http://sce.umkc.edu/documents/cme-undergraduate-program/me-self-study.

pdf

SELF-STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE for Mechanical Engineering

University of Missouri-Kansas City Department of Civil & Mechanical Engineering 352 Flarsheim Hall 5100 Rockhill Road Kansas City, MO 64110-2499 Phone: 816.235.5268 Facsimile: 816.235.1260 e-mail: http://www.sce.umkc.edu/cme/cme.shtml

Table of Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. vii Background Information ..........................................................................................................................2 Degree Title ..................................................................................................................................................2 Program Modes ..........................................................................................................................................2 Actions to Correct Previous Shortcomings ...............................................................................2 Contact Information ...............................................................................................................................2 General Information ...............................................................................................................................2 UMKC .........................................................................................................................................................2 Disciplines ...............................................................................................................................................2 Fast-track & honors options ........................................................................................................2 Student composition .........................................................................................................................3 Engineering Scholarships ..............................................................................................................4 SCE ...........................................................................................................................................................4 MOHELA (Missouri Higher-Education Loan Authority) .........................................................4 Building .....................................................................................................................................................4 Connection to KC engineering community ..........................................................................5 CME Advisory Board .........................................................................................................................6 Growth .......................................................................................................................................................6 Student Organizations ..........................................................................................................................7 Accreditation Summary ............................................................................................................................9 Students ........................................................................................................................................................9 Evaluation/admission ......................................................................................................................9 Advising .....................................................................................................................................................9 Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Acceptance of transfer students .............................................................................................. 10 Procedures to validate transfer credit .................................................................................. 10 30-hour residency ............................................................................................................................ 10 Evaluation of transfer credit in CE351 Fluid Mechanics ......................................... 10 Graduation check............................................................................................................................. 11 Program Educational Objectives .................................................................................................. 12 Consistent with the mission of the institution ............................................................... 12 Consistent with the accreditation criteria ......................................................................... 12 COMPREHENSIVE......................................................................................................................... 12 DEFINED AND DOCUMENTED ............................................................................................. 12 MEASURABLE AND FLEXIBLE .............................................................................................. 12 CLEARLY TIED TO MISSION .................................................................................................. 13 READILY ADAPTABLE TO MEET CONSTITUENT NEEDS ..................................... 13 SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEWED AND UPDATED ......................................................... 13 Mapping the curriculum to the program objectives .................................................... 13 Significant constituencies of the program......................................................................... 16 Processes used to establish and review the Program Educational Objectives .............................................................................................................................................. 17 Achievement of the Program Educational Objectives ................................................. 17 Ongoing evaluation of the level of achievement of departmental objectives........................... 22 Program Outcomes and Assessment......................................................................................... 25 Processes used to produce and assess each of the program outcomes .......... 25

Qualitative and quantitative data used to assess the quality of achievement of the outcomes.................................................................................................... 28 AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF MATHEMATICS ................................... 28 ME306 Computer-Aided Engineering..................................................................................... 28 CE319 Engineering Statistics .................................................................................................... 29 CE351 Fluid Mechanics ............................................................................................................... 29 AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OFSCIENCE ............................................... 29 ME324 Engineering Materials .................................................................................................. 29 ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer .................................................................................................. 29 AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OFENGINEERING ................................. 29 ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ........................................................................................ 29 ME451 Power Plant Design....................................................................................................... 30 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (A)....................................................................................... 30 AN ABILITY TO DESIGNEXPERIMENTS ..................................................................... 30 CE319 Engineering Computation and Statistics................................................................... 30 CE320 Introduction to Factorial Design ................................................................................ 31 ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I ...................................................................... 31 ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II..................................................................... 31 AN ABILITY TOCONDUCT EXPERIMENTS ................................................................ 31 ME324 Engineering Materials .................................................................................................. 31 ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I ...................................................................... 31 ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II..................................................................... 31 AN ABILITY TOANALYZE DATA ..................................................................................... 32 ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I ...................................................................... 32 ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II..................................................................... 32 ME415 Feedback Control Systems........................................................................................... 32 AN ABILITY TOINTERPRET DATA ................................................................................ 32 ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I ...................................................................... 32 ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II..................................................................... 32 ME415 Feedback Control Systems........................................................................................... 32 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (B) ....................................................................................... 33 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.......................................................................................................................... 33 ME111 Essential Engineering ................................................................................................... 33 ME360 Thermal Systems Design ............................................................................................. 33 ME385 System Dynamics ........................................................................................................... 34 ME44o Heating & Air Conditioning ........................................................................................ 34 ME451 Power Plant Design....................................................................................................... 34 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (C) ....................................................................................... 34 AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON MULTI-DISCIPLINARY TEAMS ........................ 35 ME111 Essential Engineering ................................................................................................... 35 CE211 Engineering Enterprise ................................................................................................. 35 CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ................................................................................................. 35 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (D) ...................................................................................... 35 AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND SOLVE ENGINEERING PROBLEMS...................................................................................................... 36 CE351 Fluid Mechanics ............................................................................................................... 36 ME360 Thermal Systems Design ............................................................................................. 36 ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer .................................................................................................. 36

ii

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (E) ....................................................................................... 36 AN UNDERSTANDING OF PROFESSIONAL AND ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY .......................................................................................................................... 37 ME111 Essential Engineering ................................................................................................... 37 CE211 Engineering Enterprise ................................................................................................. 37 CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ................................................................................................. 37 ME380 Manufacturing Methods............................................................................................... 37 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (F) ....................................................................................... 38 AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY (WRITTEN) ............................. 38 ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I ...................................................................... 38 ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II..................................................................... 38 ME360 Thermal Systems Design ............................................................................................. 38 ME380 Manufacturing Methods............................................................................................... 38 ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ........................................................................................ 39 ME451 Power Plant Design....................................................................................................... 39 AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY (ORAL)........................................ 39 ME111 Essential Engineering ................................................................................................... 39 CE211 Engineering Enterprise ................................................................................................. 39 ME380 Manufacturing Methods............................................................................................... 39 ME385 System Dynamics ........................................................................................................... 40 ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer .................................................................................................. 40 ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ........................................................................................ 40 ME451 Power Plant Design....................................................................................................... 40 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (G) ...................................................................................... 40 THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN AN ECONOMICCONTEXT ............................................................................................................ 41 ME111 Essential Engineering ................................................................................................... 41 CE211 Engineering Enterprise ................................................................................................. 41 ME451 Power Plant Design....................................................................................................... 41 THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN ANENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT ......................................................................................................................................... 41 ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ........................................................................................ 41 THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN ANGLOBAL AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT .................................................................................................................. 41 CE211 Engineering Enterprise ................................................................................................. 41 CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ................................................................................................. 42 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (H) ...................................................................................... 42 A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN ABILITY TO ENGAGE IN LIFE-LONG LEARNING ....................................................................................................... 42 ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I ...................................................................... 42 ME380 Manufacturing Methods............................................................................................... 42 ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis (capstone course) .................................................... 42 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (I) ........................................................................................ 43 A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES ............................................................. 43 ME111 Essential Engineering ................................................................................................... 43 CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ................................................................................................. 43 ME380 Manufacturing Methods............................................................................................... 43 ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ........................................................................................ 44 ME451 Power Plant Design....................................................................................................... 44

iii

ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis (capstone course) .................................................... 44 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (J) ........................................................................................ 44 AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUESNECESSARY FOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE ....................................................................................................... 44 ME415 Feedback Control Systems........................................................................................... 44 AN ABILITY TO USE THESKILLSNECESSARY FOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE ......................................................................................................................................... 45 ME219 Computer Programming for Engineers ................................................................... 45 AN ABILITY TO USE THEMODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY FOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE ................................................................. 45 ME306 Computer Aided Engineering ..................................................................................... 45 ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis (capstone course) .................................................... 45 ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (K)....................................................................................... 45 OUTCOME ASSESSMENT BY ALUMNI/AE ...................................................................... 46 PROCESS BY WHICH THE ASSESSMENT RESULTS ARE APPLIED TO FURTHER DEVELOP AND IMPROVE THE PROGRAM. ............................................. 46 DOCUMENT CHANGES .............................................................................................................. 46 MATERIALS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW DURING THE VISIT ................................ 48 Professional Component ................................................................................................................... 49 Curriculum Overview ..................................................................................................................... 49 Engineering Practice Through The Curriculum ............................................................. 50 Major Design Experience ............................................................................................................. 52 Engineering Standards and Realistic Constraints ....................................................... 56 Criterion 4 Assessment................................................................................................................. 58 IMPROVEMENTS OVER PAST SIX YEARS ....................................................................... 58 PLANS FOR THE NEXT SIX YEARS ..................................................................................... 58 Faculty ......................................................................................................................................................... 59 Size of the Faculty ........................................................................................................................... 59 Extent and Quality of Faculty Involvement ...................................................................... 59 Competence ......................................................................................................................................... 60 CME By-laws....................................................................................................................................... 61 Facilities ..................................................................................................................................................... 62 Laboratory Planning ....................................................................................................................... 62 Classrooms ........................................................................................................................................... 62 Library/on-line journals .............................................................................................................. 62 Laboratory facilities ........................................................................................................................ 63 INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENTS ............................................................... 63 MATERIAL SCIENCE ................................................................................................................... 64 CONTROLS........................................................................................................................................ 64 DESIGN ............................................................................................................................................... 65 DESIGN TEAM FACILITIES ..................................................................................................... 65 FIELD TRIPS .................................................................................................................................... 65 Computing ............................................................................................................................................ 66 Assessment of Laboratory Quality ......................................................................................... 67 Modern Engineering Tools .......................................................................................................... 68 Institutional Support and Financial Resources ................................................................. 70 Adequacy of Institutional Support ..................................................................................................... 70 Budget for the Program ................................................................................................................ 70 Resource Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 72 Support Personnel and Institutional Services ................................................................ 72

iv

Program Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 73 Faculty .................................................................................................................................................... 73 Curriculum........................................................................................................................................... 74 Appendix I Additional Program Information .......................................................................... 75 Table I-1. Basic Level Curriculum Table I-2. Course and Section Size Summary Table I-3. Faculty Workload Summary Table I-4. Faculty Analysis Table I-5. Support Expenditures Course Syllabi Faculty Resumes Sample outcome assessment cover sheet CME Student Manual Senior exit interview form Petition form (for curricular variances) Laboratory plan Enrollment growth plan CME By-laws

List of Tables
Table 1: Top area engineering employers ...................................................................................................5 Table 2: Kansas City area engineering societies ........................................................................................5 Table 3: Curriculum map .............................................................................................................................. 13 Table 4: Program objectives feedback ....................................................................................................... 23 Table 5: Program investment in the engineering community ............................................................ 24 Table 6: Outcomes assessment methodology and frequency............................................................... 26 Table 7: Program improvement.................................................................................................................. 46 Table 8: Professional component in curriculum ..................................................................................... 49 Table 9: Preparation for engineering practice ........................................................................................ 50 Table 10: Engineering Standards and Constraints ................................................................................ 56 Table 11: Faculty activity ............................................................................................................................. 61 Table 12: Instrumentation & Measurements Activities......................................................................... 63 Table 13: Mandatory field trips .................................................................................................................. 65 Table 14: Software tools available in engineering computing laboratories ..................................... 66 Table 15: Use of modern engineering tools in curriculum .................................................................. 68 Table 16: Faculty qualifications for design courses ............................................................................... 73 Table 17: Upper-level teaching faculty ..................................................................................................... 73 Table 18: Criterion 8 Curricular Requirements ...................................................................................... 74

vi

List of Figures
Figure 1: Proximity of Old Maintenance Building to Flarsheim Hall .................................................4 Figure 2: Alumni/ae assessment of student organizations (maximum = 5) .......................................8 Figure 3: Assessment of faculty advising (maximum = 5) ......................................................................9 Figure 4: Mechanical engineering alumni/ae assessment of program objectives (maximum = 5) ................................................................................................................................................. 17 Figure 5: Immediate employment history for mechanical engineering graduates......................... 18 Figure 6: Assessment of career advising vs. immediate employment (maximum = 5) ................. 19 Figure 7: Plans for professional registration (senior exit interview) ................................................ 20 Figure 8: Registration history of mechanical engineering alumni/ae............................................... 20 Figure 9: Assessment of mechanical engineering alumni/ae career success ................................... 21 Figure 10: Assessment measurement frequency in mechanical engineering curriculum ............. 28 Figure 11: Outcome (a) measurement frequency .................................................................................... 28 Figure 12: Percentage of outcome (a) achievement ............................................................................... 30 Figure 13: Outcome (b) measurement frequency.................................................................................... 30 Figure 14: Percentage of outcome (b) achievement ............................................................................... 33 Figure 15: Outcome (c) assessment frequency ........................................................................................ 33 Figure 16: Sample Delta Design from 2007 ............................................................................................ 33 Figure 17: Percentage of outcome (c) achievement................................................................................ 34 Figure 18: Outcome (d) assessment frequency ........................................................................................ 35 Figure 19: Percentage of outcome (d) achievement ............................................................................... 35 Figure 20: Outcome (e) assessment frequency ........................................................................................ 36 Figure 21: Percentage of outcome (e) achievement ............................................................................... 36 Figure 22: Outcome (f) assessment frequency ......................................................................................... 37 Figure 23: Percentage of outcome (f) achievement ................................................................................ 38 Figure 24: Outcome (g) assessment frequency........................................................................................ 38 Figure 25: Percentage of outcome (g) achievement ............................................................................... 40 Figure 26: Outcome (h) assessment frequency ........................................................................................ 41 Figure 27: Percentage of outcome (h) achievement ............................................................................... 42 Figure 28: Outcome (i) assessment frequency ......................................................................................... 42 Figure 29: Percentage of outcome (i) achievement ................................................................................ 43 Figure 30: Outcome (j) assessment frequency ......................................................................................... 43 Figure 31: Percentage of outcome (j) achievement ................................................................................ 44 Figure 32: Outcome (k) assessment frequency ........................................................................................ 44 Figure 33: Percentage of outcome (k) achievement ............................................................................... 45 Figure 34: Assessment of outcomes by alumni/ae (maximum = 5) ................................................... 46 Figure 35: Business track classes ................................................................................................................ 51 Figure 36: Sample BattleBot #1 ................................................................................................................. 53 Figure 37: Sample BattleBot #2 ................................................................................................................. 53 Figure 38: Sample human-powered vehicle drawing (2007)................................................................ 54 Figure 39: Sample Honeywell FMT clamping mechanism (2007) .................................................... 54 Figure 40: Assessment of faculty by alumni/ae (maximum = 5) ........................................................ 60 Figure 41: Assessment of facilities by alumni/ae (maximum = 5) ..................................................... 67 Figure 42: Assessment of laboratories (senior exit interviews) (maximum = 5) ............................ 67 Figure 43: Example #1 of student work using SolidWorks from ME130/131 ............................. 69 Figure 44: Example #2 of student work using SolidWorks from ME130/131 ............................. 69

vii

Self-Study Report for Mechanical Engineering

Background Information
Degree Title: Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering Program Modes: Day classes with senior electives in the evening Actions to Correct Previous Shortcomings: None Contact Information
Prof. Mark McClernon - Department Chairman for Civil & Mechanical Engineering 352 Flarsheim Hall University of Missouri-Kansas City 5100 Rockhill Road Kansas City, MO 64110 816-235-2706 mcclernonm@umkc.edu Prof. Deb OBannon - ABET Coordinator for Civil & Mechanical Engineering 370K Flarsheim Hall University of Missouri-Kansas City 5100 Rockhill Road Kansas City, MO 64110 816-235-1287 obannond@umkc.edu

General Information
degrees in the arts and sciences, business and public administration, biological sciences, law, education, medicine, nursing, pharmacy, dentistry, music, as well as computer science and engineering. There are approximately 15,000 students enrolled at UMKC at all levels. UMKC operates on the 16-week semester system for fall and winter semesters.

