EE ABET 2010.pdf

Published on May 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 101 | Comments: 0 | Views: 686
of 421
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

ABET
Self-Study Report
for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in

ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
at

South Dakota School of Mines and Technology
Rapid City, South Dakota

June 30, 2010
CONFIDENTIAL

The information supplied in this Self-Study Report is for the confidential use of ABET and its
authorized agents, and will not be disclosed without authorization of the institution concerned,
except for summary data not identifiable to a specific institution.

1

Table of Contents
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ……….……………………………………………………7
CRITERION 1. STUDENTS ………………………………………………………………….13
CRITERION 2. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES ……………………………...26
CRITERION 3. PROGRAM OUTCOMES …………………………………………………. 37
CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT …………………………………………98
CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM ….………………………………………………………...106
CRITERION 6. FACULTY ………….……………………………………………………...128
CRITERION 7. FACILITIES ……………………………………………………………….141
CRITERION 8. SUPPORT ………….………………………………………………………153
CRITERION 9. PROGRAM CRITERIA …………………………………………………...163
APPENDIX A – COURSE SYLLABI ………….……………………………………………165
APPENDIX B – FACULTY RESUMES ……………….……………………………………260
APPENDIX C – LABORATORY EQUIPMENT …………………………………………...295
APPENDIX D – INSTITUTIONAL SUMMARY …………………………………………..305
APPENDIX E -- ASSESSMENT INFORMATION …………………………………………371
APPENDIX F -- CENTER FOR ADVANCED MANUFACTURING AND PRODUCTION
………………………………………………………………………….... 390

2

List of Figures
Figure 1-1
Figure 1-2
Figure 2-1
Figure 2-2
Figure 2-3

Electrical Engineering Curriculum Flow Chart ……………………………...........19
Number of EE Students by Fall Semester of the Year ……………………..…….24
Average salary comparison ……………………………….……………………....33
Plot of placement data ………………………………………………...………..…34
Alumni survey results ―
2000-08 ECE PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL
OBJECTIVES.‖………………………………………………………………….…...34
Figure 2-4 Alumni survey of the ―
2000-08 EE PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES.‖ ……....35
Figure 2-5 Career Fair Employers Survey – Overall Impression of EE Students ……………..36
Figure3-1a Example syllabus relating Course Outcomes to Program Outcomes ………….…. 46
Figure3-1b Example showing gap analysis of student-instructor determination of achievement of
Course Outcomes …………………………………………………………………..47
Figure 3-1c Example showing post-analysis of Course Outcomes by Instructor …………..... 48
Figure 3-2 ECE Assessment of Program Outcomes by course ……………………………….. 50
Figure 3-3 PDR/CDR Design Review Rubric ………………………………………………… 52
Figure 3.4 Capstone Design Outcomes Assessment ………………………………………… 54
Figure 3-5 Pass Rate for the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam …………………………….57
Figure 3-6 Trendline for Math % Difference From National Scores ………………………….60
Figure 3-7 Trendline for Probability and Statistics % Difference From National Scores ….....61
Figure 3-8 Trendline for Chemistry % Difference From National Scores …………………….62
Figure 3-9 Trendline for CENG Ethics and Business Practices % Difference from National
Scores ……………………………………………………………………………...63
Figure 3-10a Alumni Survey Program Outcomes ……………………………………………..64
Figure 3-10b Alumni Survey Program Outcomes ……………………………………………..65
Figure 3-10c Alumni Survey Program Outcomes ……………………………………………..66
Figure 3-11a 2007-2008 Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills …………….……………………………………………67
Figure 3-11b 2007-2008 Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills …………………………………………..……………….67
Figure 3-12a 2008-2009 Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills …………………………………………………………...68
Figure 3-12b 2008-2009 Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills ……………………………………………..…………….68
Figure 3-13a 2009 Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and Communication
Skills ……………………………………………………………………………..69
Figure 3-13b 2008-2009 Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills …………………………………………………………...69
Figure 3-14 Graduating Senior Exit Interview Questions …………………………………..70
Figure 3-15 STEPS Survey Outcomes …………………………………………………………………73

Figure 3-16 Competition Results from Capstone Design Teams and CAMP Teams ………....80
Figure 4-1: Short and Long term loop ………………………………………………………...98
Figure 4-2 ECE Assessment of Program Outcomes by course ………………………………..99

3

Figure 7.1(a) EP Building First Floor …………………………………………………….…144
Figure 7.1 (b) EP Building Second Floor ………………………………………………...….145
Figure 7.1 (c) EP Building Third Floor ……………………………………………………....146

4

List of Tables

Table 1-3.
Table 1-4.

History of Admissions for Freshmen Admissions for Past Six Years: All Students
……………………………………………………………………………………13
History of Admissions Standards for Freshmen Admissions for Past Six Years
Electrical Engineering …………………………………………..………...……..14
Transfer Students for Past Six Academic Years EE ………………………...…..21
Enrollment Trends for Past Six Academic Years …………………………..…...23

Table 1-5

Program Graduates ………………………………………………………..…………...….25

Table 1-1
Table 1-2

Table 2-1
Table 2-2

Table 3-1.
Table 3-2
TABLE 3-3
Table 3-4
Table 3-5
Table 3-6
Table 3-7
Table 3-8
Table 3-9
Table 3-10
Table 3-11
Table 3-12a
Table 3-12b
Table 3-13
Table 5.1a.
Table 5.1b
Table 5-2,
Table 5-3.
Table 5-4.
Table 5-5a
Table 5-5b
Table 5-5c
Table 6-1.

Institutional Objectives and the Computer Engineering Program Objectives …..28
The relationship between computer engineering program objectives and ABET (ak) Criteria ………………………………………………………………………..29
Three-year assessment cycle for Program Objectives and Outcome with Details
About Implementation ………………………………………………………......38
Association of American Colleges and Universities Employer Survey Mapped to
Program Outcomes ………………………………………………………….......40
The relationship between program outcomes and Program educational objectives
………………………………………………………………..……………….....42
Summary of Outcomes ……………………………………………………….....43
Assessment Measures used to determine achievement of program outcomes ….44
Achievement of Program Outcomes Assessment Methods ………………….....49
Spring 2010 Capstone Design Projects ……………………………………..…..53
Capstone Design Competition Projects and Co-curricular Competition Projects
………………………………………………………………………….…….….55
Relation of Capstone Design Student Performance to Program Outcomes Spring
2010 …………………………………………………………………….…….…56
Weighted Differences of % Correct Answers Between SDSM&T and National
Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Subject Areas Scores …………….….…..59
Alignment of STEPS outcomes with the ABET (a) through (k) ……….….…....72
History of CAAP scores for Electrical Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort
since 2004 ……………………………………………………………….…...…75
History of CAAP scores for Computer Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort
since 2004 ………………………………………………………………….…...75
Program Outcomes Assessment Methods ………………………………….…. 78
History of CAAP scores for Electrical Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort
since 2004 ………………………………………………………………….….108
History of CAAP scores for Computer Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort
since 2004 ………………………………………………………………….….108
Alignment of STEPS outcomes with the ABET (a) through (k) ………….…..112
Basic-Level Curriculum……………………………………………………..…115
Course and Section Size Summary ………………………………………..…..119
Math and Science Component of the ECE Curriculum …………………..…...123
Engineering Topics Component of the EE Curriculum …………………..….. 124
Courses with Significant Design Component …………………………..…… 125
Faculty Workload Summary …………………………………………….…….131

5

Table 6.2
Table 7.1a
Table 7.1b
Table 7.2

Faculty Analysis …………………………………………………………..…....132
ECE Laboratories …………………………………………………………........142
ECE Student-operated Laboratories ………………………………………..….142
Engineering Tools used in the ECE Curriculum …………………………..…..152

6

Self-Study Report

Electrical and Computer Engineering Department
Electrical Engineering
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Contact information
All the members of the faculty in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
participated in preparing this document. For further information on this document or other
related materials please contact:
Dr. Michael Batchelder
Professor and Department Chair
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology
501 East Saint Joseph Street
Rapid City, SD 57701-3995
[email protected]
(605) 394-2451 (department secretary)
(605) 394-1220
(605) 394-2913 FAX
B. Program History
The Electrical Engineering Department approved by the South Dakota Board of Regents
governing body in June of 1913 and was first accredited by the engineering accrediting agency in
1936.
Many changes have taken place since the last ABET visit in Fall 2004, and these are summarized
below:
Course and Curriculum
 The requirement to take GE 115 was dropped and EE/ME 264, Sophomore
Design, was introduced as an elective to be required starting fall 2010.
 The Robotics and Intelligent Autonomous Systems (RIAS) joint MS program
among CSC, ECE, and ME was created. It provides additional course
opportunities for undergraduates as well as graduate students and the possibility
for a wide range of projects including capstone design projects.
7





Coordination among ECE, Mechanical Engineering, and Computer Science on
Capstone Design was emphasized with many successful multidisciplinary
projects: Recycling Sorter, Regolith Mining, Submarine, and Electric
Snowmobile
Probability and statistics now a required EE course.

Instructional Delivery and Technology
 Tablet PC Program – all students have a laptop that they can write on the screen
with a stylus. The program is supported with appropriate infrastructure to operate
smoothly.
 Example of changes due to the Tablet program:
o EE/ME 351, Mechatronics changed to open source microcontroller system
to allow all students to legally install development software on their
tablets.
o Students can take notes on slides as they are presented in class.
Program Development
 An evening freshman student kit building (soldering parts onto circuit boards that
perform a function such as electronic dice) program was started 2009-2010 to
enhance and maintain interest. The IEEE student branch has taken on the project
and managed it successfully.
 Increased ECE and CSC Faculty coordination:
o Computer Science (CSC) professor sat in on CENG 442
o Experimental section of CSC 150 taught with developments from CENG
442
o ECE professor sat in on CSC Advanced Operating Systems Course
o ECE professor taught CSC 150 in exchange for CSC professor teaching
ECE course
o Increased cooperation on capstone design projects and research projects.
 A substantial increase in ECE Department scholarships: $68,000 for 43 students
 Enhanced department activities for students: Christmas party, treats during finals
week, lunch pot lucks, student lounge being refurbished and named as a
memorial to past secretary.
 Increased connections with the Center for Advanced Manufacturing and
Production (CAMP). Information about the program is found in Appendix F.
Infrastructure and Equipment
 Change from Mentor Graphics and UNIX to new controls lab
 Removed 3‖ wafer fabrication furnace that was too expensive to maintain and
operate
 EP 338, Mechatronics Lab benches replaced
 Antenna lab anechoic chamber installed in EP 127
 Installed system and locks for electronic card access to building and labs with
student IDs
 Telecommunications Instructional Modeling System (TIMS) purchased and
installed.
8

Administrative Changes
 University changing from rotating chairs to heads. This should result in better
leadership and continuity for department programs
 Flat structure. There are no deans, the heads report to the provost.
Departments are organic and dynamic human structures and often go through cycles of
administrative, faculty, and staff changes. Since the last visit many changes have occurred.
At the university level, there have been two presidents, two engineering deans, and two provosts.
The administrative structure has changed from rotating chairs on a 9 month appointment to heads
on 12 month appointments. The structure with two colleges and two deans has been replaced
with the heads reporting directly to the provost.
At the department level there have been three chairs and now a new head to start in the fall
semester of 2010.
Faculty changes include seven professors leaving the department due to retirements, move to a
dean position, spouses‘ career moves, not meeting department teaching standards, and the
decision to start a private company. The department is rebuilding with three new professors
joining the department in the past three years with more searches in progress. We are very
fortunate to have MS and Ph.D. graduate students and two adjunct professors doing excellent
work teaching courses for the department during the rebuilding process.
Staff changes include the loss of our beloved secretary dying of cancer, a replacement secretary
for a year who left to pursue law school, and the new addition of a very capable current secretary
who transferred from another department on campus
The impact of these many changes has been both negative and positive; these impacts are
detailed below. The process of self-study over the past year has been very beneficial in that it
clarified our internal structures, reconfirmed our continuous improvement processes and
structures, and furnished both the program and the incoming department head with a
comprehensive account of program strengths and opportunities.
C. Options
The electrical engineering program has no tracks or options in the department. The electrical
engineering curriculum is principally oriented toward preparing students for careers by providing
them with the engineering and technical education appropriate to meet modern technological
challenges. The basic curriculum includes required course work in mathematics, basic sciences,
humanities, social sciences and fundamental engineering topics in circuit analysis, electronics,
electrical systems, electromagnetic, energy systems, and properties of materials.
Electrical engineering students are required to select three senior elective courses from a wide
variety of subject areas to fit their particular interests. Elective subject areas include
communication systems, power systems, control systems, microwave engineering, and computer
systems.

9

D. Organizational Structure
On July 1, 2009, the college structure consisting of a College of Engineering and a College of
Science and Letters was disbanded. The administrative structure was flattened through the
elimination of the college dean positions (two positions total), and leadership for the academic
departments and programs was strengthened by transitioning the 9-month chair positions to 12month department head positions. As of the time of the fall 2010 visit, ten of fourteen
departments should have 12-month department head positions, depending on the outcome of
current searches:
1. Chemical and Biological Engineering
2. Civil and Environmental Engineering
3. Electrical and Computer Engineering
4. Geology and Geological Engineering
5. Humanities and Social Sciences
6. Industrial Engineering
7. Mechanical Engineering
8. Materials and Metallurgical Engineering
9. Mining Engineering
10. Physics
As quickly as budgets allow, all nine-month chair positions will be transitioned to 12-month
department head positions.
The department heads and chairs report directly to the Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs and meet with him bi-weekly in an Academic Leadership Council. Current
organizational charts for the institution as a whole and for the division of Academic Affairs are
included in Section G of Appendix D.
E. Program Delivery Modes
The department offers the Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering degree (BSEE)
exclusively as an on-campus, residential program. The classes are usually offered during the
day, primarily between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. However, a few classes, and many
help sessions occur during the evening hours.
A co-operative education experience is also available for all electrical engineering students who
have been admitted to the program. Students may use a maximum of six co-op credits toward
their BSEE degree.
F. Deficiencies, Weaknesses or Concerns from Previous Evaluation(s) and the Actions
taken to Address them
After the 2004 visit, the following institutional concern was cited by the Engineering
Accreditation Commission of ABET. This concern applied to all engineering programs.
1. Criterion 6. Facilities The undergraduate laboratory equipment for the engineering
programs at SDSMT range from adequate to very good, due mostly to the program
10

faculty writing grants to external bodies such as NSF. While this has been successful so
far at obtaining some state-of-the-art equipment that undergraduates may use, this is not a
reliable and sustainable method for ensuring that the undergraduate laboratories have
more general up-to-date equipment that the students are likely to encounter when they
enter the workforce. SDSMT therefore needs to identify and secure a stable funding
source for general equipment replacement that is vital to guarantee the future health of
their engineering programs.
Actions taken at the institutional level that address this concern are as follows:
In February 2005, a request was made of the Board of Regents for a 100% increase in the
laboratory fee levied on students for engineering laboratory courses. Regents priorities for
holding increases in student fees to under 5.5% led the Regents to approve a 22.3% increase in
the fees for all laboratory courses taught at SDSM&T. This increase was approved effective
March 2005. Monies collected from laboratory fees are allocated in a manner most effective for
the maintenance and upgrading of laboratories across campus. The provost receives 10% of all
laboratory fees, and the remaining 90% is placed in a special account of the department offering
the course for which the fees were levied. The department head controls use of laboratory fee
revenues. The provost typically redirects his 10% of laboratory fee revenues to the departments.
For instance, in AY 2009-2010, the provost redistributed to the department heads $110,000 in
laboratory fee revenues.
The building of the Paleontology Research Laboratory (33,000 square feet), and the Chemical
and Biological Engineering/Chemistry Building Addition (45,000 square feet) will be important
contributions to the upgrading of instructional laboratories when they are completed in summer
2010. The paleontology building will function primarily as a repository for the specimen
collection and will house preparation, casting, and instructional laboratories for the paleontology
program. The instructional labs now used for chemistry and chemical and biological engineering
will be replaced entirely by the new state-of-art laboratories in the new Chemical and Biological
Engineering/Chemistry Building Addition.
To further support the ongoing maintenance and upgrading of laboratories and equipment, the
allocation of ―
F&A monies‖ (i.e., the indirect costs charged to all externally funded programs)
was revised in 2006 (and again in 2009 with the elimination of the dean positions) with the result
that the provost receives 10% of all indirect costs, the vice president for research receives 15% of
indirect costs, the primary investigator (PI) of the externally funded program receives 10% of the
indirect costs, and the department head of the program where the PI resides receives 10% of the
indirect costs.
The provost and vice president for academic affairs collaborate and seek advice from the
department heads about the best use of the recouped indirect costs in the provost‘s and research
vice president‘s budgets for the maintenance and upgrading of laboratories and equipment.
In 2004 there were no department deficiencies, weaknesses, or concerns documented in the Final
Report. However, there were three observations.
1. A set of assessment processes is in place, and the current documentation of these
assessment processes within the electrical engineering program is extensive, but
11

spread out. Some flow charts showing an overview are provided but additional
succinct presentations documenting the processes would be helpful.
An attempt to coordinate the assessment processes into a more succinct
presentation is included in this self-study.
2. The design experience is completed by all students. In the past, a number of the
senior design projects were individual projects. The program is commended for
transitioning to more extensive team experience as demonstrated by recent projects in
the Mechatronics course and recent capstone design projects.
We are ensuring that the multidisciplinary projects continue by increased
coordination between departments on capstone design and the addition of EE/ME
264, Sophomore Design. Sophomore Design introduces multidisciplinary design
and the design process earlier in the curriculum to prepare for enhanced capstone
design projects.
3. A number of the students expressed the opinion that in GE 115, Professionalism in
Engineering and Science 1, the course content is mostly ―
busy work‖. Some thought
that it might be better to use this course to give them an overview of the fields of
engineering that might become their major.
We have replaced the GE 115 course with EE/ME 264, Sophomore Design that
presents design earlier in the curriculum giving the students an opportunity to
design an actual product incorporating both electrical and mechanical
requirements and actually manufacture it for each person in the class. This
multidisciplinary course includes many engineering fields and tasks such as
budgeting, managing, purchasing, ethical and legal issues, and manufacturing as
well as design so that students are engaged in real engineering that covers
multiple disciplines. More information on this course is presented in Criterion 4.

12

CRITERION 1. STUDENTS
A. Student Admissions
Incoming freshmen at the School of Mines are required to declare a major. Admission standards
apply to the institution overall and are not differentiated by program. Effective fall 2006,
admission standards were raised such that automatic admission is granted to any incoming
freshman with an ACT composite score of 25 or greater and a math ACT score of 25 or greater.
Automatic admission is also granted to applicants with a high school GPA of 3.5 or greater and
four or more years of years of higher-level math. Applicants with ACT composite scores of 20
or lower or a high school GPA of 2.0 or lower are denied admission. All other applicants are
evaluated on an individual basis by the Admissions Committee. Non-traditional students (i.e.,
age 24 or older), transfer students, and students seeking readmission are treated according to
Board of Regents policy 2:3, which can be viewed at http://www.sdbor.edu/policy/2Academic_Affairs/documents/2-3.pdf
Once admitted, students with an ACT math score of 25 or greater take the COMPASS test to
determine initial math placement. Students with an ACT math score of 24 or lower are placed in
math based on that ACT score. These automatically placed students may elect to take the
COMPASS in order to challenge their placement but are not required to do so. Table 1-1.1
below shows the history of admission standards for all freshmen at the School of Mines over the
last six years. Table 1-1.2 below shows the history of admissions for the Electrical Engineering
program.
Number
of Fed
Cohort
Students
Term
MIN. AVG. MIN. AVG. MIN. AVG. Enrolled
Fall 2009
16
26.1
840 1165.1 0.0%2 72.5%
361
Fall 2008
15
26.1
770 1176.5 10.0% 73.6%
314
Fall 2007
17
25.8
780 1129.6 4.7% 73.6%
348
Fall 2006
17
25.5
820 1187.6 9.2% 74.3%
279
Fall 2005
14
24.4
790 1092.2 0.5% 71.0%
352
Fall 2004
15
24.3
760 1179.5 0.9% 70.0%
338
1
Counts all students in IPEDS Federal Cohort, which means all first-time full time
degree-seeking students
2
Admitted student graduated 2nd in a class of 2 students
Table 1-1 History of Admissions for Freshmen Admissions for Past Six Years: All Students1
Composite
ACT

Composite
SAT

13

Percentile
Rank in High
School

Table 1-2 History of Admissions Standards for Freshmen Admissions for Past Six Years
Electrical Engineering
Composite
% rank High
New
# with
ACT/SAT
School
Students
ACT/SAT
Term
MIN.
AVG.
MIN.
AVG.
Enrolled
Scores
22
22
Fall 2009
23
27.0
5.3%
68.8%
Fall 2008
20
19
19
26.5
10.0%
72.2%
Fall 2007
20
19
21
28.2
10.5%
63.7%
Fall 2006
18
17
19
25.1
45.5%
70.6%
Fall 2005
21
20
20
25.7
34.5%
77.7%
Fall 2004
34
33
19
26.4
14.0%
78.5%
Electrical Engineering
ACT or SAT equivalent Composites score
B. Evaluating Student Performance
The ACT score and the COMPASS Exam are use to evaluate entering students for placement
into the appropriate math course. At the sophomore level, the College Assessment of Academic
Proficiency ( CAAP) exam evaluates writing, mathematics, reading, and science reasoning and is
taken upon completion of 48 credits. Students failing will be required to develop a remedial plan
with their advisors and will be allowed to retest within one year.
During the first year, the curriculum for engineering students is similar including common
courses of Chemistry, Calculus, English, and Physics. Assessment involves homework, quizzes,
tests, exams, reports, and other standard methods.
In ECE courses, students are evaluated using the standard methods mentioned with the added
assessment of the lab component of most courses including lab report assessment and projects
report assessment.
Students performing poorly at midterm are assigned a DEF grade. The Director of Retention and
Testing contacts those students and the student‘s advisor to ensure that the student and advisor
are aware of the need for increased attention to the course.
The SD State System general education requirements must be met prior to the junior year, with
an exception made for the School of Mines in the case of ENGL 289, Technical Communication
II and for three credit hours of humanities or social sciences. These two classes can be taken
after the sophomore year. The general education requirements prompt the registration officer to
carefully track each student‘s academic progression and to place a registration hold on any
student who advances too far into his or her major program of study prior to completing his or
her general education. An additional check and formative assessment of student progress is the
System requirement that all students take and score well on the Collegiate Assessment of
Academic Proficiency (CAAP) examination. Completion of 48 credit hours at or above the 100
level is required for eligibility to take the exams. Students must take the exams during the first
14

semester in which they become eligible. Because satisfactory performance is required for
subsequent registration and the baccalaureate degree, low exam scores provide another indicator
that an intervention and/or targeted advising are needed.
C. Advising Students
Academic Advising and Academic Support for all Students
Incoming freshmen are required to declare a major, and admission decisions are processed by
Admissions Office personnel as described above in Section A. Student Admissions.
Online interactive checklists are offered and updated each semester to guide first-time, nontraditional, and international students through each step of the enrollment process. The standard

New Student Checklist‖ directs students to clubs, organizations, and support services in order to
ensure a good transition to college. An example can be viewed at
<http://www.gotomines.com/admissions/accepted/checklist/standard/spring10>.
The ACT sub-scores for math and English are used to place students into mathematics and
English courses. A student may be required to take the ACT COMPASS test if
 The ACT scores are five years old and no college-level courses in math or English have
been taken in the intervening time
 The ACT math sub-score is 24 or greater
 The ACT math sub-score is 24 or lesser and the student wants to challenge the automatic
placement into a math course
 The ACT writing sub-score is 17 or less
 The ACT reading sub-score is 16 or less
The office of the Registrar and Academic Services (RAS) assigns each freshman a ―
freshmen
advisor‖ from his or her discipline or a closely related discipline. Transfer students are assigned
to the transfer advisor for the student‘s major area of study. Freshmen and transfer advisors are
faculty members identified by the academic programs for these designations because of their
training, their mentoring skills, or both.
Each academic program has an individualized process for transitioning new students from their
freshmen or transfer advisors to the advisor in the major who will remain the student‘s advisor
throughout their undergraduate study.
All academic programs have a Curriculum Check Sheet, and most also have curriculum flow
charts. These items are reviewed and the checklist updated by the student hand his or her advisor
according to a schedule established in each program. All students are strongly encouraged to
visit advisors at the beginning of every semester; however, the availability of self-service
functions through WebAdvisor sometime thwarts advisor efforts to encourage students to make
face-to-face contact. Registration holds, regularly scheduled degree audits by the registration
officer, and mandatory degree-check events designed by each program help keep a student on
track and well advised.
The Registrar and Academic Services (RAS) assists with freshman orientation, counseling,
course selection and registration guidance prior to and through a student‘s first semester of
15

enrollment. At the end of the first semester, each student is assigned a faculty advisor in their
program of study. The advisor helps the students with respect to General Education requirements
that are necessary to meet institutional as well as departmental requirements.
While a student progresses towards a degree, the advisor monitors his or her academic standing.
Every semester after midterm, the RAS office generates a deficiency report that includes the
student‘s name, his or her advisor‘s name and the course or courses in which the student is not
performing well. These reports are sent to each department and then to each advisor. The
advisor then talks to the student about his or her problems and tries to suggest possible solutions.
Students whose GPA falls below minimum university-wide standards for two consecutive
semesters may be subject to academic probation.
The University also developed a Web-based advising system called WebAdvisor. WebAdvisor is
a tool that allows applicants, students, and faculty to perform many different functions online at
their convenience. Those who have applied for admission to the South Dakota School of Mines
and Technology can view their admission status and placement test score summary. Students can
register for classes, add/drop classes, view their academic profiles (e.g., grades, transcripts, test
scores), and view their account profiles (e.g., account and financial information
Academic Advising and Academic Support for key student groups
Campus-wide structures and processes for delivering targeted advising and academic support to
students who are ―
traditional,‖ transfer, ―
non-traditional,‖ Native American, female, veterans of
military service, international, and/or deemed to be ‗at risk‘ are described below.



Traditional‖ students are newly graduated from high school, less than 21 years of age,
and are enrolling in college for the first time. These students fill out a Course
Registration Survey that solicits the information needed for the office of the Registrar and
Academic Services to create their course schedules for the first year. While alterations to
a student‘s schedule can be readily made in response to advisor input, providing a
schedule for incoming students has proven to be the best way to get first-time, full-time
students off to a good start.
All universities in the SD State System consider College Entrance Examination Board
Advanced Placement scores of 3, 4, or 5 for course credit. Similarly, the System
recognizes the rigor of the International Baccalaureate (IB) courses and the IB Diploma
Program and considers higher-level courses for which students earned a five (5) or better
on the final exam for credit. Details on System policies regarding AP and IB credits can
be found at http://www.sdbor.edu/administration/academics/CredValidation.htm
The office of the Registrar and Academic Services (RAS) assigns each freshman a

freshmen advisor‖ from his or her discipline or a closely related discipline. These
freshmen advisors are faculty members identified by the academic programs for
designation as ―
freshmen advisors‖ because of their training, their mentoring skills, or
both.

16




Transfer students‖ enter the School of Mines with previously earned post-secondary
credits. See Section D below on ―
D. Transfer Students and Transfer Courses.‖




Non-traditional‖ students are 21 years of age or older and may have previous postsecondary experiences and/or professional and life experiences that qualify as credit
towards a degree. For such students, we offer the College Board‗s College Level
Examination Program (CLEP) and credit by verification processes. Credit by
examination can be arranged on a case-by-case basis; however, credits earned through
validation methods other than nationally recognized examinations (that is, universityadministered tests and verification like military credit or prior learning) are not allowed.
Credit by all examination methods cannot exceed 32 credits for baccalaureate degrees.
For details, see <http://www.sdbor.edu/administration/academics/CredValidation.htm>.



Native American students enjoy the advocacy and support of the Office of Multicultural
Affairs (OMA) and the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES)
student group. While the (OMA) responds to the needs of all under-represented
students, including African Americans, Latino/a students, and Asian Americans,
concerted efforts are made to offer Native Americans a structured support network that
includes academic support services, peer mentoring, workshops focused on career and
personal development, and promotion of cultural competence through access to
community diversity education seminars. The School of Mines runs targeted outreach to
Native American high school students and has a thriving NSF-funded Tiospaye in
Engineering academic support and scholarship program designed to improve the
recruitment and retention of Native American students. (Additional information is
available at <http://multicultural.sdsmt.edu> and http://tiospaye.sdsmt.edu>.)



Female students make up roughly 30% of the overall student population and have been
supported since 2005 by the Women in Science and Engineering (WISE) program.
Between 2005 and 2010, a dedicated director position existed for the coordination of
WISE programming, including a mentor and mentees (M&M) program that paired upper
class women with freshmen and sophomore students. The WISE office also conducts
extensive outreach to middle- and high-school girls, and the annual ―G
irls‘ Day‖ event
has brought 200+ young women to campus for a day-long engineering and science
experience since 2005. Administrative oversight of the WISE program is in transition and
housed within Admissions as of the writing of this self-study.



―Ve
terans‖ are a growing sub-group of students with distinctive needs. In 2009, to
supplement the support given to veterans by the Veteran‘s Information Registration
Officer in RAS, a Veteran‘s Resource Center was created. A Veteran‘s Club for
deployed and returning veteran students is strongly supported by faculty and staff
members in the Department of Military Science and in the division of Student Affairs.



International students are supported throughout their time on campus by the Ivanhoe
International Center <http://www.hpcnet.org/international> A special online checklist is
maintained to guide international students through the enrollment process

17

<http://www.gotomines.com/admissions/accepted/international> , and Ivanhoe Center
staff assist with all matters, from VISA requirements to housing.


―Atrisk‖ students are identified as such via multiple indicators, such as academic
probation, multiple academic appeals and/or referral to the Early Alert Team by staff and
instructors. At risk students are contacted by the Director of Retention and referred to
support services, including University Counseling and ADA services, the Tech Learning
Center for tutoring, supplemental instruction sessions, and the Career Center for
consultation on career interests and aptitudes.
Students whose cumulative grade point average falls below a 2.0 are placed on academic
probation and advised not to enroll in more than twelve (12) credits. While on academic
probation, a term grade-point average of 2.0 or better must be maintained in order to
avoid academic suspension. Suspension means a student must sit out of school for two
semesters or seek early readmission through the academic appeal process.
SD State System policy allows a student to register for a course three times before he or
she must receive permission from the Academic Appeals Committee to make a 4th
attempt at a course. A comprehensive plan to radically reduce the number of multiple
attempts in foundational courses in math and chemistry is being implemented at the
School of Mines and will be fully operational by fall 2010. The plan involves week-four
evaluation of student progress and a schedule of highly structured and mandatory
interventions, including attendance at a weekly University Success Symposium.

The basic curricula for the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department are published in the
university catalog. Each student is provided the website address for the catalog. In addition each
student is provided with a EE Flow Chart that indicates the courses required in the ECE program
and the recommended semesters in which they should be taken. Figure 1-1 shows a copy of the
EE flow chart. Copies of updated versions of the EE flow chart, University Catalog and semester
schedules are available on the web, paper copies are readily accessible in the ECE office and also
in the hallway outside the ECE office.
Academic Advising for ECE Students
Advising begins when faculty meet with prospective students to tour the ECE facilities, with
introduce them to current students, discuss career possibilities and the curriculum. Upon
entering the program, the student is assigned an advisor. Department advisors work with
Department of Retention and Testing to meet with incoming students to review good practices,
identify potential problems to avoid, review curriculum and their first semester courses..
Knowing the catalog and curriculum requirements is the student‘s responsibility; the advisor is
there to assist, to handle problems, and to offer professional advice on courses and career paths.
Advisors monitor student progress and work with the Registrar and Academic Services (RAS)
to identify problems early and solve problems when they occur. New ECE faculty do not advise
students until the faculty member has been in the department long enough to become familiar
with the curriculum. Adjunct faculty are not academic advisors.

18

The online system WebAdvisor allows the student and the advisor to check the student‘s
transcript and perform a degree audit for tracking progress towards graduation. Advisory use the
program flowchart shown in Figure 1-1 as a means of monitoring progress towards graduation as
the curricular requirements, prerequisites, co-requisites, and semesters offered provide a global
view of the student‘s progress.
We are currently working on a process to make more use of the Tablet PC program in advising.
Student Name:

Electrical Engineering
Latest Revision: December 8, 2009

Preparatory

CHEM
106

3

or high school
chemistry
(recommended)

PHYS
111
MATH
102/102L

Freshman (16/17)

3
C

MATH
120

3

CHEM
112L

1

CHEM
112

3

Entry Level Math
and English
Determined by:
ACT scores
and
COMPASS exam

PHYS
213L
PHYS
211

3

3
C

MATH
123

4
C

MATH
125

4

PHYS
213
MATH
321

CENG
244
PE or

1

MUEN 1XX
1xx

CSC
150
PE or

3

4
C

1

3

GenEd 3
SS/Hum

4

EE
221

4

EE
351
ENGL
279

Course
###

Completed or Concurrent

EE
311

3

EE
382*

S

F

3.5

Senior 4
Elective

GenEd 3
SS/Hum

MATH
381 or 441

3

EE
330*

4

EE
312

3.5

S

Senior 4
Elective

EE
464

2

Senior
Elective or
EE grad
course

EE
465

2

Tech 3
Elective

S

F

4

(Sophomore Standing)
32 credits
completed

EE
320

4

ENGL
289

3

F

4

EE
322

S

Free 3
Elective

Note: 1 of the above
courses (*) may be
taken in the Sr year

Free 1
Elective
Upper 3
SS/Hum

16 if entered SDSM&T before 2007

6 Credits SS (Gen Ed - Goal #3 - 2 disciplines)
6 Credits HUM (Gen Ed - Goal #4 - 2 disciplines or
foreign language)
3 Credits - 300 or 400 level course

Credit Hours
Grade Required (if applicable)
F = Fall Semester
S = Spring Semester
O = Odd Numbered Years
E = Even Numbered Years
(blank) = Offered every semester

Humanities
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

__
__
__

Social Science
1. _________ __
2. _________ __
3. _________ __

Upper Level _______________

Figure 1-1 Electrical Engineering Curriculum Flow Chart

19

4

EE 312
EE 322

EE
421

F

EE 311
EE 330

EE
431

F

EE 330

EE
432

FO

EE 311

EE
451

S

EE 362

EE
461

F

EE 382

EE
481

F

EE 362
EE 382

EE
482

FE

EE 382

EE
483

S

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

CENG 244
CSC 150

CENG 4
342 S

EE 312

CENG 4
420 SE

EE 320

CENG 4
440 F

CENG 342

CENG 4
442 S

15 Credits Social Science and Humanities

GenEd 3
SS/Hum

When Offered

11 credits are required

2

3

C

Legend
Prerequisite

EE
362*

F

(varies)

3

(Sophomore Standing)
32 credits
completed

GenEd 3
SS/Hum

EM
216

Free Elective or
EE 264 Fstarting
fall 2010

1xx
MUEN 1XX

ENGL
101

MATH
225

4

3

2

3

IENG
301
ME 211

EE
381

4

Senior Electives

Senior (18/15)

3

1

C

EE
220
4

Junior (16.5/17.5)
(Junior Standing)
64 credits
completed

or high school
physics
(recommended)

(if qualified)

Sophomore (18/18)

CENG 244
MATH 381
or 441

CENG 4
444 F

CENG 342

CENG 4
446 S

CSC 150
EE 351

CENG 4
447 SO

Career Advising for All Students and for Students in the Electrical Engineering Program
The Career Center is centrally located in the student center and is very active in promoting
services that range from interest and aptitude inventories, career counseling; assistance with
participating in the Students Emerging as Professionals (STEPS) program for professional
development; resume and interview preparation; and linking students with coop, internship, and
employment opportunities. (More detail can be found at <http://careers.sdsmt.edu>.
The Career Center hosts two career fairs on campus per year, one each in the fall and the spring.
At the time of the last general review, in fall 2004, fifty-seven employers were represented at the
Career Fair. The number and variety of employers represented increased each year and totaled
145 in fall 2008. Economic conditions depressed the number of employers represented last year
to 76 in fall 2009. The percentage of students who graduate having completed an internships or
coop experiences (i.e. 75% as of academic year 2008-09), job placement rates (i.e., 98% for
2007-08 graduates), and average starting salary (i.e., $56,215 for 2008-09 graduates) remain very
solid.
The ECE faculty provide career-planning support by helping students with alumni contacts,
advice on graduate school, writing letters of recommendation, and general discussion of career
paths. Companies with job openings often contact the department directly and this information
is passed along to the Career Planning Office and to appropriate students.
D. Transfer Students and Transfer Courses

Transfer students‖ enter the School of Mines with previously earned post-secondary credits.
An online checklist is created each semester to guide transfer-student transitions to the School of
Mines. (See <http://www.gotomines.com/admissions/info-for/transfer> for an example.)
Upon admission, the registration officer in collaboration with the Associate Provost for
Accountability and Assessment determine which credits meet the general education
requirements, any upper-division humanities or social sciences requirements, and physical
education requirements. The registration officer sends a check list showing the results of this
credit-transfer analysis to the student‘s for review and inclusion in the student‘s file.
Transfer-credit decisions for courses in the student‘s major are made by the academic
department. All academic programs have a designated ―
transfer advisor,‖ and the registration
officer assigns this person to an incoming transfer student as his or her initial advisor. The
Universities in the SD State System share a common course numbering system and common
course descriptions for many courses. Transfer-credits from schools in the System and from
schools with which an articulation agreement exists are easy to process.
Transfer credits from other post-secondary schools (both domestic and foreign) are reviewed on
a case-by-case and course-by-course basis. For mathematics, chemistry, physics, some of the
sciences, general engineering, and some science courses the typical course of action is for the
course catalog description and syllabus to be examined to determine sufficient similarity to a
required course.
20

All transfer credit granted is fully documented on the Degree Check Sheet that is completed as
part of applying for graduation. If the Degrees Committee could have any questions about the
application of transfer credits, course syllabi and other documentation accompany the Degree
Check Sheet when it is forwarded to the Degrees Committee for final approval.
The ECE Department transfer advisor works with the transfer students to assure that the
appropriate courses are reviewed and appropriate credit is assigned.

Number of Transfer
Students Enrolled
10
6
8
5
8
7

Term
Fall 2009
Fall 2008
Fall 2007
Fall 2006
Fall 2005
Fall 2004

Table 1-3. Transfer Students for Past Six Academic Years EE

D.1. ECE Department Policy on Waivers and Substitutions

Waivers If a student cannot, or for some reason need not, take a particular course, that course
may, under appropriate circumstances, be waived. The credit, however, must be made up with
additional course work. An example is a waiver of physical education for someone with a
documented physical disability. Under appropriate circumstances, the prerequisite for a course
may be waived or deferred. All waivers are documented and communicated to the Registrar and
Academic Services office.
Substitutions A course may be substituted for a required course provided the course is similar in
content and meets the intent of the required course. No additional course work credit is required
as long as the substitute course carries an equal amount of credit (or more) to that of the required
course. An example is the substitution of physics thermodynamics for mechanical engineering
thermodynamics. Any substitution must be in accordance with the ABET requirements.
Procedure for Waivers or Substitutions Waivers and substitutions are made only at the
recommendation of the advisor to the department chair who brings them to a vote of the

21

department faculty. If approved, the action will be recorded in the student‘s file kept by the
advisor and a memorandum sent to the RAS office to be included in the student's file.

E. Graduation Requirements
Early in the semester prior to the semester in which the student plans to graduate, the major
advisor completes a Degree Check for the office of the Registrar and Academic Services (RAS).
A Degree Check involves retrieving the student‘s record from WebAdvisor and performing an
inventory of the student‘s academic record in conjunction with both general education and
program requirements.
The advisor annotates the Degree Check sheet whenever a substitute course has been allowed for
one of the required or recommended courses in the program. If a course was taken on an

Independent Study‖ or ―
Special Topics‖ basis because of the SD State System requirements for
minimum course enrollment, this will be noted. Before a student‘s application for graduation
will be processed by RAS, the advisor must sign and send to the registration officer a
confirmation that a degree check has been performed and the student has met all requirements.
To guarantee that all graduates of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department have
satisfied all of the University, Department and ABET requirements, a system of checks and
balances is employed.
Student academic records are maintained on the Datatel Colleague® student information system.
The system is accessible by faculty members for the read-only access to student academic
records through Colleague®. Faculty members who are academic advisors also have access to
their advisees records through WebAdvisor, an Internet portal to the Colleague® or
WebAdvisor. The program evaluation tool of Colleague®, sometimes called the ―
degree audit‖,
records each student‘s course completions on a list of curricular requirements for the degree.
The ECE department utilizes the Datatel Colleague® student information system to perform a
degree check for all graduating students. When all requirements have been completed, the
student is qualified for graduation. In addition to this, the Academic and Enrollment Services
office also double checks all the transcripts sent by the departments.

F. Enrollment and Graduation Trends
Table 1-4 below shows the number of student enrolled and number of graduates in recent years
in a yearly basis. Figure 1-2 plots the number of students enrolled for the past six years. The
enrollment trend follow national trends with a drop in enrollment and then a recent rise as
prospective students and their parents realize that there are careers in electrical engineering with
good pay available even in the economic downturn. Table 1-5 shows placement for the last 25
EE graduates.

22

Year

Year

Year

Year

Year

Year

20042005

20052006

20062007

20072008

20082009

20092010

0

1

1

0

0

0

Full-time Students Fall

149

141

137

124

102

112

Full-time Students Spring

147

142

130

105

93

106

Part-time Students summer

24

23

29

25

23

20

Part-time Students Fall

15

16

17

14

18

8

Part-time Students Spring

14

15

18

28

15

13

Student FTE summer1

7.0

9.2

9.9

7.5

6.5

6.7

Student FTE Fall1

159.1

149.3

144.9

131.6

110.9

114.2

Student FTE Spring1

154.8

152.6

138.9

119.9

98.8

111.2

Full-time Students Summer

Degrees Awarded

26

18

26

28

33

15 credits per term; dual major students are counted in each major
1
FTE = Full-Time Equivalent

Table 1-4. Enrollment Trends for Past Six Academic Years

To provide a context for the data on enrollment in electrical engineering, the following tables are
provided in Appendix D:
Table D-5.2 Program Enrollment Data, All Students, All Programs
Table D-5.3 Program Enrollment Data for Programs in the Educational Unit

23

23

Number of EE Students

Number of EE Students by Year
Fall Semester
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2004

Figure 1-2

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Number of EE Students by Fall Semester of the Year

24

(For Past Five Years or last 25 graduates, whichever is smaller)

1999 Fall

12/20/2008

NA

2

2001 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

Initial or Current
Employment/
Job Title/
Other Placement
Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard
US Air Force (civilian)

3

2001 Fall

12/20/2008

NA

United Launch Alliance

4

2002 Fall

12/20/2008

NA

5

2003 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

6

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

Union Wireless

7

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

Black and Veatch

8

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

ATK

9

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

SDSMT Chemistry Dept

10

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

Innovative Systems

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

Wyoming Machinery
Co.
Grad School –
SDSM&T
Ultieg Engineers

2004 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

2004 Fall

12/20/2008

NA

2004 Fall

12/20/2008

NA

2005 Fall

12/20/2009

NA

2005 Fall

12/20/2009

NA

2005 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

20

2005 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

21

2005 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

22

2005 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

Lockheed Martin

23

2005 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

Grad School- SDSM&T

24

2006 Fall

5/20/2009

NA

US Air Force (civilian)

25

2007 Fall

12/20/2009

NA

L-3 Communications

Numerical
Identifier
1

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Year
Matriculated

Year
Graduated

Prior Degree(s)
if Master Student

Certification/
Licensure
(If Applicable)

Grad School –
SDSM&T
Medical School
Open Systems
International
Western Area Power
Administration
DRS Intelligence &
Avionics Solutions
Digi-Key

(NOTE: ABET recognizes that current information may not be available for all students)
Table 1-5 Program Graduates

25

CRITERION 2. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES
This section describes the development and on-going evaluation of the Department of Electrical
and Computer Engineering (ECE) program objectives. The objectives describe the expected
accomplishments of graduates during their first few years after graduation. The program
objectives have been derived from and support the mission statement of the South Dakota
School of Mines and Technology and are based on the needs of its constituents.
In 2003 the program educational objectives were revised. After on-going regular evaluation, the
program educational objectives have been deemed appropriate and have not changed.

A. Mission Statement
The university‘s mission (printed below) is published in the SDSM&T catalog on the university
website at http://catalog.sdsmt.edu/mission-and-purpose/.
University Mission, Vision and Goal
The South Dakota School of Mines and Technology serves the people of South Dakota in
their technological university. Its mission is to provide a well-rounded education that
prepares students for leadership roles in engineering and science, to advance the state of
knowledge and application of this knowledge through research and scholarship, and to
benefit the state, regions, and nation through collaborative efforts in education and
economic development.
The School of Mines is dedicated to being a leader in 21st Century education that reflects
a belief in the role of engineers and scientists as crucial to the advancement of society.
Our vision is to be recognized as a premiere technological university in the United States.
Most immediately, our goal is to be recognized as the university-of-choice for
engineering and science within South Dakota and among our peer group of specialized
engineering and science universities.
The Electrical and Computer Engineering department also has published its mission statement in
the university catalog and is copied below.
Department Mission
The mission of the electrical engineering program, in support of the mission of School of
Mines, is to provide electrical engineering students with education that is broadly based
in the fundamentals of the profession so that graduates will be able to maintain a high
degree of adaptability throughout their professional careers. It is also intended that the
students will develop a dedication to the profession and an ability to maintain
professional competency through a program of lifelong learning.

26

B. Program Educational Objectives
The terms and definitions used throughout this report are consistent with ABET publications and
guidelines. Their consistent use within the program and campus wide has a strong positive
impact on achieving clarity and cooperation campus wide in regards to assessment.
Program Educational Objectives are statements that describe the expected accomplishments of
graduates during the first few years after graduation and are unique to each program.
Program outcomes are statements that describe what students are expected to know, attitudes
they are expected to hold, and what they are able to do by the time of graduation. Achievement
of program outcomes should indicate the student is equipped to achieve the Program Educational
Objectives. For ABET-accredited programs, outcomes must embrace the 11 (a) through (k)
requirements of ABET Criterion 3
Course objectives are statements about the broad educational goals of a course.
Course Outcomes are statements that describe what students are expected to know, attitudes they
are expected to hold, and what they are able to do as a result of taking a course.
The Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering curricula are designed to provide the
fundamental principles of engineering and science, and the liberal education essential to the
continued professional growth of the typical graduate. The Electrical and Computer Engineering
department program objectives listed below are also published in the catalog on-line at
http://sdmines.sdsmt.edu/, under departments and Electrical and Computer Engineering.
Objectives –Electrical Engineering
1. Graduates will be able to successfully practice electrical engineering and related fields
regionally, nationally, and globally.
2. Graduates will be well-educated in the fundamental concepts of electrical engineering and
be able to continue their professional development throughout their careers.
3. Graduates will be skilled in clear communications and teamwork and capable of
functioning responsibly in diverse environments.

C. Consistency of the Program Educational Objectives with the Mission of the
Institution
The program objectives were crafted within the framework of the mission of South Dakota
School of Mines and Technology, the mission of the electrical engineering program, and the
ABET accreditation criteria. Table 2-1 below illustrates the correspondence of the institutional
objectives to the electrical engineering program objectives.

27

A
SDSM&T
Objectives

Well
Rounded
Graduate

B.
Leadership
Roles

C.

D

Advance the
State of
Knowledge

Benefit
State,
Region,
Nation

E
Premiere Tech
Univ of choice
in SD and
Region

Electrical Engineering
Objectives
1 Practice in field regionally and
nationally.
2 Knowledgeable in
fundamentals
3 Skilled in communications
and teamwork and functioning
responsibly in diverse
environments.

Table 2-1 Institutional Objectives and the Electrical Engineering Program Objectives
The program objectives are designed to produce graduates who will be well educated in the
fundamental concepts of electrical engineering and mathematical principles and, moreover, will
be able to continue professional development throughout their life. Due to economic
globalization interdisciplinary teaming and communication skills are becoming increasingly
important as such we prepare graduates to function responsibly in diverse environment.
Table 2-2 below shows the relationship of the electrical engineering program objectives to the
ABET Criterion 3 outcomes a-k.

28

Obj 1: Graduates will
be able to successfully
practice electrical
engineering and related
fields regionally and
nationally

Obj 2: Graduates will be well
educated in the fundamental
concepts of electrical
engineering and able to
continue their professional
development throughout their
career.

a.Knowledge of Math, Science
& Engineering

X

X

b. Design and conduct
experiment

X

c. Design a system and meet
desired needs

X

Program Outcomes

Obj 3: Graduates will be
skilled in clear
communications and
teamwork and capable of
functioning responsibly in
diverse environments.

X

d. Function in multidisciplinary teams
e. Identify, formulate, and
solve engineering problems
f. Understanding of
professional and ethical
responsibility

X

X

X

X
X

g. Ability to communicate
effectively
h. Engineering solutions in a
global and societal context

X

i. Recognition of the need for,
and an ability to engage in
life-long learning

X

X

j. Knowledge of contemporary
issues

X

X

k. Techniques, skills, and
modern engineering tools

X

X

X

Table 2-2: The relationship between electrical engineering program objectives and ABET
(a-k) Criteria

D. Program Constituencies
The constituents of the electrical engineering program include the following:
1. Employers of graduates of electrical and electrical engineering programs
2. Electrical Engineering alumni
29

3. Current undergraduate electrical engineering students
4. Electrical and Computer Engineering faculty
1. Employers of our graduates: Employers of our graduates are the primary constituents of the
program. Program objectives are based primarily on the needs of employers. Examples of the
employers of our electrical engineering graduates include Digi-Key, Ultieg Engineers, Lockheed
Martin, and numerous other industries. By our plan, we survey the employers of our 3rd and 7th
year graduates yearly. As explained elsewhere, some of the annual surveys were missed but data
from employers surveyed at the Career Fairs provides more results than we have been able to
obtain from sending survey requests to employers. The most recent survey sent to employers in
the spring of 2009 returned only two responses. The most employer input comes from recruiters
visiting campus, especially during the fall and spring Career Fairs. Career Services asks Career
Fair industrial representatives to fill out surveys that provide information for the department.
An additional source of employer input is our Industrial Advisory Board (IAB), which has been
in place since early 1990s. The board meets yearly on campus with the department faculty,
student representatives, and the administration. The faculty and the IAB members set the
agenda for the meeting cooperatively. The agenda normally includes a review of proposed
changes in the academic program, discussions of new activities for the department, and meeting
with student groups and administrative personnel. The report and the recommendation of the
IAB are distributed to all faculty members and the Provost.
Current members of the advisory board include:
Bob Case, NERC Compliance Manager at Black Hills Corporation
Jon Titus, Free Lance Journalist and former editor of EDN and Test and Measurement
World
Herschel Smartt, Laboratory Fellow and Industrial Technologies Department Manager
Idaho National Labs
Jackie Sargent, Vice President of Power Supply and Renewables Integration, Black Hills
Power (not able to attend the last board meeting
One of the priorities of the board is to rebuild and expand the board to approximately a dozen
members. Past members going off the board included representatives from Rockwell Collins and
Intel Corporation.
2. Alumni: Alumni are very actively encouraged to share their perspectives on and advice for
the program through alumni surveys and the human interchange fostered by the alumni
newsletter and personal visits to alumni by department faculty members. The all school reunion
every fifth year provides an opportunity for discussion and feedback from alumni. We survey
the 3rd and 7th year graduates yearly although during the transition between chairs some of the
surveys were missed. The change to a head instead of chair will provide better continuity. The
most recent survey covered alumni from 2000-2001 and 2004-2007. Responses were collected
in the spring of 2009.

