2EET - CEDE - Pennsylvania State University by zhouwenjuan

VIEWS: 1 PAGES: 98

									                      Self-Study Report – Part I

      Associate Degree in Electrical Engineering
                 Technology (2EET)

               The Pennsylvania State University



                               Berks Campus




                                   June 2006

PREPARED FOR:
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)
Technology Accreditation Commission (TAC)
111 Market Place, Suite 1050
Baltimore, MD 21202-4012
Phone: 410-347-7700
www.abet.org
                                        Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


                                                                      Table of Contents
PART 1 ........................................................................................................ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

SELF-STUDY REPORT............................................................................ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

LIST OF FIGURES.....................................................................................................................................................3

LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................................................................3

A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION .....................................................................................................................4
    A.1. TITLES ...............................................................................................................................................................4
    A.2. PROGRAM MODES ..............................................................................................................................................4
    A.3. ACTIONS TO CORRECT PREVIOUS FINDINGS ......................................................................................................4
B. ACCREDITATION SUMMARY .........................................................................................................................6
    B.1. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES...............................................................................................................7
       B.1.a. Philosophy Behind 2EET Program Objectives..........................................................................................7
       B.1.b. 2EET Program Objectives .........................................................................................................................8
    B.2. PROGRAM OUTCOMES ........................................................................................................................................8
       B.2.a. 2EET Program Outcomes..........................................................................................................................8
       B.2.b. 2EET Program Outcome Relationship with ABET Criterion 2 .................................................................9
       B.2.c. 2EET Program Outcome Relationship with ABET Criterion 1 .................................................................9
       B.2.d. Relationship between 2EET Program Outcomes and Program Objectives.............................................10
       B.2.e. The Relationship between 2EET Program and Course Outcomes...........................................................11
       B.2.f. 2EET Program Organization of Display Materials Demonstrating Accomplishment of Outcomes.........11
    B.3. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION ......................................................................................................................12
       B.3.a. Assessment and Evaluation......................................................................................................................12
       B.3.b. 2EET Program CQI Process ...................................................................................................................13
       B.3.b.1. SEDTAPP University Wide Continuous Improvement Plan .................................................................13
       B.3.b.2. Penn State Berks Local 2EET Continuous Improvement Process ........................................................20
       B.3.b.2.1. Berks 2EET Program Constituencies ................................................................................................21
       B.3.b.2.2. Berks Use of 2EET Assessment Findings to Strengthen Program .....................................................22
       B.3.b.3. Examples of Continuous Improvement Evidence..................................................................................27
    B.4. PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS ..........................................................................................................................29
       B.4.a. 2EET Curriculum and Course Sequencing..............................................................................................29
       B.4.b. Program Credit Requirement ..................................................................................................................31
       B.4.c. Quality Assurance of Core Courses.........................................................................................................31
       B.4.d. Descriptive Details on Content and Portions of the Program .................................................................34
       B.4.e. Demonstration of Adequate Attention to Key Curriculum Components ..................................................36
       B.4.f. Co-operative Education Provisions..........................................................................................................36
       B.4.g. Additional Review Materials ...................................................................................................................37
    B.5. FACULTY ..........................................................................................................................................................37
       B.5.a. Faculty Qualifications Analysis...............................................................................................................37
       B.5.b. Faculty Background and Core Competencies .........................................................................................37
       B.5.c. Faculty Support of Program ....................................................................................................................37
       B.5.d. Faculty Industrial Experience .................................................................................................................37
       B.5.e. Faculty Development ...............................................................................................................................38
       B.5.f. Faculty Resources for Program Objective Management..........................................................................39
       B.5.g. Faculty Workload Summary ....................................................................................................................39
       B.5.h. Listing of Courses taught by Faculty .......................................................................................................39
    B.6. FACILITIES .......................................................................................................................................................50
       B.6.a. 2EET Program Classrooms, Laboratories, and Infrastructure ...............................................................51
       B.6.b. 2EET Program Classroom Adequacy Assessment...................................................................................51
    B.7. INSTITUTIONAL AND EXTERNAL SUPPORT........................................................................................................54



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                                 Page 2 of 98                                                                  June 2006
                                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

       B.7.a. Adequacy of Institutional Support, Resources and Leadership ...............................................................54
       B.7.b. Support Expenditures for the 2EET Program..........................................................................................55
       B.7.c. Penn State Berks Campus Industrial Advisory Committee ......................................................................57
    B.8. PROGRAM CRITERIA .........................................................................................................................................57
       B.8.a. Evidence of Program Criteria Satisfaction..............................................................................................57
APPENDIX A: BERKS 2EET CQI MEETING MINUTES..................................................................................60

APPENDIX B: SYSTEM WIDE 2EET MEET, EXIT SURVEY RESULTS, AND COURSE CHAIR LIST ..65

APPENDIX C: BERKS IAC 2EET SUBCOMMITTEE BYLAWS, ANNUAL REPORT, AND MEETING
MINUTES ..................................................................................................................................................................88

APPENDIX D: 2EET CURRICULAR COMMITTEE CHARTER AND MEMBER LIST..............................93

APPENDIX E: 2EET CURRICULAR COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES ..................................................95


                                                                        List of Figures
Figure 1: 2EET Program Graduation Statistics since ABET TAC 2000/01 Assessment Cycle ..................................13
Figure 2: SEDTAPP University-Wide Continuous Improvement Process for Engineering Technology Programs....14
Figure 3: Curriculum Committee – Course Chair – Faculty Interactions ....................................................................17
Figure 4: Berks campus 2EET Program Continuous Improvement Process ...............................................................20
Figure 5: Penn State Berks versus University Wide MEET Course Survey Data FA04 .............................................24
Figure 6: Penn State Berks versus University Wide MEET Course Survey Data SP05..............................................25
Figure 7: Penn State Berks versus University Wide MEET Course Survey Data FA05 .............................................26
Figure 8: Penn State Berks versus University Wide MEET Course Survey Data SP06..............................................27
Figure 9: Electronics Laboratory, Luerssen Building , Room L22..............................................................................51
Figure 10: Autocontrols/Programable Logic Controller Laboratory, Luerssen Building, Room L4 ...........................52
Figure 11: Electrical Laboratory, Luerssen Building, Room L2 .................................................................................53

                                                                         List of Tables

Table 1: ABET TAC Assessment Team Findings at Berks Campus.............................................................................4
Table 2: 2EET Program Outcomes and ABET General Criteria Relationship ............................................................10
Table 3: Program Objective and Outcome Correlation ...............................................................................................10
Table 4: Program Outcome/ 2EET Program Course Mapping ....................................................................................11
Table 5: Organization of Program Outcome Display Materials ..................................................................................12
Table 6: 2EET Program Assessment Measures, Methods, Participants and Frequency..............................................18
Table 7: 2EET Program Curriculum and Course Sequencing .....................................................................................29
Table 8: 2EET Program General Education Courses...................................................................................................31
Table 9: Penn State Berks Actions from Measures & Evaluation in Engineering Technology Surveys .....................32
Table 10: Faculty Background Versus 2EET Program Curricular Areas ....................................................................37
Table 11: Berks Campus Faculty Professional Development Activities Since Last ABET Visit................................38
Table 12: Berks Campus Faculty Workload Summary ...............................................................................................39
Table 13: Berks Campus Listing of Courses Taught by Faculty .................................................................................39
Table 14: Faculty Analysis ..........................................................................................................................................40
Table 15: Support Expenditures for the 2EET Program ..............................................................................................55
Table 16: L2 Electrical Lab .........................................................................................................................................55
Table 17: L4 Automation and Control Lab .................................................................................................................56
Table 18: L22 Electronics Lab ....................................................................................................................................56
Table 19: Penn State Berks Campus Industrial Advisory Committee .........................................................................57
Table 20: Mapping 2EET Program Courses to ABET Program Criteria.....................................................................59




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                                Page 3 of 98                                                               June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



A. Background Information
A.1. Titles
The Electrical Engineering Technology (2EET) program is a two-year engineering technology program that awards
an Associate Degree in Electrical Engineering Technology to successful graduates. The 2EET Associate Degree is
the only degree awarded and there are no options offered.
A.2. Program Modes
The 2EET program is offered as a day and evening program. The day program cycle begins annually during each
Fall semester, while the evening program cycle begins every three years during the Fall semester. The most current
evening program cycle began in the Fall of 2004. More details about the program can be found at the campus
website <<http://www.bk.psu.edu/academics/degrees/2eet/2eet.html>>.


A.3. Actions to Correct Previous Findings
The last accreditation visit of the Berks Campus 2EET program occurred October 16 thru 17, 2000, and the final
report, which documented the findings of that visit, was issued on August 22, 2001. During that assessment cycle
three Berks Campus engineering technology degree programs were evaluated by the ABET TAC assessment team,
they were; the Mechanical Engineering and Electrical Engineering Technology Associate degree programs along
with the newly established Electro-Mechanical Engineering Technology Baccalaureate degree program. Both
Associate degree programs were re-accredited and the new Baccalaureate degree program was accredited for the
first time in 2001.

A summary of the ABET TAC assessment team final statements for the 2EET Associate degree program are
outlined in Table 1. Several strengths were noted for both the institution and the program. No deficiencies were
identified. Weaknesses, concerns, and comments aligned with a few central themes, primarily regarding student
recruitment and laboratory equipment.

Table 1: ABET TAC Assessment Team Findings at Berks Campus
ABET TAC Assessment Team Berks Campus 2000/01                                 2EET AD
Category
Institutional Strength          3                                             -
Institutional Deficiency        0                                             -
Institutional Weakness          0                                             -
Institutional Concern           1                                             -
Institutional Comment           0                                             -
Program Strength                -                                             2
Program Deficiency              -                                             0
Program Weakness                -                                             0
Program Concern                 -                                             1
Program Comment                 -                                             0

The ABET TAC assessment team recommended in its 2000/01 Institutional Concern that a recruiting and enrollment
strategy be developed for the associate degree programs to ensure continued program growth and stability. The
Berks campus developed the following actions to address this concern;
  (1) the college produce brochures for each program and distribute them to prospective students each academic
      year.
  (2) the college representatives annually visit high schools in the college service area.
  (3) the college faculty participate in Open House sessions for prospective engineering and engineering technology
      students.



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 4 of 98                                       June 2006
                            Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

    (4) the college representatives attend College Fairs to discuss engineering technology programs and distribute
        literature.
    (5) the college staff enhance websites for all engineering technology programs.
    (6) the college representatives attend Transfer Fairs at surrounding community colleges.
    (7) the college staff host meetings with the Southeast Pennsylvania Tech Prep Consortium.
    (8) the college advertise engineering technology programs in local media.

The ABET TAC assessment team recommended in its 2000/01 2EET Program Concern that the college develop and
implement a recruitment plan specifically focused at increasing enrollment in the program in order to ensure
continuous program growth and stability. The Berks campus developed four actions to address this concern:
    (1) the college meet with the Southeastern Tech Prep Consortium of Pennsylvania to develop articulation
        agreements with Career and Technology Centers in Berks and Lancaster counties.
    (2) the college publish a new 2EET program brochure and distribute to high schools in the college’s service area.
    (3) the college meet with prospective engineering technology students and parents during college sponsored Open
        Houses.
    (4) the college conduct a panel discussion of industry leaders during National Engineers week.

In addition to the above the Berks campus has completed the following actions since the last assessment cycle:
    (1) The Berks Campus hired a full-time engineering lab aide in November 2004 to support the engineering
        technology programs.
    (2) Since the 2000 accreditation visit, the School of Engineering Design, Technology and Professional Programs1
        (SEDTAPP) and the individual campuses offering engineering technology programs have undertaken a
        comprehensive re-design and implementation of continuous quality improvement programs. Many of the
        changes implemented through this process address the timely collection and evaluation of feedback from all
        program constituents, including graduates and employers of graduates. Details of improvements to the quality
        control process for the 2EET program as well as other programs are included in the assessment and evaluation
        section in this report.

The Berks campus formed its 2EET Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) team consisting of five faculty
members who teach courses in the 2EET program. The full-time faculty reviews the Standard Course Outlines and
provides feedback to system wide course chairs. The team is also working with part-time faculty to incorporate
outcomes into course syllabi. The 2EET CQI team evaluates the assessment data collected and makes
recommendations to the course chairs based on an evaluation comparison of campus outcome ratings to results
system wide. The recommendations will be acted upon with concurrence from the Industrial Advisory Committee
(IAC) and other program constituents. A list of recent recommendations from this team are summarized in Table 9.

The Berks campus addressed areas for improvements identified by ABET during the last accreditation visit. A
recruitment strategy was developed to stabilize the enrollment in the engineering technology programs and to
provide an opportunity for growth. The strategy encompassed producing and distributing advertising brochures to
prospective students; involving faculty and admissions staff at promotional events for parents and students;
developing partnerships with secondary schools, career and technology centers, and community colleges; and
enhancing program information available on our Web sites and during individual freshmen advising sessions. A
laboratory renovation and equipment upgrade was conducted to provide more laboratory experiences for students on
industrial type equipment. Two laboratories were repainted, refurbished, and re-equipped. Grants and gifts were
secured to purchase over $100,000 worth of modern equipment for the engineering technology labs. Several
initiatives closed the loop leading to quality improvements in the ET programs at Berks.

The Berks campus conducts an annual meeting each Fall with its Engineering and Engineering Technology
Industrial Advisory Committee. The purpose of the 2000 and 2001 meetings was to meet with the ABET TAC


1
  SEDTAPP is the department of Penn State’s College of Engineering with academic authority over the EET
program. This is a new name for the department. At the time of the 2000 visit, the department was named the
School of Engineering Technology and Commonwealth Engineering (SETCE).


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                           Page 5 of 98                                      June 2006
                            Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

assessment team during their site visits for the 2EET and 2MET programs in 2000 and for the EMET program in
2001.

The 2002 meeting was conducted on 15 October with ten faculty, five staff, and twelve engineers from industry
present. Members from industry were invited to be guest speakers at First Year Seminars for engineers. The EMET
Program reported on graduation and enrollment numbers and the status of articulation agreements with community
colleges. The 2EET Program reported on student enrollment and new automated data acquisition techniques to be
introduced into laboratory classes. The 2MET Program reported on student enrollment and requested feedback on
the computer-aided design software used by local industries. The Baccalaureate Engineering Program reported on
enrollment and the PA Engineering Equipment Grant Program. Continuing Education reported on the Project Lead
The Way Program and certificate courses in technology.

At the meeting, the IAC was provided an overview of the Engineering Assessment Plan development and
implementation process by the Berks campus Institutional Research & Assessment Officer. The assessment plans
developed within the Engineering programs at the college determine student learning outcomes, prepare for
accreditation renewal, and enhancing the programs’ accountability to their constituency (prospective students,
current students, alumni, employers, faculty, etc). The development of the assessment plan includes several
components:

 (1)   Develop/refine mission statement
 (2)   Confirm education objectives
 (3)   Articulate learning outcomes (includes defining assessment strategies and criteria)
 (4)   Gather data via assessment strategies
 (5)   Analyze and interpret data as feedback
 (6)   Recommend improvements to curriculum and learning objectives

Both associate and baccalaureate degree programs developed preliminary assessment plans with the new ABET
2000 criteria in mind. Appropriate assessment strategies such as employer surveys, alumni surveys, and exit
interviews with graduating students will be coordinated with the Office of Institutional Research to reduce
duplication of effort and maximize efficiency. Other assessment strategies such as review of transcripts and sample
student work will be coordinated in conjunction with the institutional research office and the engineering technology
program coordinators and assessment teams. A panel of Industrial Advisory Council members will be asked to
review the feedback and make recommendations for curricular improvements.

After the luncheon meeting, breakout sessions were held by each subcommittee to discuss details of assessment
plans for the EMET, 2EET and 2MET programs and to review continuing education activities to help meet the
technical training needs of area industries.

The 2003 meeting was held on 28 October. The agenda included status reports from EMET, 2EET, 2MET, ENGR
at Lehigh-Valley, and ENGR at Berks, Career Services, and Continuing Education. The Division Head for
Engineering, Business, and Computing lead a discussion forum on Engineering and Engineering Technology in the
Berks and Lehigh Valley Areas. A Program Coordinator presented material on ABET Preparation for Engineering
Technology Programs. Breakout groups met for EMET, 2EET, and 2MET to discuss the Program Objectives and
Program Outcomes drafted by the SEDTAPP Curricular Committees.

The most recent IAC meetings of Fall 2004 and 2005 have been devoted towards program status reporting including
providing feedback on program objectives and outcomes, enrollment trends, exit survey results, and employer
survey results with participation from the Berks campus Continuing Education, Alumni Relations, and Career
Services departments. A copy of the 2EET subcommittee report is included in Appendix C: Berks IAC 2EET
Subcommittee Bylaws, Annual Report, and Meeting Minutes

B. Accreditation Summary
To be accredited by the Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET), it is now necessary for
engineering technology programs adopt clearly defined and measurable program objectives and outcomes.
Objectives represent those post-graduation accomplishments reasonably expected of graduates within the first few


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                           Page 6 of 98                                     June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

years following graduation. Outcomes represent the skills, knowledge and capabilities graduates should attain at the
time of graduation such that they are prepared to achieve the objectives of the program.
The 2EET program at Penn State is offered at several campuses within the Penn State system including the Berks
campus. However, the program is academically controlled and administered by the School of Engineering Design,
Technology, and Professional Programs (SEDTAPP), which is a department within Penn State’s College of
Engineering. More information about SEDTAPP and its mission in the College of Engineering can be found at
<<http://www.sedtapp.psu.edu/>>. As such, the 2EET program curriculum, as well as its objectives and outcomes,
are common to all offerings of the program. To ensure proper breadth, relevance, and currency, the 2EET
curriculum, and the expected objectives and outcomes, were established and maintained, through an ongoing process
that involves faculty and constituent representation from all campuses where the 2EET program is offered. The
details of this process are described in later sections of this report where continuous quality improvement practices
are described; however, it was through this collective process that the current 2EET program objectives and
outcomes were established. The current objectives and outcomes are described in the following paragraphs.

B.1. Program Educational Objectives

B.1.a. Philosophy Behind 2EET Program Objectives
To be valid, program objectives must be derived from the larger vision and mission of the University and the
College offering the program. In the case of the 2EET program, this linkage is easily drawn. As stated in the latest
University strategic plan, Penn State “is a multi-campus, public land-grant university that improves the lives of
people…through, integrated, high-quality programs in teaching, research and service.”2 In the arena of academic
programs, the University pursues this vision via a strategy that calls for “review[ing] academic programs [for]
quality, centrality, and demand [and] identify[ing] programs for enhancement, expansion, redefinition, merger, or
elimination to achieve world-class excellence.”3 Within the University, the College of Engineering (COE) is the
primary agent responsible for pursuing this academic strategy for engineering technology programs. That
responsibility is reflected in the College’s most recent strategic plan, where it is stated that the College’s mission is
to ‘develop and deliver an undergraduate curriculum based on active, problem-based and professionally oriented
teaching and learning’4 and to do so in a way that gives Penn State engineering technology programs their ‘own
identity and decision making capability,’ ‘strengthen[s] baccalaureate pathways for viable programs,’ and ‘markets
Penn State engineering technology programs nationwide.’5
In the SEDTAPP’s view, the University’s and College’s focus on ‘problem-based, professionally oriented’
academics is consistent with the demands that future engineering technology graduates will face. That is, job
challenges for future graduates will be driven more by two trends – rapid changes in technology (automation,
digitization, miniaturization, embedded computerization, etc.) and market globalization – than by any other factors.
In that context, it will not be so much the facts and information that graduates acquire while in school that matter,
but will instead be their ability to apply new facts and information to the conceptualization, evaluation and solution
to new problems, to be able to convey those solutions in clear fashion to others, and to do so in the context of local
and international demands and constraints. Further, their professional success and advancement will hinge on
their ability to respond to new problems in this way.

The objectives of the Penn State 2EET program reflect the conviction that future graduates will be faced with ever
increasing technical job challenges driven by the rapidly changing face of the global economy. Modernization,
digitization, and automation across the spectrum of human endeavor mean that almost any technical system today
will include elements from almost all aspects of electrical technology. Analog sensors measure the state of the
surroundings. Signal conditioners manage and digitize that information, and computers or embedded processors use
the digitized information to determine desired actions and information. Computed results drive both digital and
analog devices to move things, display things, alter things, communicate, or otherwise produce desired effects.

2
  “Progress Admist Challenge – The Pennsylvania State University Strategic Plan – 2003-04 through 2005-06,” page
4.
3
  Ibid, page 6.
4
  Penn State University College of Engineering Strategic Plan, 2005/6 – 2008/9, page 11
5
  Ibid., page 13

ABET 2K TAC Self Study                           Page 7 of 98                                         June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

2EET graduates in this environment will be obligated to understand, assemble, install, operate, troubleshoot, and
many times help in the design of all aspects of these new technologies and products. To do so, they will need a solid
theoretical foundation across the spectrum of electrical, electronic, digital and computer topics. However, beyond
the theory, they will need to understand and quantify the practical capabilities and limitations of technologies built
on the theory. Otherwise, without this practical foundation, their ability to operate, install, troubleshoot, and
maintain modern systems will be severely limited.
However, theoretical and practical understanding is no longer enough. The ever increasing influence of global
competition and the global economy means that all fields, technical and non-technical, involve more interaction and
cooperation among individuals from varying cultures and backgrounds than ever before. In this environment, strong
interpersonal skills, effective communication, and sound social, environmental, and ethical awareness are essential.
Finally, the rapid pace of technological change in recent years has made it clear that the technical details that
students learn in school today will be obsolete long before their careers end. Therefore the only defense against
technical obsolescence is a commitment to continual education, either self-directed or in an organized format.
Technical specialists must accept this commitment or they will be unsuccessful. With this philosophical framework,
the objectives adopted for Penn State’s 2EET program are discussed in the following section.


B.1.b. 2EET Program Objectives
The 2EET program objectives are – “To produce graduates who, during the first few years of professional practice,
will:
    1.   Demonstrate broad knowledge of electrical/electronics engineering technology practices to support
         design, application, installation, manufacturing, operation, and maintenance as required by their
         employer,
    2.   Apply basic mathematical and scientific principles for technical problem solving in areas which may
         include circuit analysis and analog and digital electronics, microprocessors and electrical machines,
    3.   Utilize computers and software in a technical environment,
    4.   Demonstrate competence in written and oral communication,
    5.   Work effectively as an individual and as a member of a multidisciplinary team,
    6.   Show awareness of social concerns and professional responsibilities in the workplace, and
    7.   Continue their professional training and adapt to changes in the workplace through additional formal
         or informal education.”
B.2. Program Outcomes

The program objectives outlined in section B.1. Program Educational Objectives are the achievements that
are expected of 2EET graduates once they leave Penn State and embark on their careers. Program outcomes, on the
other hand, are those skills and capabilities that are the foundation on which those achievements can be built.
Program outcomes are the basis on which 2EET graduates will build a successful career, as reflected in their ability
to achieve the objectives outlined above. Eleven outcomes have been established for the 2EET program to ensure
graduates are equipped to accomplish the expected objectives.
B.2.a. 2EET Program Outcomes
Those outcomes require that – “Graduates be able to:
    1.   Apply basic knowledge in electronics, electrical circuit analysis, electrical machines, microprocessors,
         and programmable logic controllers,
    2.   Conduct experiments, and then analyze and interpret results,
    3.   Apply basic mathematical, scientific, and engineering concepts to technical problem solving,
    4.   Demonstrate a working knowledge of drafting and computer usage, including the use of one or more
         computer software packages for technical problem solving,
    5.   Communicate effectively orally, visually, and in writing,
    6.   Work effectively in teams,
    7.   Understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities,


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                          Page 8 of 98                                       June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

    8.  Have a respect for diversity and a knowledge of contemporary professional, societal and global issues,
    9.  Recognize the need for lifelong learning and be prepared to continue their education through formal
        or informal study,
    10. Apply creativity through the use of project-based work to design circuits, systems or processes, and
    11. Have a commitment to quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement.”


B.2.b. 2EET Program Outcome Relationship with ABET Criterion 2
In addition to the objectives, which establish expectations for the performance of 2EET graduates once they enter
the workforce after graduation, TAC of ABET also has expectations regarding the capabilities and skills that all
engineering technology students should possess at the time they graduate. These general expectations are defined in
Criterion 2 of the General Accreditation Criteria and are typically referred to as the “a – k” requirements. In the
most recent Accreditation Criteria, these requirements stipulate that – “graduates [from accredited engineering
technology associate degree programs] have:
    a.   appropriate mastery of the knowledge, techniques, skills and modern tools of their disciplines
    b.   ability to apply current knowledge and adapt to emerging applications of mathematics, science,
         engineering and technology
    c.   ability to conduct, analyze and interpret experiments and apply experimental results to improve
         processes
    d.   ability to apply creativity in the design of systems, components or processes appropriate to program
         objectives
    e.   ability to function effectively on teams
    f.   ability to identify, analyze and solve technical problems
    g.   ability to communicate effectively
    h.   recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in, lifelong learning
    i.   ability to understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities
    j.   respect for diversity and a knowledge of contemporary professional, societal and global issues
    k.   commitment to quality, timeliness and continuous improvement”
B.2.c. 2EET Program Outcome Relationship with ABET Criterion 1
In addition to the General Criteria, which apply to all accredited engineering technology programs, there are also
specific performance expectations established by program specific accreditation criteria. The program specific
criteria for Electrical/Electronic(s) Engineering Technology Programs stipulate that – “graduates [from accredited
associate degree programs] must demonstrate knowledge and hands-on competence … in:
    a.   the application of circuit analysis and design, computer programming, associated software, analog
         and digital electronics, and microcomputers towards the building, testing, operation, and maintenance
         of electrical/electronic systems, and
    b.   the application of physics or chemistry to electrical/electronic(s) circuits in a rigorous mathematical
         environment at or above the level of algebra and trigonometry.”
Both the general and the program specific criteria were considered during the development of the 2EET program
outcomes. The correspondence between 2EET outcomes and the general and program specific criteria are outlined
in Table 2.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 9 of 98                                        June 2006
                                   Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

Table 2: 2EET Program Outcomes and ABET General Criteria Relationship

                       Program Outcomes                                                   ABET General Criteria                           2EET
                          (Students should: )                                                                                            Program
                                                                                                                                         Specific
                                                                                                                                         Criteria
                                                                          a     b     c     d       e   f   g    h       i       j   k    a    b
1       Apply basic knowledge in electronics, electrical circuit
        analysis, electrical machines, microprocessors, and               X     X                                                        X
        programmable logic controllers.
2       Conduct experiments, and then analyze and interpret results.                  X                                                  X
3       Apply basic mathematical, scientific, and engineering
                                                                                X           X           X                                X    X
        concepts to technical problem solving.
4       Demonstrate a working knowledge of drafting and computer
        usage, including the use of one or more computer software         X                                                              X
        packages for technical problem solving.
5       Communicate effectively orally, visually, and in writing.                                           X
6       Work effectively in teams.                                                                  X
7       Understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities.                                                    X
8       Have a respect for diversity and a knowledge of
                                                                                                                             X
        contemporary professional, societal and global issues
9       Recognize the need for lifelong learning and be prepared to
                                                                                                                 X
        continue their education through formal or informal study.
10      Apply creativity through the use of project-based work to
                                                                                            X                                            X
        design circuits, systems or processes.
11      Have a commitment to quality, timeliness, and continuous
                                                                                                                                     X
        improvement.


