• The Engineering Technology Program at UCF will be recognized nationwide as a leading provider of motivated, hands-on, technically educated, professional employees to industry in Central Florida and beyond.
• The Engineering Technology Program at UCF will seek to grow the Department’s resources in partnership with industry to match the increase in demand for educated professionals in support of the Florida High Tech Corridor Initiative and other opportunities throughout the State of Florida and beyond.

• Convenience - A distance program is currently available for BSET, BSEET and IST programs. Many classes are evening and there is a flexible schedule to the courses. Degree program can be completed within the advertised amount of time.
• Curriculum - Courses currently offered cover skills and knowledge immediately usable in industry. Greater flexibility in offering courses with direct industry relevance. Very fast success track once students are employed.
• Student Body - Students are typically more mature and older than traditional engineering students. Majority of students are working in industry providing good mix of experience. Students make pay higher or comparable to engineers with same level (Bachelors) degree in Engineering.
• Teaching Quality - Average teaching quality (based on evaluations and feedback) is higher than College and University. Higher percentage of courses are offered by full-time faculty than other programs. Use of adjuncts is desired (good) due to industry experience required by program objectives. Exit interview results also indicate that the quality of teaching in the ENT program is higher than the average quality in the College.

• Perception - Perception of ENT graduates as “lesser” engineers cause some industries to lock out ENT graduates. The state of Florida does not allow ENT graduates to obtain PE licensure. Lower standards for math and science courses reinforce this perception.
• Facilities –Lower funding levels has meant lower quality lab facilities.
• Underrepresented Groups – ENT has experienced a lower minority and women percentage than engineering. This corresponds to the national average.

• Community College Partnerships - Increased activity by the community colleges (SCC, VCC, DBCC, UPC, …) to provide workforce in technical job areas has expanded the market of graduates available to the ENT program.
• Alumni Success - Strong alumni with successful careers in industry provide an excellent block of mentors and advertising strength to attract good graduates.
• Broadness of Program – The broadness of the program has allowed ENT to work with many other departments (Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, and Industrial) in sharing of facilities, and curriculum. Students have access to many other professional clubs and societies.

Objective 1.1 Attract and retain recognized faculty

Indicator 1.1.1 Percent of new faculty hires that are under-represented minorities and/or women [performance target = national norms]

Indicator 1.1.2 Normal tenured faculty leaving UCF for better offers
[performance target = 0%]

Objective 1.2 Enhance and foster faculty professional growth and gain national exposure

Indicator 1.2.1 Number of conferences and workshops attended by faculty as presenters [performance target = 2 per faculty per year]

Indicator 1.2.2 Number of faculty involved in national society leadership positions [performance target = 50% of department faculty]

Indicator 1.2.3 Number of faculty achievement articles in the Media (success videos) [performance target = 4 per year]

Objective 1.3 Increase annual refereed scholarly publications

Indicator 1.3.1 Number of refereed conference proceedings published per faculty [performance target = 1 per faculty per year]

Objective 1.4 Increase funding from external agencies

Indicator 1.4.1 Number of externally funded research releases per faculty [performance target = 1 per faculty per year]

Objective 1.5 Increase Teaching Effectiveness

Indicator 1.5.1 Number of faculty attending instructional workshops [performance target = 1 per faculty per year]

Indicator 1.5.2 Number of faculty receiving external recognition for teaching excellence [performance target = 1 faculty per year]

Indicator 1.5.3 The number of faculty attending ASEE, AAHE, etc. Conferences [performance target = 20% of faculty per year]

Indicator 1.5.4 Number of teaching-related journal and proceedings articles accepted for publication [1 per 4 faculty per year]

Indicator 1.5.5 Quality of instruction [performance target = 90% of faculty with ratings of very good to excellent]

Objective 2.1 Establish and implement programs to recruit, retain, and develop a quality, diverse undergraduate and graduate student body

Strategy 2.1.1 Department faculty attend “college nights” available at the Community Colleges and High Schools in partnership with IAB member-company representatives to develop a bond with prospective students and to display the Department technology to the interested public.

Strategy 2.1.2 Select faculty members will visit with high school counselors in information sessions to make them aware of the programs benefits

Strategy 2.1.3 Develop and offer an Engineering Technology graduate program

Objective 2.2 Develop a state-of-the-art educational environment and curricula

Strategy 2.2.1 Offer BSET, Operations option, and BS, Information Systems Technology, completely at a distance by fall, 2000 and fall 2002, respectively

Indicator 2.2.1 Courses in place

Indicator 2.2.2 Percent of teaching classrooms equipped with computer/information technology [performance target = 100 percent by 2002]

Indicator 2.2.3 Number of course enhancements and revisions (or review) [performance target = 90% of courses in curriculum every 4 years]

Objective 2.3 Increase faculty use of educational technology in the curricula

Indicator 2.3.1 Number of faculty who attend and use “technology-in-the-classroom” training programs [performance target = 2 faculty per year]

Indicator 2.3.2 Number of faculty using educational technology and innovations (list to be created) in the classroom [performance target = 100% of faculty]

Objective 2.4 Ensure quality of undergraduate and graduate programs through implementation of established Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) and Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) assessment process.