30

3. Current undergraduate students: Undergraduate electrical engineering students are
constituents of the program. Their parents and families are considered constituents, albeit
indirectly, because of their natural interest in the quality of the program.
The department chair meets with Student Advisory Board (SAB ) when needed but at least
annually to find out problems and issues faced by our students. SAB is very active in both
voicing concerns and suggesting solutions to problems and recommendations for improvements.
As an example, students sought to improve their access to ECE laboratories and the building.
With the assistance of funds from the Provost, we were able to add electronic locks that can be
programmed for access by student ID cards.
The student constituency is also consulted through graduation surveys and exit interviews. To
make students more comfortable and to encourage candidness, we conduct exit interviews with
graduating seniors through the Academics Services department. The most recent exit interviews
were conducted in 2007. During changes of chairs some of the interviews were missed;
however, the change to a head in place of a rotating chair will improve continuity. The most
recent exit interviews were scheduled for the spring of 2010. We will be modifying the process
since a request for a voluntary visits to the Academic Services department for the interview was
not successful. Conducting the exit survey in the senior design class with Academic Services
department personnel should be a more successful approach.

4. ECE Faculty: The electrical engineering faculty are a constituent of the program, as are the
computer engineering faculty, the engineering faculty members in other departments at the
institution, and the general faculty members at South Dakota School of Mines and Technology.
The ECE faculty follow the Chronicle of Higher Education and professional organizations such
as IEEE and ASEE as well as other journals to track current curricular trends. The faculty also
participates in various workshops and meetings related to curriculum development and
engineering accreditation.

E. Process for Establishing Program Educational Objectives
Since the 1998 accreditation review, the ECE program objectives have been revised twice, once
in spring 2000 and again in fall 2003. The process to ensure a timely review of our program
objectives and to provide for continuous improvement is as follows: Every three years there will
be a review of program objectives:




by the Industrial Avisory Board
by the department faculty
by the Student Advisory Board

After these reviews are completed, results and comments are considered by the department
faculty and appropriate action taken.
31

F. Achievement of Program Educational Objectives
The method used to evaluate the extent to which the educational objectives in electrical
engineering are being met is described here. We have adopted the view that the Educational
Objectives refer to abilities demonstrated by our graduates during the first several years
following graduation from the program. We evaluate the achievement of these objectives by
employing the following performance metrics:
Objective 1: Graduates will be able to successfully practice electrical engineering and related
fields regionally and nationally.






Number of grads working in field or related fields regionally
Number of grads working in field or related fields nationally
Satisfaction with graduates‘ performance as expressed by employers
Demand by key employers of SDSM&T‘s graduates
Salary and placement data

Objective 2: Graduates will be well educated in the fundamental concepts of electrical
engineering and able to continue their professional development throughout their career.


Number of CENG grads who go on to graduate school




Number of CENG grads who take the PE exam
Satisfaction with graduates‘ knowledge of CENG fundamentals as expressed by
employers
Satisfaction with knowledge of CENG fundamentals as expressed by graduates
themselves
Number of CENG grads who become active in professional societies
Career moves and promotions data from Alumni survey





Objective 3: Graduates will be skilled in clear communications and teamwork and capable of
functioning responsibly in diverse environments.
Satisfaction with CENG graduates‘ communication and teaming skills as expressed by
employers





Satisfaction with communication and teaming skills as expressed by graduates
themselves
Results from the employers Career Fair survey,
Interviewers at the Career Fair with employers
Positions held by alumni from Alumni survey.

We evaluate the objectives based on the needs of our constituents once in every three years and
make refinements as warranted. We also assess our students‘ achievement of these objectives,
but to a lesser degree than for program outcomes since we have less access to students after
graduation than before graduation. Overall, however, the ECE department employs a package of
measures that offer an accurate composite picture of the fitness of the objectives themselves and
32

the degree to which graduates of the program exhibit the learning and skills the objectives
describe.
The primary evidence of student achievement of program objectives comes from
1. Alumni Surveys conducted every year for 3rd and 7th year graduates
2. Employer Survey conducted every year for the employers of the 3rd and 7th year
graduates
3. Alumni database
4. Input from the Advisory Board members and other corporate contacts
5. Results from the employers Career Fair survey.
The next section under Criterion 3 describes the process and results of our assessment and the
level of achievement of our program outcomes by our students.
F.1 Analysis of Inventories & Surveys Used to Assess Program Objectives
F.1.a Analysis of Placement Data
Employment inventory and census information are tabulated to track where graduates are
working and how much they earn.
Figure 2-1 below compares the average salary of EE graduates of SDSM&T fresh out of
university and EE graduates nationwide. Salaries in general have been increasing over the past
several years but may have been affected by the recent economic situation. The average salary
for the years 2005/6 to 2009/10 was $55,251.

Salary

Salary Comparison
$62,000
$60,000
$58,000
$56,000
$54,000
$52,000
$50,000
$48,000

SDSM&T
National

Year

Figure 2-1: Average salary comparison

33

Figure 2-2 below shows the placement data of our graduates. The data is influenced by the
ability of our Career Services unit to obtain information.
Personal contacts with our graduates indicate that the number of graduate working in their field
is actually slightly higher than reflected here. The demand for electrical engineers has been
relatively strong in spite of the recent economic downturn.

Number of Graduates

Placement Data
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Number of Graduates
Working in Major
Graduate School

Year

Figure 2-2: Plot of placement data
F.2 Alumni Survey Analysis

ECE Alumni Survey
Program Educational Objectives
(n=16)

6
5
4

Grade

3
2

Importance

1

Difference

0
-1

1

2

3

Figure 2-3: Alumni survey results ―2000-08 ECE PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES.‖

34

Electrical and Computer
Engineering
Program Educational
Objectives

Assessment of the extent to
which the objective was met
5=High

1. Graduates will be able to
successfully practice electrical
and/or computer engineering and
related fields regionally,
nationally, and globally.
2. Graduates will be well
educated in the fundamental
concepts of electrical and/or
computer engineering and be able
to continue their professional
development throughout their
careers.
3. Graduates will be skilled in
clear communications and
teamwork and capable of
functioning responsibly in diverse
environments.

5

4

1=Low
3

5=High

2

1

2

1

2

1

N.O.

5

4

3
N.O.

5

4

3
N.O.

Importance of associated
skills or knowledge
1=Low

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

Figure 2-4: Alumni survey of the ―2000
-08 EE PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES.‖
The results from our most recent survey of ECE alumni were received in the spring of 2009. The
2009 alumni survey included specific questions about all program objectives and outcomes as
shown in Figure 2.4 above. Students reported both ―
expectations‖ and ―
satisfaction‖ pertaining
to how well the ECE program prepared them relative to each objective, and this enables us to
calculate a ―
gap analysis.‖ In Figure 2.3, ―
grade‖ refers to student satisfaction, or how well
prepared they judged themselves to be and ―
importance‖ refers to the significance the alumi
place on the achievement of a particular objective.
Overall, the mean ―
grade‖ alumni gave us on the achievement of program outcomes was 4.42 on
a 5-point scale, which faculty regard, overall, as satisfactory. The maximum difference between
student satisfaction and importance (or ―
gap‖) is seen in objectives # 3, communication, teaming,
and functioning responsibly in diverse environments.
We are increasing the degree to which we encourage students to get involved in multi-discipline
teaming projects, especially with students from our mechanical engineering program. The
introduction of EE/ME 264, Sophomore Design, includes measures to increase experience of
teaming and communications.

35

F.3. Employer Survey
Results from the employer survey at the Career Fair for 2007-2009 are given in Figures 2-5.
More complete data are given in Criterion 3.

EE Career Fair
Employers Overall Impression 2007-09
n=90
0.60
0.50

0.56

0.40
0.30

0.37

0.20
0.10

0.08

0.00

0.00

Average

Fair

Poor

0.00
Excellent

Good

Figure 2-5 Career Fair Employers Survey – Overall Impression of EE Students
The Employers Survey of our alumni was disappointing as too few results were obtained to draw
any conclusions; however, the comment below from one of the employers is consistent with the
other results obtained.

Educational Objectives 1 and 2 need strengthening beyond "can get a job (1)" and "understand
concepts (2)". By emphasizing project work in small teams in the program, Expand 1 to include
group leadership and managing group dynamics based on the team roles: "team leader,
individual contributor, program lead". After all engineering and software development are both
like "team sports". Expand 2 to include "applying developing strong problem-solving skills"
(creativity also desirable). Concepts are not enough in the business world, real projects that
demonstrate the application of the knowledge to solve real-world problems is highly valued by
prospective employers everywhere.‖

36

CRITERION 3. PROGRAM OUTCOMES
A. Process for Establishing and Revising Program Outcomes
Program outcomes are defined here as the statements that describe what students are expected to
know or be able to do by the time of graduation from the electrical engineering program. The
ECE department adopted ABET (a through k) outcomes as their program outcomes.
This section describes the assessment process, documented results, and evidence that results are
applied to continuously improve the program and a demonstration of the achievement of each
program outcome. We have a good process to ensure a timely review of our program outcomes
and to provide for continuous improvement. It is the right process for us; however, the process
was disrupted by leadership changes. Leadership is being rebuilt. We have a coherent record to
describe since 2004 but we cannot claim that all faculty members adhered to the process for the
last six years.
The original assessment schedule is shown in Table 3-1; however, this has evolved during
leadership changes and staffing changes into a more practical and realistic process of reviewing
assessment results as they are available at weekly department meetings and evaluating possible
changes at end of semester meetings.
As the notes for Table 3-1 indicate, much of the assessment schedule was followed but some
items (e.g. alumni surveys, employer surveys, and exit interviews) were missed and some made
up at a later date. We believe that adequate information for assessment is available for those
surveys that were performed as shown in the table.
Additional items beyond those in the original plan have evolved as assessment indicators
including Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination results, results of capstone and
competition team projects, and the activity of the IEEE student branch. Although these items
are mainly used to evaluate the achievement of program outcomes, they also can provide
feedback for evaluating the program outcomes themselves. FE examination results are reviewed
by category as they become available. Results from engineering competitions are an indicator of
how well our students perform in designing and building projects compared with other
universities. The IEEE student branch has over 60 members and every year for the past six years
has chartered a bus to attend the IEEE Region V and to participate in the student robotics
competition.

37

Year 1 (2005-06)
(2008-09)
Fall

Spring

Year 2 (2006-07)
(2009-10)
Fall

Spring

Year 3 (2007-08)
(2010-11)
Fall

Spring

Student Assessments

X1
X1

X1
X1

X1
X1

X1
X1

X1

X1

Instructor Assessments

X1
X1

X1
X1

X1
X1

X1
X1

X1

X1

Capstone Design Assessments

X2
X2

X2
X2

X2
X2

X2
X2

X2

X2

200/300 level Course Review

X2
X2

X2
X2
X2
X2

400 Level Course Review

X2
X2

Exit Interview

X1
X3

X1
X3

1

Advisory Board Report

X
X1

X
X1

X

Alumni Survey

( )
X4

X3

X3

Employer Survey

()
X5

X3

X3

X1

1

Evaluation of Program
Objectives and Outcomes

1

X5

Implementation of Changes

X

5

Notes:
1

Followed plan with few exceptions
Did not follow plan but performed informal assessment
3
Missed scheduled assessment
4
Makeup, not on original schedule
5
Informal evaluation at weekly and end of semester department meetings and changes made
when needed
2

Table 3-1. Three-year assessment cycle for Program Objectives and Outcome with Details
About Implementation
38

Only two responses were received from the employer survey; poor response from employer
surveys seems to be a common problem; however, a 2009 national survey by the Association of
American Colleges and Universities, Raising The Bar -Employers‟ Views On College Learning
In The Wake Of The Economic Downturn, provided us with some useful information indicating
the program outcomes are relevant to employers The survey is found at
http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/2009_EmployerSurvey.pdf .
Quoting from the survey: ―
The areas in which employers feel that colleges most need to increase
their focus include 1) written and oral communication, 2) critical thinking and analytical
reasoning, 3) the application of knowledge and skills in real-world settings, 4) complex problemsolving and analysis, 5) ethical decision-making, 6) teamwork skills, 7) innovation and
creativity, and 8) concepts and developments in science and technology.‖ Table 3-2 maps these
employer responses to the a-k program outcomes.

39

AACU Employers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Survey
Program
Outcomes

a

x

b

x

x

c

x

d

x

e

x

x

f
g

x
x

h

x

i

x

j

x

k
Table 3-2

x

x

Association of American Colleges and Universities Employer Survey
Mapped to Program Outcomes

B. Program Outcomes
Program outcomes are defined here as the statements that describe what students are expected to
know or be able to do by the time of graduation from the electrical engineering program. The
ECE department adopted ABET (a through k) outcomes as their outcomes. Each Electrical
Engineering student shall demonstrate:
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data

40

(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic
constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety,
manufacturability, and sustainability
(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a
global, economic, environmental, and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
The program outcomes are documented on the ECE Department web site: http://ece.sdsmt.edu.
C. Relationship of Program Outcomes to Program Educational Objectives
The Program Outcomes are demonstrable by students at the time of graduation, whereas the
Objectives are intentionally more broad. The educational objectives are therefore somewhat
more difficult to measure quantitatively. However outcomes are chosen to provide an education,
which should lead to demonstration of the desired objectives. Table 3-3 shows the relationship
between outcomes and program objectives.

41

Program

Obj 1: Graduates will
be able to successfully
practice electrical
engineering and related
fields regionally and
nationally

Obj 2: Graduates will be well
educated in the fundamental
concepts of electrical
engineering and able to
continue their professional
development throughout their
career.

Knowledge of Math, Science
& Engineering

X

X

Design and conduct
experiment

X

Design a system and meet
desired needs

X

Objectives
Program
Outcomes

X

Function in multi-disciplinary
teams
Identify, formulate, and solve
engineering problems
Understanding of professional
and ethical responsibility

X

X

X

X
X

Ability to communicate
effectively
Engineering solutions in a
global and societal context
Recognition of the need for,
and an ability to engage in
life-long learning

Obj 3: Graduates will be
skilled in clear
communications and
teamwork and capable of
functioning responsibly in
diverse environments.

X

X

X

X

Knowledge of contemporary
issues

X

X

Techniques, skills, and
modern engineering tools

X

X

TABLE 3-3 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PROGRAM OUTCOMES AND PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL
OBJECTIVES

D. Relationship of Courses in the Curriculum to the Program Outcomes
Table 3-4 shows summary of outcomes of each course against the program outcomes. Math,
Social Science and Humanities courses are not included in this table.

42

Contemp. Issues
Outcome ‗k‘
Modern Tools

Outcome ‘i’Life-long
Learning
Outcome ‗j‘

Outcome ‗g‘
Communication
Outcome ‗h‘
Global & Soc.

Outcome ‘f’ Ethics

Courses

Outcome ‗a‘
Fundamentals
Outcome ‗b‘
Design & Expt.
Outcome ‗c‘
System Design
Outcome ‗d‘
Teaming
Outcome ‗e‘
Engg. Problem

Outcomes

CSC 150

X

ME 211

X

EM 216

X

CENG 244

X

X

X

EE 220

X

X

X

X

EE 221

X

X

X

X

EE 311

X

X

X

X

X

EE 312

X

X

X

X

EE 320

X

X

X

X

EE 322

X

X

X

X

X

EE 330

X

X

X

X

X

EE 351

X

X

X

EE 362

X

EE 381

X

EE 382

X

X

X

EE 464

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

EE 465

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

EE 421

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

EE 431

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

EE 432

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

EE 451

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

EE 481

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

EE 482

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CENG 342

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CENG 420

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CENG 442

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CENG 444

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CENG 446

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

CENG 447

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X
X

X

X

X

X

X
X

X
X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Table 3-4: Summary of Outcomes

43

E. Documentation
The relationship between each course and the program outcomes is found in Table 3-4. A binder
for each course contains representative student work and a mapping of the program outcomes
and the assessment method used.

F. Achievement of Program Outcomes
Both direct and indirect measures of achievement of program outcomes are applied. Direct
measures provide for the direct examination or observation of student knowledge or skills
against measurable performance criteria. Indirect measures of student learning that ascertain the
opinion or self-report of the extent or value of learning experiences. Table 3-5 shows the
assessment tools used.
Direct Assessment
Fundamentals of Engineering Exam
CAAP Exam
Industrial Advisory Board Report
Employer Survey
Design Competition Results

Indirect Assessment
STEPS Survey
Course Assessment Survey
Exit Interview
Student Advisory Board
Alumni Survey
Capstone Project Outcomes

Table 3-5 Assessment Measures used to determine achievement of program outcomes

F.1 Course Assessments
The assessment plan diagramed in Figure 3-2 has been developed to ensure that graduates have
achieved the Program Outcomes. The faculty as a whole monitors the surveys from the
students, alumni, and industry on a regular basis. Typically, end of semester meetings review
and consider any needed changes.
Each course has well defined course outcomes, which are initially identified by the instructor or
instructors teaching the course and are mapped into Program Outcomes. Every course syllabus
provided to students at the beginning of the semester has course outcomes clearly identified.
Course outcomes of each course are reviewed at the end-of-semester faculty meeting, or if
necessary, in other special purpose faculty meetings. Students evaluate each course at the end of
the semester through these course outcomes. Each course instructor also assesses how well
students are able to demonstrate course objectives. For an example of an Instructor Assessment
please see the example in Figure 3-1. Student assessments as well as instructor assessments for
all courses will be available at the time of visit.
Based on course contents, the instructor develops sets of outcomes reviewed by the ECE faculty.
Course outcomes are mapped to the program outcomes. Appendix A contains all the ECE course
44

syllabi. At the end of each semester, course instructors have the task of evaluating the students‘
achievement for each outcome. Instructor assessment also includes comments on specific areas
of improvement and/or ideas for enhancing the course.
Instructors are encouraged to give a pre-exam in ECE courses where students are evaluated to
determine how well previous courses have prepared them to take successive courses. This also
guides instructor as to what material may need to be reviewed from previous course or courses.
Results will be discussed among the faculty members informally in faculty meeting, and
appropriate actions initiated to correct perceived deficiencies. The students who are deficient
can be given some extra assignments, and tutored.
The syllabus that is given to students for each course at the beginning of the semester includes
expected course outcomes and their relationship to the program outcome. This helps the students
to better understand the entire curriculum. At the end of each semester students also evaluate
their achievement of each course outcome. All data are gathered by the course instructor around
the end of the semester and are provided to the ECE secretary who, with the help of work-study
students, enters the data in a spreadsheet for the chair to review at the end of semester meeting
(or possibly at the start of the semester meeting, depending on when the data becomes available).
Figure 3-1 is an example of the course outcomes analysis performed at the end of the semester
by each instructor for each course (as mentioned leadership changes and staffing changes may
have resulted in some of these being missed). Figure 3-1a shows the mapping of course
outcomes to program outcomes. The instructor rates his or her perceived level of achievement
for each of the course outcomes as do the students; the result is compared in a gap analysis as
shown in Figure 3-1b. Additionally, the instructor writes comments for each of the outcomes
with notes on what was successful and suggestions for improvement or changes as needed as
shown in Figure 3-1c. These results are stored on the file server where they are available for
review – useful for the next person to teach the course.

45

EE 421 Communications Systems Fall 2008
COURSE OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Define specialized communications terms.
2. Describe and explain modulation methods.
3. Describe and explain the affects of noise on communications systems.
4. Analyze communications systems using basic tools such as Fourier transform, convolution, and
sampling theory.
5. Use tools such as MATLAB and C programming for analyzing and designing communications systems.
6. Test, debug, and verify that the design meets the desired specifications.
7. Work effectively in design and development teams to implement components of communications
systems.
8. Understand concepts of professionalism, ethics, product liability, social responsibility, and intellectual
property in the context of communications systems design.
9. Use design resources such as professional journals, trade journals, and the web in a communications
system design.
10. Communicate the project design effectively.
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OUTCOMES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
 An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
 An ability to communicate effectively.
 The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
 A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
 A knowledge of contemporary issues.
 An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program
objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Course
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Program
Outcomes
1
2
1
2
2
1
(a)
1
1
2
2
3
(b)
1
1
1
1
2
3
(c)
1
2
3
2
(d)
1
1
1
1
2
1
(e)
1
3
1
(f)
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
(g)
1
1
1
3
2
(h)
1
1
1
1
1
3
(i)
1
1
1
1
3
2
(j)
1
1
1
4
4
3
2
(k)

Figure 3-1a Example syllabus relating Course Outcomes to Program Outcomes
46

Average Answer

EE 421 Post Assessment F08
3.8
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
3
2.9
2.8
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Question
Student Answer- Accomplished

Student Answers- Appropriate

Average Answer

EE 421 Post Assessment with Gap Analysis
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
-0.50

1

2

Student Answer

3

4

5
6
Question

Batchelder Answer

7

8

9

10

Student-Batchelder Gap

Figure3-1b Example showing gap analysis of student-instructor determination
of achievement of Course Outcomes

47

EE 421 OUTCOMES:
The outcomes planned for the course are listed in Table 1 with instructor comments and
an estimate of how well each outcome was met.

Outcome
Number

Instructor
Estimate of
Result

Outcome
Upon completion of this course, students
should demonstrate the ability to:

Instructor Comment

Define specialized communications
terms.
Describe and explain modulation
methods.
Describe and explain the effects of noise
on communications systems.
Analyze communications systems using
basic tools such as Fourier transform,
convolution, and sampling theory.

3.0 / 4

Ok

3.5 / 4

AM, DSB, SSB, FM, PM covered in
detail.
Need to spend more time on this.

5.

Use tools such as MATLAB and C
programming for analyzing and designing
communications systems.

3.0 / 4

6.

Test, debug, and verify that the design
meets the desired specifications.

3.0 / 4

7.

Work effectively in design and
development teams to implement
components of communications systems.

3.0 /4

8.

Understand concepts of professionalism,
ethics, product liability, social
responsibility, and intellectual property in
the context of communications systems
design.

2.5 / 4

9.

Use design resources such as professional
journals, trade journals, and the web in a
communications system design.

3.0 / 4

10.

Communicate the project design
effectively.

1.
2.
3.
4.

Table 1.

2.5 / 4
3.5 / 4

With background from EE 221 and
312 plus the experience from this
course students should be in good
shape on these topics.
We did not use Matlab as much this
year but focused on hardware lab
projects. Two of the assignments
required C programming with the
PIC microcontroller.
The class spent a fair amount of time
in the lab with the design project on
both hardware and software.
All labs were assigned in teams
including the final class project
assignment.
I attempted to bring in appropriate
topics during the semester although
not in a focused manner.

Used examples of current topics from
trade journals and several specific
circuit designs from amateur radio
publications; however, should have
the class do more of this rather than
just providing examples for them.
3.0 / 4
All lab assignments required a report
and they gave an oral presentation on
their final project.
Outcomes and Results

Figure 3-1c Example showing post-analysis of Course Outcomes by Instructor
48

Part of the instructor assessment involves writing comments on ways to improve the course and
student learning for future years. To change or modify the objectives or outcomes of a course,
instructors must seek approval from the program faculty. Pre-exams are administered in some
core courses to determine student preparedness upon entry into the course.
Table 3-6 illustrates the assessment and evaluation process for determining the achievement of
program outcomes.

b Experiment

X

c Design

X

d Teaming

X

e Solve

X

f Ethics

X

X

X

X
X

X

X
X

X
X

X

X

X

g
Communicate

X

h Global

X

X

i Life-long

X

X

j Issues

X

X

k Tools

X

X

Table 3-6

10. PE and Advanced Degrees

9. Capstone & Competition projects

8. IEEE Student Branch

7. CAAP Exam

6. STEPS

5 Industrial Advisory Board

X

4 Exit Interview (Q9)

X

a Knowledge

3. Employer Survey

2. Alumni Survey

Program Outcomes Assessment Method

1. FE Exam

Outcome

X

X

X

X

X

X
X

X

X

Achievement of Program Outcomes Assessment Methods

49

One of the most effective determinations of outcomes occurs at the course level. Each course
has objectives tied to program outcomes and the post-assessment written by the instructor rates
how well the objective has been met and is compared to the student survey result. This gives the
instructor feedback at the end of the semester and provides the instructor the data and
opportunity to assess and record the effectiveness of the course.
In a small department with sequences of courses such as Circuits I - Circuits II - Electronics I Electronics II, a natural feedback process occurs within the sequence from one instructor to the
previous course instructor.

Every Course
Offering

Assessment
Assessment &
Improvement
Loop
Improvement
Planning

Instructor
Course
Assessment

Evaluation

Student Course
Assessment

Courses and
activities

Scheduled
Intervals
Internal Input





Exit Interviews
Feedback from
Academic advisors
Feedback from
succeeding course in a
sequence
Feedback from capstone
design

External Input





Figure 3-2 ECE Assessment
of Program Outcomes by
course

50

Alumni Survey
Employer input
Advisory Board
FE Results

F.2

Capstone Design and Competition Projects

The Preliminary Design Review and Critical Design Review provide faculty and students the
opportunity to assess the project status and offer advice on the project through the rubric shown
in Figure 3.3. The public and the media are invited to the campus-wide Design Fair where all
capstone design projects are on display. Attendees are asked to fill out a rubric at these events to
provide feedback to the students and improve the process.
Multidisciplinary capstone projects are emphasized especially with Mechanical Engineering,
Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, and Computer Engineering. Meeting of the faculty
involved assess the projects and the process and consider possibilities for improvement. For
example, the most recent meeting on June 9th included faculty from Mechanical Engineering,
Metallurgical Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Computer Science, and
Industrial Engineering. Items for improvement included earlier prototyping and earlier Critical
Design Reviews, emphasizing the spiral rather than waterfall model of the design process, and
techniques to reduce the wasted time at the beginning of the capstone design process.
A list of recent projects is shown in Table 3.1 below. Note that three of the projects were part of
competitions with other universities and achieved very good results: 4th place, 4th place, and 1st
place. Two other projects had external sponsors that provide project evaluation since a desired
completed product is the goal.
As with all other courses, a student and instructor survey and post-analysis is performed for the
capstone design course.

51

PRELIMINARY/CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW EVALUATION FORM
PROJECT TITLE:

________________________________________________________

MENTOR/SPONSOR:_______________________________________________________
GROUP MEMBERS:

________________________________________________________

EVALUATOR:

________________________________________________________

EVALUATION AREAS (Please place comments in the space provided or on the back)
1. Project Introduction: What and Why
2. Project Goals/Objectives/Specifications/Constraints
3. Review of Solution Concept
4. Detailed design of candidate solution: Quality of Problem Analysis
5. Detailed design of candidate solution: Risk Analysis and Mitigation Plan
6. Detailed design of candidate solution: Implementation/Test/Verification
Matrix
7. Detailed design of candidate solution: Compliance with Original
Requirements
8. Project Budget and Deliverables
9. Project Plan and Execution: On Time or Lagging?
10. Overall Design Review Effort
TOTAL SCORE (out of 100)
* EVALUATION RATING SCALE: 0 (LOWEST) TO 10 (HIGHEST) EACH AREA

Figure 3-3 PDR/CDR Design Review Rubric

52

SCORE*

Project

Description

Team

Electric Motorcycle

Battery powered DC motor powers
an electric motorcycle
NASA competition to mine lunar
regolith with remote control via IP
video stream – team placed 4th at
Kennedy Space Center
Competition
Electric Snowmobile designed and
built – placed 3rd in design paper
and 5th overall at the SAE
competition in Houghton, MI
Competition to design and build a
device to sort recyclables – team
placed 1st in regional ASME
competition
Autonomous submarine to explore
flooded goldmine, sponsored with
funds from Idaho National Lab
Design and build a robot like that
in the movie Short Circuit for
outreach to K-12 students
Switched Reluctance DC Motor
Controller in a project funded by
the Army Research Lab

4 EE students

Lunar Regolith Excavator

SAE Clean Snowmobile
Competition
ASME Autonomous Materials
Sorter Competition
Autonomous Submarine
Johnny Five Interactive Robot
Dakota Power SRDCM Controller
Video Surveillance

Table 3-7

3 ME
2 EE
1 CSC
2 ME
2 EE
3 ME
1 EE
1 CENG
4 EE
2 ME
1 IE
1 EE
1 CENG
1 CSC
2 EE
2 EE
1 CENG

Spring 2010 Capstone Design Projects

Capstone Design Outcome
Assessment Fall 2009
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
1

2

3

4

5

6

537

8

9

10

11

12

CAPSTONE DESIGN OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Begin a design project by writing a mission statement, developing an objectives tree,
consider alternative solutions, and choose a solution using a matrix comparison technique.
2. Use data sheets understanding the types (product review, advance information,
preliminary information, and definitive), terms (e.g. typical, min, max, absolute max), and
issues of specsmanship.
3. Use project management tools such as Gantt Charts created with MS Project.
4. Work effectively in teams.
5. Use appropriate prototyping techniques such as breadboards, wirewrap, protoboards,
surface mount, programmable chips, and PCB layout and fabrication.
6. Understand concepts of professionalism and ethics.
7. Include issues of standards and certification in project design.
8. Include issues of intellectual property issues in project design.
9. Include issues of product liability and social responsibility in project design.
10. Use design resources such as professional journals, trade journals, catalogs, and the
Internet in project design.
11. Communicate the project design effectively.
12. Test, debug, and verify that the design meets the desired specifications.

Figure 3.4 Capstone Design Outcomes Assessment

Critical Design Review
Effort/Project Difficulty
Progress Reports (4) + Globalization Essay
Team Self-Review
Mentor Evaluation
Final Oral Presentation
Final Written Report + Globalization Essay
Log Book
Project Outcome and Project Demonstration

10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
20%

Table 3-8 Capstone Design Allocation of Grade

54

Engineering Competitions recent results from capstone design projects
2009 ASME Mars Rock Retriever: EE and ME: first place in the region
2010 ASME Autonomous Recyclable Materials Sorter:
EE, CENG, and ME: first place in
the region
2010 NASA Lunar Regolith Mining: EE, CENG, CSC, and ME: fourth place nationally
SAE Clean Snowmobile Competition, zero emissions division: EE and ME
2010 - Third in Design Paper and 5th place overall
2009 – 1st in Draw Bar Pull and Cold Start and 4th overall
Engineering Competitions recent results from CAMP Teams
International Aerial Robotics Competition http://iarc.angel-strike.com/ - Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle Team: EE, CENG, CSC,ME, IE
2006 – 1st place overall at Ft. Benning, Georgia.
2007 – 2nd overall at Ft. Benning, Georgia, Best Technical Paper
2008 – received 3 of the 4 awards plus a special award: Best technical paper, tied with
Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech for Best System Design.
2009 - Best Presentation Award, 4th place overall, at University of Puerto Rico
IEEE Region V Robotics Competition http://www.sdsmtrobotics.com/ EE, CENG, CSC, ME
2006 – Honorable Mention
2007 – 4th and 6th
2008 – 3rd, 4th, and 9th
2009 – 3rd in morning competition and 6th overall
Table 3-8 Capstone Design Competition Projects and Co-curricular Competition Projects

55

CDR

a Knowledge

Proj
Diff

Essays
and
Reports

Team
Review

8.7

b Experiment
c Design

8.7

9.1

d Teaming

Mentor
Eval

Final
Oral
Rpt

Final
Written
Rpt
(+
global)

Log

Proj
Outcome

Evaluation
Grade

8.3

15.8

82

8.3

15.8

80

8.3

15.8

84

9.5

e Solve

9.1

f Ethics

95
8.3

15.8

18.1

g
Communicate

8.7

83
90

18.1

4.7

h Global

9.7

4.5

91

9.7

97

i Life-long

15.8

j Issues

9.7

k Tools

79
97

8.3

15.8

80

Weight

10

10

20

10

10

5

10

5

20

100

Average
Score
Spring 2010

8.7

9.1

18.1

9.5

8.3

4.7

9.7

4.5

15.8

88.4

Table 3-9 Relation of Capstone Design Student Performance to Program Outcomes Spring
2010

F.3

Fundamentals of Engineering Exam

The Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Exam results are valuable as a nationally normed
measure of student‘s engineering ability and to some extent problem-solving ability The ECE
department requires that all graduating seniors take the FE exam unless some compelling reasons
prevent the student from taking it; however, the department has no means of forcing students to
take the FE exam so that the compliance rate varies between 50 and 80%. Our decision to
56

require the exam without making the actual score count for credit may skew the FE results in a
manner that makes our student performance appear poorer than it actually is. The passing rate
for our students over the last several years is given below in Figure 3.-5.

CENG Passing
120
100
80
60

CENG % Passing

40
20

% National
11

1

2

3

2

2

2

4

Number

1

0

EE Passing
120
100
80
60

EE % Passing

40

% National
Number

20
13

7

12

11

10

15

8

13

4

0
2005 2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009
Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall

Figure 3-5 Pass Rate for the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam
The passing rate fluctuates but is generally above the national passing rate.
Results from the subject areas provides results that can provide one means of evaluating different
areas of the curriculum. Table 3-10 shows a weighted difference of the percent of correct
answers comparing ECE student scores and national scores in the subject areas of the FE
Electrical Exam. The ECE scores 5% or more below national scores are highlighted and
followed with a trendline analysis in Figures 3-6 to 3-9.
57

Since many of the courses are in common, a better view can be obtained by analyzing both
electrical and computer engineering results. Based on the table, the main area of concern is
probability and statistics. The ECE faculty changed the math elective for EE students in the
2007-2008 academic year so that the elective must be chosen from two probability and statistics
course options. The improved recent score of EE student in this area seems to be a result of this
requirement.
The poor performance of the Computer Engineering students in electromagnetics should not be
an issue since the area is not part of the program.

58

CENG %
EE %
Difference Different
AM Subject
Mathematics
Engineering Probability and Statistics
Chemistry
Computers
Ethics and Business Practices
Engineering Economics
Engineering Mechanics (Statics and
Dynamics)
Strength of Materials
Material Properties
Fluid Mechanics
Electricity and Magnetism
Thermodynamics
PM Subject
Circuits
Power
Electromagnetics
Control Systems
Communications
Signal Processing
Electronics
Digital Systems
Computer Systems

-5.3
-6.3
-6.9
-2
-5.9
9.8

-0.8
-7.5
-0.9
2.4
3
7.6

5.6
2
1.3
4.1
0.4
-1.9

4.4
0.4
4.1
2.1
2.7
2.2

-1.3
2.7
-11.1
2.3
-4.4
1.9
-3.8
0.3
-3.4

3.4
3
4.9
1.4
-0.2
-4.4
2.2
-4.6
-4.8

Table 3-10 Weighted Differences of % Correct Answers Between SDSM&T and
National Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Subject Areas Scores
Highlighted values are greater or lower than national scores by 5 % or more indicating areas of
interest.

59

CENG Math
100
80
CENG

60

National

40

Difference
20
11

1

2

3

2

2

2

4

1

0

Number
Linear (Difference)

-20
-40

EE Math
100
80
EE

60

National

40

Difference

20
13

7

12

11

10

15

8

0

13

4

Number
Linear (Difference)

-20

Figure 3-6 Trendline for Math % Difference From National Scores

60

CENG Prob & Stat
100
80
60

CENG

40

National

20

Difference
11

1

2

3

2

2

2

4

1

0

Number
Linear (Difference)

-20
-40
-60

EE Prob & Stat
70
60
50
40

EE

30

National

20

Difference

10

13

7

12

11

10

15

8

0

13

4

Number
Linear (Difference)

-10
-20
-30

Figure 3-7 Trendline for Probability and Statistics % Difference From National Scores

61

CENG Chemistry
80
60
CENG

40

National

20
11

1

2

3

2

2

2

4

1

0

Difference
Number

-20

Linear (Difference)

-40
-60

EE Chemistry
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20

EE
National
Difference
13

7

12

11

10

15

8

13

4

Number
Linear (Difference)

Figure 3-8 Trendline for Chemistry % Difference From National Scores

62

CENG Ethics
100
80
CENG

60

National

40

Difference
20
11

1

2

3

2

2

2

4

1

0

Number
Linear (Difference)

-20
-40

EE Ethics
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10

EE
National
Difference
13

7

12

11

10

15

8

13

4

Number
Linear (Difference)

Figure 3-9 Trendline for CENG Ethics and Business Practices % Difference from National
Scores

Complete results from specific categories of the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam are found in
the Assessment Appendix.
F.4

Alumni Survey

The program graduates are asked to assess the extent to which the program outcomes were met
and the importance of the associated skills or knowledge. Since the number of responses was
limited (16 responses) the results for both Computer Engineering and Electrical Engineering
63

graduates are aggregated and found in the Assessment Appendix. Overall survey results gave a

grade‖ for the department of 4.1 out of a 5.0 scale.
Of the 16 responses, one has become a registered professional engineer and two have completed
or are completing advanced degrees.

CENG Alumni Survey
Program Outcomes
(n=4)
6.0
5.0
4.0
Grade

3.0

Importance

2.0

Difference

1.0
0.0
-1.0

a

b

c

a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
Avg

d

e

f

Grade
4.8
4.8
5.0
4.8
5.0
5.0
4.5
4.8
5.0
4.3
4.8
4.8

g

h

i

Importance
4.3
4.8
4.3
3.8
4.8
4.0
4.8
3.3
4.0
3.5
3.8
4.1

j

k

Difference
0.5
0.0
0.8
1.0
0.3
1.0
-0.3
1.5
1.0
0.8
1.0
0.7

Average Gap = 0.68
Figure 3-10a Alumni Survey Program Outcomes

64

EE Alumni Survey
Program Outcomes
(n=12)
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0

Grade

2.0

Importance

1.0

Difference

0.0
-1.0

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

i

j

k

-2.0

a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
Avg

Grade
4.4
4.0
3.7
4.0
4.3
3.9
4.3
3.5
3.8
3.2
3.9
3.9

Importance
4.8
4.7
4.8
4.8
4.7
4.5
4.8
3.5
4.3
3.6
4.6
4.4

Difference
-0.3
-0.7
-1.1
-0.8
-0.3
-0.6
-0.5
0.0
-0.6
-0.4
-0.7
-0.5

Average Gap = -0.53
Figure 3-10b Alumni Survey Program Outcomes

65

ECE Alumni Survey
Program Outcomes
(n=16)
6.0
5.0
4.0
Grade

3.0

Importance

2.0

Difference

1.0
0.0
-1.0

a

b

c

a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
Avg

d

e

f

Grade
4.5
4.2
4.1
4.2
4.5
4.2
4.4
3.8
4.1
3.5
4.1
4.1

g

h

i

Importance
4.6
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.7
4.4
4.8
3.4
4.3
3.6
4.4
4.4

j

k

Difference
-0.1
-0.5
-0.6
-0.3
-0.2
-0.2
-0.4
0.4
-0.2
-0.1
-0.3
-0.2

Average Gap = -0.22
Figure 3-10c Alumni Survey Program Outcomes

F.4

Employer Survey and Career Fair Survey

Only two responses were received from the employer survey and the results were deemed not
significant to include; however, useful results were obtained from the Career Services office
survey of Career Fair employers and are found in the figures following.

66

EE Overall 07-08

EE Communication 0708

n=41
0.7

n=41

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0

0.4
0.3
0.2

0.3

0.1

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.7

0.1

0.2

0.0

0.0

Figure 3-11a 2007-2008 Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills

CENG Overall 07-08

CENG Comunication
07-08

n=9
0.7

n=9

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.5

0.6

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1

0.7

0.5
0.4
0.3

0.2
0.1

0.0

0.0

0.2

0.0

0.1

0.2
0.1

0.0

0.0

Fair

Poor

0.0
Excellent Good Average

Figure 3-11b 2007-2008 Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills

67

EE Overall 08-09

EE Communications 0809

n=21
0.6
0.5

n=21
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00

0.5

0.4
0.4

0.3
0.2
0.1

0.1

0.0

0.0

Fair

Poor

0.76

0.05

0.14

0.00

0.00

0.0
Excellent Good Average

Figure 3-12a 2008-2009 Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills

CENG Overall 08-09

CENG Communication
08-09

n=9
0.6

n=9
0.6

0.5

1.0

0.4
0.3

0.8

0.2
0.1

0.8

0.6

0.3

0.4
0.1

0.2
0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.2

0.0

0.0

Fair

Poor

0.0
Excellent Good Average

Fair

Poor

Excellent Good Average

Figure 3-12b 2008-2009 Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills

68

EE Overall Fall 09

EE Communication Fall
09

n=28
0.70

n=28

0.60
0.50

0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00

0.57

0.40
0.30

0.39

0.20
0.10

0.04

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.57

0.21

0.21

0.00

0.00

Figure 3-13a 2009 Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills

CENG Overall Fall 09

CENG Communication
Fall 09

n=9
0.7

n=9

0.7

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.5

0.4

0.4

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.6
0.4

0.2

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Fair

Poor

0.0
Excellent Good Average

Fair

Poor

Excellent Good Average

Figure 3-13b 2008-2009 Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills
F.5

Exit Interview

Figure 3-14 shows the questions for the graduating senior exit interview. Although it provides
useful feedback for the department, only question 9 provides assessment data for program
69

outcomes, a combination of outcomes a, c, e, and k. From three years of exit interview data the
answers to question 9 were 27/30 yes (Do you feel that your program of study has prepared you
reasonably well in the fundamentals of your major (EE or CENG)?).

Electrical and Computer Engineering Department
Student Assessment (Graduating Seniors)

Department Questions:
1. From your perspective, what does the department do well?
2. From your perspective, in what areas does the department need to improve?
3. Individual faculty members use a variety of teaching methods or techniques.
a. Describe the teaching methods that you find to be most effective.
b. Describe the teaching methods that you find to be least effective.
4. Did prerequisite courses prepare you adequately for the next course in the sequence?
5. In what general area of your field do you expect to find employment?
6. What is your assessment of the department courses?
a. Introductory courses (sophomore level).
i. Most useful? Why?
ii. Least useful? Why?
b. Core courses (junior-level).
i. Most useful? Why?
ii. Least useful? Why?
c. Elective courses (senior Level).
i. Most useful part? Why?
ii. Least useful? Why?
d. Senior Design.
i. Most useful part? Why?
ii. Least useful? Why?
7. What is your assessment of the availability of department elective course offerings?
8. What is your assessment of department laboratory facilities?
a. For introductory courses (sophomore level).
b. For core courses (junior level).
c. For elective courses (senior level).
9. Do you feel that your program of study has prepared you reasonably well in the fundamentals of your
major (EE or CENG)?
Yes No
If no, why not?
10. Would you recommend the EE or CENG BS program at SDSM&T to an incoming student who is
interested in majoring in EE or CENG?

Figure 3-14

Graduating Senior Exit Interview Questions

F.6
STEPS
Students Emerging as Professionals (http://steps.sdsmt.edu/)
Student Affairs staff worked closely with engineering faculty members to identify the
dimensions of student development that can be advanced and reinforced through co-curricular
offerings and support services offered by student affairs.

70

All freshmen take an online assessment that introduces them to and measures their attainment of
the nine STEPS outcomes. The assessment is an individualized developmental snapshot in time
that the student can access and compare to results of his or her reassessments. Students are
encouraged to retake the assessment at key points in their academic career.
To reinforce and promote the attainment of the ten STEPS outcomes, students are given a
calendar of events that cross references the STEPS outcome the event will reinforce. (See the

calendar‖ link at http://steps.sdsmt.edu/.) The goal is to remind students of the importance to
their development as professionals of these outcomes, to give them opportunities to exercise and
develop these outcomes, and to make clear how highly valued these outcomes are by all aspects
of the campus community.
Also published by the STEPS program is information about resources germane to each outcome.
For example, links to the National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics and other
professional ethical creeds are given to support the ―
Act with Integrity‖ outcome. For the ―
Lead
and Serve on Teams‖ outcome, students are directed to the Leadership Development Team and
its programming, to CAMP, to the All-Campus Leadership retreat, and other resources.
An online database of STEPS assessment results is provided to faculty so they can track the
number and class level of students in the program who have taken the STEPS assessments.
While most of the results are currently for freshmen and sophomores, within a few years, the
engineering programs will have pre-test, formative-assessment, and post-test results for students
as they develop during their academic careers at the School of Mines.
A folder detailing the STEPS program and efforts by Student Affairs to reinforce and advance
the attainment of key ABET (a) through (k) outcomes will be available in the resource room at
the time of the visit.
In 2006, the STEPS (Students Emerging as Professionals http://steps.sdsmt.edu/) program was
created to closely align Student Affairs programming with the achievement of key outcomes. As
of the creation of this self-study, 1,083 students have taken the STEPS pre-assessment. Table 311 below shows the nine STEPS outcomes and their alignment with the ABET (a) through (k).

71

STEPS Outcome

ABET Outcome
supported by STEPS
assessments and
programming

1

Engage in lifelong learning

Outcome (i)

2

Apply technical understanding

Outcome (k)

3

Serve the community

Outcome (h)

4

Value a global perspective

Outcomes (h) and (j)

5

Lead and serve on teams

Outcome (d)

6

Communicate

Outcome (g)

7

Respect self and others

Outcome s(d) and (f)

8

Value diversity

Outcome (d) and (j)

9

Act with integrity

Outcome (f)

Table 3-11 Alignment of STEPS outcomes with the ABET (a) through (k)

The STEPS survey outcome in Figure 3-15 are primarily from freshmen; however, the program
is developing and faculty anticipate being able to track students over time and also to use
individual results in advising and mentoring of students.

72

CENG STEPS Survey 2007-2010
n=52
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

EE STEPS Survey 2007-2010
n=69
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

Figure 3-15 STEPS Survey Outcomes

F.7

CAAP Exam

The primary system-wide measurement of students‘ achievement of outcomes in general
education is the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) test. All students must
73

take the CAAP at the completion of their sophomore year (i.e. completion of 48 credit hours) and
must achieve a minimum score (i.e., system-wide ―
cut scores‖) in order to remain enrolled and
continue with their academic careers.
In the area of mathematical reasoning, students enter the School of Mines better prepared than
students system wide or students nationally. In 2009, the average composite ACT score of
entering students at the School of Mines was 26.1, and the mean math sub-score was 26.7.
Unsurprisingly, at the conclusion of their sophomore year when they take the CAAP test,
approximately 13% of students at the School of Mines test in the 99th percentile of students
nationally and 94% (or more) of School of Mines students test above the national mean score in
math.
To better assess the actual gains in learning made by students regardless of their academic
preparation upon entry, the ―
ACT Gains Analysis‖ is done by using students‘ incoming ACT in
conjunction with CAAP exam scores for the same students. The ―
gains‖ measured are a better
indication of learning gains than the CAAP scores alone.
ACT analyzes the ―
gains‖ made by the approximately 350-375 School of Mines students who
take the CAAP in any given year to the approximately 36,000 students in our national reference
group and designates each student as making ―
lower than expected progress,‖ ―
expected
progress,‖ or ―
higher than expected progress‖ in each of the four sub-score areas.
Over the last six years, between 12% and 27% of all School of Mines students made ―
greater
than expected‖ gains in math and less than 1% made ―
lower than expected‖ gains in math.
Again, these ―
gains‖ are a measure of how much learning occurred between initial enrollment
and the taking of the CAAP exam at the end of the sophomore year.
Similar ―
gains‖ are seen for School of Mines students in the sub-score of science reasoning. In
the areas of writing and reading, School of Mines students do not out-perform students system
wide or nationwide at the same high level as they do in math; however, 77% or more score above
the national mean in writing and reading, and between 4 and 6% score in the 99th percentile
nationally in these two areas.
Even though the CAAP scores primarily measure learning resulting from the general education
curriculum, they are an indicator of student learning in areas key to ABET, such as math and
writing.

74

Term
student
enrolled1

School of Mines Students
In Electrical Engineering

System-All Students2

Nat'l Four-Year Public
Sophomores

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Fall 20093
Fall 2008

66.3

65.8

66.6

66.9

58.9

62.7

62.4

64.2

57.8

61.8

58.7

63.1

Fall 2007

66.8

66.9

67.5

67.0

58.7

63.7

62.8

64.4

58.5

62.8

61.7

64.2

Fall 20064

65.7

63.0

64.1

65.9

58.8

63.0

62.6

64.4

Fall 2005

65.5

65.8

65.9

66.3

58.9

62.9

62.7

64.5

Fall 2004

64.9

65.3

66.3

67.1

58.5

63.8

62.8

64.5

1

Math Read
58.8
62.8

Sci
Reas Writ
62.0 64.2

Includes all students in the Federal IPEDS cohort of first-time, full-time students enrolled in a degree program

2

School of Mines students are included in the calculation of system-wide mean scores

3

No scores are given for students enrolling in fall 2009 as these students have not yet completed 48 hours and have
not taken the CAAP test.
4

National mean scores for 2004-2006 are not available

Table 3-12a History of CAAP scores for Electrical Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort since
2004
Term
student
enrolled1

School of Mines Students
In Computer Engineering

System-All Students2

Nat'l Four-Year Public
Sophomores

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Fall 20093
Fall 2008

66.4

67.8

67.8

68.0

58.9

62.7

62.4

64.2

57.8

61.8

58.7

63.1

Fall 2007

66.5

66.6

68.0

68.0

58.7

63.7

62.8

64.4

58.5

62.8

61.7

64.2

Fall 20064

64.1

64.6

66.2

67.1

58.8

63.0

62.6

64.4

Fall 2005

66.1

65.8

68.0

66.1

58.9

62.9

62.7

64.5

Fall 2004

64.1

66.8

67.7

67.0

58.5

63.8

62.8

64.5

1

58.8

62.8

62.0

64.2

Includes all students in the Federal IPEDS cohort of first-time, full-time students enrolled in a degree program

2

School of Mines students are included in the calculation of system-wide mean scores

3

No scores are given for students enrolling in fall 2009 as these students have not yet completed 48 hours and have
not taken the CAAP test.
4

National mean scores for 2004-2006 are not available

Table 3-12b History of CAAP scores for Computer Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort
since 2004

75

F.8

ECE Department Advisory Board

The department Advisory Board meets every year on campus to assist the Electrical and
Computer Engineering programs in meeting department goals. The board also provides input on
curricular matters, suggests industry trends, and points out shortcomings. The Advisory Board
report is discussed in departmental meeting and is kept in the department office. The two most
recent Advisory Board reports are found in the Assessment Appendix.
F.9

IEEE Student Branch Activities

IEEE at SDSM&T is a student branch of National IEEE with over 60 members, including
students, faculty and staff. The student branch traces its history back to 1925. The branch
activity is an indication of the recognition of the need for life-long learning and the importance
of being engaged in life-long learning. Section I of the Assessment Appendix gives the schedule
of student branch events for the past academic year illustrating the robust activities in which the
students are engaged. Of special interest are the Activities Nights where members host
electronic kit building activities for underclassmen (http://ieee.sdsmt.edu/Activity%20Night.htm)
where they learn to solder and build kits such as electronic dice, blinking Valentines hearts, and
metronomes as shown in the Photo 3-11.
In every year since the previous accreditation cycle, the student IEEE branch has chartered a bus
to attend the IEEE Region V conference and compete in the IEEE Robotics Competition. The
IEEE Robotics team raises funds for travel and robot construction and has been successful in
finding sponsors such as the South Dakota NASA Space Grant Consortium, EchoStar, and
Advanced Circuits. At least once in the past six years, students have entered the Ethics
Competition and the Design Competition. Students take advantage of the conference sessions
and of the opportunity to meet with professional attendees as well as students from other
universities providing motivation towards meeting program outcomes of:
o An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility,
o An ability to communicate effectively,
o The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions
in a global and societal context,
o A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning,
o A knowledge of contemporary issues.