B.2.d. Relationship between 2EET Program Outcomes and Program Objectives
If program outcomes are to provide the proper foundation for achieving program objectives, it is essential that there
be a direct correlation between the outcomes and the expected objectives. Table 3 illustrates this correlation in
general terms.

Table 3: Program Objective and Outcome Correlation

                                                                                                                Program Objectives

                     Program Outcomes (i.e., students should:)                                          1   2        3       4       5    6    7
    1     Apply basic knowledge in electronics, electrical circuit analysis, electrical machines,
                                                                                                        X   X
          microprocessors, and programmable logic controllers.
    2     Conduct experiments, and then analyze and interpret results.                                  X            X
    3     Apply basic mathematical, scientific, and engineering concepts to technical problem
                                                                                                        X   X        X
          solving.
    4     Demonstrate a working knowledge of drafting and computer usage, including the use
                                                                                                        X   X        X
          of one or more computer software packages for technical problem solving.
    5     Communicate effectively orally, visually, and in writing.                                                  X       X
    6     Work effectively in teams.                                                                                                 X
    7     Understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities.                                                                   X    X
    8     Have a respect for diversity and a knowledge of contemporary professional, societal
                                                                                                                                     X    X
          and global issues
    9     Recognize the need for lifelong learning and be prepared to continue their education
                                                                                                                                               X
          through formal or informal study.
 10       Apply creativity through the use of project-based work to design circuits, systems or
                                                                                                        X                            X
          processes.
 11       Have a commitment to quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement.                                      X               X    X




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                       Page 10 of 98                                                       June 2006
                                Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

B.2.e. The Relationship between 2EET Program and Course Outcomes
In general, 2EET program outcomes are achieved through work in the various courses that make up the 2EET
curriculum. To ensure that happens, it is necessary to recognize the relationship among the expected outcomes and
the courses that are responsible for achieving those outcomes. That relationship, as currently constituted in the
2EET curriculum, are illustrated in the following table, which indicates those courses that are primarily responsible
for achieving the individual outcomes. However, it is important to recognize that most, if not all, outcomes are
achieved through the influence of many courses and activities. That is, the relationship between program outcomes
and program courses shown in Table 4 is not an exclusive one; the courses indicated as responsible for achieving an
outcome are just the primary source of that training, but not necessarily the only one. Details of the curriculum and
the courses making up the curriculum are covered in a later section of this report.

Table 4: Program Outcome/ 2EET Program Course Mapping

          Program Outcomes                                                                                                         Courses
          (Students should: )



                                                                                  EET 109 LAB




                                                                                                                                        EET 118 LAB

                                                                                                                                                      EET 120 LAB

                                                                                                                                                                    EET 205 LAB




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     EET 221 LAB
                                                                                                                                                                                                      EET 213W




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Gen. Educ.
                                                                                                EGT 101

                                                                                                          EGT 102
                                                                        EET 101




                                                                                                                    EET 114

                                                                                                                              EET 117




                                                                                                                                                                                  EET 210

                                                                                                                                                                                            EET 211



                                                                                                                                                                                                                 EET 216

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           EET 220
                                                      ET 002

                                                               ET 005



1 Apply basic knowledge in electronics, electrical
  circuit analysis, electrical machines,
                                                                        X                                           X         X                                                   X         X         X          X         X
  microprocessors, and programmable logic
  controllers.
2 Conduct experiments, and then analyze and
                                                                                  X                                                     X             X             X                                                                X
  interpret results.
3 Apply basic mathematical, scientific, and
  engineering concepts to technical problem                    X                                                    X                                                             X                   X          X
  solving.
4 Demonstrate a working knowledge of drafting
  and computer usage, including the use of one or
                                                               X                                X         X                                                                                 X                              X
  more computer software packages for technical
  problem solving.
5 Communicate effectively orally, visually, and in
                                                                                                                                                      X             X                                 X                    X
  writing.
6 Work effectively in teams.                                                                                                            X                                                             X                    X         X
7 Understand professional, ethical and social
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   X
  responsibilities.
8 Have a respect for diversity and a knowledge of
  contemporary professional, societal and global                                                                                                                                                                                                   X
  issues
9 Recognize the need for lifelong learning and be
  prepared to continue their education through        X                                                                                                                                                                                            X
  formal or informal study.
1 Apply creativity through the use of project-based
                                                                                                                                                      X             X                       X                              X
0 work to design circuits, systems or processes.
1 Have a commitment to quality, timeliness, and
                                                                                                                                                                                                      X                    X
1 continuous improvement.


B.2.f. 2EET Program Organization of Display Materials Demonstrating Accomplishment of Outcomes
To facilitate the accreditation team’s review of the success of the 2EET program in achieving its defined outcomes,
Table 5 has been used as an organizing framework for program outcome display materials. These folders shall be
arranged by outcome and contain samples of student work relevant to that outcome from each of the courses
indicated in Table 4. Evidence in terms of the ability of the 2EET program to meet its program objectives shall be
arranged in a series of folders containing samples of current alumni, employer, and exit surveys.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                    Page 11 of 98                                                                                                                               June 2006
                            Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


Table 5: Organization of Program Outcome Display Materials
Element                                                    Description
                        6
Standard Course Outline                                    SEDTAPP foundation document describing, for all
                                                           instructors teaching this course, the essential materials to
                                                           be covered in the course. Among other things, the
                                                           standard course outline identifies the program outcomes
                                                           supported by the course (from Table 4), and more
                                                           important, defines for each program outcome, one or
                                                           more explicit ‘course outcomes’ to be achieved by the
                                                           course. ‘Course outcomes’ are those context-appropriate
                                                           goals of the course that have direct relevance to
                                                           accomplishment of the higher-level program outcomes
                                                           supported by the course.
Course Syllabus                                            Instructor’s specific outline, based on the standard
                                                           course outline, describing class schedules, reading
                                                           assignments, grading policies, etc.
Course Outcome Mapping                                     Instructor’s specific mapping to evidence for each
                                                           individual each course outcome.



B.3. Assessment and Evaluation

B.3.a. Assessment and Evaluation


Data provided by the Penn State Berks Alumni and Registrar Offices show that 61% of 2EET graduates have gone
on to further their education by pursuing a four-year or advanced degree. Figure 1 shows student enrollment has
gradually increased since 2000 with exception to the 2004/05 academic year where the enrollment dropped to five.
This brief drop in enrollment is believed to be caused by the recent closure of Agere Systems, which in the past, was
a major constituent of the program due to the number of their employees enrolled in the program. The most recent
cycle of the Berks 2EET program cycle which began in the Fall 2005 session showed 14 new students enrolled
overall for the Fall 2005 session with 30 students enrolled in the major.




6
   Standard course outlines are reference documents used by all faculty teaching EET courses in the Penn State
system. Each outline defines the minimum expectations for course coverage, suggests textbooks, identifies
necessary laboratory equipment, etc. An outline also identifies the program outcomes that a course is expected to
support, and more important, defines in terms explicit to the course content those achievements that will support
achievement of the related program outcomes. Section B.3 of this report explains standard course outlines in more
detail.

ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 12 of 98                                        June 2006
                                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


                      Berks 2EET Graduate Trend                                   Distribution of 2EET Graduates

                16
                14
                12                                                                                  1, 3%
     Students




                10
                                                                              16, 39%                               15, 38%
                 8
                 6
                 4
                 2
                 0                                                                                8, 20%
                     2000/01   2001/02   2002/03   2003/04   2004/05
                                     Academic Year

                                     2EET Graduates                           BS EET    BS EMET   Other Degree   Work/Unknown


                     Figure 1: 2EET Program Graduation Statistics since ABET TAC 2000/01 Assessment Cycle


B.3.b. 2EET Program CQI Process


SEDTAPP is the department for the College of Engineering with the academic authority to carry out the engineering
technology mission as established by the College’s strategic plan. SEDTAPP is also the office that coordinates the
delivery of these programs for the University College, of which the Berks campus is one location. From the
perspective of curriculum and programs, that mission for engineering technology is to ‘develop and deliver an
undergraduate curriculum based on active, problem-based and professionally oriented teaching and learning’7 and
to do so in a way that gives Penn State engineering technology programs their ‘own identity and decision making
capability,’ ‘strengthen[s] baccalaureate pathways for viable programs,’ and ‘markets Penn State engineering
technology programs nationwide.’8


B.3.b.1. SEDTAPP University Wide Continuous Improvement Plan


SEDTAPP strives to achieve this mission via a three-pronged strategy that emphasizes ongoing assessment of and
planning for the future vision of technology; systematic control, monitoring and evolutionary growth of existing
program curricula, and coordinated resource allocation and professional development of faculty. The general
responsibilities for carrying out these three strategies are embedded in three broad-based activities headed,
respectively, by the Engineering Technology Council, the Engineering Technology Advisory Board, and the
administrations of the SEDTAPP and the individual University campuses where technology programs are offered.
Further, ongoing monitoring, assessment, improvement, and strategic growth of all the engineering technology are
inherent features of these activities. The attached diagram, Figure 2, summarizes the organization and interaction
among these activities. Detailed descriptions of the activities and responsibilities of each area follow.




7
    Penn State University College of Engineering Strategic Plan, 2005/6 – 2008/9, page 11
8
    Penn State University College of Engineering Strategic Plan, 2005/6 – 2008/9, page 13


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                        Page 13 of 98                                      June 2006
                     Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology




   Figure 2: SEDTAPP University-Wide Continuous Improvement Process for Engineering Technology
                                           Programs




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                Page 14 of 98                               June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

The Engineering Technology Council (ETC):

In addition to the COE’s engineering technology programs delivered by the University College, there are
engineering technology programs offered, and in some cases academically controlled, by four other academic
colleges within the Penn State system (The Capital College, the Altoona College, the Behrend College and the Berks
College). Student movement among these programs is common, and in fact, is encouraged by the University to
optimize the availability of programs to all Pennsylvania residents. As a result, it is essential that programs at all
locations and colleges remain as compatible as possible to avoid creating artificial barriers for students needing this
flexibility of movement. Further, it is essential that all of the technology programs at the University share a
coordinated strategy of program and curriculum development to minimize unwanted duplication, optimize resource
usage, avoid internal competition for students, and create an integrated system of opportunities for future technology
students. The ETC is the main vehicle for ensuring the inter-campus coordination necessary to bring these results
about.

The ETC consists of the administrative leaders (department heads, division head, etc.) at each of the six colleges
involved in offering engineering technology programs. The Council typically meets four times a year, and the
meetings typically focus on developing long-term vision and strategy to enhance engineering technology (ET)
system-wide. These efforts involve developing a body-of-knowledge for ET, working with state-wide economic
development initiatives, collaborating with state industry consortiums, and benchmarking with other institutions in
the country.

The Engineering Technology Advisory Board (ETAB):

The ETAB serves both a strategic role and an operational role in the management of engineering technology at Penn
State. Its strategic role is to serve as an advisory body to the ETC with the specific duty of helping to develop
strategic visions for the orderly evolution of ET at Penn State. This duty includes identifying emerging issues likely
to influence future technology education, assessing the relevance of those issues to Penn State ET programs,
brainstorming effective responses to emerging trends, developing practical strategies for pursuing future visions,
identifying potential funding sources for development activities, and preparing grant proposals to obtain funding.

The ETAB’s operational role is to facilitate the consistent delivery of SEDTAPP’s existing technology programs
across the Penn State system, and to manage the orderly evolution of those curricula to meet changing demands. It
does this by overseeing curriculum development activities in all the ET programs and by working to ensure that all
programs evolve in a consistent and coordinated fashion. In this role, the ETAB establishes consistent goals for all
programs, correlates activities and courses that can be shared among programs, establishes and disseminates
curriculum and course standards, respondes to constituents’ suggestions for curriculum improvement, and manages
evolutionary changes in curricula.

The ETAB consist of selected faculty members, key administrators, and active curriculum and course coordinators
from throughout the Penn State technology system. Because of ETAB’s focus on curriculum evolution, the key
constituents are the lead ET curriculum and course coordinators. It typically meets two to three times each year.

The ETAB accomplishes its operational objectives primarily by providing strategic direction to its three main
support groups: the system-wide program coordinators, the program curriculum committees, and the engineering
technology course chairs. The roles of each of those groups are:

         System-wide Program Coordinators – though there are eight distinct ET programs in the SEDTAPP system
         (2EET, 2MET, BET, TelET, NanoET, AET, BEST, and EMET) , commonalties in their curricula permit
         them to be grouped into three major programmatic areas: Electrical-based ET (2EET, TelET, BET, &
         NanoET), Mechanical-based ET (2MET, AET, & BEST), and Electro-Mechanical ET (EMET). The
         SEDTAPP has assigned a System-wide Program Coordinator for each of these programmatic areas. A
         system-wide coordinator’s job is to be the liaison among the individual program coordinators at all
         campuses where their respective programs are offered. The liaison function relates primarily to keeping
         campus program leaders abreast of curriculum developments, coordinating development activities that
         involve those leaders, identifying opportunities for resource sharing and/or exchange among programs, and


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 15 of 98                                        June 2006
                        Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

       identifying common needs and interests, and opportunities for shared effort, among faculty at different
       locations.

       Program Curriculum Committees – as with the system-wide coordinators, there are three SEDTAPP
       Curriculum Committees, one for 2EET-related programs, one for 2MET-related programs, and one for the
       EMET programs. Curriculum committees are responsible for establishing, controlling, monitoring,
       disseminating, and directing the orderly evolution of the SEDTAPP engineering technology program
       curricula. The committees meet twice during the year at the spring and fall SEDTAPP faculty meetings
       and at other times during the year as situations dictate. Committees consist of faculty representatives from
       all of the colleges within Penn State that deliver engineering technology programs. Committee functions,
       membership, and operating rules are governed by Bylaws, which are available at
       <<http://cede.psu.edu/tc2k/contents/programs.htm>>. Each committee accomplishes its charge mainly
       through the following activities:

           •   Establishing and disseminating the TC2K ‘objectives’ expected of the program, and periodically
               reviewing and updating those objectives based on assessment information.
           •   Establishing and disseminating the TC2K ‘outcomes’ expected of the program, and periodically
               reviewing and updating those outcomes to ensure they support the current program objectives.
           •   Establishing those courses and activities in the program curriculum that are to be the primary
               means by which program outcomes are to be achieved.
           •   Recruiting and managing course chairpersons to develop and maintain standard course outlines for
               all technical courses in the curriculum.
           •   Reviewing, approving, and disseminating standard course outlines to faculty.
           •   Receiving, reviewing, responding to, and acting on faculty recommendations for curriculum
               change and improvement.
           •   Managing the curricular change process though the colleges and the University Faculty Senate for
               official curriculum changes.
           •   Monitoring program-related assessment information from various assessment systems (employer,
               graduate, and student exit surveys; advisory body inputs; M.E.E.T. data system; etc.) and taking
               appropriate curricular action to respond to that information.
           •   Maintaining records documenting curricular change activities.

       Course Chairpersons – chairpersons in charge of SEDTAPP’s standard course outlines hold a key place in
       the SEDTAPP curricular quality control structure. As noted above, curriculum committees establish the
       expected ‘objectives’ and ‘outcomes’ for programs, and then identify those courses in the curriculum that
       are the key producers of the expected outcomes. The committees rely on a set of approved, standard course
       outlines to ensure that the defined outcomes are consistently achieved everywhere a program is offered.
       They do this by expecting every faculty member teaching in the SEDTAPP engineering technology
       programs to use the standard outlines as the basis for their own in-course syllabi. Course outlines follow a
       standard format. They also explicitly identify the program outcomes supported by the course, expand those
       program outcomes into specific course outcomes, suggest example activities and practices that can be used
       to achieve those course outcomes, and suggest possible ways to assess and document students’ success in
       achieving each outcome.

       Course chairs are the agents responsible for developing, maintaining, and revising the course outlines.
       Chairs are selected from among the faculty who have significant experience teaching each course. Those
       faculty are responsible to first develop, and then provide annual updates of the outlines to the curriculum
       committees for review and approval. Approved outlines are then distributed to all faculty, generally via the
       various curriculum committee websites. The 2EET Curriculum Committee website can be found at
       https://cms.psu.edu/section/default.asp?id=GROUP%2D050404%2D163808%2DXEJ.                     (authorization
       required)

       In the process of developing and maintaining outlines, course chairs receive input from several sources. As
       noted above, curriculum committees identify the program outcomes to be supported by courses, and act as
       the review and approval body for changes to outlines. However, the primary inputs leading to


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                       Page 16 of 98                                      June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

        improvement of outlines come from faculty. Each semester, the SEDTAPP surveys (via the M.E.E.T data
        system) the performance of every technology course at every location with reference to the established
        program ‘outcomes.’ One element of that process offers faculty the opportunity to comment on the
        effectiveness of existing course outlines and course outcomes, and to offer suggestions for improvement.
        Those suggestions and comments are made available directly to the course chairs. When receiving such
        comments, course chairs are expected to evaluate the comments, if necessary, discuss the comments with
        the appropriate faculty, and develop suitable responses. Suitable responses may be anything from a
        discussion and resolution of the comments with the interested faculty to the identification of necessary
        revisions to the outline. Course chairs are responsible for managing and documenting these activities and
        reporting the outcomes to curriculum committees on an annual basis. The flow chart in Figure 3 clarifies
        the nature of these interactions.




                   Figure 3: Curriculum Committee – Course Chair – Faculty Interactions


Administrative Support Structure For Engineering Technology:

The framework on which all of the above activities hang is the administrative infrastructure of the Penn State
colleges that offer technology programs. The head of the SEDTAPP provides overall coordination of this function,
primarily by interacting with the local campus Directors of Academic Affairs (DAAs) to keep them apprised of
external demands and obligations on the technology programs (mostly related to accreditation), future directions and
opportunities being pursued by SEDTAPP leadership, and funding and grant opportunities that may help support



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 17 of 98                                       June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

local programs. The SEDTAPP head also establishes workload guidelines for technology faculty, provides input to
faculty performance evaluations, consults in and provides guidance for faculty hiring, and advocates, with the
campus administration, in faculty promotion and tenure decisions. Finally, the SEDTAPP provides some funds to
the campuses to support professional development activities for faculty.

Campus DAAs are the local counterparts to the SEDTAPP head. They are the academic leaders at the campuses,
and as such, are most directly responsible for faculty supervision and development. They are responsible for
managing work assignments, providing necessary clerical and staff support, assessing and rewarding performance,
planning for and supporting professional development, ensuring adequate resources and facilities for programs,
hiring faculty, and advocating for faculty in promotion and tenure processes.

A Campus Program Coordinator is the main administrative interface between the DAA and the technology program
and its faculty. The coordinator’s core role typically includes establishing program class schedules, assigning
standing faculty to classes, arranging for adjunct faculty when needed, advising students, and interacting with the
System-wide Program Coordinator (see above). Coordinators also monitor and anticipate equipment and resource
needs of the technology programs and keep campus administration aware of those needs. They also are expected to
take the lead in identifying sources and possible funding to meet those needs. Much of this activity takes place via
interactions with the local industrial advisory committees, which are typically orchestrated by the campus
coordinator. Finally, coordinators are typically leaders in campus recruitment and marketing efforts, and for
identifying and organizing student internships, tours, and recruitment functions.

Finally, the faculty represent the foundation for all of the functions discussed above. In the context of ensuring
quality of the technology programs, they have four key roles. First and foremost, they are obligated to teach the
various courses in the program with particular emphasis given to accomplishing the course outcomes stipulated in
the standard course outlines. Second, they are responsible for continually assessing the accomplishments in their
courses against their expected outcomes, mainly by participating in the various assessment activities and surveys
conducted by the SEDTAPP via the ETAB. They are also expected to routinely assess both their courses and the
program with respect to developing trends and changing technology, and to recommend to course chairs and
curriculum committees, course and curriculum adjustments to adapt to these changes. Finally, faculty are expected
to be actively involved with local industrial contacts, via the local advisory committee and elsewhere, to identify
sources of resources, funding, and adjunct faculty candidates, and to create opportunities for tours, internship,
student employment, and faculty development and consultancy.

A number of strategies are employed by the Berks Campus to assure the 2EET program is fulfilling its stated
mission. These strategies include an evaluation and assessment plan designed to monitor the program and provide
feedback to the Berks Campus 2EET program continuous improvement committee (CQI) for appropriate action.
Assessment is undertaken using a feedback loop system generally based on two means of feedback. The first of the
two loops reviews the objectives and determines whether the program satisfactorily meets the requirements of the
constituents, while the second reviews the outcomes to determine whether the program is providing the education
necessary to meet the objectives.    Evaluation is based on data obtained from assessment measures reflected in
Table 6 and are used to draw assessment conclusions about the 2EET program vision, mission, and outcomes.
Minutes of the Berks 2EET CQI meetings are included in Appendix A: Berks 2EET CQI Meeting Minutes
Table 6: 2EET Program Assessment Measures, Methods, Participants and Frequency

Measure         Method                              Purpose               Participants   Frequency Media
1               Locally Developed Student Course    Analyzing student     Instructors    Periodically       Paper
                Examinations and Quizzes            performance in                       During Each
                                                    and out of the                       Semester
                                                    classroom
2               Locally Developed Laboratory        Analyzing student     Instructors    Periodically       Paper
                Reports                             competence in                        During Each
                                                    critical laboratory                  Semester
                                                    skills
3               Locally Developed Student           Analyzing student     Instructors    Periodically       Paper
                Communication Skills &              competence in                        During Each
                Competencies                        critical                             Semester
                                                    communication
                                                    skills



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                             Page 18 of 98                                        June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

4             Graduating Student Exit                 Seeks evaluation    Graduating Students    Each               Online
              Questionnaires                          of program                                 Semester
5             https://www.engr.psu.edu/MEET           Seeks 360 degree    Students and Faculty   Each               Online
                                                      evaluation of                              Semester
              Course                                  course outcomes
              Evaluations
6             http://srte.site.psu.edu/SRTEReport/    Seeks evaluation    Students               Each Semester      Paper
              Instructor Evaluations                  of instructor
                                                      performance
7             Alumni Survey                           Seeks alumni        Graduates within 5     Annually           Mailing
                                                      evaluation of the   years of graduation
                                                      program and
                                                      objectives
8             Employer Survey                         Seeks employer      Employers in the       Annually           Mailing
                                                      evaluation of       Berks County region
                                                      program and         and those who hire
                                                      objectives          graduates
9             Student Focus Groups & Forums           Seeks student       Entering Freshmen      Periodically       Paper
                                                      feedback on the
                                                      reasons they
                                                      chose the program



       Measures 1, 2, and 3: Student exams, laboratories, project reports, presentations, and project evaluations, in
       core 2EET classes are the basis for assessment measures 1, 2, and 3. Samples of this data are provided by
       all 2EET instructors and are forwarded to the staff assistant for report consolidation and archiving. The
       report is made available by the Program Coordinator at the end of each semester. The Program
       Coordinator then disseminates the results to appropriate constituents.

       Measure 4: Student exit questionnaires are distributed in the fourth semester in conjunction with the
       graduation application process. The results of the exit questionnaire are subsequently forwarded to the staff
       assistant. The results of this survey are made available by the Program Coordinator at the end of the
       semester. The Program Coordinator then disseminates the results to appropriate constituents.

       Measure 5: Web-based course evaluations are administered at the end of each semester by the University
       and subsequently provided to the Staff Assistant. The results of this survey are made available to the
       Program Coordinator at the end of the semester by each faculty member along with a plan of actions to
       address inadequacies. The Program Coordinator then disseminates the results to appropriate constituents.

       Measure 6: Paper Student Rating of Teaching Effectiveness (SRTE) are administered at the end of each
       semester by faculty and provided to the Staff Assistant. The results of this survey compiled by University
       Park location and forwarded to the Berks Campus Division Head six weeks after the close of the semester.
       These confidential results are then shared with faculty during their annual evaluation with their division
       head.

       Measures 7 and 8: Alumni and Employer surveys are administered by the staff assistant normally in late
       Spring/early Summer. The results of these surveys are made available to the Program Coordinator at the
       end of the semester. The Program Coordinator then disseminates results to appropriate constituents.

