Whatcom Community College

?Manufacturing/Engineering Technology AAS Degree-CNC Certificate of Completion- Associate of Science Degree Transfer to OTProgram Outcome Report 2019-20I. General information Date report submitted8-12-20Program faculty who contributed to this reportSteve FosterProgram outcomePLO #3 Follow, develop, and troubleshoot manufacturing processes and procedures.Course(s) that formally assesses this program outcome (at its highest level, see program outcome curriculum map and plan)MFG 121Number of students assessed for this program outcome10Quarter students were assessed (e.g., fall 2019)Fall 2019II. Assessment of indicators for the program outcome (add more rows if necessary)Indicators (taken from rubric) Students will be able to…List the most significant teaching and learning activities used by faculty to facilitate the learning of each indicator in their class(es)List the graded assignment(s) that formally assesses each indicator at its highest levelPerformance expectations: Identify the percentage range for each level of performance by replacing the “xx’s” belowAverage score for the indicator (%)How well did the students perform? Safely setup and operate manual lathes and mills and produce parts to blueprint specificationsCourse lectures, quizzes, assignments, demonstrations in lab, assigned reading, and online videos via BlackboardFinal ProjectBelow expected levels: 0 – 69 %At expected levels: 70– 89 %Above expected levels: 90 – 100%73.23% FORMCHECKBOX below expected levels FORMCHECKBOX at expected levels FORMCHECKBOX above expected levelsFollow, develop, and troubleshoot manufacturing processes and proceduresHands on labs, assigned readings, exams, assignment feedbackFinal ProjectBelow expected levels: 0 – 69 %At expected levels: 70– 89 %Above expected levels: 90 – 100%73.23% FORMCHECKBOX below expected levels FORMCHECKBOX at expected levels FORMCHECKBOX above expected levelsIndirect Evidence Describe the Indirect Evidence(Signs students are probably learning, but the evidence of exactly what they are learning is less clear and less convincing Hours reportedNumber of hours students spend in manufacturing technology labIII. Overall assessment of this program outcome (please be thorough in all responses)Overall, how well did the students perform on this program outcome? (to checkmark a box, right-click on the checkbox and select ‘properties’ and ‘checked’) FORMCHECKBOX below expected levels FORMCHECKBOX at expected levels FORMCHECKBOX above expected levelsAnalyze assessment of indicator results in section II: What does the information in section II suggest to you about the performance expectations, the teaching strategies, and student learning? PLO 3 is formally assessed in MFG121 MFG121 – Manufacturing Processes IGrade information taken from module assignment scores, project scores, and final exam/projectStudent Achievement LevelSeptember-2019 to June-2020 (24 individual records)69% or less 26%70% – 79%11%80% - 89%14%90% - 98%40%99% - 100%9%Next steps: Plans for reinforcing effective teaching and learning strategies and for improving student learning (clearly identify what will be done, by whom, by when, and how you will assess the impact of the changes) The manufacturing technology department is currently looking into aligning PLO#3 with industry certification which focuses on safe and proper setup/operation of manual lathes and mills. Several certification options we will look into are those currently available through NIMS (National Institute for Metalworking Standards and Amatrol/NIMS.Focusing on the 70% and below results, we intend to start offering an option for students to revisit the module assignments and research finding the correct answers. Once the student believes they can explain the answer they will then meet with one of the instructors to share those results. This will give us an opportunity to connect with students for one more learning opportunity to solidify important foundational knowledge. Projected quarter of implementing “next steps”Fall 2021Results of “next steps” implementation – this section is to be completed the following year(describe how the implementation of the above “next steps” impacted teaching and learning in the program) Date the “results of ‘next steps’ implementation” section above was submittedIV. Program Learning Outcomes and GoalsOutline any PLO changes made this year (Additions, revisions, deletions)A slight revision was made to PLO 1 and # 5 PLO was added. From Advisory Board input we decided to clearly separate the outcomes between a manual lathes/mills and CNC lathes/mills. Select one PLO and identify a goal to be accomplished during next school yearPLO #2. Interpret and create mechanical blueprints to industry standards will and student Success to increase effective student engagement strategies.The Wildly Important Goal identified for this evaluation is Goal B Objective #5: Increase effective student engagement strategies.Clearly outline the correlation between the PLO and above goalThe goal for the department is to increase completion rates. Our strategy will be to create a rubric for the final project that is used to assess the above PLO. This will ensure inner-rater reliability and help students clearly know what skills and knowledge they will be graded on, but also what they should be able to do in the industryAdditional Resources necessary to accomplish this goalDean FeedbackGoals for program to increase completion rates and implementation/offering of certificates meets WIG’s Objectives in Decreasing student time to completion prevents early drop-out and decreases negative impact on earning power in the workforce. Program outcome supports ILO’s, and demonstrates skill building through instruction, hands-on learning and capstones within welding program. And through assessment students demonstrate industry applicable “out there” beyond this course, in the workforce, as a result of the learning experiences in this course. Indicators are achieved through learning and activities to allow students to meet learning outcomes evident in syllabi and program outcomes. Thereby closing the “loop.” Performance levels are on low end. Emphasis on the 70% and below rates with options for students to revist modules, research questions and provide corrrect answers with faculty interaction and support is excellent evidence of assessment and meets WIG 1 objective improving access to educational ad support systems. I see a constant re-assessment and evaluation in the PLO, CLO’s and ILO’s to meet institutional mission as well as meeting the needs of students. CTE students differ from Gen Ed in that the emphasis in learning outcomes needs to align also with industry demand and support students in learning, to critically think and problem solve and actual apply skills after course. The faculty in this program work hard, support students and strive for excellence. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download