76

Photo 3-1

Chris (EE), Nat (CENG), Jordan (EE), and Chester (EE) working hard on their
Metronomes during an IEEE Activities Night

Program Outcome Assesments
Table 3-13 summarizes the methods used in the outcomes assessment. The performance criteria,
assessment methods, evaluation, and summary are provided for each of the (a)-(k) program
outcomes. The summary found at the bottom of each table showing the assessment of each
outcome is the interpretation of the faculty based on the multiple sources of assessment input for
each outcome.

77

b Experiment

X

c Design

X

d Teaming

X

e Solve

X

f Ethics

x

x

x

10. PE and Advanced Degrees

Summary
Evaluation

9. Capstone & Competition
projects

8. IEEE Student Branch

7. CAAP Exam

6. STEPS

5 Industrial Advisory Board

X

4 Exit Interview (Q9)

x

3. Employer Survey

2. Alumni Survey

a Knowledge

Program Outcomes Assessment Method

1. FE Exam

Outcome

x
x

x

x
x

x
x

X

x
x

x

x

x

g
Communicate

X

x

x

h Global

X

x

i Life-long

X

x

j Issues

X

x

k Tools

x

x

x
x

X

Table 3-13 Program Outcomes Assessment Methods

78

x

Outcome (a)
Performance Criteria

Assessment Methods

Evaluation

an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
1.

Gap of 5% or less between national scores in the FE exam in the areas of
Math, Chemistry, Statics and Dynamics, Engineering Economics,
Thermodynamics, Strength of Materials
2.
Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5 on
Alumni Survey of program outcomes
3.
90% of graduating seniors feel prepared reasonably well in the fundamentals
4.
Exceed national norms in math in the Collegiate Assessment of Academic
Proficiency (CAAP) exam
5.
a. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (a) is at least 80%
b. 75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25%
1.FE Exam
2. Alumni Survey
3. Exit Interview
4.CAAP Exam
5.Performance in capstone design projects and competition projects
1. FE Exam results are given in the Appendix E and summarized here (negative % is
below national average)
Math

Variable but comparable to national results
EE Average gap -0.8 %
MEETS
CENG Average gap -5.3 %
MEETS
EE Average gap -0.9 %
MEETS
CENG Average gap -6.9 %% MEETS
EE Average gap % +4.4
MEETS
CENG Average gap %+5.6
EXCEEDS
EE Average gap % +7.6
EXCEEDS
CENG Average gap %+9.8
EXCEEDS
EE Average gap %+2.2
MEETS
CENG Average gap %-1.9
MEETS
EE Average gap %+0.4
MEETS
CENG Average gap %+2.0
MEETS

Chemistry
Statics and Dynamics
Engineering Economics
Thermodynamics
Strength of Materials

Summary

2. Alumni Survey –outcome (a)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 4.8
4.3
+0.5
EXCEEDS
EE
4.4
4.8
-0.3
MEETS
ECE
4.5
4.6
-0.1
MEETS
3. Exit Interview – 27/30 = 90% say reasonable preparation in major MEETS
4. CAAP Exam – well above national average
MEETS
5. a. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (a) is 82%
MEETS
b. 75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25% MEETS

Areas to examine are the FE math score and chemistry score for CENG
students. Since the number of CENG students taking the exam is small and
the EE students take the same math and chemistry courses, the EE scores are
also given. Together the FE scores indicate the courses are appropriate and
the performance is acceptable.

79

Engineering Competitions recent results from capstone design projects
2009 ASME Mars Rock Retriever: EE and ME: first place in the region
2010 ASME Recycleable Materials Sorter: EE, CENG, and ME: first place in the region
2010 NASA Lunar Regolith Mining: EE, CENG, CSC<, and ME: fourth place nationally
SAE Clean Snowmobile Competition, zero emissions division: EE and ME
2010 - Third in Design Paper and fifth place overall
2009 – 1st in Draw Bar Pull and Cold Start and 4th overall
Engineering Competitions recent results from CAMP Teams
International Aerial Robotics Competition http://iarc.angel-strike.com/ - Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle Team: EE, CENG, CSC,ME, IE
2006 – 1st place overall at Ft. Benning, Georgia.
2007 – 2nd overall at Ft. Benning, Georgia, Best Technical Paper
2008 – received 3 of the 4 awards plus a special award: Best technical paper, tied with
Georgia Tech and Virginia Tech for Best System Design.
2009 - Best Presentation Award, University of Puerto Rico
IEEE Region V Robotics Competition http://www.sdsmtrobotics.com/ EE, CENG, CSC, ME
2006 – Honorable Mention
2007 – 4th and 6th
2008 – 3rd, 4th, and 9th
2009 – 3rd in morning competition and 6th overall
2010 – good design but did not place (team comprised freshmen and sophomores)
Figure 3-16 Competition Results from Capstone Design Teams and CAMP Teams

80

Outcome (b)

an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze
and interpret data

Performance Criteria

1.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more
than 0.5 on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

2.

a. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (b) is at least 80%
b. 75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25%

Assessment Methods
Evaluation

1. Alumni Survey
2.Performance in capstone design and competition projects
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (a)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 4.8
4.8
0.0
MEETS
EE
4.0
4.7
-0.7
MEETS
ECE
4.2 4.7
-0.5
MEETS
2. a. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (a) is 82% MEETS
b. 75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25% MEETS

Summary

Area to examine: EE alumni consider that outcome (b) result does not
meet the importance that they assign to it

81

Outcome (c)

an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired
needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social,
political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability

Performance Criteria

1.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

2.

Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (b) is at least 80%
/ 75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25%

3.
Assessment Methods

Industrial Advisory Board review judges designs as proficient,
apprentice, novice with none at the novice level
1. Alumni Survey
2.Performance in capstone design and competition projects

Evaluation

3. Industrial Advisory Board review at the Design Fair
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (a)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 5.0 4.3
0.7
EE
3.7
4.8
-1.1
ECE
4.1
4.6
-0.5
2. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (a) is 80%

EXCEEDS
MEETS
MEETS
MEETS

75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25% MEETS

Summary

3. Although formal judging was not recorded, verbal reports from IAB were
uniformly positive
MEETS
Area to examine: EE alumni consider that outcome (c) result does not meet
the importance that they assign to it. Results from recent successes with
capstone design projects and competition projects indicate current abilities in
this area meet or exceed what can be reasonably expected.

82

Outcome (d)

an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams

Performance Criteria

1.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

2.

STEPS survey result in Lead and Serve on Teams is at least 4.0 on 5.0
scale

3.

Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (b) is at least 80%
/ 75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25%

Assessment Methods
Evaluation

1. Alumni Survey
2.Performance in capstone design and competition projects
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (a)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 4.8
3.8
1.0
EXCEEDS
EE
4.0
4.8
-0.8
MEETS
ECE
4.1 4.6
-0.5
MEETS
2. CENG STEPS survey result is 4.0/5.0
EE STEPS survey result is 4.0/5.0
3. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (d) is 95%

MEETS
MEETS
MEETS

75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25% MEETS

Summary

On a 5 point scale EE assign an importance of 4.8 and a grade of 4.0.
Results for recent and past successes with capstone design projects and
competition projects, all team-based, indicate current abilities in the area are
good in practice; however, academic advisors can recommend that PSYC 319
Teams and Teaming would be a good social science elective.

83

Outcome (e)

an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems

Performance Criteria

1.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

2.

Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (b) is at least 80%
/ 75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25%

Assessment Methods
Evaluation

1. Alumni Survey
2.Performance in capstone design and competition projects
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (e)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 5.0 4.8
0.2
MEETS
EE
4.3
4.7
-0.4
MEETS
ECE
4.5 4.7
-0.2
MEETS
2. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (e) is 83%

MEETS

75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25% MEETS

Summary

All measures meet the performance criteria

84

Outcome (f)

an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility

Performance Criteria

1.

Gap of 5% or less between national scores in the FE exam in the
area of ethics and business practice

2.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

3.

STEPS survey result in Act with Integrity is at least 4.0 on 5.0 scale

4.

Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (f) is at least 80%

Assessment Methods

1. FE Exam
2. Alumni Survey
3. Performance in capstone design and competition projects

Evaluation

4. Capstone Design
1. EE Average gap %+3.0
CENG Average gap %-5.9

MEETS
MEETS

2. Alumni Survey –outcome (f)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 5.0 4.0
+1.0
EE
3.9
4.5
-0.6
ECE
4.2 4.4
-0.2

MEETS
MEETS
MEETS

3. STEPS survey result in Act with Integrity is a 4.2 on 5.0 scale
Summary

4. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (f) is 90%
Areas to examine:

MEETS

FE Exam: Since the number of CENG students taking the exam is
small and the EE students take the same basic courses, the EE scores
are also given. Together the FE scores indicate the courses are
appropriate and the performance is acceptable.
Alumni Survey: EE Alumni rate the perceived level of the ethics
outcome lower that their perceived importance; however, the EE FE
exam results are good. The direct measure of the FE exam provides an
objective result that indicates the performance criteria is met.

85

Outcome (g)

an ability to communicate effectively

Performance Criteria

1.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

2.

Employer Survey of communication skills at least 75% excellent to
good

3.

Industrial Advisory Board rates communication skills at least
adequate

4.

STEPS survey result in Communicate is at least 4.0 on 5.0 scale

5.

Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (g) is at least 80%

Assessment Methods

1. Alumni Survey
2. Employer Survey
3. Industrial Advisory Board
4. STEPS survey

Evaluation

5. Capstone Design
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (f)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 4.5 4.8
-0.2
EE
4.3
4.8
-0.5
ECE
4.4 4.8
-0.4

MEETS
MEETS
MEETS

2. Employer Survey from Career Fair
2007-2008 CENG Excellent/Good 80%
2007-2008 EE
Excellent/Good 80%
2008-2009 CENG Excellent/Good 80%
2008-2009 EE
Excellent/Good 76%
Fall 2009 CENG Excellent/Good 40% (60% Average)
Fall 2009 EE
Excellent/Good 79%

MEETS
MEETS
MEETS
MEETS
MEETS
MEETS

3. Industrial Advisory Board reviewed capstone design reports and offered
advice to students on improving their writing. No specific judgment outcome
was assigned.
N/A
Summary

4. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (g) is 91% MEETS
Areas to examine: EE Alumni survey rated communication more important
that the perceived outcome.
Area to examine: The CENG employer survey from the Career Fair for fall
2009 did not meet the performance criteria although the other two did.

86

Outcome (h)

the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering
solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context

Performance Criteria

1.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

2.

STEPS survey result in Communicate is at least 4.0 on 5.0 scale

5.

Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (h) is at least 80%

Assessment Methods

1. Alumni Survey
2. STEPS survey

Evaluation

3. Capstone Design
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (f)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 4.5 4.8
-0.3
EE
4.3
4.8
-0.5
ECE
4.4 4.8
-0.4

MEETS
MEETS
MEETS

2. CENG STEPS result in Value a Global Perspective is a 3.2 on 5.0 scale
MEETS
EE STEPS result in Value a Global Perspective is a 3.6 on 5.0 scale
MEETS
Summary

3. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (g) is 97% MEETS
Area to examine: EE Alumni rate the outcome less than the perceived
importance and the EE STEPS survey is consistent. The performance
criterion is not met
CENG STEPS result does not meet the performance criterion.
Need to work on this area.
Some of the design competitions are international where students have a
chance to meet and socialize with teams from other countries. For example,
The Clean Snowmobile Competition and the International Aerial Robotics
Competition have international entries.

87

Outcome (i)

a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning

Performance Criteria

1.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

2.

STEPS survey result in Communicate is at least 4.0 on 5.0 scale

3.

IEEE student branch will attend the region 5 IEEE
Conference/Number in the IEEE student branch

4.

Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (i) is at least 80%

5.

At least 10 % of graduates will pursue an advanced degree

Assessment Methods

Evaluation

1. Alumni Survey
2. STEPS survey
3. Number students attending Region 5 Conference/Number in IEEE student
branch
4. Capstone Design
5. Number of alumni attending graduate school
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (i)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 5.0 4.0
+1.0
EXCEEDS
EE
3.8
4.3
-0.5
MEETS
ECE
4.1 4.3
-0.2
MEETS
2. CENG STEPS result in Engage in Life Long Learning is a 3.9 on 5.0 scale
MEETS
EE STEPS result in Engage in Life Long Learning is a 3.9 on 5.0 scale
MEETS
3. Since the last review cycle the student branch has attended the region 5
conference every year. Number in IEEE student branch is 60.
MEETS
4. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (g) is 79% ~MEETS
5. Table 1.4 indicates 3 of 25 EE students are attending graduate school
The Alumni Survey had 2 of 12 EE responses with a graduate degree and 1
of 12 responses taking the PE exam.
MEETS
Table 1.4 indicates 2 of 25 CENG students are attending graduate school.
The Alumni Survey had 0 of 4 CENG responses with a graduate degree.
~MEETS
Last minute data for 2008-2009 graduates: 1 of 8 CENG in graduate school
Last minute data for 2008-2009 graduates: 5 of 30 EE in graduate school
This outcome needs some effort in the future.
Areas to examine: The EE Alumni Survey results indicates an appreciation of
the importance of life long learning but that the perceived outcome from the
EE program was less.
The STEPS survey was a bit less than the established performance criterion.

88

Outcome (j)

a knowledge of contemporary issues

Performance Criteria

1.

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes

2.

Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (j) is at least 80%

Assessment Methods

Evaluation

Summary

1. Alumni Survey
2. Capstone Design
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (f)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 4.3 3.5
+1.0
EE
3.2
3.6
-0.4
ECE
3.5 3.6
-0.1

MEETS
MEETS
MEETS

2. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (j) is 97%

MEETS

Performance Criteria are met

89

Outcome (k)

an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools
necessary for engineering practice

Performance Criteria

1.
2.

Assessment Methods

Evaluation

Perceived outcome (Grade) not less than Importance by more than 0.5
on Alumni Survey of program outcomes
Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (j) is at least 80%

75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25%

1. Alumni Survey
2. Capstone Design
1. Alumni Survey –outcome (f)
Grade Importance Difference
CENG 4.8 3.8
+1.0
EE
3.9
4.6
-0.7
ECE
4.1 4.4
-0.2

MEETS
MEETS
MEETS

2. Capstone course grade mapped to outcome (j) is 80% MEETS
75% of the competition projects place in the upper 25% MEETS
Summary

Area to examine: Alumni survey does not meet the criterion. The results in
the capstone design course and the competition outcomes are a more objective
outcome involving real engineering practice.

90

Performance Outcomes Summary
CENG Outcome (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
Areas to examine:
Discussion:

Actions:

CENG FE scores in math an chemistry.
The number of CENG students taking the FE is small and the four
students with poor math scores make the results for the group look poor.
EE and CENG students take the same math and science courses and EE
scores with meet the performance criteria. The same conditions apply for
the FE scores in chemistry.
Continue to monitor the CENG scores for math and chemistry.

EE Outcome (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

none
the performance criteria are met
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods

CENG Outcome (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and
interpret data
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

none
The performance criteria are met
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods

EE Outcome (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret
data
Areas to examine:
EE alumni consider that outcome (b) result does not meet the importance
they assign to it.
Discussion:
On a 5 point scale they assign an importance of 4.7 and a grade of 4.0.
Actions:
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods but
return to the annual schedule of alumni surveys to determine if this is a
long term issue. The lab courses are examined to determine if the lab
work is too constrained with not enough open-ended work.

91

CENG Outcome (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs
within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social,
political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
Areas to examine:
none
Discussion:
The performance criteria are met
Actions:
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods
EE Outcome (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs
within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social,
political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

EE alumni consider that outcome (c) result does not meet the importance
that they assign to it.
On a 5 point scale they assign an importance of 4.8 and a grade of 3.7.
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods but
return to the annual schedule of alumni surveys to determine if this is a
long term issue. The design portion of our curriculum is distributed
throughout ECE courses including courses with specific design emphasis
EE 264, EE 351, EE 464, EE 465. EE 264 and EE 351 are relatively new
and alumni may not have included them in their assessment. Results for
recent and past successes with capstone design projects and competition
projects indicate current abilities in the area are good.

CENG Outcome (d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

none
The performance criteria are met
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

EE Outcome (d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

EE alumni consider that outcome (d) result does not meet the importance
that they assign to it.
On a 5 point scale they assign an importance of 4.8 and a grade of 4.0.
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods but
return to the annual schedule of alumni surveys to determine if this is a
long term issue. Results for recent and past successes with capstone
design projects and competition projects, all team-based, indicate current
abilities in the area meet or exceed what can reasonably be expected;
however, academic advisors can recommend that PSYC 319 Teams and
Teaming would be a good social science elective.

92

CENG Outcome (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems teams
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

none
The performance criteria are met
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

EE Outcome (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems teams
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

none
The performance criteria are met
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

CENG Outcome (f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
Areas to examine:
Discussion:

Actions:

FE exam scores have a gap of -5.9% with respect to national scores
Since the number of CENG students taking the exam is small and the EE
students with a +3.0% take the same basic courses. Together the FE
scores indicate the courses are appropriate and the performance is
acceptable.
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

EE Outcome (f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

EE Alumni rate the perceived level of the ethics outcome, 3.9, lower than
their perceived importance, 4.5.
The EE FE exam results are good, 3.0% higher than the national average.
The direct measure of the FE exam provides an objective result that
indicates the performance criteria is met.
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

CENG Outcome (g) an ability to communicate effectively
Areas to examine:
Discussion:

Fall 2009 CENG Career Fair employer survey did not meet the
performance criterion.
The alumni survey results gave a grade of 4.5 and an importance of 4.8
which meets the performance criterion but is a bit low. Verbal feedback
from the most recent Industrial Advisory Board meeting on the capstone
design reports was good. Another indication is the result from team
competitions that have included first place finishes in design papers and
presentations such as the 2009 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle competition

93

Actions:

(Best Presentation Award, Second Best Design Paper) and the 2010 Clean
Snowmobile competition (Third in Design Paper).
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

EE Outcome (g) an ability to communicate effectively
Areas to examine: EE Alumni rate the perceived level of the communication outcome, 4.3, lower
than their perceived importance, 4.8.
The employer survey from the Career Fair met the performance criterion
Discussion:
and the verbal feedback from the most recent Industrial Advisory Board
meeting on the capstone design reports was good. Another indication is
the result from team competitions that have included first place finishes in
design papers and presentations such as the 2009 Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle competition (Best Presentation Award, Second Best Design
Paper) and the 2010 Clean Snowmobile competition (Third in Design
Paper).
Actions:

Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

94

CENG Outcome (h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering
solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context
Areas to examine: EE Alumni rate the perceived level of the communication outcome, 4.3, lower
than their perceived importance, 4.8. The STEPS survey results in a 3.6
on a 5.0 scale on Value a Global Perspective.
Discussion:
Although the capstone design course requires a paper written on
engineering global issues, the combination of alumni survey and STEPS
survey of current students indicate more work need to be done in this area.
Actions:
Include more work throughout the ECE curriculum in this area. Some has
begun with engineering considerations of the Toyota safety issues in the
news during the semester in the CENG 442 Micro-based Systems class
with both CENG and EE students.
CENG Outcome (h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering
solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

The STEPS survey results in a 3.2 on a 5.0 scale on Value a Global
Perspective.
Although the capstone design course requires a paper written on
engineering global issues, the STEPS survey of current students
indicatesmore work need to be done in this area.
Include more work throughout the ECE curriculum in this area. Some has
begun with engineering considerations of the Toyota safety issues in the
news during the semester in the CENG 442 Micro-based Systems class
with both CENG and EE students.

CENG Outcome (i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning
Areas to examine:
Discussion:

Actions:

The STEPS survey results in a 3.9 on a 5.0 scale on Engage in Life Long
Learning.
The STEPS survey of current students indicates more work need to be
done in this area. For the 2008-2009 year, one of eight CENG students
has continued to graduate school. The activity of the IEEE student branch
is very positive and supports continued activity in the IEEE after
graduation.
Discuss the advantages of continued professional development in ECE
classes and make the information on graduate schools more readily
available especially in the capstone design class where the performance
criterion is marginally met.

EE Outcome (i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning
95

Areas to examine:
Discussion:

Actions:

The STEPS survey results in a 3.9 on a 5.0 scale on Engage in Life Long
Learning.
The STEPS survey of current students indicates more work need to be
done in this area. For the 2008-2009 year, 5 of 30 students have continued
to graduate school which is a good indication. The activity of the IEEE
student branch is very positive and supports continued activity in the IEEE
after graduation.
Discuss the advantages of continued professional development in ECE
classes and make the information on graduate schools more readily
available especially in the capstone design class where the performance
criterion is marginally met.

CENG Outcome (i) a knowledge of contemporary issues
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

none
The performance criteria are met
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

EE Outcome (j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
Areas to examine:
Discussion:
Actions:

none
The performance criteria are met
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods.

CENG Outcome (k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools
necessary for engineering practice.
Areas to examine:
Discussion:

Actions:

none
The performance criteria are met. Results for recent and past successes
with capstone design projects and competition projects indicate current
abilities in the area provide the ability to practice engineering using
techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools. The Center for
Advanced Manufacturing and Production (CAMP), with the support of a
Manufacturing Specialist and an Electronics Specialist for student and
faculty projects along with extensive prototyping capabilities, gives
students excellent access and support for engineering practice.
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods but
return to the annual schedule of alumni surveys to determine if this is a
long term issue.

96

EE Outcome (k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary
for engineering practice.
Areas to examine:
Discussion:

Actions:

EE Alumni rate the perceived level of the communication outcome, 3.9,
lower than their perceived importance, 4.6.
Results for recent and past successes with capstone design projects and
competition projects indicate current abilities in the area provide the
ability to practice engineering using techniques, skills, and modern
engineering tools. The Center for Advanced Manufacturing and
Production (CAMP), with the support of a Manufacturing Specialist and
an Electronics Specialist for student and faculty projects along with
extensive prototyping capabilities, gives students excellent access and
support for engineering practice.
Continue monitoring the data using the existing assessment methods but
return to the annual schedule of alumni surveys to determine if this is a
long term issue.

97

CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
A. Information Used for Program Improvement

Mission

Constituents‘ Input

ABET

Objectives

Strategic
Planning Loop

Outcomes

Curriculum

Assessment
Assessment &
Improvement
Loop
Improvement
Planning

Admission

Evaluation

Courses and
activities
Courses and
activities
Courses and
activities
Courses and
activities
Courses and
activities
Courses and
activities

Graduation

Figure 4-1: Short and Long term loop
Our continuous review process comprises two feedback loops: the outer loop (Strategic Planning
Loop) for improving program level enhancement and the inner loop (Assessment &

98

Improvement Loop) to provide for curricula improvement. This process is illustrated in Figure
4-1.


Outer Loop: The outer loop (strategic planning loop) is used to provide initial and
follow-on, high-level guidance to the department in developing and maintaining its
program objectives and outcomes. Initial input comes from constituents, ABET
guidance, and university-level directives. These inputs are used to refine and monitor
department objectives and outcomes. On a routine basis, data are collected from a
number of sources as described in Criterion 2 to provide feedback.



Inner loop: The inner loop (assessment and improvement loop) provides for ongoing
curricula and course improvement. Based on feedback obtained, the department renders
curricular changes, and individual instructors refine, when appropriate, the courses under
their jurisdiction. The inner loop also provides a mechanism for the faculty and students
to provide feedback on specific courses. More detail is shown in Figure 4-2. The inner
loop is the domain of course improvement, and suggestions for course improvements
typically arise from instructor or student comments and discussions of the ECE faculty.

Every Course
Offering

Assessment
Assessment &
Improvement
Loop
Improvement
Planning

Instructor
Course
Assessment

Evaluation

Student Course
Assessment

Courses and
activities

Scheduled
Intervals
Internal Input





Exit Interviews
Feedback from
Academic advisors
Feedback from
succeeding course in a
sequence
Feedback from capstone
design

External Input





Alumni Survey
Employer input
Advisory Board
FE Results

Figure 4-2 ECE Assessment of Program Outcomes by course

99

B. Actions to Improve the Program
B.1

Courses and Curriculum

EE/ME 264 Sophomore Design
An example of the outer loop review process in action is seen in our recent decision to add
EE/ME 264 Sophomore Design as a required part of the curriculum in place of the credits
formerly used for GE 115. To maintain student interest CENG 244, Introduction to Digital
Logic, was introduced in the Freshman year in 2003. As mentioned below, it became clear that a
course in the sophomore year to maintain interest and motivate would be beneficial.
The need for the course was recognized at a weeklong workshop at St. Olaf College sponsored
by The Collaboration attended by SDSM&T students, faculty (ECE, ME, CEE, and IS
Departments), and administrators from Student Affairs. EE/ME 264, sophomore Design, was
offered as an elective for ECE students for several semesters before the faculty voted to require it
in the EE and CENG programs beginning in the Fall 2010 semester. The course is required for
EE, CENG, and ME students and is team taught by ECE and ME faculty.
The design project is selected by the class with guidance from the instructors. The product
requirements included:
 Elements from both ECE and ME,
 One manufactured product for each person in the class,
 Must meet budget,
 Must meet time requirements,
 Each person in the class must be involved in the design and manufacturing.
The design this past semester (spring 2010) included much from CENG and EE students. The
class chose to design and manufacture a three axis accelerometer data logging system based on
the Arduino microcontroller board (which is used in the EE/ME 351 Mechatronics course). The
students selected the project design goals and guided the design choices although as sophomores
they did not have sufficient background to do the detailed circuit and software design. The ECE
instructor worked with students to perform the circuit design, Steve Lawler, the Electronics
Specialist, helped the students with the board design, and the ECE instructor did the basic
software design for the students to build on. The circuit board were manufactured using the bare
board fast turnaround process at Advanced Circuits in Denver.
Each student built a board with the accelerometer and EEPROM memory chips by soldering the
components and following a brief construction manual. The finished board plugs onto an
Arduino microcontroller board. Safety precautions required during the manufacturing included
safety glasses and fume filter fans. Carefully selected foam was used to mount the board into the
case with a battery. The foam acts as a mechanical lowpass filter to avoid logging aliased data
from high frequency vibrations.

100

The instructors were impressed with the effort the students applied to the class and how the
design process and manufacturing captured their interest. They had many applications in mind
for using the project from mountain bikes, ATVs, and cars, to radio controlled airplanes.
The ECE department has changed the class from an elective to a required course as it is in the
ME department. This will provide more balance between the number of ECE students and ME
students which will help in balancing the class departments during the design, purchasing, and
fabrication of the project.
Previous projects chosen by the class when it was an ECE elective include:



a temperature display for a beverage can cozy,
a bottle opener with a breathalyzer: This required an alcohol sensor whose output voltage
was measured with a microcontroller containing an A/D converter and the level displayed
on LEDs. The project was designed in conjunction with the chemist who performs DUI
analysis for the Rapid City Police Department and provided a teachable moment on the
societal context of engineering design.

Robotics and Intelligent Autonomous Systems (RIAS)
A master of science program entitled Robotics and Intelligent Autonomous Systems is a joint
program among CSC, ECE, and ME started in 2008. It provides additional course opportunities
for undergraduates as well as graduate students.
Faculty coordination between ECE and CSC
Computer Science professor Dr. McGough sat in on CENG 442, Micro-based System Design, in
the spring of 2007. The class did a preliminary design of an ARMbot, a small mobile robot
based on the ARM7 2106 microcontroller. In the spring of 2008 Dr. McGough presented an
experimental version of CSC 150, Introductory Programming, as an option for students to learn
C programming by programming the ARMbot.
Computer Science professor, Dr. Corwin sat in on EE 451 Control Systems in the spring of 2007.
In the Fall of 2008, Dr. Batchelder sat in on Dr. McGough‘s CSC 772, Advanced Operating
Systems class. Dr. Batchelder teaches CENG 447, Embedded and Real-time Computer Systems,
and this provided additional perspective on the subject for him.
In the fall of 2009 the CSC Department and the ECE Department exchanged faculty so that ECE
instructor Elaine Linde taught CSC 150, Introduction to Programming, and CSC professor Dr.
Hoover taught EE 652, Non-linear Controls. Since then, Dr. Hoover has transferred from the
CSC Department to the ECE Department in an amicable transition.

101

Capstone Design coordination among ECE, ME, and CSC
Increasing coordination among ECE, ME, and CSC faculty reduces the barriers to students
engaged in multi-disciplinary projects. Faculty from the different departments coordinate the
preliminary design reviews (PDR) and the critical design reviews (CDR) as well as moving
toward a common evaluation rubric.
For example, in the past academic year multi-disciplinary projects included an autonomous
recycling sorter, a remote controlled lunar regolith mining machine, an autonomous underwater
vehicle, an electric snowmobile. Illustrating the advantage of this coordination:

the autonomous recycling sorter was entered in an ASME student design
competition and placed first in the region,
the remote controlled lunar regolith mining machine placed fourth in the NASA

competition at the Kennedy Space Center,

the electric snowmobile placed third in the design paper and fifth overall in the
SAE Clean Snowmobile Competition, Zero Emissions Division.
Multidisciplinary capstone projects are emphasized especially with Mechanical Engineering,
Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, and Computer Engineering. Meeting of the faculty
involved assess the projects and the process and consider possibilities for improvement. For
example, the most recent meeting on June 9th included faculty from Mechanical Engineering,
Metallurgical Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Computer Science, and
Industrial Engineering. Items for improvement included earlier prototyping and earlier Critical
Design Reviews, emphasizing the spiral rather than waterfall model of the design process, and
techniques to reduce the wasted time at the beginning of the capstone design process.
Probability and statistics now a required course in EE program
As discussed in Criterion 3, the FE Exam results in the probability and statistics subject area for
EE students has a weighted difference of 7.5% below the national average. Based on this result
and an examination of the curriculum which showed that it was possible for EE students receive
limited coverage of the area depending on the path through the curriculum, the faculty changed
the curriculum to require that EE students take one of two courses in probability and statistics:
MATH 381, Introduction to Probability and Statistics, or MATH 441, Engineering Statistics.
B.2

Instructional Delivery and Technology

Tablet PC Program
As described elsewhere, the Tablet PC Program enables all students to have a Tablet PC. This
gives the student the possibility of taking handwritten notes onto slides that the instructor has
made available.
Since each student has the tablet machine, the department leverages the acquisition by adopting
software that can be installed on each student‘s machine. For example, the EE/ME 351
Mechatronics class in the fall of 2009 changed from using a department designed and produced
microcontroller board, the PEL4, to a readily available commercially board produced by many
102

manufactures called the Arduino. The advantage to the student beside a lower cost is the open
source software development system for the Arduino that can be installed on every tablet
whereas the software development system for the PEL4 cost $300 per seat and could be installed
only on lab machines.
B.3
Program Development
Carolyn Brich Student Lounge being developed
The late Carolyn Brich was the beloved ECE secretary who struggled for several years before
succumbing to cancer in the fall of 2008. To memorialize her love of students: alumni, faculty,
students, and staff have started a fund to refurbish the ECE Student Lounge and to provide for
ECE Department activities for students. Although the Student Lounge is still in progress, several
student events take place each year including a Christmas party, treats during final exam week,
and departmental pot luck lunches.
Freshman student kit building to enhance and maintain interest
In the spring of 2009, ECE faculty members introduced an experiment of inviting freshmen to
build kits to build and maintain student interest. This was so successful that the following year
the IEEE student branch took over the evening kit building offering a new kit each month for
freshmen to build.
Increase in Scholarships
With the assistance of Dr. Larry Simonson, ECE Emeritus Professor, now a development officer
in the SDSM&T Foundation, the ECE Department was able to award $68,000 to 43 ECE
students during the past academic year. This is in addition to the scholarships available through
the university.
Addition of technical writer to the Industrial Advisory Board
The alumni survey shows a gap between the importance of communications and the perceived
accomplishment. To address the communications portion of this gap, we invited Dr. Jon Titus to
join the ECE Advisory Board. Dr. Titus is a former designer and chief editor of EDN and Test &
Measurement World magazines and was awarded a 2002 George R. Stibitz Computer &
Communications Pioneer Award. Dr. Titus provided feedback on improving writing in capstone
design reports and gave a seminar on technical writing for the IEEE student group during the
most recent IAB meeting. Technical Communications instructors attended his seminar and
reported that they enjoyed his presentation and that his advice aligned with what they teach.
B.4

Infrastructure and Equipment

The expensive to maintain and operate 3‖ wafer fabrication furnace was removed spring 2007
As we removed the semiconductor fabrication equipment, we also replaced the Mentor Graphics
and UNIX lab with a dedicated controls lab that serves more students and more courses.
103

Students did not use the UNIX lab for programming, as that is available in the CSC Linux Lab,
but for the CAD tools. An increased emphasis on VHDL and FPGAs is more appropriate for the
positions most student will encounter on graduation.
Proximity card access to building and labs
The 2009 and the 2010 Student Advisory Board reports requested for flexible access to the ECE
labs. With the assistance of funds from the Provost and departmental funds during the latter part
of the 2010 spring semester electronic proximity card readers were installed in most of the labs
allowing programmed access with student ID cards. The system should be fully operational for
the fall 2010 semester.
Antenna Lab in EP 127
With mentoring from faculty, students built and installed an anechoic chamber for testing
antennas in the Communications Engineering and Applied Electromagnetics Lab, EP 127.
TIMS Telecommunications Instructional Modeling System
TIMS provides hands-on experience in modeling signals and systems and communications
systems in hardware using a modular approach. A mainframe accepts plug-in modules that are
patched together to model systems such as amplitude modulation/demodulation, frequency
modulation/demodulation, signal-to-noise ratio, binary phase shift keying (BPSK), and phaselock loops, This equipment is used in EE 421, Communications Systems, and is available for use
in EE 312, Signals. It fits in a spectrum between simulation by Matlab and specific system
design hardware.
PEL4 to Arduino
As part of EE/ME 351, Mechatronics, students are required to have a microcontroller board to
use in lab projects. The PIC 16F676-based ,PEL4 designed and built in the department for
many years, was dropped in the fall of 2009 in favor of the open-source commercially available
microcontroller board called the Arduino. This change was recommended by an alumnus who
maintains contact with the department thorugh the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle team. The
advantages of the Arduino include lower cost, more memory space, and an open source software
development system that can legally be installed on student tablet computers. As additional
advantage is the large body of knowledge available on the web related to Arduino applications.
New Circuit Board Prototyping Milling Machine Installed in EP 335
A new circuit board prototyping mill was purchased in the spring of 2007 for the EP 335 student
lab. The lab is operated by students for student projects and is under the operating control of the
104

IEEE Robotics Team. They provide training for use of the equipmen with assistance available
from the Electronics Specialist. The purchase was funded by the Center for Advanced
Manufacturing and Production in support of the Robotics Team which is under the CAMP
umbrella.
Mechatronics and Power Lab benches replaced
The lab benches in the Mechatronics Lab, EP 338, and Power Lab, EP 341, were replaced during
the semester break in the 2008-2009 academic year. Based on feedback from the Student
Advisory Board and the Industrial Advisory Board several appearance problems in the building
are being worked on such as water stained ceiling tiles (the building roof is flat and requires
regular maintenance to fix leaks) and peeling laminate on some of the lab furniture.
B.5

Administrative changes

Chairs to Heads
Although not a change instituted by the ECE Department, the university change from rotating
chairs to heads will improve continuity within the ECE programs. The flatter structure of heads
reporting to the provost will ensure good communication within the university.
Strategic hiring of faculty
Since the last ABET review, seven faculty members have retired, accepted a dean position,
become an entrepreneur and left as the company became successful, or moved to accommodate a
spouse‘s career. One faculty member‘s contract was not renewed due to poor teaching that did
not improve with mentoring, In addition to the formal faculty evaluation process, a major
consideration of the decision not to renew the contract was a report from the Industrial Advisory
Board and a report from the Student Advisory Board. The department is rebuilding with
excellent faculty as reported in Criterion 6.

105

CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM
A. Program Curriculum
5.A.1.a General Education
The general education curriculum at the School of Mines is integrated into students‘ study in the
major and supportive of the ABET (a) through (k) outcomes, particularly ABET outcomes (a),
(g), and (h).
All students complete a 30 credit hour system-wide general education core curriculum consisting
of 9 credits of written and oral communications, 6 credits of humanities, 6 credits of social
sciences, 6 credits of a science with laboratory, and 3 credits of mathematics. School of Mines
engineering students take an additional 3 credits of humanities or social science at the upper
division level, as well as mathematics and science courses far in excess of that required for
meeting the general education requirements.
The following seven learning outcomes for general education are held in common by all schools
in the South Dakota Board of Regents system:
1. Students will write effectively and responsibly and will understand and interpret the
written expression of others
2. Students will communicate effectively and responsibly through listening and speaking
3. Students will understand the organization, potential, and diversity of the human
community through study of the social sciences
4. Students will understand the diversity and complexity of the human experience through
study of the arts and humanities
5. Students will understand and apply fundamental mathematical processes and reasoning
6. Students will understand the fundamental principles of the natural sciences and apply
scientific methods of inquiry to investigate the natural world
7. Students will recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate,
organize, critically evaluate, and effectively use information from a variety of sources
with intellectual integrity
The primary system-wide measurement of students‘ achievement of five of these seven outcomes
is the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) test. All students must take the
CAAP at the completion of their sophomore year (i.e. completion of 48 credit hours) and must
achieve a minimum score (i.e., system-wide ―
cut scores‖) in order to remain enrolled and
continue with their academic careers.
Table 5-1 below shows the mean CAAP scores of School of Mines students enrolled in the
electrical engineering program and computer engineering program over the past five years in
comparison to all students in the South Dakota system and to all students nationwide enrolled in
four-year public institutions who take the CAAP at the conclusion of their sophomore year. The
breakout sub-scores for mathematical reasoning, reading, science reasoning, and writing are
given.

106

In the area of mathematical reasoning, students enter the School of Mines better prepared than
students system wide or students nationally. In 2009, the average composite ACT score of
entering students at the School of Mines was 26.1, and the mean math sub-score was 26.7.
Unsurprisingly, at the conclusion of their sophomore year when they take the CAAP test,
approximately 13% of students at the School of Mines test in the 99th percentile of students
nationally and 94% (or more) of School of Mines students test above the national mean score in
math.
To better assess the actual gains in learning made by students regardless of their academic
preparation upon entry, the ―
ACT Gains Analysis‖ is done by using students‘ incoming ACT in
conjunction with CAAP exam scores for the same students. The ―
gains‖ measured are a better
indication of learning gains than the CAAP scores alone.
ACT analyzes the ―
gains‖ made by the approximately 350-375 School of Mines students who
take the CAAP in any given year to the approximately 36,000 students in our national reference
group and designates each student as making ―
lower than expected progress,‖ ―
expected
progress,‖ or ―
higher than expected progress‖ in each of the four sub-score areas.
Over the last six years, between 12% and 27% of all School of Mines students made ―
greater
than expected‖ gains in math and less than 1% made ―
lower than expected‖ gains in math.
Again, these ―
gains‖ are a measure of how much learning occurred between initial enrollment
and the taking of the CAAP exam at the end of the sophomore year.
Similar ―
gains‖ are seen for School of Mines students in the sub-score of science reasoning. In
the areas of writing and reading, School of Mines students do not out-perform students system
wide or nationwide at the same high level as they do in math; however, 77% or more score above
the national mean in writing and reading, and between 4 and 6% score in the 99th percentile
nationally in these two areas.
Even though the CAAP scores primarily measure learning resulting from the general education
curriculum, they are an indicator of student learning in areas key to ABET, such as math and
writing.

107

Table _5.1a. History of CAAP scores for Electrical Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort since
2004
Term
student
enrolled1

School of Mines Students
In Electrical Engineering

System-All Students2

Nat'l Four-Year Public
Sophomores

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Fall 20093
Fall 2008

66.3

65.8

66.6

66.9

58.9

62.7

62.4

64.2

57.8

61.8

58.7

63.1

Fall 2007

66.8

66.9

67.5

67.0

58.7

63.7

62.8

64.4

58.5

62.8

61.7

64.2

Fall 20064

65.7

63.0

64.1

65.9

58.8

63.0

62.6

64.4

Fall 2005

65.5

65.8

65.9

66.3

58.9

62.9

62.7

64.5

Fall 2004

64.9

65.3

66.3

67.1

58.5

63.8

62.8

64.5

1

Math Read
58.8
62.8

Sci
Reas Writ
62.0 64.2

Includes all students in the Federal IPEDS cohort of first-time, full-time students enrolled in a degree program

2

School of Mines students are included in the calculation of system-wide mean scores

3

No scores are given for students enrolling in fall 2009 as these students have not yet completed 48 hours and have
not taken the CAAP test.
4

National mean scores for 2004-2006 are not available

Table 5.1b History of CAAP scores for Computer Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort since
2004
Term
student
enrolled1

School of Mines Students
In Computer Engineering

System-All Students2

Nat'l Four-Year Public
Sophomores

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Fall 20093
Fall 2008

66.4

67.8

67.8

68.0

58.9

62.7

62.4

64.2

57.8

61.8

58.7

63.1

Fall 2007

66.5

66.6

68.0

68.0

58.7

63.7

62.8

64.4

58.5

62.8

61.7

64.2

64.1

64.6

66.2

67.1

58.8

63.0

62.6

64.4

Fall 2005

66.1

65.8

68.0

66.1

58.9

62.9

62.7

64.5

Fall 2004

64.1

66.8

67.7

67.0

58.5

63.8

62.8

64.5

Fall 2006

1

4

58.8

62.8

62.0

64.2

Includes all students in the Federal IPEDS cohort of first-time, full-time students enrolled in a degree program

2

School of Mines students are included in the calculation of system-wide mean scores

3

No scores are given for students enrolling in fall 2009 as these students have not yet completed 48 hours and have
not taken the CAAP test.
4

National mean scores for 2004-2006 are not available

108

Despite variation from student-to-student in the specific General Education courses taken, the
alignment of learning outcomes in the General Education program with the ABET a-k outcomes
can be represented since a large majority of students take a readily identifiable sub-set of high
enrollment courses. The following tables show how each General Education learning outcome
aligns with the ABET a-k outcomes.

Objective #1: Students will write effectively and responsibly and understand and interpret the
written expression of others.
ABET Outcomes


(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

High-Enrollment GenEd courses that
meet Objective

ENGL 101 - Composition I
ENGL 201 - Composition II
ENGL 279 - Technical
Communications I
ENGL 289/289L - Technical
Communications II

GEP Objective #2: Students will communicate effectively and responsibly through speaking and listening.
ABET Outcomes


(a)

(b)

High-Enrollment GEP courses that meet
Objective

SPCM 101 - Fundamentals of Speech
ENGL 279 - Technical Communications I
ENGL 289/289L - Technical
Communications II

109

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

GEP Objective #3: Students will understand the organization, potential, and diversity of the human
community through study of the social sciences
ABET Outcomes


(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

High-Enrollment GEP courses that meet
Objective

PSYC 101 - General Psychology
SOC 100 - Introduction to Sociology
SOC 150 - Social Problems
SOC 251 - Marriage and the Family
HIST 151/152: American History I and II

GEP Objective #4: Students will understand the diversity and complexity of the human experience
through study of the arts and humanities
ABET Outcomes


(a)

(b)

High-Enrollment GEP courses that meet
Objective

HIST 121 - Western Civilization I
HIST 122 - Western Civilization II
HUM 100 - Introduction to Humanities
PHIL 100 - Introduction to Philosophy
PHIL 200 - Introduction to Logic

110

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

GEP Objective #5: Students will understand and apply fundamental mathematical processes and reasoning.
ABET Outcomes


(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

High-Enrollment GEP courses that meet
Objective

MATH 102/102L - College Algebra

GEP Objective #6: Students will understand the fundamental principles of the natural sciences and apply
scientific methods of inquiry to investigate the natural world.
ABET Outcomes


(a)

(b)

High-Enrollment GEP courses that meet
Objective

Chemistry 112/112 Lab
Physics 111
Physics 213 Lab
Physics 213/213 lab
Physics 211/211 lab

111

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

Objective #7: Students will recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate,
organize, critically evaluate, and effectively use information from a variety of sources with intellectual
integrity
ABET Outcomes
(a)



(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

High-Enrollment GenEd courses that meet
Objective

ENGL 101 - Composition I
ENGL 201 - Composition II
ENGL 279 - Technical Communications I
ENGL 289/289L - Technical Communications II

5.A.1.b STEPS
In 2006, the STEPS (Students Emerging as Professionals http://steps.sdsmt.edu/) program was created to
closely align Student Affairs programming with the achievement of key outcomes. As of the creation of
this self-study, 1,083 students have taken the STEPS pre-assessment. Table 5-2 below shows the nine
STEPS outcomes and their alignment with the ABET (a) through (k).
STEPS Outcome

ABET Outcome
supported by STEPS
assessments and
programming

1

Engage in lifelong learning

Outcome (i)

2

Apply technical understanding

Outcome (k)

3

Serve the community

Outcome (h)

4

Value a global perspective

Outcomes (h) and (j)

5

Lead and serve on teams

Outcome (d)

6

Communicate

Outcome (g)

7

Respect self and others

Outcome s(d) and (f)

8

Value diversity

Outcome (d) and (j)

9

Act with integrity

Outcome (f)

Table 5-2, Alignment of STEPS outcomes with the ABET (a) through (k)

112

5.A.1.c
Oral and Written Communication
Oral and Written communication skills are addressed in the ‗writing sequence‖ (i.e., ENGL 101
and ENGL 279 and 289, Technical Communications I and II). To continually improve writing
and oral communication skills, faculty members who teach ENGL 101; the technical
communication sequence, ENGL 279 and ENGL 289; and Speech 101, design and conduct
assessments of key skills germane to general education outcomes 1 and 2.
For example, in AY2008-2009 instructors in ENGL 101, 279, and 289 randomly selected 28
papers to evaluate for competence in use of references, sources and in-text documentation. Each
paper was evaluated by two faculty members, and all faculty members teaching these courses
met to analyze the results in conjunction with National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
scores and input gathered from employers regarding students‘ communication skills at the annual
career fairs held on campus.
Similarly, a rubric-based assessment of students‘ oral communication skills was performed in
Speech 101 and ENGL 279, Technical Communication I, in AY2008-09. An oral presentation
rubric was used in pre- and post-assessments of 81 students for the first attempt at a speech and
the final version of the same speech. Six dimensions of rubric scored (i.e., content, organization,
style/tone, preparation, presentation, and ethics).
The results of these writing and oral communication assessments as well as the conclusions and
ideas for improvement can be seen at <http://academics.sdsmt.edu/assessment/>; however, the
general conclusion was that the goal of fully preparing engineering and science students in oral
and written communication requires unflagging effort and the support of all faculty members
across campus. The ECE Department also emphasizes writing in the ECE courses, particularly
in lab reports and project reports.
To reinforce and support the achievement of outcomes for written communication, a ―
writing
intensive‖ requirement was implemented in 2006 whereby each academic program designated
one or more courses at the junior or senior level to as ―w
riting intensive‖ and designed the
curriculum to ensure each student exercises the skill of writing in the context of his or her
discipline. For more details on the writing-intensive courses in the engineering programs, please
see Appendix D, Section K on Academic Supporting Units.
General education learning in the area of global understanding and global issues is reinforced
once students move into their major areas of study through a ―
global-intensive‖ requirement. All
engineering programs at the School of Mines designate courses at the 300 level or above as

global-intensive‖ and design the curriculum to prompt students to consider global and
contemporary issues in the context of their discipline. The placement of the global-intensive
courses at the junior or senior level supports the integration of general education outcomes into
learning in the major and helps support the attainment of ABET outcomes (h) and (j). For more
details on the global-intensive courses in the engineering programs, please see Appendix D,
Section K on Academic Supporting Units.

113

5.A.1.d

Laboratory Experience

Electrical and Computer Engineering students have required laboratories with nearly all courses.
In these courses, lab reports are required and the quality of the writing accounts for a portion of
the lab grade. The course instructor either grades the reports or supervises the graduate students
charged with grading the reports and they correct the spelling, grammar, and usage errors in the
laboratory reports. This provides constant review and reinforcement of writing skills throughout
the undergraduate curriculum.
The Senior Design I and Senior Design II courses put particular emphasis on oral and written
communication skills. The Senior Design sequence requires regular progress memos, a
preliminary design review, a critical design review, as well as a final report and a demonstration
of the project at the campus-wide design fair.
The Electrical and Computer Engineering Department continues to put a major emphasis on
laboratory experience for students. This begins with the basic science courses and continues
with required laboratories in most electrical and computer engineering courses.
All the laboratory courses offered in the department require students to have hands-on
experience. Several laboratories conclude with a special project that provides additional
opportunity to explore design in that subject area. The basic course has laboratories that
emphasize analysis while the other courses have some degree of design in at least some of the
laboratory exercises. In the senior electives and Senior Design, heavy emphasis is placed on
design so that theory and practice are strongly integrated and reinforced.
The laboratories are located in a modern facility and new equipment is purchased on a regular
basis to replace older equipment. The ECE Lab Plan provides a means of anticipating and
coordinating needs. Additional support from CAMP has improved the prototyping capabilities
with Altium Designer CAD software and circuit board milling capabilities. Although money is
tight, there are no major problems with maintaining appropriate instruments in the instructional
laboratories. In addition to the lab fee that students pay for each lob credit, the ECE Department
has significant funds available to support the labs. The Provost maintains an account for
laboratory equipment and supplies that can be used by departments for special needs. For
example, the Provost funded most of the cost of installing electronic locks for students to access
ECE labs using their university IDs. In addition, several . faculty members have pursued
external sources of equipment money and equipment donations.
The department employs one full-time technician who repairs and maintains the instructional
equipment used in the teaching laboratory. The department, in conjunction with CAMP, also
employees an Electronic Specialist who helps on projects that faculty or students may have. He
is a great asset to design project with many years of design and production engineering
experience in various industries.