       Measure 9: Student focus groups may be held periodically to study the trends of Freshmen students
       entering the college and the reasons for their major selections. The results of this survey are made available
       to the Program Coordinator at the end of the semester. The Program Coordinator then disseminates the
       results to appropriate constituents. As of the date of this self study no focus group study data was available
       and none were planned.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                               Page 19 of 98                                              June 2006
                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



B.3.b.2. Penn State Berks Local 2EET Continuous Improvement Process


The 2EET program is controlled overall by the mission, vision, goals of the college, and the program’s continuous
improvement (CQI) committee. The committee’s charter is to continuously improve the program though feedback
taken from the assessment measures, advances in technology, students, industrial, and alumni constituencies. The
Berks 2EET program CQI committee is composed of fulltime faculty who teach courses in the 2EET program and is
chaired by the Program Coordinator. The CQI committee meets twice per semester to discuss status of actions
based on data collected from the assessment measures and program constituencies. Figure 4 reflects the means by
which the continuous improvement process in conducted. Examples of improvement achieved through this process
are discussed in section B.3.b.3. Examples of Continuous Improvement Evidence




                  Figure 4: Berks campus 2EET Program Continuous Improvement Process




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                       Page 20 of 98                                     June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

B.3.b.2.1. Berks 2EET Program Constituencies
It is important that the 2EET program meets the needs of its constituents and we recognize that the constituents’
needs may change over time. The program must change as the needs change in order to remain valuable to the
constituents. To recognize the need for change, the program must keep contact with the constituents. Any changes
affecting more than one constituent will be reviewed with input from other constituents. Determining the degree to
which the constituents are satisfied is done in the manners listed below. The program strategies to do so are
contained here.

        Students: The SEDTAP committee developed a web-based assessment tool titled “Measures and
        Evaluation for Engineering Technology” (MEET) for use in engineering technology programs. At the end
        of each semester students are requested to complete a course survey that prompts them to rate their ability
        in accomplishing the course requirements and overall outcomes. The instructors of these courses are
        requested to complete a course survey that prompts them to rate the effectiveness of the course in meeting
        each outcome as well as each individual students ability to meet the outcomes. The data is compiled at
        University Park campus and is available to all engineering faculty usually by the next semester. Program
        outcome based results are included in this report and are a part of section B.3.b.2.2. Berks Use of 2EET
        Assessment Findings to Strengthen Program

        Graduates: The ETCE has initialed on a pilot basis web-based survey to help assess and potentially
        improve the quality of engineering technology programs. That tool is a comprehensive, web based exit
        survey given to all two-year engineering technology graduates. This survey investigates all aspects of the
        students’ experiences in the 2EET program, ranging from hours spent studying to satisfaction with faculty,
        advising, lab facilities, student classmates, etc. The first pilot survey was conducted during March and
        April of 2004. A sample of this report is included in Appendix B: System Wide 2EET MEET, Exit
        Survey Results, and Course Chair List.

        Alumni: Surveys sent to former graduates of the 2EET program are utilized to assess the use of their skills
        gained by the program and ascertain whether new materials should be integrated into the curriculum.

        Industrial Advisory Committee: The fourth of the program constituencies is the Industrial Advisory
        committee (IAC). The current members of the Berks campus IAC are listed in Table 19. As with the
        2EET Curriculum Committee, the role of the IAC is defined by the bylaws, department level guidelines,
        and its primary function is to “permit representatives from the industry that hire technology graduates to
        reflect upon, evaluate, and emphasis of [2EET]…education.” At the Berks Campus, the 2EET
        Subcommittee of the IAC meets at least once each year. The specific issues addressed at these meetings
        vary, but primarily they focus on curriculum changes being considered by the faculty and the 2EET
        Curriculum Committee. IAC members are asked to comment on changes being considered. Comments
        and recommendations from the IAC that are generic in nature are channeled back to the 2EET Curriculum
        Committee for consideration. IAC comments that are pertinent only to Berks Campus are handled locally.
        Typically, items in the latter category relate to such things as technical elective offerings appropriate for the
        Berks campus, industrial support for donations to the program, internship opportunities, graduate
        opportunities, etc. A copy of the IAC bylaws, most recent 2EET program annual report, and the minutes
        from the most recent IAC 2EET subcommittee meeting are included in the Appendix C: Berks IAC 2EET
        Subcommittee Bylaws, Annual Report, and Meeting Minutes.

        2EET Curriculum Committee: The 2EET program (as are all engineering technology programs in the
        SETCE) is supported by an official Curriculum Committee. The charter for this committee can be found in




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 21 of 98                                          June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

        Appendix D: 2EET Curricular Committee Charter and Member List, but fundamentally its purpose is
        to continually assess the content and organization of the 2EET program curriculum to ensure that it
        continues to meet objectives specified in the University Programs Bulletin. As such, the 2EET Curriculum
        Committee is the focal point for continuing quality control, assessment, and improvement of the 2EET
        program. Minutes from recent 2EET Curriculum Committee are included in the Appendix E: 2EET
        Curricular Committee Meeting Minutes.

        The committee accomplishes its charter through periodic meetings in which academic issues are debated,
        evaluated, and if appropriate, proposed to the full body of 2EET faculty for approval. If approved by the
        faculty, changes are then forwarded to the College of Engineering Faculty Council for ratification. If
        approved at this level, changes are implemented through the standard curriculum revision process of the
        University Faculty Senate. This multi-level, multi-discipline review process provides assurance that
        curricular changes are deemed appropriate by a wider audience before implementation.

        By charter, Curriculum Committee meetings must be held at least once per year. In practice, there have
        been between two and four meetings each year for the last decade. 2EET faculty are kept apprised of the
        committee’s activities through biannual SEDTAPP faculty meetings. A standard item of those meetings is
        a breakout session for 2EET faculty in which committee activities are discussed and faculty input for
        curricular improvement is solicited. In recent years, with the advent of the Internet and e-mail, the
        committee has also begun to relay on broadcast messaging to disseminate special announcements, conduct
        polls, and exchange information with faculty.

        Critical to the quality control function of the Curriculum Committee is the fact that most recommendations
        brought before it come from the 2EET faculty. This is critical for two reasons. First, the faculty has day-
        to-day involvement with students in the program and facilities available that deliver the program.
        Secondly, many faculty are actively involved in industry and consulting. Thus they have direct experience
        with employer expectations for technology graduates, and they learn, first-hand, of new developments and
        changes in direction in technology industries. Together these facts make faculty one of the better
        assessment and feedback groups for program quality control. The Curriculum Committee review and
        revision process recognizes and takes advantage of this fact.

B.3.b.2.2. Berks Use of 2EET Assessment Findings to Strengthen Program
Once the above information has been gathered and compiled, the Berks CQI committee determines if action is
necessary. This is done during the regular meetings of the committee. These meetings take place at least once per
semester.

Action is necessary when goals were not being met, when there is evidence of shortcomings in the program
objectives or outcomes when compared to university wide results, or lastly, there are changes in the needs of the
Berks campus constituencies.

If the CQI committee determines action is necessary, the team must also determine what type of action is required.
Action can be in the form of changing courses, using different learning exercises, adjusting goals, modifying
outcomes, or changing objectives. In very rare instances it may be necessary to change the mission. The action plan
must also include appropriate changes or additions to the assessment tools and measures, learning experiences and
goals.

The Faculty, Administration, and IAC must approve any changes to the Mission or Objectives. The university wide
course chairs must approve changes to course outlines, and the 2EET curriculum committee must approve changes
to the student outcomes, learning experiences, or goals.

Any approved action is enacted as soon as reasonably possible. This is likely the beginning of the next semester. In
some circumstances, action is taken after appropriate meetings of the 2EET curricular committee are held. The
action plan is then documented and incorporated into the assessment plan for the program. These changes are
reviewed on a continuous basis during the regular meeting of the Berks CQI committee.



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 22 of 98                                       June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

The charts displayed in Figures 5-8 reflect data collected from MEET surveys for the 2EET program over the last
two academic years. In these charts a rating of 0 (zero) indicates a particular outcome was not met; a rating of 1
(one) indicates a particular outcome was met; and a rating of 2 indicates a particular outcome was exceeded. It
should be noted that not all 2EET courses are offered each semester and that there is a potential for a particular
outcome to not appear in a particular academic year due to the program cycle.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                       Page 23 of 98                                      June 2006
                                                   Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

Each outcome is rated four ways:

            1.       Faculty Course Perception
            2.       Student Course Perception
            3.       Faculty Rated Student Performance
            4.       Student Rated Self Performance

2EET students are generally meeting the program outcomes in all categories with commitment to quality (11),
understanding professional, ethical, and social responsibilities (7), communications (5), computer usage (4), and
experimentation (2) being the highest rated. The lowest rated are mathematics (3) and applying creativity (10).


                     Fall 2004 Berks Campus EET Student/Faculty                                                         Fall 2004 University Wide EET Student/Faculty
                                  Course Evaluations                                                                                 Course Evaluations



            11                                                                                                 11



            10                                                                                                 10



            8                                                                                                  8




            7                                                                                                  7




            6                                                                                                  6
                                                                                                     Outcome
  Outcome




            5                                                                                                  5




            4                                                                                                  4




            3                                                                                                  3




            2                                                                                                  2




            1                                                                                                  1



                 0              0.5                  1                1.5               2                           0              0.5                  1                1.5            2

                                                   Rating                                                                                             Rating


                         Student Performance             Faculty Perception                                                 Student Performance             Faculty Perception
                         Student Self Perception         Student Course Perception                                          Student Self Perception         Student Course Perception




                          Figure 5: Penn State Berks versus University Wide MEET Course Survey Data FA04




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                                               Page 24 of 98                                                                        June 2006
                                                   Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



                    Spring 2005 Berks Campus EET Student/Faculty                                                   Spring 2005 University Wide EET Student/Faculty
                                 Course Evaluations                                                                             Course Evaluations



           11                                                                                                 11



           10                                                                                                 10



            8                                                                                                 8



            7                                                                                                 7



            6                                                                                                 6
 Outcome




                                                                                                    Outcome
            5                                                                                                 5



            4                                                                                                 4



            3                                                                                                 3



            2                                                                                                 2



            1                                                                                                 1


                0           0.5            1                1.5          2            2.5                          0            0.5                  1                1.5            2
                                                   Rating                                                                                          Rating

                         Student Performance            Faculty Perception                                               Student Performance             Faculty Perception
                         Student Self Perception        Student Course Perception                                        Student Self Perception         Student Course Perception




                          Figure 6: Penn State Berks versus University Wide MEET Course Survey Data SP05




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                                              Page 25 of 98                                                                     June 2006
                                                  Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



                    Fall 2005 Berks Campus EET Student/Faculty                                                         Fall 2005 University Wide EET Student/Faculty
                                 Course Evaluations                                                                                 Course Evaluations



           11                                                                                                 11



           10                                                                                                 10



            8                                                                                                 8



            7                                                                                                 7



            6                                                                                                 6
 Outcome




                                                                                                    Outcome
            5                                                                                                 5



            4                                                                                                 4



            3                                                                                                 3



            2                                                                                                 2



            1                                                                                                 1


                0              0.5                  1                1.5               2                           0              0.5                  1                1.5            2
                                                  Rating                                                                                             Rating

                        Student Performance             Faculty Perception                                                 Student Performance             Faculty Perception
                        Student Self Perception         Student Course Perception                                          Student Self Perception         Student Course Perception




                         Figure 7: Penn State Berks versus University Wide MEET Course Survey Data FA05




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                                              Page 26 of 98                                                                       June 2006
                                                    Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



                     Spring 2006 Berks Campus EET Student/Faculty                                                    Spring 2006 University Wide EET Student/Faculty
                                  Course Evaluations                                                                              Course Evaluations



            11                                                                                                  11



            10                                                                                                  10



             8                                                                                                  8



             7                                                                                                  7



             6                                                                                                  6
  Outcome




                                                                                                      Outcome
             5                                                                                                  5



             4                                                                                                  4



             3                                                                                                  3



             2                                                                                                  2



             1                                                                                                  1


                 0               0.5                  1                1.5               2                           0            0.5                  1                1.5            2
                                                    Rating                                                                                           Rating

                          Student Performance             Faculty Perception                                               Student Performance             Faculty Perception
                          Student Self Perception         Student Course Perception                                        Student Self Perception         Student Course Perception




                           Figure 8: Penn State Berks versus University Wide MEET Course Survey Data SP06
B.3.b.3. Examples of Continuous Improvement Evidence
As the previous discussion illustrates, the task of monitoring and improving the quality of Penn State’s 2EET
programs is spread over multiple hierarchical levels, starting with the University-level SEDTAPP administration and
its supporting committees and devolving down through the 2EET curriculum committee and supporting course
chairs finally to the local 2EET program coordinators and faculty. The following list highlights several examples of
specific assessment and improvement actions that have been taken at each level during the past two years. Though
not exhaustive, these examples do provide a representative indication of the scope and depth of 2EET quality
improvement activities, both in general and locally at the Berks campus.
Example CQI Activities of SEDTAPP and Supporting Committees:
Representative examples of quality improvement accomplishments of the SEDTAPP administration and supporting
committees are:
                     •    Development of a system wide website devoted to engineering technology majors within the
                          university at << http://www.et.psu.edu/>>.
                     •    Development and implementation of the on-line, Internet-based MEET survey system. MEET
                          data has been collected since fall of 2004 and is available on-line at
                          <<https://www.engr.psu.edu/MEET/>>. ET faculty, program coordinators, curriculum
                          committees, and administrators use the data to support both semester-based and annual course
                          and program assessments (examples of 2EET program assessments by the 2EET curriculum
                          committee and course assessments done by 2EET faculty at Berks are discussed later).


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                                                Page 27 of 98                                                                    June 2006
                              Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

        •       Development and implementation of an on-line, Internet-based exit survey of graduating ET
                students to determine their career directions and to obtain their overall assessment of the
                capabilities they acquired as a student at Penn State. Surveys have been conducted each
                semester since spring of 2005, and results are used by SEDTAPP administration and the 2EET
                curriculum committees to identify program weaknesses and areas for improvement. Past
                survey results are available at <<http://www.cede.psu.edu/tc2k/>>.
        •       Development and implementation of an on-line, Internet-based survey of actual and potential
                2EET employers to determine the post-graduation performance of Penn State students and to
                gain industry feedback on the appropriateness and relevance of 2EET program educational
                objectives and outcomes. Surveys have been conducted each semester since spring of 2005.
                As with the exit and MEET surveys, results from the employer/industry survey are used to
                identify program weaknesses and areas for improvement. Past survey results are available at
                <<http://www.cede.psu.edu/tc2k/>>

Example CQI Activities of 2EET Curriculum Committee & 2EET Course Chairs:
Representative examples of quality improvement accomplishments of the 2EET curriculum committee and 2EET
course chairs are:
    •       Creation of a standard format for all 2EET technical course outlines to include explicit indication
            of the correlation between 2EET program outcomes and subsidiary course outcomes.
    •       Revision and on-line posting of all 2EET course outlines following the new, standardized format.
            Current outlines are available via the 2EET curriculum committee link at
            <<http://cede.psu.edu/tc2k/contents/programs.htm>>. Outlines have been available in this fashion
            since fall of 2004.
    •       Policy established requiring annual update of standard course outlines, including written
            justification for all modifications. Updates are to be based on MEET results and on a review and
            resolution of suggestions and concerns raised by faculty either via MEET or curriculum committee
            meetings. Update reports for the most recent revisions are maintained at the 2EET curriculum
            committee site <<http://cede.psu.edu/tc2k/contents/programs.htm>>.


Example CQI Activities of 2EET Program Coordinator and 2EET Faculty at Berks:
At the local level, the program coordinator and the faculty are responsible for ensuring that the overall quality of the
2EET program is monitored, maintained, and improved. At Berks, this responsibility has led to a variety of
activities targeting program improvement. Some specific examples, and their effects on program quality, are:
            •    Since the fall of 2005, the 2EET program coordinator has been holding periodic CQI meetings with all
                 engineering and engineering technology faculty to review local MEET assessments, course scheduling,
                 and recruitment. These sessions have led to:
                     o Creation of a website with information, document repository, links, and group
                          communications for improve communication between faculty. The website is located at
                          https://cms.psu.edu/section/default.asp?id=GROUP%2D060207%2D203729%2DSEG
                          (authorization required)
                     o Improved schedule course schedule development with reduced conflicts.
                     o Forum for review of end of semester MEET survey results.
                     o Forum to discuss course outlines and the correlation between available lab equipment
                     o Revision of the Berks 2EET program brochure.
                     o Changes to the Berks 2EET website
                     o Revisions to 2EET program prospective student letter.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                            Page 28 of 98                                        June 2006
                            Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


B.4. Program Characteristics

The characteristics of the 2EET curriculum are outlined in the following paragraphs. The information is organized
according to the specific topics called out by Criterion 4 of the General Accreditation Criteria.


B.4.a. 2EET Curriculum and Course Sequencing
The 2EET curriculum and course sequencing are illustrated in Table 7. The year and semester in which students
typically take courses are indicated in the first column; however, some alteration of this schedule may occur in
individual cases depending on specific student needs. Sequencing of technical courses is dictated by course
prerequisites, which are stipulated in the University Bulletin. Footnotes in Table 7 highlight correlations between
various curriculum elements and specific TC2K accreditation criteria. . General education courses available to
2EET program students are illustrated in Table 8.

Standard course outlines can be viewed at the Engineering Technology Student Guide website <<
http://cede.psu.edu/StudentGuide/associate/2eet.htm>>. Detailed outline/syllabi for the technical core and specialty
courses listed in Table 7, as conducted at the Berks campus as part of the 2EET program, will be a part of the
display during the visit. Both a hardcopy of the course outlines and a CD version of the course outlines are also
provided.

Table 7: 2EET Program Curriculum and Course Sequencing
Year and                        Course                                                                Category (Credit Hours)
Semester              (Department, Number, Title)




                                                                                                             Physical & Natural
                (C) – indicates foundation or core course




                                                                                                                                                          Technical Content
                                                                                                                                     Social Sciences &
                                                              Communications




                (S) – indicates technical specialty course




                                                                                                                                                          (Lecture/Lab
                                                                                        Mathematics




                                                                                                                                     Humanities
                                                                                                             Sciences




                                                                                                                                                          Credits)
                                             Electrical & Electronics Courses1
 Yr 1, Sm 1   EET 101 – Electrical Circuits I (C)                                                                                                                3/0
 Yr 1, Sm 1   EET 109 – Electrical Circuits I Lab (C)                                                                                                            0/1
 Yr 1, Sm 2   EET 114 – Electrical Circuits II (C)                                                                                                               4/0
 Yr 1, Sm 2   EET 117 – Digital Electronics (S)                                                                                                                 3/0
 Yr 1, Sm 2   EET 118 – Electrical Circuits II Lab (C)                                                                                                           0/1
 Yr 1, Sm 2   EET 120 – Digital Electronics Lab (S)                                                                                                             0/1
 Yr 2, Sm 1   EET 205 – Semiconductor Lab (S)                                                                                                                   0/1
 Yr 2, Sm 1   EET 210 – Fund. of Semiconductors (S)                                                                                                             2/0
 Yr 2, Sm 1   EET 211 – Microprocessors (S)                                                                                                                     3/0
 Yr 2, Sm 1   EET 213W – Fund.of Elecrical Machines2 (S)                       (4/1)3                                                                           4/1
 Yr 2, Sm 2   EET 216 – Linear Electronic Circuits (S)                                                                                                          3/0
 Yr 2, Sm 2   EET 220 – Programmable Logic Controls (S)                                                                                                         1/1
 Yr 2, Sm 2   EET 221 – Linear Electronics Lab (S)                                                                                                              0/1
                                                                                                                                  Total credits =               23/7
                                               Supporting Technical Courses1
 Yr 1, Sm 1   EGT 101 – Technical Drawing Fund. (C)                                                                                                              0/1
 Yr 1, Sm 1   EGT 102 – Intro. to Computer-Aided Drftg                                                                                                           0/1
              (C)
 Yr 1, Sm 1   ET 002 – ET Orientation (C)                                                                                                                        0/1
 Yr 1, Sm 2   ET 005 – Engr. Methods in ET (C)                                                                                                                   0/1
                                                                                                                                  Total credits =                0/4
                                                    Mathematics Courses4
 Yr 1, Sm 1   Math 081 – Tech Math I                                                                  3
 Yr 1, Sm 2   Math 082 – Tech Math II                                                                 3
 Yr 2, Sm 3   Math 083 – Tech Math III                                                                4
                                                             Total credits =                          10



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                               Page 29 of 98                                                                                  June 2006
                                  Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                                          Physical Sciences Courses5
    Yr 1, Sm 2     Phys 150 – Tech Physics I                                                                3
    Yr 2, Sm 1     Phys 151 – Tech Physics II                                                               3
                                                                                    Total credits =         6
                                                          Communications Courses
    Yr 1, Sm 1     Engl 015 – Rhetoric & Composition2                       3
    Yr 2, Sm 2     CAS 100 – Effective Speech2                              3
                                                 Total credits =            6
                                                 Technical Elective Course Selections
     (Courses below automatically satisfy technical elective requirements of the program. Other courses may be approved by the ETCE
                                                                 Dept. Head)
    Yr 2, Sm 2    Chem 011 – Intro Chemistry                                                          3
    Yr 2, Sm 2    Chem 012 – Chemical Principles                                                      3
    Yr 2, Sm 2    CET 261 – Fluid Flow                                                                                           3
    Yr 2, Sm 2    CmpSc 101 – Basic Computer Prgmg                                                                               3
    Yr 2, Sm 2    CmpSc 201 – Computer Prgmg for Engr                                                                            3
    Yr 2, Sm 2    EET 297 – Independent Studies                                                                                1–9
    Yr 2, Sm 2    IET 101 – Mfg Matls, Processes & Lab                                                                           3
    Yr 2, Sm 2    IET 105 – Economics of Industry                                                                                2
    Yr 2, Sm 2    MchT 111 – Statics                                                                                             3
    Yr 2, Sm 2    Math 140 – Calc w/ Analytic Geom I                                     4
    Yr 2, Sm 2    Math 141 – Calc w/ Analytic Geom II                                    4
    Yr 2, Sm 2    BiSc 003 – Environmental Science                                                    3
                                                                           Total Credits (A minimum of 1 credit is required) = 1–4
                           General Education Courses (one course in each discipline is required)6
    Yr 1, Sm 1     Social Sciences, Humanities or Arts7                                                                    3
    Yr 2, Sm 2     Social Sciences, Humanities or Arts7                                                                    3
    Yr 2, Sm 2     Social Sciences, Humanities or Arts7                                                                    3
                                                                                                   Total Credits =         9
                  Totals Required for the Degree (by Category) =            63             10              6               9               35
                                               Percent of Total =           93             15              9               14              53
                                                                                          Total Credits Required in the Program =          668


                                                                Table 7 – Notes
1     The breadth and depth of the technical sciences and supporting technical courses are designed to satisfy the Technical Content requirement
      of Criterion 4 of the GENERAL CRITERIA. Details of how individual courses address specific elements of this criterion are covered elsewhere
      in this report.
2     These courses have specific and significant relevance to the Communications requirements specified by Criterion 4 of the GENERAL
      CRITERIA. The college composition and public speaking courses are required by the University of all associate degree graduates. Further,
      the “W” designated course requires extensive and focused development of written and oral communication skills within the specific context
      of the program discipline. The requirement for a discipline-specific “W” course in all degree programs is also a University-wide
      requirement.
3     These totals and percentages do not include the contribution of the “W-designated” technical course to the communications training of
      students. If that contribution is included, the communications credit total would be 11, and the percentage would be 17%
4     The technical math sequence includes topics in college algebra, trigonometry, and concepts of technical calculus, including limits,
      derivatives & differentiation, integration & integration techniques, and basic differential equations. This range of coverage exceeds the
      minimum Mathematics requirements of Criterion 4 of the GENERAL CRITERIA.
5     The two-course physics sequence required by the 2EET program covers topics in mechanics, heat, wave motion, sound, electricity, light,
      and basics of modern physics. Coverage is from the perspective of the basic sciences, which provides students with a broader theoretical
      foundation for their studies in the technical sciences. Both courses include experimental lab activities. This content and focus is consistent
      with the Physical and Natural Sciences requirement of Criterion 4 of the GENERAL CRITERIA.
6     All associate degree graduates at Penn State University must complete a minimum of nine credits in the study of the Social Sciences,
      Humanities, and Arts. One course in each area is generally required. Additionally, at least one of these courses must be intercultural in
      nature, and a second must be international in focus to satisfy University-wide requirements for breadth and diversity in programs’ societal
      and global perspectives. These requirements are consistent with the Social Sciences and Humanities requirement of Criterion 4 of the
      GENERAL CRITERIA.
7     Examples of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts courses typically available at the campus are listed in Table 1A, which follows.
8     Total program credits exceed the minimum of 64 specified by Criterion 4 of the GENERAL CRITERIA.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                      Page 30 of 98                                                    June 2006
                               Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

Table 8: 2EET Program General Education Courses
General Education Courses - 2EET students are required to complete three credits each of Social Sciences, Humanities,
and Arts studies for a total of nine General Education credits. At least one of these courses must be an “International and Intercultural
Competency” (GI) designated course. Typical courses satisfying these requirements are listed below. GI designated course are shown in
Italics.
Subject                            Course                  Description
                                                                 Arts
Art                                Art 20                  Introduction to Drawing
Art History                        ArtH 112                Renaissance to Modern Art
Integrative Arts                   InArt 1                 The Arts
Music                              Music 005               An Introduction to Western Music
                                   Music 007               Evolution of Jazz
Theatre Arts                       Thea 102                Fundamentals of Acting

                                                              Humanities
Comparative Literature             CmLit 10                The Forms of World Literature
English                            Engl 129                Shakespeare
                                   Engl 139                Black American Literature
                                   Engl 191                Science Fiction
                                   Engl 194                Women Writers
History                            Hist 1                  The Western Heritage I
                                   Hist 2                  The Western Heritage II
                                   Hist 20                 American Civilization to 1877
                                   Hist 21                 American Civilization since 1877
                                   Hist 175                The History of Modern East Asia
                                   Hist 191                Early African History
                                   Hist 192                Modern African History
Philosophy                         Phil 103                Introduction to Ethics
Religious Studies                  Rl St 001               Introduction to World Religions
                                   Rl St 101               Comparative Religion

                                                     Social & Behavioral Sciences
Anthropology                       Anth 045                Cultural Anthropology
Economics                          Econ 002                Introductory Microeconomic Analysis
                                   Econ 004                Introductory Macroeconomic Analysis
Geography                          Geog 020                Human Geography: An Introduction
Political Science                  Pl Sc 001               Intro to American National Government
                                   Pl Sc 003               Introduction to Comparative Politics
                                   Pl Sc 014               International Relations
Psychology                         Psy 002                 Psychology
                                   Psy 213                 Intro to Developmental Psychology
                                   Psy 243                 Psychology of Personal Well-Being
Sociology                          Soc 001                 Introductory Sociology
Women’s Studies                    WmnSt 001               Introduction to Women’s Studies



B.4.b. Program Credit Requirement

The 2EET program consists of 66 total credits which exceeds the 64 credit minimum stipulated by the ABET TAC
2005-2006 Program Criteria.
B.4.c. Quality Assurance of Core Courses

The quality of core 2EET course is facilitated by the M.E.E.T online evaluation of courses. The process for
implementing corrective action is discussed in detail in section B.3.b.2. Penn State Berks Local 2EET Continuous
Improvement Process. The MEET data collected since Fall 2004 appears in Figure 5 through Figure 8 is an
average of all 2EET courses offered. Specific data on individual courses are available by query and download via
the website at https://www.engr.psu.edu/MEET. Actions taken based on Survey results are outlined in Table 9.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                 Page 31 of 98                                                June 2006
                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


Table 9: Penn State Berks Actions from Measures & Evaluation in Engineering Technology Surveys

Berks Initiated   Course          Description        Faculty        Response             Solution
Actions

1                 EET 220         Course outline     Stanton        Replace word         Course outline
                                  revision                          “terminals” with     changed effective
                                                                    “modules” in first   Spring 2006 per
                                                                    and second           course chair
                                                                    outcomes.            Sohail Anwar.

