University of Hawaii Community Colleges
Instructional Annual Report of Program Data (ARPD)

Select the desired review year, college, and program from the drop down menus. Once a program has been selected, the results will be displayed.

Review Year: College: Program:

College: Hawaii Community College
Program: Architectural Engineering & CAD Tech

Printer Friendly

PDF PDF
The last comprehensive review for this program can be viewed at:
http://hawaii.hawaii.edu/program-unit-review/docs/2010_aec_comprehensive_instructional_program_review.pdf
STEM Program

Program Description

 

Mission/Description::

The Architectural, Engineering and CAD Technologies program’s mission is to provide the maximum learning opportunity for students to build proficiency in CAD technology, construction methodology, field and manual dexterity, design and code comprehension, and sound work ethics; in alignment the UHCC’s and HawCC’s mission to serve all segments of our Hawai`i Island community.

The Architectural, Engineering & CAD Technologies (AEC) program strives to prepare students for employment with architectural firms, contractors, engineers, and surveyors, or county, state and federal agencies. Students develop skills that enable them to complete job responsibilities that include assisting a surveying crew, creating schematic design sketches, construction working drawings of buildings, shop drawings, or in construction material sales, blueprint interpretation and other field related duties.

 Entry requirements for the AEC program include placement into Math 22 and placement into Eng 20R or ESL 9 or prior completion of both. The program also supports the following programs, Carpentry, Electrical Installation & Maintenance Technology, and Machine Welding & Industrial Mechanics, by providing five blueprint reading courses for their majors.

Part I. Quantitative Indicators

Overall Program Health: Cautionary

Majors Included: AEC

Demand Indicators Program Year Demand Health Call
09-10 10-11 11-12
1 New & Replacement Positions (State) 47 36 19 Unhealthy
2 *New & Replacement Positions (County Prorated) 3 11 1
3 *Number of Majors 59 59 43
4 SSH Program Majors in Program Classes 675 564 646
5 SSH Non-Majors in Program Classes 342 336 258
6 SSH in All Program Classes 1,017 900 904
7 FTE Enrollment in Program Classes 34 30 30
8 Total Number of Classes Taught 29 26 26

Efficiency Indicators Program Year Efficiency Health Call
09-10 10-11 11-12
9 Average Class Size 14.2 13.4 14 Healthy
10 *Fill Rate 88% 86% 91%
11 FTE BOR Appointed Faculty 2 2 1
12 *Majors to FTE BOR Appointed Faculty 29.5 29.3 42.5
13 Majors to Analytic FTE Faculty 22.8 24.3 18.2
13a Analytic FTE Faculty 2.6 2.4 2.3
14 Overall Program Budget Allocation $237,257 $167,190 $175,356
14a General Funded Budget Allocation $237,257 $167,190 $153,296
14b Special/Federal Budget Allocation $0 $0 $0
14c Tuition and Fees Not Reported Not Reported $22,060
15 Cost per SSH $233 $186 $194
16 Number of Low-Enrolled (<10) Classes 2 5 0

Effectiveness Indicators Program Year Effectiveness Health Call
09-10 10-11 11-12
17 Successful Completion (Equivalent C or Higher) 95% 82% 87% Cautionary
18 Withdrawals (Grade = W) 3 31 13
19 *Persistence (Fall to Spring) 71% 78% 77%
20 *Unduplicated Degrees/Certificates Awarded 14 6 10
20a Degrees Awarded 14 6 10
20b Certificates of Achievement Awarded 0 0 0
20c Advanced Professional Certificates Awarded 0 0 0
20d Other Certificates Awarded 0 0 0
21 External Licensing Exams Passed Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
22 Transfers to UH 4-yr 2 2 5
22a Transfers with credential from program 1 1 1
22b Transfers without credential from program 1 1 4

Distance Education:
Completely On-line Classes
Program Year  
09-10 10-11 11-12
23 Number of Distance Education Classes Taught 0 0 0  
24 Enrollment Distance Education Classes 0 0 0
25 Fill Rate 0% 0% 0%
26 Successful Completion (Equivalent C or Higher) 0% 0% 0%
27 Withdrawals (Grade = W) 0 0 0
28 Persistence (Fall to Spring Not Limited to Distance Education) 0% 0% 0%

Perkins IV Core Indicators
2010-2011
Goal Actual Met  
29 1P1 Technical Skills Attainment 90.10 87.50 Not Met  
30 2P1 Completion 45.00 43.75 Not Met
31 3P1 Student Retention or Transfer 56.00 65.22 Met
32 4P1 Student Placement 51.00 58.82 Met
33 5P1 Nontraditional Participation 16.25 27.08 Met
34 5P2 Nontraditional Completion 15.15 12.50 Not Met
Last Updated: August 6, 2012
Glossary | Health Call Scoring Rubric

Part II. Analysis of the Program

In the DEMAND category, new and replacement positions within the State and the County continues to decline as a reflection of the downturn in the construction economy.  As a result, the data shows the number of declared AEC majors has also declined from the previous year's numbers of 59 for both years, with a drop to 43 AEC majors.  However, the maximum capacity for incoming students is fixed at 16, due to the available square footage in the AEC program's facilities,  limiting the number of student manual drafting and CAD workstations.

In the EFFICIENCY category, the fill rate has increased but also to note, the Majors as well as FTE per BoR reflects one full-time faculty member.  This is a temporary reflection, as AEC was in the process of hiring a second full-time faculty member to replace a member who retired.

