New York Institute of Technology School of Engineering and ...

1

New York Institute of Technology

School of Engineering and Computing Sciences

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Technology

Department of Telecommunications Network Management

Assessment Report

Academic Year 2013-2014

.

May 30, 2014

2

Contents

1- Introduction Page 03

2- ECET Program Assessment Page 04

2.1 A Little Historic

2.2 Assessment of ABET Program Outcomes

2.3 Findings and Recommendations

2.4 ECET Summary Assessment

3- Telecommunication Network Management Program Assessment Page 17



3.3 TELE Summary Assessment

4- Brief Notes 1

5-Global Competency Assessment Page 22

Appendix A : Page 29

Appendix B: Page 30

3

1-Introduction

As usually done at the end of each academic year, the Electrical and Computer Engineering

Technology program and the Telecommunications Network Management program were both assessed

in compliance with program outcomes as defined by ABET for Engineering Technology. The tools used

to collect data and the methods used to compound the collected data were the same used in the

previous academic year. These tools are common to all programs in the School of Engineering and

Computing Sciences. In the next pages of this report, we will elaborate more on the process used to

assess each of these two programs.

For the 2013-2014 academic year, NYIT emphasized the need to also assess global competency

in all programs offered by each school. We understand that , thanks to the development of new

technologies in all areas of human activities, distances have been bridged and communications links

have been shortened to such a point that the whole world looks very much like a global unified market

where a graduating student should be :

- aware of cultural diversities and sensitivities across major poles of the globe,

- an efficient communicator using all kind of communication technologies,

- informed and well prepared to the challenges that a new designed product can encounter

when exposed to various cultures,

- aware of global challenges that need to be a concern for whole populations such as

preservation of the environment and natural resources for the future generations

- a responsible person with competency in ethical and moral issues with local or global actions.

4

2- Electrical and Computer Engineering program Assessment

2.1 A little Historic

The ECET Program is accredited by ABET-ETAC . It has a long history of assessing the program outcomes

defined by ABET for Engineering Technology. At the source of this assessment, all courses are required

to list their student learning outcomes which are then linked to the program outcomes. The correlation

between these two set of outcomes allows the evaluation of the student’s learning process where

deficiencies can be detected trough compilation of EGMU scores and where instructors can use the

resulting data to refocus their attention on specific topics that might be harder for students to master.

The EGMU scores (0-3) are evaluated with Faculty Assessment Report Card (FCAR) that all instructors

submit at the end of each semester for every course that they teach. An EGMU score of 1.5 is

considered our benchmark score; anything below this mark requires special attention from the

instructor , who, with the help and suggestions from the assessment committee, can find new

approaches to teach a specific subject matter and/or change his teaching strategies in order to improve

the score the next time the course is offered .

2.2 Assessment of ABET Program outcomes

Our goal is to assess the a-through-k program outcomes (POs) , shown in figure 1, as stated by

ABET for Engineering Technology programs. To do so, we have set a course versus POs matrix coverage,

which is shown in figure 2. The data is collected using a course-dedicated Faculty Assessment Report

Card (FCAR) . Each course has its student learning outcomes that are correlated with specific PO(s). In

our department, an assessment meeting takes place at the end of each semester. Most of the discussion

is devoted to reviewing courses used to measure ABET Program Outcome and to discussing

performances and ways to improve PO scores. Prior to each meeting, all full-time and adjunct faculty

were required to submit their FCARs . An important part of each FCAR is the instructor’s comments. Our

committee of full-time professors carefully reviews these comments and, if appropriate, will come up

with suggestions to improve any PO that does not achieve the benchmark score of 1.5. This mechanism

thus yields a “health card” for each course with both objective and subjective data that are collected at

the end of each semester.

The data collected from the FCARS are then put onto Excel spreadsheets that, among other things, show PO scores. We use these FCARs for further analysis that consist of the following:

1. Reviews and discussion of the feedback provided by faculty members in text form within each FCAR. This feedback was evaluated at course level in consultation with the subject matter experts and also examined with an eye on their relevance to achieving program level outcomes.

2. Creation of a composite quantitative EGMU (Excellent/Good/Minimal/Unsatisfactory) score for each program outcome (a through k)

3. Creation of an EGMU percentage showing students with scores greater than 1.5 (E = 3.0 and G = 2.0) 4. Creation of an EGMU percentage of students with scores less than 1 (number of students with

scores of U).

