DOCSLIB.ORG

ABET Self-Study Report Facilities Engineering Technology Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ABET Self-Study Report Facilities Engineering Technology Program ABET Self-Study Report for the Facilities Engineering Technology Program at California State University Maritime Academy Vallejo, CA 01 July 2019 CONFIDENTIAL The information supplied in this Self-Study Report is for the confidential use of ABET and its authorized agents and will not be disclosed without authorization of the institution concerned, except for summary data not identifiable to a specific institution. TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND INFORMATION ............................................................................................... 6 A. Contact Information ............................................................................................................... 6 B. Program History ..................................................................................................................... 6 C. Options ................................................................................................................................... 7 D. Program Delivery Modes ........................................................................................................ 7 E. Program Locations .................................................................................................................. 8 F. Public Disclosure ..................................................................................................................... 8 G. Deficiencies, Weaknesses or Concerns from Previous Evaluation(s) and the Actions Taken to Address Them ........................................................................................................................ 9 CRITERION 1. STUDENTS ....................................................................................................... 10 A. Student Admissions .............................................................................................................. 10 A.1-Student Admission for Transfer Students and Transfer Articulation Policies ................ 13 A.2- Elevated “Impaction” Admission Requirements and Processes ................................... 13 A.3- Marine Engineering Technology (MET) and Facilities Engineering Technology (FET) Impaction Admission Requirements and Recommendations .............................................. 13 B. Evaluating Student Performance .......................................................................................... 15 C. Transfer Students and Transfer Courses .............................................................................. 19 D. Advising and Career Guidance ............................................................................................. 20 E. Work in Lieu of Courses ........................................................................................................ 21 F. Graduation Requirements .................................................................................................... 22 G. Transcripts of Recent Graduates .......................................................................................... 23 CRITERION 2. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES ................................................. 24 A. Mission Statement ............................................................................................................... 24 B. Program Educational Objectives .......................................................................................... 24 C. Consistency of the Program Educational Objectives with the Mission of the Institution .... 25 D. Program Constituencies ....................................................................................................... 26 E. Process for Review of the Program Educational Objectives ................................................. 27 CRITERION 3. STUDENT OUTCOMES .................................................................................. 29 A. Process for the Establishment and Revision of the Student Outcomes ............................... 29 B. Student Outcomes ................................................................................................................ 29 C. Mapping of Student Outcomes to Criterion 3 Student Outcomes ....................................... 30 2 D. Relationship of Student Outcomes to Program Educational Objectives .............................. 30 CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ................................................................... 32 A. Documentation of Processes or Plan ................................................................................... 33 B. Assessment Metrics and Methods of Student Outcomes .................................................... 35 B.1 Indirect Assessment Methods ........................................................................................ 35 B.2 Direct Assessment Methods ........................................................................................... 49 C. Assessment Schedule and Frequency ................................................................................... 71 D. Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 71 E. Using Results for Continuous Improvement ......................................................................... 78 E.1 Continuous Improvement (Indirect assessment methods) ............................................ 79 E.2 Continuous Improvement (Direct assessment methods) ............................................... 79 F. Additional Information ......................................................................................................... 84 CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM ................................................................................................ 85 A. Program Curriculum ............................................................................................................. 87 A.1 Curriculum Alignment With Program Educational Objectives (PEOs) ............................ 87 A.2 Curriculum Prerequisite Structure Supporting Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) ...... 