114

5.A.1.e

Computer Experience

The computer experience begins in the freshman year with CSC 150 Computer Science I, which
focuses on problem solving, algorithm development, and programming concepts. Students use
the C++ programming language in the class. Students also learn assembly language, C,
structured design techniques, software testing, and documentation in required and senior elective
courses. Furthermore, students use, EXCEL, PSPICE, MATLAB, XILINX, ADS, ALTIUM,
and other design and analysis software during their coursework.

5.A.2 Credit hours and distribution
Table 5-3. Basic-Level Curriculum
Electrical Engineering
Category (Credit Hours)
Year;
Semester or

Course

Quarter

(Department, Number, Title)

Math & Basic
Sciences

Engineering
Topics
Check if Contains
Significant Design
()

Freshman

MATH 123 Calculus I 1

4

(

)

Year;

CHEM 112 General Chemistry I

3

(

)

First

CHEM 112L Gen.Chem. I Lab

1

(

)

Semester

CENG 244 Intro to Digital Sys

(

)

(

)

4

Hum. or SS Elective(s)

General
Education

3

PE Physical Education1

1

(

)

(

)

Freshman

ENGL 101 Composition I

Year;

MATH 125 Calculus II

4

(

Second

PHYS 211 University Physics I

3

(

)

Semester

PE Physical Education

(

)

Hum. or SS Elective(s)

(

)

3

Free Elective4

(

)

2

(

)

(

)

Sophomore

Other

4

)

Year;

EE 220 Circuits I
MATH 321 Differential Equations

4

(

)

First

CSC 150 Computer Science I

3

(

)

Semester

PHYS 213 University Physics II

3

(

)

115

3

1

Category (Credit Hours)
Year;
Semester or

Course

Quarter

(Department, Number, Title)

Math & Basic
Sciences

PHYS 213L Univ. Physics II Lab

1

Engineering
Topics
Check if Contains
Significant Design
()

(

General
Education

)

Hum.or SS Elective(s)
Sophomore
Year;

ENGL 279 Technical Comm I
EE 221 Circuits

Second

MATH 225 Calculus III

Semester

EE 351 Mech.and Meas.Systems

3

4
4
4

(

)

(

)

(

)

(

)

3

()

Hum or SS Elective(s)

(

)

3

Junior

ENGL 289 Tech Comm. II

(

)

3

Year;

EE 311 Systems

First
Semester

3.5

()

EE 320 Electronics I

4

()

EE 381 Elec. and Magnetic Fields

3

EM 216 Statics and Dynamics

(

4

)

()

(
Junior

Other

)

3.5

()

4

()

Year;

EE 312 Signals
EE 322 Electronics II

Second

EE 330 Energy Systems

4

()

Semester

EE 382 Applied Electromagnetics

3

()

3

Approved Math Elective

Category (Credit Hours)
Year;
Semester or

Math & Basic
Sciences

Quarter

Engineering
Topics
Check if Contains
Significant Design
()

Senior

EE 362 Elec. & Mag. Prop.of Mat.

3

(

)

Year;

IENG 301 Basic Engr. Economics

2

(

)

116

General
Education

Other

Category (Credit Hours)
Year;
Semester or

Course

Quarter

(Department, Number, Title)

First

ME 211 Thermodynamics

Semester

EE 464 Senior Design I
EE Electrical Engr Elective

Math & Basic
Sciences

Engineering
Topics
Check if Contains
Significant Design
()

3
3

(

()

4

()

(

)

Senior

EE 465 Electrical Engr. Design II

2

()

Year;

EE Electrical Engr. Elective3

4

()

Second

EE Electrical Engr. Elective3

3

Semester

Hum. or SS Elective(s)
Technical Elective4

3

Free Elective

)

(

)

(

)

3

33

71

30

2

24.2%

52.2%

22.1%

1.5%

32 hrs

48 hrs

25%

37.5 %

136

PERCENT OF TOTAL
Totals must

(

3

1

TOTALS-ABET BASIC-LEVEL REQUIREMENTS
OVERALL TOTAL
FOR DEGREE

Other

)

2

Free Elective4

General
Education

Minimum semester credit hours

satisfy one set Minimum percentage

Curriculum Notes
1. Music ensemble courses, (MUEN 101, 121 or 122) may be substituted for physical education courses. Any
other substitutions must be approved in advance by the physical education department head.
2. MATH 381 and 441 are approved electives.
3. Eleven electrical engineering elective credits required.
EE Electives
EE 421 Communications Systems
EE 431 Power Systems
EE 432 Power Electronics
EE 451 Control Systems
EE 481 Microwave Engineering
EE 483 Antennas for Wireless Communications
EE 552 Robotic Control Systems
CENG 342 Digital Systems
CENG 420 Design of Digital Signal Processing Systems
CENG 440 VLSI Design
CENG 442 Microprocessor Design

117

4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4

CENG 444 Computer Networks
(credit for only one of CENG 444 or CSC 463 may be used)
CENG 446 Advanced Computer Architectures
(credit for only one of CENG 446 or CSC 440 may be used)
CENG 447 Embedded and Real-Time Computer Systems

4
4
4

4.

A free elective is any college level course 100 level or above that is acceptable toward an engineering or
science degree. Military science courses, 100 level and above, apply as free electives only; substitution for
departmental, technical, humanities, or social science electives is not permitted.

5.

A technical elective is any science or engineering course 200 level or above that does not duplicate the
content of any other course required for graduation. Co-op credits may be used for technical elective credit.
A maximum of 6 co-op credits may be used for the EE degree. Electrical engineering students are required
to take the Fundamentals of Engineering exam prior to graduation.

118

Table 5-4. Course and Section Size Summary
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING

Course No.

MATH 123

Title

Calculus I
CHEM 112 General Chemistry I
CHEM 112L Gen.Chem. I Lab
CENG 244
Intro to Digital Sys
Hum. or SS Elective(s)
PE
Physical Education

Responsible
Faculty
Member

No. of
Sections
Offered in Avg. Section
Current Year Enrollment Lecture
13

Linde

100%

4
15
2
52
30

34.23
117.25
26.13
53.50
36.92
23.40

15
13
2
30
52

20.40
31.15
113.00
23.40
36.92

100%
100%
100%
100%
100%

2
9
8
2
9
52

26.00
33.22
32.88
113.00
21.78
36.92

75%
100%
66.6%
100%

15
2
9
2
52

22.47
16.00
35.89
17.50
36.92

100%
75%
100%
75%
100%

100%
75%
100%

ENGL 101
MATH 125
PHYS 211
PE

Composition I
Calculus II
University Physics I
Physical Education
Hum. or SS Elective(s)
Free Elective

EE 220
MATH 321
CSC 150
PHYS 213
PHYS 213L

Circuits I
Differential Equations
Computer Science I
University Physics II
Univ. Physics II Lab
Hum. or SS Elective(s)

ENGL 279
EE 221
MATH 225
EE 351

Technical Comm I
Circuits
Calculus III
Mech. & Meas. Systems
Hum. or SS Elective(s)

ENGL 289
EE 311
EE 320
EE 381
EM 216

Tech Comm. II
Systems
Electronics I
Elec. and Magnetic Fields
Statics and Dynamics

Tolle
Whites
Montoya

16
1
1
1
2

18.06
23.00
29.00
24.00
36.50

100%
85.7%
75%
100%
100%

EE 312
EE 322
EE 330
EE 382

Signals
Electronics II
Energy Systems
Applied Electromagnetics

Tolle
Whites
Montoya
Whites

1
1
1
1

28.00
22.00
23.00
23.00

85.7%
75%
75%
83.4%

EE 362
IENG 301
ME 211
EE 464
EE

Elec. & Mag. Prop.of Mat. Hemmelman
Basic Engr. Economics
Thermodynamics
Senior Design I
Askildsen
Electrical Engr. Elective
Free Elective

1
1
1
3

18.00
26.00
39.00
22.00

100%
100%
100%
100%

Montoya

Anagnostou
Grahek

119

100%

Lab

Other

100%
25%
100%

25%
33.3%
100%

25%
25%

14.3%
25%

14.3%
25%
25%
16.6%

EE 465
EE

Electrical Engr. Design II
Electrical Engr. Elective
Technical Elective
Hum. Or SS Elective(s)
Free Elective

Askildsen

2

10.50

100%

52

36.92

100%

Courses listed below are electives and/or courses contained in the catalog but not prescribed in the basic curriculum
EE 264/264L Sophomore Design

(Becomes a required course
starting Fall 2010)

EE 291
Independent Study
EE 292
Topics
EE 301/301L Introd. Circuits, Machines
& Systems
EE 303/303L Basic Circuits
EE 391
Independent Study
EE 392
Topics
EE 421/421L Communication Systems
EE 431/431L Power Systems
EE 432/432L Power Electronics
EE 451/451L Control Systems
EE 481/481L Microwave Engineering
EE 483/483L Antennas for Wireless
Communication
EE 491
Independent Study
EE 492
Topics
EE 498
Undergrad
Research/Scholarship

5.A.3

Batchelder

4

Linde

6

Linde
Batchelder
Rausch
Rausch
Tolle
Whites
Anagnostou

3.00
24.33

4
2
2
2
2
-

12.50
9.00
17.00
18.00
16.00
-

1
2

2.00
-

50%

50%

75%

25%

66.6%

33.3%

75%
75%
75%
75%

25%
25%
25%
25%

-

1.00

100%
100%

Capstone Design

Appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints are incorporated in the
capstone design experience as these concepts appear throughout the curriculum. Standards are
so ubiquitous in everyday activities that we often do not recognize them. From CDs (ISO9669
Standard) that are interchangeable among players and PCs by different manufacturers to light
bulb sockets that accept bulbs from any manufacturer and power cords that plug in to the AC
mains. As students learn design, they have the experience of dealing with the appropriate
standards and regulations. Regulations are created by governmental bodies while standards may
come from public or private bodies. Although standards may not have the force of law, products
not adhering to standards will not be successful in the marketplace.
Second year students begin their studies of circuits in EE 220, 221 and learn in the lab that only
certain standard values of components are available. In the introduction to digital logic course,
CENG 244, students learn standard logic power supply voltages, IC package types, and
footprints for PCB layout as they breadboard their projects in the lab for testing.
Third year students in Mechatronics, EE/ME 351, learn about standard interfaces such as the
USB standard that they use to transfer data between a PC and a microcontroller board. Some of
the sensors and actuators they study have accepted standards e.g. thermocouples and servo PWM
120

control signals. Using their knowledge from CSC 150 they find that the microcontroller can be
programmed using standard C and C library functions. In CENG 342 they learn to design logic
circuits using the VHDL standard IEEE 1076. In EE 330, Energy Systems, they learn standards
applying to the power industry. In EE 382 Lab, Applied Electromagnetics, they learn the various
types of standard coax and connectors. CENG 314 Assembly Language Programming students
learn the standard character codes ASCII and Unicode plus the IEEE 754 floating point standard.
Fourth year students have the opportunity to study specific standards in the elective areas. For
example, in CENG 444 Computer Networking, students learn protocol standards (TCP/IP), LAN
(IEEE 802.3), Wireless (IEEE 802.11), as well as detailed standards such as the various CRC
formats. The IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) RFC standards are reviewed for specific
protocols.
CENG 442, Micro-based System Design, studies industry standard interfaces such as I2C, and
SPI. CENG 447, Embedded and Real-time Systems, designs projects using a real-time operating
system that meets the RTCA DO-178B safety standard. The ANSI standard terminal control
codes are used to display information on a VT100 terminal emulator driven by an embedded
system. CENG 446 has studied the ISA and PCI standard buses. The capstone design course
projects may require development according to applicable standards. For example, a design for a
battery powered inverter investigated the IEEE 1547 standard for running distributed generators
when the power is out. Another project used the Midi Standard for interfacing a musical
synthesizer to a PC. In the capstone design class, FCC Part 15 regulations are studied for
allowable levels of radiated and conducted interference. Many capstone design students design
printed circuit boards and learn the industry standards i.e. Gerber files.

Student Design Competitions
Students are involved in many co-curricular design project teams. Quoting Philip Ross from his
article ―
Start your Motors!‖ in the October 2003 IEEE Spectrum, ―
When prospective employers
gripe about technical schools, the refrain is almost always the same: too many newly minted
engineers are unable to work with professionals in other disciplines, and they find it difficult to
set priorities and get a complex job done. Also, rookie engineers struggling to work on different
aspects of a given problem concurrently usually fail to communicate effectively about what they
are doing‖. Students working in these multidisciplinary teams under tight budgets and
constrained time have learned to communicate and set priorities. As they graduate, these
engineers are no longer rookies.
For example, the robotics team comprises typically 20 to 30 members with various majors
including at various times EE, CENG, ME, IE, CSC, MATH, and GEOL. Their goal is to
design, build, test, and optimize robots to compete in the IEEE Region 5 Robotics contest. In the
past competitions they have always placed in the top 25% (except the past year when a young
team did not place). For the first five years of the team, they never placed lower than third.
They have made it a priority to attract underclassmen to the team where they can learn in a
collegial setting and put them to work learning, designing, and building robots.

121

The Solar Motion Team, after ten years of participating in the SunRayce competition building
and racing solar power cars, decided to reform as the Alternative Fuel Vehicle Team. Their first
project was a hydrogen fuel cell powered car and since then have participated in the SAE Clean
Snowmobile Competition, Zero Emissions Division for the past four years. The team has
consistently placed fourth or fifth designing and building a better electric sled each year as the
other competitors have likewise improved.
Twenty some students are members of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Team. The UAV team
purpose is to design, build, test, and optimize an autonomous flying machine to compete in the
Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems, International's Aerial Robotics Competition
(IARC), "The ultimate collegiate challenge". The heart of the team is EE, CENG, ME, and CSC
students who have competed in IARC for several years at Ft. Benning and 2009 at the University
of Puerto Rico. They have placed first one year, second another, third, and fourth in other years.
Capstone Design
The capstone design course sequence, Senior Design I and Senior Design II, builds on design
experience acquired throughout the curriculum. Although CENG 224, Introduction to Digital
Logic, does not have a significant design component, the first year students do get significant lab
experience and debugging experience that is an important part of the design process. EE/ME
264, Sophomore Design, has been taught for several semesters as required for ME students but
elective for EE and CENG students. The ECE faculty have added it to the required curriculum
starting in the fall of 2010. The course is team taught by ECE and ME faculty who guide the
beginning student designers through the process by a class design project with elements from
ECE and ME. The class as a whole does the design although departments are broken out for ECE
design and manufacturing, ME design and manufacturing, purchasing, legal, and management.
The course is described in more detail in Criterion 4.
EE/ME 351, Mechatronics, involves design projects that integrate sensors (temperature, pressure,
distance, etc.), actuators (servos, motors, solenoids, etc.), and microcontrollers. In one project,
teams are provided a set of parts including a microcontroller board, servos, IR sensors, and Hbridge motor controllers with which they design a mobile robots to perform a specified objective.
The semester culminates with a competition among robots that the teams have designed and
built.
Based their accumulated design experience, students are in a good position to work on
multidisciplinary team-based design projects for their capstone design course. Increasing
coordination among ECE, ME, and CSC faculty reduces the barriers to students engaged in
multi-disciplinary projects. Faculty from the different departments coordinate the preliminary
design reviews (PDR) and the critical design reviews (CDR) as well as moving toward a
common evaluation rubric.
For example, in the past academic year multi-disciplinary projects included an autonomous
recycling sorter, a remote controlled lunar regolith mining machine, an autonomous underwater
vehicle, an electric snowmobile. Illustrating the advantage of this coordination:
122





the autonomous recycling sorter was entered in an ASME student design
competition and placed first in the region,
the remote controlled lunar regolith mining machine placed fourth in the NASA
competition at the Kennedy Space Center,
the electric snowmobile placed third in the design paper and fifth overall in the
SAE Clean Snowmobile Competition, Zero Emissions Division.

Multidisciplinary capstone projects are emphasized especially with Mechanical Engineering,
Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, and Computer Engineering. Meetings of the faculty
involved assess the projects and the process and consider possibilities for improvement. For
example, the most recent meeting on June 9, 2010 included faculty from Mechanical
Engineering, Metallurgical Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Computer
Science, and Industrial Engineering. Items for improvement included earlier prototyping and
earlier Critical Design Reviews, emphasizing the spiral rather than waterfall model of the design
process, and techniques to reduce the wasted time at the beginning of the capstone design
process.

4.

Curricular components
Math and Science Courses

33 Credits

Math 123 Calculus I

4

Math 125 Calculus II

4

Math 225 Calculus III

4

Math 321 Differential Equations

4

Math 381 Introduction to Probability and Statistics 3
Or
Math 441 Engineering Statistics

4

CSC 150 Computer Science I

3

Chem 112 Chemistry I

3

Chem 112L Chemistry I Lab

1

Physics 211University Physics I

3

Physics 213 University Physics II

3

Physics 213L University Physics II Lab

1

Table 5-5a

Math and Science Component of the ECE Curriculum

123

CENG 244 Introduction to Digital Systems

4 (3-1)

EE 220 Circuits I

4 (3-1)

EE 221 Circuits II

4 (3-1)

EE 264 Sophomore Design

2 (1-1)

EE/ME 351 Mechatronics

4 (3-1)

EE 311 Systems

3.5 (3-0.5)

EE 312 Signals

3.5 (3-0.5)

EE 320 Electronics I

4 (3-1)

EE 322 Electronics II

4 (3-1)

EE 330 Energy Systems

4 (3-1)

EE 362 Electric and Magnetic Properties of
Materials

3 (3-0)

EE 381 Electric and Magnetic Fields

3 (3-0)

EE 382 Applied Electromagnetics

3 (2.5-0.5)

EE 464 Senior Design I

2 (1-1)

EE 465 Senior Design II

2 (1-1)

EE Elective

4 (3-1)

EE Elective

4 (3-1)

EE Elective

3 (3-0) or 4 (3-1)

IENG 301 Engineering Economics

2 (2-0)

EM 216 Statics and Dynamics

4 (4-0)

ME 211 Thermodynamics

3 (3-0)

Technical Elective

3 (3-0)

TOTAL

73 (59.5-13.5)

Table 5-5b

Engineering Topics Component of the EE Curriculum

124

Course

Credit (Lecture-Lab)

EE/ME 351 Mechatronics

4 (3-1)

EE 311 Systems

3.5 (3-0.5)

EE 312 Signals

3.5 (3-0.5)

EE 320 Electronics I

4 (3-1)

EE 322 Electronics II

4 (3-1)

EE 330 Energy Systems

4 (3-1)

EE 382 Applied Electromagnetics

3 (2.5-0.5)

EE 464 Senior Design I

2 (1-1)

EE 465 Senior Design II

2 (1-1)

EE Elective

4 (3-1)

EE Elective

4 (3-1)

EE Elective

3 (3-0) or 4 (3-1)

Total

41 (31.5-9.5)

Table 5-5c

Courses with Significant Design Component

In the syllabus for each course, the outcomes are mapped to the program outcomes; likewise, the
program outcomes are mapped to the program educational objectives as discussed in Criterion 2.
The course notebooks available onsite contain samples of student work showing how the course
outcomes are achieved.
5. Cooperative education
The department has active summer internship and co-op programs. Frequently industry
recruiters are seeking candidates for these programs. Credits are available as CP 297/397/497
Cooperative Education. Up to six credits can be used to meet curricular requirements. Normally
these are free electives; however, it is possible for students to fulfill the technical elective
requirement with co-op credit and in some strictly monitored case applied as a senior EE
elective. The student must show that work, including design work, in the co-op experience is
equivalent to the learning experience in a senior elective. Details about the internship and
cooperative education program are available at http://careers.sdsmt.edu/students/coops-interns/.
Students must write a report and submit a supervisors evaluation to receive credit for the co-op
experience. Each department has a co-op coordinator who is familiar with the program and can
advise students in the process.

125

6. Materials that will be available for review
Representative samples of graded student work for each course will be available in the course
notebooks including low medium and high performance samples from all assignments including
homework, quizzes, tests, exams, computer usage, and lab reports.
B. Prerequisite Flow Chart
Student Name:

Electrical Engineering
Latest Revision: December 8, 2009

Preparatory

CHEM
106

MATH
102/102L

3

Freshman (16/17)

or high school
chemistry
(recommended)

3
C

PHYS
111

3

MATH

3

120

CHEM
112L

1

CHEM
112

3

MATH
123

Entry Level Math
and English
Determined by:
ACT scores
and
COMPASS exam

PHYS
211

3

C

4
C

MATH
125

4

PHYS
213L

1

PHYS
213

3

MATH
321

CENG
244
PE or

1

MUEN 1XX
1xx

CSC
150
PE or

4

4
C

3

ENGL
279

GenEd 3
SS/Hum

EM
216

4

EE
221

EE
362*

Course
###

EE
311

Completed or Concurrent

3

EE
382*

S

F

4

3.5

Senior 4
Elective

GenEd 3
SS/Hum

MATH
381 or 441

3

EE
330*

4

EE
312

3.5

S

Senior 4
Elective

EE
464

2

Senior
Elective or
EE grad
course

EE
465

2

Tech 3
Elective

S

F

4

(Sophomore Standing)
32 credits
completed

EE
320

4

ENGL
289

3

F

4

EE
322

S

Free 3
Elective

Note: 1 of the above
courses (*) may be
taken in the Sr year

Free 1
Elective
Upper 3
SS/Hum

16 if entered SDSM&T before 2007

6 Credits SS (Gen Ed - Goal #3 - 2 disciplines)
6 Credits HUM (Gen Ed - Goal #4 - 2 disciplines or
foreign language)
3 Credits - 300 or 400 level course

Credit Hours
Grade Required (if applicable)
F = Fall Semester
S = Spring Semester
O = Odd Numbered Years
E = Even Numbered Years
(blank) = Offered every semester

Humanities
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

__
__
__

Social Science
1. _________ __
2. _________ __
3. _________ __

Upper Level _______________

126

4

EE 312
EE 322

EE
421

F

EE 311
EE 330

EE
431

F

EE 330

EE
432

FO

EE 311

EE
451

S

EE 362

EE
461

F

EE 382

EE
481

F

EE 362
EE 382

EE
482

FE

EE 382

EE
483

S

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

CENG 244
CSC 150

CENG 4
342 S

EE 312

CENG 4
420 SE

EE 320

CENG 4
440 F

CENG 342

CENG 4
442 S

15 Credits Social Science and Humanities

GenEd 3
SS/Hum

When Offered

11 credits are required

2

3

C

Legend
Prerequisite

F

(varies)

3

(Sophomore Standing)
32 credits
completed

GenEd 3
SS/Hum

4

EE
351

1xx
MUEN 1XX

ENGL
101

MATH
225

Free Elective or
EE 264 Fstarting
fall 2010

1

IENG
301

3
3

2

3

Senior Electives

Senior (18/15)

ME 211

EE
381

C

EE
220
4

Junior (16.5/17.5)
(Junior Standing)
64 credits
completed

or high school
physics
(recommended)

(if qualified)

Sophomore (18/18)

CENG 244
MATH 381
or 441

CENG 4
444 F

CENG 342

CENG 4
446 S

CSC 150
EE 351

CENG 4
447 SO

C. Course Syllabi
Appendix A contains the course syllabi.

127

CRITERION 6. FACULTY
A. Leadership Responsibilities
The department head is the administrator with primary responsibility for the academic
program(s) residing in the department. The department head in collaboration with program
faculty members has responsibility for and control of the program curriculum and responsibility
for program development and the design of new programs. Additional primary responsibilities
of the department head include program enrollment management and the fostering of
opportunities for external funding.
The department head is the administrator responsible for all hiring of faculty members and other
personnel in the program, annual evaluation for program personnel and faculty members, and the
provision of input to the provost regarding annual evaluations and petitions for promotion and
tenure. The department head reviews each faculty member‘s Professional Development Plan and
negotiates the terms of the plan with each faculty member before it is sent to the provost for final
review and approval.
The fiduciary responsibilities of the department head include managing the budget for the
program, making salary recommendations, and overseeing operating expenses and student
support budgets. The department head provides an important oversight and coordinating step in
the process of approving research proposals submitted by faculty members in the program. The
department head provides input to the provost on space utilization, program needs, and any
additional information needed by the administration to ensure the effective management of
institutional resources.
The department head is the administrator with primary responsibility for the academic
program(s) residing in the department. The department head in collaboration with program
faculty members has responsibility for and control of the program curriculum and responsibility
for program development and the design of new programs. Additional primary responsibilities
of the department head include program enrollment management and the fostering of
opportunities for external funding.
The department head is the administrator responsible for all hiring of faculty members and other
personnel in the program, annual evaluation for program personnel and faculty members, and the
provision of input to the provost regarding annual evaluations and petitions for promotion and
tenure. The department head reviews each faculty member‘s Professional Development Plan and
negotiates the terms of the plan with each faculty member before it is sent to the provost for final
review and approval.
The fiduciary responsibilities of the department head include managing the budget for the
program, making salary recommendations, and overseeing operating expenses and student
support budgets. The department head provides an important oversight and coordinating step in
the process of approving research proposals submitted by faculty members in the program. The
department head provides input to the provost on space utilization, program needs, and any
additional information needed by the administration to ensure the effective management of
institutional resources.

128

B. Authority and Responsibility of Faculty
The department head in collaboration with program faculty members has responsibility for and
control of the program curriculum and responsibility for program development and the design of
new programs. The program curriculum is controlled at the program level, with changes,
modifications, and developments vetted by the University Curriculum Committee and forwarded
to the Faculty Senate for approval.
Because of the integrated and interdependent way institutions in the Board of Regents system are
managed, some curricular changes and modifications may need Board of Regents approval. In
these instances, curricular changes are reviewed and approved by the provost before being taken
to the Academic Advisory Council (AAC). The AAC is comprised of the vice president or
provost for academic affairs at all institutions in the state system. The AAC forwards
recommendations on curricular matters to the Council of Presidents (COPS) which makes
recommendations for final approval to the Board of Regents.
As a matter of Regents policy, all courses are evaluated by students with the IDEA end-ofsemester survey. (See <http://www.theideacenter.org> for more information on this
instrument.) Student evaluations of each course taught in the program are returned to the
department head who reviews the evaluations and follows up with an individual consultation
with each faculty member in the program. The results of all course surveys are placed in the
faculty member‘s permanent file which resides in the Office of the Provost. While the provost
has free access to all faculty member files, the department head and the faculty member are the
primary audience for end-of-course student evaluations. The monitoring and improvement of
teaching quality is the purview and primary responsibility of the department head in
collaboration with the faculty members in the program.
Each ECE department faculty member participates in the review of courses in their areas of
specialty. Reports on individual courses are done at the end of the semester and include
administrative information, details on course and computer content, course objectives,
assessment information, and any lessons learned during the semester. New courses may be
presented by a faculty member to the department for approval. If approved, it then will be
submitted to the University Curriculum Committee. The committee members will then
review it for consistency with the university or duplication of other courses. If approved, it
will then be submitted to the Academic Affairs Committee of the South Dakota Board of
Regents where it will be reviewed by the six vice presidents/provosts across the state. If
approved, it will then be implemented during the following semester.
The department also reviews all proposed changes to individual courses and any other
impact to the approved program. Proposed changes to the computer engineering curriculum
are reviewed by both the computer science and the electrical and computer engineering
departments. Their purpose is to control changes to the curriculum through a formal review
and approval process.
The Electrical and Computer Engineering faculty has the qualifications, motivation, and
leadership support and encouragement to evaluate and improve the electrical and computer
engineering programs. The annual assessment process uses inputs from faculty members and
support personnel to ensure the program is adequate and that program objectives are met.
129

C. Faculty
The department of Electrical and Computer Engineering includes faculty from both Electrical
and Computer Engineering that provides instructions to both programs. Four faculty members
and one part time adjunct instructor are identified as primarily EE, two as primarily CENG
faculty and one full-time adjunct professor, and one faculty member regularly teaching in both
areas. In addition, six faculty member from the Computer Science Department teach core or
elective courses taken by computer or electrical engineering students. The ECE faculty makes
decisions about the EE curriculum and any waivers or substitutions or waivers. The Computer
Engineering faculty from ECE and the faculty from CSC makes decisions about the Computer
Engineering curriculum.
In December 1999 Mr. Steven P. Miller, an alumnus of this department, donated approximately
$1.3 million to establish an endowed chair in the Electrical and Computer Engineering
department. The intent of endowment was to nurture the quality of the faculty by supporting an
eminent scholar who will contribute to the Electrical and Computer Engineering department, and
the institution in significant ways. In August 2001 the ECE department was able to hire an
eminent professor with proven research track record.
The principle strength of our department is a faculty dedicated to maintaining outstanding
undergraduate and graduate programs.

130

Table 6-1. Faculty Workload Summary
Electrical and Computer Engineering
Faculty Member
(name)

FT
or
Classes Taught (Course No./Credit Hrs.)
4
PT
Term and Year1
FT Spring 2010: EE 221 Circuits II (4 credits); EE 491, Independent Study:
Anten-nas for Wireless Communications (3 credits)

Fall 2009: EE 692 Advanced Antenna Design (3 credits); EE 464, Senior
Design I (co-taught) (4 credits); EE 465, Senior Design II (co-taught) (4
credits); CE 464, Senior Design I (co-taught) (4 credits); CE 465, Senior
Design II (co-taught) (4 credits)

Dimitrios Anagnostou

PT Fall 2009 CENG/EE 464, CENG/EE 465
Bernt Askildsen

12.50%

Spring 2010: CENG/EE 464, CENG/EE 465

FT Fall 2009: EM/ME 264 (2) w/D Dolan, CENG 244 (4) teamed w/E. Linde
Michael Batchelder

Fall 2009: EE 221, EE 421

5

28

65%

25%

10%

Spring 2010: EE 322, EE 692
FT Fall 2009: EE 552 Robotic Control Systems, CENG 244, Intro to Digital
Systems; EE 301/303 Basic Circuits

Elaine Linde

67

Spring 2010: EE/ME 264 (2) (team taught w/Dan Dolan), CENG 442 (4
credits)

FT
Wael Fathelbab

Total Activity Distribution2
Research/
Teaching
Other3
Scholarly
30%
60%
10% Service
Activity

Spring 2010: CSC 150 Computer Science I;
CENG 244 Intro to Digital Systems

301/303 Basic Circuits;

131

90

10

FT Spring 2010- EE 220/220L (3-1) Circuits I; EE 330/330L (3-1) Energy
Systems; EE 498 (1-0) Undergraduate Research; EE 692-81 (3-0) Topics:
Advanced Microwave Engineering; EE 798 (2-0) Master‘s Thesis

Thomas Montoya

65

25

10

60

30

10

40

50

10

Fall 2009: EE 220/220L (3-1) Circuits I; EE 381 (3-0) Electric and
Magnetic Fields
PT
Scott Rausch
FT
Charles Tolle

1
2
3
4

Spring 2010: EE431 Power Systems (3) \EE 431L Power Systems Lab
(1)
Spring 2010: EE 312 (3); EE312L(0.5); EE 451(3); EE 451L(1);ME
453(3); ME 453L(1); BME 798 (3)

100%

Fall 2009: EE 311(3); EE311L(0.5)
FT

Keith Whites

Fall 2009: EE 432Power Electronics (3); EE 432L Power Electronics
Lab(1)

Fall 2009 -EE 320 (3), EE 320L (1), EE 798 (3), NANO 898 (1), EE 382
(2.5)
Spring 2010, EE 382L (0.5) Spring 2010, EE 798 (3) Spring 2010,
NANO 898 (5)

Indicate Term and Year for which data apply (the academic year preceding the visit).
Activity distribution should be in percent of effort. Members' activities should total 100%.
Indicate sabbatical leave, etc., under "Other."
FT = Full Time Faculty
PT = Part Time Faculty

132

Table 6.2 Faculty Analysis

Asst Prof

Bernt Askildsen

Instructor

TT

NTT

MS, ABD
PT Electrical
Engineering

Michael Batchelder

Professor

T

FT

Wael Fathelbab

Asst Prof

TT

FT

Elaine Linde

Instructor

NTT FT

Thomas Montoya

Assoc Prof

T

Scott Rauch

Instructor

NTT PT

FT

PhD
Electrical,
Electro &
Comm. Eng
PhD
Electrical,
Electro &
Comm Eng
MS
Mechanical
Engineering
PhD
Electrical,
Electro &
Comm Eng
BS
Electrical,
Electro &
Comm Eng

4

10

4

South Dakota
School of
Mines & Tech
Virginia
Polytech Inst.
State U (1975)

2.5

36

U of Bradford,
UK (1999)
CSU Ft.
Collins (1995)

High

Consulting/
Summer
Work in
Industry

4

Research

High

4

Technical
Chamber of
Greece (in
Greece).

This
Institutio

Total
Faculty

Govt./
Industry
Practice
18 months
Post Doctoral
Fellow at
Georgia Tech.

Professiona
l Society

Dimitrios Anagnostou

FT Electrical &
Computer
Eng

U of NM
Albuquerque
(2005)

Level of Activity
(high, med, low, none) in:

Years of Experience
Profession
Registration/
Certification

PhD

Institution from
which Highest
Degree Earned &
Year

Highest Degree
and Field

TT , T , NTT

FT or PT

Name

Rank

Electrical and Computer Engineering

Med

Member,
IEEE

Papers,
Proposal
s

1.4 Months
Research

None

IEEE

low

None

34

None

SM IEEE,
ACM,
Sigma Xi
Med

Low

Low

3

None

IEEE

High

Low

7

8.5

8.5

None

Low

Low

Low

Ga Inst Tech
(1998)

4

12

9

None

Low

Med

Low

SDSMT
(1975)

25

4

4

None

Med

None

High

133

PhD
Charles Tolle

Keith Whites

Assoc Prof

Professor

TT

T

FT Electrical,
Electro &
Comm Eng
PhD
FT Electrical,
Eng

UT State U
(1998)

14

U of Illinois
UrbanaChampagne(1
991)

2

1.5

None

IEEE med

med

Med

19

9

None

Low

High

None

Instructions: Complete table for each member of the of the program faculty. Use additional sheets if necessary. Updated information is to be provided at the time of the visit. The
level of activity should reflect an average over the year prior to visit plus two previous years.
Column 3 Code: TT = Tenure Track

T = Tenured

NTT = Non Tenure Track

[[Academic Affairs fills out all but the three right-hand columns for Table 6-2. The Program head or designee notes whether the activity is low, medium, or high. Footnotes can
be added to the table if so desired to define the levels.]]

134

D. Faculty Competencies
Teaching load are typically two courses for those involved in research and working with
graduate students and three courses otherwise. Faculty are expected to serve on department
committees and one university committee (or more if they wish) and serve as academic advisors.
Although travel funds are limited, most faculty can attend conferences and workshops on a
regular basis. The teaching loads leave time for research and faculty professional development.
Some examples of recent professional development efforts include innovation in classroom and
laboratory techniques, participation and attendance at local and national American Society for
Engineering Education (ASEE) annual conferences, local Institute for Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (IEEE) section meetings, and consulting projects.
Every department faculty member is encouraged to attend at least one professional
conference or activity per year (IEEE, ASEE, short course, etc.) to help stay abreast of
technological and educational advancements.

E. Faculty Size
The Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering possesses a wealth of talent,
experience, and education in its faculty. The faculty has a wide diversity of emphasis areas
within the electrical and computer engineering fields. This allows us to cover all major areas in
our curriculum. The overlap in certain fields allows us to have faculty members to collaborate in
research and development. When needed the full-time faculty is supplemented with adjunct
faculty members and part-time faculty members. The adjunct and part-time faculty members
also have considerable teaching and technical experience in their field of expertise.

Below is a table summarizing the ECE faculty expertise and teaching responsibilities.
Primary commitment to the Electrical Engineering Program – do not teach computer engineering
courses:
Dr. K. Whites
Dr. T. Montoya
Dr. Dimitrious Anagnostou
Dr. Charles Tolle
Scott Rausch (adjunct)

Electromagnetics, Electronics
Electromagnetics, Fields, System
Electromagnetics, Fields, Antennas
Systems, Controls, Signals
Circuits, Energy Systems

Primary commitment to electrical engineering – teaches CENG 244 and Mechatronics
Ms. E. Linde
Circuits, Systems, Mechatronics
Primary commitment to Computer Engineering - teach some electrical engineering courses:
135

Dr. M. Batchelder
Embedded Systems, Computer Architecture
Dr Randy Hoover (transferred from the CSC Department to the ECE Department June 2010)
Embedded Systems
Dr. B. Hemmelman (adjunct)
DSP, VLSI, Computer Architecture
Graduate students teaching courses
Bernt Askildsen (Biomedical Ph.D. Student) Capstone Design (extensive experience in
industry)
Ralph Grahek (MSEE student)
Mechatronics (extensive experience in industry)

F. Faculty
In Appendix B include an abbreviated resume for each program faculty member with the rank of
instructor or above. The format should be consistent for each resume, must not exceed two
pages per person, and, at a minimum, must contain the following information:


Name and academic rank



Degrees with fields, institution, and date



Number of years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and
dates of advancement in rank



Other related experience, i.e., teaching, industrial, etc.



Consulting, patents, etc.



States in which professionally licensed or certified, if applicable



Principal publications of the last five years



Scientific and professional societies of which a member



Honors and awards



Institutional and professional service in the last five years



Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities



Percentage of time committed to the program

G. Faculty Development
Teaching loads are typically two courses for those involved in research and working with
graduate students and three courses otherwise. Faculty are expected to serve on department
committees and one university committee (or more if they wish) and act as academic advisors.
Although travel funds are limited, most faculty can attend conferences and workshops on a
regular basis. The teaching loads leave time for research and faculty professional development.

136

Faculty development has been supported through the Provost‘s office for quite some time. In
order to more closely match the faculty development programming with the evolving needs of
the faculty, the Provost‘s Advisory Council for Faculty Development was created in 2009.
Eleven faculty from across the campus and across faculty ranks work with the Provost to provide
vision and guidance. The day to day operations of faculty development are led by Dr. Jennifer
Karlin, Associate Professor of Industrial Engineering, who was appointed faculty development
coordinator in 2009. Beginning in fall 2010, the Provost will be buying 30% of her time for
faculty development. The current faculty development program balances support for teaching,
research, and career development. The faculty development budget of $28,000 is used to fund
external speakers, new faculty orientation, and other targeted events, such as a webinar for
faculty writing CAREER proposals. A student fee mandated by the Board of Regents provides
additional funds, approximately $100,000 per year beginning in 2009, specifically for faculty
development related to mobile computing in the curriculum.
As a complement to faculty development, the Education and Assessment Research Seminar
(EARS), provides an outlet for campus faculty to be engaged in an ongoing dialogue on issues
related to best practices in engineering and science education and assessment. Over the past
three years, EARS has offered 23 seminars on a variety of faculty initiated topics including a
discussion on ASEE‘s year of dialogue initiative, holistic learning, campus diversity initiatives,
mathematics education, technology enabled learning, and Research Experiences for
Undergraduates (REU). .

Sample list of faculty development workshops and presentations
Dimitris Anagnostou
Attended TPC meeting:
1) IEEE APS/URSI Intl‟ Symposium, URSI Intl‟ Symposium 2010, Toronto, Canada, July 11-17,
2010.
Attended International Conferences (since 2007):
1) IEEE MTT – Intl‟Microwave Symposium 2007, Honolulu, HI, USA, June 3-8, 2007.
2) IEEE APS/URSI Intl‟ Symposium 2007, Honolulu, HI, USA, June 10-15, 2007.
3) IEEE APS/URSI Intl‟ Symposium 2008, San Diego, CA, USA, July 5-12, 2008.
4) 8th Annual Flexible Electronics and Displays Conference (FEDC ‟09), February 2-5, 2009.
5) IEEE APS/URSI Intl‟ Symposium 2009, Charleston, SC, USA, June 1-5, 2009.
6) IEEE MTT – Intl‟Microwave Symposium 2009, Boston, MA, USA, June 7-12, 2009.
7) IEEE APS/URSI Intl‟ Symposium 2010, Toronto, Canada, July 11-17, 2010.
Workshop Invited Talks:
1) IEEE APS/URSI 2009 Intl‟Symposium, Charleston, SC, USA, June 06, 2009.
Workshop: ―
MEMS Reconfigurable and Steerable Antennas Workshop‖.

137

Title of Presentation: ―
RF MEMS antennas on liquid crystal polymer for 3-D SOP RF front
ends‖.
2) IEEE-MTT 2009 International Microwave Symposium, Boston, MA, USA, June 12, 2009.
Workshop: ―
Modern RFID: Inkjet
Sensors on Flexible Substrates‖.

Printing of

"Green"

RFID

and

RFID-enabled

Title of Presentation: ―Gre
en antennas beyond RFID‖.
Workshop Attended:
1) NSF CAREER Proposal Writing Workshop 2007, Honolulu, Hawaii, March 23, 2007.
Other Workshops, Talks, Presentations and Posters:
1) ―NS
F CAREER Proposal Seminar Series Pt. 1‖, Broadcasted to SDSM&T, SDState and USD
through the Access Grid, Rapid City, SD, May 11, 2007.
2) Poster: ―Di
rect-Write Printed Ultra-Wideband (UWB) Antennas on Organic Substrates for
Reduced Interference Between UWB and 802.11a WLAN Systems‖, 11th Annual Student
Research Poster Session, State Capitol, Pierre, SD, February 20, 2008.
3) ―Dir
ect Write Flexible Electronics Technology‖, AAAS Research Competitiveness Program
Review, Sioux Falls, SD, April 9, 2008.
4) ―Re
search Activities in Applied Electromagnetics at SDSM&T‖, Seminar Talk at SDState,
Brookings, SD, April 18, 2008.
5) Poster: ―Pr
inted Paper-Based Antenna for Wireless Communications‖, South Dakota EPSCoR
State Conference, Sioux Falls, SD, Sept. 11, 2008.
6) ―Co
st Effective Full Spectrum Polymer Photovoltaics using Printing or Roll-to-Roll
Processing‖, SD EPSCoR all investigators meeting, Mitchel, SD, June 11, 2008.
7) Poster: ―Rad
iation Analysis of a Cavity Resonance Antenna With Artificial Dielectric
Superstrates‖, NSF EPSCoR RII All Investigator Meeting / Diversity Workshop 2010,
Chamberlain, SD, June 13-15, 2010.
8) Poster: ―Di
rect-Write Flexible and Reconfigurable Antennas for Flexible Displays‖, NSF
EPSCoR RII All Investigator Meeting / Diversity Workshop 2010, Chamberlain, SD, June 1315, 2010.
9) ―Recon
figurable Antennas on Flexible Substrates Broadband Multilayer Filters / Self-Powered
Energy-Harvesting RF Systems Monolithically-Integrated with Efficient Solar-Cells –
SPHERES‖, NSF EPSCoR RII All Investigator Meeting / Diversity Workshop 2010,
Chamberlain, SD, June 13-15, 2010.
Short courses attended:
1) J. Volakis, S. Koulouridis and Z.N.Chen, ―
Miniaturization and material design methods for
antennas‖, at the IEEE APS/URSI Intl‘ Symposium 2007.

Michael Batchelder






IEEE Region 5 Conference 2005 Norman, OK
2005 Collaboration Workshop at St. Olaf College, MN
IEEE Region 5 Conference 2006 San Antonio, TX
IEEE Region 5 Conference 2007 Fayetteville AR
IEEE Region 5 Conference 2008 Kansas City, MO
138










IEEE Region 5 Conference 2009 Lubock, TX
Capstone Design Conference 2007 Boulder CO
International Aerial Robotics Competition 2008 Ft. Benning, GA
International Aerial Robotics Competition 2009 Univ. of Puerto Rico
ABET Webinars 2009-2010
Navy Educator Orientation Visit 2010 San Diego, CA
On-campus monthly Education and Assessment Research Seminar
Subscribe to Tomorrow‘s Professor Faculty Development Email Newsletter
http://cgi.stanford.edu/~dept-ctl/cgi-bin/tomprof/postings.php

Randy Hoover




IEEE Systems, Man, and Cybernetics conference 2009 San Antonio
(presented two papers and chair for the machine vision session)
USAF Unmanned Aerial Systems symposium 2009
Attended (judged) the SDSM&T research symposium May 2010

Elaine Linde





ASEE Annual Conference 2005 Portland OR
International Aerial Robotics Competition 2007 Ft. Benning, GA
International Aerial Robotics Competition 2008 Ft. Benning, GA
International Aerial Robotics Competition 2009 Univ. of Puerto Rico

Keith Whites
1.

Metamaterials 2009, 3rd International Congress on Advanced Electromagnetic Materials in
Microwaves and Optics, London, UK, pp. 153-155, Aug. 30-Sept. 4, 2009.

2.

IEEE Antennas and Propagat. Soc. Int. Symp., Charleston, SC, p. 202.1, June 1-5, 2009.

3.

Metamaterials 2007, Rome, Italy, pp. 66-69, Oct. 22-26, 2007.

4.

IEEE Antennas and Propagat. Soc. Int. Symp., Honolulu, HI, pp. 2765-2768, June 10-15, 2007.

5.

Metamaterials 2007, Rome, Italy, pp. 621-624, Oct. 22-26, 2007.

6.

Antenna Measurement Techniques Association (AMTA) Symposium, Austin, TX, pp. 88-93, Oct.
22-27, 2006.

7.

IEEE Antennas and Propagat. Soc. Int. Symp., Albuquerque, NM, vol. 4, pp. 3195-3198, July 9-14,
2006.

8.

Joint 9TH International Conference on Electromagnetics in Advanced Applications (ICEAA '05) and
11TH European Electromagnetic Structures Conference (EESC '05), Torino, Italy, pp. 105-108,
Sept. 12-16, 2005.

9.

IEEE Antennas and Propagat. Soc. Int. Symp., Washington, DC, vol. 1B, pp. 640-643, July 3-8,
2005.

139

10.

Bianisotropics 2004: Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Complex Media and Metamaterials,
Het Pand, Ghent, Belgium, pp. 34-39, September 22-24, 2004.

11.

IEEE Antennas and Propagat. Soc. Int. Symp., Monterey, CA, pp. 1772-1775, June 20-25, 2004.

12.

IEEE Antennas and Propagat. Soc. Int. Symp., Columbus, OH, vol. 2, pp. 407-410, June 22-27,
2003.

13.

XXVIIth Triennal General Assembly of the International Union of Radio Science (URSI),
Maastricht, The Netherlands, URSI Paper No. 636, Aug. 17-24, 2002.

14.

USNC/URSI National Radio Science Meeting Digest, San Antonio, TX, p. 108, June 16-21, 2002.

15.

NATO Advanced Research Workshop Bianisotropics 2002: 9th International Conference on
Electromagnetics of Complex Media, Marrakech, Morocco, p. 4, May 8-11, 2002.

140

CRITERION 7. FACILITIES
A. Space
A.1

Offices (Administrative, Faculty, Clerical, Teaching Assistants)

The ECE Department is located in the Electrical Engineering / Physics (EP) building. Adequate
space is provided for the department chair office in EP310, secretary/reception space in EP 311,
and work room with copier, printer, and storage of office supplies in EP 312. Teaching
assistants have desks and office space in EP 238.
The Electrical and Computer Engineering department office has a department chair, one full
time secretary, one part-time secretary as needed, and typically two student workers provide
office and administrative support.
A.2
Classrooms
The campus currently includes 651,847 square feet of building space with 33,374 square feet
devoted to classrooms, 139,416 square feet devoted to instructional and research laboratories and
75,162 square feet devoted to offices and administration. Two building are now under
construction, The Paleontology Research Laboratory (33,000 square feet), and the Chemical and
Biological Engineering/Chemistry Building Addition (45,000 square feet). In addition, the Tech
Development Laboratory is located near campus, and the Black Hills Business Development
Center is located on campus but is run as a collaborative enterprise between the School of Mines
and the regional economic development entities.
The EP building contains the classrooms 208, 251A, 251B, 252, 253, 254, and 255 as shown in
the floor plan of the Electrical Engineering / Physics building, Figures 7.1 a, b, and c. Although
some ECE classes are taught in other buildings, most are taught in these classrooms. In addition,
the instructional laboratories EP 336, 338, 341, and 342 are designed so that they can be used as
classrooms when needed.
A.3
Laboratories
The ECE Department has a tradition of emphasizing the application of classroom theory in the
laboratory. Of the 21 regular undergraduate EE courses, 19 have lab credit, and of the 11
regular CENG courses, 11 have lab credit. In addition, of the 15 graduate courses that are
available to qualified seniors, 7 have lab credits. The 9 of the 15 Electrical and Computer
Engineering Laboratories directly support 37 different undergraduate courses that have specified
laboratory credit and 2 labs indirectly support undergraduate courses.

.

141

Room

Lab Title

Courses

Notes

1

EP 127 Communications Engineering and EE 322, EE 382, EE
Applied Electromagnetics
421, 481, 482, 621,
622, 623

2

EP 213 Faculty Research/LAEC North

3

EP 230 Miller Electromagnetics Research

4

EP 241 Embedded Systems

5

EP 244 Electronics Specialist

6

EP 307 PC Computer

Open

7

EP 336 General Teaching

EE 220, 221, 321, 1
CENG 244, open

8

EP 338 Mechatronics

EE351

9

EP 339 Digital Systems/Communications

CENG 244, 342, 421

EE 483, EE 692 (Adv. 2
Antenna Eng.)
2
CENG 342, 420, 442,
447, EE 624, 641, 648
2
1

1

10 EP 340 Controls Lab

EE 311, 312, 451, 651

11 EP 341 Power Lab

EE 330, 431, 432

12 EP 342 General Teaching

EE 220, 221, 321, 1
CENG 244, open

1

Table 7.1a
ECE Laboratories
Room

Lab Title

Notes

1 EP 238

Graduate GTA/GRA Office

2,3

2 EP 334

K0VVY Ham Shack

2

3 EP 335

PCB fabrication/CAMP / Robotics Team / EE-ME 351 2
Mechatronics
Table 7.1b
ECE Student-operated Laboratories

Notes: 1 Designed for dual use for lectures
2 Not available as a general undergraduate lab
3 Under development

142

Introductory courses have a closed laboratory in which students work with the instructor and
teaching assistants at a scheduled weekly session. More advanced courses commonly use an
open laboratory approach in which student groups work at their own rate on their own schedule.
Closed labs are scheduled on Tuesdays and Thursdays leaving the rest of the week available for
open lab time. Some of the labs are designed so that lectures may be held as part of the lab or
occasionally using the lab as a classroom. Since the lab space is open and monitored until ten
pm weekdays (except Friday night) with additional hours available on weekends, adequate time
is available for all to complete their laboratory work.
Some of the laboratory space and equipment is shared with other departments to make the most
effective use of resources. The PC Lab in EP 307, formerly a department PC lab, is now
operated by the Instructional Technology Service (ITS) for the use of the entire campus although
the ECE Department has priority for scheduled use of the lab. ITS maintains and upgrades the
lab on a regular basis freeing ECE funds for other purposes. The Mechatronics Lab, EP338,
serves courses required for CENG, EE, and ME students. The Mechatronics class is jointly
taught by the ME and ECE Departments and both share in provisioning the lab. The Controls
Lab, EP340 is shared by students taking EE451/ME453 as well as research projects. The ECE
department works collaboratively with the RIAS (Robotics and Intelligent Autonomous
Systems) program in this laboratory and in the RIAS Lab, CB107. There are plans to establish
more RIAS lab space in the McLaury building.
Other areas of shared support include SolidWorks, a 3D CAD program which the ME
Department makes available, and MATLAB, for which the ECE Department shares a site license
with the rest of the campus. ITS makes available to the campus the Microsoft Academic
Alliance program which allows the campus plus individual faculty and students to use Project
Professional, Visio Professional, Visual Studio.Net, Windows CE, and many other Microsoft
tools. The Center for Advanced Manufacturing and Production (CAMP) also shares in
expanding the ability to develop prototypes e.g. PCB CAD software, the circuit board milling
machine, microcontroller developments systems, and FPGA development systems.