5

Figure 1: Engineering Technology Program Outcomes for 2013-2014 According to ABET

Program Outcome

a an ability to select and apply the knowledge, techniques, skills, and modern tools of the

discipline to broadly-defined engineering technology activities

b an ability to select and apply a knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering, and

technology to engineering technology problems that require the application of principles

and applied procedures or methodologies;

c an ability to conduct standard tests and measurements; to conduct, analyze, and interpret

experiments; and to apply experimental results to improve processes;

d an ability to design systems, components, or processes for broadly-defined engineering

technology problems appropriate to program educational objectives;

e an ability to function effectively as a member or leader on a technical team

f an ability to identify, analyze, and solve broadly-defined engineering technology

problems;

g an ability to apply written, oral, and graphical communication in both technical and non-

technical environments; and an ability to identify and use appropriate technical literature

h an understanding of the need for and an ability to engage in self-

directed continuing professional development;

i an understanding of and a commitment to address professional and ethical

responsibilities including a respect for diversity;

j a knowledge of the impact of engineering technology solutions in a societal and global

context;

k a commitment to quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement.

6

Prior to the academic year 2013-2014, a set of courses with strongly connected program outcomes is

selected to collect data for assessment purpose. The matrix in figure 2 shows the list of courses selected

for that purpose ; the matrix shows also the strong connection with selected POs.

Figure 2: Matrix of courses versus a-through-k Program Outcomes chosen for

Academic year 2013-2014

a b c d e f g h i j k

ETEC 110 *

* *

ETEC 131 *

* *

ETEC 495

* * * *

CTEC 204 * *

CTEC 216 * * *

CTEC 235 *

* *

CTEC 247 * *

CTEC 350 * *

Fall 2013 Assessment

7


ETEC 120 *

* *

ETEC 231

*

CTEC 335 *

* *

ETEC 410 * * * *

IENG 400 * * * *

Spring 2014 Assessment

(*) Means strongly connected

When a PO is strongly connected to the courses, we collect the score for that PO for data evaluation.


The full time faculty met to:

1. Evaluate the data for this program

2. Discuss program outcome performance

3. Identify course(s) contributing to low benchmark scores for respective program outcomes.

4. For each course with low benchmark scores, review FCAR’s entries from the professor to

identify the reasons for the low performance. Review history of course(s) and past suggestions if

a recurring problem

5. Identify and propose strategies to improve weak program outcome performance through work,

curriculum development and pedagogy

6. Suggest ways instructors can review assessment tasks and consider crafting new ones

7. Suggest adjustments to teaching strategies based on assessment results

8

Review of each course for assessment purpose follows.

ETEC 110 Electrical Technology I : FCAR submitted by Prof. L. Amani

The scores for POs c, e and g were above 2.0

The instructor was satisfied by the performance of the students.

Recommendation: None at this time

ETEC 120 Electrical Technology II: FCAR submitted by Prof. G. Salayka

The scores for POs c, e and f were above 2.32

The instructor had a little difficulty in completing the semester’s work, due to additional problem

solving in class. However It is apparent that it paid off, since the EGMU scores are well above the

baseline of 1.5.

Recommendation: None at this time . The instructor will however continue to evaluate ABET and

Learning outcomes as well as student performance for this course.

ETEC 131 Electronics Technology I: FCAR submitted by Prof. G. Salayka

The scores for POs a, c and e were well above the threshold value of 1.5.

The instructor noticed that, typically, the students have conceptual problems with this course. This

was less so than in other semesters.

Recommendation: None at this time.

ETEC 231 Electronics Technology II: FCAR submitted by Prof. G. Salayka

The score for PO “f” was 2.40.

Learning Outcome “ PERFORM BOTH DC AND AC ANALYSIS ON VARIOUS MOSFET CIRCUITS” was not

covered by the instructor since he opted not to cover the material on JFET's and MOSFET's in order to

spend time covering critical material on Class A and Class B BJT amplifiers. This material is important in

Electronics and some of it is necessary in order to perform a frequency analysis and graph Bode' plots

later in the course.


ETEC 310 Communications Circuits I : FCAR submitted by Prof. G. Salayka

The scores for PO a, c, f and g were above 2.15

The Instructor was satisfied by the performance of the students.


9

ETEC 410 Control Systems Technology: FCAR submitted by Prof. L. Amara

The score for POs a, b, d and f were above 1.83

The instructor emphasized the design of control systems in the frequency domain using Root Locus,

Bode Analysis and inclusion of Controllers (PI,PD,PID). Lead-Lag Phase compensators to improve

system performance were also introduced. SIMULINK was used extensively in this class. There is a

concern for the laboratory equipment from Feedback ; some of the parts are starting to fall apart and

need replacement. From 6 stations we went down to 4 stations that are still operational. The DC motors

need to be replaced: the problem is that Feedback is a British company that is no longer operating in

the US . Because the student’s population in this class was small this semester, the instructor managed

to run all the lab experiments that required the use of the Control System lab kits from Feedback Co.