The current EFFECTIVENESS Indicator shows a positive increase in successful completion over the prior year.  Persistence data remains very close to the same in the last two periods.  Degrees awarded and transfers to a 4 yr. institution have both increased from 6 to 10 and 2 to 5 , respectively.  The number of withdrawals reflect a situation where there were two students who were not able to return the following semester, (1 due unavailability of financial aid, and the other due to a military situation) after early registering and both withdrew from  6 courses each.  A third student also withdrew from 6 courses during the first week of classes to transfer to UhHilo in preparation of then transferring to School of Architecture at UH Manoa.  The remaining withdrawals were the current students who were  continuing on into Spring semester where a new experimental course was being offered in lieu of the original course they  early registered for.  This involved the remaining 14 students, for a total of the 31 withdrawals and 13 withdrawals reflected in item #18 for both the 2011 and 1012 Spring semestesr in which the experimental course which also required  the processing of course waiver substitutions..  The following academic year, one of the two students overcame her personal hardship and returned to finish the program requirements and graduated.  The other student also retrned and is currently completing his 3rd semester coursework and is on track to graduating next Spring.

Part III. Action Plan

In the PERKINS IV indicator data for the 2010-2011 period, the Technical Skills Attainment and Completion categories were not met.  One student withdrew and 3 students were missing classes for logisitical and personal reasons. There were 4 non-traditional students in a cohort of 12.   Three out of the  four non-traditional students graduated, and said three  are currently employed in the field (1 at County Planning Dept., 1 in a full-time position at a private architectural firm, and 1 in a part-time contract with another private architectural firm).  The 4th student who did not graduate is currently enrolled in the AEC courses required for graduation. 

Part IV. Resource Implications

[To be completed.]

Program Student Learning Outcomes

For the 2011-2012 program year, some or all of the following P-SLOs were reviewed by the program:

Assessed
this year?
Program Student Learning Outcomes

1

Yes
PLO 4. Design and code comprehension. (SLO 5 & 8)

2

Yes
SLO 5. Formulate design, revise, and construct projects of knowledge and comprehension based on design criteria requiring recall of past courses/experiences and be able to defend, explain, and discuss designs.

3

Yes
SLO 8. Demonstrate computation and reasoning skills.

A) Evidence of Industry Validation

Assessment through industry validation was conducted in April 2012.  The AEC advisory council consists of 4 members in the following fields.  A licensed land surveyor, a licensed architect, a drafting/surveying equipment and supply business owner, and an AEC graduate currently working in the industry.  Three out of four was available to attend the April event and AEC meeting.

The AEC program also encourages students to seek a voluntary credentialing path for the nationally recognized Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Associate (GA) credential through the United States Green Building Council organization.  Sustainability concepts are introduced to the students in a 2nd semester course and concepts are incorporated throughout many courses in the remaining third and fourth semesters. This form of validation is currently optional for the AEC majors and entails extra-curricular studies, exam preparation, training and travel to take the exam.

B) Expected Level Achievement

The expected level of achievement by industry validation was at least 85% for the project artifacts presented at the meeting.

C) Courses Assessed

The artifacts assessed by the Advisory Council were assignments from the AEC 130 Residential Working Drawings course.  The unit of study was fundamentals of design and the assignment challenge was to develop a sustainable and efficient design for the annual Model Home Project.  This is AEC's capstone project in collaboration with the following CTE programs: Carpentry, Electrical Installation and Maintenance Technology, Diesel Mechanics, Machine Welding and Industrial Mechanics and the Agriculture Programs.

D) Assessment Strategy/Instrument

The artifacts assessed were architectural presentation boards consisting of a floor plan, site plan, front exterior elevations and site and building data. In this assignment, the students created  hand-drawn design sketches and mounted their drawings on a board to be presented to the Model Home committee consisting of faculty from all ATE programs involved in this Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) project.  Each year, the committee narrows the choices down to the top three designs and DHHL makes the final choice.

To design the floor plan layout and site plan with location of building, the students demonstrate their knowledge of building and zoning codes.  They also apply their understanding of the fundamentals of design.  They are provided  a project program with a set of design criteria, including maximum square footages for different parts of the building, and are faced with critical design decisions. This activity occurrs in the third semester of the program where each student has by now experienced multiple floor plan design assignments. They must utilize their past experiences and knowledge on this capstone project.

The Advisors were introduced to this project and were given a rubric assessment table to use in their assessment process.  Due to limited remaining time on the evening of this meeting, the advisors took the copies of the artifacts and the rubrics as "homework". 

E) Results of Program Assessment

Althought the Advisors initially expressed positive feedback on this particular project selected for assessment, the AEC faculty followed up multiple times with all advisors on the progress of their assessment. Unfortunately, they were not able to complete their assessment in time for the final report. The lesson learned from this unsuccessful experience is to minimize the extent of the project assignment selected for assessment, and to also recommend the 'College' gathering portion be shortened to allow enough time for individual program discussions plus time for in-person assessment of a simplified student project assigment. 

F) Other Comments

The LEED Green Associate credentialing process is intensive and intended for industry professionals in current practice. However, HawCC's Office of Continuing Education and Training has offered training courses with tuition grant monies for our students who were interested in the opportunity.  During this past academic year, eight AEC majors took advantage of the training workshops and thus far, three students passed the exam and are now credentialed as LEED Green Associates. The other five students have a remainder of six months to continue preparing and then re-take the exam on Oahu.

G) Next Steps

The AEC program will continue to assess courses and student projects with industry validation in the upcoming cycles.  In the Spring of 2013, AEC 117 Intro to Surveying will be assessed.  Artifacts includes exercises using the engineering scale and understanding contours.

The LEED Green Associate is the first level of credentialing in USGBC, and is well respected in the architectural field, therefore the AEC program will also encourage student participation as optional professional preparation whenever this additional training opportunity arises.