University of Cincinnati
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI December 02 , 2002 I, Mira Lalovic , hereby submit this as part of the requirements for the degree of: Doctor of Philosophy . in: Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering . It is entitled: _____________An_ABET_Assessment_Model________ _____________Using_Six_Sigma_Methodology_______ Approved by: Dr. Richard R. Shell , Dr. Ali A. Houshmand , Dr. Ronald L. Huston , Dr. Roy Eckart , AN ABET ASSESSMENT MODEL USING SIX SIGMA METHODOLOGY A dissertation submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in the Department of Mechanical, Industrial and Nuclear Engineering of the College of Engineering 2002 by Mira Lalovic B.S., Belgrade University, Yugoslavia, 1995 M.S., University of Cincinnati, US 1999 Committee Chair: Dr. Richard L. Shell Abstract Technical fields are changing so rapidly that even the core of an engineering education must be constantly reevaluated. Graduates of today give more dedication and, almost certainly, more importance to continued learning than to mastery of specific technical concepts. Continued learning shapes a high-quality education, which is what an engineering college must offer its students. The question is how to guarantee the quality of education. In addition, the Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology is asking that universities commit to continuous and comprehensive education, assuming quality of the educational process. The research is focused on developing a generic assessment model for a college of engineering as an annual cycle that consists of a systematic assessment of every course in the program, followed by an assessment of the program and of the college as a whole using Six Sigma methodology. This unique approach to assessment in education will provide a college of engineering with valuable information regarding many important curriculum decisions in every accreditation cycle. The Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering (IME) Program in the College of Engineering at the University of Cincinnati will be used as a case example for a preliminary test of the generic model. Acknowledgments I wish to express my sincere appreciation to Dr. Richard L. Shell, my committee chair, for all encouragement and priceless guidance throughout my endeavors to fulfill the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Special thanks to Dr. Roy Eckart, in addition to being a committee member, for his support and guidance in every step of the way. I am also indebted to the other members of my committee, including Dr. Ronald L. Huston for his support and optimism, which helped me maintain the needed confidence in achieving this goal and Dr. Ali A. Houshmand, who helped me tremendously through the years with his supreme knowledge in the area of quality and application of statistical methods which ultimately made this research work possible. I would like to express my deepest thanks to my parents who gave me unlimited love and affection, encouraged me to work hard, supported me unselfishly, and protected me during the hard times. I dedicate my dissertation to them as a token of my love for them. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................. 1 LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................................... 4 LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... 7 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 8 1.1. PROBLEM DEFINITION ........................................................................................... 8 1.2. IMPORTANCE OF THIS RESEARCH ........................................................................ 12 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 14 2.1. SIX SIGMA LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 14 The History .................................................................................................. 14 Total Quality Management Versus Six Sigma.............................................. 15 The Six Sigma Ways.................................................................................... 17 The Statistical Definition of Six Sigma ......................................................... 19 How the Organizations of Today Are Improving Process Quality ................ 23 The DMAIC Six Sigma Improvement Model ................................................ 27 Some Guidelines for Making Six Sigma Work in Service Organizations...... 28 2.2. DATABASE SYSTEMS LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................... 31 The Basics of a Database System............................................................... 32 Relational Database Systems...................................................................... 35 2.3. ABET ASSESSMENT LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................... 37 1 ABET EC 2000 ............................................................................................ 37 Program Educational Objectives.................................................................. 38 Program Outcomes and Assessment .......................................................... 38 Accreditation on the Program Level............................................................. 39 Elements and Requirements of the Evaluation ............................................ 40 Some Experiences of Accredited Programs ................................................ 41 2.4. APPLICATION OF THE MODEL ............................................................................... 43 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 44 3.1. GENERAL APPROACH TO THE MODEL................................................................... 44 3.2. MECHANISM OF THE GENERIC ASSESSMENT MODEL ............................................. 49 Program-Level Assessment......................................................................... 50 Core Processes and Key Customers........................................................... 51 Definition Phase: Defining Customer Requirements and Program Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 52 Measurement Phase: Measuring Current Performance............................... 56 Designing the Assessment Tools............................................. 57 Map of the Database Structure................................................ 69 Database Entity Relationship Diagram .................................... 74 Design of the Relational Tables ............................................... 77 Queries Design ........................................................................ 79 Analysis Phase ............................................................................................ 81 Statistical Inference Analysis ................................................... 87 Design and Implementation Phase — Implementing Improvements ........... 91 2 Control Phase .............................................................................................. 93 Control of the Process ............................................................. 93 Two-Loop Model ........................................................................................ 102 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS ............................................................................................. 104 4.1. ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 104 4.2. IMPROVE AND CONTROL.................................................................................... 124 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 128 FUTURE RESEARCH................................................................................................. 129 REFERENCES............................................................................................................ 132 APPENDIX A. SQL CODE............................................................................................. 143 APPENDIX B. LIST OF REPORTS.................................................................................. 162 APPENDIX C. INDUSTRIAL & MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING PROGRAM CURRICULUM 179 APPENDIX D. 2001-2002 CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION ENGINEERING PROGRAMS .... 185 3 List of Figures Figure 2.1. Total Quality Pioneers An ABET Assessment Model Using Six Sigma Methodology............................................................................................... 15 Figure 2.2. Normal Distribution Between Six Sigma Limits ........................................... 20 Figure 2.3. Effect of a 1.5 σ Shift With Only 3.4 ppm Defects ....................................... 22 Figure 2.4. Defect Rates (ppm) Versus Quality Level ................................................... 23 Figure 2.5. Simplified Picture of a Database System .................................................... 33 Figure 3.1. The Six Sigma Road Map ........................................................................... 46 Figure 3.2. A Program General Process Map ............................................................... 47 Figure 3.3. Organization