Indicator 2.4.1 ABET accreditation status [performance target = maintain ABET accreditation]

Indicator 2.4.2 SACS accreditation status [performance target = maintain SACS accreditation]

Indicator 2.4.3 Number of programs receiving successful 3-year review of SACS matrices by University Assessment Committee [performance target = 100 percent]

Indicator 2.4.4 Number of programs successfully completing their integrated ABET/SACS/Program Review/Accountability assessment plan [performance target = all programs]

Objective 2.5 Develop the structure for a student support service program to enhance student retention and success

Indicator 2.5.1 Number of engineering technology students actively and productively involved in the department’s recruiting/retention efforts [performance target = 10 % of full-time students]

Indicator 2.5.2 Level of satisfaction of students with department’s support services [performance target = 85 percent of students are satisfied]

Indicator 2.5.3 Percent of engineering technology students that achieve satisfactory academic progress [performance target = 85 percent by 2005]

Objective 3.1 Expand outreach with K-12 and CC systems in Central Florida

Strategy 3.1.1 Alumni Champion Program will be created to identify and commit successful alumni to recruitment activities within the companies they work for with a goal of attracting 2-year grads into a Engineering Technology program.

Strategy 3.1.2 Testimonials will be solicited from successful graduates and utilized in printed media as part of a mail campaign targeting prospective students both in employment and at the Community College and High School level.

Strategy 3.1.3 Internet will be used to link the UCF-ENT website, at minimal cost, with industry web pages, Community College websites, High School websites

Strategy 3.1.4 Strengthen AS to BS programs

Indicator 3.1.1 Number = 20 percent expansion per year

Indicator 3.1.2 Number of Community College Programs [performance target = baseline of community colleges in the metropolitan area]

Objective 3.2 Expand the scope and number of industry and government supported programs

Strategy 3.2.1 Department faculty and IAB members will attend local Job Fairs to offer an alternative path to those motivated to seek a change in their lives and employment

Strategy 3.2.2 Faculty members will offer seminars on contemporary topics of interest each quarter to manufacturing, engineering and construction companies at their place of employment to raise awareness about the level of teaching offered by the Department

Strategy 3.2.3 Faculty members will offer consulting to industry companies who support the Department financially or with in-kind donations of equipment or services

Strategy 3.2.4 Explore the establishment of a Central Florida applied technology resource consortium.

Strategy 3.2.5 Participate in Faculty Internship Programs

Strategy 3.2.6 Faculty will meet with Human Resource Managers to detail the benefits available to companies who employ graduates and work to overcome the habit of specifying job requirements as BSEE or BSME when BSEET or BSET is more appropriate.

Strategy 3.2.7 Offer undergraduate and graduate certificate programs

Strategy 3.2.8 Pursue research dollars

Strategy 3.2.9 Pursue creation of degree programs or concentrations in existing programs to meet needs of metropolitan community [performance target = 1 additional program/concentration every 2 years]

Indicator 3.2.1 Number of certificate programs [performance target = 1 additional program per year]

Indicator 3.2.2 Number of teaching, research and service links [performance target = 10 percent increase per year]

Objective 3.2 Strengthen our ties with international universities and companies

Indicator 3.2.1 Number of faculty involved in programs sponsored by International Committee of the College or University [performance target = 10 percent increase per year]
Indicator 3.2.2 Number of faculty involved in Fulbright scholars programs [performance target = 2 by 2011]

Goal 4 An organization committed to obtaining the highest quality standards in all phases of its operations, processes, and management

Objective 4.1 Establish a quality assessment process throughout the Department

Indicator 4.1.1 An implemented comprehensive assessment and quality improvement plan [performance target = development by 2005 and implementation by 2006]
Indicator 4.1.2 An established semester publication to capture periodic assessment data and review of processes, programs, and operations when the data is obtained [performance target = first publication by 2009]
Indicator 4.1.3 Number of faculty meetings with a major emphasis on assessment [performance target = two per year]
Indicator 4.1.4 Number of documented program improvements based on the use of assessment [performance target = at least one per program per year]
Indicator 4.1.5 Percent of faculty that have received training on assessment [performance target = 10% all faculty]

Objective 4.2 Enhance communications among college personnel and among academic and administrative units

Strategy 4.2.1 Develop a well defined protocol for disseminating information and requests to all department faculty and staff [performance target = implement by 2001].
Strategy 4.2.2 Inform faculty of activities and initiatives discussed in the Deans and Directors Council [performance target = implement by 2009].

