures using Solid Works. In ENGR 2070, Fundamentals of Manufacturing, manufacturing facility tours are organized to introduce students to real life applications of manufacturing processes and the effect of design choices on manufacturing. Sophomore students take ENGR 3020,Work Design and Measurement. This course includes small design projects accomplished by teams of (usually three) students. Videotaped industrial workstations and laboratory exercises focus on group definition of the problem, development of alternative solutions, evaluation of alternatives (economics, safety, and technical feasibility), development and presentation of a solution. The design focus of this course is divided into a series of smaller design experiences. Written reports are required for laboratory projects. Some are individual reports and the design teams write others. The development of technical writing skill is an important part of this course. Junior students take ENGR 3140, Engineering Economics. In this course they analyze the economic ramifications of engineering design choices. Students learn how to conduct economic evaluation of design alternatives. Also juniors take ENGR 3190,Human Factors. Design activities in this course are directed at group projects but involve larger, more comprehensive projects with expectations of more formal analysis, development, and documentation. The course focuses on the definition and solution to real world problems and development of a formal written report and oral presentation. Also in this course safety issues are discussed. Junior students take two statistics courses, ENGR 3601, and ENGR These courses concentrate on data analysis, design of experiments and statistical inferences. The students also take ENGR 3841, Operations Research I, ENGR 4100, Production Planning and Control, ENGR 4300, Quality Engineering and ENGR 4400, Systems Modeling. Students are capable by this time of 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 97

99 98 undertaking design activities in groups or as individuals. The designs performed in these courses generally have more stringent technical requirements. Senior year is when students experience major design experience in ENGR 4200, Simulation, ENGR 4280, Design and Management of Human Work Systems, ENGR 4430, Facilities Planning, and ENGR 4440, Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, and the two quarter sequence of Senior Design, ENGR 4610 and ENGR The Systems Simulation course culminates in the development and validation of a model of a real world situation by a team. Feedback as to the adequacy of the design and quality of its execution is obvious and direct. Students are now capable of objectively assessing their performance. The following figure indicates that students are more confident about their abilities in engineering design. Context of Engr Practice Team Work Engr Principles/Ethical Design Principles Engineering Science Probability/Statistics Mathematics Basic Science Figure B Graduating Student Survey B.5.2 Capstone Design Experience Students having met the prerequisites can start the sequence of ENGR 4610 and ENGR 4620 in the winter quarter of their senior year. Students are grouped in teams of two to three students. The groups are introduced to local companies that expressed interest in sponsoring senior design projects. Diverse industries including manufacturing, entertainment, health care and other service industries have been sponsors of our student capstone design projects. Since last ABET visit we have increased the credit hours on these courses from 2 +2 to 3+3 credits to allow time to cover contemporary issues in engineering. Issues such as sustainability, environmental impact of engineering solutions, engineering ethics and globalization are introduced and discussed in the first quarter of capstone design. Also in the first quarter students typically interact with industry sponsors to develop the project scope, write a formal proposal and present the proposal to the company and to the class. The class meets as a group once a week. In the second quarter (ENGR 4620) the concentration is on completing the project, writing and presenting progress reports and writing and presenting the final report. The faculty teaching the course develops the general requirements and formats of proposals, 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 98

100 99 progress reports, and final reports. The instructor and the sponsor evaluate the final report. The instructor, sponsor, other faculty and representatives of IAB evaluate the formal presentations made by individual groups. Also a peer evaluation process of proposals, progress reports, practice final presentations, and final presentations. The figure below represents the latest outcomes assessment results using senior design presentations and reports. Program Outcome Assessment Tool Student Team Performance (c) Design system/component/process Final Presentation & Report Max=87.5 Ave=83.9 Min=75 (d) Function on multidisciplinary teams Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=83.9 Min=50 (e) Solve engineering problems Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 (f) Understand Professional/ ethical responsibilities Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=82.1 Min=62.5 (g) Communicate Final Presentation & Report Max=87.5 Ave=82.1 Min=68.8 (h) Understand global/ societal context Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=82.1 Min=62.5 (i) Recognize life-long learning Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools Final Presentation & Report Max=100 Ave=87.5 Min=75 Figure B Outcomes Assessment in Senior Design B.5.3 Coverage of Mathematics and Basic Sciences Each student must take a minimum of 53 quarter hours of Mathematics/Statistics and Basic Sciences. Table shows math/basic science coverage. Figure indicates an improvement of student confidence in their Math/Basic Science knowledge. Topical Area Mathematics/ Statistics Table B Mathematics and Basic Sciences Coverage. Area Hours Course Course Hours 28 Math 1304 Calculus I 4 Math 1305 Calculus II 4 Math 2304 Calculus III 4 Math 2101 Linear Algebra 4 Stat 3601 Stat. and Prob. for CS & Engineering I 4 Math/Basic Science Elective (Differential Eq.) 4 Basic Sciences 25 Chem 1101 Basic Chemistry 5 Phys 1001 Physics I 5 Phys 1002 Physics II 5 Phys 1003 Physics III 5 Psyc 1005 Intro to Psychology Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 99

101 100 Context of Engr Practice Team Work Engr Principles/Ethical Design Principles Engineering Science Probability/Statistics Mathematics Basic Science Figure B Mathematics and Basic Science knowledge B.5.4 Coverage of Engineering Topics Engineering topics consists of two general areas: engineering design and engineering science. Table summarizes how these two areas are addressed in the curriculum. Topical Area Table B Engineering Science and Design Coverage. Course Engr. Scienc e Engr. Desig n Engineering Core 14 ENGR 1011 Engineering an 3 Introduction ENGR 2010 Electric circuits theory 3 ENGR 3101 Statics and Dynamics 4 Cr edi t Ho urs Program Required Courses CS 1160 Introduction to Computer Sci. 4 ECON 2301 Principles of Microeconomics 4 ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics 2 ENGR 2070 Fundamental of Manuf. 2 ENGR 3020 Work Design & Measurement 4 ENGR 3140 Engineering Economy 4 ENGR 3190 Human Factors 4 ENGR 3841 Operations Research I Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 100

102 101 Topical Area Other Technical Electives Course Engr. Scienc e Engr. Desig n Cr edi t Ho urs ENGR 4100 Production Planning and Control 4 ENGR 4200 Simulation 4 ENGR 4280 Design and Management of Human Work Systems 4 ENGR 4300 Quality Engineering 4 ENGR 4350 Reliability Engineering 3 ENGR 4400 Manufacturing Systems 4 Engineering ENGR 4430 Facilities Planning and Design 4 ENGR 4603 Operations Research II 4 ENGR 4610 Senior Design I 3 ENGR 4620 Senior Design II 3 8 The following table indicates that students place high or very high value to most of their engineering courses. Table Percentage of students indicating high or very high value for engineering courses Required Courses Percent indicating High or Very high value Number respondents ENGR 3020 Work Design & Measurement 87% 13 ENGR 3101 Static and Dynamic 60% 9 ENGR 3140 Engineering Economy 80% 12 ENGR 3190 Human Factors 80% 12 ENGR/STAT 3601 Statistics for CS & Engr I 80% 12 ENGR/STAT 3602 Statistics for CS & Engr II 73% 11 ENGR 3841 Operations Research I 87% 13 ENGR 4080 Systems Engineering 60% 9 ENGR 4100 Production Planning and Control 73% 11 ENGR 4200 System Simulation 87% 13 ENGR 4280 Des Mgmt of Human Work Sys 67% 10 ENGR 4300 Quality Engineering 73% 11 ENGR 4350 Reliability Engineering 67% 10 ENGR 4430 Facilities Planning and Design 73% 11 ENGR 4440 Computer Integrated Mfg 47% 7 ENGR/STAT 4603 Operations Research II 40% 6 ENGR 4610/4620 Senior Design I & II 53% Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 101

103 102 B.5.5 General Education Content As part of their course of study, students must complete 72 hours of General Education requirements. These are to be distributed across the Humanities, Fine Arts, and Social and Behavioral Sciences. The outcomes for the University s general education program are as follows: Table General Education Outcomes G.E. Outcomes Communication skills: reading, writing, quantitative reasoning, critical thinking and speaking skills Problem solving competencies including the ability to define and analyze problems and synthesize and use information for the resolution of problems in an environment in which the student is working well with others Information competency Connected and integrated learning An awareness of issues of cultural, racial, ethnic, and gender diversity. As we discussed under criteria 3, the G.E. outcomes are directly support several of a-k program outcomes. Also there is a strong assessment process in place for G.E. courses to support the achievement of indicated outcomes. In cooperation with the University General Education program we have created an Engineering Cluster that freshmen engineering students have to complete as a cohort. The cluster creates a cooperative environment between engineering students and also it gives them the opportunity to develop close working relationship with their engineering classmates. We believe that the G.E. cluster improves our retention rate in the crucial freshman year. As part of this cluster we have received approval for some of required courses in the engineering curriculum to count as G.E. These are MATH 1304 (Calculus I) ENGR 1011 (Engineering an Introduction), ENGR 2060 (Material Science), ENGR 3140 (Engineering Economics) and ENGR 3190 (Human Factors). This has enabled us to have sufficient room for all our major requirements and electives without expanding the curriculum beyond reasonable credit requirements. Students are also required to take 12 hours of English and communications courses as part of their G.E. requirements. Another the University requirement is a sequence of courses in U.S. History, U.S. Constitution and California government and a course in writing skills Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 102

104 103 Area A. Communication in English Language B. Natural Sciences and Mathematics C. Humanities: Fine Arts and Letters D. Social Sciences Table B General Education Content Sub-area Minimum Minimum Units Courses Sub area Area A1 Oral Communication 1 4 A2 Written Communication A3 Critical Thinking 1 4 B1 Physical Science 1 4 B2 Life Science 1 4 B3 Science Lab B4 Quantitative Reasoning 1 4 B5 Science Elective 1 4 B6 UD Science Elective 1 4 C1 Fine Arts 1 4 C2 Letters 1 4 C3 Humanities Elective 1 4 C4 U.D. Humanities Elect. 1 4 D1 Elective 1 4 D2 Elective 1 4 D3 Elective 1 4 D4 U.D. Social Science Elective 1 4 F. Performing Arts and Activities G. G.E. G1-3 Frosh Activities Electives G4 Information Literacy 1 2 Totals B G.E. Changes Implemented The following major changes to G.E. requirements have been implemented since last ABET visit: Engineering cluster has been developed to streamline freshman advising and to create an Engineering Community to improve student retention More required courses in the curriculum have been approved for G.E. to reduce the total degree requirements ENGR 1011(Engineering an Introduction) is now an approved G.E. course which helps us to attract undeclared freshmen to engineering. Other changes to the program curriculum were discussed under criterion 4, Continuous Improvement. Material supporting the activities pertaining to satisfaction of this criteria will be provided at the time of the visit Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 103

105 104 B.6 Faculty This section of the report demonstrates that the faculty have the competencies to cover all of curricular areas of the program and show that the faculty is of sufficient number to accommodate student-faculty interaction, advising and counseling, service activities, professional development, and interaction with practitioners and employers, as required by EC2000 Criterion 6. B.6.1 Faculty Size and How Competencies Cover Curricular Areas The Department currently has 4 full time faculty and three faculty with joint appointments with Statistics, Computer Science and Management. In any given quarter, approximately 15 undergraduate Engineering course sections are offered by these faculty members. These include cross-listed courses with Statistics and Management. All faculty members in the Department hold PhDs in appropriate disciplines for their areas of responsibility. The expertise of full time faculty in addition to the faculty of other departments teaching cross-listed courses covers the main industrial engineering focus areas. Typically, faculty members are also involved in research in their areas of expertise. Each faculty member s area of professional activity and the undergraduate courses for which they have responsibility are listed below. Dr. David Bowen, Associate Professor. Ph.D. (University of California, Berkeley, Industrial Engineering). Areas of interest: Human work systems, human factors, process flow analysis, and engineering education. He has been the PI for a major NSF project on design and analysis of engineering teams. He joined CSU East Bay after years of industry experience as an IE consultant. ENGR 1011 ENGR 3020 ENGR 3841 ENGR/Phys 3101 ENGR 3190 ENGR 4280 ENGR 4350 ENGR 4610, 4620 Introduction to Industrial Engineering Work Design and Measurement Operations Research Statics & dynamics Human Factors Design and Management Of Human Work Systems Reliability Engineering Senior Design Dr. Saeid Motavalli, Professor and Chair. MS (University of Southern California, Industrial Engineering) and PhD (University of Pittsburgh, Industrial Engineering). Areas of interest: Manufacturing Systems, Manufacturing Measurement, Reverse Engineering, and CAD/CAM and engineering education. He is currently the PI for a grant from MESA for attracting and retaining students in engineering and science. He is a licensed Professional Engineer (P.E.) Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 104

106 105 ENGR 1011 ENGR 1420 ENGR 4440 Introduction to Industrial Engineering Engineering Graphics Computer Integrated Manufacturing Dr. Helen Zong, Professor. PhD (University of Houston, Industrial Engineering) Areas of interest: Manufacturing, Production, Facilities Planning, and Simulation. Dr. Zong has spent the last two summers as visiting scholar in INTEL and Applied Materials Corporations conducting research in simulation of their manufacturing systems. She is a licensed Professional Engineer (P.E.). ENGR 1011 ENGR 2060 ENGR 2070 ENGR 4100 ENGR 4200 ENGR 4300 ENGR 4430 ENGR 4610, 4620 Introduction to Industrial Engineering Materials Engineering Fundamentals of Manufacturing Production Planning and Control Simulation Quality Engineering Facilities Planning and Design Senior Design Dr. Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Assistant professor Ph.D. (University of Alabama, Industrial Engineering), Areas of interest: Simulation, AI, and Expert Systems. She has had several grants from sources such as U.S. Air Force and from industry to develop computerized training systems and also to conduct simulation studies. She has several years of industry experience, served at various IE capacities. ENGR 3140 ENGR 3841 ENGR 4100 ENGR 4200 ENGR 4400 ENGR 4350 ENGR 4401 Engineering Economy Operations Research Production Planning and Control Simulation Manufacturing Systems Engineering Reliability Engineering Operations Research II Faculty with joint appointments Dr. Eric Suess, Statistics Dr. Roger Doering, Computer Engineering Dr. Zinovy Radovilsky, Management and ITM 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 105

107 106 Courses taught by other departments Statistics Engr/Stat/ 3601 Engr/Stat 3602 Engr/Stat 4401 Management and Accounting Mgmt/Engr 3600 Other electives Math and Computer Science CS 1160 Engr 2010 Statistics for CS and Engineers I Statistics for CS and Engineers II Operations Research II Theories of Management (elective) Intro to CS and Programming Electric Circuits Theory B.6.2 Student-Faculty Interaction The faculty practice an open-door policy. In addition, each faculty member has scheduled Office Hours each week during which they are available in their respective offices to respond to any questions/concerns students may have. Faculty members also solicit student input through . Faculty members routinely attend IIE student chapter meetings. The IIE student chapter arranges picnics and industry tours for faculty and students. B.6.3 Student Advising and Counseling Each student is assigned an advisor upon admission to the program. Students have the freedom to change advisor at any time. The objective is for the student to develop an ongoing relationship with an advisor and for the advisor to develop an understanding of the unique needs of each advisee. Each faculty has direct access to student records through the University electronic student advising data base system and also through the students files kept at the Department office. B.6.4 University Service Activities All faculty members participate in various university/college service activities. Level and amount of participation varies based on faculty interest and length of employment at CSUEB. Following is a partial list of recent university/college committee service by the department faculty. Faculty vita provides a more detailed picture of such activities. University Research Committee College Curriculum Committee College Computer Committee College Scholarship Committee University Student Mentoring Program Faculty advisor to student chapter of IIE CSUEB Foundation Board member Member of University Assessment Task Force General Education Sub Committee 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 106

108 107 Faculty Senate B.6.5 Professional Development Faculty are active members of one or more professional societies, typically IIE and ASEE and SME. The Department pays the membership dues for one professional society per year per faculty. The Department supports student chapter of IIE. The Chapter schedules regular meeting and also organizes facility tours. Dr. Zong is the faculty advisor to the IIE student chapter. Dr. Bowen has been successful in receiving major funding from NSF to study human work system. Dr. Ganjiezadeh and Dr. Zong have received funding from industry. Dr. Motavalli has been the PI of two major outreach and retention grants from NSF and MESA. He has recently received a grant from BECHTEL Foundation to develop a systematic approach to student transfer from community colleges to engineering schools. The Department and the College of Science support faculty travel to national and international conferences such as IERC and ASEE. The faculty attended the ABET training workshop in Pittsburgh PA, June The Department Chair has been regularly attending the IIE national conference and ABET training workshops. He is an ABET program evaluator for industrial engineering programs. B.6.6 Interaction with Practitioners and Employers The faculty use a wide range of industry-based projects in courses. In addition, faculty participates in meetings of local chapters of IIE. The faculty also interact with local industry through our Industrial Advisory Board (IAB), which is well represented, by local industry. Dr. Bowen s NSF funded grant required interaction with industry to conduct surveys and interviews with engineers. He also identifies and supervises senior design projects that are sponsored by industry. Dr. Zong has received a number of summer fellowships to work at companies such as INTEL, and Applied Materials over the last two summers. Dr. Ganjeizadeh has several years of industry experience and has strong ties with companies in the area. The faculty, through their contacts, organize several industry plant tours for students every year. B.6.7 Adequacy of the size of the faculty Currently the Industrial Engineering program has about 100 students listed as advisees with a total of 4 FTE faculty assigned to the program, a student (FTE)/faculty (FTE) ratio of 11 to 1. The combination of FT faculty and joint faculty from other departments teaching cross-listed courses, allow the Department to offer all required course as scheduled and to offer sufficient number of technical electives for the students to choose from. A folder indicating faculty achievement and supporting documents will be provided at the time of the visit Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 107

109 108 B.7 Facilities This section of the report describes classrooms, laboratory facilities, equipment, and infrastructure and discusses the adequacy of these facilities to accomplish program objectives, as required by Criterion 7. B.7. 1 Classrooms Most Engineering courses are held in classrooms located in the Science and the new Business and Technology (VBT) Buildings. The majority of classrooms holds up to 35 students and are adequate for teaching the courses. Larger size classes and multi-media rooms are also available in the Science and VBT buildings. Almost all classrooms are equipped with computer stations and overhead projection systems (multi-media capable). In uncommon situations where the class is not equipped, the instructor can request portable systems. The University Computer Services Center provides LCD projectors, Laptop computers, VCRs and TVs on demand. Also the Engineering Department owns LCD projectors and screens for Lab. use. B.7.2 Laboratories With our move to the new facility in the VBT building, we have ample space for laboratory facilities. We have three relatively large laboratories in the VBT building and one large laboratory in the Science building. Also with our move to the new building we received in excess of $200,000 in new equipment money. Using these funds we developed a state-of-the-art computer laboratory with 35 stations. We also purchased several new pieces of equipment for our Performance Measurement Laboratory. Currently the Department maintains four Laboratories to support the undergraduate courses in the Engineering program. These labs contain a variety of traditional as well as advanced manufacturing, measurement, ergonomics and computational equipment. These laboratories include: Computer Integrated Manufacturing/Quality Testing (Room VBT 231): Serves as a teaching lab for, Fundamentals of Manufacturing (ENGR 2070), Quality Engineering (ENGR 4300) and Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems (ENGR 4440). It is designed and developed to support various engineering courses with equipment ranging from table-top machine tools, robots, coordinate measuring machine and computer workstations to control this equipment. Computer Laboratory (Room VBT 223): Our new computer laboratory houses 35 computer workstations equipped with the latest versions of IE and manufacturing software. We also have several laptops that can be borrowed by faculty and students to work on-special projects. This laboratory is open to engineering students to work on their projects and homework. This lab is utilized as a teaching lab for courses such as Engineering an Introduction (ENGR 1011), Engineering Graphics (ENGR 1420), Electric Circuits (ENGR 2010), Simulation (ENGR 4200), Reliability Engineering (ENGR 4350), Systems Engineering (4400), Facilities Planning (ENGR 4430) and CIM Systems (ENGR 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 108

110 ). This lab is equipped with multi-media presentation equipment. Human Performance Laboratory (Room VBT 230): The Human Performance Laboratory is the newest laboratory in Engineering. Engineering courses such as Work design and measurement (ENGR 3020), Human Factors (ENGR 3190) and Design and Management of Human Work Systems (ENGR 4280) utilize this lab. The lab is equipped with various types of work measurement hardware and software, a treadmill and a work simulator machine. It also houses two Segway vehicles to study ergonomic design concepts. This laboratory is equipped with multi-media presentation equipment. Material Testing Laboratory (Room South Science 247) : Material Testing Laboratory houses an MTS machine, a torsion tester, an engineering microscope, and other measurement equipment. The lab houses a plastics processing equipment that is capable of demonstrating various plastics processes such as injection molding, blow molding and extrusion. This laboratory is utilized in Engineering Materials (ENGR 2060), Fundamentals of Manufacturing (ENGR 2070) and Quality Engineering (ENGR 4300). Open Computer Laboratories: College of Science operates several computer labs, which are open to all College of Science students. These laboratories can also be used as classrooms. The computers are loaded with various software including optimization software tools. B.7.3 Equipment and Tools The Engineering laboratories house equipment that students and faculty use in meeting the requirements of the program. The equipment in each laboratory is itemized in this section. Computer Integrated Manufacturing (located in VBT 231) Hardware - Brown and Sharp Coordinate Measuring Machine - Starrett Micrometer and Caliper sets - Height Gages - Granite inspection surfaces - Table top lathe and milling machines - Robotics arms - PCs Software - MS Office - CNC Interface - Robot Interface - CMM Interface Computer Laboratory (located in 223 VBT) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 109

111 110 Hardware: - 35 networked PC s/ Printer Software: - SOLID WORKS - MASTER CAM - Spectra CAD/CAM - PROMODEL - STORM 4 - LINGO - Microsoft Office - Microsoft Project Human Performance (Located in VBT 230) Hardware: - Work Simulator Station - Treadmill - Dynamometers - Camcorder - Light meter - Sound meter - Stopwatches - Work sampling and ergonomics training video tapes - Segway vehicles Software - Work sampling study software - Time study software - Work simulator software - Brain wave analysis software - Microsoft Office Materials Testing Laboratory (located SSc. 247) Hardware - Surface finish testing and evaluation equipment - Material hardness testing equipment - MTS tensile testing machine - Torsion testing machine - Plastics processing equipment - Surface polishing equipment - Heat treatment ovens - Engineering Microscope/vision inspection - PCs Software - Material Testing software - MS Office 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 110

112 111 B.7.4 Computing and Information Infrastructure The computer hardware and software in the Engineering Department are continuously updated to keep up with this rapidly changing technology. The computer lab contains a wide variety of software that engineering students would use in various courses such as in operations research, quality control, simulation, work measurement and design, statistics and design of experiments, facilities planning, computer programming languages, etc. The computers in the labs are connected to the internet through the College of Science server. It also has wireless connectivity for students use their personal laptops. There are also several laboratories in the College of Science that are open to engineering students. These laboratories have lab attendants to help students on their computer problems. Various statistical and optimization software are available in these labs. B.7.5 Laboratory Development Plan The department has a development plan for each lab to provide the students with access to the latest technology in different areas of industrial and manufacturing engineering. The plan is updated annually through the efforts of the faculty and the chair. As money become available the faculty through curriculum committee meetings collectively prioritize Department needs. B Financing of Laboratory Development The funds for laboratory development come from two sources. The College of Science equipment fund which, is allocated to various departments based on need. The second source, which is particular to Engineering, comes from the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Academic Affairs office has funded several of the laboratory development projects in Engineering. We have also received additional funding after our move to the VBT building. B The Development Plan The five-year laboratory development plan is as follows: CIM/Computer Laboratory Upgrade the computers in the laboratory (every three years) Renew software contracts (every year) Add software on Neural Network, Information Systems/AI. Human Performance/Quality Testing Laboratory Oxygen consumption equipment Pressure/EMG/posture, data collection system 3-D motion analysis system Task simulator software 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 111

113 112 B.7.6 Opportunities for Using Modern Engineering Tools In various courses in the curriculum, students get an opportunity to use (1) modern, wellequipped laboratories, (2) current computing facilities (hardware & software), and (3) current textbooks and instructional materials. Laboratories and computing facilities are described above. The textbooks can be inspected with the course materials at the time of site visit. Table Percentage of students indicating Lab equipment as being state of the art or very good Survey year Number of respondents Computer Lab. 67% 57% 66% CIM Lab. 50% 75% 44% Manufacturing 50% 75% 38% Major Laboratory Improvement was initiated in Computer/CIM 38% 50% 72% Lab. Human 80% 28% 53% Performance measurement Lab. Quality testing Lab. 38% 50% 50% B.8 Institutional Support and Financial Resources This section of the report describes the level and adequacy of institutional support, financial resources, and constructive leadership to achieve program objectives and assure continuity of the program, as required by Criterion 8. The information contained in Appendix I presents supporting tables. B.8.1 Budget Process The base budget of the department in any year is essentially the previous year s budget, adjusted for any increase approved by the Provost. This base budget is usually adjusted upwards from the allocation of additional funds from the Dean s office. The Office of Academic Affairs provides additional funds for capital equipment expenditures. Table B8.1.1 shows a summary of the departmental budget for the current year and previous three years, excluding faculty/staff salaries and expenses funded through research projects Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 112

114 113 Table B8.1.1 Budget Summary* Operating Capital Travel RA Total Expense Equipment Initial Budget $18,000 $6,000 $24,000 Actual $16,905 $5,389 expenditure $22, Initial Budget $18,000 $6,000 Actual Expenditure $12,108 $5,112 $24,000 $17, Initial Budget $18,000 $6,000 $24,000 Actual Expenditure 13,964 5,114 $173,188 $154,110 (Move to new building) Initial Budget $18,000 $6,000 $24,000 Actual Expenditure $25,693 $5,885 $31,578 * Excludes: faculty/staff/ra salary and expenses and other expenditures funded through research projects. B.8.2 Institutional/Financial/Leadership Support The Dean of the College of Science provides financial, managerial and administrative leadership for the Department. Traditionally, the Dean s office has provided, when requested, additional funds for equipment and faculty travel. In preparation for accreditation visit, the Dean funded the trip of the entire faculty to attend the ABET training workshop in Pittsburgh PA (June 2008). The Dean also assisted in funding the Chair s trip to 2008 IIE Conference in Vancouver Canada to attend IIE ABET preparation training. The University, through Faculty Development Office, has arranged for faculty workshops in teaching improvement, program assessment, and classroom management. The Office of Research and Sponsored Programs assists and trains faculty on proposal writing and locating funding sources. The University has supported the new faculty with seed money for developing their research and proposals for outside funding. The President and the Vice-President for Academic Affairs have identified the Engineering program as a high priority unit and provide us with substantial funding for our capital equipment purchases. Also the CSU Chancellor has funded a $60,000/year outreach project for the campus. We are using these funds to attract students to our engineering programs Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 113

115 114 B.8.3 Retention and Recruitment of Faculty Retention and recruitment of faculty are active areas for the Department. We conducted a search for tenure track faculty in This search resulted in the hiring of Dr. Farnaz Ganjeizadeh. We have not experienced faculty retention problems. B.8.4 Planning and Funding of Faculty Development The College of Science and the Department of Engineering usually fund faculty development activities. Each year, the College makes a certain amount available to match the Department funding for faculty travel. Using these funds, the Department has usually sponsored one trip or more a year to a conference or to a funding agency. In addition, funds are also available for faculty to travel with students to student conferences, regional meetings of ASEE, or to attend ABET workshops. Table B shows the state funded travel budgets of recent years. On occasion, based on the department chair s recommendation, the College provides release time for faculty to engage in research/service or scholarly activity. Also the University provides several competitive internal grants for faculty. These grants are for improving research competitiveness, preparing proposals to external agencies, and research in education. Engineering faculty members have been successful in receiving funds from these internal sources. The Office of Faculty Development sponsors workshops on topics related to teaching and service activities. The Department sponsors industrial site visits for the students and faculty in terms of transportation. The ABET training workshops have been funded by the department and the College of Science. The University provides internal funding through competitive grants for faculty to initiate their research to be able to write external grant proposals. B.8.5 Planning and Funding of Facilities Development The Department has developed a laboratory development plan that is regularly updated through the deliberations of the faculty and consultation with IAB. This plan is the basis for major equipment purchases or grants requests. Funds for lab development come from two main sources: from the Dean s Office or special allocations from the Vice-President for Academic Affair s Office. Each year the chair in consultation with the faculty prepares a request for equipment. The request is submitted to the Dean. The Dean and the Provost typically review the request and funding is allocated to the Department. Our requests for laboratory development have always been approved. Section B describes the lab development plan for the department. B.8.6 Support Services In order to maintain and operate various labs, the department has one technician (jointly with Physics department). This is in addition to computer technicians available at the 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 114

116 115 College of Science. All technicians are qualified for the duties of their respective positions. For office work, the Department has a full-time secretary. The Office of Duplicating Services assists the Department for major copying needs. The office of Media and Technology services helps the faculty with the development of special presentations and technology use in classroom. The office of Faculty Development also conducts workshops on Blackboard training and Web based course development. The University Library on campus provides library services through its own holdings and inter-library loan facilities. The library holdings are sufficient for all undergraduate instructional needs. The catalog is accessible online, making it easy for search. The Engineering Librarian is available for special needs of engineering faculty and students. The library subscribe to several database systems for on-line literature search. Library support is fully described in Appendix II. Computing, Communication, and Media Support are fully described in Appendix II. B.9 Program Criteria This section describes how the requirements of the IE program criteria are met in the areas of curricular topics and faculty qualifications, as required by Criterion 9. The program must demonstrate that graduates have the ability to design, develop, implement and improve integrated systems that include people, materials, information, equipment and energy. The program must include in-depth instruction to accomplish the integration of systems using appropriate analytical, computational and experimental practices. B.9.1 Curriculum The primary curriculum activity aimed at achieving this output is through industry-based, open-ended problem-solving in the capstone design courses and in other courses (especially in ENGR 3190 Human Factors, ENGR 4200 Simulation, ENGR 4430 Facilities Planning, ENGR 4400 Systems Engineering and ENGR 4440 CIM Systems). The following paragraphs summarize the design and integration experience of students throughout the program. Freshman Year The design experience of the engineering students starts from the freshman year. ENGR 1011 (Engineering an Introduction) is the first exposure of the students to Industrial Engineering. It covers an introduction to the engineering design process. Group projects are assigned for students to work on a simple design project and come up with alternative solutions to the problem. Also in freshman year the students take ENGR 1420 (Engineering Graphics), which introduces the concept of mechanical drafting and graphics design. Students work in groups to complete drawing projects with consideration to design specifications such as dimensioning and tolerancing. In ENGR 2070 (Fundamentals of Manufacturing) manufacturing facility tours are organized to 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 115

