Self-Evaluation Study Volume 1 - Texas State University2baf5a36-bb...Volume 1 Bachelor of Science ... Department of Engineering Technology Construction Science and Management Program

Self-Evaluation Study Volume 1

Bachelor of Science

Construction Science and Management

Prepared by the Department of Engineering Technology

Construction Science and Management Program

Dr. Gary Winek, Program Director

Texas State University

June 2017

to the American Council for Construction Education

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... ii TABLE OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................ ii 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Requirements ......................................................................................................................... 4 1.1.1 INSTITUTION AND DEGREE PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY ...................................... 4

2 GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................. 9 2.1 Requirements ......................................................................................................................... 9

2.1.1 INSTITUTIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ........................................... 9 2.1.2 EDUCATIONAL UNIT AUTONOMY, STRUCTURE AND LEADERSHIP .......... 12 2.1.3 FACULTY PARTICIPATION ...................................................................................... 13 2.1.4 CONTRIBUTION TO THE INSTITUTION ................................................................ 14

3 CURRICULUM ........................................................................................................................ 15 3.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 15

3.1.1 DEGREE PROGRAMS .............................................................................................. 15 3.1.2 GENERAL EDUCATION ............................................................................................ 18 3.1.3 BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT ............................................................................. 20 3.1.4 CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................................................... 21 3.1.5 STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES ...................................................................... 26

4 FACULTY AND STAFF ............................................................................................................. 38 4.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 38

4.1.1 FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................................ 38 4.1.2 FACULTY SIZE ......................................................................................................... 39 4.1.3 FACULTY WORK LOAD ......................................................................................... 44 4.1.4 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL STAFF SUPPORT .................................. 45 4.1.5 EMPLOYMENT POLICIES ....................................................................................... 46 4.1.6 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................... 48 4.1.7 FACULTY EVALUATION ........................................................................................ 48

5 STUDENT POLICIES ............................................................................................................... 51 5.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 51

5.1.1 ACADEMIC POLICIES ............................................................................................. 51 5.1.2 TEACHING QUALITY ................................................................................................ 52 5.1.3 ADMISSIONS AND ENROLLMENT ....................................................................... 53 5.1.4 RECRUITMENT AND COMPOSITION ................................................................... 54 5.1.5 ACADEMIC ADVISING AND MENTORING ......................................................... 57 5.1.6 COURSE SCHEDULING ........................................................................................... 58 5.1.7 STUDENT PLACEMENT .......................................................................................... 59 5.1.8 EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES ....................................................................... 60 5.1.9 STUDENT FEEDBACK ............................................................................................. 61 5.1.10 FINANCIAL AID AND SCHOLARSHIP ................................................................... 62

6 PHYSICAL RESOURCES ....................................................................................................... 63 6.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 63

6.1.1 OFFICES, CLASSROOMS AND LABORATORY SPACES ................................... 63 6.1.2 LIBRARY RESOURCES ........................................................................................... 66 6.1.3 INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGICAL EQUIPMENT ................. 67

7 FINANCIAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................................... 70 7.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 70

7.1.1 BUDGETED FUNDS ................................................................................................. 70

i

7.1.2 NONRECURRING FUNDS ....................................................................................... 73 8 INDUSTRY, ALUMNI AND PUBLIC RELATIONS ................................................................ 74

8.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 74 8.1.1 SUPPORT FROM INDUSTRY .................................................................................. 74 8.1.2 SUPPORT FOR INDUSTRY ..................................................................................... 75 8.1.3 STUDENT-INDUSTRY RELATIONS ...................................................................... 76 8.1.4 ALUMNI RELATIONS AND FEEDBACK .............................................................. 78 8.1.5 PUBLIC DISCLOSURES ........................................................................................... 79

9 ACADEMIC QUALITY PLANNING PROCESS AND OUTCOME ASSESSMENT .............. 80 9.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 80

9.1.1 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ............................................................................. 80 9.1.2 EDUCATIONAL UNIT STRATEGIC PLAN ............................................................ 80 9.1.3 DEGREE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PLAN ........................................................... 82 9.1.4 ASSESSMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ........................................................... 84

10 REVIEW LAST VISITING TEAM REPORT: WEAKNESSES AND CONCERNS ............... 86 10.1 Previous Accreditation Actions ............................................................................................ 86

TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: Texas State University Organizational Chart ....................................................................... 10 Figure 2: CSM Organizational Chart ................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3: Department of Engineering Technology Structure and Reporting Lines - Organizational

Chart 2016-2017 .......................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 4: Summary of Direct and Indirect Measurements .................................................................. 35

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1: BS of Construction Science and Management Degrees Awarded by Semester 2012-2016 .... 8 Table 2: Summary of Category Semester Hour Requirement – Bachelor Degree .............................. 23 Table 3: Objective/Direct Assessment Measurements ........................................................................ 29 Table 4: Summary of SLO Performance and Action Plan .................................................................. 35 Table 5: Fall 2016 Teaching, Research, and Service Assignments for the CSM Program ................. 40 Table 6: Spring 2017 Teaching, Research, and Service Assignments for the CSM Program ............. 41 Table 7: Ingram School of Engineering v. Engineering Technology .................................................. 43 Table 8: Department of Engineering Technology Support Staff ......................................................... 45 Table 9: Ingram School of Engineering Support Staff ........................................................................ 45 Table 10: Salary Comparisons Between Engineering Technology and Engineering .......................... 46 Table 11: CSM Faculty, Spring 2017 .................................................................................................. 47 Table 12: Required Construction Courses - Sections and Enrollments .............................................. 59 Table 13: Classrooms Used For Construction Courses ....................................................................... 64 Table 14: Laboratories Used For Construction Courses ..................................................................... 65 Table 15: Faculty and Staff Offices .................................................................................................... 66 Table 16: Department of Engineering Technology Operating Revenue (Amounts per FY16 Budget to

Actual Report) ............................................................................................................................. 70 Table 17: Ingram School of Engineering Operating Revenue ............................................................ 70 Table 18: Department of Engineering Technology Expenditures (Salaries per FY16 Salary Budget

Report) ......................................................................................................................................... 71 Table 19: Ingram School of Engineering Expenditures ...................................................................... 71

ii

Table 20: Department of Engineering Technology Expenditures by Program for Prior Fiscal year (FY 2016) ............................................................................................................................................ 72

Table 21: Members of the Construction Advisory Board Spring 2017............................................... 74 Table 22: List of Construction Student Association Activities (AY 2016) ......................................... 77

iii

5

SELF-EVALUATION STUDY

Submitted by: Name of Educational Institution:

Texas State University Name of Educational Unit:

Department of Engineering Technology Title of the Degree Program:

Construction Science and Management 1 INTRODUCTION DEGREE PROGRAM NAME

Bachelor of Science in Construction Science and Management

1.1 Requirements

1.1.1 INSTITUTION AND DEGREE PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY 1.1.1.1 The degree program is to be located in an educational institution of

higher learning that is legally authorized under applicable laws to provide a degree program of education beyond that of the secondary level. Provide background information on the institution, educational unit and the degree program as it relates to history, mission, size, accreditation, etc.

Degree Granting Authority for Texas State: Following is standard information that is provided to Accreditation agencies as required by SACS regarding Texas State’s ability to provide a degree program of education beyond that of the secondary level.

Texas State University receives degree-granting authority through the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) and the Texas State University System (TSUS), two units empowered by the State of Texas. This narrative provides evidence of compliance by highlighting statutes recorded in the Texas Education Code that grant authority to the Coordinating Board and the Texas State University System and describing Texas State’s relationship with the THECB and the TSUS.

GOVERNMENTAGENCIES

Governance in the State of Texas is vested in the hands of an elected state house of representatives, state senate, and governor. Approved statutes related to education are compiled in the Texas Education Code. Chapter 61, Subchapter C, Section 61.051 of the Texas Education Code (Texas Education Code, 1) indicates that the THECB is "the

6

highest authority in the state in matters of public higher education and is charged with the duty to take an active part in promoting quality education throughout the state." The Texas Administrative Code provides that “no new department, school, degree program, or certificate program may be added at any public institution of higher education except with specific prior approval of the Board (THECB)” (Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, 2).

The Texas Administrative Code specifies rules for the THECB regarding academic degree programs. Its Rules, Chapter 5, Subchapter C, Rules Applying to Public Universities, Health-Related Institutions, and/or Selected Public Colleges of Higher Education in Texas, detail the process that must be followed for Approval of New Academic Programs at Public Universities, Health-Related Institutions, and Review of Existing Degree Programs. Subchapter C also sets forth definitions, criteria for new baccalaureate, masters, doctoral, and certificate programs, review of existing programs, and the process for requesting and gaining approval of new programs (Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, 3). DEGREE-GRANTING AUTHORITY

The Texas Education Code also establishes several different university systems, each with its own governing board. These include the Texas State University System and its Board of Regents, which is the governing board for Texas State and seven other institutions of higher education. Subtitle 3, Chapter 95.01 of the Code, includes provisions related to the administration of the TSUS, and Section 95.24 provides that “The board may determine the conditions on which students may be admitted to the universities, the grades of certificates issued, the conditions for the award of certificates and diplomas, and the authority by which certificates and diplomas are signed” (Texas Education Code, Title 3, 4). TSUS Board of Regents Rules and Regulations specify that “Each request for new courses, degree programs, or departments must be approved by the Board of Regents with subsequent approval by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board before being included in the catalogue” (Texas State University System Rules and Regulations, 5). Chapter 96 of the Texas Education Code identifies the institutions of the Texas State University System, and Section 96.41 indicates that "Texas State University is a coeducational institution of higher education with campuses located in the city of San Marcos and in the city of Round Rock. The University is under the management and control of the Board of Regents, Texas State University System" (Texas Education Code).

TSUS Rules and Regulations, Chapter III, Section 1. (10)3, lists "Degree program additions, deletions, and changes" among the items requiring board approval (TSUS Board of Regents Rules and

7

Regulations, 5(I.6.) Page III-6). The Board’s Academic Affairs Committee, comprised of not more than three board members, including the chair, and appointed by the chairman of the Board has "… primary responsibility for submitting recommendations to the Board concerning all courses, programs, and degrees which are offered or proposed by each Component" (TSUS Board of Regents Rules and Regulations, I-6.2 page I-6).

Authorized in 1899 as a normal school, what became Texas State University was approved for education graduate courses starting in 1936 and by 1938 was offering graduate degrees in social science, science and mathematics, and in language and literature. In 1997, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges approved the university’s first doctoral program in geography.

Texas State University does not have any conditionally-approved degrees nor does it offer degrees at branch campuses or off-campus instructional sites located in other states or other countries.

In summary, Texas State University is authorized by the appropriate government agencies and accrediting authority to award baccalaureate, master’s, and doctoral degrees.

History and Accreditation: In 1903, the doors to Southwest Texas State Normal School in San Marcos opened to 17 faculty members and a student body of 303. By 1999, when the centennial of the original legislative action was observed, the University was proud to have grown to over 21,000 students and 900 faculty. Today, 18 years later, what has been Texas State University-San Marcos since 2003 and Texas State University since 2013, serves over 38,000 students with a faculty and staff of over 4,000. The 5th largest public university in Texas, it is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges. Texas State’s San Marcos campus students choose from bachelor’s, master’s, specialist, and doctoral degrees as well as undergraduate and graduate certificate programs. Texas State’s Round Rock campus, slightly north of Austin, houses programs in nursing as well as upper-level courses leading to other bachelor’s degrees and certificate programs, plus several complete master’s degree programs.

Today’s Texas State is a public, student-centered, Hispanic-serving, doctoral-granting and Emerging Research institution dedicated to excellence in serving the educational needs of the diverse population of Texas and the world beyond. It has also been labeled as veteran-friendly in college guidebooks. Central and south Texas as well as the Dallas/Ft. Worth metroplex, and the Gulf coast account for over 90 percent of the enrollment and are the fastest growing higher education regions in terms of contribution to enrollment over the past decade. The upper Rio Grande (El Paso) and Dallas/Ft. Worth metroplex are the fastest growing Texas areas

8

percentagewise, also. However, the percentage of students from out of state has grown faster than any Texas region over the past ten years and the University enrolled students from all 50 states and 66 other countries in the fall 2016 semester alone.

The current student body of 38,808 reflects the multi-ethnic and cultural diversity of the state with over half being ethnic minorities. The university has been designated a Hispanic Serving Institution by the U.S. Department of Education and the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, while it also serves a large number of students (37 percent) who are the first in their families to attend an institution of higher education. Hispanic first- time freshman enrollment at Texas State has grown 381 percent since 2000, over twice the 165 percent growth rate of Hispanics at all Texas public universities. First-time freshman enrollment at Texas State has grown over 120 percent since 2000, over twice the 54 percent growth at all Texas public universities. Overall on campus, 88 percent are undergraduates while 12 percent are engaged in graduate study.

Over 1,900 faculty members support coursework, students and research through the College of Applied Arts, McCoy College of Business Administration, the College of Education, the College of Fine Arts and Communication, the College of Health Professions, the College of Liberal Arts, the College of Science and Engineering and University College. The Honors College offers interdisciplinary coursework for high ability students and The Graduate College coordinates the master’s and doctoral programs across the San Marcos and Round Rock campuses.

U.S. News and World Report lists Texas State University as a selective institution. Over half of entering freshmen are from the top quartile of their high school class and the mean SAT score for the most recent freshman class was 1028, compared with a Texas mean for college-bound seniors of 944 and a U.S. mean of 1002. The criteria used in admissions differ by institution, but Texas State’s undergraduate admissions standards would be considered by most to be among the ten most selective of Texas’ 37 public four-year colleges and universities.

Institutions used in peer studies vary according to the purpose of the study, so that appropriate peers can be used for different topics. One of the more commonly used national peer groups includes the University of Arkansas, University of Central Florida, University of New Mexico, University of Oklahoma, and the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee.

Located midway between Austin and San Antonio, Texas State’s San Marcos campus is also on the edge of the Balcones Escarpment, where prairies abruptly turn into the Hill Country. The location includes Spring

9

Lake, headwaters of the San Marcos River and one of the oldest inhabited spots in North America. The springs that feed the lake and river are home to eight endangered species and one of the best places in the world to study freshwater aquatic ecosystems and species. San Marcos remains a popular place for modern-day humans. The city has been the fastest or among the fastest growing urban areas in the nation for several years.

The environment provides a natural focus for University faculty and student researchers, but the scope of scientific activity spreads far beyond that. The area’s population growth has been accompanied by mushrooming business and industrial growth. That too, has stimulated, and been stimulated by, research activity on campus. In 2012, Texas State University was designated as an Emerging Research University by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. This was confirmation not only of what the university has done, but where it is going. The Coordinating Board defines Emerging Research Universities as institutions that offer a wide range of baccalaureate and master’s degree programs, serve a student population within and outside the region, and are committed to graduate education through the doctorate in targeted areas of excellence. The university currently enrolls 486 doctoral students and had over $54 million in total research and development expenditures in the 2016 fiscal year. This “Emerging” designation allows Texas State to progress toward National Research University Fund status, which provides access to special funds designed to bolster higher education research.

In 2014, the University adopted a 10-year Strategic Plan for Research with targeted investments of institutional funds to support increased research activity across campus. Texas State’s Initiative for Interdisciplinary Research Design and Analysis is the primary point of contact for faculty seeking expertise in the design, analysis and publication of research at the highest levels. Statisticians provide assistance with the development and articulation of technical components, selection of appropriate analytic methods, identification and creation of measurement instruments, data management protocols, as well as data analyses and interpretation of results.

Those 17 original faculty members from 114 years ago would barely recognize what the world, and Texas, have become. But they would find that their ambition to serve the educational, intellectual, environmental, business and industrial needs of Texas still has a home here.

Construction Science and Management: The Construction Science and Management (CSM) Program had its beginnings in 1984 when the Department of Industrial Arts changed its name to the Department of Technology. Along with the name change came considerable reworking of its programs. As a consequence, the Bachelor of Science in Technology with a major in Industrial Technology-Construction Technology degree program emerged.

In 2006, a Construction Advisory Board (CAB) was formed and this CAB

10

has provided direction and guidance to our program since that date. In the Fall of 2007, the department changed its name to the Department of Engineering Technology from The Department of Engineering and Technology and in the Spring of 2008, the Bachelor of Science in Concrete Industry Management (CIM) was introduced. With this new major came three new faculty, all with Civil Engineering degrees and over $500,000 of construction laboratory improvements and new equipment purchases. The CIM majors take several courses from the CSM program and the CIM faculty teach several CSM courses. The members of both the CSM and CIM programs work closely together to benefit the construction industry.

The first construction career fair was held in Fall 2006. During the Fall of 2010, the career fair was expanded to include CIM majors and the name was changed to the Construction and Concrete Industry Job Fair. The career fair is held each long semester to connect employers with students seeking internships, summer jobs, and full-time employment. In Fall 2016, there were 66 employers and 246 students in attendance.

Through the years, the construction degree has gone through several modifications to bring it into alignment with the American Council for Construction Education (ACCE) accreditation requirements. These changes included major curriculum changes to the program, hiring credentialed faculty and staff as the opportunities became available, and relocation into the R.F. Mitte Building, a state-of-the-art facility, in the Fall of 2003. The Bachelor of Science degree in Construction Science and Management has been accredited by ACCE since 2013.

University Mission Statement: Texas State University is a public, student- centered, Emerging Research University dedicated to excellence in serving the educational needs of the diverse population of Texas and the world beyond.

CSM Mission Statement: The mission of the Construction Science and Management program is to achieve a nationally recognized, student- centered, industry-oriented, construction program that prepares graduates to become outstanding future leaders, well versed in relevant management practices, current construction techniques and methods used to construct the built environment.

Size: As of Fall 2015 Texas State University has an enrollment of about 38,000 students. Of these students, about 33,500 are undergraduates, over 500 are post-baccalaureate, and about 4,000 are Masters and Ph.D. students. The Construction Science and Management program, as of Fall 2016, has approximately 450 majors. This enrollment represents a 50% growth in students over the past two years. Accreditation: Texas State University is accredited by the Commission on Colleges (COC) of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), the regional accrediting organization for eleven states in the southeastern United States. The University successfully went through the reaccreditation process in 2010. More information about the University’s SACS accreditation can be found

11

at: http://avpie.txstate.edu/SACS/Overview/Letter.html.

The degree program is to be in operation for a sufficient time to have granted the degree for which accreditation is sought. Degree programs shall have at least one class of graduates. Describe the time of degree program operation and graduation rates by semester.

Graduation Data: The Bachelor of Science in Construction Science and Management degree was first offered in Fall 2010, and the first student graduated with that degree in Spring 2012. Five years of graduation data are presented in Table 1, which lists the number of degrees awarded by semester as well as by year for the period of 2012-2016. This data represents those students graduating with a BS in Construction Science and Management, which replaced the previous construction degree: Industrial Technology- Construction Technology which had its beginning in 1984. The older degree had its final graduates in 2013.

Table 1: BS of Construction Science and Management Degrees Awarded by Semester 2012-2016

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Spring 1 0 16 22 20

Summer 2 6 8 8 9 Fall 0 2 7 24 26

Total 3 8 31 54 55

1.1.1.2 Describe the major emphasis of the degree program.

Program Emphasis: The mission of the CSM program currently provides students with a general background in the construction industry. However, in the CSM Program’s 2017-2023 Strategic Plan, the faculty has proposed offering specialization in Commercial and Residential Construction. This change is being considered based on two reasons. First, the alumni survey data indicate that about 90% of our CSM graduates are employed in either commercial or residential construction and, therefore, these specializations would benefit the majority of our majors. Second, with the growth of the program to 456 Majors (Spring 2017) there are sufficient students to populate the new concentrations and sufficient faculty, which has increased to 10 Full-time Teaching Equivalent (FTE) positions, to staff the new courses.

1.1.1.3 Who is the designated administrator responsible for the leadership and management functions of the degree program (include title and rank)?

Administrator of the construction unit: Name of Administrator: Dr. Gary Winek Title: Professor and Construction Program Director

12

2 GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION

2.1 Requirements

2.1.1 INSTITUTIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

2.1.1.1 Describe the organizational structure of the educational institution. Be sure to provide a basis for establishing authority and responsibility, utilizing resources, and achieving the degree program’s mission, goals, and objectives.

Texas State University’s organizational chart is presented in Figure 1, In this chart the administrative structure is traced from the level of the President to the college level. Specifically, the academic side of the university is divided into colleges, which are subdivided into schools and departments. The Construction Science and Management (CSM) Program resides within the Department of Engineering Technology and the department is an academic unit of the College of Science and Engineering (COSE). Departmental Chairs and School Directors report to an academic Dean, who in turn reports to the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs (VPAA). The Provost/VPAA reports to the University President.

The Department of Engineering Technology’s organizational chart with respect to the CSM program is presented in Figure 2. The construction program director, Dr. Gary Winek, reports to the chair of the Department of Engineering Technology, Dr. Andy Batey. Other program directors within the department such as those for the Engineering Technology and the Concrete Industry Management (CIM) programs report at the same level. Program administration is a shared responsibility of the program directors and the chair. The chair is ultimately responsible for class coverage, room scheduling, and departmental budget. In order to assure adequate lecture and laboratory sections are offered for the department’s programs, the chair coordinates with the program directors.