Recommendation: Address the situation with the laboratory equipment.

ETEC 470 Fiber-Optic Communication Technology: FCAR submitted by Prof. L. Amara

The scores of POs a ,b,d,f,g, and h were above 1.88

The instructor covers initially a broad range of topics in this course going from basic understanding

of light propagating in a fiber to design of a typical optical fiber receiver. Design of optical fiber

communication links was emphasized beyond the common power budget analysis. Optical Network

Topology, components, layering concepts , WDM and DWDM networks and synchronous optical

networks (SONET) were covered. The term papers on various optical communication technology topics

were decent.


CTEC 204 Programming Fundamentals I: FCAR submitted by Prof. R. Meyers

The scores of POs a and g were above 1.62

The instructor felt like a kind of break-through with this term group of students as opposed to other

groups to which he taught the same course. He was presenting the idea of recyclable idioms, but he

modified his presentations by writing up some handout notes discussing in more detail when and why a

particular strategy may be relevant. He also emphasized, again and again, that the descriptions used for

control strategies required that students be able to describe Boolean expressions using pseudo-code

and then to implement the expressions as source code. He also presented a few more specific decision

strategies while simultaneously giving them the circumstances under which a particular strategy may be

used (e.g. stand-along, within the body of a loop, or as a post-loop).

He got the usual objections of "we want more specific source code examples rather than all that

pseudocode," but this time he bridged the gap by giving them exercises requiring them to do the

intermediate steps of implementing pseudo-coded Boolean expressions and strategy descriptions into

source code.

RE emphasis on the need to write clear documentation and to lay out their code nicely: More

students got it now than in previous terms.


10

CTEC 206 Programming Fundamentals II: FCAR submitted by Prof. R. Meyers

The scores of POs a, d and g were above 1.73 The instructor was quite surprised by the good performance of the students in this course; He

continued to use Eclipse to show how the mechanics of Java work and was more than pleased to see that students were much better able to grasp what was going on with respect to reference parameters and arguments. There are still problems getting students to write code that is easy to read. In this course, there is very little literature other than, perhaps, coding idioms that students may use to solve some problem. Seeing that these notions aren't in the accepted literature, the instructor would prefer to have a different outcome from outcome g assigned to this course. He had no problem with outcomes a and d; he felt they are relevant to the course.

Recommendation: Request that outcome g be removed from CTEC206 because ABET has changed the wording of this outcome where it is requiring citations from the literature as part of the skills to be realized.

CTEC 216 Digital Electronics: FCAR submitted by Prof. H. Kashani

The scores for POs “c”, “f”, and “k” were above 2.0

The instructor gave a good introduction to digital systems design with VHDL. The laboratory

included many VHDL applications oriented experiments using Quartus II software and Altera Boards.


CTEC 243 Computational Analysis I: FCAR submitted by Prof. R. Meyers

The scores for POs a, b and f were above 1.74. The instructor found the course to be quite satisfactory in terms of the approach, the interactions

with the students, and the student performance. In looking at the material covered, he feels that there are some topics that can be cut out and some that can be added.

The students had a pretty good sense of what a derivative and what an integral are, so there was little need for him to take up even one second of class time on these topics, even as review material. The exercise where crossings of two plotted polynomial expressions were zoomed in on and compared for equality may be eliminated but he admits that it is still a valuable exercise where students can see how to use plots as a "graphical ruler." He believes he can cover this topic with a different approach when students start solving differential equations in CTEC247.

Although there is no direct skill requiring students to get vector or matrix data from binary files, he felt the need to use them in the latter part of the course and was frustrated because he couldn't. Also, some MATLAB functions that apply Boolean operations on vectors or that use the find function to get probability information from different vectors were not used. He would cut some material (as mentioned) and will replace it with boolean operators as applied to vectors along with the find function. In doing so, he feels he can have a course that follows the catalog description very closely.

He also felt that he needs to foster a common-sense approach to looking at certain problems. MATLAB does, after all, return some heavy-duty results that can run roughshod over the obvious. The instructor recognizes the need to make sure students do not miss the obvious through getting bogged down by MATLAB's clear and obvious ability to do a lot of highly sophisticated grunt math with little effort on the student's part other than to use the toolboxes properly.

11

Recommendations: None at this time but for some changes in the presentation of the subject matter as discussed above.

