EAC Self-Study Questionnaire by P9DvF6

VIEWS: 21 PAGES: 65

									                                      ABET
                                Self-Study Report

                                                for the

                Bachelor of Science in Aerospace
                          Engineering

                                              Program

                                                    at

                   Georgia Institute of Technology
                                  Atlanta, GA 30332-0150




                                            July 1, 2008

                                            CONFIDENTIAL
The information supplied in this Self-Study Report is for the confidential use of ABET and its authorized
agents, and will not be disclosed without authorization of the institution concerned, except for summary
data not identifiable to a specific institution.
                                                      Table of Contents

BACKGROUND INFORMATION .............................................................................................................. 3
CRITERION 1. STUDENTS ....................................................................................................................... 9
CRITERION 2. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES ................................................................ 17
CRITERION 3. PROGRAM OUTCOMES ............................................................................................... 22
CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ................................................................................. 33
CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM ............................................................................................................... 36
CRITERION 6. FACULTY ....................................................................................................................... 45
CRITERION 7. FACILITIES .................................................................................................................... 49
CRITERION 8. SUPPORT ........................................................................................................................ 54
CRITERION 9. PROGRAM CRITERIA................................................................................................... 56
GENERAL CRITERIA FOR ADVANCED-LEVEL PROGRAMS .......................................................... 56
APPENDIX A – COURSE SYLLABI ........................................................................................................ 58
APPENDIX B – FACULTY RESUMES .................................................................................................... 58
APPENDIX C – LABORATORY EQUIPMENT ...................................................................................... 58
APPENDIX D – INSTITUTIONAL SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 58
                             Self-Study Report
                                 Aerospace Engineering
                     Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering (BSAE)
                Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering (Cooperative Plan)
               Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering (International Plan)
             Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering (Research Option)
                             Georgia Institute of Technology

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

     Contact information
      <<List name, mailing address, telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address for
      the primary pre-visit contact person, i.e., Dean, Department Chair, Program Director>>
      Robert G. Loewy
      William R.T. Oakes Professor & Chair
      School of Aerospace Engineering
      Georgia Institute of Technology
      Atlanta, GA 30332-0150
      Office: (404) 894-3002
      Office Fax: (404) 894-2760
      robert.loewy@ae.gatech.edu

      Lakshmi N. Sankar
      Regents Professor and Associate Chair for Undergraduate Studies
      School of Aerospace Engineering
      Georgia Institute of Technology
      Atlanta, GA 30332-0150
      Office: (404) 894-3014
      Office Fax: (404) 894-2760
      lsankar@ae.gatech.edu

     Program History
      <<Include year implemented and summarize major program changes with an emphasis
      on changes occurring since the last visit>>
The School of Aerospace Engineering is one of the oldest programs in the country. It was
originally established as "The Daniel Guggenheim School of Aeronautics" on March 3, 1930
when the Georgia School of Technology (now, Georgia Institute of Technology) received a
$300,000 grant from The Daniel Guggenheim Fund for the Promotion of Aeronautics, Inc. The
other six recipients of a similar grant were California Institute of Technology, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, University of Michigan, New York University, Leland Stanford Junior
University (now simply, Stanford University), and University of Washington.
The Guggenheim Building was dedicated on June 8, 1931. The first classes were begun in
September 1931 with eighteen students, two faculty members, and a budget of $10,000. To
better reflect the School's growing and expanding interests and responsibilities beyond the field
of aeronautics, its name was officially changed to the School of Aerospace Engineering
effective July 1, 1962.
The first Bachelor's degree was awarded in 1932 to thirteen graduates. In 1967, there were 64
Bachelor's degrees awarded, and by 1986 a peak of 106 Bachelor's degrees were awarded. The
Master's degree was first awarded in 1934 to two candidates. The Ph.D. program was begun in
1961 with one student, with two Ph.D. degrees awarded in 1966.

Major Changes since the Last Visit:
The following major changes have been made to the program since 2002. Two new degree
options - BSAE (International Plan) and BSAE (Research Option) - have been added, in 2005
and 2007, respectively. Undergraduate research courses (AE 2699, 4699), research fellowship
courses (AE 2698, AE 4698), and Design Competition courses (AE 2355, 4355) were created
to recognize and document the students’ research accomplishments on their transcripts. We
have already implemented an honors program, and offer a minor in AE.

BSAE (International Plan): The evolution of technology (e.g. high-speed aircraft) is bringing
the world to our footsteps. Tomorrow’s aerospace endeavors will require collaboration among
nations, and international business partners. US citizens should be trained to meet the changing
global environment. They should be aware of international trade/business practices, corporate
laws and regulations, and environmental issues. Fluency in a foreign language is becoming a
business requirement, not a luxury. In recognition of these factors, the School of Aerospace
Engineering (along with several other programs at Georgia Tech) began in fall 2005 to offer
International Plan as a special degree option.
The BSAE (International Plan) option has the following requirements, which may be
completed over the same total number of credit hours, as the BSAE program.
      Students are required to complete two years (e.g. Spanish 1001, 1002, 2001, and 2002)
       of foreign language studies in a language of their choice.

      Students are required to take one course focused on international relations, one course
       that provides a historical and theoretical understanding of the global economy, and one
       course that provides familiarity with an area of the world or a country that allows them
       to make systematic comparisons with their own society and culture. These three
       courses (9 credit hours) may be applied towards the social science requirements of the
       program. A list of courses approved in these three areas is available on the website of
       the Registrar's Office.

      Students must complete 26 weeks (just over 6 months) of active engagement abroad.
       The terms may include any approved combination of study, work or research conducted
       abroad. Although they need not be consecutive, the immersion experience(s) should
       demonstrate cultural, linguistic and/or intellectual coherence and must be completed
       within no more than two terms.
At this writing (January 2008) there are 27 students pursuing this option.
BSAE (Research Option)

Research Option may be completed over the same number of credit hours (132) as the other
options in the program. This option offers students the opportunity for a substantial, in-depth
research experience. It offers students a taste for what long-term research can be like and
provides extensive experience not found within a typical course setting. One-on-one student
and faculty mentoring is also a highlight of the experience. Students are strongly encouraged at
the end of their experience to work with their faculty mentor to develop a journal publication or
conference presentation on the research in addition to the actual thesis.
The research option requires that the students
      Complete at least 9 units of undergraduate research
           o   Courses should span at least two, preferably three terms
           o   Research may be for either pay or credit
           o   At least 6 of the 9 required hours should be on the same topic
      Complete a research proposal outlining their research topic and project for the thesis
      Write an undergraduate thesis/report of research on their findings
      Take the class LCC 4700 “Writing an Undergraduate Thesis” (taken during the thesis-
       writing semester).
Completion of Research Option is noted on the student’s transcript.
This program just began in spring 2007. Three students have already graduated under this
option.

AE Honors Program:

Students are admitted to the AE honors program during their sophomore year, provided they
have an overall GPA of 3.5 or higher on classes taken at Georgia Tech. They are required to
maintain a GPA above 3.5 during the subsequent semesters. Students in the honors program
also conduct undergraduate research (for a minimum of three semesters) either for credit (AE
2699 and AE 4699 courses) or for pay (AE 2698 and AE 4698). Finally, honors students are
required to present their research in AIAA student conferences, brown bag seminars, or other
symposia on campus. Students graduating under the honors program are eligible to enroll in our
graduate program with minimal paper work, and may apply up to 6 hours of advanced electives
(at the 4000 or 6000 level) earned at the BSAE level towards their graduate program. At this
writing, over 70 AE students are enrolled in the honors program.

The web site http://www.ae.gatech.edu/academics/undergraduate/semester/honors/index.html
gives additional information on our honors program.

AE Minor Program:

The School of Aerospace Engineering offers a minor in AE as a service to the rest of the
campus. Students must complete 18 hours of course work from one of several tracks
(aerodynamics, structures, propulsion, etc). Additional information may be found at the web
site http://www.ae.gatech.edu/academics/undergraduate/forms/AE_Minor3.pdf .         At this
writing, there are approximately 20 students pursuing this option.

Organizational Structure
      <<Use text and/or organization charts to describe the administrative structure of the
      program from the program to the department, college, and upper administration of your
      institution, as appropriate>>

The School is chaired by Prof. Robert G. Loewy. He is assisted by Associate Chairs, Prof.
Jechiel Jagoda and Prof. Lakshmi Sankar, in the areas of graduate and undergraduate studies,
respectively. There are 37 faculty members with expertise in aerodynamics, structures and
materials, structural dynamics and aeroelasticity, propulsion and combustion, flight mechanics
and control, avionics, software engineering, cognitive engineering, and aerospace system
design. Discipline committees are responsible for curricular and research activities in each of
these fields. Because of the diversity and interdisciplinary expertise of our faculty members, it
is quite common for a faculty member to serve on two discipline committees. Operational
committees are responsible for overseeing activities such as facilities development,
faculty/student honors and awards, reappointment, promotion and tenure, etc.

The School Chair reports to the Dean of the College of Engineering. The School Chair and the
faculty members also work closely with the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs. The School is
well represented in Institute bodies such as undergraduate and graduate committees, study
abroad, and international plan administration committees.
The Chart below shows the discipline committees within the School.

                                    SCHOOL OF AEROSPACE ENGINEERING
                                     DISCIPLINE COMMITTEES (2007-2008)
             AERODYNAMICS & FLUID MECHANICS                             PROPULSION & COMBUSTION
             Chair: P. K. Yeung                                         Chair: J. Seitzman
             K. K. Ahuja(1)     S. Ruffin                               K.K. Ahuja(1)      S. Menon
             D. Giddens(2)      L. Sankar                               J. Jagoda          M. Walker
             J. Jagoda          J. Seitzman                             T. Lieuwen         B. Zinn
             N. Komerath        M. Smith
             S. Menon

             FLIGHT MECHANICS & CONTROLS                                AEROELASTICITY & STRUCTURAL
             Chair: J.V.R. Prasad                                       DYNAMICS
             A. Calise            W. Haddad                             Chair: O. Bauchau
             R. Braun             E. Johnson                            J. Craig          J.V.R. Prasad
             J.P. Clarke          A. Pritchett                          S. Hanagud        M. Ruzzene
             M. Costello          R. Russell                            D. Hodges         M. Smith
             E. Feron             D. Schrage
                                  P. Tsiotras

             STRUCTURAL MECHANICS &                                     SYSTEM DESIGN & OPTIMIZATION
             MATERIALS BEHAVIOR                                         Chair: D. Schrage
             Chair: E. Armanios                                         Aeronautics       Space
             O. Bauchau         G. Kardomateas                          J. P. Clarke      R. Braun
             S. Hanagud         A. Makeev                               M. Costello       R. Russell
             D. Hodges          M. Ruzzene                              J. Craig          P. Tsiotras
                                V. Volovoi                              E. Feron          M. Walker
                                                                        D. Mavris         A. Wilhite(4)
                                                                        W. Mikolowsky     J.Saleh
                                                                        A. Pritchett
                                                                        J.V.R. Prasad
                                                                        V. Volovoi

             (1) Joint with GTRI            (3) Visiting Professor
             (2) Joint with BME             (4) NIA Langley Professor (2/3 time off-campus)

                                        NOTE: Underlined are primary, not underlined are secondary

The chart below shows the operating committees within the School.

                                   SCHOOL OF AEROSPACE ENGINEERING
                                     OPERATING COMMITTEES (Fall ‘07)

        A.E. ADVISORY (Elected)                                         COMPUTING FACILITIES & OPERATIONS
        Chair: W. Haddad                                                Chair: J. Craig
        E. Armanios      T.Lieuwen                                      E. Feron        S. Menon
        O. Bauchau       M. Smith                                       R. Latham       J.V.R. Prasad
                                                                        W. Meyer                M. Smith
        ACADEMIC COUNCIL
        Chair: L.N. Sankar                                              FACULTY HONORS
        E. Armanios                 J. Seitzman                         Chair: N. Komerath
        R. Braun                    M. Smith                            O. Bauchau       G. Kardomateas
        J.V.R. Prasad               P.K. Yeung                          D. Hodges        S. Ruffin

        SEMINARS                                                        GRADUATE
        Chair: G. Kardomateas                                           Chair: J. Jagoda
                                                                        O. Bauchau              A. Pritchett
        STUDENT HONORS                                                  R. Braun                J. Seitzman
        J. Jagoda (ex-officio)                                          G. Kardomateas          P. Tsiotras
        L. Sankar (ex-officio)
                                                                        UG ENROLLMENT ENHANCEMENT
        FACULTY ADVISORS                                                Co-Chairs: B. Loewy & M. Smith
                  S. Ruffin                                          J.P. Clarke       J. Seitzman
        AESSAC       S. Ruffin                                          T. Lieuwen         M. Walker
        AIAA         T. Lieuwen                                         S. Ruffin
        AHS          D. Schrage
                                                                        LABORATORY FACILiTIES
        REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION                                        Chair: T. Lieuwen
        TENURE                                                          J. Craig          P. Tsiotras
        Chair: J. Craig                                                 N. Komerath       M. Walker
        E. Armanios     J.V.R. Prasad
        S. Menon        D. Schrage
   Program Delivery Modes
    The program is delivered on the Georgia Tech campus during the day, between 8 AM
    and 6 PM for most classes, except for lab classes and recitation sessions.

   Deficiencies, Weaknesses or Concerns Documented in the Final Report from the
    Previous Evaluation(s) and the Actions taken to Address them
    <<Summarize the Deficiencies, Weaknesses, or Concerns documented in the Final
    Report from the previous general evaluation and succeeding interim reviews, if any.
    Describe the actions taken to address them, including effective dates of actions, if
    applicable. If this is an initial accreditation, it should be so indicated.>>

    There were no deficiencies, weaknesses, or concerns documented in the final report
    from the visit during 2002.
CRITERION 1. STUDENTS

     Student Admissions
      <<Summarize the requirements and process for admission of students to the program.
      Complete and include the appropriate version of Table 1-1 for a baccalaureate or
      masters program>>
      Undergraduate admissions are centrally handled by the Institute (see
      www.admission.gatech.edu). Individual units (e.g. the School of Aerospace
      Engineering) do not directly receive or process applications for admission. The
      application forms are typically available on-line by the month of August (when students
      have entered their senior year in high school) for the following year. The application
      deadline is January 15 of the calendar year when the student will enter Georgia Tech.
      Scholarship programs (e.g. President’s Scholarship) have an earlier deadline (Oct 31).

      The Office of Admissions uses the following criteria in the admission decisions –
      academic record/GPA, SAT/ACT scores, leadership activities, and the application
      essay. In all instances, students choosing AE as their primary major and met these
      criteria are granted admission into our program by the Office of Admissions.

      The web site http://www.admission.gatech.edu/jump/faqq.asp contains detailed
      responses to a number of frequently asked questions that applicants may have.

     Evaluating Student Performance
      <<Summarize the process by which student performance is evaluated and student
      progress is monitored>>
      The School of Aerospace Engineering uses the following complementary procedures for
      monitoring the progress of students.