117 116 introduce students to real life applications of manufacturing processes and the effect of design choices on manufacturing. Sophomore Year In their sophomore year students take ENGR 3020 (Work Design and Measurement). This course includes small design projects accomplished by teams of (usually three) students. Video-taped industrial workstations and laboratory exercises focus on group definition of the problem, development of alternative solutions, evaluation of alternatives, development and presentation of a solution. Written reports are required for laboratory projects. Also ENGR 3140 (Engineering Economy) teaches students to conduct economic evaluation of engineering projects. Junior Year In the junior year the students take ENGR 3190 (Human Factors), ENGR 4430 (Facilities Planning), ENGR 4100 (Production Planning and Control). Design activities in these courses are directed at group projects but involve larger, more comprehensive projects dealing with systems with expectations of more formal analysis, development, and documentation. The courses focus on the definition and solution of a real world problem and development of a formal written report and oral presentation. Also in the junior year students take two statistics courses, ENGR 3601, and ENGR These courses concentrate on data analysis, design of experiments and statistical inferences. Senior Year The senior year is where students get major design experience. Course taken during this year include ENGR 4200 (Systems Simulation), ENGR 4300 (Quality Engineering), ENGR 4350 (Reliability Engineering), ENGR 4400 (Systems Engineering), ENGR 4440 (Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems) and a two-quarter sequence of capstone design courses ENGR 4610 and ENGR 4620 (Senior Design I and II). Students are capable by this time of undertaking design activities in groups or as individuals. The designs performed in these courses generally have more stringent technical requirements. The Systems Simulation course culminates in the development and validation of a model of a real world situation by a team. Feedback as to the adequacy of the design and quality of its execution is obvious and direct. Students are now capable of objectively assessing their performance. For further information refer to Section B4. ENGR 4610 and 4620 are the culmination of the undergraduate design experience. In Senior Design, student in teams work on industry projects. The mix of students encourages learning from each other and the development of managerial and leadership skills. The objective is to assure a breadth of experience. Every student must complete two capstone design projects before graduation Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 116

118 117 The following table shows the assessment of the program criteria using various tools. Table B Assessment Tools for Program Criteria IE Program Criteria, Assessment Tools Capstone Design Co-op Project reports and supervisor evaluation Industry-Based and other system design projects in the following courses ENGR 3190 Human Factors ENGR 4200 Simulations ENGR 4430 Facilities Plan. ENGR 4610, 4620, Senior Design I, II The following table summarizes the latest assessment results regarding program criteria. The numbers in the table are averages of evaluations done using all the tools indicated above. Program Outcome The program must demonstrate that graduates have the ability to design, develop, implement and improve integrated systems that include people, materials, information, equipment and energy. The program must include in-depth instruction to accomplish the integration of systems using appropriate analytical, computational and experimental practices. Spring 08 Winter08 Fall Fall 08 As indicated by the assessment process our students meet this outcome. We are continuously striving to use the assessment process to improve the level of achievement of program outcomes by our students. The senior design course has been enhanced by increasing contact hours and project scopes. Co-op projects have all been successful with very positive feedback from supervisors. Many class projects include elements of IE program criteria. B.9.2 Faculty Evidence must be provided that the program faculty understand professional practice 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 117

119 118 and maintain currency in their respective professional areas. Program faculty must have responsibility and sufficient authority to define, revise, implement, and achieve program objectives. The department currently has 4 faculty positions fully dedicated to IE program. We also have 3 faculty with joint appointments with Statistics, Computer Science, and Management/ITM. The FTE s are allocated as follows: 3.33 FTE to support undergraduate IE program David Bowen Farnaz Ganjeizadeh Saeid Motavalli (0.67 for administrative duties) Helen Zong In any given quarter, these faculty and support faculty from Statistics, Management/ITM and Computer Science Departments offer approximately undergraduate engineering course sections. All faculty members in the Department hold PhDs in appropriate disciplines for their areas of responsibility. Two out of four full time Engineering faculty members hold professional Engineering (PE) licenses in specialized areas: Professional Engineer, PE Saeid Motavalli Helen Zong All faculty members are active in giving professional presentations in technical conferences and publishing their research findings in refereed journals. Curriculum development and revision as well as implementation of ABET criteria and assessment/evaluation process are the responsibilities of the faculty. The faculty must approve all changes in these areas before they are implemented. As indicated in sections 2 and 3, the faculty have the responsibility, and authority, to define/assess/revise as well as implement changes in the curriculum and processes for achieving program outcomes and objectives.supporting material to indicate assessment and evaluation of program criteria will be provided at the time of the visit. B.10 Copies of Survey Forms/ Industrial Advisory Board Meeting Minutes. Copies of the following forms are attached in this section: Graduation Requirement Checklist Graduating Senior Exit Survey Form Alumni Survey Form (current and new version) Employer Survey Form (current and new versions) Minutes of the IAB meetings 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 118

120 119 Graduation Check sheet Catalog year Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 119

121 120 Graduation Check Sheet Catalog Year 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 120

122 121 GRADUATING SENIOR EXIT SURVEY Note to Graduating Students: Program accreditation requirements and general good practices motivate the Engineering Department to continually measure and assess achievement of program educational outcomes. Through this survey, the Engineering Department is attempting to collect information for such assessment. To ensure confidentiality, please do not to write your name or ID number anywhere on this survey form. Please complete all five pages of the survey. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. Entered Program: (check one): Year: Term: Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer Graduating: (check one): Year: Term: Fall, Winter, Spring, Summer Major: Industrial Engineering I. Self-evaluation of Student's Knowledge and Ability Please rate how confident you are in your knowledge or understanding using the given scale Knowledge of Area Level of confidence No Confidence Low Confidence Somewhat Confident Highly Confident Extremely Confident 1 Basic sciences (physics, chemistry, etc.) 2 Mathematics (calculus, differential equation, linear algebra, etc.) 3 Probability and statistics 4 Engineering sciences 5 Engineering design principles 6 Engineering professionalism and ethical standards 7 Teamwork 8 Socio-economic context in which engineering is practiced 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 121

123 122 Please rate how confident you are in your ability to satisfactorily perform the following tasks: Task Level of confidence No Confidence Low Confidence Somewhat Confident Highly Confident Extremely Confident 9 Integrate knowledge and information for engineering problem solving 10 Communicate ideas and results verbally 11 Communicate ideas and results in writing 12 Communicate engineering ideas and results in drawings and graphic expressions 13 Build teams and facilitate team processes/outcomes 14 Locate needed knowledge and self-learn 15 Work effectively in an international/global environment II. Evaluation of Engineering Courses Taken at CSUEB For each Engr course you have taken at CSUEB, rate its value (as you perceive) toward your (1) professional development, (2) career/job prospect enhancement, and/or (3) development as a person. Mark 'Not Taken' if you have not taken the course at CSUEB. Feel free to write your comments (positive and/or negative) in the space provided. Value Rating of Course Comments: CSUEB Course Course Not Taken No Value Low Value Some Value High Value Very High Value Required Courses CHEM 1601 General Chemistry CS 1160 Intro to Computer Science and Programming ECON 2301 Principles of Microeconomics ENGR 1011 Introduction to Engineering ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics ENGR 2010 Electric Circuit Theory ENGR 2060 Materials Science ENGR 2070 Fundamentals of Manufacturing MATH 1304 Calculus I MATH 1305 Calculus II MATH 2304 Calculus III PHYS 1001 Physics I 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 122

124 123 Value Rating of Course Comments: CSUEB Course Course Not Taken No Value Low Value Some Value High Value Very High Value PHYS 1002 Physics II PHYS 1003 Physics III PSYC 1000 General Psychology ENGR 3020 Work Design and Measurement ENGR 3101 Static and Dynamic ENGR 3140 Engineering Economy ENGR 3190 Human Factors ENGR/STAT 3601 Statistics for CS and Engineers I ENGR/STAT 3602 Statistics for CS and Engineering II ENGR 3841 Operations Research I ENGR 4100 Production Planning and Control ENGR 4200 System Simulation ENGR 4280 Design and Management of Human Work Systems ENGR 4300 Quality Engineering ENGR 4350 Reliability Engineering ENGR 4400 Systems Modeling ENGR 4430 Facilities Planning and Design ENGR 4440 Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems ENGR/STAT 4603 Operations Research II ENGR 4610 Senior Project I ENGR 4620 Senior Project II MATH 3331 Differential Equations BIOL 3020 Genetics Evolution and Humanity BIOL 4020 Contemporary Human Biology MATH 2101 Elements of Linear Algebra MATH 3750 Numerical Analysis CIS/ENGR 3281 Systems Analysis and Design ENGR 3898 Co-Op Education ENGR 4180 Product-Process Design ENGR 4900 Independent Study ENGR 4990 Special Topics MATH/ENGR 4841 Topics in Optimization MGMT/ENGR 3110 Applications of Decision Making MGMT/ENGR 3600 Theories of Management Electives 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 123

125 124 Value Rating of Course Comments: CSUEB Course Course Not Taken No Value Low Value Some Value High Value Very High Value Others (specify) Others (specify) Other Comments on Courses: III. Evaluation of Industry Based Projects In Senior Projects, as well as in other courses, you have participated in projects that were based on real-life situations outside of classroom in which you had to do one or more of the following activities: study situation, collect data, model, analyze data, design system, or make improvement recommendations. How many industry based projects have you participated in at CSUEB, include Senior Projects but do not include co-op internship projects: (enter a number) Rate the value, as you perceive, of your industry-based project experience: Value Rating of Industry-based Project Experience No Value Low Value Some Value High Value Very High Value Comments IV. Evaluation of ENGR Facilities In the course of your study at CSUEB, you have used Engineering laboratories. Using the given scale, evaluate the quality of equipment and facilities in these laboratories Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 124

126 125 CSUEB Laboratory Quality of Equipment and Facilities Comments Did not use Totally Useless Low Quality but Useable Adequate for Course Use Mostly High Quality State-of-the-Art Computer/CIM Laboratory Human Performance Lab Material Quality Testing Lab Other comments on Laboratories: IV. Use the space provided below to make any comments you would like regarding your experience in the Engineering program, especially identify the strengths or best aspects of the program and any weaknesses or aspects that would most benefit from improvement efforts. Thank you for providing this important information Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 125

127 126 California State University, East Bay, Department Of Engineering Alumni Survey Form ( Current) PART I Personal Information: 1. Name: 2. Address: 3. Current Employer: 4. Current Supervisor's Name and Address: 5. What is your current job title? 6. How long have you held an engineering position: 7. Educational degrees received or expected: 8. Have you taken the fundamentals of engineering exam? 9. How well did your education prepare you for the test? 10 Do you have a Professional Engineering license? 11. Indicate the professional societies you are a member of: PART II The following table lists the Engineering program educational objectives. Please use a scale of 1 to 5 to rate how strongly you feel you have achieved these objectives. ( 1 indicating not at all and 5 meaning you have strongly achieved them) 1. Successfully apply your learned skills throughout your professional pursuits 2. Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development 3. Have the ability to communicate and work well as an individual and on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines 4. Are recognized as a qualified engineer with high ethical standards N/ A 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 126

128 127 PART II How would you rate your ability in the following areas. Use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is extremely poor and 5 is extremely well. 1. Use of knowledge in basic math and sciences 2. Use of knowledge in engineering science 3. Model and design system and components 4. Communicate effectively in both written and oral formats 5. Communicate ideas and results in drawings and graphically 6. Integrate knowledge and information for engineering problem solving 7. Work effectively in international/global environment 8. Apply engineering professionalism and ethical standards appropriately 9. Obtain needed knowledge and self learn 10. Build teams and facilitate team processes 11. Awareness of the socio-economic environment in which engineering is practiced 12. Use appropriate computer hardware and software 13. Collect and analyze data properly In your current position do you engage in the following activities? If yes, how well did CSUEB prepared you for it Yes No Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 127

129 128 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING ALUMNI SURVEY FORM ( ) PART I Personal Information: Name Address Current Employer What is your current job title How long have you held engineering position (years)? Educational Degrees received or expected Have you passed the fundamentals of engineering exam? Do you have a P.E. License? Indicate the professional societies you are a member of Do you think you have achieved the objectives set out by the engineering program at CSUH? PART II For the following questions use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is extremely poor and 5 is extremely well. Use knowledge in basic math and sciences Use of knowledge in engineering science Model and design system and components Communicate ideas and results in drawing and graphics expressions Integrate knowledge and information for engineering problem solving Work effectively in international/global environment Apply engineering professionalism and ethical standards appropriately Obtain needed knowledge and self learn Built teams and facilitate team processes Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 128

130 129 Be aware of socio-economic environment in which engineering is practiced Use appropriate computer hardware and software Collect and analyze data properly PART III For the following questions rate your answer between 1 to 5 with 1 meaning not at all and 5 meaning very much. At the end of my undergraduate studies, I was prepared for graduate study or professional career in my major area A sufficient number of technical electives in my area of interest were available The laboratory facilities supporting my area were satisfactory The quality of teaching within my major area was satisfactory I was satisfied with the advising received from the faculty members of the department I was treated with dignity and respect by the faculty members of the department Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 129

131 130 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, EAST BAY DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING EMPLOYER SURVEY ( CURRENT) As part of our continuous improvement process, the Engineering Department at CSUEB is continually measuring and assessing achievements of its identified program educational objectives and outcomes. One part of the assessment process is the identification of the performance of our graduates relative to identified program objectives and outcomes. Through this survey, the Engineering Department is attempting to collect information for such assessment. We would greatly appreciate your time and effort in completing this survey. PART I Identify your industry Number of engineers employed at your facility How many CSUEB engineering graduates work in your facility? PART II The table below lists the engineering program educational objectives. Please evaluate the CSUEB engineering graduates that you have supervised/worked with on how well they are achieving these objectives. Use a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning strongly disagree and 5 meaning strongly agree, to assess achievement of the following program objectives. The CSEUB graduates that I have supervised.. 1. Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits 2. Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development 3. Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines 4. Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards N/ A PART III 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 130

132 How do CSUEB engineering graduates compare with other engineers working for you? 2. Does it appear that CSUEB engineering graduates are well prepared for the job? 3. What are the strengths of CSUEB engineering graduates? 4. What are the weaknesses of CSUEB engineering graduates? 5. What suggestions do you have for us to improve the quality of our graduates? 6. Have CSUEB engineering graduates upheld professional and ethical standards? 7. Given the opportunity would you hire additional CSUEB engineering graduates? 8. Would you like to become active in the Department of Engineering Industrial Advisory Board? 9. Would you be willing to provide internship or co-op opportunities for our students? 10. Please provide additional Comments/Suggestions Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 131

133 132 MINUTES OF ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS SINCE 2003 Minutes from the DECEMBER 5, 2003 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: N. Ely, M. Komroksy, M. Plotkin, T. Kenyon, M. Leung, S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, H. Zong, T. Copus, E. Suess, R. Doering, A. Krimetz, D. Minnix, R. Worrall, S. Roy, F. Ganjeizadeh, M. Saffi Regrets: N. Rees, J. Bhadury, A. James, D. Fearn Meeting started at 10:15 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m. Minutes from June 2003 IAB meeting reviewed and approved with one correction. The course title of ENGR 4280 was corrected to Design and Management of Human Work Systems. Introductions were made. Terry Kenyon announced that he will be resigning from the Board and he introduced his replacement, Dale Minnix. Saeid Motavalli made his presentation. ACCREDITATION UPDATE The ABET Review Team was at CSUH October 19-21, The review was very positive with no major issues being raised. The Reviewers cited one weakness and one concern. The weakness is related to assessment of program objectives and outcomes. The Department has not closed the cycle of evaluation program objectives using external measures such as: the success of graduates, positions held by graduates, and survey of employers of graduates. Motavalli presented the Board with an Alumni Survey Form and Employer's Survey Form. The forms were discussed and suggestions were made. Motavalli noted the suggestions. He will send the revised forms to Board for additional feed back. The concern cited by the ABET Reviewers was the number of faculty. Motavalli said the Department is in the process of hiring a new tenure-track faculty member and this would solve their concern. STUDENT RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES Motavalli has visited City College of SF, Ohlone, Chabot, and Las Positas. The 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 132

134 133 Department has also advertised the program in the community college papers. Motavalli has met with the Enrollment Services Outreach Office and provided promotional material about the program for their high school visits. The Department also participated in the Major/Minor Fair and the Al fresco event. ENROLLMENT STATISTICS Enrollment figures show that enrollment to the program is rising. Motavalli also noted that Freshmen entering the program has increased. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS To attract more students into the Engineering Program, the Engineering Department is in the process of developing a M.S. Degree in Engineering Management, a Certificate in Quality Management, and a Certificate in Engineering Management. Motavalli asked the Board if they thought these would be useful programs. The Board agreed. For the MS in Engineering Management the Chancellors office requires a "Demand Survey" for the degree. There are only two universities in the area, Stanford and Santa Clara College, that offer the degree and they are private colleges. Motavalli asked for input from the Board on what and who to ask to identify the need for the degree. The Board discussed this and made several suggestions. Motavalli will create a "demand survey" based on these suggestions and will send to Board members for review. The MS Degree and the two certificates were discussed by the Board members. The Board was very positive about the certificate programs, especially the Quality Management Certificate. Leung said the certificate programs could be offered through the University's Extended Education Program with the possibility of doing the courses at the business site. LAB DEVELOPMENT The Engineering Department developed the Human Performance/Quality Testing Laboratory and remodeled the machine shop to be used for demonstration of basic manufacturing processes. FACULTY RECRUITMENT The Engineering Department has narrowed the list of candidates to 5 for campus interviews and hope to finish the interviews by the end of January Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 133

135 134 OPEN DISCUSSION Helen Zong thanked Ling Liauw for Intel's donation of the Zeiss Axiotron Microscope system. They also paid to have the microscope relocated to CSUH. The Department is very grateful for the donation. Michael Leung gave an update on the new Business and Technology building. The University is only short $750,000 and ground breaking is scheduled for Fall of Michael Leung asked the industry board members what direction they see the job market for future IE graduates heading. The general feeling was that the industry is becoming more service oriented. Lines are being set up in foreign countries. There is more demand for management. Being multi-lingual is a strength. Eight to ten graduates get jobs in service industry - applied manufacturing Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 134

136 135 Minutes from the JUNE 4, 2004 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: M. Komroksy, M. Plotkin, M. Leung, S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, H. Zong, T. Copus, R. Doering, A. Krimetz, D. Minnix, F. Ganjeizadeh, M. Saffi, A. James, M. Dehghani, L. Liauw, Z. Radovilsky, W. Odisho Regrets: N. Rees, J. Bhadury, N. Ely, Z. Yasana, J. Summers. S. Basu, R. Burt, S. Clark, R. Hurst, S. Roy, R. Worrall, J. Pham, J. Mallon, D. Fearn The meeting was held at Wente Vineyards Meeting started at 10:15 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:15 p.m. Minutes from December 2003 IAB meeting reviewed and approved. Introductions were made. The new Engineering Department Tenure-track faculty member, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh was introduced and two new IAB members, Zinovy Radovilsky from the College of Business and Walter Odisho from NUMMI, were welcomed. Saeid Motavalli made his presentation. STUENT RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES Motavalli and Zong visited local community colleges. The Department Faculty called the 50 students admitted to the program to welcome them into the program. ENROLLMENT STATISTICS Enrollment figures show that enrollment to the program continues to rise. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS The two new certificate programs were approved by the University; Quality Management and Engineering Management. The Engineering Management Certificate was discussed extensively. Concerns were raised that there was no finance course and that financial analysis was extremely important Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 135

137 136 At the end of the discussion the Board agreed to adding Finance 6033 Graduate Introductions to Financial Decisions to the Certificate in Engineering Management. The Certificate will require students to take Project Management (ENGR/MGMT 6200) and Graduate Introductions to Financial Decisions (FIN 6033) and then take two courses from the following three courses: Quality Engineering (ENGR4300/5300), Enterprise Planning and Control (MGMT 6130), Product Process Design (ENGR 4180/6180). The M.S. in Engineering Management is going through the approval process. The Engineering Department is aiming for Fall 2005, but Fall 2006 may be reality. There is a possibility of admitting students into the program before this date if the degree program is approved. The mail survey sent to approximately 2,700 engineers in the Bay Area revealed a positive interest in a M.S. degree in Engineering Management. The Board discussed the value of a Thesis versus the value of a Project. It was decided to revisit the issue in a couple of years OUTREACH IDEAS, OPEN DISCUSSION The Board was asked for marketing ideas. Suggestions were - Go to companies and give a presentation. - Offer a free slot for one person at a large company. - Contact Human Resource offices and set up lunch time presentation. - Set up information tables in lunch rooms. - Direct mail via internet targeting IE list attaching a flyer. - Set up a table at Tech shows. It was suggested that we need to make the programs easy to access by working people by offering classes off site, internet courses, and distant learning. Another recommendation was to capitalize on the CSU name in our marketing. Zong invited everyone to attend the Senior Design presentations Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 136

138 137 Minutes from the DECEMBER 10, 2004 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: M. Komroksy, M. Plotkin, M. Leung, S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, T. Copus, R. Doering, A. Krimetz, F. Ganjeizadeh, M. Dehghani, W. Odisho, J. Bhadury, N. Ely, S. Basu, D. Mejia, R. Hurst, R. Doering, R. Caramella, E. Reiter Regrets: N. Rees, J. Summers, S. Clark, R. Worrall, J. Pham, H. Zong, L. Liauw, Z. Radovilsky, Y. Chen, C. Chan The meeting was held at NUMMI Meeting started at 10:30 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m. Introductions were made. Walter Odisho gave a presentation about NUMMI. Saeid Motavalli made his presentation. STUDENT RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES Department representatives visited local community colleges. The Department brochure was mailed to 119 high school counselors in the Bay Area. The accreditation of the Department was publicized in local papers. ENROLLMENT STATISTICS Enrollment figures show that enrollment to the program continues to rise. This is very good compared to other IE programs. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS The MS in Engineering Management proposal is continuing through the system. The target date is Fall The Department can start offering courses in Fall ASSESSMENT Program Objectives Program objectives and outcomes were described along with the Department's assessment tools. An IAB member expressed concern about the statement Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards. While ethics are important, may be difficult to 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 137

139 138 prove. Motavalli said the assessment tools would address this. Program Outcomes The 9 outcomes were presented and discussed. Tools Faculty self assessment of courses. Form designed by David Bowen. Assessments are done quarterly and have been very useful. Outcome of the course is tied to outcome of program. Alumni survey. The Alumni Survey was discussed. This is a difficult survey to get back. There are plans to put it on the website. One typo was found on question 12 (Part I) and the wording on question 11 (Part II) was changed. Employer survey. Motavalli asked that the IAB members look over the Employer Survey and him feedback. Motavalli also asked that all employers who have hired our students to please fill out the survey and return it. This is very important to our assessment process. Motavalli presented the results from the Alumni and Employer surveys that the Department has received. Weakness was in the use of math and basic sciences for both employers and alumni. Strengths were in professional responsibility and ethics and multidisciplinary teamwork. The surveys were discussed and concerns about the results were expressed. Motavalli said that with so few respondents it is hard to make conclusions. It appears that transfer students are coming in with weak math skills. Which were most of the graduates who came through the program 2 years ago. The curriculum is much different now and graduates will soon be students who started the program as freshman. Also as the program grows the department can raise admission standards. Right now the department is collecting data points. A suggestion to add number of responses to each question was made by an IAB member. Motavalli agreed. IAB members also suggested: The department should go back in person and talk to the people who gave low ratings to questions. Build a time series. Assessment Procedure Concerns were raised by IAB members about closing the loop. No connection between the outcomes and program objectives. Motavalli described how the questions were formed to assess the objectives Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 138

140 139 OUTREACH FOR NEW PROGRAMS Rich Caramella gave a presentation about the Office of Continuing Education at CSUH. He described how the Office was promoting the Engineering Department's 2 certificate programs. Rich also asked for help from IAB members on how best to publicize the certificate program. OPEN DISCUSSION The concern was raised again about how the Department is going close the loop to address what we have already learned and IAB would like to see the report before it is sent out. Motavalli will the report to IAB for comments as he goes along. Dean Leung discussed adding a computer engineering option to the Engineering program. The option is currently being offered Computer Science and they already have the faculty. The curriculum will be presented to IAB for review. Minutes from the June 3, 2005 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: M. Komroksy, M. Leung, S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, T. Copus, A. Krimetz, F. Ganjeizadeh, N. Ely, J. Sabenorio, L. Liauw, A. Homayoun, S. Roldan, H. Zong Regrets: Z. Radovilsky, W. Odisho, E. Suess, J. Bhadury, R. Doering, M. Dehghani, M. Plotkin The meeting was held at UPS Meeting started at 10:30 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m. John Sabenorio gave a presentation about UPS. Introductions were made. Two new IAB members, John Sabenorio from UPS and Amir Homayoun from Applied Materials, were welcomed. Steve Roldan represented GD California at this meeting. Saeid Motavalli made his presentation. ENROLLMENT STATISTICS Enrollment figures show that enrollment to the program continues to rise. Two questions were raised 1) Are there enrollment targets and 2) What accounted for the increase 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 139

141 140 between 04 and 05. Leung responded to question 1 While the University has targets, there are none for Engineering. Motavalli responded to question 2 The increase is due to more freshman entering the program. STUDENT RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES Department representatives visited local community colleges. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS The MS in Engineering Management content has been posted to the Engineering Website. Five courses that can be applied to the MS in Engineering Management are going to be offered Fall Quarter INTERIM REPORT TO ABET The report will be sent to ABET mid-june INTERIM REPORT CURRICULAR ISSUES The Engineering Department changed a prerequisite for Manufacturing Systems; initiated Freshman Interest Group (FIG) to assure enrollment in Psychology and Chemistry; Engineering Econ and Human Factors have been approved for areas in GE.; Engineering students can double count Materials Science, Engineering Econ, and Human Factors for their major and GE. In response to a question about course value from the Graduating Senior Exit Survey and Alumni Survey, the Engineering Department proposed replacing Differential Equations with Linear Algebra. After a lively discussion, the Advisory Board recommended that the curriculum not be changed. COMPUTER ENGINEERING Motavalli asked the Advisory Board to review the Survey of High School Counselors regarding the proposed program in Computer Engineering. The Board suggested that the Department survey the industry in addition to high school counselors. They also recommended contacting other universities in the area that are offering computer engineering to get a sense of enrollment trends. PROMOTION OF GRADUATE PROGRAM Dr. Motavalli asked the Board to review and make comments on the letter to the MS in Engineering Management survey respondents. OPEN DISCUSSION 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 140

142 141 John Sabenorio was asked how our student s compare to graduates from other universities and what our student s strengths and weaknesses were. John said our students are comparable to students from other universities and exceed them in some areas. Our student s strengths are professionalism, analytical skills, and team skills. Weaknesses were in data mining and technical writing. Minutes from the December 2, 2005 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, T. Copus, F. Ganjeizadeh, R. Doering, N. Ely, J. Sabenorio, L. Liauw, S. Roldan, H. Zong Regrets: W. Odisho, President Rees, J. Kelly, J. Bhadury, M. Dehghani, M. Plotkin M. Komrosky,A. Krimitz The meeting was held at INTEL Meeting started at 10:30 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m. Minutes from June 2005 meeting approved. Ling Liauw gave a presentation about INTEL. Introductions were made. Steve Roldan represented GD California at this meeting. Saeid Motavalli made his presentation. ENROLLMENT STATISTICS Enrollments were slightly down. The question of why were enrollments down was raised. Motavalli said it was unknown. Motavalli said that international student enrollments were down nationwide. Hard for our university to compete. Motavalli said that the Engineering Department was getting more freshmen, but was low on transfer enrollments. Motavalli said that the IE enrollments at CSUEB were above the national average for undergraduate IE. He said growth will be in the graduate program. STUDENT RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES Department representatives visited local community colleges. New brochures were developed for the engineering programs offered by CSUEB. Samples were given to the Advisory Board Members. The CSUEB Engineering website has been redesigned to include the MS program Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 141

143 142 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS The new Computer Engineering Option was discussed. Fall 2007 is the target date for the program to be official. It will be offered in cooperation with the Computer Science Department at CSUEB. Motavalli asked that current members serve both programs and asked for suggestions for additional new members. PROMOTION OF NEW PROGRAMS Motavalli asked for ideas on how to inexpensively advertise our new programs. The following were some suggestions: 1) Offer a course on site at companies. 2) Lunch time presentation of programs at large companies. 3) Advertise the program in professional society websites, but avoid national level. 4) MSE mass mailings. Motavalli said that he was working with the University s marketing department at CSUEB regarding having an expert handle the s. 5) Advertise in the local EEE. 6) Ling suggested researching who was the University Relations contact at INTEL. She was willing to look into it. 7) Online courses. Motavalli said online courses were being developed. 8) Suggested working more closely with local high schools. 9) Send former students out to do some recruiting. 10) Put together a brochure with testimonials. 11) Make a video of testimonials. OPEN DISCUSSION Bowen asked for projects for Senior Design. Ling is looking for intern Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 142