2                 EET 220         Course outline     Stanton        Delete third         Course outline
                                  and content                       course outcome       changed effective
                                  revision                          that reads           Spring 2006 per
                                                                    “Students will be    course chair
                                                                    abled to use         Sohail Anwar.
                                                                    special purpose
                                                                    PLC input
                                                                    terminals to
                                                                    accurately
                                                                    monitor and
                                                                    records the state
                                                                    of devices such as
                                                                    thermocouples,
                                                                    RTDs, etc.” This
                                                                    adds considerable
                                                                    time to a two
                                                                    credit course that
                                                                    only meets once
                                                                    per week.
                                                                    Covering analog
                                                                    modules should
                                                                    be enough for
                                                                    students to build
                                                                    on. Let’s leave
                                                                    this to the
                                                                    discretion of the
                                                                    instructor if time
                                                                    permits.

3                 EET 220         Course outline     Stanton        Delete sixth and     Course outline
                                  and content                       seventh course       changed effective
                                  revision                          outcomes and         Spring 2006 per
                                                                    replace with text    course chair
                                                                    that reads           Sohail Anwar.
                                                                    “Students will be
                                                                    able to use
                                                                    modern PLC
                                                                    programming
                                                                    tools and
                                                                    software to
                                                                    develop
                                                                    functional ladder
                                                                    diagrams and
                                                                    programs to
                                                                    monitor and


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                   Page 32 of 98                                   June 2006
                     Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                                             control processes
                                                             suitable for
                                                             sequential
                                                             control.”

4              EET 101        Course outline     Litwhiler   Replace Mesh         Course outline
                              and content                    Analysis with        changed effective
                              revision                       Nodal Analysis or    Fall 2006 per
                                                             at least allow a     course chair
                                                             choice between       Richard Snyder.
                                                             either type of
                                                             analysis.

5              EET 213W       Course outline     Buczynski   Address              Course outline
                              and content                    fundamental          changed effective
                              revision                       issues associated    Fall 2006 per
                                                             with control of      course chair Todd
                                                             electric machines.   Batzel

6              EET 114        Course outline     Buczynski   Eliminate mesh       Course Outline
                              and content                    analysis from        Change Under
                              revision                       outcomes or          Review by
                                                             course outline for   Course Chair
                                                             EET 114.             Maryam
                                                             Replace with         Ghorieshi
                                                             Nodal analysis.


7              EET 114        Course outline     Buczynski   Move Fourier         Course Outline
                              and content                    series and           Change Under
                              revision                       nonsinusoidal        Review by
                                                             circuits should be   Course Chair
                                                             moved to EET         Maryam
                                                             117.                 Ghorieshi




ABET 2K TAC Self Study               Page 33 of 98                                June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

B.4.d. Descriptive Details on Content and Portions of the Program

Standard course outlines can be viewed at the Engineering Technology Student Guide website <<
http://cede.psu.edu/StudentGuide/associate/2eet.htm>>. Detailed outline/syllabi for the technical core and specialty
courses listed in Table 7, as conducted at the Berks campus as part of the 2EET program, will be a part of the
display during the visit. Both a hardcopy of the course outlines and a CD version of the course outlines are also
provided. The following descriptive details address the general academic areas of the 2EET program.

        Communications – While communications skills are imparted in a variety of places in the 2EET
        curriculum, the specific elements that address students’ communications skills directly are English 15
        (Rhetoric & Composition), Communications Arts and Sciences 100 (Effective Speech) and EET 213W
        (Fundamentals of Electric Machines).” The first two of these courses provide traditional college-level
        instruction in the art of effective writing and effective public speaking respectively. The EET 213W course
        is the University-approved “writing intensive” course in the 2EET program. In this format students are
        required to submit high quality written laboratory reports using word processing software, CAD, and/or
        spreadsheets.

        The University requires all students to complete at least 3 credits of writing-intensive courses within their
        major. Further, "W" courses must include writing assignments that relate clearly to the course objectives
        and serve as effective instruments for learning the subject matter of the course. Typically, assignments are
        designed to help students investigate the course subject matter, gain experience in interpreting data, shape
        writing and/or speaking for a particular audience, or practice the type of writing and/or speaking associated
        with a given profession or discipline. “W” courses also provide opportunities for students to receive
        written feedback from the instructor and to apply that feedback to future efforts. “W” courses often include
        peer review of student communications, tutorial assistance, instructor conferences, group writing projects,
        use of writing or learning centers, and classroom discussions of writing and/or speaking assignments. From
        a grading perspective, it is typically expected that 25% of the grade in a “W” course will be determined
        from the writing and speaking activities.

        While the English composition, speech communications, and “W” courses provide special emphasis to the
        development of 2EET students’ communications skills, it is also possible to point out specific examples of
        written, oral and graphical communications exercises within the technical curriculum.

        Technical Writing Exercises – Essentially all lab courses within in the 2EET curriculum require
        students to prepare formal written reports to document lab exercises. Basic, structured lab reports are
        required in all three of the freshman lab courses (EET 109, 118 & 120); sophomore electronic labs
        (EET 205 & 221) elevate the level of this type of formal lab reporting. Finally, the EET 213W course
        requires students to prepare a substantial, library-research-based research paper, and the EET 220
        course requires students to prepare several project reports, in a journal paper format, documenting
        PLC-based controls projects done in that course. Formal laboratory write-ups for EET 220 PLC system
        design are required several times (3-5) during the semester, and a capstone final project is required at
        the end of the semester and serves as the final exam. The final project culminates the course content
        by integrating into one project. Students are required to submit proposals and formal write-ups of their
        projects. RSLogix 500 development software serves as a CAD type illustration of the project.
        Informal oral demonstrations of their projects are also required.

        Oral Presentation Exercises – The speech communications class is the obvious focus for developing
        students’ oral presentation skills. However, oral presentations are a standard element of the EET
        213W course where students are required to present summaries of their research reports to classmates
        using standard presentation tools. As part of the training in the use of presentation software, students
        are required to combine results from various software tools (word-processing, spreadsheet tables and
        graphs, electronic simulations, etc.) into a professional slide-based presentation. Students in EET 220
        are required to give informal oral demonstrations of their final projects.

        Graphical Presentation Exercises – Graphical presentation of visual and numerical information is a
        critical skill in technology professions. The 2EET curriculum imparts this skill in several courses.
        Visual presentations using CAD are the specific focus of the EGT 102 course. Students are required to


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 34 of 98                                       June 2006
                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

       demonstrate a full range of skills covering multi-view, sectional and isometric drawings; dimensioning,
       layout, and complex assemblies. As noted above, creation of graphical representations of numerical
       data is required in many labs, and the ET 005 and EET 213W courses give particular emphasis to this
       topic. ET 005 covers the use of various mathematical and simulation software (Excel, Mathcad,
       Matlab, PSpice, etc.), and part of that coverage specifically addresses creation of engineering-quality
       graphs of calculated and measured data. Graphing skills learned in ET 005 are honed in EET 213W
       where a variety of lab exercises require students to collect, analyze, and synthesize laboratory
       measurements into meaningful engineering-quality graphs of machine performance characteristics.

       Library Research & Use of Technical Literature – There are two key instances where 2EET students
       are required to investigate and use library and technical data resources. In ET 005, students are
       instructed in the content and use of a range of technical data retrieval resources available through the
       University Libraries. They are required to use this knowledge to conduct to retrieve a collection of
       technical resources ranging over a broad range of technical subjects. Also, the research report required
       in the EET 213W course is a formal research report requiring review and proper referencing of
       information sources, which are generally retrieved both through the library and the Internet. Finally,
       the EET 120, 205, 220, and 221 lab courses routinely require students to retrieve equipment and
       component performance specifications from manufacturers’ literature, most often via Internet websites.
       In EET 220 students are required to research technical specifications on the internet that can be used
       with either discrete or analog PLC modules.

       Teamwork Skills – Essentially all lab courses in the 2EET curriculum are team-based exercises
       involving teams of 2 or 3 students conducting lab exercises. In EET 213W, students are required to
       work in teams and conduct research projects during the semester on topics that relate to electrical
       machines. They are also required to give team-based oral presentations on their research projects to
       their peers and other 2EET instructors. Student peer evaluations and 2EET faculty evaluations are a
       factor in the grading process. In EET 220 students are required to work in teams of 2 or 3 students to
       design a PLC based solution for a sequential control problem.

       Mathematics – The 2EET technical math sequence includes topics in college algebra, trigonometry, and
       concepts of technical calculus, including limits, derivatives & differentiation, integration & integration
       techniques, and basic differential equations. This range of coverage exceeds the minimum requirements of
       the ABET criteria for an associate degree program.

       Physical and Natural Sciences – The two-course physics sequence required by the 2EET program covers
       topics in mechanics, heat, wave motion, sound, electricity, light, and basics of modern physics. Coverage
       is from the perspective of the basic sciences, which provides students with a broader theoretical foundation
       for their studies in the electrical and electronic technical sciences. Both courses include experimental lab
       activities. This content and focus is consistent with the physical and natural sciences requirement of the
       ABET criteria for an associate degree program.

       Social Sciences and Humanities – All associate degree graduates at Penn State must complete a minimum
       of nine credits in the study of the social sciences, humanities, and arts. One course in each area is generally
       required. Additionally, at least one of these courses must be intercultural in nature, and a second must be
       international in focus to satisfy University-wide requirements for breadth and diversity in programs’
       societal and global perspectives. These requirements are consistent with the social sciences and humanities
       requirement of the ABET criteria for an associate degree program.

       Technical Content – The technical content of the 2EET curriculum consists of the combination of ET-,
       EGT-, and EET- designated courses (see Table 7). The combination of these courses represents 35, or
       53%, of the total 66 credits in the program, which is between the minimum of 33% and the maximum of
       67% required by the General Criteria.

       The ET-, EGT- and 100-level EET-designated courses constitute the core or foundation of the program.
       The ET courses provide students with foundation training in computer tools that are essential to success in
       the program. The EGT courses provide a similar purpose with respect to engineering drawing and
       computer-aided drafting skills. The freshman-level EET courses teach students the fundamental concepts,


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 35 of 98                                        June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

        theories and analysis techniques for dealing with DC, AC and digital circuits; tools that are essential to
        success in the technical specialty courses of the sophomore year.

        The 200-level EET-designated courses represent the technical specialty courses in the 2EET program.
        Building on the core courses, these courses teach students fundamentals of the operation and analysis of
        analog electronic devices and circuits, microprocessors and microcontrollers, programmable logic controls,
        and AC and DC electrical machines.

        Laboratory Activities - support essentially all core and specialty topics. All laboratories require students to
        use standard laboratory measurement equipment (analog and digital voltage and current meters, function
        generators, frequency counters, power supplies, oscilloscopes, tachometers, power meters, etc.) to excite
        and monitor the performance of electrical and electronic devices and electrical machines. In most cases,
        the data determined through these measurements are analyzed and synthesized into formal laboratory
        reports. Laboratory teams are used with EET 213W to perform experiments on electrical machines and
        transformers.

        Design practices and the use of design tools -in the 2EET curriculum are concentrated in four topical areas:
        digital electronics, analog electronics, programmable logic controls, and electric machines. Courses in each
        of the areas require students to complete open-ended design analyses, in many cases supported by lab
        demonstrations, to arrive at workable device and circuit designs. These projects include such activities as
        designing PLC controls for sequential processes involving on/off temperature, robotic bins, traffic, and
        carwash controls; investigating the effects of standard modeling parameters on performance characteristics
        of induction motors; designing, building and verifying digital combinational logic circuits and
        counter/timer circuits; designing, building and verifying operation of standard amplifier circuits; etc. In all
        cases, students are expected to use standard design tools such as PSpice, LogicWorks, Excel, Mathcad,
        LabView, etc. as well as standard design methods taught in class to accomplish these design efforts.


B.4.e. Demonstration of Adequate Attention to Key Curriculum Components
The following table shows the breakdown, by credit count, to the distinct curricular elements of the EET program:
                           Table B.4-2 – Credit Allocations to Key Curricular Topics
          Curricular Area                        Total Credits                     Percent of Program
          Technical Core1                              17                                  26
       Technical Specialties2                          18                                  27
           Mathematics                                 10                                  15
         Physical Sciences                              6                                    9
         Communications3                             6 (11)                              9 (17)
        Soc. Sc/Hum/Arts                                9                                   14
              Totals                                   66                                  100
Notes:
    1 – Technical core courses are ET-2, -5, EGT-101, -102, EET-101, -109, -114, & -118.
    2 – Technical specialty course are EET-205, -210, -211, -213W, -216, -220, -221, & -220
    3 – Numbers in () include credits for EET 213W in the ‘Communications’ category. Numbers not in () reflect
        only the Engl-15 (college composition) and CAS-100 (effective speaking) courses.
As the table shows, more than half of the program is dedicated to technology subjects. Further, more than three
quarters of the program is dedicated to technology subjects supported by critical math and science topics. The
remaining ~25% of the program is committed to essential communications skills and exposure to core topics in the
humanities and social sciences. This distribution of studies is typical of similar programs at other schools.
B.4.f. Co-operative Education Provisions
The Berks campus 2EET program has no co-operative education or internship provisions.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 36 of 98                                         June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

B.4.g. Additional Review Materials
Most review materials demonstrating the above described characteristics are included in the ‘Outcomes’ and
‘Course’ files described previously in section B.2.f. 2EET Program Organization of Display Materials
Demonstrating Accomplishment of Outcomes Information not contained in those files generally will be
found in appendices to this report or online at SEDTAPP-maintained websites. Where appropriate, the text herein
indicates the relevant appendix or identifies the Internet address to the relevant website. (Note – if viewing an
electronic version of this report from an Internet-connected computer, links to online sources are active, and the
information may be accessed directly by ‘clicking’ on the link while holding down the ‘Ctrl’ key).

B.5. Faculty

B.5.a. Faculty Qualifications Analysis
An analysis of the Berks Campus 2EET Faculty is outlined in Table 14. Faculty vitae information immediately
follows this section.

B.5.b. Faculty Background and Core Competencies
Table 10 relates faculty backgrounds and competencies to each of the curricular areas of the 2EET program based
on industrial experience, research, and/or fields of study.
Table 10: Faculty Background Versus 2EET Program Curricular Areas
                   Circuit         Analog          Digital                                            Programmable
                   Analysis        Electronics     Electronics    Microprocessors      Machines       Logic
                                                                                                      Controllers
Buczynski          X               X               X                                   X
Litwhiler          X               X               X
Stanton            X               X               X                                   X              X
Haraschak          X                               X              X
Schanzenbach       X               X               X
Tappert            X               X               X              X                    X

B.5.c. Faculty Support of Program


The number of 2EET faculty members is sufficient to accommodate the needs of the program. With roughly 20
students in the program, the faculty to student ratio provides for a great deal of interaction and personal attention.
Advising and counseling duties are performed by the full time faculty members with the student load equally shared.
All of the full time faculty members are active participants in the Industrial Advisor Committee which meets
regularly with local employers and industry representatives to discuss and affect the program emphases and
direction.

B.5.d. Faculty Industrial Experience


As indicated in the matrix of part b and the attached curriculum vitae, each of the faculty members has significant
industrial experience in their course areas. Faculty members are active members of discipline-specific societies
which provide journals, periodicals and conference opportunities to help maintain technical currency.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                           Page 37 of 98                                      June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

B.5.e. Faculty Development
The 2EET program is supported by the Engineering, Business, and Computing (EBC) division of Penn State Berks.
As part of this division, college and university, ample opportunities exist for professional development for the 2EET
faculty members. Opportunities range from local workshops to funding for international travel to attend
conferences. Faculty members prepare an annual report on their activities in these areas and are strongly
encouraged to participate.
Table 11 provides an example of such activities for each faculty member.

Table 11: Berks Campus Faculty Professional Development Activities Since Last ABET Visit
Faculty Member        Professional Development Activities
Buczynski             Presented a paper at ASEE Mid-Atlantic Conference, April, 2003. Participant at ASEE
(Full Time)           Mid-Atlantic conferences- 2002 and 2004. Reviewer for ASEE Annual Conference
                      Proceedings, 2004, 2005 and 2006. Invited participant- ABET TEI Workshop- June 2002.
                      Participant- ABET TC2K workshop, May, 2004. Participant- Excel workshop, Penn State
                      Berks, September 2005. Participant- ANGEL workshop, Penn State Berks, March 2005.
                      Participant- "Writing in Science and Technology" workshop, Penn State Berks, May 2004.
                      Participant- faculty retreat, "Developing a Student Centered Culture", Penn State Berks,
                      January 2003. Participant- faculty retreat- "Student Learning", Penn State Berks, January,
                      2002. Participant- "Teaching and Learning Seminar", Penn State Berks, March, 2000.
Litwhiler             Paper presented at ASEE Annual Conference and Expo, 2004. Participated in “Writing in
(Full Time)           Science and Technology: Enhancing Teaching and Learning,” May 2004. Invited
                      participant in ABET TEI Workshop, October 2004. 2 papers presented and session co-
                      moderator at ASEE Annual Conference and Expo, 2005. 2 papers presented and session
                      moderator at ASEE Annual Conference and Expo, 2006. Reviewer for ASEE Annual
                      Conference and Expo, 2004, 2005 and 2006. Attended National Instruments’ “NI Week”
                      conference and expo, 2006.
Stanton               Presented a paper at the Large Engineering Systems Conference on Power Engineering
(Full Time)           June 21, 1999. Attended 4 day Rockwell PLC Maintenance and Troubleshooting seminar
                      8/10/2004 thru 8/13/2004. Scheduled and passed PA state FE exam on 10/31/2004.
                      Granted PA state FE certificate 12/21/2004. Attended Pack Expo Conference 2004 with
                      local food processors and higher education institutions 11/9 thru 11/10. Attended
                      conference on Educating, Supporting, and Serving Returning Adult Students 11/19/2004.
                      Attended Penn State Berks faculty retreat 1/5/2005. Participated in Penn State Road
                      Scholars May 9-11, 2005. Attended PLC Training Exposition in Harrisburg, PA on
                      5/4/2005. Participated in Servo and Loop Control training at Hershey Company
                      5/24/2005 thru 5/26/2005. Attended FTCAP student advising training on 6/23/2005.
                      Scheduled and passed PA state PE exam on 10/31/2005. Participated in Kinetix 6000 and
                      Ultra 3000 Servo training at Hershey Company 1/24/2006 thru 1/27/2006. Participated in
                      Kinetix 6000 and Ultra 3000 Servo training at Hershey Company 1/24/2006 thru
                      1/27/2006. Participated in Controllogix PLC training at Hershey Company 2/6/2006 thru
                      2/10/2006. Licensed PA PE on 2/10/2006. Participated in DeviceNet Industrial Network
                      training at Hershey Company 3/14/2006 thru 3/16/2006. Participated in Ethernet
                      Industrial Network training at Hershey Company 5/10/2006 thru 5/11/2006.
Haraschak             N/A
(Adjunct)
Schanzenbach          N/A
(Adjunct)
Tappert               N/A
(Adjunct)




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 38 of 98                                       June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

B.5.f. Faculty Resources for Program Objective Management


Program objectives are developed by the 2EET curriculum committee at the university level. Any faculty member
can provide input to the curriculum committee to affect changes to the program objectives. Each faculty member
has control over his/her own course materials used to convey the required course content. Feedback via various
evaluation methods is then used by the faculty members to correct and/or improve the outcomes.

B.5.g. Faculty Workload Summary


The Berks Campus faculty workload summary is outlined in Table 12.


Table 12: Berks Campus Faculty Workload Summary
Item                                  Range                                       Average
Credit Hours                          8 - 10                                      9
Contact Hours Per Week                9 - 12                                      11
Laboratory Size                       7 - 12                                      9
Class Size                            7 - 50                                      15
Advisees                              15 - 17                                     16


B.5.h. Listing of Courses taught by Faculty


          The Berks Campus faculty workload summary is outlined in Table 13
Table 13: Berks Campus Listing of Courses Taught by Faculty
Faculty                         Course

Robert Buczynski                EET 114, EET 213W*

Dale Litwhiler                  EET 101*, EET 205*, EET 210*, EET 216, EET 221

Gregory Stanton                 EET 101*, EET 109*, EET 220

Henry Haraschak                 EET 109*, EET 117, EET 120*, EET 211”

George Schanzenbach             ET 002*, ET 005, EET 109*, EET 118

Eric Tappert                    EET 114, EET 213W* (lab only)

* Indicates Fall 2006 course.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                          Page 39 of 98                                 June 2006
                                                             Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


 Table 14: Faculty Analysis

                                                                                                                                      Level of Activity (high, med, low, none)*
                                                                                       Years of Experience               Professional in:




                                   FT or PT
                                              Degrees Earned                                                             Registration
                                              Degree, Year, &                          Govt./Industry Teaching This      (Indicate    Professional Professional Work in
Name                   Rank                   Institution                              Eng/ET         Eng/ET Institution State)       Development Society            Industry
Robert J. Buczynski    Assoc.     FT          BSEE, 1961, Bucknell U.                                                      PE,            med          med          none
                       Prof.                  MSEE, 1964, Northeastern U.              10            35        24          Pennsylvania

Dale H. Litwhiler      Assist.    FT          BSEE, 1984, Penn State Univ.                                                 PE,            med          med          low
                       Prof.                  MSEE, 1989, Syracuse Univ.               13            9         4           Pennsylvania
                                              PhD EE, 2000, Lehihgh Univ.
Gregory D. Stanton     Lecturer   FT          ASEET, 1990, Penn State Univ.                                                PE,            high         med          med
                                              BSEET, 1992, Penn State Univ.            11            2         2           Pennsylvania
                                              MSEE, 1998, Penn State Univ.
Henry P. Haraschak     Lecturer   PT          BSEE, 1958, Penn State Univ.                                                                low          low          high
                                              MS, Physics, 1964, Franklin & Marshall   26            32        32
                                              College
George Schanzenbach    Lecturer   PT          BSEE, when?, where?                                                          PE,            low          low          low
                                              MSEE, when?, where?                      32            13        13          Pennsylvania
                                              M. Adm., when?, where?
Eric Tappert           Lecturer   PT          BSEE, 1969, U. of PA.                                                        PE, NJ & PA.   med          high         high
                                              MS Telecomm, 1998, U. of Colorado.       27            2         4




 ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                  Page 40 of 98                                              June 2006
                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                        Faculty Curriculum Vitae

1.     Name:                    Robert J. Buczynski

2.     Department:              Engineering, Business and Computing

3.     Appointment Date:        August 1982

4.     Years/Service            23

5.     Rank:                    Associate Professor of Engineering

6.     Degrees:                 BSEE, Bucknell University
                                MSEE, Northeastern University
7.     Other Teaching:          Luzerne Community College, Associate Professor and Chairman of Engineering
                                Technology, 1967-78.

8.     Industrial:              Western Electric, Senior Engineer, 1980-82
       (full-time)              Metropolitan Edison, Supervisor, 1979-80
                                Bell Telephone Laboratories, MTS, 1978-79
                                RCA, Applications Engineer, 1965-67

9.     Industrial:              None
       (part-time)

10.    Consulting:              None

11.    Registration:            Professional Engineer, Pennsylvania

12.   Publications:             Buczynski, R. J. “Audio Evaluation of Laboratory Reports”, Proceedings of the
                                ASEE Mid-Atlantic Conference, April, 2003.

                                Buczynski, R. J. “A Model Industrial Advisory Committee for Engineering and
                                Engineering Technology”, Proceedings of the ASEE Mid-Atlantic Conference,
                                November, 1997.

                                Buczynski, R. J., "Computer Software for Engineering Technology," Computers
                                in Education Journal, Oct.-Dec. 1989.

                                Buczynski, R. J. "Computer Software for Engineering Technology: A
                                Compilation," ASEE, Washington, D.C., January 1988.

                                Buczynski, R. J. "A Computer-Assisted Method for Laboratory Reports,"
                                Proceedings of the 95th Annual Conference of the American Society for
                                Engineering Education, ASEE, Washington, D.C., Vol. 1, June 1987.

                                Buczynski, R. J. "Implementation of a Project Team Method in Two-Year
                                Engineering Technology Laboratories," Journal of Engineering Technology,
                                ASEE, Washington, D.C., Vol. 3, Spring 1986.

13.    Societies:               IEEE - Senior Member. Served as secretary of IEEE Committee on Technology
                                Accreditation Activities, 1990 & 1991.

                                IEEE – TAC of ABET Program Evaluator, 1985-1994


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                    Page 41 of 98                                     June 2006
                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


                              ASEE - Member of Engineering Technology Division; Reviewer for Annual
                              Conference Proceedings; Participant at: ASEE Mid-Atlantic Conferences -
                              2002, 2003, 2004; ASEE National Conferences – 1993 -1997.

14.    Honors:                Recipient of ASEE Centennial Certificate, June 1993.

                              Selected as Senior Member of IEEE, September 1989.

                              Recipient of the Penn State Engineering Society Outstanding Teaching Award,
                              May 1988.