         1. We use a faculty-led academic advising process. Please see the next section for
            additional details.
         2. Students enrolled in 1000 and 2000 level courses receive a mid-term evaluation
            of their progress (“S”: Satisfactory or “U”: Unsatisfactory) by the instructors.
            This evaluation is not recorded in the transcript and does not enter into the grade
            point average calculations. This evaluation serves as an early indicator to the
            student of his/her performance in that course. If a student has two or more “U”
            grades, the student is required to meet with his/her academic advisor to discuss
            their grades and develop strategies for improving their performance. AE places
            an academic hold on the student’s records until the student and the advisor have
            had an opportunity to have this meeting.
         3. The data from the students’ academic records are processed at the end of each
            term to monitor their term grade point average and the overall GPA. Their
            academic status (Faculty Honors, Dan’s List, Good, Warning, probation, Drop)
            are also monitored. The entire faculty receives this list by e-mail from the AE
            School Academic Office, so that they may monitor their advisee’s progress. A
            paper copy of the current transcript is kept in the permanent records and used to
            by the advisors to monitor the progress.
       4. The students and the faculty have access to an on-line auditing tool developed
          by the Institute (http://www.registrar.gatech.edu/students/cappinstructions.php)
          This system allows the student to monitor his/her progress in various categories
          (humanities, social sciences, mathematics/Physics/Chemistry, engineering
          sciences, AE courses, free electives etc), and plan their future studies. Students
          may also use this tool to examine “What-If” scenarios (e.g. addition of a dual
          major, minor, or certificates) and to identify the impact of enrolling in the Co-
          Op, International Plan, or Research Option on their course load during the
          upcoming semesters.
       5. The progress of students in special categories (research option, honors program,
          thesis option, international Plan) are monitored by the Academic Office, in
          coordination with the Institute (Office of International Education,
          Undergraduate research opportunities Program), and the advisors and students
          are periodically notified.
       6. Students who have been dropped from class roll due to poor academic
          performance are required, as part of the readmission process, to prepare and sign
          a three-term academic contract spelling out their course work and required term
          the GPA. These students are advised and monitored by the School Associate
          Chair, and the academic advisor. The registrar’s office also monitors the
          student’s transcript at the end of each term (until the student’s overall GPA rises
          to 2.0 or above) to ensure that these students are making satisfactory progress
          towards “good” standing.
       7. Transfer students are strongly encouraged to meet their academic advisors at
          least once every term and develop a 2 or 3 year study plan. This is done to
          ensure that they will complete the program in time.
       8. The School of Aerospace Engineering strongly encourages all the students to
          develop a portfolio of accomplishments that complements their studies. For this
          reason, we also monitor (in addition to the transcripts) the student portfolios of
          accomplishments and offer enriching opportunities- study abroad experiences,
          International Plan, Co-Op, undergraduate research, honors program, thesis
          option.

   Advising Students
    <<Summarize the process by which students are advised regarding curricular and career
    matters>>

    The School of Aerospace Engineering has a faculty based academic advising system in
    place. All the students are assigned an Academic Advisor, who also serves as their
    mentor and career advisor during the entire time the student is in our program.

    Until Dec 2007, mandatory academic advisement was required of all students, and a
    hold was placed on all students to ensure that the students consult their academic
    advisors before registering for classes. An Institute-wide survey indicated that the
    students were unhappy with this system and preferred a voluntary system. The AE
    School Student Advisory Council examined this matter from the students’ perspective
    and cited a number of reasons. The busy teaching and research on the part of our
    faculty, and the class schedules of the students both often kept the students from
meeting their advisors in a timely fashion. This caused some of the students to register
late, by which time many of the classes were full. The system (outside of AE) also has
various restrictions that kept the students from following the schedule that was
developed during the academic advising session. These include level restrictions that
keep a senior from taking a required freshman or sophomore level class and vice versa,
major restrictions placed by other units that give priority to their own students, and
limits on class size to ensure quality instruction. Our external advisory board also
examined the difficulties and frustrations that the students faced (in spite of the number
of hours our faculty and students spent meeting) and recommended

The AE faculty, in consultation with the student advisory council, has developed the
following plan that has been implemented in spring 2008.

      All the students are assigned an advisor, and are strongly encouraged to meet
       with their advisors at least once a term.
      All the seniors (approximately 100 to 120 out of a total of ~700 students) are
       given academic advisement at the time they submit their degree petition by the
       Associate Chair or the staff Academic Advisor. This is done during the semester
       prior to the graduating term. A complete academic audit of the student’s
       transcript is done as part of this advisement, and the students are advised to take
       the remaining courses for meeting all the requirements of the program. This
       information is entered into the program of study as part of the degree petition
       certification process. This information is also entered into the student’s records
       by the registrar. Any deviation from this program of study (say, due to the
       student inadvertently failing to register for a required class) triggers a degree
       petition deficiency at the start of the graduating term. The student is able to
       correct this deficiency during the first week of classes when the registration
       schedule may be changed.
      The freshman students (typically 170 to 200 students) are advised in group
       sessions, since nearly all of them have common course requirements.
       Approximately 70 of these students are registered for the freshman seminar (two
       sections of GT 1000) taught by the Associate Chair of the Undergraduate
       Program and the staff Academic Advisor. These students receive their academic
       advising during regularly scheduled class hour. Students not enrolled in the
       program attend two or more group advising sessions. The School takes
       advantage of these group sessions, and the GT 1000 lectures to brief the
       freshman students on the program options (Co-Op, International Plan, thesis
       Option) and other enriching experiences (design-build fly competitions, honors
       program, research opportunities, internships, etc). One-on-one academic
       advising session is offered for all freshman students who wish to meet with a
       faculty advisor and for those with special requirements (e.g. students with a
       large number of AP credit hours).
      Students with a GPA above 3.5 (approximately 70 to 80 students) are offered
       academic advising by their academic/research advisor.
      Transfer students (approximately 20 to 30) are strongly encouraged to see an
       advisor.
          The remaining students (approximately 350) are grouped into two groups: those
           with a GPA above 2.5 and those with a GPA below 2.5. For students with a
           GPA below 2.5, academic advisement is mandatory because these students need
           to carefully plan their course of study to maintain good standing (GPA > 2.0) in
           the future. Students with a GPA above 2.5 are not required, but strongly
           encouraged to meet with their advisor before selecting classes.
       Regardless of the category above to which a student belongs, the student always has
       the opportunity to meet with his/her advisor at a mutually convenient time during
       their studies to plan their studies and explore enrichment options.

    Career mentoring is done in a number of complementary ways, in order to ensure that
    the students receive the guidance they need in choosing their careers and employers.
    The School works closely with the institute staff, alumni, and employers. The following
    approach is being used.
         Career Services (http://www.career.gatech.edu/) has dedicated staff members
           trained in advising students as they make their career choices. Career Services
           has a well equipped career library, and assists students with their resume
           preparation, and in posting the resume and the student portfolios on a database
           that all employers have access to. Career Services also schedules on-campus
           interviews several times a year. Finally special events (e.g. career Fair) and
           information sessions featuring industry speakers are organized several times a
           year.
         The Division of Professional Practice (http://www.profpractice.gatech.edu/)
           offers three unique programs: Co-Op, Internship, and Work Abroad. Staff
           members who are familiar with the aerospace industry are assigned to work with
           the AE students (Co-Op: Debbie Pearson, Work Abroad: Jyoti Kaneria,
           Internships: Cindi Jordin). Students may meet with a staff advisor by scheduling
           an appointment. A staff advisor from this Division is also available once a week
           (Cindi Jordin, typically on a Tuesday, from 11 AM to 12 noon, in Room 325 of
           Montgomery-Knight) to meet with students interested in these opportunities.
         Student Chapters of the professional societies (AIAA, AHS) organize regularly
           scheduled events in which the employers and recruiters give a seminar for
           interested students on their industry sector and job/internship/Co-Op
           opportunities. These seminars are usually combined with on-campus interview
           sessions hosted by the AE School, Career Services, or the Division of
           Professional Practice.
         Many AE faculty members also serve as career advisors for students. These
           members have spent several decades working in the government, industry, or
           research labs. Most of our faculty members also have extensive industry and
           government liaisons as a result of their sponsored research activities. Students
           seeking career mentoring in a specific sector (aircraft, space, rotorcraft,
           government, DoD, NASA) are referred to these specialists by the student’s
           academic advisor and the AE Academic Office.

   Transfer Students and Transfer Courses
    <<Summarize the requirements and process for accepting transfer students and transfer
    credit. Complete and include Table 1-2>>
    Applications from transfer students for all units (including AE) are centrally received
    and processed by the Georgia Tech Office of Admissions. The web site
    http://www.admiss.gatech.edu/transfer/ gives the admission criteria, deadlines, and
    other useful information. In the case of transfer students interested in pursuing a degree
    in AE, we require that they have completed at least 30 semester hours of course work
    with a GPA of 2.7 or above (GPA > 3.0 for out of state students), and that they have
    completed English I and II, Calculus I and II, Chemistry I, and Physics I. Calculus II
    should include linear algebra. If this is not the case, the incoming student is required to
    take a 2 hour course (Math 1522) on linear algebra upon entering Georgia Tech. A
    course on computer science is strongly encouraged, equivalent to CS 1371 (where Java
    and Matlab programming languages are covered in addition to principles of computing).
    If the student has taken a computer science course that does not include Matlab but
    covers the remaining topics, then the student is required to take a 1 credit hour self-
    paced course on Matlab (CS 1171).

    The Registrar’s Office at Georgia Tech has created a transfer credit equivalency
    database (see https://oscar.gatech.edu/pls/bprod/wwtraneq.P_TranEq_Ltr ) that allows
    incoming transfer students to look up the classes they have taken and the equivalent
    Georgia tech credit they will receive for this work. The courses transferred into the
    student’s program are recorded with the grade “T” in the student’s transcript. It is
    highly desirable that as much of the applicable coursework be transferred into the
    Georgia Tech prior to the student entering Georgia Tech, so that the student and the
    academic advisor can plan a program of study. Because of the differences in the
    schedules of the colleges around the world, the grades for many of the courses may not
    have been reported to the registrar on time. Georgia tech allows the student to transfer
    credit after he/she has entered our program.

    If a course that a student has taken at the prior institution is not found on the transfer
    credit equivalency database, the student is asked to meet with the academic advisors at
    the individual units (Math, Chemistry, AE, etc) with supporting material (transcript,
    course outlines, names of text books used, etc). The unit sends a ‘transfer credit
    approval form’ to the registrar if the course is found to be equivalent to a Georgia Tech
    course. Courses that are not identical to those at Georgia tech are given generic numbers
    (AE 2xxx, CS 13x1, etc). The equivalency table database is updated to include all
    transferred courses. In many cases, partial credit is given if only a few topics are
    missing (linear algebra, Matlab, etc). For instance, in the case of students transferring a
    course on dynamics, 3-D rigid body dynamics content is sometimes missing. In such an
    event, the student is asked to take a bridge course (for 1 or 2 credit hours) that covers
    the missing material.

   Graduation Requirements
<<Summarize the process for ensuring that each graduate completes all the graduation
requirements for the program>>
The students in the school of Aerospace Engineering are strongly encouraged to meet with
their academic advisors regularly to ensure that they are making satisfactory progress
towards      the      degree.     A     flow      chart     (available    on-line     at
   http://www.ae.gatech.edu/academics/undergraduate/forms/Sem-05A1.pdf ) is used to
   manually record the grades during the advisement period, to identify courses that remain to
   be completed. Students may also monitor their progress using an auditing tool available on-
   line at http://www.registrar.gatech.edu/students/cappinstructions.php.

   We conduct three audits of the student coursework during the senior year in order to ensure
   that the student is meeting all the requirements, and that he/she has not inadvertently
   neglected to take a class that is needed for graduation.

      During the term prior to the graduation, the student fills out a degree petition, listing the
       classes he/she will take during the following (graduating term). This degree petition,
       and the student’s transcript, both are manually audited by the Associate Chair of the AE
       School and/or the staff Academic Advisor, to ensure that the student will complete all
       the requirements. Any discrepancies (e.g. missing courses, transfer equivalencies, etc)
       are addressed at this point as needed. A meeting with the student is arranged as needed.
       The registrar receives a copy of this audit. The student can monitor the status of the
       degree petition on-line to ensure that there are no deficiencies.
      These students, like all other students, will pre-register for classes for the following
       term. For instance, a student graduating in spring 2008 will pre-register for the spring
       term classes in October 2007. The Registrar’s Office generates an audit of the
       graduating term courses. The AE School receives this audit, and independently checks
       the audit to ensure that the student is pre-registering the required courses to complete
       degree requirements.
      At the start of the graduating term, the graduating senior has an opportunity to add or
       delete courses. In order that the student does not inadvertently drop a required course, a
       third manual audit is done (by the AE School and the registrar) before registration
       closes. The student is given ample time, as a result, to correct any deficiencies.

      Enrollment and Graduation Trends
       <<Summarize the enrollment and graduation trends for the past five years>>
       The BSAE program has been steadily growing over the past 5 years. The table below
       gives the total enrollment and graduation data.
       Year          Total Enrollment # of BSAE Degrees awarded     Co-Op Enrollment
              2002                 638                           45                251
              2003                 733                           65                265
              2004                 743                           78                266
              2005                 735                           94                235
              2006                 732                          136                194



Table 1-1.     History of Admissions Standards for Freshmen Admissions for Past
                                    Five Years
                             {{Use this table for baccalaureate programs}}
                                                              Percentile Rank in High    Number of
Academic        Composite ACT           Composite SAT                 School            New Students
  Year          MIN.      AVG.          MIN.     AVG.            MIN.          AVG.       Enrolled
   Table 1-1.      History of Admissions Standards for Graduate Students for Past
                                       Five Years
                                   {{Use this table for masters programs}}
                                             Composite
                                            Undergraduate          Percentile Rank in             Number of
 Academic         Composite GRE                 GPA              Undergraduate Program           New Students
   Year           MIN.      AVG.           MIN.     AVG.            MIN.         AVG.              Enrolled




              Table 1-2. Transfer Students for Past Five Academic Years
                                                        Number of Transfer Students
                           Academic Year                         Enrolled




              Table 1-3. Enrollment Trends for Past Five Academic Years
                                    Year           Year           Year         Year              Year
                               (Current-4)       (Current-3)   (Current-2)   (Current-1)     (Current)
    Full-time Students
    Part-time Students
                 1
    Student FTE
    Graduates
    1
      FTE = Full-Time Equivalent


                                   Table 1-4. Program Graduates
                    (For Past Five Years or last 25 graduates, whichever is smaller)

                                                                                                       Initial or
                                                                                                       Current
                                                                                Certification/
Numerical          Year               Year                Prior Degree(s)                           Employment/
                                                                                  Licensure
Identifier      Matriculated        Graduated           if Master Student                             Job Title/
                                                                               (If Applicable)
                                                                                                        Other
                                                                                                     Placement
   1
   2
   3
   4
   N
 (NOTE: ABET recognizes that current information may not be available for all students)
CRITERION 2. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES

ABET Definition: Program educational objectives are broad statements that describe the career and
professional accomplishments that the program is preparing graduates to achieve.

ABET definition: Assessment under this criterion is one or more processes that identify, collect, and prepare
data to evaluate the achievement of program educational objectives.
ABET definition: Evaluation under this criterion is one or more processes for interpreting the data and evidence
accumulated through assessment practices. Evaluation determines the extent to which program educational
objectives are being achieved, and results in decisions and actions to improve the program.

   Mission Statement
        <<Provide a copy or summary of any applicable institutional, college, departmental, and
        program Mission Statements and document where they are published>>

The Mission and Vision statements for the School of Aerospace Engineering are given below.
Please see http://www.ae.gatech.edu/people/lsankar/APR/Strategic.Plan.htm for the Strategic
Plan.


The mission of the School of Aerospace Engineering is threefold:

       To provide capable, motivated, and well-prepared students with an aerospace
        engineering education of the highest quality, that will enable them to reach their
        maximum potential in a technological world
       To significantly advance knowledge, its applications and integration in aerospace
        related disciplines
       To serve the larger community of which we are a part, where our abilities can be
        uniquely useful.