144 143 Minutes from the JUNE 2, 2006 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, T. Copus, F. Ganjeizadeh, R. Doering, H. Zong, S. Ceguerra, M. Plotkin, M. Leung, J. Bhadury, T. Delavega, M. Komrosky, M. Deghani, K. Maxwell, T. Sloan, A. Krimitz, A. Zullo Regrets: W. Odisho, N. Ely, Z. Radovilsky, L. Liauw, S. Basu, A. Homayoun Meeting started at 10:30 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m. Minutes from December 2, 2005 meeting approved. New members were introduced and welcomed. Stephanie Ceguerra with ESCO is a CSUEB Engineering Alumni; Tim De La Vega with UPS is replacing John Sabinorio; Karen Natoli Maxwell with NUMMI is replacing Walter Odisho. Saeid Motavalli made his presentation. ENROLLMENT STATISTICS Enrollments were slightly down, but Departmental FTES (Full Time Equivalent Student) were up. This is very good. NEW PROGRAM The new Computer Engineering Option has been approved for Fall MS ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT Currently seven students have applied to the program and the Department is getting quite a few calls from people interested in learning more about the program. Fall Marketing Campaign There is an integrated marketing campaign underway to recruit for Fall 2006 and Winter Tena Sloan, Marketing Director at CSUEB, presented the strategy of the campaign along the materials. The target audience for this campaign is working engineers across all disciplines and industries targeting industrial, manufacturing, mechanical, civil and electrical/computer 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 143

145 144 engineers targeted in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties; current CSUEB Undergrad Engineering and Science students; CSUEB alumni engineering students. A question was raised about why San Mateo and Santa Clara counties were included and not San Francisco. Tena replied that the Hayward campus was easily accessible from the San Mateo Bridge and that Santa Clara was chosen because of Silicon Valley. Tena said that the response data will be evaluated from these two counties and the next campaign could target San Francisco county. A direct mail package was sent to 15,000 engineers. The package included a personalized letter announcing the program offering a free white paper on Engineering Management, student testimony, a fact sheet, and business reply card. Interested engineers could ask for more information using the business reply card, calling or web form. All respondents will be invited to an Informational Meeting on June 29th. The informational meeting will consist of a presentation by Saeid and a short talk given by an Advisory Board member. Tena asked for a volunteer. Martin Plotkin said he would attend and give a talk. A current MS Engineering Management student, a representative from Financial Aid, and a representative from Graduate Admissions have also been asked to attend the informational meeting. Informational attendees will receive follow up s and phone calls asking them if they have additional questions and reminding them of application deadlines. TOUR OF THE WAYNE AND GLADYS VALLEY BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY CENTER OPEN DISCUSSION The promotional process for the Engineering Departments programs continued to be discussed. Suggestions were made to work closer with community colleges and local high schools. Motavalli will continue his community college visits. The Department has sent information on the IE program to high school counselors. The Department will do the same with the BS in Computer Engineering. Motavalli proposed to the Board that they meet only once a year instead of twice a year. The Board would like to continue meeting twice a year Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 144

146 145 Minutes from the January 2007 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, T. Copus, F. Ganjeizadeh, H. Zong, S. Ceguerra, M. Plotkin, M. Leung, J. Bhadury, T. Delavega, M. Komrosky, K. Maxwell, N. Ely, A. Homayoun, G. Briceno, Z. Radovilsky, A. Krimetz, T. Swenson, E. Lobos, S. Ritchie, B. Herston Regrets: President Qayoumi, E. Suess, Meeting started at 10:15 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m. Minutes from June 2006 meeting approved. New members were introduced and welcomed. Gracia Briceno with OVISO is a CSUEB Engineering Alumni Guests were Steve Ritchie with the California Coastal Conservancy and Benjamin R. Herston, with MWH Americas Saeid Motavalli made his presentation. ENROLLMENT STATISTICS Program continues to grow. The Department had 16 MS students enter the program in the Fall and 10 have applied for winter and spring. ACCREDITATION ACTIVITIES The visit will take place in Fall Alumni and Employer Surveys are now online. Some Board members expressed concern about the liability of the employer surveys. There was a suggestion that we have them checked by HR. Faculty self assessments of courses they teach are being performed. Exit Surveys are being administered to all graduating students. Senior design projects are being evaluated by industry and faculty Results from past surveys were presented. Number of respondents is increasing as 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 145

147 146 graduating students increase. There is concern about the low rating on the Computer/CIM Lab and the Manufacturing Process Lab. The new labs, along with changing the way the labs are taught, should improve the ratings. Chem 1601 General Chemistry has low ratings. This could be because the course is very basic, similar to high school chemistry. There have been suggestions to have students take Chem 1101 General Chemistry that would be more suitable to engineering students. This could create a problem with the Cluster that engineering majors take. A Board member suggested that the Department meet with the Chair of Chemistry to review the evaluations of the Chem 1601 courses. NEW PROGRAMS Computer Engineering has been approved by the Chancellor s office effective Fall Quarter The MS program is starting off well. STRATEGIC PLANNING Motavalli asked the Board for their thoughts on a long range plan (10 year) for engineering at CSUEB. The following points were brought up and discussed Current Trends in IE Service (UPS, Airlines, Hospitals) Systems Engineering Administration of Health Systems Survey industry for trends Modify manufacturing program Energy Management: lighting, heating (monitoring) Environmental large field: air, water, energy IE Program must adapt Supply Chain Management Collaborate with other departments. Health Systems in Engineering Health care is a huge industry. Collaboration with health sciences May pick up students who don t get into nursing program, may pick up those students. There was concern that the courses that nursing students take may not translate to engineering track. Possible a separate program unique to health care systems Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 146

148 147 Construction Management Construction Management was discussed at length and determined that it could be a viable program. The following points were raised: Construction management booming. Many civil engineers will be retiring creating a shortage of civil engineers and construction managers. Suggest a graduate program in Construction Management instead of B.S. Will learn from the program that already exists in Continuing Education. Program will be offered exclusively online Chico has large program so there is a demand. Explore PSM Construction Management Create a program similar to civil. May compete with civil, but the jobs are out there for construction management IAB members are welcome to join the Construction Management advisory board Environmental Engineering Broad field Humbolt and San Diego have Environmental Engineering programs The Department can work with the Environmental Science program The College of Science will explore this degree more Environmental Engineering at MS level, possible PSM degree Bio Engineering is not feasible, needs big resources. Bhadury warned about too many courses or degrees with management in the title or ASCSB will evaluate program. Minutes from the January 2008 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, T. Copus, F. Ganjeizadeh, H. Zong, S. Ceguerra, M. Plotkin, M. Komrosky, N. Ely, A. Krimetz, G. Icabalzeta, J. Wold, A. Tran, R. Mutialu, M. Mahoney, P. Hladun, J. Sabenorio, B. Alvarez Regrets: M. Dehghani, M. Saffi, K. Maxwell, M. Leung Meeting started at 10:30 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m. Minutes from January 2007 meeting approved with corrections. New members were introduced and welcomed: Gisele Icabalzeta, Peterson Power Systems, CSUEB Engineering Alumni Jeff Wold, CSUEB Engineering Alumni 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 147

149 148 Adam Tran, Lockeed Martin, CSUEB Engineering Alumni Rajan Mutialu, CSUEB Engineering Alumni Peter Hladun, Artisan Confections, CSUEB Engineering Alumni Bruno Alvarez, Cisco Systems, CSUEB Engineering Alumni John Sabenorio with UPS was welcomed back to the Advisory Board. Motavalli described the Engineering Department s new strategies for outreach, enrollment statistics and accreditation time-lines. Motavalli also described accreditation activities and asked for new assessment ideas. Motavalli had the alumni present at the meeting describe their jobs and how they apply the education they received from the Engineering Department to their jobs. Curricular modifications that will go into effect Fall Quarter 2009 were reviewed by Motavalli and he described the new programs in Construction Management that the Engineering Department has developed. Mike Mahoney, VP/Provost, Academic Affairs discussed the budget and the University s commitment to continue increasing enrollment, continuing to recruit new faculty, and improving the classroom and University environment. The Open Discussion focused on ways to improve current assessment practices and new ideas. Suggestions were: If program is still geared toward working students, target those students. Alumni events. Alumni network Google Group Set up meetings with employers of alumni and Motavalli, either by phone or in person, to get feedback on performance of our graduates. Have alumni give presentations to Introduction to Engineering Courses. Video of student testimonials. Alumni as roll models. Alumni mentors. Personalize employer survey requests Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 148

150 149 Minutes from the JUNE 2008 Advisory Board Meeting The minutes will reflect the summarization of the pertinent discussion held with regards to the various items in the agenda. Present: S. Motavalli, D. Bowen, T. Copus, F. Ganjeizadeh, H. Zong, E. Plotkin, M. Komrosky, N. Ely, A. Krimetz, G. Icabalzeta, A. Tran, R. Mutialu, M. Mahoney, M. Qayoumi, S. Bibb, P. Hladun, J. Sabenorio, M. Saffi, K. Maxwell, M. Leung, R. Doering, T. Gowen, O. Lobos, R. Neveu, M. Oty, J. Schultz Regrets: S. Ceguerra, J. Wold Meeting started at 12:00 p.m. Meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Minutes from January 2008 meeting approved. New members were introduced and welcomed: Ethan Plotkin, GD California President Qayoumi welcomed and thanked the advisory board members for their commitment. He said that outreach programs like MESA and STEM were important for the campus and that the Dean was there to support the engineering and outreach programs. The President was excited about the Construction Management program and would like to see a Professional Science degree offered. Mike Mahoney, Provost, said he is very happy with the engineering program. Enrollment Statistics Motavalli reviewed enrollment statistics noting that the program is growing. Outreach Initiatives Ramona Nevue, Director of the MESA program, briefly described the program. This is one of the outreach programs targeting minorities in engineering and science. Another outreach program is AMP targeting minorities and under-represented groups. This program has grown from 8 students in the program to approximately 18 students. The Engineering Department has benefited greatly from this program by providing opportunities for engineering majors to do research with faculty. One of the AMP students received a summer internship in Germany through the AMP scholars program. The University received a $60,000 grant (CSU Chancellor s Initiative) for outreach to grow engineering Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 149

151 150 Accreditation Time-Line The accreditation team will visit in Fall 2009 and we will have a mock review Winter Motavalli asked the Board and Department faculty for help with assessment documents. Motavalli feels this review will be harder this time. ABET has added a new criterion Continuous Improvement. Motavalli will be preparing documents this summer. Accreditation Activities To-Date The Engineering Department and MESA program hosted an Alumni Re-Connect Event that was very well attended by alumni. The Department was able to get surveys and feedback from them. Motavalli said it was much more difficult to get feedback from employers and asked again for help from the alumni. The faculty are doing self assessments. This data will be collected and organized this summer. Faculty will be attending an ABET Accreditation Workshop this summer. Program Improvements Resulting from Assessment Activities Motavalli said that changes based on assessment must link to methods. Self Study Report, Detailing Achievements Related to 9 Criteria ABET will look at Sequence (prerequisites) Transfer evaluations Show proof of exceptions Teamwork show assessment Motavalli said that we should separate the computer engineering faculty from industrial engineering so that there are no confusion in the accreditation process. Motavalli said that our laboratories are okay, but ABET will want to see a lab development plan. ABET will want to see funding to maintain the program. Documentation Motavalli said that there will be a lot of documentation and report writing required. The Dean will give release time to a faculty member to help the chair Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 150

152 151 Program Educational Objectives Motavalli asked the Advisory Board to review and give feedback on the Program Educational Objectives. After discussion, the following changes were made: Program Educational Objectives The educational objectives of the Industrial Engineering program as adopted by its constituencies are: The Department of Engineering provides a quality engineering education that produce graduates who: Exhibit evidence of Successfully apply their learned skills throughout their professional pursuits Have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning and professional development Have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines Are recognized as qualified engineers with high ethical standards A Board member asked if theses objectives are measurable. Motavalli said yes, the Survey questions are measurable. A Board member asked if we are tracking Professional Societies. Motavalli said yes, in Alumni Survey that question is asked. Open Discussion Dr. Zong presented Engineering Scholarships to Talitha Gowen, Oscar Lobos, and Jamie Schultz Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 151

153 152 Appendix I - Additional Program Information Table 1. Basic level Curriculum Table 2. Course and Section Size Summary Table 3. Faculty Workload Summary Table 4. Faculty Analysis Table 5. Support Expenditures 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 152

154 153 Table 1-a. Basic-Level Curriculum (Current) (Name of Program: Engineering, Option Industrial Engineering) Year; Quarter Course (Department, Number, Title) Math & Basic Sciences Category (Credit Hours) Engineering Topics Checked if Contains Design ( ) General Education. Other 1; 1 1; 2 1; 3 2; 1 2; 2 2; 3 COMM 1004 ( ) 4 CHEM ( ) MATH ( ) GS 1011 ( ) 1 LIBY 1210 ( ) 2 ENGR ( ) ENGL 1001 ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) KPE Activity ( ) 1 GS ENGR ( ) MATH ( ) Critical thinking ( ) 4 PSYC ( ) KPE Activity F2 ( ) 1 GS 1031 ( ) 0.5 ENGR ( ) MATH ( ) Fine Arts ( ) 4 ECON 2301 ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) PHYS ( ) Social Sciences ( ) 4 ENGL 1002 ( ) 4 MATH ( ) PHYS ( ) Letters ( ) 4 Social Sciences Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 153

155 154 Year; Quarter or Quarter 3, 1 3; 2 3; 3 4; 1 4; 2 4; 3 Course (Department, Number, Title) Category (Credit Hours) Math & Basic Science Engineering Topics Check if Contains Design General Education ( ) CS ( ) PHYS ( ) KPE Activity ( ) 1 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) Humanities ( ) 4 KPE Activity ( ) 1 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) Upper division GE 4 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) US History/Government ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) Math/Science Elective 4 ( ) US History/Government ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) Elective, engineering 4 ( ) ENGR ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) Elective, engineering 4 ( ) Totals-Abet Basic-Level Requirements Overall Total For Degree Percent Of Total Totals Must Minimum Quarter Credit Hours Satisfy One Set Minimum Percentage Other 57 hrs 83 hrs ( ) 52 hrs 12 hrs 57 hrs 83 hrs ( ) 52 hrs 12 hrs 28% 41% 25% 6% 48 hrs 72 hrs 25% 37.5 % 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 154

156 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study

157 156 Table 1-a. Basic-Level Curriculum ( valid to spring 2008) (Name of Program: Engineering, Option Industrial Engineering) Year; Quarter Course (Department, Number, Title) Math & Basic Sciences Category (Credit Hours) Engineering Topics Checked if Contains Design ( ) General Education. Other 1; 1 1; 2 1; 3 2; 1 2; 2 2; 3 COMM 1004 ( ) 4 CHEM ( ) MATH ( ) GS 1011 ( ) 1 LIBY 1210 ( ) 2 ENGR ( ) ENGL 1001 ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) KPE Activity ( ) 1 GS ENGR ( ) MATH ( ) Critical thinking ( ) 4 PSYC ( ) KPE Activity F2 ( ) 1 GS 1031 ( ) 0.5 ENGR ( ) MATH ( ) Fine Arts ( ) 4 ECON 2301 ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) PHYS ( ) Social Sciences ( ) 4 ENGL 1002 ( ) 4 MATH ( ) PHYS ( ) Letters ( ) 4 Social Sciences Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 156

158 157 Year; Quarter or Quarter 3, 1 3; 2 3; 3 4; 1 4; 2 4; 3 Course (Department, Number, Title) Category (Credit Hours) Math & Basic Science Engineering Topics Check if Contains Design General Education ( ) CS ( ) PHYS ( ) KPE Activity ( ) 1 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) ENGR/STAT ( ) ENGR ( ) Humanities ( ) 4 KPE Activity ( ) 1 ENGR ( ) ENGR/STAT ( ) ENGR ( ) Upper division GE 4 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) US History/Government ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) Math/Science Elective 4 ( ) US History/Government ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) Elective, engineering 4 ( ) ENGR ( ) 4 ENGR ( ) ENGR ( ) Elective, engineering 4 ( ) Totals-Abet Basic-Level Requirements Overall Total For Degree Percent Of Total Totals Must Minimum Quarter Credit Hours Satisfy One Set Minimum Percentage Other 56 hrs 82 hrs ( ) 52 hrs 12 hrs 56 hrs 82 hrs ( ) 52 hrs 12 hrs 28% 41% 25% 6% 49 hrs 74 hrs 25% 37.5 % 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 157

159 158 (Name of Program: Industrial Engineering) Note that instructional material and student work verifying course compliance with ABET criteria for the categories indicated above will be available during the campus visit. Table 2. Course and Section Size Summary (Name of Program: Engineering) Type of Class (1) No. of Sections Avg. offered in Course No. Title Section Lecture Laboratory Recitation Other Current Year Enrollment ENGR1011 Introduction to I.E % 30% ENGR1420 Engineering Graphics % 60% ENGR2060 Material Science % 50% ENGR 2070 Fundamentals of Manufacturing % 30% ENGR2010 Electric Circuits Theory % 20% ENGR3020 Work Design and Measurement % 50% ENGR3101 Statics and Dynamics % ENGR3140 Engineering Economy % ENGR3601 Statistics for CS and Engineers I % ENGR3602 Statistics for CS and Engineers II % ENGR3841 Operations Research I % ENGR4100 Production Planning and control % 30% ENGR4200 Simulation % 30% ENGR4180 Product-Process Design % 30% ENGR4280 Design and Mang. of Human Wk Sys % ENGR4300 Quality Engineering % 30% ENGR 4400 Systems Modeling % ENGR4401 Operations Research II % ENGR4430 Facilities Planning and Design % 30% ENGR 4440 CIM Systems % 20% ENGR4610 Senior Design Project I % ENGR 4620 Senior Design Project II % ENGR4900 Independent Study 1 100% ENGR4990 Special Topics Not offered 100% CIS 3281 Systems Analysis & Design 7 100% MGMT3110 Applications of Decision Making 1 100% MGMT3600 Theories of Management % 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 158

160 159 Table 3. Faculty Workload Summary (Name of Program: Engineering) Faculty Member (Name) FT or PT Classes Taught (Course No./Credit Hrs.) Term and Year 1 Total Activity Distribution P t Teaching Research Other David Bowen FT ENGR3020/4CR/F ENGR3841/4CR/F2007 ENGR4280/4CR/F2007 ENGR3101/4CR/W2008 ENGR1011/3CR/W2008 ENGR4610/3CR/W2008 ENGR3190/4CR/SP2008 ENGR4180/4CR/SP2008 ENGR4620/3CR/SP2008 Farnaz Ganjeizadeh FT ENGR1010/2CR/F ENGR2010/3CR/F2008 ENGR4100/4CR/W2008 ENGR4350/3CR/W2008 ENGR4400/4CR/SP2008 Saeid Motavalli FT ENGR1420/2CR/W ENGR4440/4CR/SP2008 Helen Zong FT ENGR3140/4CR/F ENGR4200/4CR/F2007 ENGR2060/4CR/W2008 ENGR4430/4CR/W2008 ENGR1011/3CR/SP2008 ENGR2070/2CR/SP2008 ENGR4300/4CR/SP Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 159

161 160 Table 4. Faculty Analysis (Name of Program: Engineering, Full Time Tenure Track) 12/16/2008 Name Age Rank FT or PT Highest Degree Institution which highest degree earned & year Years of Experience Gov./Indus try Practice Total Faculty This Institution Professional Registration (Indicate State) Level of Activity (high, medium, low, none) Profession al Society Research Consulting / Summer work in Industry David Bowen 47 Associate Professor FT PhD Farnaz Assistant 52 Ganjeizadeh Professor Ft PhD Saeid Motavalli 53 Professor FT PhD Helen Zong 53 Professor FT PhD University of California Berkeley University of Alabama University of Pittsburgh University of Houston Medium ASEE low Low Low Medium Low High P.E. Illinois IIE, ASEE, ASCE, Medium Low AGC Medium P.E., Minnesota IIE, SME low High Updated information is to be provided at the time of the visit. The level of activity reflects an average over the current year, year prior to visit, plus the two previous years Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 160

162

163 162 Table 5. Support Expenditures (Name of Program: Engineering*) Expenditure Category (prior to previous (year of visit) (previous (current year) year) year) Fiscal Year Operations (1) (not including $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 staff) Travel (2) $5,389 $5,112 $5,114 $5,885 Equipment (3) $154,110 $15,000 (a) Institutional Funds $154,110 $15,000 (b) Grants and Gifts (4) $38,675 $40,550 $195,600 $410,000 Graduate Teaching $4,000 Assistants Part-time Assistance (5) (undergrad RA) $12500 $4,500 $14, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 162

164 163 Appendix II Course Syllabi 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 163

165 164 CHEMISTRY 1601, 1605 BASIC CHEMISTRY Instructor: Dr. Rebecca A. Krystyniak Text: Fundamentals of General, Organic, and Biological Chemistry 4th Edition, McMurray and Castellion Lab Manual: Exploring Chemistry, Laboratory Experiments in General, Organic, and Biological Chemistry, Peller Attendance is strongly recommended, however the penalty for missing the class is missing the class, as well as receiving a zero on the daily quiz. During class you will be expected to participate. There will be no make-up quizzes, exams or assignments!!! Serious conflicts must be worked out in advance of the scheduled exams. Grading: Labs (150 pts): 25% Quizzes/Homework (~ 75 pts): 15% Article Reviews (40 pts): 10% Exams (300 pts): 50% Exams: There will be three scheduled exams. Exams will each cover approximately 3 chapters. The exams will be primarily short answer and problem solving with the occasional multiplechoice question. I reserve the right to include problems assigned as homework on these exams. Material covered in the laboratory will also be included in the exams. The final exam will be given during the last class period and will be comprehensive. There will be three sections to the final, one for each test from the quarter. I will compare your lowest test score from the quarter with your performance on that portion of the final. I will count the higher of the two percentages as your test score for that test. Quizzes: Quizzes will be given at the beginning of each class, unless otherwise stated. These quizzes will cover the material presented since the previous quiz. There will be no make-up quizzes. Article Reviews: You will write reviews of four articles as is indicated on the class schedule. They will always be due on a Thursday. Directions for the reviews are outlined on a separate hand-out. Homework: The only way to succeed in chemistry is to work lots of problems and questions. I will assist you by giving you problem sets to complete for each chapter. I encourage you to work in study groups. Voluntary collaboration on homework is perfectly acceptable. I retain the right to collect homework at any time and grade it Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 164

166 165 Labs: Normally you will work in groups of two or three. Each person is responsible for turning in their own laboratory report. Lab reports will be due one week after the laboratory work is completed at the beginning of the next laboratory period. Late reports will not be accepted unless prior arrangements are made. Unsafe behavior in the laboratory will not be tolerated. If this occurs the offender will be asked to leave the laboratory and will receive a zero for that lab activity. IF YOU MISS YOUR LABORATORY CLASS, YOU WILL RECEIVE A ZERO FOR THAT WEEKS LABORATORY REPORT. If you are sick or have an emergency, it is YOUR responsibility to contact your instructor BEFORE the scheduled laboratory session. Make-up laboratories will be handled on a case-by-case basis. If you fail the laboratory portion of the course, you will automatically fail the course. Overall course grades will be based on the following scale. This course will not be curved % A 93 90% A % B % B 83-80% B % C % C 73-70% C % D % D 63-60% D- < 60% F Miscellaneous: While chemistry is fun for all, visitors to class are discouraged. Visitors to lab are not allowed. Any visitor should be cleared through me prior to the visit if possible. If you have a documented disability and wish to discuss academic accommodations, or if you need assistance in the event of an emergency evacuation, please contact the professor as soon as possible. Tentative Course Schedule: Week # Dates Lecture 1 9/26 Chap Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 165

167 /1, 3 Chap 1,2 3 10/8, 10 Chap 2,3 Article Review Due 4 10/15, 17 Chap 4 Exam 1 (Chap 1-3) 5 10/22, 24 Chap 4, 5 Article Review Due 6 10/29, 10/31 Chap 5,6 7 11/5, 7 Chap 6, 7 Article Review Due 8 11/12,14 Chap 7 Exam 2 (Chap 4-6), 9 11/19, 21 Chap 8 Article Review Due 10 11/26 Chap /3, 5 Chap 10, Exam 3 (Chap 7-10) 12 12/10 Final Tentative Laboratory Schedule and Point Breakdown Dates Lab Points 9/26, 10/1 Check-in; Discussion of Lab Safety /3, 8 The Study of a Combustion Reaction, Exp /10, 15 Physical Properties of Inorganic 20 Compounds, Exp. 3 (skip 3d) 10/17, 22 Specific Heat, Exp /24, 29 Lewis Dot Structures and Molecular 18 Models, Exp. 6 10/31, 11/5 Chemical Reactions and their 20 Classifications, Exp. 7 11/7, 12 Equilibrium Systems, Exp /14,19 Collection and Measurement of Hydrogen 18 Gas, Exp /21, 26 Acids, Bases, ph and Indicators, Exp /3, 5 Check out Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 166

168 167 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, EAST BAY and BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY GENERAL CHEMISTRY 1101 Instructor: Dr. Vincent E. Alvarez Winter Quarter, 2009 Text/Resources: 1) Chemistry: A Molecular Approach by Nivaldo Tro, Revised 1st Edition, Pearson Prentiss Hall, 2008; 2) Solutions Manual; 3) Mastering General Chemistry ( LECTURE SCHEDULE _Date Day Topic Chapter 1/6 T Syllabus, Procedures, Matter, Temperature 1 1/8 Th SI Units, Significant Figures, Data Manipulation 1 1/13 T Atoms, Nuclei, Isotopes, Periodic Table 2 1/15 Th Atomic Mass, Moles, Molar Mass 2 1/20 T Nomenclature, Chemical Equations 3 1/22 Th Formulas, Percent Composition 3 1/27 T Molecular Mass/Balancing Chem. Eqns. 3 1/29 Th Midterm 1 1/2/3 2/3 T Chemical Reactions/Stoichiometry 4 2/5 Th Percent Yield/Limiting Reagents/ Calculations 4 2/10 T Solution Chemistry 4 2/12 Th Reaction Types/Net Ionic Equations 4 2/17 T Molarity/Titrations/pH 4 2/19 Th Review of Chap 4 4 2/24 T Midterm 2 4 2/26 Th Energy/First Law of Thermodynamics Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 167

169 168 3/3 T Enthalpy 6 3/5 Th Calorimetry/Enthalpy of Formation 6 3/10 T Hess s Law/Thermo calculations 6 3/12 Th Review for Final 1-4, 6 FINAL EXAMINATION: Tuesday March 17, :00-11:50 Comprehensive 1-4, 6 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, EAST BAY and BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY GENERAL CHEMISTRY 1101 Instructors: Alvarez, Staff Winter Quarter, 2009 Text: Chemical Principles in the Laboratory, 8th ed., Masterton, Wolsey, Slowinski LABORATORY SCHEDULE Date Day EXPERIMENT Number 1/6 T Check-in, Safety 1/8 Th Densities of Liquids and Solids 1 1/13 T Quiz #1: Chapter 1 1/15 Th Fractional Crystallization 3 1/20 T Purification of KNO3 3 cont. 1/22 Th Quiz #2: Chapters 1,2 1/27 T Determination of a Chemical Formula 4 1/29 Th Mass Ratio 5 2/3 T Properties of Hydrates 6 2/5 Th Non-Metals and Their Compounds Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 168

170 169 2/10 T Quiz #3: Chapter 4 2/12 Th Spot Tests for Common Ions 35 2/17 T Alkaline Earth and Halogens 12 2/19 Th Quiz #4: Chapter 4 2/24 T Analysis of an Unknown Chloride 7 2/26 Th Analysis of Al-Zn Alloy 10 3/3 T Heat Effects and Calorimetry 14 3/5 Th Energy Handout 3/10 T Quiz #5: Chapter 6 3/12 Th Check-out 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 169

171 170 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, EAST BAY CHEMISTRY and BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT OF Required Course Information GENERAL CHEMISTRY 1101 Winter Quarter 2009 Instructor: Dr. Vincent E. Alvarez Phone: (510) Office Hours: TTh 2:30-3:30pm and by appointment Office: SS-407 According to University policy the following information is provided to students relative to grading policy. Grade Point Distribution Midterm Exam I 100 Midterm Exam II 100 Quizzes 100 Final Exam 200 Lab Experiments 240 Total 740 Lecture Attendance: Lecture attendance is not mandatory but students are responsible for all information provided during lecture including changes in the schedule and material covered. Copied lecture notes do not serve the same purpose as attendance and are not a substitute for taking them first-hand. All examinations must be taken as scheduled. Students should only miss an exam due to serious illness under the care of a doctor--colds, aches and pains, car batteries, late BART, work arrangements, etc. are not acceptable excuses. Should a serious illness occur, the student (or a representative) must leave a message on the instructor s answering machine prior to the exam and visit the office immediately upon the return to class. At that time, a makeup exam may be given, the class average for that exam or one exam double-counted at the discretion of the instructor. If the illness occurs at the end of the quarter, an incomplete grade may be considered, but only if the University regulations are satisfied please read these regulations; incomplete grades will not be given to avoid a low final grade. Students who miss numerous lectures and miss an exam (unexcused) should consider withdrawing from the course. Students should not be late for exams as no extra time is given. Laboratory Attendance: Laboratory attendance is mandatory and all experiments must be performed to the satisfaction of the lab instructor. Any student, who misses a lab or a quiz, must notify the laboratory instructor--same day-- and provide an excuse to the lab instructor immediately upon the return to lab. The absence must be for an illness and not for work irregularities, car problems, other course 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 170

172 171 activities, etc. If the instructor accepts the excuse the student may dry-lab the experiment and earn a maximum of 15 points, including the Advanced Study Assignment. If a quiz is missed the instructor may give a make-up quiz or a class-average value to a student with a valid excuse. Zero points will be assigned for a non-excused absence. Students who miss more than one or two lab periods should consult with the lecture instructor to consider withdrawal. Late to lab students should not come late to lab. Instruction is given at the beginning of the period and an instructor is authorized to exclude students who have not heard the safety instructions and the hazardous chemical waste disposal procedures. Possible exclusion of the student from the lab may result. Completion of the laboratory and lecture portions of the course is mandatory in order for the student to receive a grade. The lecture instructor reserves the right to adjust lab scores to a common average to insure fairness in the assignment of lab points. If you have a documented disability and wish to discuss your approved academic accommodations, or if you would need assistance in the event of an emergency, please make an appointment to meet with me as soon as possible. Please review the policy concerning academic dishonesty in the university catalog. Students found guilty of cheating on an exam will receive an F for that exam and an Academic Dishonesty Incident Report will be filed with the Academic Affairs Office. The student will receive a copy of the report Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 171