143

EP Building Floor Plans
note: areas given in ft2 are approximate

Communications
and Applied
Electromagnetics
Lab

Figure 7.1(a) EP Building First Floor

144

LAEC
North Lab

Electronics
Specialist
Lab 312 ft2

Embedded
Systems Lab
635 ft2

Miller Lab
893 ft2

Graduate Student
Research Lab
600 ft2

Figure 7.1 (b) EP Building Second Floor
145

Wall
removed
ITS
Computer
Lab

Controls
Lab

800 ft2

438 ft2
General
Instructional
Lab
1381 ft2

Power Lab
2

893 ft

General
Instructional
Lab
1381 ft

Mechatronics

2

Lab
893 ft2

Research
/CAMP
/Prototyping
CAD

/Robotics Lab

/Digital

800 ft2

Lab
2

438 ft

Figure 7.1 (c) EP Building Third Floor

146

B. Resources and Support
1.

Computing Resources, Hardware and Software Used for Instruction

B.1.a Computing Facilities
Details on the campus network infrastructure, computing resources, and serves provided by
Information Technology Services (ITS) is found in Appendix D, Section L. Non-Academic
Supporting Units.
Within the ECE laboratories, three computing labs are available. EP 307, formerly an ECE
computer lab, has been shifted to ITS to become a campus-wide PC Lab.. The Embedded
Systems Lab contains seven new PCs and tools for single board computer, microcontroller and
FPGA development. In addition, EP 338, EP 339, EP 341, and EP 241 have PCs available.
These are connected to Digital Oscilloscopes and PAL/GAL/EPROM programmers but are
available for general use as well. PC and UNIX / LINUX labs are available in other buildings on
campus as well and all students are required to purchase a tablet computer. All machines are
connected to the campus network and the wireless network is available almost everywhere on
campus for students using mobile computers.
B.1.b Prototyping Facilities
Because of the departmental culture of project-based education and participation in the Center
for Advanced Manufacturing and Production (CAMP), facilities are readily available for student
and faculty prototype fabrication. The department, with the assistance of CAMP, has 20 licenses
for Altium Designer, the CAD tool for schematic capture, simulation, and printed circuit board
layout with auto-routing. The Electronics Specialist gives short-courses for students using a
tutorial. Once the PCB has been designed and verified by the built-in rule checker, it can be
built on the circuit board milling machine. This machine has been so popular that a second
higher performance machine has been purchased. The department provides 152 reels of 5%
resistors in standard values along with various types of hookup wire in the student lounge. Other
components and parts are coordinated by the ECE technician who maintains a supply of common
parts and orders other parts as needed by specific courses.
If prototypes require mechanical components, the Manufacturing Specialist with ME / CAMP
provides assistance with the CAD program SolidWorks, designing for fabrication in the rapid
prototyping machine or CNC machining.
Many projects include microcontrollers. All ECE and ME students take a required course in
Mechatronics where the students use the Arduino open-source electronics prototyping platform
which uses the Atmel ATMEGA328 mircocontroller. The development software is open source
and has integrated well with the use of the student‘s tablet computers. One of the Mechatronics
team-based projects is designing a robot. Using the departments prototyping facilities, the teams
147

build their robot designs. One of the highlights of the class is the competition among the
Mechatronics robots.
Other prototyping systems include Xilinx FPGA development boards with the corresponding
development tools and the Sharc digital signal processing development boards with the Visual
DSP development software.
B.1.c Faculty facilities
All faculty have adequate office space including regularly updated PCs. Adequate lab space is
available for specific courses and research. Staff support is excellent, including secretary,
technician, and Electronics Specialist. The Instructional Technology Services (ITS) and the
department technician provide excellent computer and networking support. The Electronics
Specialist supports faculty with class projects and research projects.
B.1.d Student Facilities
A student lounge is available with telephone, microwave oven, refrigerator, paper cutter, stapler,
copier, and network printer. Magazine racks with professional journals and trade journals as
well as hobby magazines are available in the student lounge area. In addition, labs EP 338 and
EP 341 are configured with tables and chairs to facilitate student teams and study groups.
Cabinets in EP 241, 338, and 341 are available for student teams to checkout to store materials
and prototypes as they develop their projects.
Some specific labs are operated primarily by student organizations, for example, the K0VVY
Amateur Radio Club and the Robotics Team.
Students who are willing have their picture taken and placed on a display board opposite the
ECE Department office. This helps students and faculty know each other by name. Faculty
members donate to a fund that the departmental secretary uses to provide seasonal treats such as
hot chocolate, cake, brownies, etc and a Christmas party. Each semester the department hosts
graduates and their spouses / partners in a graduation dinner.

148

B.2

Laboratory Equipment Planning, Acquisition, and Maintenance Processes

The basic funding provided through the normal state university sources, the laboratory fee that
students pay, and funds available through the Foundation is adequate to operate, maintain, and
upgrade the ECE laboratories. However, we have been successful in enhancing the laboratory
experience for our students by working to secure grants (e.g. NSF, Agilent, Rockwell and
EMCOS), alumni funding, vendor discounts (Zeland), on-campus centers (Center for Advanced
Manufacturing and Production - CAMP, Advanced Materials Processing - AMP, and the
Composites and Polymer Engineering Laboratory - CAPE) and occasional one-time funds
available through the state. Appendix C shows the basic engineering tools available for students
in their courses and projects.
In March 2005, the Board Regents approved a 22.3% increase in the fees for all laboratory
courses taught at the School of Mines. Funds collected from laboratory fees are allocated in a
manner that is determined to be most effective for the maintenance and upgrading of laboratories
across campus. The provost receives 10% of all laboratory fees, and the remaining 90% is
placed in a special account of the department that offers the course for which the fees were
levied. The department head controls use of laboratory fee revenues. The provost typically
redirects his 10% of laboratory fee revenues to the departments. In AY 2009-2010, the provost
redistributed to the department heads $110,000 in laboratory fee revenues.
To further support the ongoing maintenance and upgrading of laboratories and equipment, the
allocation of ―
F&A funds‖ (i.e., the indirect costs charged to all externally funded programs) was
revised in 2006, and again in 2009 after the elimination of the dean positions. The result is that
the provost receives 10% of all indirect costs, the vice president for research receives 15% of
indirect costs, the principal investigator (PI) of the externally funded program receives 10% of
the indirect costs, and the department head of the program where the PI resides receives 10% of
the indirect costs.
The provost and vice president for academic affairs collaborates with and seeks advice from the
department heads about the best use of the recouped indirect costs in the budgets of the provost
and the vice president for research.

149

B.3

Support personnel available to install, maintain, and manage departmental
hardware, software, and networks

The ECE Department has the services of a full-time technician who installs, maintains, and
manages departmental computer equipment. The next level of support is through the
Instructional Technology Services Department (ITS) which handlez issues beyond the scope of
the services available at the department level.
B.4

Support Personnel Available to Install, Maintain, and Manage Laboratory
Equipment

The ECE Department has the services of a full-time technician and a full-time graduate engineer
called the Electronics Specialist. The technician maintains, calibrates, and repairs the lab
equipment as well as helping to set up the laboratories on lab days (Tuesdays and Thursdays).
The Electronics Specialist helps students and faculty with their projects including circuit board
design and prototype fabrication. The position is shared by the ECE Department and the Center
for Advanced Manufacturing and Production (CAMP), which also supports a Manufacturing
Specialist who works with students on mechanical fabrication, machining, welding, and rapid
prototyping for their projects. The Electronics Specialist also helps faculty with their class and
research projects. The support personnel are provided the opportunity for training to keep up-todate on the latest tools and equipment.
Components and parts are coordinated by the ECE technician who maintains a supply of
common parts and orders other parts as needed by specific courses.
If prototypes require mechanical components, the Manufacturing Specialist with ME / CAMP
provides assistance with the CAD program SolidWorks, designing for fabrication in the rapid
prototyping machine, and CNC machining.

150

C.

Major Instructional and Laboratory Equipment

Table 7.2 and Appendix C provide a list of major instructional and laboratory equipment.

Tool

Courses

Basic Lab Equipment: DMM, Function
Generator, Power Supply

EE 220, 221, 321, 322, 351, CENG 244

Arbitrary Waveform Generators

EE451, EE322

Digital Oscilloscopes

EE 220, 221, 321, 322, 351, 451 CENG 244

Digital Oscilloscopes with Logic Analyzer
Capability

CENG 244, CENG 342, EE451

TIMS EMONA communications simulator

EE 312, 421

Matlab and toolboxes

EE 311, 312, 330, 431, 451

ADS

EE 322, 481, 483, 692

IE3D

EE 483, 692

PSpice, B2Spice, LTSpice

EE 220, EE 221, EE 321

Microwave Studio

EE 692

Mplab

CENG 442, 447

Arduino

EE 351

DXP / Protel

CENG 244, CENG 464, CENG 465, EE 464, EE
465

PowerWorld

EE 431

PCB Milling Machines

CENG 244, CENG 464, CENG 465, EE 464, EE
465, EE 481, EE 483, EE 692

4 sets of Basic machines, various sizes of
transformers and loads

EE 330, EE 431

Rapid Prototyping Machine

CENG 464, CENG 465, EE 464, EE 465

Xilinx Tools

CENG 244, CENG 342, EE 647

FPGA Development Boards

CENG 342

Visual Studio and Visual Studio.NET

CSC 150, CENG 444, EE 641

uC/OS-II

CENG 447

ARM Single Board Computers

CENG 447

Microchip In Circuit Debuggers and
Programmers

CENG 442, CENG 447

Analog Devices Sharc DSP Boards

CENG 420
151

RF Network Analyzers

EE 381, EE 382, EE 480, EE 481, EE 483, EE
692

Anechoic Chamber

EE 483, EE 692

Wire Shark Network Protocol Network
Analyzer

CENG 444

Microsoft Project

CENG 464, CENG 465, EE 464, EE 465

175 MHz Universal Counter

EE322

AC/DC Fluke Current Probes

EE 330, 431, 432

50 MHz Fluke Scopemeter

EE 330, 431, 432

Fluke Power Quality Analyzer

EE 330, 431, 432

Wattmeters

EE221, 330, 431, 432

Fluke True PMS Multimeters

EE221, 330, 431, 432

Table 7.2

Engineering Tools used in the ECE Curriculum

152

CRITERION 8. SUPPORT

A. Program Budget Process and Sources of Financial Support
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (SDSMT) is one of six institutions of higher
education supported by the State of South Dakota. SDSMT supports its operation from four
primary funding sources: the state general fund, tuition and fees, overhead from externally
funded research, and funds raised from private sources.
The budget process begins early in the spring semester. The administration collects budget
requests from graduate education, the research office, and other administrative offices on
campus. The Provost solicits budget requests from the individual departments.
The department heads meet with the provost to provide input on budget requests and needs.
Based on these recommendations, allocations of funding for the upcoming fiscal year are
consolidated and prepared by the Provost. This information is provided to the Vice President for
Business and Administration and then submitted to the President in May.
The Board of Regents reviews all six state-support university budgets, and the comprehensive
budget request is forwarded to the Governor‘s Office in September. At the end of the calendar
year, the Governor presents the request to the Legislature for deliberation and approval, which is
completed in March. The budget year begins on July 1 and ends on June 30. The university
budget, when approved, is appropriated to the Provost and then provided to academic
departments, the Graduate Office, and other university administrative offices. Department heads
administer the individual departmental accounts, with oversight provided by the Provost.

B. Sources of Financial Support
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology supports its operation from four primary funding
sources: the state general fund, tuition and fees, overhead from externally funded research, and
funds raised from private sources.
The primary financial resource for departmental operations is state funds provided by the
university‘s operating expenses (OE) fund. The base OE budget includes faculty and staff
salaries as well as allocations for categories such as equipment, travel, and teaching assistants.
Laboratory fees provide funding for purchases of equipment, field trips, and associated
laboratory costs. The laboratory course fee is $53.20 per course; 80% of this revenue stays with
the department, to be used for expendable laboratory items and other costs related to laboratory
courses.
153

Additional funding sources include the university‘s Capital Assets fund, supplementary funding
from the Graduate Office and the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs,
release time funds generated by faculty members from research projects, and return on overhead
from research funds generated by faculty members.
Funds raised from private sources are provided by the SDSMT Foundation, primarily through
donations by alumni, companies, and other entities.

C. Adequacy of Budget
The budget is adequate for meeting the current needs of the ECE Department programs.
Considering anticipated growth, with projections for continued hiring of both electrical
engineering graduates and computer engineering graduates, increased funding in the future will
be needed to add new faculty members, as appropriate, and to enhance laboratories and
equipment.

D. Support of Faculty Professional Development
The department and institution provide support and encouragement for faculty development
through travel and on-campus opportunities. These are described below.
At the institutional level, faculty development is administered by the Provost. In 2009, the
Provost created an advisory group for faculty development consisting of department heads and a
faculty member who is the coordinator for faculty development. The faculty development
coordinator, Dr. Jennifer Karlin, is a faculty member in the industrial engineering program, and
she has responsibility for the creation and offering of faculty development activities that span the
academic year and begin with the new faculty orientation at the beginning of the academic year.
The budget for faculty development is controlled by the provost, but signature authority has been
granted to the coordinator, Dr. Karlin. Institutional and state funds for faculty development are
approximately $38,000 per academic year. In addition, a new student fee instituted in 2009
generates approximately $110,000 per year for targeted use in developing mobile computing
applications in the curriculum.
The Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering has a policy of providing special
support for new faculty members. Soon after arrival, they are provided with a computer and they
are not expected to carry a normal teaching load during their first year.
Travel funding is disbursed preferentially to faculty members who are presenting a paper at a
conference or are meeting with the director of a research program in the development of a
154

proposal. Faculty members also can request matching funds from the Provost and from the
Office of Research Affairs, as well as other campus sources.
ECE faculty members are encouraged to participate in conferences and professional meetings.
The department also has been able to allocate funds for publication costs, software, and
equipment needed for faculty professional development.
Institutional funding for faculty professional development and assessment is approximately
$38,000 per year, as mentioned earlier. This is described in the section on Criterion 6, Faculty.

E. Support of Facilities and Equipment
Resources currently are adequate for acquisition, maintenance, and operation of facilities and
equipment for the ECE programs. The operating expenses funding, capital assets, laboratory
fees, return on overhead from research funds, and discretionary funds received as gifts are
adequate to maintain and replace laboratory equipment properly.

F. Adequacy of Support Personnel and Institutional Services
Many of the technical needs of the individual programs are met through a common SDSMT
personnel support pool. The largest group in this pool is the Information Technology Services
(ITS), which maintains and improves the computing backbone for the institution, as well as
providing computing technical assistance. All of the campus now has access to a wireless
system. This has greatly simplified the process of using the computing facilities of the institution
in classes and laboratories. Each of the programs also has access to the technician pool, which is
able to assist with laboratory needs. Technician availability is typically at least at the building
level. At a minimum, one technician is available in each building housing engineering
departments on a shared basis between programs in the building. Each of the programs has
access to secretarial support, typically at the departmental level. Most of the secretaries have
nine-month positions with the exception of programs having significant summer teaching
responsibilities. Work-study students often supplement the regular secretarial support during the
academic year.
As mentioned earlier, the ECE Department has a full-time technician, Dennis Rush, who
provides computer support for installing, maintaining, and managing hardware and software..
He also provides support for maintaining and repairing laboratory equipment. The technician‘s
office is in EP 331.
Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTAs) are allocated on the basis of the number of undergraduate
laboratories which would be assisted by having a GTA assigned to them and the number of
155

graduate students in a particular program. The GTAs assist faculty in laboratory instruction,
grading of assignments, and recitations.
Support services on campus are provided by specific units or offices, each of which has means of
making services available and tracking user needs on a day-to-day basis. All key campus service
entities are detailed below.

Academic Support Entities
Office of the Registrar
and Academic Services
(RAS)

RAS office is staffed all regular work hours. RAS staff collaborates
with other units on campus to offer weekend ―
COMPASS Test/Early
Registration‖ days‖, Admission‘s ―
Visit Mines‖ days and summer
orientations. Online services offered through WebAdvisor which gives
students 24/7 access student records, adding/dropping classes, running a
program evaluation, linking to the SDePay system for financial
information, and linking to the National Student Clearinghouse for
enrollment verifications, etc. NSSE and the SSI results are used to
supplement informal daily feedback on services.

Devereaux Library

Extended hours (i.e., open until Midnight five nights a week) are offered
during fall and spring semesters. The Reference desk is staffed Sunday
through Friday and assistance available in person, by phone or email or
online via blog, Facebook page, twitter and Meebo. Library
informational sessions are offered one-on-one or large group upon
request. An extensive informational webpage keeps users informed and
allows 24/7 access to online. Academic departments are surveyed
yearly regarding collections and acquisitions.

Chemical storeroom

Storeroom is open and staffed during weekdays, and when the Campus
Chemical Materials Coordinator is unavailable, the Environmental
Health and Safety Director serves as a back-up. Schedule information is
posted, and storeroom inventory is available online. Chemical orders
can be dropped off any time of day. Information about the chemical
storeroom is included in graduate student seminars and is provided to
academic departments during the annual Environmental Health and
Safety audit. The Campus Chemical Materials Coordinator monitors
filled orders to ensure needs are met.

Financial Aid office

Office staffed weekdays. Asynchronous and off-hours communication
is handled via [email protected]. A toll-free number is offered,
and the Financial Aid web site is kept up to date with extensive
information on Federal, state and institutional aid programs available at
the School of Mines.

Admissions

Digital information is provided via the web or email. Print publications
are distributed at college fairs, during hosted campus events and
personal visits. Campus visits and consultations with admissions
counselor and faculty members are by appointment or on a drop-in
156

basis. Counselors available online through a social network site
(Zinch), by phone, and by email.
Information
Technology Services
and helpdesk

The ITS Help Desk/Repair Center/Tablet Central is staffed extended
hours Monday through Friday. Callers are given a 24-hour emergency
pager number for after hour issues. Assistance is available by person,
phone or email, as well as online help on the ITS website.
Informational surveys are sent electronically once a year to students to
identify service needs, and the ITS director meets each semester with
the Student Association. Faculty/Staff are queried about their needs
during training sessions.

Graduate education

Graduate office staffed during weekdays, and graduate education web
site offers extensive information on all programs, including a webautomated admission application form. Each semester graduate student
orientation is offered at which time input on services is solicited.
Thesis/dissertation workshops and informational seminar/luncheons are
used to communicate about graduate services and to collect input.
Email is regularly used to keep graduate students informed of
requirements, services, and deadlines.

Youth Programs &
Continuing Education

Web site is updated daily and includes links to the K-12 campus Web
site. Programs and events are actively marketed through brochures,
mailings, fliers, advertising, Web sites, and e-mail. Office staff is
available via telephone or e-mail during regular campus hours and
during programs outside of office hours. Feedback and workshop ideas
are solicited via an evaluation form given at each program, and alumni
and teacher surveys are used to solicit program ideas

Student Support Entities
Counseling and ADA
Services

Free counseling and disability services offered during weekday business
hours and upon request. Counseling offices are centrally located in the
student center and close to dining and residence hall facilities. Services
are well advertised in student publications and on our website, and
contact can be made by phone, email, or personal visits. If needs are not
met by employees or graduate interns, off-campus referrals are made.
A yearly summary of service activity is compiled.

Career Center

Personalized assistance is given in the office during business hours, by
appointment, and via printed publications and electronic formats. An
online system provides 24/7 information on job postings, campus
interviews, career fairs, and career development workshops. Feedback
from students and employers is solicited on a regular basis through
surveys, individual conversations and emails. Careful tracking of
placement rates and starting salaries are all used to stay abreast of trends
relevant to providing career services.

Multicultural Affairs

Programs and events marketed through digital signage, brochures,
mailings, fliers, advertising, Web site, and e-mail. An American Indians
in Science and Engineering Society (AISES) newsletter produced bi157

annually. All offerings published via the online streaming news. Web
site has frequently updated streaming news and resource links. Office is
staffed during business hours and available during off-hour
programming. AISES meets weekly and the National Society of Black
Engineers (NSBE) and Society of Professional Hispanic Engineers
(SHPE) meet bi-monthly. Free weekly multicultural luncheons
encourage drop-in contacts, and all ethnic minority students are
contacted via email regularly to ensure that information is shared and
needs are being met. A representative is part of the Early Alert team of
faculty and staff that meets weekly to discuss interventions for specific
students at risk
Student activities and
leadership

Weekly e-news letters are sent to all students, campus offices, and
departments for printing and posting. The Student Activities and
Leadership Center (SALC) is staffed during regular business hours for
feedback and input regarding programming and student needs.
Activities, programs, and events are aggressively advertised through all
acceptable on-campus methods, including, electronic billboards,
sidewalk chalk, and posters. Student, staff, and event-specific surveys
are used to get input on student needs and interests. The webpage is
updated weekly and the Facebook page semi-weekly.

Tech Learning Center

Free tutoring offered 7 days a week during fall and spring semester and
weekdays in summer. Tutors are high performing students in math,
chemistry, computer science, English and/or physics. Tutoring
Schedule and Areas of Expertise Charts are posted on the web site,
dormitories, and bulletin boards in campus buildings. Data collected on
services used is analyzed continuously to adjust programming. TLC
coordinator visits with veteran tutors and instructors of key chemistry
and math courses to gather input on tutoring service effectiveness.
Supplemental instruction sessions are provided for foundational math
and chemistry courses.

Ivanhoe International
Center

Office staffed during work hours and email and fax is monitored
continuously. A web site for international students has in-depth
information about admissions, maintaining status, and obtaining work
permission. Questions about arrival plans, cultural adjustment, and
events on campus are handled one-on-one, in orientation sessions, and
via email. Email notifications are sent for events, deadlines, and
requirements for internationals. Seminars offered on regulatory issues,
income tax assistance, etc. Students studying abroad are supported via
the web site, pre-travel orientations and the offering of key information
on health, safety, emergency planning, cultural adjustment issues in
print and digital formats.

Residence life office

Office staffed working hours to support mail delivery, key/door access
management, and assistance to students and the public. Hall directors
and student staff are available 24/7 via on-call/on-duty rotations. Staff
cell phone numbers are published. Programming and activities to
support students academically and socially are offered. To gain
feedback on services and needs, an evaluation is levied each semester
158

(with a 70% average return rate). Hall directors and ResLife Director
meet with student groups throughout the year to solicit in-put on
services, policies and procedures.
Wellness Center

The Center helps create an atmosphere and ethos of health and fitness
for campus. Facilities are open and monitored M-F from 7:00 AM –
8:00 PM, weekends 12:00 PM – 4:00 PM. Hours are customized for
holidays. The facility is open for all on campus.

Intramural sports

Intramural sports programming is run fall and spring semesters by the
Intramural Director and Intramural Manager and multiple work study
referees. Offerings are publicized via a web site, email and print
publications.

Swimming Pool

The pool is open weekdays for as many hours as possible with workstudy life guards. Information publicized via e-mail, online, and print
notices.

Administrative Support Entities
Finance office

A business services web site maintained with information about the full
range of administrative services and human resources. The ―
BUG‖
(Banner Users‘ Group) meets monthly for training. BUG-generated
materials are posted on the system portal and advertised via the BUG
newsletter. Students are informed of services through mailings, email,
and Orientation information packets. Parents informed through the

Parents‘ Primer on Finance‖ publication and parents‘ sessions during
Orientation. All new employees receive a ―
Welcome to Mines‖ packet
covering financial services and reporting. Input on services and
university finances and budgets are sought through the Budget Advisory
Committee.

Purchasing/ business
services

The Business Services web site includes purchasing,
telecommunications, copier, thesis process and print center information
and links is updated and available 24/7. Training sessions, e-mail
instruction, and one-on-one meetings are offered on demand. The state
purchasing group publishes a quarterly newsletter, UPP Words: News
from University Procurement Professionals, and does a survey yearly to
inquire into end-user needs and satisfaction.

Scheduling

A complete campus scheduling service is offered online, including
confirmation, room set-up requests, a log-in book for guests signing up
for an event, an event-planning checklist, and detailed information on
formation and setup of rooms available.

Human resources

Information and services pertaining to compensation, recruitment,
benefits, performance management, employee relations, and
interpretation and enforcement of policies and procedures are offered
24/7 through the HR website and the system portal. Leave and
timesheet submission announcements are sent via email. Recruitment,
time card, and leave reporting are all handled online. The director of
159

human resources serves as the campus Title IX/EEO (Equal
Employment Office) representative for human rights issues and is CoCoordinator of ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). Grievance
procedures are published online and via the system portal.
University Publications
and Web Support

Email is used to inform campus of training sessions for web support and
the university‘s web content management system. Website feedback is
collected through e-mail-submission feedback links on all web pages.
Media contacts attend a yearly on-campus luncheon at which their input
is solicited. Staff members visit local media outlets yearly to solicit
feedback and maintain relationships. An online Media/Experts Guide is
posted to the website.

Cashier / student
accounts

Office is centrally located in the student union and open 8-4 weekdays.
Web site offers 24/7 access to e-commerce options, including
information on payment of tuition, fees, and bills through the South
Dakota University System SDePay. Information and FAQs also
provided about mail payments, electronic funds transfer, campus debitcard system, and the schedule of tuition and fees.

Digital signage

A campus digital signage system provides information, event listing,
and campus mapping. All campus entities can submit content for
display via email An improved approach to posting is under review as
of spring 2010 following a request by the Student Association.

Keyless Entry System

A keyless entry system has been implemented in the student center, all
residence halls, and many labs. Expansion to other buildings and
facilities is underway and monitored and guided by a University task
force.

Research and Related Support Entities
Office of Sponsored
Programs (OSP)

OSP maintains comprehensive website of services for both the PreAward and Post-Award aspects of grants. Site includes links to forms
as well as contact information for support staff charged with helping
with grant-related tasks. A weekly Grant Opportunities Newsletter is
published to campus and includes specialized notices about the downselect process for limited-applicant RFPs. Faculty and staff suggestions
on content and presentation are used to improve the newsletter. A
monthly ―
Miner‘s Paydirt‖ is published to summarize awards granted by
monthly and year-to-date. The ―
Paydirt‖ also contains feature articles
on select awards and campus issues germane to research.

Office of Technology
Transfer

OTT receives disclosures from inventors in hard copy form, but an
automated / online submission system will be in place by June 2010.
Online service capabilities will include tracking through all stages of the
process of evaluation and patent application. An MOU between the
OTT and the Small Business Development Center (SBDC) in Madison,
SD enhances the level and quality of disclosure evaluation services.
The OTT is part of a regional Center for Business and Economics that
coordinates the use of experts nationwide in the evaluation of
160

intellectual property.
Facilities and Infrastructure Support Entities
Environmental Health
and Safety

Through an extensive web site, EHS provides links to and information
on emergency management, campus alert system, incident
reporting/tracking, risk management, chemistry storeroom inventory,
hazardous waste removal, campus training, campus safety report and
crime statistics, and sustainability initiatives. A campus standing
committee for Environmental Health, Safety, and Risk Management
provides advice on services and initiatives.

Bookstore

Located in the student center, the bookstore is open normal business
hours and during many campus special events. The bookstore maintains
an online storefront through which users can buy or sell new or used
textbooks and purchase software or School of Mines gifts and clothing.

Dining Services

Food services and catering are provided by Aramark, which maintains a
web site where users can access the online catering request system,
catertrax; read menu offerings for the dining room, the miner‘s shack
snack bar, and java city coffee shop; learn about the meal plan options;
and check service hours.

Facilities services
(campus safety,
parking, maintenance,
mail room, grounds and
building projects, state
car-pool vehicles)

Offices are staffed business hours and the campus safety office is staffed
24/7. The facilities web site offers online request forms for parking
passes, work order requests, and fleet vehicle reservations. A monthly
facilities newsletter is sent to all campus. Campus standing committees
for Parking, Campus and Facilities Planning, Environmental Health,
Safety, and Risk Management, and Signage provide input to the vice
president for oversight responsibilities for facilities and related services.

Child care (Kids Kastle
Little Miner's
Clubhouse)

On-campus center serves children from four weeks to ten years old
Monday through Friday, 5:45 a.m. to 6:15 p.m. year round. Stipends
for parents who are students are available, and an application is offered
online.

Faculty and Staff
Lounge

The lounge and its kitchen are open during business hours and is
overseen by a standing campus committee. Dues are solicited, and a
cook is retained to make a variety of cookies that are sold on an honor
system. Beverages and snacks are sold on an honor system, and the
cash box remains unlocked.

Periodic formal master planning is done to ensure the currency and relevance of support services
and facilities. In 2005, the comprehensive campus master plan was reviewed and updated. Since
that time, two new buildings and a new dorm have been built and extensive remodeling and
expansion work on the student center was completed. An RFP for a facilities master plan that
will encompass buildings and land development went out to bid in June 2010 for com. We
anticipate the RFP will go out to bid in June 2010 for completion in fall 2010. The Campus
Facilities Planning Committee has broad representation and is actively engaged in defining the
scope and goals for our new facilities planning effort.
161

The School of Mines made a significant investment for the safety and well being of its campus in
2007 when it hired a professional Director of Environmental Health and Safety (EHS). EHS‘s
stated mission is to promote a positive, responsible, integrated safety culture at all levels of the
university community. EHS accomplishes its role through education, consultation, and
compliance monitoring. Services include emergency management, campus alert system, incident
reporting/tracking, risk management, chemistry storeroom, hazardous waste removal, campus
training, and sustainability initiatives. The EHS website, along with frequent electronic campus
updates, serves as an effective tool for communicating this key support process. EHS serves as
the coordinator and primary contact point for campus emergency services and safety.
The School of Mines abides by the Campus Security Act which requires all public and
postsecondary institutions to comply with numerous safety and security policies and reporting
requirements. Campus crime statistics and other Campus Security Act information are found on
the Student Life website. The Facilities Services website provides information related to escort
service, emergency services, parking regulations, and vehicle registration.
Safety personnel monitor the campus and work closely with the Director of Environmental
Health & Safety and the Rapid City Police Department (RCPD) to enforce community, state, and
federal laws. The RCPD headquarters is located only six blocks from campus, and the institution
has fostered a longstanding relationship with the RCPD, who serves as our primary law
enforcement entity.

162

CRITERION 9. PROGRAM CRITERIA
PROGRAM CRITERIA FOR ELECTRICAL, COMPUTER, AND SIMILARLY NAMED
ENGINEERING PROGRAMS
Lead Society: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
Cooperating Society for Computer Engineering Programs: CSAB
These program criteria apply to engineering programs that include electrical, electronic,
computer, or similar modifiers in their titles.
1. Curriculum
The structure of the curriculum must provide both breadth and depth across the range of
engineering topics implied by the title of the program. The program must demonstrate that
graduates have: knowledge of probability and statistics, including applications appropriate to the
program name and objectives; and knowledge of mathematics through differential and integral
calculus, basic sciences, computer science, and engineering sciences necessary to analyze and
design complex electrical and electronic devices, software, and systems containing hardware and
software components, as appropriate to program objectives.
Programs containing the modifier ―
electrical‖ in the title must also demonstrate that graduates
have knowledge of advanced mathematics, typically including differential equations, linear
algebra, complex variables, and discrete mathematics.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Breadth in the EE curriculum is illustrated by the following list of required courses.
Breadth in EE Curriculum
Circuits
Computers/Programming
Mathematics
Digital Systems
Systems
Signals
Electronics
Power/Machines
Electromagnetics
Materials
Statics/Dynamics
Thermodynamics
Engineering Economics
Capstone Design

EE 220, 221
CSC 150, EE 351
MATH 123, 125, 225, 321, 381/441
CENG 244
EE 311
EE 312
EE 320, 322
EE 330
EE 381,382
EE 362
EM 216
ME 211
IENG 301
EE 464, 465

The required courses of the electrical engineering curriculum combines a tightly integrated set of
courses designed to provide a solid theoretical foundation in the principles of electrical
engineering and practical applications of the principles through laboratory experience.
163

Depth in EE Curriculum
The elective component of the curriculum offers students the opportunity to explore a variety of
advanced electrical engineering topics in depth. Electrical engineering students may select areas
of concentration in communication systems, power systems, control systems, electromagnetics,
and digital/computer systems. In addition, students may in some cases use graduate courses in
both ECE and ME departments to study an area in more depth, for example control systems.
Students are required to take a minimum of 11 credits of ECE electives, which provides a depth
of knowledge appropriate at the undergraduate level.
Knowledge of Mathematics and Statistics
The ECE department has a heavy emphasis in mathematics preparation. The students are
required to take calculus I, calculus II, Calculus III, differential equations, and probability and
statistics. Several mathematics topics are covered in core electrical engineering courses. In
circuits (EE 220 and 221) students are introduced to complex variables, Laplace transforms, and
linear algebra to analyze AC and Dc circuits. Students learn Fourier transforms, Fourier
analysis, z-transforms in signals and systems courses (EE 311 and 312). Boolean algebra and
logic are taught in the introductory digital logic course (CENG 244). Complex variables and
phasors are an inherent component of the electric machine course (EE 330). Vectors and vector
calculus are heavily utilized in electromagnetic fields (EE 381 and 382).
Probability and statistics are covered in one of the required math courses (MATH 381 or 441).
Students are exposed to statistical parameters including mean, standard deviation, histograms,
and best fit lines in Phys 213L. EE 220, circuits I, introduces the idea of component tolerances
and probability distribution. EE 312, signals, discusses random signals, and probability
distribution of noise as does EE 322, Electronics II. EE 362, electronic materials, presents
Fermi-Dirac statistics, equilibrium statistics in semiconductors, generation and recombination
probabilities, and carrier lifetimes.
Analyze and design complex electrical and electronic devices, software, and systems containing
hardware and software components
The capstone design discussion in Criterion 3 and the discussion on competition projects
describe significant projects of complexity. The capstone course builds on analysis and design
capabilities built over the curriculum leading to the capstone course.

164

APPENDIX A – COURSE SYLLABI
Core Courses for Electrical Engineering
CENG 244/244L
EE 220/220L
EE 221/211L
EE 264/264L
EE 311
EE 312/312L
EE 320/320L
EE 322/322L
EE 330/330L
EE 351/351L
EE 362
EE 381
EE 382/382L
EE 464
EE 465
EM 216
ME 211

Intro to Digital Systems
Circuits I
Circuits II
Sophomore Design
Systems
Signals
Electronics I
Electronics II
Energy Systems
Mechatronics and Measurement Systems
Electronic and Magnetic Properties of Materials
Electric and Magnetic Fields
Applied Electromagnetics
Senior Design I
Senior Design II
Statics and Dynamics
Thermodynamics 3

Support Courses
Chem 112
Chem 112L
CSC 150
CSC 250
Engl 101
Engl 279
Engl 289
IENG 301
Math 123
MATH 125
Math 225
Math 321
Phys 211
Phys 213
Phys 213 L

General Chemistry I
General Chemistry I Lab
Computer Science I
Computer Science II
Composition I
Technical Communications I
Technical Communications II
Basic Engr Economics
Calculus I
Calculus II
Calculus II
Differential Equations
University Physics I
University Physics II
University Physics II Lab

165

EE Electives
EE 421
Communications Systems 4
EE 431
Power Systems 4
EE 432
Power Electronics 4
EE 451
Control Systems 4
EE 481
Microwave Engineering 4
EE 483
Antennas for Wireless Communications 4
EE 552
Robotic Control Systems 3
CENG 342
Digital Systems 4
CENG 420
Design of Digital Signal Processing Systems 4
CENG 440
VLSI Design 4
CENG 442
Microprocessor Design 4
CENG 444
Computer Networks 4 (credit for only one of
CENG 444 or CSC 463 may be used)
CENG 446 Advanced Computer Architectures 4 (credit for only one of CENG 446 or CSC 440
may be use

166

Elective/ Required Course

CENG244/244L – Basic Circuits
Spring Semester 2010

Catalog Data: (3-1) 4 Credits. Prerequisite: Completion of college algebra or equivalent. This course is
designed to provide Computer Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Computer Science students with
an understanding of the basic concepts of digital systems and their hardware implementation. Topics
covered include combinational logic circuits, sequential logic circuits, and CPU control.
Prerequisites:
Completion of college algebra or equivalent
Course Web Page: http://sdmines.sdsmt.edu/sdsmt/directory/courses/2010sp/ceng244/244LM001
Textbook:
Digital Design, M. Morris Mano, Prentice Hall, Fourth Edition, 2007.
x5196 [email protected]
Instructor: Elaine Linde EP 316
Office Hours: TBD, check schedule posted outside office
Lecture:
Section 01
MWF 3:00-3:50 EP 254
Lab:
Sections 51/52/53
T 12:00-1:50/2:00-3:50 EP 342/336
Goals: The objective of this course is to provide students with an understanding of the basic concepts
associated with the analysis and design of combinational circuits and sequential circuits. Combinational
circuits include AND, OR, NOT, NAND, and NOR logic gates, adders, code converters, and memory
devices. Sequential circuits include flip-flops, registers, counters, and programmable logic devices.
Tentative Grading:
Exams
30%
Final Exam 25%
Weekly Quizzes
10%
Lab Projects 20%
Homework
15%
Topics:
 Sequential Logic
 Binary Systems
 Boolean Algebra
 Algorithmic State Machines
 Boolean Function Simplification
 Combinational Logic
Freedom in learning: Students are responsible for learning the content of any course of study in
which they are enrolled. Under Board of Regents and University policy, student academic
performance shall be evaluated solely on an academic basis and students should be free to take
reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study. Students who believe that an
academic evaluation is unrelated to academic standards but is related instead to judgment of their
personal opinion or conduct should contact the dean of the college which offers the class to initiate
a review of the evaluation.
Laboratory projects: Projects involving topic areas listed above.
ADA note:
Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact the
instructor and/or the campus ADA coordinator, Ms. Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the
earliest opportunity.
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Convert numbers between binary and decimal, binary and hexadecimal, and decimal and
binary coded decimal notation.
2. Perform the mathematical operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division
using signed and unsigned binary numbers.
167

3. Analyze combinational logic circuits using AND, NOT, OR, NOR, NAND, and XOR logic
gates.
4. Design combinational logic circuits using truth tables and Karnaugh maps.
5. Program EPROMs and PALs
6. Analyze sequential logic circuits and prepare timing diagrams using Flip-Flop Characteristic
Tables
7. Design sequential logic circuits using state diagrams, state tables, and Flip-Flop Excitation
Tables
8. Construct logic circuits in the laboratory using student trainer boards
9. Design and construct digital control and data processing circuits using ASM charts to define
digital hardware algorithms
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
 An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
 An ability to communicate effectively.
 The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global
and societal context.
 A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
 A knowledge of contemporary issues.
 An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the
program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Objectives
(a)
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
(b)
1
3
2
1
3
2
3
(c)
3
3
4
(d)
(e)
1
2
3
2
2
3
2
4
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
PREPARED BY: Elaine Linde, Date: last update January 15, 2010
168

EE 220220L Circuits I

Required Course

CATALOG DATA:
EE 220/220L Circuits I. (3-1)4 credits. Prerequisites: Math 125 completed with a grade of ―
c‖. Corequisite Math
321. This course is designed to provide the electrical engineering student with an understanding of the basic
concepts of the profession. Topics covered include resistive circuits, transient circuits, and sinusoidal analysis.
Students also investigate essential principles by conducting laboratory experiments related to the topics studied in
the classroom. P-spice is used to analyze electrical circuits using personal computers.
TEXTBOOK:
Fundamentals of Electric Circuits, Charles K. Alexander and Matthew N.O. Sadiku, McGraw-Hill, 2000.
COORDINATOR: Dr. Thomas P. Montoya, Assistant Professor
GOALS: The objective of this course is to provide students with the working knowledge of the fundamentals of
electrical engineering. A particular emphasis is made on DC, transient, and AC steady-state circuit analysis.
CLASS SCHEDULE:
Lecture: 3 hours per week.
Laboratory: 2 hours every week (1 credit hour).
Topics:
1. DC Circuits:.
2. Basic Laws:
3. Methods of Analysis:
4. Circuit Theorems:
5. Operational Amplifiers:
6. Capacitors and Inductors:
7. First-Order Circuits:
8. Second-order Circuits:
9. Sinusoids and Phasors:
10. Sinusoidal Steady-State Analysis:
11. AC Power Analysis:
COMPUTER USAGE:
Students use circuit simulation software (such as PSpice) to analyze simple circuits containing current & voltage
sources, resistors, capacitors, inductors, operational amplifiers, and semiconductor devices such as BJTs.
LABORATORY:
A one credit hour lab EE 211L accompanies this course. The laboratory meets for two hours every week for a total
of 13 laboratories during the semester. The following laboratories are performed:
Using the Digital Multimeter, Ohm‘s Law, Voltage and Current Division, Nodal Analysis,
Mesh Analysis-Transistor Circuit, PSpice Demonstration and Use, Thevenin and Norton Circuits,
Use of the Signal Generator and Oscilloscope, The Operational Amplifier, RL and RC Circuits,
First-Order Circuits, Second-Order Circuits, AC Sinusoidal Circuits
The students use basic measurement equipment in the labs including the power supply, digital multimeter, function
generator and oscilloscope. All the circuits are breadboarded. In the pre-laboratory work, the students typically
analyze the circuits to familiarize themselves with the upcoming lab and often are asked to verify their solutions
using PSpice.
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Understand and apply the definitions of the SI units for charge, current, voltage, energy, and power.
2. Apply Ohm‘s Law to calculate voltages, currents, and impedances/resistances for AC and DC circuits.
3. Understand and calculate equivalent capacitances, inductances, resistances, and impedances for series,
parallel, Wye, and Delta connected resistors, capacitors, and inductors.
4. Understand and apply the voltage and current division rules to AC and DC circuits.
5. Understand and apply Kirchoff‘s Laws, including Nodal and Mesh analysis, to AC and DC circuits.
6. Understand and apply the principles of linearity and superposition to AC and DC circuits.
7. Understand and calculate the Thevenin and Norton equivalents for AC and DC circuits.
8. Analyze and design simple operational amplifier circuits.
9. Understand the properties of capacitors and inductors and apply the current-voltage relationships of capacitors
and inductors.
10. Analyze natural and step response of first order circuits (series RC and RL)
11. Analyze natural and step response of second order circuits (series and parallel RLC)
12. Understand, apply, and use phasors for sinusoidal steady-state AC circuit analysis.

169

13. Understand and calculate apparent, complex, instantaneous, and average power, effective or RMS voltages
and currents, power factor, and power factor correction for AC circuits.
14. Use PSpice to model/simulate simple DC, transient, and AC circuits.
15. Use basic laboratory measurement equipment including the power supplies, digital multimeters, function
generators, and oscilloscopes to conduct experiments.
16. Understand and use a laboratory notebook for documenting experiments and writing technical reports.
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
a. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
b. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
c. An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
d. An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
e. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
f. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
g. An ability to communicate effectively.
h. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
i. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
j. A knowledge of contemporary issues.
k. An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives
listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Objectives
(a)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(b)
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
(c)
1
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
3
(d)
2
(e)
1
2
2
2
2
4
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
(f)
3
(g)
4
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)
2
3
3
3
4
3
2
4
3
3
3
2
3
4
3
2
PREPARED BY: Thomas P. Montoya, Date: 2/1/02), Modified per faculty discussion on 2/15/02 Reviewed June 2010

170

EE 221/221L Circuits II

Spring 2009, 3-1 (4 credit hours) Required

CATALOG DATA:
EE 211/211A Circuits II: (3-1) 4 Credits. Prerequisites: EE 220 completed with a grade of ―
C‖ or better, MATH 321.
This course is a designed to provide the electrical engineering student with an understanding of the basic
concepts of the profession. Topics covered include resistive circuits, transient circuits, and sinusolidal analysis.
Students also investigate essential principles by conducting laboratory experiments related to the topics studied
in the classroom. P-Spice is used to analyze electrical circuits using personal computers.
Instructor:
Dr. Dimitris Anagnostou, Ph.D., Office: EP-319, phone: 605-394-4184, email:
[email protected], webpage: http://anagnostou.sdsmt.edu
Lecture Room:
11:00 - 11:50am MWF, EP 253
Office Hours:
12:00 - 12:50pm MW, also see posted weekly schedule or by appointment. Email usage is
encouraged.
Lab TA:
Prasuna Bandalapally, Office: EP-238, 12:00-2:00pm MTWThF or by email:
[email protected]
Text:
Fundamentals of Electric Circuits, 4th Edition, Alexander and Sadiku, 2008. Students are
encouraged to keep the textbook.
Attendance:
REQUIRED and graded. Do NOT notify the instructor if you will be absent from class unless it is for a
very serious reason or school-sponsored events. If you miss an exam for good and valid reason, inform the instructor
as soon as possible to schedule a make-up exam. Students who miss class for unjustified reasons are responsible to
cover on their own all material and assignments discussed. In most cases, a written justification is required.
Electronic Devices Policy: ABSOLUTELY NO ELECTRONIC DEVICES/GADGETS ALLOWED IN CLASS. You
MUST turn off your cell phone, ipod, laptop and any other electronic device before class begins. No text messaging
in class. No headphones. TABLET PCs are allowed ONLY for note-taking purposes. The instructor reserves the
right to request evidence of proper Tablet PC use.
Homework Policy:
 Homework is due before class begins. Late homework will NOT be accepted.
 Students may discuss homework problems with classmates. However, blatant copying, plagiarism (without
proper referencing), etc., is not allowed and such works will receive zero credit.
 For full credit, show all your work (include code for plots, units, intermediate stages, etc.). Include the
equations you used. If you use equations derived elsewhere, reference them (e.g., source, eq. number and/or
page). Box or double underline your answers. Use conventional engineering units (i.e. μF, mV, GHz, etc). All
pages should be in order, numbered, and stapled
Exams: Exam dates, once finalized, cannot be changed. Exams are closed books and notes.
Other Policies: All laboratory/project assignments must be completed at a passing level to pass. Unless otherwise
specified, all coursework is to be individually completed. See The Student Code of Conduct for SDSM&T.
Integrity Policy: You are expected to do your own work (as an individual or as a team as the case may be); however,
one can learn by consulting with others. If you receive help from others, acknowledge that assistance appropriately, in
writing. Understand the significant difference between consulting or asking someone a question versus outright
copying or plagiarism. If individuals or teams turn in assignments that are clearly not their own work, all parties
involved can expect to receive zero credit for that assignment. In addition, if teams fail to demonstrate teamwork,
all parties involved can expect to receive zero credit for that assignment.
WWW: Ensure your @mines.sdsmt.edu email is listed on WebAdvisor. Email and URL http://anagnostou.sdsmt.edu
may be used for course-related communication.
ADA:
Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations, contact the instructor and/or the campus
ADA coordinator, Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924.
Grading: 3 Hour Exams @ 10%/each,30 %; Homework/Quizzes, 20 %; Labs / Reports / Log-book/Projects,15 %;
Attendance, 05 %; Final Exam (required), 30 %; Total 100 %
Tentative Grading Scale: The minimum percentages necessary for letter grades are as follows: 100>A>90, 89>B>80,
79>C>70, 69>D>60, F<60. The instructor reserves the right to adjust this scale (to the students‘ advantage), based
on overall performance and assignments and examinations difficulty.
Topics (Chapters Covered): Textbook Chapters 11-19.
Tentative Course Schedule, TBA – EE 221, Circuits II, Spring 2010
ABET Course Outcomes:

171

1.

Understand the concepts of and can calculate apparent, complex, instantaneous, and average power, effective or
RMS voltages and currents, power factor, and power factor correction for AC circuits.
2. Understand the basic concepts of 3-phase circuits and analyze simple 3-phase circuits.
3. Analyze circuits with coupled inductances using both mesh and nodal analysis.
4. Determine the stored energy in circuits with mutual inductance.
5. Use the concept of the ideal transformer to approximate the behavior of transformers.
6. Determine the transfer functions of RLC and operational amplifier circuits and construct approximate Bode plots of
the magnitude and phase of the transfer function.
7. Understand how to construct the basic first and second-order filters using passive components.
8. Calculate the Laplace transforms of the elementary functions using the definition of the Laplace transform.
9. Know from memory the Laplace transforms and inverse Laplace transforms of the elementary functions.
10. Know how to determine the Laplace transforms of integrals and derivatives of the elementary functions.
11. Apply the initial and final theorems to the Laplace transform of a function.
12. Determine the partial fraction expansion of a Laplace transform.
13. Use the Laplace transform method to set up and solve circuit problems using either mesh or nodal analysis.
14. Determine the Fourier coefficients of simple periodic functions.
15. Determine the response of a linear system to an input which is a periodic function.
16. Determine the Fourier transforms of pulses composed of simple functions. Can determine the time domain
response of a linear system to a pulse input.
17. Determine the z-parameters, y-parameters, hybrid parameters, and transmission parameters of linear systems and
convert between the various representations using tables.
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
(a) An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
(b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
(c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
(d) An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
(e) An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
(f) An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
(g) An ability to communicate effectively.
(h) The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
(i) A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
(j) A knowledge of contemporary issues.
(k) An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives listed
above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis
Outcomes
1 2 3 4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Objectives
a.
4 4 4 4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
b.
3 3 3
3
4
4
4
c.
1
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
d.
2
e.
2 2 3 2
2
2
4
2
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
f.
2
3
g.
2
4
h.
i.
j.
k.
2 3 3 3
4
3
2
4
3
3
3
2
3
4
3
2
1
PREPARED BY: Dimitris Anagnostou, Jan. 10, 2010

172

EE-ME264: SOPHOMORE DESIGN
CATALOG DATA:
EE/ME 264 Catalog Description: EE 264/264L SOPHOMORE DESIGN
(1-1) 2 credits. Prerequisite: sophomore standing. This course focuses on the design process including project management
and teamwork; formal conceptual design methods; acquiring and processing information; design management tools; design
for manufacturability, reliability, maintainability, sustainability; design communication: reports and presentations; ethics in
design; prototyping designs; case studies.
TEXTBOOK:
Engineering Design: a project-based introduction, 3rd ed. Dym and Little, Wiley, 2009 .
INSTRUCTORS:
Dr. Dan Dolan
Phone: 394-1273 Office hrs: Posted Office: CM 207 E-Mail: [email protected]
Dr. Mike Batchelder Phone: 394-2451 Office hrs: Posted Office: EEP 311 E-Mail: [email protected]
COURSE OBJECTIVES:
The objective of this course is to provide students with an understanding of:
1) Core values, mission, and objectives of a company,
2) The use of modern design tools and software to augment the product development process and communicate the
results,
3) The use of a CAM system and CNC machining center.
CLASS SCHEDULE:
Lecture:
Monday 12:00-12:50, EEP254
Lab:
Tuesday 12:00-12:50, EEP254
Web:

http://www.hpcnet.org/264s10 The course web page will be utilized for posting assignments and handouts.