15.    Programs:              Participant –ABET TC2K Accreditation Workshop, May, 2004.

                              Invited Participant – ABET TEI Workshop, June, 2002.

                              Participant – IEEE TAC of ABET Accreditation Workshop, June 1993.

16.    Other Duties:          Advisor for Engineering and Engineering Technology students.
       (base salary)
                              2EET Program Coordinator- Berks Campus, May 2002- May 2005.

                              2EET Program Coordinator for SETCE, January 1993 - September 1994.

                              Co-Chair – Penn State Berks Campus Industrial Advisory Committee, 1990 to
                              2002.

                              Chair – EBC Division Promotion and Tenure Committee, 2004-05

                              Member – Berks College Promotion and Tenure Committee, 2005-06.

                              Member – BKLV College Promotion and Tenure Committee, 1997-99, 2001-03.

                              Member – EBCHD Division Promotion and Tenure Committee, 1999-2000

                              Member – ETCE Promotion and Tenure Committee, 2003-04.

                              Member – SETCE Promotion and Tenure Committee, 1993-94.

                              Member – College of Engineering 2EET Curriculum Committee, 2000-2003.

                              Chair – BKLV College Engineering Search Committee, 2001-02.

                              Member – BKLV College Engineering Search Committees, 2003-04 and 1997-
                              98.

                              Chair – BKLV College EE/2EET Lab Supervisor Search Committee, 2004.

                              Co-Supervisor – EE/2EET Lab Supervisor, 2004 - present.

                              Member – ABET CQI team, 2004 – present.

                              Peer Teaching Reviewer for 2 to 3 Berks campus faculty per year from various
                              disciplines, 1999 – present.


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                  Page 42 of 98                                     June 2006
                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



17.    Other Duties           Administrative Evaluator for Division Head – conducted annual
       (extra comp.)          performance evaluations of all engineering faculty at BKLV College, spring
                              2001.


18.    Summer:                Freshman Testing, Counseling and Advising Program – Faculty Advisor,
                              Summers 1999-2005.


19:    Other:                 Judge -Annual Science Fairs at area schools, January 1995 – 2004.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                  Page 43 of 98                                      June 2006
                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                        Faculty Curriculum Vitae


1.     Name:                    Dale H. Litwhiler

2.     Department:              Division of Engineering, Business and Computing, Penn State Berks – Lehigh
                                Valley College.

3.     Date Hired               August 2002

4.     Years/Service            4

5.     Rank:                    Assistance Professor of Engineering

6.     Degrees:                 BSEE, Penn State University, 1984
                                MSEE, Syracuse University, 1989
                                Ph. D. EE, Lehigh University, 2000

7.     Other Teaching:          Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA. Teaching assistant 1989 – 1993.

8.     Industrial:              Lockheed Martin, Newtown, PA. Staff Engineer, 1994 – 2002.
       (full-time)              IBM Federal Systems, Owego, NY. Senior Associate Engineer, 1984 – 1989.

9.     Industrial:              IBM Federal Systems, Owego, NY. 1989 – 1994.
       (part-time)

10.    Consulting:              Apogee Labs, North Wales, PA. 2005.

11.    Registration:            Professional Engineer, Pennsylvania

12.    Publications:            Litwhiler, D. H. and Lovell, T.D., “USB Data Acquisition Units Provide New
                                Measurement and Control Options for Engineering Technology Students,”
                                Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Portland, OR, June, 2005.

                                Litwhiler, D. H. and Lovell, T.D., “Acoustic Measurements Using Common
                                Computer Accessories: Do Try This at Home,” Proceedings of the ASEE
                                Annual Conference, ASEE, Portland, OR, June, 2005.

                                Litwhiler, D. H., “A Versatile LabVIEW™ Environment for Communicating
                                with Dallas-Maxim 1-Wire™ Devices,” Computers in Education Journal, Vol.
                                XV, No. 2, April – June, 2005.

                                Litwhiler, D. H., “More Meaningful PSpice™ Simulations via LabVIEW™,”
                                International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2005, pp. 3 - 10.

                                Litwhiler, D. H., “Listening to PSpice™ Simulations with LabVIEW™,”
                                International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2005, pp. 19 –
                                25.

                                Litwhiler, D. H., “A Simple Software and Hardware System Solution for
                                Process Measurement and Control in Engineering Technology Student Design
                                Projects,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, Salt Lake City,
                                UT, June, 2004.



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                     Page 44 of 98                                       June 2006
                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

13.    Societies:             ASEE - Member of Engineering Technology and Instrumentation Divisions.
                              Reviewer for the 2004 Annual Conference Proceedings; Reviewer for the 2005
                              Annual Conference Proceedings; Moderator for the 2005 Annual Conference.

14.    Honors:                one

15.    Programs:              Participant – ABET TC2K workshop, Greensburg, PA, October, 2003.


16.    Other Duties:          Advisor for 12 Engineering Technology students.
       (base salary)
                              Member – Penn State Berks Campus Industrial Advisory Committee

                              Member – BKLV College Engineering Search Committee, 2004.

                              Member – BKLV College 2EET Lab Supervisor Search Committee, 2004.

                              Supervisor – 2EET Student Laboratory Assistant, 2003 – 2005.

                              Co-Supervisor – 2EET Lab Supervisor, 2004 - Present.

                              Member – ABET CQI team, 2004 – Present.

                              Member – University 2EET Curriculum Committee, 2002-2005.


18.    Other Duties           Freshman Testing, Counseling and Advising Program – Faculty Advisor, July,
                              2004.
       (extra comp.)


19:    Other:                 TBD.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                  Page 45 of 98                                    June 2006
                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                       Faculty Curriculum Vitae


1.     Name:                   Gregory D. Stanton, P.E.

2.     Department:             Division of Engineering, Business and Computing, Penn State Berks – Lehigh
                               Valley College.

3.     Date Hired              July 1, 2004

4.     Years/Service           2

5.     Rank:                   Lecturer, Electrical Engineering

6.     Degrees:                A ENG 2EET, Penn State University, Abington College, 1990
                               BS EET, Penn State University, Capital College, 1992
                               M ENG EE, Penn State University, Capital College, 1998

7.     Other Teaching: None.

8.     Industrial:             Engineering Director, Bulova Technologies, LLC; Lancaster, PA, 2003 – 2004.
       (full-time)             Process Engineer, Manager of Electronics Manufacturing and Producibility,
                               Smiths Aerospace Electronic Systems; Germantown, MD, 2001 – 2003
                               Test Cell Manager, Production Manager, Sr. Product Manager, Hughes Network
                               Systems, Inc.; Germantown, MD, 1997 – 2001
                               Reliability Engineer, Quality Engineer, Quality Manager, Product Quality
                               Manager, Yuasa-Exide, Inc.; Reading, PA, 1993 – 1997
                               Engineering/Math Tutor, Penn State University, Harrisburg, PA, 1992 -1993
                               Lab Assistant, Penn State University, Abington, PA, 1988-1990
                               Electronics Technician, Gauss Systems and Controls, Inc., Ivyland, PA, 1987-
                               1988

9.     Industrial:             None.
       (part-time)

10.    Consulting:             Berks Career and Technology Center, Curriculum Development, 2006

11.    Registration:           Professional Engineer, Pennsylvania, 2005
                               Fundamentals Engineering, Pennsylvania, 2004
                               Certified Process Engineer, Maryland, SMTA, 2002
                               Certified Systems Engineer, Maryland, SMTA, 2001

12.    Publications:           Stanton, G. D., Idowu P. B. “A Fuzzy Genetic Modeling of the Multiple-
                               Constrained Economic Dispatch Problem,” Proceedings from the Large
                               Engineering Systems Conference on Power Engineering, Halifax, Nova Scotia,
                               Canada, June 1999.

13.    Societies:              Member of IEEE, 1998
                               Member of ISA, 2005
                               Member of SMTA, 2001

14.    Honors:                 None.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                    Page 46 of 98                                    June 2006
                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

15.    Other Duties:          Program Coordinator, Electrical Engineering Technology Program
       (base salary)          Advisor for Electrical Engineering Technology students.
                              Member – Penn State Berks Campus Industrial Advisory Committee
                              Member – ABET CQI team, 2004 – Present.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                  Page 47 of 98                                 June 2006
                     Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                       Faculty Curriculum Vitae


1. Name:                    Henry P. Haraschak

2. Department:              Division of Engineering, Business and Computing, Penn State Berks – Lehigh
                            Valley College.

3. Date Hired:              August 1974

4. Years/Service:           25+ years part-time

5. Rank:                    Lecturer

6. Degrees:                 BSEE, The Pennsylvania State University, 1958
                            MS, Physics, Franklin & Marshall College, 1964

7. Other Teaching:          Reading Area Community College
                            Continuing Education – Penn State Berks Campus
                            Technician Review Course – Keystone Technical Associates

8. Industrial:              AT&T Technologies - 26 years Senior Design Engineer,
  (full-time)               1959 - 1985


9. Industrial:
  (part-time)


10. Registration:

11. Consulting:

12. Publications:

13. Societies:              Sigma Pi Sigma -Physics Honor Society

14. Honors:


15. Other Duties:
 (base salary)

16. Other Duties:
  (extra comp.)

17. Summer:

18: Other:




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                   Page 48 of 98                                 June 2006
                     Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                    Faculty Curriculum Vitae

1. Name:                    George Schanzenbach

2. Department:              Division of Engineering, Business and Computing, Penn State Berks – Lehigh
                            Valley College.

3. Date Hired:              August 1993

4. Years/Service:           13

5. Rank:                    Lecturer, part-time

6. Degrees:                 B.S.E.E., M.S.E.E., MAdm

7. Other Teaching:          Substitute teacher local area public schools (Kutztown, Conrad Weiser,
                            Reading, Antietam, Wyomissing)

8. Industrial:              32 years engineering experience as System Engineer/Project Engineer applied to
                            data
  (full-time)               processing systems, photovoltaic solar electric systems, wind turbine electric
                            systems, turbomachinery instrumentation and control, and spacecraft attitude
                            control.
9. Industrial:
  (part-time)

10. Registration:           Professional Engineer, Commonwealth of PA, PE-012659

11. Consulting:

12. Publications:           "Reduction of Electrical Runout to Improve the Accuracy of Eddy Current
                            Probe Sensing of Turbomachinery Vibration," ASME 72-LUB-R, 1972.
                            "The Installation and Application of Sensors for Turbomachinery Monitoring,"
                            Third Turbomachinery Symposium Texas A&M University, 1974.
                            "Economic Emergence of Solar Electric Systems," Penn State University, 1981.

13. Societies:              Member - IEEE

14. Honors:

15. Other Duties:
 (base salary)

16. Other Duties:
  (extra comp.)

17. Summer:

18: Other:                  Patents: "Adjustable Probe Holder," #3898562
                            "Trip Device for a Rotating Machine," #4064764




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                 Page 49 of 98                                    June 2006
                     Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                       Faculty Curriculum Vitae


1. Name:                    Eric Tappert

2. Department:              Division of Engineering, Business and Computing, Penn State Berks – Lehigh
                            Valley College.

3. Date Hired:              August 2002

4. Years/Service:           3

5. Rank:                    Lecturer

6. Degrees:                 BSEE, University of Pennylvania, 1969
                            MS Telecomm, University of Colorado, 1998

7. Other Teaching:          Northampton County Area Community College
                                   Associate Professor Electronics Technology, 1981 – 1984.

8. Industrial:              Agere Systems, Member Technical Staff, 1996 – 2001.
  (full-time)               AT&T Bell Labs, Member Technical Staff, 1995 – 1996.
                            AT&T Microelectronics, Member Technical Staff, 1993 – 1994.
                            PEComm, Chief Engineer, 1991 – 1993.
                            All-Control Systems, Project Manager, 1990 – 1991.
                            AT&T Microelectronics, Technical Support Mgr., 1984 – 1989.
                            Western Electric, Senior Engineer, 1969 – 1981.

9. Industrial:
  (part-time)


10. Registration:           Licensed Professional Engineer, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

11. Consulting:

12. Publications:

13. Societies:              IEEE, ACM, NSPE, PSPE

14. Honors:                 Eta Kappa Nu


15. Other Duties:
 (base salary)

16. Other Duties:
  (extra comp.)

17. Summer:


B.6. Facilities



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                   Page 50 of 98                                 June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

B.6.a. 2EET Program Classrooms, Laboratories, and Infrastructure

The Electrical Engineering Technology lab area is comprised of four rooms: an electronics lab, an auto controls/
programmable logic controller lab, a stockroom and an electrical lab. This area is managed by a full time staff
laboratory supervisor.

B.6.b. 2EET Program Classroom Adequacy Assessment

The electronics lab covers about 600 square feet and is composed of six student workstations each with dual power
supply, function generator, digital multimeter, timer/counter and oscilloscope. A Dell Dimension computer is
located at each station that is connected to the network and contains software programs such as PSpice version 8, B-
Square Logic, MATLAB 5 and LabVIEW 7.1. There is a separate workstation that is used to program PLDs and
this computer has CUPL and the EMUP program installed on it. Three storage cabinets are located in this
laboratory. The room is equipped with an overhead projector and screen and a TV and VCR.




                        Figure 9: Electronics Laboratory, Luerssen Building , Room L22

The programmable logic controller lab is composed of a 12 seat classroom area and a formal laboratory area
covering about 900 square feet. Both areas are supported with whiteboard space, an electronic smart-board, a data
projector, an overhead projector and screen, and general storage cabinets. The formal lab area contains six teaching
stations and each is equipped with two 120VDC supplies and 120V 1φ, 120V 3φ, and 208V 3φ supplies. The PLC
equipment includes six SLC-500 stations, two PLC-5 stations and an instructor station. Also, nine Dell Optiplex
Gxa computers are located here running Windows NT with Office 97, Netscape Communicator, MATLAB 5,
LabVIEW 7.1, PSpice Eval 8, RSView 32, RS Logix 5, RS Logix 500, RS Linx, and Panel Builder software.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 51 of 98                                       June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology




      Figure 10: Autocontrols/Programable Logic Controller Laboratory, Luerssen Building, Room L4

The stockroom separates the electrical and PLC laboratories. The room is comprised of a general area,
approximately 500 square feet, and two smaller areas (a repair room and a power room), each of about 77 square
feet in size. Components, instruments, and a collection of reference materials are stored here. This area also houses
the office of the laboratory supervisor. Switches and breakers to control all voltages to the power panels for each
teaching station are located in the power room.

The electrical lab covers an area of about 900 square feet. It includes a 25-seat classroom area, supported by
chalkboard space, a technology podium (Dell computer with internet and LAN access, CD/DVD/VCR players),
projection system, retractable screen, and an overhead projector. The principle lab area is equipped with seven
teaching stations with each one having 120VDC, 120V 1φ, 120V 3φ and 208 3φ supplies. The room is equipped
with DC motors and generators, AC motors and generators and five mobile DC/AC motor control stations. Also,
four networked Dell Dimension computers are located here running Windows XP with Office XP, Netscape
Communicator, MATLAB 5, LabVIEW 7.1, and PSpice Eval 8. A networked laser jet printer is also located in this
room. There are three storage cabinets in the rear of the room.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 52 of 98                                       June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology




                        Figure 11: Electrical Laboratory, Luerssen Building, Room L2

Additional computer equipment is centrally located in rooms L140 – L146 of the Luerssen building and it is
connected to mainframe computers at University Park with related interactive terminals and backup equipment.
Also there are microcomputers and twenty handheld iPAQ pocket PC devices available for implementation into
classroom work and for student use. Since the previous ABET visit, the following additional laboratory equipment
has been added:

    •   12 Tektronix Model 1002 Digital Storage Oscilloscopes with communications adapter.
    •   12 LabJack USB portable data acquisition units.
    •   8 B-K Precision Adjustable Power Supplies
    •   Manufacturer and model? Spectrum Analyzer
    •   Allen Bradley SLC 500 motion control equipment and software


The facilities described above are used by the Engineering Technology department; however the labs are shared by
all the electrically-based ET programs and the baccalaureate EMET program At present, the facilities are adequate
to accommodate all enrollment demands without scheduling conflicts among the programs. Enrollment trends
indicate that this situation should not change in the near future.
Historically, money to replace laboratory equipment has come from several sources, including grant proposals,
tuition surcharges, targeted fund drives, matching funds from the College of Engineering (COE), Berks Campus
equipment funds, and campus general funds. Generally, major renovations and equipment upgrades are handled
through grant activities, while smaller purchases and expendable resources are covered from general funds and
surcharge accounts.
In recent years, funding for equipment purchases and repairs in most of the labs has become more available because
of tuition surcharges imposed on the baccalaureate EMET students who also use these labs. Those funds are
earmarked exclusively for lab maintenance and equipment purchases for those labs supporting the EMET program,
which includes the 2EET program since the same labs are used by both. Those funds are totally under the control of



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 53 of 98                                      June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

the campus’ EMET program coordinator. Some additional funds for equipment purchases and repairs are provided
by an 2EET annual budget
Equipment repair and maintenance are handled in two ways. Minor repairs and maintenance are done by the
technical support staff on campus. Major repairs are contracted out either to the equipment repair center at the
University Park campus or to equipment vendors. Funds for these repairs come from the same sources indicated
above.
Computer Facilities
Computer equipment available in the 2EET labs is described in the previous section. However, in addition to lab-
based computing equipment, students in the 2EET program have access to computers in the campus Computer
Center. The Computer Center consists of five computer labs and an AutoCAD classroom.
A variety of applications software is available on the Computer Lab stations, and in many cases, to all computers
connected to the campus network.. A sampling of available analytical software relevant to the 2EET program would
include, among others, PSpice, MultiSim, Mathcad, Matlab, and Labview.
The Computer Center also maintains a collection of reference materials for all software. Materials are available to
students for use in the Center, but they may not be checked out. Help services are provided via reference desk,
which is manned by both administrative staff and work-study students.

B.7. Institutional and External Support

B.7.a. Adequacy of Institutional Support, Resources and Leadership


An annual 2EET budget for equipment purchases and repairs is provided by the head of the Engineering, Business,
and Computing Division of the Berks campus. The Director of University Relations is the person who is the campus
representative to patrons and benefactors who may wish to donate money or equipment to the Electrical Engineering
Technology Associate Degree program. Funding for upgrading of computers and software used in the 2EET
program can be obtained through annual 2EET budget request, state annual grant funding, or other special funding
options. When a piece of equipment becomes non-operational a decision is made to repair, scrap or replace. If the
equipment is repairable, it is repaired in-house or sent out for repair if the depth of the repair exceeds in-house
expertise. If a piece of equipment is non-operational and is no longer needed in the program, then it is sent to
salvage. Operation and use of equipment is under the direction of the instructor of the particular course(s) the
equipment is used and the full-time lab supervisor.

The Berks campus provides financial aid services, advising, tutoring, and career placement services. A divisional
administrative assistant is available to support the engineering technology faculty, however, most of the engineering
technology faculty prepare their own exams, reports, etc.

Faculty positions are publically advertised. A search committee is delegated with the responsibility of screening all
candidates for the advertised position. Instructors are required to hold a minimum of a Master’s degree, more
recently however, a PhD is desired. Instructors are hired having varying degrees of industrial experience. Tenure
faculty positions require a PhD degree. All faculty hold some professional affiliation. Faculty within the university
are appropriate monies annually for the purposes of remaining current in their field of expertise and also for
professional development.

The Berks campus has an open enrollment policy. Students are funneled through the FTCAP process which
includes placement testing in English, Mathematics, and Chemistry. If the results of the test scores are below
required levels students are placed in remedial courses to bring them up to the level expected for entry into the
program. Students do not receive credit towards there degree for taking these courses however the courses do
contribute towards there cumulative GPA.

An advisor is assigned to each student in the 2EET program. Near the conclusion of each semester students are
advised of the courses that they should schedule the next semester. Should the student require individual advising
anytime the semester then the student is encouraged to arrange for an appointment with their advisor.


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                          Page 54 of 98                                        June 2006
                            Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


The Berks campus has a Career Services Office which aims to develop independence, self-esteem, empowerment,
and resourcefulness in Penn State Berks students. The office functions as a team working with the overall university
and local community. Services are available to both recent graduates and alumni. Goals of the career services
office include:

 (1) Develop of campus employment opportunities
 (2) Provide listings of part-time, temporary, or summer employment via College Central Network
     (http://www.bk.psu.edu/academics/career_services/cc.html)
 (3) Facilitate student entry into community and employment market in their area of study.
 (4) Develops internship positions related to a student’s program of study
 (5) Provide support for cover letter and resume writing and access to the Career Technology Center

B.7.b. Support Expenditures for the 2EET Program
Table 15 shows the support expenditure for the Berks 2EET program over the last three years.
Table 15: Support Expenditures for the 2EET Program
Expenditure                                                                                    Budgeted for the
Category               Two years ago           Last Year               Current Year            Year of the Visit
Operations,
                       $3,312.00               $4,552.70               $4,678.89               $5,103.39
excluding staff 1
Travel 2                $2,283.45               $1,427.10              $6,066.59               $1,040.93
Equipment: 3
  (a) Institutional     $6,630.24               $3,820.64              $470.00                 $4,174.61
Funds
  (b) Grants and       $13,344.35              $0                      $14,826.00              $8,000.00
Gifts 4
Temporary (non-
                       $0                      $0                      $0                      $0
teaching) Assistance

The following tables (16-18) reflect the investments made in the electrical labs since last ABET TAC program
review. These facilities are typical used for 2EET course although resources are shared amongst the 2EET, MET,
and EMET programs where appropriate.



Table 16: L2 Electrical Lab
Date        Description                                                       Quantity     Unit Cost       Total
                                                                                                           Cost
Jun-2001    LP Tek Spectrum Analyzer w/AM+FM, LPT-2250                        1                 $2619          $2619
Jun-2002    Dell Optiplex Desktop Personal Computer                           7                 $1200          $8400
Apr-2004    HP iPAQ Handheld Computers                                        20                 $356          $7120
May-        Nova-Strobe, BA115, Stroboscope                                   4                  $235            $940
2005
May-        AEMC Digital Power Meter, Model 3910                              1                     $650         $650
2005
May-        Lab-Volt Electro-Mag Break, 3152-20                               1                     $733          $733
2005
Jun-2005    BK Precision LCR Meter, 875B                                      3                  $184            $552
Sept-       Allen Bradley 1305 Variable Speed Drive Demo Kit (used)           1                  $500            $500
2005
Sept-       Dell Latitude Laptop Computer                                     2                 $1000             $200
2005
                                                                                                Total:          $23514


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 55 of 98                                         June 2006
                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



Table 17: L4 Automation and Control Lab

Date       Description                                            Quantity    Unit Cost   Total
                                                                                          Cost
Jun-2002   Feedback Instrumentation Modules w/ transducers        2              $2935        $5870
May-       Feedback Process Control Simulator, PCS327             1              $3694        $3694
2003
May-       Feedback Level/Flow Process Rig, 38-100                1             $14992         $14992
2003
May-       LabJack U12 Data Acquisition & Control Device          12              $119          $1428
2003
May-       Digital Oscilloscope, TDS-1002                         7               $995          $5250
2003
May-       Ross 2 Pen Recorder, Model 202                         1               $995            $995
2003
Aug-       Tektronix Digital Oscilloscope, TDS-1002               1               $995            $995
2004
Jun-2005   RS-232 Break-out Box                                   3                 $20           $60
Jun-2005   Precision LCR Meter, 875B                              3                $184          $552
Jun-2005   ABB Commander Controller                               4                $800         $3200
Jun-2005   Allen Bradley Servo Motors w. accessories              6               $2471        $14826
Jun-2005   Dell Optiplex Desktop Personal Computer                9               $1000          $900
Dec-2005   Allen Bradley AC Input Module, 1746-IA16               6             $227.50         $1365
Dec-2005   Allen Bradley AC Output Modules, 1746-OA16             1             $317.10          $317
Dec-2005   Siemens S7-222 PLC                                     2             $199.00          $398
Dec-2005   Q-kits AC Dimmer Kit                                   1              $34.45           $34
Oct-2005   Vex Robotics Starter Kit                               1             $498.00          $498
                                                                                 Total:        $23514

Table 18: L22 Electronics Lab

Date       Description                                            Quantity    Unit Cost   Total
                                                                                          Cost
Jun-2002   PAD-234 Digital Trainer (Agere)                        5               $150          $750
Jun-2002   Tektronix Digital Oscilloscope, TDS220 (Agere)         3              $1795         $5385
Jun-2002   Fluke True RMS Digital Multimeter, 187 (Agere)         5               $389         $1945
Nov-       Wavetek LCR Meter, 27XT                                1               $119          $119
2000
Nov-       Simpson 260-8 Volt Ohm Meter                           3               $195            $585
2000
Apr-2002   Instek True RMS Digital Multimeter, GDM-8145           10              $289         $2890
Jun-2002   Tektronix Digital Oscilloscope, TDS-1002               10              $750         $7500
Mar-       BK Precision Power Supply, Model 1710A                 14              $216         $3024
2003
Mar-       EZ Micro-12 Microcontroller Tutor Trainer              10              $225          $2250
2003
Jan-2004   Dell Optiplex Desktop Personal Computer                6              $1100          $6600
Apr-2005   PAD-234 Digital Trainer                                1               $150           $150
Jun-2005   BK Precision LCR Meter, 875B                           5               $184           $920
Jan-2006   Kanda PLD Starter Kit                                  1               $200           $200
                                                                                 Total:        $32318


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                      Page 56 of 98                          June 2006
                                Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