UMKC: The University of Missouri-Kansas City offers bachelors, masters and doctorate

Disciplines: Civil, Electrical and Mechanical Engineering programs have been offered since

1977. In 2000, the engineering program merged with the Computer Science and Telecommunications Program to form the School of Computing and Engineering. B.A. and B.S. degrees are offered in computer science, a Bachelor of Information Technology is offered, and the Electrical Engineering degree was changed to Electrical and Computing Engineering recently. The B.S. in mechanical engineering requires 126 credit hours.

Fast-track Mechanical Engineering Program:

Well-prepared high school students are eligible for a combination degree program within the Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering . This program involves completion of a B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering after four years and completion of an M.S. degree in

Mechanical Engineering one year later. In addition, qualifying students are given financial incentives during the fifth year of the program. Student begin with the existing undergraduate degree programs in the school. They will take the same classes as other undergraduates, carrying 15-18 credit hours per semester. If they continue to meet the requirements, they are invited to take graduate level classes, through the dual-enrollment process, before they graduate with a B.S. degree. After graduating with a bachelor's degree, they continue with the graduate program in the same discipline and compete for one of ten financial incentives made available by the Dean's office. The BS+MS program in Mechanical Engineering requires:

126 Undergraduate Credit Hours, 30 Graduate Credit Hours, for a total of 156 Total Credit Hours.

Academic Requirements: 1. Students enrolled in the plan must maintain a 3.5 GPA in all required degree coursework. 2. Students must maintain full-time continuous enrollment for the five years of the program. 3. Only 10 students are admitted to the program each year from CME. 4. If a vacancy arises during the first two years of the program it may be filled by another qualifying student. 5. Students will follow the specific requirements of their respective bachelor's degree program (mechanical or civil engineering), and will complete six hours of graduate coursework in the summer between the third and fourth year of the program. Six more graduate credit hours will be done in the summer immediately following the fourth year with the remaining 18 graduate credit hours completed in the fall and winter semesters of the program's fifth year. 6. Students must be admitted to the graduate school no later than the Winter Semester of their fourth year. 7. Upon successful completion of the first four years, students in the CME Fast Track Master's Scholar program receive either o A Graduate Teaching Assistantship (GTA) which includes a fee waiver for three residential credit hours, or o A Tuition Fee Waiver for their first graduate semester. These are renewable for the second semester of the fifth year only if they complete at least nine credit hours during their first semester with at least a 3.50 GPA.

Student composition: The mechanical engineering students have traditionally been a commuter population with many students working and having family obligations. The recent (2004) completion of the Oak Street residence hall and plans to complete another on-campus housing facility (Oak Street West apartments) by fall 2008 has begun to decrease our average student ages. We have already seen many of our students complete the degree in the minimum time. In January 2007, the average enrollment for civil and mechanical engineering undergraduates exceeded 12 semester hours (full-time) for the first time. Our students generally draw from the Kansas City metropolitan area, and most of our alumni/ae remain in the area as well. The Kansas City area has many mechanical engineering employment opportunities, so our students and alumni/ae are well-employed in the region.

Engineering Scholarships
SCE: The School of Computing and Engineering has a number of scholarships (endowed and annually-funded) targeted for engineering majors. The scholarships are entirely merit-based. MOHELA (Missouri Higher-Education Loan Authority): MOHELA announced new programs [in May 2007] designed to steer more students towards careers in math, engineering, and scienceMOHELA's mission is to eliminate barriers for students so they can access higher education, and this funding is so more students look in these specific fields. "We're going to have to encourage our country's most talented people to pursue careers in these areas," said Doug King, CEO of St. Louis Science CenterThe other program targets prospective engineers. Only first time freshmen will be eligible. Those students entering an engineering or two-year pre-engineering program who meet academic standards can get up to thirty-five hundred dollars in loan forgiveness. The program will be available for the 2007-2008 school year for freshmen who have officially declared a Pre-Engineering or Engineering major. (source: http://www.komu.com/satellite/SatelliteRender /KOMU.com/ba8a4513-c0a8-2f11-0063-9bd94c70b769/96c67bf4-c0a8-2f1101e3-771696b41266)

Building: Flarsheim Hall was completed in 1999, and the Civil and Mechanical Engineering
Department was one of the first departments to move to the building. The building has office space, classrooms, and a dedicated laboratory corridor on all floors with double air exchange and heavy-duty utilities. The faculty offices and computer-based research laboratories for CME are on the third floor. All ME labs are on the third floor. The Dean of the School of Computing and Engineering is located on the fifth floor of Flarsheim Hall. Project space for the student competitions and a student machine shop are being created in an adjacent building (Old Maintenance Building see Figure 1). Figure 1: Proximity of Old Maintenance Building to Flarsheim Hall

Connection to KC engineering community: The Kansas City engineering community is vibrant. Most of our alumni/ae stay in Kansas City and can enjoy many employment opportunities. The engineering community has always been a rich source of talented, committed adjunct faculty who bring breadth and depth to our program, particularly in senior electives.

Table 1: Top area engineering employers Employer Number of engineers in Kansas City area 830 500 450 240 237 100 70 28

Honeywell FMT Black & Veatch Burns & McDonnell US Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District City of Kansas City, MO HNTB Corporation George Butler Associates Inc. Missouri Dept. of Transportation

Table 2: Kansas City area engineering societies

Organization ASME ASHRAE MSPE Western Chapter & KSPE Eastern Chapter Society of Manufacturing Engineers

Membership 1050 725 620 200

The CME Department seeks to support business growth in Kansas City. Corporate home offices and headquarters need to hire local talent and have training available. While branch offices of other engineering firms may locate in Kansas City in order to compete for local contracts, the region and our department wants to encourage home offices that are firmly rooted in the area, reinvest in the area, and are long-term employers.

The Mechanical Engineering program uses several industrial adjunct professors to teach core undergraduate classes. These committed adjunct professors add to the breadth of course offerings, and have been involved in both planning and assessing outcomes in their classes. The Mechanical Engineering program has offered primarily elective classes at local consulting company sites. The locations of these classes have several benefits: 1. Provide classroom space during a high-demand classroom period at UMKC (evenings). 2. Expose our students to local companies and working engineers. 3. Expose local companies and engineers to the Department of Civil & Mechanical Engineering.

CME Advisory Board: The CME Advisory Board established in 2005 is composed of four mechanical engineers and four civil engineers from nonredundant employers. The advisory board members are middle- and upper-level supervisors with experience in hiring entry-level engineers. Their composition is also distributed among small and large consulting firms and government. At this time, two members of the advisory board are alumni, and five have been adjunct instructors for our programs.
The purpose of the Civil and Mechanical Engineering ("CME") Advisory Board is to foster an ever increasing level of excellence in the University of Missouri at Kansas City Engineering program. The Board will accomplish this by catalyzing increased interaction between students, faculty, department heads and the larger engineering community; providing input on academic issues; supporting the promotion, development and expansion of the education programs and facilities in the School; and recognizing significant achievements of the Civil and Mechanical Engineering alumni and supporters. In order to provide the highest quality education to the students the Advisory Board will advise and assist the faculty in developing industrially relevant programs by providing recommendations for improving the curriculum with respect to the needs of the community; will help to develop assessment instruments and programs for assessing the outcomes of the Civil and Mechanical Engineering academic program; cultivate a network of individuals and corporations to support the continued improvement of the Civil and Mechanical Engineering Department facilities and resources; and increase the awareness of the broader community of the quality of the students and programs. The 2007 Annual Report includes the following closing statement: It is the assessment of this Board that we have developed an understanding of the 21st Century pressures on higher education and are excited about the future of the Civil and Mechanical Engineering programs. engineering has averaged 40%/year recently. The growth is attributed to effective recruiting, new building (Flarsheim Hall), faculty stability and departmental leadership.

Growth: The enrollment growth of undergraduate students in civil and mechanical

Student Organizations
There are a wide variety of engineering organizations in the School of Computing and Engineering for students. The Human-powered Vehicle design team operates under the auspices of ASME. All the student groups are eligible for university funding. ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Engineers) ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) Entrepreneurship & Innovation Club ISPE (International Society of Pharmaceutical Engineers) NSBE (National Society of Black Engineers) NSPE (National Society of Professional Engineers) Order of the Engineer Pi Tau Sigma National Mechanical Engineering Honor Society (Phi Eta chapter) SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) SCE Student Council (responsible for Engineers Week activities) SHPE (Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers) SWE (Society of Women Engineers - Student section I057) Tau Beta Pi National Engineering Honor Society (Missouri Delta chapter) The value of participating in student engineering organizations was assessed in the CME Alumni/ae Survey, conducted in 2006. The data are presented below (answers could range from 1 to 5) in Figure 2, and show that participation in engineering societies at the student level is worthwhile.

Figure 2: Alumni/ae assessment of student organizations (maximum = 5)

Assessment of ME Student Involvement

5
pre2000 ME alumni/ae 2000+ ME alumni/ae

4 3 2 1 0
l rg to ea ip rsh e d d stu en t er mb e gm or

stu

n de

Accreditation Summary
Students
Evaluation/admission
First-time college student applicants to the undergraduate program are admitted if they obtain: (1) an ACT mathematics score of at least 25; and (2) an ACT composite score of at least 24, or a high school class rank in the upper 25 percent. First-time college student applicants who do not meet the standard criteria but do meet UMKC general admission requirements, and have other indicators that demonstrate potential for success, may be admitted to the Civil and Mechanical Engineering Department under the "V" Modifier. The student may apply for acceptance into the mechanical engineering discipline after completing 24 semester credit hours of the required coursework with acceptable grades (GPA 2.0).

Advising
Students are required to meet with a faculty adviser prior to registration for the following semester. The faculty adviser guides the student in selecting courses that are necessary for completion of degree requirements, and answers questions regarding elective course programs and options. During the advising period, the faculty adviser determines whether the student is meeting degree requirements by reviewing the program advisement form. Any exceptions to the normal procedure must be approved by written petition (copy in Appendix I). Figure 3 reflects the quality of faculty academic advising. The data are taken from ME senior exit interviews (grey) and alumni/ae survey (white). Scores are expressed out of a maximum value of five. The data indicate a good level of confidence in academic advising. Figure 3: Assessment of faculty advising (maximum = 5)
5 Quality of Academic Advising

0
y Ma e 5 6 7 6 4 5 04 00 00 i/a 00 00 00 00 20 y 2 umn y2 y2 c2 c2 c2 e a a e e a D D D M M M al

Monitoring
C-Prerequisite Rule: A grade of C (2.0) or better must be earned in every course that is a prerequisite for an engineering course. Courses taken within UMKC are easy to monitor for the C-prerequisite, however problems have developed when students have taken classes in other schools, but the transcript was not sent in time for advising. Efforts are made to enforce the Cprerequisite, but there are occasional excursions from the rule.

Acceptance of transfer students

Non-first-time college students (transfer students) are admitted provided they have at least a 2.0 cumulative GPA and a last-term GPA of at least a 2.0 at each institution attended. Otherwise, a formal review with a written appeal by the department is required. GPAs are computed using only transferable coursework applicable toward the mechanical engineering degree. Coursework satisfactorily completed at other universities or colleges is transferable as applicable. Engineering courses are accepted only if they are from ABET-accredited engineering programs or have been approved as part of a transfer articulation agreement1. University of Missouri (UM) System2 transfer credit is always posted as "accepted" on our record, and all grades and grade points transfer and apply toward the UM GPA. The University of Missouri Policy states that "Any course that leads to an undergraduate degree on any campus of the University of Missouri shall be accepted in transfer toward the same degree on each campus of the University offering said degree." UM System transfer courses are subject to the C-prerequisite rule. International students transferring from non-ABET-accredited engineering programs are required to have the equivalent of a 2.5 cumulative GPA, with a cumulative GPA of at least 2.0 and a last-term GPA of at least 2.0 at each institution attended. GPAs are computed using only transferable coursework applicable towards the mechanical engineering degree. After admission, students are advised and monitored as described above.

Procedures to validate transfer credit: For applications from non-articulation or UM

System colleges, transfer credit is determined on a case-by-case basis through the petition system. The UMKC professor of record is asked to evaluate the adequacy of courses taken elsewhere. Evidence for evaluation may include catalog information, syllabus, book, etc. The decision is recorded on the petition form and placed in the students academic file.

The CME Advisory Board ruled that engineering courses taken at other non-ABET-accredited universities (e.g. statics) need to be taught by an engineer with at least 18 hours of postbachelor education (10/18/2005).

30-hour residency: The final 30 consecutive credit hours of coursework must be taken at
UMKC. Students must be registered in the school in which the degree is awarded.

Evaluation of transfer credit in CE351 Fluid Mechanics: Fluid Mechanics is a

required course, and is often one of the first ones taken by transfer students. A review of semester grades from 2000-2003 showed only 7% of students received less than a C (which would prevent them from proceeding to the next course) while we have approximately 35%
1 Articulation agreements exist with local two-year colleges, theMetropolitan Community Colleges, and Johnson County Community College. See http://www.umkc.edu/articulation for lists of classes covered by the articulation agreements. 2

St. Louis).

The University of Missouri System is a four-campus system (Kansas City, Columbia, Rolla and

10

transfer students into the junior year. The high success rate of our transfer students reinforces our confidence in classes transferred in, such as Calculus, Statics and Dynamics.

Graduation check: Students are directed to apply for graduation a semester before they expect to graduate. A graduation check is then put in motion to ensure that each student has met all the requirements for graduation, including courses, campus examinations, and GPA. The early check allows the student to make corrections in their last semesters registration to graduate on time. Senior exit interview: A paper survey (copy in Appendix I) and confidential interview with
the department chair is completed by each graduating senior. Questions include: employment/graduate school plans, assessment of advising, laboratory quality, EAC a-k outcomes, FE exam completion, student organization participation, and open-ended questions, as well.

11

Program Educational Objectives

1. Students have the professional skills that prepare them for immediate employment in Mechanical Engineering 2. Students apply the necessary problem-solving, design, and application skills for successful careers in Mechanical Engineering 3. Students have the educational foundation and communication skills that prepare them for diverse career paths 4. Students succeed in the complex social, business, and technical environment in which their engineering contributions will be utilized

Consistency with the mission of the institution

UMKCs Mission applies to the entire campus with its ten professional schools: Lead in Life and Health Sciences. The Mechanical Engineering program has hired two faculty in biomechanics, and has offered numerous electives in engineering-applications to the health sciences, such as: Introduction to Biomaterials, Structure & Properties of Calcified Tissues, Biodynamics, and Introduction to Biomechanics. Deepen and Expand Strength in the Visual and Performing Arts. Develop a Professional Workforce Through Collaboration in Urban Issues and Education. The ME objectives resonate most strongly with the urban mission of the university. The strong ties to the engineering community in Kansas City, and the commitment that the engineering community has made to the Mechanical Engineering program through our adjunct professors, CME advisory board, and capstone design projects ensure that the Mechanical Engineering program promotes UMKCs urban mission goal. Create a Vibrant Learning and Campus Life Experience. Mechanical engineering students have abundant opportunities to participate in mechanical engineering organizations, such as ASME, ASHRAE, SAE and SWE, and to participate in student design competitions (e.g. human-powered vehicle).