TOPICS: The course will focus on the development of a product. The laboratory will be used to design and manufacture a small
class project using CNC and electronics.
COMPUTER USAGE: Students should be knowledgeable in the use of graphical design software, as well as the basics of Microsoft
Office, and the WEB.
Outline EE/ME264
I.
Engineering Design
II.
The Design Process
III.
Understanding the Client‘s Problem
IV.
Functions and Specifications
V.
Finding Answers to the Problem
VI.
Reporting the Outcome
VII.
Managing the Design Process
VIII.
Design for …
IX.
Ethics in Design
COURSE OUTCOMES:
1
2
3
4
5

Upon completion of this course students will have demonstrated the ability to:

Be able to make a problem definition statement including needs or customer objectives,
Understand organization development and structure,
Use modern design tools,
Use modern manufacturing tools,
Document and communicate results and findings in written and oral form.

RELATION OF COURSE OUTCOMES TO ME PROGRAM OUTCOMES:
ME Department Objectives
We realize that building upon traditions of excellence requires continual development of active partnerships among the faculty, the students, and our

173

constituents. In keeping with these objectives, the mechanical engineering program produces graduates who are able to perform at a level that meets
or exceeds industry expectations. Our students will be able to achieve the objectives listed below within a few years of graduation through attainment
of the outcomes listed below at the time of graduation.
Objective (1) Lead and/or manage effective engineering design analyses
Outcomes
• Apply skills in engineering science and mathematics;
• Practice effective analysis;
• Conduct data analyses and analyses verification.
Objective (2) Lead and/or manage effective engineering design teams:
Outcomes
• Apply effective engineering design skills;
• Demonstrate teaming proficiency;
• Participate in research and professional development.
RELATION OF COURSE OUTCOMES TO ECE PROGRAM OUTCOMES:

COURSE OUTCOMES:

Upon completion of this course students will have demonstrated the ability to:
1 Be able to make a problem definition statement including needs or customer objectives,
2 Understand organization development and structure,
3 Use modern design tools,
4 Use modern manufacturing tools,
5 Document and communicate results and findings in written and oral form.
RELATION OF COURSE TO ECE PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:

An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.

An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.

An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.

An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.

An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.

An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.

An ability to communicate effectively.

The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context.

A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.

A knowledge of contemporary issues.

An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to
4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Objectives

Outcomes

(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)

LABORATORY:

1

2

3

4

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
4

4

5

4

2
4

4

Computer-controlled circuit board manufacturing mill, FADAL CNC Vertical Machining Center, ROMI
Turning Center, Basic manufacturing machines (Drill press, bandsaw, etc.), PCB design, soldering

Grading: Homework/project 50%, Lab 50%
ABET category contents estimated by faculty members who prepared this course description:
PREPARED BY: Dan Dolan and Michael Batchelder, Updated August 27, 2009.

174

Engineering Design - 2.0 credits

EE 311/311L - Systems

Fall Semester 2009

Required Course
Catalog Data: (3-0.5) 3.5 credits. Prerequisites: EE 221 completed with a grade of ―C or better, EM 216
completed or concurrent. Mathematical, topological, and circuit models of electro-systems, such as electromagnetic,
electromechanical, electro thermal, etc.
Prerequisites: EE 221 and background in:
 Electronic circuits.
 Transient circuits
 Sinusoidal analysis
 Introduction to Laplace analysis
Course Web Page:
http://sdmines.sdsmt.edu/sdsmt/directory/courses/2009fa/ee311/311LM001
Textbook:
Control Systems Engineering, 5th Edition, by Norman S. Nise, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River
Street, Hoboken, NJ, 07030, 2008.
Instructor:
Dr. C. R. Tolle EP 323
394-6133
[email protected]
Office Hours: MWF 1:00pm-2:00pm, M 3:00pm-4:00pm, or by appointment.
Lecture:
Section 01
EP 253 2:00pm-2:50pm MWF
Lab:
Open Lab
EP 340
Goals: The student completing the course should be able to apply hardware and software design concepts to
understand first and second order systems transient and steady state response analysis.
Tentative Grading:
Attendance, Participation, and Professionalism 5%
Quizzes
5%
Homework Assignments
10%
Lab Projects
20%
3 Mid Terms each 20%
60%
Topics:
1. beginning system modeling
2. transient and steady state response analysis
3. stability analysis i.e. Routh-Hurwitz criterion, root-locus techniques, and frequency domain
techniques
4. state space methods
5. beginning design of systems to satisfy the given specifications
6. modern computational software tools for analysis and design of feedback systems
7. i.e. MATLAB (possible alternative software programs: Octave, Maple, or Sage).
Freedom in learning: Students are responsible for learning the content of any course of study in which they
are enrolled. Under Board of Regents and University policy, student academic performance shall be
evaluated solely on an academic basis and students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or
views offered in any course of study. Students who believe that an academic evaluation is unrelated to
academic standards but is related instead to judgment of their personal opinion or conduct should contact the
dean of the college which offers the class to initiate a review of the evaluation.
Laboratory projects: Students learn to simulate ordinary differential equations (ODE) as well as simulate state space
systems in Matlab and Simulink. They also learn to measure transient time constants for simple first and second
order circuits.
ADA note: Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact the instructor
and/or the campus ADA coordinator, Ms. Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity.
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Use techniques such as linearization, dynamic response, Laplace transforms to model systems.
2. Use block diagrams to represent systems.
3. Use signal flow graphs to represent systems.

175

4. Determine the sensitivity of the output to changes in the transfer function.
5. Determine how disturbances affect the output of a system
6. Analyze the performance of a system in the time domain.
7. Analyze the performance of a system in the frequency domain.
8. Analyze the stability of a linear control system.
9. Use root-locus methods to analyze feedback control systems via gain adjustment.
*10.Apply the principles of a PID (proportional, integral, derivative) to a controller strategy.
11. Use frequency methods (frequency response, Bode) to analyze systems.
12. Use state variable models to represent a system.
13. Be comfortable using Matlab as an analytical tool.
* as time permits
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
 An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
 An ability to communicate effectively.
 The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and
societal context.
 A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
 A knowledge of contemporary issues.
 An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering
practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program
objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
Objectives
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)

1

2

3

4
3
1
2
4

3
2
1
1
3

3
2
1
1
3

1
2
1
1
4

1
1
1

1
1
1

3

3

4

5

6

7

4
2
1
1
3

4
2
1
1
3

4
3
1
1
3

4
3
1
1
3

1
1
1
4

1
1
1
4

1
1
1
1
4

1
1
1
1
4

8
4
3
1
1
3
2
1
2
1
1
4

9
4
2
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
4

10

11

12

13

4
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2

4
2
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
4

4
3
1
2
4

3
4
1
1
4
1
1
1
1

1
2
1
1
4

4

ABET category contents estimated by faculty member who prepared this course description:
Engineering Science - 2.5 credits, or 70%
Engineering Design - 1.0 credits, or 30%
PREPARED BY:

Charles R. Tolle, Date: last update June 21, 2010

176

EE 312/312L - Signals
Spring Semester 2010

Required Course
Catalog Data: (3-0.5) 3.5 credits. Prerequisites: EE 221 completed with a grade of ―C or better. Characterization of signals;
the complex plane as a representative of the transient and frequency responses, continuous and discrete signal processing.
Prerequisites: EE 221 and background in:
 Electronic circuits.
 Transient circuits
 Sinusoidal analysis
 Introduction to Fourier and Laplace analysis
Course Web Page:
http://sdmines.sdsmt.edu/sdsmt/directory/courses/2010sp/ee312/312LM001
Textbook:
Signals and Systems: Continuous and Discrete, R.E. Ziemer, W.H. Tranter, D.R. Fannin, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632, 1998.
Instructor:
Dr. C. R. Tolle EP 323
394-6133
[email protected]
Office Hours: MWF 10:00am-11:00am, W 3:00pm-4:00pm, or by appointment.
Lecture:
Section 01
EP 208 9:00am-9:50am MWF
Lab:
Open Lab
EP 340
Goals: The student completing the course should be able to understand the underpinnings and progression for modern
transform theory, i.e. Fourier Series, Fourier Transform, Discrete Fourier Transform, Laplace Transform, and the Z Transform.
Students should be able to recognize and understand simple signal processing with modern mathematical tools, e.g. Matlab, and
understand the basis for linear time invariant system analysis.
Tentative Grading:
Attendance, Participation, and Professionalism
5%
Homework Assignments and Quizzes
15%
Lab Projects
20%
3 Mid Terms each 20%
60%
Topics:
 difference between an energy versus power signal
 how to analyze and characterize continuous-time and discrete-time signals in the time domain
e.g. convolution and difference/differential equation representations
 how to analyze and characterize continuous-time and discrete-time signals in the frequency domain
e.g., Fourier
series/transform, discrete-time Fourier transforms, discrete Fourier transform, Laplace transforms and ztransform.
 how to use modern computational software tools for analysis and processing of signals
e.g. MATLAB (possible alternative software programs: Octave, Maple, or Sage).
Freedom in learning: Students are responsible for learning the content of any course of study in which they are enrolled.
Under Board of Regents and University policy, student academic performance shall be evaluated solely on an academic
basis and students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study.
Students who believe that an academic evaluation is unrelated to academic standards but is related instead to judgment
of their personal opinion or conduct should contact the department head which offers the class to initiate a review of the
evaluation.
Laboratory projects: Students learn to perform simple signal processing activities within Matlab.
ADA note: Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact the instructor and/or the
campus ADA coordinator, Ms. Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity.
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Apply fundamental continuous-time and discrete-time signal properties: e.g causality, linearity, and timeinvariance to signals.
2. Solve linear discrete-time difference equations by recursion, and find complete solutions when possible.
3. Solve linear first-order continuous-time differential equations, and find the complete solutions when possible.
4. Apply or use the convolution representation for linear, time-invariant, continuous-time and discrete-time
systems to find the response of systems to input signals.
5. Be able to convolve continuous-time and discrete-time signals.

177

6.

Be able to compute the Fourier series for continuous-time periodic signals, and the Fourier transform (and
inverse) for simple aperiodic continuous-time signals (including the use of the various properties of the Fourier
transform).
7. Apply or use frequency-domain analysis (i.e., Fourier series and transform) to find the response of systems to
periodic and aperiodic continuous-time signals.
8. Apply the properties of ideal filters to find the output of the filter to input signals.
9. Apply or use the principles of sampling and resulting consequences in the frequency domain.
10. Be able to compute both the discrete-time Fourier transform (DTFT) and discrete Fourier transform (DFT) of
discrete-time signals as well as their inverses, including the use of the various properties of the DTFT and
DFT.
11. Be able to compute both the z-transform and inverse z-transform of discrete-time signals, including the use of
the various properties of the z-transform.
12. Be able to compute the z-transform transfer function of discrete-time systems.
13. Apply or use frequency-domain analysis (i.e., DTFT, DFT, and z-transform) to find the response of discretetime systems to discrete-time signals.
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
(a) An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
(b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
(c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
(d) An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
(e) An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
(f) An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
(g) An ability to communicate effectively.
(h) The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
(i) A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
(j) A knowledge of contemporary issues.
(k) An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives
listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
Objectives
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

2
3
4

3
2
2

2
2
2

3
2
2

4
3
2

4
3
2

4
3
2

2
2
2

4
4
3

4
3
2

4
3
2

4
3
3

3
3
3

1

2

2

4

1

1

3

1

4

1

1

1

1

4

2
4

2
4

2
4

1

1

1
2
4

4

4

4

4

4

2

2
4

ABET category contents estimated by faculty member who prepared this course description:
Engineering Science – 3.5 credits, or 100% Engineering Design - 0.0 credits, or 0%
PREPARED BY: Charles R. Tolle, Date: last update June 21, 2010

178

EE 320/320L: Electronics I
Required Course

CATALOG DATA:
EE 320/320L– Electronics I: (3-1) 4 Credits
Pre- or co-requisite: EE 221. Presents concepts of electronic devices and circuits including
modeling of semiconductor devices, analysis and design of transistor biasing circuits, and
analysis and design of linear amplifiers. Use of computer simulation tools and breadboarding as
part of the circuit design process is emphasized. Students are introduced to methods of
designing circuits which still meet specifications even when there are statistical variations in the
component values.
TEXTBOOK:
Electonic Circuit Analysis and Design, (2th ed). Donald Neamen, 2001.
INSTRUCTOR:
GOALS:

The objective of this course is to provide students with the working knowledge required to analyze and design basic
diode and transistor circuits. Diode circuits include DC and small signal, voltage rectification and limiting and
clamping circuits. Transistor circuits include BJT (bipolar junction transistors) and MOSFET (metal oxide
semiconductor field effect transistor) technologies. Large signal and small signal analysis is covered as well as the
frequency response of selected transistor amplifier circuits.
CLASS SCHEDULE:

Lecture: 3 hours per week.
Laboratory: 3 hours every two weeks (1 credit hour).
Topics: Diodes, Bipolar Junction Transistors, Field Effect Transistors, Frequency Response of
Amplifiers, and Multiple Transistor Circuits: current mirrors, logic gates.
COMPUTER USAGE:

Students use their favorite circuit simulation software (such as B2Spice or PSPICE) to analyze circuits containing
semiconductor devices such as diodes, BJTS and FETs.
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:

1. Draw the characteristic curves for the diode, BJT and MOSFET, to identify regions of
operation, and to construct linear circuit approximations for each.
2. Complete simple load line analyses for diode and transistor circuits.
3. Design and analyze common rectifier circuits such as half cycle, full cycle and bridge
rectifiers and compute the diode currents and peak inverse voltage (PIV) for the circuit with a
resistive load.
4. Bias a diode, BJT or MOSFET device to achieve a desired quiescent operating point.
5. Linearize non-linear devices (diodes and transistors) and apply small signal models were
appropriate.
6. Design and analyze common transistor amplifier configurations for BJTs (such as common
emitter, common base and common collector) and for FETs (such as common source and
source follower).
7. Know advantages and disadvantages of common transistor amplifier configurations.
8. Design and analyze simple digital circuits using diodes, BJTs or MOSFETs.
9. Compute the frequency response of basic transistor amplifier circuits.
179

10. Use SPICE to analyze circuits that include semiconductor devices such as diodes, BJTs and
FETs.
11. Construct basic diode circuits in the laboratory (such as rectifiers) and make AC and DC
voltage and current measurements.
12. Construct basic BJT transistor circuits in the laboratory (such as small signal amplifiers) and
make AC and DC voltage and current measurements.
13. Construct basic FET transistor circuits in the laboratory (such as small signal amplifiers) and
make AC and DC voltage and current measurements.
RELATION OF COURSE OUTCOMES TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 (a) An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 (b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret
data.
 (c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 (e) An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 (k) An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the
program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis):
Course Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

ABET
Objectives

(a)

2

3

4

3

3

4

3

4

(b)
(c)
(e)
(k)

3

4

3

3

3

3

4

4

3

4

3

3

4

4

4

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

LABORATORY:

A one credit hour laboratory EE 321A accompanies this course. The laboratory meets for three hours every other week
for a total of six laboratories during the semester. The following six laboratories are performed:

PN Diodes, Diode Circuits, Zener diode. Bipolar Junction Transistor Bias Circuits, Common
Emitter Amplifier, Emitter-Follower Amplifer, and MOSFETs

The students use basic measurement equipment in the labs including the power supply, digital multimeter, function
generator and oscilloscope. All the circuits are breadboarded. In the pre-laboratory work, the students typically
analyze the circuits to familiarize themselves with the upcoming lab and often are asked to verify their
solutions using SPICE.
PREPARED BY:
Larry Meiners, Date: Sept. 3, 2002

180

EE 322/322L: Electronics II
Wireless Communication Electronics
Required

CATALOG DATA:
EE 322/322L Electronics II: (3-1) 4 Credits. Prerequisite: EE212 and EE321. A continuation
of EE 321 with emphasis on design applications of linear and nonlinear integrated circuits.
TEXTBOOK:
D. B. Rutledge, The Electronics of Radio. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
1999.
COORDINATOR:
Dr. Keith W. Whites, Professor and Steven P. Miller Endowed Chair
GOALS:
The principle objective of this course is to present an advanced and utterly practical course in
analog electronics. This objective is met using the excellent text by Prof. Rutledge, which
presents analog electronics in the context of a CW transceiver. Based on this text, the course
is quite nontraditional in that nearly all homework problems involve laboratory work
centered around the analysis and construction of the NorCal 40A, which is a 40-m, 2-W CW
transceiver. Among other topics, this course teaches new analog circuits, how electrical subcircuits
are interconnected to form the transceiver and issues related to communication
circuits and channels.
CLASS SCHEDULE:
Lecture: 3 hours per week.
Laboratory: A majority of the 36 homework problems assigned in this course involves
laboratory work, which is performed during open lab hours from 7:30 AM to
10:00 PM.
Topics: (―NC
40A:‖ indicates the sub-circuit in the NorCal 40A associated with the topic)
1. Introduction and review, Filters, Transformers, Field effect transistors, Power amplifiers,
Oscillators, Mixers, Audio amplifiers, Automatic gain control, Receiver performance,
COMPUTER USAGE:
Circuit simulation is performed using both Puff and Agilent Technology‘s Advanced Design
System (ADS). Approximately 20% of the 36 problems assigned during the semester involve
circuit simulation.
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should possess an ability to:
1. Understand the operation of a superheterodyne receiver and its advantages over a direct
conversion receiver.
2. Use an automatic waveform generator, and account for the effects of this device – as well
as an oscilloscope – on a circuit under test.
3. Properly solder and desolder electrical components to a printed circuit board in an RF
circuit.
4. Design an LC ladder filter to meet passband and rejection specifications.
5. Tune a transformer and understand how to use it as an impedance matching device.
6. Design and implement npn and pnp BJTs as electronic switches.
7. Design and analyze BJT common emitter amplifiers, both with impedance loads and with
transformer-coupled loads.
8. Design and analyze BJT emitter follower amplifiers.
181

9. Recognize BJT differential amplifier circuits and recall their uses.
10. Design and implement JFET source follower amplifiers.
11. Understand the operation and design of class C power amplifiers.
12. Recall the efficiencies of class A and class C amplifiers.
13. Construct and analyze a simple thermal circuit for a transistor and heat sink combination.
14. Recall the basic operation of feedback oscillators.
15. Use a frequency counter to make precise frequency measurements.
16. Understand the operation of Gilbert cell mixers.
17. Understand the sources of spurious responses in receivers and their limiting effects on
performance.
18. Design and construct a simple audio amplifier circuit using an LM386 IC.
19. Recall the basic operation of receiver automatic gain control using JFETs as variable resistors.
20. Understand the limiting role of noise in communications circuits.
21. Calculate signal to noise ratio (SNR), minimum detectable signal (MDS), noise power
density and noise equivalent power (NEP) from measured data.
22. Understand the effect of cascading noisy electrical components.
23. Understand the source of receiver intermodulation and its effects on receiver
performance.
24. Make proper measurements and then calculate the dynamic range of a receiver.
25. Use power splitter/combiner devices and adjustable attenuators.
RELATION OF COURSE OUTCOMES TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
• (a) An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
• (b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data
• (c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
• (e) An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
• (k) An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing
the program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis):
LABORATORY:
As mentioned earlier, this course is centered both on the detailed theoretical analysis of a CW
transceiver as well as its construction. Nearly all of the laboratory work is centered on the
construction of the NorCal 40A, which is a 40-m, 2-W CW transceiver. Once the radio has
been constructed, the last two weeks of the course are devoted to measuring and characterizing the
performance of the radio.
Equipment that is used in this course includes:
• Agilent 4396B 2 Hz-1.8 GHz RF Network/Spectrum/Impedance analyzers,
• Agilent 33120A 15-MHz function/arbitrary waveform generators,
• HP 54645 digital oscilloscopes,
• Tenma 72-4095 175-MHz universal counters,
• Kay 839 DC-2 GHz adjustable signal attenuators,
• Mini-Circuits ZFSC-2-4 power splitters/combiners.
PREPARED BY:
Keith W. Whites, Date: March 24, 2003 (Modified 3/24/03, June 2010)
182

EE 330 Energy Systems
Required Course

CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
(3-1) 4 credits. Prerequisite: EE 221. Production, transmission, and utilization of energy in systems
with major electrical subsystems, with particular emphasis on electromagnetic and
electromechanical systems and devices.
TEXT BOOK:
S. J.Chapman, Electric Machinery Fundamentals, McGraw Hill 1999
COORDINATOR:
Abul R Hasan, Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering
GOALS:

This is a required course for EE majors. The primary goal of this course is to provide students with a basic
understanding of electrical machine, its characteristics and operational behavior. Another goal of this course
is to enhance interest in power area and is to create foundation for students to take follow-on courses.

CLASS SCHEDULE:
Lecture: 3 hour per week
Laboratory: Lab both simulation & actual laboratory (1 credit hour)
TOPICS: Three-phase Fundamentals, Magnetic Circuits, Transformers, DC Machines, DC
Generators, Induction Motors, Synchronous Generators, Synchronous Motors
COMPUTER USAGE:

Students use MATLAB calculations.

OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Analyze three-phase balanced circuit using single-phase equivalent
2. Use of phasor diagram to represent voltage & current of a circuit
3. Use of power triangle concept to analyze power factor correction
4. Analyze linear and non-linear simple magnetic circuits for power applications
5. Perform open-circuit, short circuit & load test on single-phase transformer
6. Perform calculations on transformer voltage regulation & efficiency
7. Uses of three-phase transformer connection to achieve desired power & voltage
8. Understand principles of DC machines
9. Calculations of DC machine characteristics
10. Understanding of rotating magnetic fields and how an Induction Machine works
11. Perform the no-load, blocked-rotor, and DC test on induction motor
12. Calculations of Induction Machine performance characteristics
13. Understand the basic Synchronous generator and motor behavior
14. Describe the conditions needed to connect AC generator to Utility grid
15. Effect of field excitation and V-curve of a synchronous motor
183

RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs
(d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a
global and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
Laboratory:
A one credit hour laboratory EE 330 A accompanies this course. This is closed laboratory because
of the safety issue with electricity & electrical machines. The laboratory also includes visit to local
power industry and talk by professional engineers on contemporary issues.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program
objectives listed above ( on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis.

ABET
Objectives

Course Outcomes
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i

1
4
4
3

2
4
2
4

3
4
2
4

4
4
2
4

3

3

3

3

5
4
4
4
3
3
1
2

6
4
4
4
3
3
1
2

7
4
4
3
4

8
4
3

9
4
4
4
4

10
4
3

11
4
4
4
3
3
1
2

12
4
4
4

13
4
3

4

14
4
3
2

15
4
3
2

2

2

1

1

1
1

j
1

k
PREPARED BY: Thomas P. Montoya, Date: June 2010

184

1

2

EE 351/351L Mechatronics and Measurement Systems
Required Course
Office
Phone
Instructor:
Ralph Grahek
EP 3314
2222
Office Hours: to be determined (daily schedule posted outside door)
CLASS SCHEDULE: Lecture: 3 hours per week.
Laboratory: 3 hours per week.
TEXTBOOK AND MATERIALS:
Mechatronics (3rd ed.), Alciatore and Histand.
Arduino, Experimental Microcontroller Circuit Board, 1 per team
Catalog Description:
EE 351/351L Mechatronics and Measurement Systems (3-1) 4 credits
Prerequisites: CSC 150 and EE 220 or EE 301. This course will encompass general measurement techniques
found in mechanical and electrical engineering. These include measurement of force, strain, frequency,
pressure flow rates, and temperatures. Elements of signal conditioning and data acquisition will be
introduced. In addition to this material, the course will have a mechatronics approach reflected in the
combined applications of electronic mechanical and control systems. This course is cross-listed with ME
351/351L.
GOALS:
The objective of this course is to introduce the field of mechatronics. The students will focus on integrating
systems that include various sensors and actuators with a microcontroller. There is also an emphasis on
developing skills to have successful multi-disciplinary teams.
Computer Usage:
Student will use Arduino microcontroller board to program the Atmel MEGA328 microcontroller. Software
to program this microcontroller is open-source and can be loaded on the student‘s laptop.
COURSE OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Apply the basic methodology of electronic measurements.
2. Apply the basics of signal conditioning.
3. Perform basic computer interfacing for measurements and control.
4. Select a transducer for standard measurements (temperature, flow, pressure, strain, displacement,
velocity and acceleration etc.)
5. Select an electronically controlled actuator.
6. Apply the process of design of a mechatronic system.
7. Implement a mechatronic system.
8. Present a project via a detailed presentation or creative video.
9. Demonstrate the fundamentals of working in a team.
10. Deal with issues that arise within a team such as conflict resolution, communication, trust
development, and mutual accountability.
RELATION OF COURSE TO ABET OUTCOME CRITERIA:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program outcomes:
(a) An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
(b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
(c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
(d) An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
(e) An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
(f) An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
(g) An ability to communicate effectively
(h) The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and
societal context

185

(i) A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning
(j) A knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering
practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program
outcomes listed above (on a scale of 0 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis)
Course Outcomes

Course Outcomes

Course Outcomes

ABET Outcomes

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
(a)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
(b)
4
4
4
4
2
3
3
1
2
2
(c)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
(d)
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
(e)
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
1
3
3
(f)
2
2
1
1
4
4
(g)
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
4
4
4
(h)
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
3
3
(i)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
(j)
1
1
3
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
(k)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
RELATION OF COURSE OUTCOMES TO PROGRAM OUTCOMES:
ME Program Outcomes
ME 351
Objective 1
Objective 2
Program Outcome
1
2
3
1
2
3
(1)
4
3
3
2
(2)
4
2
3
2
(3)
4
2
1
3
(4)
4
2
2
3
(5)
4
3
2
3
(6)
4
2
1
4
2
(7)
4
2
3
4
2
(8)
4
(9)
4
(10)
4
* (For a list of Program Objectives and Program Outcomes, please go to http://mech.sdsmt.edu)
EE Program Objectives
EE 351
Objective 1
Objective 2
Objective 3
(1)
4
4
(2)
4
4
(3)
4
4
(4)
4
3
(5)
4
3
(6)
4
4
4
(7)
4
4
4
(8)
1
4
(9)
2
4
(10)
2
4

186

EE 362 – ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS
Fall Semester 2009
Catalog Data: ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS. (3-0) 3 credits.
Prerequisites: MATH 225, MATH 231, PHYS 213. This course studies the behavior of
materials of interest to electrical engineers and covers fundamental issues such as energy
band theory, density of states, Fermi-Dirac statistics, equilibrium statistics in
semiconductors, and Fermi energy. This foundation is then used to study a variety of topics
such as conduction, semiconductor devices, ferromagnetism, lasers, gaseous electronics, and
thermoelectric phenomena.
Texts:
Semiconductor Physics and Devices, Donald Neamen, Irwin, 2003.
References:
Modular Series On Solid State Devices, Pierret and Neudeck, Addison-Wesley, 1987.
Coordinator: Brian T. Hemmelman, Assistant Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Office Hours are 1:00-2:00 p.m. M/W/F and by appointment.
I can be reached by email, [email protected], or Skype (Brian Hemmelman)
Lecture:
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday
3:00-3:50 p.m. CB108
Objectives:
The objective of this course is to provide students with an understanding of the physics
behind the properties of materials of interest to electrical engineers and how devices made of
those materials behave and operate.
Topics:
The Crystal Structure of Solids
Introduction to Quantum Mechanics
Schrodinger‘s Wave Equation including Boundary Conditions
Energy Bands and Energy Band Diagrams
Density of States
Fermi-Dirac Statistics
Equilibrium Statistics in Semiconductors
Dopants
Fermi Energy
Electrical Conduction in Solids
Drift and Diffusion Currents
Generation and Recombination
Carrier Lifetime
PN junctions (physical structure and zero, forward, and reverse bias)
Current-Voltage Relationship in PN junctions
Small Signal Model of PN junctions
Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor Field-Effect Transistors
MOSFET Operation
MOSFET Equivalent Circuit Model
Bipolar Junction Transistors
BJT Modes of Operation
BJT Minority Carrier Distribution
BJT Equivalent Circuit Models
Outcomes:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
(1)
Describe the physical structure of semiconductor materials.
(2)
Have developed an understanding of the basic concepts describing the behavior of
bulk semiconductors; these include the energy-band mode, the Fermi function, and
the calculation of electron and hole densities in semiconductors.
(3)
Understand the roles played diffusion current, drift current, and generation
recombination in describing current flow in semiconductors
(4)
Describe the electric fields and electric potential inside a pn junction.
(5)
Understand the mechanism of rectification in pn junctions.

187

(6)
(7)

Understand the operation of LEDs and photodiodes.
Understand the operation of, and the terminology used in describing and specifying
the properties of MOSFETs.
(8)
Understand the operation of, and the terminology used in describing and specifying
the properties of BJTs.
Relation of Course to Program Objectives:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:

An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.

An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.

An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.

An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.

An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.

An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.

An ability to communicate effectively.

The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and
societal context.

A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.

A knowledge of contemporary issues.

An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering
practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in
addressing the program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a
strong emphasis).
Outcomes
Objectives
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)
Grading:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

3

4
1
2

4
1
2

4
1
1

4

4

2

2

4
2
3

4
2
3

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
2

2
2

2
1

2
2

2
2

3
3

3
3

The following grading scheme is tentatively planned. Adjustments may be made depending
on the actual amount of material covered.
3 1-Hour Exams
300 points
90-100%
A
Homework
200 points
80-89%
B
1 2-Hour Final
150 points
70-79%
C
60-69%
D
0-59%
F

You must earn at least a 60% exam average to pass the class.
Prepared by: Dr. Brian T. Hemmelman, August 28, 2009.

188

EE 381 Electric and Magnetic Fields
Required

EE 381 Catalog Description: 93-0)3 credits. Prerequisites: MATH 225 (Calculus III) and 321 (Diff. Eqn.),
and Phys 213 (Univ. Phys. II). Fundamentals of vector field theory (e.g. Maxwell‘s equations) as applied to
electric and magnetic phenomena. Also, theory and applications of lossless transmission lines are covered.

Instructor

office

phone

e-mail

Time

Room
Dr. Thomas Montoya
EP 325 394-2459 [email protected] 10:00 - 10:50 am MWF EP 254
Text: Elements of Electromagnetics (Third Edition), Sadiku, 2001, ISBN 0-19-513477-X.
Topics/Course Schedule: Chapters 1-9 & parts of 11, see attached schedule (subject to revision).
Attendance: REQUIRED. Notify the instructor ahead of time (when possible) if you will be absent from class.
ADA: Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact the instructor
and/or the campus ADA coordinator, Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity.
Grading (approx):
3 Hour Exams @ 20, 15, & 10%.................................................. 45%
Quizzes …………………………................................................. 20%
Homework …………………………............................................ 15%
Final Exam (required) .................................................................. 20%
Total .................................................................................. 100%
Tentative grading scale: 100<A<90, 90<B+<85, 85<B<75, 75<C+<70, 70<C<60, 60<D<50, F<50.
Course Policies
 Missed homework and quizzes will not be made up. I will drop the lowest homework grade &
lowest two quiz grades (no questions asked). Homework is due at the beginning of class on the specified
days. Assignments received after this time will be deemed late (20% penalty). Assignments will NOT
be accepted after solutions are posted to the course web page.
 Except when otherwise specified, all coursework is to be individually completed, see The Student
Code of Conduct for SDSM&T. Students are encouraged to discuss homework with classmates.
 To facilitate grading, it shall meet the following specifications (see course web page for examples):
(a)
Use the front side (i.e., single-sided) of 8.5‖  11‖ Engineering graph paper or plain white
paper (NOT pages torn from spiral notebook) for assignments.
(b)
All pages should be in order and numbered (i/j format) in top right hand corner, with the
course number, problem number(s), and your name appearing at the top of each page.
(c)
Write-out/paraphrase the problem and show all work so it can be understood without the
text.
(d)
Writing/figures/graphs must be legible- cannot read = no credit.
(e)
All work exceeding one page should be stapled - no paper clips, folded corners, or folders.
(f)
Answers should be boxed or double underlined, with the variables, values and units (if any),
included.
(g)
Leave a space (e.g., 1/2‖) between consecutive parts of a problem, and draw a line across
the page at the end of each complete problem. No more than two problems on any single page.
Assignments: The assignments will be posted on the course web page. Also, a course e-mail list will be
utilized to distribute assignments as well as notify students of course-related information and events.
Office Hours: 3-4 pm M, W, TH, & F, or by appointment.
WWW: See link(s) from http://montoya.sdsmt.edu . The course web page will be heavily utilized for
posting assignments, examples, solutions, ...

189

Tentative Course Schedule
Topics
Transmission Lines- Introduction, parameters, equations, input impedance, SWR, and power
Vector Algebra- Intro, scalars & vectors, unit vector, addition & subtraction, position/distance vectors,
dot/cross products, components
Coordinate Systems & Transformation- Intro, Cartesian, Circular Cylindrical, Spherical, constantcoordinate surfaces
Vector Calculus- Intro; differential length, area & volume
Exam #1 (covers 11.1-11.4, Chapters 1 & 2)
line, surface & volume integrals; Del operator; gradient; divergence & divergence theorem; curl &
Stoke’s theorem, Laplacian; classification
Electrostatic Fields- Intro, Coulomb‘s Law, field intensity, electric fields, electric flux density, Gauss‘s Law
& applications, electric potential, electric dipole, energy density
Electric Fields in Material Space- Intro, material properties, convection & conduction currents,
conductors, dielectric polarization, dielectric constant & strength, continuity equation, boundary
conditions
Electrostatic Boundary-Value Problems - Intro, Poisson’s & Laplace’s eqns.
Exam #2 (covers Chapters 3-5)
Uniqueness theorem, solution procedure, resistance & capacitance
Magnetostatic Fields- Intro, Biot-Savart’s Law, Ampere’s Circuit Law & applications, magnetic flux
density, static Maxwell’s equations, magnetic scalar and vector potentials
Magnetic Forces, Materials, and Devices- Intro, forces, magnetic torque & moment, magnetic dipole,
materials, boundary conditions, inductance, magnetic energy, magnetic circuits, force on magnetic materials
Maxwell’s Equations- Intro, Faraday‘s Law
Exam #3 (covers Chapters 6-8)
transformer & motional EMFs, displacement current, time-varying potentials, time-harmonic fields
Catch-up and Review
EE381 Final Exam- 2-3:50pm, EP254

190

EE 382/382L: Applied Electromagnetics
CATALOG DATA:

Required Course

EE 382/382L – Applied Electromagnetics (2.5-0.5) 3 Credits. Prerequisite: EE381. Field theory (e.g.,
Maxwell‘s equations) for time-varying electromagnetic phenomenon. Applications include transmission
lines, plane waves, and antennas. Students are introduced to typical laboratory equipment associated with
applied electromagnetics (e.g., vector network analyzer).

TEXTBOOK: Elements of Electromagnetics (Fourth Edition), Sadiku, 2007.
COORDINATOR: Dr. Thomas P. Montoya, Associate Professor
GOALS: The objective of this course is to provide students a basic understanding of Maxwell‘s equations
for the time-varying case; analyzing uniform plane wave propagation, reflection, and transmission; analysis,
applications, and theory of lossless and lossy transmission lines in the frequency-domain and time-domain;
transmission line impedance matching techniques using Smith charts, and an introduction to antennas.
CLASS SCHEDULE: Lecture: 3 hours per week.
Laboratory: no scheduled weekly lab; lab projects will be scheduled as required and/or dictated by
equipment availability, usually numbering 3 labs throughout the semester.
Topics:
Time-varying Fields and Maxwell‘s Equations, Theory and Applications of Transmission Lines, Plane
Electromagnetic Waves, Antennas
COMPUTER USAGE:
Students are encouraged to use PSpice to verify problems involving electrical circuits and transmission
lines, computer programs for mathematics and graphing (e.g., MS Excel. MathCad, MATLAB, ...), and
will be introduced to the Numerical Electromagnetics Code (NEC) for antennas analysis and design.
LABORATORY PROJECTS:
Laboratory projects will include transmission line concepts (both time-domain and frequency-domain)
and the design, construction, and testing of an antenna.
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Understand and apply Maxwell‘s equations to problems involving time-varying fields, particularly
Faraday‘s Law.
2. Understand and be able to calculate how an UPW propagates through a lossy or lossless media.
3. Calculate the polarization of a UPW given the electric or magnetic fields.
4. Apply/calculate the Poynting vector and theorem to UPWs given the electric or magnetic fields.
5. Solve frequency-domain problems (i.e., find impedances, reflection coefficients, currents, voltages, and
power flow) for lossless transmission lines.
6. Solve frequency-domain problems (i.e., find impedances, reflection coefficients, currents, voltages, and
power flow) for lossy transmission lines.
7. Solve time-domain or transient problems (i.e., find reflection coefficients, currents, and voltages versus
time at stationary points or versus position at a given time) for lossless transmission lines.
8. Use Smith charts to calculate or find reflection coefficients, impedances, the location of voltage maxima
and minima, and VSWR on a lossless transmission line.

191

9. Solve lossless transmission line matching problems (e.g., single-stub, double-stub, quarter-wave
matching section, ...).
10. Understand and apply fundamental antenna concepts and definitions.
11. Understand and apply the Friis transmission and Radar range equations.
12. Analyze and design a dipole/monopole or loop wire antenna
13. Design, construct, match, and test one of the widely utilized antennas (e.g., log-periodic dipole arrays
(LPDA), Yagi-Uda dipole arrays, ...)
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
 An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
 An ability to communicate effectively.
 The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and
societal context.
 A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
 A knowledge of contemporary issues.
 An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering
practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program
objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
Objectives
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

4

4

3

3

4
1
2

4
1
3

3

3

4

1

4
1
3

4

2

4
1
3

4

4
3
4

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

3

4

2

2

4
2

2

3
2
2

PREPARED BY: Keith W. Whites, Date: June 23, 2010

192

2

4

CENG/EE 464: Senior Design I
Required

Spring 2010

Office
Phone
E-mail
[email protected]
Instructor:
Bernt Askildsen
EP324
394-1223
Office Hours: Daily schedule posted outside door or by appointment
Lecture:
Tuesday
8:00am
EP252
Catalog Description:
CENG/EE 464 COMPUTER ENGINEERING DESIGN I
(2-0) 2 credit. Prerequisites: CENG 342, EE 320. Prerequisite or corequisite: EE 311, EE 312, CSC 470, and
ENGL 289. This course will focus on the design process and culminate with the faculty approval of design
projects (including schematics and parts list) for CENG 465. Typical topics included are the development of
a product mission statement, identification of the customer and customer needs, development of target
specifications, consideration of alternate designs using a decision matrix, project management techniques,
legal and ethical issues, FCC verification and certification, use of probability and statistics for reliable
design, interpretation of data sheets, and component selection. (Design content - two (2) credits)
WRITING AND GLOBAL ISSUES:
This course emphasizes writing and an understanding of global issues in fulfillment of Policy 2:7 of the
Board of Regents. The quality of your writing will be evaluated and will contribute to your grade for the
progress- and final reports. Evaluation of your grasp of global issues will be done as part of the final
written report and occasional quizzes.
TEXTBOOK: None
GOALS: The goal of this course is to provide students with the working knowledge of practical design
issues, project management, issues of professionalism, and prototype development.
FACULTY MENTOR:
Each project must have a faculty mentor. You must meet with your faculty mentor weekly (or regularly
as specified by your mentor).
CLASS SCHEDULE:
Lecture: 1 hour per week. Laboratory: Open Lab to work on your project.
ADA NOTE:
Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact me and/or the campus
ADA coordinator, Ms. Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity.
TOPICS:
Design Background, Teaming, Data Sheets, Project Management Tools, PCB Layout, using the circuit ,
board prototyping machine, Professionalism and Ethics, Standards and Certification, Intellectual
Property: patents, Product Liability, Design Resources (most publications available in student lounge
magazine rack)
TENTATIVE GRADING:
Class Assignments (1 through 4)
20%
Internal Team Evaluation
10%
Preliminary Design Review
10%
Prototype (module) Demonstration
20%
Progress Memos ( 1 through 3)
10%
Log Book
10%
Final Oral Presentation
10%
Final Written Report
10%
(Assigned by instructor and mentor considering project difficulty, background, and team size)
LOGBOOK: You must keep a logbook for your project. If working on a team project, note that each
person must keep a logbook. All work on the project should be recorded in the logbook as the work is
done. Even your rough calculations and thoughts about how to proceed on the project should be entered. The
purpose of the following requirements:
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1 Begin a design project by writing a mission statement, developing an objectives tree, consider
alternative solutions, and choose a solution using a matrix comparison technique.

193

2

Use data sheets- understanding the types (product review, advance information, preliminary
information, and definitive), terms (e.g. typical, min, max, absolute max), and issues of probability
and statistics for reliable design.
3 Use project management tools such as Gantt Charts created with MS Project.
4 Work effectively in teams.
5 Use appropriate prototyping techniques such as breadboards, wirewrap, protoboards, surface mount,
programmable chips, and PCB layout and fabrication.
6 Understand concepts of professionalism and ethics.
7 Include issues of standards and certification in project design.
8 Include issues of intellectual property in project design.
9 Include issues of product liability and social responsibility in project design.
10 Use design resources such as professional journals, trade journals, catalogs, and the internet in
project design.
11 Communicate the project design effectively.
12 Test, debug, and verify that the design meets the desired specifications.
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
 An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
 An ability to communicate effectively.
 The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
 A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
 A knowledge of contemporary issues.
 An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program
objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12
Objectives
(a)
2
2
2
3
2
(b)
4
(c)
4
4
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
(d)
3
4
4
(e)
4
2
4
2
2
2
4
3
2
(f)
4
3
3
2
(g)
3
3
2
3
2
4
(h)
3
2
3
2
2
(i)
3
3
3
(j)
3
3
3
3
(k)
2
3
4
4
3
4
PREPARED BY: Michael J. Batchelder, Date: August 30, 2002 (updated January 13 th, 2010 by Bernt Askildsen)

194

EE/CENG 465 Senior Design II
Office

Required

Phone

Instructor #1: Bernt Askildsen
EP 324
394-1223
Office Hours: Daily schedule posted outside door or by appointment
Lecture:
Thursday
8:00AM
EP252

SPRING 2010
E-Mail

[email protected]

Catalog Description:CENG/EE 465 COMPUTER ENGINEERING DESIGN II
(2-0) 2 credits. Prerequisite: CENG 464. The course requires students to conduct their own design projects in a
simulated industrial environment. Requirements include detailed laboratory notebook, periodic written and oral
progress reports, and a written and oral presentation of a final project report. (Design content - two (2) credits)
WRITING AND GLOBAL ISSUES: This course emphasizes writing and an understanding of global issues in fulfillment of
Policy 2:7 of the Board of Regents. The quality of your writing will be evaluated and will contribute to your grade for
the progress- and final reports. Evaluation of your grasp of global issues will be done as part of the final written report
and occasional quizzes.
FACULTY MENTOR: Each project must have a faculty mentor. You must meet with your faculty mentor weekly (or
regularly as specified by your mentor).
REPORT: Notice that the final written report and oral report video may be posted on the web. Arrangements can be
made in cases where this may not be appropriate such as sponsor confidential material.
SUBMITTING PROGRESS AND FINAL REPORTS: E-mail to [email protected] and project mentor. If
attachments are too large to email, submit on CDROM or place in the temporary directory on the fileserver emailing the
location. The final report is a formal oral and written report.
ADA NOTE: Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact me and/or the campus
ADA coordinator, Ms. Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity.
FREEDOM IN LEARNING: Under Board of Regents and University policy student academic performance may be
evaluated solely on an academic basis, not on opinions or conduct in matters unrelated to academic standards. Students
should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment
about matters of opinion, but they are responsible for learning the content of any course of study for which they are
enrolled. Students who believe that an academic evaluation reflects prejudiced or capricious consideration of student
opinions or conduct unrelated to academic standards should contact the dean of the college which offers the class to
initiate a review of the evaluation.
LOGBOOK: You must keep a logbook for your project preferably continuing the logbook from Senior Design I. If you
are working on a team project, each person must keep a logbook. All work on the project should be recorded in the
logbook as the work is done. Even your rough calculations and thoughts about how to proceed on the project should be
entered. The reader should be able to not only reproduce your work from the logbook, but also should be able to
understand why you made certain choices from your comments in the logbook.
Logbook requirements:
1. Must be bound (Spiral bound not appropriate)
2. Each page must be numbered
3. All entries must be in ink
4. All entries must be signed and dated
5. Blank areas must be crossed out
6. Mistakes should be lined out and initialed, still legible
7. Data sheet copies, program listings, design ideas from trade journals, web page printouts, faxes, textbook page
copies etc can be glued or taped in the logbook. Sign and date so that the writing is half on the logbook page and
half on the entered page.
8. Leave a few pages at the beginning which can be used as a table of contents
9. Do your work in the logbook i.e. don‘t work on scratch paper then copy into logbook. Record a narrative – what
you are doing and why i.e. record what you are thinking.
10. Record phone numbers, summarize conversations with vendors about parts
11. Can keep CD in a sleeve glued in the logbook to keep successive versions of software.
12. Make timely entries i.e. make entries at least every week. If nothing accomplished, enter that in logbook
TENTATIVE GRADING:
Critical Design Review
10%
Globalization Essay
10%
Effort/Project Difficulty
10%
Progress Reports
(4) +
Team Self-Review
10%
Mentor Evaluation
10%

195

Final Oral Presentation
10%
Final Written Report + Globalization Essay 10%
Log Book
10%
Project Outcome and Project Demonstration 20%
The completion of the course includes a final written report and a formal oral presentation. The oral presentation of the
report will be taped as part of the assessment process. The final written report and oral report video from 465,
Engineering Design II, may be placed on the web. Arrangements can be made in cases where this may not be
appropriate such as sponsor confidential material. A project poster will also be required as part of the participation in
the Project Demonstration (fall) or Design Fair (spring).
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Begin a design project by writing a mission statement, developing an objectives tree, consider alternative
solutions, and choose a solution using a matrix comparison technique.
2. Use data sheets understanding the types (product review, advance information, preliminary information, and
definitive), terms (e.g. typical, min, max, absolute max), and issues of specsmanship.
3. Use project management tools such as Gantt Charts created with MS Project.
4. Work effectively in teams.
5. Use appropriate prototyping techniques such as breadboards, wirewrap, protoboards, surface mount,
programmable chips, and PCB layout and fabrication.
6. Understand concepts of professionalism and ethics.
7. Include issues of standards and certification in project design.
8. Include issues of intellectual property issues in project design.
9. Include issues of product liability and social responsibility in project design.
10. Use design resources such as professional journals, trade journals, catalogs, and the Internet in project design.
11. Communicate the project design effectively.
12. Test, debug, and verify that the design meets the desired specifications.
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
 An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
 An ability to communicate effectively.
 The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
 A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
 A knowledge of contemporary issues.
 An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives
listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12
Objectives
(a)
2
2
2
3
2
(b)
4
(c)
4
4
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
(d)
3
4
4
(e)
4
2
4
2
2
2
4
3
2
(f)
4
3
3
2
(g)
3
3
2
3
2
4
(h)
3
2
3
2
2
(i)
3
3
3
(j)
3
3
3
3
(k)
2
3
4
4
3
4
PREPARED BY: Michael J. Batchelder, Date: August 30, 2002 (updated January 13th, 2010 by Bernt Askildsen)

196

EM 216 – Statics & Dynamics – Spring 2010

Required
Lois Arneson-Meyer, Assistant Professor
Credits: (4 - 0) 4 credits
CB 309 8-8:50 am
MTWF Section 01
Course Description: Prerequisite: Math 125 completed with a grade of ―C‖ or better. STATICS:
The study of effects of external forces acting on stationary rigid bodies in equilibrium. Frames and
machines, friction, centroids and moments of inertia of areas and mass are discussed.
DYNAMICS: Newton‘s laws of motion are applied to particles and rigid bodies. Topics
considered are absolute and relative motion; force, mass and acceleration (of particles and rigid
bodies); work and energy; impulse and momentum.
Course Objective:
This course is designed to provide students with the basic knowledge for the
analysis
of the effects of external forces action on stationary rigid bodies in equilibrium and
the study
of particles and rigid bodies in motion.
Course Outcomes:
The students successfully completing this course will have the ability to:
1. Determine the components of a force in rectangular coordinates
2. Draw complete and correct free-body diagrams and write appropriate
equilibrium equations from the free-body diagrams.
3. Evaluate forces acting on static bodies including determining resultants
and 3D components
4. Calculate moments in 2D and 3D about a point utilizing cross products.
5. Determine the support reactions on a structure
6. Determine the connection forces in trusses and in general frame structures.
7. Given standard shapes and corresponding centroids and or moment of inertia
be able to compute centroids and or moment of inertia for composite bodies.
8. Determine forces required to overcome initial friction and calculate friction
losses for bodies in motion.
9. List the principles of rectilinear and curvilinear kinematics and apply them to
problems of particle motion.
10. List the principles of rectilinear and curvilinear kinematics and apply them to
problems of rigid bodies in motion.
11. Explain and apply Newton‘s Second Law of Motion, Linear and angular
momentum and motion under a central force for rigid bodies.
12. Explain work and energy principals for particles and rigid bodies.
Text:

Vector Mechanics for Engineers STATICS & DYNAMICS, 9TH Ed., Beer & Johnston.
You are required to bring your text to every class. Your book is your portable instructor. It is
available 24/7. I suggest you use it – read the text and study the examples.

Supplies: Engineering paper for all homework, engineering pencil, straight edge, scientific calculator.
Homework: Homework will be due at the beginning of the next class period. Staple all pages together.
Homework must be prepared in a professional manner. Use a straight edge for figures and free
body diagrams. Homework more than one week late will not be accepted. No homework accepted
after the last day of class. Late homework is 20% off/calendar day.

197

Academic integrity:

Cheating of any type will result in an F in the course; this includes
the copying of homework.

Attendance:

Students with five absences will be asked to withdraw from the class.

Grade basis:

Tests and
Quizzes
Final
Homework

Tests:

90-100
80 – 89
70 – 79
60 – 69

60%
20%
20%

A
B
C
D

Tests will be given at normal class time. 4 exams (100 points each) will be given and
one 50 point exam. No makeup on quizzes. No retakes on tests. You are allowed one 8.5 x 11
inch crib sheet.