88 Table 5-1a Curriculum .............................................................................................................. 91 A.3 Flow Chart Illustrating The Prerequisite Structure of Program’s Courses ...................... 97 A.4 Curricular Areas .............................................................................................................. 97 A.5 Capstone Experience ...................................................................................................... 97 A.6 Professional and Ethical Responsibilities ....................................................................... 98 A.7 Summer Co-ops / Cruise ............................................................................................... 100 A.8 Display Materials .......................................................................................................... 100 B. Course Syllabi ..................................................................................................................... 100 C. Advisory Committee ........................................................................................................... 100 CRITERION 6. FACULTY ........................................................................................................ 104 A. Faculty Qualifications ......................................................................................................... 104 B. Faculty Workload ................................................................................................................ 104 C. Faculty Size ......................................................................................................................... 105 Table 6-1. Faculty Qualifications ............................................................................................ 106 Table 6-2. Faculty Workload Summary .................................................................................. 109 D. Professional Development ................................................................................................. 116 E. Authority and Responsibility of Faculty .............................................................................. 117 Facilities Engineering Technology Program Self Study Report 3 CRITERION 7. FACILITIES .................................................................................................... 120 A. Offices, Classrooms and Laboratories ................................................................................ 120 A.1 Offices .......................................................................................................................... 120 A.2 Classrooms ................................................................................................................... 121 A.3 Laboratories ................................................................................................................. 122 A.4 Simulators ................................................................................................................... 126 A.5 Manufacturing Spaces .................................................................................................. 127 A.6 Training Ship ................................................................................................................. 128 B. Computing Resources ......................................................................................................... 129 B.1 Network Infrastructure ................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Television Academy Awards
    2019 Primetime Emmy® Awards Ballot Outstanding Comedy Series A.P. Bio Abby's After Life American Housewife American Vandal Arrested Development Atypical Ballers Barry Better Things The Big Bang Theory The Bisexual Black Monday black-ish Bless This Mess Boomerang Broad City Brockmire Brooklyn Nine-Nine Camping Casual Catastrophe Champaign ILL Cobra Kai The Conners The Cool Kids Corporate Crashing Crazy Ex-Girlfriend Dead To Me Detroiters Easy Fam Fleabag Forever Fresh Off The Boat Friends From College Future Man Get Shorty GLOW The Goldbergs The Good Place Grace And Frankie grown-ish The Guest Book Happy! High Maintenance Huge In France I’m Sorry Insatiable Insecure It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia Jane The Virgin Kidding The Kids Are Alright The Kominsky Method Last Man Standing The Last O.G. Life In Pieces Loudermilk Lunatics Man With A Plan The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel Modern Family Mom Mr Inbetween Murphy Brown The Neighborhood No Activity Now Apocalypse On My Block One Day At A Time The Other Two PEN15 Queen America Ramy The Ranch Rel Russian Doll Sally4Ever Santa Clarita Diet Schitt's Creek Schooled Shameless She's Gotta Have It Shrill Sideswiped Single Parents SMILF Speechless Splitting Up Together Stan Against Evil Superstore Tacoma FD The Tick Trial & Error Turn Up Charlie Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt Veep Vida Wayne Weird City What We Do in the Shadows Will & Grace You Me Her You're the Worst Young Sheldon Younger End of Category Outstanding Drama Series The Affair All American American Gods American Horror Story: Apocalypse American Soul Arrow Berlin Station Better Call Saul Billions Black Lightning Black Summer The Blacklist Blindspot Blue Bloods Bodyguard The Bold Type Bosch Bull Chambers Charmed The Chi Chicago Fire Chicago Med Chicago P.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Battlebots Newsletter: Preparing for Competition March, 2021 As the Newest Design Team, Battlebots Has Never Competed Before