Consistency with the accreditation criteria

COMPREHENSIVE: The mechanical engineering programs objectives focus on a traditional mechanical engineering career, but have room for research careers or different career trajectories, such as medicine or law through the strong, basic foundation that is built through our curriculum and educational experiences. DEFINED AND DOCUMENTED: The current objectives have been included in the university catalog since 2005. MEASURABLE AND FLEXIBLE: The language of the mechanical engineering objectives was crafted so that they would be measurable. The recent alumni/ae survey included several measurements of the objectives.

12

CLEARLY TIED TO MISSION: The correlation between UMKCs Develop a Professional Workforce and our succeed in the complex...environment in which their engineering contributions will be utilized is striking. READILY ADAPTABLE TO MEET CONSTITUENT NEEDS: The objectives are general enough to accommodate a variety of employers and student goals. SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEWED AND UPDATED: The ME program had general goals, but the language was not measurable. The previous objectives were to prepare students to enter the profession of Mechanical Engineering, to prepare students for graduate study and to prepare students to engage in life-long learning. Our close relationship with the CME Advisory Board assures updating when needed. A full review of the objectives and curriculum is planned for the 20072008 year.

Mapping the curriculum to the program objectives

Table 3: Curriculum map ME Program Objectives Students have the professional skills that prepare them for immediate employment in Mechanical Engineering Program Outcomes 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 d an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams Curricular Opportunities ME360 Thermal System Design, ME440 HVAC, ME451Power Plant Design

e an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering programs g an ability to communicate effectively (oral and written) k an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice

ME111 Essential Engineering, CE211 Engineering Enterprise, CE311 Technical Entrepreneur CE351 Fluid Mechanics, ME360 Thermal System Design, ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer ME440 HVAC, ME451 Power Plant Design, ME362 Instrumentation, ME360 Thermal System Design ME415 Feedback Control, ME456 Capstone Design

13

Students apply the necessary problem-solving, design, and application skills for successful careers in Mechanical Engineering

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 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 Criterion 8: the ability to work professionally in both thermal and mechanical systems areas including the design and realization of such systems

CE319 Statistics, CE351 Fluid Mechanics, ME324 Materials, ME 306 ComputerAided Engineering, ME451 Power Plant Design, ME440 HVAC CE319 Statistics, ME352/362 Instrumentation, ME324 Materials, ME415 Feedback ME360 Thermal Design, ME440 HVAC, ME451 Power Plant Design

CE351 Fluid Mechanics, ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer, ME360 Thermal System Design ME 496 Power Plant Design, ME360 Thermal System Design, ME496 Capstone Design

14

Students have the educational foundation and communication skills that prepare them for diverse career paths

e an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems f an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility

g an ability to communicate effectively (oral and written)

h the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context i a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning

CE351 Fluid Mechanics, ME 399 Heat & Mass Transfer, ME 360 Thermal System Design ME111 Essential Engineering, CE211 Engineering Enterprise, CE311 Technical Entrepreneur, ME380 Manufacturing ME111 Essential Engineering, CE211engineering Enterprise, ME 440 HVAC, ME451 Power Plant Design, ME362 Instrumentation, ME360 Thermal System Design ME111 Essential Engineering, CE211 Engineering Enterprise, CE311 Technical Entrepreneur, ME451 Power Plant Design, ME440 HVAC ME362 Instrumentation, ME456 Capstone Design

15

Students succeed in the complex social, business, and technical environment in which their engineering contributions will be utilized

b an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data d an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams

f an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility

g an ability to communicate effectively (oral and written)

h the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context i a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning j knowledge of contemporary issues

CE319 Statistics, ME 352/362 Instrumentation, ME324 Materials, ME415 Feedback ME111 Essential Engineering, CE211 Engineering Enterprise, CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ME111 Essential Engineering, CE211 Engineering Enterprise, CE311 Technical Entrepreneur, ME380 Manufacturing ME111 Essential Engineering, CE211 Engineering Enterprise, ME440 HVAC, ME451 Power Plant Design, ME362 Instrumentation, ME360 Thermal System Design ME111 Essential Engineering, CE211 Engineering Enterprise, CE311 Technical Entrepreneur, ME451 Power Plant Design, ME440 HVAC ME362 Instrumentation, ME456 Capstone Design CE311 Technical Entrepreneur, ME440 HVAC, ME451 Power Plant Design, ME456 Capstone Design

Significant constituencies of the program

Area employers Alumni/ae Students

16

Processes used to establish and review the Program Educational Objectives

The program objectives were updated in a series of meetings during the Fall 2003 semester. The faculty group that designed the current objectives included several of our adjunct professors who are both employers and alumni. Following the establishment of the CME Advisory Board in January 2005, the objectives were reviewed and ratified by this constituent group. The objectives have been posted prominently for view by the faculty, students and visitors since January 2006.

Achievement of the Program Educational Objectives

Assessment of the objectives used three sets of data: senior exit interviews, alumni/ae survey, and board of registration records for Kansas and Missouri. Figure 4 shows the alumni/ae response to the objectives. The four responses correspond directly to the objectives. The alumni/ae indicate a good assessment of the execution of the objectives. Figure 4: Mechanical engineering alumni/ae assessment of program objectives (maximum = 5)

Assessment of ME Program Objectives

5 4 3 2 1 0
p em n me l oy s t fu ss e c uc rs ree a lc

pre2000 ME alumni/ae 2000+ ME alumni/ae

me im

te di a

ed

na tio a uc

l fo

a nd

n tio en

nt me n o vi r

x ple m co

The objective which states Students have the professional skills that prepare them for immediate employment in Mechanical Engineering was also assessed through the senior exit interviews (Figure 5). Generally, our seniors enjoy excellent employment options (in Dec 2006, n=1).

17

Figure 5: Immediate employment history for mechanical engineering graduates

1.0 0.9 Immediate Employment 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0
4 5 6 7 4 5 6 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 y2 y2 y2 y2 c2 c2 c2 a e a a e e a D D D M M M M

These data were plotted with senior exit data (Figure 6) on the quality of career advising, which had a surprising results. The students routinely rate the career advising low in spite of their excellent employment records. This graph generated some discussion with the faculty and alumni. The faculty admit to engaging in a low level of career advising because of the high employment. Many of our students have internships in engineering companies and develop their professional networks before graduation. The School has also hosted career fairs in Flarsheim Hall each semester since 2004. The source of career advising was not specified in the senior exit interview, which will be modified in the next edition of the interview form.

18

Figure 6: Assessment of career advising vs. immediate employment (maximum = 5)

Career advising Immediate employment

1.0

Quality of career advising

4 3 2 1 0
07 06 05 06 05 04 04 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 y c y c y c y De De De Ma Ma Ma Ma

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0

The objectives on successful careers were assessed through P.E. registration, leadership roles, and job satisfaction. Figure 7 shows the fraction of seniors who had already taken the EIT and who planned to obtain a P.E. in the future. A high percentage of our graduates plan to become registered engineers. Figure 8 shows an independent assessment of engineering registration, taken from the registration board roster of Kansas and Missouri (most of our alumni/ae remain in the two-state area) seven years after graduation. The y-axis indicates the number of mechanical engineering graduates for whom the registration data were checked. The pie chart shows the registration of survey respondents. Figure 9 shows the alumni/ae survey results regarding leadership roles in engineering societies and whether the alumna/us was happy. The mechanical engineering graduates have the ability to apply the necessary problem-solving, design, and application skills for successful careers in Mechanical Engineering, and succeed in the complex social, business, and technical environment in which their engineering contributions will be utilized. There were no fellows in the alumni/ae respondent group. The School of Computing and Engineering reimburses students for successful completion of the FE exam, which positions our graduates for successful careers and reinforces our position on professional registration. The program makes our students aware of NSPE Professional Policy 168 which calls for formal continuing education.

19

Immediate employment

0.9

Figure 7: Plans for professional registration (senior exit interview)

Completed FE exam Planning to obtain PE

1.0 0.9 0.8

FE & PE Plans

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0

4 4 5 5 6 6 7 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c2 y2 y2 c2 y2 c2 y2 a a a a e e e D D D M M M M

Figure 8: Registration history of mechanical engineering alumni/ae

21
ME PEs total ME graduates

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
y1 Ma 7 99

16
alumni/ae survey PEs unregistered alumni/ae

7-1 99 1 AY

8 99

99 00 01 -19 -20 -20 8 9 0 9 9 0 19 19 20 AY AY AY Graduation date

20

Figure 9: Assessment of mechanical engineering alumni/ae career success

37

28

19

ip rs ato rsh e u l d a ev l lea BET ona i A t a aniz org

er ws are c fello h wi t py" p a "h

Ongoing evaluation of the level of achievement of departmental objectives

The mechanical engineering program has a close and almost constant interaction with its constituents.

21

Table 4 presents a timeline of programmatic responses to our constituents. The column labeled Objective refers to the number of the objective. 1. Students have the professional skills that prepare them for immediate employment in Mechanical Engineering 2. Students apply the necessary problem-solving, design, and application skills for successful careers in Mechanical Engineering 3. Students have the educational foundation and communication skills that prepare them for diverse career paths 4. Students succeed in the complex social, business, and technical environment in which their engineering contributions will be utilized

22

Table 4: Program objectives feedback Date Action

In response to

Objective Program Improvement

2003

business track ME 211 Engineering Enterprise start Fall 2003 ME 311 Technical Entrepreneur start Winter 2004 C + + programming language changed to VBA/Excel in ME 219 Computer Programming for Engineers include factorial design in CE319 Engineering Statistics career fair in Flarsheim for SCE employers (internships and permanent employment) Nov. 2004; Feb. 2005; Oct. 2005; Feb. 2006; Oct. 2006; Feb. 2007 FE review 2005 offered on campus at no charge; 2006 offered off-campus by MSPE for $550 (n=22); 2007 offered oncampus for one-hour credit fee $300 (n=15). All review classes were open to the public advisory board established and convened book for ME 211 Engineering Enterprise (FS2006): Building a winning career in a technical profession-20 Strategies for Success after College (minutes 9/11/06) Solid Works (3-D modeling) included in ME 130 Engineering Graphics

2003

anticipating the collaboration with the UMKC Institute for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, which opened in 2004 employers

34

8 11

2004 2004

input from Sixsigma Black Belts and employers senior exit interviews

1234 1

2005

MSPE

1 8

2006 2006

need to connect formally with constituents students underemployed in nonengineeringrelated jobs

1234 4 X

2006

industry feedback and senior exit interviews

234

23

Date

Action

In response to

Objective Program Improvement

2007

2007

CE320 Intro to Factorial Design (1 hour class for students transferring a traditional statistics course) SolidWorks (ME131) (1 hour class on 3-D modeling to supplement traditional graphics courses)

transfer students request

234

transfer students request

234

The mechanical engineering program has also invested in its constituents through the additional activities outlined in Table 5. Table 5: Program investment in the engineering community Date Interaction 9 2003 Continuing education classes in HVAC offered on-campus by Trane 1 2004 ME454 Power Generation Systems available for credit or continuing education 1 2007 Statistics for pre-engineering course (ENG215) offered at community college 6 2007 ENG104 upgraded from FORTRAN to C + +/MATLAB at community college In response to HVAC industry Black & Veatch transfer students transfer students

24

Program Outcomes and Assessment

an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics (a1), an ability to apply knowledge of science (a2), an ability to apply knowledge of engineering (a3) an ability to designexperiments (b1) an ability toconduct experiments (b2) an ability toanalyzedata (b3) an ability tointerpret data (b4) 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 (c) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams (d) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems (e) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility (f) an ability to communicate effectively (written) (g1) an ability to communicate effectively (oral) (g2) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a economiccontext (h1) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in aenvironmentalcontext (h2) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in aglobal and societal context (h3) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning (i) a knowledge of contemporary issues (j) an ability to use the techniques necessary for engineering practice (k1) an ability to use theskills necessary for engineering practice (k2) an ability to use themodern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice (k3)

Processes used to produce and assess each of the program outcomes

25

The CME faculty met regularly during the 2004 fall semester (8/27/04, 10/8/04, 11/12/04, 11/16/04) to distribute the outcomes throughout the curricula. We agreed that we would have the most reliable data if we focused our assessments on required courses that were unlikely to be transferred in by our transfer students, if we parsed the compound outcomes apart (to ensure assessment, such as a, b, h & k) and built redundancy into our assessment system. Table 6 below shows the redundancy and richness of data for each outcome. Therefore, the outcomes were voluntarily assigned to (generally) required junior and senior classes. We did not conduct outcome assessments in the senior electives or in classes taught outside of CME. The faculty accepted outcomes for their classes that fit with existing or planned activities and the professors pedagogical style. The outcomes were assessed each time the course was offered. The high density of outcome data from our faculty is a result of this voluntary participation. The faculty developed their own rubrics for assessment (quantitative vs. qualitative; exam questions vs. projects; etc.) and set the standards for excellent, adequate and unsuccessful outcome attainment. The CME Department set a metric goal of 85% competency on all outcomes. Graphs of outcome data competency are presented at the end of each outcomes discussion. The graphs are marked with a threshold line at 85%. Table 6: Outcomes assessment methodology and frequency Outcome Assessment Methodology a 1 (mathematics) Exam questions Projects 2 (science) Homework Exam questions 3 (engineering) Projects b 1 (design) Exam questions Design reports 2 (conduct) Lab reports 3 (analyze) Lab reports Projects 4 (interpret) Lab reports Projects c Design reports d Peer review e Exam questions Design reports f NIEE case analysis Ethics term papers Field trip reports g 1 (written) Design reports Lab reports Field trip reports 2 (oral) PowerPoint files Presentations h 1 (economic) Homework Case studies 2 (environmental) Class discussions 3 (global and Case studies Exam questions societal) i Project reports Design projects j Exam questions Classes 3 3 2 3 4 3 3 5 3 3 4 6 7 3 1 2 3 6

26

Outcome

1 (techniques) 2 (skills) 3 (tools)

Assessment Methodology Homework Class discussions Field trip reports Patent searches Project reports Exam questions CAD drawings Lab reports Computer programs

Classes

1 1 2

27

Qualitative and quantitative data used to assess the quality of achievement of the outcomes
The outcome assessment data are presented below. The distribution of outcome assessment through the ME curriculum is presented graphically in Figure 10. Each outcomes detailed discussion is preceded by its own frequency graph. Specific feedback/improvement events are . Each outcome section ends with the overall marked with a small feedback logo achievement of that outcome by the students. Figure 10: Assessment measurement frequency in mechanical engineering curriculum

AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF MATHEMATICS

Figure 11: Outcome (a) measurement frequency

ME306 Computer-Aided Engineering: Outcome (a1) has been assessed in the CAE class once in WS2005. Students demonstrate their ability to apply mathematics in writing compilable programs utilizing numerical integration techniques, i.e. Runge-Kutta. The criteria are excellent (choice of difficult

28

problem with a well-formulated solution), adequate (typical problem with good attempt), and unacceptable (badly formulated problem). Over 90% of the students scored in the excellent or adequate range. CE319 Engineering Statistics: Outcome (a1) has been assessed in the Statistics class four times. The students demonstrate their ability to apply mathematics by inverting 3x3 matrices. During the first assessment period, homework was used as the assessment mechanism, but because some students choose to skip homework assignments, exam questions were used in the following three assessment periods to get more complete data. Fourier regression was added to the data collection in the third and fourth years. The assessment criteria are excellent (>90%), adequate (70-90%) and unacceptable (<70%). The civil and mechanical engineering students outcomes were segregated during the last two years (the first two years are aggregated across the two programs). The faculty evaluation of the data are acceptable to good achievement of the outcome. Over 80% of the students performed at a good level of mathematics application. CE351 Fluid Mechanics: Outcome (a1) has been assessed in the Fluid Mechanics class four times. The students demonstrate their ability to apply mathematics by solving exam and homework questions on fluids problems, such as moment analysis and the Reynolds transport theorem. The assessment criteria are excellent (>90%), adequate (70-90%) and unacceptable (<70%). The civil and mechanical engineering students outcomes were segregated during the last three years (the first year was aggregated across the two programs). The faculty evaluation of the data find >70% in the adequate to excellent range for mathematics application. AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OFSCIENCE ME324 Engineering Materials: Outcome (a2) was assessed using crystallography homework in FS2003. A different faculty member used exam questions on the relationships between materials processing, structure and performance to assess students abilities to apply science to problems in the next two years. The criteria are excellent (>80%), adequate (60-80%) and unacceptable (<60%). Over 90% of the students were rated in the adequate range. The professor planned to use exam questions as a more reliable assessment tool in the future, which was implemented by the next professor. ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer: Outcome (a2) used several homework assignments on conduction electrical networks, and the 1-D closed-form analytical heat conduction problem to assess students ability to apply the knowledge of science over the past two years. The criteria are excellent (>90%), adequate (70-90%) and unacceptable (<70%). Over 90% of the students were rated in the adequate range. The professor planned to use exam questions as a more reliable assessment tool in the future. AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OFENGINEERING ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning: Outcome (a3) has been assessed three times. The technical content of the final project was used to assess the ability to apply the knowledge of

29

engineering. The criteria are excellent (correct and elegant solution), adequate (typical solution, largely correct) and unacceptable (major errors). All students were rated excellent or adequate during the three assessment cycles. The professors notes indicate a need for increased quantitative content in the final designs, and also reports that the quality of the technical content did improve as he refined his expectations for the designs. ME451 Power Plant Design: Outcome (a3) has been assessed four times. The professor has modified how he assessed the application of engineering in this class, from a special project assigned late in the semester, to a take-home project assigned earlier. The criteria were excellent (difficult problem with elegant solution), adequate (typical problem with typical solution) and unacceptable (problem too easy with major errors in solution). All students were rated excellent or adequate during the four assessment cycles. The professor notes, Technical content of final project was significantly improved, and students performed well. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (A)
Figure 12: Percentage of outcome (a) achievement

The student achievement of (a) is shown in Figure 12. Our measurement of an ability to apply knowledge of 100 mathematics, science, and engineering for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold in their senior year.

50 0
AN ABILITY TO DESIGNEXPERIMENTS
Figure 13: Outcome (b) measurement frequency

A
F r So J r Sr

The Department of Civil & Mechanical Engineering takes a strict interpretation of the language, ability to design experiments. We understand this outcome language to have its source in the Six-sigma Black Belt community where design of experiments (DOE) or factorial design is a well-defined engineering expertise. We include a significant section of the engineering statistics course on factorial design, and require students transferring in a traditional statistics class to complete a one-hour supplemental class (CE320) on factorial design. CE319 Engineering Computation and Statistics: Outcome b1 has been assessed three times. The inclusion of factorial design was a result of faculty discussions on the EAC outcomes. ANOVA and 2n factorial design questions on exams were used to assess b1. The assessment criteria are excellent (>90%), adequate (70-90%) and unacceptable (<70%). The civil and mechanical engineering students outcomes were segregated during the last

30

two years (the first year is aggregated across the two programs). Only five mechanical engineering students out of 37 were rated unacceptable for outcome b1. Instructional improvements in factorial design pedagogy have been implemented, and continued improvement in factorial design competence is expected. Student interest in factorial design has grown and the department plans to offer senior electives in the area during 2007-08. CE320 Introduction to Factorial Design: The supplemental factorial design class, CE320, was offered for the first time in Winter 2007. The outcome data was segregated for civil and mechanical engineering students. All of the mechanical engineering students (n=2) were rated excellent using the same measurement techniques and criteria as listed above in CE319. ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I: Outcome (b1) was assessed twice in ME352 using exam questions requiring the design of an experiment to meet a given situation. The criteria are excellent (90-100%), adequate (75-89%) and unacceptable (<75%). Only 2 students out of 27 did not achieve excellent or adequate ratings for the ability to design experiments. ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II: Outcome (b1) was assessed three times in ME362 using the experimental design section of the final project report. The criteria are excellent (90-100%), adequate (75-89%) and unacceptable (<75%). The professor noted that student procrastination on the final report was a problem, and planned to enforce the progress on the report using preliminary drafts and the project demonstration. The second cycle showed 90% of the students in the excellent or adequate range for this outcome, but the professor noted that additional progress enforcement was still needed. In the third cycle, all students were rated excellent or adequate. AN ABILITY TOCONDUCTEXPERIMENTS ME324 Engineering Materials: Outcome (b2) has been assessed three times in Engineering Materials. Exam questions on the relationships between materials processing, structure and performance were used to assess students abilities to conduct experiments. The criteria are excellent (>80%), adequate (60-80%) and unacceptable (<60%). Over 90% of the students were rated in the adequate range. ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I: Outcome (b2) has been assessed twice, using the precision lab report to measure students abilities to conduct experiments. The criteria are excellent (90-100%), adequate (75-89%) and unacceptable (<75%). Only 1 student out of 27 did not achieve excellent or adequate ratings for the ability to design experiments. ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II: ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II: Outcome (b2) was assessed three times in ME362 using the process control lab report. The criteria are excellent (90-100%), adequate (75-89%) and unacceptable (<75%). Over 90% of the students were rated excellent or adequate on this outcome

31

AN ABILITY TOANALYZEDATA ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I: Outcome (b3) has been assessed twice, using the flow lab report to measure students abilities to analyze data. The criteria are excellent (90100%), adequate (75-89%) and unacceptable (<75%). Only 2 students out of 27 did not achieve excellent or adequate ratings for the ability to design experiments. ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II: Outcome (b3) was assessed three times in ME362 using the convection lab report. The criteria are excellent (90-100%), adequate (7589%) and unacceptable (<75%). Over 80% of the students were rated excellent or adequate on this outcome ME415 Feedback Control Systems: Outcome (b3) has been assessed twice in Controls. The final project which analyzed a control system based on a physical system was used to assess the students ability to analyze data, and the criteria are excellent (novel system of students own design), adequate (modified existing system found in text) and unacceptable (improper model of system). Over 90% of the students were rated excellent or adequate for this outcome. The professor needed to change textbooks after the first assessment because the text was too theoretical. The text adopted in the second assessment cycle improved students moving from the adequate to the excellent range, but the faculty specified the need for some physical experiments (torsional pendulum, magnetic levitation) to support the outcome in the next year. AN ABILITY TOINTERPRET DATA ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I: Outcome (b4) has been assessed twice, using the strain lab report to measure students abilities to conduct experiments. The criteria are excellent (90-100%), adequate (75-89%) and unacceptable (<75%). Only 1 student out of 27 did not achieve excellent or adequate ratings for the ability to design experiments. ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II: ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II: Outcome (b4) was assessed three times in ME362 using the analysis section of the mass-springdamper lab report. The criteria are excellent (90-100%), adequate (75-89%) and unacceptable (<75%). The professors comments regarding the first years assessment were, Have students write LabVIEW program to acquire data from accelerometer, LVDT, and force sensor during first week of lab. This code can then be incorporated into LabVIEW program required for the second weeks lab. All the students in the second year were rated excellent or adequate. The professor specified that a new accelerometer was needed for the experiment. The new accelerometer was used in the third year, however the version of LabVIEW in the lab was different than the version available in the student computer labs, so that caused confusion. More than 85% of the students were rated excellent or adequate in the third assessment cycle. ME415 Feedback Control Systems: Outcome (b4) has been assessed twice in Controls. The final project which interpreted the response of the students uncompensated systems was used to 32

assess the students ability to interpret data, and the criteria are excellent (complete consideration of response), adequate (typical consideration of response) and unacceptable (improper analysis of system). Over 85% of the students were rated excellent or adequate for this outcome. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (B)
Figure 14: Percentage of outcome (b) achievement

The student achievement of (b) is shown in Figure 14. Our measurement of an ability to design and conduct 100 experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold.

50 0

B
Fr So Jr Sr

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
Figure 15: Outcome (c) assessment frequency

ME111 Essential Engineering: The first outcome measurements in the freshman design class were made in Winter 2007. The design project used the Delta Design game which has budgetary, architectural, thermal and structural constraints to design a dwelling for a 2-D people on another planet (see Figure 16 below). The outcome data were segregated for the civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The criteria for evaluation were excellent (>85%), adequate (70-85%), and unacceptable (<70%).
Figure 16: Sample Delta Design from 2007

The mechanical engineering students received excellent assessments. ME360 Thermal Systems Design: Outcome (c) was assessed four times in ME360. This outcome was assessed using a power plant design project which uses the Rankine cycle and generates 500 MW. The criteria are excellent (detailed design, consideration of all constrains, economic and environmental impacts), adequate (moderately detailed design, minor errors in design calculations), and unacceptable (significant lack of detail, major errors in design calculations).

33

Student achievement improved from no students in the excellent range in the first year, to 45% excellent and 55% adequate in the second year, after the professor gave improved guidance on what was expected in a design report. In year four, nearly all the students were rated in the adequate range, and the professor specified that interim progress reviews will be put in place for the next year. ME385 System Dynamics: Outcome (c) was measured once in ME385, using a multi-discipline design project which included thermal, fluid and electrical elements. The criteria are excellent (A or A-), adequate (B or C) and unacceptable (D or F). All the students were rated in the excellent or adequate range. The professors comments: Design project 2 was given toward the end of the semester and the students complained about how much work it was. When I saw the reports, I saw that they had, for the most part, greatly exceeded my expectations. They had pulled on a wealth of engineering data that some of them had access to through their jobs. ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning: Outcome (c) has been assessed three times in ME440 using test questions on the compression cycle in the first two years, and a cooling tower design project in the last two years. The cooling tower design criteria are excellent (cooling tower model works and was checked), adequate (cooling tower mainly works), and unacceptable (cooling tower model has large errors). In the last year, the criteria for excellent was expanded to include off-design condition checks. The professors comments after the first year were that the assessment of (c) needed a broader scope than the exam question, so in year two, he used both the exam and cooling tower project to assess (c). All students in year two were excellent or adequate. More EXCEL applications needed to be introduced in class to facilitate the cooling tower designs. In year three, again, all students were rated excellent or adequate. There was a lot more student enthusiasm about the project with more EXCEL skills. ME451 Power Plant Design: Outcome (c) has been assessed four times in ME451, using a condenser design project. The criteria are excellent (design fully consistent with HEI standards), adequate (design with only minor flaws or inconsistencies) and unacceptable (incorrect design). Only 6 students out of 54 in the four years have not been rated excellent or adequate. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (C)
Figure 17: Percentage of outcome (c) achievement

The student achievement of (c) is shown in Figure 17. 100 Observations of student achievement in ME111 were ignored because students in that class are not represented in our recent graduates. Our measurement of an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired 50 needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability for our students 0 exceeds the 85% achievement threshold.

C
Fr S o J r S r

34

AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON MULTI-DISCIPLINARY TEAMS

Figure 18: Outcome (d) assessment frequency

ME111 Essential Engineering: The first outcome measurements in the freshman design class were made in Winter 2007. The outcome data were segregated for the civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The students worked in six-person teams on two projects: a team-building effort for Engineers Week (road rally), and completion of the Delta Design game, which has project management, architect, thermal engineer and structural engineer roles. A team assessment taken from the Journal of Engineering Education (Kaufman, Felder & Fuller, 2000, Accounting for individual effort in cooperative learning teams, JEE 89(2):133-140) was used confidentially to complete peer reviews of each team after the Delta Design project. The criteria were Excellent (positive peer reviews), Adequate (problems identified, but corrected) and Unacceptable (problems identified but uncorrected). The mechanical engineering students all received good peer reviews. The professors corroborate the ratings. This methodology will be used in future course offerings. CE211 Engineering Enterprise: There have been six assessments of outcome (d) in CE211, with three different instructors. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The assessments included team debriefings, team presentations, and a team evaluation instrument. The criteria for excellent, adequate and unacceptable varied from internal team functionality to the diversity (discipline or personality type) of the team members. The evaluation by the instructors shows 0% unacceptable in all six assessments. The instructors note that they must take a strong role in team composition and worked to improve the teams functioning in the class projects. CE311 Technical Entrepreneur: There have been four assessments of outcome (d) in CE311. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The assessments used a team evaluation instrument. The criteria for excellent, adequate and unacceptable depended on team functionality and the diversity (discipline or personality type) of the team members. The evaluation by the instructors shows 0% unacceptable in all four assessments. The instructors note that they must take a strong role in team composition and worked to improve the teams functioning in the class projects. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (D)
Figure 19: Percentage of outcome (d) achievement

The student achievement of (d) is shown in Figure 19. Observations of student achievement in ME111 were ignored because students in that class are not represented in our recent graduates. Our measurement of an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold.

100 50 0

D
Fr So Jr Sr

35

AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND SOLVE ENGINEERING PROBLEMS

Figure 20: Outcome (e) assessment frequency

CE351 Fluid Mechanics: Outcome E has been assessed in the Fluid Mechanics class four times. The students demonstrate their ability to formulate and solve engineering problems by solving exam and homework questions on fluids problems, such as forces and moments on nozzles, and flow through a three-reservoir system. The assessment criteria are excellent (>90%), adequate (70-90%) and unacceptable (<70%). The faculty evaluation of the data find a high percentage of the students (>80%) in the adequate to excellent range for mathematics application. ME360 Thermal Systems Design: Outcome (e) was assessed four times in ME360. This outcome was assessed using a vapor compression refrigeration cycle quiz question. The criteria are excellent (detailed design, consideration of all constrains, economic and environmental impacts), adequate (moderately detailed design, minor errors in design calculations), and unacceptable (significant lack of detail, major errors in design calculations). Student achievement improved as the professor included more material on irreversibility and exergy. ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer: Outcome (e) was assessed twice using team projects. The criteria are excellent (thorough evaluation of design problem and acceptable solution), adequate (design solution acceptable, but calculations are not complete or clear) and unacceptable (no calculations to support ideas or design options). All students were rated in the excellent or adequate range. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (E)
Figure 21: Percentage of outcome (e) achievement

The student achievement of (e) is shown in Figure 21. 100 Our measurement of an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold.