   Our vision for the School of Aerospace Engineering at Georgia Tech is one of a compact
community of scholars, expert supporting staff and dedicated students, acting in a partnership
with the faculty members of other Georgia Tech schools, university administration, and
industry and government leaders so as to best carry out our mission.

We see ourselves as:

       Constituting a school dedicated to excellence in all we do
       Preeminent in aerospace engineering education
       Instilling in our students a sense of responsibility for ethical practice and of concern for
        the environment
       Leading the wider aerospace community with advances in the sub-disciplines in which
        we concentrate
       Adapting to changes in societal needs so that the education we provide and advances in
        knowledge we achieve are continually relevant and important to our country for the
        foreseeable future in every era.
The mission and vision statements of the school are consistent with the College of Engineering
found at http://www.coe.gatech.edu/about/vision.php and that of the Institute found at
http://www.irp.gatech.edu/apps/factbook/?page=15

   Program Educational Objectives
The educational objectives of the BSAE degree program are published in the catalog. It is also
published in the ABET Self-Study document, and at the undergraduate program web site
www.ae.gatech.edu/undergraduate .

Objective 1: Our graduates will have the necessary understanding of the essential disciplines of
aerodynamics, structures, vehicle dynamics and control, propulsion, and interdisciplinary
design to be well prepared for careers in aerospace and related engineering fields.

Objective 2: Our graduates will be well trained to function as professionals who can formulate,
analyze, and solve open-ended problems that may include economic and societal constraints.

Objective 3: Our graduates will have good communication skills and be able to function well in
teams and in a global environment.

Objective 4: Our graduates will be trained to be life-long learners who can continuously acquire
knowledge required to research, develop, and implement next-generation systems and
applications

   Consistency of the Program Educational Objectives with the Mission of the Institution
        <<Describe how the Program Educational Objectives are consistent with the Mission of
        the Institution>>
The Institute’s mission is to "to provide the state of Georgia with the scientific and
technological knowledge base, innovation, and workforce it needs to shape a prosperous and
sustainable future and quality of life for its citizens. It is achieved through educational
excellence, innovative research, and outreach in selected areas of endeavor.” The program’s
first objective addresses the technological knowledge base that is critical to be a good engineer.
The second and fourth objective addresses the skill sets that are needed for our graduates to be
to be successful innovators and researchers. The third objective addresses the skill sets that the
engineers need to have professionals in a global setting.

   Program Constituencies
      <<List and describe the Program Constituencies>>
The program constituencies are: students, faculty, Aerospace Engineering School Advisory
Council (AESAC, a body made of external advisors), industries, professional societies (AHS,
AIAA), alumni, and co-op employers.

   Process for Establishing Program Educational Objectives
       <<Describe the process that periodically documents and demonstrates that the Program
       Educational Objectives are based on the needs of the program's various constituencies >>
The School of Aerospace Engineering educational objectives were established during the 1996-
1997 academic year, and are revised once every 5 years. The objectives are evaluated annually
by our faculty with the aid of data collected from our assessment instruments. An annual
assessment report is subsequently prepared, and is documented at 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004,
2005 2006.
Minor changes to the program are periodically made to ensure that the objectives are being
achieved. A comprehensive review of the objectives is done once every five years. The most
recent comprehensive review was completed during the 2006-2007 academic year.
The process begins with a draft statement of objectives prepared by the Aerospace Engineering
Academic Council, a body made of discipline chairs and faculty leaders. During this phase, we
make extensive use of industry input. The industry input is documented at
http://www.ae.gatech.edu/~lsankar/ABET2008/Educational.Objectives.IndustryInput.doc
We next review the Institute and College of Engineering mission, the School of Aerospace
Engineering Mission Statement and the Aerospace Engineering Strategic Plan to ensure our
educational objectives are consistent with our mission. The draft statement of objectives is
distributed to the aerospace engineering faculty, and are extensively critiqued and revised over
numerous e-mail messages.
The draft statement is subsequently presented to the AIAA student branch and to Sigma
Gamma Tau, our Student Honor Society, and their feedback is collected (see Student Advisory
Council Comments ). The draft statement is also presented to the Aerospace Engineering School
Advisory Council, an advisory body made of industry leaders, faculty members from leading
educational institutions, and government labs (see External Advisory Board Comments). The
comments from the constituencies are distributed to the faculty for final revisions. The
objectives are finalized at a faculty meeting.
 We also distributed our objectives and received oral/written feedback from the program
coordinators of all the schools within the College of Engineering, from the Associate Dean of
Engineering (Dr. Jane Ammons), and the Institute Assessment Office, to ensure that these
objectives are consistent with the mission of the College and the Institute, and that these may
be clearly evaluated.
The objectives are posted on the Aerospace Engineering Web site and in the catalog. The
intention is to raise the faculty and student awareness of these objectives, and to receive
feedback.
   Achievement of Program Educational Objectives
       <<Describe the assessment and evaluation process that periodically documents and
       demonstrates the degree to which the Program Educational Objectives are attained >>
The School of Aerospace Engineering conducts an annual assessment of whether the
educational objectives are being realized by our graduates and whether the program expected
outcomes are achieved by our students. The most recent assessment reports for the past several
years are found at and is documented at 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 2006. Because the
program objectives address the attributes of our graduates during the first several years after
graduation, we extensively use alumni surveys (See data from the 2001, 2004, and 2007 surveys),
and input from the employers and recruiters. We also use external benchmarks (e.g. publication
record, honors and awards, student team success in design competitions) to determine whether
our students (and in particular our seniors) are pursuing activities that will equip them, upon
graduation, to fully achieve our educational objectives. See the following links for some of
external benchmark data that has been used in this assessment:
      Students Honors and Awards: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 2006
      AIAA National Design Competition Award History
      American Helicopter Society International Competition Results
      Sample Senior Design Projects
       http://pweb.ae.gatech.edu/people/rbraun/classes/ae4803b/Proposals/index.html

       http://pweb.ae.gatech.edu/people/rbraun/classes/spacesystems05/Proposals/index.html

       http://pweb.ae.gatech.edu/people/rbraun/classes/spacesystems06/Proposals/index.html
Assessment of Alumni Survey data
The alumni survey data is distributed to our faculty, and the AE Student Advisory Council (see
http://aesac.tk for the web site maintained by our Student Advisory Council) and to our
External Advisory Council) in a timely fashion. This data is processed and the results assessed
as follows. We first identify the areas (and skill sets) that the alumni feel are extremely
important to be successful engineers and researchers. On a scale of to 5, if the alumni give a
median score of 3 or above, that particular area (or skill set) is considered extremely important.
We compare these skill sets with those explicitly or implicitly mentioned our educational
objectives to determine if our objectives are closely matched with the training that our alumni
found to be most important in their work place.
We next identify how well the graduates believe they were trained in these areas. On a scale of
1 to 5, if the alumni rate their training as 3.5 or above in a particular area, then we conclude that
we have the educational processes and practices in place, consistent with our educational
objectives and alumni expectations. If the alumni data indicates that they are not adequately
trained in an important area, we reexamine the educational processes and practices and make
appropriate changes.
Since the last ABET visit in 2002, we have collected two sets of alumni data (2004 and 2007)
and have used the results to re-examine our objectives, improve our educational practices, and
fine tune our curriculum. As an illustration of how our assessment is done, we present the 2007
data collected from our graduates during the 2001-2004 period. We examine areas that our
alumni found to be extremely important, and their satisfaction with the training they received at
Georgia Tech in that area. The data reduction was done by the Georgia Tech office of
Assessment. The number of surveys returned was high enough (> 60) and may be expected to
yield statistically meaningful data.
We first examine the alumni data in relation to our first educational objective that we prepare our
graduates to excel in technical areas. We examine data related to AE specific technical areas to
assess the importance of these areas as perceived by the graduates and their preparation. As
stated earlier, an area is considered extremely important if it is rated 3 or above on a scale of 1 to
5. The preparation in that area is considered adequate if it is rated 3.5 or above, on a scale of 1 to
5. The table below shows a summary of the collected data.
                                             2007 Baccalaureate Alumni Survey Program Data
                                      Survey Question                                         No of Samples    Importance        Preparation
Understand and apply knowledge of Aerodynamics and fluid mechanics                                  62             3.06             4.2
Understand and apply knowledge of Aircraft and spacecraft structures                                62             2.77             3.88
Understand and apply knowledge of Flight mechanics and control                                      61             2.89             3.75
Understand and apply knowledge of Dynamics, Structural Dynamics, & Aeroelasticity                   62             2.73             3.88
Understand and apply knowledge of Propulsion                                                        59             2.78             4.02
Understand and apply knowledge of Design of aerospace systems                                       61             3.02             3.84
Understand and apply knowledge of Economics issues                                                  62             2.66             2.63
Understand and apply knowledge of Engineering graphics                                              61             2.9              3.45
Understand and apply knowledge of Integration of complex systems                                    61             3.48             3.13


The table above indicates that our graduates found nearly all of the areas covered in our
program (and addressed in our first educational objective) to be very important in their work
place. The graduates felt that they were adequately prepared in most of these areas, although
the data indicates that they desire additional preparation in economic issues related to
engineering, engineering graphics, and in integration of complex systems.
We next look at areas related to the importance and preparation of our graduates in non-
technical areas, addressed in our objectives 2 through 4. These objectives address how well our
graduates will function as professionals and innovators in their chosen fields. It is seen that in
nearly all the areas that our alumni found important (a score greater than 3 on a scale of 1 to 5),
the alumni felt that they were adequately trained (a score of 3.5 or above on a scale of 1 to 5). It
is seen that our preparation exceeds the expectations or importance in most areas. The alumni
expressed the opinion that more preparation is needed in the following areas: oral and written
communications and presentations, ability to function in multi-disciplinary teams, interpersonal
conflict resolution, design of components from a business perspective, professional and ethical
responsibilities in their profession, and societal/cultural impact of their professional practice.
                                       2007 Baccalaureate Alumni Survey (Summer 2001- Spring 2004 BSAE grads)
                                              Survey Question                                         No of samples Importance    Preparation
Understanding and apply knowledge of advanced mathematics (eg, calculus and above)                          64         3.23          4.19
Understanding and apply knowledge of computer science and technology                                        64         3.83          3.79
The ability to Communicate orally, informally, and in prepared presentations                                64         4.5            3.4
The ability to Communicate in writing (eg, business letters, technical reports)                             64         4.31          3.64
The ability to Use computing technology in discipline-specific analysis and design                          63         4.05          3.89
The ability to Conduct an information search using catalogs, indexes, bibliographies, Internet, etc         64         3.42          3.59
The ability to Exercise leadership skills                                                                   64         4.05          3.27
The ability to Function on multi-disciplinary or cross-functional teams                                     64         4.33          3.45
The ability to Effectively resolve interpersonal conflict within a group or team                            64         3.77            3
The ability to Function in culturally and ethnically diverse environments                                   63         3.52          3.67
The ability to Design and conduct experiments                                                               64         3.16          3.58
The ability to Analyze and interpret data                                                                   64         4.27          4.24
The ability to Think critically and logically                                                               64         4.67          4.45
The ability to Identify, formulate and solve problems within your discipline                                64         4.27          3.98
The ability to Design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs                                 64         3.91          3.65
The ability to Synthesize and integrate knowledge across disciplines                                        64         3.95          3.53
The ability to Use techniques, skills and tools necessary for practice in your discipline                   62         3.97          3.81
The ability to seek out new information or skills needed for the practice of your discipline                63         3.75          3.78
The ability to integrate new concepts or practices within the context of your profession                    64         4.19          3.87
An understanding of product development or design from a business perspective                               64         3.19           2.4
An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility within your discipline                          64          4             3.2
An understanding of the social and cultural impact of yoru professional practice                            64         3.03          2.27


We finally examine the data to determine the graduates’ overall satisfaction with the education
they received. As shown in the table below, the graduates are well satisfied with their training
and with their career.
                           2007 Baccalaureate Alumni Survey (Summer 2001- Spring 2004 BSAE grads)
                                                                                                       Aerospace     Aerospace
                                         Survey Question                                              Engineering   Engineering
                                                                                                        Samples        Mean
Overall preparation to: Practice professionally within your discipline?                                    63           4.08
Overall preparation to: Obtain employment after graduation                                                 63           4.19
Overall preparation to: Develop a meaningful philosophy of life                                            56           3.52
How well prepared were you for graduate/professional study by your undergraduate program at Georgia        42           4.29
Satisfaction w/ career choice since graduation                                                             61           3.97
Satisfaction w/ career progression since graduation                                                        60           3.65

Actions taken to close the loop based on Alumni Data

The 2007 and 2004 alumni data, when examined in the context of our educational objectives,
indicated that the educational objectives are being met in nearly all of the areas. It is clear that
additional improvements and changes to our educational practices and processes are desirable in
some of the areas. Over the past six years, based on the 2001, 2004, and 2007 surveys, the
following closing-the-loop actions have been taken.
     The alumni expressed the opinion that more preparation is needed in the area of oral and
        written communications and presentations. Our School has been systematically collecting
        samples of student writings. These include freshman writing and presentations from GT
        1000 and Introduction to AE (AE 1350); sophomore writing in selected courses such as
        low speed aerodynamics (AE 2020), junior level lab courses (AE 3051, AE 3145) and
        senior design projects (AE 4350, 4351, 4536, 4357, 4358, 4359). We also collect
        comments from external visitors and judges where such data is available. Two full years
        of data has been collected, and additional systematic collection of the samples is planned
        to conduct longitudinal studies of the development of writing and presentation skills. Our
        faculty feels that good writing and presentation skills require coaching on the part of
        instructors and TAs rather than teaching, i.e. requiring more technical writing classes. We
        are examining our undergraduate curriculum (and particular the lab courses) to see how
        additional training on writing and presentation may be integrated in these courses. We are
        also expanding the offering of attractive electives (design-build-fly competition courses,
        undergraduate research) that emphasize oral and written communication skills.
     The alumni survey indicates that additional preparation is needed in the following areas:
        ability to function in multi-disciplinary teams, interpersonal conflict resolution, the design
        of components from a business perspective, professional and ethical responsibilities in
        their profession, and societal/cultural impact of their professional practice. These skill sets
        are inter-related and are best learned in team design activities. Since the last ABET visit in
        2002, the AE program has greatly expanded the senior design activities from a single
        sequence of courses (AE 4350 in the fall, AE 4351 in spring) dealing with aircraft design
        to three sequences: aircraft design, spacecraft design, and rotorcraft design. These
        expanded choices and the smaller class sizes should improve the ability of the instructors
        and external judges (and examiners) to more closely interact with the students and develop
        their skill sets in these critical areas.

Assessment of Employer and Recruiter Input: Because Aerospace employers are diversified from
very large size organizations (e.g. Boeing) to small firms and entrepreneurs, it was difficult to
design a single survey that will periodically collect relevant data. The AE School therefore
directly interacts with the industry recruiters (many of whom are mid-level career managers) and
upper level administrators both to establish our educational objectives and to assess if these
objectives are being met. The AE staff academic advisor and faculty usually attend the
information sessions where the recruiters meet the potential recruits to discuss the skill sets
expected of the engineers in the workplace. The Career Service Office also arranges luncheon
sessions for the academic advisor and faculty (e.g. the Associate Chair and the staff academic
advisor) with the recruiters on campus to discuss the skill sets the recruiters are looking for in our
candidates and their personal assessment of how well the graduates are doing in the work place.
The AE faculty and staff also have extensive interactions with industry and government
employers and directly refer our graduates for internships, co-op positions, and jobs upon
graduation. The faculty members also work jointly with industries and government laboratories
on sponsored research activities. This interaction provides another avenue for discussing our
educational objectives with the employers, and get feedback on the preparation of our graduates
for succeeding in industry and government labs.
The data collected from the recruiter input in the form of free form conversations (which are
documented, and communicated to the faculty as needed) and written e-mail responses. The web
site www.ae.gatech.edu/~lsankar/ABET2008 contains samples of written input from the
employers on our educational objectives.