173 172 CS 1160 Introduction to Computer Science and Programming Methods Fall 2008 Instructor: Dr. Leann Christianson Office: SC S 429B Phone: (510) [email protected] Web: Office Hours: Tuesday/ Thursday 1:00-2:00, 5:30-6:00 Class Schedule Section 1: TR 10:00-11:50 SC N 336 Class Schedule Section 2: TR 6:00-7:50pm SC N 336 Course Description: This course is an introduction to computer programming using the C++ language. Emphasis will be placed on C++ syntax, programming, and problem solving. Topics will include, input, output, data types, control structures, functions, data structures, and program design. Coursework will include programming, written, and in class assignments. Prerequisites: MATH 1300 or equivalent and some computer experience. Students with no computer experience are encouraged to take CS 1020 as preparation for the course. Required Text: Gaddis, Tony, Starting out with C++ from Control Structures through Objects, Sixth Edition, Supplemental Text: Deitel, C++ How to Program or Dale & Weems Program and Problem Solving with C++ Course Objectives: To introduce the syntax and semantics of the C++ programming language To provide experience with coding and testing program solutions To provide experience with problem solving and algorithm design Grading: Homework/Labs 25% Programs 25% Midterm Exam 25% Final Exam 25% Final Grades are based on the following total course % A B C D 0-59 F The top and bottom ranges of each grade level will earn plusses or minuses respectively. For example: A-, B+ Class Policies & Notes Owning a computer is not a requirement for this class, however, writing programs is essential in order for you to master the material. The computer lab in S SCI 146 is available for your use. Please check the lab for days and hours open. Attendance is recommended. You are responsible for all topics covered if absent. All class examples, slides, assignments, due dates and other information will be posted on 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 172

174 173 Blackboard. Use your netid to log in regularly. Assignments are due at the start of class on the due date. Late programs and homework will not be accepted (except in the case of a documented emergency). Please contact the instructor in this case Assignments should be submitted early as specified by the instructor if an absence is unavoidable. Multiple page assignments must be stapled. (Please do this before coming to class as the instructor will not bring one for your use). Incompletes will be granted to those with extreme emergencies who have finished half of the coursework and completed the first midterm with a passing grade. A documented reason as to why you cannot finish the course is necessary. Examples include hospitalization and death in the family. Travel or unsatisfactory performance in the course are not justifiable reasons. Advice and Consultation: All programming projects are to be individual efforts, not group efforts. This means that there should be no sharing of code; such sharing constitutes academic dishonesty, as described below and in the CSUEB catalog. ``High level'' discussion of algorithms is acceptable, but detailed discussion is not. Any essential code included from sample programs must be properly acknowledged in comments. Any work not your own, e.g., results obtained from reference sources or from other individuals, should receive appropriate bibliographic citations. [Dr. Nico cs 1160 syllabus]. The instructor will expect academic honesty from each student. If a student is academically dishonest, the student will receive a 0 for the assignment or exam and an academic dishonesty report will be filed. This will occur on the first infraction and will become part of the student's permanent academic record. Any plagiarism will also result in the filing of an academic dishonesty report. (Plagiarism is the act of using someone else s words or programming code and claiming them as your own. Please see refer to the CSUEB catalog for a description). Academic dishonesty reports will be filed on the first occurrence. Make-up exams will only be given in extreme circumstances. If possible, contact the instructor in advance. Documentation (e.g., a doctor s note or other) is required prior to the make-up exam. Make-up exams will not be given for the final. If you have a documented disability and wish to discuss academic accommodations, please contact the instructor as soon as possible. The final exam has been scheduled at the start of the quarter. The exam date cannot be changed for an individual student Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 173

175 174 CSU-East Bay Principles of Microeconomics: Econ 2301 Dr. Lall B. Ramrattan Fall Quarter 2008 Mondays: [Sept 24- Dec 7]; Room: VBT 137. Time: 6:00-9:30PM; Home: (925) ; Office Phone: (510) Office Hours: Monday: 11:30-12 noon & 4:00-6:00 pm. Wednesday: 11:30-12 noon; Room:AE 208. Reading Materials: The basic text and reading materials for this course: N. Gregory Mankiw, Principles of Microeconomics, Thompson South-Western, 2007 (Fourth: ISBN ]. Scope, Method, and Purpose. This course applies microeconomic theories to business problems in a non-technical way. Microeconomics is alive today because it is a normal science that solves the problems posed by current and recent economic activities in the domestic and global economies. The course emphasizes basic economic analysis of prices and markets, consumer behavior, the theory of production and costs, pricing and employment of the factors of production, international trade issues, public policy, and current domestic microeconomic problems. Outside reading materials, which are related to important topics, will be covered as time permits. This is particularly important for economic methodologies--positive economics, paradigms, and research programs. In terms of workload, we need to cover, and you need to read before each class, approximately two chapters per meeting. Expected Learning Outcome. From the analytical point of view, students will be trained on how to use demand and supply tools to study market states such as balanced, soft, and tight states. They will learn how to distinguish between excess demand and excess supply, and ways to steer the economy back to equilibrium. The technique of demand and supply will be used to analyze and make technical calculations of consumer, producer, and welfare surpluses, with applications to firms, and tax incident problems. They will also be modified for the study of diseconomies such as environmental problems, inequalities from the income distribution point of view, and voting paradoxes.. Students will learn all aspects of market structures such as perfect competition, monopoly, monopolistic competition, and oligopolies, from the traditional as well as from a game theory perspective. To ensure the above objectives are understood, all the items will be included in student s 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 174

176 175 examination. Prerequisite: The mathematics necessary for this course will be covered in class from first principles. Students should be able to reason in terms of graphs and symbols at the ninth-grade level. Attendance is critical for this course. Students should not plan to be out for more than one class. Exams: This course will have two major examinations, two quizzes in essay format [I generally waive the second quiz if the class averages is B or better on the midterm], and some homework assignments. Make-up exam will not be automatic. It will be available to students who were properly excused from the scheduled exam. All make-up(s) will be toward the end of the semester. Leaving out the HW assignments, the weights below show that a total of 250 points will be scored. This will be augmented by two points for each HW assignments. If the second quiz is waived, the total will be decrease by 25 points. Grades are on an absolute scale with: 95 + = A, = A-, = B+, = B, and = B-. The letter grades for Cs and Ds follow the pattern for Bs. Description Weights Dates First Quiz 25 Points Oct. 6 Midterm 100 Points Oct. 27 Second Quiz 25 Points Nov. 10 Final 100 Points Week of Dec 8-14 HW Assignments 2 Points Each TBA Policy on Academic Dishonesty: The University has a published policy on cheating and academic dishonesty. Students are expected to be familiar with the policy and to abide by it. Cheating will result in: 1) a zero score on the test and the loss of all grading options; and/or 2) an "F" grade for the course; and/or 3) referral to the Academic Vice President for expulsion from the University. Accommodations for Students with Disabilities: If you have a documented disability and wish to discuss academic accommodations, or if you would need assistance in the event of an emergency evacuation, please contact me as soon as possible. Students with disabilities needing accommodation should either speak with me or SDRC. Emergency Information California State University, East Bay is committed to being a safe and caring community. Your appropriate response in the event of an emergency can help save lives. Information on what to do in an emergency situation (earthquake, electrical outage, fire, extreme heat, severe storm, hazardous materials, terrorist attack) may be found at: Please be familiar with these procedures. Information on this page is updated as required. Please review the information on a regular basis Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 175

177 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study

178 177 Engineering 1011 (1010) Engineering: An Introduction Professor David Bowen (510) Professor Roger Doering (510) Office: Rm 227 Valley Business & Technology Center Office Hours: Mon 1:30-3:00pm & 8:20-9:10pm; Wed 2:30-3:30pm Office: N450 Science Office Hours: Mon 2:45-3:45pm TTh 3:30-4:00pm & 6:00-6:30pm Course Description: Introduction to the engineering profession and creative engineering problem-solving through hands-on design projects, presentations, and activities. An introduction to various engineering disciplines. Issues such as sustainability, optimal use of resources, design for manufacturability, design for reuse and logistics are considered. WEEK DATE DAY TOPIC ACTIVITY/LAB 1 7-Jan M Intro Measure Warren Hall 1 9 W Intro Student Profile 2 14 M Design General MouseTrap 2 16 W Design Reuse Design Exercise 3 21 M MLKJr NONE 3 23 W Design Sustainability 4 28 M Excel College Rankings 4 30 W MathCAD MathCAD Lab1 5 4-Feb M MathCAD MathCAD Lab2 5 6 W MathCAD MathCAD Lab M Midterm 6 13 W Bridge Construction (Virtual) Bridge Construction 7 18 M Bridge Construction Bridge Construction (Competition) 7 20 W Electronics/Logic Logic Circuits (Virtual) 8 25 M Electronics/Logic Logic Circuits (Actual) 8 27 W Robots Robot Arm Control (Virtual) 9 3-Mar M Access Database Creation 9 5 W Ethics Case Study M Report Writing Humidity Report W Presentations Presentations Grading Midterm 15% Labs/activities 30% Presentation 20% Final 35% 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 177

179 178 Relation to Program Objectives Our program objectives include producing graduates who have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning, and have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams. This course advances realization of these objectives by requiring students to seek and utilize learning resources outside the class via assigned homework, laboratories and a project, and by requiring students to work in teams on laboratories and in-class activities. Communication skills are further promoted through oral presentation of the term project and laboratory write-ups. Relation to Program Outcomes This course contributes to the following outcomes (e) Solve engineering problems (j) Know contemporary issues The main purpose of this course is to generate enthusiasm for engineering and an appreciation for the impact of engineering solutions on contemporary issues. Students conduct a number of laboratory experiments and in-class activities related to sustainability and design exercises. The course is open to non-majors and has no prerequisites, so designs are typically generated through design-test-redesign improvement cycles rather than through application of analytical tools. Design Experience: Students design multiple solutions to open ended design problems throughout the course. Principles of redundancy, learnability, efficiency and memory requirements are illustrated. Integrated design projects are undertaken. Laboratory Usage: Laboratory activities include measurement of a building, design of a mousetrap, use of computer simulation for bridge design, and introduction to circuit design, MathCAD and Excel software. Computer Usage: Course includes use of computer simulation for bridge design, and introduction to circuit design, MathCAD and Excel software. Communication Building: Oral and written communication awareness and skills are developed through the mousetrap design exercise, wherein groups create a design, then build based on another group s design. Each group receives feedback on potential improvements to their written design instructions. Extensive use of teams affords opportunities for oral communication, and groups typically provide oral or written results to the class and/or instructors. Engineering Science: 40% Engineering Design: 60% Prepared by: David Bowen, 1/2/ Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 178

180 179 ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics Required for IE 2008 Catalog Description: Engineering drawing, computer-aided design, dimensioning, and tolerancing. Drawings of mechanical components. One hr. lect., 3 hrs. lab Textbook: Graphics Concepts with Solid Works, 2nd Edition, Richard M. Lueptow and Michael Minbiole, Prentice Hall Software: SOLID WORKS Coordinator: Saeid Motavalli Course Objectives: To give students a basic understanding of graphics communication standards of design ideas. To discuss the principles for design implementation through dimensioning and tolerancing. To discuss 3-dimensional modeling techniques. Prerequisites: N/A Relation to Program Objectives: The program objectives include statements such as: Produce graduates who are recognized as qualified engineers and can communicate effectively. This course enables students to utilize engineering graphics as a standard language of communicating and implementing design ideas. It also introduces students to state-of-the-art CAD software (Solid Works) that contributes to our graduates being considered as qualified engineers. Course Content: Topic Introduction to Graphics Communication + Solid Works Projections in Engineering Graphics Sketching and Text Section and Auxiliary Views Dimensioning and Tolerancing Reading and Constructing Working Drawings Reading weeks Assignment Chapter 1 1 Chapter 2 + Notes Chapter 3 1 Chapters 3 and 4 Chapter 6 + handouts Chapter 5 1 Design and 3-D Chapter Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 179

181 180 Modeling 7,8,9,10 Relation to Program Outcomes: This course contributes to the following outcomes: (a) Apply Math and Basic Science Knowledge (c) Design System/component/process, and (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools. Students apply their knowledge of trigonometry to engineering graphics design. They use engineering graphics software to design several parts and assemblies. Students use engineering graphics techniques and Cad software to design construction and mechanical drawings. Real-life Problem Solving Experience: Majority of laboratory assignments are designs for actual industrial parts. Design Experience: Design process is explored and the effect of design choices such as dimensioning and tolerancing on the manufacturing cost and requirements are explored. Laboratory Usage: This course utilizes the SOLID WORKS software in engineering laboratory to cover the following: Use of basic file handling commands Experience with the CAD hardware and setup of the drawing environment Use basic CAD commands to draw and edit lines, arcs, circles, and text. Dimensional annotation of the drawing Orthographic projections Section and auxiliary views Surface models and solid models. Assembly drawing and Design Computer Usage: All laboratory projects are done using Solid Works CAD software Communication Building: Students learn graphics design communication standards Engineering Science: 75% Engineering Design: 25% Prepared by: Saeid Motavalli Date: August 30th, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 180

182 181 ENGR 2010: Electric Circuits Theory Winter 2008 Syllabus Required for IE 2008 Catalog Description: Electric Circuit Theory I (3) Application of fundamental circuit laws and theorems to the analysis of DC and to steady-state single-phase and three-phase circuits. Prerequisite: PHYS 1002 Co-required (may be taken concurrently). Texts: Introductory Circuits for Electrical & Computer Engineering James W. Nilsson, Susan A. Riedel, (2008 Prentice Hall, ISBN ) Introduction to PSpice Manual Using OrCAD Release 10.5 Nilsson & Riedel, (2008 Prentice Hall, ISBN ) Reference and Software: Mathcad and PSpice Coordinator: Roger Doering Course Objective: In this course the students will learn electric circuit principles and circuit analysis techniques. The main course objectives will be to introduce the fundamentals of AC and DC electricity, DC Circuits, linearity and superposition, Transient and steady state single phase and second order circuits. Additionally, a summary of Electrical and Electromechanical devices, Microelectronics design and fabrication processes will be presented. Week Date Topics Readings 1 9/25 Review of Electrical Physics. Ch 1 Discussion of water models. Schematics. Mathcad Intro 2 9/30 10/2 Charge, Current, Voltage, Power, Energy Resistance, Kirchhoff s Laws. Analysis using Mathcad Ch /7~ 10/9 In-class Demonstration: resistor linearity/ burn-out. Capacitor Discharge. Series & Parallel. Measuring. Wheatstone. Delta/Wye 4 10/14~10/16 PSpice intro schematic entry, simulation of bias point. Node Voltage methods, solving using Mathcad s given/find blocks and Matrix methods. Ch 3 Ch Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 181

183 /21~10/23 Mesh-Current Method. Thévenin & Norton Midterm Exam, Open book, PSpice, Mathcad 6 10/28~10/30 Op-Amps /solving feedback equations. Follower, Inverting, Summing, Non- Inverting, Gain, db 7 11/4 ~11/6 OP-amps Continue, Difference, Instrumentation Amp, PSpice frequency Sweep. 8 11/13 Inductors, Capacitors, Mutual inductance Ch 4 Ch 5 Ch 5 Ch /18~11/20 Response of RL and RC circuits PSpice and Mathcad solutions Ch /25 Introduction to Complex exponential Ch 9 function and Phasors 11 12/2~12/4 Review 12 Final :12/11/2008 Thursday 2-3:50 Comprehensive Final Exam using PSpice and Mathcad. Relation to Program Outcomes: This course addresses the following outcomes; Apply Math/Science Knowledge (e) Solve engineering problems Students are using their math/science knowledge in analyzing electrical circuits. The students are presented with various scenarios and must select the appropriate approach among different alternative as Thevinin & Norton Analysis, Super positioning, etc. in order to solve the problems. Engineering Science: 100% 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 182

184 183 ENGR 2060: Materials Science Required for IE Catalog Description: Structure of matter. Physical and mechanical properties of materials, including metals, alloys, ceramics, insulating materials, semiconductors, super semiconductors, and polymers. Equilibrium diagrams. Heat treatments, material selection, and corrosion phenomena. Prerequisite: CHEM 1601 (Basic Inorganic Chemistry) or CHEM 1605 (Basic Chemistry for Healthier Living), and MATH 1304 (Calculus I). Three hour lecture. 3 hours lab. 4 quarter-credits. Textbook: Introduction to Materials Science for Engineers, 6th Edition, by James F. Shackelford, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Coordinator: Helen Zong Class Website: Course Objectives: Upon completing this course, students should master following knowledge. Basic engineering material types and properties; Material properties relationships with chemical compositions, microstructures, heat treatments and manufacturing processes; Basic guidelines of material selections in terms of products performances, manufacturing abilities, costs and environment impacts. Prerequisites: CHEM 1601: Basic Inorganic Chemistry or CHEM 1605: Basic Chemistry for Healthier Living, and MATH 1304: Calculus I. Relation to Program Objectives: The program objectives include that ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. This course enables students to understand basic engineering material types, properties and material selections. This course also introduces students to hands-on stress-stain experiments, heat-treatment, and phase diagram analysis. Course Content: Topics Reading Weeks Assignment Introduction Ch Bonding Ch Prerequisite test: 30 min Crystal Structures: Perfection and Imperfection Ch. 3, 4 1 Diffusion Ch Mechanical Behavior Ch Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 183

185 184 Thermal Behavior Ch Phase Diagrams Ch Midterm exam: 2:20 hr Heat Treatment Ch.10 1 Metals Ch Semiconductor Materials Ch Material selections Ch Final exam: 1:50 hr Relation to Program Outcomes: This course contributes to (a) ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. Students apply their knowledge of basic engineering material types and properties to select heat treatments and manufacturing processes. Real-life Problem Solving Experience: Laboratory experiments of material stress-strain analysis, lead-tin phase diagram analysis, and carbon-steel heat-treatment analysis gave students hands-on opportunities to solve material property problems. Laboratory Usage: Material stress-strain tests using QTest-100 machine and Test Work software; Material hardness tests using Hardness Test machine; Phase diagram analysis using tube furnace and data Studio software; Carbon-steel heat-treatment analysis using box furnace, microscope, QTest-100 machine and Test Work software. Computer Usage: Test Work software for material stress-strain and carbon-steel heat-treatment analysis, Data Studio software for lead-tin phase diagram analysis, and digital image software for microstructure analysis of heat-treated carbon-steels. Communication Building: Students practiced lab report writing of material stress-strain analysis, lead-tin phase diagram analysis, and carbon-steel heat-treatment analysis. Engineering Science: 100% Prepared by: Helen Zong Date: December, 2008 ENGR2070: Fundamentals of Manufacturing 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 184

186 185 Required for IE Catalog Description: Traditional and non-traditional manufacturing processes. Cutting tool analysis. Production methods. Prerequisite ENGR 1010 (Introduction to Engineering) and ENGR 2060 (Materials Science). One hour lecture. 3 hours lab. 2 quartercredits. Textbook: Fundamentals of Manufacturing for Engineers, by Fred Waters, UCL Press, Coordinator: Helen Zong Class Website: Course Objectives: Upon completing this course, students should master following knowledge. 1. Understand and describe basic types of manufacturing processes; 2. Select feasible processes to manufacture a given product; 3. Compare the pros and cons of different feasible processes; 4. Describe the major considering factors of manufacturing process selections; 5. Search for information to improve manufacturing process. Prerequisites: CHEM 1601: Basic Inorganic Chemistry or CHEM 1605: Basic Chemistry for Healthier Living, and MATH 1304: Calculus I. Relation to Program Objectives: The program objectives include that ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. This course enables students to understand basic types of manufacturing processes. This course also provides students opportunity of factory tours to observe manufacturing processes in productions. Course Content: Topics Reading Assignment Week Introduction Ch Prerequisite test: 30 min Material removal Processes Ch. 8,9 2.5 Joining Processes Ch Casting Processes Ch Plastic processes Plastic process Facility tour at PlastiKon Inc. Ch Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 185

187 186 Forming and shaping Processes Ch Surface Operations Lecture notes 0.5 Midterm exam: 1:50 hr 0.5 Semiconductor manufacturing processes Lecture notes 1 Advanced manufacturing processes Advanced processes tour at Design to Part show Ch. 7 & Lecture notes 1.5 Manufacturing processes selections all 0.5 Final exam: 1:50 hr Relation to Program Outcomes: This course contributes to (a) ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. Students apply their knowledge of basic engineering processes to compare pros and cons of alternative manufacturing processes. Laboratory Usage: CNC milling operation programming using Spectrum software; CNC milling operation using Spectrum Light machine; CNC lathe demonstration using Spectrum Light machine Engine lathe, mill, drill, band saw, and grind demonstrations in machine lab. Computer Usage: Spectrum software for CNC programming. Engineering Science: 100% Prepared by: Helen Zong Date: December, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 186

188 187 Engineering 3020 Prof. D. Bowen (510) Work Design and Measurement Office: Valley Business & Technology Center, Room 227 Course Description: Principles of work simplification and motion analysis. Recording of work flow and methods. Work measurement and standards, time study, synthetic data, predetermined time systems, and work sampling. Allowances and performance rating, productivity measures. Work design improvement. Military standards. Prerequisite: ENGR Course Objectives and Content Students will learn how to record work flow and methods, and how to apply work measurement and standards, time study, synthetic data, predetermined time systems, and work sampling to design and improve work systems Students will understand meaning, use and application of allowances, performance ratings, learning curves, incentive systems and work design improvement. Schedule Week Topics Readings Labs 0 Introduction - Historical Ch1, Principles of Scientific none Perspective/FWTaylor Management 1 Problem Solving Tools & Operations Quality Assessment Ch 2 and Ch 3 Analysis /Flow Process Chart 2 Time Study Ch 9 Guest Lecture 3 Performance Rating and Allowances Ch 10 & Ch 11 Performance Rating 4 Learning Curve Ch 18 Learning Curve 5 Work Sampling Ch 14 Exam 6 Standards and Predetermined Time Systems Ch 12, Ch 13 and Ch 14 Field Study (1) 7 Holiday -- Field Study (2) 8 Proposed Method Implementation Ch. 8 Consultant Simulation 9 Hawthorne Studies & Incentive Systems Ch 17 Plane Manufacturing 10 Assembly (1) (Two Labs) Assembly (2) Grading 35% - Labs 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 187

189 188 25% - Midterm 40% - Final Texts The Principles of Scientific Management, F.W. Taylor; Methods, Standards and Work Design, Niebel and Freivalds Laboratory Handouts Relation to Program Objectives Our program objectives include producing graduates who have the ability to apply learned skills, are recognized as qualified engineers and have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams. This course advances realization of these objectives by providing new engineering skills and methods related to work measurement, and applying those skills to analyze and design work systems. Work is undertaken in groups, and students are assigned to groups in a number of ways so that communication is not limited to those that they are already comfortable with. Relation to Program Outcomes This course contributes to the following outcomes (a) Apply math/science engineering knowledge (b) Design/conduct experiments. (c) Design system/component/process (e) Solve engineering problems Students apply knowledge of math and engineering to analyze and design work systems, including work flow analysis, time and motion analysis and the implications of learning for system design and economic analyses. Students investigate and apply concepts through laboratory experiments and field studies. Design skills are applied in the plane manufacturing and the final assembly laboratory sessions. Real Life Problem Solving Experience: Some laboratories and active learning exercises during lectures incorporate real life problems. Notable in this regard are the field study, the final assembly and the consultant simulation laboratory activities. Design Experience: Students design an airplane manufacturing system, and a final assembly layout and assembly system. Design problems are incorporated into the exams. Laboratory Usage: Laboratories and field studies are utilized in this class. No specialized laboratory equipment is utilized for this course Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 188

190 189 Communication Building: The consultant simulation requires group oral presentations, while the other laboratories require inter group communication and negotiation. Groups are assigned in different ways (e.g., by birth month, randomly based on selection from a deck of cards, by age, by height, etc.) to ensure that groups have different people and that students are exposed to a variety of communication skills and learning styles. Engineering Science: 80% Engineering Design: 20% Prepared by: David Bowen, 10/4/ Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 189

191 190 Engineering 3101 Statics & Dynamics Professor David Bowen (510) Office: Rm 227 Valley Business & Technology Center Course Description: An intermediate introduction to Newtonian mechanics. Analysis of forces on engineering structure in equilibrium, moments, couples, kinematics, energy and gravitation. Analysis of motions of particles and rigid bodies in engineering. Prerequisite: PHYS Course Objectives and Content Students will be able to perform analyses of static forces on engineering structures in equilibrium, moments and couples. Students will be able to solve problems involving kinematics of a particle including force, acceleration, work and energy. Schedule Week Topics Readings 1 General Principles and Force Vectors Ch 1 & 2 2 Equilibrium of a particle Ch 3 Force System Resultants *Quiz* Ch 4 3 HOLIDAY-NO CLASS None Force System Resultants Ch 4 4 Force System Resultants Ch 4 Equilibrium of a rigid body *Quiz* Ch 5 5 Equilibrium of a rigid body Ch 5 Equilibrium of a rigid body Ch 5 6 Friction Ch 8 Friction *Quiz* Ch 8 7 Kinematics of a particle Ch 12 Kinematics of a particle Ch 12 8 Force and acceleration of a particle Ch 13 Force and acceleration of a particle *Quiz* Ch 13 9 Work and Energy of a particle Ch 14 Work and Energy of a particle Ch Work and Energy Ch 14 Kinematics of a rigid body & Review None 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 190

192 191 Grading 48% - Quizzes 52% - Final Text: Engineering Mechanics: Statics & Dynamics, R. C. Hibbeler Relation to Program Objectives Our program objectives include producing graduates who have the ability to apply learned skills, are recognized as qualified engineers and have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams that include engineers and colleagues from other disciplines. This course advances realization of these objectives by providing some basic engineering skills that engineers of all disciplines are familiar with. Opportunities to practice applying these skills to solving engineering problems, both via calculations and via small hands-on group design projects are also provided. Relation to Program Outcomes This course contributes to the following outcomes (a) Apply math/science engineering knowledge (e) Solve engineering problems In this course students primarily apply math to solve problems relating to engineered systems, including static systems such as structures and dynamic systems such as projectiles. Design Experience: During two specific hands-on activities, students design simple systems that apply learned concepts. The first is strength of a system to traverse a chasm, the second is to launch a projectile. Both are treated as design competitions. Engineering Science: 90% Engineering Design: 10% Prepared by: David Bowen, 10/4/ Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 191

193 192 ENGR 3140: Engineering Economy Required for IE Catalog Description: Macroeconomic concepts such as inflation, interest rates, banking system, global trade, and exchange rates, fundamental microeconomic concepts of supply and demand, opportunity costs, and comparative advantage. Economic analysis of engineering decisions. Determining rates of return on investments. Effects of inflation, depreciation, and income taxes. Application of basic principles and tools of analysis using case studies. Prerequisites: ECON 2301 (Principles of Microeconomics), MATH 1304 (Calculus I). Textbook: Fundamentals of Engineering Economics, 2nd edition, by Chan S. Park. Pearson/Prentice Hall Company, Coordinator: Helen Zong Class Website: Course Objectives: Upon completing this course, students should master following knowledge. 1) Basic concepts of engineering economics; 2) To be able to evaluate decision alternatives using different economic criteria; 3) To practice economical problem solving and engineering communication through course projects. Prerequisites: ECON 2301: Principles of Microeconomics, MATH 1304: Calculus I Relation to Program Objectives: The program objectives include that (a) ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering, (k) ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice. This course enables students to understand basic concepts and decision criteria of engineering economics. This course also introduces students to economical problem solving and engineering communication through course projects. Course Content: Topics Reading Week Topic 1: Engineering Economic Decisions Ch Topic 2: Time value of money Ch. 2 2 Prerequisite test: 30 min Topic 3: Equivalence and Compound Interest Ch 3 1 Topic 4: Present Worth Analysis Ch Midterm exam: 1:50 hr 0.5 Topic 5: Annual Cash Flows Ch Topic 6: Rate of Return Analysis & Incremental Analysis Ch Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 192

194 193 Topic 7: Depreciation & Income Taxes Ch Topic 8: Replacement Analysis Ch Topic 9: Inflation Ch Course Project presentation 1 Final exam: 1:50 hr Relation to Program Outcomes: This course contributes to (a) ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering, (k) ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice. Students apply their knowledge of engineering economics to solve real world economical problems in their course projects. Through the course projects, students practice applications of economical decision making and engineering report writing and presentations. Real-life Problem Solving Experience: Students apply their knowledge of engineering economics to solve real world economical problems in their course projects. Through the course projects, students practice applications of economical decision making and engineering report writing and presentations. Computer Usage: Microsoft Excel software and online calculators are used for rate-of-return calculations and analysis. Communication Building: Students practiced project report writing and group oral presentations of their course projects. Engineering Science: 100% Prepared by: Helen Zong Date: December, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 193

195 194 Contact Information David Bowen (510) Human Factors Engineering 3190 Office: 227 Valley Business & Technology Center Course Description: Analysis of factors influencing the efficiency of human work. Data on the physical and mental capacities of persons, the physical environment, work organization, and the problem of aging. Human reactions and capabilities related to specific tasks and systems. Design of machines, operations, human computer interface and work environment to match human capacities and limitations, including the handicapped. Prerequisites: PSYC 1000 (or 1001 or 1005); STAT/ENGR 3601 or STAT Course Objectives and Content In this course we will investigate factors influencing the efficiency of human work. We will examine the physical and mental capacities of people, the physical environment, and special needs populations. We will use knowledge of human reactions and capabilities related to specific tasks and systems to guide design of machines, operations, human-computer interfaces and work environments to accommodate human capacities and limitations. We will utilize concepts and results from a variety of fields such as psychology, physiology, kinesiology, biomechanics and statistics and apply engineering perspectives and methodologies to analyze and design systems where people can work safely, efficiently and accurately. Students are required to complete a course project which will include significant writing and an oral presentation. In addition to covering the specific project topic, the presentation is an opportunity to display learned concepts concerning visual presentation of information. Schedule Week Topics Readings 1 Introduction Overview and Importance Ch 1 & 2 Physical Attributes, Abilities and Limitations 2 Anthropometry & Biomechanics Ch 9 & Ch 13 3 Physiology of Receptors Ch 4 & Ch 6 Cognitive Abilities and Limitations 4 Human Information Processing Ch 3 5 Signal Detection Theory / TEST Ch 3 6 Attention / Decision Making Heuristics and Biases Supplemental Material Systems Design and Applications 7 Displays, Stereotypes and Guidelines Ch 4, Ch 5 & Ch 6 Ch 13, 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 194

