2010 GRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEW MASTER OF SCIENCE ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Academic Unit: Engineering Management Program Contact Person: Glen Marotz, Professor Associate Dean, Research and Graduate Programs School of Engineering (SOE) Telephone: 785-864-2980 Email: [email protected] Date: October 1, 2010 Table of Contents Page Organizational and Summary Details (OSD) 7 OSD.1. Engineering Management Program Highlights OSD.2. Executive Summary OSD.3. Self-study Process: OSD.3.a. Documents and Data Sources OSD.3.b. Approach 1. What do we do and why do we do it? 16 1.A. Mission of Unit 1.A.1. Centrality to the mission of the School of Engineering and the Edwards Campus 1.A.2. The Engineering Management mission 1.B. Unit goals and priorities 1.C. Short mission statement 1.D. Role of unit 1.E. Need and Impact statements 1.E.1 Why is there a Graduate Program in Engineering Management? 1.F. Graduate Instructional Programs Reviewed in this Report (Master of Science in Engineering Management, Edwards Campus) 1.G Graduate Catalog Description of the EMGT Program 2. Who does it? 22 2.A. Faculty in Profile: 2.B. Who is doing the teaching? 2.C. Who is doing the advising/mentoring? 2.D. What is their workload? 2.E. Quantitative and Qualitative indicators: 2.E.1. Overall counts/FTE 2.E.2. Tenure-track, other, GTA 2.E. 3. Demographics 2.E.4. Scholarly Output 2.E.5. Grants 2.E.6. Awards 2.E.7. Master‘s-level Chair status 1 | P a g e 2.F. Maintaining Quality 2.F.1. How are you recruiting and retaining Faculty to sustain and enhance program quality? 2.F.2. Given your observation of the median age of the Faculty, what is your succession plan? 3. How well do we do it, and who thinks so? 31 3.A. Recruitment, Admission, Enrollment, Retention, Progression, & Graduation 3.A.1. Recruitment, Admission, Enrollment 3.B.1.a. Recruitment 3.B.1.b. Admission 3.B.2. Retention, Progression, Graduation 3.B.2.a. Retention 3.B.2.b. Time to Degree 3.B.2.c. Student Performance at Graduation 3.C. National and Regional Comparisons 3.C.1. Comparison of Selected Programs (UCOL, Drexel, Duke, KSU, MIT, UTexas, WSU) 3.C.2. Big 12 EMGT Programs 3.D. EMGT Statistics 3.D.1. GRE Test Scores 3.D.1.a. Financial Support 3.D.1.b. Demographics 3.D.2. Program Productivity 3.D.2.a. Distribution of class sizes 3.D.2.b. Advising 3.D.2.c. Time to degree 3.D.2.d. Degrees Awarded 3.D.2.e. Student research productivity 3.D.3. Program Quality Outcomes 3.D.3.a. Learner Outcomes 3.D.3.b. Tests, Papers and Projects 3.D.3.c. Placement rates, employer assessments 3.D.3.d. Student awards 3.D.3.e. Service, Outreach/engagement and Corresponding Impact 3.E. Assessment 3.E.1. (RS1): DeSieghardt Strategic Communications Report 3.E.2. (RS2 to RS4): The School of Engineering—Engineering Career Center (ECC) 3.E.3. (RS5): 2010 EMGT Alumni Survey 3.E.4. (RS5A): Statistical Results from the 2010 Alumni Survey Data 3.E.5. (RS6): EMGT Advisory Board Questionnaire 2010 3.E.6. (RS7): 2005/2009 AIMS EMGT Graduate Student Satisfaction Survey 2 | P a g e 4. Overall Quality 68 4.A. External indicators of quality 4.A.1. External Accreditation 4.A.2. National Rankings 4.A.3. Faculty Awards 4.B. Reflecting on your short mission statement 4.B.1. Students 4.B.2. Faculty 4.B.3. Service 4.C. What is your overall assessment of the quality of the academic programming in the unit at the present time? 5. Given your present assessment of program quality, what are your plans to advance the program? 75 5.A. Strategic Plan Development: SWOT Analysis 5.A.1. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats 5.C. Discussion of Targets for Change: Weaknesses and Opportunities 5.C.1. Establishment of an SOE Edwards Center (SEEC) Management Structure 5.C.2. New Degree Program: Project Management 5.D. A New Off-Site Approach to Customer‘s Educational Needs 5.E. Additional Resources 5.E.1. Triangle Initiative 5.E.1.a. Triangle Initiative: funding/faculty/degree programs 6. How will you evaluate future progress and successes? 83 6.A. Unit Metrics: EMGT 6.B. School Metrics: SOE Appendices 87 A.1. Reports and External Surveys Electronic Survey and Results of EMGT Alumni Survey Electronic Survey and Results for EMGT Advisory Board Survey Cohort Statistical Analysis A.2. DEMIS (AIMS), SOE and ASEE Data Resumes/CV‘s AIMS/DEMIS Report A.3. EMGT Programs in the USA ASEM Listing ASEE List of Graduates from EMGT MS Programs 3 | P a g e Selected EMGT Programs from other Universities KU EMGT Program Description MS-Level Professional Programs in the SOE Admission Requirements for the PMGT Program Project Management Institute MEM Consortium A.4. Student Teaching Evaluations Faculty Evaluations by Students A.5. Accredited/Certified Programs ABET Accredited programs ASEM Certified programs 4 | P a g e List of Tables OSD 1. Budget recapitulation for AY 2005-2006 to 2009-2010 1. Student Demand: 2005-2009 2. Master of Science