Closing the Loop based on Employer Input The employers that the AE School and faculty
interact with are complimentary of our educational processes and appear to be very satisfied with
the training that our graduates receive at Georgia Tech. All of them feel that a broad training
focusing on the fundamentals is very important. Depending on the employer’s perspective and
background, they desire additional training and emphasis in areas such as orbital mechanics,
design of systems with schedule as a constraint, and systems engineering skills. The AE program,
over the past few years, has increased our elective offerings in these areas. For example, a course
on orbital mechanics is offered (AE 4310) and may be used as a technical elective. Courses on
life cycle cost and courses emphasizing the “system of systems” are periodically offered.

Assessment of External Advisory Council Input: The AE School External Advisory Council
(AESAC) was closely involved in the establishment of our program objectives. Their input to the
establishment of the objectives is documented at www.ae.gatech.edu/~lsankar/ABET2008 . The
external advisors also receive annual briefings on all the aspects of our undergraduate program –
processes and survey results related to our program objectives and outcomes, our new educational
initiatives designed to achieve these objectives (e.g. International Plan, Research Option, Honors
Program, undergraduate Research, and Design-Build-Fly Competitions) and new course
offerings. The external advisory board also meets with the student representatives to hear about
the students’ thoughts and suggestions related to the education.
The external advisory council summarizes their findings in the form of an oral and written
debriefing to the School Chair and the Dean of the College of Engineering. Electronic copies of
these findings are on file in the AE School Chair’s Office and will be made available to the
ABET visitor. The School Chair, in consultation with the faculty, takes immediate actions on the
Council’s suggestions as resources allow. The Council is briefed on the actions taken, at the next
AESAC meeting.

Closing the Loop based on External Advisory Council Input: The input from the External
Advisory Council (made of leaders form industry and academia) was taken into account in
establishing the educational objectives. The Council members have been complimentary of the
educational initiatives being taken to achieve these objectives. They have pointed out areas that
need improvement. For example, in the most recent meeting in Fall 2007, the external advisory
council commented on the growing pains associated with the rapid increase in our undergraduate
and graduate student enrollment and the rapid growth in our sponsored research programs. They
also cited the difficulties experienced by students in receiving academic advisement, and the
limited access our undergraduate students to the AE computer lab to the undergraduates between
11 PM and 7 AM. The following actions have been taken to close the loop, based on the external
advisory council input.
     In co-ordination with the College of Engineering, faculty members are being added in
        strategic areas. The total number of instructional faculty has grown from 33 to 39 over the
        past several years.
     The mandatory academic advisement of students by faculty is being replaced by the multi-
        tiered advisement of our freshman, graduating seniors, and other students, as discussed in
        the section on students (Criterion 2, above).
     The limited access to the AE undergraduate computing lab was based on personal safety
        and security concerns for our students. The School is exploring placing the software
        needed by our students (e.g. for senior design) on public servers. Many of the other
        software (e.g. CATIA, ABAQUS, etc) are already available to the students under a
        floating license. Finally, during peak periods of an academic term (e.g. the weeks before a
        major senior design project is due) the School is offering 24/7 access to the lab, subject to
        the availability of resources.

Assessment of AE Student Advisory Council Input: AE Student Advisory Council is consulted
whenever the educational objectives are revised, and their input is used to fine tune the objectives.
An extensive summary of the Council’s activities and minutes of the meetings may be found at
the web site http://aesac.tk documenting this interaction. The student advisory council gives the
AE School input on a number of matters ranging from study abroad course offerings to co-op
student preparation.

Closing the loop based on AE Student Advisory Council Input: The Student Advisory Council,
over the past several years, has periodically met with the AE faculty leaders to discuss how our
educational processes and practices may be enhanced. These suggestions have been taken into
account and implemented wherever resources permit. Here are some examples.
    The undergraduate student advising process was recently revised based on the student
       input communicated through AESAC.
    The co-op surveys conducted by AESAC indicated that the co-op students desire
       additional training in oral and written communication skills and on the use of advanced
       software (e.g., CAD) and programming skills (e.g. java, C++). A lunch and learn seminar
       series has been organized by the AE faculty in collaboration with the students to provide
       informal training on these topics, to be followed by users’ group meetings organized by
       the students.
    AE Expos have been organized that bring faculty and students together in an informal
       setting, allowing students to meet with the faculty and browse/explore the research
       offerings of our faculty.

In summary, our program educational objectives were established in consultation with our
constituents. We use a number of assessment instruments (alumni survey, employer input,
external advisory council input, and Student Advisory Council input) to monitor if these
objectives are being realized and to periodically take corrective actions. This input and corrective
actions        are         systematically        documented,           as        discussed         at
www.ae.gatech.edu/~lsankar/ABET2008.
Assessment of External Benchmark Data: External benchmark data, in particular national
competitions and awards serve as early indicators of our graduates’ success in the work place.
These competitions are designed by the AIAA and AHS members working actively in the
industries and government labs and reflect the training and expertise expected of our graduates.
The School monitors the performance of our student teams in these competitions (see AIAA
Award History, http://vtol.org/temp/webrelease15.html ), and the honors and awards received
by our students. Where available, comments from the external reviewers of the student entries are
also collected.

Closing the Loop Based on External Benchmark Data: The AE student teams have done
extremely well in these competitions, and have won at least one national design competition each
year since 1999. The processes used to design complex aerospace systems are changing, and it is
becoming necessary to incorporate these changes in our education processes. For example,
manufacturability of components and the life cycle cost of the system must now be taken into
account at the time of design. This information is communicated to the faculty for incorporation
in the coursework . For example, in some of our senior design courses, the students use DELMIA
in conjunction with CATIA to address manufacturability issues. Single point designs are
gradually giving to multidisciplinary optimization of systems with multiple attributes and
constraints.
While the assessment data indicates that our undergraduate students win a number of individual
awards, the data indicates that their participation and success in national student conferences is
not commensurate with the size of our program. This observation has been communicated to our
faculty, and has led to an increased effort by our faculty to offer undergraduate research
experiences (AE 2698, 2699, 4698, 4699) and an undergraduate thesis option.

CRITERION 3. PROGRAM OUTCOMES

ABET definition: Program outcomes are narrower statements that describe what students are expected to know
and be able to do by the time of graduation. These relate to the skills, knowledge, and behaviors that students
acquire in their matriculation through the program.
 ABET definition: Assessment under this criterion is one or more processes that identify, collect, and prepare
data to evaluate the achievement of program outcomes.
ABET definition: Evaluation under this criterion is one or more processes for interpreting the data and evidence accumulated
through assessment practices. Evaluation determines the extent to which program outcomes are being achieved, and results in
decisions and actions to improve the program.


   Process for Establishing and Revising Program Outcomes
        <<Describe the process used for establishing and revising Program Outcomes>>
The program outcomes are defined by our faculty, in a manner that is consistent with the
educational objectives. These are reviewed annually as part of our annual assessment report
preparation, and are revised, as needed, once every 5 years. The most recent revisions to the
program outcomes were done during the 2006-2007 academic year. These outcomes are shared
with our constituencies (students, external advisory board, alumni, and employers) to ensure
that the outcomes include the critical skills deemed essential by these constituents.

We use the following approach, patterned after the ABET two-loop cycle, to establish, assess,
and revise our educational objectives and outcomes:
                                                                                    Outcomes consistent with
                                                                                    Objectives established.
             Objectives established                                                 Quantitative indicators established.
             In consultation with
             Constituents.


                                                                                              Develop a curriculum
                                                                                              that includes general education;
                                          Annually evaluate objectives and assess             engineering topics; major design
                                          the outcomes based on results from                  experience; and electives that
                                          assessment instruments                              include independent
                                                                                              research and design.




      Disseminate assessment                                                           Annually collect input from:
      Results to faculty, students,                                                    Instructors, design faculty, Exit surveys,
      AESAC.                                                                           student portfolios, AESAC.
      Perform comprehensive review                                                     Periodically collect input from alumni,
      of objectives every five years                                                   employers, Co-Op employers.



                          Examine Indicators:
                          1. Alumni and employer satisfaction that the graduates are achieving the program
                          objectives. See section 3.
                          2. Student satisfaction that they are realizing program outcomes
                          2. External benchmark data documenting student participation in design, internship, or
                          research beyond required coursework
                          3. Alumni/senior plans for post-graduate education


    Program Outcomes
         <<List the Program Outcomes and describe how they encompass Criterion 3 and any
         applicable Program Criteria. Indicate where the Program Outcomes are documented>>
     The program outcomes are documented at the AE School Web site
     http://www.ae.gatech.edu/academics/undergraduate/ugbook/AE_UG_Handbook.htm . The
     course outlines have individually tailored versions of these outcomes.
a)   The graduates of the undergraduate program in aerospace engineering will have an
     understanding of physics, chemistry and mathematics, and how they pertain to solving real
     world problems.
b)   The graduates will have a firm understanding of engineering science fundamentals that
     enables the graduates to examine real world problems for the underlying physical
     principles, and decide on appropriate methods of solution.
c)   The graduates will have the ability to design, conduct and analyze the results of
     experiments in order to measure and study physical phenomena.
d)   The graduates will have the ability to analyze and design aerospace structural elements,
     such as trusses, beams and thin walled structures, taking into account structural dynamics
     and aeroelastic effects.
e) The graduates will have the ability to analyze and design airfoils and wings, accounting for
   viscous and compressibility effects.
f) The graduates will have the ability to analyze and design air-breathing and rocket
   propulsion systems.
g) The graduates will have the ability to analyze the flight dynamics of aircraft and spacecraft,
   and design flight control systems.
h) The graduates will have the ability to work in teams and design complex systems such as
   aircraft and spacecraft, from conceptual and preliminary design perspectives.
i) The graduates will have good oral, written and graphical communication skills.
j) The graduates will be well trained in the role of the engineer in society, and have an
   awareness of ethical, environmental and quality concerns in the engineering profession.
k) The graduates will be trained to be life-long learners, pursuing and interested in
   independent study, research and development.

   Relationship of Program Outcomes to Program Educational Objectives
       <<Describe how the Program Outcomes lead to the achievement of the Program
       Educational Objectives>>
Our constituents view the expected outcomes listed above as the skill sets our students will
have at the time of graduation. The educational objectives describe the expected
accomplishments of graduates during their first few years of work in the industry, academia, or
a government laboratory. The expected outcomes are thus crucial to, and closely tied to,
achieving our educational objectives. These are linked to each other as follows.

          Items (a)-(f) in the above list are aimed at our first educational objective -
           development of successful engineers.
          Items (g)-(j) is related to our second and third educational objectives - development
           of successful professionals.
          All the items above and item (k) in particular, directly relate to our fourth objective
           of instilling a desire for life-long learning in our graduates.

   Relationship of Courses in the Curriculum to the Program Outcomes
         <<Describe the relationship of courses in the curriculum to the Program Outcomes>>
Each of the outcomes listed above have been linked to specific courses, where the skills needed
to realize these outcomes are taught. They have also been mapped against the ABET (a)-(k)
criteria. The table below shows this link.
                                                                                    ABET
                              Program Outcomes                                      (a)-(k)      Courses
                                                                                                 Math 1501,1502,
                                                                                                 2401, 2403; Physics
a) The graduates of the undergraduate program in aerospace engineering will
                                                                                                 2121, 2122;
have an understanding of physics, chemistry and mathematics, and how they          a)
                                                                                                 Chemistry 1310;
pertain to solving real world problems.
                                                                                                 Science elective; all
                                                                                                 AE courses


b) They will have a firm understanding of engineering science fundamentals                       MSE 2001; EE 3710;
that enables the graduates to examine real world problems for the underlying       a), e)        EE 3741; all AE
physical principles, and decide on appropriate methods of solution.                              courses

                                                                                                 AE3051, AE 3145,
c) They will have the ability to design, conduct and analyze the results of                      AE 4525; AE
                                                                                   b), k)
experiments in order to measure and study physical phenomena.                                    electives
                                                                                                 290x/390x/490x
d) They will have the ability to analyze and design aerospace structural                         COE 2001, COE
                                                                                   a), c), e),
elements such as trusses, beams and thin walled structures, taking into account                  3001, AE 3125,
                                                                                   k)
structural dynamics and aeroelastic effects.                                                     3145, 2220, 4220

e) They will have the ability to analyze and design airfoils and wings,            a), c), e),
                                                                                                 AE2020, 3021, 3051
accounting for viscous and compressibility effects.                                k)

f) They will have the ability to analyze and design air-breathing and rocket       a), c), e),
                                                                                                 AE 3051, 3450, 4451
propulsion systems.                                                                k)

g) They will have the ability to analyze the flight dynamics of aircraft and       a), c), e),
                                                                                                 AE 3515, 3521, 4525
spacecraft, and design flight control systems.                                     k)
                                                                                                 AE 1350, 3310,
                                                                                                 4350, 4351, 4356,
h) They will have the ability to work in teams and design complex systems          a), c), d),
                                                                                                 4357, 4358, 4359;
such as aircraft and spacecraft, from a preliminary design perspective.            h)
                                                                                                 Electives 1355,
                                                                                                 2355, 3355, 4355
                                                                                                 ENGL 1101, 1102;
                                                                                                 ME 1770; LCC
i) They will have good oral, written and graphical communication skills.           g)            3401; AE 3051,
                                                                                                 3145, 4350,
                                                                                                 4351,4525
                                                                                                 Humanities, Social
j) They will be well trained in the role of the engineer in society, and have an                 Sciences, AE 1350,
awareness of ethical, environmental and quality concerns in the engineering        f), j), h)    4350, 4351;
profession.                                                                                      Electives 1355,
                                                                                                 2355, 3355, 4355
                                                                                                 All AE courses;
k) They will be trained to be life-long learners, pursuing and interested in                     Electives 1355,2355,
                                                                                   i)
independent study, research and development.                                                     3355, 4355, AE
                                                                                                 290x, 390x, 490x
   Documentation
        <<Describe by example how the evaluation team will be able to relate the display
        materials, i.e., course syllabi, sample student work, etc., to each Program Outcome>>
Please see http://www.ae.gatech.edu/~lsankar/ABET2002/ABET.Courses for course syllabi.
See www.ae.gatech.edu/~lsankar/ABET2008/Direct.Assessment.Data for the direct assessment
data to be discussed, already available on line. Much of the student work (senior design
reports, design competition reports, undergraduate research reports) are electronically archived,
and will be made available to the visitor prior to the visit.

    At the time of the visit, sample student work in the class (exams, homework) lecture notes,
    and text books in use will all be available for examination.

       Achievement of Program Outcomes
    << Explain the assessment and evaluation processes that periodically document and
    demonstrate the degree to which the Program Outcomes are attained. Describe the level of
    achievement of each Program Outcome. Discuss what evidence will be provided to the
    evaluation team that supports the levels of achievement of each Program Outcome>>

    The School of Aerospace Engineering uses a variety of direct and indirect assessment
    instruments to determine if our graduates are achieving the program outcomes. All of this
    data    is     electronically   captured      and      documented       at    a  web site
    www.ae.gatech.edu/~lsankar/ABET2008/Direct.Assessment.Data and is being made
    available to the evaluation team at the time the self-study report is submitted.

