Direct and Indirect Assessment of Universidad de las Américas Puebla’s Food Engineering Program Outcomes

Abstract

The Food Engineering program from Universidad de las Americas Puebla (UDLAP) is approved by the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) and accredited by the Consejo de Acreditacion de la Ensenanza de la Ingenieria (CACEI), which is the peer-accrediting agency of the US Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) in Mexico. Graduates of UDLAP’s Food Engineering program (FE) shall attain thirteen outcomes; eleven of them are similar to ABET Criterion 3 (a-k) program outcomes; as well as specific IFT core competencies regarding major areas: food chemistry and analysis; food safety and microbiology; food processing and engineering; applied food science; and success skills. As part of assessment efforts at FE, the Food Engineering Undergraduate Curriculum Committee designed a strategy that uses both direct and indirect assessment measures. Direct assessments of the FE program outcomes were conducted through the analysis of evidence collected (since spring 2009) in the food engineering undergraduate thesis and corresponding defenses (by means of specific rubrics), as well as in the capstone course Design and Development of Food Products and Processes (by means of self-, peer-, instructor-, and outside evaluators-assessment results, as well as final grades received by students). In the case of theses and their defenses, the outcome with the highest score was for the program outcome “An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for food engineering practice”. Regarding the degree to which students utilized program outcomes in the design and development of its product as well as in their oral and written work-products at the capstone course, the mean scores from surveyed stakeholders were higher than the 3.0 out of 5.0 points. Indirect assessment was fulfilled through surveys and curricular mapping: 1) curricular mapping analysis of FE outcomes and IFT competencies; and 2) design and implementation of a survey that asked to assess with a Likert scale the perception of program outcomes in two respects: importance of the outcomes and progress made by students in achieving these outcomes. This survey has been applied since 2008 to the following groups: faculty, graduating seniors, alumni, employers, as well as to students enrolled in the program at their 1st, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th semester and earlier results are discussed elsewhere. FE curricular mapping was carried out with collaboration of program faculty who were asked to rate for each of the courses they teach the degree to which they are promoting FE thirteen outcomes and IFT core competencies. Responding whether they do not cover, initiate, develop, or emphasize each outcome and/or IFT competency in their classes. Faculty felt that the outcome that they promote and emphasize less is “an ability to communicate effectively in English in written form”. The following areas of improvement have been found from IFT core competencies mapping: “understand the basic principles and practices of cleaning and sanitation in food processing operations”, and “understand the requirements for water utilization and waste management in food and food processing”. FE program using of assessment results to improve student learning through curricular modifications as well as a summary of improvements and modifications up to date (such as using a plan to perform embedded assessments in several FE courses) are presented.