    Battlebots Newsletter: Preparing for Competition March, 2021 As the newest design team, Battlebots has never competed before. Our first competition would have been in March of 2020. However, COVID cancelled all of our events that year. With that being said, the team will be competing with two robots this year: the 15lb robot from 2020 and the 30lb robot from 2021. Students are excited to finally be able to see their robots compete at Bots KC in Kansas City, MO and Norwalk Havoc Robot League in Norwalk, CT. Navigating the logistics of traveling safely to competitions has been a challenge, but we are hopeful everything will work out. The state of what is safe nowadays is always changing and we want to make sure we take all the precautions necessary to compete responsibly. In February, the team performed construction on building a full scale testing enclosure for our robots. The former 12ft square arena has been extensively upgraded. Measuring a full 16ft by 16ft with 8ft ceiling it meets the size of competition standards and allows our team to test and practice safely on a regular basis. The expansion was a whole team effort to construct. We tore down the old enclosure and used its components within the new arena to save cost of the material and manufacturing time. Now that the new box is complete, the team will really be able to see what the robots are capable of on a larger scale. Our new 30lb robot has been named “Option 14”. Its name is somewhat of an inside joke on the team.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineering and Engineering Technology
    Engineering and Engineering Technology Career Information Definition according to the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET): Engineering is the profession in which knowledge of the mathematical and natural sciences gained by study, experience, and practice is applied with judgment to develop ways to utilize economically the materials and forces of nature for the benefit of mankind. Engineering Technology is the part of the technological field that requires the application of scientific and engineering knowledge and methods combined with technical skills in support of engineering activities; it lies in the occupational spectrum between the craftsman and the engineer at the end of the spectrum closest to the engineer. Difference between Engineering Technology and Engineering Technical engineering projects involve research, complex analysis/design, development, manufacturing, test/evaluation, production, operation and distribution/sales of a finished and successful product. Engineers are mostly involved in the initial phase, whereas engineering technologists are mostly involved in the final phases. Their roles overlap in the development, manufacturing and test/evaluation of a product. Therefore, Engineering Technology is all about applying engineering principles to get the job done successfully (Applications Engineering). Engineers are the scientists within the team with in-depth math/science knowledge. Engineering technologists work as technical members of the engineering team with math/science background. Cal Poly
    [Show full text]
  • Extensible Hardware Architecture for Mobile Robots
    ___~ __ Extensible Hardware Architecture for Mobile Robots Eric Park*, Linda Kobayashi. and Susan Y. Lee* Inrelligenr Roborics Group IWSA Ames Research Center Moffen Field. CA 94035-1000, USA {epark, Ikobayaslzi, qvlee} @arc.nasa.gov Absfruct-Tbe Intelligent Robotics Group at NASA Ames Research Center has developed a new mobile robot hardware architecture designed for extensibility and reconfigurability. Currently implemented on the k-9 rover. and won to be integrated onto the HOseries of burnan-robot collaboration research robots, this achitecture allows for rapid changes in instrumentation configuration and provides a high degree of modularity through a synergistic mix of off-the-shelf and custom designed components, allowing eased transplantation into a wide vane6 of mobile robot platforms. A component level overview of this architecture is presented along with a description of the changes required for implementation on UO,followed by plans for future work. Zndex Terns- modular. extensible, hardware architecture, mobile robot, k9 INTRODUCTION Fig. 1. K9 rover Mobile robots used for research and development are in increasing demand as the application space for robotics widens. With this demand comes the need for a smarter K9 Overview way to produce reliable mobile robots with a proven set of avionics. Time and money lost in developing custom The K9 rover is a 6-wheel steer. 6-wheel drive rocker- architectures for each new robot makes it increasingly bogey chassis outfitted with electronics and instruments important to develop extensible hardware architectures that appropriate for supporting research relevant to remote can expand and accommodate rapid changes in configu- exploration 191 [3] [4].
    [Show full text]
  • Who Makes Trends? Understanding Demographic Biases In
    Who Makes Trends? Understanding Demographic Biases in Crowdsourced Recommendations Abhijnan Chakraborty∗#, Johnnatan Messiaso#, Fabricio Benevenutoo, Saptarshi Ghosh∗, Niloy Ganguly∗, Krishna P. Gummadi# #Max Planck Institute for Software Systems, Germany ∗Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, India oUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil Abstract A large number of prior works on trending topics have fo- what Users of social media sites like Facebook and Twitter rely on cused on the trends are (e.g., classifying the trends into crowdsourced content recommendation systems (e.g., Trend- different categories (Naaman, Becker, and Gravano 2011)), ing Topics) to retrieve important and useful information. Con- or how the trends are selected (e.g., proposing new algo- tents selected for recommendation indirectly give the ini- rithms to identify trends from the content stream (Benhardus tial users who promoted (by liking or posting) the con- and Kalita 2013)). Complementary to the earlier works, our tent an opportunity to propagate their messages to a wider focus in this paper is on the users who make different topics audience. Hence, it is important to understand the demo- worthy of being recommended as trending. Specifically, we graphics of people who make a content worthy of recom- attempt to analyze the demographics of crowds promoting mendation, and explore whether they are representative of different topics on the social media sites. By promoters of the media site’s overall population. In this work, using ex- a topic, we refer to the users who posted on the topic be- tensive data collected from Twitter, we make the first at- fore tempt to quantify and explore the demographic biases in it became trending, thereby contributing to the topic’s the crowdsourced recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Chief of Facilities Engineering-WW-Facilities