13

Figure 1: Texas State University Organizational Chart

14

Figure 2: CSM Organizational Chart

2.1.1.2 Describe the degree program and its relationship to the overall organizational structure of the institution. Note how this is documented, defined, and publicly made accessible.

The Bachelor of Science (BS) in CSM degree program also includes a minor in Business Administration. This undergraduate program is one of four programs offered through the Department of Engineering Technology. Alongside the other degrees offered by the department, CSM’s description, mission statement, program outcomes, and a link to a page of additional information are all available on the department’s website: http://www.txstate.edu/technology/degrees-programs/undergraduate.html

The Department of Engineering Technology is an academic unit of the College of Science and Engineering. The department’s website lists the college name on the banner of the website, so that the public can easily identify the home college. Furthermore, the college website lists all of its constituent departments (http://www.cose.txstate.edu/advising/undergraduate/majors.html) and the degrees that each department offers.

15

2.1.2 EDUCATIONAL UNIT AUTONOMY, STRUCTURE AND LEADERSHIP

2.1.2.1 Describe how the educational unit is a distinct and an identifiable entity within the educational institution.

The Department of Engineering Technology is a distinct unit within the College of Science and Engineering. The department is led by its own chair and has an administrative and faculty office suite on the second floor of the Roy F. Mitte building. The chair represents the department’s interests at Council of Chairs meetings and in interactions with the dean of the college. As a program in the Department of Engineering Technology, CSM has its own director. The director has an administrative course release to provide sufficient time to coordinate the curriculum, staff classes, interface with the Construction Advisory Board, arrange for the career fairs, meet with ongoing and potential donors, coordinate student competitions, and maintain ACCE Accreditation. The director further represents the interests of the CSM program in the directors’ meetings with the department chair. Beyond these physical, academic, and administrative distinctions, the department maintains its own website and participate in various recruitment activities.

2.1.2.2 Describe the qualifications of the administrator that heads the degree program or educational unit.

Dr. Gary Winek is the Construction Program Director and a full professor in the Department of Engineering Technology. He earned his Bachelor of Science in Industrial Education from the University of Wisconsin at Stout, his Masters of Education from Ball State University, and his Ph.D. in Industrial Education from the University of Maryland. Dr. Winek has been teaching construction courses at Texas State University since they were first offered in 1984 and has been the program’s leader since that time.

2.1.2.3 Explain how the organizational structure of the educational unit is designed to encourage communication, coordination, and interaction between administrative officers, faculty, and students involved with the degree program, other disciplines, and other educational institutions.

At the college level, the chair of the Department of Engineering Technology regularly coordinates and collaborates with other academic units at the Council of Chairs as well as through interactions with the college dean. The CSM program director coordinates with the other program area directors and the department chair at the regular directors’ meetings. Further, the CSM faculty has periodic meetings throughout the academic year to coordinate curricular and program activities.

The faculty and administration are genuinely concerned with the physical

16

and ethical welfare of students. To that end, Texas State University has established rules of conduct and has published these in a Code of Student Conduct. These regulations guide students in achieving personal and academic goals and help the university function in an orderly way. Since students voluntarily associate themselves with Texas State University, they should know that these rules are honestly and faithfully enforced. The rules include clear prohibitions against sexual or racial harassment.

2.1.2.4 Describe how the educational unit and leadership structure is defined and publicly accessible

The department’s organizational chart is presented in Figure 3. This document is publicly available on the department’s website: http://www.txstate.edu/technology/about/overview.html. Dr. Winek’s role as Construction Program Director along with the other CSM Program Faculty is given on this chart. This information is available to the public on the departmental website: http://www.txstate.edu/technology/degrees- programs/undergraduate/construction-sci.html. The program director leads the CSM faculty and ultimately reports to the department chair.

Figure 3: Department of Engineering Technology Structure and Reporting Lines - Organizational Chart 2016-2017

17

2.1.3 FACULTY PARTICIPATION

2.1.3.1 Explain how the faculty participates in the educational unit’s governance and administration in accordance with the educational institution’s guidelines.

The tenured faculty serve on the Personnel Committee. In that position, they review the performance of the entire faculty for the purposes of awarding merit salary increases, evaluating the junior faculty for reappointment, and making recommendations on tenure and promotion. All faculty also have the opportunity to serve on faculty hiring committees.

2.1.3.2 Explain how the faculty participate in degree program maintenance and administration in accordance with the educational institution’s guidelines.

Tenured faculty also have the opportunity to serve on the department’s curriculum committee. Through this committee, the faculty are able to shape the direction of and make changes to the curriculum as needed.

2.1.4 CONTRIBUTION TO THE INSTITUTION

2.1.4.1 Detail how the educational unit and degree program contributes to the mission of the institution.

Texas State University’s mission statement is:

Texas State University is a public, student-centered, Emerging Research University dedicated to excellence in serving the educational needs of the diverse population of Texas and the world beyond.

The Department of Engineering Technology and the Construction Science and Management Program contribute to this mission by providing educational opportunities to the students enrolling at Texas State University. Texas State University is a Hispanic Serving Institution with 35% of its student body identifying as Hispanic as of Fall 2015. Further, there is no majority race or ethnic group on campus. This ethnic and racial diversity of the university reflects the population growth patterns of the state and is further repeated in the department and construction program’s student body.

18

3 CURRICULUM

3.1 Requirements

3.1.1 DEGREE PROGRAMS

3.1.1.1 Compare the teaching philosophy and purpose of the degree program with the teaching philosophy and purpose of the educational unit and the institution.

The teaching philosophy and the purpose of the Construction Science and Management Program at Texas State University is embedded in the CSM’s Mission Statement:

The Mission of the Construction Science and Management program is to achieve a nationally recognized, student-centered, industry- oriented, construction program that prepares graduates to become outstanding future leaders, well versed in relevant management practices, current construction techniques and methods used to construct the built environment.

In this mission statement the program is to be “student-centered” and “industry-oriented”, which is the program’s teaching philosophy with the purpose of the program to produce students well versed in construction practices and techniques necessary for them to construct the built environment.

The CSM program’s mission to prepare students for careers in construction fits well with the College of Science and Engineering’s three-fold mission:

1) To prepare students for careers across a broad range of

science, engineering, mathematics, and technology disciplines

2) To provide all students with core knowledge in science and mathematics

3) To provide future educators with the scientific and mathematical knowledge needed for K-12 teaching in the 21st century

The university’s mission also reinforces the College of Science and Engineering (COSE) and CSM student- focused mission statements by stating that, “Texas State University is a public, student-centered, Emerging Research University dedicated to excellence in serving the educational needs for the diverse population of Texas and the world beyond.”

19

3.1.1.2 Describe how the degree program curriculum is related to the needs of society and the construction profession.

The Construction Science and Management (CSM) Faculty alongside the Industrial Advisory Council (IAC) and the Construction Advisor Board (CAB) periodically review the CSM Curriculum to ensure it is meeting the needs of Texas and our nation along with being sure the students are well prepared to meet the needs of the construction profession. The university also engages in strategic planning, where the CSM program strategically looks six years into the future. During these sessions, the CSM curriculum is reviewed and plans made to make necessary modification. Some of these suggested changes are to develop commercial and residential construction specializations within the major and to offer a residential-specific capstone course to compliment the current capstone course, which traditionally has had a commercial focus. (See Appendix D3: 2017-2023 Strategic Plan – Construction Science and Management). To ensure quality within the Program, students are required to complete a 30 hour, Pre-Construction Curricula before they are allowed to enroll in upper level CSM courses. This ensures students have the necessary math, science, and construction background to succeed in the upper level CSM courses. Also, students must make a “C” or higher in each of these courses and achieve a 2.5 GPA overall in the 30 hour, Pre-Construction Curricula. These courses consist of: *Note: The IAC is the group composed of all industry members from which twelve are elected to serve on the CAB, which is the governing board.

Pre- Construction Curricula

CSM 1260 – Introduction to the Construction and Concrete Industry CSM 2313 – Architecture Design I – Construction Documents CSM 2342 – Construction Materials and Processes (PHYS 1315 & 1115) CSM 2360 – Residential Construction Systems (CSM 2342) MATH 2417 – Pre-Calculus MATH 2328 – Elementary Statistics CHEM 1335 & 1141 or 1341 & 1141 (MATH 1315 or higher) PHYS 1315 & 1115 – General Physics I (MATH 1315 or higher) PHYS 1325 & 1125 – General Physics II (MATH 1315 & PHYS 1315)

The complete 2016/17 eight-semester, 120-credit hour Bachelor of

Science and Management Degree follows. Included in the CSM major is the 30-hour Pre-Construction Curricula and an 18 credit hour Business Minor.

20

Bachelor of Science

Major in Construction Science and Management (BS/CSMG/BUS)

Minimum required: 120 semester hours

Freshman Year – 1st Semester Hours

CSM 1260 – Introduction to the Construction & Concrete Industry………….2 PHYS 1315/1115 – General Physics I……………………………………………….…4 MATH 2417 – Pre‐Calculus Mathematics…………………………………………….4 US 1100 – University Seminar…………………………………………………………….1 ENG 1310 – College Writing I……………………………………………………………3 POSI 2310 – Principles of American Government…………………. ................ 3 Total 17

Sophomore Year – 1st Semester Hours

Freshman Year – 2

nd Semester Hours

MATH 2328 – Elementary Statistics……………………………. ........................ 3 PHYS 1325 & 1125 – General Physics II……………………………..……………….4 CSM 2342 – Construction Materials and Processes……………………………… .................. 3 ENG 1320 – College Writing II…………………………………. ........................... 3 CSM 2313 – Fundamentals of Architectural Problem Solving and Design……………..3

Total 16

nd

CHEM 1335/1141 or 1341/1141 ‐ General Chemistry I…………………..…4 Sophomore Year – 2 Semester Hours

ACC 2301 – Accounting in Organizations and Society……………………………3 POSI 2320 – Functions of American Government………………………………..……………….3 BLAW 2361 – Legal Environment of Business…………………. ..................... 3 CSM 2360 – Residential Construction Systems……………………. ................. 3 Total 16

Sophomore Year – Summer Session Hours TECH 2190 – Internship………………………………………. ............................ 1 Total 1

Junior Year – 1st Semester Hours

CSM 3360 – Structural Analysis…………………………… ............................. 3 CSM 3366 – Soils and Foundation……………………………. ......................... 3 ECO 2301 – Principles of Economics………………………………………………………..3 CSM 3363 – Heavy, Civil and Highway Construction Systems ..................... 3 Total 12

Senior Year – 1st Semester Hours

CSM 4368 – Environmentally Conscious Design and Construction…………..3 MGT 3303 – Management of Organizations……………………………………….3 CSM 4369 – Construction Contracts, Liability and Ethics…………. ...... 3 TECH 4380 – Industrial Safety………………………………………………………….3

CSM 4364 – Construction Project Management and Scheduling……………..3

Total 15

COMM 1310 – Fundamentals of Human Communication………. ................ 3 TECH 2351 – Statics and Strength of Materials…………………………………….3 PHIL 1320 – Ethics and Society…………………………………………. ..................... 3 CSM 3361 – Commercial Building Construction Systems…. ........................ 3 HIST 1310 – History of the United States to 1877………………………………….3

CSM 2160 – Introduction to Construction Surveying and Site Layout…………1

Total 16

Junior Year – 2nd Semester Hours

CSM 4313 – Architectural Design II ......................................................... 3 HIST 1320 – History of the United States, 1877 to Date………… ................... 3 ENG Literature (see gen. req. 2) ………….……………………………………….3 CSM 3367 – Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Systems…………………….3 CSM 4361 – Construction Estimating…………………………………………………..3

Total 15

Senior Year – 2nd Semester Hours CSM 4360 – Senior Construction Management Capstone……………………………….3 ART, DAN, MU, or TH 2313 – Introduction to Fine Arts………. ........ 3 MKT 3343 – Principles of Marketing………………………………………………….3 CIS 3317 – E‐Business………………………………………. ............................... 3 Total 12

18

The above curriculum was developed to reflect both the needs of society and the construction profession.

3.1.1.3 List the semester hours required for the degree:

The Bachelor of Science in Construction Science and Management consists of 120-semester credit hours.

3.1.2 GENERAL EDUCATION

3.1.2.1 Communications: List the courses and course descriptions along with corresponding semester or quarter hours associated with Communication Core Subject Area (note the courses that are taught external to the degree program).

Students in the CSM degree complete nine (9) hours in Communications, which are listed below. The course prefix and course number are interpreted as follows and this system is used for all courses at Texas State University. The first two (2) to four (4) letter abbreviation represents the department where the course is offered. For example, ENG=English, CSM=Construction Science and Management, and TECH=Technology. The first number of the four digit number that follows the course prefix, represents the level of the course, with 1 = Freshman, 2 = Sophomore, 3 = Junior, and 4 = Senior. The second number represents the semester credit hours of the course. The last two digits are used by the department to designate a specific course and do not follow a university standard, since they are unique to each department. Therefore, ENG 1310 is a course offered through the English Department of the freshman level and constitute three (3) credit hours.

Also, unique to Texas State is a “Writing Intensive” designation, which is abbreviated as a “WI” at the end of some course descriptions. Courses with a WI designation must base at least 65% of the students’ grades on written assignments with one extended piece of writing. The university requires that all students graduate with a minimum of nine (9) hours of WI courses. The CSM Program has a maximum potential of 18 hours of WI courses (HIST 1310 & 1320; PHIL 1320; CSM4368 & 4369; and TECH 4380). Therefore, in addition to the nine (9) hours of communication classes listed below, all CSM majors will have a minimum of nine (9) WI as well.

Communications (9 hours - External to Degree)

ENG 1310 - College Writing I. Expository writing as a means of exploring and shaping ideas. Emphasis on critical reading and the improvement of essays through revision.

ENG 1320 - College Writing II.

19

Continuation of English 1310. Expository writing as a means of analyzing and understanding texts. Research paper required. Requirements in sophomore English must be completed before a student takes any advanced work in English.

COMM 1310 - Fundamentals of Human Communication. This course examines the speaking and listening principles and techniques that are fundamental for every aspect of human communication. The course develops basic verbal and nonverbal communication skills and knowledge in three specific contexts: interpersonal, small group, and public speaking.

3.1.2.2 Mathematics: List the courses and course descriptions along with corresponding semester or quarter hours associated with Mathematics Core Subject Area (note the courses that are taught external to the degree program).

Mathematics (7 hours - External to Degree)

MATH 2328 - Elementary Statistics. This course is an algebra-based introduction to descriptive statistics, random sampling, design of experiments, probability and the Central Limit Theorem. Inferential statistics topics include the foundational concepts for confidence intervals and hypothesis testing for simple experiments.

MATH 2417 - Pre-Calculus Mathematics. A survey of functions, trigonometry and analytic geometry to prepare students for calculus.

3.1.2.3 Physical Science: List the courses and course descriptions along with corresponding semester or quarter hours associated with the Physical Science Core Subject Area (note the courses that are taught external to the degree program).

Physical Sciences (12 hours - External to Degree)

CHEM 1335 - Engineering Chemistry. This one semester lecture course is tailored to engineering students. Topics include stoichiometry, gases, chemical bonding and structure, periodic trends, materials, energy, kinetics, equilibrium, electrochemistry and nuclear chemistry. Course is a stand-alone course and does not serve as a prerequisite to any courses currently requiring CHEM 1341 as a prerequisite. Restricted to Electrical Engineering, Construction Science and Management, Concrete Industry Management, and Technology Management majors

CHEM 1141 - General Chemistry Laboratory I. First of two laboratory courses in general chemistry for science-related majors. Course introduces the students to the basics of experimental measurements, including density, separation techniques, formula

20

determinations, titrations, thermodynamics, gas laws, and descriptive chemistry.

PHYS 1315 - General Physics I. The first course in a two semester sequence which is a survey of the basic laws and principles of physics and includes the topics of mechanics and heat. Designed for students whose program requires technical physics, but who are not pre-engineering students or majors or minors in physics.

PHYS 1115 - General Physics I Laboratory. First of two laboratory courses in General Physics for science-related majors. Course introduces students to the basics of measurement. Topics cover mechanics and heat.

PHYS 1325 - General Physics II. Second course in a two semester sequence which is a survey of the basic laws and principles of physics and includes the topics of waves, light, electricity and magnetism. Designed for students whose program requires technical physics, but who are not pre-engineering students or majors or minors in physics.

PHYS 1125 - General Physics II Laboratory. Second of two laboratory courses in general Physics. Course introduces the students to experimental measurements and demonstration of principles of electricity, magnetism, optics, modern physics, and electromagnetic waves.

3.1.3 BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT

3.1.3.1 List the courses and course descriptions along with corresponding semester or quarter hours that are fundamental to the Core Subject Matter of Business and Management. These courses are intended as foundational knowledge for construction business practices (note the ones that are taught external to the degree program):

Note: The following 18 semester hours of Business courses also constitute a Business Administration Minor

Business and Management (18 hours- External to Degree)

ACC 2301 - Accounting in Organizations and Society. Introductory accounting course for non-business majors. Describes the role of accounting as an information system essential for the operation of today’s organizations. Focus is on (1) how data is captured and processed to provide information for decision-making, and (2) how the information provided can be used for decision-making.

BLAW 2361 - Legal Environment of Business. A survey of basic features of the American legal system and legal aspects of business transactions. Topics include the nature and sources of law, court

21

systems and procedures, agency, torts, contracts, ethics, and government regulation of business.

CIS 3317 - E-Business. Explores the constantly changing world of e-Business from an international perspective. This course will emphasize e-Business challenges and opportunities in the worldwide marketplace, while focusing on global issues of management, implementation, and integration of IT resources. Does not count for CIS advanced elective credit.

ECO 2301 - Principles of Economics. A non-technical study of micro– and macroeconomic principles, including demand and supply, production and cost, market structures, aggregate output and performance of the economy, the business cycle and growth, unemployment and inflation, money and banking, fiscal policy, monetary policy, and international trade and finance. Not for business or economics majors.

MGT 3303 - Management of Organizations. A study of management functions in modern organizations, the internal and external environmental factors affecting organizational efficiency, and the application of quantitative and behavioral science to management study.

MKT 3343 - Principles of Marketing. This course studies the strategic marketing process, which creates value for consumers and organizations through integrated production and distribution of products. It examines the marketing process in the context of the global, cultural, economic, legal/regulatory environment. It also examines ethical and socially-responsible marketing and the impact of information technology.

3.1.3.2 Explain how these topics are taught as separate and distinct from the topics contained in the construction business and management topics found in 3.1.4.

The 18 hours of Business courses listed in 3.13 are 100% taught in the McCoy College of Business. The Business College also provides a list of approved courses that will constitute a Business Administration Minor and these courses are taught by Business faculty. The Business College is also accredited through the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) and must conform to their standards.

The construction-related business and management courses with the CSM prefix are developed by the CSM faculty with input from the IAC/CAB members. The content taught in these classes conforms to the standards set by ACCE, through the use of the twenty SLOs.

3.1.4 CONSTRUCTION

Table 2 summaries the ACCE semester hour degree requirements and compares the

33

main categories of course offerings to the Texas State University’s CSM program offering.

Table 2: Summary of Category Semester Hour Requirement – Bachelor Degree

Core Area ACCE

Minimum Degree

Program

3.1.2 General Education

3.1.2.1 Communications 6 9

3.1.2.2 Mathematics: Greater than Algebra and Trigonometry 3 7

3.1.2.3 Physical Science: Analytical Physical Science 6 12

3.1.3 Business and Management Accounting, Economics, Business Law, and Principles of Management

12

18

Total Combined 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 33 46

Total External to the Program 33 46

3.1.4 Construction 50 52

Other 37 22

TOTAL SEMESTER HOURS 120 120

List all other courses along with course descriptions:

3.1.4.1 Construction Courses (52 hours – Internal to the Degree)

CSM 1260 - Introduction to the Construction and Concrete Industry. This is an introductory course for Construction and Concrete Industry Management (CIM) majors. Residential, commercial, heavy, civil and highway construction is explored including the concrete industry. The role of the contractor, architect/engineer and owner are covered including contracts, careers, sustainability and economic importance of the construction industry

CSM 2160 - Introduction to Construction Surveying and Site Layout. Common construction surveying and site layout techniques are studied using both optical levels and total stations. Benchmarks, building lines, property lines, differential and profiling are discussed in lecture with applied exercises performed in the laboratory.

CSM 2313 - Architecture Design I - Construction Documents. Students are introduced to the language and process of producing architectural construction documents in residential projects utilizing computers and CAD software. Site plans, floor plans, sections, elevations, and details are drawn individually and as a team as orthographic projection theory and its importance in resolving complex building geometry are covered

CSM 2342 - Construction Materials and Processes. This course will introduce students to various types of construction materials

26

including ceramics, ferrous, non-ferrous, and organic materials used in construction. Their properties, working characteristics and processes used to manufacture and assemble these materials are studied. Laboratory activities are used to reinforce lecture material.