CTEC 247 Computational Analysis II: FCAR submitted by Prof. R. Meyers

The scores of POs “a” and “b” were above 1.68.

The instructor recognized that the coverage of subject matter in the course was not as

comprehensive as he could have expected, though its delivery of the course eclipsed the presentation of

the previous year's. He believes that he spent too much time covering the simulation of Craps using

MATLAB (though students can see the advantage of MATLAB implementation over Java in game

simulation). The course is a fairly new one the BS with Technology major curriculum, and since the

instructor has also been assigned both Computational Analysis I and II courses, he thinks that some of

the material covered in this course can be moved up to CTEC243 so that more time can be spent on

differential equations and systems.

Regardless, the course was quite well-received, for those who stayed with it. In a long run, this

course will be well -integrated with the CTEC243 course where a lot of Engineering Math can be taught

using the tools of MATLAB. Just how well it can be done depends upon the skills students have from the

previous math course. If they know both what a derivative and what an integral is and have a practical

knowledge of applying the principles of differentiation and integration, then we may have a good

sequence.

Recommendation: None except for some adjustments in the curriculum as noted.

CTEC 241 Circuit Design and Fabrication: FCAR submitted by Prof. L. Amara

The POs a, d and f scored above 1.59

The lowest score was associated with PO “f”; in this case the ability to design a Finite State

Machine with both the conventional method and ,second, with VHDL. This is due to the fact that some

of the students in this class did not have the expected background for this course; in general, these are

transfer students with no background with VHDL or synthesis of logical circuits. They took some digital

design course and were given transfer credits for the pre-requisite CTEC 216-Digital Electronics

Recommendation: Transfer students should be tested at the beginning of semester to see if they

can stay in this course, otherwise they should retake CTEC 216.

CTEC 235 Microcomputers I : FCAR submitted by Prof. H. Kashani

The scores for POs a, e, and f were above 1.92 Beside the regular coverage of the topics covered in this course, the instructor has dedicated a lab

session introducing an advanced development environment such as VS 2012 for developing apps on Windows platform. He covered the elements of C# language showing the student how similar it is to Java, the language they are supposed to know. The purpose of this exercise was to prepare them for the CTEC 335 where VS 2012 will be covered and used extensively.


12

CTEC 335 Microcomputers II: FCAR submitted by Prof. H. Kashani

The scores for POs a, f and h were above 2.00

Due to current wide-spread use of ARM based microprocessors in almost all mobile devices , the

instructor saw the need to cover the application of ARM processor in place of the 8086 CPU. Some of

the main concepts from the x86 have been carried over such that they are treated in the context of the

ARM processor. These concepts include interrupts, serial communication and display programming. A

small open source computer board known as Netduino has been adopted as the focus of this course.

Netduino is new and it is based on Microsoft .NET platform. It is programmed under Visual Studio 2010

IDE using C# . Since C# and Java share the same basic syntax, students with knowledge of Java had no

difficulty working with C#. Due to the high-level nature of the .NET platform, advanced concepts like

event-driven programming and multithreading are covered in both the lecture presentation and the

laboratory experiments. Another major concept entailed turning Netduino into a small embedded Web-

Server that collected data from its sensors (e.g. light levels using HTTP protocol). An experiment based

on an embedded Web-Server has been designed and introduced. Application and programming of the

2-wire serial interfacing bus called I2C has also been introduced. Two experiments using the I2C bus

have been designed and introduced. The first experiment applied interfacing and programming of a

4x20 LCD display via the I2C bus. The second experiment applied ADC and DAC interfacing of sensors

where communication between the sensors and Netduino was carried out using the I2C bus.

Experiments on PWM and its use in controlling the speed of a DC motor and setting an LED’s intensity

was also designed. An experiment with stepper motor programming was also carried out. This complete

overhaul of the course provides the student with knowledge of the latest tools and techniques used in

micro computing.

It is unfortunate that, though the instructor submitted a detailed purchase request for lab parts

(starting in the Fall term of 2012), they were never delivered. Nonetheless, through the instructor’s

desire to revamp the course, he purchased all needed parts for its presentation from his own personal

funds.

Recommendation: Review course content and submit a new course description to the curriculum

committee in Fall 2014. Make sure the adequate equipment/parts are available in the laboratory for Fall

2014.

13

CTEC 350 Micro-Based Systems: FCAR submitted by Prof. L. Amara

The scores for POs d and h were above 1.73

The term projects using 8051 microcontroller interfacing applications were decent. At some point,

the instructor will have to integrate C language in this class. Indeed most approaches to microcontroller

based systems are no longer presented using the low-level assembly language approach but rather the

mid-level C-language as the medium of instruction. Furthermore, the laboratory has acquired new

microcontroller boards that are all programmed using C rather than assembly language.