Office: Civil Mechanical Building Rm: 121, hours will be posted on door.
Phone: 394-2446. The instructor will be available for study table in the
Library or Miners Shack during designated times as announced in class.
FBD’s: Free Body Diagrams must be shown on all answers to homework and exam
questions as appropriate. FBD‘s must include forces, distances, dimensions,
angles, and directions as appropriate in addition to any other parameters
necessary to understand and/or solve the problem. Answers without FBD‘s
will not be graded and will count as zero.
Final Exam: If you have a 93 percent overall total on homework and tests and quizzes you will not be
required to take the final. All other students will be required to take the final exam at the
assigned period during final exam week.

Prepared by: Dr. Lois Arneson-Meyer, Civil and Environmental Engineering, May 2010

198

IENG 302

ENGINEERING ECONOMICS
Spring Term 2010

3 CR. HRS

M,W,F: 12:00 PM – 12:50 PM CB 204W

Instructor Contact Information:
Instructor:
Dr. Dean Jensen
Office Location:
CM 322
Office Hours:
M, W, F: 11:00 AM – 11:50 AM
E-mail for an appointment outside of office hours.
Office Phone:
394 – 1278
E-mail: [email protected]
Course Description:
Catalog Description: Studies economic decision making regarding capital investment alternatives.
Covers compound interest and depreciation models, replacement and procurement models. Analysis
is made variously assuming certainty, risk and uncertainty. Graduation credit cannot be given for
both IENG 301 and IENG 302.
Additional Course Description: To develop a basic understanding of the methods of engineering
economic study – problem solving using cash flow diagrams, table factors, and comparison of
alternatives considering the time value of money.
Course Prerequisites:
Junior standing preferred. Students may use spreadsheet software to complete portions of the course.
It is expected that students will be able to access and download internet files.
Description of Instructional Methods:
This course utilizes electronic (PowerPoint, spreadsheet, …) and traditional (chalkboard, overhead,
…) methods of lecture delivery. Students will solve problems using standard engineering economic
practices both manually and electronically.
Course Requirements:
Required Materials:
 Blank, L. & Tarquin, A. (2005). Engineering Economy (6th ed.). New York NY: McGraw –
Hill. 759pp. ISBN 0-07-320382-3.
 Engineering Problems Paper – 8-1/2" x 11", three hole drilled, ruled five squares/division, 50 pp.
(approx.).
 Engineering Notebook – 9-3/4" x 7-1/2", 5x5 quad-ruled, 80-100 pp. (approx.).
 Engineering/Scientific calculator.
Supplementary Materials:
Course Website: http://webpages.sdsmt.edu/~djensen/IENG302
Student Learning Outcomes:
Students will demonstrate:
 the ability to move various cash flows across time while accounting for discrete or continuous
compound interest, e.g., single payment factors, uniform-series factors, and arithmetic and
geometric gradient factors.
 the ability to apply the concept of minimum attractive rate of return in economic decisionmaking.
 the ability to identify the most appropriate engineering economy tool for evaluating alternatives.

199









the ability to evaluate asset alternatives using present worth analysis, annual worth analysis, rate
of return analysis, and benefit / cost analysis.
the ability to utilize computer spreadsheets and their functions to solve engineering economy
problems.
the ability to determine the economic service life of an asset that minimizes the total annual
worth of costs.
the ability to perform an asset replacement study between the defender and the best challenger.
the ability to determine the difference inflation makes between money now and money at other
points in time.
the ability to apply straight-line, declining balance, sum of years digits, units of production, and
MACRS depreciation models to reduce the value of the capital investment in an asset.
the ability to calculate before-tax and after-tax cash flows.

Evaluation Procedures:
Tests: Four exams will be given, and missed exams are not normally made-up. If a single midterm
is missed for an instructor-approved reason, then the weight of the next exam will be doubled. All
exams are open engineering notebook, and use of a scientific calculator is encouraged. Other
materials, including graded and returned homework, may not be used. Access to PDAs, cell phones,
and devices with QWERTY keyboards is not allowed during exams. These devices may be checked
with the instructor prior to the exam, and recovered at the end of the exam period.
Assignments: Assigned problems should be turned in on engineering problem (EP) paper, and
should be reasonably lettered. Word-processor/spreadsheet output is also acceptable. Illegible or
poorly documented problems may not be graded – this decision is at the discretion of the grader.
State all necessary assumptions. All portions of an assignment should be stapled together, and the
student‘s name should appear on each page. Assignments are minimally graded. Each problem in
an assignment set is scored on a 10 point basis, and the percentage earned out of the assignment total
is recorded. All assignment sets are equally weighted.
Tentative Course Outline:
Topic Set 1
Time Value of Money
Cash Flow Patterns
Effective Interest Rates
Complex Cash Flows

Topic Set 2
Net Present Worth and Lifetime Issues
Annual Worth Analysis
Bonds and Perpetuity (Capitalized Costs)
Internal Rate of Return/Incremental Analysis

Topic Set 3
Benefit/Cost Analysis
Incremental Benefit/Cost Analysis
Replacement/Economic Service Life

Topic Set 4
Inflation
Depreciation
After Tax Cash Flow Analysis

See course website for current schedule at: http://webpages.sdsmt.edu/~djensen/IENG302

200

ME 211: Introduction to Thermodynamics
Required
CATALOG DATA:

ME 211 – Introduction to Thermodynamics: (3-0) 3 Credits. An introduction to the basic concepts of
energy conversion, including the first and second laws of thermodynamics, energy and entropy, work
and heat, thermodynamic systems analysis, and the concepts of properties and state. Application of these
fundamentals to energy conversion systems will be presented.

PREREQUISITES: MATH 125, PHYS 211
TEXTBOOK:

Thermodynamics An Engineering Approach; Yunus A. Cengel and Michael A. Boles, 6th ed., McGrawHill

COURSE LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

Upon Completion of this course, students will have demonstrated ability to:
1. Apply and appreciate the utility of the general problem-solving method,
2. Apply basic thermodynamic concepts and energy-related terminology and units,
3. Apply concepts related to systems, properties and states, including
heat, energy and work, with consideration of special forms of work and energy,
5. Apply concepts of energy conservation (First Law of Thermodynamics),
6. Apply concepts related to entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics,
7. Apply the knowledge base to the analysis of thermodynamic systems or thermodynamic
cycles.

CLASS SCHEDULE:

Lecture: 3 hours per week, 8:00AM-8:50AM and 11:00AM-11:50AM, MWF.

TOPICS:

The course will cover the traditional elements of an introduction to engineering thermodynamics and will
be presented in four units.
Unit 1: Basic Concepts of Thermodynamics and Properties of Pure Substances
 Thermodynamics and Energy, Dimensions and Units
 Systems – Closed & Open, Properties of a System
 State and Equilibrium, Processes and Cycles
 Temperature and the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics
 Pressure and pressure measuring methods
 Problem solution methods
 Pure substances, phases and phase change processes, property diagrams for phase change
processes
 Property tables and introduction to software for properties
 Ideal gases, the equation of state, and the compressibility factor
 Ideal gases, liquids, solids: Specific heats, internal energy, and enthalpy
 Applications of the concepts

201

Unit 2: Energy transfer by heat, work, and mass. Introduction of the conservation of energy concept
for closed, open, and unsteady systems
 Closed systems and applications
 Steady-flow systems and the control volume
 Applications for closed and open systems
 Unsteady flow systems
Unit 3: The second law of thermodynamics and entropy
 Introduction, thermal energy reservoirs, heat engines, efficiencies, reversed heat engines,
coefficient of performance
 Applications: Heat engines, refrigerators, heat pumps
 Principles of the Carnot cycle and specific applications, the absolute temperature scale
 Reversible and irreversible processes
Unit 4: Applications of engineering thermodynamics to energy conversion systems to include:
Rankine cycle, refrigeration cycle, gas turbine cycle, other selected gas power cycles, alternate
energy conversion systems, and design based projects

COMPUTER USAGE:

Application of Microsoft Excel to spreadsheet based problems and TEST (the Expert System for
Thermodynamics) for design/parametric analysis.

CRITERION 5:

The objective of this course is to provide students with the working knowledge required to formulate
and analyze problems in basic engineering thermodynamics. This understanding is further
developed by application in other junior and senior level courses, including a second course in
engineering thermodynamics.

RELATION TO PROGRAM OUTCOMES:

The following table indicates the assessment matrix in addressing the program outcomes over
the past six semesters. ME 211 has contributed to the assessment of Program Outcomes with
emphasis on outcomes 1 & 2; 1 – Apply skills in engineering, science, and mathematics; 2 –
Conduct effective analysis

ME 211
Semester
F07

ME Program Outcomes
Objective 1
Objective 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
3

S08
F08
S09
F09

3
3
3

2
2

S10

PREPARED BY:

Wayne B. Krause, Date: September 5, 2009

202

Electrical Engineering
Support Courses
Chem 112

General Chemistry

Chem 112L General Chemistry Lab
CSC 150

Computer Science I

CSC 250

Computer Science II

ENGL 101 Composition I
ENGL 279 Technical Communications I
ENGL 289 Technical Communications II
MATH 123 Calculus I
MATH 125 Calculus II
Math 225

Calculus III

MATH 321 Differential Equations
PHYS 211 University Physics I
Physics 213 University Physics II
Physics 213L University Physics II Lab

203

Department:

CHEMISTRY 112—General Chemistry I
Chemistry

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data: (3-0) 3 credits. Prerequisite: MATH 102. An introduction to the basic principles of chemistry for

students needing an extensive background in chemistry (including chemistry majors, science majors,
and pre-professional students). Completion of a high school course in chemistry is recommended.

Prerequisites:
1. A minimum of one year of high school chemistry.
1.

Concurrent enrollment in, or completion of, Math 102 or a score on the math placement exam sufficient to place
in Math 115 or higher.

Textbook:
Chang, Raymond. Chemistry, 9th ed., McGraw-Hill: New York, 2007
Optional: Cruickshank, Brandon and Chang, Raymond. Student Solutions Manual for use with Chemistry, 9th ed.,
McGraw-Hill: New York, 2007.

Course Learning Outcomes:
1. Understand, and use correctly, the symbolic representations, chemical notation, formulas, and
systematic rules of nomenclature that characterize the language of chemistry.
2. Understand and apply the mole concept in a variety of chemical calculations, including calculating
the number of particles in a given mass of substance (and vice versa), and the quantitative
relationships between reactants and products in a chemical reaction.
3. Recognize the different types of chemical transformations: acid-base, precipitation, combination,
decomposition, single-replacement, oxidation-reduction, double replacement, and combustion.
4. Understand the basic principles of energy transfer involving chemical systems, including the transfer
of heat and work between system and surroundings, the qualitative and quantitative interpretation of
thermochemical equations, and the application of Hess‘s Law.
5. Understand the various models of atomic structure, the basic principles of quantum theory, and the
experiments that led to those principles.
6. Write ground-state electron configurations for atoms and ions of any representative element and the
3d transition series elements.
7. Understand the fundamental aspects of chemical bonding, including writing Lewis structures,
describing the bonding in molecules by simple valence-bond theory, and using Valence Shell
Electron Pair Repulsion Theory to predict the geometries of molecules and ions.
8. Use modern atomic theory to understand and predict the properties of different elements.
9. Understand the properties of the different states of matter.
10. Qualitatively and quantitatively describe the properties of the gaseous state and the fundamental laws
governing the behavior of gases.
11. Understand, qualitatively and quantitatively, the behavior of solutions and their colligative
properties.
12. Understand how fundamental intermolecular interactions among particles determine the physical and
chemical properties of a system.
13. Understand the fundamental postulates of kinetic-molecular theory and use them to explain the
physical behavior of the three states of matter.

Topics:

Topics treated in the first semester are: measurements, atomic theory, stoichiometry,
thermochemistry, states of matter, periodicity, bonding, and physical properties of
solutions.
Class/Laboratory Schedule:
Varies
Contribution to Criterion 5:

3 credits of math / basic sciences
204

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
LEVEL OF
EMPHASIS
LOW

MED

HIGH

ABET OUTCOME
(A) AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF
MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND ENGINEERING

X

(B) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN AND CONDUCT
EXPERIMENTS, AS WELL AS TO ANALYZE AND
INTERPRET DATA

X

(C) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM, COMPONENT, OR
PROCESS TO MEET DESIRED NEEDS WITHIN REALISTIC
CONSTRAINTS SUCH AS ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL,
SOCIAL, POLITICAL, ETHICAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY,
MANUFACTURABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY
(D) AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON MULTIDISCIPLINARY
TEAMS
(E) AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND SOLVE
ENGINEERING PROBLEMS

X

(G) AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY
(H) THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO
UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING
SOLUTIONS IN A GLOBAL, ECONOMIC,
ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT
(I) A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN ABILITY
TO ENGAGE IN LIFE-LONG LEARNING
(J) A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
(K) AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUES, SKILLS, AND
MODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY FOR
ENGINEERING PRACTICE.

X

PREPARED BY: Dr. Duane Hrncir, Ph.D. Chemistry and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs,
June 1, 2010

205

CHEM 112L: General Chemistry I Lab
Department:

Chemistry

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

(0-1) 1 credit. Prerequisite or corequisite: CHEM 112. Laboratory designed to
accompany CHEM 112.

Prerequisites:
Textbook:

CHEM 112
Manual: General Chemistry I Lab – CHEM112L

Course Learning Outcomes:
Students will learn common chemical laboratory safety practices and the
experimental methods used in investigating and analyzing the properties and
the behavior of matter.










Topics:

Understand the basic concept of chemical experiments.
Understand the distinction between qualitative and quantitative analysis.
Identify sources of error in chemical experiments.
Interpret experimental results and draw reasonable conclusions.
Analyze data in terms of the precision and accuracy of results.
Learn the importance of performing accurate and precise quantitative
measurements.
Lean and understand laboratory safety procedures.
Keep complete experimental records.
Reinforce and apply the knowledge learned in CHEM112.

Laboratory safety, experimental and analytical methods, and the properties and the
behavior of matter.

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

basic sciences

206

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
LEVEL OF
EMPHASIS
LOW

MEDI
UM

HIG
H

ABET OUTCOME
(A) AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF MATHEMATICS,
SCIENCE, AND ENGINEERING

X

(B) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN AND CONDUCT EXPERIMENTS, AS
WELL AS TO ANALYZE AND INTERPRET DATA

X

(C) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM, COMPONENT, OR
PROCESS TO MEET DESIRED NEEDS WITHIN REALISTIC
CONSTRAINTS SUCH AS ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL,
SOCIAL, POLITICAL, ETHICAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY,
MANUFACTURABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY
(D) AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON MULTIDISCIPLINARY
TEAMS
(E) AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND SOLVE
ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
(G) AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY
(H) THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND
THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN A GLOBAL,
ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT
(I) A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN ABILITY TO
ENGAGE IN LIFE-LONG LEARNING
(J) A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
(K) AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUES, SKILLS, AND
MODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY FOR
ENGINEERING PRACTICE.

X

PREPARED BY: Dr. Duane Hrncir, Ph.D. Chemistry and Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs, June 1, 2010

207

CSC 150/150L COMPUTER SCIENCE I
Department:

Mathematics and Computer Science

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

(2-1) 3 credits. Prerequisite and corequisite: MATH 123. An introduction to
computer programming. Focus on problem solving, algorithm development, design,
and programming concepts. Topics include sequence, selection, repetition,
functions, and arrays.

Prerequisites:
familiarity with
environment.
Textbook:
Tony

MATH 123, Calculus I. Students are expected to have a basic
operating computers using the Windows XP
Starting Out With C++, From Control Structures through Objects, 6th Ed.
Gaddis, 2009, Addison Wesley

Course Learning Outcomes:
A student who successfully completes this course should, at a minimum, be able to:
1. Identify appropriate and inappropriate uses of copied material, and apply proper
attribution to non-original code.
2. Identify the differences between C++ basic data types and select types appropriate to a
purpose.
3. Select correct and appropriate C++ identifier names.
4. Write syntactically correct C++ statements.
5. Use correct input/output methods appropriate to data type and format.
6. Properly use if…else and switch constructs. Evaluate and use explicit Boolean values, as
well as the implied Boolean evaluation of any value or expression.
7. Evaluate relational expressions to arrive at a Boolean value. Use Boolean operators to
construct complex relational expressions.
8. Select the appropriate type and implement the three types of looping mechanisms: for,
while, do…while.
9. Construct and use functions. Write correct function prototypes, definitions, and calls to
the functions. Identify when arguments are passed by value and by reference; select the
appropriate method. Differentiate between valued and non-valued functions. Identify the
lifetime and scope of automatic, static and global variables.
10. Declare, initialize, and manipulate one-dimensional and two-dimensional arrays. Use
arrays as function parameters. Describe the effects of accessing memory beyond an
array‘s allocated memory.
11. Declare, initialize and manipulate C-style and C++-style strings. Use string functions.
Correctly use strings as function arguments.
12. Implement simple search algorithms (linear and binary.) Describe the limitations and
efficiency of binary search.
13. Implement simple sorting algorithms (bubble and selection sorts.)
208

14. Correctly access text files for reading and writing operations. Test for successful file
opening, handle errors and test for end of file. Read/write formatted data.
15. Use command line arguments to control program operation.
Topics:
sequence, selection, repetition, functions, and arrays.
Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

basic math and sciences

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
ABET OUTCOME
(A) AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF
MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND ENGINEERING
(B) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN AND CONDUCT
EXPERIMENTS, AS WELL AS TO ANALYZE AND
INTERPRET DATA
(C) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM, COMPONENT, OR
PROCESS TO MEET DESIRED NEEDS WITHIN REALISTIC
CONSTRAINTS SUCH AS ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL,
SOCIAL, POLITICAL, ETHICAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY,
MANUFACTURABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY
(D) AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON MULTIDISCIPLINARY
TEAMS
(E) AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND SOLVE
ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
(G) AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY
(H) THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO
UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING
SOLUTIONS IN A GLOBAL, ECONOMIC,
ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT
(I) A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN ABILITY
TO ENGAGE IN LIFE-LONG LEARNING
(J) A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
(K) AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUES, SKILLS, AND
MODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY FOR
ENGINEERING PRACTICE.
PREPARED BY: Dr. Kyle Riley, Department Head; June 1, 2010

209

LEVEL OF EMPHASIS
LOW
MED
HIGH
X

CSC 250 COMPUTER SCIENCE II
Department:

Mathematics and Computer Science

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

(4-0) 4 credits. Prerequisite: CSC 150 completed with a minimum grade of ―C
‖.
Problem solving, algorithm design, standards of program style, debugging and
testing. Extension of the control structures and data structures of the high-level
language introduced in CSC 150. Elementary data structures and basic algorithms
that include sorting and searching. Topics include more advanced treatment of
functions, data types such as arrays and structures, and files.

Prerequisites:

The prerequisite for this course is CSC150, which in turn implies a prerequisite
of Calculus I. Concurrent enrollment in CSC 251 is optimal from the perspective
of both CSC250 and CSC251.

Textbook:

Data Abstraction and Problem Solving with C++: Walls and Mirrors, Carrano,
Helman, and Veroff, Addison Wesley, 5th edition, 2007.
Course Learning Outcomes:
A student who successfully completes this course should, at a minimum:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Write syntactically correct C++ statements.
Use both text and binary files.
Dynamically allocate and use arrays.
Use pointers to access data types.
Understand function, scope, parameter passing mechanisms, and modularity
Understand the use of classes and structures.
Understand the software development cycle.
Understand and use recursion to solve complex problems.
Develop and use an Abstract Data Type (ADT).
Develop and use linked lists using a variety of implementation methods.
Methods discussed include: singular, circular, doubly linked, and threaded.
11. Develop and use a stack using a variety of implementation methods.
12. Develop and use a queue using a variety of implementation methods.
13. Understand class inheritance.
Topics:

Problem solving, algorithm design, standards of program style, debugging and
testing, elementary data structures and basic algorithms, sorting and searching,
advanced treatment of functions and data types such as arrays and structures, and
files.

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

basic math and sciences

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)

210

ABET OUTCOME
(A) AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF
MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND ENGINEERING
(B) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN AND CONDUCT
EXPERIMENTS, AS WELL AS TO ANALYZE AND
INTERPRET DATA
(C) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM,
COMPONENT, OR PROCESS TO MEET DESIRED
NEEDS WITHIN REALISTIC CONSTRAINTS SUCH AS
ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, POLITICAL,
ETHICAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY,
MANUFACTURABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY
(D) AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON
MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAMS
(E) AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND
SOLVE ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
(G) AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY
(H) THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO
UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING
SOLUTIONS IN A GLOBAL, ECONOMIC,
ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT
(I) A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN
ABILITY TO ENGAGE IN LIFE-LONG LEARNING
(J) A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
(K) AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUES, SKILLS,
AND MODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY
FOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE.
PREPARED BY: Dr. Kyle Riley, Department Head; June 1, 2010

211

LEVEL OF
EMPHASIS
LOW MED HIGH
X

ENGLISH 101 - COMPOSITION I
Department:

Humanities and Social Science

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

(3-0) 3 credits. Appropriate student placement based on entry level
assessment or completion of ENGL 031, 032, or 033. Practice in the skills,
research, and documentation needed for effective academic writing. Analysis
of a variety of academic and non-academic texts, rhetorical structures, critical
thinking, and audience will be included.

Prerequisites:

None

Textbook:

Reid, Stephen. The Prentice Hall Guide for College Writers. 8th ed. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2006.

Course Learning Outcomes: As a result of taking courses meeting this goal, students will:
1. Write using standard American English, including correct punctuation, grammar, and sentence
structure.
 Recognize and repair common errors in grammar, punctuation, and usage in their papers.
 Apply standard English grammar, punctuation, and other mechanical aspects to all written
assignments.
 Compose clear, effective sentences and combine them into focused, coherent paragraphs that
match the assigned writing purpose.
 Improve their mastery of punctuation, grammar, and sentence structure through class
discussions and exercises, quizzes, instructor feedback, and the draft and revision process.
2. Write logically.
 Recognize and repair common focus and organization errors in their papers.
 Apply common organizational strategies to all written assignments.
 Write clear, effective paragraphs and combine them into a logical sequence and focal pattern
that match the assigned writing purpose.
 Improve their mastery of organization and logical writing through class discussions, written
exercises, instructor feedback, and the draft and revision process.
3. Write persuasively, with a variety of rhetorical strategies (e.g. expository, argumentative,
descriptive).
 Identify and repair common rhetorical and reasoning errors in their papers.

Apply common rhetorical and reasoning strategies to all written assignments.

Design and produce writing using appropriate rhetorical strategies that match audience
needs and assigned writing purpose.

Improve their mastery of persuasion and rhetorical strategies through class discussions,
written exercises, instructor feedback, and the draft and revision process.
4. Incorporate formal research and documentation into their writing, including research obtained
through modern, technology-based research tools.
 Identify and repair common documentation errors in their papers.
212





Apply common research strategies to all written assignments that require it.
Design and produce writing using appropriate research tools that match audience needs,
proper documentation requirements, professional ethical standards, and assigned writing
purpose.
Improve their mastery of research and documentation methods through class discussion,
written exercises, quizzes, instructor feedback, and the draft and revision process.

Topics:

Fundamentals of expository writing, including writing about observation, writing
from reading, writing to explain, writing to evaluate, and writing an argument.

Class/Laboratory Schedule:
Varies
Contribution to Criterion 5:
General Education
Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
ABET OUTCOME
(A) AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF
MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND ENGINEERING
(B) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN AND CONDUCT
EXPERIMENTS, AS WELL AS TO ANALYZE AND
INTERPRET DATA
(C) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM, COMPONENT, OR
PROCESS TO MEET DESIRED NEEDS WITHIN REALISTIC
CONSTRAINTS SUCH AS ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL,
SOCIAL, POLITICAL, ETHICAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY,
MANUFACTURABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY
(D) AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON MULTIDISCIPLINARY
TEAMS
(E) AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND SOLVE
ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
(G) AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY
(H) THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO
UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING
SOLUTIONS IN A GLOBAL, ECONOMIC,
ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT
(I) A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN ABILITY
TO ENGAGE IN LIFE-LONG LEARNING
(J) A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
(K) AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUES, SKILLS, AND
MODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY FOR
ENGINEERING PRACTICE.

LEVEL OF EMPHASIS
LOW MEDIUM HIGH

X

PREPARED BY: Dr. Sue Shirley, Department Chair, Humanities and Social Science, June 1, 2010

213

ENGL 279 TECHNICAL COMMUNICATIONS I
Department:

Humanities and Social Sciences

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

Prerequisites:

Textbook:

(3-0) 3 credits. Prerequisites: ENGL 101 or equivalent and sophomore standing.
Introductory written and oral technical communications with emphasis on research and
explanations of scientific and engineering topics.
ENGL 101 or equivalent and sophomore standing

Brusaw, Charles T., Gerald J. Alred, and Walter E. Oliu. Handbook of Technical
Writing. 9th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martin‘s P, 2009; Lannon, John. Technical
Instruction Manual
Communication. 11th ed. New York: Pearson, 2008.

Course Learning Outcomes:
As a result of taking courses meeting this goal, students will:
1.
Prepare and deliver speeches for a variety of audiences and settings.
Assessment: Students will:
a. analyze the relevant characteristics of their intended audience.
b. prepare and deliver speeches of differing lengths, topics, and purposes for a variety of
technical, professional, and general audiences.
c. improve their mastery of audience and setting analysis through class discussion and
exercises, peer review, instructor feedback, practice and final speeches.
2.

Demonstrate listening competencies including choice and use of topic, supporting
materials, organizational pattern, language usage, presentational aids, and delivery.
Assessment: Students will:
a. recognize the different speech goals and organizational patterns used for
informational, demonstration, and/or persuasion speeches.
b. demonstrate in individual and/or collaborative speeches their competency in selecting
and using appropriate supporting materials and presentational aids for the intended
type of speech and audience.
c. demonstrate in individual and/or collaborative speeches their competency in using
appropriate language for the intended type of speech and audience;
d. incorporate effective delivery techniques, both vocal and nonverbal, for the intended
speech and audience in individual and/or collaborative speeches;
e. improve their mastery of choosing and using appropriate topics and organizational
plans, supporting materials, language, presentation aids, and delivery techniques
through class discussion and exercises, peer review, instructor feedback, practice and
final speeches..

3.

Demonstrate listening competencies by summarizing, analyzing, and paraphrasing ideas,
perspectives, and emotional content.
Assessment: Students will:
a. demonstrate listening competencies through peer review exercises.

214

b. improve their mastery of listening skills through class discussions and exercises,
instructor and student feedback, practice and final speeches.
Topics: written and oral technical communications, research and explanations of
scientific and engineering topics.
Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:
General Education, 3 credits
Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
ABET OUTCOME
(A) AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF
MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, AND ENGINEERING
(B) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN AND CONDUCT
EXPERIMENTS, AS WELL AS TO ANALYZE AND
INTERPRET DATA
(C) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM,
COMPONENT, OR PROCESS TO MEET DESIRED
NEEDS WITHIN REALISTIC CONSTRAINTS SUCH
AS ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL,
POLITICAL, ETHICAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY,
MANUFACTURABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY
(D) AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON
MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAMS
(E) AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND
SOLVE ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
(G) AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY
(H) THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO
UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING
SOLUTIONS IN A GLOBAL, ECONOMIC,
ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT
(I) A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN
ABILITY TO ENGAGE IN LIFE-LONG LEARNING
(J) A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
(K) AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUES, SKILLS,
AND MODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY
FOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE.

LEVEL OF EMPHASIS
LOW
MEDIUM HIGH

PREPARED BY: Dr. Sue Shirley, Department Chair; June 1, 2010

215

X

ENGL 289 TECHNICAL COMMUNICATIONS II
Department:

Humanities and Social Sciences

Designation:

Required
Catalog Data: (3-0) 3 credits. Prerequisites: ENGL 279 or equivalent and
sophomore standing. Advanced written and oral technical communications with
emphasis on the research, preparation, and delivery of complex technical documents.

Prerequisites:

Textbook:

ENGL 279 or equivalent and sophomore standing

Brusaw, Charles T., Gerald J. Alred, and Walter E. Oliu. Handbook of
Technical Writing. 9th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martin‘s P, 2009;
Lannon, John. Technical Communication. 11th ed. New York: Pearson,
2008.
Instruction Manual: Pfeiffer, William S. Pocket Guide to Technical
Writing. 4rd ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2007.
Gurak, L. and J. Lannon. A Concise Guide to Technical Communication. 3rd
Ed., 2007

Course Learning Outcomes:
As a result of taking courses meeting this goal, students will:
 Prepare and deliver speeches for a variety of audiences and settings. Assessment:
Students will Analyze the relevant characteristics of their intended audience;


Prepare and deliver speeches of differing lengths, topics, and purposes for a variety of
technical, professional, and general audiences;



Improve their mastery of audience and setting analysis through class discussion and
exercises, peer review, instructor feedback, practice and final speeches.



Demonstrate listening competencies including choice and use of topic, supporting
materials, organizational pattern, language usage, presentational aids, and delivery.
Assessment: Students will recognize the different speech goals and organizational
patterns used for informational, demonstration, and/or persuasion speeches;




Demonstrate in individual and/or collaborative speeches their competency in selecting
and using appropriate supporting materials and presentational aids for the intended type
of speech and audience;



Demonstrate in individual and/or collaborative speeches their competency in using
appropriate language for the intended type of speech and audience;



Incorporate effective delivery techniques, both vocal and nonverbal, for the intended
speech and audience in individual and/or collaborative speeches;
216

Topics:



Improve their mastery of choosing and using appropriate topics and organizational plans,
supporting materials, language, presentation aids, and delivery techniques through class
discussion and exercises, peer review, instructor feedback, practice and final speeches.



Demonstrate listening competencies by summarizing, analyzing, and paraphrasing ideas,
perspectives, and emotional content. ssessment: Students will 1) Demonstrate listening
competencies through peer review exercises; Improve their mastery of listening skills
through instructional practices and procedures.
Written and oral technical communications, research, and the preparation, and
delivery of complex technical documents.

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

General Education, 3 credits

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
ABET Outcome
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as
to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to
meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as
economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health
and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact
of engineering solutions in a global, economic,
environmental, and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in
life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern
engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
PREPARED BY: Dr. Sue Shirley, Department Chair; June 1, 2010

217

Level of Emphasis
Low
Medium
High

X

IENG 302

ENGINEERING ECONOMICS
Spring Term 2010

3 CR. HRS

Required
M,W,F: 12:00 PM – 12:50 PM CB 204W

Instructor Contact Information:
Instructor:
Dr. Dean Jensen
Office Location:
CM 322
Office Hours:
M, W, F: 11:00 AM – 11:50 AM
E-mail for an appointment outside of office hours.
Office Phone:
394 – 1278
E-mail: [email protected]
Course Description:
Catalog Description: Studies economic decision making regarding capital investment alternatives.
Covers compound interest and depreciation models, replacement and procurement models. Analysis
is made variously assuming certainty, risk and uncertainty. Graduation credit cannot be given for
both IENG 301 and IENG 302.
Additional Course Description: To develop a basic understanding of the methods of engineering
economic study – problem solving using cash flow diagrams, table factors, and comparison of
alternatives considering the time value of money.
Course Prerequisites:
Junior standing preferred. Students may use spreadsheet software to complete portions of the course.
It is expected that students will be able to access and download internet files.
Description of Instructional Methods:
This course utilizes electronic (PowerPoint, spreadsheet, …) and traditional (chalkboard, overhead,
…) methods of lecture delivery. Students will solve problems using standard engineering economic
practices both manually and electronically.
Course Requirements:
Required Materials:
 Blank, L. & Tarquin, A. (2005). Engineering Economy (6th ed.). New York NY: McGraw –
Hill. 759pp. ISBN 0-07-320382-3.
 Engineering Problems Paper – 8-1/2" x 11", three hole drilled, ruled five squares/division, 50 pp.
(approx.).
 Engineering Notebook – 9-3/4" x 7-1/2", 5x5 quad-ruled, 80-100 pp. (approx.).
 Engineering/Scientific calculator.
Supplementary Materials:
Course Website: http://webpages.sdsmt.edu/~djensen/IENG302
Student Learning Outcomes:
Students will demonstrate:
 the ability to move various cash flows across time while accounting for discrete or continuous
compound interest, e.g., single payment factors, uniform-series factors, and arithmetic and
geometric gradient factors.
 the ability to apply the concept of minimum attractive rate of return in economic decisionmaking.
 the ability to identify the most appropriate engineering economy tool for evaluating alternatives.

218









the ability to evaluate asset alternatives using present worth analysis, annual worth analysis, rate
of return analysis, and benefit / cost analysis.
the ability to utilize computer spreadsheets and their functions to solve engineering economy
problems.
the ability to determine the economic service life of an asset that minimizes the total annual
worth of costs.
the ability to perform an asset replacement study between the defender and the best challenger.
the ability to determine the difference inflation makes between money now and money at other
points in time.
the ability to apply straight-line, declining balance, sum of years digits, units of production, and
MACRS depreciation models to reduce the value of the capital investment in an asset.
the ability to calculate before-tax and after-tax cash flows.

Evaluation Procedures:
Tests: Four exams will be given, and missed exams are not normally made-up. If a single midterm
is missed for an instructor-approved reason, then the weight of the next exam will be doubled. All
exams are open engineering notebook, and use of a scientific calculator is encouraged. Other
materials, including graded and returned homework, may not be used. Access to PDAs, cell phones,
and devices with QWERTY keyboards is not allowed during exams. These devices may be checked
with the instructor prior to the exam, and recovered at the end of the exam period.
Assignments: Assigned problems should be turned in on engineering problem (EP) paper, and
should be reasonably lettered. Word-processor/spreadsheet output is also acceptable. Illegible or
poorly documented problems may not be graded – this decision is at the discretion of the grader.
State all necessary assumptions. All portions of an assignment should be stapled together, and the
student‘s name should appear on each page. Assignments are minimally graded. Each problem in
an assignment set is scored on a 10 point basis, and the percentage earned out of the assignment total
is recorded. All assignment sets are equally weighted.
Tentative Course Outline:
Topic Set 1
Time Value of Money
Cash Flow Patterns
Effective Interest Rates
Complex Cash Flows

Topic Set 2
Net Present Worth and Lifetime Issues
Annual Worth Analysis
Bonds and Perpetuity (Capitalized Costs)
Internal Rate of Return/Incremental Analysis

Topic Set 3
Benefit/Cost Analysis
Incremental Benefit/Cost Analysis
Replacement/Economic Service Life

Topic Set 4
Inflation
Depreciation
After Tax Cash Flow Analysis

See course website for current schedule at: http://webpages.sdsmt.edu/~djensen/IENG302

219

MATH 123 CALCULUS I
Department:

Mathematics and Computer Science

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data: (4-0) 4 credits. Prerequisite: MATH 115 with a minimum grade of ―C
‖ or appropriate
mathematics placement or permission of instructor. Students who are initially placed into MATH
102 or below must complete MATH 102 and MATH 120 with a minimum grade of ―C‖ before
enrolling in MATH 123. Students who are placed in MATH 120 should consult their advisor to
determine whether their placement score was sufficiently high to allow concurrent registration in
MATH 123. The study of limits, continuity, derivatives, applications of the derivative,
antiderivatives, the definite and indefinite integral, and the fundamental theorem of calculus.

Prerequisites: College Algebra (MATH 102) with a grade of C or better or an acceptable ACT
score. Corequisite of Trigonometry (MATH 120) with a grade of C- or better or an
acceptable score on the COMPASS Placement Exam.
Textbook:

Calculus by Rogawski, published by Freeman, 2008.

Course Learning Outcomes:
As a result of taking a course meeting this goal, students will:
1. Use mathematical symbols and mathematical structure to model and solve real world
problems. Assessment: Students will
o Identify, interpret, and correctly apply standard mathematics symbols to solve
problems requiring the derivative. This will be demonstrated on quizzes, labs,
homework, and/or exams.
o Identify, interpret, and correctly apply standard mathematics symbols to solve
problems requiring the integral. This will be demonstrated on quizzes, labs,
homework, and/or exams.
2. Demonstrate appropriate communication skills related to mathematical terms and
Assessment: Students will
o Correctly use functional notation of algebra, trigonometry, and calculus. This will be
demonstrated on quizzes, labs, homework, and/or exams.
3. Demonstrate the correct use of quantifiable measurements of real world situations
Assessment: Students will
o Apply their knowledge of the integral in applications such as area, volume, moments,
work, arc length, and surface area. This will be demonstrated on quizzes, labs,
homework, and/or exams.
o Apply their knowledge of the derivative in applications such as related rates, linear
approximations, curve sketching, optimization, velocity, and acceleration. This will
be demonstrated on quizzes, labs, homework, and/or exams
Topics:

The study of limits, continuity, derivatives, applications of the derivative,
antiderivatives, the definite and indefinite integral, and the fundamental
theorem of calculus.

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

variable

220

Contribution to Criterion 5:

basic math and sciences

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
Low

ABET Outcome
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as
to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to
meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as
economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and
safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact
of engineering solutions in a global, economic,
environmental, and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in
life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern
engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
PREPARED BY: Dr. Kyle Riley, Department Head; June 1, 2010

221

Level of Emphasis
Medium

High

X

X

Math 125 CALCULUS II
Department:

Mathematics and Computer Science

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data: (4-0) 4 credits. Prerequisite: MATH 120 completed with a minimum grade of ―C
‖ or
appropriate score on departmental Trigonometry Placement Examination and MATH 123 completed
with a minimum grade of ―
C.‖ A continuation of the study of calculus, including the study of
sequences, series, polar coordinates, parametric equations, techniques of integration, applications of
integration, indeterminate forms, and improper integrals.
Prerequisites: MATH 120 (Trigonometry) completed with a grade of ―C‖ or better or an acceptable score
on the COMPASS Trigonometry Placement Examination, and MATH 123 completed with a grade of
―C‖ or better. (Trigonometry is a critical prerequisite for this course. Students should ensure that they
have passed MATH 120 or the COMPASS Trigonometry Placement Examination before enrolling in
MATH 125.)

Textbook:

Calculus by Jon Rogawski

Course Learning Outcomes:

As a result of taking a course meeting this goal, students will:

1. Use mathematical symbols and mathematical structure to model
and solve real world problems. Assessment: Students will
o Identify, interpret, and correctly apply standard mathematics
symbols to solve problems requiring the integral. This will be
demonstrated on quizzes, labs, homework, and/or exams.
o Identify, interpret, and correctly apply standard mathematics
symbols to solve problems requiring an infinite series. This
will be demonstrated on quizzes, labs, homework, and/or
exams.
2. Demonstrate appropriate communication skills related to
mathematical terms and Assessment: Students will
o Correctly use functional notation of algebra, trigonometry, and
calculus. This will be demonstrated on quizzes, labs,
homework, and/or exams.
3. Demonstrate the correct use of quantifiable measurements of real
world situations. Students will
o Apply their knowledge of the exponential and logarithms in
applications. This will be demonstrated on quizzes, labs,
homework, and/or exams.

Topics:



Integrals and Derivatives involving Exponential, Logarithmic, Inverse, and Hyperbolic
functions.
222









Integration techniques
Indeterminate Forms and L‘Hopital‘s rule
Improper integrals
Vectors and applications
Matrices and linear algebra
Infinite Series
Tests for convergence Taylor Series, Fourier Series

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Variable

Contribution to Criterion 5:

basic math and sciences

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)

Level of Emphasis
Low

Medium

High

ABET Outcome
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
and engineering

X

(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as
to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to
meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as
economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and
safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact
of engineering solutions in a global, economic,
environmental, and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in
life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern
engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
PREPARED BY: Dr. Kyle Riley, Department Head; June 1, 2010

223

X

MATH 225 CALCULUS III
Department:

Mathematics and Computer Science

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

(4-0) 4 credits. Prerequisite: MATH 125 completed with a minimum grade of ―C‖. A
continuation of the study of calculus, including an introduction to vectors, vector
calculus, partial derivatives, and multiple integrals.

Prerequisites:

Math 125 with a grade of ‗C‘ or better.

Textbook:

Calculus with Analytic Geometry, Eighth Edition, Larson, Hostetler, and Edwards

Course Learning Outcomes:
A student who successfully completes this should, at a minimum:
1. know basic vector operations
2. know how to work with lines and planes in space
3. understand vector functions and their derivatives
4. be able to compute position, velocity and acceleration vectors
5. understand functions of several variables
6. be able to compute partial derivatives and gradients using multivariate chain rules
7. be able to find extremals of constrained and unconstrained functions
8. understand iterated integrals
9. be able to set up and evaluate double and triple integrals in various coordinate
10. systems
11. understand vector fields
12. be able to compute line integrals
13. understand the basic integral theorems of vector analysis
Topics:

vectors, vector calculus, partial derivatives, and multiple integrals..

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

basic math and sciences

224

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
ABET OUTCOME

LEVEL OF EMPHASIS
LOW MEDIUM
HIGH
X

(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and
engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to
analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet
desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic,
environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety,
manufacturability, and sustainability
(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of
engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and
societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in lifelong learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
X
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern
engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.

PREPARED BY: Dr. Kyle Riley, Department Head; June 1, 2010

225

MATH 321 DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS
Department:

Mathematics and Computer Science

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:
(4-0) 4 credits. Prerequisite: MATH 125 with a minimum grade of ―C‖. Selected
topics from ordinary differential equations including development and applications of first order,
higher order linear and systems of linear equations, general solutions and solutions to initial-value
problems using matrices. Additional topics may include Laplace transforms and power series
solutions. MATH 225 and MATH 321 may be taken concurrently or in either order. In addition to
analytical methods this course will also provide an introduction to numerical solution techniques.
Prerequisites:
Textbook:

Math 125 with a grade of ‗C‘ or better.
Differential Equations with Boundary Value Problems, 7th edition, Zill

Course Learning Outcomes:
1. know how to use separation of variables
2. be able to solve first order ordinary differential equations
3. be able to solve second order linear ordinary differential equations
4. understand the difference between homogeneous and non-homogeneous linear systems
5. be familiar with at least one science or engineering application of differential equations
6. be able to compute the Laplace transform and inverse Laplace transform for simple functions
7. understand the basic process of how to use the Laplace transform to solve an initial value
problem
8. be familiar with a numerical technique for solving an initial value problem, such as Euler‘s
Method or the Runge Kutta method
9. be able to carry out basic matrix addition and matrix multiplication
10. be able to solve a linear system in matrix form
11. be able to use matrices to solve simple linear first order systems of ordinary differential
equations
Topics:

Direction fields, separation of variables, analytical methods to solve linear differential
equations with constant coefficients, applications of higher order differential equations, Laplace
transforms, linear systems of ordinary differential equations, and basic numerical methods for
solving ordinary differential equations.

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

Basic math and sciences

226

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
LOW
ABET OUTCOME
(A) AN ABILITY TO APPLY KNOWLEDGE OF MATHEMATICS,
SCIENCE, AND ENGINEERING
(B) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN AND CONDUCT EXPERIMENTS, AS
WELL AS TO ANALYZE AND INTERPRET DATA
(C) AN ABILITY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM, COMPONENT, OR
PROCESS TO MEET DESIRED NEEDS WITHIN REALISTIC
CONSTRAINTS SUCH AS ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL,
SOCIAL, POLITICAL, ETHICAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY,
MANUFACTURABILITY, AND SUSTAINABILITY
(D) AN ABILITY TO FUNCTION ON MULTIDISCIPLINARY
TEAMS
(E) AN ABILITY TO IDENTIFY, FORMULATE, AND SOLVE
ENGINEERING PROBLEMS
(G) AN ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY
(H) THE BROAD EDUCATION NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND
THE IMPACT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS IN A GLOBAL,
ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT
(I) A RECOGNITION OF THE NEED FOR, AND AN ABILITY TO
ENGAGE IN LIFE-LONG LEARNING
(J) A KNOWLEDGE OF CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
(K) AN ABILITY TO USE THE TECHNIQUES, SKILLS, AND
MODERN ENGINEERING TOOLS NECESSARY FOR
ENGINEERING PRACTICE.

PREPARED BY: Dr. Kyle Riley, Department Head; June 1, 2010

227

LEVEL OF EMPHASIS
MEDIUM

HIGH

X

X

PHYS 211: University Physics I
Department:

Physics

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

(3-0) 3 credits. Prerequisite: MATH 123 or permission of instructor. This is
the first course in a two semester calculus-level sequence, covering
fundamental concepts of physics. This is the preferred sequence for students
majoring in physical science or engineering. Topics include classical
mechanics and thermodynamics. The School of Mines course covers classical
mechanics only.

Prerequisites:

MATH 123 or permission of instructor.

Textbook:

Fundamentals of Physics, D. Halliday, R. Resnick, J. Walker, 8th Ed. Pt. 1

Course Learning Outcomes:
1. Demonstrate the scientific method in a laboratory experience. This
outcome will be achieved and assessed in Phys 213L course.
2. Gather and critically evaluate data using scientific method. Assessment:
Students will be able to critically evaluate data (given or obtained) with
proper accuracy using appropriate laws and formulas of classical
mechanics for scientifically sound presentation of laboratory reports,
homework assignments, and of solutions on quizzes and exams.
3. Identify and explain the basic concepts, terminology and theories of
selected natural sciences. Assessment: Students will be able to identify
and apply basic concepts and appropriate laws of classical mechanics in
order to solve assigned problems in homework, quizzes, exams, and in
oral presentation.
4. Apply selected natural science concepts and theories to contemporary
issues. Assessment: Students will be able to explain how physics
concepts, laws, and phenomena relate to contemporary engineering and
science in classroom discussions and written assignments.
Topics:

Classical mechanics

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

3 credits of math / basic sciences

228

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)

LEVEL OF
EMPHASIS

LOW

ABET OUTCOME
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well
as to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process
to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as
economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health
and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the
impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic,
environmental, and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage
in life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern
engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
Prepared By: Dr. Andre Petukhov, Department Head; June 1, 2010

229

MEDI
UM

HIGH

X

PHYS 213 UNIVERSITY PHYSICS II
Department:

Physics

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

(3-0) 3 credits. Prerequisite: PHYS 211. This course is the second course in a two
semester calculus-level sequence, covering fundamental concepts of physics.
This is the preferred sequence for students majoring in physical science or
engineering. Topics include electricity and magnetism, sound, light, and optics.
The School of Mines course covers electricity and magnetism only.

Prerequisites:

PHYS 211.

Textbook:

Fundamentals of Physics, Part 3, Halliday, Resnick, Walker, 8th Ed. with Wiley
Plus

Course Learning Outcomes:
As a result of taking courses meeting this goal, students will:
1. Critically evaluate data using the scientific method. Assessment: Students will be able to
critically evaluate data (given or obtained), with proper accuracy, using appropriate physical
laws and formulas for laboratory reports, homework assignments, and solutions on quizzes
and exams.
2. Identify and explain the basic concepts, terminology, and theories of the selected natural
sciences. Assessment: Students will identify and apply basic concepts and appropriate physical
laws in order to solve assigned problems in homework, quizzes, exams, and oral presentations.
3. Apply selected natural science concepts and theories to contemporary issues. Assessment:
Students will be able to explain how physics concepts, laws, and phenomena relate to
contemporary engineering and science in classroom discussions and written assignments.
Topics:
Electric Charge, charge, conductors and insulators, Coulomb‘s Law
Applications of Coulomb‘s Law
Applications of Coulomb‟s Law
Electric Fields, electric field lines, electric field due to a point charge
Electric field due to a dipole, continuous charge distributions
Electric fields due to continuous charge distributions
Electric fields due to continuous charge distributions
Point charge and dipole in a electric field

Gauss’ Law, flux of an electric field, Gauss’ Law

Electric Potential , electric potential energy, electric potential, potential from
the field
Potential due to a point charge
Potential due to continuous charge distributions
Field from potential
Capacitance, calculating the capacitance
Capacitors in parallel and in series
Energy stored in an electric field
Capacitor with a dielectric
Current and Resistance, current and current density
Resistance and resistivity

230

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

basic math and sciences

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
Low

ABET Outcome
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as
to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to
meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as
economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and
safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact
of engineering solutions in a global, economic,
environmental, and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in
life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern
engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
PREPARED BY: Dr. Andre Petukhov, Department Head; June 1, 2010

231

Level of Emphasis
Medium

High

X

PHYS 213L UNIVERSITY PHYSICS II LABORATORY
Department:

Physics

Designation:

Required

Catalog Data:

(0-1) 1 credit. Prerequisite or corequisite: PHYS 213. This laboratory
accompanies PHYS 213. Introduction to physical phenomena and measurements.
Recording and processing data, determining uncertainties, reporting results. The
experiments supplement the work in PHYS 211 and PHYS 213

Prerequisites:

Concurrent registration in or completion of PHYS-213..

Textbook:

Suggested Ref.: Experimentation, D. C. Baird, 3d Edition

Course Learning Outcomes:

As a result of taking courses meeting this goal, students will:
1. Demonstrate the scientific method in a laboratory experience. Assessment:
Students will be able to relate obtained experimental data with corresponding
physics laws and formulas and critically evaluate these data with proper
accuracy using appropriate formulas, and present scientifically sound
laboratory reports.
2. Gather and critically evaluate data using scientific method. Assessment:
Students will be able to critically evaluate data (given or obtained) with
proper accuracy using appropriate laws and formulas of classical mechanics
for scientifically sound presentation of laboratory reports.
Topics:

physical phenomena and measurements, recording and processing data,
determining uncertainties, and reporting results

Class/Laboratory Schedule:

Varies

Contribution to Criterion 5:

basic math and sciences

232

Relationship of Course to ABET Outcomes (a) through (k)
Level of Emphasis
Low

Medium

High

ABET Outcome
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science,
and engineering

X

(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as
to analyze and interpret data

X

(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to
meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as
economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and
safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering
problems
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact
of engineering solutions in a global, economic,
environmental, and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in
life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern
engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
PREPARED BY: Dr. Andre Petukhov, Department Head; June 1, 2010

233

X

Electrical Engineering
Elective Courses
EE 421Communications Systems
EE 431Power Systems
EE 432Power Electronics
EE 451Control Systems
EE 481Microwave Engineering
EE 483Antennas for Wireless Communications
CENG 342 Digital Systems
CENG 420 Design of Digital Signal Processing Systems
CENG 440 VLSI Design
CENG 442 Microprocessor Design
CENG 444 (or CSC 463 may be used)
CENG 446 Advanced Computer Architectures
CENG 447 Embedded and Real-time Computer Systems

234

EE 421 Communications Systems
Elective Course
Instructor:
Dr. Batchelder
Office:
EP 322
Phone:
394-2454
Email:
[email protected]
Office Hours:
Posted outside office
EE421 Catalog Description: Fundamentals of analog and digital signal transmission. Performance
characteristics such as channel loss, distortion, bandwidth requirements, signal-to-noise ratios, and error
probability. (Design content – two (2) credits)
Prerequisites: EE 312 and EE 322
GOALS:

The goal of this course is to provide students with the working knowledge of the broad range
of communications systems including techniques for transmitting and receiving analog and
digital signals.
Lecture:
Monday, Wednesday, Friday 2:00 EP 208
Lab:
Tuesday
meet as needed
We will normally not have scheduled laboratories. Students will be given laboratory/project
assignments and completion dates by which to finish and turn-in these assignments.
Students can expect computer analysis and simulation using MATLAB as well as hardware
labs. Please submit lab reports via email.
Expectations: Know and can use MATLAB and C programming
Facility with circuits, electronics, and digital logic
Web:
http://www.hpcnet.org/ee421F08
The course web page will be utilized for posting assignments and handouts.
Text:

Communication Systems 4th Edition, Carlson, Crilly, Rutledge, 2002, ISBN 0-07-0111127-8.
Text web page is www.mhhe.com/engcs/electrical/carlson .

