A method for assessing required course-related skills and prerequisite structure

Engineering curricula should be dynamic with a goal of constant improvement and refinement. Unfortunately, this is often not the case; courses are developed, altered, and expanded in a piecemeal manner. Namely, as time progresses many programmes end up with courses that are developed and not a developed curriculum. To remedy this shortcoming product, development tools are proposed for the refinement and assessment of an existing curriculum; how these methods could be used for the development of a curriculum is also highlighted. The voice of the customer (VOC) process is used to identify and prioritise desired student skills. The design structure matrix (DSM) is used to assess course prerequisite structure. There is broad agreement between faculty and industry related to which professional skills are the most important. The DSM is shown to be a useful tool in ordering courses and assessing prerequisite structures. The DSM is also shown to be useful in identifying which courses in a curriculum are critical and should be the focus of educational and administrative resources.

[1]  Michael Harris,et al.  A Model for Curricular Revision: The Case of Engineering , 2009 .

[2]  Mary Besterfield-Sacre,et al.  The ABET “Professional Skills” — Can They Be Taught? Can They Be Assessed? , 2005 .

[3]  S D Eppinger,et al.  Innovation at the speed of information. , 2001, Harvard business review.

[4]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  Applying the design structure matrix to system decomposition and integration problems: a review and new directions , 2001, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[5]  Sarah Spence Adams,et al.  The Olin curriculum: thinking toward the future , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[6]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Product Design and Development , 1995 .

[7]  Shuvra Das,et al.  A 10-Year Mechatronics Curriculum Development Initiative: Relevance, Content, and Results—Part I , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[8]  Ludovic-Alexandre Vidal,et al.  Project risk management processes: improving coordination using a clustering approach , 2011 .

[9]  Craig L. Miller,et al.  PLM curriculum development: Using an industry-sponsored project to teach manufacturing simulation in a multidisciplinary environment , 2005 .

[10]  J. Earnest.  ABET engineering technology criteria and competency based engineering education , 2005, Proceedings Frontiers in Education 35th Annual Conference.

[11]  Shun Takai,et al.  A Use of Subjective Clustering to Support Affinity Diagram Results in Customer Needs Analysis , 2010, Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl..

[12]  Mohamed A. Gadalla.  Innovation in Curriculum Development for Manufacturing Education , 2008 .

[13]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  A simulation-based process model for managing complex design projects , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[14]  Shuvra Das,et al.  A 10-Year Mechatronics Curriculum Development Initiative: Relevance, Content, and Results—Part II , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[15]  Udo Lindemann,et al.  STRATEGIC DIVERSIFICATION BY NETWORK PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS , 2006 .

[16]  B.D. Gannod,et al.  Course, Program, and Curriculum Gaps: Assessing Curricula for Targeted Change , 2005, Proceedings Frontiers in Education 35th Annual Conference.

[17]  Chelsea C. White,et al.  Key factors in the successful application of quality function deployment (QFD) , 2001, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[18]  K. Tan,et al.  Integrating Kano's model in the planning matrix of quality function deployment , 2000 .

[19]  Michael Johnson,et al.  Tool Use and Activities of Practicing Engineers over Time: Survey Results , 2011 .