Recommendation: Introduce information about using 8051 C programming as an alternative to the

assembly language. Programming in C allows for structured programs and is highly suggested for

complex 8051-based projects.

CTEC 471 Internet Development I: FCAR submitted by Prof. R. Meyers

The scores for POs a, b, d, f and h were well above the benchmark value of 1.5. This is a web site design course. The instructor highlighted the fact that his off-script assignments

ate away some of his class time, but he believed that it gave students a better sense of styles that are kept throughout a site and styles that are required to change from page to page. He intended to follow the same off-script approach the next time he teaches the course, where he believes this approach will invoke the artistic/creative juices in the students to get them to think more creatively about designing web pages. He found these off-script assignments to be quite successful and to help him better discriminate between each student's strong and weak points. Looking at the catalog description for this course, the instructor thinks that some of the material assigned to this course (e.g. server-sided scripting languages, security issues and dynamic web pages) is just overwhelming for the students and he feel s that it should be taught in another course.

Recommendation: Review syllabus and course content to see if some of the initially listed topics should be deleted.

ETEC 495 Seminar Project : FCAR submitted by Prof. L. Pavlidis

The scores for POs “g”, “h”,”i” and “k” were all above 2.75 The instructor recalls that during the Fall 2013 semester, he had a good group of dedicated students

who finished their projects on time. However, the major problem facing all the students is the absence of dedicated and equipped space with tools (hardware and software) so that they can work on their projects at school. They need microcontroller software/hardware development tools to develop their projects. Microcontroller-based projects are the most common type of project undertaken by the students. These tools are necessary in order to assist their code development and debugging. Such tools should include at the minimum some microcontroller programmers and compilers. Also, most students need to secure their projects when there are off campus; if we could provide some form of “lockers,” it will make it easier on them and also deprive them from excuses as far as the security of parts that they buy for the projects (some invest more than $200 for parts).

Recommendation: Acquire development tools for Fall 2014 semester and consider having the students use the senior project room assigned to the SoECS. RE the oral presentations of the project: some of the students lacked evident skills to make an efficient communication; it is suggested that they rehearse their presentation prior to the final event.

14

IENG 400 Ethics and Global Issues: FCAR submitted by Prof. O. Cubenas

The scores for POs f, g, h and j were above 1.85

There were many global issues discussed in this course such as the following:

Issue: Should the US Continue to Pursue the Option of Nuclear Energy?

Issue: Are Biblical and Scientific Understandings of Nature Compatible?

Issue: Is Sustainable Development Compatible with Economic Development?

Issue: Should a Human Clone be Considered a Real Human Being?

Issue: Should the Precautionary Principle be the Primary Concern in Decision Making?

The students were very involved in class discussions of these issues and appreciated the fact that

the issues covered areas that were not purely technical. There was spirited debate on the Issue: "Should

a Human Clone be Considered a Real Human Being?". On this topic very often rather than reasoned

arguments, students gave arguments that were based solely on their religious beliefs and the arguments

tended to be emotional rather than reasoned resulting in a lack of critical thinking. The students'

communication skills at the beginning of the class were below expectation. Their essays were graded for

content and the effective communication of ideas. The overall grade was reduced if the essay was

poorly written and students were told that before handing in their essays they should submit them to

the Writing Center for help. By the end of the semester their communication skills were markedly

improved.

Recommendation: It is strongly recommend that writing and oral communication skills be

emphasized in all courses requiring term paper s or technical reports

IENG 240 Engineering Economics: FCAR submitted by Prof . T. Decanio

The scores for POs a,b and h were above 1.70

This course examines financial principles and problems relevant to the management-engineering

decision making environment. The instructor wanted to highlight that despite the use of relatively

simple mathematics, students find this a difficult course. It introduces concepts and reasoning methods

which they do not encounter in straight engineering courses.

Recommendation: This course should be taken only by juniors and seniors.

IENG 251 Project Engineering: FCAR submitted by Prof. T. Decanio

The scores for POs b , e and k were above 1.87

This course that introduces many new concepts, is more of a survey course and touches on material

such as quality control, financial considerations and reliability which are covered in more depth in later

courses. A major deliverable is the term project/case study with students working in teams of 4-5.

Recommendation: This course should be taken before IENG 240. Also, some of the better

students have discovered flaws in the prepackaged software that comes with the textbook; this should

be addressed with the publisher of the textbook/software.