    Specifically, the following assessment and evaluation processes are in place:

           The faculty of the School of Aerospace Engineering conducts an assessment of the
            students’ preparation, from a pre-requisites perspective. This is done in selected
            upper level courses once per calendar year, during the first two weeks of a semester.
            The assessment information is communicated to the faculty in that discipline by the
            instructor. Remedial actions such as tutorials and recitation sessions are arranged as
            needed. The instructors in the pre-requisite classes revise the course content and
            coverage, as required, based on the information received from this assessment. See
            the web site for faculty input on assessment of student preparation in several
            specific courses: www.ae.gatech.edu/~lsankar/ABET2008/Direct.Assessment.Data

           Senior exist surveys are conducted once per calendar year. The survey is filled out
            by the students during the term prior to graduation, as part of the degree application
            process. The surveys are electronically processed by the office of Assessment at the
            end of the spring term and made available at a web site. Comparative data from exit
            surveys conducted at other units within Georgia Tech are also available at this web
            site. This data is disseminated to the AE faculty as soon as the survey results have
            been processed, usually during the beginning of the following fall term. See 2001,
            2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 2006 2007 for this data.
           As discussed under criterion 2, senior design projects, external design competition
            entries, undergraduate research reports, and other portfolio items (e.g. honors and
            awards) are collected once a year, typically at the end of the spring semester.
            Comments from external judges, were available, are also collected. These comments
            (where available) and results from the national competitions are disseminated to the
            students, the instructors and the AE faculty as soon as they are available.

           Samples of students’ writing are collected throughout the year, from the freshman
            class through the senior design. Undergraduate research project reports and student
            publications resulting from this work are collected at the end of each term. A CD
            containing a sample collection for one full year from various courses (senior design,
            undergraduate research, AE 2020 and 1350 writing samples, lab course writing
            samples) will be made available to the reviewer prior to the visit.

           As discussed in under criterion 2 above, alumni surveys are conducted once every
            three years in collaboration with the College of Engineering and the office of
            Assessment (see 2001 Survey Results, 2004 Survey Results, 2007 Survey Results).
            While the alumni surveys are primarily used to assess the program educational
            objectives, these are also useful in assessing the program outcomes. Te findings of
            the alumni survey are documented at an institute web site, and disseminated to the
            faculty as soon as these are available. Employer surveys are conducted by the Co-
            Op division. The faculty of the School of AE periodically meet with employers to
            find out their expectations for the employee (i.e. skill sets required to succeed in the
            job), and an assessment of how well our graduates are functioning in their chosen
            fields.

           An annual assessment report is submitted to the Institute once a year (during the fall
            term) summarizing the findings of these assessment studies, and whether the
            outcomes are being met. See 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 2006 for the annual
            assessment reports for the past several years.

Assessment of Faculty Data: The faculty members have assessed the student preparation at the
start of many of our important courses (e.g. statics, deformable bodies, dynamics, system
dynamics and control, low speed aerodynamics, aerospace vehicle performance, senior design)
and extensively documented areas where the students lack the pre-requisite material that would
prevent the student from fully realizing the outcomes of the upper level course. The faculty
members have proposed several remedial actions.

Examples of closing the loop based on faculty assessment of student preparation:

    •   It was observed by the senior design faculty that the student preparation for capstone
        courses varied widely. This was traced to the primary pre-requisite course, AE 3310
        (Aerospace Vehicle Performance). To address this, AE 3310 (Vehicle Performance)
        was reorganized to meet the cap-stone design needs. CD of course materials prepared
        and distributed to all the faculty members responsible for teaching this course.
    •   It was observed that AE 3515 ((System Dynamics and Control) poses difficulty due to
        its heavy math content, and abstract concepts. Under an instructional grant from the
           College of Engineering, Prof. Amy Pritchett has explored a redesign of AE 3515 (3
           hour lecture, 1 hour of problem solving). Students critique each other’s work, video-
           tape their own critique.
      •    The instructors (COE 2001, statics) found inadequate prepared students. To correct
           this, instructors increasingly use problem solving sessions. TAs assigned for courses
           where extra help is needed. This approach has been found to be quite successful.
      •    Instructors in all the gateway courses in AE (statics, dynamics, and low speed
           aerodynamics) observed inadequate preparation in math and physics. To correct this,
           the math and physics pre-requisites (C or better) are more strictly enforced. Refresher
           material is placed at the Aerospace Digital Library.

Assessment of Exit Survey Data: The exit survey is administered by the Georgia Tech office of
Assessment. The survey data is disseminated the AE faculty and student body as soon as it is
available. This survey contains useful information that is related to expected outcomes, as well
as other data. The data is closely examined to determine if the seniors, in their opinion, are
realizing the expected outcomes (a)-(k) above. As an example, the results from the 2006 exit
survey, related to the (a)-(k) outcomes above, is presented below. Given the large number of
responses, this data is statistically meaningful. A median score below 3 (on a scale of 1 to 4), or
a median score below 7 (on a scale of 1 to 10) indicates a perceived weakness (on the part of
students) in a specific area.

                                                                                         No                    Mini   Max
                                                                                                   Level of
                                                                                         of                    mu     imu
                                                                                                 preparation
                                                                                     responses                  m      m
 your ability to apply knowledge of mathematics
                                                                                           111             4     2      4
 your ability to apply knowledge of physical sciences and chemistry
                                                                                           111             4     1      4
 your ability to identify and formulate engineering problems
                                                                                           111             4     3      4
 your ability to formulate alternative solutions to engineering problems
                                                                                           109             3     1      4
 your ability to formulate alternative solutions to engineering testing
                                                                                           108             3     1      4
 your ability to design a system, component, or process to meet user needs
                                                                                           111             3     1      4
 your ability to apply modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice
                                                                                           111             3     2      4
 your ability to understand the societal impact of engineering solutions
                                                                                           109             3     1      4
 your ability to understand the environmental impact of engineering solutions
                                                                                           108             3     1      4
 your ability to produce written reports regarding technical topics
                                                                                           110             3     1      4
 your ability to deliver oral reports regarding technical topics
                                                                                           109             3     1      4
 Aerodynamics-Analytical Skills
                                                                                           108             7     1      9
 Aerodynamics-Lab, Data Acquisition and Analysis Skills
                                                                                           100             7     1      9
 Aerodynamics-Independent Research
                                                                                            88             5     1      9
 Structures-Analytical Skills
                                                                                           108             7     2      9
 Structures-Lab, Data Acquisition and Analysis Skills
                                                                                           106             7     2      9
 Structures-Independent Research
                                                                                            86             5     1      9
 Flight Mechanics and Control-Analytical Skills
                                                                                           108             7     2      9
 Flight Mechanics and Control-Lab, Data Acquisition and Analysis Skills
                                                                                      101   7   1   9
 Flight Mechanics and Control-Independent Research
                                                                                      85    5   1   9
 Propulsion and Combustion-Analytical Skills
                                                                                      108   8   2   9
 Propulsion and Combustion-Lab, Data Acquisition and Analysis Skills
                                                                                      101   6   1   9
 Propulsion and Combustion-Independent Research
                                                                                      84    5   1   9
 Aeroelasticity and Structural Dynamics-Analytical Skills
                                                                                      96    7   1   9
 Aeroelasticity and Structural Dynamics-Lab, Data Acquisition and Analysis Skills
                                                                                      89    5   1   9
 Aeroelasticity and Structural Dynamics-Independent Research
                                                                                      79    4   1   8
 Astronautics-Analytical Skills
                                                                                      99    5   1   9
 Astronautics-Lab, Data Acquisition and Analysis Skills
                                                                                      90    4   1   9
 Astronautics-Independent Research
                                                                                      79    4   1   9
 Aerospace Systems and Design-Analytical Skills
                                                                                      107   7   1   9
 Aerospace Systems and Design-Lab, Data Acquisition and Analysis Skills
                                                                                      97    7   1   9
 Aerospace Systems and Design-Independent Research
                                                                                      84    5   1   9
 To what extent do you think that the BS in AE had prepared you for a career in
 AE                                                                                   109   3   2   4
 To what extent do you think that the BS in AE had prepared you for knowledge
 and appreciation for professional standards                                          109   3   1   4
 To what extent do you think that the BS in AE had prepared you for delivering
 technical oral reports                                                               109   3   1   4
 To what extent do you think that BS in AE has stimulated your desire for life-long
 learning
                                                                                      108   3   2   4


During this particular year, the survey indicated the independent research opportunities in all
areas as a particular weakness. The students rated themselves as adequately trained in analytical
skills and lab skills in discipline specific areas. This particular class of students also felt that
they were adequately trained to be life-long learners. The student perception of their oral and
written communication skills has steadily improved in exit surveys from year to year.
The above data is just an example of the exit survey data that has been collected and analyzed
using methodologies above. Results for other years have similarly been examined and
processed.

Closing the Loop Based on Exit Surveys: There are small variations in the median scores and
averages from year to year. However, students consistently have rated themselves as well-
trained in the mathematics, sciences, and aerospace discipline topics. The students desire more
undergraduate research opportunities and hands on skills. To accommodate it, the School offers
several sections of undergraduate research courses (AE 2699, 2698, 4699, 4698) for credit and
pay and allows up to 10 hours of free elective credit.

Assessment of Portfolio Items: The honors and awards list (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 2006
) and the benchmark data (e.g. student performance in national design competitions found at
http://aiaa.org/documents/student/designcomphistory2006-2007.xls),         and     undergraduate
research documents indicate that the students get adequate opportunities, outside of required
course work, to develop their team design skills, oral and written communication skills, and
research skills. Participation in these activities is voluntary both on the part of instructors as
mentors, and on the part of students who pursue these activities as free electives. Nevertheless,
a large number of our students participate in design competitions and/or undergraduate
research.

Closing the Loop Based on Portfolio Items: An examination of our portfolio items indicates
that much of the design competition activities were in the area of aircraft and spacecraft design,
and in traditional disciplines (aerodynamics, structures, propulsion, etc). The program has
added faculty in rotorcraft design and work with specialists at the Georgia Tech Research
Institute in the turbomachinery area to broaden the education and design experiences for our
students. We have also added faculty in emerging disciplines (software engineering, avionics,
cognitive engineering, Human Factors, air transportation). A number of electives are taught in
these areas to train our students. It is anticipated that the addition of new faculty, new electives,
and new research areas will diversify and enrich the research experiences our students will
receive during the coming years.

CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

   Information Used for Program Improvement
        <<Describe the available information, such as results from the Criteria 2 and 3
        processes, commonly used in making decisions regarding program improvements>>
     The results of the alumni surveys and employer surveys, along with input from our faculty,
our Student Advisory Council and the external Advisory Council, are used to make decisions
about improvements at the program level. We also take into consideration the input from the
Board of Regents, the Provost’s Office, and the College of Engineering, in particular the
strategic plan and the mission and vision of these organizations.
     Results from the other assessment instruments (instructors, exit survey, samples of student
work, other portfolio items) discussed under criterion 3 above are used to make improvements
at the course level.
 Actions to Improve the Program
        <<Describe actions taken to improve the program since the last general review.
        Indicate why (the basis for taking action) and when each action was implemented and
        the results of the implementation. >>
In this section, we summarize the input from our constituents and the assessment data from
each of these instruments, and actions taken to close the loop and continuously improve the
program.

International Plan and Research Options: Georgia Tech, as part of the Southeastern Colleges
and Schools (SACS), periodically conducts a self-assessment study and develops plans for
improving the quality of its educational and research programs. The most recent self-study was
conducted in 2005. As part of this review, Tech proposed a quality enhancement plan:
(http://www.assessment.gatech.edu/SACS/QEP/QEP_Mar21_Georgia_Tech_final_print.pdf ). At the undergraduate
level, an International Plan option intended to prepare our students for the global community,
and a Research Plan option intended to enhance their skills in scholarship and innovation, were
proposed.

The faculty of the School of Aerospace Engineering, in consultation with our constituents,
acted on this recommendation and began offering two new degree options: BSAE (IP) and
BSAE (RO). The International Plan option first became available in the fall of 2006, and 27
students are enrolled in the IP Plan at this writing. The Research Option first became available
in spring 2007.

Enhanced Study Abroad Offerings: In 2002, with input from our faculty, our industry and
government partners, the external advisory council, and the student advisory council, the
School           developed          a        strategic        plan        documented          at
http://www.ae.gatech.edu/people/lsankar/APR/Strategic.Plan.htm. One of the goals of this plan
was to internationalize the undergraduate program, base don the fact that the aerospace industry
is a global enterprise that brings engineers and investors from across the globe. Beginning in
2005, the School began offering its own study abroad offerings taught by AE faculty at the
Oxford University in England, and Georgia Tech Lorraine in France. These offerings allow
student to take AE courses towards their degree, along with humanities and social sciences
related to the region. The participation of AE students in study abroad program has steadily
grown as a result.
Honors Programs and Undergraduate Research Programs: The 2002 Strategic Plan also calls
for the establishment of an honors program that was intended to promote scholarly research and
innovation activities among our undergraduate students. This program was developed in
consultation with our constituents and incorporates academic excellence (3.5 GPA or above),
excellence in research (3 terms of research for pay or credit), and development of oral and
written technical communication skills. Students may apply the research credit earned towards
the BSAE (Research Option) and document their work as an undergraduate thesis. We also
began offering research opportunities for credit or pay for those students who do not meet the
3.5 GPA threshold, and yet have a aptitude for and a desire to conduct undergraduate research.
Four new courses (AE 2699 and AE 4699 for credit; AE 2698 or AE 4698 for pay) were
created to document the research accomplishments in the students’ transcripts. Since its
inception, this initiative has led to a steady growth in the number of students participating in
undergraduate research as shown in the chart below. The number of students participating in
the honors program has also steadily grown.




Minor Program in AE: The 2002 Strategic Plan also called for the establishment of a minor
program in AE as a service to the campus community, and as a way of enhancing
interdisciplinary education and research at the undergraduate level. This program combines
required courses (Introduction to AE, low speed aerodynamics, and Vehicle Performance) with
electives in a track for a total of 18 credit hours.

Increased Opportunities for Undergraduate Design Experiences: Until 1999, the participation of
AE students in design was largely limited to the senior capstone design experience. Students
participating in design competitions largely conducted such activities on their own time, under
the mentorship of our faculty members. Beginning in 1999, several new design-build-fly and
design competition courses (AE 1355, 2355, 3355, and 4355) were offered that bring together a
vertically integrated team of freshman, sophomore, junior, and senior students. These activities
were recorded in the transcript, and the students were allowed to count these activities towards
their free elective credit, for a maximum of 10 credit hours. These activities allow students at
the 1000 and 2000 levels to work with advanced CAD and CAE tools, enhancing their skill
sets. The table below shows participation among our students in these courses over the past 6
years.

                             Year         AE 1355         AE 2355        AE 3355           Total
                             2002           32              17             11                      60
                             2003           29              25             17                      71
                             2004           27              12             16                      55
                             2005           41              27             28                      96
                             2006           23              26             23                      72
                             2007           26              28             26                      80

These design activities have allowed the AE School to benchmark our students and our
educational program against peer institutions. As shown in the table below, since 1999, the AE
students have won at least one award every year in the prestigious AIAA design competitions
(http://aiaa.org/documents/student/designcomphistory2006-2007.xls ). In 2007, the AE
undergraduate students won the second place in an AHS Helicopter Design Competition.