196 195 Ch 14 & Ch 15 8 Human Computer Interface & Work Environment Ch 16 & Ch 17 9 Work Environment & Safety Ch 18, Ch 19 & Ch Special Needs Users & Project Presentations Course Requirements: In class assignments & 20% Homework Midterm 20% Project (15% written, 10% oral presentation) 25% Final 35% Text Human Factors in Engineering and Design, Mark S. Sanders, & Ernest J. McCormick, Seventh Edition Relation to Program Objectives Our program objectives include producing graduates who have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning, and have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams. This course advances realization of these objectives by requiring students to seek and utilize learning resources outside the class via a term project, and by requiring students to work in teams on laboratories and on the project. Communication skills are promoted through oral and written presentation of the term design project. Relation to Program Outcomes This course contributes to the following outcomes (a) Apply math/science engineering knowledge (b) Design/conduct experiments. (c) Design system/component/process (e) Solve engineering problems (j) Know contemporary issues (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools Students apply knowledge of math and statistics to determine population accommodation for ergonomic designs and information processing loads. They conduct a number of laboratory experiments on human capabilities and limitations. They answer questions and create ergonomic designs regarding controls and displays. Students use signal detection theory to solve engineering problems, and are exposed to contemporary issues via careful selection of the design project assignment. Real Life Problem Solving Experience: Problems on exams and active learning exercises during lectures and some laboratories incorporate real life problems. The design project affords the greatest opportunity for real life problem solving. Design Experience: Students design multiple forms of controls and displays for multiple perceptive modalities throughout the course. Principles of redundancy, learnability, efficiency and memory 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 195

197 196 requirements are illustrated. Integrated design projects are undertaken. Laboratory Usage: This class utilizes the Simulator II laboratory equipment to gather anthropometric data, and utilizes the computer laboratory in order to obtain and analyze anthropometric data. Other laboratory activities include measurement of human information processing abilities and examination of the design and function of Segways. Brainfingers apparatus is used to explore biofeedback as a control modality. Computer Usage: Design of the human computer interface, including icons, command, WIMP systems as well as keyboard and alternate input devices are considered. Biofeedback as a computer input modality is demonstrated. Communication Building: Visual and written communication principles and guidelines are investigated as pertains to human factors design of controls and displays. Engineering Science: 50% Engineering Design: 50% Prepared by: David Bowen, 10/4/ Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 196

198 197 ENGR : Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineering Required for IE 2008 Catalog Description: Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineering I (4) Basic probability rules (independence, Bayes' Theorem), distributions (binomial, Poisson, normal, exponential), reliability. Descriptive, inferential statistics (control charts, estimation, hypothesis testing: one, two samples), correlation, regression. Emphasizes: computer analysis, simulation; science, engineering applications. Not open to those with credit for STAT/ENGR/MATH Prerequisite: MATH 1305 Textbook: Montgomery, Runger: Applied Statistics And Probability for Engineers, 4th edition, John Wiley & Sons 2007 Software: Microsoft Excel Class Website: On BlackBoard Instructor: Dr. Staffan Fredricsson Topics Readings Weeks 1 Role of Statistics in Engineering (Read, no HW assigned) Ch Probability Ch Discrete Random Variables and Probability Distributions Ch Continuous Random Variables and Probability Distributions Ch Joint Probability Distributions (Partial) Ch Midterm Random Sampling and Data Description Ch Point Estimation of Parameters Ch Statistical Intervals for a Single Sample Ch Tests of Hypothesis for a Single Sample Ch Midterm Statistical inference for Two Samples Ch Simple Linear Regression and Correlation Ch Statistical Quality Control Ch Final Relation to Program Outcomes: (a) Apply Math/Science Knowledge During classes, theoretical background is presented using PowerPoint. Problems are presented on PowerPoint and solved manually on blackboard/whiteboard. Class time is approximately evenly split between theory and problem solving. Some of the theory requires a basic calculus knowledge. Some problems require basic calculus. Later topics require knowledge aquired in earlier topics. Students are required to solve a set of homework problems each week. Many problems require the use of statistics functions in MS Excel. Homework is graded and solutions distributed on Blackboard/Internet. Prepared by: Staffan Fredricsson Date: Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 197

199 198 ENGR 3602/STAT 3503 Design and Analysis of Experiments (Required for IE) 2008 Catalog Description: General linear hypothesis with emphasis on design and analysis of experiments. Data from science, engineering, and quality management. Factorial designs: random effects, nesting. Optional topics: incomplete blocks, missing data, analysis of covariance. Computer-aided analysis. Cross-listed with MATH Prerequisite: STAT 3502 or Required Text: Ott and Longnecker: An Introduction to Statistical Methods and Data Analysis, 5th edition, Duxbury, 2001 (ISBN ) Instructor: Dr. YanYan Zhou Office: TR680 Phone: Office Hours: ThTu 6:00 to 7:00pm or by appointment Perequisite: The crucial prerequisite is ENGR3601/STAT3502, In particular, the minimal required background in statistics includes: Basic descriptive statistics General ideas of estimation and hypothesis testing (confidence intervals, type I & II errors, p- values) One, two sample t-tests Simple linear regression Topics covered: Factorial designs and multiple comparisons Latin square designs Fixed, random, and mixed models Nested models Crossover design and repeated measures Introduction to ANOCA Multiple Regression Nonparametric alternatives to ANOVA models Assessment: The final grade is calculated as Homework 20% + midterm I 25% + midterm II 25% + final 30%. Grading Policy A (90% and above) B(80% to 89%) C (65% to 79%) D (55% to 64%) F (54% and under) Relation to program outcomes: Ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. Ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data. The courses emphasis is on the design and analysis of scientific experiments. It uses the 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 198

200 199 knowledge of mathematics and basic statistics to analyze experimental design Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 199

201 200 Engineering 3841 Operations Research I Professor David Bowen (510) [email protected] Office: Valley Business & Technology Center, Room 227 Course Description: Theory and application of deterministic optimization techniques. Topics selected from project management, networks, linear programming, non-linear programming, game theory and dynamic programming. Prerequisite: MATH Course Objectives and Content Students will learn to use mathematical modeling and optimization as a tool for decision making including problem definition, formulation, solution and sensitivity analysis. Students will to appropriately and accurately apply the following tools and techniques: PERT/CPM (Project Management Tools), Network optimization, Linear Programming, Game Theory and Decision Analysis. Schedule Week Topics Readings 0 Project Planning Ch 1, Ch 10 (exclude LP) 1 Project Planning / Network Optimization Ch 1, Ch 10 (exclude LP) 2 Network Optimization Ch 9 (exclude 9.7) 3 Linear Programming: Graphical Solution Ch 2, Ch 3.1, 3.2 TEST 4 Linear Programming: Formulation Ch Linear programming: Simplex Solution Ch Linear programming: Simplex Solution Ch Holiday TEST 8 Linear Programming: Sensitivity Analysis Ch 4.7, 4.8, Appendix 4.1 LINDO 9 Game Theory Ch Decision Analysis Ch 15 Grading: 15% Test 1, 15% Test 2, 25% Project, 45% Final Text 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 200

202 201 INTRODUCTION TO OPERATIONS RESEARCH, Seventh Edition, Frederick S. Hillier & Gerald J. Lieberman Relation to Program Objectives : Our program objectives include producing graduates who have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning, and that successfully apply learned skills. This course advances realization of these objectives by requiring students to seek and utilize learning resources outside the class via a term project, and by requiring students to apply learned skills in novel ways to current events. Relation to Program Outcomes This course contributes to the following outcomes (a) Apply math/science engineering knowledge (e) Solve engineering problems (i) Recognize life-long learning (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools Students apply knowledge of math via mathematical modeling and optimization of constrained systems. They utilize these math based modeling skills to find solutions to traditional engineering problems as well as non-traditional problems. Students are given a project that requires use of sources and research that are beyond what is covered in class, allowing practice and demonstration of efficacy of life-long learning skills. Real Life Problem Solving Experience: The course project affords opportunities for real life problem solving. Computer Usage: Computer software is utilized for mathematical modeling, including Excel and linear programming software. Engineering Science: 100% Engineering Design: 0% Prepared by: David Bowen, 10/4/ Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 201

203 202 ENGR 4100: Production Planning and Control California State University, East bay Winter 2008 Syllabus Required for IE 2008 Catalog Description: Inventory planning and control systems. Implementation of manufacturing resource planning including demand forecasting, production planning, master scheduling, bill-of-material, and inventory master file. Capacity requirements planning and shop floor control. Prerequisites: ENGR 2070, 3841; STAT/ENGR Textbook: Manufacturing Planning and control for supply chain management by Vollmann, WhybarkMcGraw-Hill / ISBN: Reference and Software: EEXCEL and STORM Coordinator: Farnaz Ganjeizadeh Course Objectives: This course gives the students the ability to integrate various aspects of Inventory planning g and control using application software and utilizing various approaches to forecasting, planning and control to improve the operations of manufacturing and service systems. Prerequisite by Topics: ENGR 2070, 3841; STAT/ENGR Course Content: wk Topics Assignments (tentative-subject to class coverage), announced every week via blackboard. 1 1/7/~1/9/08 Course syllabus & Introduction to Chapter (notes) CH 1 MPC 2 1/14~1/16/ /21~1/23/ /28~30/08 5 2/4~2/6/08 6 2/11~2/13/0 8 CH2 Sales and Operations Planning CH3 Sales and Operations Planning CH4 Enterprise Resources Planning (ERP) CH 5 NO class-mlk Holiday Supply Chain Inventory Management CH 6 Master Production Scheduling CH 6 Master Production Scheduling MIDTERM 1 (tentative) CH 7 Material Requirements Planning (MRP) CH 7 Continue (MRP) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 202

204 /18~2/20/ /25~2/27/ /3~3/5/ /10~3/12/0 8 CH 8 Distribution Requirements Planning CH 8 Transshipment problems MIDTERM 2 (tentative) CH 9 Just-In-Time CH 10 Capacity Planning and Utilization CH 11 Production Activity Control Last day of classes ( Review) Relation to Program Outcomes: This course addresses the following outcomes; Apply Math/Science Knowledge (e) Solve engineering problems Students are using their math/science knowledge in analyzing automation technologies and robotics structures. Students design automation systems including selecting automation technologies designing system requirements and analyzing alternatives. The class team project is the design of a manufacturing system for producing a certain product. Students are required to design the system, equipment, automation technologies needed, layout plan, material handling system and production/process planning for the system. Students use, Solid Works, Master CAM, and CMM software and hardware in this class Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 203

205 204 Contact Information David Bowen (510) Office: 227 Valley Business & Technology Center Office Hours: Tues. 3-4:00pm, 7:50-8:30pm, Thurs. 2:40-4:00pm Course Description: In this course we will investigate the product and process design cycle as a source of competitive advantage. Topics will include innovation, functional maps, aggregate planning, crossfunctional integration, design for manufacturability, and the design-build-test cycle. Case studies, guest speakers, site visits and computer simulations and tools may be used to reinforce concepts presented in lectures and reading assignments. The following weekly schedule is tentative and could be changed to accommodate site visit/guest speaker schedules. Tentative Schedule Week Topics Readings 1 Introduction - Innovation None Development Capability Ch 1 2 Development Strategy Ch 2 Disk Drive Design Computer Activity On-line Material 3 Functional Mapping Ch 3 Aggregate Project Plans Ch 4 4 Identification, Screening and Convergence Ch 5 Framework for Development Ch 6 5 Cross-Functional Integration Ch 7 The Design-Build-Test cycle Ch 9 6 Test Ch 1-6 Semiconductor Manufacturing None 7 Material Selection & Processing Computer Activity On-line Material New Product/Process Innovation Applications Video & Discussion 8 Prototyping Ch 10 Learning from Development Ch 11 9 Building Development Capability Ch 12 Project Presentations Project Reports 10 Design for the Environment None Design for the Environment None Grading Product Process Design Engineering 4180/ Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 204

206 205 10% - Case Study Analysis & Computer Activity Performance 25% - Project 25% - Midterm 40% - Final Text Managing New Product and Process Development: Text and Cases By Clark & Wheelwright Engineering Science: 100% 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 205

207 206 ENGR 4200: System Simulation Required for IE Catalog Description: Design and analysis of manufacturing and service systems by simulation. Function of random variables. Random number and function generators, programming and characteristics of simulation languages. Three hrs. lect., 3 hrs. lab. Prerequisites: CS 1160 (C++), STAT/ENGR 3601 (Introductory Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineering), ENGR 3841 (Operations Research). 4 quarter-credits. Textbook: Simulation using ProModel, 2nd edition, by Charles Harrel. McGraw-Hill Company, Reference book: Operations Research, by Hamdy A. Taha, 4th edition, ProModel software. Coordinator: Helen Zong Class Website: Course Objectives: Computer simulation is a powerful tool for designing and evaluating systems with complex stochastic processes. This course covers basic queuing theory, simulation theory, methodology, and its application. A general-purpose simulation software, ProModel, is used for hands-on applications. Students will be able to: 1) Model basic systems using discrete event simulation techniques; 2) Conduct analysis of simulation input and output data; 3) Make management decisions using simulation; 4) Conduct simulation studies of real world systems. Prerequisites: CS 1160: C++, STAT3601: Introductory Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineering, ENGR 3841: Operations Research. Relation to Program Objectives: The program objectives include that (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering; (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data; (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems; (k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice. This course enables students to model basic systems using discrete event simulation, to conduct analysis of simulation input and output data, to make management decisions using simulation, and to conduct simulation studies of NUMMI truck assembly line system. Course Content: Topics Reading Assignment Weeks Introduction Lecture notes 0.5 Prerequisite test: 30 min Topic 1: Queuing theories Lecture notes and reference handouts 3 Topic 2: Introduction to Simulation Ch 1, 2. Lab 1, Topic 3: Simulation basics Ch. 3, 4, 5. 1 Midterm exam: 2:20 hr 0.5 Topic 4: Model development Ch. 6. Lab 3, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 206

208 207 Topic 5: Model validation and verification Ch.8, Lab Topic 6: Output analysis Ch.9, Lab Facility tour at NUMMI 0.5 Topic 7: Modeling manufacturing systems Ch. 12, NUMMI truck assembly line Model 1 Topic 8: Modeling material handling and Ch. 14, 0.5 service systems NUMMI truck assembly line Model 2 Topic 9: Additional ProModel techniques 0.5 Final exam: 1:50 hr Relation to Program Outcomes: This course contributes to (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering; (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data; (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems; (k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice. Students practice simulation model development of manufacturing and material handling systems. Students conduct simulation experiments of a real manufacturing system NUMMI truck assembly line operations. First, students visited NUMMI factory to observe the truck assembly line operations and to collect related data. Then students identify and formulate the pull system operations. Students developed simulation systems to evaluate the performances of the truck assembly line and to improve its efficiency. Real-life Problem Solving Experience: Students visited NUMMI factory to observe the truck assembly line operations and to collect related production information. Based on the collected data, students identified and formulated NUMMI s pull production operations. Then students developed simulation systems to evaluate the performances of the truck assembly line and to improve its efficiency. Laboratory Usage: Students completed 5 simulation labs using ProModel software; Computer Usage: ProModel software and Microsoft Excel. Communication Building: Students practiced lab report writing of simulation labs. Engineering Science: 75% Engineering Design: 25% Prepared by: Helen Zong Date: December, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 207

209 208 Prof. F. Ganjeizadeh (510) Engineering 4280/5280 Design and Management of Human Work Systems Fall 2008 Office Hours: T, TH 2:30-3:30pm & TH 10:00~11:00pm and by appointment Days & Times Room Instructor Meeting Dates Tu 6:30PM - 10:00PM Science, Rm. N221 Farnaz Ganjeizadeh Start 9/30 LABS sessions for this class as required: VBT 223 Text Book: Organizational Theory, Design, and Change, Grath R. Jone, Fifth ed. ISBN Prentice Hall Course Description: Qualitative principles and techniques used to maximize labor productivity, employee satisfaction, and organizational performance in work settings. Topics include worker motivation and incentive systems, leadership, worker autonomy, work groups and participatory organizational structures including quality control circles, total productive maintenance teams, and socio-technical systems. Catalog Description: Design and Management of Human Work Systems (4) Qualitative principles and techniques used to maximize labor productivity, employee satisfaction, and organizational performance in work settings. Topics include worker motivation and incentive systems, leadership, worker autonomy, work groups and participatory organizational structures including quality control circles, total productive maintenance teams, and socio-technical systems. Course Objectives: This course gives the students the ability to integrate various aspects of labors and productivity utilizing application software to improve the operations of manufacturing and service systems. Prerequisite ENGR 3020, ENGR Grading Guidelines: : Percentage Grade Percentage Grade 59%-68% D 81% - 83% B- 69% - 71% D+ 84% - 86% B 72% - 74% C- 87% - 89% B+ 75% -77% C 90.% - 92%% A Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 208

210 209 78% - 80% C+ 93% - 100% A Any student that receives a final percentage that is 59% or less will receive a failing grade in this course. Grading: Final 25%, Project 25 %, Midterm 30% (15% each), Homework & case studies In- Class Exercises and presentations 20% Week Topics Readings 1 Introduction organization and its environments Ch 1, 9/30 Stakeholders, Managers and ethics CH 2 2 Managing in a changing environment 10/7 Challenges of organization design 3 Authority and control 10/14 Specialization and coordination 3 (test 1 Tentative) 10/21 Theory X and Y, Z Building Engineering teams and continuous improvement Ch 3, CH 4 Ch 5, 6 4 Select team project topic/ project teams 10/28 Designing organizational structure Ch 7 Handouts Reading-research papers 5 11/4 6 11/ /18 Present a brief summary and a written paragraph of the team project Strategy in changing environment Organizational Design, Competence and technology Holiday (test 2 Tentative) Presentation of project progress/ a summary of written progress Types of organizational changes Organizational transformation 8 Innovation/creativity 11/25 Managing conflict 12/2 Projects and final discussion 10 FINAL EXAM Tuesday 6:30 12/9 Ch 8 Ch 9 Ch 10 Tentative Schedule Note: Additional research topics will be presented. Relation to Program Outcomes: This course addresses the following outcomes; (c) Design system/component/processes (d) Functional teams (i) Life long practice (j) Contemporary issues 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 209

211 210 ENGR 4300: Quality Engineering Required for IE Catalog Description: Quality control, reliability, maintainability, and integrated logistic support. Statistical theory of process control and sampling inspection. Risks associated with decisions based on operating characteristics of control charts and sampling plans. Reliability and life testing methods. Economics of statistical QC. Prerequisites: ENGR 2070 (Fundamentals of Manufacturing), STAT 3601 (Introductory Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineering). Textbook: Quality, 4th edition, by Donna C. S. Summers, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Coordinator: Helen Zong Class Website: Course Objectives: Upon completing this course, students should master following knowledge. Basic concepts and techniques of total quality management (TQM); Basic team work skills and applications of quality improvements; Statistical process control (SPC) techniques and applications. Prerequisites: ENGR 2070: Fundamentals of Manufacturing, STAT 3601: Introductory Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineering. Relation to Program Objectives: The program objectives include that (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering; (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems. This course enables students to master basic quality management theories and techniques, to apply SPC and other quality control tools to solve quality problems. Course Content: Topics Reading Weeks Assignment Introduction Ch.1~3 1 Prerequisite test: 30 min Quality basics and statistics Ch.4 1 Variable control charts Ch.5 2 Process capability Ch.6 1 Measurement devices Lab Handout 0.5 Other Control charts Ch Midterm exam: 1:50 hr 0.5 Probability Ch Attributes control charts Ch Reliability Ch ISO9000 Ch Final exam: 1:50 hr 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 210

212 211 Relation to Program Outcomes: This course contributes to (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering; (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems. Students use quality control tools, such as Pareto charts, fishbone diagrams, histograms to identify critical quality problems. Students select correct quality control tools to analyze and solve quality problems. Laboratory Usage: Students practice using measurement devices, such as CMM, surface finish, dimensions. Computer Usage: SPC chart software and Microsoft Excel. Engineering Science: 100% Prepared by: Helen Zong Date: December, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 211

213 212 ENGR 4350: Reliability Engineering Winter 2008 Syllabus Required for IE 2008 Catalog Description: Reliability concepts and mathematical models, mechanical device reliability, electrical device reliability, systems reliability and maintainability, reliability data, assurance program elements. Prerequisites: ENGR 3841 and Text: Practical reliability Analysis, Ken Neubeck, ISBN , Prentice Hall. Coordinator: Farnaz Ganjeizadeh Course Objective: i) To present Reliability concepts and mathematical models, mechanical device reliability, electrical device reliability, systems reliability and maintainability, reliability data, assurance program elements. ii) Train students in the application of the qualitative and quantitative reliability methods in solving real world reliability problems. Prerequisites ENGR 4350, W 2008 Tentative Course Schedule Note: This is a tentative schedule and subject to change per class requirements. week Week Topics Readings 1 1/7, 1/9 Reliability terms distributions and models Introduction (notes) Notes Ch 1, 2 1/14, 1/16 The application of confidence limits in reliability Ch 2 analysis 3 1/21 1/23 No class (MLK holiday) Reliability program tasks Ch 3 4 1/28, TEST 1 Ch 4, 5 1/30 Electrical component reliability 5 2/4,2/6 Thermal factors reliability, Impact of water on Ch 6,7 reliability 6 2/11,2/13 Failure analysis and trouble shooting Ch 8 7 2/18, Failure analysis and trouble shooting Ch 9 2/20 TEST 2 8 2/25, 2/27 Graphs and growth curves, Hypothesis testing in Ch 10,11 reliability 9 3/3, 3/5 Hypothesis testing in reliability, software Ch11, Ch 12 reliability 10 3/ 10, 3/12 software reliability Overview Ch19 Summary and 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 212

214 213 3/16 Final Exam Discussion Relation to Program Outcomes: This course addresses the following outcomes; Apply Math/Science Knowledge (e) Solve engineering problems Students are using their math/science/statistical knowledge in analyzing reliability problems. The students are presented with case studies to discuss with their team members and must select the appropriate reliability analysis technique to solve the problem and present to the class. Engineering Science: 100% 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 213

215 214 ENGR 4400: Systems Modeling Winter 2008 Syllabus Required for IE 2008 Catalog Description: Integration, problem identification, and the application of problem resolution techniques in manufacturing and service domains. System approach to problem identification, description, modeling, and resolutions derived by traditional optimization techniques as well as artificial intelligence methods. Supply chain modeling methods, logistics support analysis, procurement, and outsourcing strategies. Prerequisites: ENGR 3841 and Text: Systems Engineering and Analysis (1998). B. Blanchard & W. Fabrycky. Prentice Hail ISBN Coordinator: Farnaz Ganjeizadeh Course Objective Modeling tools and their use with respect to system optimization and architecture evaluation will be presented. System engineering management practice and systems engineering will conclude this course. The course will be divided into three components. 1. The first will address the process of system engineering as applied across system life cycle. 2. The second will provide introduction to, and application of sets of models& tools and methods, applied to problem formulation, problem analysis (including modeling techniques). 3. The third address interpretation of alternatives and decision processes as applied to system engineering management. The student will receive information tools and techniques to support their: ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems understanding of professional and ethical responsibility ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice. Topics Covered: Introduction & System Life Cycles System Definition. System Design Lifecycle Functional Analysis & Conceptual Design Prototype Development System Test & Development Models of Decision Making Models of Econometric Evaluation, Optimization, Queuing Models Optimization Supportability & Maintainability (time permitted) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 214

216 215 week Week Topics Readings Part 1 : Bringing Systems to being 1 4/2, Introduction to QA, fundamentals of decision analysis Ch 1 Part II: System Design Process 2 4/7, 4/9 Bringing Systems to being (CT) Bringing Systems to being Ch 2 & Ch 3 3 4/14, 4/16 Preliminary system Design Detail design and development Ch 4 Ch 5 4 4/21, 4/23 Exam 1: (Ch 1~5) System test, evaluation and validation Ch 6 Part III: System Analysis and Design Evaluation 5 4/28, 4/30 Alternative models in decision making CH 7 6 5/5, 5/7 Models for economic evaluation (dependent on class requirement) Qeuing th. (time permitted) 7 5/12, 5/14 Optimization in design and operations Ch 8 Ch 10 CH9 AI programming (LAB) 8 5/19,5/21 EXAM 2 (7, 8, 9) Suppy chain techniques CH /26,5/28 Memorial day, no class outsourcing Control concepts / reliability (time permitted) 10 6/2, 6/4 Life cycle testing Review for final exam Relation to Program Outcomes: This course addresses the following outcomes; (a) Apply Math/Science Knowledge (c) Design system/ component/process (d) Function on multidisciplinary teams (e) Solve engineering problems (k) Engineering Practice Ch 19 Ch 11 Ch 17 Students are using their math/science/statistical knowledge in analyzing reliability problems. The students are presented with case studies to discuss with their team members and must select the appropriate reliability analysis technique to solve the problem and present to the class. Engineering Science: 60% Engineering Design: 40% 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 215

217 216 ENGR 4430: Facilities Planning and Design Required for IE Catalog Description: Design concepts and input requirements in planning and design of new or renovation of existing manufacturing systems. Product, process, and flow and activity analysis techniques. Flow line and buffering techniques. Computer-aided layout design and evaluation. Design of handling systems. Math models of location problems. Prerequisites: Engr 3020 (Work Design and Measurement) and 3841 (Operations Research). 3 hour lecture. 3 hours lab. 4 quarter-credits. Textbook: D. R. Sule, Manufacturing Facilities, Location, Planning, and Design, 2nd Edition. 1994, PWS Publishing Company. Coordinator: Helen Zong Class Website: Course Objectives: Upon completing this course, students should master following knowledge. Basic concepts and techniques of site selection; Machine and labor requirement calculations and selections; Manufacturing department relationships and facility layout design. Prerequisites: Engr 3020: Work Design and Measurement; 3841: Operations Research. Relation to Program Objectives: Relation to Program Objectives: The program objectives include that (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering; (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability; (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems; (g) an ability to communicate effectively. This course enables students to design manufacturing facility layouts with consideration of efficiency, safety, economy, and sustainability. Students solve real facility design problems in the course design projects. Course Content: Topics Reading Week Assignment Topic 1: Facility Locations Ch.15, 17, 18, 19 2 Prerequisite test: 30 min Topic 2:Production charts and systems Ch. 5 1 Topic 3: Machine and labor selection Ch. 6 1 Topic 4: Facility Layout Design Ch Midterm exam: 1:50 hr 0.5 2/21/08: Facility tour 0.5 Topic 5: Cellular Manufacturing Layout Ch.5 & handouts 1 Topic 6: Computer-Aided Facility Layout handouts 1 Project Presentations Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 216

218 217 Final exam: 1:50 hr Relation to Program Outcomes: This course contributes to (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering; (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability; (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems; (g) an ability to communicate effectively. Students practice layout design concepts and techniques. Students apply layout design knowledge to real manufacturing facilities. Student teams identify layout problems from real life for course design projects. Then student write project proposals. After the project proposals are approved by the sponsoring companies and course instructor, students developed new layouts for efficiency, economy and safety improvements. Students report the final layout designs by written reports and oral presentations to the class. Real-life Problem Solving Experience: Students conduct course design projects of real problems in the communities. These problems include copy machine placements, library new division layout, computer lab layout, bookstore layout, local fast food service layout. Laboratory Usage: Students Storm software to assist layout evaluations. Computer Usage: Storm software and Microsoft Excel. Communication Building: Students practiced project proposal and report writing, as well as team presentations. Engineering Science: 75% Engineering Design: 25% Prepared by: Helen Zong Date: December, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 217

219 218 ENGR 4440 Computer Integrated manufacturing Systems Required for IE 2008 Catalog Description: Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems (4) Introduction to automation, computer aided manufacturing, group technology, computer aided process planning, cellular manufacturing, just-in-time manufacturing, Push and Pull Manufacturing Systems, and production control. Prerequisite: ENGR Three hrs. lect., 2 hrs. lab. Text Book : Automation, Production Systems, and Computer Integrated Manufacturing 3rd Edition By Mikell P. Groover, Prentice Hall, Software: Solid Works and Master CAM Coordinator: Saeid Motavalli Course Objectives: This course gives the students the ability to integrate various aspects of manufacturing systems using computers, utilizing robotics, create manufacturing cells using JIT and pull system concepts, and utilizing various automation technologies to improve the operations of manufacturing systems. Prerequisite by Topics: Basics of manufacturing processes and production planning and control. Course Content: Topics Readings Weeks 1 Introduction to CIM, Manufacturing Ch 1, 2 1 systems and CAD 2 Introduction to Automation Ch 3, CH Basic Elements of Automation Ch Numerical Control and APT CH programming 4 (test 1 Tentative) Ch 7 1 Robotics Systems 5 Programmable Logic Controllers Ch Intro to Manufacturing Systems, Ch 13, 14, 15 2 Group Technology and Cellular Manufacturing 7 (test 2 Tentative) Class Notes 2 Pull and Push systems JIT 8 Quality and Automated Inspection Ch 22, Process Planning and Concurrent Ch 25 1 engineering 10 FINAL Relation to Program Outcomes: This course addresses the following outcomes; Apply Math/Science Knowledge 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 218

220 219 (c) Design system/component/processes (d) Solve engineering problems (k) Use engineering techniques/tools/skills Students are using their math/science knowledge in analyzing automation technologies and robotics structures. Students design automation systems including selecting automation technologies designing system requirements and analyzing alternatives. The class team project is the design of a manufacturing system for producing a certain product. Students are required to design the system, equipment, automation technologies needed, layout plan, material handling system and production/process planning for the system. Students use, Solid Works, Master CAM, and CMM software and hardware in this class. Engineering Science: 60% Engineering Design: 40% Prepared by: Saeid Motavalli Date: Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 219