15

2-4 ECET Summary Assessment

The Excel spreadsheet and chart in figure 3 show the scores of each Program outcome for ECET. All

Program Outcome scores were above the benchmark value of 1.5. The lowest value of 1.76 was

obtained by Program Outcome “b” and the highest by Program Outcome “i”. As for the resulting score

for PO “b”, this is at some point expected since the PO in question is related to the ability to select and

apply knowledge of Mathematics and Sciences to engineering problems; we will never emphasize

enough the need for the ECET students to be proficient in applied mathematics. Nonetheless, all

professors have noticed some level of weakness in Mathematics with some students. Our courses CTEC

243 Applied Computational Analysis has been added after the last ABET visit to bridge some gaps in

Integral and differential Calculus, and it is starting to show some encouraging results. RE the perfect

score of 3 of PO “i”: this was the result associated with the ETEC 495 Seminar Project class.

Appendix A shows how the scores have been computed.

16

Summary - Aggregated

per Outcome Benchmark a 1.98

b 1.76

c 2.20

d 2.00

e 2.43

f 2.24

g 2.03

h 2.37

i 3.00

j 2.27

k 2.56

Figure 3: 2013-2014 ECET-FCAR Assessment Data (see Appendix A for Excel Spreadsheet used for computation of Data)

17

3-Telecommunications Network Management Program assessment

3. Telecommunications Network Management Program Assessment

This program is very much entwined with the ECET program since it is also an ETEC/CTEC courses based

program to the exception of the Telecommunications courses


We will still use the same POs used for Engineering Technology. The matrix in figure 4 shows the list of

courses selected to assess the POs.

Figure 4 : Matrix of courses versus PO s used for TCMGT Program Assessment


ETEC 131 *

* *

ETEC 495 * * * *

CTEC 204 * *

CTEC 216 * * *

IENG 400 * * * *

TELE 110 * *

TELE 420 * * * *

TELE 220 * * *

TELE 431 * * * * *

TELE 321 * * * *

3.2 Telecommunications Courses Findings and Recommendations.

As we did for the ECET program, during the assessment meetings, the FCARs were reviewed, data was

collected and feedback from the instructors was taken into consideration.

18

The following courses were reviewed

TELE 110 Telecommunications Fundamentals I: FCAR submitted by Prof. R. Benferhat

The scores for POs a and d were above 1.72

In this course fundamentals of a telecommunications system are addressed. The different network

architectures are reviewed and compared. The OSI model and TCP/IP protocols were reviewed. Analysis

of published work where students had to select a paper to analyze from a set of selected papers in

Telecommunication was part of the course objectives. This course was offered on both campuses via a

DL communication link. Once again there was no proctoring system present in OW. The professor had to

contact directly NYIT Tech Support to have the exams duplicated and distributed to students. The

students where left alone in the room without adequate proctoring.

Recommendation: The Proctoring System procedures and protocols for this DL class should be

reviewed and a better system should be in place. Also the instructor feels that the Math pre-requisites

for this course should be revised and the textbook used in the class should also be reassessed.

TELE 210 Data Networking Fundamentals: FCAR submitted by prof. J. Linehan

The score for PO a was 2.33

The instructor found out that many students had previous experience with networking concepts.

This was dealt with by reviewing the material where new concepts were added and expounded upon.

Some lessons were strengthened by using real life examples and having the students provide analysis of

their own networking experiences.


TELE 220 Applied Telecommunications: FCAR submitted by Prof. R. Benferhat

The scores for POs a , f and g were above 2.0

Projects such as Huffman coding and the information theory activity were highly received by the

class.

Recommendation: More in class hand on projects

TELE 321 Cellular and Wireless Technologies: FCAR provided by Prof. J. Linehan

The scores for POs a , b, f and h were above 1.83

Students initially had difficulties solving exam problems correctly. This was solved by reviewing the

material and retesting on an exam, which showed improvement. Some lessons were strengthened using

real life examples and having the students provide analysis of their own uses of wireless and cellular

technologies.


19

TELE 420 Internetworking Technology I: FCAR provided by Prof. V. Leggio

The scores for POs a , b, f and h were above 1.70

The instructor taught with great details on industry trends and next generation architecture in

Networking LAN/Campus/Wan technologies and the optical transport space.


TELE 431 Internetworking Technology II: FCAR provided by Prof. V. Leggio

The scores for POs b, e, f, g, and k were above 2.0

Highlight on strong system engineer and graph theory understanding. Strong concentration on IOS

configuration of routers, switches and servers.