    JOB DESCRIPTION CHIEF OF FACILITIES ENGINEERING (FACILITIES DIVISION) WATERWORKS Human Resources Department 700 Town Center Drive, Suite 200 Newport News, VA 23606 NEWPORT NEWS, VA Phone: (757) 926-1800 CITY OF OPPORTUNITY Fax: (757) 926-1825 GENERAL STATEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITIES Under limited supervision, this position is responsible for the oversight and management of the Facilities Engineering Branch of the Department of Waterworks. Reports to the Facilities Manager. ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS Responsible for the effective supervision and administration of the Facilities Engineering Branch including budget preparation and monitoring, development of capital improvement plans, purchasing and financial transactions, preparation of reports, performance management, employee relations, prioritizing and assigning work and related activities. Oversees and serves as project manager on major water utility projects; identifies, researches, and recommends project needs, plans, and scope of work; drafts requests for proposals; assists in selecting contractors; oversees and monitors work performed by contractors to ensure that contract plans, scope and specifications are being followed; oversees project inspections; interprets, contracts, resolves conflicts, and negotiates contract changes as appropriate; reviews and recommends invoices for payment. Ensures the safety, security, and regulatory compliance of all work assigned. Coordinates, develops, and recommends long-range plans pertaining to the maintenance, rehabilitation and new construction of
    [Show full text]
  • Plant-Engineering-2019-Maintenance-Report.Pdf
    Facilities Maintenance March 2019 Sponsored by Table of contents Section Pages Introduction and methodology 3 Summary of findings 4 Respondent profile 5-9 Facility maintenance 10-24 Additional resources 25 2 Introduction and methodology Objective This study was completed by Plant Engineering to evaluate the maintenance practices and strategies currently in place in manufacturing facilities and the effects of maintenance on productivity and profitability. Sample The sample was selected from recipients of Plant Engineering for whom email addresses were available. Only respondents responsible for maintenance for all or part of their facilities were asked about maintenance strategies, outsourcing maintenance, training, technologies, and unscheduled downtime. Method Subscribers were sent an email asking them to participate in this study. The email included a URL linked to the questionnaire. ▪ Data collected: Dec. 21, 2018, through Jan. 9, 2019 ▪ Number of respondents: 199 o Margin of error: +/- 6.9% at a 95% confidence level ▪ Incentive: Survey participants were offered the opportunity to enter a drawing for a chance to receive a $100 Amazon.com gift card. 3 Summary of findings • Maintenance strategies: Seventy-eight percent of manufacturing facilities follow a preventive maintenance strategy; 61% have a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS), and 56% use a run-to-failure method. • Scheduled maintenance: Fifty-three percent of facilities allocate up to 10% of their annual operating costs to maintenance processes; 30% devote more than 10% of this budget on maintenance. The average facility spends 20 hours each week on scheduled maintenance. • Attention to systems: Rotating equipment (motors, power transmission, etc.), fluid power systems (air, hydraulic, etc.), and plant automation systems are the three areas where facilities dedicate the most maintenance support, followed by internal electrical distribution systems and material handling equipment.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 UC MET Battlebot Team
    2020 UC MET Battlebot Team 15lb Bot Senior Design II Report Senior Design Proposal submitted to the Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering College of Engineering and Applied Science University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering Technology by Fred Schroeder Isabella Long Mathew Itapson December 2019 Thesis Advisor: Dr. Janet Dong 15lb Bot SD II Report Fred Schroeder, Isabella Long, Mathew Itapson TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................... 1 LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ 2 LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................. 3 ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. 4 PROBLEM DEFINITION AND RESEARCH .................................................................... 4 PROBLEM STATEMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 4 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................................... 4 RESEARCH ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • January 13, 2017 RE: Request For
    State of Vermont Agency of Transportation Contract Administration Finance & Administration One National Life Drive [fax] 802-828-5545 Montpelier VT 05633-5001 vtrans.vermont.gov/contract-admin January 13, 2017 RE: Request for Proposals (RFP) – Facilities Engineering Consultant Services 2016 – Civil, Architectural, Structural, Electrical and/or Mechanical Engineering The State of Vermont, acting through the Agency of Transportation (VTrans), is requesting proposals from engineering consultation for various facilities projects throughout the State including, but not limited to in the development of facility construction/repair plans, creation of property surveys, and other engineering work associated with highway and transportation buildings. Engineering Services requested include Civil Engineering, Architectural Engineering, Structural Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Mechanical Engineering. Consultants may propose for one or more than one type of engineering service. All work will be accomplished in accordance with the provisions set forth in this Request for Proposals (RFP), and with the following: Scope of Work (SOW) dated December 8, 2016; Procedures for Selecting Contractors and Specifications for Contractor Services document including Customary State Contract Provisions, dated August 28, 2008, Revised December 29, 2008; General Special Provisions dated November 22, 2011; and Standard State Provisions for Contracts and Grants dated July 1, 2016, all of which are attached hereto. All applicable Federal, State, and local regulations will be followed. All questions or requests for clarification related to this RFP shall be forwarded in writing to the VTrans Point of Contact at: Bonnie Sanders, Agency of Transportation, Contract Administration, 1 National Life Drive, Montpelier, VT 05633-5001 - or - e-mail to [email protected] Subject Line: Facilities Engineering Consultant Services 2016 - or - Faxed to (802) 828-5545 Attention: Bonnie Sanders Subject Line: Facilities Engineering Consultant Services 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Syllabus – Egr 590 Introduction to Facilities