1999-2000    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Individual Aircraft Design Competition
                                                                                Georgia Institute of Technology   Second
1999-2000    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Space Design Competition        Georgia Institute of Technology   Second
1999-2000    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Space Design Competition        Georgia Institute of Technology   Third
1999-2000    AIAA Foundation/Cessna/ONR Design/BuildFly Competition             Georgia Institute of Technology   Third
2000-2001    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Engine Design Competition       Georgia Institute of Technology   Third
2001-2002    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Space Design Competition        Georgia Institute of Technology   Second
2002-2003    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Engine Design Competition       Georgia Institute of Technology   First
2002-2003    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Engine Design Competition       Georgia Institute of Technology   Second
2003-2004    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Space Design Competition        Georgia Institute of Technology   Second
2003-2004    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Engine Design Competition       Georgia Institute of Technology   First
2004-2005                                                                    Georgia Institute of Technology
             AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Space Transportation Design Competition                           Second
2004-2005    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Engine Design Competition       Georgia Institute of Technology   Second
2004-2005    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Engine Design Competition       Georgia Institute of Technology   Third
2004-2005    AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Engine Design Competition       Georgia Institute of Technology   Third
2005-2006    AIAA Undergraduate Team Space Transportation Design Competition Georgia Institute of Technology      First
2006-2007    AIAA Undergraduate Team Space Design Competition                   Georgia Institute of Technology   First


Other Actions: The assessment studies described under criteria 2 and 3 above have led to the
following observations and associated corrective actions.
     • Observation: Students who were readmitted after drop had a high failure rate
            –  Action: Retention of students in difficulty (re-admit after drop) has been
               improved with mentoring and selection of courses that combine academics,
               DBF Competitions, research.
           – In some cases, we work with the students to identify their strengths and
               interests, and help them transfer to new programs once they achieve good
               standing.
    •   Other actions taken based on assessment studies:
           – Pre-requisites for performance and some senior design courses have been
               relaxed.
           – Science electives have been broadened to include technical electives.


CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM

       Program Curriculum
        <<Describe how students are prepared for a professional career and further study in the
        discipline through the curriculum and indicate how the curriculum is consistent with the
        Program Educational Objectives and Program Outcomes>>

        <<Provide evidence that the minimum credit hours and distribution, as specified in
        Criterion 5, are met>>

        <<Describe the culminating major design experience, including how it is based on the
        knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work and how appropriate engineering
        standards and multiple realistic constraints are incorporated in the experience>>
        <<Demonstrate that adequate time and attention are given to each curricular component,
        consistent with the outcomes and objectives of the program and the institution>>
        <<Describe the provisions for any cooperative education that is used to satisfy
        curricular requirements. Include a description of the academic component evaluated by
        program faculty>>
         <<Describe the additional materials that will be available for review during the visit to
         demonstrate achievement related to this criterion>>
ABET requires that the program must provide an integrated educational experience that
develops the ability of graduates to apply pertinent knowledge to solving problems in the
engineering technology specialty. The orientation of the technical specialization must manifest
itself through program objectives, faculty qualifications, program content, and business and
industry guidance. The program objectives, faculty qualifications, and constituent guidance are
documented under other criteria. The program content is briefly described here.

Total Credits The Baccalaureate program consists of a total of 132 semester hours. A sample 8
semester program is shown at: http://www.catalog.gatech.edu/colleges/coe/ae/ugrad/bsae/bsae.php

Our program meets and exceeds the minimum ABET requirement of 124 semester hours.

Communications ABET recommends that the communications content must develop the ability of
graduates to:
       a. plan, organize, prepare, and deliver effective technical reports in written, oral, and other
       formats appropriate to the discipline and goals of the program,
       b. incorporate communications skills throughout the technical content of the program,
       c. utilize the appropriate technical literature and use it as a principal means of staying
       current in their chosen technology, and
       d. utilize the interpersonal skills required to work effectively in teams.

This requirement is being met in the BSAE program in the following ways.
     At the freshman level, the students take AE 1350 which requires the students to work on a
        group design project. The students present this work to the instructor and the entire class
        through written reports and an oral presentation.
     At the sophomore level, many of the required AE courses include essay questions and
        discussions.
     At the junior level, AE students take a technical communications course (LCC 3401) where
        formal technical communication skills are re-emphasized. The lab courses (AE 3051, AE
        3145) have written reports that are graded for content as well as writing, and a final oral
        examination where the student is asked to design an experiment and present it to his/her
        peers and the instructor.
     At the senior level, the capstone design sequence (Design I and II in the fall and spring
        terms, respectively) gives ample opportunity for the students to practice their writing skills
        and oral communication and presentation skills.
     The AE program has 10 hours of free electives. Many students take courses such as
        Freshman Seminar (GT 1000), Design-Build-Fly Competitions (AE 1355/2355/3355/4355)
        where students function in a vertically integrated environment and practice writing and oral
        communication skills, and undergraduate research (AE 2699 or AE 2699).
Samples of the student work have been collected for these courses, and are periodically assessed
using standard rubrics, to evaluate the improvement in the student’s oral and written
communication skills from the freshman year through the senior year. These rubrics, the assessment
data, and samples of the student work are documented at a companion web site.
Mathematics ABET requires that “the level and focus of the mathematics content must provide
students with the skills to solve technical problems appropriate to the discipline and the program
objectives. Algebra, trigonometry, and an introduction to mathematics above the level of algebra
and trigonometry constitute the foundation mathematics for an associate degree program. Integral
and differential calculus, or other appropriate mathematics above the level of algebra and
trigonometry, constitutes the foundation mathematics for baccalaureate programs.”

This requirement is satisfied in the BSAE curriculum with two full years (16 credit hours) of
calculus, linear algebra, and differential equations.

Physical and Natural Science ABET states that the basic science content can include physics,
chemistry, or life and earth sciences that support program objectives. This component must include
laboratory experiences which develop expertise in experimentation, observation, measurement and
documentation.

This requirement is satisfied in the BSAE program by requiring classical physics (Physics 2211),
Modern Physics (Physics 2212), and Chemistry (Chemistry 1310). These courses all have a lab
component. Students are also required to take a science elective (Earth and Atmospheric Sciences,
Biology, etc) or a technical elective (typically an AE course).
Social Sciences and Humanities ABET requires that the social sciences and humanities content
must support technical education by broadening student perspective and imparting an
understanding of diversity and the global and societal impacts of technology.

In the BSAE program, the humanities requirement is being satisfied by requiring 12 hours of
humanities:     English     1101,   English     1102,    plus  two   courses   chosen    from
http://www.registrar.gatech.edu/students/hum.php#c . The social sciences requirement is being
satisfied by constitution requirement (History 2211/2212 or POL 1101 or INTA 1200), economics
(ECON 2101, 2105 or 2106), plus 6 hours of courses chosen from
http://www.registrar.gatech.edu/students/socialscience.php#e .

Technical Content ABET requires that the technical content of a program must focus on the
applied aspects of science and engineering in that portion of the technological spectrum closest to
product improvement, manufacturing, construction and engineering operational functions. The
technical content must develop the skills, knowledge, methods, procedures, and techniques
associated with the technical discipline and appropriate to the goals of the program.
The technical content develops the depth of technical specialty and must represent at least 1/3 of the
total credit hours for the program. In order to accommodate the essential mathematics, sciences,
communications, and humanities components, the technical content is limited to no more than 2/3
the total credit hours for the program.
a. The technical content of the curriculum consists of a technical core and the increasingly complex
technical specialties found later in the curriculum. The technical core must provide the prerequisite
foundation of knowledge necessary for the technical specialties.
b. Laboratory activities must develop student competence in the use of analytical and measurement
equipment common to the discipline and appropriate to the goals of the program.
c. Technical courses must develop student knowledge and competence in the use of standard design
practices, tools, techniques, and computer hardware and software appropriate to the discipline and
goals of the program.
d. Capstone or other integrating experiences must draw together diverse elements of the curriculum
and develop student competence in focusing both technical and non-technical skills in solving
problems.

In the AE curriculum, this is satisfied by requiring a total of 63 hours of engineering topics
(Approximately 51.5% of the curriculum). These include
     12 hours of engineering topics: Computer science (CS 1371), engineering graphics (CE/ME
       1770), material sciences and engineering (MSE 2001), Circuits theory (ECE 3710), circuits
       lab (ECE 3741).
     10 hours of structural analysis including lab skills: statics (COE 2001), deformable bodies
       (COE 3001), aerospace structural analysis (AE 3125), and structures lab (AE 3145)
     8 hours of aerodynamics including lab skills: low speed aerodynamics (AE 2020), high
       speed aerodynamics (AE 3021), fluids lab (AE 3051)
     6 hours of thermodynamics (AE 3450), and jet and rocket propulsion (AE 4451)
     6 hours of dynamics (AE 2220) and aeroelasticity (AE 4220)
     10 hours of system dynamics and control (AE 3515), flight dynamics and control (AE
       3521), and controls lab including control system design (AE 4525)
     11 hours of design topics including Introduction to AE (AE 1350), Aerospace vehicle
       Performance (AE 3310), Senior design project I (AE 4350/4356/4358), senior design
       project II (AE 4351/AE4357/AE4358).
Cooperative Education ABET requires that cooperative education credit used to satisfy prescribed
elements of these criteria must include an appropriate academic component evaluated by the
program faculty. In our program, co-operative experience is not counted towards the 132 hours of
required course work.


      Flow Chart
   Please see http://www.ae.gatech.edu/academics/undergraduate/forms/Sem-05A1.pdf for a
   sample flow-chart of our 132 hour curriculum.
      Course Syllabi
               Please see the appendix for all required, and most of the elective coursework in
               our program.
                                         Table 5-1 Curriculum
                           BSAE (Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering)

                                                                       Category (Credit Hours)
                                                                          Engineering
                                                                             Topics
                                                                            Check if
    Year;                                                                   Contains
 Semester or                   Course                     Math & Basic     Significant      General
   Quarter           (Department, Number, Title)           Sciences        Design ()      Education   Other
Sem1, Yr 1   Math 1501, Calculus I                      4                            ( )
             English 1101: English Composition I                                     ( ) 3
             Chemistry 1310: General Chemistry          4                            ( )
             CS 1371: Computer Science I                                             ( ) 3
             HPS 1040/1061/1062/1063: Wellness                                       ( )               2

Sem 2, Yr 1   Math 1502, Calculus II                    4                           (   )
              English 1102: English Composition II                                  (   ) 3
              Physics 2211: Physics I                   4                           (   )
              HIST 2111, POL 1101, PUB 3000 or INTA                                 (   ) 3
              1200
              AE 1350: Introduction to AE                                         2( )

Sem 1, Yr 2   Math 2401: Calculus III                   4                           (   )
              Physics 2212: Physics II                  4                           (   )
              COE 2001: Statics                                                    2(   )
              ME/CE 1770 ENGINEERING GRAPHICS                                      3(   )
              & VISUALIZATION
              MSE 2001 PRINCIPLES &                                                3(   )
              APPLICATIONS OF ENGINEERING
              MATERIALS

Sem 2, Yr 2   Math 2403: Differential Equations         4                           (   )
              AE 2020: Low Speed Aerodynamics                                      3(   )
              AE 2220 : Dynamics                                                   3(   )
              Science/Technical Elective                3                           (   )
              ECON 2100 or 2105 or 2106 or 2101                                     (   ) 3

Sem1, Yr 3    COE 3001: deformable Bodies                                          3(   )
              AE 3515: System Dynamics & Control                                   4(   )
              AE 3450: Thermodynamics & Compressible                               3(   )
              Flow
              ECE 3710 CIRCUITS & ELECTRONICS                                      2(   )
              LCC 3401 TECHNICAL                                                    (   ) 2
              COMMUNICATION PRACTICES
              AE 3310 : INTRODUCTION TO                                            3(   )
              AEROSPACE VEHICLE PERFORMANCE
                                          (continued on next page)
                                 Table5-1. Basic-Level Curriculum (continued)
                                    AEROSPACE ENGINEERING
                               Course
                      (Department, Number, Title)                       Category (Credit Hours)

                                                                         Engineering
                                                                           Topics
                                                                          Check if
    Year;                                                     Math &      Contains
 Semester or                                                   Basic     Significant             General
   Quarter                                                    Science    Design ()             Education       Other
Sem2, Yr 3     AE 3021: High Speed Aerodynamics                                  3(       )
               AE 3125: Aerospace Structural Analysis                            4(       )
               AE 3521 : Flight Dynamics                                         4(       )
               Humanities Elective                                                (       ) 3
               AE 3145: Structures Lab                                           1(       )
               AE 3051 EXPERIMENTAL FLUID                                        2(       )
               DYNAMICS

Sem 1, Yr 4    AE 4451: Jet & Rocket Propulsion                                      3( )
               Humanities Elective                                                    ( ) 3
               AE 4350/4356/4358 Senior Design project I                             3( )
               ECE 3741: Instrumentation &Electrical Lab                             1( )
               Social Science Elective                                                ( ) 3
               Free Elective                                                          ( ) 4

Sem 2, Yr 4    AE 4220 Aeroelasticity & Structural                                   3(   )
               Dynamics
               AE 4351/4358/4359: Design Project II                                  3( )
               AE 4525 : Control System Design Lab                                   2( )
               Social Science Elective                                                ( ) 3
               Free Elective                                                          ( ) 6

TOTALS-ABET BASIC-LEVEL REQUIREMENTS                            31              63                 36       2
OVERALL TOTAL                                           132
FOR DEGREE
PERCENT OF TOTAL                                               24%          48%                   27%           1%
 Totals must Minimum semester credit hours                    32 hrs       48 hrs
satisfy one set Minimum percentage                             25%         37.5 %



        Prerequisite Flow Chart
         {{Attach a flow chart showing the prerequisite structure of program’s courses required
         or allowed towards the major.}}
         See http://www.ae.gatech.edu/academics/undergraduate/forms/Sem-05A1.pdf
        Course Syllabi
         {{Attach course syllabi in Appendix A for each course used to satisfy the mathematics,
         science, and discipline-specific requirements required by Criterion 5 or any applicable
         Program Criteria. The syllabi formats should be consistent for each course, must not
         exceed two pages per course, and, at a minimum, contain the following information:
Department, number, and title of course
Designation as a Required or Elective course
Course (catalog) description
Prerequisites
Textbook(s) and/or other required material
Course learning outcomes / expected performance criteria
Topics covered
Class/laboratory schedule, i.e., number of sessions each week and duration of
    each session
Contribution of course to meeting the requirements of Criterion 5
Relationship of course to Program Outcomes
Person(s) who prepared this description and date of preparation}}
Please see Appendix A.
                                         Table 5-1 Curriculum
                                            <<Name of Program>>

                                                                       Category (Credit Hours)

                                                          Math &




                                                                                                           1
                                                                       Engineering       General




                                                                                                    Design
       Year;                                              Basic




                                                                                                               Other
                                                                         Topics         Education




                                                                                                    Engr
    Semester or                 Course                   Sciences
      Quarter          (Department, Number, Title)




    TOTALS
    Total Credit Hours Required for Completion of the Program
1
    Place an “X” in this column if the course contains significant engineering design content.
                                           Table 5-2. Course and Section Size Summary
                                                             <<Name of Program>>

                                                                    No. of
                                                 Responsible      Sections
                                                   Faculty        Offered in      Avg. Section
                                                                                                            1            1           1
Course No.                   Title                Member         Current Year      Enrollment     Lecture       Laboratory   Other




     1
         Enter the appropriate percent for each type of class for each course (e.g., 75% lecture, 25% laboratory).
CRITERION 6. FACULTY