Recommendation: Telecommunication Laboratory equipment should be up updated with new

components.

3.3 TELECOM Program Assessment summary

Figure 5 shows assessment data result. All Program outcome scores were above 1.88. There is no

deficiency in terms of program outcome performance. However it is becoming clear that the need to

improve the telecommunications lab is a necessity if we want to attract more students to this program.

The ECET/TELE curriculum committee has therefore set top priority to developing a new

Telecommunications program and to addressing needs to update our Telecommunications lab.

Appendix B shows how the scores have been computed.

20

TELE - FCAR Assessment Data

(ABET Outcomes a-k)

2013-2014

Figure 5: TELE –FCAR Assessment Data

Summary - Aggregated per

Outcome Benchmark a 1.88

b 2.26

c 2.20

d 2.15

e 2.38

f 2.16

g 2.04

h 2.29

i 2.40

j 2.27

k 2.54

21

4-Brief Notes

4.1 ECET/TELE Curriculum Committee

The committee has met several times during the past year to discuss the Telecommunications

Network Management Program. The consensus is that the program needs to be reevaluated in

order to drop the management side of the curriculum, thereby revamping the program towards new

technologies that include the study of (1) evolving web applications (APP design and others , (2)

mobile and wireless communications,(3) web security and (4) machine to machine. All

Telecommunications courses will be reevaluated.

The major set-back in this program’s getting off the ground springs from the lack of a dedicated

laboratory with adequate equipment; the current state of the Telecommunications Laboratory

requires major improvements. We are planning to come up with a proposal for not only a new

curriculum but also for a new Telecom Lab where we are definitely considering the possibility of

outside funding. We intend to present the proposal soon after in the beginning of Fall 2014

semester. We understand that a state of the art Telecommunications laboratory can also be used

by both the IT and the ECE departments.

4.2 ECET/TELE Industrial Advisory Board Meeting

The annual meeting took place on April 30, 2014 in OW. It was attended by Lak Amara (Chair),

Richard Meyers, Hossein Kashani and Georges Salayka from the ECET Faculty and by Dr. Bob Difazio

from Inter Digital Communications Co., David Mesecher from BAE Systems, Dr. Ronald Pirich formerly

from Northrop Gruman Co. and now with L.I. Forum for Tech., Joe Miller from Parker Electronics System

Division Mark Leibowitz, Eng. Supervisor at BAE Systems, all from industry.

Despite the unexpected stormy weather that day, we managed to have our annual meeting. One of

the main topics on the agenda was the presentation of the new TELECOM curriculum; feedback from all

members was very positive.

4.3 Enrollment in both ECET and TELE Programs.

The statistics at the beginning of Spring 2014 semester were as follows:

ECET : 66 students (95% FT)

TELECOM: 22 Students

TELECOM Verizon program : 67 students

The Faculty is well aware of the trend of the population in both programs. In general, we do not

have a retention problem except for students who lost their financial aid because of academic

probation.

4.4 Professional Development and Scholarship

Both are stressed to be an integral part of the well-being of both programs. Faculty are encouraged

to be productive in either area, if not both.

22

5-Golbal Competency Assessment

For the academic year 2013-2014, the focus of the NYIT college-wide program level

assessment was Global Competency. According to the NYIT Assessment Office: students can

identify interdependencies among cultures and are able to collaborate effectively,

participating in social and business settings globally.

Upon graduation, students will be able to:

a) Recognize the impact of the global interconnectedness of issues, processes,

trends, and systems on their academic specializations and worldviews.

b) Practice well-researched oral, written, visual, and digital communication in

its diverse cross-cultural forms.

c) Describe a complex global issue from multiple cultural perspectives and

explain how those perspectives affect the treatment of the issue.

d) Employ effective and appropriate interaction and teamwork with people of

different nationalities and cultures, demonstrating respect for social, cultural,

and linguistic diversity.

For assessment purpose, we will use the two forms that the NYIT Assessment office

provided us. There are shown below with our entries. Some are common to all engineering

programs.

23

Name of the Programs Electrical and Computer Engineering Technology,

Telecommunications Network Management

1. Describe (or design) an assignment in

capstone course that can be used for

assessing global competency in

senior year

All undergraduate students are required to take

IENG 400 “Global Issues & Technology”. In this course, issues we discuss are:

1. Is the precautionary principle a sound

basis for international policy?

After discussing the question in class,

the students are asked to write an essay

on:

How may the application of the

precautionary principle set obstacles in

the paths of developing countries?

The students then debate the question in

class which exposes the students to very

different views on this topic.