B.7.c. Penn State Berks Campus Industrial Advisory Committee

The Berks campus engineering and engineering technology programs share a single Industrial Advisory Committee
composed of members who represent constituents of all programs. Meetings are held annually in the Fall semester
and are conducted in tow phases. The main phase of the meeting involves a status report of each program along
with reports from the Continuing Engineering, Alumni Relations, and Career Services departments. The econd
phase involves breakout sessions where the subcommittees meet to discuss specifica attributes of the programs they
represent. Table 19 reflects the list of IAC members effective Spring 2006 semester. Those participants noted by
an asterisk after their names specifically represent the 2EET program.
Table 19: Penn State Berks Campus Industrial Advisory Committee
Name                                      Title                                       Organization
Mr. Richard P. Aulenbach                  President and CEO                           RPA Associates, Inc.
Mr. Scott Benner                          Plant Manager                               Hofmann Industries, Inc.
Mr. Keith S. Campbell*                    Principal                                   Campbell Management Services
Mr. Joseph Deane, P.E.*                   Principal                                   KTR Associates, LLC
Mr. John Eagelman*                        Supervisor – Electrical & Software Engrg.   Magnatech International, L.P.
Dr. Terry D. Hand, P.E.                   Manager of Civil Engineering                Spotts, Stevens and McCoy, Inc.
Mr. Kenneth Hill*                         Engineering Technician                      AI Control Systems
Mr. Frank Kaczmarczyk                     Consultant
Mr. Charles Kopicz                        Chief Advocate for Positive Change          Performance Advocates
Ms. Kim Loudis*                           Vice President                              Barbey Electronics
Mr. Neil F. McCormick                     Engineering Leader, Control Systems         Arrow International
Mr. William B. Meister, AIA                                                           Meister Architects
Mr. Michael A. Melnick, P.E.*             Principal Electrical Engineer               Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.
Mr. Donald C. Miller                      Manager-Industry Issues                     GPU Energy
Mr. Kenneth A. Orr *                      Engineer                                    World Electronics
Mr. Josh Perlman                          Project Engineer                            Reading Body Works
Ms. Jennie Rodriguez                      Manager, Employment and Diversity           Carpenter Technology Corporation
Mr. Brian Roth                            Project Engineer                            Arrow International
Mr. Keith Sanford                         Executive Vice President                    Neapco, Inc.
Mr. Michael R. Schmehl                    Plant Administrative Manager                Reliant Energy
Mr. Daniel Schlegel*                      Senior Engineering Technician               Lutron Electronics, Inc.
Dr. Jerry F. Shoup*                       Associate Director, School of Science,      Penn State Harrisburg
                                          Engineering and Technology
Mr. Leonard Stump                         Staff Specialist                            Carpenter Technology Corp.
Mr. Ronald J. Tomasello                   Director, Global Engineering                Dana Corporation
Mr. Eric Turgeon, EIT*                    Design Engineer                             Turgeon Engineering
Mr. Norman A. Ulrich, Jr.                 Executive Vice-President of Operations      Can Corporation of America
Mr. Hani Wahba*                           Electrical Engineer                         Nexans
Ms. Bernette D. Wrobel*                   President                                   Pagoda Electrical & Mechanical, Inc.
*Denotes 2EET Program Subcommittee members
B.8. Program Criteria

B.8.a. Evidence of Program Criteria Satisfaction


The relationships between 2EET program and course outcomes and ABET Program Criteria for
Electrical/Electronic(s) Engineering Technology programs were outlined briefly in section B.2 of this report.
Table 20 below repeats that information in expanded detail to show explicitly those courses in the curriculum that
are designed to satisfy the specific program criteria stipulated in the ABET program criteria.
As shown in Table B.2.1 and B.2.3, ABET’s 2EET program criteria A and B are addressed by Penn State’s 2EET
program through five educational outcomes. Those are:




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                            Page 57 of 98                                            June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

•   Outcome 1 – application of basic knowledge in electronics, electrical circuit analysis, electrical machines,
    microprocessors, and PLC, which is primarily addressed by courses EET 101, 114, 117, 210, 211, 213W, and
    220.
•   Outcome 2 – conduct of experiments, and then analysis and integration of results, which is accomplished
    primarily in lab courses EET 109, 118, 120, 205, and 221.
•   Outcome 3 – application of mathematical, scientific, and engineering concepts to technical problem solving,
    which is primarily accomplished in courses ET 002 and 005, EET 101, 114, 210, 213W, and 216.
•   Outcome 4 – demonstrate a working knowledge of drafting and computer usage, including the use of one or
    more computer software packages for technical problem solving, which is primarily addressed in ET 005, EGT
    101 and 102, EET 211 and 220.
•   Outcome 10 – application of creativity through the use of project-based work to design circuits, systems, and
    processes, which is primarily centered in courses EET 205, 211, 213W, 220, and 221.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 58 of 98                                       June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

Table 20 correlates the courses listed above to the requirements established by the 2EET program criteria
established by ABET.
Table 20: Mapping 2EET Program Courses to ABET Program Criteria

                                                                                                ABET 2EET Program Criteria

                                                                                                                                                                            B
                                                              A                                                                                                     Application of the
                                    Application of the following to the design, building,                                                                         following to electrical
                                          testing, operation, and maintenance of                                                                                    and/or electronic
                                                electrical/electronic circuits                                                                                           circuits




                                                                                                                                                                                               Application of Mathematics
                                                                     Programming & Associated
                                     Circuit Analysis, Design, &




                                                                                                                                                                      Application of Physics
                                                                                                                                              Microprocessors &
                                                                                                   Analog Electronics



                                                                                                                        Digital Electronics




                                                                                                                                              Microcomputers
                                                                     Software
                                     Testing




            Courses
Phys 150                                                                                                                                                              X
Phys 151                                                                                                                                                              X
EGT 101                                                                    X
EGT 102                                                                    X
ET 002                                                                     X                                                                                                                   X
ET 005                                                                     X                                                                                                                   X
EET 101                                     X                                                                                                                         X                        X
EET 109                                     X                              X
EET 114                                     X                                                                                                                         X                        X
EET 117                                     X                                                                           X
EET 118                                     X                              X
EET 120                                     X                              X                                            X
EET 205                                     X                              X                       X
EET 210                                     X                                                      X                                                                                           X
EET 216                                     X                                                      X                                                                  X                        X
EET 221                                     X                              X                       X
EET 211                                     X                              X                                                                      X
EET 213W                                    X                                                                                                                         X                        X
EET 220                                     X                              X                       X                                              X




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                             Page 59 of 98                                                                                      June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


Appendix A: Berks 2EET CQI Meeting Minutes
                                 Penn State Berks 2EET Program CQI Meeting
                                 Monday, September 12, 2005, 10:00-11:00AM
                                          Room T145, Thun Library

Attendance: Robert Buczynski, Jeff Wike, Hank Haraschak, Dale Litwhiler, George Schanzenbach, Gregory Stanton

Meeting Minutes:

Greg provided an overview of the CQI meeting’s purpose to the team members, noted future meetings. Future
meetings will be occurring Bi-weekly starting Sep 12 and will be held in T109. Greg briefly discussed critical
ABET TAC actions required by 2EET faculty stemming from the ETCE meeting held Aug 24.

Greg highlighted the need for all faculty to begin incorporating the 2EET program outcomes (specific to a particular
course) and the course outcomes into all Fall 2005 syllabi. This initiative will advise students of what will be
expected of them at the completion of the course. In other words, each student should be able to perform all course
outcomes satisfactorily and can evaluate themselves effectively on the MEET course surveys.

Greg opened a discussion on the need for a Berks 2EET standard syllabus. The template was emailed to all Berks
faculty for consideration. A copy is attached to these minutes. No specific issues were raised by faculty with
regard to the template. All faculty were asked to begin using the template in the Spring 2006 session. Faculty
should incorporate a day into their Lecture/Laboratory Topic outline for the students to complete the MEET and
SRTE surveys. Greg asked faculty to start thinking about ways to link course outcomes to assessment methods on
their course syllabi.

The MEET course survey and history archive data can be found at:

https://www.engr.psu.edu/MEET/

The SRTE data can be found at:

https://cbt.uts.psu.edu/SRTEWeb/

Bob suggested the template incorporate not only the Penn State undergraduate grading system but include a section
for faculty define how their grades will be calculated for the course.

Greg opened a discussion on course outline revisions. Faculty were asked to consult the Angel Course Management
webpage and review course outlines as soon as possible. Ideally all feedback from faculty on outcomes should be
sent to course chairs no later than Sept. 15in time for the EET curricular meeting. In the future course outline
revisions shall be considered annually by course chairs and will be processed in the October timeframe. Greg asked
all faculty to keep copies of email and other correspondence sent to course chairs involving proposed changes. This
data will be used to demonstrate the continuous improvement process with the ABET TAC assessment team.

The most current course outlines for the 2EET program can be found at:

https://cms.psu.edu/section/default.asp?id=GROUP%2D050404%2D163808%2DXEJ

Dale indicated he has sent requests to the course chair for EET 101 to remove Mesh Analysis from the course
outline. No response has been received yet.

Greg indicated he had sent a request on Sept. 7 to Sohail Anwar requesting modifications to the EET 220 course
outcomes. Sohail responded on Sept. 8 and agreed to make all proposed changes to the course.

George indicated the suggested topics for ET 005 needed to be revised since they do not adequately address what is
being taught at Penn State Berks.


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 60 of 98                                       June 2006
                            Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


Greg opened a discussion on MEET survey data and how it will be used for part of the program assessment. Greg
asked faculty to review MEET survey date for the courses taught in Fall 2004 and Spring 2005. Dale and Bob
indicated that some course data was missing. Faculty should notify Dan Lall at DLall@psu.edu in the event data is
missing, corrupt, or truncated. Bob suggested we incorporate a MEET data review into the meeting and make it a
working session. Greg agreed this may be the best way to handle it and will try to being this process at the next CQI
meeting.

Greg opened a discussion on ABET TAC assessment evidence. This evidence in the form of student work, exams,
quizzes, assignment, etc, will be used to demonstrate course outcomes are being met. Penn State Berks 2MET,
2EET, and EMET program coordinators are planning on taking three student samples, one exceeding expectations,
one average, and one below. The intent is to illustrate a sample of student performance on each course outcome.

Bob suggested faculty collect all student works and select three samples from each course for each outcome. This
would avoid student apprehension with whether or not their work was selected. He also suggested folders be created
for each course and the materials be separated based on course outcome. Greg indicated he planned to collect all
materials from students and make copies of select few then return them to students as soon as possible. Greg
indicated ABET TAC assessment auditors will be interested in seeing marked up exams, quizzes, assignments, and
lab reports. Faculty should be sure to copy marked and graded items. Jeff indicated two filing cabinets are now
available in the Power Lab.

Greg reported that another brochure revision was required due to a photo change. Upon review the brochure will be
approved and go to print. About 1000 copies will be ordered for this printing cycle.


Greg reported the major changes to the 2EET website have been made but more revisions are required. Faculty
were asked to review the website and offer suggestions for improving content. Greg reported that the site is
receiving about three requests for information a week. In the future it may be best for us to develop some kind of
standard response with materials.

The Penn State Berks 2EET website can be found at:

http://www.bk.psu.edu/academics/degrees/2eet/2eet.html

Greg reported Fall 2005 first year enrollment for the 2EET program was at 18 students based on an assessment of
EET 101.1 and EET 101.50 enrollment. Greg also reported two additional students have submitted applications to
begin in studies in the Spring 2006 semester. There are 11 students still undecided and Greg and Dale should work
with these students to help them decide within the next few weeks. Dale reported, that when asked, 10 students
indicated they were 2EET majors in his class.

Actions:

    1.     Faculty to review all syllabi and assure specific program outcomes and course outcomes are reflected on all
           Fall 2005 2EET syllabi. Please complete this action by Sept. 19 2005.

    2.     Faculty to review course outlines for major issues and send proposed changes to course chairs by Sept. 15
           if possible.

    3.     Faculty be prepared to review MEET survey data for their course at the next CQI meeting. Faculty are
           asked to identify which courses and sections they taught in Fall 2005 and Spring 2005 prior to next
           meeting.

    4.     Faculty are asked to review the Penn State Berks 2EET website and make recommendations on
           improvements or changes. Please submit your feedback to Greg at gds114@psu.edu no later than Oct. 1
           2005.



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                          Page 61 of 98                                       June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                  Penn State Berks 2EET Program CQI Meeting
                                  Wednesday, September 12, 2005, 1:30-2:15PM
                                           Room T115, Thun Library

Attendance: Robert Buczynski, Jeff Wike, Hank Haraschak, Dale Litwhiler, George Schanzenbach, Gregory Stanton

Meeting Minutes:

Greg went over the assumptions made while developing the Spring 2007 electrical faculty course schedules. The
schedule is due to the registrar by the end of the Spring 2006 semester.

The draft Spring 2007 schedule incorporates the same meeting times and days for courses currently being offered
this semester. Additional courses as required for EET and EMET evening program cycles were also incorporated.
Data was not available for the evening MET program. Faculty were asked to confirm whether the meeting
times/days were acceptable. Dale and Bob noted it was unusual to see evening classes offered that were out of synch
with our official published evening program schedule. Greg indicated we [2EET program] are striving for a goal of
20 first semester students for the Fall 2006 semester and it is conceivable that two sections may be needed for each
lab course due to class size constraints for some classrooms.

Furthermore data about the program demographics shows the majority of those enrolled are adult learners (~60%)
seeking to further their professional careers by acquiring the 2EET degree while working. Offering these courses
during the evening seems to provide additional options for potential students who are working full-time to pay for
college. The marked up copy of the schedule is attached.

Bob suggested the loop be closed with the advising department to assure the availability of these evening sections is
not misconstrued as an official two year evening program versus the current six year evening program posted on the
2EET website. Greg will discuss this with the campus advising department as part of ongoing communication with
regards to scheduling.

Greg reviewed the curricular changes that will be in effect for the Fall 2006 session. These changes are summarized
below:

    1.   ET 002 (1), EGT 101 (1), and EGT 102 (1) will be replaced with ED&G 100 (3) starting in the Fall 2006.

             a.    George indicated he was concerned with the decision to eliminate ET 002. Greg summarized the
                   reasons for the changes. These included financial, academic, and program flexibility perspectives.
                   In the case of financial it makes more sense to expand sections of ED&G 100 over continuation of
                   EGT 101 and EGT 102. From an academic perspective most students entering the program from
                   traditional and non-traditional standpoints are well versed in computer and software use including
                   MS Word, MS Excel, and Internet. Lastly this change makes it more seamless for a student on an
                   engineering track to switch to a technology track.

    2.   MATH 81 (3), MATH 82 (3), and Math 83 (4) will be replaced with MATH 26 (3), MATH 22 (3), and
         MATH 140 (4) starting in the Fall 2006.

             a.    Greg summarized the reasons for the changes. MATH 26 should be scheduled BEFORE MATH
                   22 to assure students are getting the trigonometry for EET 101. Again financial and program
                   flexibility were the drivers for the change. Bob questioned whether MATH 83 will still be offered
                   in the Fall. Greg indicated that it would and is reflected in the current schedule online with the
                   registrar.

Greg indicated he will be visiting with IAC members over the summer to have each evaluate the surveys versus
holding a meeting due to schedule difficulties between IAC members. This seems to be more effective over a
specific meeting time and encourages more open discussion of specific needs for each member.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 62 of 98                                       June 2006
                             Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

Greg highlighted the need for all faculty to begin sorting their ABET display materials before the end of the
semester. Greg requested that faculty do the following before submitting student samples to Jeff Wike for filing:

    1.     A folder should be established for each course taught (merge all sections). In this folder include a copy of
           the course outline, a copy of the syllabus, AND a sheet showing the mapping to and from each piece of
           evidence intended to substantiate the success of the outcomes stipulated by the course outline.

    2.     Do not include any MEET data in with your course folders. This will be handled separately as part of
           assessment evidence since it is more suitable to present this data as a measure of program objectives (post
           graduation).

!!Reminder!! MEET data is due next week so please have all your students complete the online surveys before the
end of classes next week.

The MEET course survey and history archive data can be found at:

https://www.engr.psu.edu/MEET/

Actions:

    5.     Faculty to review possible ABET questions list posted on Berks 2EET CQI Angel site.
    6.     Faculty must evidence collection for the Spring semester by the week after finals.
    7.     Greg to modify schedule and distribute for final approvals.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                           Page 63 of 98                                        June 2006
                     Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology




ABET 2K TAC Self Study              Page 64 of 98                         June 2006
                     Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology



Appendix B: System Wide 2EET MEET, Exit Survey Results, and Course
Chair List

                 EET SYSTEM-WIDE PROGRAM REPORT FOR THE YEAR 2005




ABET 2K TAC Self Study              Page 65 of 98                         June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

                                              Table of Contents

A. SUMMARY 67

B. CAMPUSES & PROGRAMS CURRENTLY INVOLVED 67

C. DATA DEFINITIONS AND METHODS 68

D. RESPONSE STATISTICS             69
  A.      MEET 69
  B.      EXIT SURVEYS     69

E. SYSTEM-WIDE PROGRAM REPORT: ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY (EET)                 70
  A.      FREQUENCY DATA BY CAMPUS       70
       i. MEET Data        70
       ii. Exit surveys    70
  B.      ANALYSIS         71
  C.      PROGRAM OUTCOME MEASURES BY CAMPUS              73
       i. System-wide      73
       ii. Altoona 73
       iii. Berks   73
       iv. DuBois 74
       v. Fayette 74
       vi. Hazleton        75
       vii.         New Kensington 75
       viii.        Wilkes-Barre   76
       ix. York     76
F. Actions taken by the EET Curriculum Committee in response to the MEET … 14
   Data Analysis
G. Actions taken by the EET Course Chairs in response to the MEET Data…….. 16
   Analysis




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                    Page 66 of 98                         June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

A. Summary

The Assessment Team has been working with faculty and administration to develop a system that will aid in the
direct measurement of Program Educational Objectives (PEOs), Program Outcomes (POs), and Course-Level
Outcomes (COs). Several instruments have been designed and tested:

    •    Online Exit Surveys (Program Outcomes)
    •    Online Industry Surveys (Program Educational Objectives)
    •    Online Alumni Surveys (Program Outcomes and Program Educational Objectives)
    •    The online M.E.E.T (“Measuring and Evaluating Engineering Technology”) system which contains 3
         instruments
              o Instructor Perception of Student Performance (With Evidence)
              o Instructor Perception of Course Effectiveness (With Comments)
              o Student Perception of Ability and Course Effectiveness (With Comments)

Each instrument makes use of a common database which stores the PEOs, POs, COs, and the mapping scheme. Any
changes made to these outcomes will be reflected immediately in all of the appropriate instruments. “Old”
outcomes are automatically archived for reference.

The exit surveys are available for use by all programs. The final design will include a personal email invitation by
an appropriate campus representative.

The industry surveys are still being pilot tested. The data requires more manipulation in order to be usable.

The alumni surveys are in the design stage, but should be ready for use by late September, 2005.

The primary part of the assessment system is in M.E.E.T. The M.E.E.T. is fully functional, and is capable of
gathering performance data on ALL courses in ALL programs at ALL campuses. Once a baseline has been
established, the M.E.E.T. can be scaled down to collect data only from a certain segment of the curriculum. It’s
important that users know that the current level of data collection is NOT representative of the expected standard.
Each program will eventually decide how many and which courses will participate in M.E.E.T. data collection. The
bulk of this report will deal with M.E.E.T. data collected to date.

M.E.E.T. data collection can begin at any time following the drop/add deadline. Typically, most faculty will
complete the assessment near the end of the semester. It is important, however, that students and faculty not try to
assess an outcome that has not been “covered” at the time of the M.E.E.T. assessment! Experience will let faculty
know when is the most appropriate time for completing the M.E.E.T.

Once data has been entered, users can access a data review interface and review the different courses and campuses
showing the data that was previously obtained. Although functional, the user interface will be re-designed to
improve usability.

B. Campuses & Programs currently involved

       Campuses                                                Programs
Altoona                     2EET, BS EMET, 2MET
Berks                       2EET, BS EMET, 2MET
DuBois                      2EET, 2MAET, 2MET
Fayette                     2EET
Hazleton                    2EET, 2MET
New Kensington              2BET, 2EET, BS EMET, 2MET
Shenango                    2MET
Wilkes-Barre                BS EET, 2EET, 2TELT
York                        2EET, BS EMET, 2MET



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 67 of 98                                        June 2006
                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


C. Data definitions and methods

    •   Program Educational Objectives – Statements that describe the expected accomplishments of graduates
        during the first few years after graduation.
    •   Program Outcomes – Statements that describe what students are expected to know and are able to do by the
        time of graduation, the achievement of which indicates that the student is equipped to achieve the Program
        Educational Objectives.
    •   Course outcomes – As Program Outcomes tend to be broad statements, these outcomes are written to define
        the specific knowledge and abilities that satisfy the Program Outcomes.
    •   Exit surveys – These are aimed at current graduates to get a summative sense of how well the Program
        Outcomes have been achieved. In addition, their general comments can be taken for consideration.
    •   Industry surveys – Pilot runs are currently underway on these. Information is elicited from current and
        potential employers of graduates with regards to the Program Educational Objectives and Program
        Outcomes. Typically, these industry representatives have hired graduates in the past, or will be hiring them
        in the near future.
    •   Alumni surveys – These are in the design and development process. Like the Industry surveys these will
        address both Program Educational Objectives and Program Outcomes. The targeted group is alumni
        approximately two years following graduation.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 68 of 98                                       June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

D. Response statistics

    a.   MEET

                                           Faculty members             Response Rates
     Semester            Course sections
                                                             Faculty           Students
     Fall 2004                176                 63           124 (70.5%)       137 (77.8%)
   Spring 2005                194                 69           130 (67.0%)       147 (75.8%)
  Academic year
                              370                 78             254 (68.7%)       284 (76.8%)
    2004-2005

    b. Exit surveys

                                                       Number of                  Percent
     Program                  Responses
                                                       graduates               response rate
BET                                  0                       0                       -
EET                                 15                      33                    46 %
EMET                                18                      32                    56 %
MAET                                 1                       3                     33 %
MET                                 23                      56                    41 %
TELT                                 1                       1                    100 %
TOTAL                               59                     126                    47 %




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                     Page 69 of 98                                  June 2006
                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

E. System-wide Program Report: Electrical Engineering Technology (EET)


    a.   Frequency data by campus

           i. MEET Data

                                                                     Response Rates
         Campus                Course sections
                                                       Faculty members               Students
Altoona                              14                    1 (7.1%)                13 (92.9%)
Berks                                12                   10 (83.3%)                9 (75.0%)
DuBois                               12                     3 (25%)                 9 (75.0%)
Fayette                              12                    9 (75.0%)                9 (75.0%)
Hazleton                              8                    8 (100%)                  8 (100%)
New Kensington                       10                     9 (90%)                 8 (80.0%)
Wilkes-Barre                         11                      0 (0%)                 5 (45.5%)
York                                 10                   10 (100%)                 10 (100%)
TOTAL                                89                   50 (56.2%)               71 (79.8%)



           ii. Exit surveys
               (Spring 2005)

Campus                                                       Number of student responses
Altoona                                                                   4
Berks                                                                     3
DuBois                                                                    2
Hazleton                                                                  2
Wilkes-Barre                                                              1
York                                                                      3
TOTAL                                                                    15




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                      Page 70 of 98                                  June 2006
                        Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

   b. Analysis
                                 Observations, Possible Trends & Discrepancies
                     Flags on Program Outcomes (POs) with possible links to specific courses

       This is a yearlong look at the 11 Program Outcomes that were created for the EET program. From a
       system-wide standpoint the POs that did not meet the required score of 1.0 (“met”) were numbers 5, 7, and
       11. However, it is important when looking at the program level to be aware of extreme scores at different
       campuses that can affect the average. No scores were recorded system-wide for POs 8 and 9 so there could
       be no observations, trends, or discrepancies to be reported.

       A more detailed look will be given to Program Outcomes that scored below a 1.0 in any of the four
       categories, namely, Student Performance (SP), Faculty Perception (FP), Student Self Perception (SSP), and
       Student Course Perception (SCP). However, bear in mind that the lack of complete data sets may have
       skewed resulting scores. Only the courses and outcomes that had responses could be used in generating
       these identifiers. Also, without comments and proper evidence not much can be said about the actual causes
       for flagged scores at this time.

         PO 1     Apply basic knowledge in electronics, electrical circuit analysis, electrical machines,
                  microprocessors, and programmable logic controllers.
                  All campuses had a score of 1.0 or more.

         PO 2      Conduct experiments, and then analyze and interpret results.
                  At DuBois a flag was raised in SP. This can be linked to EET 118 (Sp ’05) where students had
                  to conduct experimental measurements and troubleshoot the network circuit, take data, analyze,
                  and interpret results; however, no evidence or comments are available.

         PO 3     Apply basic mathematical, scientific, and engineering concepts to technical problem solving.
                  Fayette’s results flagged both SP and FP with a link to ET 002 relating to using Excel
                  spreadsheets and choosing graphing techniques; New Kensington flagged SP which have
                  stemmed from EET 114 (Sp ’05) regarding finding quantitative solutions.

         PO 4     Demonstrate a working knowledge of drafting and computer usage, including the use of one or
                  more computer software packages for technical problem solving.
                  At Hazleton FP was flagged. This could be linked to EET 220 (Sp ’05) regarding producing
                  working drawings where to reduce paperwork, the work was done online.

         PO 5     Communicate effectively orally, visually, and in writing.
                  At Fayette SP and FP were highlighted which may be linked to EET 120 where a faculty
                  comment indicated that more time needed to be spent with students on writing solid reports; SP
                  at Hazleton could be tracked to EET 213W (Fall ’04, delivering presentations) and EET 120 (Sp
                  ’05, preparing engineering reports) and FP at York (probably Fall ’04, EET 213W).

         PO 6     Work effectively in teams.
                  FP at New Kensington called attention possibly from EET 118 (Sp ’05) regarding working in
                  teams through experimental exercises and EET 213W where the instructor asked for effective
                  ways to develop objective measures demonstrating this outcome.

         PO 7     Understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities.
                  Data for this PO was only seen at some campuses. It seemed that responses for it were only seen
                  at DuBois, Hazleton, and York. At all of these three campuses this outcome seemed to have
                  some shortcomings. DuBois (SP, FP), Hazleton (SP, SSP, SCP), and York (SP) showed up. This
                  seemed to stem from EET 213W dealing with student interaction in team based laboratory
                  exercises.
                  Additionally, at DuBois a sharp discrepancy was seen between faculty and student responses.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                       Page 71 of 98                                        June 2006
                        Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

         PO 8    Have a respect for diversity and a knowledge of contemporary professional, societal and global
                 issues
                                                       NO DATA

         PO 9    Recognize the need for lifelong learning and be prepared to continue their education through
                 formal or informal study
                                                       NO DATA

         PO 10 Apply creativity through the use of project-based work to design circuits, systems or processes.
               At Fayette FP was flagged, seemingly from ET 002 (Fall ’04) regarding using MS Word and
               Excel to write a research paper on a technical topic from multiple sources in the internet.