     Leadership Responsibilities
      <<Identify the person who has leadership responsibilities for the program. Describe the
      leadership and management responsibilities of that person. >>

     Authority and Responsibility of Faculty
      <<Describe the role played by the program faculty with respect to course creation,
      modification, and evaluation. Describe the roles played by others on the campus, e.g.,
      Dean’s Office, Provost’s Office, with respect to these areas. Describe the process used
      to ensure consistency and quality of the courses taught>>

     Faculty
      <<Describe the composition, size, credentials, experience, and workload of the faculty
      that supports this program. Complete and include Tables 6-1 and 6-2>>

     Faculty Competencies
      <<Describe the competencies of the faculty and how they are adequate to cover all of
      the curricular areas of the program>>

     Faculty Size
      <<Discuss the adequacy of the size of the faculty and describe the extent and quality of
      faculty involvement in interactions with students, student advising, service activities,
      and professional development>>
      {{Attach as Appendix B an abbreviated resume for each program faculty member with
      the rank of instructor or above. The format should be consistent for each resume, must
      not exceed two pages per person, and, at a minimum, must contain the following
      information:
      Name and academic rank
      Degrees with fields, institution, and date
      Number of years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and
          dates of advancement in rank
      Other related experience, i.e., teaching, industrial, etc.
      Consulting, patents, etc.
      States in which professionally licensed or certified, if applicable
      Principal publications of the last five years
      Scientific and professional societies of which a member
      Honors and awards
      Institutional and professional service in the last five years
      Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities
      Percentage of time committed to the program}}
   Faculty Development
    <<Describe the plan that is in place for faculty development and the funding available
    to execute this plan. Provide detailed descriptions of professional development
    activities for each faculty member>>
                                                      Table 6-1. Faculty Workload Summary
                                                                    <<Name of Program>>

                                                                                                                                    2
                           FT                                                                         Total Activity Distribution
    Faculty Member          or      Classes Taught (Course No./Credit Hrs.)                              Research/Scholarly
                               4                             1                                                                                  3
        (name)             PT                  Term and Year                               Teaching             Activity                Other




1
    Indicate Term and Year for which data apply (the academic year preceding the visit).
2
    Activity distribution should be in percent of effort. Members' activities should total 100%.
3
    Indicate sabbatical leave, etc., under "Other."
4
    FT = Full Time Faculty        PT = Part Time Faculty




                                                                               47
                                                                     Table 6-2. Faculty Analysis
                                                                           <<Name of Program>>

                                                                                                                                                         Level of Activity (high, med, low,




                                          Highest Degree and
                                                                                        Years of Experience                                                          none) in:




                                                                                                                     This Institution
                                                                                    Govt./Industry




                                                                                                     Total Faculty




                                                                                                                                                          Professional
                                                                                                                                         Certification
                                                                                                                                        Registration/
                                                                                                                                        Professional




                                                                                                                                                                                    Consulting
                                                                                                                                                                         Research



                                                                                                                                                                                    /Summer
                         Type of                                Institution from




                                                                                    Practice




                                                                                                                                                                                    Industry
                                                                                                                                                                                    Work in
                                                                                                                                                          Society
                        Academic FT                              which Highest
                Rank




                                          Field
                       Appointment or                          Degree Earned &
   Name                 TT, T, NTT PT                                 Year




Instructions: Complete table for each member of the faculty of the program. Use additional sheets if necessary. Updated information is to be provided at
the time of the visit. The level of activity should reflect an average over the year prior to visit plus the two previous years.
Column 3 Code: TT = Tenure Track        T = Tenured               NTT = Non Tenure Track




                                                                                   48
CRITERION 7. FACILITIES

      Space
       <<Summarize the availability of program facilities and indicate how adequate they are
       for supporting the educational objectives and outcomes of the program>>
       <<Discuss the following>>
              Offices (Administrative, Faculty, Clerical, Teaching Assistants)
              Classrooms
              Laboratories
              Library

      Resources and Support
       <<Describe the computing resources, hardware and software used for instruction.
       Specify any limitations that impact the student’s ability to achieve the program’s
       outcomes and the faculty’s teaching and scholarly activities>>
       <<Describe the laboratory equipment planning, acquisition, and maintenance processes
       and their adequacy>>
       <<Describe the type and number of support personnel available to install, maintain, and
       manage departmental hardware, software, and networks>>
       <<Describe the type and number of support personnel available to install, maintain, and
       manage laboratory equipment >>

      Major Instructional and Laboratory Equipment
       <<List major instructional and laboratory equipment and attach as Appendix C>>

The undergraduate and graduate curriculum in Aerospace Engineering is designed to provide a
comprehensive program of study leading to a Bachelor's, MS, or Ph D Degree. A key part of this
program, particularly at the undergraduate level, is the laboratory experience, which is carefully
designed to complement the concepts studied in the classroom and to introduce the student to a
variety of experimental techniques and modern instrumentation.

Objectives of the Undergraduate Laboratories: The objectives of the undergraduate laboratories
in aerospace engineering are to provide the student with:

i) a sound education in the fundamentals of experimental methods, diagnostics, and advanced
instrumentation;
ii) a laboratory experience that emphasizes a highly personal and hands-on involvement with
challenging experiments, and a chance to learn through measurement and inference;
iii) physical insights into the subject matter encountered in the classroom; and
iv) experimentally-derived results that can be compared with theoretical predictions discussed
in the classroom, thus developing in the student a strong feeling and appreciation for the need to
continually compare theory with observations; and
v) an opportunity to make technical presentations (written and oral) and respond to questions.
                                                49
The Role of the Laboratories in the Curriculum: The laboratory portion of the program of study
is designed around the following courses.

 i) Required laboratory courses in the three fundamental disciplines that are the focus of the
undergraduate aerospace curriculum, namely aerodynamics, flight mechanics, and structures.
ii) A computer course and computer applications laboratory that support all of the other
laboratory and lecture courses in the curriculum.

The laboratory courses consist of the following.

AE 3051 - Experimental Fluid Mechanics. The course complements AE 2020 (Low Speed
Aerodynamics), AE 3450 (Thermodynamics and Compressible Flow) and AE 3021 (High-Speed
Aerodynamics).

AE 3145 - Structures Laboratory. This course complements AE 2120 (Introduction to
Mechanics), AE 3120 (Introduction to Structural Analysis) and AE 3121 (Aerospace Structural
Analysis)

AE 4525 -Control System Design Laboratory. This course complements AE 3515 and AE 3521
(Aircraft and Spacecraft Flight Dynamics).

In addition, the Aerospace Computer Lab is a facility that supports all laboratory and lecture
courses in the aerospace engineering curriculum by providing students access to modern
computational resources for performing class assignments and projects, writing reports and
preparing presentations.

Funding and Support for Laboratories: Funding for laboratory equipment is provided from the
Institute, the School, and outside sources. The school also supports the laboratories through
monies for supplies and personal services. Personal services take the form of Graduate Teaching
Assistants (GTAs) and support personnel. Two to three Teaching Assistants are assigned to each
of the three experimental laboratories; they set up the experiments, assist/oversee the student
experimenters and help in grading laboratory reports, all under faculty supervision. Support
personnel include full-time employees in the aerospace engineering machine shop and
electronics shop, and computer support specialists. The school policy is that maintenance and
repair of instructional laboratory equipment has the first call on the services of the support
personnel.

Funding for major equipment items purchased in the past has come primarily from the Institute
through the Dean of Engineering, the Provost’s Office (Academic Affairs), and Student
Technology Fees, as well as some funding from the AE School. It is anticipated that funding
support will continue to come from these sources, while outside support from both government
(e.g., NSF) and industry will continue to be pursued.

Overview of Laboratories


                                                50
i) Aerospace Computer Laboratory – The computing support staff in the AE School supports
the Aerospace Computer Lab. The laboratory is currently open from 8 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. on
Monday-Friday. It is operated in an unattended mode during these times. All faculty members
have direct access to the lab and can use it for instructional purposes at any time during the
week. Supervising graduate teaching assistants for the senior capstone design courses also have
access to the lab and can use it on weekends and evenings for supervised lab sessions.
Otherwise, unattended operation of the lab outside normal business hours is not allowed.

The lab supports a suite of software that is appropriate to the educational and research objectives
of the school. The core includes word processors, spreadsheets, equation solvers, math systems,
graphics systems, network access software, and all software in the suite of software that students
are required to purchase. In addition, a smaller number of special purpose software systems are
maintained. All 30 systems currently in the lab are running either Windows 2000 or Windows
XP.

The lab hosts specialized software for supporting classes in computational structural analysis,
computational aerodynamics, simulation, geometric modeling, and multimedia creation and
presentation. A Beowulf Cluster system was acquired and installed in laboratory space in the
Weber Space Science and Technology Building. The aim of this facility is to enable
professional-level computation programs in fluid mechanics, solid mechanics and aeroelasticity
into undergraduate courses. The results from well-validated codes will be made available to
formulate realistic problems, assess results using physical insight, and to give students a feel for
the usage of such codes within an environment of academic guidance.

The laboratory is located in Knight 318 and occupies approximately 700 square feet of space.
The room is equipped with an SVGA video projector and can be used for classroom instruction
where each student has immediate access to a computer. In addition the lab can be used to host
problem-solving sessions for other courses or it can serve as a place for student design teams to
work together on a project.

ii) Classroom Facilities – Classroom instruction in aerospace engineering is continually being
revised, updated and improved to reflect the latest developments in the field and to incorporate
the best and most appropriate instructional technology. To support these efforts, all of the
classrooms in the AE School are also being continuously improved with the addition of new but
proven A/V technology appropriate to our program of undergraduate instruction.

iii) Aerospace Structures Laboratory – The Aerospace Structures Laboratory provides hands-
on experience in structural testing and experimental data collection and analysis for every
aerospace engineering undergraduate. Space for the laboratory is located in Room 301 of the
Montgomery Knight building. In addition, space is shared with the Structures and Materials
Laboratory in Room 106 of the Montgomery Knight building, and the Composites
Manufacturing Laboratory, located in Rooms 216-217 of the Weber building.

The structures laboratory is currently taught as one course, AE 3145, offered each semester of
the academic year. This one-credit hour class is offered in three or four sections each semester,
with enrollment in each section limited to twelve students. The course consists of seven two-

                                                 51
week laboratory experiment cycles, with a one-hour lecture offered during the first week and a
three-hour laboratory performed the following week of each cycle.

The student selects seven experiments from a supplied list. This list changes as new experiments
are designed and developed. Training is provided to allow each student to install strain gages in
at least one of these experiments. Tests are conducted, data collected, and formal written reports
prepared for each experiment. Where applicable, comparisons between experimental findings
and analyses are made. Analysis of the data and data visualization are carried out using
spreadsheets and Matlab scripts while reports are prepared using word processors.

A member of the faculty teaches the laboratory course for a full year. Two graduate Teaching
Assistants are assigned to assist students in each laboratory section. One Instron screw-jack
testing machine with modern computer-based controller is available in Room 301 for structural
testing, and a second Instron 8500 series servohydraulic test machine, also computer controlled,
is available in the Structures and Materials Lab. Thus, both static testing with controlled screw-
jack displacements and full dynamic testing under load, displacement, or strain control can be
experienced. The laboratory is also equipped with a computerized data acquisition system, and
emphasis is placed on the use of this system by the students to automate data collection from the
experiments whenever possible. This is part of a joint effort with the Aerodynamics Laboratory
(AE3051) to develop and implement a unified treatment of computerized data acquisition and
control in tests using advanced instrumentation.

The structures laboratory courses provide a laboratory experience with a student/instructor ratio
of about 4/1.

iv) Aerodynamics and Propulsion Laboratory Facilities – The laboratory experience in
Aerodynamics/Propulsion consists of a two-credit-hour junior-level core course (AE3051).
 AE3051 aims to introduce the student to various diagnostic techniques commonly used in fluid
mechanics research, preliminary design, and testing, specifically related to aerodynamics and
propulsion.

Nine different sets of experiments are performed in AE 3051 during nine laboratory periods
stretching over thirteen weeks. Knowledge of low-speed aerodynamics and two-dimensional
compressible flow is assumed; these are covered in AE2020 and 3450, respectively. Each
experiment is built around a series of related measurement techniques. In addition, the student
learns to compare experimental results with the knowledge gained in the lecture courses. Seven
of the nine experiments in AE3051 require results summarized into data reports and the other
two require full laboratory reports. The experiments are performed in teams of three to five, but
individual reports have to be prepared by each student. The reports include the student's answers
to several questions. The grading of the reports considers various aspects of technical reporting
and laboratory practice. In addition, each student makes a ten-minute oral presentation to the
class, describing the proposed solution to a hypothetical measurement problem assigned in the
last four weeks of the semester. This "proposal" is graded on creativity, thought, and
thoroughness. The audience is encouraged to ask questions. The data acquisition procedures are
largely computerized and all laboratory reports must be produced using word processing and


                                                52
computer graphics. However, some aspects of the experiments are done by human observation,
careful alignment and adjustment, judgment and qualitative sketches.

The facilities required to run AE3051 are located in Room 403/5 and 42" x 42" low speed wind
tunnel in Room 106 of the main Aerospace Engineering building. The Combustion Laboratory
is housed in the new Combustion Facilities. A shock tube is set up parallel to the low turbulence
tunnel in the same room. Supersonic flow experiments are carried out in a Mach 2 tunnel and an
in-draft nozzle located in the Combustion Laboratory. In these three facilities, the undergraduate
labs and courses are assigned priority in scheduling.

v) Flight Mechanics and Controls Laboratory Facilities – The undergraduate controls
laboratory is the main avenue for teaching analysis, modeling and control of dynamical
(mechanical) systems to the undergraduate students in the School of Aerospace Engineering.
 Typically, 90-100 undergraduate students take this lab every year. The pre-requisites include
AE3521 (Aircraft and Spacecraft Flight Dynamics) and AE3515 (Vibrations and System
Dynamics).

Twelve sets of experiments are performed in AE4525 during the semester. The experiments
include either modeling (DC motor), or control (helicopter) or both (DC motor, Gyro Stabilized
platform). Each experiment deals with a specific principle (PID controller design, lead-lag
design, LQR, etc) and it focuses around a separate demo. Extensive use of the MATLAB and
SIMULINK environments allow the students to implement/modify their control designs during
the lab time in an interactive manner. Use of numerical simulations are necessary to test Flight
Control or Stability Augmentation Systems for aircraft or stabilizing controllers for spacecraft.
Recently, this deficiency has been mitigated by the incorporation of two new experiments: one
on spacecraft 3-axial dynamics and control using a “spacecraft platform” on a three-axial air-
bearing and one on 3-D flight simulator for avionics control design. The lab is conducted as
follows: There is one 1-hr lecture each week that goes over the particular subject to be covered in
the lab that week. Depending on the number of students, the rest of the week is devoted to
conducting the experiments. For this purpose, the students are divided into groups of 8-10
students. Each group rotates on a weekly basis to a different experiment. The students’ lab
responsibilities include both an individual report and a group report. In the individual report each
student includes the details of his/her own control design. This part is completed before the
student comes to the lab. The group report includes the results from the controller
implementation and its evaluation during the lab. Each group is requested to compare between
the simulated and measured response of the system and subsequently comment on the
performance of each controller design implemented during the lab. Additional homework is
occasionally assigned that covers topics introduced in the lecture part of the class.