CSM 2360 - Residential Construction Systems. A residential construction course, which deals with interpreting plans and specifications, along with studying site work, foundations, walls, roofing, ceilings, floor and finishing systems. Also, residential MEP systems are covered along with applicable building codes and construction financing.

CSM 3360 - Structural Analysis. This is a structural engineering fundamentals class to include design loads, reactions, force systems, functions of a structure, and both the analysis and design of determinate structures by classical and modern techniques.

CSM 3361 - Commercial Building Construction Systems. This is a commercial building construction systems class that deals with soils, site work, heavy foundations, steel, reinforced concrete and pre-cast structures along with common assemblies. Commercial MEP’s are studied along with CSI master format, as-built and shop drawings, schedule of values, AIA documents and appropriate building codes.

CSM 3363 - Heavy, Civil and Highway Construction Systems. Selection, acquisition and capabilities of heavy construction equipment are presented. Applications of economics to performance characteristics and production of equipment is discussed. Sector-specific construction management methods are covered, including unit price estimating, equipment fleet design, repetitive scheduling and major components of highways, bridges and engineered facilities.

CSM 3366 - Soils and Foundations. Properties of subsurface materials and the principles of subsurface construction are studied. Topics include soil classification and testing, soil mechanics and foundation systems, including site layout, excavation, caissons, piles, slurry wall, slab and spread footings.

CSM 3367 - Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Systems. This course covers typical Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (MEPs) systems found in residential and commercial construction along with design and installation methods used to conserve both energy and water in new and remodeled structures.

CSM 4313 - Architectural Design II - Technology in Construction. Students create individual and group commercial projects which include plans, elevations, sections, details, and 3D drawings utilizing 3D building information modeling (BIM) and other current technologies used in the industry. Structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, accessibility, and sustainable building issues are discussed.

33

CSM 4360 - Senior Construction Management Capstone. Students work in groups to prepare a bid proposal based on a real life construction project involving contract negotiations, construction documents interpretation, estimating, bidding, scheduling and developing safety and quality control plans. Emphasis is on developing leadership, team building, and written and oral communication skills. For senior construction majors.

CSM 4361 - Construction Estimating. The fundamentals of construction estimating are covered including feasibility, conceptual, square feet, cubic feet, unit in place, preliminary, engineering, range and contractor’s detail bid estimates. Plans and specifications are used along with contemporary estimating software to develop estimates commonly used in the construction industry.

CSM 4364 - Construction Project Management and Scheduling. Concepts of construction management are studied beginning with contract documents through the effective management of manpower, machines, material and money necessary to complete construction projects on time and within budget. Gantt Charts and PERT/CPM schedules are developed, using contemporary software.

CSM 4368 - Environmentally Conscious Design and Construction. This course covers environmentally sustainable practices used in building design and construction. The LEED system will be used to guide the course, which covers aspects of sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, indoor environmental quality and the CAD design process.

CSM 4369 - Construction Contracts, Liability and Ethics. Legal aspects of design and construction contract documents are presented, including contract formation, interpretation, rights and duties and changes. Legal liabilities are explored in the context of professional ethics for design firms and constructors.

TECH 2190 - Industrial Internship. This course is a supervised experiential learning course in various technical disciplines as appropriate to a student’s degree program. This work integrated learning course helps the student link theory with practice. Repeatable for credit.

TECH 2351 - Statics and Strength of Materials. Course covers principles of statics and strength of materials to include forces, equilibrium, friction, centroids, and stress/strain relationships, axial stress and deformation, thermal stress and deformation, stress concentrations, factor of safety, torsional stress, beam stresses and combined stress.

TECH 4380 - Industrial Safety.

Introduction to the field of industrial safety with emphasis on compliance with Federal and State regulations.

3.1.4.2 Other Courses (22 hours – External to the Degree)

28

Following is a list of “other courses” required by the university under the General Education Core. ART, DAN, MU or TH 2313 (3 credit hours), Introduction to Fine Arts (see Catalog for Description)

ENG LIT (3 credit hours) select form two World Literature, tow British Literature or two American Literature selections (see Catalog for Description)

HIST 1310 - History of the United States to 1877. A general survey of the history of the United States from its settlement to the end of Reconstruction.

HIST 1320 - History of the United States, 1877 to Date. A general survey of the history of the United States from Reconstruction to present.

PHIL 1320 - Ethics and Society. Study of ethics, its recent focus on social problems, and new fields of inquiry, including environmental ethics, ethics in business, professions, technology and sport. Also such global issues as poverty, minority rights, and stem cell research. Emphasis on development and application of principles of critical thinking and moral reasoning

POSI 2310 - Principles of American Government. A survey of the principles of political science, of the American system of government, and of the origins and development of the constitutions of the United States and Texas. Satisfies the legislative requirements for teacher certification

POSI 2320 - Functions of American Government. This course is a study of functions performed in the American system of government, both national and state, within the framework of the U.S. and Texas Constitutions

US 1100 - University Seminar. University Seminar is an introduction to the nature and aims of university education, with special emphasis on the value of broad learning. US 1100 is required of all undergraduate students entering the university with 0-15 semester credit hours completed since high school graduation

3.1.5 STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (Sections 3.1.5.1 and 3.1.5.2 not used) 3.1.5.1 Determination of Achievement of Student Learning Outcomes

A Provide an index, cross-tab, curriculum map, or other form of summary clearly relating Course Learning Outcomes to Student Learning Outcomes.

33

All nineteen of the CSM and TECH required major courses have two to seven course outcomes listed on the first page of the course syllabus. Those course outcomes are mapped back to one of the ten CSM program outcomes. Each of the program outcomes have two unique Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) associated with them. Note that all course outcomes will be associated with a program outcome but not all course outcomes will be associated with an SLO. By doing so, we are able to include additional concepts we believe are important to the CSM major, but are not covered by a SLO. In Appendix D24, we have listed the: Construction Science and Management Mission Statement The Ten Program Outcomes

o Two unique SLOs associated with each Program Outcome ▪ Course(s) where the SLOs are covered

This document, found in Appendix D24, provides a clear curriculum map, showing how the twenty SLOs are associated with the ten program outcomes, which are based on CSM’s mission statement.

B Provide a syllabus in Volume II for each course used to support the Student Learning Outcomes. Syllabi shall include the following: Course Learning Outcomes in relation to the Student Learning

Outcomes, Instructional methods, Topical outline, Method of assessment of course learning outcomes, and Grade performance criteria.

Note: A Master Notebook is kept by the Program Director that lists the method used to assess the Course Outcomes along with the actual test questions, assignment sheets, etc. used in the class. This information will also be clearly listed by each Course Outcomes, using a standard format in all Spring 2017 Syllabi, which will be made available for the visiting team. The nineteen Course Syllabi, from the nineteen courses required for the CSM major are found in Appendix B. Sixteen of these courses have the CSM (Construction Science and Management) prefix and three have the TECH (Technology) prefix. These three courses are TECH 2190: Industrial Internship, TECH 2351: Statics and Strength of Materials, and TECH 4380: Industrial Safety. The reason the TECH prefix courses are included in the CSM Major is that they cover content that is also required by the other two programs in the Department (CIM and ET/TM).

The syllabi for these nineteen courses follow a common format, with the “Course Outcomes and Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)” found on page one of each syllabus. Each course outcome will reference a program outcome and some course outcomes will also reference an SLO in addition to the program outcome. The course outcomes that reference only a program

30

outcome, cover additional content we believe is important for the students to know, but are not specifically covered by an SLO. The instructional method for each course is located in the catalog description for the course, which is found on page one of the syllabus. Within the catalog description the instructional method is indicated in parenthesis. A (3-0) means the course is a three-hour lecture course, with no laboratory, while a course with a (2-2) designation would meet two hours per week for lecture and another two hours per week for laboratory. Topical outlines for each course are also included in the syllabi along with the grading criteria listed under “Evaluation”. All syllabi can be found in Appendix B, of Volume II of this Self-Evaluation Study.

C Identify the individual courses where each of the Student Learning Outcomes has been included and provide evidence that those outcomes have been included in the curriculum of the course.

Please refer back to “A” in this section for the course where each of the twenty SLOs are covered and Appendix D24 for the curriculum map. The individual course outcomes provide evidence that SLOs are included in the course and the course outline indicates when the SLOs are to be covered.

Each SLO is measured using a direct and an indirect measurement. The direct measurement can take the form of test question, student projects, oral presentations, and written presentations for example. The indirect or subjective measurement uses a five-point Likert Scale, asking the students to rate how well they feel they learned each course outcome, all of which are mapped back to a program outcome.

D Provide a table identifying the specific assessment measures used to evaluate each Student Learning Outcome and indicate which are considered to be direct assessment measures.

Table 3 lists the CSM program’s mission statement followed by the ten program outcomes. Under each program outcome is listed two unique SLOs. These SLOs are mapped back to specific courses and the direct measurement used in these courses to measure the SLO. Actual examples of the direct measurement used can be found in the course notebooks under “Student Work”. These notebooks will be available to the visiting team as required by ACCE.

Each course uses an indirect or subjective measurement, where students are asked to rate how well they learned the course outcomes, which they rate using a five-point Likert scale. This subjective measurement form (see example in Appendix D8) is common for all required CSM Major required courses.

33

Table 3: Objective/Direct Assessment Measurements

Construction Science & Management Mission Statement The Mission of the Construction Science and Management program is to achieve a nationally recognized, student‐centered, industry‐oriented, construction program that prepares graduates to become outstanding future leaders, well versed in relevant management practices, current construction techniques and methods used to construct the built environment. Program Outcomes These ten “Program Outcomes” were developed to support the program’s mission statement. As mentioned earlier, each of the ten Program Outcomes have two unique and related SLOs listed under each Program Outcome. Under the SLOs are the course or courses in which the SLO is measured and the method used to measure the SLO.

Program Outcome Number 1 ‐ Students will apply an understanding of construction fundamentals.

SLO 4 – Create construction project cost estimates. SLO 5 – Create construction project schedules.

SLO CLASSES Measurement

4 CSM 2360

Residential Construction Systems

Estimate (Habitat for Humanity)

4 CSM 4361

Construction Estimating Exam 1 (10‐11, 13,18) Final Exam (1‐2,4,11,29‐30,35‐36)

5 CSM 4360

Senior Construction Management Capstone

Averaging team scores on Capstone proposal (2‐4,6,10,14‐15) (85% Cutoff)

5 CSM 4364

Construction ProjectManagement & Scheduling

Homework 3, 4

Program Outcome Number 2 ‐ Students will demonstrate an understanding of construction processes.

SLO 7 – Analyze construction documents for planning and management of construction processes. SLO 8 – Analyze methods, materials, and equipment used to construct projects.


7 CSM 2360


Midterm (64‐101)

7 CSM 3361

Commercial BuildingConstruction

Plan reading assignments 1‐3 using Bluebeam/Procore

7 CSM 3363

Heavy, Civil, & HwyConstruction

Exam 1 (33)

32

7 CSM 3366

Soils & Foundation AC Soil Mechanics Exercise (1‐15)

7 CSM 4313

Architectural Design II – Tech in Construction

Commercial set of construction documents

7 CSM 4361

Construction Estimating Exam 1 (5‐7,9) Exam 2 (3,8,16,21‐22) Final Exam (3, 31)

8

CSM 2342

Construction Materials & Processes

Exam 1 (12‐27,29,32,33) Exam 2 (2,3,7,8,16‐ 21,27,29,30,32,34,36) Exam 3 (1,3,4,6,11‐20,24‐ 26,30,31,33)

8 CSM 3360

Structural Analysis Exam 1 (14‐16), Exam 2 (3‐5) Final (14a)

8 CSM 3363

Heavy, Civil, & Hwy Construction

Exam 1 (1‐20)

8 CSM 3366

Soils & Foundation Exam 1 (1‐25)

Program Outcome Number 3 ‐ Students will apply effective communication skills. SLO 1 – Create written communications appropriate to the construction discipline.

SLO 2 – Create oral presentations appropriate to the construction discipline.


1 CSM 4360


Capstone proposal response (2‐4,6,10,14‐15) (85%Cutoff)

1 CSM 4368

Environ Conscious Design & Construction

Midterm 1, Part 1 (39,41‐43) Part 2 (4,5,7) Term Project

2 CSM 3363

Heavy, Civil, & HwyConstruction

Avg individual score of group presentations

2 CSM 4313

Architectural Design II –Tech in Construction

Oral presentation on commercial project

2 CSM 4360


Overall average presentation scores (65% Cutoff)

2 TECH 4380

Industrial Safety Proposal and progress report presentation

Program Outcome Number 4 ‐ Students will understand project risk management and project control processes.

SLO 13 – Understand construction risk management. SLO 16 – Understand construction project control processes.


13 CSM 4369

Construction Contracts,Liability, & Ethics

Test 1 (14, 42‐46) Part 2 (4, 5, 7) ( Cutoff 70%)

33

13 TECH 4380

Industrial Safety Exam 1 (1‐10) Exam 2 (1‐50) and Media report activity and report

16

CSM 4364

Construction Project Management & Scheduling

Homework 7

Program Outcome Number 5 ‐ Students will demonstrate strong leadership, management and teamwork skills.

SLO 9 – Apply construction management skills as an effective member of a multi‐ disciplinary team. SLO 12 – Understand different methods of project delivery and the roles and responsibilities of all constituencies involved in the design and construction process.


9 CSM 2313

Architectural Design I –Construction Documents

Final Exam (23,25,83,85)

9 CSM 4313

Architectural Design II –Techn in Construction

Commercial set of construction documents

9 CSM 4360


Average presentation # 2 (Content scores as graded by industry panel) (70% Cutoff)

12 CSM 1260

Introduction to theConstruction Industry

Exam 2 (26‐41)

12 CSM 2313

Architectural Design I –Construction Documents

AIC Exam Study Guide (1,6,22)

12 CSM 3360

Structural Analysis Exam 1 (1‐4)

12 CSM 3361

Commercial BuildingConstruction

Exam 1 (1,5,8,11)

12 CSM 4364


Exam 1 (15 questions)

12 CSM 4369


Test 1 (27,29‐32) Part 2 (1,13‐15 only two out thesefour) (70% Cutoff)

Program Outcome Number 6 ‐ Students will apply modern technology to solve construction related problems.

SLO 10 – Apply electronic‐based technology to manage the construction process. SLO 11 – Apply basic surveying techniques for construction layout and control.


10 CSM Architectural Design I – Final Exam (89,90,95,99,101)

34

2313 Construction Documents

10 CSM 2360


Construction Rule of Thumb Spreadsheet Exercise

10 CSM 3361

Commercial Building Construction

Plan reading assignments 1‐3 using Bluebeam/Procore

10 CSM 4361

Construction Estimating Labs 7‐9

10

CSM 4364

Construction Project Management & Scheduling

Homework 8

11 CSM 2160

Surveying Lab exercises and final staking project

11 CSM 3363

Heavy, Civil, & Hwy Construction

Exam 2 (31, 32)

Program Outcome Number 7 ‐ Students will recognize and apply high professional practices, sustainability and ethical standards.

SLO 6 – Analyze professional decisions based on ethical principles. SLO 18 – Understand the basic principles of sustainable construction.


6 CSM 4369


Exam 1 (43) Final Exam (42,59,61,62) Assignment 5(70% Cutoff)

6 TECH 4380

Industrial Safety Exam 1 (part 3 analysis)

6 TECH 2351

Statics & Strength of Materials

Homework ‐ Professional Ethics (1‐5)

18 CSM 2342


Exam 1 (9,10,30,31) Exam 2 (13,15,38‐40) Exam 3(2,7,9,32)

18 CSM 3367

Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing Systems

Exam 2 (11‐15, 19‐21)

18

CSM 4368

Environ Conscious Design & Construction

Midterm 1, Part 1 (50) Part 2 (1,2,4,5) 2b, Final Exam

(16,17,27,55) 2c, Midterm 2, Part 1

(9,10,18,19,23,25)Part 2 (1,2) 2d, Final Exam

(5,39,56,66)Class Presentation, 2e, Final Exam (13,36,63)

Program Outcome Number 8 ‐ Students will demonstrate an understanding and application of construction building systems.

SLO 19 – Understand the basic principles of structural behavior.

SLO 20 – Understand the basic principles of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems.

33


19 TECH 2351

Statics & Strength of Materials

Exam 1a,b (2‐5) Exam 2a,b (1‐8) Exam 3a,b (1‐4)

19 CSM 3360

Structural Analysis Exam 1 (14‐16) Exam 2 (3‐5) Final (14a), Exam 2(6,7,15) Final (4a,4b,14b,15b,16)

20 CSM 3367

Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing Systems

Exam 1 (1‐37) Exam 2 (1‐10, 16‐18, 24‐25) Exam 3 (1‐16, 27, 30‐36, 46‐47)

Program Outcome Number 9 ‐ Students will demonstrate an understanding of construction business fundamentals.

SLO 14 – Understand construction accounting and cost control. SLO 17 – Understand the legal implications of contract, common, and regulatory law to manage a construction project.


14 CSM 4364


Exam 3 (10 questions)

17 CSM 4369


Class average of Homework (1‐4) (70% Cutoff)

Program Outcome Number 10 ‐ Students will demonstrate an understanding of safety plans and quality assurance protocols.

SLO 3 – Create a construction project safety plan. SLO 15 – Understand construction quality assurance and control.


3 CSM 4360


Average team scores Capstone proposal responses (2,3,4,14,15) (85% Cutoff)

3 TECH 4380

Industrial Safety Safety procedure assignment

15 CSM 2342


Lab (1‐5) Exam 1 (3‐8,28) Exam 2 (1,4‐ 6,9,22,31,33,35) Exam 3 (27‐29)

15 CSM 3366

Soils & Foundation Exam 2 (10‐25)

36

E Provide evidence in the form of assessment tools, any associated grading rubrics, and one example of graded student work to prove adequacy of the assessment tool in evaluating students’ ability to meet each Student Learning Outcome. Programs using third-party certifications shall provide comprehensive results for each Student Learning Outcome where such assessment is applied.

Each of the nineteen course notebooks has a section titled “Student Work”, where three examples of graded student work are provided, representing a high, medium and low sample. Examples of the grading rubric used to evaluate estimates, schedules, and group projects, for example, are also provided as the coversheet to the students’ graded work. These notebooks will be made available to the visiting team.

F Provide evidence that the results obtained from the formal assessment of the Student Learning Outcomes have been included as part of the quality improvement plan.

The “Summary of Direct and Indirect Assessments” is located below in Figure 4, which was developed using data from the CSM Major required courses and required SLOs. This information was from the 2014/15 and 2015/16 academic years, which were the first two years in which the program transitioned from the former prescriptive method, using the Curriculum Matrix to the system of program evaluation using SLOs.

The first two columns of the graph above each SLO, represent the historical data for both the subjective and objective methods used to evaluate each SLOs. The next two columns represent the subjective and objective measurement for the Spring semester of each year. Each instructor will evaluate this data each Fall and Spring semesters, completing the “Instructor’s Course Assessment and Improvement Plan” found in Appendix D9. Based on this data, the instructor writes comments on how he/she plans to improve the course next semester. After three years, this information is comprehensively reviewed by the faculty and needed changes are made to the course or to the curriculum, if warranted.

40

Figure 4: Summary of Direct and Indirect Measurements

G Provide a report of the methods of assessment for each Student Learning Outcome, and the most recently reported evaluation of the results, resulting actions, and a follow-up of these actions on student performance including dates of each of these.

The table below (Table 4) summarizes which SLOs were meeting or exceeding the acceptable standard of 70% for both the subjective and objective measurement and what, if any action, was recommended to improve the performance on a particular SLO. After collecting three years of data, the courses along with the curriculum are comprehensively reviewed and changes made. This comprehensive review will take place during the Fall 2017 semester and will be available to the visiting team during their October visit. The chart below represents two years of data, ending Spring of 2016. Note that for SLO 14, only the current semester data was available because of changes made to the course. After the Spring 2017 semester, we will have an additional two semesters of data for a total of three semesters.