50 0

E
Fr S o J r S r

36

AN UNDERSTANDING OF PROFESSIONAL AND ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY

Figure 22: Outcome (f) assessment frequency

ME111 Essential Engineering: The first outcome measurements in the freshman design class were made in Winter 2007. The outcome data were segregated for the civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. Prof. McClernon, P.E. gave a brief presentation on engineering ethics, and the students completed an analysis of two NIEE cases using the NSPE Code of Ethics. The criteria for evaluation were excellent (used Code of Ethics effectively to analyze cases), adequate (marginal analysis of cases), and unacceptable (no case analyses submitted). The mechanical engineering students received excellent assessments. CE211 Engineering Enterprise: Outcome (f) assessment in this class has evolved over the last five assessments, from on-line class ethics discussions, to NIEE case analysis, to a paper for the Milton F. Lunch Ethics Contest, to a paper on the NSPE Code, to class discussions of ethics. The criteria have evolved as well. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. Only four students over the entire assessment period were found to be unacceptable for the ethics assignments. The current instructor uses both a class discussion and a paper for the Lunch Contest. CE311 Technical Entrepreneur: There have been four assessments of outcome (f) in CE311. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The assessed activities include class discussions of ethics, guest speaker (attorney), and case study analyses. There is an exam used as the direct measurement, where excellent (at least two ethical issues accurately recalled), adequate (one or two ethical issues recalled, but not with complete accuracy) and unacceptable (not recalled). Only five students in the entire study period were unacceptable. The professor notes that cultural differences affect business ethics, and also cite the pride that the students exhibit in their future standing as engineers. ME380 Manufacturing Methods: Outcome (f) was assessed five times in ME380 using written trip reports from manufacturing facilities site visits, where the host engineers focused on professional responsibility, particularly regarding plant safety. The host engineers also discussed career development and Six-sigma process improvements. The criteria are excellent (well-written trip report that captured details of company capabilities), adequate (adequate trip report that captured most of the capabilities of the company), and unacceptable (poorly-written trip report which did not capture adequate detail of the companys business and capabilities). The quality of student achievement has varied over the study period from 75% to 100% in the excellent or adequate range. The professor notes in the last year that his trip report preparation training improved the student performance to 100%.

37

ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (F)

Figure 23: Percentage of outcome (f) achievement

The student achievement of (f) is shown in Figure 23. 100 Observations of student achievement in ME111 were ignored because students in that class are not represented in our recent graduates. Our measurement of an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility 50 for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold.

F
Fr So Jr Sr

AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY (WRITTEN)

Figure 24: Outcome (g) assessment frequency

ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I: Outcome (g1) was assessed twice in ME352 using the vibrations lab report, which required introduction, experimental program, results, discussion, conclusions, appendices, and references. The criteria are excellent (85-100%), adequate (70-84%) and unacceptable (<70%). All the students achieved excellent or adequate ratings for the ability to use written communications, however, the professor noted that there was confusion between computed and measured frequencies, so he implemented a reinforcement of the concept of frequency and circular frequency in the vibration lab lecture, which improved the student performance in the following year. ME362 Instrumentation and Measurements II: Outcome (g1) was assessed three times in ME362 using the mass-spring-damper lab report. The criteria are excellent (85-100%), adequate (70-84%) and unacceptable (<70%). Over 80% of the students were rated excellent or adequate on this outcome. ME360 Thermal Systems Design: Outcome (g1) was assessed four times in ME360. This outcome was assessed using the power plant design report . The criteria are excellent (detailed, well-written and well-organized), adequate (moderately detailed report, some typographical and grammatical errors), and unacceptable (significant lack of detail, poorly-written and poorly-organized, numerous typographical and grammatical errors). Student performance on (g1) improved significantly (50% noncompliance to 5%) as professor provided clearer expectations of the design report. ME380 Manufacturing Methods: Outcome (g1) was assessed four times in ME380 using the semester project report. The criteria are excellent (well-written), adequate (some typos, incomplete information), and unacceptable (poorly-organized, unclear report).

38

At least 90% of the students rated excellent or adequate on written communication skills. The professor notes in the last evaluation, Level of presentation and reports has improved. Continue emphasis on report writing next year. ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning: Outcome (g1) has been assessed three times in ME440 using the final project report. The criteria is excellent (well-organized report, correct language structure, fully-referenced), adequate (typical organization with only minor flaws or inconsistencies), and unacceptable (poor organization, gross errors in language mechanics, or unreferenced). All students were rated excellent or adequate on written communication skills. The professors notes from year one: Students really have limited concept of how to write a technical report mechanics were OK, but format looked more like a magazine article. Professor continued to provide guidance to the students on proper engineering report formatting, so that in year three: Technical report formatting good. ME451 Power Plant Design: Outcome (g1) has been assessed four times in ME451 using the final project report. The criteria is excellent (well-organized report, correct language structure, fully-referenced), adequate (typical organization with only minor flaws or inconsistencies), and unacceptable (poor organization, gross errors in language mechanics, or unreferenced). Only 2 students out of 54 had unacceptable written communication skills. The professor notes that the written quality of the reports was better than the technical content, so he emphasized the technical content, which improved in year two and continued through the observation period. AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY (ORAL) ME111 Essential Engineering: The first outcome measurements in the freshman design class were made in Winter 2007. The outcome data were segregated for the civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The students must submit a PowerPoint file which is judged by the following criteria: excellent (clear, compelling presentation), adequate (some typos, busy slides) or unacceptable (poorly organized or inappropriate animation). All mechanical engineering students submitted excellent slide files. CE211 Engineering Enterprise: There have been six assessments of outcome (g2) in CE211, with three different instructors. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The students gave a detailed research presentation on their company during the first three course offerings, and gave both formal teaching presentations and final team project presentation during the last three offerings. The criteria was excellent (A or B), adequate (C) and unacceptable (D or F). Only three students over six semesters were rated unacceptable for oral communication skills. ME380 Manufacturing Methods: Outcome (g2) was assessed four times in ME380 using the presentation of the semester project. The criteria are excellent (presented clearly to class), adequate (incomplete information, nonprofessional discussions), and unacceptable (poorlyorganized, unclear presentation). At least 90% of the students rated excellent or adequate on oral communication skills. The professor notes in the last evaluation, Level of presentation and reports has improved.

39

ME385 System Dynamics: Outcome (g2) was measured once in ME385, using the presentation of a suspension design project. The criteria are excellent (A or A-), adequate (B or C) and unacceptable (D or F). All the students were rated in the excellent or adequate range. ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer: Outcome (g2) was assessed twice in ME399 using design presentations. The criteria are excellent (clear presentation), adequate (some typos, missing information, nonprofessional discussions) and unacceptable (poorly organized). All students were rated excellent or adequate for oral communication. ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning: Outcome (g2) has been assessed three times in ME440 using the final project report. The criteria is excellent (well-organized presentation, good presentation mechanics), adequate (typical organization and presentation mechanics), and unacceptable (presentation does not convey understandable results). All students were rated acceptable on oral communication skills. The professors comments in year one: Students need more practice in making technical presentations they have not advanced much from what they are learning in their basic speech class. His comments in years two and three: Presentations much better than last yearstudents are getting more practice in other classesBe sure not to overwhelm students with presentations in every class [discuss in ] faculty meeting. ME451 Power Plant Design: Outcome (g2) has been assessed four times in ME451 using the final project report. The criteria is excellent (well-organized presentation, good presentation mechanics), adequate (typical organization and presentation mechanics), and unacceptable (presentation does not convey understandable results). Only 3 students out of 54 had unacceptable oral communication skills. The professor notes that the presentation quality of the reports was better than the technical content, so he emphasized the technical content, which improved in year two and continued through the observation period. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (G)
Figure 25: Percentage of outcome (g) achievement

The student achievement of (g) is shown in Figure 25. 100 Observations of student achievement in ME111 were ignored because students in that class are not represented in our recent graduates. Our measurement of an ability to 50 communicate effectively, for both oral and written communication, for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold.

G
Fr So Jr Sr

40

THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN AN ECONOMICCONTEXT
Figure 26: Outcome (h) assessment frequency

ME111 Essential Engineering: The first outcome measurements in the freshman design class were made in Winter 2007. The outcome data were segregated for the civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The students read and answer questions on a book chronicling the Corvette redesign. The book includes discussions of corporate reorganization, budgets, scheduling, and product cost. The criteria are excellent (>80%), adequate (60-80%) and unacceptable (<60%). 85% of the mechanical engineering students were excellent or adequate. CE211 Engineering Enterprise: There have been six assessments of outcome (h1) in CE211, with three different instructors. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The students completed company case studies in early course offerings, and used textbook and class discussions about the effects of 9/11/2001. Professors comment: This topic is the primary focus of this class. We work hard through the use of examples and problems in the textbook, case studies, guest speakers, and personal financial skill references designed to show the students how their personal lives can be improved by mastering these concepts and practicing the skills. ME451 Power Plant Design: Outcome (h1) has been assessed four times in ME451 using analysis of a 50 MW gas turbine using levelized economic factors. The criteria is excellent (fully-documented EXCEL spreadsheet with correct results), adequate (incomplete documentation or minor mistakes in analysis), and unacceptable (major errors in analysis). The students performance on h1 improved from three unacceptable in year one to all acceptable in the following years, although the professor noted weakness in the application of EXCEL to the problem. More aspects of power EXCEL were introduced in a lower-level class (ME306) which subsequently improved performance in the last two years assessed in ME451. THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN ANENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning: Outcome (h2) has been assessed three times in ME440 using class discussion of ozone depletion chemistry. The criteria is excellent (student can explain mechanics and impacts of CFC use), adequate (student can discuss refrigerant impact ratings), and unacceptable (unable to discuss concepts). All students were rated by the professor to have an acceptable demonstration of h2. THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN ANGLOBAL AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT CE211 Engineering Enterprise: Outcome h3 has been assessed two times. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The class currently focuses on this outcome through the issues of engineering employment. 41

CE311 Technical Entrepreneur: There have been four assessments of outcome (h3) in CE311. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. This outcome is assessed with quiz questions on global and social engineering issues. The criteria are excellent (3 or more examples), adequate (1 or 2 examples) and unacceptable (no examples). Student performance increased from 85% excellent or adequate to 100% as the choices of case studies was refined. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (H)
Figure 27: Percentage of outcome (h) achievement

The student achievement of (h) is shown in Figure 27. 100 Observations of student achievement in ME111 were ignored because students in that class are not represented in our recent graduates. Our measurement of the broad education necessary to understand the impact of 50 engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold. 0

H
Fr So Jr Sr

A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN ABILITY TO ENGAGE IN LIFELONG LEARNING

Figure 28: Outcome (i) assessment frequency

ME352 Instrumentation and Measurements I: Outcome (i) was assessed twice in ME352 using the instrumentation design project proposal. The students needed to research the fabrication and/or use of instrumentation techniques and devices. The criteria are excellent (90-100%), adequate (75-89%) and unacceptable (<75%). All students were rated excellent or adequate for self-learning. ME380 Manufacturing Methods: Outcome (i) was assessed four times in ME380 using the semester project report describing the history of a manufactured product, and interaction with working engineers regarding careers and continuous education. The criteria are excellent (well-written), adequate (some typos, incomplete information), and unacceptable (poorlyorganized, unclear report). Student achievement of this outcome increased from 95% to 100% as the professor increase[d] focus on technology improvements and the role of education. ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis (capstone course): Outcome (i) has been assessed twice in ME496, using the self-directed learning necessary for each student to be familiar with the BattleBot technology and rules. The criteria are excellent (detailed understanding of

42

technology and rules), adequate (basic understanding of technology and rules), and unacceptable (no understanding of technology and rules). All students were rated excellent or adequate. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (I)
Figure 29: Percentage of outcome (i) achievement

The student achievement of (i) is shown in Figure 29. Our measurement of a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold.

100 50 0

I
Fr So Jr Sr

A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES

Figure 30: Outcome (j) assessment frequency

ME111 Essential Engineering: The first outcome measurements in the freshman design class were made in Winter 2007. The outcome data were segregated for the civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. The students read and answer questions on a book chronicling the Corvette redesign. The book includes discussions of corporate reorganization, marketing, manufacturing, and foreign competition. The criteria are excellent (>80%), adequate (60-80%) and unacceptable (<60%). More than 85% of the mechanical engineering students were excellent or adequate. CE311 Technical Entrepreneur: There have been four assessments of outcome (j) in CE311. The outcomes are aggregates of civil, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering students. This outcome is assessed with quiz questions on contemporary issues. The criteria are excellent (2 or more examples), adequate (1 or 2 examples) and unacceptable (no examples). Student performance has been 100% excellent or adequate. ME380 Manufacturing Methods: Outcome (j) was assessed five times in ME380 using written trip reports from manufacturing facilities site visits. The criteria are excellent (trip report that captured issues and/or concerns of company toured), adequate (some typos, missing information, nonprofessional discussions), and unacceptable (poorly organized, unclear report). The quality of student achievement has generally been more than 90% in the excellent or adequate range. The professor consistently notes that tours give excellent exposure to engineering environment. An improvement in unacceptable student performance from 23% to zero (year four to year five) is attributed to improved trip reports, and question and answer sessions with company engineers.

43

ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning: Outcome (j) has been measured three times in ME440, using a faculty-moderated discussion of refrigerant trends, ozone depletion, global warming, and the Montreal protocol. The criteria is excellent (student can explain how to manage design in terms of industry trends), adequate (student can discuss new refrigerants and properties), and unacceptable (unable to discuss concepts). All students were rated excellent or adequate. ME451 Power Plant Design: Outcome (j) has been measured four times in ME451, using a faculty-moderated discussion of emissions and emission controls. The criteria is excellent (student can explain reasons for regulation and technology of mitigation), adequate (student can discuss technology of mitigation), and unacceptable (unable to discuss concepts). The first year, the students were overwhelmed with information, and 30% were unacceptable. The professor upgraded his presentation of emissions technologies, and the student noncompliance decreased to 10% by year four. ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis (capstone course): Outcome (j) was measured twice in ME496, by participating in an intellectual property workshop and performing a patent search. The criteria are adequate (completion of patent search assignment) and unacceptable (no patent search completed). All students were rated adequate for Outcome (j). ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (J)
Figure 31: Percentage of outcome (j) achievement

The student achievement of (j) is shown in Figure 31. 100 Observations of student achievement in ME111 were ignored because students in that class are not represented in our recent graduates. Our measurement of a knowledge of 50 contemporary issues for our students exceeds the 85% achievement threshold.

Fr So Jr Sr

AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUESNECESSARY FOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE

Figure 32: Outcome (k) assessment frequency

ME415 Feedback Control Systems: Outcome (k1) was assessed twice in ME415 using the final project. The students were required to use the techniques of time domain or frequency domain to compensate their system. The criteria were excellent (MATLAB controls toolbox with some custom analysis in MATLAB or EXCEL), adequate (MATLAB controls toolbox) and unacceptable (improper technique or implementation). The student noncompliance fraction improved from 20% to zero with the adoption of a new textbook.