221 220 ENGR 4603 Operations Research II 2008 Catalog Description: ENGR 4603: Theory of stochastic models with applications to engineering. Markov processes, queues, birth-death processes. Operations research applications. Inventory models, risk theory, fatigue failure, and reliability. Computer simulation. Not open to those with credit for STAT/ENGR 3603 or STAT/ENGR/MATH Prerequisite: STAT/ENGR (Sp) Required Text: Higgins and Keller-McNulty, Concepts in Probability and Stochastic Modeling, Duxbury Press, 1994, ISBN: Computer Software: R/S-Plus and Excel for computer simulations. Coordinator: Jaimie Kwon Course Objectives: This course is an introduction to stochastic models and their applications to science and engineering. The emphasis will be on modeling random processes occurring or evolving in time. The major topics covered in this course are discrete-time Markov chains (Chapter 4), Bernoulli counting and Poisson processes (Chapter 7), queuing models and birthdeath processes (Chapter 7), and continuous-time Markov chains (Chapter 9). Other possible topics include reliability, renewal processes, martingales, and Brownian motion. Prerequisite: Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineers II (ENGR STAT PROB FOR SCIENCE ENGR II) Course Contents: Week # Chapters and tests Topics 1 Ch 1, 2 Probability, discrete random variables 2 Ch 3 Special discrete random variables 3 Ch 4; Test 1 Markov chains 4 5 Ch 5 Continuous random variables 6 Test 2 7 Ch 6 Special continuous random variables 8 Ch 7 Markov counting and queuing process 9 Test 3 10 (Ch 8, 9, 10) Sums of random variables, systems models, reliability models FINAL Test 4 Final Relation to Program Outcomes: This course addresses the following outcome(s); (a) Apply Math/Science Knowledge Students are using their math/science knowledge in analyzing stochastic processes and queuing systems. Prepared by: Jaimie Kwon Date: 12/02/ Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 220

222 221 Contact Information Professor David Bowen (510) Senior Project Engineering 4610 & 4620 Office: Valley Business & Technology Center 227 Course Description: ENGR Development of technical writing and presentation skills through class discussions, proposal writing and presentations. Development of team skills through identification and development of team project proposal and through team building exercises. Utilization of engineering design process and project management techniques in proposal development. Introduction of engineering ethics through case studies. Prerequisites for Engineering Department: Senior standing and departmental approval. ENGR Utilization of industrial engineering skills and engineering design concepts including development of alternative solutions and economic analysis of alternatives to complete an industrial project. Prerequisites or co-requisites for ENGR 4610: any three of ENGR 4100, 4200, 4300, Prerequisite for ENGR 4620: ENGR 4610 Course Objectives and Content In this two course series, industrial engineering skills and engineering design concepts, including development of alternative solutions and economic analysis of alternatives, are utilized to complete an industrial project. Students will develop and expand technical writing and presentation skills through class discussions, proposal writing and presentations, Students will develop and expand team skills through identification and development of team project proposal and through team building exercises Students will be able to utilize engineering design process and project management techniques for proposal development and execution. Students will understand ethical conflict and resolution through study of the Professional Engineering Code of Ethics, and application of the code to selected case studies. Grading 10% - Attendance 45% - Final Presentations 45% - Final Written Report 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 221

223 222 Schedules ENGR 4610 Week Topic Due in class Introduction Expectations, I.E. Presentations, Resumes 1 Resumes I.E. Presentations 2 Effective Meetings Meeting Summary Template 3 4 Brainstorming Contract Components Workshop-Project Metrics & Economics In-Class Result In-Class Result 5 Team Meetings w/professor Activity Logs, Meeting Summaries 6 Presentations--Economic Implications and Consequences Presentations 7 Teams, Teamwork & Learning Style Printed Copy of Presentations 8 Team Meetings w/professor Activity Logs, Draft interim reports 9 Ethics None 10 Presentations Presentation, Interim Report 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 222

224 223 ENGR 4620 Week Topic 1 Report Writing (Guest Speaker) 2 Team Meetings w/professor Due in class All work materials or Binder with all written materials All work materials or Binder with all written materials 3 Globalization & the Multi-Cultural Workforce None 4 Tutorials 5 Project updates 6 Tutorials 7 Team Meetings w/professor 8 Draft Report Review Workshop 9 Giving Good Oral Presentations 10 Final Presentations Presentations, activities, handouts, teaching materials Oral Presentations Presentations, activities, handouts, teaching materials All work materials, including client deliverables Draft Report None Presentation, Final Report Relation to Program Objectives Our program objectives include producing graduates who have enthusiasm and aptitude to continuously pursue learning, and have the ability to communicate and work well as individuals or on teams. This course advances realization of these objectives by requiring students to seek and utilize learning resources outside the class via a term project, and by requiring students to work in teams on laboratories and on the project. Communication skills are promoted through oral and written presentation of the term design project. Relation to Program Outcomes This course contributes to the following outcomes (c) Design system/component/process (d) Function on multidisciplinary teams (e) Solve engineering problems (f) Understand Professional/ ethical responsibilities (g) Communicate (h) Understand global/ societal context (i) Recognize life-long learning (k) Use engineering techniques/skills/tools Students are assigned to teams, and the class is treated as a consulting firm with multiple teams 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 223

225 224 that interact and rely on each other for feedback and suggestions. Each Team s fundamental assignment is to utilize their engineering skills to solve some portion of a client s real-world problems. Solutions must be acceptable ethically and in view of a global/societal context as well as being technically and economically viable. In accomplishing this assignment, teams typically use multiple engineering tools and methods, communicate with individuals from many disciplines, and utilize multiple learning resources. The project culminates in a written report to the client and faculty, and an oral presentation to the clients and university community, as well as local employers, family and friends. Real Life Problem Solving Experience: Projects require teams to collaborate closely with a work organization, helping them to address a real problem or decision that they are currently facing. Each year an attempt is made to include manufacturing, service and non-profit organizations as clients. Design Experience: Projects vary from year to year and client to client. All students are involved to some extent in all projects, while the primary focus for each group is on their assigned client. Past projects have included, facility design and layout, design of inventory control systems, analysis of system redesigns via simulation and manufacturing system redesign. Communication Building: Students are taught and practice both written and verbal communication extensively in this class, including the elevator talk, oral presentation of progress, keeping of an activity log, writing of meeting summaries, and of course the final report and oral presentation. Engineering Science: 25-75% (Can vary considerably by project/client) Engineering Design: 25-75% (Can vary considerably by project/client) Prepared by: David Bowen, 10/4/ Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 224

226 225 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, EAST BAY DEPARTMENT OF MATH AND COMPUTER SCIENCE MATH CALCULUS I SYLLABUS Effective date: Fall 2007 Catalog description: Differential calculus. Limits and continuity. Exponential and logarithmic functions. Techniques and applications of differentiation. Prerequisite: MATH 1300 or departmental permission. Textbook: Calculus, Early Transcendentals, 6 th ed., James Stewart: Brooks/Cole About 30 class meetings. This schedule leaves time for exams and review Day Section Topic 0 0 Preview of Calculus (reading) 1 1.1,1.2,1.3 Functions (as needed) & 1.5 Graphing Calculators and Exponential Functions & 1.6 Inverse Functions, Exponentials and Logs, Inverse Trig Functions Tangent and Velocity Problems Limit of a Function & 2.4 Calculating Limits using limit laws and Definition Continuity Asymptotes Derivatives and Rates of Change Derivative as a Function Derivatives of Polynomials and Exponentials Product and Quotient Rule Derivatives of Trig Functions Chain Rule Implicit Differentiation & 3.11 Derivatives of Logs & Hyperbolic Functions & 3.8 Rates of Change, Exponential Growth and Decay Related Rates & 4.8 Linear Approximations and Differentials and Newton s Method Maximum and Minimum Values Mean Value Theorem Derivatives and Graphing L Hospital s Rule & 4.6 Curve Sketching Optimization Antiderivatives (optional) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 225

227 226 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, EAST BAY DEPARTMENT OF MATH AND COMPUTER SCIENCE MATH CALCULUS II SYLLABUS Effective date: Winter 2004 Catalog description: Integral calculus. The indefinite integral, area, the Fundamental Theorem and techniques of integration. Applications to volume, arc length, physical and biological problems. Prerequisite: MATH Textbook: Calculus, Early Transcendentals, 5th ed., James Stewart: Brooks/Cole Day by day syllabus, about 30 MWF class meetings. NOTE: This schedule leaves some time for exams and review Day Section Topic Areas and distances The definite integral Antiderivatives (review from Math 1304) The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Indefinite integrals and the net change theorem The Substitution rule The logarithm defined as an integral Areas between curves Volumes Volumes by cylindrical shells & 6.5 Work and average value of a function Integration by parts Trigonometric integrals Trigonometric substitution Integration of rational functions by partial fractions & 7.6 Strategy for integration; using tables Approximate integration Indeterminate forms & L Hospital s Rule (review from 1304) Improper integrals & 8.2 Arc length and area of a surface of revolution & 8.4 Selected applications to Physics, Engineering, Economics, and Biology Modeling with differential equations & 9.4 Separable equations; exponential growth and decay & 10.3 Curves defined by parametric equations; polar coordinates 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 226

228 227 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, EAST BAY DEPARTMENT OF MATH AND COMPUTER SCIENCE MATH CALCULUS III SYLLABUS Effective date: Spring 2004 Catalog description: Infinite series, convergence of power series. Vectors in space. Partial derivatives, chain rule, directional derivatives and gradient. Curves and surfaces. Maxima and minima. Multiple integrals. Prerequisite: MATH Textbook: Calculus, Early Transcendentals, 5th ed., James Stewart: Brooks/Cole Day by day syllabus, about 30 MWF class meetings. NOTE: This schedule leaves some time for exams and review Day Section Topic Curves defined by parametric equations Calculus with parametric curves Polar coordinates Areas and lengths in polar coordinates & 12.2 Three-dimensional coordinate systems; vectors The dot product & 12.5 The cross product; equations of lines and planes , Cylinders and quadric surfaces; cylindrical and spherical coordinates (optional) Functions of several variables Limits and continuity Partial derivatives Tangent planes and linear approximations The chain rule Directional derivatives and the gradient vector Maximum and minimum values Double integrals over rectangles Iterated integrals Double integrals over general regions NOTE: Chapter 11 may be covered in sequence (before Chapter 12) Sequences Series The integral test and estimates of sums The comparison tests Alternating series 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 227

229 Absolute convergence and the ration and root tests Strategy for testing series; review Power series , Representations of functions as power series; Taylor and Maclaurin series If time allows, the following sections should be covered Lagrange multipliers Double integrals in polar coordinates Applications of double integrals Surface area 15.7 Triple integrals 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 228

230 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study

231 230 Physics 1001: Course Syllabus Instructor Prof. Derek F. Jackson Kimball Office: South Science Room S251. Phone: (510) e- mail: Office hours: Tu 12:00-1:00 pm, W 12:00-1:00 pm in S251 Study Session: F 2:00-4:00 pm room TBA Lectures M W F 10:40-11:50am, Room: N220 Text Randall D. Knight, Physics for Scientists and Engineers (with Modern Physics) 2nd Edition (Pearson/Addison Wesley, 2008) [ISBN #: ]. If you have a documented disability and wish to discuss your Student Disability Resource Center (SRDC) approved academic accommodations, or if you would need assistance in the event of an emergency, please make an appointment to meet with me as soon as possible. 2 Physics 1001: Course Syllabus Grading Labs: 15% Problem Sets: 20% Discussion questions: 10% Midterm 1: 15% Midterm 2: 15% Final: 25% Disabilities 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 230

232 231 Course Outline Day Date Topic Reading from Knight W F M W F Sep Oct 1 3 Introduction Displacement, vectors, velocity, acceleration Order-of-magnitude estimates, instantaneous velocity and derivatives Position from velocity, integrals Instantaneous acceleration, vectors 1.7, pp , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp Homework Due M W F M W F M W F D kinematics, projectile motion Uniform circular motion Forces, Newton s 1st and 2nd Laws Free-body diagrams, equilibrium, friction, drag Newton s 3rd Law Ropes and pulleys REVIEW EXAM 1 Circular motion , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp Prob. Set 1 Prob. Set 2 Prob. Set 3 M W F M W F Nov Fictitious forces Conservation of momentum, impulse Inelastic collisions Kinetic energy, gravitational potential energy, conservation of mechanical energy Hooke s Law, elastic collisions Work and kinetic energy , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp Prob. Set 4 M W F Thermal energy, conservation of energy REVIEW EXAM , pp Prob. Set 5 M W F M W F Rotational motion, moment of inertia Torque, rotational dynamics Static equilibrium, rolling motion Conservation of angular momentum Simple harmonic motion Thanksgiving (University Closed) , pp , pp , pp , pp , pp Prob. Set 6 M W W Dec Energy in harmonic motion Pendulum, damping, resonance REVIEW M Dec 8 Final Exam (11:00 am 12:50 pm) , pp , pp Prob. Set Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 231

233 232 Physics 1002: Course Syllabus Instructor Prof. Derek Jackson Kimball Office: South Science Room S251. Phone: (510) Office hours: M W 8:30-9:30 am and by appointment. Problem Solving Study Session: F 2:30-5:00 pm in North Science 246 Lectures M W F 10:40-11:50am, Room: North Science 206 Text Randall D. Knight, Physics for Scientists and Engineers (with Modern Physics) (Pearson/Addison Wesley, 2004) [ISBN #: ]. If you have a documented disability and wish to discuss your Student Disability Resource Center (SRDC) approved academic accommodations, or if you would need assistance in the event of an emergency, please make an appointment to meet with me as soon as possible. 2 Physics 1002: Course Syllabus Course outline Grading Labs: 15% Problem Sets: 15% Web Assignments: 15% Midterm 1: 15% Midterm 2: 15% Final: 25% Disabilities 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 232

234 233 Day Date Topic Reading from Knight M W F Jan Intro, simple harmonic motion (SHM) Energy in SHM, dynamics of SHM Pendulum, small-angle approx, resonance none Ch. 14, pp Ch. 14, pp M W F M W F M W F M W F M W F M W F M W F M W F M W F Feb 1 Electric charges & forces, Coulomb s Law Electric field Continuous charge distributions, motion of charges in fields Ch. 25, pp Ch. 25, pp Ch. 26, pp Ch. 26, pp MLK, Jr. Day (University Closed) Symmetry, flux Gauss s Law Ch. 27, pp Ch. 27, pp Current and conductivity Review Midterm 1 Ch. 28, pp Electric potential energy, electric potential Connection between potential and field Batteries and capacitors Mar Basic circuits, Ohm s Laws, Kirchhoff s Laws Power, resistors, RC circuits Magnetic fields Magnetic dipoles, Amp`ere s Law Magnetic forces, magnetism in materials Electromagnetic induction, magnetic flux, Lenz s Law Faraday s Law, induced fields & currents, LC & LR circuits Electromagnetic fields, displacement current Maxwell s Equations Ch. 29, pp Ch. 30, pp Ch. 30, pp Ch. 31, pp Ch. 31, pp Ch. 32, pp Ch. 32, pp Ch. 32, pp Ch. 33, pp Ch. 33, pp Ch. 34, pp Ch. 34, pp AC circuits RLC circuit Midterm 2 Ch. 35, pp Ch. 35, pp Relativity Time dilation & length contraction Lorentz transformations, relativistic energy & momentum W 19 Final Exam (11:00 am 12:50 pm) Ch. 36, pp Ch. 36, pp Ch. 36, pp Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 233

235 234 Physics 1003: Course Syllabus Instructor Prof. Derek Jackson Kimball Office: South Science Room S251. Phone: (510) Office hours: M W 9:30-10:30 am and by appointment. Problem Solving Study Session: F 2:00-4:00 in North Science 247 Web information Course information, handouts, problem sets, solutions, etc. will be posted on BlackBoard. There is also a discussion board for posting questions and discussing homework problems. Lectures M W F 10:40-11:50am, Room: North Science 206 Text Randall D. Knight, Physics for Scientists and Engineers (with Modern Physics) (Pearson/Addison Wesley, 2004) [ISBN #: ]. If you have a documented disability and wish to discuss your Student Disability Resource Center (SRDC) approved academic accommodations, or if you would need assistance in the event of an emergency, please make an appointment to meet with me as soon as possible. 2 Physics 1003: Course Syllabus Course outline Grading Labs: 15% Homework: 30% In-class group presentation: 10% Midterm 1 (Thermodynamics): 15% Midterm 2 (Optics): 15% Final (Quantum Mechanics): 15% Disabilities 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 234

236 235 Day Date Topic Reading from Knight M W F Apr Intro, Macroscopic description of matter Work, Heat, 1st Law of Thermodynamics Specific Heat, Micro/Macro Connection Ch. 16 Ch Ch. 17.7, Ch M W F M W F nd Law of Thermodynamics, Heat engines Refrigerators, Carnot Cycle Review Midterm 1: Thermodynamics Waves, Doppler effect Superposition Ch. 18.6, Ch Ch none Ch Ch. 20 Ch M W F M W F M W F Interference Wave optics Diffraction 30 Ray optics Lenses Review May Midterm 2: Optics End of classical physics Photons, matter waves Ch Ch Ch Ch Ch none Ch Ch. 37 Ch M W F Bohr model of Hydrogen Wavefunctions & Heisenberg s Uncertainty Principle Schr odinger Eqn. in 1D Ch Ch. 39 Ch M W F M W F Jun 1 Finite potential wells Harmonic oscillator, tunneling Angular momentum & spin Memorial Day (University closed) Multielectron atoms, periodic table, lasers Nuclear physics Ch Ch Ch none -Ch Ch. 42 M W F Student presentations Student presentations Student presentations -none -none -none M 11 Final Exam: Quantum Mechanics (11:00 am 12:50 pm) Ch Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 235

237 236 PSYC 1005 General Psychology for Healthier Living Catalog Description: An introduction to the scientific study of basic processes underlying human and animal behavior; perception, learning, states of consciousness, human development, emotion, personality, psychopathology, etc. will be examined with special attention to how these concepts and theories are related to physical and emotional health. COURSE REQUIREMENT: To get a fuller flavor of psychology as an experimental science, one must have some direct contact with ongoing research. Consequently, you will participate in 5 hours of research as an experimental subject. If you do not complete the 5 hours, you will receive an Incomplete in the course. If your grade at this point is a D or F, you would receive that grade instead of an Incomplete. Keep your yellow sheet that the experimenter will give you after the experiment is over. Sign up sheets for the experiments are located around the corner from the Psychology office (Sci S 229). To do well in this course you need to consistently attend the lectures and arrive on time for class. Turn off all pagers and cell phones as they are a major annoyance. In order to get credit for this course, you must be enrolled in a General Education Activities Section (General Studies 1010). You receive a separate grade for that section. EXAMS: There will be 4 exams (each worth 50 points) and a final exam (worth 80 points) based on the lectures, readings, videos, and class discussions. The exams will be multiplechoice and you will need a scantron sheet and pencil for each exam. There are no make-up exams. If an emergency arises, you need to leave a message on my voice mail (925) before the exam is given. If you do not do this, you receive a zero for that exam. ASSIGNED TEXT: Introduction to Psychology (10th edition) by Dennis Coon THE FOLLOWING GRADING SYSTEM WILL BE USED cumulative points = A cumulative points = B cumulative points = C cumulative points = D Below 168 = F OFFICE HOURS: Tuesdays & Thursdays 11:15-12:00 pm in Room SciS 235. TENTATIVE COURSE SCHEDULE March 29th Introduction and Course Overview Chpt 1 March 31st Research Methodology Chpt 1 April 5th Physiological Psychology Chpt Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 236

238 237 April 7th Perception Chpt 6 States of Consciousness Chpt 7 April 12th EXAM 1 April 14th Conditioning & Learning Chpt 8 April 19th Memory Chpt 9 Stress & Coping Chpt 15 April 21st Motivation & Emotion Chpt 12 April 26th EXAM 2 April 28th Child Development Chpt 3 May 3rd Life Span Development Chpt 4 Intelligence Chpt 11 May 5th EXAM 3 May 10th Personality Chpt 14 May 12th 19th Psychopathology Chpt 16 May 24th & 26th Psychotherapy Chpt 17 May 31st EXAM 4 June 2nd Review June 7th (12-1:30pm) FINAL EXAM 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 237

239 238 Appendix III Faculty Vita (Faculty that have taught engineering courses) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 238

240 239 Name: David M. Bowen Academic Rank: Associate Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Industrial Engineering & University of California, Berkeley 1992 Operations Research (IEOR) M.S. IEOR University of California, Berkeley 1988 CERT. Education, Math, Cross- U.S. Peace Corps 1984 Cultural Skills & Swahili, USA and Kenya, East Africa B.S. IEOR University of California, Berkeley 1983 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 7 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 2001 Associate Professor Appointed June 2007 Assistant Professor Appointed August 2001 Other related experience (teaching, industrial, etc.) Visiting Assistant Professor, University of California, Berkeley 1997-present Managing Partner, BOPTIMAL Enterprises, Oakland, CA Lecturer, Graduate Business Admin. Program, St. Mary's College, Moraga, CA Education and Training Manager / Consultant, TEFEN USA, Santa Clara, CA Research Engineer, Competitive Semiconductor Manufacturing Program, UC Berkeley Lecturer, Industrial Engineering & Operations Research Department, UC Berkeley Graduate Student Instructor & Research Assistant IEOR Department, UC Berkeley Engineering Intern, California Public Utilities Commission, San Francisco, CA Mathematics Teacher/U.S. Peace Corps Volunteer, Kenya, East Africa Scientific and Professional Societies: American Society of Engineering Education Honors & Awards Finalist, IIE 'Best Doctoral Dissertation' Competition Operations Research Society of America Doctoral Colloquium Invitee Outstanding Graduate Student Instructor Award Funded Research Projects, Grants, Fellowships and Visiting Faculty Positions Title Award Amount Role - Funding Institution Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation $53,000 Site Director - NSF 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 239

241 240 Brain Actuated Remote Controlled Vehicle $4,720 PI - CSU RSCA grant Building Engineering Team Skills- With $108,866 original PI - NSF Industry Needs In Mind (BETS-WINIM) $19,904 supplement UC Berkeley Visiting Faculty $10,000 Visiting Faculty - Engineering Team Skills Research & Summer Stipend Fellowship - CSU Course Development Faculty Support Grant Professional Development Activities: ABET Accreditation Workshop Pittsburgh, PA 2008 Social Dynamics of Campus Change: Creating an Interdisciplinary Research Agenda National Academy of Engineering, Invited workshop participant Washington DC 2006 Attendee Educating Engineers: Theory, Practice, and Imagination, Carnegie Foundation for the Stanford, CA 2006 Advancement of Teaching ICEE Annual International Meeting San Juan, Puerto Rico 2006 Participant Faculty Learning Community on the CSUEB Scholarship of Teaching and Learning NSF Grantee Meeting Washington, DC 2005 ASEE Annual Meeting Portland, OR 2005 ICEE Annual International Meeting Gainsville, FL ICCIE Annual International Meeting San Francisco, CA 2004 FIE/IEEE Annual Meeting Colorado 2003 NSF Grantee Meeting Washington DC 2003 ASEE Regional Meeting Los Angeles, CA 2003 Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) 2008 NSF Review Panel (via ) 2007 Elected to serve on CSU East Bay Foundation Board of Directors 2007 Reviewer for Computers & Industrial Engineering: An International Journal 2006 Elected to Universitywide Committee on Fairness 2006 Reviewer for Computers & Industrial Engineering: An International Journal 2006 Panel Member, Bay Area Engineering Programs, CSU Community College Counselor Conference 2005 Elected to serve as member of the Academic Senate 2005 Member and Chair, Universitywide Subcommittee on Student Research 2005 Reviewer for American Society for Engineering Education 2004 Reviewer for the International Network for Engineering Education and Research (ineer) 2004 NSF Review Panel (meeting in Arlington, VA) 2003 Elected to serve as member of Universitywide Committee on Research 2003 NSF Review Panel (via , served twice under two separate requests) 2001-Present Member of College-wide curriculum committee 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 240

242 241 Selected Publications: Bowen, D. M., The Elevator Talk: Communicating Technical Material to Non-Technical Listeners, Proceedings, International Conference on Engineering Education, San Juan, Puerto Rico July 23-28, Bowen, D. M., Alvaro, M., Mejia D. and Saffi M., Industry Practices for Providing Engineers with Team Skills, American Society for Engineering Education Conference Proceedings, Portland, OR, June Bowen, D. M., Ganjeizadah, F., Motavalli, S. and Zong, H., Development of a New M.S. Degree in Engineering Management, American Society for Engineering Education Conference Proceedings, Portland, OR, June Bowen, D. M., Alvaro, M., Mejia D. and Saffi M., Team Skills of Engineers Do We Teach What Industry Wants? Proceedings, International Conference on Engineering Education, Gainesville, Florida, October Bowen, D. M. and James, A., Learning Experiences for a New User Modality, Proceeding, 34 th International Conference on Computers and Industrial Engineering, San Francisco CA, Nov , Bowen, D. M., Building Engineering Team Skills Phase One: Industry Values and Best Practices, 33rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference Proceedings, Boulder, CO November, Bowen, D. M., Team Skills for Engineers: Yearning, Learning, Spurning and Discerning, American Society for Engineering Education PSW Conference Proceedings, Los Angeles, CA, March, Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year Course Quarter Credit Lecture(hr) Laboratory Grad/UG ENGR 3841 Operations Research I Fall U ENGR 3020 Work Design/Measure Fall U ENGR 4/5280 Design & Mgmt HWS Fall U & G ENGR 1011 Intro to Engr Winter U ENGR 3101 Statics & Dynamics Winter U ENGR 4610 Senior Project Winter U ENGR 3190 Human Factors Engr Spring U ENGR 4/5180 Prod/Proc Design Spring U & G ENGR 4620 Senior Project Spring U 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 241

243 242 Farnaz GanjeizadehAcademic Rank: Assistant Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Industrial and Systems Engineering University of Alabama in Huntsville 1997 M.S. Engineering Administration Syracuse University, NY 1979 B.S. Industrial Engineering and operations Syracuse University, NY 1977 Dissertation Topic: Simulation Output Analysis via Inductive Classification. Research Interest: Simulation output analysis using artificial intelligence techniques Number of Years Service at CSUEB: Five Date of Original Appointment: Fall 2004 Academic Rank Institution Appointment Date Assistant Professor CSUEB Fall 2004-present Visiting Scholar CSUEB Sept 2003-Fall 2004 Part Time Faculty San Jose State University Jan 2003-Aug 2004 Lecturer University of Alabama in Huntsville Fall 1994-Aug 1995 Graduate Research Assistant University of Alabama in Huntsville Fall 1992-Aug1994 Scientific and Professional Societies of Which a Member Member of AIIE, American Institute for Industrial Engineers Honors and Awards Member of Alpha Pi MU, National Industrial Engineering Honor Society, 1992 Deans list, 1978 Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) Program Coordinator of ABET Accreditation for year 2009 Member of Academic Senate, Present (elected two year term). CAPR (Committee on Academic Planning & Review) member, 2005-Member of COMCORE (Cyberinfrastucture for Interdisplinary Research), 2006-present.Search committee member our tenure-track position in Construction Management present. Representative of the Engineering Department, honors graduation during academic, Representative of the Engineering Department, freshman advising and recruiting, 2007 and Science Festival, 2007 Preparation of ABET accreditation team visit, Proposals for MS certificate degrees, Engineering Management and Quality Engineering, Principle Publications (last five years) Selecting of AGV Dispatching Strategy via Inductive Classification, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Helen Zong, and Phillip Ronald, International Journal of Industrial Engineering (submitted Nov 2008). A Hunt for Better teaching Introductory Statistics and Business Courses, Julia, Norton, YanYan Zhou, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, presented at Joint Statistics Meetings, Section on Statistical Education, Denver, August Paper accepted for publication, Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, October Manufacturing Analysis by Inductive Classification Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Helen Zong, Proceedings of FAIM 18 th International FAIM Conference, Volume II, pp , June 28- July 2, 2008 Academic Resource planning by inductive classification, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Saeid Motavalli, Michael Leung and Jordan Cruz, California Journal of Operations Management, in volume 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 242

244 243 6,no. 1 pp70-78 in Academic Resource planning by inductive classification, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Saeid Motavalli, Michael Leung, Book of abstracts, 22 nd European Conference on Operations Research, MC-39, pp 74, Integrated Computer Simulations with Real World Problem Solving, Helen Zong, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh; California, Journal of Operations Management, Volume III, No 1, pp , Muti-Sensory System for Monitoring Machining Condition, Saeid Motavalli, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Proceedings of 16 th International FAIM Conference, Volume II, pp , 2006, July 20-22, Simulation Modeling for Resource Planning in Engineering Academic Institutions ; Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Saeid Motavalli, & Michael Leung; Proceedings of FAIM 15 th International FAIM Conference, Volume II, pp , July 22-26, Development of a New M.S. Degree in Engineering Management David Bowen, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Saeid Motavalli, Helen Zong; Proceedings of American Society for Engineering Education Annual conference and Exposition, Major Research Projects (last five year) Optimization of Central North Alabama Health Services Scheduling ; funded at $4000, Faculty Learning Community (FLC) ; funded at $2000. Completed Automated Intelligent Training System (AITS) funded at $38,000 by US Air Force. Completed Simulation Output Analysis by Machine Learning ; RSCA summer fellowship awarded at $5742, 2005 Other Assigned Duties Performed During Academic Year (with Average Hours per Week) Coordination of ABET accreditation for 2009 (one quarter release) Directing three CS and one Engineering undergraduate in research projects,grant funded by US Air force. Supervision of seven Engineering students Alliance for Minority Participation (AMP) program Supervision of two honor projects in Production Planning and Scheduling, and Electrical Circuits Participation in Programs to Improve Teaching and Professional Competence (last five years) ABET Faculty Workshop on Assessing Program Outcomes, 2008 Faculty training Back to Bay Workshops, 2007 and 2008 Faculty Learning Community (FLC) evaluating the best practices for program assessment, CSUEB Courses, Course Academic Quarter Course Academic Quarter ENGR 2010 Fall 2007 MGMT 3100 Spring 2008 ENGR 1010 Fall 2007 ENGR 4400 Spring 2008 ENGR4350 Winter 2008 ENGR 4280 Fall 2008 ENGR 4100 Winter 2008 ENGR 3841 Fall Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 243