39

Table 4: Summary of SLO Performance and Action Plan

SLO

#

Meets the

70% Level

Action to be taken based on Instructors Assessment

1 Y CSM 4360: Provide past examples of poor and excellent end of class projects to student at the beginning of the course

1 Y CSM 4368: Update course materials and exams to reflect new LEED updates 2 Y CSM 3363: Increase number of guest speakers and make one field trip

2 Y CSM 4313: Modify the grading rubric to better discriminate between learning and non-learning

2 Y CSM 4360: Adjust the cutoff score to reflect the higher scores obtained on the SLO

2 Y TECH 4380: Enhance the grading rubric for the students oral presentations 3 Y CSM 4360: Design a new safety plan exercise 3 Y CSM 4380: Refine the safety plan grading rubric in order to provide the

students with more detailed feedback4 Y CSM 2360: Develop a grading rubric used to grade the Habitat for Humanity

slab estimate 4 N CSM 4361: Include real plans and specs to compliment book estimating

exercises 5 Y CSM 4360: Modify grading cutoff score, based on past results 5 Y CSM 4364: Add additional in class scheduling exercises 6 Y CSM 4369: Add two additional case studies 6 Y TECH 4380: Review ethical case studies used in class 7 Y CSM 2360: Review 37 midterm test questions used to evaluate construction

documents, to insure they cover they topic adequately 7 Y CSM 3361: Provide students with more hands on experiences with

construction documents 7 Y CSM 3363: Add a field trip to site and at least one guest speaker to the

course 7 Y CSM 3366: Provide more lab exercises and reading assignments to course 7 Y CSM 4313: Combine Course Outcomes 2 and 3 into one, since they both

cover SLO 7 7 Y CSM 4361: Add more online modules, so more time can be spent in class

with “On Screen Takeoff”.8 Y CSM 2342: Work to improve the scheduled completion of Course Outcome

1, so more students submit the required work on time 8 Y CSM 3360: Transition part of homework to TRACS in order to speed up

feedback 8 Y CSM 3363: Expose students to more guest speakers8 Y CSM 3366: Provide more labs, guest speakers and reading assignments 9 Y CSM 2313: Review final exam questions as they relate to SLO 9 9 Y CSM 4313: Refine grading rubric for group project 9 Y CSM 4360: Review and refine grading rubric used by industry panel

40

10 Y CSM 2313: Review and refine final exam questions used to measure CAD proficiency

10 Y CSM 2360: Increase the complexity of the electronic spreadsheet problem to include the additional functions along with Sheet 1, 2, and 3

10 Y CSM 3361: Include exercises where students lookup ASTM standard online 10 Y CSM 4361: Have students spend more time with, “On Screen Takeoff”. 10 Y CSM 4364: Provide more time for students to use P-6, scheduling software11 Y CSM 2160: Establish permanent benchmarks in the outdoor area where

students do their fieldwork11 Y CSM 3363: Add a field trip and one speaker to the course

12 Y CSM 1260: Develop PowerPoint slides to complement lecture materials on project delivery

12 Y CSM 2313: Incorporate the AIC Study Guide materials on construction documents into the course

12 Y CSM 3360: Emphasis the Engineer’s rules verse the Contractor’s role in the design and construction process.

12 Y CSM 3361: Incorporate additional visuals of new construction methods. 12 Y CSM 4364: Add additional in class exercises 12 Y CSM 4369: Add two more case studies to the course 13 Y CSM 4369: Add additional case studies13 Y TECH 4380: Add more examples involving risk management 14 Y CSM 4364: Improve course material covering a “cash loaded” resource chart 15 Y CSM 2342: Rework course content as format of class more from three hours

lecture/work to two hours lecture and two hours lab work per week 15 Y CSM 3366: Provide more lab exercises, a guest lecture and more reading

assignments 16 Y CSM 4364: Add additional in-class exercises dealing with project central 17 Y CSM 4369: Add two more case studies to the course 18 Y CSM 3367: Incorporate new equipment into the course including the new

infrared sensing gas and the air balancing equipment 18 Y CSM 4368: Sub USGBC, LEED, GA exam for the final grade for students

electing to take the exam 19 Y TECH 2351: Find additional instructors and bring them up to speed with the

course 19 Y CSM 3361: Show students more visual examples of structural systems used

in construction 20 Y CSM 3367: Incorporate infrared heat detector and air balancing equipment

into the course

The above actions were recommendation for the 2016/17 semester, which represents two complete cycles, based on the past two academic years. The cycles end at the completion of each Spring semester, with evaluation of the data done during the summer and recommendations made for the Fall of the next academic year. Then every three years a comprehensive review of the past three year’s data is made and the CSM Faculty determine needed changes to the CSM required courses, curriculum and/or program. These recommendations are then shared with

39

the CAB and their input sought, before these changes are implemented. Note that the current semester’s average, for CSM 4361, and SLO 4’s objective measurement fell slightly below the required 70%. The instructor has addressed the situation and results of the changes will be available at the end of the Spring 2017 semester.

Note: Sections 3.2: Courses Delivered by Alternate Forms of Delivery, 3.3: Multiple Campus Degree Program Delivery and Section 3.4: Dual or Second Degrees, do not apply to the CSM Program at Texas State University.

4 FACULTY AND STAFF

4.1 Requirements

4.1.1 FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

4.1.1.1 Describe the academic qualifications, professional experience, and scholarly/creative activities of the faculty and provide curricula vitae for all faculty members in the program in Appendix A in Volume II. If applicable, describe the regional accreditation organization’s requirements for faculty assignment and how the program complies with them.

Academic Qualifications: The CSM program has nine (9) full-time faculty as of Spring 2017. Three of the faculty are tenure or tenure-track: Dr. Winek (Professor), Dr. Lee (Associate), and Dr. Talley, P.E. (Assistant). All of the tenured and tenure-track faculty have doctorates. There are three Senior Lecturers on the faculty: Dr. Hager, Mr. Sharma, and Ms. Spencer, AIA. Dr. Hager has a Ph.D. and the other Senior Lecturers have master’s degrees and are currently pursuing doctorates. Of our three full-time lecturers, Mr. Humphries and Mrs. Sharma have master’s degrees and Dr. Kim has a Ph.D. In summary, the CSM faculty has five (5) Ph.D. faculty, two (2) faculty with master’s degrees currently pursuing their doctorates and two (2) with master’s degrees.

Professional Experience: CSM faculty are hired, in part, because of their professional experience in the construction industry. For instance, Dr. Talley, PE is a licensed Professional Engineer (Structures) and Ms. Spencer, AIA is a licensed architect. All of the faculty are encouraged to continue to participate in additional professional construction related activities while employed at the University. These activities include participation in professional areas of research related to construction or education, attending appropriate conventions and workshops to stay abreast of current trends in their field and participation on professional committees. Tenured faculty are encouraged to take faculty development leaves to keep current in their research and profession.

40

Scholarly Creative Activities: The Department of Engineering Technology, is the Educational Unit in which the CSM program is located, requires faculty working toward tenure and promotion to publish an average of 1 to 1 1/2 referred articles per year, complemented with grants, professional presentations and conference proceeding. As verified in the faculty vitae, these minimum requirements are often exceeded. In addition to the tenure and tenure track faculty, the CSM program has two lecturers that are working towards their Ph.D. and both are now becoming involved in scholarly pursuits. The vitae of all nine of the CSM faculty are provided in Appendix A, found in Volume II of this report.

SACSCOC Accreditation: Texas State University is accredited through the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) and complies with this organization’s requirements for faculty qualification and assignments. Generally, the tenure and tenure-track faculty teach two, three-credit courses per semester, providing them with time to conduct their research and service activities. The senior lecturers teach three courses with a significant service activity, or activities, which provides for a one-course release. Full-time lecturers teach four, three- credit courses.

4.1.1.2 Describe the process of how faculty are assigned teaching responsibilities, including how they have demonstrated expertise and adequate background in the areas assigned.

Teaching responsibilities are assigned by the chair of the Department of Engineering Technology in consultation with the CSM Program Director. Faculty are assigned courses based on their expertise, past teaching experience and their educational background. In some cases, where the expertise to teach a particular course does not exist on the faculty or additional sections of a course needed to be taught, adjunct faculty are hired with the appropriated credentials.

4.1.1.3 Evaluation of faculty competence shall recognize appropriate professional experience as being equally as important as formal educational background.

Professional experience is highly valued by the CSM program. For the first time in the programs’ history, we have hired a Professor of Practice to start in Fall 2017. This position requires a master’s or higher degree in a construction-related discipline, but more importantly requires a minimum of 10 years of construction experience for the rank of Associate Professor of Practice and 15 years of experience for the rank of Full Professor of Practice. The Professor of Practice does not carry with it the scholarship requirement of a traditional tenure-track position, thus allowing the individual’s time for industrial outreach and instructing classes, which are situations were experience in the construction industry is most important. We have just concluded the search for the Professor of Practice position during the Spring 2017 semester and we were able to hire Dr. Chris Smith, who has 30 years of documented work experience and both a master’s and Ph. D. in Civil

39

CSM Faculty Courses/Assignment CreditHours

LEC LAB Enrollment %

of timeHager, Cassandrea(Senior Lecturer)

Service

Dept. NewsletterWebsite CSM Advising

25%

Lee, Soon Jae (AssociateProfessor)

Research & Service

Research CSM Advising

50%

Sharma, Vivek (Senior Lecturer)

Service

Engineering. He will be joining the faculty during the Fall 2017 semester.

Also we value professional experience in the adjunct faculty we employ. For example, Mr. Mark Roden is a licensed surveyor and teaches our surveying course.

4.1.2 FACULTY SIZE 4.1.2.1 List the teaching, administrative, research, and other assignments for each

faculty member for the past academic year. Include course, list type (lecture, online, lab, etc.), number of lecture hours, number of laboratory hours, number of separate preparations, class size, and availability of teaching assistants. Also include faculty member’s counseling activities, administrative activities, committee assignments, extension or continuing education commitments, and research activities.

The Fall 2016 and Spring 2017 CSM faculty assignments are included in Table 5 and Table 6, respectively. Note that adjunct faculty and faculty from the Concrete Industry Management (CIM) program are also included in these tables to provide a comprehensive picture of how the CSM courses are staffed.

Table 5: Fall 2016 Teaching, Research, and Service Assignments for the CSM Program

CSM 4313.001 3 2 2 24 25%

CSM 4313.002 3 2 2 24 25% CSM 5313 (Grad) 3 3 0 11 25%

Humphries, Cade (Lecturer)

CSM 3363 3 3 0 41 25% CSM 3363

3 3 0 42 25%

Sharma, Harnish (Lecturer)

CSM 1260 2 2 0 67 25%CSM 2342 3 3 ARR 39 25% CSM 2342 3 3 ARR 27 25% CSM 2342 3 3 ARR 28 25%

CSM 2313.001 3 2 2 23 25% CSM 2313.003 3 2 2 22 25% CSM 2313.004 3 2 2 23 25% CSM 4368 3 3 ARR 22 25%

40

CSM 4360

3 1 ½

(1 sec) 1 ½

(2 sec) 29 50%

CSM 4369 3 3 0 39 25%

41

Talley, Kimberly (AssistantProfessor)

Research & Service

Research Co-Director, Bobcat Made MakerspaceCSM Advising

50%

Spencer, BJ (Senior Lecturer)

Service Internship Coordinator CSM Advising

25%

CSM 3360 3 3 0 48 25% CSM 3361

3 2 2 37 25%

Winek, Gary (Professor)

Program Administration & Service CSM Program Director Student Advising Library Departmental Representative Department Curriculum Committee College Curriculum Committee Department Personnel Committee SACS Administrator for CSM

Student Competition Team Advisor

CSM 2313.251 3 2 2 23 25% CSM 3361.251 3 3 0 52 25% CSM 4313.252 3 2 2 24 25%

CSM 2360 3 2 2 (2) 50 50% TECH 5100 1 1 0 2

45

CSM Faculty Courses/Assignment CreditHours

LEC LAB Enrollment %

of timeHager, Cassandrea(Senior Lecturer)

Service

Dept. NewsletterWebsite CSM Advising

25%

Also for the Fall 2016 semester the CSM program employed Dr. Yoo Jae Kim from the Concrete Industry Management Faculty to teach one section of CSM 3367, Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Systems, Mr. Bryant Kent (Adjunct) to teach one section of CSM 4364, Construction Project Management and Scheduling and Mr. Charles Roden (Adjunct) to teach two section of CSM 2160, Introduction to Construction Surveying and Site Layout.

Table 6: Spring 2017 Teaching, Research, and Service Assignments for the CSM Program

CSM 2313 3 2 2 23 25%

CSM 4313.251 3 2 2 20 25% CSM 4313.253 3 2 2 24 25%

Humphries, Cade (Lecturer)

Kim, Hyunhwan (Lecturer)

CSM 3366.251 3 3 0 38 25% TECH 2351.251 3 3 0 42 25% TECH 2351.252 3 3 0 40 25% CSM 3367.252 3 3 0 15 25%

Lee, Soon Jae (Associate Professor)

Research & Service

Research CSM Advising

50%

Sharma, Harnish (Lecturer)

CSM 2313.251 3 2 2 26 25% CSM 2313.253 3 2 2 24 25% CSM 2313.255 3 2 2 23 25% CSM 4368.251 3 3 ARR 65 25%

Sharma, Vivek (Senior Lecturer)

Service CSM Advising CSA Faculty Advisor

25%

CSM 1260.252 2 2 0 28 17% CSM 1260.253 2 2 ARR 52 17% CSM 2342.251 3 1 ½ ARR 52 32% CSM 2342.252 3 1 ½ ARR 15 32%

Plus four 2342 Labs 1hr

CSM 3363.251 3 3 0 41 25%CSM 3363.252

3 3 0 42 25%

CSM 4360.251 3 1 ½ 39 50% Plus two (2) Labs 1 ½ 0 CSM 4369 3 3 3 43 25%

41

Spencer, BJ (Senior Lecturer)

Service

Internship CoordinatorCSM Advising

25%

Winek, Gary (Professor)

Program Administration & Service

CSM Program DirectorStudent Advising Library Departmental RepresentativeDepartment Curriculum Committee College Curriculum Committee Department Personnel Committee SACS Administrator for CSM

42%

CSM 2313.252 3 2 2 23 25% CSM 3361 3 3 0 53 25% CSM 4313.252 3 2 2 24 25%

Talley, Kimberly (Assistant Professor)

Research & Service

Research Co-Director, Bobcat Made Makerspace CSM Advising

50%

CSM 2360 3 2 0 50 50% Plus two (2) Labs 0 0 2 0 TECH 5100 1 1 0 5 8%

CSM 3360 3 3 0 44 25% CSM 4361

3 2 2 45 25%

43

Also for the Spring 2017 semester the CSM program employed a Licensed Surveyor to teach three (3) sections of Surveying, a Doctoral Teaching Assistant to teach 1 section of CSM 3366 and 3367, a Post Doctorate Professor to teach a section of CSM 3367 and a CIM Faculty member to teach a section of CSM 4364.

4.1.2.2 Compare the program’s faculty size to that of comparable academic programs within the institution, including number of faculty member, number of courses offered, number of students enrolled, and type of instruction.

The Ingram School of Engineering (ISOE) has a similar mission, faculty with technical credentials and laboratory based classes comparable to those found in the Engineering Technology (ET) Department. A comparison is found in Table 7 below.

Table 7: Ingram School of Engineering v. Engineering Technology

ISOE ET DEPT Number of Faculty 18 10 TT, 5 SL, 11

Adjuncts/Lecturers Number of students enrolled Spring 2017 860 UG /45 Grad 837 UG / 27 Grad Major courses offered 63 UG / 10 Grad 59 UG / 7 Grad

Instructional type Lec, Lec/Lab Lec, Lec/Lab Notes: TT = Tenure or Tenure Track, SL = Senior Lecturer, UG – Undergraduate, Grad = Graduate Student, Lec = Lecture Format, and Lec/Lab = Mixed Lecture and Laboratory Format

Both the Ingram School of Engineering and the ET Department have similar enrollments and maintenance and operations budgets. The budgets are similar because of the laboratory nature of both programs.

4.1.2.3 Describe the process used to determine when new or additional faculty members are needed and how other responsibilities and services are used in the determination of faculty needs.

The Engineering Technology Chair, working with the three (3) Program Directors (CSM, CIM, ET/IT) try to anticipate increases in enrollments for the next semester. If possible we hire adjuncts or per course faculty to meet the anticipated demand. If the demand is expected to be great, we can request a “Temporary, Full-Time Lecturer” position from the provost office who provides funding on a semester by semester or annual basis. These faculty members generally teach four course per semester. If this position is continuously funded through the provost office for two or more years, the department can request that the position become permanent, at which time the funds are transferred to the department and the position is funded on permanent basis through the departmental budget. Also we can hire Doctorial Graduate Assistant (DIAs), when available, to also help with short term

44

course staffing needs. The CSM program has a goal to achieve an average of 40:1 faculty to student ratio in order to maintain the quality of the degree.

4.1.3 FACULTY WORK LOAD

4.1.3.1 Describe the process by which the faculty workload is distributed.

Faculty workload is distributed based on the university’s 12 credit workload policy (http://policies.txstate.edu/division-policies/academic-affairs/04-01- 40.html). However, the course workload can be reduced for scholarly activities, excessive service and administration. The goal is to provide equal, sometimes different workload for each faculty known as “full professional responsibilities”. More details can be found in the Policy and Procedure statement, PPSNo.04.01.40 (7.05). For practical purposes within the Engineering Technology Department this means tenure and tenure track faculty with a research agenda will commonly teach two three-credit hour courses per semester, senior lecturers with a significant service activity or activities, will teach three three-credit hour courses per semester and full-time lecturers will teach four three-hour classes per semester with little or no service activities expected from them.

4.1.3.2 Describe how number of lecture hours, number of laboratory hours, number of separate preparations, class size, availability of teaching assistants, counseling and advising activities, administrative activities, committee assignments, extension or continuing education commitments, and research activities are considered when assigning workload.

As stated in 4.1.3, 12 workload credits (four three-credit classes) is considered to be a normal workload. These 12 workload credits generally consist of assigning one workload per lecture hour and 0.5 workload credits per laboratory hour. Therefore, a course such as CSM 2360, Residential Construction System, which meets for two hours of lecture per week and two hours of lab per week, would equal 3 work load credits, as compared to CSM 4369, Construction Contracts, Liability and Ethics, which is a three-hour lecture class and is assigned three workload credits.

Workload credits can also be given for research, significant service activities, administration duties, committee assignments and student advising. Also, faculty may receive a release for a semester to develop a new three-credit workload course or make improvement to the curriculum. At the end of each semester (Fall, Spring and Summer) the chair submits a workload report for each faculty member to the Dean. After the workload report is approved, faculty receive their individual workload report for the semester and the Departmental Workload report is also made available for their review.

This report ensures that all faculty are meeting their “Full Professional”

50

responsibilities and that the Departmental Workload is equitably distributed.

4.1.4 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL STAFF SUPPORT

4.1.4.1 List the administrative and technical support for the program, then list the current support staff of the construction educational unit and their assignments. Include clerical staff, technicians, and non- teaching graduate assistants. Indicate the percentage of full time employment.

Following (Table 8) is a listing of the of the support staff for the Department of Engineering Technology which is shared between the four undergraduate programs (CSM, CIM, ET and TM).

Table 8: Department of Engineering Technology Support Staff

TITLE NAMES % EMPLOYED RESPONSIBILITESAdministrative Assistant III Sylvia Salinas 100 Administrative Administrative Assistant II Christina Lopez 100 Administrative Laboratory Technician Supervisor

Shane Arabie 100 Technical Supervisor

Laboratory Technician Vacant 100 TechnicianComputer Technician Marcus Ickes 100 Computers Technician Student Workers 2 to 3/semester 5-10hrs/wk Administrative Support

4.1.4.2 Compare the program’s support to that of degree programs of similar size and function within the institution.

Below (Table 9) is a listing of the support staff for the Ingram School of Engineering, which has a similar mission and size comparable to the Engineering Technology Department. The Ingram School of Engineering also has a comparable number of technical laboratories and classrooms that the laboratory technicians support.

Table 9: Ingram School of Engineering Support Staff

TITLE NAMES % EMPLOYED RESPONSIBILITES

Administrative Assistant III Sarah Rivas 100 Administrative

Administrative Assistant II Vacant Administrative

51

Laboratory Technician Supervisor

Ray Cook 100 Technical Supervisor

Laboratory Technician Jason Wagner 100 Technician

Computer Technician (2) Chelsey Torres Bikram Dasgupta

100 Computers Technician

Budget Specialist Carla Batey 100 Budget Support

Student Workers 2/semester 10‐15 hr/ wk Administrative Support

The tables shown in both section 4.1.41 and 4.1.42 show comparable staffing for both the Engineering Technology Department and the Ingram School of Engineering.

4.1.5 EMPLOYMENT POLICIES

4.1.5.1 Provide construction faculty salaries and comparable faculty salaries within like educational units within the institution for the current year. Data that would reveal individual salaries may be omitted and provided directly to the visiting team. Indicate the average 9 month salaries by rank. Convert all 12 month salaries to 9 month salaries. Indicate the conversion factor from 12- month to 9-month salaries.

The salaries for the construction faculty compared to the salaries of faculty primarily teaching in the Concrete Industry Management (CIM), Engineering Technology (ET)/ Technology Management program are comparable.

The department uses the College and University Professional Association (CUPA median salary as a baseline when hiring new faculty, which can be adjusted based on a persons’ area of expertise and experience. Also when funds are available, merit raises are given, which over time, will allow some faculty salaries to increase more than others. Promotion to Associate Professor and to Full Professor each carry a 7% salary increase. Therefore, the system is structured so faculty with comparable credential receive similar salaries within a given rank and program. Individual faculty salaries can be made available to the visiting team if requested.