         PO 11 Have a commitment to quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement.
               Hazleton flagged SP and York had SP and FP; both probably stem from EET 213W (Fall ’04)
               regarding repetitive revisions of written assignments of increasing quality. Additionally, a
               discrepancy was seen between faculty and student responses.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                     Page 72 of 98                                      June 2006
                                        Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

   c.         Program outcome measures by campus
                        [0 = Not Met; 1 = Met; 2 = Exceeded][Missing bars = No data available]
                                          X-axis set at 1 to show Met/Not Met
                i. System-wide
                                                                     EET System-wide

                   2


                  1.8


                  1.6


                  1.4


                  1.2
              S
              c
              o    1                                                                                                Student Performance
              r                                                                                                     Faculty Perception
              e                                                                                                     Student Self Perception
                  0.8                                                                                               Student Course Perception


                  0.6


                  0.4


                  0.2


                   0
                            1       2        3           4           5        6       7        10        11
                                                             Program Outcomes


                  ii. Altoona
                                                                   EET Altoona

         2


        1.8


        1.6


        1.4


        1.2
   S
   c
   o     1                                                                                                    Student Performance
   r                                                                                                          Faculty Perception
   e                                                                                                          Student Self Perception
        0.8                                                                                                   Student Course Perception


        0.6


        0.4


        0.2


         0
                        1       2        3       4           5        6           7       10        11
                                                     Program Outcomes


                  iii. Berks


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                           Page 73 of 98                                               June 2006
                                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


                                                                   EET Berks

        2


       1.8


       1.6


       1.4


       1.2
   S
   c
   o    1                                                                                                    Student Performance
   r                                                                                                         Faculty Perception
   e                                                                                                         Student Self Perception
       0.8                                                                                                   Student Course Perception


       0.6


       0.4


       0.2


        0
                       1       2        3       4           5        6           7       10        11
                                                    Program Outcomes




                 iv. DuBois
                                                                       EET DuBois

                  2


                 1.8


                 1.6


                 1.4


                 1.2
             S
             c
             o    1                                                                                                Student Performance
             r                                                                                                     Faculty Perception
             e                                                                                                     Student Self Perception
                 0.8                                                                                               Student Course Perception


                 0.6


                 0.4


                 0.2


                  0
                           1       2        3           4           5        6       7        10        11
                                                            Program Outcomes


                 v. Fayette



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                          Page 74 of 98                                               June 2006
                              Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


                                                        EET Fayette

            2


           1.8


           1.6


           1.4


           1.2
       S
       c
       o    1                                                                        Student Performance
       r                                                                             Faculty Perception
       e                                                                             Student Self Perception
           0.8                                                                       Student Course Perception


           0.6


           0.4


           0.2


            0
                 1        2        3     4           5        6        7   10   11
                                             Program Outcomes




           vi. Hazleton
                                                        EET Hazleton

            2


           1.8


           1.6


           1.4


           1.2
       S
       c
       o    1                                                                        Student Performance
       r                                                                             Faculty Perception
       e                                                                             Student Self Perception
           0.8                                                                       Student Course Perception


           0.6


           0.4


           0.2


            0
                 1        2        3     4           5        6        7   10   11
                                             Program Outcomes


           vii. New Kensington



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                           Page 75 of 98                                June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


                                                EET New Kensington

            2


           1.8


           1.6


           1.4


           1.2
       S
       c
       o    1                                                                  Student Performance
       r                                                                       Faculty Perception
       e                                                                       Student Self Perception
           0.8                                                                 Student Course Perception


           0.6


           0.4


           0.2


            0
                 1    2        3     4           5        6     7    10   11
                                         Program Outcomes




       viii. Wilkes-Barre
                                                 EET Wilkes Barre

            2


           1.8


           1.6


           1.4


           1.2
       S
       c
       o    1                                                                  Student Performance
       r                                                                       Faculty Perception
       e                                                                       Student Self Perception
           0.8                                                                 Student Course Perception


           0.6


           0.4


           0.2


            0
                 1    2        3     4           5        6     7    10   11
                                         Program Outcomes


           ix. York



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                       Page 76 of 98                              June 2006
                         Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


                                                     EET York

            2


           1.8


           1.6


           1.4


           1.2
       S
       c
       o    1                                                                 Student Performance
       r                                                                      Faculty Perception
       e                                                                      Student Self Perception
           0.8                                                                Student Course Perception


           0.6


           0.4


           0.2


            0
                 1   2        3     4           5        6      7   10   11
                                        Program Outcomes




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                      Page 77 of 98                              June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

F. Actions taken by the EET Curriculum Committee in Response to the MEET Data Analysis

The EET Curriculum Committee met on November 18, 2005 and reviewed the MEET DATA ANALYSIS REPORT
for the EET PROGRAM. The committee took the following actions in response to the MEET DATA ANALYSIS
for various EET Program Outcomes:

    •    Communicate effectively orally, visually, and in writing.
         At Fayette SP and FP were highlighted which may be linked to EET 120 where a faculty comment
indicated that more time needed to be spent with students on writing solid reports; SP at Hazleton could be
tracked to EET 213W (Fall ’04, delivering presentations) and EET 120 (Sp ’05, preparing engineering
reports) and FP at York (probably Fall ’04, EET 213W).

Action Item: An e-mail will be sent by the EET Curriculum Committee Chair to all the EET Campus Coordinators
to look into this problem. The e-mail will be sent in February 2006 and consultation with the entire EET faculty will
occur at the April 2006 ETCE Faculty Meeting.

    •   Understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities.
        Data for this PO was only seen at some campuses. It seemed that responses for it were only seen at
DuBois, Hazleton, and York. At all of these three campuses this outcome seemed to have some shortcomings.
DuBois (SP, FP), Hazleton (SP, SSP, SCP), and York (SP) showed up. This seemed to stem from EET 213W
dealing with student interaction in team based laboratory exercises.
        Additionally, at DuBois a sharp discrepancy was seen between faculty and student responses.

Action Item: An e-mail will be sent by the EET Curriculum Committee Chair to all the EET Campus Coordinators
to look into this problem. The e-mail will be sent in February 2006 and consultation with the entire EET faculty will
occur at the April 2006 ETCE Faculty Meeting.

    •   Have a commitment to quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement.
        Hazleton flagged SP and York had SP and FP; both probably stem from EET 213W (Fall ’04)
regarding repetitive revisions of written assignments of increasing quality. Additionally, a discrepancy was
seen between faculty and student responses.

Action Item: This problem may be the result of a lack of communication between faculty and students. The EET
Curriculum Committee Chair will discuss this problem with appropriate instructors. Consultation with the entire
EET faculty will occur at the April 2006 ETCE faculty meeting.

    •   Have a respect for diversity and a knowledge of contemporary professional, societal and global issues
                                                         NO DATA

Action Item: In the past P08 was not covered by any EET course. It was covered by the General Education courses.
This program outcome is now covered by ET 005 and EET 213W. In future, we expect to have data regarding the
Program Outcome #8.

    •   Recognize the need for lifelong learning and be prepared to continue their education through formal or
        informal study
                                                         NO DATA

Action Item: In the past P09 was not covered by any EET course. It was covered by the General Education
Courses. The EET Curriculum Committee decided at the November 18 meeting that the Program Outcome #9
should be covered in EET 117 and EET 211. The Curriculum Committee Chair will contact the EET 117 and 211
Course Chairs in February 2006 to inform them regarding this decision.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 78 of 98                                      June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

G. Actions taken by the EET Course Chairs in response to the MEET DATA ANALYSIS


ET 002 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT




Sources of Data

    1.   MEET data gathered during Spring 2005 semester:

    2.   Review comments from EE T faculty across the Penn State campuses.

    3.   Review comments from the system-wide EE T Curriculum Committee members.

MEET Data Analysis

An analysis of MEET data reveals that all the course outcomes scored 1.0 or above. In other words all the course
outcomes were met or exceeded. However, course outcome o3c was an exception. In the category of students self-
perception, this outcome attained a score of zero (not met). The course outcome o3c says “ Students will be able to
analyze and interpret experimental results using Excel spreadsheets given voltage, current, and resistance data
measurements from series and parallel circuits.” This course outcome o3c was flagged.

Review Comments from EE T Faculty and the System-wide EE T Curriculum Committee Members

    1.   The EE T faculty members questioned the rigid nature of ET 002 course outcomes. They pointed out to the
         fact that the course outcomes were very narrowly focused. They asked for a flexibility in the nature of EE T
         002 course outcomes to allow all Penn State campuses, which offer EE T programs, meet the program
         outcomes even if they have different resources.

    2.   The EE T Curriculum Committee asked that since course outcomes 10a, 10b, and 10c that are used to meet
         Program Outcome 10 should be taken out of ET 002 standard course outline. Program outcomes 10 states
         that “students should apply creativity through the use of project-based work to the design of circuits,
         systems, or processes”. The committee felt that since this particular program outcome is adequately met in
         EE T 120, EE T 205, EE T 211, EE T 220, and EE T 221, it was not needed in ET 002.

    3.   The EE T Curriculum Committee asked that Program Outcome 5 be added to the ET 002 course outline.
         Outcome 5 states that “Students should communicate effectively orally, visually, and in writing”. The
         committee felt that since one of the objectives of ET 002 was to introduce students to effective oral, visual,
         and writing skills, Program Outcome 5 should be met in ET 002 also.

    4.   Suggestion was made by faculty that the topics covered in ET 002 should include Introduction to Power
         Point.

Revisions Made in the ET 002 Course Outlines

In response to the MEET data analysis and the suggestions listed above, following revisions were made in the ET
002 course outline:

    1.   All the ET 002 course outcomes were made flexible enough to allow different Penn State campuses meet
         the EE T Program Outcomes associated with ET 002 using different resources.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                          Page 79 of 98                                        June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

    2.   The ET 002 course outcomes associated with Program Outcome 10 were removed from the ET 002 course
         outline.

    3.   A course outcome “students will be able to use word processing, spreadsheets, and CAD software to
         develop a formal laboratory or technical report” associated with EE T Program Outcome 5. 5 was added to
         the course outline.

    4.   The course topic “Introduction to Power point” was added to the list of topics covered in ET 002.



ET 005 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



Changes from Course Chair Meetings and Faculty Feedback
Described below are the most recent changes to the ET5 course outline, as a result of the EET Curriculum Meeting
on 9/15/2005, to demonstrate the CQI process for course outlines.

    1.   One of the items on the agenda for the EET Curriculum Meeting on 9/15/ 2005 was “Using ET 02 to
         address program outcomes #8 and #9.” From the minutes of the 9/15/05 meeting under item #5, “Nathaniel
         Bohna commented that ET 002 is not taught at Fayette campus. (Students may substitute ED&G 100 for
         this course.) This brought up the question of how program outcomes #8 and #9 can be assigned to just one
         course that is not even a required course.” The option to take Engineering Design and Graphics (ED&G
         100), a three credit course, in place of EDG 101 and EDG 102, each one credit, and the extra credit counted
         for ET 2 is available to all campuses since ED&G 100 has many of the components of ET2.
    2.   “The committee continued discussion of an appropriate course in which to place program outcome #8. ET
         005 and EET 213W were discussed as possible courses in which program outcome #8 would be
         appropriate.”

         Committee Vote:
               The EET curriculum committee voted unanimously (6 in favor, 0 opposed) to add program
               outcome #8 to ET 005 and EET 213W in the mapping.

         Outcomes #8, “Have a respect for diversity and knowledge of contemporary, professional, societal, and
         global issues”, was added to the ET 005 course outline.

    3.   “The committee then discussed the removal of any optional course outcomes from the mappings. It was
         determined that optional course outcomes just cause confusion.” As the Course Chair, I also agreed with
         this since the optional outcomes were included in the on-line course evaluations and campuses did not
         include the optional material would show poor results that would be misleading.
    4.   The following changes were incorporated in the ET 005 outline and the changes were sent out to committee
         members for comments:

     Outcome 8: Have a respect for diversity and knowledge of contemporary, professional, societal, and global
     issues.
     • Students will describe contributions made by minorities in Engineering.
     • Students will discuss contemporary professional, societal, and global issues.

    5.   One comment received back from a faculty member stated that “The following items are too specific.
         Again, I think they need to be written in a way that instructors have flexibility to do different things.” In
         addition, the faculty member also added, “I suggest that we limit the actions in ET 5 to an introduction of
         students to the codes of ethics that practitioners of engineering & technology are expected to abide by, and
         possibly some problem/homework assignment focused on controversial technology. I would leave the
         respect for diversity and cultures, etc., etc., to the Gen Ed courses.”



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 80 of 98                                        June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

    As Course Chair, I agreed and the sub-outcomes were changed as follows:

     Outcome 8:
     • Introduction of students to professional code of ethics that practitioners of engineering & technology are
       expected to abide by.
     • Students complete some problem/homework assignment focused on controversial technology.

    6.   All optional items were removed for the course outline.

ET 5 M.E.E.T. Data Evaluation – All Campuses
The M.E.E.T. data for all campuses for Spring 04 had low scores for the following outcomes:
4b-Students will create a Virtual Instrument using a graphical programming language. (optional). The outcomes
were just met (>1.0) for Student performance, Faculty Perception, Student Self Perception, and Student Course
Perception.

6a-Students will participate in an exercise on team problem solving. (optional) The student Performance was a 1.5.
The outcomes averaged 1.0 for Faculty Perception, Student Self Perception, and Student Course Perception.

The M.E.E.T. data for all campuses for Spring 05 had low scores for outcomes 4b and 6a. In addition, it had low
scores for 4c-Students will perform simulated data acquisition with a Virtual Instrument. (optional)

All other outcomes were met or exceeded.

        This further supports the decision stated above from the Course Chair Meeting and Faculty
Feedback to eliminate the “optional” items from the outcomes assessment (M.E.E.T) in the future even
though these topics may be included as optional material in the “Goals of the Course”.

ET 5 M.E.E.T. Data Evaluation – York Campus
The M.E.E.T. data for my campus (York) indicated that for item 3b-Students will be able to perform calculations
with mathematical analysis software and analyze and interpret the results, the average in all four areas was a 1.0.
Material will be added on curve fitting Spring 06.

The M.E.E.T. data for my campus (York) indicated for item 4c-“Students will perform simulated data acquisition
with Virtual Instrument (optional)”, the average in all four areas was a 1.0. Material will be added Spring 06 that
will acquire actual data rather than just simulated data for analysis.

All other outcomes were met or exceeded.


EE T 114 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



Changes from Course Chair Meetings and Faculty Feedback, to demonstrate the CQI process for course
outlines.

Described below is the most recent request to modify the EET 114 course outline Professor Robert J. Buczynski,
wrote
”I think mesh analysis should not be part of the outcomes or course outline for EET 114. Mesh analysis is a
cumbersome method for students to learn and, as far as I know, they never use it again in the EET program. Nodal
analysis is far more important than mesh analysis. Nodal analysis is the basis for PSpice and is far more useful than
mesh      analysis.   I    see    no    justification  for    keeping      mesh      analysis    in    EET     114.”
Also he made comments about Fourier Series and Nonsinusoidal Circuits” I think Fourier series and nonsinusoidal
circuits should be moved to EET 117. That is a more logical place to present these topics since rectangular periodic
waves and related circuit behavior are inherent in EET 117 course content. As I see it, Fourier series and
nonsinusoidal circuit responses can be more effectively presented in EET 117 and related to the digital waveforms


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 81 of 98                                      June 2006
                            Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

and circuits that are part of that course. That would be better than having Fourier series and nonsinusoidal circuits
taught as a once-and-done topic in EET 114 that is not related to anything else in the course. Personally, I have
difficulty in justifying enough time in EET 114 to present Fourier series and nonsinusoidal circuits in a meaning
way, if at all, to my students. I think it would be a much better learning situation for our EET students if these topics
and outcome were moved to EET 117.
Professor                                   Ron                               Land,                                wrote
”-     Course       Outcome       #1,     bullet   #3    ---      suggest     'and/or'    should    be     just     'and.'
- Course Outcome #1, bullet #4 --- suggest list should read 'real, reactive, and apparent power...'
- Course Outcome #3 as worded seems like just a summary of Outcome #1. I would suggest in Outcome #1 the
word 'calculate' be replaced by the word 'represent,' e.g. in bullet #1, something like 'Students should be able
represent correctly the AC and DC currents and voltages in a circuit using...' Then, Outcome #3 could use the word '
calculate' to indicate that students will use certain mathematical theories and concepts to solve the circuit
representations developed as a result of Outcome #1. That is, something like, 'Students will be able to apply
concepts of algebra, complex numbers, simultaneous equation, and phasors to calculate accurate solutions to AC and
DC           circuits       using           the       methods          indicated         in       Outcome            #1.”

    7.   First issue need further discussion therefore Dr, Sohail Anwar, Chair of the Curriculum Committee decided
         EET Curriculum Committee should look in to it..
    8.   The latest version of course outline considered the rest of the comments


EE T 118 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



Changes from Course Chair base on Faculty Feedback, to demonstrate the CQI process for course outlines.

Described below is the most recent modification done on the EET 118 course outline base on suggestion of
Professor                                                     Rom                                                 Land,
”-    Course      Outcome       #1,      bullet   #3       ---    suggest      'and/or'   should    be     just    'and.'
 - Course Outcome #1, bullet #4 --- suggest list should read 'real, reactive, and apparent power...
 - Course Outcome #3 as worded seems like just a summary of Outcome #1. I would suggest in Outcome #1 the
     word 'calculate' be replaced by the word 'represent,' e.g. in bullet #1, something like 'Students should be able
     represent correctly the AC and DC currents and voltages in a circuit using...' Then, Outcome #3 could use the
     word ' calculate' to indicate that students will use certain mathematical theories and concepts to solve the
     circuit representations developed as a result of Outcome #1. That is, something like, 'Students will be able to
     apply concepts of algebra, complex numbers, simultaneous equation, and phasors to calculate accurate
     solutions to AC and DC circuits using the methods indicated in Outcome #1.”

Student Perception of the course “The lab manual in particular was very helpful with this. It was very tutorial.”
Comment          was        made        by        the        student       in       MEET           Questioners.


EE T 205 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



The primary purpose of EET 205 Semiconductor Laboratory is to teach students how to build circuits based
primarily on operational amplifiers and how to use digital multimeters, signal generators, frequency meters and
oscilloscopes to test these circuits. In addition, students must learn to write well organized reports using a word
processor. Lastly, they must learn to apply PSPICE for Windows (or equivalent software) to evaluate the potential
performance of these circuits.

A review of the outcomes for fall 2004 revealed that student performance for one outcomes was sub par (<1) from
the standpoint of instructor perception. It was:




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                           Page 82 of 98                                         June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

         10a: Using both device theoretical performance knowledge and analytical skills, students will be able to
         design formal test procedures that exercise and test circuit performance capabilities to demonstrate
         relationship to required performance.

The course outline was modified to address this perceived deficiency. The model composition for the semester
laboratory exercises now includes several coordinated exercises to provide students experience in designing a
laboratory experiment to explore circuit operation, complete the experiment in simulation software, prepare a report
on results and present the results. Suggest sequencing is as follows:

         1.   Lab circuit design selection
         2.   Lab experimentation design
         3.   Lab software simulation (PSPICE or equivalent)
         4.   Completion of write-up
         5.   Class presentation


EE T 210 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



The primary purpose of EET 210 Fundamentals of Semiconductors is stated as follows:
        The purpose of the course is to teach students to analyze and design amplifiers using operational amplifiers.
        The student will also master the application of operational amplifiers and other integrated circuits to create
        oscillators, communications systems, and data conversion systems.

In addition, the course introduces students to the concept of p-n junctions, diodes and circuits that incorporate
diodes, including circuits for signal processing and power supplies.

A review the outcomes for fall 2004 revealed that student performance for two outcomes was sub par (<1). These
were:

         1d: Students will understand the basic operation of operational amplifiers and be able to design and
         analyze simple comparators.

         1e. Students will understand the use of negative feedback in operational amplifiers circuits and be able to
         analyze voltage, current, resistance and conductance amplifiers and simple active filters.

Outcomes (1a-c and 3a&b) included material associated with bipolar and field effect transistors. Information on
these was not required to understand the use and analysis of operational amplifiers and circuits including them.
Instead these took away time and diluted focus to impede student learning in the area of operational amplifiers.
Consequently, it appeared prudent to eliminate these from outcomes 1a-c and 3a&b for this course and concentrate
on these in EET 216 in which these are emphasized.


EE T 211 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



In reviewing the results of the MEET data system wide for the Fall 2004 semester, the following observations were
made.

1) All the average scores in both student perception and faculty perceptions were above one meaning that the
     outcomes were met or exceeded except for faculty perception of outcome 10a that averaged 0.8:
  “Students should be able to design electrical circuitry for the Microprocessor I/O    ports in order to interface
the processor to external sensors and I/O”




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 83 of 98                                       June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

   One faculty comment regarding this stated that the time ran out on the semester and the material was not able to
be adequately covered. In lieu of this, no change in the course outline was deemed necessary.
2) In order to be more efficient, some outcomes were combined.
    4b and 4c were combined into one


3) The course comments system wide seem to indicate that outcome 1a “Students should be able to solve basic
   binary math operations.” Is a topic that is covered in EET 117. Therefore the outcome was changed to read:
   “Students should be able to solve basic binary math operations using the microprocessor.”
4) The phase “real world” replaced with process to avoid confusion.

5) Outcomes 10c and 10d were deleted based on faculty comments pertaining to time
   constraints.


EE T 213W DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



MEET data for EET 213W could not be evaluated for Fall 2004, since there appear to be problems with the database
for the Fall Semester courses (at least for EET 213W). MEET data for EET 213W has student comments that were
clearly related to another course. For instance, feedback for the electric machines course such as "We learned to do
basic drawings in Autocad" indicated to me that the MEET data was not valid for the course. (Note: This issue has
been brought to the attention of the MEET implementers, who are currently investigating.)

Despite the lack of MEET feedback data, there have been some suggestions from course faculty regarding the
course outline for EET 213W. The major changes include the following:

     1.       To better address program outcome #7, another course outcome has been added.
                  •    Students will be required to investigate various social, ethical, and professional
                       responsibilities in the controversial use of technology and defend a suitable solution.

          The justification for this addition is that we (course chair and NK faculty member) agreed that the intent
          Program Outcome 7 (Students should understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities.) was not
          fully covered with the previous course outcome alone (Previous course outcome: Primarily via team-based
          laboratory activities, students will demonstrate the ability to interact effectively on a social and
          interpersonal level with fellow students, and will demonstrate the ability to divide up and share task
          responsibilities to complete assignments).

2.        Based on faculty feedback (BK) it was agreed that we should address some fundamental issues associated
          with control of electric machines. Therefore, the following course outcome was added:
                  •    Students will demonstrate an understanding of the fundamental control practices associated
                       with AC and DC machines


          The justification for this addition is that an understanding of fundamental electric machine controls
          (starting issues, braking, plugging, etc.) is an important aspect of this course.
3.        The course outcomes supporting Program Outcome #1 were re-written to be less specific, giving faculty at
          various locations some flexibility in how they are addressed.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                          Page 84 of 98                                        June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

A draft copy of the proposed EET 213W course outline was sent to all faculty teaching those courses. There were
no objections from faculty to the proposed changes.

EET 216 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



The primary purpose of EET 205 Linear Electronic Circuits is to teach students to analyze and design small signal
and power amplifiers and power supplies using electronic devices such as diodes, transistors (bipolar and FET) and
integrated circuits. Students will also learn to analyze MOSFETS, diacs, thyristors, and triacs.

A review of the outcomes for fall 2004 revealed no sub par (<1) outcomes. Consequently, no significant changes
were made to the course outline. Suggested references were updated.


EE T 220 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT




Sources of Data

    1.   MEET data gathered from the following EE T 220 sections offered during Spring 2005 semester:

         Altoona

                   EE T 220 Sec: 001
                   EE T 220 Sec: 002
                   EE T 220 Sec: 003

         Berks

                   EE T 220 Sec: 001
                   EE T 220 Sec: 002

         Dubois

                   EE T 220 Sec: 001

         Fayette

                   EE T 220 Sec: 001

         Hazleton

                   EE T 220 Sec: 020

         New Kensington

                   EE T 220 Sec: 001

         York

                   EE T 220 Sec: 031

    2.   Review comments from EE T faculty across the Penn State campuses.


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                       Page 85 of 98                                      June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


    3.   Review comments from the system-wide EE T Curriculum Committee members.

MEET Data Analysis

An analysis of MEET data reveals that:

    1.   In the category of student performance, each course outcome received a rating of 1 or more. Thus each
         course outcome was met or exceeded. The exceptions were outcomes o1e and o1c. The outcome o1e had a
         rating of 0.9 which is almost 1. However o1c had a rating of 0.6 which means that this course outcome was
         not met.

    2.   In the category of faculty perception, each course outcome had of rating of 1.0 or above. Two course
         outcomes had a rating close to 1. However, outcome o1c had a rating of 0.3. Thus all the course outcomes
         were met or exceeded except outcome o1c.

    3.   In the category of student self perception, each course outcome had a rating of 1.0 or above which means
         all the course outcomes were met or exceeded.

    4.   In the category of student course perception each course outcome had a rating of 1.0 or above. Thus each
         course outcome was met or exceeded.

Therefore, the course outcome o1c was flagged. This course outcome states:

“Students will be able to use special purpose PLC input modules to correctly monitor and record the state of
devices such as thermo couples, RTDs, etc.”

Review Comments from EET Faculty and the System-wide EET Curriculum Committee Members

    1.   The EE T faculty members indicated that there were too many course outcomes associated with EE T 220.
         They asked that the EE T 220 course outcomes be combined to yield a smaller number of course outcomes.

    2.   The EE T faculty members indicated that the course outcomes were narrow in terms of equipment to be
         used with PLCs. They asked that the course outcomes should be changed to reflect a greater flexibility in
         the use of equipment to be interfaced to PLCs.