Goal 5 An organization successful in obtaining resources to support academic development

Objective 5.1 Increase resources available to support faculty teaching and research

Indicators 5.1.1 Conduct periodic review of faculty salaries to access competitive status with salaries of faculty in comparable rank at other universities. Salaries less than average will be increased through out-of-cycle raises, and dual compensation [performance target = faculty salary competitive with national averages by 2007] .
Indicator 5.1.2 Develop connectivity with industry that results in increased research (sponsored research, faculty/scientist exchange programs) [performance target = 20% of faculty involved in programs].

Objective 5.2 Increase resources available to support recruitment and retention of quality students

Strategy 5.2.1 Develop brochures and advertising material

Indicator 5.2.2 Develop connectivity with industry that results in increased financial aid and educational experiences (Coop opportunities, fellowships/scholarships, senior design projects, and/or faculty/scientist exchange programs) [performance target = 10% increase in each of the above listed opportunities].

Objective 5.3 Ensure that resources are available to support development and expansion of key academic and research programs

Indicator 5.3.1 Attract and obtain funds from university E&G operating budget to support research endeavors [performance target = baseline number of budget allocated to research].
Indicator 5.3.2 Expand distance learning opportunities with state, national, and international partners that will increase student credit hours [performance target = 2 per year].

Objective 5.4 Increase resources available to support recruitment and retention of quality staff associates

Indicators 5.4.1 Supplement staff salaries through continuing education activities and dual compensation opportunities related to sponsored research.

Objective 5.5 Increase infrastructure, classroom space, lab space and office space.

Strategy 5.5.1 Identify amount of space to support increased enrollment.

• Classrooms
• Electronics labs
• Digital labs
• Feedback lab
• Communications lab
• Computer lab
• Fluids/Strength of Materials labs
• Metrology lab
• Studio hours

Statement of Chair’s Objectives

The chair’s objectives for the department are specific objectives set forth by the chair for the department independent of the strategic planning committee. These objectives in some measures duplicate the SP objectives, but also include objectives set forth by the chair.

Objective 1 - Increase enrollment to allow the department to operate under the “Pegasus model” .

The Pegasus model is a complex model which resolves generation of Student Credit Hours to a dollar figure and thus to a FTE model. To meet this objective through direct faculty generation, each faculty teaching 8 courses per year – would need to keep an average of 32 students per course (based on teaching 3000 and 4000 level course with no OPS support). Use of adjuncts reduces this number. The chair must balance use of adjunct and full time faculty to achieve a sustainable productivity, while maintaining program quality. In the Spring 2002 the department has been able to maintain productivity levels under the Pegasus Model for the first time.

Objective 2 – Increase availability of programs through Distance Learning and partnerships.

It is understood that courses taught in a Distance Mode require more effort on a per student basis and the use of technology, however with proper training and resources (WebCT support and training, assistance of the FEEDS staff, Training supplied by FCTL) it is quite reasonable to expect faculty to handle the loads of distance students. It is also expected that professors make the best use of their teaching methods and not compromise quality to accommodate distance students. The department has been able to schedule all lectures requested by the faculty in a distance mode. The next challenge is in dealing with laboratory issues for courses that have a laboratory component.

Objective 3 – Involve department faculty in applied engineering research

The department has traditionally faced a major problem with perception as “second class” engineers. This perception has been compounded by the reluctance of the faculty to participate in funded research, which is often perceived by Engineering faculty as inability. The majority of faculty within the department hold a Ph.D. in Engineering or a Basic Science and thus have the ability to perform research. Currently 4 of 9 faculty are actively involved in funded research – the expectation is that this number will increase to 100% by the year 2008.

In addition to funding research – ENT faculty should also be expected to actively participate in graduate research committees and serve on Master’s and Ph.D. committees. This can be done by making this a factor on the faculty annual report and evaluation, and increasing opportunities for collaborations. Faculty will also be encouraged to seek joint appointments with other departments.

Objective 4 – Increase partnership, lab sharing, collaborative research, and student design projects with other departments

A major issue within any College is the allocation of space and resources. At the same time very few Colleges have a resource shortage in this respect – instead territoriality creates an inefficient use of existing resources. Professors tend to protect “their” laboratories where sharing could create a better use of the facility. Because the ENT department teaches courses in specific topics (i.e. Hydraulics, Structural Analysis, etc.) on an infrequent basis (1 to 2 year cycle) – dedication of a specific laboratory for these purposes would be a misallocation of resources. It is the chairs responsibility to ensure the faculty have adequate resources to teach these courses. In all cases the first response is to seek the resources from within the College pool of resources and when available seek a sharing relationship with other departments.

Another opportunity for collaboration that has not been pursued adequately is the “interdisciplinary design project” Team projects are encouraged in the ENT senior design, but these have rarely crossed interdisciplinary boundaries. It is recognized that there is a need to provide incentives to faculty to encourage this type of collaboration – and the groundwork with the other departments has been made.