Salaries between faculty in the Engineering Technology Program and the Ingram School of Engineering for faculty with similar credentials, are comparable since the university uses the CUPA median salary scale. Also, since several of the faculty in the Engineering Technology Department and in particular the CSM program (Dr. Lee and Dr.

50

Talley both have Civil Engineering Degrees) have Engineering Degrees, their salaries are comparable to those in the Ingram School with faculty having similar credentials.

Following is a chart comparing the salary budget, number of FTE, and average salaries for Professor, Associate Assistant, and Instructors, between the Department of Engineering Technology (ET) and the Ingram School of Engineering (ISOE). These two departments offer a fair comparison since they both offer accredited programs, teach technical courses, often requiring associated labs and both hire faculty, often with engineering credentials.

Table 10: Salary Comparisons between Engineering Technology and Engineering

ET DEPT ISOE Total Department Salaries $1,659,864.98 $2,148,301.86

CSM Salaries (included above) $978,813.00 No. of FTE 100% 100% Average Professor Salary $98,483.00 $107, 020.50 Average Associate Salary $82,126.00 $89,571.68 Average Assistant Salary $76,970.00 $79,016.28 Average Instructor Salary $53,485.00 $61,783.64

4.1.5.2 List the current faculty of the construction educational unit, including part- time and graduate instructors. List the full-time faculty first, grouped alphabetically within rank. Indicate the rank at the head of each group. Show the full-time equivalence (FTE) for each part-time faculty member (i.e., .25 for quarter-time). Indicate years on staff as of the end of the current academic year. Indicate tenure status and whether an academic year (9 mo.) or fiscal year (12 mo.) appointment.

Following (Table 11) is a list of CSM Faculty for the Spring 2017 semester:

Table 11: CSM Faculty, Spring 2017

FTE

Years on Staff

Tenure Status

Appointment Period

Full Professor: Dr. Gary Winek (Director) 1 36 Tenured 10 ½ month Associate Professor: Dr. Soon Jae Lee 1 7 Tenured 9 month Assistant Professor: Dr. Kimberly Talley 1 5 Tenure-Track 9 month Senior Lecturers:

51

Dr. Cassandra Hager 1 19 NTL 10 ½ monthMr. Vivek Sharma 1 7 NTL 10 ½ month Ms. BJ Spencer 1 7 NTL 12 month Instructors: Mr. Steven Humphries 1 2 NTL 10 ½ monthDr. Hyunhwan Kim 1 ½ NTL 9 month Ms. Harnish Sharma 1 1 NTL 12 month Per Course: Mr. Mark Roden .25 F/Sp 5 NTL 9 monthMr. Bryan Kent .25/F 1 NTL Adjunct Note: NTL = Non-tenure line

The CSM Program also receives teaching assistance from the CIM faculty. Dr. Yoo Jae Kim generally teaches CSM 3367 the MEP course for 0.25 FTE in Fall, Spring and Summer semesters along with Dr. Anthony Torres who typically teaches CSM 4364 (Scheduling and Project Management) during the spring semesters for 0.25 FTE. Mr. Bryan Kent, a per course faculty, teaches the same course as Dr. Torres in the fall semesters for 0.25 FTE credit. We also have hired our first “Professor of Practice”, Dr. Chris Smith, who will be joining the faculty during the Fall 2017 semester. He will have a three (3) course teaching load (CSM 1260, 3361 and 4361) in the fall of 2017.

4.1.6 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

4.1.6.1 Describe the professional development opportunities provided to faculty members.

The department has sufficient travel funds to allow CSM faculty to attend events that are appropriate for their rank. This includes attending conferences such as ASC, ACCE, ASTM, and the ASC Region V Conference held in Dallas at TEXO (combined ABC and AGC chapters). Funds are also available for instructors to participate in activities to keep them current in their respective fields and to maintain their professional credentials.

4.1.6.2 Describe consulting work conducted by faculty members and the process for balancing consulting and assigned duties and responsibilities.

Since Texas State University is striving to become a tier-one research university, most of a tenured or tenure-track faculty member’s time is spent pursuing grants and contracts and writing associated referred articles necessary for tenure, rank, and merit raises. It is within the area of service that faculty members can engage in consulting activities.

50

4.1.7 FACULTY EVALUATION

4.1.7.1 Describe the process used in faculty evaluation and how this is used to maintain high quality instruction. Include samples of any instruments or forms used.

The faculty are evaluated using two main methods. Professionally, they are evaluated using their “Personal Profession Objectives” (PPOs), which are both a formative and summative process. The process begins in January when each permanent faculty member submits an outline of what they plan to accomplish during the next calendar year in the areas of: 1) Teaching; 2) Scholarly Activities (not required of instructors) and 3) Service. The chair then reviews the faculty members PPOs for appropriateness for their rank and in keeping with the mission and goals of the department (see Appendix D1 for an example). At the end of the calendar year, the PPOs are updated by the faculty. Notes are added to regarding objectives were accomplished or not accomplished and an explanation of additional accomplishments, not anticipated when the PPOs were originally developed. These summative PPO reports are then reviewed by both the senior faculty and chair for merit consideration in the low, medium or high categories.

The second method of evaluation, primarily used to evaluate teaching consists of three separate surveys. These three (3) surveys consist of:

1) Department of Engineering Technology, Texas State University, Faculty/Class Evaluations

This survey instrument consists of 31 questions in the following six areas: 1) Learning; 2) Enthusiasm; 3) Organization; 4) Individual Rapport; 5) Examinations; and 6) Student and Course Characteristics. Students mark their rating of the 31 questions on a scantron sheet, which is computer scored. Every instructor will receive an item analysis for each question including the mean and standard deviation. Also their mean and standard deviation for that semester is compared with the running average and standard deviation for the department. A master summary report is available comparing all instructors in the department, which both the program directors and chair use as one measure to determine the teaching quality in the department. (Appendix D6.1).

2) Student Reaction to Instruction and Course Survey Form

This is an open ended questionnaire in which students can write comments related to six questions. These written comments are available to the

51

instructors, program directors and chair after grades have been posted and is another instrument that can be used to evaluate teaching (Appendix D7).

3) Construction Science and Management: Instructor’s Course Assessment and Improvement Plan

This third method used for assessing the effectiveness of a faculty member teaching is through the use of the “Instructor’s Course Assessment and Improvement Plan” Summary Form (Appendix D9). This form is used to summarize both the subjective and objective measurement for each course outcome, listed on each course syllabi. All course outcomes are based on one of the ten program outcomes and some course outcomes also relate back to a SLO (see course syllabi in Appendix B). The instructor along with the CSM program director review this form and base improvement by comparing the historical Subjective (S) and Objectives (0) averages with the current semester averages in these two areas. After reviewing the data, the instructor develops an improvement plan to be implemented the next semester. Appendix D8 is an example of the “Student Self Evaluation” Form, which students complete using a five-point Likert scale. These results are tabulated and the average is reported on the “Instructors Course Assessment and Improvement Plan”. The objective averages shown on the form are based on objective type measurement such as test questions, assignments, group projects and written assignments.

4.1.7.2 Define the educational institution’s faculty evaluation cycle.

All full time faculty are evaluated annually using their Personal Professional Objectives or PPOs (see 4.1.7.1). The same faculty also have their teaching evaluated each semester the course is taught, through the use of the “Instructors Course Assessment and Improvement Plan” mentioned in 4.1.7.1.

Tenure-track faculty go through a more rigorous evaluation as they prepare for tenure/promotion in their sixth year. Each year they are asked to update their vitae and highlight what they accomplished during the last year in areas of teaching, scholarship and service. Both the Personnel Committee (tenured faculty) and the chair carefully review the tenure-track faculty member’s accomplishments. Both the committee and chair submit a letter to the candidate commenting on their current and past accomplishments and noting areas where they have excelled and areas that need improvement. The third year review is extremely critical, since the tenure-track faculty must demonstrate that they are making significant progress towards both tenure and promotion or they risk receiving a one-year terminal contract. The candidate is again reviewed in their fourth and fifth year, with the sixth year report being of paramount importance as it is generally used to support the candidates request for tenure and promotion before the College of Science and Engineering Review Committee.

50

5 STUDENT POLICIES

5.1 Requirements

5.1.1 ACADEMIC POLICIES

5.1.1.1 Describe the existing written policies indicating required courses and acceptable elective courses that meet degree program objectives and the Student Learning Outcomes.

Students entering Texas State University will be assigned a University Catalog year, based on the year in which they first began taking college level courses in the state of Texas. Based on this Catalog year, the student has six (6) years to complete their degree. If they do not finish their degree during this time period, the student will need to meet the additional requirements, if any, found in the newer assigned catalog.

Also the catalog year establishes the exact courses and other degree requirements required to complete the Construction Science and Management (CSM) degree. Currently the CSM degree consists of 120 semester hours and including an 18-hour Business Administration Minor. All students entering the CSM major, enter with a degree designation of “Pre-Undergraduate Degree Program”, which is called the Pre-Construction program. Once they have completed the required 30 hours of Pre-Construction courses, which consists of their two Math courses, three science course, and four CSM related courses, while receiving no lower than a “C” in any of these courses and earn a 2.5 GPA or higher in these 30 hours of courses, they can make an application to enter the full major. Once accepted as a full major, their degree status will change to a Bachelor of Science in Construction Science and Management and they can enroll in advanced level CSM courses (See Flowchart in Appendix D10). Also the exact courses required for the CSM degree and the recommended sequence in which these courses are to be taken can be found in the University Catalog under the students Catalog Year (Appendix D11, catalog example of sequencing of classes).

Pre-Construction Courses (Fall 2016):

CSM 1260 – Introduction to the Construction and Concrete Industry CSM 2313 – Architecture Design I – Construction Documents CSM 2342 – Construction Materials and Processes (PHYS 1315 & 1115) CSM 2360 – Residential Construction Systems (CSM 2342) MATH 2417 – Pre-Calculus MATH 2328 – Elementary Statistics CHEM 1335 & 1141 or 1341 & 1141 (MATH 1315 or higher) PHYS 1315 & 1115 – General Physics I (MATH 1315 or higher) PHYS 1325 & 1125 – General Physics II (MATH 1315 & PHYS 1315)

Students can also view the twenty ACCE required Student Learning

52

Outcomes (SLOs) along with CSM Major required course or courses in which they are covered by going to the Engineering Technology’s website (www.txstate.edu/technology).

5.1.1.2 Describe how these policies are developed with input from faculty, student and other stakeholders of the degree program.

Changes to the CSM curriculum are made in accordance with the University’s Curriculum policies. When changes are needed, the requested changes begin with the CSM Faculty, with input from the Construction Advisory Board (CAB). Then the curriculum changes must be approved by the Department’s Curriculum Committee, the COSE Curriculum Committee and the University’s Curriculum Committee. In some cases, a major curriculum change will require Board of Regents approval (http://policies.txstate.edu/division-policies/academic- affairs.html). Students have input into this process though the Senior Exit Survey, where they are asked to rate the importance of each required CSM course.

5.1.2 TEACHING QUALITY

5.1.2.1 Explain the process which exists in the degree program for ensuring quality of teaching by full-time and part-time faculty that is consistent with the degree program’s mission and objectives.

Please see section 4.1.7.1 on Faculty evaluations. All part- and full-time faculty are evaluated using the standard two (2) end of semester surveys. In addition, the full-time faculty are evaluated using their Personal Professional Objectives (PPOs), which are generated in January and evaluated at the end of the year. Also, tenure-track faculty are evaluated annually through in-class observations.

All full- or part-time faculty are required to cover the CSM Program Outcomes and SLOs assigned to the course and which are listed under “Course Outcomes” on the course syllabus. All course outcomes are directly traceable back to the ten program outcomes. Under each program outcome, there are listed two unique SLOs. Note that all course outcomes will have a program outcome assigned, but may not have an associated SLO, since our classes cover more content then found in the 20 SLOs. At the end of each semester, students complete a subjective instrument, in which they rate how well they believe they learned the course outcomes (Appendix D8). The instructor also tabulates the objective measurements for the same course outcomes. Both subjective and objective measurements are recorded on the “Construction Science and Management: Instructions Course Assessment and Improvement Plan” which contains both the historical and current average for those course outcomes. The instructor also develops an improvement plan

53

stating how he/she plans to make improvements to the course. This information is reviewed annually by the CSM Program Director (Appendix D9).

5.1.2.2 Describe the systematic assessment mechanism with clear metrics that is in

place for evaluating the quality of teaching within the degree program.

Faculty are evaluated annually using two (2) survey instruments (Appendices D6 and D7) and their Personal Professional Objectives (PPOs), found in Appendix D. In addition, Tenure Track faculty are also evaluated through in-class observation by senior faculty members. See section 4.1.7.1 for more information on evaluating the quality of teaching.

5.1.3 ADMISSIONS AND ENROLLMENT

5.1.3.1 Demonstrate how the admission process for students enrolling in the degree program reflects students’ potential for success in both academic studies and professional practice.

Any student meeting the admission standards to enroll at Texas State University are eligible to declare Construction Science and Management as their major. Basic admission requirements to enroll in Texas State are that the Student must have an approved high school degree meeting basic state required standards an appropriate SAT/ACT score (http://www.admissions.txstate.edu/future/freshman/admissions- requirements.html). Transfer students will have to meet two different admission standards depending on whether or they are transferring with between 1 and 29 hours or have completed 30 or more hours (http://www.admissions.txstate/future/transfer.html).

Once they have declared CSM as their major they will have to successfully complete the 30 hours of Pre-Construction coursework, receiving no lower than a “C” grade in any of these 12 courses while obtaining a 2.5 GPA in these classes (See 5.1.1.1. for a list of these courses and Appendix D11 for a sequencing of these classes).

The successful completion of the 30 hours of Pre-Construction courses increases the success of CSM students in their advanced CSM courses. History has shown that it is the math (Math 2329 & 2417) and science classes (PHYS 1315 & 1115; PHYS 1325 & 1125 and CHEM 1335 & 1141) that cause some students problems. Therefore, if they cannot pass these classes they will not be able to become a full major. At the Pre-Construction stage it is early enough in their academic career that they can change majors without a large credit loss. Also, we have found in the advanced level CSM courses, instructors do not have to review basic math and science concepts, since all students have passed these courses with a “C” or better.

54

5.1.3.2 Describe how the admission process for the degree program reflects institution-wide policies as well as the program’s mission, goals, and objectives, including the admission of internal and external transfer students.

The admission requirements and processes are the same for CSM Program as they are for Texas State University. Also the CSM Program’s mission, goals and objectives are based on the Departments Strategic Plan, which is based on the COSE Strategic Plan, which is based on the University’s Strategic Plan.

External transfer students (external to the university) admission standards are covered in 5.1.3.1. Internal transfer students need only to change their major to CSM, however both internal and external transfers need to successfully complete the 30 hours of Pre-Construction coursework before they can apply for full major status and become eligible to enroll in advanced CSM courses.

5.1.4 RECRUITMENT AND COMPOSITION

5.1.4.1 Describe the degree program’s aspirations regarding student composition and how the program’s recruitment and retention mechanisms support those aspirations.

The CSM program aspires to be a nationally recognized leader in the field of Construction Science and Management. Therefore, the program seeks to recruit and retain the best students. Because Texas State is located on the IH- 35 growth corridor, between Austin and San Antonio, recruitment is not a major concern. The problem is the program is growing so quickly. We have increased from 244 students during the Spring of 2013, when the program received its initial accreditation to a student enrollment of 456 during the Spring of 2017 (See Appendix I for enrollment figures). Therefore, to maintain the quality of the program we instituted the 30-hour Pre- Construction curriculum, which have been mentioned before, this includes all of the students’ math and science courses and four CSM courses. Once they pass these courses with a “C” or higher and a 2.5 GPA in these 30 hours, the student makes application (See Appendix D16) to become a full Major, which is required before they can take advanced level CSM courses. We have not yet limited the number of qualified students entering the major, but we may have to consider setting program caps to match program resources if resources are unable to keep pace with enrollment.

Also, the program aspires to have a student composition that reflect the population of Texas. Since Texas has a large Hispanic population and Texas State University is a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI), the CSM Program also strives to include Hispanic students in its program. Woman are also encouraged and are increasingly enrolling in the CSM program.

Once a student has declared CSM as a major, we encourage them to remain a major. Students that are having problems with math can seek help through

55

three (3) different tutoring services on campus (Math Laboratory, Student Learning Activity Center (SLAC) and the Collaborative Learning Center (CLC)). Students having trouble with sciences can seek assistance from the latter two tutoring services mentioned above as well as the Physics Help Center. Both math and science courses are offered with Supplemental Instruction (SI) sections and students are encouraged to register for these sections and attend the SI sessions to have the greatest success in these courses. Faculty are also required to keep posted office hours, during which students are welcomed to see their instructor without an appointment and receive help with problems they are having in a CSM class. Students with writing problems can seek assistance through the Writing Center or the SLAC. Therefore, any student who declares CSM as their major have access to several sources to receive the tutoring they need, which helps with retention for students that are serious about the CSM Major.

Students with academic problems, such as probation, must meet with a COSE Advisor to develop a plan for them, to get off probation as soon as possible. Students who have been suspended must also meet with a COSE Advisor upon return to the university to generate an academic plan that will lead them to graduation.

Both COSE Advisors and CSM Major Advisors are available to help students as needed, with problems that are or may be affecting their academic success. Therefore, if a student is serious about graduating with a CSM degree, we make sure they have the needed support services necessary to help them succeed academically.

5.1.4.2 Explain how the degree program’s recruitment is directed towards

individuals with high academic achievement and community involvement as well as those with defined career goals in construction.

The CSM program is located in the College of Science and Engineering (COSE), which attracts students with high academic achievement especially in math and science because of the nature of the programs offered through the College. The CSM program is no different and attracts and maintains students with high academic abilities because of its 30 hours of Pre-Construction courses and a 2.5 minimum GPA required in those courses. Texas State is considered to be among the top ten most selective of the 37 public four-year colleges and universities in the State of Texas. In addition, over half of all entering freshman are in the top quartile of their high school class and the mean SAT Score for freshman was 1028 compared to a mean for college bound high school seniors of 944. Also, U.S. News and World Report lists Texas State as a selective institution (see section 1 of this report for more details).

Community involvement is not a prerequisite for entering the CSM program, but once the student is in the major, they have opportunities to become involved in community service. The Construction Student Association

56

(CSA), which all CSM students are encouraged to join, held seven (7) ramp builds last academic year, where the organization joined forces with “Ramp Texas” to install handicapped ramps for people in the community that couldn’t afford them. CSA is also runs Boko’s Builders, which is a university sponsored event where students perform major community service. Two years ago, the CSA, through the Boko’s Builders program, did a major remodeling of a home in a depressed area of the city. This included remodeling the bathroom and rebuilding the bathroom floor which was rotten in many places. Last year, the CSA did a major remodel of the local VFW hall. This year CSA built a new storage building for and landscaped the homeless resource center.

The CSM major is a 120-hour course of study, which provides a general background in construction by requiring students to take a course in Residential, Commercial, and Heavy Civil and Highway, along with general construction courses in estimating, scheduling, and contracts. However, in our 2017-2023 Strategic Plan, we are considering adding concentrations in Residential and Commercial initially and Heavy Civil and Highway along with Industrial in the future. This is now conceivable, because of our larger enrollment of 456 majors and increase in faculty. By making these changes, we will be able to provide students who have defined “Career Goals in Construction” with options to better meet their career goals.

5.1.4.3 Compare the recruitment and publicity of the degree program to other

programs in the institution.

Our recruitment and publicity for the CSM program is average for our institution. Our efforts in these areas has allowed the program to grow from 197 majors is the Spring of 2013, when the program was first accredited to 456 major during the Spring of 2017.

We commonly recruit students through the following means: high school campus visits; Bobcat Days (University Sponsored); through our Construction Advisory Board (CAB), at our Construction and Concrete Industry Job Fairs, individual program tours as requested by high schools and others and through University Admissions, which runs tours of campus as a recruiting tool for the university. Since current enrollment into the CSM program is stretching the previous bounds of the programs’ capacity, our efforts are currently more focused on selecting the most capable students to enter the program. This is accomplished through an application process before the students are allowed to become a full major. This process involves completing an application form (Appendix D16) after the student has successfully completed the 30 hours of Pre-Construction coursework.

57

5.1.5 ACADEMIC ADVISING AND MENTORING

5.1.5.1 Describe the current academic advising process available to students in the degree program. Explain how this advising process includes competent, continuous and consistent advising to the students in the degree program.

Texas State, the College of Science and Engineering, and the CSM Program work together to provide the student with a competent, continuous, and consistent advising process to be sure the student knows what courses to take and when to take them along with providing the students with additional information required to graduate. The CSM degree consists of 120 semester hours with no electives. Also several of the CSM courses have pre-requisites, so sequencing is key to a student graduating in a timely manner.

Freshman (less than 30 hours) are assigned a Personalized Academic Career Exploration (PACE) Advisor. They are required to meet with their PACE Advisor when first entering the University and every semester thereafter for career advice as needed and to select the proper courses for the next semester until they have completed 30 hours. After 30 hours, they then receive advising through their College of Science and Engineering (COSE) and their assigned CSM Faculty Advisor.