    3.   Course outcome 4a (Outcome #4, bullet #1) was questioned by the faculty. This outcome states “Students
         will be able to produce working drawings of PLC based control systems using appropriate CAD software”.
         It was said that if the intent of this course outcome was to use CAD in the broader sense of computer-aided-
         design software, it should be removed. If the course outcome was making a reference to the use of PLC
         software packages to produce ladder diagrams, its working should be appropriately changed.

Revisions Made in the EE T 220 Course Outlines

In the response to the MEET data analysis and the suggestions listed above, following revisions were made in the
EE T 220 course outline:

    1.   The EE T 220 course outcomes were combined together to produce a smaller set of outcomes, that is, a
         total of 8 course outcomes.

    2.   The course outcomes were written in a way to reflect flexibility in the use of equipment to be interfaced to
         PLCs.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 86 of 98                                        June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

    3.   Outcome 4a (Outcome #4, bullet #1) was rewritten as follows: “Students will be able to use PLC software
         packages to produce ladder diagrams and system flow diagrams”.


EE T 221 DATA ANALYSIS STATEMENT



The primary purpose of EET 221 Semiconductor Laboratory is to teach students how to build circuits based
primarily on diodes, BJTS and FETs and how to use digital multimeters, signal generators, frequency meters and
oscilloscopes to test these circuits. In addition, students must learn to write well-organized reports using a word
processor. Lastly, they must learn to apply PSPICE for Windows (or similar programs) to evaluate the potential
performance of these circuits with the aid of a computer.

A review of the outcomes for fall 2004 revealed that student performance for one outcomes was sub par (<1) from
the standpoint of instructor perception. It was:

         10a: Using both device theoretical performance knowledge and analytical skills, students will be able to
         design formal test procedures that exercise and test circuit performance capabilities to demonstrate
         relationship to required performance

The EET 205 course outline was modified to address a similar deficiency through composition of the semester
laboratory exercises. Consequently, it is left to the instructor to consider such in this course.

                                LIST OF EE T COURSE CHAIRS (2005-2006)



Course                    Course Chair                        E-mail


EE T 101                  Richard Snyder             rjs17@psu.edu

EE T 109                  Richard Snyder             rjs17@psu.edu

EE T 117                  Andrzej Gapinski           ajg2@psu.edu

EE T 120                  Andrzej Gapinski           ajg2@psu.edu

EE T 114                  Maryam Ghorieshi           mxg32@psu.edu

EE T 118                  Maryam Ghorieshi           mxg32@psu.edu

EE T 205                  Gerald Cano                gxc15@psu.edu

EE T 210                  Gerald Cano                gxc15@psu.edu

EE T 211                  Ken Dudeck                 ked2@psu.edu

EE T 213 W                Todd Batzel                tdb120@psu.edu

EE T 216                  Gerald Cano                gxc15@psu.edu

EE T 221                  Gerald Cano                gxc15@psu.edu

EE T 220                  Sohail Anwar               sxa15@psu.edu



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 87 of 98                                      June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

ET 002                     Sohail Anwar               sxa15@psu.edu

ET 005                     Michael Marcus             mxm81@psu.edu

Appendix C: Berks IAC 2EET Subcommittee Bylaws, Annual Report, and
Meeting Minutes
                                     Penn State Berks-Lehigh Valley College

                                Division of Engineering, Business and Computing

                                          Industrial Advisory Committee
For
Engineering and Engineering Technology
                                                       Bylaws



PURPOSE


The Penn State Berks-Lehigh Valley College Industrial Advisory Committee for engineering and engineering
technology (PSBLVCIAC) is constituted to support the various engineering and engineering technology
educational programs and activities of Penn State Berks-Lehigh Valley College (PSBLVC) in the following
ways:

1.       Provide on-going assessment and input regarding new and existing engineering and engineering technology
         programs, courses, and delivery methods.

2.       Communicate formal recommendations of the PSBLVCIAC to college administration and faculty, SETCE
         administration, the Berks Campus Advisory Board, the Lehigh Valley Campus Advisory Board, or others
         as appropriate.

3.       Provide liaison for engineering and engineering technology educational activities at PSBLVC with business
         and industry in the greater Berks and Lehigh Valley areas.

4.       Assist in obtaining sources of support for the growth and development of engineering and engineering
         technology education at PSBLVC.

5.       Provide input and support for activities relating to the accreditation of engineering and engineering
         technology programs at PSBLVC.

ORGANIZATION

The PSBLVCIAC shall have four standing subcommittees and an executive committee as outlined below. Ad hoc
subcommittees may be formed as necessary by majority approval of the executive committee. The officers of the
PSBLVCIAC will include one-co-chair from industry, one co-chair from PSBLVC engineering faculty, and a
secretary from industry. The officers from industry are elected from the regular membership for a term of one year
and the faculty co-chair shall be elected for a term of two years. Elections will be held at the general meeting of the
PSBLVCIAC in fall of each year.

The secretary shall become co-chair upon completion of the term of office as secretary. The past co-chair from
industry shall serve for one year as an ex-officio member of the executive committee.


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 88 of 98                                        June 2006
                        Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


Subcommittees

       There shall be four standing subcommittees as follows:

       1.       Electrical Engineering Technology - chaired by an electrical engineering faculty member from
                PSBLVC.

       2.       Mechanical Engineering Technology – chaired by a mechanical engineering faculty member from
                PSBLVC.

       3.       Baccalaureate Degree Programs – chaired by an engineering faculty member from PSBLVC.

       4.       Continuing and Distance Education – chaired by the Director of Continuing and Distance
                Education at PSBLVC or his/her representative.

Executive Committee

       The executive committee will include the co-chairs and secretary of the PSBLVCIAC, the Coordinator of
       Career Services at PSBLVC, and the chairs of the standing subcommittees. The primary purpose of the
       executive committee shall be to provide overall planning and guidance for the PSBLVCIAC.

MEETINGS

A.     Industrial Advisory Committee

       The PSBLVCIAC will meet annually, or more frequently if required, to hear reports and vote on
       recommendations from the subcommittees and to conduct other business as necessary.

B.     Subcommittees

       The subcommittees shall conduct semi-annual or annual meetings as determined by the members of each
       subcommittee.




C.     Executive Committee

       The executive committee will meet quarterly or on a schedule determined by its members.

MEMBERSHIP

A.     Industrial Advisory Committee

       The PSBLVCIAC shall consist of all regular members of the standing subcommittees and the executive
       committee. Membership will include those from business, government or industry who are affiliated with
       engineering or engineering technology activities and those from Penn State University who have interest in,
       or involvement with, engineering or engineering technology education at PSBLVC.

B.     Subcommittees

       Membership on a subcommittee will include those who have specific interest in the educational area
       represented by the subcommittee. There should be at least seven members on each subcommittee with the
       majority of members from outside PSBLVC.


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                      Page 89 of 98                                       June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology




        Approved by the PSBLVCIAC – October 12, 1999          (Rev. 8 – 9/16/02)

                                          Penn State Berks Campus
                             Department of Engineering, Business, and Computing
                             Engineering Technology IAC Report - 2EET Program

General Program News:
   • ABET accreditation review slated for Fall 2006.
   • 2EET program outcomes adopted for ABET TAC 2000 standard.
           o System requires ongoing feedback from students, faculty, graduates, employers, and alumni.
   • Participation in 8th Annual ASEE Model Design Competition planned for Summer 2006
   • EET 297 robotics course planned for Summer 2006

Adapted 2EET Program Outcomes:
   1. Apply basic knowledge in electronics, electrical circuit analysis, electrical machines, microprocessors, and
       programmable logic controllers.
   2. Conduct experiments, and then analyze and interpret results.
   3. Apply basic mathematical, scientific, and engineering concepts to technical problem solving. Demonstrate
       a working knowledge of drafting and computer usage, including the use of one or more computer software
       packages for technical problem solving.
   4. Communicate effectively orally, visually, and in writing.
   5. Work effectively in teams.
   6. Understand professional, ethical and social responsibilities.
   7. Have a respect for diversity and a knowledge of contemporary professional, societal and global issues
   8. Recognize the need for lifelong learning and be prepared to continue their education through formal or
       informal study.
   9. Apply creativity through the use of project-based work to the design of circuits, systems or processes.
   10. Have a commitment to quality, timeliness, and continuous improvement.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 90 of 98                                      June 2006
                                       Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


                              Berks 2EET Graduates                               Distribution of 2EET Graduates Since
                                                                                                 2001/01
                   20

                   15
        Students

                                                                                                    1, 3%
                   10
                                                                                16, 39%                             15, 38%
                   5

                   0
                        2000/01   2001/02   2002/03   2003/04   2004/05
                                                                                                8, 20%
                                       Academic Year

                                        2EET Graduates                          BS EET    BS EMET    Other Degree    Unknown


Program Viability and Measures:
   1. Enrollment Trend
           a. Increasing.
   2. Current enrollment
           a. Overall (34); Full time (21); First Semester Status (10), Part Time (13)
   3. 2005/06 Projected Graduates
           a. Overall (7); Spring 2005 (5); Fall 2005 (2)
   4. Graduate Survey
           a. 11 Questions/three respondents.
           b. Most questions ranked between prepared and very prepared for each outcome.
   5. Student MEET Surveys
           a. Ratings for most 2EET course outcome range from 1 to 2.
   6. Employer Survey
           a. Questions geared towards ranking skills of 2EET graduates.
           b. Soon to be released. IAC asked for participation.
   7. Proposed Changes to Program
           a. None
   8. Recent Equipment/Technology Additions
           a. PLC Lab upgrade - Summer 2005 (RSLogix 500, RSView, PanelView, RSLynx).
           b. Rockwell Kinetix Ultra 3000 Servo/Motion Equipment added.


                                                     Penn State Berks 2EET Program
                                                  Annual IAC 2EET Subcommittee Meeting
                                                   Monday, November 15, 2005, 12:00PM
                                                         Room T115, Thun Library

Attendance: Robert Buczynski (PSU), Jeff Wike (PSU), Dale Litwhiler (PSU), Gregory Stanton (PSU), Eric Turgen
(Turgeon Engineering), Dan Schlegel (Lutron), Joseph Deane (KTR Associates)

Meeting Minutes:

Greg provided an overview of the 2EET subcommittee meeting’s purpose to the team members and noted future
meetings are typically held annually unless special meetings are called.

Greg provided a status review of the recent accreditation review cycle and indicated surveys would be sent to all
IAC members requesting feedback on 2EET graduate performance over time; say 2-3 years after graduation.

Greg opened the meeting by presenting a status report of the 2EET program and then prompted the members for
their opinion on the skills they seek with our 2EET graduates.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                                          Page 91 of 98                                 June 2006
                            Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

Joe from KTR indicated experience reading electrical system drawings, HVAC, and power system applications were
key skills for his organization.

Dan from Lutron indicated knowledge of power electronics (Triacs, FETs) was a critical skill for 2EET graduates.

Eric indicated experience with laboratory equipment, knowledge of experimentation, technical equipment skills, and
software programming skills were critical for his organization.

Greg indicated that course outlines for all course are constantly under review as a part of CQI and are revised
annually in the October timeframe for the following academic year. Request for changes due to above suggestions
would be handled during the next CQI cycle (October 2006).

Greg prompted the members for ideas on ways to continue growth and expand enrollments.

Dan indicated Lutron would be willing to offer plant tours to faculty and students of the 2EET program and visit
onsite for classroom presentations. Dan expressed interest in seeing 2EET visit Career and Technical schools in the
Berks and Lehigh County areas.



Greg asked if any of the IAC members would be willing to support a photography project for a marketing brochure
involving EET graduates that would target local high school guidance counselors.



Dan from Lutron indicated they would but could not allow picture in the manufacturing area and would have to
check approvals before moving forward.

Actions:

    8.     Greg will follow up with Lutron and schedule a plant tour with Lutron to better understand their needs.

    9.     Greg will schedule time with EET faculty for Lutron 2006 to visit select EET classes in the fall 2005 and
           spring 2006.

    10. Greg to follow up with Lutron on possible photographs for brochure.

    11. Greg to send electronic copies of course outlines to Dan Schlegel of Lutron for review.

    12. Greg will pass on Lutron information to career service to assure participation in next career fair.

    13. Greg will arrange KTR visit with Joe Deane.

    14. Greg to establish contact with Career/Technical schools in Berks county.




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                           Page 92 of 98                                      June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology


Appendix D: 2EET Curricular Committee Charter and Member List

           Electrical Engineering Technology Associate Degree Program - Curriculum Committee
                                   Rules, Responsibilities, and Procedures

Purpose
     The 2EET Curriculum Committee will be the faculty body responsible for continually assessing the content and
organization of the Electrical Engineering Technology, Biomedical Engineering Technology, Telecommunications
Engineering Technology, and Nano-Manufacturing Engineering Technology Associate Degree Program curricula to
ensure that they continue to meet the specified educational objectives of these program as described in University
Program Bulletins and other University-approved publications. This responsibility shall include ensuring congruity
of courses at all Penn State University locations where the programs are offered, development of and justification
for modifications and/or enhancements to the academic content of the programs as demands of the various
technologies change, and these continuing assessment of the relevance of existing curriculum elements to the
professions. As part of these responsibilities, the committee will ensure the maintenance of minimum standards for
topical content for all program courses via the assignment of course chairpersons and the creation and maintenance
of reference course outlines.

    All actions taken and curriculum changes proposed by the committee shall require formal approval by a
majority of the properly designated EET or EET-related program faculty at all locations where the 2EET,
2BET, 2TELT, and 2NMT programs are offered. Properly designated faculty are those faculty holding full-
time teaching positions at one of the represented colleges and who are actively teaching courses in the
associate degree program in Electrical Engineering Technology or electrical technology-related programs.

Rules of Organization
    The EET Curriculum Committee shall be constituted as follows:
         • The committee shall consist of eleven members distributed as follows: 7 representatives shall be from
             the Commonwealth College and 1 representative from each of the four independent colleges (Altoona,
             Behrend, Berks-Lehigh Valley, and Capital). Out of the 7 representatives from the Commonwealth
             College, four members shall represent Electrical Engineering Technology, one shall represent
             Biomedical Engineering Technology, one shall represent Telecommunications Engineering
             Technology, and one shall represent Nano-Manufacturing Engineering Technology.
         • Membership shall be for a term of 3 years.
         • Members must be full-time faculty currently responsible for teaching courses in one of the represented
             programs.
         • Member selection processes shall be left to the discretion of the colleges.
         • The committee shall have a chairperson. The chair will be elected by a majority of the committee and
             will hold office for a term of three years.
         • The committee shall also have a secretary. The secretary will also be chosen by majority vote of the
             committee and shall be elected for a term of three years. The secretary shall develop, maintain and
             distribute records of committee meetings and distribute minutes of those meetings to the committee.
             Additional duties may be assigned by the committee chair.
         • Any individual acting in an official coordinating capacity among 2EET or electrical-technology related
             programs shall be an ex-officio member of the committee. If this person is not one of the duly elected
             committee members as defined above, the committee membership shall be twelve rather than eleven.
         • Program coordinators acting in ex officio capacity as described above shall be voting members of the
             committee.

Rules of Operation
    The EET Curriculum Committee shall operate according to the following rules:
         • A quorum shall consist of at least six voting committee members. No items may be formally voted
            upon without the presence of a quorum.
         • The committee shall meet at least once per year at a mutually agreed location to assess the existing
            program curricula and conduct other business of the committee as needed. Additional, special


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 93 of 98                                      June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

              meetings may be held, if needed. Such meetings shall be organized by the committee chair in
              coordination with the committee members and appropriate administrative representatives of the
              various colleges.
        •     The committee meetings shall be attended only by committee members and those guests invited by the
              committee chair. Guests shall not have voting privileges.
        •     If a committee member is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, he/she shall be allowed to designate a
              proxy.
        •     At least once per year, the committee shall solicit input about academic concerns, recommendations,
              and/or proposals from all standing engineering technology faculty at all colleges represented by the
              committee.
        •     Faculty at any represented college may submit academic proposals of issues for consideration to the
              committee at anytime, generally by way of the representative(s) for their college.
        •     The committee shall consider all recommendations and proposals submitted and determine the
              appropriate action, if any, to be taken.
        •     Course chairs, who report to the curricular committee, shall serve as long as they are willing and as
              long as they have taught a course for which they are course chairs within the last two years. Course
              chairs shall have the following duties:
              --Revise course outlines at least every two years
              --Respond to faculty concerns, suggestions, and issues regarding course outlines.
              --Notify the EET curricular committee of issues with faculty regarding course outline content that
              cannot be resolved between the course chair and faculty member.
        •     The committee shall have final authority to resolve issues between faculty and course chairs regarding
              course outlines. Specific responses documenting committee actions shall be provided to the individual
              faculty and the course chair in these circumstances.
        •     The committee shall maintain written records of all committee actions, faculty recommendations, and
              issue resolutions.
        •     Written reports of committee deliberations will be distributed periodically to the faculty of all
              represented colleges.

Modification of Curriculum Committee Rules and Procedures
        These rules may be modified at any time by a majority vote of a quorum of all the properly designated EET
        or EET-related programs faculty at all locations where these program are offered.

                                      EE T CURRICULUM COMMITTEE

                                                   (2004 – 2005)

Name                                E-mail                             Campus

Sohail Anwar (Chair)                sxa15@psu.edu                      AA

Nathaniel Bohna                     nab141@psu.edu                     FE

Maryam Ghorieshi                    mxg32@psu.edu                      HZ

Myron Hartman                       mdh15@psu.edu                      NK

Niranjan Idgunji                    nsi1@psu.edu                       WB

Ronald Land                         rel9@psu.edu                       NK

Dale Litwhiler                      dhl10@psu.edu                      BK

Michael Marcus                      mxm81@psu.edu                      YK



ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 94 of 98                                      June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

Willie Ofosu                        wko1@psu.edu               WB

Jerry Shoup                         jfs1@psu.edu               CL

Rob Weissbach                       rsw7@psu.edu               BD

Ping Werner                         plw7@psu.edu               DB




Appendix E: 2EET Curricular Committee Meeting Minutes

                                           EET Curriculum Committee
                                               Meeting Minutes
                                                    3/16/06

Attendees:
Name                       Campus                      Email                       Program
Robert Weissbach           Behrend                     rsw7@psu.edu                EET
Sohail Anwar               Altoona                     sxa15@psu.edu               EET
Myron Hartman              New Kensington              mdh15@psu.edu               BET
Dale Litwiler              Berks                       dhl10@psu.edu               EET
Michael Marcus             York                        mxm81@psu.edu               EET

    1.   Accessing 2EET website. Sohail said you should go into the course management system (CMS) and search
         for ‘EE T’ (not ‘EET’) and you should find the Angel website. This website contains all detailed
         information we need. Myron asked for editing rights on the Angel site because your ABET information for
         BET is going to be stored there. The 2005 EET system-wide report will be uploaded here.
    2.   Minutes from November 18, 2005 were approved.
    3.   Closing the loop on educational objectives. Sohail said this was being done by industry surveys. There
         were 4 companies that responded indicating that EET most represented their business, but only one EET
         response was listed in the tables, because only one EET was hired in the past 2 years. The committee
         agreed that each campus should be making alternative arrangements to get industry survey data. Rob
         recommended the chair of the curricular committee ensure that the survey results administered by
         SEDTAPP be provided to each campus program coordinator as soon as possible.

         In response to a question from Michael, Rob stated how Behrend is validating their educational objectives,
         namely, by employer and alumni surveys, as well as using the IAC to ensure that the existing objectives are
         valid. Rob stated that he looks at the educational objectives as being the primary driver for determining the
         program outcomes.

    4.   Mapping of Program Outcomes 7, 8 and 9 are still at issue. These will be revisited at the April meeting.
    5.   Michael stated that each Volume 1 should have, in paragraph form, an overall assessment of all the data for
         the evaluator.
    6.   Course outlines common to multiples programs. Courses included ET 2, ET 5, EET 101 and EET 101,
         EGT 101 and 102, EET 114 and EET 118, EET 117 and EET 120. In the block called “Relationship to
         EET program outcomes”, Michael recommended the following:
              a. Do nothing
              b. Add a statement saying, “and similar outcomes in the MET and BET programs”
              c. List all the outcomes for all the programs (MEET online data will not be able to support for this
                  accreditation visit). Therefore, this could become a future fix if not implemented now.
    7.   Discussion about modifying the EET program, including adding DSP, rf, LabVIEW, computer
         programming, and networking was discussed. Things to get rid of included discrete transistor design, how
         we look at motors, and all the analysis techniques. The discussion centered around meeting the needs of


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                         Page 95 of 98                                       June 2006
                          Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

        industry and to stay current. The reality is that any changes to the 2EET program will be driven by the
        baccalaureate degree program needs, as well as industry and advisory board input. Myron stated that the
        BET program would like to make recommendations to ensure that their needs are also met.
    8. Sohail’s opinion is that modernization of the 2EET program is in reality only to support modernization of
        the first two years of the EMET program.
    9. Myron’s opinion is that whatever can support his BET program he will support. He also stated that
        industry and alumni surveys, and placement of graduates need to help in the future direction of the
        program.
    10. Dale’s opinion is that there is no industry base near his campus (Berks) to support the 2EET program alone.
        However, the EMET program still requires EET style courses for the major.
    11. Rob’s opinion is that, based on recent closures of EET programs in the Penn State system, based on
        competition with community colleges, little industry need for graduates, and parents’ desire to have their
        children achieve a 4-year degree, that development of a straight-through EMET program will result in the
        end of associate degree EET programs in the Penn State system. Therefore, changes to modernize courses
        in the 2EET program should only be driven by EMET (or possibly ECET) baccalaureate degree needs, not
        from the 2EET curricular committee.
    12. The four remaining members of the group discussed the uniform course abbreviation (UCA) process. The
        group members approved in principle having the E T 005, EE T 117, EE T 120 and EE T 211 courses take
        on a CMPET designation. All other EE T courses will become EET courses. Harrisburg and Behrend will
        also assume the EET course designation, except for those courses that take on a CMPET designation. If
        Michael approves, then we have a quorum in support of these changes.

Recorded by Rob
3/16/06


                        Electrical Engineering Technology Associate Degree Programs
                                        Curricular Committee – ABET

                                               November 18, 2005
Attendees:
NAME                               CAMPUS                               E-MAIL
Sohail Anwar(Chair)                Altoona                              sxa15@psu.edu
Ping Werner                        Du Bois                              plw7@psu.edu
Harley Hartman                     York                                 hhh2@psu.edu
Nathaniel Bohna                    Fayette                              nab141@psu.edu
Ron Land                           New Ken                              rel9@psu.edu
Willie Ofosu                       Wilkes-Barre                         wko1@psu.edu

    •   Sohail reported that the new 2 EET Outcomes- to- Course Mapping is now placed on the EET Curriculum
        Committee Website.
    •   Sohail reported that Course Chairs were asked to revise course outline. Most Chairs were provided
        suggestions (reasons) for the changes. Missing from the completed list are EET 101 and EET 109.
        Suggestions for changes have been submitted for the two courses, but the changes not made in spite of
        several attempts to get the Course Chair to make the changes. Suggestions were requested to deal with this
        situation.
        Suggestions put forward are:-
                  Replace him with new Course Chair
                  He must revise course outline before he gives up his responsibility as the Course Chair.
    •   Course Chairs must provide summary reports for revisions made
    •   Curriculum Committee Chair has checked all the course outlines to ensure that all suggested changes have
        been incorporated. Documentation from Course Chairs for changes should be shown. Some Course Chairs
        did not submit this documentation. These are ET 002, EET 101, EET 109, EET 117 and EET 120
    •   No changes were requested for EET 118. A motion was made (Willie) and seconded (Ping) that a statement
        should be included by the Course Chair to the effect that no changes were requested.


ABET 2K TAC Self Study                        Page 96 of 98                                      June 2006
                           Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology

    •    Question was raised whether Superposition be included in EET 101. Response was yes; to allow MET
         students develop skills in this aspect of circuit analysis.



    •    Data Analysis for EET courses
                 EET 101, EET 109 – not available
                 EET 117, EET 120 – to be presented soon
                 EET 118 – needs no changes (Course Chair should provide statement that
                              no concerns were raised.)

Action Item: Recommend a consistent format for source data documenting course
                 updates. This should include resolution of comments from faculty instead
                 of the comments for the review.

    •    Data Analysis for Overall EET program to be placed on EET Curriculum Committee website.
    •    Measure and evaluations in Engineering Technology Meet
                 Objectives flagged were 5, 7 and 11
                 Objectives with no scores recorded were 8, 9
                 Program Outcome 9 should be covered in EET 117 and EET 211 (Motion – Sohail, seconded by
                 Ping). Course chairs will be contacted to take care of these.
                 Objective 11 – Lack of communication; Curriculum Committee chair will
                                    discuss this with appropriate instructors.
                 Objective 7 – Needs investigation; look at data next year.
                 Objective 5 – Send email to program coordinators to look into problem –
                                  Committee will review it next year (this goes for 11 as well)

     •   EET Curriculum Committee Chair will summarize Course Chair activities as part of his annual report.

     •   Course Outcomes to Program Outcomes:
         Address the fact that from deliberations this year some of the course outcomes didn’t incorporate program
         outcomes that were assigned; this is now being corrected by Course Chairs.
     •   CQI process for EET program:
         This has been started. The process must be in use for one year, then review for changes that may be
         needed.
     •   BET program:
         Committee judges that the proposed BET 200 level electronics series would not be a suitable substitute for
         the EET 200 level electronics sequence. (Motion – Ron, seconded by Nathaniel).

     •   Ron Land – New Ken DAA proposed change to the normal sequence of Physics            courses ie: 150 in
         Fall and 151 in Spring. This should be submitted to all the campus DAAs through Dhushy.




Action Item : Recommend a consistent format for source data documenting course
                  updates. This should include resolution of comments from faculty instead
                  of the comments for the review.


Recorded by Willie Ofosu
November 18, 2005




ABET 2K TAC Self Study                       Page 97 of 98                                       June 2006
                     Penn State Berks Electrical Engineering Technology




ABET 2K TAC Self Study              Page 98 of 98                         June 2006

								
To top