· 2020
Capstone Design Courses And Assessment: A National Study
- 185citations
- 2020year
Short summary
A national survey of 119 US engineering institutions found that faculty report current capstone design course assessment practices do not fully align with ABET EC 2000 Criteria 3 and 4, with many faculty expressing uncertainty about sound assessment methods.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- 43% of surveyed US engineering institutions (119 out of 274) reported on their capstone design course assessment practices.
- Faculty indicate that current capstone assessments do not fully meet ABET EC 2000 Criteria 3 and 4.
- A significant portion of faculty (98 interviewed/surveyed in Phase 2) expressed uncertainty regarding best practices for assessment, including objective writing and strategy selection.
- There is a stated interest among faculty for national collaboration on capstone design assessment.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
ABET EC 2000 Criteria 3 and 4 specifically focus on student learning objectives and associated assessment and evaluation practices that are often integral to capstone design courses. This paper reports findings from a two-phase study conducted to better understand the nature and scope of assessment practices within capstone design courses across engineering disciplines, and in particular, the extent to which current practices align with ABET EC 2000 expectations. Phase 1 provides the findings from a nationwide survey of engineering disciplines in the U.S. with accredited engineering programs. One hundred nineteen of 274 institutions surveyed returned usable surveys for an institutional response rate of 43%. Faculty at these institutions were asked a variety of questions about the nature of the capstone experience, type of assessments employed, and the extent to which current practices align with ABET EC 2000 Criteria 3 and 4 expectations. Faculty members report that some ABET EC 2000 Criteria are currently not well assessed in capstone design courses and expressed interest in collaborating with colleagues across the country on capstone design assessment, development, and use. Phase 2 reports the findings from interviews and surveys of 98 faculty members identified from Phase 1. Faculty members were asked a variety of questions about classroom assessment practices in capstone design courses. Findings suggest uncertainty on the part of many faculty members concerning sound assessment practices, including writing objectives, using appropriate assessment strategies, sampling material appropriately, and controlling for mismeasurement of student achievement. Based on the findings a variety of recommendations are reported in this paper.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source., 2020 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Architecture
ArchitectureEngineering