44

AN ABILITY TO USE THESKILLSNECESSARY FOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE ME219 Computer Programming for Engineers: Outcome k2 was measured four times. The outcomes are aggregates of civil and mechanical engineering students. The data are exams on programming techniques in Power EXCEL, MATLAB, and EXCEL VBA. The criteria are excellent (>90%), adequate (70-90%) and unacceptable (<70%). More than 90% of the students were in the acceptable range for this outcome. In FS2006, the measurement pool expanded to include working programs, as well as the exams. The students in successive classes (CE319) are successful in executing programs to solve tridiagonal matrices. AN ABILITY TO USE THEMODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY FOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE ME306 Computer Aided Engineering: Outcome (k3) was assessed once in ME306. The students were assessed on their programs for a Modified Euler solution application. The criteria are excellent (coded and formatted properly, and code works), adequate (coded or formatted improperly, but code works) and unacceptable (code doesnt work). All the students were excellent or adequate. ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis (capstone course): Outcome (k3) was assessed twice in ME496. Students produce engineering drawings of their BattleBot and group project designs using AutoCAD or SolidWorks/Pro-E. The criteria are excellent (solid modeling with drawings), adequate (2-D CAD models and drawings) and unacceptable (hand drawings or sketches). All students were rated excellent or adequate. ACHIEVEMENT OF OUTCOME (K)
Figure 33: Percentage of outcome (k) achievement

The student achievement of (k) is shown in Figure 33. Our measurement of an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice for our students exceeds the 85% achievement 50 threshold.

100

K
Fr So Jr Sr

45

OUTCOME ASSESSMENT BY ALUMNI/AE The alumni/ae survey included an assessment of the outcomes, as shown below in Figure 34, which shows confidence by our alumni/ae in the programs ability to produce well-prepared mechanical engineering graduates. Figure 34: Assessment of outcomes by alumni/ae (maximum = 5)

Assessment of Educational Outcomes

5 4 3 2 1 0

pre2000 ME alumni/ae 2000+ ME alumni/ae

PROCESS BY WHICH THE ASSESSMENT RESULTS ARE APPLIED TO FURTHER DEVELOP AND IMPROVE THE PROGRAM. The assessment results have been used to improve the courses internally, to improve student performance in downstream classes by improving the prerequisite class, have improved prerequisite specifications, added specific classes needed by transfer students and prepared the faculty and staff for enrollment growth. A timeline of program improvement follows below in Table 7. The assessment results were discussed in faculty meetings, and have resulted in shared assessment methods. DOCUMENT CHANGES Table 7: Program improvement Date Action 8 2003 business track ME 211 Engineering Enterprise start Fall 2003 ME 311 Technical Entrepreneur start Winter 2004 In response to Objective Program Improvement X

Anticipating the 34 collaboration with the UMKC Institute for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, which opened in 2004

46

8 8

2003 2004

C + + programming language changed to VBA/Excel in ME 219 include factorial design in CE319 Engineering Statistics Biodynamics elective Black & Veatch for additional classroom space; Burns and McDonnell for additional classroom space start Winter 2007; HNTB for additional classroom space planned. Classes at remote sites open to all students. CE 447 Law & Contracts for Engineers senior elective available as continuing education materials electives (Metallic Materials and ME 424 Nonmetallic Materials) transfer credit monitoring of lower-division engineering courses (were they taught by engineers?) advisory board established and convened New course: ME220 Circuits for CME (minutes 10/20/05) enrollment growth planning hired teaching professor for freshman/sophomore classes reassign instruction of sophomore classes book for ME 211 Engineering Enterprise (FS2006): Building a winning career in a technical profession-20 Strategies for Success after College (minutes 9/11/06)

employers input from Sixsigma Black Belts and employers university mission (life sciences) need for additional electives (senior exit interviews) and classroom space, and request for onsite offerings consulting engineering firms Honeywell and CME Advisory Board CME Advisory Board need to connect formally with constituents student complaints, senior exit interviews enrollment growth senior exit interviews senior exit interviews Students underemployed in nonengineeringrelated jobs

2 1234

X X

8 8

2005 2005

X X

2005

9 10

2005 2005

X X

1 1

2006 2006

1234

X X

3 8 8 8

2006 2006 2006 2006

X X X 4 X

47

8 10

2006 2006

2007

2007

2007

2007

Solid Works (3-D modeling) included in ME 130 Engineering Graphics removed junior standing and senior standing prerequisites and replaced them with specific prerequisite courses CE320 Intro to Factorial Design (1 hour class for students transferring a traditional statistics course) redesign and reassign instruction of ME111 Essential Engineering (freshman design course) SolidWorks (ME131) (1 hour class on 3-D modeling to supplement traditional graphics courses) Vehicle Dynamics (adjunct instructor from ProCharger) advisory group for machining and manufacturing established corrected prerequisite assignment of differential equations for CE351 Fluid Mechanics and CE 321 Structural Analysis Introduction to Biomechanics elective student machine shop

industry feedback and senior exit interviews confused advising

X X

transfer students request senior exit interviews transfer students request academic support of Baja buggy competition team needed coordinate curriculum with machine shop advising

3 4

2007 2007

X X

8 1

2007 2008

university mission (life sciences) student teams, future machining class, fabrication needs in ME496 and ME306

X X

MATERIALS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW DURING THE VISIT The outcome worksheets with the list of assessed activities, rubric, and assessment of student work will be organized by outcome in notebooks. The student work data corresponding to the worksheets are available separately. Course boxes from the 2006-2007 year contain the text and examples of students work. The course boxes include all courses available for undergraduate enrollment, not just the courses that assessed a-k. Example materials from the EIT review course will be available.

48

Professional Component
Curriculum Overview
The mechanical engineering program provides a solid academic base in mathematics, science on which to build engineering science and design skills that culminates in a major design experience. The general education courses prepare students for communication skills and engineering business insight. Table 8 shows the curriculum divided into the major groups of undergraduate coursework. Table 8: Professional component in curriculum Requirement Credits Description Calculus Mathematics 19 Differential equations Statistics Physics Chemistry Speech English Business American History Upper level Computer applications Courses MATH 210 Calculus I MATH 220 Calculus II MATH 250 Calculus III MATH 345 Differential Equations CE319 Engineering Statistics PHYS 240 Physics I PHYS 250 Physics II CHEM 211 General Chemistry ComSt 110 Speech ENGL 225 English II CE211 Engineering Enterprise CE311 Technical Entrepreneur Choose from list 200-level elective ME130 Engineering Graphics ME219 Programming for Engineers ME306 Computer-aided Engineering CE275 Statics CE276 Strength of Materials ME285 Dynamics CE351 Fluid Mechanics ME111 Essential Engineering ME352 Instrumentation & Measurements I ME362 Instrumentation & Measurements II ME299 Thermodynamics ME220 Circuits

Science

15

General Education

18

Mechanics Engineering Fundamentals 36

Freshman design Instrumentation

Thermodynamics Circuits

49

Mechanical systems

Upper division

38 Thermal systems

Mechanical engineering electives

ME324 Engineering Materials ME380 Manufacturing Methods ME385 System Dynamics ME415 Feedback Controls ME456 Mechanical Component Design ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis (capstone course) ME360 Theremal System Design ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning or ME451 Power Plant Design 9 hours needed

Engineering Practice through the Curriculum

We recognize that success in a engineering career often includes business development and client relations, as well as technical design skills. We have created two business of engineering classes (211 & 311) within our School (see Figure 35) which introduce undergraduate engineering students to market analysis, business plans, and venture capital funding. Table 9 provides specific examples of student activities in both engineering design and the business of engineering. Table 9: Preparation for engineering practice Course Example design number/name activities ME111 Essential Engineering ME130/131 Engineering Graphics CE211 Engineering Enterprise Delta Design 6-piece assembly, eng drawings, bill of materials Fee analysis for consulting engineering simulation; portfolio analysis of engineering companies Feasibility study for technical company; project planning Six-sigma analyses instrument-based project

Business of engineering activities budget for Delta Design

Location in curriculum Freshman Freshman Sophomore

CE311 Technical Entrepreneur CE319/320 Engineering Statistics ME352/362 Instrumentation & Measurements

Junior Junior Junior

50

ME360 Thermal System Design ME380 Manufacturing Methods ME385 System Dynamics ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer ME415 Feedback Control Systems ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ME451 Power Plant Design ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis

combined-cycle power plant manufacturability; supplies; facilities mechanical system design group designs compensators cooling tower wet-fin heat exchanger co-generation system; turbine island; condenser projects environmental concerns engineering economics; facilities siting; emissions controls intellectual property cost analysis cost constraints

Junior Junior Junior Junior Senior Senior Senior

Senior

Figure 35: Business track classes

ME111 Essential Engineering Lower division engineering courses

Upper division engineering courses

CE211 Engineering Enterprise

CE311 Technical Entrepreneur

ME496 capstone design

51

Major Design Experience

ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis is the capstone mechanical engineering class. The class has been taught for the last five out of seven years by a senior engineer from the Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies (FMT) manufacturing plant in Kansas City (Scott Yerganian, P.E.). Mr. Yerganian holds numerous patents in mechanical design, and is a committed member of the CME adjunct cadre. Students work on both n individual and group mechanical design projects during the course. The individual design project is the development of a Battlebot, using the constraints of the national Battlebot competition. The students submit a conceptual design of their project to the instructor, including CAD drawings, design calculations, costs and a list of references (see samples below in Figure 36 and Figure 37). The individual design reports are graded with the following rubric categories: Report format Design concept overview (description of how design works, what weight classification it will fit into, and how it meets the competition rules) Illustrations and identification of major components Calculations which demonstrate feasibility Detailed design description Costs (materials and fabrication costs) Quality of design Completeness of design

The 2006 group design criteria were given by Honeywell FMT(electronics shipping container see specifications below), BE Aerospace (improvement of a sweep-on oxygen mask), and the Human-powered Vehicle team (HPV design). The 2007 projects were provided by Honeywell FMT (see specifications below) and the Human-powered Vehicle team (see sample below in Figure 38). The group projects have significant client interaction, including a problem proposal, PowerPoint presentation, drawing set (4-5 sheets), and a bill of materials. A report is also submitted to the instructor. The 2006 Honeywell FMT project to design a shipping container: As part of our operation, we calibrate many pieces of portable electronic equipment for use in other areas of the plant. We ship these items to and from Metrology using padded shipping tubs. The tubs are transported around the plant using fork trucks. We have ergonomic concerns with our associates lifting equipment in and out of the tubs. I would like to see if a better container/method can be developed that will minimize ergonomic hazards. A few possibilities include a container with improved access, a container with an integral lift for raising/lowering the container for easier loading/unloading, or a container with some type of racks or shelves that slide in and out for easier loading. The type of equipment we ship varies, but is mostly rack-mountable electronic equipment, with a maximum size of 20.5" wide, 12" tall, and 26.5" deep. The maximum weight of an item is 70 pounds, but most items are 25 pounds or less.

52

The container must be able to be transported using fork lifts and must also provide adequate padding and protection for fragile equipment. The existing containers use a minimum of 4" of foam padding to protect the equipment. The containers could be based on a commercially available product or designed from scratch, but the overall cost of the container should be kept as low as possible. The containers should also have casters to allow them to be moved by hand when needed. The dimensions of the existing containers are: 48" x 43" x 39" tall. The 2007 Honeywell FMT project for a clamping mechanism (see example below in Figure 39): Design a new clamping mechanism to hold package during soldering New clamps must tie into present activation mechanism Machine must be able to get package in and out of heat stage with cover on Package cannot move during scrubbing (0.001 to 0.006 movements) Withstand temperatures of 400C Package must be kept level on heat stage Package must be kept in good contact with heat stage Prefer not to clamp just on the lead frame or on seal ring

The group design reports are graded with the following rubric categories: Report format Customer requirements Design requirements Illustrations and description of design concepts Concept selection Detailed design description Quality of design Completeness of design Team peer evaluations contributed to project grade
Figure 37: Sample BattleBot #2

Figure 36: Sample BattleBot #1

53

Figure 38: Sample human-powered vehicle drawing (2007)

Figure 39: Sample Honeywell FMT clamping mechanism (2007)

The mechanical engineering capstone experience provides students with significant interaction with industrial clients, contributes to outcome assessment for the program, and is aligned with

54

all four program objectives (preparation for immediate employment, skills for successful careers, preparation for diverse career paths, complex work environment).

55

Engineering Standards and Realistic Constraints

Industry standards and realistic constraints are included in many of our required mechanical engineering courses. Table 10 includes the specific standard or constraint and the student activities that apply those constraints. Table 10: Engineering Standards and Constraints Required Constraints Course Number/Name ASHRAE ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ASTM ME380 Manufacturing Methods ME324 Engineering Materials ME 440 Heating & Air Conditioning AISI (American ME380 Manufacturing Iron & Steal Methods Institute) NIST ME352/362 Instrumentation and Measurements SAE Aerospace & ME380 Manufacturing Materials Methods Standards ASME Power ME451 Power Plant Test Code Design ANSI/ISO ME130 Engineering Graphics GAAP (Generally CE211 Engineering Enterprise Accepted Accounting Principles) Heat Exchanger ME451 Power Plant Institute Design BattleBot ME496 Mechanical competition rules Design Synthesis Economic CE211 Engineering Enterprise CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer ME451 Power Plant Design Course topics projects homework & projects homework grain-size hardness piping standards homework dimensions homework turbine design tolerances & dimensions portfolio analysis

condenser design BattleBot design supply and demand; market maturity; business cycles define market segment; competitive analysis; advertising; proposal for investor cost analysis bid analysis; capitalized cost; discounted cash flow

56

Environmental

Social and Political

Ethical

Health and Safety

Manufacturability / Constructability / Implementability

CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ME385 System Dynamics ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ME451 Power Plant Design CE211 Engineering Enterprise CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ME385 System Dynamics ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning CE211 Engineering Enterprise CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ME352 Instrumentation & Measurements Lab ME380 Manufacturing Methods ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer ME220 Electric Circuits ME380 Manufacturing Methods ME324 Engineering Materials ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ME451 Power Plant Design ME130 Engineering Graphics CE211 Engineering Enterprise CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ME380 Manufacturing Methods ME451 Power Plant Design ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis

identify environmental threats to business greenhouse gas consideration in design greenhouse gas analysis refrigerant selection facility siting; emission control; fly ash disposal diversity in teams effect of political climate on business marketing; regulations facility siting; current regulations; fuel costs behavior in other cultures business and professional ethics academic honesty academic honesty academic honesty grounded circuits, GFI plant tours laboratory safety refrigerant properties; Legionella sp. SO2; NOx; effects of emissions 6-piece assembly business success likelihood business success likelihood all reliability, constructability all

57

Sustainability

CE211 Engineering Enterprise CE311 Technical Entrepreneur ME451 Power Plant Design

business life cycle business life cycle maintainability

Criterion 4 Assessment
IMPROVEMENTS OVER PAST SIX YEARS The freshman design class (ME111) was redesigned in Jan 2007 to increase freshman retention and capture EAC outcome data. The CME Department began offering FE review classes during the winter semester in 2005 to support the goal of professional registration for civil and mechanical engineering students.