Transfer students with over 30 hours receive advising through the COSE when they first enroll in Texas State. The initial advising for transfer students can be completed either online or during scheduled advising sessions on campus. Using either of the above methods, students are provided with an evaluated transcript, so it is clear to them which transfer courses will count towards the degree. Also, during these advising sessions, a schedule of courses is developed for the student to take their first semester on campus.

In subsequent semesters the transfer students or former PACE students can see either their COSE or CSM Advisor as needed for additional career guidance or course selection help.

The department does send all students an email before registration for the Fall and Spring semesters, reminding them of the 30-hour Pre-Construction course requirements along with a flow chart suggesting in what order the 120 semester hours required for the CSM degree should be taken. Information on how to contact their COSE and/or major advisor is also provided. Based on the Alumni Exit Survey almost 100% of students have seen their COSE Advisor one or more times during their stay at Texas State.

5.1.5.2 Explain how students are well informed about and have adequate access to

placement services and opportunities that are or may be available to them.

The CSM program works closely with Career Services to ensure that CSM students are aware of internships, summer jobs and full-time employment

58

opportunities available to them. The Construction and Concrete Industry Job Fair is a major event, sponsored jointly between the CSM and CIM Programs and Career Services. The later arranges the location of the career fair, notifying employers of the event and collecting the registration fee, currently at $500/event. The career fairs are offered in late September and February and usually have sixty to seventy employers in attendance. The CSM program provides the companies and contact information to Career Services, who in turn add this information to the career fair invitation list. The Construction and Concrete Job Fairs started in the Fall of 2009 and became a very popular event for students seeking internships, summer employment and full-time employment with 380 students attending the February 9, 2017 career fair.

Also, students can post their resumes on the Career Services website and specify companies that are allowed to access their resumes. Career Services also has a website called Jobs4Cats, where employers can list positions they have available and the students can search these listings.

With our Senior Exit Survey indicating that 93% of our CSM students had jobs in the construction industry before they graduated and the other 7% of the respondent finding employment within a month after graduating, the program feels that our placement activities are meeting our student needs (Appendix D12).

5.1.6 COURSE SCHEDULING

5.1.6.1 Describe how courses within the degree program are offered in formats and times to ensure appropriate student access and timely completion of degree program requirements. In the table below list the required construction courses in the degree program with the number of sections and average enrollment for the most recent academic year.

We are currently able to offer all the CSM courses at least twice a year during the Fall and Spring semesters, as shown in Table 12 along with enrollment data. Higher demand CSM courses that are also taken by other majors or Technology minors are also offered during the summers. Appendix F is the Flow Chart that is being used to show the recommended order in which the program suggests CSM students take their major related classes. Please note that in the rectangular boxes used to display these courses the semesters in which these classes are typically offered are also listed. Sequencing of the major classes is highly critical, if a student is to graduate in a timely manner. Please note that the 30 hours of “Pre-Construction” courses must be completed first: MATH 2417, CSM 1260, PHYS 1315 & 1115, CSM 2313, MATH 2328, PHYS 1325 & 1125, CSM 2342, CHEM 1335 & 1141 and TECH 2351 (Blue colored courses on Appendix F). In these 30 hours or 12 courses, a CSM student can make no lower than a “C” and must achieve a 2.5 overall GPA. If the student has met these requirements, or are currently taking their last Pre-Construction course or courses, they can apply to become a full major. Currently, we are allowing all qualified Pre-Construction students to become full

59

majors, but if the number of CSM majors continues to rise without a corresponding growth in resources, we may have to set restrictions on the number of students we will accept as full majors. Once the student becomes a full major they can enroll in the 12 advanced CSM courses: CSM 2360, 2160, 3360, 3361, 3366, 4364, 4361, 4369, 3363, 3367, 4368 and 4369 (noted as orange boxes on the flow char in Appendix D10). The format of these courses are lecture or lecture with an associated laboratory. This summer (2017) we plan to offer CSM 4368, Environmentally Conscious Design and Construction, as a hybrid online, class, where students will learn the material online and come to campus periodically to take their exams. If this online course proves successful, other CSM courses maybe offered in this format.

Table 12: Required Construction Courses - Sections and Enrollments

Course

Prefix, No.

Required CSM Courses

Course Title

Fall‘16

Sections

Spr. ‘17

Sum. ‘16

Total Enrollments

Fall Spr. Sum.

CSM 1260 Introduction to the Construction and Concrete Industry

2 2 0 146 80 -

CSM 2160 Introduction to Construction Surveying and Site Layout

2 3 0 40 47 -

CSM 2313 Architecture Design I – Construction Documents

4 5 1 92 119 17

CSM 2342 Construction Materials and Processes 2 2 1 42 67 16 CSM 2360 Residential Construction Systems 1 1 0 50 50 - CSM 3360 Structural Analysis 1 1 0 41 37 - CSM 3361 Commercial Building Construction Systems 1 1 0 57 53 -CSM 3363 Heavy, Civil and Highway 1 1 0 41 37 - CSM 3366 Soils and Foundations 1 2 0 42 54 - CSM 3367 Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Systems 1 2 1 37 47 7 CSM 4313 Advanced Architecture 3 3 1 71 68 10 CSM 4360 Senior Construction Contract Administration 1 1 0 40 39 - CSM 4361 Construction Estimating 1 1 0 37 45 - CSM 4364 Construction Project Management and

Scheduling 1 1 0 35 47 -

CSM 4368 Environmentally Conscious Design and Construction

1 1 0 22 65 14

CSM 4369 Construction Contracts, Liability and Ethics 1 1 0 39 43 7

5.1.7 STUDENT PLACEMENT

5.1.7.1 Describe how the degree program or institution provides a student placement service that can effectively assist students in entering the job market.

61

The program provides a Fall and Spring Construction and Concrete Industry Job Fair, which attracted 66 employers during the Fall of 2016 and 61 employers during the Spring of 2017. Also, 480 students attend the fall and 380 students attend the spring career fairs. This career fair has been one of the students’ most successful means of finding internships, summer jobs and full time employment. Students can also register with Career Services to have their resumes posted online and they can also check Career Services for additional construction job postings on Jobs4Cats (See 5.1.5.2 for additional information).

5.1.7.2 Provide the job titles and construction sector (residential, commercial, etc.) for all graduates in the most recent year. Provide the number of students where data is not available, who are not employed in the construction sector, and who have continued their education.

Based on our 2016 Senior Exit Survey, the most common job title was Field Engineering (36%), a tie for second most common job title was Superintendent and Estimator with both receiving 18%, followed by Project Manager at 9%. Based on the same survey, 61% of the CSM majors went into Commercial, followed by 23% entering Heavy, Civil and Highway and 15% entering Residential. (See Appendix D16 for 2016 Senior Exit Survey)

5.1.8 EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

5.1.8.1 Describe how students are encouraged to participate in activities that complement their academic studies, including students that are pursuing their education via alternative delivery methods.

Students are encouraged to join the Construction Student Association (CSA) for $20/year. This organization provides the following activities outside of the CSM curriculum: Monthly meetings on various topics, often featuring guest speakers. Affiliation with NAHB, ABC and AGC Homecoming Tailgate Celebration Ramp Build community service Boko’s Builders community service Spring Golf Tournament Resume Builder Workshop Student Competition

All CSM instructors announce CSA events in their classes and some offer extra credit for attending CSA-sponsored events. Also, CSA sends email/announcements for their events to all CSM majors. We currently have no alternative course delivery.

60

5.1.8.2 List specific industry-based professional and trade organizations that students in the degree program are involved with.

Students have the opportunity to become involved with the Home Builders Association (HBA) of Greater Austin, and the NAHB Associated Builders and Constructors (ABC) of Austin along with the National Organization, AGC and USGBC. By joining CSA, as mentioned in 5.1.8.1, they are affiliated with all three of these organizations.

5.1.8.3 State the extent of participation by students in extracurricular activities.

We have a paid membership in CSA of 120 students or 26% of our 456 majors. This membership makes CSA one of the largest student organizations on campus. Also, about 1/3 of our students participate in various CSA sponsored events during the year. The participation would be higher but many of our students work and may only spend two days on campus taking courses and several others are commuters. Often the commuting students travel from Austin, which is 30 miles north of San Marcos or San Antonio, which is 45 miles south. All three cities are located on the IH 35 growth corridor.

5.1.9 STUDENT FEEDBACK

5.1.9.1 Describe how the degree program’s assessment process systematically uses student feedback as input in the continuous improvement process.

The program uses the “CSM Senor Exit Survey” (Appendix D12) to gather information from our recently graduated seniors and the Construction Alumni Survey to gather information from graduates of the program (Appendix D13). These two surveys are used to make program improvements, based on the information these surveys provide. Also, each semester students complete three different evaluations. The first subjective evaluation indicates how well the SLOs assigned to the course, (Appendix D8) have been met, second a questionnaire is used to evaluate: learning, enthusiasm, organization, individual rapport, examinations and student and course characteristics (Appendix D6) and third, a written, open ended, six question “Survey Form: Student Reaction to Instruction and Course” (Appendix D7) is administered to gain additional information about the Program from the CSM Majors. This information is used by the individual instructors to improve their course or courses and the program director to monitor the quality of the courses and the performance of the CSM faculty.

62

5.1.10 FINANCIAL AID AND SCHOLARSHIP

5.1.10.1 Explain the mechanism by which the institution keeps students informed about the availability of financial aid. Describe how the degree program informs students of scholarship opportunities.

Financial Aid information is located on the University’s website (www.finaid.txstate.edu). This site also lists university and college provided scholarships. The department emails a list of all departmental including construction scholarships to students on the first Monday in October, with completed applications due back in the main office (RFM 2240) by 5:00 the first Monday in November (see Appendix D17 for the 2015/16 list of all departmental scholarships).

6 PHYSICAL RESOURCES

6.1 Requirements History: The Construction Science and Management (CSM) Program is exclusively offered on the main campus of Texas State University, which is located in San Marcos, Texas. The CSM program moved to its current location, in the Roy F. Mitte (RFM) Building, in August 2003 after the building was completed. This building was exclusively designed for the Engineering Technology Department, which includes degrees in: 1) Construction Science and Management, Concrete Industry Management, Engineering Technology, and Technology Management and for the Physics Department. Unique features were designed into the RFM building to accommodate the CSM Program including, the construction/concrete laboratory complete with aggregate storage and a concrete equipment clean out pit; soils laboratory and open space with high ceilings for building construction modules. Also two CAD/Architecture computer laboratories were designed and well equipped with Engineering Workstations for teaching architecture related concepts using AutoCAD, Revit, BIM, estimating, and scheduling software. Our primary construction room was designed as a combination lecture and computer laboratory with room to accommodate 44 students for lecture with 22 computers around the perimeter of the room for use during laboratory time in courses such as Residential, Estimating, and Scheduling. Also, all faculty have their own offices and the department has a well-furnished conference room.

Current Situation: The problem with our physical resources is that since the RFM building was constructed, the university added the Ingram School of Engineering, which occupies 100% of the space on the fifth floor along with rooms on the fourth, third, second and first floor. Also, since the building was completed the university added a new Ph.D. Program in Material Science, Engineering and Commercialization (MSEC), which occupies floor space on the third and first floors. Because of the growth of these programs the CSM Program lost 620 square feet during a remodel in 2011, to accommodate the new Master’s Degree in Engineering. This new program came with 21 new Graduate Assistants and additional Graduate Faculty, all of which require office and classroom space.

Future Solution: Currently, Ingram Hall, the new $104 Million engineering and science building is being constructed about a block away from the RFM building. It was hoped that the engineering programs would all move to the new building. However, engineering is adding a new program in

63

Civil Engineering which is planned to stay in the RFM building. Currently about five million dollars had been allocated to remodel RFM for Civil Engineering along with better utilized space for the existing programs. Currently, we have met with the building programmers who have noted the needs of the current and future occupants of the building. The CSM program has been working with the Program Director of Civil Engineering to determine if there are common labs we can share. To date, it appears that a soils and foundation lab can be shared along with a MEP lab.

We will have more information on the building remodel and how it will affect the CSM program, when the visiting team is on campus. We hope by then, the programmers will have presented their information to the Architects and we will have a set of plans sharing the extent of the remodel.

6.1.1 OFFICES, CLASSROOMS AND LABORATORY SPACES 6.1.1.1 Classrooms

A List the classrooms used for courses taught by the construction educational unit. Indicate the seating capacity, furnishings (i.e., fixed seats, tablet arm chairs), and environmental problems (i.e., lighting, cooling, noise, sun control).

The primary classrooms that are used for construction courses are listed in Table 13. Additional classrooms are available on the fifth floor of the R.F. Mitte building, the neighboring Supple Science building, and the Undergraduate Academic Center.

Table 13: Classrooms Used For Construction Courses

Bldg. Room

No. Approx.

Area Capacity Furnishing

Environmental Problems

R.F. Mitte 3224 2000 100 Tablet/Arm Chair None R.F. Mitte 3241 2000 100 Tablet/Arm Chair None R.F. Mitte 4234 1156 40 Tablet/Arm Chair None R.F. Mitte 4231 1326 50 Tables/Arm Chair None R.F. Mitte 4233 1584 44 Tables & Chairs None

B Discuss whether the space is shared with other academic units and who controls the assignment of the space.

All of the classrooms listed in Table 13 are controlled by the Department of Engineering Technology. Engineering Technology therefore has first call privilege for class scheduling purposes. Once the department has made its class assignments, the university can schedule other classes in the rooms during unscheduled times.

6.1.1.2 Laboratories

64

A List the laboratories used for courses taught by the construction unit. Briefly describe the space, including furnishings and equipment. List the construction courses that use the space on a scheduled basis.

The laboratory spaces used for construction courses are listed in Table 14. Table 14: Laboratories Used For Construction Courses

Building Room

No. Approx.

Area Laboratory

Name Description Courses

R.F. Mitte

1240

1980

General CAD

Architectural Design I Construction Materials

Adv. Architectural Design

CSM 2313 CSM 2342 CSM 4313

R.F. Mitte 1220 800 Material Testing General Material Testing CSM 2342 R.F. Mitte 1225D 988 Soils and Asphalt Soil and Asphalt Testing CSM 3366 R.F. Mitte 1225D 350 Research Research CSM 2342

R.F. Mitte 1225 1500 Construction Construction CSM 2360 CSM 3361

R.F. Mitte 1225 & 1225A.2

2500 Concrete Testing Concrete Testing CSM 2342 CSM 3361

R.F. Mitte 1210 1273 Repair Repair and Maintenance N/A

R.F. Mitte 4236 1488 Construction CAD Architectural Design I

Adv. Architectural Design CSM 2313 CSM 4313

R.F. Mitte

4233/ 4227

1584

Construction/ Classroom/Computer

Lab

Residential Commercial

MEPs Capstone

Estimating Scheduling

CSM 2360 CSM 3361 CSM 3367 CSM 4360 CSM 4361 CSM 4364

B Discuss whether the space is shared with other academic units and who controls the assignment of the space.

All laboratories listed above (Table 14) are first call classroom laboratories controlled by the Department of Engineering Technology. The general CAD and Material Testing laboratories are shared with the Ingram School of Engineering, but the department maintains first-call prerogative in scheduling these labs. The other laboratories are almost exclusively used by the Department of Engineering Technology. In case of an overflow, the computer laboratory located on the fifth floor of the R.F. Mitte building and under the control of the Ingram School of Engineering is available for use by the construction program. A healthy reciprocity in terms of sharing spaces exists in the College of Science and Engineering and between the Engineering Technology and Engineering Departments.

6.1.1.3 Offices

A List the faculty and staff offices.

Faculty and staff offices are listed in Table 15.

65

Table 15: Faculty and Staff Offices

Building Room No. Approximate Area Occupant Furnishings R.F. Mitte 2213 100 sq. ft. Soon Jae Lee Office Furniture R.F. Mitte 2240 D 270 sq. ft. Gary Winek Office Furniture

R.F. Mitte 2221 110 sq. ft. Cassandrea Hager/

Harnish SharmaOffice Furniture

R.F. Mitte 4215 110 sq. ft. Vivek Sharma Office Furniture R.F. Mitte 4242 120 sq. ft. BJ Spencer Office Furniture R.F. Mitte 4245 110 sq. ft. Kimberly Talley Office Furniture R.F. Mitte 2205 400 sq. ft./shared Cade Humphries Office Furniture R.F. Mitte 2205 400 sq. ft./shared Hyunhwan Kim Office Furniture

6.1.2 LIBRARY RESOURCES

6.1.2.1 Describe how books, periodicals, and other reference materials may be obtained by the construction educational unit (i.e., central library, departmental library, interlibrary loan program, internet, intranet, etc.).

Books and periodicals may be obtained by the construction unit primarily from our holdings in this area in the Alkek Library. The Alkek Library serves the entire university community. Thus, not only are learning materials in construction but also materials in related areas such as science, engineering, and business are available at this facility. The Alkek Library also participates in the Inter Library Loan (ILL) process. Faculty and students can request materials through the ILL process. Additionally, our university participates in TEXShare, a library resource-sharing program between all public institutions of learning in the State of Texas. A total of 25 research databases in the library cater to the needs of the Department of Engineering Technology. The library subscribes to a total of 106 periodicals and journals in the areas of building construction and architecture. Currently, most of these periodicals and journals are available electronically at the library as the library moves from print to an electronic format. Lastly, the library subscribes to approximately 200,000 electronic books/e-texts in many subjects.

6.1.2.2 Describe where the books and periodicals related to construction are located (e.g., central library, departmental library, electronic holdings, etc.).

These materials are located in the Alkek Library as described above, with the Catalog available online and many journals and periodicals are also available electronically.

66

6.1.2.3 Identify the courses taught by the construction unit that make use of library reference materials, and discuss the utilization.

The following construction courses make extensive use of library materials. Often these materials are kept at the reserve desk available to be checked out and used by students towards the completion of projects and other assigned activity. Typically, these materials tend to be very expensive and/or extensive in scope, which would render them prohibitive; expensive if a student had to purchase them. Examples of such materials include the RSMeans Square Foot Costs manual and the Occupational Safety and Health Standards for Construction manual. Other construction courses use the general library collection for doing construction related research necessary for writing papers. Some courses that make use of these materials include:

CSM 2360 Residential Construction Systems International Residential Codes 2016 RSMeans Square Foot Estimator-Reference required to complete class assignments

CSM 2342 Construction Materials and Processes ASTM standards for lab exercises

CSM 3366 Soils and Foundation ASTM Standards required to conduct laboratory activities

CSM 4313 Advanced Architectural Design General Library Collection – for researching Building Information Modeling topics. A summary paper is written. International Building Codes – on reserve for reference use in the semester project.

CSM 4361 Construction Estimating 2016 RSMeans Building Cost Data for lab exercises

6.1.3 INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGICAL EQUIPMENT

6.1.3.1 Describe the computational equipment and software available to students to enable them to attain required learning outcomes. Describe the computational equipment and software available to faculty to support their scholarly and professional activities.

Student Computers: Computers are an integral part of the construction curriculum. Students get introduced to MS Office applications such as Word, Excel and PowerPoint. The Architectural Design courses expose students to CAD software such as AutoCAD and Revit and BIM Software. The courses in Project Planning, Estimating and Scheduling expose students to software

72

such as National Construction Estimator, Primavera, Microsoft Project, On Screen Takeoff, Bluebeam, and Sketch up.

All students receive a user account and email ID upon registering. This enables the students to use one of several centralized computing facilities such as those in the Alkek Library and the Collaborative Learning Center (CLC). At these centers students can access internet, send and receive email and use general purpose software such as MS Office. Also, most departments have one or more general computer labs that can be used by all Texas State students when these labs are not being used for teaching classes.

The department has two CAD specific laboratories (Rooms 1240 and 4236) in the R.F. Mitte building that students can also use for general purposes and for completing construction related assigned work. The construction unit also has available their first call lecture/computer lab specifically designed for teaching construction courses and the associated estimating/project management/capstone/MEP lab (Room 4233). The departmental Microcomputer Lab Technician assists with any technical issues that faculty and students may have. Also, students pay a computing fee when they register for classes which provide the university with about $600,000 annually to replace obsolete or worn out computers. An internal grant proposal is required to be submitted to the Academic Computing Committee. This committee reviews these proposals from all academic departments and decides which to fund. Our department has been extremely successful in this endeavor and has replaced all of our classroom computers with Dell, Xeon Processor equipped, and engineering workstations with enhanced graphic cards and 17” LCD monitors. These computers are found in the following classrooms: RFM 1240 (36 computers), RFM 4233 (23 computers), and RFM 4236 (25 Computers). Note that one computer in the three computer labs mentioned above is a teacher’s station and is not usable by students.

Faculty Computer Support and Software Availability: New tenure and tenure- track CSM faulty hires submit a startup package as part of their initial contract with the university. In this package they can request specialized computers and other hardware along with needed software for their research, if the university does not have a site license for the software package. Also, all faculty are on a four- to five-year replacement cycle for their office computer or laptop, which can be either a Mac or PC based machine. These machines can be loaded with several software packages under license with the university, such as MS Office, Adobe, TRACS.