in Engineering Management Degree 3. EMGT Full-time Faculty 4. EMGT Part-time Faculty 5. Faculty Workload 6. Typical Full-time Faculty Workloads Fall 2010 7. Typical Part-time Faculty Workloads Fall 2010-Srping 2011 8. EMGT Scholarly Output 9. EMGT Grants 10. Student Statistics by Year and Status Category for MCM, EMGT, & MSIT 11. Admission, Probation, Provisional Status 12. Master‘s Degrees Awarded in Engineering Management, 2008-2009 (ASEE, 2010) 13. Commonalities Among the Selected Programs 14. Eight Selected Programs 15. Engineering Management Programs: Big 12 16. Class of 2009 Graduates 17. Examples of Recent EMGT Outreach Efforts 18. Factors Assessed in the Alumni Survey 19. EMGT Degree Importance to Employers 20. Advisory Board Members 21. Area of Interest and Specific Questions 22. ABET Listed Engineering Management Programs 2010 23. American Society for Engineering Management Certification 24. General Criteria for Master‘s Level Programs 25. Faculty Awards 26. M.S. Engineering Management Students 27. SWOT Analysis 28. Master‘s-level Degree in Project Management 29. PMI Membership 30. Schedule for Implementation List of Figures 1. Engineering Graduate Students Admitted on Probation/ Provisional Status: Fall 2008, 2009, & 2010 2. Engineering Master‘s-level Students Admitted on Probation/Provisional Status: Fall 2008, 2009, & 2010 Degree-Seeking Engineering Management Students: All Admitted and Enrolled 3. Degree-Seeking Engineering Management Students: All Admitted and Enrolled 4. Degree-Seeking Engineering Management Students: Admitted and Enrolled on Probationary Student Status 5 | P a g e 5. Degree-Seeking Engineering Management Students: Applicants by Math Requirement and Average BS GPA 6. Degree-Seeking Engineering Management Students: Admitted and Enrolled by Math and Average BS GPA 7. Degree-Seeking Engineering Management Students: Admitted and Enrolled by Type and Current Status 8. Graduate Student Satisfaction Measures 9. SEEC Organizational Structure 6 | P a g e OSD.1. Engineering Management Program (EMGT) Highlights The success of the EMGT program rests on the success of its graduates. EMGT has been in existence for twenty-six years, and counts 585 graduates, among them, senior executives in a variety of corporations, businesses, industries, and governmental agencies. In a recent survey of EMGT alumni, 83.6 percent of the respondents thought that their EMGT education was very important/somewhat important (top two categories) in achieving their level of professional success; 59.3 percent have received a promotion to, or acceptance of, a new position--with managerial duties--after completing the EMGT program; and 95.7 percent responded ―If I had to do it again, I would attend the EMGT Program at the University of Kansas‖. Graduates (95.0 percent) have recommended the KU EMGT Master's degree to others, a mark of satisfaction with the overall program. The EMGT program is designed specifically to meet the educational needs of the predominant market demand in the Kansas City (KC) metropolitan area: Engineering and Consulting (E/C). The KC E/C community employs about one-half of all of the KU EMGT graduates; manufacturing (the most common market for EMGT graduates produced by other institutions nationwide) employs only about thirteen percent of EMGT graduates, and IT/Software employs about twelve-percent. The remaining fraction holds various-level positions in USA and international institutions and corporations. The program is the most productive Master‘s-level program (measured on the basis of SCHR/FTE) in the School of Engineering, and the largest program on the Edwards Campus. About eighty-nine percent of the Master‘s students in the program work full-time and attend graduate school part-time, although a small group (nine-percent) are able to both work and attend full-time because of the way in which classes are scheduled. More than ninety-percent of the students hold a professional position at the middle-management tier or above. A significant number hold executive-tier positions. The design of the program is coupled with accessibility: students can take advantage of the EMGT program by attending classes scheduled at convenient times at the Edwards Campus in Overland Park, or they join their colleagues through live-streaming of class sessions, or they can take advantage of remote access to course materials and lectures through Distance Learning. EMGT was the first KU-SOE program to implement a Distance Learning curriculum. The program was started ten years ago in order to reduce student attrition caused by travel, work-schedule, and relocation issues. The digital recording of evening classes— typically taught from 7:10 to 10:00 PM--allows in-class and distance-learning students 7 | P a g e an opportunity to review the lecture at a later time or date, understand the discussion, re-read the handouts from class, and review and study at their own pace.