245 244 Name: Saeid Motavalli Academic Rank: Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Industrial Engineering University of Pittsburgh 1989 M.S. Industrial Engineering University of Southern California 1979 B.S. Mechanical Engineering Tehran Polytechnic 1977 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 7 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 2001 Other related experience (teaching, industrial, etc.) 2001-present Professor and Chair, Department of Engineering, California State University East Bay, Hayward CA Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Engineering, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb IL Assistant Professor, Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering Wichita State University (WSU), Wichita KS Senior Engineer, Bio-Mechanics Corporation of America, Deer Park New York Scientific and Professional Societies: Institute of Industrial Engineers (IIE) American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Honors & Awards College of Engineering award for excellence in research for 1995, Wichita State University. College of Engineering and Engineering Technology award for excellence in research for 2000, Northern Illinois University. Funded Research Projects, Grants, Fellowships and Visiting Faculty Positions Title Amount Role Funding Inst. Date Louis Stokes $53,000 PI NSF Alliances for Minority Participation Mathematics, Engineering, Science Achievement (MESA) $250,000/year PI MESA State Wide 2007-present Professional Development Activities: 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 244

246 245 ABET Accreditation Workshop Pittsburgh, PA 2008 IIE annual meeting +ABET training 2003-present ABET program evaluator 2004-present Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) 2004-Present Member of G.E. Sub committee of CIC, present Present Member of all departmental committees including Personnel, and curriculum committees Member of the Budget Advisory Committee (COBRA) Selected Publications (last five Years): F. Ganjeizadeh, S. Motavalli, and Michael Leung, Academic Planning Using Simulation for Efficient Allocation of Resources in Engineering Programs, California Journal of Production and Operations Management Vol. 6 No. 1, pp , Feb K.K. Krishnan, S. H. Cheraghi and S. Motavalli, Case Study in Using Dynamic From-Between Charts to Solve Dynamic Facility layout Problems, California Journal of Production and Operations Management, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp , Feb M. A. Gamila, S. Motavalli, A modeling Technique for Loading and Scheduling Problems in FMS, Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 19, 2003 pp A. Alrashdan, S. Motavalli and B. Bidanda, Creation of Surface Models for Reengineering of Manufactured Parts, Proceedings of the 18 th International Conference on Production Research (ICPR 18), July 31-August Salerno Italy. Bowen, David; G., Farnaz; Motavalli, Saeid; Zong, Helen, Development Of A New Masters Degree Program In Engineering Management (2005 Conference) Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition 2005, Portland OR. F. Ganjeizadeh, S. Motavalli and M. Leung, Simulation Modeling for Resource Planning in Engineering Academic Institutions, Proceedings of the 15 th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing, July 18 th 20 th, 2005, pp Bilbao Spain. Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year H o u r s Course Quarter Credit Lecture Lab Grad/UG ENGR 6400 Quant. Methods in E. M. Fall G ENGR 1420 Engineering Graphics Winter U ENGR 4440 CIM Systems Spring U 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 245

247 246 Helen Y. Zong, Ph. D., P.E. Professor of Industrial Engineering Initial tenure-track appointment at CSUEB: Sept., Current rank at CSUEB: Professor and Tenured. Education: Ph.D. of industrial engineering, University of Houston, May MS of mechanical engineering, East-China Petroleum Institute, Dec BS of mechanical engineering, Southwest Petroleum Institute, Jan Professional Licensing: Licensed Professional Engineer, license effective until Certified MIP (Manufacturing Improvement Process) project leader. Professional and Related Experience: 6/2006~present: Professor of industrial engineering, California State University, East Bay, CA. 9/2000~6/2006: Associate professor of industrial engineering, California State University, East Bay, Hayward, CA. Courses and subjects taught: - Engr 6300: Applied Quality Assurance - Engr 5300: Quality Engineering - Engr 5200: Systems Simulation - Engr 4620: Senior Design Project II - Engr 4610: Senior Design Project I - Engr 4430: Facilities Planning and Design - Engr 4300: Quality Engineering - Engr 4200: System Simulations - Engr 4180: Product-Process Design - Engr 4100: Production Planning and Control - Engr 3140: Engineering Economy - Engr 3040: Strength of Materials - Engr 3020: Work Design and Measurement - Engr 2070: Fundamentals of Manufacturing - Engr 2060: Materials Science - Engr 1010: Introduction to Industrial Engineering Professions - Engr 1011: Introduction to Engineering Professions - Other Accomplishments: - Research publications and consulting services to bay area industries. - Faculty adviser of IIE students chapter at CSUEB Advised graduate and undergraduate students of industrial engineering. - Developed laboratories and improved the undergraduate curriculum of industrial engineering program at CSUEB. 7/93~8/00: Associate professor of manufacturing engineering, tenured faculty member, ABET accredited program, St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, MN Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 246

248 247 Publications of Referred Journals and Referred Conference Proceedings Helen Zong, Saeid Motavalli, A Study of Machine Failure Impact on Throughput Times, Proceedings of the 2008 Industrial Engineering Research Conference, Vancouver, Canada, May Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Helen Zong, and Saeid Motavalli, Manufacturing Analysis via Inductive Classification, Proceedings of the 2008 FAIM Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing Conference, Skövde, Sweden, July Helen Zong, Repair-time Variability Effects on Production Lead-times, California Journal of Operations Management, p. 144~151, February Joyendu Bhadury, S. Khurana, H.S. Peng, Helen Zong, Optimization Modeling in Acquisitions: A Case Study from the Motor, The Journal of Supply Chain Management, Volume 42, Issue 4, p 40-53, October Helen Zong, Liqiong Tang, Heuristic Algorithms for Machine-Operator Coupling Problems, the 36 th International Conference on Computer & Industrial Engineering, p. 219~226, Taipei, Taiwan. June Helen Zong, Farnaz Ganjeizadeh, Integrating Computer Simulations with Real World Problem Solving, California Journal of Operations Management, p. 120~126, February David Bowen, Farnaz Ganjeizadah, Saeid Motavalli, Helen Zong, Development of a New M.S. Degree in Engineering Management, Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Portland, Oregon. June Helen Zong, Throughput Time Evaluation using Flexible Simulation, California Journal of Operations Management, p. 116~112, March Helen Zong, Warren Yu, Liqiong Tang, Service Level Improvement of a Customer Service Center, the 34 th International Conference on Computer & Industrial Engineering, p. 309~314, San Francisco, CA. November Liqiong Tang, Michael Rodger, Helen Zong, Reconfigurable Mechatronic System, the Eighth International Conference on Manufacturing & Management, p. 549~555, Gold Coast, Australia, December Saeid Motavalli, Helen Zong, Behrooz Falahi A Linear Approximation Technique for Evaluation of Form Tolerances, the 12 th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing, p.735~742, Dresden, Germany, July 2002, Helen Zong, Saeid Motavalli, Warrant Yu Teaching Teamwork techniques for Engineering Students, Proceedings of ASEE Pacific Southwest Section Spring 2002 Conference, p. III- B.1~8, Fresno, CA, April, Membership in Professional Societies: - Institute of Industrial Engineers (IIE), senior member of Silicon Valley chapter, faculty advisor of CSUEB student chapter Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 247

249 248 Name: Roger Doering Academic Rank: Tenured Assistant Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Electrical Engineering University of California, Berkeley 2001 M.S. Computer Science University of California, Berkeley 1974 B.S. Systems Engineering Case Western Reserve University 1973 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 7 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 2001 Other related experience (teaching, industrial, etc.) 2002-present Assistant Professor, Department of Engineering and Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, California State University East Bay, Hayward CA Graduate Student, Teaching Assistant, textbook author, U.C. Berkeley Consultant, Display systems and software Vice President of Research and Development, Digital Electronics Corporation, Hayward Engineering Project Manager, Integrated Automation Vice President of Engineering, Digital Electronics Corporation, Berkeley, Oakland, Burlingame Graduate Student, Teaching Assistant. Scientific and Professional Societies: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ( IEEE) IEEE Computer Society IEEE Electron Devices Society Honors & Awards Outstanding Graduate Student Instructor, U.C. Berkeley '92. Sam Silver Award for Academic achievement and interest in the Arts, EECS Dept. '94. Member of Tau Beta Pi and Eta Kappa Nu.. Professional Development Activities: December 2007 Poster Presentation at ISDRS 2007, Baltimore MD Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) Present Member of CS Graduate Committee 2007 Fall Quarter Member of Academic Senate Current Research Projects: Layout a 2½D CAD tool for MEMS and IC layout. A Windows application being developed jointly with my grad students. MIPSym, an Integrated Development Environment with Editor, Assembler, Simulator and Debugging environment for use in Assembly Language Courses. Textbook Projects: Two textbooks are currently being used in draft form in my classes, one titled MIPS Assembly Language Programming, co-authored with Bob Britten of Chico and one titled, Introduction to Logic and Computer Architecture. Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year H o u r s 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 248

250 249 Course Quarter Credit Lecture Lab Grad/UG CS 2430 Assembly Language Fall U CS 3430 Computer Architecture Fall U CS 3434 Microprocessor Lab Fall U CS 3432 Digital Lab Winter U CS 4432 Computer Arch II Winter U ENGR 1011 Intro to Engineering Winter U CS 3430 Computer Architecture Spring U CS 4865 GUI Prog. using RAD Spring U CS 6430 Computer Sys. Arch. Spring G CS 6865 Topics in GUI Prog. Spring G 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 249

251 250 Name: Joshua D. Kerr Academic Rank: Assistant Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Statistics UC Davis 2006 M.S. Statistics University of Southern Maine 2001 B.A. Mathematics University of Southern Maine 2000 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 2 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 2006 Scientific and Professional Societies: Member of the American Statistical Association Member of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics Funded Research Projects, Grants, Fellowships and Visiting Faculty Positions New Faculty Research Mini-Grant, CSU East Bay (2007) Presentations Kerr, J.D., W. Polonik, R.H. Shumway. Estimation of Multiple Signals from Seismic Array Data. Presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Kerr, J.D., W. Polonik, R.H. Shumway. Signal Extraction in Seismic Array Data.. Presented at the 2008 Statistical Conference in Honor of Bob Shumway, Abstracts/Posters Kerr, J.D. and W. Polonik. Multiple Signal Extraction in Seismic Array Data. Presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Cosenza, C., J.D. Kerr, B. Trumbo, Using a Mark-Recapture Experiment to Illustrate Methods of Point and Interval Estimation. Presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Professional Development Activities: Principal organizer of the 2008 Conference in Honor of Bob Shumway. Attended the Joint Statistical Meeting each year over the last 3 years. Institutional and Professional Service (last two years) Minor Advisor, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2007-present). Advised many Statistics BS students and filed many graduation checks. Advised many Economics students with the Statistical Economics Option. Master s Exam Coordinator, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2007-present) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 250

252 251 Master s Exam Committee, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2006-present) Department of Statistics Coordinator of the Science Festival, CSU East Bay, (2007) Academic Senator, CSU East Bay, (2008-present). Hiring Committee, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, ( ). Hired Prof. YanYan Zhou. Selected Publications (last two Years): Kerr, J.D. and C. Cosenza (2008). Fishing for an Estimate: Capture-Recapture Estimates of Population Size. Submitted for Publication, Stats Magazine. Eudey, L., J.D. Kerr, B. Trumbo (2008). Using R to Simulate Permutation Distributions for Some Elementary Experimental Designs. Submitted for Publication, Journal of Statistical Education. Kerr, J.D., book review #8017, Time Series Analysis, by Henrik Madsen, Chapman & Hall, 2008, JASA (to appear 2009) Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year Course Quarter Credit Lecture Lab Grad/UG STAT 6204 Probability Theory Fall Grad STAT 6204 Probability Theory Fall Grad STAT 3050 Statistics: From Data to Decisions Fall UG STAT 4601 Regression Spring UG STAT 1000 Elem. of Probability and Statistics Spring UG STAT 1000 Elem. of Probability and Statistics Spring UG STAT 6205 Statistical Theory Winter Grad STAT 3050 Statistics: From Data to Decisions Winter UG STAT 6204 Probability Theory Fall Grad STAT 1000 Elem. of Probability and Statistic Fall UG STAT 1000 Elem. of Probability and Statistics Fall UG 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 251

253 252 Name: Jaimie (Jaimyoung) Kwon Academic Rank: Assistant Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Statistics UC Berkeley 2000 M.S. Statistics Seoul National University 1996 B.S. Computer Science and Statistics Seoul National University 1994 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 4 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 2004 Scientific and Professional Societies: Member of the American Statistical Association Funded Research Projects, Grants, Fellowships and Visiting Faculty Positions Title Amount Role Funding Inst. Date Use of FasTrak Data for Dynamic Origin-Destination Matrix Estimation Advanced Use of FasTrak Data for Travel Time Estimation Tools for Operations Planning (TOPL) II TS-514 Generating Real Time Loop Diagnostics and Travel Times from Existing Field Hardware Evaluation of PeMS to improve the Congestion Monitoring program Causes and Impact of Nonrecurrent Congestion 8 Units Release Time, $1,000 4 Units Release Time; $1,000 PI PI Cal state East Bay, Faculty Support Grant Cal state East Bay, Faculty Support Grant $54,174 Subcontract Caltrans $159,956 PI Caltrans $47,892 Subcontract Caltrans $46,499 Subcontract Caltrans Professional Development Activities: Attended the Joint Statistical Meeting each year over the last 5 years. Attended the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting each year over the last 5 years. Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) Undergraduate Advisor, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2004-present). Academic Senator, CSU Hayward, ( ). Computer Advisory Committee, College of Science, CSU East Bay, ( ) New Faculty Search Committee, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2004, 2005, 2006). Selected Publications (last five Years): Kwon, J. and Varaiya, P., (2008) Effectiveness of California's High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) system, Transportation Research Part C, 16 (1), pp Bickel, P.J., Chen, C., Kwon, J., Rice, J., van Zwet, E., Varaiya, P., (2007) "Measuring Traffic," Statistical Science, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp Kwon, J., Petty, K., Shieh, E., Kopelias, P., and Papandreou, K. (2008) Automatic Method for Imputing and Balancing Link Traffic Counts, In TRB 87 th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers CD-ROM. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., Kwon, J., Petty, K., Kopelias, P., and Papadimitriou, F. (2008) Empirical Modeling of the Effect of Incidents on Congestion and Travel Time Prediction: Case Study of Attica Tollway in Athens, Greece, In TRB 87 th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers CD-ROM. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., Gomes, G., Horowitz, R., Kurzhanskiy, A.A., Varaiya, P. and J. Kwon. (2008) Behavior of the Cell Transmission Model and Effectiveness of Ramp Metering. Forthcoming in Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies. Kwon, J., Petty, K. and Varaiya, P. (2007) Probe Vehicle Runs or Loop Detectors? Effect of Detector Spacing and 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 252

254 253 Sample Size on the Accuracy of Freeway Congestion Monitoring, Transportation Research Record, no. 2012, Transportation Research Board, pp Kwon, J., Mauch, M. and Varaiya, P. (2006) Components of Congestion: Delay from Incidents, Special Events, Lane Closures, Weather, Potential Ramp Metering Gain, and Excess Demand, Transportation Research Record, no. 1959, Transportation Research Board, pp Chen, C., Varaiya, P. and Kwon, J. (2005) "An Empirical Assessment of Traffic Operations." In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory (15th ISTTT, Maryland, US), Pergamon, New York, Kwon, J. and Varaiya, P. (2005) "Real-Time Estimation of Origin-Destination Matrices with Partial Trajectories from Electronic Toll Collection Tag Data," Transportation Research Record no. 1923, Transportation Research Board, pp Kwon, J. and Petty, K. (2005) "A Travel Time Prediction Algorithm Scalable to Freeway Networks with Many Nodes with Arbitrary Travel Routes," Transportation Research Record no. 1935, Transportation Research Board, pp Choi, I.-G., Kwon, J. and Kim, S.-H., (2004) "Local feature frequency profile: A method to measure structural similarity in proteins," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Vol. 101, No. 11, pp Kwon, J., Chen, C. and Varaiya, P. (2004) "Statistical Methods for Detecting Spatial Configuration Errors in Traffic Surveillance Sensors," Transportation Research Record no. 1870, Transportation Research Board, pp Bickel, P.J., Chen, C., Kwon, J., Rice, J., Varaiya, P. and van Zwet, E. (2003). "Traffic Flow on a Freeway Network," in Denison, D.D. et al. (Eds.) Nonlinear Estimation and Classification, New York, Springer. (Originally in Proceeding of MSRI Workshop on Nonlinear Estimation and Classification, Berkeley, California, March 19-29, 2001) Kwon, J., Varaiya, P. and Skabardonis, A. (2003) Estimation of Truck Traffic Volume from Single Loop Detector Outputs Using Lane-to-lane Speed Correlation, Transportation Research Record no. 1856, Transportation Research Board, pp Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year Hours Course Quarter Credit Lecture Lab Grad/UG STAT 2010, Elements of Statistics for Business and Fall UG Economics STAT , Introduction to Statistical Data Winter Grad Mining and SQL STAT/MATH 3502 Statistical Inference I / STAT Spring Grad/UG 6304, Advanced Statistical Inference STAT 4401 Intro Stochastic Processes / ENGR 4603 Spring Grad/UG Operations Research II STAT 5601, Introductory Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineering / STAT 3601, Statistics and Probability for Science and Engineering I Fall Grad/UG Name: Shenghua Kelly Fan Academic Rank: Assistant Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Statistics U of Minnesota 1999 M.S. Statistics U of Minnesota 1998 B.S. Mathematics National Taiwan University 1993 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 3 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 2005 Scientific and Professional Societies: Member of the American Statistical Association and its local chapter s president (elect) Member of the International Biometrics Society Funded Research Projects, Grants, Fellowships and Visiting Faculty Positions 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 253

255 254 Title Amount Role Funding Inst. Date Faculty Support Grant ~$ 31,300 PI CSU East Bay Faculty Support Grant ~$ 35,000 PI CSU East Bay Start-up Grant ~$ 10,000 PI CSU East Bay Faculty Support Grant ~$ 55,000 PI National Singapore University Faculty Support Grant ~$ 7,000 PI National Singapore University Visiting Assistant Professor ~$45,000 UC Santa Barbara Professional Development Activities: Attended and presented in the Joint Statistical Meeting in 2000, 2006, and 2007 July 2004, the 6th ICSA International Conference. Singapore (also an organizer for an invited session) July 2004, the XXIInd International Biometric Conference. Cairns, Australia (poster session) Dec 2003, the 2003 Experimental Design Workshop in Taipei. Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan (invited speaker) Nov 2002, One-Day Teaching Seminar: The Art and Science of Teaching. Singapore (invited speaker) August 2001, the 5th ICSA International Conference. Hong Kong, China July 2001, University of Augsburg, Germany (invited speaker) June 2001, moda6. Vienna, Austria (invited speaker) Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) Undergraduate Advisor, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2005-present). Advised many Statistics BS students and Economics students Seminar coordinator, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, ( ), organized many professional meetings Scholarship Committee, College of Science, CSU East Bay, (2005-present) Academic Senator, CSU East Bay, (2007-present) Vice president ( ) and elect president ( ) of the SF Local Chapter of American Statistical Association Paper reviewers for several tier one statistical journals, (2001-present) Selected Publications (last five Years): Fan, S. K. (2007). "Measurement Errors in Independent Observer Line Transect Surveys," accepted for publication by Journal of Data Science Fan, S. K. and Wang, Y. G. (2006). "Multiple Responses from Subjects at Different Doses in Phase I Clinical Trials," Biometrics, 63: Fan, S. K. and Wang, Y. G. (2006). "Decision-theoretic Designs for Clinical Trials with Multiple Outcomes," Statistics in Medicine, 25: Fan, S. K. and Chaloner, K. (2005). "Design for a Trinomial Response: Robustness and Small Sample Properties." Response Surface Methodology and Related Topics, edited by Andre Khuri: Fan, S. K. and Chaloner, K. (2004). "Optimal Designs and Limiting Optimal Designs for a Trinomial Response." Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 126: Fan, S. K. and Chaloner, K. (2003). "A Geometric Method for Singular c-optimal Designs." Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 113: Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year H o u r s Course Quarter Credit Lecture Lab Grad/UG STAT 1000 Elementary Statistics Spring UG BSTA 6652 Survival Analysis Winter Grad STAT 4515 Multivariate Data Analysis Fall UG 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 254

256 255 STAT 6515 Advanced Multivariate Data Analysis Fall Grad 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 255

257 256 Name: Eric A. Suess Academic Rank: Associate Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Statistics UC Davis 1998 M.S. Statistics CSU Hayward 1993 B.S. Statistics and Economics UC Berkeley 1991 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 10 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 1998 Scientific and Professional Societies: Member of the American Statistical Assocation Member of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics Funded Research Projects, Grants, Fellowships and Visiting Faculty Positions Title Amount Role Funding Inst. Date PSM Development Grant ~$30,000 Subcontract, PI SLOAN PSM Development Grant ~$25,000 Subcontract, PI SLOAN SIMI-2Assessment and Evaluation ~$90,000 Subcontract, PI ACOE Professional Development Activities: Attended the Joint Statistical Meeting each year over the last 5 years. Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) Department Chair, Department of Statistics and Biostatistics, CSU East Bay, (2006-present). Currently mentoring 6 untenured faculty members. Yearly writing of Chair retention letters. Wrote job description and guided Prof. Mitch Watnik as Hiring Committee Chair Hired YanYan Zhou. Implemented the change from the Department of Statistics to the Department of Statistics and Biostatistics Fall Implemented the beginning of the new MS program in Biostatistics. Lead the curriculum revision of the Biostatistics MS program Spring Lead the curriculum revision of the Statistics MS program Spring To Lead the curriculum revision of the undergraduate Statistics BS program Spring Graduate Advisor, Biostatistics, Department of Statistics and Biostatistics, CSU East Bay, (2007-present). Recruiting students. Directing Co-graduate Advisors Prof. Lynn Eudey and Prof. Mitch Watnik on graduation paperwork. Undergraduate Advisor, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (1998-present). Advised many Statistics BS students and filed many graduation checks. Advised many Economics students with the Statistical Economics Option. Summer Acting Chair, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008). Summer 2002 participated in the hiring of staff member. Summer 2006 participated in the hiring of replacement staff member Peggy Towers Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 256

258 257 Selected Publications (last five Years): Eric Suess and Bruce Trumbo (2009 expected). Gibbs Sampling and Screening Tests: From Random Numbers to the Gibbs Sampler (Springer Tests in Statistics). Bruce Trumbo and Eric A. Suess, book review #8041, Models for Probability and Statistical Inference: Theory and Applications, by James H. Stapleton, Wiley, 2008, JASA (2008) Eric Suess, Bruce Trumbo, David Ahlberg (2007). Classroom Simulation: Distributions of Sales and Queue Lengths at a Fast-Food Counter. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association. Eric Suess, Daniel Sultana, Gary Gongwer (2006). How Much Confidence You Have in Binomial Confidence Intervals? Stats Magazine. Daniel M. Sultana, Charlyn Suarez, Bruce E. Trumbo, Eric A. Suess (2006). Is it Normal? A Simulation Study of Properties of Some Normality Tests. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association. Bruce E. Trumbo, Eric A. Suess, Jacob Colvin (2006). Classroon Simulation: Indicators of Outliers in Boxplots of Normal Data. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association. Bruce E. Trumbo, Eric A. Suess, Clayton W. Schupp (2005). Simulation: Computing the Probabilities of Matching Birthdays. Stats Magazine. Eric A. Suess, Bruce E. Trumbo, Yun Jiang (2005). Classroom Simulation: Understanding One-Way Random- Effects ANOVA. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association. Bruce E. Trumbo, Eric A. Suess, Shuhei Okumura (2005). Classroom Simulation: The Margin of Error in a Public Opinion Poll. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association. Bruce E. Trumbo, Eric A. Suess, Rebecca E. Brafman (2004). Classroom Simulation: Are Variance-stabilizing Transformations Really Useful? Proceedings of the American Statistical Association. Clayton W. Schupp, Bruce E. Trumbo, Eric A. Suess (2004). An Introduction to R: Simulating Birthday Matches in the Nonuniform Case. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association. Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year H o u r s Course Quarter Credit Lecture Lab Grad/UG MGMT 6110 Business Forecasting Fall Grad STAT 3050 Data to Decisions Winter UG STAT 6501 Mathematical Statistics I Winter Grad STAT 6502 Mathematical Statistics II Spring Grad 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 257

259 258 Name: Mitchell Watnik Academic Rank: Assistant Professor Degree Field Institution Date Ph.D. Statistics UC Davis 1996 M.S. Statistics UC Davis 1993 B.A. Quantitative Economics UC San Diego 1991 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 3 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 2005 Scientific and Professional Societies: Member of the American Statistical Association Professional Development Activities: Attended the Joint Statistical Meetings each year over the last 5 years. Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) Graduate Advisor, Statistics, Department of Statistics and Biostatistics, CSU East Bay, (2007-present). Recruiting students. Advising students on graduate courses and coursework. Assisting students with filing for graduation. Undergraduate Advisor, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2005-present). Advised many Statistics BS students and filed many graduation checks. Committee on Instruction and Curriculum, CSU East Bay, (2007-present). Co-organizer and Chair of the Contributed Papers Session "Time Series, State Space Models, and Other Reflections on the Work of Bob Shumway", Joint Statistical Meetings, August 7, Co-organizer of the "2008 Statistical Conference in Honor of Bob Shumway", UC Davis, June 26-27, At-large Member of Academic Senate, CSU East Bay, (2008-present). Organizer of Symposium on Statistics and Operations Research in Baseball (sponsored by CSU East Bay, American Statistical Association Section on Statistics in Sports, and Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences Section on Operations Research in Sports). Speakers were: Cory Schwartz (Director of Statistics for MLB.com), Chris Long (Sr. Quantitative Analyst for the San Diego Padres), Sig Mejdal (Sr. Quantitative Analyst for the Saint Louis Cardinals), Nate Silver (Columnist for Baseball Prospectus), Jeffrey Ma (VP of Research for Protrade.com), Hal Stern (Professor of Statistics, UC Irvine), Joel Sokol (Associate Professor of Operations Research, Georgia Tech), Eric Bickel (Director of Decision Analysis Systems Lab, Texas A&M Univ.), and Henry Reichman (Professor of History, CSU East Bay). College of Science Representative to Academic Senate, CSU East Bay (2005-8). Selected Publications (last five Years): Barrett, D.M., C. Weakley, J.V. Diaz, and M. Watnik (2007). Qualitative and Nutritional Differences in Processing Tomatoes Grown under Commercial Organic and Conventional Production Systems, Journal of Food Science, 72 (9), Lim, Michele, Diana R. Shiba, Ingrid J. Clark, Daniel Y. Kim, Douglas E. Styles, James D. Brandt, Mitchell R. Watnik, Isaac J. Barthelow (2007). Personality Type of the Glaucoma Patient, Journal of Glaucoma, 16(8), Watnik, Mitchell (2007). Review of Advanced Statistics from an Elementary Point of View by Michael J. Panik, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102, Invernizzi P, Miozzo M, Oertelt-Prigione S, Meroni PL, Persani L, Selmi C, Battezzati PM, Zuin M, Lucchi S, Marasini B, Zeni S, Watnik M, Tabano S, Maitz S, Pasini S, Gershwin ME, Podda M. (2007). X monosomy in female systemic lupus erythematosus. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. (Sept.) 1110, Cassady, Diana, Marilyn Townsend, Robert A. Bell, and Mitchell Watnik (2006). Portrayals of branded soft drinks in popular American movies: a content analysis, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 258

260 259 Activity, 3:4. Garcia, E, MR Watnik, and DM Barrett (2006). Can We Predict Peeling Performance of Processing Tomatoes?, Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 30, Hackman, RM, PJ Havel, HJ Schwartz, JC Rutledge, MR Watnik, EM Noceti, SJ Stohs, JS Stern and CL Keen (2006). Multinutrient supplement containing ephedra and caffeine causes weight loss and improves metabolic risk factors in obese women: a randomized controlled trial, International Journal of Obesity, 30(10), Gershwin, ME, Selmi C, Worman HJ, Gold EB, Watnik M, Utts J, Lindor KG, Kaplan MM, Vierling JM, USA PBC Epidemiology Group (2005). Risk factors and comorbidities in primary biliary cirrhosis: A controlled interviewbased study of 1032 patients. Hepatology, 42(5), Invernizzi, P, Miozzo M, Selmi C, Persani L, Battezzati PM, Zuin M, Lucchi S, Meroni PL, Marasini B, Zeni S, Watnik M, Grati FR, Simoni G, Gershwin ME, Podda M (2005). X Chromosome monsomy: a common mechanism for autoimmune diseases. Journal of Immunology, 175(1), Sebat F, Johnson D, Musthafa AA, Watnik M, Moore S, Henry K, Saari M. (2005). A multidisciplinary community hospital program for early and rapid resuscitation of shock in nontrauma patients. Chest, 127(5), Kimura Y, Selmi C, Leung PS, Mao TK, Schauer J, Watnik M, Kuriyama S, Nishioka M, Ansari AA, Coppel RL, Invernizzi P, Podda M, Gershwin ME. (2005). Genetic polymorphisms influencing xenobiotic metabolism and transport in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. Hepatology, 41(1), Invernizzi P, Miozzo M, Battezzati PM, Bianchi I, Grati FR, Simoni G, Selmi C, Watnik M, Gershwin ME, Podda M. (2004). Frequency of monosomy X in women with primary biliary cirrhosis. Lancet, 363, Spies MA, Woodward JJ, Watnik MR, and Toney MD. (2004). Alanine Racemase Free Energy Profiles from Global Analyses of Progress Curves. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 126, Benson GD, Kikuchi K, Miyakawa H, Tanaka A, Watnik MR, Gershwin ME. (2004). Serial analysis of antimitochondrial antibody in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. Clinical and Developmental Immunology, 11, Baumgarth N, Szubin R, Dolganov GM, Watnik MR, Greenspan D, Da Costa M, Palefsky JM, Jordan R, Roederer M, Greenspan JS. (2004). Highly Tissue Substructure-Specific Effects of Human Papilloma Virus in Mucosa of HIV-Infected Patients Revealed by Laser-Dissection Microscopy-Assisted Gene Expression Profiling. American Journal of Pathology, 165, Ziboh, VA; Naguwa, S; Vang, K; Wineinger, J; Morrissey, BM; Watnik, M; and Gershwin, ME (2004). Suppression of Leukotriene B4 Generation by Ex-vivo Neutrophils Isolated from Asthma Patients on Dietary Supplementation with Gammalinolenic Acid-containing Borage Oil: Possible Implication in Asthma. Clinical and Developmental Immunology, 11, Grow, MP; Singh, A; Fleming, NW; Young, N; and Watnik, M (2004). Cardiac Output Monitoring During Off- Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 18, Siekmann, JH; Allen, LH; Watnik, MR; Nestel, P; Neumann, CG; Shoenfeld, Y; Peter, JB; Patnaik, M; Ansari, AA; Coppel, RL; and Gershwin, ME (2003). Antibody Titers to Common Pathogens: Relationship to Food-Based Interventions in Rural Kenyan School Children. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 77, Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year H o u r s Course Quarter Credit Lecture Lab Grad/UG ECON 6400 Seminar in Econometrics Winter Grad STAT 2010 Elements of Statistics for Business and Economics Fall UG STAT 2010 Elements of Statistics for Business and Economics Winter UG STAT 6011 Statistical Modeling for Management and Economics Winter Grad STAT 6250 Statistical Programming Fall Grad STAT 6509 Theory and Application of Regression Spring Grad STAT 6510 Analysis of Variance Fall Grad 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 259