The FMC lab is located in Rooms 212/214 of the Montgomery Knight Building. It occupies a
space of 480 sq-ft; there are six stations for experiments (this includes the actual device and the
controlling PC). Three graduate students (supported by the School) are available to assist the
students with the experiments. Among them one (typically the most senior) is designated as the
“lead” TA, who is responsible for conducting and overseeing the experiments. The other two
TAs mainly assist with the grading of the lab reports and for helping the students during
designated office hours.

                                                 53
CRITERION 8. SUPPORT

     Program Budget Process and Sources of Financial Support
      <<Describe the process used to establish the program budget and provide evidence of
      continuity of institutional support for the program>>
  Resource allocation at Georgia Tech is a top down process, where the State of Georgia
  allocates the resources for the entire University System of Georgia. The Board of Regents
  allocates these resources to individual universities. Once Georgia Tech receives an allocation
  from the Board of Regents, these allocations flow through the hierarchy of leadership to the
  various Colleges, including the College of Engineering.

  The school of Aerospace Engineering is informed of the total allocations for an upcoming
  fiscal year (June 1 – May 30) by the Dean of Engineering. The Dean bases this allocation on
  a number of factors: total number of faculty members, number of credit hours taught, the
  overhead generated by the School based on research, etc. Once the overall allocation for a
  fiscal year is known, the School prepares a budget.

     Sources of Financial Support
      <<Describe the sources of financial support including both “hard” and “soft” monies>>

  The School relies on four sources of financial support: support from the State of Georgia as
  discussed above, sponsored research support, technology fee funds (lottery funds received
  from the State for upgrade and upkeep of educational technology), and endowments and gifts
  to the Georgia Tech Foundation earmarked for the School.

  Over the past several decades, the amount of funding available from these sources, and in
  particular the state funds and the sponsored research, have steadily grown. The figure below
  shows the growth in these categories over the past 12 years.




                                              54
                                                           AE TOTAL EXPENDITURES                                           TOTAL
                                                                                                                           TOTAL-STATE
                                                                                                                           TOTAL-SPONSORED
                    $32,000,000
                    $31,000,000
                    $30,000,000
                    $29,000,000
                    $28,000,000
                    $27,000,000
                    $26,000,000
                    $25,000,000
                    $24,000,000
                    $23,000,000
                    $22,000,000
                    $21,000,000
    TOTAL DOLLARS




                    $20,000,000
                    $19,000,000
                    $18,000,000
                    $17,000,000
                    $16,000,000
                    $15,000,000
                    $14,000,000
                    $13,000,000
                    $12,000,000
                    $11,000,000
                    $10,000,000
                     $9,000,000
                     $8,000,000
                     $7,000,000
                     $6,000,000
                     $5,000,000
                     $4,000,000
                     $3,000,000
                     $2,000,000
                     $1,000,000
                             $0
                                  FY'94   FY'95   FY'96   FY'97   FY'98   FY'99    FY'00   FY'01   FY'02   FY'03   FY'04   FY'05   FY'06   FY'07



Over this period, the gifts and endowments have grown steadily as well, leading to a number
of endowed Chairs and Professors.

                   Adequacy of Budget
    <<Describe the adequacy of the budget>>
The funds received from the Dean’s Office have been adequate for our faculty and staff
needs. The total number of faculty has grown from 28 to 38 over the past 10 years, with a
proportional increase in the state allocations received from the Dean’s Office. The sponsored
research funds that the faculty members raise have been sufficient to develop and grow a
vibrant research program that benefits graduate and undergraduate students, both.

While there has been a rapid growth in the enrollment at the undergraduate and graduate
level, there School has strived to keep the class sizes small (between 40 and 50, where
possible). This has lead to a large number of sections all of them taught by faculty, and an
associated increase in the number of teaching assistants and graders. The state funding has
not kept pace with the increased resources needed to employ TAs and graders.


                   Support of Faculty Professional Development
                    <<Describe the adequacy of support for faculty professional development, how such
                    activities are planned, and how they are supported>>

                                                                                  55
       Support for faculty development is provided in a number of ways. The Dean returns a
       significant portion of the research overhead to the school, which is used to cover faculty
       development and career growth efforts. As an example, some of the travel expenses for
       the faculty members for professional development (seminars, workshop, collaborative
       research) not covered by sponsored research are supported by the School. The School and
       the Institute also provide support in the form of presidential undergraduate research
       assistantships, internal grants for excellence in teaching and research. Funds are also
       provided to encourage and promote excellence in teaching and research, mentoring
       honors program students, and so on.

      Support of Facilities and Equipment
       <<Describe the sufficiency of resources to acquire, maintain, and operate facilities and
       equipment appropriate for the program>>

   The technology fees allocations have been very valuable in acquiring and replacing
   equipment in our instructional and computing labs. We have been able to replace roughly 1/3
   of the computers in the undergraduate computing lab every year, and have been able to
   provide software licenses (remotely available to students) for many of the state of the art
   software used in the aerospace industry.
   With the growing number of students, faculty, and staff, additional resources are needed for
   maintenance and upkeep of the educational lab equipment and the computing infrastructure.

      Adequacy of Support Personnel and Institutional Services
       <<Describe the adequacy of support personnel and institutional services necessary to
       meet program needs>>
    The School has a well equipped workshop staffed by three technicians, a Business
    Office staffed by five professionals, Academic Office staffed by three administrative
    assistants, and a staff academic advisor. The computing needs are supported by two
    research engineers. The faculty members also receive administrative support from six
    administrative assistants and an administrative manager.

    With the growing needs in the instructional computing area, and the growing number of
    faculty members, there is an imminent need for two to three additional staff members.

CRITERION 9. PROGRAM CRITERIA

      <<Describe how the program satisfies any applicable Program Criteria. If already
       covered elsewhere in the Self-Study Report, provide appropriate references>>


GENERAL CRITERIA FOR ADVANCED-LEVEL PROGRAMS

{{This section applies only to programs seeking EAC Masters-Level Accreditation and should
be omitted for other programs}}


                                               56
   <<Describe the procedure used to ensure that all graduates satisfy both the baccalaureate-
    level and masters-level criteria. Use Table 5-1 to list the course requirements of the
    masters-level curriculum>>

   <<Demonstrate that graduates have an ability to apply advanced level knowledge in a
    specialized area of engineering related to the program area. Identify the specialized areas
    of engineering and the associated advanced level knowledge>>




                                            57
                                  APPENDIX A – COURSE SYLLABI


                                 APPENDIX B – FACULTY RESUMES
                                             (Limit 2 pages each)



                           APPENDIX C – LABORATORY EQUIPMENT


                           APPENDIX D – INSTITUTIONAL SUMMARY

The institution may employ any means it chooses to represent itself to ABET and the visiting team. Consequently,
the references to specific tables in the following are for guidance only. The information may be presented in any
manner the institution chooses.

The Institution
        <<Name and Address of the Institution>>
        <<Name and Title of the Chief Executive Officer of the Institution>>

Type of Control
        <<Description of the type of managerial control of the institution, e.g., private-non-profit,
        private-other, denominational, state, federal, public-other, etc.>>

History of Institution
        <<Provide a brief history of the Institution, its origin, and its development>>

Student Body
         <<Briefly describe the student body and where the students come from.>>

Regional or Institutional Accreditation
        <<Name the organizations by which the institution is currently accredited and the dates
        of initial and most recent accreditation evaluations>>

Personnel and Policies
        <<Summarize the following elements
            The promotion and tenure system
            The process used to determine faculty salaries
            Faculty benefits>>

Educational Unit
        <<Describe the educational unit (see General Instructions). Describe the administrative
        chain of responsibility from the individual responsible for the program to the chief


                                                       58
         executive officer of the institution. Include names and titles. An organization chart may
         be included>>

Credit Unit
         <<It is assumed that one semester or quarter credit normally represents one class hour or
         three laboratory hours per week. One academic year normally represents at least 28
         weeks of classes, exclusive of final examinations. If other standards are used for this
         program, the differences should be indicated.

         Further, in cases where the Criteria specify curricular content in terms of years, the
         credit equivalent of one year is determined by dividing the number of credits required
         for graduation by the nominal length of the program in years. For example, if a four-
         year bachelor’s program requires 130 credit hours for graduation, then 130/4 = 32.5 is
         the number of credit hours equivalent to one year>>

Instructional Modes
         <<If modes other than traditional on-campus instruction are employed in any programs,
         the additional modes of instruction should be listed and described in relation to the
         applicable programs. The institutional and/or unit policies under which the alternate
         modes are offered should be summarized>>

Grade-Point Average
         <<Indicate the grade-point average required for graduation. If there are differences in
         requirements among the regular and alternative instructional modes, please explain>>

Academic Supporting Units
         <<Provide information about units that teach courses required by the programs being
         evaluated, e.g., mathematics, physics, etc. Include names and titles of the individuals
         responsible for these units>>

Non-Academic Supporting Units
         <<Provide information about units that provide non-academic support to the programs
         being evaluated, e.g., library, computing facilities, placement, tutoring, etc. Include
         names and titles of the individuals responsible for these units>>

Faculty Workload
         <<Describe the faculty workload policy. Define what constitutes a full-time load>>

Tables
         {{The tables that follow are simply a guide and are not required in the Self-Study
         Report. All are optional. The institution is encouraged to employ any means it
         chooses to represent itself to ABET and the visiting evaluation team.}}

                                                59
                                                Table D-1. Programs Offered by the Educational Unit

                                                                                                                                                      Offered, Not
                                                                                                                          Submitted for               Submitted for
                                                           2                                                                          3                          4
                                    Modes Offered                                                                          Evaluation                  Evaluation
                                                                                                       Administrative




                                  Cooperative
                                                                                                        Unit or Units




                                                                                                                        Accredited.
                                  Education




                                                                           Complete




                                                                                                                                      Accredited




                                                                                                                                                   Accredited




                                                                                                                                                                Accredited
                                                               Alternate
                                                                                                        (e.g. Dept.)




                                                  Campus




                                                                           Years to
                                                                           Nominal




                                                                                                                                      Not Now




                                                                                                                                                                Not Now
                                                                                                         Exercising




                                                               Mode




                                                                                                                        Now




                                                                                                                                                   Now
                            Day
                                                                                      Administrative     Budgetary




                                                  Off
                     1
     Program Title                                                                       Head             Control




List the titles of all degrees offered by the educational unit responsible for the programs being evaluated, undergraduate and graduate,
granted by the institution. If there are differences in the degrees awarded for completion of cooperative education programs, these should be
clearly indicated.
1
    Give program title as shown on a graduate’s transcript
2
    Indicate all modes in which the program is offered. If separate accreditation is requested for an alternative mode, list on a separate line.
    Describe “Other” by footnote.
3
    Only those programs being submitted at this time for reaccredidation (now accredited) or initial accreditation (not now accredited) should be
    checked in this column.
4
    Programs not submitted for evaluation at this time should be checked in this column.




                                                                                      60
                          Table D-2. Degrees Awarded and Transcript Designations by Educational Unit

                                                                   2
                                                   Modes Offered
                                                                       Alternative
                          1                                                                                   3                                   4
          Program Title              Day     Co-op     Off Campus         Mode       Name of Degree Awarded           Designation on Transcript




Complete the table for all programs, as follows:
1
    Give the program title as officially published in catalog.
2
     Indicate all modes in which the program is offered. If separate accreditation is requested for an alternative mode, list on a separate line.
     Describe “Other” by footnote.
3
    List degree awarded for each mode offered. If different degrees are awarded, list on separate lines.
4
    Indicate how the program is listed on transcript for each mode offered. If different designations are used, list on separate lines.




                                                                           61
                           Table D-3. Support Expenditures
{{This table should be completed for the Educational Unit and for each program being evaluated}}
                           <<Name of Educational Unit or Program>>
                                                      1                    2                   3
 Fiscal Year                           (previous year) (current year)     (year of visit)
 Expenditure Category
                                  4
 Operations (not including staff)
        5
 Travel
             6
 Equipment
    (a) Institutional Funds
                          7
    (b) Grants and Gifts
 Graduate Teaching Assistants
                        8
 Part-time Assistance
 (other than teaching)
 Faculty Salaries
Report Department Level and Program Level data for each program being evaluated. Updated
tables are to be provided at the time of the visit.
1
    Provide the statistics from the audited account for the fiscal year completed year prior to the
    current fiscal year.
2
    This is your current fiscal year (when you will be preparing these statistics). Provide your
    preliminary estimate of annual expenditures, since your current fiscal year presumably is not
    over at this point.
3
    Provide the budgeted amounts for your next fiscal year to cover the fall term when the ABET
    team will arrive on campus.
4
    Categories of general operating expenses to be included here.
5
    Institutionally sponsored, excluding special program grants.
6
    Major equipment, excluding equipment primarily used for research. Note that the
    expenditures (a) and (b) under “Equipment” should total the expenditures for Equipment. If
    they don’t, please explain.
7
    Including special (not part of institution’s annual appropriation) non-recurring equipment
    purchase programs.
8
    Do not include graduate teaching and research assistant or permanent part-time personnel.




                                                62
 Table D-4. Personnel and Students
      {{This table should be completed for the Educational Unit and for each program being evaluated}}
                                 <<Name of Educational Unit or Program>>
                                                 1
                                             Year : _________
                                                                                     2
                                                      HEAD COUNT                 FTE            RATIO TO
                                                                                                        3
                                                     FT        PT                               FACULTY
              4
Administrative
Faculty (tenure-track)
Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists
Office/Clerical Employees
       5
Others
                                   6
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment
  Report data for the program unit(s) and for each program being evaluated.
  1
     Data on this table should be for the fall term immediately preceding the visit. Updated tables for the
     fall term when the ABET team is visiting are to be prepared and presented to the team when they
     arrive.
  2
     For student teaching assistants, 1 FTE equals 20 hours per week of work (or service). For
     undergraduate and graduate students, 1 FTE equals 15 semester credit-hours (or 24 quarter credit-
     hours) per term of institutional course work, meaning all courses — science, humanities and social
     sciences, etc. For faculty members, 1 FTE equals what your institution defines as a full-time load.
  3
     Divide FTE in each category by total FTE Faculty. Do not include administrative FTE.
  4
     Persons holding joint administrative/faculty positions or other combined assignments should be
     allocated to each category according to the fraction of the appointment assigned to that category.
  5
     Specify any other category considered appropriate, or leave blank.
  6
     Specify whether this includes freshman and/or sophomores.




                                                      63
                                            Table D-5. Program Enrollment and Degree Data
                           {{This table should be completed for the Educational Unit and for each program being evaluated}}
                                                      <<Name of Educational Unit or Program>>




                                                                                  Undergrad



                                                                                              Grad
                                                                                  Total



                                                                                              Total
                          Academic                  Enrollment Year                                               Degrees Conferred
                            Year         1st      2nd       3rd       4th     5th                       Bachelor     Master     Doctor     Other
    CURRENT                      FT
                                 PT
1                                FT
                                 PT
2                                FT
                                 PT
3                                FT
                                 PT
4                                FT
                                 PT
5                                FT
                                 PT
Give official fall term enrollment figures (head count) for the current and preceding five academic years and undergraduate and graduate degrees
conferred during each of those years. The "current" year means the academic year preceding the fall visit.

FT--full time
PT--part time




                                                                         64
                                Table D-6. Faculty Salary Data1
    {{This table should be completed for the Educational Unit and for each program being evaluated}}
                              <<Name of Educational Unit or Program>>

                                        Academic Year ______

                           Professor       Associate Professor       Assistant Professor    Instructor
          Number
            High
           Mean
            Low
1
    If the program considers this information to be confidential, it can be provided only to the Team
    Chair.




                                                  65

								
To top