Faculty receives a new computer upon joining Texas State University. This computer is replaced about four to five years per the provisions of a planned replacement policy. Faculty can download the following software from Technology Resources website: Adobe Software, AlertUS, Antivirus, Autodesk, CrashPlan PROe, Display Fusion, EndNote X7, JMP Pro 12, Microsoft Office 2016, Microsoft Project 2016, Microsoft Skype for Business, Microsoft Visio 2016, NVivo 11 Pro, SAP GUI, SPSS Statistics, and VLC Media Player.

71

6.1.3.2 For courses delivered by alternate methods, describe the type of technical support

given the students.

There are currently no courses in the CSM program delivered by alternate methods.

7 FINANCIAL RESOURCES

7.1 Requirements

7.1.1 BUDGETED FUNDS

7.1.1.1 Indicate the amount and percentage of operating revenue and expenditures for the construction educational unit and units within the institution that are comparable to the construction educational unit. In addition, explain how these units are similar in size and function.

The following tables lists the total budget expenditures during the 2015/2016 academic year. The categories included are program faculty salaries, travel, equipment, educational supplies, software supplies, registrations, fees, maintenance, event functions. Table 16 and Table 17 present the Operating Revenue for FY16 for the Department of Engineering Technology and the Ingram School of Engineering, respectively. Similarly, Table 18 and Table 19 present the expenditures of these two departments in FY 16.

Table 16: Department of Engineering Technology Operating Revenue (Amounts per FY16 Budget to Actual Report)

Revenue Source Revenue Amount ($)

% of Total

Institutional Funds (M&O budget, GA, UIA & SW salaries) 346,270.36 16.24% Institutional Funds – faculty/adjunct/staff/ salaries 1,659,864.98 77.83% Department Discretionary Income Revenue Account * 6,450.93 .30% Construction Discretionary Income Revenue Account * 49,298.08 2.31% Concrete Industry Management Income Revenue Account * 70,926.85 3.32% Total Operating Revenue 2,132,748.20 100% *Private endowments from industry donors Table 17: Ingram School of Engineering Operating Revenue

Revenue Source Revenue Amount ($)

% of Total

Institutional Funds (M&O budget, GA, UIA & SW salaries) 475,590.59 N/A

Institutional Funds – faculty/adjunct/staff/ salaries 2,304,076.03 N/A

Other (Discretionary and Endowment Funds-optional) 204,000 N/A

Total Operating Revenue 2,983,666.62 N/A

72

Table 18: Department of Engineering Technology Expenditures (Salaries per FY16 Salary Budget Report)

Source Amount ($) % of Total

Administrative Overhead (Chair & Staff Salaries) 381,739.88 18.72%

ET Faculty & Adjunct Salaries 465,398.86 22.82%

CIM Faculty & Adjunct Salaries 260,006.71 12.75%

CSM Faculty & Adjunct Salaries 491,022.46 24.08%

Graduate Student Salaries 61,697.07 3.04%Office Supplies, Equipment, Travel, Student Wages, etc. (usually referred to as M&O budget per FY16 Budget to Actual Report)

379,148.00 18.59%

Total Expenditure 2,039,012.98 100%

Table 19: Ingram School of Engineering Expenditures

Source Amount ($) % of Total

Administrative Overhead (Chair & Staff Salaries) 552,660.00 17.60%

EE Faculty & Adjunct Salaries 1,105,983.64 35.23%

IE Faculty & Adjunct Salaries 425,668.07 13.56%

Manufacturing Engineering Faculty & Adjunct Salaries 446,750.40 14.23%

Graduate Student Salaries 151,899.75 4.83%

Office Supplies, Equipment, Travel, Student Wages, etc (usually referred to as M&O budget per FY16 Budget to Actual Report)

456,747.78 14.55%

Total Expenditure 3,139,709.64 100%

7.1.1.2 Indicate the amount and percentage of operating revenue and expenditures

allocated for the construction degree program and, if applicable, other degree program contained within the educational unit.

Table 20 presents the Department of Engineering Technology’s expenditures by program including the enrollment and dollar amount expended per student in each of the department’s programs. Please note that the Construction Science and Management and our Concrete Industry Management Programs both have separate income generating revenue accounts in which some of the expenditures are exhausted from and therefore, not reflected in the below table.

72

Table 20: Department of Engineering Technology Expenditures by Program for Prior Fiscal year (FY 2016)

Program Expenditure Amounts ($)

Percentage Total # of Students (Based on Spring 2016 Enrollment Figures)

$/Student

Construction Science & Management * 517,180.15 32.41% 381 $1,357.43Concrete Industry Management * 276,863.14 17.35% 48 $5,767.98Engineering Technology 763,617.94 47.86% 260 $2,936.99Technology Management-Graduate 37,914.80 2.38% 37 $1,024.72Technology Management-Undergraduate 0 0% 27 $0TOTAL 1,595,576.03 100% 753

Note: * Programs have additional revenue accounts.

7.1.1.3 Detail how projected resources will be adequate to ensure the capacity of the degree program to achieve its planned growth, future goals, and objectives.

The financial resources provided from the state to the department are expected to remain the same now and for the immediate future. However, the University does provide money for per course or adjunct faculty when needed. When enrollments increase dramatically, the provost office will provide funds for hiring temporary full-time lecturers, who will teach 12 workload credits or four courses. This money must be requested each academic year from the Provost Office. If this request is sustained for a number of years, the money can be requested to be transferred from the provost’s office to the department’s budget, making the position permanent. Currently, the CSM program has three temporary full-time lecturers and 2 to 3 adjunct faculty each year.

Summer school money can also be requested from the Provost’s Office each year based on projected demand for summer courses. The department can request additional Maintenance and Operating (M&O) Funds from the Provost Office for unique circumstances. For the 2016/2017 academic year, the department received an additional $16,000 to make up for a projected budget shortfall.

In the CSM 2017-2023 strategic plan, the program is requesting adding an online Master’s Degree. The funding for this new degree would be requested through a written Master’s Degree program proposal, which would need to be approved by the Higher Educators Coordinating Board and then funded by the State. In this proposal we would be requesting at least 2 tenured faculty lines, 6 graduate assistants, a computer technician and an instructional design specialist.

73

In conclusion, the CSM program, through the budget provided to the Department of Engineering Technology, has had adequate funding to staff the program along with an M&O budget large enough to fund the essential needs of the CSM degree. When additional money is needed to meet program budget short falls, the Provost Office has been able to provide the necessary funding.

7.1.2 NONRECURRING FUNDS

7.1.2.1 Identify the source, amount, and use of nonrecurring funds (soft monies, annual gifts, donations, etc.) for the degree program.

The CSM Program does not rely on nonrecurring funds, but does rely on monies generated from the Construction and Concrete Industry Job Fair, which takes place twice a year and the membership fees paid by the Industry Advisory Council (IAC) members.

7.1.2.2 Detail how any nonrecurring funds have been used in the last three fiscal years.

The Program seldom received nonrecurring funds, but it does use money from the Job Fair and IAC memberships to fund student travel, supplement faculty travel and to purchase equipment when state funds are not available or inadequate to fund the entire purchase.

8 INDUSTRY, ALUMNI AND PUBLIC RELATIONS

8.1 Requirements

8.1.1 SUPPORT FROM INDUSTRY

8.1.1.1 Provide evidence that the construction industry advisory committee is representative of potential employers of graduates of the degree program and other industry professionals.

The Construction Advisory Board (CAB) consists of a group of 12 companies (Table 21) elected from the Industrial Advisory Council (IAC). The IAC is comprised of all the companies that support the CSM Program by becoming members and paying $1000/year membership fee. Both the IAC and the elected CAB members represent the employers that hire our students. These firms consist of Commercial, Residential, Subcontractor, Suppliers and other construction related industries (See Appendix D19 for a list of these companies).

Table 21: Members of the Construction Advisory Board Spring 2017

Title First Name

Last Name

Company Job Title Category

Mr. Cisco Hobbs Rogers-Obrien Construction

Director of Preconstruction

Commercial

74

Dr. Earl Ingram Ingram Readymix, Inc. President Supplier Mr. William Norton Project Control Senior Project Manager Project

ManagementMr. Randy Pawelek Bartlett-Cocke President Commercial Mr. Chris Peck McCarthy Vice President – Business

& Development Commercial

Mr. David Stayshich Fluor Daniel Corporate Construction Engineering Manager

Commercial

Mr. Ryan Stewart Turner Construction Manager Commercial Mr. Joel Stone SpawGlass Chief Executive Officer Commercial Mr. Ken Trainer Chesmar Homes President Residential Mr. Michael Vickery Baker Triangle Senior Vice President Project

Management Mr. Edgar Onyeagu H-E-B Construction Project

Leader Commercial

Mr. Jeremy Smith Sedalco Project Manager Commercial Mr. Ben Keillor Joeris General

ConstructionProject Manager Commercial

8.1.1.2 Provide evidence that the construction industry advisory committee meets at least once a year for the purpose of advising and assisting the development and enhancement of the degree program.

The Construction Advisory Board (CAB) meets twice a year with the construction faculty. The meetings are generally held in October and February, and are scheduled the day before the Fall and Spring Construction and Concrete Industry Job Fairs. This scheduling method allows advisory board members, who travel considerable distance, to attend the CAB meeting, stay overnight and participate in the construction career fair the next day. These meetings start at 10:00 a.m. and end at 2:00 p.m. Each regular meeting of the CAB includes an executive session which provides the board a chance to discuss items of interest outside the presence of the faculty.

There is a $1,000 annual membership fee for board members. This money is initially placed in the Construction Technology Discretionary Account and can be moved to different accounts as the Board and CSM Program Director see fit. The advisory board follows the procedures set forth in the “Construction Advisory Board Bylaws,” which were approved during the 2007/08 school year.

8.1.1.3 Provide minutes of each construction industry advisory committee meeting.

The meeting minutes from the CAB Spring 2017 and Fall 2016 are provided in Appendix D21. A complete notebook of past CAB minutes will be provided to the visiting team, during their site visit.

8.1.2 SUPPORT FOR INDUSTRY

Demonstrate that the degree program maintains continuous liaison with the

75

various constituencies it serves via active participation by faculty in associations and other professional organizations for the purpose of serving the construction industry.

The following list of our faculty notes how they are involved in associations and professional organizations:

Dr. Gary Winek (Professor) Attends ACCE Conference

o ACCE Visiting Member o Completed ACCE Advanced Visiting Team Training

Attends ASC, Region IV Educator’s Annual Conference HBA – Austin contact ASC 2015 Conference

Dr. Soon Jae Lee (Associate Professor)

LEED Accredited Professional Civil Engineering License Reviewer for over 10 Journals (See resume for list)

Dr. Kimberly Talley, PE (Assistant Professor)

PE Structural License ASEE: Construction Division Reviewer/Presenter/Member Member of ASCE Member, Structural Engineers Association of Texas Member, ACI ASC 2015 Conference

Ms. B.J. Spencer, AIA (Senior Lecturer)

Attends ASC, Region V Educator’s Annual Conference AIA Member Texas Society of Architects Member ASC 2015 Conference

Mr. Vivek Sharma (Senior Lecturer)

ABC – Austin Contact AGC – Austin Contact ACCE – Evaluator in Training ASEE – Member USGBC – Member LEED Associate Professional

Also adequate funding is available through the department to fund CSM Faculty travel to various construction related activities. In cases when travel funds are low, we have used construction discretionary funds to supplement departmental travel funds.

76

8.1.3 STUDENT-INDUSTRY RELATIONS

8.1.3.1 Demonstrate that the degree program actively encourages and facilitates participation of students in activities of construction- related organizations, internships, and cooperative education programs.

The program requires a mandatory 400 hour/10 week internship as a graduating requirement. This internship is commonly undertaken in the summer between a student’s sophomore and junior year. The details on the internship are provided in the section 8.1.3.2. In addition to this structured program, the Construction Student Association also actively seeks volunteers from the student body for their involvement in the various construction related organizations. CSA represents program at ABC, AGC, NAHB and USGBC forums. In year 2016 alone, CSA hosted 12 guest speakers, 5 Workshops, 5 jobsite tours, and 5 community outreach projects that totaled over 2,100 volunteer hours and $53,000 in home renovations. These activities are summarized in Table 22, below:

Table 22: List of Construction Student Association Activities (AY 2016)

Date. Company Activity Amount/ Quantity

Notes

Community Service Projects 3/27/2015

DPR Boko's Builder

$30,420 15 students for 3 days.

4/1/2016 DPR Boko's Builder

$5,000 5 Students for 3 days

Various

Texas State

Ramp Build

#11

A group of students on Saturday morning

Guest Speakers 9/23/2015

DPR

Gave information and answered questions on DPR and the opportunities they have available.

38

Project

Management

9/29/2015

Austin Construction Leadership Council

Members from various companies comprising the CLC gave tips and advice to students on how to better format their resumes

25

Commercial

10/14/201

5

Rogers‐ O'Brien

Explained how they utilized Bluebeam and drone technology on their projects

35

Commercial

77

1/17/2016

Whiting‐ Turner

Spoke on Plangrid and Sketchup, then informed students on information and opportunities with the company

60

Commercial

2/3/2016

SpawGlass

Mr. Eubank provided students with information about SpawGlass.

35

Commercial

2/8/2016

Austin Construction Leadership Council

Members from various companies comprising the CLC gave tips and advice to students on how to better format their resumes

20

Commercial

2/24/2016

Fromberg

President/Owner/CEO of Fromberg was present to discuss experience working for a smaller GC. Also discussed opportunities within the company

21

Residential

3/9/2016

Hensel Phelps

Provided information and opportunities available in the company.

20

Subcontractor

3/23/2016

Lott Brothers

Gave presentation on Lean Construction and informed students on information about their company

15

Commercial

Field Trips/Jobsite Tours 10/2/2015 SpawGlass Moore St. Housing 15

11/6/2015 McCarthy SH 71 26

11/20/201 5

Beck Group

UT Dell Medical School

14

2/19/2016

Whiting Turner

Bexar 911 Call Center

19

4/9/2016

Hensel Phelps

UT Dell Medical School

12

8.1.3.2 Demonstrate that all students (traditional and distance education) have access to information about internships and cooperative education programs and activities of construction-related organizations in their local area.

An education portal website called TRACS (Texas State University) is maintained and provided to all students with all listed internship opportunities. The Construction Management Program doesn’t have distance education students. The information about this internship program is available on the

78

Department of Engineering Technology website (http://www.txstate.edu/technology/) by looking under, “Internship Information” and additional information can be found under this heading by clicking on “Internship Options”, Internship Documents-TECH 2190.

8.1.4 ALUMNI RELATIONS AND FEEDBACK

8.1.4.1 Demonstrate that the degree program maintains a current registry of alumni and contact with them to seek feedback in its improvement process.

Donor Services maintains a database, with contact information on the CSM Alumni. We use this date to contact our former students for things like our Alumni Survey.

8.1.4.2 Demonstrate that the degree program engages the alumni in activities such as a formal advisory board, student career advising, potential employment, curriculum review and development, fund raising, and continuing education.

Currently, we received feedback from our alumni, through the Alumni Survey, which is conducted every three years. In turn, we send the alumni our Fall and Spring Departmental Newsletters (See Appendix D22 for Fall 2016 Newsletter). Our Alumni also are guest speakers in our classes and make presentations at some of our monthly Construction Student Association (CSA) meetings. At the end of most presentations, they discuss their career track and advise students on possible careers for them in construction along with sometimes offering students internships, summer job and full-time employment. Many of our alumni also attend the Construction and Concrete Industry Job Fairs in the Fall and Spring of e a c h year, where they represent their companies that are looking to hire interns, summer employees or graduates for full-time employment. We had 66 employers attend the Fall 2016 career fair and 62 attended the 2017 Spring event. Also our alumni, through the IAC, review the curriculum and suggest changes. Alumni also contributed to fund raising, by participating in the CSA Golf Tournament, joining the IAC with an annual membership fee of $1,000, and through the $500 fee their companies pay to attend the career fair. Of the career fair registration fee, 50% or more of this fee is returned to the department. Also, our alumni are active in continuing education activities. Some alumni will work with our ABC, NAHB, Commercial, Heavy Civil and Design Build competition teams, while others will make presentations or seminars on a specific topic such as Resume Building and how to interview properly.

8.1.5 PUBLIC DISCLOSURES

8.1.5.1 Demonstrate that the institution broadly and accurately publishes the objectives of the degree program, admission requirements, degree program assessment measures employed, the information obtained through these assessment measures and actions taken as a result of the feedback, student achievement, the rate and types of employment of graduates, and any data

79

supporting the qualitative claims made by the degree program.

The CSM Program provides all required public information on its webpage at http://www.txstate.edu/technology/.

8.1.5.2 If accreditation status is published, demonstrate that there has been no release of the degree program’s term or period of accreditation.

We do not list the terms or period of accreditation on the departmental website, but do list the year in which the program was initially accredited However, all specialized/professional accreditations, including name of accrediting organization, date of most recent accreditation and date of scheduled reaffirmation, are posted on the website of the Associate Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness (http://www.avpie.txstate.edu/assessment/accreditation/Accreditation-Certification.html)

9 ACADEMIC QUALITY PLANNING PROCESS AND OUTCOME ASSESSMENT

9.1 Requirements If terminology of the assessment process varies from the definitions found in Section 1 of the Standards contained in ACCE Document 103, provide a glossary of compatible terminology.

We have used the terminology stated in ACCE Document 103, throughout the Self-Evaluation Study except for two terms which have been shortened:

1) Course Outcomes = Course Learning Outcomes (ACCE) 2) Program Outcomes = Program Learning Outcomes (ACCE)

9.1.1 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

Provide a copy of the Program Quality Improvement Plan in Appendix C of Volume II including the following:

9.1.1.1 Strategic Plan for the educational unit

The Department of Engineering Technology’s 2017-2023 Academic (Strategic) Plan appears in Appendix D4. This plan combines the strategic vision of the three programs in the Department. Also found in Appendix D5, is the specific strategic plan for the CSM Program.

9.1.1.2 Assessment Plan for the degree program

The “Quality Improvement Plan for the Construction Science and Management Program”, is found in Appendix C, and uses six Direct Measures and three Indirect Measures as part of the Program’s Assessment Plan. In addition, the provided four (4) Program Goals of: 1) Program Improvements; 2) Faculty; 3) Facilities; and 4) Industry along with their

80

ten associated Degree Program Objectives are designed to further guide the Program in accomplishing its mission.

9.1.1.3 Assessment Implementation Plan for the degree program

The Assessment Implementation Plan for the CSM Program, which is based on six Direct Measures and three Indirect Measures is found in the “Quality Improvement Plan for the Construction Science and Management Program” in Appendix C

9.1.2 EDUCATIONAL UNIT STRATEGIC PLAN Describe the educational unit’s Strategic Plan for the continuous improvement of the degree program, and specifically:

9.1.2.1 Describe the systematic and sustained effort to enable the degree program to fulfill its mission.

The CSM program’s mission statement provides the vision from which the CSM Program’s 2017-2023 Strategic Plan was derived. In the CSM’s Strategic Plan, five goals were established to systemically move the program forward. These five goals are:

1) Develop a Master’s Degree in Construction Management that will support the CSM and CIM programs

2) Balance CSM Faculty between Tenure and Non-Tenure Line Faculty 3) Space Allocations 4) CSM Level Program Changes (Curriculum) 5) Become an independent Department of Construction and Concrete

Management (CM)

See Appendix C for the Construction Science and Management Strategic Plan 2017-2023.

9.1.2.2 Describe the internal status of the degree program resources as well as the external factors that influence the operation of the degree program.

The CSM Program has three major concerns. They are:

1) Faculty to meet the growing number of CSM students 2) Space needs to accommodate the growing number of CSM majors 3) Financial needs to fund the growing CSM program

The university has provided the program with additional money to hire Adjunct Faculty and temporary Lecturers (year-to-year) to meet the program’s expanding enrollment. However, we must address the concern, of establishing the proper ratio between Tenure and Non-Tenure Line Faculty in our Strategic Plan (Appendix D5), because of the rapid increase in Non- Tenured Line Faculty hired to meet the immediate need of a rapidly expanding program.

The second concern is with space, which the program lacks as its student population increases. We are hopeful that with the remodeling of the R. F. Mitte

81

Building, scheduled for completion in Fall 2019, it will alleviate this problem as the Ingram School of Engineering moves to its new building in the Fall of 2018. However, the new civil engineering program will occupy much of the space that will be vacated by this move. It is hoped in the remodel of R. F. Mitte, that the CSM program can gain additional space for its program along with sharing common spaces, such as a Soils and MEPs lab with the new civil engineering program, which is to begin offering classes in the Fall of 2019. The third concern is financial resources, which currently are barely adequate based on the money we receive from the State and discretionary money raised by the CSM program to finance or supplement additional CSM program needs when State funding is inadequate. However, the State Legislature (Spring 2017) is discussing reducing state funding to universities, which could affect the money available to the CSM Program.

