Www.usna.edu
Approved MinutesME Department Offsite 2013Friday August 16, 20130900 – 1500AttendanceFaculty present were Jon Angle, Oscar Barton, Lloyd Brown, Cody Brownell, John Burkhardt, Patrick Caton, Jim Cowart, Linda Craugh, Jamer Doughty, Bruce Duncan, Wally Elger, Karen Flack, Steve Graham, Len Hamilton, JJ Hartsog, Peter Joyce, Michelle Koul, Joe Leidig, Keith Lindler, Rick Link, Ethan Lust, Luksa Luznik, Marshall Millet, Mark Murray, Robert Nowlin, Josh Radice, John Schedel, Andrew Smith, Michael Toepper, Ralph Volino, Joe Watkins, Sophoria Westmoreland, Jeff WoertzWelcomeOscar called the meeting order at 0850 and introduced faculty members VADM(ret) Joe Leidig and LT. JJ Hartsog. Both offered welcoming remarks. In his opening remarks he cited achievements by department faculty and provided rankings of the department cited by US News and World Report. He also discussed the progress toward the new Nuclear Engineering Major becoming selectable. He discussed the areas of expertise within the Department and our need for a design focused Professor.ReportsDepartment MetricsJon Angle presented as series of department metrics which included TMC by department and yardwide, midshipmen academic performance, faculty size using 160 TMC as a FTE metric, and service selection by major. The topic of NUC service selection generated a healthy discussion. Karen raised the issue of what response should we provide when midshipmen question about the “nuclear service selection draft”. Several faculty offered comments. Joe Leidig indicated that the concept of a draft is not correct since midshipmen are required to provide a list of preferences. Cody indicated that, in the brigade, this perception exists. Rick questioned whether or not nuclear had to be on their list of preferences. Andrew wondered if ME majors have a higher chance of appearing before the nuclear board than other majors. ACTION: Joe Leidig will explore this issue of nuclear service draft. What percentage of mids get their first choice?FE PerformanceJamer presented an overview of last year’s FE performance in the division and by department. Overall the department’s performance outpaces the national performance. He mentioned the new online format for Spring 2014 and offered a few suggestions to ensure participation since sites do not include USNA. Marshall question the impact on FE registration on the nuclear major once it is up and running, recognizing that it will not be accredited at first. Several cited that accreditation concerns service when taking the PE exam, and that there are ways to accommodate those who did not graduate from an accredited program. Colin questioned if there is a way of forcing midshipmen to pay for the exam, similar to other items they are required to pay for, calculators for example. Karen offered that the department should capture the value of FE licensure through midshipmen video testimonials. Should we encourage fall vs spring examination was offered by Rick. Concerns were raised about the new computer based method/offsite location of the test affecting the number of MIDS who take the exam. ACTION: Jamer was going to research a time restraint on when students can take the FE. (i.e. within x months of graduation)Student Outcomes AssessmentMike presented the new approach to student outcomes assessment and evaluation. One concern that surfaced is crafting rubrics required in the method. ACTION: Oscar will invite Katherine Cermak to discuss how to create effective rubrics. This discussion should take place early in the semester. Joe Watkins asked if we should break out outcomes attainment by major since the department has several service courses, – EM211 for instance. ACTION: MIKE bring assessment committee together to review implementation strategy.Faculty Course EvaluationsJon presented a brief overview of the new Blackboard and its impact on our newly adopted process of administering course evaluations electronically. Jon indicated that in blackboard options are available for collapsing rosters into one master list. Keith recognized that the MIDS should have the ability to review input and change the responses. ACTION: Survey faculty of other concerns and resolve early for fall adoptionDTS OverviewMicheal Baden and the representative for DTS were not able to attend. To move forward with developing the skills needed to use DTS, Jamer Doughty volunteered to offer guidance based upon his experience. ACTION: Jamer host a seminar on best practices for DTS.Department OrganizationAndrew Smith presented an overview of the current department structure and offered several reasons why changing the structure is needed. Six breakout groups were formed and tasked each group to create and present their version of a re-organized department and to present their philosophy for their structure. Common in each presentation were program directors. ACTION: Committee formed to review all plans, consolidate input and present a proposal for re-organization. The committee includes Steve Graham, Josh Radice, Mark Murray, Andrew Smith and Joe WatkinsThe meeting adjourned at 1500. ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.