    SYLLABUS – EGR 590 / CE 590 INTRODUCTION TO FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS FALL 2019 Days and Dates: Mondays from August 26 through December 3, 2018 (14 Class Sessions) All exams will be administered during scheduled class sessions – no separate final exam date is scheduled Time: 6:00 to 8:45 PM with a 15 minute break Location: Mann Hall room 406 INSTRUCTOR James A. Rispoli, M.S. (Civil Engineering), M.A. Business, P.E. Senior Lecturer, Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering Professor of Practice, Center for Nuclear Energy Facilities and Structures, Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, NC State University 215 Mann Hall (919) 515-7628 [email protected] Office Hours: One-half hour or more if needed, prior to each Monday class session. Other times by appointment. Since there will be both on-campus students and distance-ed students, opportunities for telephone discussion with individual students can be arranged by email. COURSE OVERVIEW This course is intended to build on a traditional bachelor’s degree in an engineering discipline, and introduce the engineer graduate students to a multi-disciplinary approach to engineering and management required in the field of facilities engineering. James Rispoli, the course instructor, is a licensed professional engineer with 15 years experience at installation level: as chief of engineering, chief of facilities planning and programming, director of facilities and public works at a major airport, and director of public works, facilities and environment at a major seaport. Additionally, he was facilities and environmental planning department head for a federal agency, covering installations in a 24 state area.
    [Show full text]
  • Manatee Libraries October 2018 Events
    Downtown South Manatee Sat Braden River Mon 01 Area 52 SciClub (ages 8-12): Zany Zoetropes 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Tu e 02 Forty Carrots: Partners in Play1 12:30 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. Wed 03 Preschool Storytime 10:15 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Tu e 02 Forty Carrots: Partners in Play1 10:15 a.m. - 11:15 a.m. Kids Krew: Candy Science 3:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. Thurs 04 Tree Tops Storytime 12:30 p.m. - 1:00 p.m. Wed 03 Library Apps (eBooks/eAudio, Movies, TV & Music 2:00 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. Latin Cooking Demo With Dr. Capó (Food Pharmacy) 6:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Fri 05 Forty Carrots: Partners at Play (Session 1)1 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Thurs 04 Preschool Storytime 10:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. Tech Tutors (by appointment only) 5:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Forty Carrots: Partners at Play (Session 2)1 11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. Mother Goose on the Loose 10:30 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Wed 03 Preschool STEM Storytime: Bugs 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Sat 06 Lego Family Fun 11:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. Early Literacy 11:00 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. Drop in DIY (ages 18+) Recycled Book Jewelry 1:30 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. Teen Advisory Board (TAB) 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Extensible Hardware Architecture for Mobile Robots
    Extensible Hardware Architecture for Mobile Robots Eric Park∗, Linda Kobayashi, and Susan Y. Lee∗ Intelligent Robotics Group NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000, USA {epark, lkobayashi, sylee}@arc.nasa.gov Abstract— The Intelligent Robotics Group at NASA Ames Research Center has developed a new mobile robot hardware architecture designed for extensibility and reconfigurability. Currently implemented on the K9 rover, and soon to be integrated onto the K10 series of human-robot collaboration research robots, this achitecture allows for rapid changes in instrumentation configuration and provides a high degree of modularity through a synergistic mix of off-the-shelf and custom designed components, allowing eased transplantation into a wide variety of mobile robot platforms. A component level overview of this architecture is presented along with a description of the changes required for implementation on K10, followed by plans for future work. Index Terms— modular, extensible, hardware architecture, mobile robot, k9 INTRODUCTION Fig. 1. K9 rover Mobile robots used for research and development are in increasing demand as the application space for robotics K9 Overview widens. With this demand comes the need for a smarter way to produce reliable mobile robots with a proven set The K9 rover is a 6-wheel steer, 6-wheel drive rocker- of avionics. Time and money lost in developing custom bogey chassis outfitted with electronics and instruments architectures for each new robot makes it increasingly appropriate for supporting research relevant to remote important to develop extensible hardware architectures that exploration [2] [3] [4]. K9’s overall dimensions are 1.05m can expand and accommodate rapid changes in configu- long by 0.85m wide by 1.6m high, with a mass of ap- ration, including transfer to an entirely different mobile proximately 65 kg and a top speed of approximately 6 platform [1].
    [Show full text]