Conference Paper

ASSESSING INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING COURSES USING BENCHMARK, FACULTY EXPERIENCE AND FE REQUIREMENTS

Volume: 2 Number: 5 August 26, 2016
  • Said Ali Hassan El-quliti
  • Neyara Radwan
EN TR

ASSESSING INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING COURSES USING BENCHMARK, FACULTY EXPERIENCE AND FE REQUIREMENTS

Abstract

Faculty of Engineering at King Abdulaziz University plans to redesign its undergraduate courses, which is required for students in 14 different programs. These courses have an annual enrolment of about 2,500 students each year. The Operations Research Teaching Area in the Department of Industrial Engineering will be presented as a case study. This area involves two core and three elective courses. The course redesign involves preparing students for the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Exam requirements while coping with the best worldwide practices as benchmark. The FE Exam is a computer-based test (CBT). It is closed book with an electronic reference. Examinees have 6 hours to complete the exam, which contains multiple-choice questions. The 6-hour time also includes a tutorial and an optional scheduled break. The exam session is administered in the following seven disciplines: Chemical, Civil, Electrical and Computer, Environmental, Industrial and Systems, Mechanical, and Other Disciplines. The top ten USA Universities in Industrial/Manufacturing Engineering are used as a benchmark to reliably lead to the desired courses redesign results. Moreover, faculty experience is also utilized to enhance the process. 

Keywords

References

  1. Altman, H.B., and Cashin, W.E. (1992). Writing a syllabus, Report No. HE 029 193, Manhattan, KS: Kansas State University, Manhattan Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development in Higher Education; IDEA paper No. 27, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 395 539.
  2. Ariovich, L. and Walker, S. A. (2015), Assessing Course Redesign: The Case of Developmental Math, Research & Practice in Assessment, pp. 54:57. Available at:http://www.rpajournal.com/dev/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/A3.pdf
  3. Bogan, C.E. and English, M.J. (1994). Bench marking for Best Practices: Winning Through Innovative Adaptation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Cusson, M., (2015), Moving towards an outcomes-based curriculum, Academic Quality Assurance, Degree Level Expectations, Educational Development Centre. Available at: http://carleton.ca/viceprovost/wp-content/uploads/Degree-Level-Expectations-March-2012.pdf
  5. Diamond R.M. (1998). Designing and assessing courses and curricula: a practical guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1998. pp. 191–202.
  6. Dubin, F. & Olshtain, E. (1997). Course Design: Developing Programs and Materials for Language Learning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Gosling, D. (2009) Learning Outcomes Debate. Accessed 12th Sept, 2009 http://www.davidgosling.net/userfiles/Learning%20Outcomes%20Debate(1).pdf
  8. Grunert J. (1997). The course syllabus: a learning-centered approach. Boston: Anker Publishing Co.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

-

Journal Section

Conference Paper

Authors

Said Ali Hassan El-quliti

Neyara Radwan

Publication Date

August 26, 2016

Submission Date

August 22, 2016

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 1970 Volume: 2 Number: 5

EndNote
El-quliti SAH, Radwan N (August 1, 2016) ASSESSING INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING COURSES USING BENCHMARK, FACULTY EXPERIENCE AND FE REQUIREMENTS. IJAEDU- International E-Journal of Advances in Education 2 5 181–192.

 Published and Sponsored by OCERINT International © 2015 - 2026

Contact: ijaedujournal@hotmail.com

Creative Commons License

International E-Journal of Advances in Education by IJAEDU is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://ijaedu.ocerintjournals.org