Similar discussions take place with

respect to the following issues as well:

2. Should society act now to forestall global

warming?

The industrialized west and the

developing and underdeveloped

economies have very different views on

this question and the students engage in

an interesting debate!

3. Should DDT be banned world-wide?

What works in the industrialized nations

causes untold harm in Africa, and the

subtropics where DDT is the most cost

effective answer to malaria.

4. Is sustainable development compatible

with human welfare?

In other words is it an essential part of

modern business ethics or as some argue

does it result in economic stagnation that

threatens the world’s poor?

.

24

1. Describe (or design) an assignment in a

capstone course that can be used for

assessing global competency in

senior year

The capstone is:

ETEC/CTEC 495 Seminar Project

In this capstone course for ETEC/TELE

program, students work in teams on their

projects.

Example of Project: NetDuino +2 Based Home

Automated System

This project was completed by students

Troy Maxwell and El Hadji Niang.

It uses a NetDuino +2 Board which is an

open source electronics plateform that is

programmed in Visual C# under the .NET

Micro Framework. The system can control a

variety of sensors associated with home

systems such as air-conditioner and boiler;

door/windows and on/off video camera

switches and many more. Furthermore ,

when fully operational, the system can be

remotely monitored through the web with an

Android based smart phone.

By working on this project, the students

got to understand the larger-scale impact of

engineering, technology, and computer

solutions in a global context. This project can

be used anywhere in the world and can be

accessed from anywhere provided that a

connection to the web exists.

El Hadji Niang who is a originally from

Senegal, Africa sees a market potential for

such system in that country. He thinks that it

can be used in Senegal or any other

equatorial country in the agriculture

business. With adequate software, it can

monitor soil moisture and control various

valves and pumps used for irrigation.

25

2. Identify how students, in explicit and cumulative ways, are prepared for this senior

assessment in prior semesters:

Name of the Programs

ECET, TELE

1. Review list of all courses in your

major program which

focus on significant

global/international issues

and problems.

include opportunities for

intensive dialogues among

students with different

backgrounds and believes.

address issues of race,

ethnicity, gender, class,

religion, and culture.

IENG 400 , IENG 251, ETEC 495 and

most courses with lab courses such as:

ETEC 110,120, 231, 310, 410 ;

CTEC 216, 235, 335, 241;

TELE 431.

In those lab courses the students work in

teams and the team members are culturally

diverse. Students are expected and are

graded on their ability to function as a

team where the descriptions of the rubric’s

metrics are:

Collaborates effectively with team

members towards optimal progress

on the chosen project. Values alternative perspectives and

encourages participation among all team members

Remains non-judgmental when

disagreeing with others/seeks

conflict resolution

These lab courses are taken in the

freshman, sophomore, junior and senior

years

2. Indicate which aspect(s) (a-d) of

the competency (see appendix) are

addressed in each course

~Aspect “d” applies to all lab based

courses.

~IENG 251 Project Engineering: Aspect

a,b,d

~IENG 400 : Aspect c

~ETEC 495 : Aspect a, b, d

26

3. Identify what students DO

(students assignment, or activities)

in each course to develop the

competency

They complete a team evaluation

document during the semester.

See Team Work Rubric Template below

4. Provide the criteria that is used (or

going to be) used for assessing the

global competences

See item 1 above.

Team Work Rubric Template

Team Captain Evaluation

Note: each of the following components will be given a score:

E: Excellent (3)

G: Good (2)

M: Minimal (1)

U: Unsatisfactory (0)

Please provide names of the team members you are evaluating and the role they have as a

member of a multidisciplinary team.

For each team member, please describe briefly what his/her task was for the week beginning at

the date below.

Team Name:

Member 1

Member 2

Member 3

27

Date:

Team captain – please enter your EGMU score in the Table below

Main Item Sub Items Member 1

Member 2

Member 3

Contribution to

the team

project/work

Demonstrates an ability

to conduct literature

research and gather

information

Introduces new ideas to

solve problems

Shares information with

other team members

Provides help or asks for

help from other team

members when needed

Taking

responsibilities

Does his/her fair share

of the project work

Participates in all team

meetings on time

Completes individual

assignments on time

Provides project

deliverables with high

quality

28

Valuing other

team members’

contributions

Considers and adopts

suggestions from other

team members

Respects others’

opinions to the project

work

Shares credits for

success and

accountability for team

results

Total Points

Comments:

(Team Captain)

29

APPENDIX A

30

APPENDIX B

New York Institute of Technology School of Engineering and ...

Documents

Transcript of New York Institute of Technology School of Engineering and ...