PLANS FOR THE NEXT SIX YEARS The mechanical engineering program plans to put the coordination of the capstone design class under the direction of a tenure-track faculty member. The program plans to continue soliciting the mechanical engineering design community for appropriate design projects, and to include members of the engineering community in the review of the students work. A one-hour class in welding techniques will be offered. A student machine shop will be completed in the Old Maintenance Building. A one-hour class in machine shop basics will be offered. Rapid-prototyping machines will be acquired during 2007-2008, and will be used in ME130/131 Engineering Graphics.

58

Faculty
Size of the Faculty
The faculty are sufficient to cover the minimum required two mechanical engineering areas, but adjunct faculty are needed to offer the breadth and depth of senior/graduate electives. Most faculty are advising at least one student organization each. The observed enrollment growth will be a challenge to accommodate. The faculty met on 3/17/2006 to plan each class/lab for enrollment increases (included in Appendix). ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigeration & Air Conditioning Engineers) Becker ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) Guess ISPE (International Society of Pharmaceutical Engineers) Fricke NSBE (National Society of Black Engineers) Thiagarajan NSPE (National Society of Professional Engineers) - McClernon Order of the Engineer McClernon Pi Tau Sigma National Mechanical Engineering Honor Society (Phi Eta chapter) Becker SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) Carlson SHPE (Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers) - van de Liefvoort SWE (Society of Women Engineers - student section I057) - OBannon Tau Beta Pi National Engineering Honor Society (Missouri Delta chapter) - OBannon Entrepreneurship & Innovation Club - Rychlewski The Kansas City area offers many excellent adjunct professors who add breadth and depth to the course offerings. Adjunct professors are generally asked to teach senior/graduate electives in the evening. The adjunct professors of undergraduate classes have been active participant in outcome assessment.

Extent and Quality of Faculty Involvement

The regular faculty complete curricular advising of all students, with the assistance of our academic staff advisor. The faculty ensure that prerequisites are taken in appropriate order, and the C (2.0)-prerequisite rule is enforced. Some classes use instructor-consent to enforce prerequisites. Both the faculty and faculty advising were assessed by the alumni/ae: the data are presented in Figure 40. The alumni/ae rate the quality of the faculty and the faculty advising as good.

59

Figure 40: Assessment of faculty by alumni/ae (maximum = 5)

5
p re2 000 M E alum ni/ae 2 00 0+ M E a lu m n i/a e

Assessment of ME Faculty

4 3 2 1 0
fa c ar l gu ul

ty ad ju a tf nc

cu

lty fa c ul ty v ad

is i

ng

re

Competence
The regular mechanical engineering faculty have doctoral expertise in heat transfer, power plant design, biomechanics, and instrumentation. Adjunct faculty in mechanical engineering complement the regular faculty by offering core undergraduate courses in manufacturing, systems dynamics and senior design. Each faculty teaches the required core design class in his specialty, as well as senior/graduate electives in that specialty. The business track courses (CE211 and CE311) are coordinated and/or taught by Prof. Rychlewski (BS/MS/PhD EE), who has appointments in the business school and engineering. Dr. Rychlewski has extensive business experience in bring engineering products to market. All the tenure-track mechanical engineering faculty hold Ph.D. dgrees in mechanical engineering and are professional engineers or PE-eligible3. The adjunct and teaching professors hold M.S. degrees and/or P.E. The faculty completed their graduate studies at a variety of major universities, and about a half of the faculty have had significant industrial engineering experience. All faculty have excellent communication skills. All the faculty have been enthusiastic in participating in the departmental objectives and measuring educational outcomes. Faculty attendance at weekly faculty meetings is very good. Most of the faculty participate as student engineering society advisors, and participate actively in the professional societies. All the tenure-track mechanical engineering faculty maintain a high level of scholarly activity. The faculty have garnered a good collection of campus and external awards, including ASME Fellow (Becker), ASHRAE Fellow (Becker), Clarence Birdseye Young Researcher Award (Fricke), UMKC Faculty Scholar (Guess) and SCE Good Teaching Award (Bloemker).

3 The Missouri Board of Registration now waives the FE exam for engineering faculty, effective February 2007..

60

Table 11: Faculty activity Faculty Professional Society Activity

Becker

Fricke Guess King McClernon Bloemker Hanlin Justice Mahoney Yerganian

ASHRAE committees (4.10, 10.6, 10.9), head of Technical Section 8.0 International Institute of Refrigeration Board of Directors ASHRAE committees (10.5, 10.9); International Refrigeration (secretary and newsletter editor) Interagency Modeling & Analysis Group (Tissue Mechanics Working Group) NIH reviewer ASEE ASM Education Committee SAE

Journal/Conference Presentations/Patent applications in Last Five Years x

x x x x x x x

CME By-laws (copy in Appendix I)

The CME departmental by-laws has specific language regarding EAC accreditation and the CME Advisory Board: The civil engineering and mechanical engineering degrees have been continuously accredited by EAC since 1977. The department is committed to maintaining EAC accreditation for its undergraduate degrees. The Chairman will appoint an ABET Coordinator to assure continuous compliance with EAC requirement. This Coordinator may have EAC reporting, self-study preparation, communications with site visiting team, and/or CME data collection responsibilities. The Chairman has ultimate responsibility for EAC compliance. In order to provide the highest quality education to the students the Advisory Board will advise and assist the faculty in developing industrially relevant programs by providing recommendations for improving the curriculum with respect to the needs of industry; will help to develop assessment instruments and programs for assessing the outcomes of the Civil and Mechanical Engineering academic program; cultivate a network of individuals and corporations to support the continued improvement of the Civil and Mechanical Engineering Department facilities and resources; and increase the awareness of the broader community of the quality of the students and programs.

61

Facilities
Laboratory Planning:
Technical staff members of SCE help maintain and service laboratory, computer and office equipment in the ME laboratories. Commercial service departments are engaged for calibrations or specialized repairs. Per the newly adopted SCE lab plan, the ME program will allot $2000 of its annual lab equipment allocations for routine laboratory maintenance, replacement and repair. Funding for the replacement of existing equipment or acquisition of new equipment is based upon allocations to the SCE Lab Equipment Committee. The ME program expects an annual allocation of ~$15,000. Gifts, grants and direct allocations from the Missouri State government may augment these appropriations from time to time.

Classrooms:
Technology: Most classrooms have a ceiling-mounted computer projector and high-speed wired network connection: some classrooms have full multimedia capabilities (DVD, VCR, computer, document camera, etc.) The campus wireless network is available in most classrooms, as well. Blackboard - the Blackboard course management software platform is available for all UMKC instructors to use in their courses. It includes homework submission, grade management, postings, and threaded discussion capabilities. The campus IT staff creates a base Blackboard page and loads the student registration list into the gradebooks for the faculty.

Library/on-line journals:
The University Libraries, primarily the Miller Nichols Library, through its library services, collections, and access arrangements, provide information support for the curricular and research needs of the School of Computing and Engineering. Journal support for these programs is available electronically to all campus IP addresses, and also remotely to all students and faculty with a UMKC email account via a proxied authentication process. Access to all fulltext electronic journals is facilitated by Serials Solutions, a web indexing and linking source that analyzes the contents of the publisher and aggregator journal packages. Relevant electronic aggregator packages include the CSA (Cambridge Scientific Abstracts) Engineering Research Database, and ASCE Publications. These and other databases provide access not only to journal articles, but also bibliographic access and abstracts to conference proceedings, books, standards, and manuals. In all, UMKC has access to more than 200 full-text electronic journal titles in civil engineering, and over 130 in mechanical engineering, with access to many more on more specific or related subjects. Library materials in the UMKC Libraries are listed in MERLIN, the online public access catalog for the 4-campus University of Missouri system, which includes the holdings of the Engineering Library on the campus of the Columbia campus of the University of Missouri, and the library supporting the engineering programs at the University of Missouri-Rolla campus. MERLIN is a cornerstone in the statewide higher education system known as MOBIUS, comprised of over 60 higher education and research institutions in Missouri, including Washington University and Saint Louis University. Books located on MERLIN/MOBIUS can be requested directly online, and the book usually arrives at UMKC within two days to one week. Traditional Interlibrary Loan services are available for other materials. The Linda Hall

62

Library of Science, Technology and Engineering, an independent research library, is located on campus, and holds comprehensive collections of print scholarly science and engineering journals, reference works, and the U.S. Patent Office publications

Laboratory facilities
INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENTS: During 1998, a Bench Top Cooling Tower, model H890, manufactured by P.A. Hilton, Ltd., was purchased from TecQuipment, Incorporated at a cost of $15,307. This unit is capable of demonstrating all of the processes found in a full-size mechanical draft evaporative cooling tower. The bench top cooling tower is fully instrumented to measure dry and wet bulb temperature, in addition to air flow rate and water flow rate. This unit will provide the students with the opportunity to investigate cooling tower performance over a range of process cooling loads and inlet temperatures. It will also allow the students to observe water flow patterns and distribution within the towers fill material. In 1999, an instrumentation upgrade added new analog and digital multimeters, function generators, a sound level meter, contact and non-contact tachometers, and a stroboscope. With this upgrade, the accuracy and the sensitivity of the experiments performed was increased. In the Fall of 2003, the antiquated data acquisition software and hardware was replaced. A new computer was purchased to run new LabVIEW data acquisition software. In addition, a new National Instruments multifunction data acquisition card was purchased along with SCXI signal conditioning modules to support the various labs. Also in the Fall of 2003 the lab was updated through the purchase of an Agilient power supply and Tektronix oscilloscope. A load cell, accelerometer, and LVDT were also purchased to support student projects and for the implementation of the mass spring damper lab for ME 362. In the Fall of 2004 a second LabVIEW based data acquisition system and computer was purchased at a cost of $5377. A new solenoid valve, pressure transducer, and piston meter were purchased to replace broken items ($1078), and an assortment of foil type strain gauges were purchased to replace gauges used in student projects at a cost of $250. Finally an Infrared Thermocouple was purchased to upgrade the radiation lab. Table 12: Instrumentation & Measurements Activities Current Experiments ME 352 Labs ME 362 Labs Electricity Mass-spring damper Pressure Process control Velocity Conduction Flow meters Convection DAQ Radiation Vibration Sound Strain Precision measurement Robot

63

MATERIAL SCIENCE: The Material Science Laboratory supports ME 324, Engineering Materials. The laboratory equipment has been obtained through direct purchase and through industrial gifts of surplus equipment. During 1998, a Buehler ball penetrator, a Kennametal tool holder and cutting insert as well as a supply of type 304 stainless steel tubing, seamless brass alloy tubing and alloy 3003 aluminum tubing were purchased for the material science laboratory at a total cost of $365.00. During 2003, the 100,000 pound servo controlled hydraulic mechanical testing machine was upgraded with new electronic controls, a new computer and a new software package to control the machine. This modernization of the testing machine made it the equivalent of a new machine. Also during 2003, a new Thermolyne F6020 benchtop muffle furnace was purchased at a cost of $3800 to replace the antiquated and non-functioning Thermolyne 2000 muffle furnace. CONTROLS: In 1993, we began the development of a new controls laboratory in order to strengthen that area of the curriculum. The laboratory was formed as a part of ME 415, Feedback Control Systems. A complete torsional control system labstation was purchased from Educational Control Products for $8000. This system consists of a coupled 2-disk rotational mechanical system with sensors, servo actuators, data acquisition boards, and integrated control software. The labstation is controlled by a 486 IBM PC, which was purchased at the same time for $1500. In 1997, an additional disk and sensor were purchased for about $700 to provide an additional mode of vibration. The complete system provides several test configurations and the flexible control software allows easy and instantaneous design of a wide range of feedback control schemes. The labstation has been used to demonstrate basic feedback controllers for ME 415. In addition, the labstations data acquisition features have been used to demonstrate the dynamic response of unforced mechanical systems in ME 385, System Dynamics. In 1996, additional MATLAB software toolkits were purchased to supplement the basic MATLAB controls toolbox. The MATLAB optimization toolkit and the graphical software package SIMULINK were purchased for about $500. The optimization toolkit provides several optimization routines for solving engineering design problems and is used extensively in ME 466, Applied Optimization. The advanced graphical software toolkit SIMULINK allows students to quickly and easily simulate complex dynamical systems by clicking and dragging components of a control system block diagram and connecting the components. SIMULINK has been used extensively in ME 501, Nonlinear Control Systems. During 2000, a Model 730 Maglev system, manufactured and sold by Educational Control Products (ECP), was purchased to demonstrate closed loop levitation of permanent and ferromagnetic elements. This system provides a variety of SISO and MIMO, stable and unstable configurations. In addition, the ECP Controls Executive Software for Windows version 4.12 was purchased. This software makes both the Model 730 and Model 205 compatible with the MATLAB and SIMULINK software packages which are available in the engineering student computer lab and are presently used in ME 415 and ME 385 as well as several other required engineering courses. The total cost for both of these acquisitions was $9580.00.

64

DESIGN: To enhance our teaching in the design area, a new design laboratory was established in 1998. It serves the needs of undergraduate and graduate students taking design classes and doing research in design. The Design Laboratory houses several types of equipment, and focuses upon rapid prototyping, design software, demo machine components and products for experiments and reverse engineering. Details are given below. In 1999, ME obtained some design-related software to support the labs activities. The three PCs mentioned above have the SilverScreen solid modeler installed, as part of the rapid prototyping project. In addition, ME purchased the following design software packages from Boothroyd-Dewhurst Inc.: Design for Manufacture, Design for Assembly, and Design for Environment The total cost of these three packages was $5100.00. Additional software will be purchased as the need arises according to teaching and research activities. A collection of various machine elements is being established in the lab to support instruction in ME 456 Mechanical Component Design. These include gears, shafts, clutches, brakes, springs, etc. The intention is to collect these used parts at no cost. DESIGN TEAM FACILITIES: The combined Student Machine Shop in the Old Maintenance Building (see Figure 1) supports the Steel Bridge, Human Powered Vehicle, and Baja Buggy teams. The teams will have fabrication and assembly space and the capabilities include wire welders, acetylene torch, cut-off band saw, drill presses, chop saws, hand tools, safety equipment, and furniture. FIELD TRIPS: The metropolitan Kansas City area has a rich variety of engineering field trip opportunities that add significantly to the on-campus laboratory experiences. Table 13 lists the field trips in required undergraduate classes. Table 13: Mandatory field trips Class Field Trip Description with Objectives CE311 Technical Each Fall we go to the Kauffman Foundation all day one Saturday to Entrepreneur participate in the Invention2Venture KU/UMKC joint program. In the Spring CE 311 goes to the Kauffman Foundation all day one Saturday to participate in the New Venture Challenge multi-university business plan competition. Purpose of the trips is to meet with student entrepreneurial teams from other schools, discuss new venture concepts or compete in new venture competitions and to meet entrepreneurial business leaders and hear topnotch speakers on entrepreneurship. CE319/320 Honeywell Avionics or Hallmark Corp to visit with Six-sigma black Engineering belts and observe manufacturing modifications recommended by Statistics factorial design analysis

65

ME380 Manufacturing

ME380 Manufacturing Methods goes on 6 field trips during the semester. The purpose of these trips is for the students to see actual manufacturing facilities and learn what the engineers do at these companies. WS2007, we went to: Superior Heat Treating Heat Treating Processes Woodbridge Injection Molded Foam Faurecia Automotive Seat Assembly General Motors Auto Assembly Elk Composite Building Products American Racing Forged Aluminum Wheels At each facility the engineers present information about the company, engineering responsibility, specifications and procedures. Each student must write a trip report for each tour. This also teaches them to write a business trip report. Hawthorne Power Plant (combustion) Field trip to local power generating station. Gives students a sense of scale and reality about the systems and components discussed in class.