The above three critical CSM Program resources are highly depended on the university and the funding which they provide the Engineering Technology Department, whose funds are used to run the three Programs with the Department.

9.1.2.3 Demonstrate that the Strategic Plan is updated periodically and that it represents the collective input from all of the degree program constituencies.

The Department’s Strategic Plan is revised every six years through a university mandate and is formally updated mid-cycle. This Strategic Plan relies on input from the three Programs it serves. The CSM Program also updates its Strategic Plan every six years as well, with information from the CSM’s Strategic Plan used to update the Department’s Strategic Plan. Both Strategic Plans rely on input from the Program’s constituencies.

9.1.3 DEGREE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PLAN Provide the educational unit’s comprehensive Assessment Plan for the continuous improvement of the degree program with documented results from all systematically collected information, and:

9.1.3.1 Describe the Mission Statement of the degree program.

The CSM Mission Statement provides a clear direction to maintain a nationally recognized program that is both student-centered and industry- oriented, which educates students to be future leaders in the Construction Industry who will construct the future built environment. This Mission Statement appears below and can also be found in the CSM’s Strategic Plan in Appendix D5.

Construction Science and Management Mission Statement

The Mission of the Construction Science and Management Program is to maintain a nationally recognized, student-centered, industry-oriented, construction program that prepares graduates to become outstanding future leaders, well versed in relevant management practices, current construction techniques and methods used to construct the built environment.

82

9.1.3.2 Describe the Degree Program Objectives (to be evaluated for clarity and ability to permit assessment of achievement).

The ten Degree Program Objectives are listed under the four goals of:

1) Program Improvement 2) Faculty 3) Facilities 4) Industry

Each of the ten Degree Program Objectives are clearly written using action verbs and have time periods listed as to when they are to be achieved.

9.1.3.3 Describe the Program Learning Outcomes and demonstrate that they are regularly formulated, evaluated, and reviewed with the appropriate participation of faculty, students, industry advisors, and other pertinent parties.

The ten program outcomes were developed to cover the twenty SLOs along with other information deemed important for CSM majors to know before graduation. The program outcomes were developed by the faculty, with input from the CAB and other relevant parties. These program outcomes are due for a major review next year, which will be the third year of their implementation.

9.1.3.4 Describe the Assessment tools used to measure degree program objectives and Program Learning Outcomes as stated in 9.1.3.2 and 9.1.3.3 above, Describe the frequency for using the tools. Describe the procedures for data collection.

The assessment tool used to measure the four program goals and the eleven degree program objectives are clearly stated within the objective itself, as to what is to be accomplished and the time period in which it is to be accomplished.

The assessment tools that the program uses to assess the ten program outcomes and twenty SLOs are direct and indirect measurements. These assessments are done each Fall and Spring semesters the course is taught. The direct assessment can take the form of exam questions, group project, major assignments, individual projects or oral presentations. The subjective assessment is based on the five-(5) point Likert scale, where students are asked to rank how well they believe they learned the course content.

This information is recoded on the “Construction Science and Management: Instructor’s Course Assessment Plan” where the direct (objective) and subjective data is recorded for the current semester along with the historical data for these two measurements (See Appendix D9 and the OIP in Appendix C for more details.)

83

9.1.3.5 Describe the Performance Criteria used to measure the achievement of the degree program objectives and Program Learning Outcomes as stated in 9.1.3.2 and 9.1.3.3 above.

The performance criteria used to measure the achievements of the Degree Program objectives are clearly started within the objective along with a time period to accomplish these objectives. These objectives are visited every year, with adjustments made as needed. Every three years, they are re- evaluated and additional degree program objectives added as older program objectives are accomplished or modified.

The acceptable minimum performance criteria for both the objective and subjective measure for the Program Outcomes is 70%.

9.1.3.6 Describe the Evaluation Methodology used for data collection.

The objective and subjective date used to evaluate the Program Outcomes is collected by the individual faculty members each Fall and Spring semesters, the course is taught. This data is recorded on the, “Instructor’s Course Assessment and Improvement Plan” (Appendix D9). Then the Program Director compiles the data for each SLO, which are evaluated in one or more courses to determine if the overall average for the objective and subjective measure for each of the twenty SLOs meets or exceeds the 70% minimum standard.

9.1.4 ASSESSMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Describe the educational unit’s Assessment Implementation Plan for the continuous improvement of the degree program and provide evidence that the degree program is making progress in achieving its mission, objectives, and learning outcomes and that it takes the outcomes assessment results into consideration in degree program development.

Specifically demonstrate that:

9.1.4.1 The degree program is conducting a comprehensive assessment of its goals and Learning Outcomes at least annually.

The SLOs and therefore the program outcomes are comprehensively evaluated each Spring semester, when the faculty submit their updated ACCE Notebooks. If an objective or subjective measurement falls below 70% for a given semester, the Program Director is notified and a plan of action to improve the rating for that objective or subjective measurement is developed. Then every three years a Comprehensive Program review is done to see what trends are developing and what corrective action may be deemed necessary to ensure that we are continuously improving the program.

84

9.1.4.2 The results of each assessment cycle are documented in a systematic manner and that a complete assessment cycle of all Student Learning Outcomes is conducted at least once every three years.

See 9.1.4.1 above for information on the three-year assessment cycle. The end of the Spring 2017 semester, will be our first, three-year cycle using the new SLOs and we will present the visiting team with the results.

9.1.4.3 Evaluation of the degree program objectives and Learning Outcomes are being compared to the stated performance criteria to determine whether stated objectives and Learning Outcomes were achieved and if there is a validated need for improvement in any areas.

The degree program objectives and the learning outcomes are reviewed annually after the Spring semester to determine if they were achieved and to determine what if any improvements are warranted.

9.1.4.4 After each comprehensive assessment cycle, the entire process is being reviewed and updated with plans for improvement including any revisions to the degree program’s assessment plan.

A comprehensive review cycle is conducted every three years, which coincides with the University’s, Department’s and CSM Program’s Strategic Plan review cycle.

10 REVIEW LAST VISITING TEAM REPORT: WEAKNESSES AND CONCERNS

10.1 Previous Accreditation Actions

The Construction Science and Management Program was visited during the Fall of 2012 and accredited during the Spring of 2013. As part of the accreditation process, the program was required to submit a first and third year “Progress Report” to address three identified “weaknesses” and five “concerns”. All weaknesses and concerns were successfully addressed as documented in the March 1, 2016 letter to our President, Dr. Denise Trauth, stating that, “The reports as submitted was accepted by the council. Action or elimination of weaknesses and concerns in the 2012 visiting Team Report were approved."

Following is the official letter accepting the CSM Programs Report and the “ACCE Progress Report Form- Weakness and Concerns”, from the third year report.

87

••

ac ce Allan J. Hauck Board Chair

Cherye! Goodale Board Vice Chair

Norma Jean Andersen Secretary

Jim Carr Treasurer

Michael M. Holland President

American Council for Construction Education

March 1, 2016

Dr. Denise Trauth, President Texas State University 601University Drive San Marcos, TX 78666

Dear Dr. Trauth,

1717 North Loop 1604 East, Suite 320 San Antonio, Texas 78232-1570

Tel: 210495.6161 Fax: 210.495.6168

E- mail: [email protected]

• C•FM••A

At its February 2016 Mid Year Meeting, the Accreditation Committee for the American Council for Construction Education (ACCE) reviewed the Third Year Progress Report for the Construction Management Program at Texas State University.

The report as submitted was accepted by the Council. Actions taken by the institution on correction or elimination of Weaknesses and Concerns cited in the 2012 Visiting Team Report were approved.

From the information in the Progress Report, the Council summarized the following comments:

The Council appreciates the responsive report and looksforward to the Program's next Self-Evaluation Study and site visit in thefall of 2017.

Ifyou have any questions, please contact Mike Holland, President for ACCE. We look forward to continued cooperation in the accreditation process between ACCE and Texas State University.

Best regards, American Council for Construction Education

Michael M. Holland, CPC, AIC President, ACCE

Cc: Dr. Eugene Bourgeois, Provost

Dr. Stephen Seidman, Dean Dr. Andy Batey, Chair of Engineering Technology Dr. Gary Winek, Program Coordinator Dr. Allan J. Hauck, ACCE Board Chair Dr. John Schaufelberger, Chair, ACCE Accreditation Committee

ac1oe

88

N2fr A»

-

American Council for Construction Education

Progress Report Form Reference ACCE Document 101, Paragraph 6.3

Institution: Texas State University Type of Report: 1st Yr -- Program: Construction Science and Management 2nd yr--

Year Accredited: 02L13 Expiration Date: 02/18 3rd.Yr x Mentor Assigned: Yes No x Other

-- --

Mentor Name: Report Date: 10/28/15

Summary Comments: (limit i:,600 characters) The faculty of the Construction Science and Management Program (CSM) believe we have adequately alleviated the three (3) weaknesses and five (5) concerns cited by the visiting team. The "adequate space" issue is adequate for now, but our program has increased by 144 more students since the last site visit and the Engineering and Physics Departments, which share the RF Mitte Building with the CSM Program, are growing as well. In three (3) years, the Engineering Department will tentatively have a new building, hopefully vacating needed space in our building (RF Mitte), to accommodate the growing CSM Program.

Submitted by: Dr. Gary Winek/Dept. Chair's Initials Professor & Program Director Title

L.tJ/28/ 2 {)/.!.} Signature Date

Reviewed and Approved by: Dr. Robert B. Habingreither Interim Dean, Science & Engineering

Nean) Title r"d:\') ltJ/_2 L I 'J 'T

Signature Date

Reviewed and Approved by: Dr. Eugene J. Bourgeois II Provost & VP Academic Affairs Name t• :Kil 11 """Vost) Title 2: '*' < ' LO · L9· 'ZO t S

::;ignature ( r Date

List of Attachments (If necessary):

1

89

ACCE Progress Report Form -Weakness and Concerns (One sheet per weakness/concern)

Current Status of Progress: [{]Alleviated DIn Progress DCorrection Plan Attachment

2

Construction Unit [See Section 2.B.l of this report]. Dr. Winek is a qualified Construction Program Coordinator who isknowledgeable and committed to the Construction Program. However, he does not receive significant release time orcompensation to accomplish the unit's goals and objectives. [See Document 103, Section 2.2]

First Year Report -(limit 1,600 characters): IN PROGRESS Based on the VIBiting Team's recommendation that Dr. Winek "...does not receive significant release time.:."to administer the construction program, it was agreed through the Dean's office, that his semester work load would average 50% administrative release or six (6) work load credits, and 50% teaching or six (6) work load credits for a total of 12 work load credits. This is considered a full time load per semester for full time faculty. To date, significant progress towards this end has been made and by the 2014-2015 academic year, the transition to 50/50 administrative to teaching work load transition should be complete. Currently, this Fall he is teaching eight (8) work loads (CSM 2360, plus two labs, CSM 1260 and TECH 5100)leaving him with four (4) work load credits release or a 33/67 administrative/teaching split. By the Fall of 2014, he will be relieved of one lab associated with CSM 2360 for a 46/s4 administrative/teaching split. For the Spring 2014 semester, it is projected that he will be teaching six (6) work load credits (CSM 2360 plus two labs and TECH s100), leaving 6 work load credits for administration or a so/so split. This is a significant improvement over his Spring 2013 work load, where he was assigned 11.0 work load credits for teaching and three (3) work load credits for advising, for a total of 14.0 work load credits. Therefore, by the 2014/201s academic year, when the transition is complete, Dr. Winek will average 11.5 work load credits for administrative and 12.5 work load credits for teaching per academic year or a 48/s2% split between program administration and teaching.

Third Year Report - Oimit 1,600 characters): The weakness has been alleviated, with Dr. Winek now on a consistent 50% administration, 50% teaching workload. He typically

teaches the CSM 2360, Residential Construction Systems course, consisting of one lecture and two labs along with teaching a one

credit graduate course, TECH 5100, each fall and spring semesters.

90

The above changes wHl be fully implemented during the Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 semester.


PREFIX NO. COURSE NAME LEVEL CREDIT ANALYSIS/DESIGN HRSTECH 2351 Statics and Strengths of Materials Sophomore 3 10

CSM 3360 Structural Analysis Junior 3 30 CSM 3363 Heavy, Civil andHighway Constr Systems Junior 3 10

CSM 3366 Soils and Foundations Junior 3 15 CSM 3367 Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Systems Junior 3 25

90 Total

Current Status of Progress: [{] Alleviated DInProgress DCorrection Plan Attachment

3

Third Year Report -(limit 1,600 characters):

The above plan, indicated in the First Year Report, has been fully implemented. We now do not claim any Analysis and Design

hours from CSM 4313 and we have added appropriate Analysis and Design hours to the courses listed above.

91

IN PROGRESS

ACCE Progress Report Form -Wealmess and Concerns (One sheet per weakness/ concern)

' o

Current Status of Progress: [l]Alleviated OmProgress nCorrection Plan Attachment

4

Third Year Report -(limit 1,600 characters): Both Forecasting Costs, Cash Flow and associated problems have been incorporated into CSM 4364, Construction Project

Management and Scheduling. In addition, cash flow diagrams followed by examples and discussion provide the students with a

working knowledge of the subject. To insure this subject is being accurately covered, Mr. Brian Kent (Adjunct Faculty Member)

consulted with an accountant from his company DPR, to be sure the material taught was accurate.

92


5

Third Year Report -(limit 1,600 characters):

Writing construction documents along with oral and written communication skills have been strengthened since the site visit in the

following three classes. The Capstone class CSM 4360, has significantly matured, since the visiting team was on campus five (5)

semesters ago. The course now includes significant report writing, including writing construction documents as part of a Request

for Proposal (RFP), students are required to develop, followed by a group oral presentation to a panel of Industry Judges,

explaining their RFP. CSM 4369, Construction Contracts, Liability and Ethics has students writing contracts including RFls, ASls ,

CORs and Addendums,for example. CSM 4313, Architectural Design II, includes both a written and oral report of the groups'

commercial project they developed during the semester.

93

ACCE Progress Report Form -Weakness and Concerns (One sheet per wealmess/concern)

First Year Report -(limit 1,600 characters): IN PROGRESS A university level curriculum meeting was held during the Spring 2013 semester to address the concern the visiting team had with the 18-24 months it takes a new course proposal to be approved and become part of the curriculum. The group found it was a systemic problem and could not be altered without the Registrar's Office working closely with the Curriculum Office to combine the "Schedule of Class Calendar" with the "Course Development Calendar" to reduce the approval time to a year or less. Since then, the university has hired a new registrar this Fall and Talks are to begin in October of 2013 with the Curriculum Office to shorten the new course proposal approval process. Ms. Micky Aurtey, Director of Curriculum Services is hopeful a solution can be found in one to two years. In the short term, the department is moclifying its current TECH 4399, Seminars in Technology course to a "Topics in Technology" course during the current curriculum cycle. By doing so, a new course can be taught as a topics course immediately after the chair submits a letter to the Curriculum Director. Then the topics course can be converted into a new course with its own prefix and course title following the current 18-24 month cycle for new course submissions.

Current Status of Progress: llJAlleviated DInProgress DCorrection Plan Attachment

Third Year Report -(limit 1,600 characters): The process for introducing a new course, has now been reduced to one year. This was accomplished by the department adding

TECH 4389 , Topics in Technology, which allows the Department to immediately add a new topic course to the curriculum with the

approval of the Departmental chair. Concurrently, the new course forms can be submitted, adding the topic's course permanently

to the department's list of courses within18 months. However, in the future the curriculum process is moving to a software based

program that truly will make the process possible in one year.

6

94

ACCE Progress Report Form - Weakness and Concerns (One sheet per weakness/concern)

First Year Report - (limit 1,600 characters): IN PROGRESS The one hour, "Introduction to Construction Surveying and Site Layout" course is taught one day a week for two hours by an adjunct faculty member, Mr. Roden, who is a licensed surveyor. The first hour of the course is devoted to lecture and second hour to laboratory type activities. However, due to the size of the class and lack of equipment, not all students are able to complete the lab exercises during this time, and need additional time outside of class. To assist Mr. Roden, we have hired a "upper classman" with surveying experience to assist students with their labs outside of the regularly scheduled lab time. Also, we have moved the class from the traditionally 5:00 - 7:00 time slot to a 3:00 - 5:00 time slot to insure adequate daylight to conduct the class. Also, the VIBiting Team noted a lack of layout exercises. While site layout was happening in the course during the site team's visit, it was not well documented. Since then, the Construction Program Coordinator, has worked with Mr. Roden to document this exercise, where students lay out a building at a specific location and set elevation, based on a given bench mark. This exercise should be well developed by the end of the Spring 2014 semester, after being refined during the Fall 2013 semester.

Current Status of Progress: [Z]Alleviated DInProgress D Correction Plan Attachment

Third Year Report - (limit 1,600 characters):

We have invested significant time and money to alleviate the concerns mentioned above by:

1) Reducing class size, by increasing the number of sections taught

2) Hiring an assistant for the instructor, on a permanent basis, to help with the labs

3) Spending $18,000 on additional equipment to insure all students in the course have access to the required equipment.

Also, we schedule the course earlier in the day, to insure adequate day light for students to preform their supervised lab activities

along with spending considerable more time in the class on site and building layout exercises.

7

95

0 .··


CONCERN # 4 Description (taken directly from the Visiting Team Report) Space [See Section 6.A.2]. While the CSM Program currently has adequate space the pressure of a growing engineering program and

the University's research agenda could negatively impact the space allocated to the construction management program. Any

further reduction in construction management laboratory space could result in a future weakness.

First Year Report - Oimit 1,600 characters): IN PROGRESS Currently, the CSM program has adequate space to operate, but will have to be diligent in protecting this space as the Ingram School of Engineering, located on the fifth floor of the RF Mitte building, continues to expand. Engineering currently has a Masters proposal going through the approval process, which includes 21 new Graduate Assistant positions, 3 Professor positions, and 2 Lecturer positions, all of whom will need to be housed within our current building. Fortunately, both the chair of our Department and chair of Engineering work well together and I will work with both to protect the spaces currently assigned to the CSM program. Long term (5-10 years) there is a proposal to build a $92 million Engineering building, which would allow Engineering to move out of the RF Mitte building and into their own building. Unfortunately, the State Legislature failed to approve new "Student Revenue Bonds" which would have funded this structure, which is ranked as the number one building priority on campus. The Legislature meets again in three years and we are hopeful funds will be allocated at that time for the new Engineering building. Once built, this will free up considerable square footage for the CSM program to expand, as Engineering vacates space in the RF Mitte building.

Current Status of Progress: [{]Alleviated D InProgress D Correction Plan Attachment

Third Year Report - Oimit 1,600 characters):

Currently, the space allocated to the CSM Program has remained essentially the same since the site visit in October of 2013.

However, things are changing rapidly. The CSM program has grown from 248 majors in the Fall of 2013 to 392 majors during the

Fall of 2015. The Engineering and Physics Departments, whom also share the RF Mitte Building with the CSM Program, have also

experienced similar growth in their student populations. However, $107 million has been allocated to build a new Engineering

Building with the hope of Engineering vacating some of their current space in our building (R. F. Mitte) when the Engineering

Building is completed in three (3) years. We will have to wait and see exactly how space allocations will be made in the future, to insure space doesn't again become an issue.

8

96


Current Status of Progress: [{]Alleviated DInProgress DCorrection Plan Attachment

Third Year Report -(limit 1,600 characters): Dr. Winek's advising workload has been significantly reduced as he now only advises Technology Minors and Engineering

Technology Majors with a Construction Engineering Technology concentration. CSM majors are currently assigned one of the

other five (5) CSM Advisors early in the program, based on the last two digits of their student number. Also, the front office is

trained to screen students when they have an advising question and the staff now directs the students to the proper CSM faculty

advisor.

The College of Science and Engineering is doing its best to keep pace with the increase in enrollment, which is 5196 students as of Fall 2015. They have hired one new advisor, which has maintained the status quo since the site visit in 2013.

9

First Year Report - (limit 1,600 characters): IN PROGRESSThe first concern of the Visiting Team was that a large percentage of students claimed their department advisor wasDr. Winek and not one of the other five (5) CSM faculty advisors. While we had a system in place to equally divide students among CSM advisors based on the last two digits of their student ID number, it was not well enforced. Today, it is made clear in the CSM 1260, Introduction to the Construction and Concrete Industry class, who a student's advisor is along with requiring the student to meet with their advisor before registration. Also, the front office is now filtering students desiring to see Dr. Winek to be sure he is their properly assigned advisor. This process has significantly reduced the number of advises Dr. Winek sees and increased the number of students the other CSM faculty advisors see. Unfortunately, reducing the number of Advisees assigned to the College of Science and Engineering (COSE) Advising Center, is not possible at the present time due to enrollment increases in the college from 3300 total science majors in Fall 2012 to 4400 total science majors during the Fall 2013 semester. CSM majors may schedule advising appointments with the COSE Advising Center utilizing their five professional academic advisors who are available to meet with CSM majors. Currently, Texas State has no plans to hire additional professional academic advisors for the COSE Advising Center.