Naples, L M (1996) Outcomes-based evaluation for educational programs in engineering: A focus on the construction industry's needs. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, USA.
Abstract
The reform movement in engineering education is requiring that the process by which engineering programs are evaluated be revisited. In 1995, the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology announced that as of 1998, engineering schools will be required to provide evidence that their programs are achieving specified educational outcomes, in order to maintain their accreditation. This is problematic since the outcomes are not defined in terms of the behavioral objectives and performance benchmarks needed to provide a clear measure of achievement. Also, there is currently no non-arbitrary method for defining behavioral objectives, or using them to inform decisions regarding accreditation, or educational reforms. This dissertation addresses these problems. The education theories of, "authentic assessment," "outcomes-based assessment," and, "mastery learning" were integrated to create an evaluation tool called a "meta-assessment rubric. " Then, a methodology for constructing a "meta-assessment rubric," was developed, using survey and focus-group techniques, multi-attribute value elicitations, and mixed-integer, linear programming. The feasibility of using this methodology to construct a "meta-assessment rubric" was then tested by a diverse group of 84 engineers in the construction industry.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | education; learning; linear programming; programming; schools |
| Index terms: | evaluation tool, dissertation, construction industry, linear programming, engineer, engineering education, program, methodology, programming, engineering school, evidence, survey, movement |
| Subjects: | educational institutions, industry analysis, software systems, data collection methods, profession, professional education, research methods, algorithms, research dissemination and communication, evaluation and assessment methods, health behaviours and lifestyles, programming |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here