ME385 System Dynamics ME451 Power Plant Design

Computing: software available in student computing labs; login limited to SCE students; students have 100 MB storage space on network drive on request, Pentium desktops with Processor (1.2 GHz or above); Memory (256 MB or above); Hard Drive (20 GB or above); Network Card (10BASE-T or above); Operating System (Windows 2000 or XP); student weekly printing quotas = 300 pages per week.
Table 14: Software tools available in engineering computing laboratories MIPSter AutoCAD 2005 IE3D BlueJ Integrated Engineering MS Visio Eclipse Software MSDNAA Ansoft ENSEMBLE Java Nonlin (Maxwell) Jcreator OPNET FIDELITY JUnit PCSPIM FLUENT Labview PSPIC GAMBIT Maple Risa 3-D GLUT (used with Vs.net) MATLAB SPIMSAL HEC-RAS MS Frontpage 2003 Visual Studio HEC-SMS MS Office 2000 Visual Studio .NET MATLAB MS Works/Excel 2003 Visual Studio .NET Gluit library HFSS Microsoft Project Visual Studio .NET I-DEAS MicroStation MSDN (help) Windows XP Zeland

66

Assessment of Laboratory Quality

The quality of mechanical engineering laboratories was assessed by both the alumni/ae (Figure 41) and exiting seniors (Figure 42). The scale of possible responses in both graphs is from 1 to 5. Both groups concur that the laboratories are acceptable, but could be improved. Improvements in the instrumentation laboratory are planned for the fall 2007 semester. Figure 41: Assessment of facilities by alumni/ae (maximum = 5)

Assessment of ME Facilities

5 4 3 2 1 0
s lab

pre2000 ME alumni/ae 2000+ ME alumni/ae

fi

t eld

s rip

Figure 42: Assessment of laboratories (senior exit interviews) (maximum = 5)

Assessment of laboratory quality

5 4 3 2 1 0

Computer laboratories Engineering laboratories

06 04 04 05 06 05 07 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 y y y y c c c De De De Ma Ma Ma Ma

67

Modern Engineering Tools

Table 15: Use of modern engineering tools in curriculum Class Engineering Tool ME130 Engineering Graphics AutoCAD / ME 131 3-D Design SolidWorks CE211 Engineering HF4D (Human Factors in Enterprise Four Dimensions) software ME219 Computer Matlab Programming for Engineers Excel/VBA ME220 Circuits MATLAB ME306 Computer-aided Engineering CE311 Technical Entrepreneur CE319/320 Engineering Statistics ME324 Engineering Materials Matlab Excel/VBA Business Plan Pro software Excel statistics add-in photomicrographs, sample polishing annealing, rolling mill Charpy impact tester case hardening with carbon, polishing, photomicrography accelerometer thermocouples, SCXI data acquisition digital tach, strobotach, eddy current, mechanical, solomat, chronometric LabView software for data acquisition LVDT, Sensotec accelerometer, data acquisition thermocouples, relays Heat Spy LabView software for data acquisition MATLAB Simulynk Student Experience all all (see examples below) compare companies all graphing signal output from a circuit all feasibility 23 factorial design determine ASTM grain size number of samples effect of cold working and annealing on hardness of sample metals observe brittle/ductile failure of samples calculate diffusion of carbon into steel Fourier transform of sample vibration compare generated frequency to FFT compare velocity measurements experiments compare measurement techniques for spring-damper system measurement and control of solenoid valve remote temperature measurements and interferences mass-spring-damper; process control lab modeling homework

ME362 Instruments and Measurements II

ME385 System Dynamics

68

ME399 Heat & Mass Transfer

ME415 Feedback Control Systems ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ME451 Power Plant Design

MATLAB House of Quality SolidWorks VBA Pugh MATLAB Simulynk VBA/Power Excel VBA/Power Excel TKSolver modified Pugh software AutoCAD

solve numerical methods for heat transfer

design compensator design cooling tower psychometric charts economic analysis bid evaluation design condenser optimization for combustion turbine choice of design options

ME496 capstone design

Figure 43: Example #1 of student work using SolidWorks from ME130/131

Figure 44: Example #2 of student work using SolidWorks from ME130/131

69

Institutional Support and Financial Resources

Adequacy of Institutional Support
Institutional support and financial resources have been sufficient to allow both the Civil Engineering Program and the Mechanical Engineering Program to achieve objectives and outcomes. The Mechanical Engineering faculty has added one Associate Professor, three Assistant Professors, and one Teaching Assistant Professor (ME/CE shared) since 2002, and currently has open positions for 2 additional faculty. During this time, there has been only one retirement. The Civil Engineering Faculty has added two Assistant Professors and one Teaching Assistant Professor (ME/CE shared) since 2002, and currently has an open position for 1 additional faculty. During this time there have been no retirements. UMKCs location in the Plaza District of Kansas City, Missouri, has proved to be a tremendous asset in attracting and keeping highly qualified faculty. In addition to resources for faculty, the university has recently converted over 3,000 square feet of space in the Old Maintenance Building, adjacent to Flarsheim Hall, for the use of civil and mechanical engineering student activities and instruction. Coupled with the Departments location in Flarsheim Hall of Technology, the largest and newest building on campus (1999), the university has provided an excellent environment for student learning and instruction. The Admissions Office and the Registrars Office of UMKC provide a cordial and effective working environment, and have been a tremendous asset in the growth of the department. The presence of a great Kansas City engineering school is a necessary element for the continued leadership and health of Kansas City engineering. Area firms are continuing to expand their support roles for the Civil and Mechanical Engineering programs as an investment in their own futures.

Budget for the Program.

Budget for the CME department is centrally controlled and administered by the SCE Deans Office. Major variation in budget is generally associated with the addition of faculty and/or staff, and these variations are managed by budget modification through the Deans office. Currently, CME has three open positions: 1 tenure-track Mechanical Engineering Assistant Professor; 1 tenure-track Civil Engineering Assistant Professor; 1 tenure-track Mechanical Engineering Assistant Professor OR 1 non-tenure track Teaching Assistant Professor. These positions will be funded by reallocation of funds to the department budget by the Deans office. Some funds, derived from Continuing Education sources, are controlled directly by the department through a discretionary account. These funds are generally used for student team support, purchase of teaching equipment, purchase of department equipment, minor infrastructure modifications, and support of faculty development.

Faculty Professional Development

Attendance at conferences, workshops, and other development-related events is accomplished by a request from the faculty member to the chair/dean, stating the timeframe of the event, any conflicts with the teaching schedule (along with how those conflicts will be resolved), and the proposed funding source. Virtually all faculty requests were honored during the 2006-2007 academic year. Faculty professional development is primarily funded from three sources.

70

Professional development funds of $1000 per academic year are provided to full time faculty to attend conferences purchase reference materials, or pay for other development-related activities. These funds are provided and approved by the deans office. For the past 26 years, UMKC has distributed recovered research F&A funds on the following basis: 50% to the unit that produced the revenue; 50% held centrally at the campus level. (During the academic year 2006 2007, CME faculty executed about $500,000 in funded research as PI or CO-PI, with about $330,000 ME and $186,000 CE.) For those funds returned to the School of Computing and Engineering, SCE policy is that 67% is distributed to the Research Incentive Funds (RIF) of principal investigator(s) who were awarded the funds and 33% is retained by the Dean. Campus policy requires that a majority of the funds expended from this source at the School level be used to support the research activities of the faculty. The current practice will be continued in FY 2008. Historically, the practice at UMKC is that the revenue derived from credit and non-credit continuing education offerings is returned to the unit that produced that revenue, less a small institutional support charge assessed on these activities (<10%). For FY2008, the University Budget committee is recommending that this practice be continued Budgetarily, these activities are expected to be self-supporting. However, the Civil & Mechanical Engineering Department also generates revenue from these activities that are placed in a departmental discretionary account. Funds from this account support numerous activities, including requests from the faculty for development funds. At this point, levels of funding from these three sources have been reasonably adequate, as evidenced by some unused funds remaining at the end of the year.

Resource Plan
The facilities and equipment provided and maintained by the university in terms of classroom space, laboratory space, and office space are currently more than adequate to meet the requirements of program objectives. Beyond the university infrastructure, CME specific resources to acquire, maintain, and operate facilities and equipment required to achieve program objectives are described in the following sections. ABET Undergraduate Laboratories: Both the Civil Engineering Program and the Mechanical Engineering Program are funded with $15,000 annually ($30,000 total) to acquire and maintain the facilities and equipment of the ABET undergraduate labs. These funds are cumulative, and currently carry balances of $20,775 and $11,388 for Mechanical and Civil, respectively. In addition to these accounts, some funding is available from the CME department discretionary funds, and special requests can be made to the Deans office for one time, major expenditures. The principle challenges in future years for the ABET undergraduate laboratories will be associated with the growth of the programs. Teaching Aids: The majority of classrooms hosting CME coursework are equipped with permanent projection and screen equipment suitable for use with a laptop computer. The university provides the faculty with office computers for support of their teaching activities. The faculty has a choice of desktop or laptop models, and these computers are replaced on a regular rotation at approximately a three to four year interval. (Faculty can choose to upgrade the computers with development funds.) Some classrooms, classified as ILE, are equipped with permanent computers, DVD, document cameras, and permanent projection equipment. All classrooms have access to both wireless and wired network connections. In addition to university furnished equipment, the CME department maintains electronic equipment available

71

for checkout by the faculty, including five laptop computers, two EPSON projectors, one video camera, two high-zoom digital cameras, and one DVD video transfer unit. Student Teams: CME is currently in the process of occupying approximately 3,000 square feet of lower level area in the Old Maintenance Building, adjacent to Flarsheim Hall, to be used for workspace for the Steel Bridge Team (CE), the Big Beam competition (CE), the Human Powered Vehicle Team (ME), and the Mini-Baja Buggy Team (ME). The university has provided funds to bring the space up to code requirement necessary for Certificate of Occupancy, and CME has financed an additional $25,000 in improvements necessary to support team/teaching activities in terms of power, ventilation, and access. Although planning is not yet complete, at least one of the current UG Civil Engineering labs may also relocate to this area.

Support Personnel and Institutional Services

Support personnel that report directly to the Chair of CME are 1 Administrative Assistant 1 Academic Advisor 1 Machinist (20 hours/week)

These positions are determined by the Deans Office, and modification to this structure cannot be made without the express consent and action of the Deans Office. At current enrollment levels, these positions are adequate to meet program objectives. Additional personnel may be required if current growth is continued. The university also provides services to enhance faculty teaching skills. The Faculty Center for Excellence in Teaching (FaCET) is faculty defined and operated with a focus on promoting academic excellence by facilitating student-centered pedagogies and practices. The Center sponsors forums for the discussion, assessment, development, and documentation of teaching practices with demonstrated verifiable benefits for students. The Center is a hub for existing UMKC programs that emphasize student learning and it is a gathering place for faculty who are committed to the improvement of their own teaching as well as for faculty who are committed to the scholarship of teaching and learning. Graduate Teaching Assistants and Lab Assistants provide effective leverage for the facultys time and energy. CME faculty with a laboratory course, or more than 60 total students in a semester are automatically assigned an assistant on a to time basis (10 hours per week to 20 hours per week.) In addition, CME appoints special GTA positions for permanent tutor positions (e.g., Calculus). Budget expenditures for student assistants in 2006-2007 were $50,500 for Civil Engineering courses and $63,300 for Mechanical Engineering. The Kansas City engineering community provides a rich resource of some of the worlds leading engineers for roles as Adjunct Professors. At a base rate of $5000 per three credit hour course, these Adjunct Professors extend the number of electives offered, bring the real world of engineering to the campus, and in general, create the ideal interface of academia and industry. The total expenditure of $60,000 ME and $20,000 CE allowed additional credit hours into the curriculum that would have necessitated nearly $500,000 of resources if provided by full time faculty.

72

Program Criteria
Faculty
Table 16 and Table 17 show that the faculty teaching courses that are primarily design in content are qualified to teach the subject matter by virtue of professional licensure, or by education and design experience, and that the faculty members responsible for the upper-level professional program are maintaining currency in their specialty area.
Table 16: Faculty qualifications for design courses

Course ME415 Feedback Control Systems ME440 Heating & Air Conditioning ME451 Power Plant Design ME456 Mechanical Component Design ME496 Mechanical Design Synthesis

Faculty Justice McClernon McClernon Yerganian Yerganian

P.E.? Design experience? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Journal/conference presentations/patent applications in the last five years X

Table 17: Upper-level teaching faculty Faculty Professional Society Activity

Becker (Professor)

Fricke (Assistant Professor) Guess (Assistant Professor) King (Assistant Professor) McClernon (Associate Professor and Chairman) Hanlin (Adjunct Professor) Justice (Adjunct Professor) Mahoney (Adjunct Professor) Yerganian (Adjunct Professor)

ASHRAE committees (4.10, 10.6, 10.9), head of Technical Section 8.0 International Institute of Refrigeration Board of Directors ASHRAE committees (10.5, 10.9); International Refrigeration (secretary and newsletter editor) Interagency Modeling & Analysis Group (Tissue Mechanics Working Group) NIH reviewer ASEE American Society for Materials Education Committee

X X X

X X X

SAE

73

Curriculum
Table 18 presents the demonstration of compliance with the program criteria for mechanical engineering. The program criteria are central to the mechanical engineering curriculum, therefore all course listed below are required for graduation and the C-prerequisite rule applies.
Table 18: Criterion 8 Curricular Requirements

Criterion 8 knowledge of chemistry and calculus-based physics with depth in at least one

Demonstration Chemistry -> engineering materials (ME324) Physics -> Dynamics (ME285) -> System Dynamics (ME385) Differential equations applications in System Dynamics (ME385) and Feedback Controls (ME415) Engineering Statistics (CE319) Thermal design systems (Heating and Air Conditioning (ME440) or Power Plant Design (ME451)) Mechanical systems (Mechanical Component Design (ME456) and Mechanical Design Synthesis (ME496))

the ability to apply advanced mathematics through multivariate calculus and differential equations familiarity with statistics and linear algebra the ability to work professionally in both thermal and mechanical systems areas including the design and realization of such systems

74

Appendix I Additional Program Information

Table I-1. Basic Level Curriculum
Standard UMKC Curriculum Transfer Curriculum from MCC

Table I-2. Course and Section Size Summary Table I-3. Faculty Workload Summary Table I-4. Faculty Analysis Table I-5. Support Expenditures Course Syllabi Faculty Resumes Sample outcome assessment cover sheet CME Student Manual Senior exit interview form Petition form (for curricular variances) Laboratory plan Enrollment growth plan CME By-laws

Appendix II Institutional Profile

75