261 260 Name: YanYan Zhou Academic Rank: Assistant Professor Degree Ph.D. University of Maryland, Baltimore County, 2004 B.S. XiaMen University, China, 1995 Number of years of service at CSUEB: 1 Date of original appointment at CSUEB: 2007 Other related experience (teaching, industrial, etc.) Florida International University, Assistant professor, Merck Research laboratories, Biometrician, Scientific and Professional Societies: American Statistical Association Honors & Awards 2008 New Faculty Research award, CSUEB 2007 Faculty Research award, FIU th annual National Business and Economics Paper Competition, China, first place Funded Research Projects, Grants, Fellowships and Visiting Faculty Positions Title Amount Role Funding Inst. Date Professional Development Activities: Joint Statistical Meeting, 2008, Denver Institutional and Professional Service (last five years) Undergraduate Advisor, Department of Statistics, CSU East Bay, (2007-present). Graduate Advisor, Department of Statistics, Florida International University, (2007-present). Coadvisor on 3 master students thesis. Hiring Committee member, Department of Statistics, Florida International University, 2006 and 2007 University curriculum committee, Florida International University, 2006 and 2007 Selected Publications (last five Years): Peer Reviewed Journals Articles 1. Roy, A., Fuller, W. A. and Zhou, Y. (2008), A Likelihood-Based Estimator for Vector Autoregressive Processes, Statistical Methodology, accepted. 2. Mi, J., Shi, W. and Zhou, Y.(2008) Distributions of Sum And Difference of Independent Pascal Random Variables, Statistics & Probability Letters, 78, Berger, V., S. Zhang and Zhou, Y. (2007) Further Thoughts on Extrapolation, with Application to Clinical Trials, Statisica Sinica. 4. Zhou, Y., Mi, J. and Guo, S. (2007) Estimation of Parameters in Logistic and Log-logistic Distribution with Grouped data, Lifetime Data Analysis, 13, Berger, V., Stefanescu, C. and Zhou, Y. (2006) The Analysis of Stratified 2 x 2 Contingency Tables, The Biometrical Journal, 48, p Zhou, Y. and Roy, A. (2006). Effect of Tapering on Accuracy of Forecasts Made With Stable Estimators of Vector Autoregressive Processes. International Journal of Forecasting, 22, p Mi, J., Chen, Z. and Zhou, Y. (2006) Estimating the Mean of Exponential Distribution From Step-Stress Life Test Data, Ch. 19 of Advances on Distribution Theory, Order Statistics and Inference, Birkhauser Boston, Inc. 8. Bergman, A., Stevens, C., Zhou, Y., and Herman, G. (2006) MK-0431 Potently Inhibits Dipeptidyl Peptidase-IV Activity and Increase GLP-1 without Producing Hypoglycemia in Young Healthy 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 260

262 261 Males Results of a Multiple-Dose, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study. Clinical Therapeutics, 28, p Berger, V., Zhou, Y., Ivanova A. and Tremmel L. (2003) Adjusting for baseline covariates by inducing a partial ordering: issues to consider. The Biometrical Journal, 46, P Zhou, Y. and Xu, L. (2003) An application of shrinkage estimation to current China s economy, Statistics and Decision, China, September issue, p Courses Taught During Most Recent Academic Year H o u r s Course Quarter Credit Lecture Lab Grad/UG STAT6551 Fall, Grad STAT3503/ENGR3602 Spring, UG STAT1000 Fall, 2007/ UG 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 261

263 262 Appendix IV Institutional Profile 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 262

264 263 I. Background Information Relative to the Institution 1. General Information Name of Institution: California State University East Bay Address: Carlos Bee Boulevard Hayward California Name and Title of Chief Executive Officer of Campus: Mohammad Qayoumi Name and Official position of the person submitting completed questionnaire: Saeid Motavalli 2. Type of Control State 3. Regional or Institutional Accreditation Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), National Association of Schools of Music, /7 (to be renewed) American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business, National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, National Association of School Psychologists, American Chemical Society, National Accrediting Commission of Registered Nursing, California State Board of Registered Nursing, Faculty and Students For the entire institution, provide faculty and student counts for the fall term immediately preceding the visit. (See Table II-1) 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 263

265 264 Table II-1. Faculty and Student Count for Institution, School Year Fall 2007 FT HEAD COUNT FTE (see Note 2) Tenure Track Faculty Other Teaching Faculty Student Teaching Assistants Undergraduate Students Graduate Students Professional Degree Students n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. PT TOTAL STUDENT CREDIT HOURS 5. Mission CSU East Bay is a university of diversity and opportunity. As a comprehensive university, we offer undergraduate and graduate degrees in a broad variety of fields. But in all our programs we offer an education that emphasizes lifelong learning, fundamental thinking and communication skills, an ethic of work and achievement, and engagement with the great breadth of human experience. Our students, faculty, and staff come from the widest variety of backgrounds and bring to the university an extraordinary range of experiences. But our university has been especially effective at educating students whose educational opportunities may have been limited and at bringing together our diverse community to learn from each other. Our degree programs combine practical training with the acquisition of academic skills that prepare students for a lifetime of work, civic engagement, and personal fulfillment. Our goal is to make a difference in the lives of our students and graduates. While located in one of the most urbanized areas of our state and country, our campuses are removed from the hustle and bustle of city life and provide safe environments for reflection and study, while retaining connections to the vibrancy of contemporary urban life. In many ways, CSU East Bay offers the benefits of a large, urban, comprehensive university while retaining much of the feel of a smaller college. The mission statement is available at the university s website, Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 264

266 Institutional Support Units Library The University Library offers extensive collections, both in print and online, to support academic programs and faculty research. The library holds over 900,000 printed items, including books, journals, scores, maps, and U.S. federal and California State government publications. The library currently maintains approximately 1,000 print subscriptions to journals, some of which offer free on-line access to electronic versions. In addition, it has over 850,000 micro-form items, and over 30,000 media resources. In terms of online access to information resources, the library subscribes to many electronic databases and provides access to approximately 16,000 journals and over 30,000 electronic books. The University Library supports and maintains both special collections and archives. Special Collections houses rare and antiquarian books; fine example of book art; and manuscript collections, such as the Jensen Family papers which provide rich primary sources on the history of the Hayward area. The University Archives contain the official records of the history of the university, as well as materials pertinent to the history of Southern Alameda County. The library online catalog, HAYSTAC, lists the entire collection and can be searched by author, title, subject, call number, and keywords. The library offers reference assistance in person at the Reference Desk, over the telephone, and through electronic chat reference and . Librarians are also available by appointment and during scheduled office hours for individual consultation regarding library research. Most library printed materials are available for check-out for various loan periods. For details about our circulation policies, ask at the Circulation Desk or check the Library's home page. The library participates in LINK+, a consortium resource sharing service that enables faculty, staff, and students to place their own requests to borrow books that are not available at Cal State East Bay. Books are borrowed from other public and private libraries throughout the state and wider region. Interlibrary Loan staff help you borrow materials not readily available at the University Library or through LINK+. The library's interlibrary loan service provides books and journal articles unavailable here. The library provides access to media resources such as DVDs, compact disks, videos, and other formats. Viewing and listening equipment is available in listening booths and at individual viewing carrels. Reserve materials that faculty members have set aside for class use are available at this desk, or through Blackboard if materials are available in digital format. Various spaces within the library are designed to facilitate group and individual work. The library offers the following: (1) The Learning Commons, a state-of-the-art facility offering the largest group of computers on campus, coupled with access to the collections, services, and support offered by the library; (2) Adaptive Technologies which include several workstations on wheelchair accessible tables, and special speech and text magnification software; (3) Photocopy Services, self-service machines available throughout the library (machines accept currency, coins, and copy cards); (4) Networked Printing Services, computers in the Learning Commons and wireless laptops allow you to print from MS Office suite (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 265

267 266 Access), the Internet, and library databases; workstations near the Reference Desk permit printing from library databases; (5) Group Study Rooms on the Upper Mall facilitate work in small groups and the intellectual exchange of ideas through discussion. The library liaison to engineering works with the department to manage subscriptions, identify new book purchases, and assist students and faculty with curricular and research needs, including reference and interlibrary loan. The budget for books and e-books is $1,475 for this year, which is the same as last year s allocation, and only covers a small portion of the information available for engineering. Access to books and e-books is through the library s catalog; however, specifically for engineering, the liaison maintains a subject guide to organize links to the majority of engineering-specific subscriptions as well as to Internet links ( Access includes: Print & electronic journals for engineering Library databases, such as ACM Portal, IEEE Digital Library, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Wiley InterScience. A newly subscribed database is ProQuest Digital Dissertations Internet resources and search engines, such as CiteSeer, Science Accelerator, Scirus, Scitation Preprints and technical reports, such as arxiv.org, patent information, NTRS, NTIS. Professional societies information, such as American Society for Engineering Education, Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences, Institute of Industrial Engineers. Instructional resources, such as videos on engineering topics will be developed shortly. 7. Computing, Communication and Media Support The Division of Information Technology Services, ITS, strives to support and enrich the university experience for students, faculty and staff-an experience that is increasingly technology enabled and network based. ITS teams develop, operate and maintain the University's shared computing and networking infrastructures, major administrative and academic information systems, baseline instructional and information technologies, and the requisite technical support services. ITS provides support services to the University community via the following three primary groups: College Technology Services (CTS) The CTS department of the Division of Information Technology Services provides instructional and computer support for the colleges and academic departments of the university. Components of this organization are also engaged in the research of new and emerging technologies that may be applicable to the instructional mission of the university. CTS is comprised of the following. Classroom Engineering and Delivery Services (CEDS), located in LI 1105, provides support for technology resources in the University's classrooms and labs. Services include designing, installing and maintaining smart classrooms; assisting faculty with delivery of lectures by assuring the operation of presentation and computer equipment in classrooms; and providing 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 266

268 267 video conference services. College Technology Teams, with offices located in each college of the University, provide computer support to faculty and staff members in academic offices. Services include configuring and troubleshooting computers; distributing and installing licensed software applications; consulting with faculty and staff members to assist with the operation of their computers; and providing services to secure the University's computers and to protect computers from security threats. College IT teams also provide services to students by assisting them to access the University's IT resources and by operating general-purpose and specialized computer labs in support of the instructional mission of the University ( Media and Academic Technology Services (MATS) ( part of the Division of Information Technology Services, is responsible for the support of academic technologies delivered throughout campus and through internet delivery strategies. Components of this organization are also engaged in the research of new and emerging technologies as they pertain to the instructional mission of the University. MATS is comprised of the following: Instructional Technology Service Center, ITSC, located in the Lower Mall across from the Library in room 2800, provides support for faculty presentation needs and facilitates their use of all forms of instructional technology in the classroom, webbased and online instructional delivery. Some of the services provided by the ITSC are multimedia production, consultation with individual faculty on computer applications and presentation equipment, coordination of campus-wide technology funding initiatives, software distribution programs, online education including the campus learning management system (Blackboard), internet delivered instruction, streaming media technologies, and instructionally related digital video and television editing and production. The Adaptive Technology Service Center is engaged in researching and disseminating AT instructional techniques and technologies as they relate to pedagogical and instructional content creation, delivery and learning activities and the support of student adaptive technology. This center provides two distinct assistive technology support teams, one dedicated to the support of faculty working to make their materials accessible and one, in close cooperation with the Student Disability Resource Center (SDRC), in the support of students needing accommodations who have been referred to them by the SDRC. Student Technology Service Center, STSC, based in the Library Information Commons, provides and maintains a large number of drop-in student accessed computers and services based in the Information Commons and throughout the library, a Student Help Desk, a large scheduled lab, a laptop loaner program for financially eligible students and a wireless laptop checkout service for use by students throughout the Library. User Support Services (USS), a department of the Division of Information Technology Services, provides desktop support and consulting to the administrative offices on campus. USS also manages a central Help Desk, which is available to all members of the campus community who 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 267

269 268 have questions regarding computing software, hardware and network communications. II. Background Information Relative to the Engineering Unit 1. Engineering Educational Unit The academic organizational chart for the institution is shown in Table II-2. The Department of Engineering is under the College of Science and offers an undergraduate degree in engineering, option industrial engineering. Table II-2. Academic Organizational Chart for the institution The department houses two laboratories, Computer/CIM laboratory and a machine shop. The departments of Statistics, Accounting, Math/Computer Science, Physics and Management and finance also offer courses for the engineering department. College of Science Mission Statement The College of Science, by fostering an environment where students, faculty and staff work collaboratively to expand knowledge in the disciplines of science and mathematics, seek to provide both majors and non-majors with the science foundation that is appropriate to their career goals and with knowledge and skills that will allow them to function as responsible and contributing members of society. In support of its mission the College of Science is committed to: 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 268

270 269 Provide a climate which encourages students, faculty, and staff to contribute to the intellectual, cultural, and economic life of the university and the communities it serves Provide academic programs that meet the evolving needs of its students and outreach programs that serve those within the primary service areas of the university Provide facilities and technology that support the learning environment Ensure students of varying age, ethnicity, culture and socio-economic status are equally well served Provide an environment that fosters a lifetime of critical inquiry and learning. The Department of Engineering Mission Statement The Industrial Engineering program at California State University, East Bay provides a quality engineering education that prepares its graduates for employment related to their major and to have an aptitude for continued learning. The program provides students with technical and problem solving capabilities, and understanding of real-world business often through practical work experience, and excellent teamwork and communications skills. It promotes a high rate of student success in completing the program in a reasonable length of time and enables the transfer students to take no longer than native students in completing the upper division portion. Students graduate from the program with a high degree of satisfaction about their education. Faculty maintains a high level of currency in the discipline through a strong program of professional development and interaction with the Industrial Advisory Board. The mission statement is posted at the department web site at: Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 269

271 Programs Offered and Degrees Granted The Department of Engineering offers a Bachelor of Science degree in engineering, option in industrial engineering. Table II-3 (Part 2). Degrees Awarded and Transcript Designations Modes Offered 2 Program Title 1 Day Co-op Off Campus Alternati ve Mode Name of Degree Awarded 3 Engineering B.S. in Engineering, option industrial engineering Designation on Transcript 4 B.S. in Engineering, 3. Information Regarding Administrators Furnish current summary curriculum vitae for the administrative head of the engineering educational unit(s) and any associates or assistants who have faculty status or are in responsible charge of a major service unit such as student counseling center, co-op coordination, etc. The summary curriculum vitae may be provided in any format but must be limited to one page Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 270

272 271 CURRICULUM VITAE MICHAEL LEUNG DEAN, COLLEGE OF SCIENCE I. Education Post-doctoral - Biochemistry University of California, Los Angeles Ph.D. - Biochemistry University of Southern California M.A. - Chemistry (Summa Cum Laude) State University of New York/College at Buffalo B.A. - Chemistry State University of New York/College at Buffalo II. Career Dean Present, College of Science, California State University, East Bay Distinguished Teaching Professor , Chemistry/Physics Department, SUNY/College Old Westbury Chair , Chemistry/Physics Department, SUNY/College Old Westbury Professor , Chemistry/Physics Department, SUNY/College at Old Westbury Associate Professor , Chemistry/Physics Department, SUNY/College at Old Westbury Assistant Professor , Chemistry/Physics Department, SUNY/College at Old Westbury III. Professional Service 1995 Present, Member of Governing Board, CSU Moss Landing Marine Laboratory 1999 Present, Member of Interim Report Committee, Accreditation Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) 2000 Present, Member of the Board of Directors of the CSU Hayward Mental Health and Wellness Education 2000 Present, Member of Strategic Planning Council, California State University Program for Education and Research in Biotechnology 2001, Member of Eligibility Committee for Review of Keck Graduate Institute of the Claremont Colleges, California, WASC 1999, Member of Eligibility Committee for Review of Palmer College of Chiropractic West, California, WASC 1999, Member of Accreditation Site Visit Team to Towson University, Maryland, Middle State Commission on Higher Education 1998, Member of Accreditation Site Visit Team to CSU Humboldt, California, WASC IV. Publications 56 publications in refereed scientific journals 57 presentations in national and international conferences V. Grants and Awards National Institute of Mental Health National Institute of Drug Abuse National Institutes of Health 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 271

273 272 National Science Foundation Kuraray Co. Ltd. (Japan) Method Development UUP/New York State Excellence Award Chancellor's Award for Excellence in Teaching 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 272

274 Supporting Academic Departments Provide information about supporting academic departments for all academic-supporting units that provide any required portion of the instruction for engineering students in the programs being evaluated. (See Table II-4) Table II-4. Supporting Academic Departments For Academic Year: (Fall 2007 Data) From State Controller s Data Base Full-time Faculty Head Count 1 Part-time Faculty Head Count 2 Teaching Assistants Head FTE Department or Unit Faculty 3 Count FTE Chemistry Accounting/Computer Information Systems Mathematics/Computer Science Management/Finance Psychology Physics Statistics Provide data for all academic supporting units, e.g., Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, English, Computer Science, etc., that provide any portion of the instruction required by the institution for engineering students. 1. The number of full-time faculty members (tenure track plus other teaching faculty, as classified in Table I) exclusive of teaching assistants. 2. The number of part-time, adjunct, or visiting teaching faculty members, exclusive of teaching assistants. 3. The sum of column 1 plus FTE** of column 2. **For student teaching assistants, 1 FTE equals 20 hours per week of work (or service). For faculty members, 1 FTE equals what your institution defines as a full-time load. 5. Engineering Finances The Engineering unit, before joining the College of Science as a Department, operated as a unit under the supervision of a committee consisting of two administrators, two deans and the director of the Engineering Program. At the time the fiscal support was provided directly by the Office of Academic Affairs. Since coming to the College of Science in September 2001, the College has reached an agreement whereby in the first five years of its operation within the College its fiscal support will continue to come directly from the Office of Academic Affairs. This approach is adopted to protect the unit s fiscal integrity as a developing department as well as to ensure its budget not be affected by the fiscal fluctuation of the School. It is further agreed that an analysis will be carried out at the completion of the five-year agreement to determine whether to continue with the existing arrangement or to fully integrate the department into College fiscally. The salaries of all tenure track faculty, lecturers and office staff are supported by funding 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 273

275 274 provided by the University to the School. The departmental budget for the Engineering Department for the past and current year has been set at $24,000. This funding is used by the department to support its faculty and students as well as the routine operation of its office and laboratories. Additional funding support for travel and professional development can be requested on a competitive basis from a common pool of funds from the College Office. During its developmental phase the department has been making annual equipment requests to the Academic Affairs Office to support the establishment of the engineering laboratories. Table II-5 summarizes the support expenditures for the Department of Engineering Expenditure Category (prior to (previous (current previous year) year) year) (year of visit) Fiscal Year Operations (1) (not including $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 staff) Travel (2) $5,389 $5,112 $5,114 $5,885 Equipment (3) $154,110 $15,000 (a) Institutional Funds $154,110 $15,000 (b) Grants and Gifts (4) $38,675 $40,550 $195,600 $410,000 Graduate Teaching $9,000 Assistants Part-time Assistance (5) (undergrad RA) $12500 $4,500 $14, Engineering Personnel and Policies Personnel All policy and procedural issues within the University are guided by two sets of documents, 1) the Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiated between the Chancellor s Office and the faculty union, California Faculty Association (Attachment 1), and 2) guidelines developed by the Faculty Senate in consultation with the Administration. Policy and procedure information that is useful to the faculty is also available in a booklet form, the Handbook and Faculty Guide. These documents can all be accessed from the Academic Affairs Website at: The descriptions provided in this section are intended to serve only as a brief overview. For details of all policies and procedures please refer to the documents mentioned in the previous 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 274

276 275 paragraph. (see Table II-6) Table II-6. Personnel and Students (Department of Engineering) Year 1 : HEAD COUNT FT PT FTE 2 Administrative 1 * 0.63 Faculty (tenure-track) 3 1 * 3.37 Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants) RATIO TO FACULTY 3 Student Teaching Assistants Student Research Assistants Technicians/Specialists Office/Clerical Employees /4.2 Others Undergraduate Student Enrollment 6 69** 11** Graduate Student Enrollment *Dept Chair is one full time person,.63 Department Administrators and.37 instructional Faculty. Total persons with tenure or on track in department working full time = 3 **Includes freshman and sophomore Faculty Salaries, Benefits, and Other Policies The document that governs issues of Promotion, tenure and retention is entitled, Promotion, Tenure, and Retention Policy and Procedures (Attachment 2). New tenure track faculty are appointed on probationary status prior to tenure. At the time of initial appointment, candidates with previous experience equivalent to that of a tenure track faculty may be granted up to a maximum of two years of service credit. Probationary faculty are reviewed for retention every year until tenure. Tenure consideration ordinarily takes place in the last year of the probation period. Section states, the normal period of probation is six years of full-time probationary service and credited service, if any. In addition, Section 1.0 states, A probationary faculty shall normally be considered for promotion at the same time he or she is considered for tenure. Probationary faculty may apply for early tenure and promotion but both require meeting of higher than normal evaluation standards. Ordinarily, a faculty is eligible to apply for full professor status after serving a minimum of four years as an associate professor. New hire salaries are based on the academic qualifications and experience of the candidates. To serve as a guide, the System has been, since 2000, based upon data collected from all 23 campuses, published the average salaries of new hires by discipline. The salaries we offer are competitive on a national basis. Faculty salary increases are defined by Article 31 of the 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 275

277 276 Collective Bargaining Agreement. In general, they include annual cost of living increases for all faculty, service increases for eligible faculty and merit increases when it is part of the contractual agreement. Additionally, faculty receive a salary increase upon promotion and chairs receive a stipend for their service. Faculty Workload Faculty workload is governed by Article 20 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. For all departments within the University a normal workload is 12 classroom contact hours. Faculty are required to have 3 hours a week of designated office hours and, in addition, they are also expected to meet with students by appointment. Supervision of Part-time Faculty All part-time faculty are under the supervision of the chair. They are reviewed periodically based on guidelines defined in Article to of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Engineering Enrollment and Degree Data Table II-8. Engineering Enrollment and Degree Data Engineering education unit as a whole: (Second Bacc. seekers counted with Undergraduates) Degrees Conferred- Enrollment Year-Fall Term College Year FT/ 2nd Total Total Year AY PT Fresh Soph Jr Sr Bac UG Grad BS MS PhD Other current 08- FT Fall PT FT na n.a*. 1 Fall PT na FT na Fall PT na FT na 2 Fall PT na FT na 0 Fall PT na FT na 0 0 Fall PT na FT na 0 Fall PT na *Degrees Conferred are for the College Year Summer through Spring. Complete data for will be available in August As of Summer and Fall 2002, 4 degrees have been conferred Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 276

278 Definition of Credit Unit One quarter credit unit hour of a lecture class represents 50 minutes of class time., while one quarter hour of a laboratory class represents minutes of laboratory time. One quarter represents 10 weeks of classes, exclusive of final examinations. 9. Admission and Graduation Requirements, Basic Programs A. Admission of Students 1. Describe the general criteria and procedures for admitting students to engineering programs. Engineering program does not have special admission requirements above the university admission requirements. The university requirements are as follows: High school graduates are admitted to the university if: have a quantifiable eligibility index (see Eligibility Index Table in this section), and have completed, with grades of "C" or better, each of the courses in the comprehensive pattern of college preparatory subject requirements. (See "Subject Requirements" later in this section.) Courses must be completed prior to your enrollment in The California State University (special high school programs are exempted from this rule). Eligibility Index The eligibility index is the combination of the high school grade point average and scores on either the American College Test (ACT) or the SAT(Math and Critical Reading sections only). Grade point averages (GPA) are based on grades earned during your final three years of high school. Included in the calculation of the GPA are grades earned in all college preparatory a-g subject requirements, and bonus points for approved honors courses (excluding physical education and military science). Up to eight semesters of honors courses taken in the last three years of high school (including up to two approved courses taken in the tenth grade) can be accepted. Each unit of A in an honors course will receive a total of 5 points; B, 4 points; and C, 3 points. Up to two 11 th grade IB, AP or honors courses with 11 th or 12 th grade course content taken in 10 th grade may also receive bonus points. The index is calculated by multiplying the grade point average by 800 and adding the total score on the SAT (mathematics and critical reading scores). With the ACT, multiply the gpa by 200 and add ten times the ACT composite score. Persons who are California high school graduates or residents need a minimum index of 2900 using the SAT or 694 using the ACT. The Eligibility Index Table illustrates several combinations of required test scores and averages. For nonresidents, a minimum index of 3502 (SAT) or 842(ACT) is required. High school graduates with a GPA of 3.00 or above (3.61 for nonresidents), are not required to submit test scores. The eligibility index table is published in the university catalog. Subject Requirements The California State University requires that first-time freshmen applicants complete, with grades of "C" or better, a comprehensive pattern of college preparatory study totaling 15 units. A "unit" is one year of study in high school Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 277

279 278 English: four years Mathematics: three years (algebra, geometry, and intermediate algebra) Social Science: two years, including one year of U.S. History or U.S. History and Government Laboratory Science: two years (one year of biological and one year of physical science, both with labs) Foreign language: two years in the same language (subject to waiver for applicants demonstrating equivalent competence) Visual and performing arts: one year in the same discipline (art, dance, drama/theater, or music) Electives: one year (selected from English, advanced mathematics, social science, history, laboratory science, foreign language, and visual and performing arts or other courses approved and included on the UC/CSU A-G list) Table II-9. History of Admissions Standards for Freshmen Some students first enrolled at CSUEB as freshmen but were admitted to the Engineering Program after their term of first enrollment. Such students are included in the academic year in which they declared the Engineering major. All students who first enrolled at CSUEB as freshmen are included in this table, regardless of their class level at the time of admission to Engineering. All terms of the Academic/ College Year Su/Fall/Wtr Composite ACT Composite SAT Percentile Rank in High School MIN AVG MIN AVG MIN AVG NA NA 32 Number of New Students Enrolled Who originated as First Time Frosh NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 19 Note Percentile Rank in High School is not collected. Below is information on High School GPAs 2008 Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 278

280 279 All terms of the Academic/ College Year Su/Fall/Wtr High School GPAS MIN AVG The university accepts courses from other recognized colleges and universities. As defined by the transfer of credit policies. The department chair in consultation with the faculty evaluates engineering courses transfers on an individual basis. Specific courses listed on transcripts are reviewed to decide whether or not they will apply toward graduation. If an institution is not well known, the chair may call an ABET accredited university in the appropriate state to assist in the determination of whether or not to accept transfer credit. California community college transfers are defined by articulation agreements. Students transferring from foreign institutions must provide course syllabi for evaluation by the department chair and the faculty. In general no credit for engineering design is granted unless the student can demonstrate design experience. Students transferring from other department at CSUH have to go through the same procedure as students transferring from other institutions. All engineering courses except ENGR1011 and cross-listed ones require departmental permission for registration. The permission is given after students receive advising (meeting all the prerequisites). This policy is uniform for engineering and non-engineering students. Transfer credits for the general education requirements are evaluated by the University Advisement Center and an official evaluation result listing all deficiencies is then sent to the Department. The Department chair in consultation with appropriate faculty members does the evaluation of major courses. The department chair completes and evaluation form prepared by the department (Fall 2002), which documents the information the transfer of credit is based on. This form is kept in the student s file. Table II-10. History of Transfer Engineering Students Some students first enrolled at CSUEB as freshmen but were admitted to the Engineering Program after their term of first enrollment. Such students are included in the academic year in which they declared the Engineering major. All students who first enrolled at CSUEB as freshmen are included in this table, regardless of their class level at the time of admission to Engineering Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 279

281 280 Number of Transfer Academic Year Students Enrolled Su/Fall/Wtr Some students first enrolled at CSUEB as transfer students but were admitted to the Engineering Program after their term of first enrollment. Such students are included in the academic year in which they were admitted to the Engineering major. Second Baccs are included with transfers. B. Requirements for Graduation 1. Describe the process used at the college and/or university levels to certify that graduation requirements complying with EAC criteria have been met by each graduate. Provide a sample of any work sheet or check-off sheet used for this purpose. The graduation check sheet is used as a tool for ascertaining that students have met all the program requirements in accordance with EAC 2000 criteria. The university has also implemented a degree audit program (Fall 2002) that automatically checks student progress towards completion of requirements. The graduation check sheets are updated periodically to monitor students progress. 2. If modes other than traditional on-campus instruction are employed in any programs, the additional modes of instruction should be listed and described in relation to the applicable programs. The institutional and/or engineering unit policies under which the alternate modes are offered should be summarized. We offer only day mode operations but many classes are offered during late afternoonevening. The same faculty teaches all the courses. Faculty are available to advise students regardless of the time of day they attend classes or when the can. 3. Indicate the grade-point average required for graduation. If there are differences in requirements among the regular and alternative program modes, please explain. Students must maintain a GPA of 2.0 or higher for graduation. 10. Non-academic Support Units There are no non-academic units that support only the engineering academic programs Industrial Engineering Option Self-Study 280