Tentative Course Objectives:

The objective of this course is to provide students a basic understanding of

OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Define specialized communications terms.
2. Describe and explain modulation methods.
3. Describe and explain the affects of noise on communications systems.
4. Analyze communications systems using basic tools such as Fourier transform, convolution,
and sampling theory.
5. Use tools such as MATLAB and C programming for analyzing and designing
communications systems.
6. Test, debug, and verify that the design meets the desired specifications.
7. Work effectively in design and development teams to implement components of
communications systems.
8. Understand concepts of professionalism, ethics, product liability, social responsibility, and
intellectual property in the context of communications systems design.
235

9. Use design resources such as professional journals, trade journals, and the web in a
communications system design.
10. Communicate the project design effectively.
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
a. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
b. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
c. An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
d. An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
e. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
f. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
g. An ability to communicate effectively.
h. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global
and societal context.
i. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
j. A knowledge of contemporary issues.
k. An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the
program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Course
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 10
Program
Objectives
1
2
1
2
2
1
(a)
1
1
2
2
3
(b)
1
1
1
1
2
3
(c)
1
2
3
2
(d)
1
1
1
1
2
1
(e)
1
3
1
(f)
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
(g)
1
1
1
3
2
(h)
1
1
1
1
1
3
(i)
1
1
1
1
3
2
(j)
1
1
1
4
4
3
2
(k)
ABET category contents estimated by faculty member who prepared this course description:
Engineering Science – 2 credits, or 50%
Engineering Design - 2 credits, or 50%

PREPARED BY:
Michael J. Batchelder, Date: August 30, 2005, updated August, 28, 2008

236

EE 431/431L – Power Systems

Spring 2010, 3-1 (4 cr)
Elective Course

Instructor
Office
Phone
Section
Time
Room
Scott Rausch
EP318
605-394-1220
M001
11:00-11:50p MWF
EP251
Lab Assistant / TA
TBD
Prerequisites: EE311 and EE 330
Catalog Description: The principles of energy conversion and transmission in modern power systems.
Specialized problems of design, control, and protection are included.
Additional Information:
1. The PowerWorld software tool will be used for some of the homework problems and laboratory projects.
2. Lecture notes for a class will be available on the department network ("F drive"). Handouts will also
be provided at the beginning of each lecture period.
Text: Power Systems Analysis and Design, 4th /SI Ed., Glover et al, Cengage Publishing
Attendance: Required. Notify the instructor ahead of time if you will be absent from class.
ADA Statement: Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact the instructor
and/or the campus ADA coordinator, Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity.
Freedom in Learning Statement: Students are responsible for learning the content of any course of study in
which they are enrolled. Under Board of Regents and University policy, student academic performance shall be
evaluated solely on an academic basis and students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views
offered in any course of study. Students who believe that an academic evaluation is unrelated to academic
standards but is related instead to judgment of their personal opinion or conduct should contact the dean of the
college which offers the class to initiate a review of the evaluation.
Use of Electronic Devices in Class: Professionalism and courtesy is requested. Please do not disrupt class by
having your cell phone ring. Please do not use your laptop computer to check email or for internet browsing
during class.
Grading (approx):
In-class Exams
55%
Quizzes
10%
Homework
10%
Laboratory
10%
Final Exam
15%
Total
100%
Policies:
 Please make arrangements with the instructor ahead of time for planned absences or if special
circumstances arise.
 Make-up exams will not be given.
 Make-up quizzes will not be given.
 Late homework will be assessed a 30% penalty.
 Late laboratory reports will be assessed a 20% penalty.
 All homework and labs must be submitted in order to obtain a grade higher than "C".
Topics:
1. Three Phase Circuits
2. Power Transformers
3. Transmission Lines
4. Transmission Line Steady State Analysis
5. Symmetrical Components
6. Faults
7. Power Flows

237

Laboratory:
A one credit hour laboratory EE 431L accompanies this course. Laboratory assignments will include
power system simulations using the PowerWorld software tool. The laboratory may also include
visit(s) to local industry and talk(s) by professional engineer(s) on contemporary issues.
Program Outcomes:
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs
(d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and
societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering
practice.
RELATION OF COURSE OBJECTIVES TO PROGRAM OUTCOMES:
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course objective in addressing the program
outcomes (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
1
4
4
4

2
4
4
4

3
4
4
4

Course Objectives
4
5
6
7
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

8
4
4
4

9
4
4
4

10
4
4
4

11
4
4
4

ABET
Program Outcomes

(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(e)
(f)
(g)
2
2
(h)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
(i)
2
2
2
(j)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(k)
CONTRIBUTION OF COURSE TO PROFESSIONAL COMPONENT:
Course content address approximately 50% engineering science and 50% engineering design.
Exam Schedule: A detailed schedule showing exam dates, homework due dates and laboratory report due
dates will be reviewed at the beginning of each lecture period.
Final Exam: Per university calendar
Office Hours: Posted
E-mail: [email protected]
PREPARED BY: Dr. Abul Hasan, August 2003
Scott Rausch, revised 14 January 2010

238

EE 432 Power Electronics
Instructor
Office
Phone
Section
Time
Scott Rausch
EP318
605-394-1220
M001
01:00-01:50p MWF
Lab Assistant / TA TBD
EE Elective Course
Prerequisites: EE 330
Catalog Description: The conversion, regulation, and control of electric power by means of
electronic switching devices; inverter and chopper circuits; pulse width modulation; motor
drives.
Additional Information:
1. The PSpice and Matlab software tools will be used for some of the homework problems
and laboratory projects.
2. Lecture notes for a class will be available on the department network ("F drive") at
6:00pm on the day prior to the lecture. Students may want to bring a paper copy of the
notes to class to facilitate note-taking. Handouts will also be provided at the beginning
of each lecture period.
Text: Power Electronics, 3rd Ed., Rashid, Pearson / Prentice Hall
Attendance: Required. Notify the instructor ahead of time if you will be absent from class.
ADA Statement: Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should
contact the instructor and/or the campus ADA coordinator, Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the
earliest opportunity.
Freedom in Learning Statement: Students are responsible for learning the content of any
course of study in which they are enrolled. Under Board of Regents and University policy,
student academic performance shall be evaluated solely on an academic basis and students
should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study.
Students who believe that an academic evaluation is unrelated to academic standards but is
related instead to judgment of their personal opinion or conduct should contact the dean of the
college which offers the class to initiate a review of the evaluation.
Use of Electronic Devices in Class: Professionalism and courtesy is requested. Please do not
disrupt class by having your cell phone ring. Please do not use your laptop computer to check
email or for internet browsing during class.
Grading (approx):
One-hour Exams
40%
Quizzes
20%
Homework
10%
Laboratory
15%
Final Exam
15%
Total
100%
Policies:
 Please make arrangements with the instructor ahead of time for planned absences or if
special circumstances arise.
 Make-up exams will not be given.
 The lowest quiz grade will be dropped. Make-up quizzes will not be given.
 Late homework will be assessed a 50% penalty.
 Late laboratory reports will be assessed a 20% penalty.
 All homework and labs must be submitted in order to obtain a grade higher than "C".
Topics:
1. Power Electronics Overview
2. Diode Circuits
3. Diode Rectifiers
4. Power Transistors
5. DC-DC Converters
6. Pulse Width Modulation / Inverters
7. Thyristors
8. Controlled Rectifiers
9. Gate Drive Circuits

239

Room
EP254

ABET
Program Outcomes

10. Protection Circuits
Laboratory:
A one credit hour laboratory EE 432L accompanies this course. This is an open laboratory.
The laboratory may also include visit(s) to local industry and talk(s) by professional
engineer(s) on contemporary issues. There will be approximately 9 lab projects that
topically follow the lecture and textbook material.
Program Outcomes:
(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering
(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data
(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs
(d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
(g) an ability to communicate effectively
(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a
global and societal context
(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning
(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues
(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
RELATION OF COURSE OBJECTIVES TO PROGRAM OUTCOMES:
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course objective in addressing the
program outcomes (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Course Objectives
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(a)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(b)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
(c)
4
(d)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
(e)
1
(f)
(g)
2
(h)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
(i)
2
2
(j)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
(k)
CONTRIBUTION OF COURSE TO PROFESSIONAL COMPONENT:
Course content address approximately 50% engineering science and 50% engineering
design.
Exam Schedule: A detailed schedule showing exam dates, homework due dates and laboratory
report due dates will be reviewed at the beginning of each lecture period.
Final Exam: Per university calendar
Office Hours: Posted
E-mail: [email protected]
PREPARED BY:
Dr. William Hughes,January 2002 Scott Rausch, revised August 2009

240

Elective Course

EE 451/451L - ME 453/453L – Control Systems
Spring Semester 2010

Catalog Data: (3-1) 4 credits. Prerequisite: ME 352 or EE 311. Analysis and design of automatic control
and process systems by techniques encountered in modern engineering practice, including both linear and
nonlinear systems with either continuous or discrete signals. This course is cross-listed with ME 453/453L.
Prerequisites: EE 311 or ME 352 and background in Laplace Transforms, Basic system modeling, Transient
responses for simple 1st and 2nd order systems, Steady State responses for simple 1st and 2nd order systems,
a basic understanding of Matlab
http://sdmines.sdsmt.edu/sdsmt/directory/courses/2010sp/ee451/451LM001
Course Web Page:
http://sdmines.sdsmt.edu/sdsmt/directory/courses/2010sp/me453/453LM001
Textbook: Control Systems Engineering, 5th Edition, by Norman S. Nise, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ, 07030, 2008.
Instructor:
Dr. C. R. Tolle EP 323
394-6133
[email protected]
Office Hours: MWF 10:00am-11:00am, W 3:00pm-4:00pm, or by appointment.
Lecture:
Section 01
EP 255 2:00pm-2:50pm MWF
Lab:
Open Lab
EP 340
Goals: The student completing the course should be able to apply hardware and software design concepts for basic
controls systems. The class focuses on transient and steady state design specifications, which lead to formal control
designs. Design concepts are stressed over simple tuning rules or fixed controller implementation types. Concepts
such as the internal model principle are stressed to allow the student to meet more complex steady state design
criteria in the face of conflicting transient and controller effort requirements.
Tentative Grading:
Attendance, Participation, and Professionalism 5%
10%
Homework Assignments and Quizzes
Lab Projects
10%
Final Projects
15%
3 Mid Terms each 20%
60%
Topics:

241

analysis of feedback control systems and specifications
e.g. Root-locus techniques (including Routh-Hurwitz criterion), frequency response techniques
(including Nyquist criterion), introduction to state-space design, introduction to digital design, etc.
 design of systems to satisfy the given specifications
e.g. Internal model principle, PI, PD, PID, lead, lag, lead-lag controllers, etc.
 modern computational software tools for analysis and design of feedback systems
e.g. MATLAB (possible alternative software programs: Octave, Maple, or Sage).
 beginning design in State Space Control*
 beginning design in Digital Control*
* as time permits
Freedom in learning: Students are responsible for learning the content of any course of study in which they
are enrolled. Under Board of Regents and University policy, student academic performance shall be
evaluated solely on an academic basis and students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data
or views offered in any course of study. Students who believe that an academic evaluation is unrelated to
academic standards but is related instead to judgment of their personal opinion or conduct should contact
the dean of the college which offers the class to initiate a review of the evaluation.
Laboratory projects: Students learn to simulate low order ordinary differential equation (ODE) systems using
state space representations within Matlab and Simulink. They learn to implement controllers. They also
learn to measure transient time constants for simple first and second order circuits.
ADA note: Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact the instructor
and/or the campus ADA coordinator, Ms. Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Use block diagrams and signal flow diagrams to represent systems.
2. Analyze the performance of a system in the time and frequency domains.
3. Sketch and interpret stability and performance using root locus.
4. Formulate design specifications for control systems.
5. Use root locus to design PD and lead controllers to improve the transient performance of a
system.
6. Use root locus to design PI and lag controllers to improve the steady state error of a system.
7. Use root locus to design PID and lead/lag controllers to improve both the transient and steady
state error of a system.
8. Use Matlab as an analytical and design tool.
9. Use frequency domain techniques to design cascade compensation (lead, lag, lead/lag) to improve
the transient and/or steady state error of a system.
10. Use frequency domain techniques to analyze the stability of a system.
11. Use Nyquist techniques to analyze the stability of a system.
12. Perform simple linear system identification via Laplace decomposition of Bode plots.
*13.Understand simple State Space design concepts: e.g controllability, observability, etc.
*14.Understand simple Digital Control System design concepts: e.g z-transform, z-plane stability, zplane design, etc.
* as time permits
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:


These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
a. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
b. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
c. An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
d. An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
e. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
f. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
g. An ability to communicate effectively.

242

h.

The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
i. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
j. A knowledge of contemporary issues.
k. An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives
listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Objectives
(a)
1
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
(b)
2
3
2
4
3
3
3
4
3
3
3
4
1
1
(c)
1
2
4
4
3
3
3
4
3
4
4
4
1
1
(d)
1
2
3
1
2
(e)
2
4
4
4
3
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
1
1
(f)
1
3
1
1
1
1
(g)
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
(h)
1
(i)
1
1
1
(j)
1
1
1
1
(k)
1
3
3
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
ABET category contents estimated by faculty member who prepared this course description:
Engineering Science – 1 credits, or 25%
Engineering Design 3.0 credits, or 75%
PREPARED BY: Charles R. Tolle, Date: last update June 21, 2010

EE 481/481L: Microwave Engineering

Elective Course
CATALOG DATA:
EE 481/481L – Microwave Engineering: (3-1) 4 Credits.
Prerequisite: EE 480 completed or concurrent. Presentation of basic principles, characteristics, and
applications of microwave devices and systems. Development of techniques for analysis and design
of microwave circuits.
TEXTBOOK:
Microwave Engineering, (2nd ed). David M. Pozar, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1998.
COORDINATOR:
Dr. Keith W. Whites, Professor and Steven P. Miller Endowed Chair
GOALS:
This course is meant to be a serious introduction to the theory, analysis and measurement of
microwave circuits constructed from microstrip and stripline. There are five primary goals
of this course. The first is to review transmission lines and matching networks followed by a
study of stripline and microstrip as well as impedance, admittance, and S parameters for Nport networks. The second and third goals concern the operation and design of passive and
active microwave circuits. Topics in these two areas include couplers, hybrids, filters, power
dividers and the gain and stability of single stage transistor amplifiers. The forth goal is the
simulation and design of microstrip circuits using Advanced Design System from Agilent
Technologies. Lastly, the course provides students with an introduction to accurate
microwave measurements, which includes microwave coax connector care, the fabrication
of microstrip circuits, and proper calibration and use of a vector network analyzer.
CLASS SCHEDULE:
Lecture: 3 hours per week.
Laboratory: 3 hours every two weeks averaged over the semester (1 credit hour).
Topics:
1. Transmission lines (TLs), Telegrapher‘s equations Terminated TLs. Smith chart.

243

Matrix description for N-port networks:
Transmission line resonators.
Microstrip power dividers:
Microstrip couplers, Quadrature (90º) hybrid directional coupler, 180 hybrid.
Microstrip filters:
Active microwave circuits:
COMPUTER USAGE:
This course makes extensive use of Advanced Design System (ADS) from Agilent Technologies. ADS is
used to design and analyze microwave circuits including six that are designed, built and measured
in the labs. ADS is also used to layout the physical microstrip circuit that is ultimately milled on
microwave laminate.
OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
17. Analyze basic transmission line problems containing generator and load mismatches, and
compute such basic quantities as reflection coefficients, standing wave ratio, delivered signal
power, etc.
18. Use the Smith chart for basic transmission line calculations.
19. Design and analyze transmission line matching devices including L-networks, parallel single stub
tuners and quarter-wave transformers.
20. Understand and use two-port parameter models of simple circuit elements (Z, Y, ABCD and S) to
analyze microwave circuits.
21. Use signal flow graphs to represent simple microwave circuits and solve for quantities of interest,
such as reflection coefficients.
22. Design and analyze microwave power dividers (T-junction and Wilkinson) and hybrids (90º and
180º) constructed from printed microstrip.
23. Design and analyze microwave filters (low- and band-pass) constructed from printed microstrip.
24. Design and analyze coupled-line and Lange microwave couplers constructed from printed
microstrip.
25. Design and analyze microwave coupled resonator filters constructed from printed microstrip.
26. Use Advanced Design System (ADS) to design and analyze simple passive microwave circuits.
27. Construct simple printed microstrip circuits from circuit boards and end launchers.
28. Make proper microwave-cable connections using torque wrenches.
29. Understand the thru-reflect-line (TRL) calibration model for vector network analyzers.
30. Calibrate a vector network analyzer and use it to make simple passive microwave measurements.
31. Measure the response of simple printed microstrip circuits using a vector network analyzer.
RELATION OF COURSE OUTCOMES TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 (a) An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 (b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 (c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 (e) An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 (k) An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the
program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis):
Course Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 13 14 15
(a)
4
3
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
(b)
4
4
4
4
4
(c)
4
4
4
4
4
4
ABET
Object
ives

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

244

(e)
(k)

3

3

3

4

4
3

4
4

4
4

4
4

4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4
LABORATORY:
A one-credit-hour laboratory EE 481L accompanies this course. EE 481L is an open laboratory that the
students sign up to reserve space in the Applied Electromagnetics and Communications
Laboratory (EE/P 230). Averaged over the semester, the laboratory meets for approximately three
hours every other week for a total of six laboratories during the semester:
1. Single Stub Tuner on Microstrip.
2. T-Junction 1:1 Power Divider.
3. Rat-Race Hybrid Coupler.
4. Stepped Impedance Low Pass Filter.
5. (To be developed.)
6. (To be developed.)
The students primarily use vector network analyzers for measuring the responses of the microstrip circuits
they construct. The microstrip circuits are primarily designed in ADS and then milled from
microwave laminate. The measured responses of the circuits are compared with simulations from
ADS, which is often the topic of the pre-laboratory work.
PREPARED BY:
Keith W. Whites, Date: October 17, 2002 (Modified 12/17/02, 6/23/10)

245

EE 483/483L Antennas for Wireless Communications
Spring 2009, 2-2 (4 credit hours)
Elective Course
EP 319
394-4184
EP 213
email: [email protected]

Instructor:

Dr. Anagnostou
Ahmad Gheethan

Office Hours:

10:50-11:50AM (MWF) or by appointment (daily schedule posted outside door)

Lecture:

Monday, Wednesday, Friday

10:00-10:50

Catalog Description:
EE 483/483L Antennas for Wireless Communications
(3-1) 4 credits. Introduction to antenna design, measurement, and theory for wireless communications including
fundamental antenna concepts and parameters (directivity, gain, patterns, etc.), matching techniques, and signal
propagation. Theory and design of linear, loop, and patch antennas, antenna arrays, and other commonly used
antennas. Students will design, model, build, and test antenna(s). (Design content- two (2) credits).
TEXTBOOK:

Balanis C., “Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design” 3rd Ed., Wiley, 2005, (ISBN: 047166782X).
Students are encouraged to keep the textbook.

GOALS:
The objective of this course is to introduce students to the basic concepts of antenna design, measurement, and
theory. In particular, they are introduced to fundamental antenna concepts and parameters (directivity, gain,
patterns, etc.), the theory and design of some common antennas (e.g., linear, loop, patch, linear arrays, YagiUda), matching techniques, and signal propagation. By the end of the course, the students should be able to
design, model, build, and test simple antennas.
CLASS SCHEDULE:
Lecture: 3 hours per week.
Laboratory: Laboratory assignments will be announced as they come up during the semester. Most
laboratory/project work will take place in the Computer Labs and in EP127.
Tentative Grading:
Two Midterm Exams
Homework
Labs/Projects
Quizzes/Other Assignments
Final Exams (required)

20%
25%
25%
10%
20%

Submitting Reports:
email to [email protected]
If attachments are too large to email, submit on USB stick or CDROM or place in the temporary directory on
the fileserver emailing the location.
ADA note:
Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact me and/or the
campus ADA coordinator, Ms. Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity.
Tentative Topics:
Tentative Course Schedule
I.
Vector analysis, antenna types, radiation mechanism, wire antenna current distribution
II.
Fundamental Antenna Parameters
III.
Antenna Software: ADS and/or IE3D
IV.
Radiation Integrals & Auxiliary Potential Functions
V.
Linear Wire Antennas
VI.
Arrays: Linear, 2D, Binomial, Chebyshev
VII.
Microstrip Antennas and Arrays,
VIII.
Matching Techniques and Matching Networks

246

IX.
X.

Loop Antennas, Yagi-Uda Arrays / LPDAs , Introduction to Apertures and Horns
Signal Propagation in Wireless Communications and Modern Antenna designs.

OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Apply, calculate, or produce fundamental parameters or quantities of antennas (e.g. radiation patterns,
radiation intensity, directivity, …).
2. Apply or use the Friis Transmission Equation and Radar Range Equation.
3. Use EM software to design and model antennas.
4. Calculate the magnetic (A) and electric (F) vector potentials given the electric (J) or magnetic (M) current
densities, respectively, for simple problems.
5. Calculate the far-field electric and magnetic fields from A or F.
6. Calculate antenna quantities and parameters for linear dipole, loop, and microstrip antennas.
7. Design, analyze, match, and test commonly used antennas (e.g., linear dipole, loop, microstrip, and YagiUda).
8. Design and analyze linear antenna arrays with uniform spacing and amplitude.
9. Measure important antenna parameters (e.g., impedance, reflection coefficient, SWR, radiation pattern, …)
using modern test equipment (e.g., vector network analyzer).
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
(a) An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
(b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
(c) An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
(d) An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
(e) An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
(f) An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
(g) An ability to communicate effectively.
(h) The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
(i) A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
(j) A knowledge of contemporary issues.
(k) An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives
listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Course Outcomes
1 2
ABET Objectives (a) 4 4
(b)
(c) 2 2
(d)
(e) 2 3
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)

PREPARED BY:
Thomas P. Montoya, Date: January 15, 2004

Last Revised: February 9, 2009, by Dimitris E. Anagnostou

247

3
3
2
3

4
4

3

2

5
4

2

6
4

8
4

3

7
4
3
4

3

9
4
3
3

3

4

4

2

1

1

2

2

2

2

4

4

3

4

CENG 342 - DIGITAL SYSTEMS

Elective

Spring Semester 2010

Catalog Data: CENG 342/342L Digital Systems (3-1) 4 Credits.
Prerequisite: CENG 244. Presents the basic concepts and mathematical tools that are applicable to
the analysis and design of digital systems, particularly state machines and digital processing systems.
The VHDL hardware description language is also introduced as a design tool.
Text:
FPGA Prototyping By VHDL Examples, Chu, Wiley Interscience, 2008.
References:
Fundamentals of Digital Logic With VHDL Design, 3rd ed., Brown and Vranesic, 2008.
VHDL for Programmable Logic, Kevin Skahill, Addison Wesley, 1996.
Digital Systems Design Using VHDL, 2nd ed., Charles H. Roth Jr., PWS Publishing,
2007.
Coordinator: Brian T. Hemmelman, Assistant Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Office Hours are 10:00-10:50 (Mountain Time) Mon/Wed/Fri and by appointment.
I can be reached by email, [email protected], or Skype (Brian Hemmelman)
Lecture:
Monday/Wednesday/Friday
1:00-1:50 p.m. CB 106
Lab:
Open Lab
Objectives:
The primary objective of this course is to educate students on how to design digital
systems in a timely manner as an individual or member of a team to meet specific needs using
modern design techniques. Secondary objectives of this course are to have students learn to
communicate their work effectively, to learn how to stay current in a rapidly changing field, and
to understand the ethical and moral ramifications of their design work.
Topics: (1)
Programmable Logic Devices
(2)
VHDL Syntax
(3)
VHDL Implementation Of Combinational Building Blocks
(4)
VHDL Implementation Of Sequential Circuits
(5)
Tri-State Logic
(6)
Review of State Machine Operation and Design
(7)
VHDL Implementation Of State Machines
(8)
Functions
(9)
Procedures
(10)
Overloading
(11)
Arithmetic Circuits
(12)
VHDL Implementation Of Arithmetic Circuits
(13)
Design Hierarchy
(14)
Case Studies
Outcomes:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
(1)
Fully understand the fundamental combinational building blocks and how to design and
implement them with VHDL.
(2)
Fully understand the fundamental sequential building blocks and how to design and
implement them with VHDL.
(3)
Understand the internal structure of PALs, CPLDs, and FPGAs and how the internal
architectures of the various chip families affect design performance.
(4)
Understand the difference between Moore and Mealy machine performance and be able
to design and implement any state machine manually or with VHDL using binaryencoding or one-hot encoding.
(5)
Understand how various arithmetic circuits work and how to design and implement them
with VHDL.
(6)
Understand how to link various digital building blocks to create a larger hierarchical
design.
(7)
Understand the core pieces of a digital processor and how to design and implement them
with VHDL.

248

(8)

Understand at a system level how a digital processor works and how to design and
implement a processor with VHDL.
(9)
Understand the link between hardware architecture, instruction sets, and software
languages.
(10)
Understand how to debug a discrete design or debug a VHDL design.
(11)
Document and effectively communicate the details of their work in written lab reports.
Relation of Course to Program Outcomes:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:

An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.

An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.

An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.

An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.

An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.

An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.

An ability to communicate effectively.

The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a
global and societal context.

A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.

A knowledge of contemporary issues.

An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in
addressing the program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates
a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11
Objectives
(a)
4
4
2
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
1
(b)
2
2
1
3
3
3
3
4
2
4
(c)
4
4
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
(d)
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
2
1
1
(e)
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
3
2
(f)
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
(g)
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
4
(h)
1
1
1
1
(i)
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
2
2
(j)
3
3
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
2
2
(k)
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
3
Grading:
The following grading scheme is tentatively planned. Adjustments may be made in the
total number of points depending on the actual amount of material covered.
3 1-Hour Exams
300 points
90-100%
A
Homework
150 points
80-89%
B
Labs
200 points
70-79%
C
1 2-Hour Final
150 points
60-69%
D
0-59%
F
You must earn at least a 60% exam average to pass the class.
Prepared by: Dr. Brian T. Hemmelman, January 13, 2010.

249

CENG 420/420L – DESIGN OF DIGITAL SIGNAL PROCESSING SYSTEMS
Fall Semester 2009
Catalog Data: Design of Digital Signal Processing Systems
(3-1) 4 Credits. Prerequisite: EE 312. An introduction to the design of digital signal
processing systems. Topics include discrete-time signals and systems, the Z-transform,
infinite impulse-response digital filters, finite impulse-response digital filters, Discrete
Fourier Transforms, Fast Fourier Transforms.
Text:

Digital Signal Processing, A Practical Approach, Emmanual C. Ifeachor and Barrie W.
Jervis, Prentice Hall, 2002.

References:

Digital Signal Processing, A Computer-Based Approach, Mitra, 2006.
Digital Signal Processing, Principles, Algorithms, and Applications, Proakis &
Manolakis, Prentice Hall, 1996.
Digital Signal and Image Processing, Tamal Bose, John Wiley and Sons, 2004.

Coordinator: Brian T. Hemmelman, Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Office Hours are 1:00-2:00 p.m. M/W/F and by appointment.
I can be reached by email, [email protected], or Skype (Brian Hemmelman)
Lecture:
Lab:

Monday/Wednesday/Friday
9:00-9:50 a.m. CB 109
The lab will be conducted as an open lab.

Objectives:

The objectives of this course are to, first, provide students with an understanding of DSP
algorithms and, second, illustrate the design, analysis, and evaluation of DSP algorithms
in various applications.

Topics:

Introduction to DSP and Its Applications
Analog-to-Digital Conversion
Digital-to-Analog Conversion
Oversampling
Discrete Fourier Transform
Fast Fourier Transform
Computational Considerations of FFT
z-Transform and inverse z-Transform
Discrete Convolution and Correlation
Finite Impulse Response (FIR) digital filter design
Infinite Impulse Response (IIR) digital filter design

Outcomes:
1.
2.
3.

Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
Understand the analog-to-digital conversion and digital-to-analog sampling processes.
Explain the benefits of oversampling.
Compute the Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT) of discrete signals as well as their
inverses, including the use of the various properties of the DFT
Compute the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) of discrete signals as well as their inverses in
addition to understanding the computational complexities and optimizations that are
involved in calculating the FFT.
Compute both the z-transform and inverse z-transform of discrete signals including the
use of various properties of the z-transform.

4.
5.

250

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Compute the z-transform transfer function of discrete systems.
Efficiently compute the convolution and correlation of discrete data sequences.
Analyze the response and stability of discrete systems to discrete signals.
Design various FIR filters and analyze their response and efficiency.
Design various IIR filters and analyze their response and efficiency.
Use MATLAB as an analysis and design tool for DSP algorithm and system
development.
12.
Implement various DSP algorithms and systems on DSP prototyping boards.
13.
Document and effectively communicate the details of their work in written lab reports.
Relation of Course to Program Objectives:
a. These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
b. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
c. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
d. An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
e. An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
f. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
g. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
h. An ability to communicate effectively.
i. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and
societal context.
j. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
k. A knowledge of contemporary issues.
l. An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering
practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the
program objectives listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13
Objectives
(a)
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
1
4
(b)
2
2
2
3
4
4
4
4
(c)
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
2
2
(d)
4
(e)
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
2
2
(f)
2
4
(g)
1
(h)
3
2
(i)
1
1
1
1
3
3
2
4
2
(j)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
3
(k)
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
3
Grading:
The following grading scheme is tentatively planned. Adjustments may be made
depending on the actual amount of material covered.
3 1-Hour Exams
300 points
90-100%
A
Homework
150 points
80-89%
B
Labwork
200 points
70-79%
C
1 2-Hour Final
150 points
60-69%
D
0-59%
F
You must earn at least a 60% exam average to pass the class.
Prepared by: Dr. Brian T. Hemmelman, August 31, 2009.

251

Elective Course

CENG 442 - Micro-Based System Design
Spring Semester 2010

Catalog Data: (3-1) 4 credits. Prerequisite CENG 342. Presents the concepts required for the design of microprocessorbased systems. Emphasis is given to the problems of system specification, choice of architecture, design trade-off, and the
use of development tools in the design process. Design projects will be implemented in the laboratory. (Design content - 2
credits)
Prerequisites: CENG 342 and background in:
 Electronic circuits.
 Digital logic design
 C programming language.
Course Web Page:
http://www.hpcnet.org/ceng442s10
Textbook:
Datasheets and application notes from microcontroller manufacturers are used in place of text book
Instructor:
Dr. M. Batchelder
EP 311
x2451 [email protected]
Office Hours: TBD, check schedule posted outside office
Lecture:
Section 01
MWF 8:00-8:50 EP 255
Lab:
Open Lab
EP 241
Goals: The student completing the course should be able to apply hardware and software design concepts to embedded
micro-based systems for different applications. Students should be able to design systems based on single-chip
microcontrollers using assembly language, C-language cross-compilers, and debuggers.
Tentative Grading:
Midterm Exam 20%
Final Exam
20%
Weekly Quizzes 30%
Lab Projects
30%
Topics:
CPU Architecture and Instruction set.
Development Software
C Compiler
Timers and interrupts
I/O: parallel, serial, .A/D, D/ALaboratory projects:
actuators

Projects involving microcontrollers, sensors, and

OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1.

Use development tools including assembler, compiler, and debugger for implementing micro-based
systems.
2. Understand the basics of CPU architectures and instruction sets.
3. Develop programs in assembly and C, understanding what is appropriate for a given situation.
4. Interface sensors, actuators, and networks to micro-based hardware.
5. Test, debug, and verify that the design meets the desired specifications.
6. Work effectively in design and development teams to implement micro-based systems.
7. Use appropriate prototyping techniques for implementing micro-based systems.
8. Understand concepts of professionalism, ethics, product liability, social responsibility, and intellectual
property in the context of micro-based design.
9. Use design resources such as professional journals, trade journals, catalogs, and the web in project
design.
10. Communicate the project design effectively.

252

RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:
These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
 An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
 An ability to communicate effectively.
 The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
 A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
 A knowledge of contemporary issues.
 An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives
listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
Objectives
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)

1

2

3

2
1

1

1

4
3
2
3
3

4

5

3

2
4
4
2
4
2
2

3
3
2

2
4

2

6

4

7
2
2
3
2

4
3

4

3

4

4

8

9

3

2
3

2
4
3
2
3

2
2
2
1
3
3
2

10
2
2
4
2
4

ABET category contents estimated by faculty member who prepared this course description:
Engineering Science - 2.0 credits, or 50% Engineering Design 2.0 credits, or 50%
PREPARED BY:
Michael J. Batchelder, Date: last update January 15, 2010

253

CENG 444 Computer Networks
Elective
Instructor:
Office:
Phone:
Email:
Web Site:
Office Hours:

Michael J. Batchelder
EP 322
394-2454
[email protected]

www.hpcnet.org/ceng444F05

Posted outside office

Catalog Description:
CENG 444/444L COMPUTER NETWORKS
(3-1) 4 credits. Prerequisite: CENG 244, MATH 381 or MATH 441. This course presents the
basic principles of computer networks design and analysis. Topics covered include the layers of
the OSI reference model. Current and proposed implementations of local, metropolitan and wide
area networks are presented; inter-networking is discussed. The different implementations are
compared and their performance evaluated. Graduation credit will not be allowed for both this
course and CSC 441. (Design content - two (2) credits)
GOALS:

The goal of this course is to provide students with the working knowledge of the broad range of
computer networks including data transmission, packet transmission, internetworking, and
network applications.

ADA:

Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact the instructor, Dr.
Batchelder at 394-2454 and/or the campus ADA coordinator, Jolie McCoy at 394-1924 at the
earliest opportunity.

Tentative Grading:

Textbook:

Midterm Exam
Final Exam
Weekly Quizzes
Lab Projects
Late Penalty:

15%
15% (optional for those graduating in December)
30% (drop the two lowest scores)
40%
Late assignments have a 10% per day penalty (not counting
weekends and holidays). Assignments must be completed even if
the penalty causes a reduction to zero credit.
Missed Quiz Policy: Unexcused absence – counts as one of the dropped quizzes
Excused absence – one fewer quiz but still drop two lowest

Computer Networks and Internets. 4th ed., by Comer, Prentice Hall

Lecture:
Lab:
Project:

MWF, 12:00-12: 50AM, CB 205E
Open Lab – normally the class will not meet during the lab period scheduled.
A team networking project is required. The team will document their project with a presentation
in class during the last week of the semester and a written report due not later than December 9,
the last day of class.
Expectations:
Know and can use:
Windows/UNIX,
C programming (other languages may also be used),
Basic Probability,
Basic Digital Logic
Tentative Outline: I.
Introduction
II.
Data Transmission
II.
Packet Transmission
IIII.
Internetworking
IV.
Network Applications
OUTCOMES:

254

Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
1. Define specialized networking terms and TLAs.
2. Describe and explain data transmission technologies, local and long distance.
3. Describe and explain packet transmission technologies, including frames, error detection, LAN, WAN,
ATM, protocols, and layering.
4. Describe and explain internetworking, including IP addresses, ARP, ICMP, IP, and TCP.
5. Analyze routing methods and protocols.
6. Analyze client – server applications.
7. Design client – server applications.
8. Use development tools such as compiler, debugger, and network analyzer for working with networking
systems.
9. Test, debug, and verify that the design meets the desired specifications.
10. Work effectively in design and development teams to implement networking applications.
11. Understand concepts of professionalism, ethics, product liability, social responsibility, and intellectual
property in the context of network design.
12. Use design resources such as professional journals, trade journals, and the web in a network system design.
13. Communicate the project design effectively.

RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:

These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
a. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
b. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
c. An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
d. An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
e. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
f. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
g. An ability to communicate effectively.
h. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
i. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
j. A knowledge of contemporary issues.
k. An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives
listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Course
Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Program
Objectives
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
(a)
1
1
1
1
3
3
2
3
(b)
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
2
3
(c)
1
2
2
2
3
2
(d)
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
(e)
2
1
3
1
(f)
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
4
(g)
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
(h)
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
(i)
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
(j)
1
1
1
1
3
3
4
3
2
(k)

ABET category contents estimated by faculty member who prepared this course description:
Engineering Science - 2.0 credits, or 50% Engineering Design 2.0 credits, or 50%
PREPARED BY: Michael J. Batchelder, Date: August 25, 2003 (updated August 23, 2004, June 2010)

255

CENG 446/446L – ADVANCED COMPUTER ARCHITECTURES

Fall Semester 2009

Catalog Data: Advanced Computer Architectures
(3-1) 4 Credits. Prerequisite: CENG 342. This course covers the basic principles
of pipelining, parallelism, and memory management. Topics covered include
cache and virtual memory, pipelining techniques, and vector processors,
multiprocessors, and distributed computing systems. Graduation credit will not
be allowed for both this course and CSC 440.
Text:

Computer Organization and Design: The Hardware/Software Interface, Patterson
and Hennessy, Morgan Kaufmann Pub., 2009.

References: Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach, Hennessy and Patterson,
Morgan Kaufmann
Pub., 2006
Structured Computer Organization, Andrew Tanenbaum, Prentice Hall, 2005.
Computer Organization and Architecture, William Stallings, Prentice Hall, 2009.
Coordinator: Brian T. Hemmelman, Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer
Engineering
Office Hours are 1:00-2:00 p.m. M/W/F and by appointment.
I can be reached by email, [email protected], or Skype (Brian
Hemmelman)
Lecture:
Lab:

Monday/Wednesday/Friday 11:00-11:50 a.m.
The lab will be conducted as an open lab.

Topics:

Introduction and Perspectives on Computer Architecture
Measuring Performance
MIPS Instruction Set
The Path from Instructions to Machine Code
Computer Arithmetic
Processor Building Blocks
Processor Datapath
Processor Control
Pipelining
Hazards
Memory Heirarchy
Cache Memory
Computer Data Storage
Computer I/O
Multicore and Parallel Processing Issues

CB 110

Computer Use: Students will use the PCSPIM simulator and Xilinx WebPack to study a
number of topics throughout the semester and implement many of the laboratory
projects.
256

Grading:

The following grading scheme is tentatively planned. Adjustments may be made
depending on the actual amount of material covered.
3 1-Hour Exams
Homework
Labwork
1 2-Hour Final

300 points
150 points
200 points
150 points

90-100%
80-89%
70-79%
60-69%
0-59%

You must earn at least a 60% exam average to pass the class.

257

A
B
C
D
F

CENG 447 Embedded/Real-Time Computer Systems
www.hpcnet.org/ceng447S08

Instructor:

Dr. Batchelder

EP 322

394-2454

Office Hours: to be determined (daily schedule posted outside door)
Lecture:

Monday, Wednesday, Friday

10:00 EP 255

Catalog Description:
CENG 447 Embedded/Real-Time Computer Systems
(3-1) 4 credits. Prerequisite EE 351, CSC 150. This course provides an introduction to programming
embedded and real-time computer systems. It includes design of embedded interrupt driven systems and
the use of commercial (for example QNX) or open-source (for example Linux RT) RTOS operating
systems. (Design content 2 credits).
TEXTBOOK:

MicroC/OS-II, The Real-Time Kernel 2nd, by Jean J. Labrosse, CMP Books.

GOALS:
The goal of this course is to provide students with the working knowledge of practical design and
implementation of embedded systems and real-time operating systems.
CLASS SCHEDULE:
Lecture: 3 hours per week.
Laboratory: Open Lab to work on lab assignments
Tentative Grading:
Midterm Exam
Final Exam
Weekly Quizzes
Lab Projects

15%
15%
30%
40%

Submitting Reports: email to [email protected]
If attachments are too large to email, submit on CDROM or place in the temporary directory on the
fileserver emailing the location.
ADA note:
Students with special needs or requiring special accommodations should contact me
and/or the campus ADA coordinator, Ms. Jolie McCoy, at 394-1924 at the earliest opportunity.
Tentative Topics:
Introduction to Embedded Systems
ARM Processor
The Real-Time Kernel
MicroC/OS-II
Embedded Linux
Gumstix Computer

258

OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should demonstrate the ability to:
10. Use development tools including assembler, compiler, and debugger for implementing
embedded systems.
11. Understand the basics of CPU architectures and instruction sets.
12. Develop programs in assembly and C, understanding what is appropriate for a given
situation.
13. Interface sensors, actuators, and networks in embedded systems.
14. Use a Real-Time Operating System to implement an embedded system design.
15. Test, debug, and verify that the design meets the desired specifications
16. Work effectively in design and development teams to implement embedded systems.
17. Understand concepts of professionalism, ethics, product liability, social responsibility,
and intellectual property in the context of embedded system design.
18. Use design resources such as professional journals, trade journals, catalogs, and the web
in an embedded system design.
19. Communicate the project design effectively.
RELATION OF COURSE TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES:

These course outcomes fulfill the following program objectives:
 An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering.
 An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data.
 An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs.
 An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.
 An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems.
 An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
 An ability to communicate effectively.
 The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal
context.
 A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.
 A knowledge of contemporary issues.
 An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.
The following table indicates the relative strengths of each course outcome in addressing the program objectives
listed above (on a scale of 1 to 4 where 4 indicates a strong emphasis).
Outcomes
Objectives
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)

1

2

3

4

5

6

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

2

7

4

9

10

2

4
4
4

4

8

4
4
4

2
4
4
3

Engineering Science 2 credits (50%) Engineering Design 2 credits (50%)
Prepared By:
Michael J. Batchelder, Date: January 13, 2003, updated January 18, 2008
259

APPENDIX B – FACULTY RESUMES
Electrical and Computer Full-Time Faculty
Dr. Dimitrous Anagastou
Dr. Michael Batchelder
Dr. Randy Hoover
Ms. Elaine Linde
Dr. Thomas Montoya
Dr. Charles Tolle
Dr. Keith Whites

Electrical and Computer Part-Time Faculty
Mr. Bernt Askildsen
Mr. Ralph Grahek
Dr. Brian Hemmelman
Mr. Scott Rausch

Computer Science Faculty
Dr. Edward Corwin
Dr. Antonette Logar
Dr. Jeff McGough
Dr. Manuel Penaloza
Dr. John Weiss

260

1.
2.

Name and Academic Rank: Dimitrios Anagnostou
Assistant Professor - Full Time
Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
B.S. – 2000 Democritus Univ. of Thrace, Greece (Electrical and Comp. Eng0
M.S. – 2002 University of New Mexico (Electrical Engineering)
Ph.D. – 2005 University of New Mexico (Electrical Engineering)

3.

Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 4 years;
Original Appointment Dates: January 2007 – present
Assistant Professor – January 2007

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational –
2001-2005
University of New Mexico, Research Assistant
2005-2006
Georgia Institute of Technology, Post-Doctoral Fellow
Industrial s1996
Di-Micro (Athens, Greece): Assistant of Comp. Engineer (FT)
s1998
Microland AEBE (Athens, Greece): Tech. & Prod. Depts. (FT)
s1999
Alcatel Telecom Hellas (Athens, Greece): Switch Networks (FT)
Research and Development –
2004
Graduate Research and Development Grant, UNM,
$750.
2008-2011
National Science Foundation, (Co-PI) $372,000
2009-2010
Defense University Research Instrumentation Program, Army
Research Office, Department of Defense
$224,000
2009-2010
NASA South Dakota EPSCoR,
$45,000

5

Consulting:

6.

States in which registered:

7.

Principal publications of last five years:
Total: 1 Patent, 12 Journal, 2 Workshops, 43 intl‘ Conference presentations (peerreviewed).
Patent: Anagnostou et. al., ―RF
-MEMS Reconfigurable Self-Similar Antenna‖, U.S.
Patent #7589674, issued September 15, 2009.

none
none

Journal Papers only follow:
D. E. Anagnostou, G. Zheng, M. Chryssomallis, J. Lyke, G. Ponchak, J. Papapolymerou, and C.
G. Christodoulou, ―Des
ign, Fabrication and Measurements of an RF-MEMS-Based SelfSimilar Reconfigurable Antenna‖, IEEE Transactions on Antennas & Propagation,
Special Issue on Multifunction Antennas and Antenna Systems*, Vol. 54, Issue 2, Part 1,
Pages: 422 – 432, Feb 2006 (*Top-8 in downloads from IEEEXplore APS in 2006*)
N. Kingsley, D. E. Anagnostou, M. Tentzeris, and J. Papapolymerou, ―RFMEMS SequentiallyReconfigurable Sierpinski Antenna on a Flexible, Organic Substrate With Novel DC
Biasing Technique‖, IEEE/ASME Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems, Vol.
16, Issue 5, Oct. 2007 pp. 1185 - 1192
D. E. Anagnostou, M. Morton, J. Papapolymerou, C. G. Christodoulou, "A 0-55 GHz Low Loss
Coplanar Waveguide to Coplanar Stripline Transition", IEEE, Transactions on
Microwave Theory and Techniques, Vol. 56, Issue 1, Jan 2008, pp: 1-6.

261

A. A. Gheethan and D. E. Anagnostou, ―
The Design and Optimization of Planar LPDAs‖,
PIERS
Online, v.4, no.8, 2008, pp: 811-814
D. E. Anagnostou, J. Papapolymerou, M. M. Tentzeris, and Christos G. Christodoulou, ―A L
ogPeriodic Koch Dipole Arrays (LPKDA)‖, IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation
Letters, v.7, pp: 456-460, Dec. 2008
D. E. Anagnostou and A. A. Gheethan, ―ACoplanar Reconfigurable Folded Slot Antenna
Without Bias Network for WLAN Applications‖, IEEE Antennas and Wireless
Propagation Letters, Vol. 8, Sept. 2009 pp: 1057 - 1060
D. E. Anagnostou, A. A. Gheethan, A. Amert and K. W. Whites, ―ADirect-Write Printed
Antenna on Paper-Based Organic Substrate for Flexible Displays and WLAN
Applications‖, IEEE / OSA Journal of Display Technology, (accepted for publication).
8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Member, IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)
Member, Technical Chamber of Greece

9.

Honors and awards:
Award: John Kraus Antenna Award, IEEE, 2010 ―f
or contribution in the integration
and design of reconfigurable multiband antennas with RF MEMS
switches over a wide band frequency range (8-25 GHz).‖
Award: Distinguished scientist living abroad, Hellenic Ministry of Defense, 2006
Honorary Societies: Eta Kappa Nu

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
University:
Faculty Senate, 2008-2010 and
Academic Affairs Committee (2008-2010)
NANO and RIAS programs of SDSM&T, Member
ECE Dept.: Laboratory and Admissions Committees, 2010-present
International Level:
Associate Editor: International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetic, Springer
TPC Committee, IEEE Antennas & Propag. Intl‟Symp. 2009, Charleston, SC
TPC Committee, IEEE Antennas & Propag. Intl‟Symp. 2010, Toronto, Canada
Session Chair: IEEE-APS 2006: (1 session), IEEE-APS 2007: (3 sessions)
IEEE-APS 2008: (2 sessions), IEEE-APS 2009: (3 sessions)
IEEE-APS 2010: (2 sessions)
Reviewer: IEEE: Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, Transactions on MTT,
APS Magazine, AWPL (Letters), MWCL (Letters)
PIER and JEMWA, IEE-IET Microwaves Antennas & Propagation (UK)
Intl‘ Journal of Numerical Modeling (Wiley), IETE Technical Review
(India), ETRI Journal (Korea)

11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities: 60%

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program

262

100%

1. Name and Rank:

Bernt Askildsen
Ph.D. student teaching assistant

2.Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
BS – 1998
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (Electrical Engineering)
MS – 2000
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (Electrical Engineering)
MS – 2003
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (Technology Management)
PhD – Expected 2010 South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (Biomedical
Engineering)
3.Years of Service on this faculty, including date of orog9nal appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:

4 years as instructor
Original appointment September 1, 2006

4.Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc
Industrial:
DDT, Vice President Technology, 2008 - Present
REALTRONINCS CORPORATION, 1996 – 1997
Educational:

SDSM&T EE/CENG DEPARTMENT, Teaching Assistant, 1997 – 1998
Research and Development
Patents: Four issued patents, eleven published pending patent applications, one recently
filed patent application and six filed provisional patents.
5.Consulting: None
6.States in which registered:
None
7.Principal publications of last five years:
Zhang, N., Askildsen, B. A., and Hemmelman, B., "Investigation of Adaptive Filtering for Noisy
ECG Signals" IEEE Mountain Workshop on Adaptive and Learning Systems, SMCals/06, Logan,
Utah, July 24-26, 2006 ● Weiss, J.W., Askildsen, B. A., Thompson, S. R., and Gervasi, A.,
"Advances In Human Target Detection Using Opaque Material Penetrating Radar Data", 20th
International Conference on Computers and Their Applications (CATA-2005), New Orleans,
Louisiana, Mar 16-18, 2005.
.
8.Scientific and professional societies of which a member
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
National Science Foundation SBIR Review Board, Spring 2010.
9.

Honors and awards:
Outstanding Recent Graduate Award, 2006
Entrepreneur Scholarship Recipient, Genesis of Innovation, 2003
Magnet Award Recipient, Rapid City Economic Development Partnership, 2000 Outstanding
Leadership Award, BTS Student Society, 1994

263

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
National Science Foundation SBIR Review Board, Spring 2010.

11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program

264

25%

40%

1.

Name and Academic Rank: Michael Batchelder
Professor - Full Time

2.

Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
B.S. - 1968
Oklahoma State University (Electrical Engineering)
M.S. - 1969
Oklahoma State University (Electrical Engineering)
Ph.D. - 1974
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ. (Electrical
Engineering)
Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 35 years;
Original Appointment Dates: August 1974-May 1984, August 1986-date
Professor - August 1986
Associate Professor - August 1980
Assistant Professor - August 1974

3.

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational 1968-69
Oklahoma St. Univ., Teaching Assistant
1971-74
V.P.I., Research Assistant
1980-81
Bergen Ingeniorhogskol, Bergen, Norway Visiting
Professor
1984-86
State University of New York at Binghamton Associate
Professor
Industrial s1967
Collins Radio (now North American Rockwell)
Dallas,Texas. Lab Technician
1969-71
Western Electric, Winston-Salem NC and Bell Labs,
Whippany NJ. Engineer, digital systems test design
s1978
Hughes Aircraft, Los Angeles, CA. systems development
on simulator trainer for F-14.
1980-81
Chr. Michelsen Institute, Bergen, Norway Visiting Scientist
Research and Development 1985
Universal Instruments Corporation: Axes Error
Compensation
$19,498
1985
Universal Instruments Corporation: Robot Peripheral
Control Language
$14,000
1986
Universal Instruments Corporation: A Multi-tasking Robot
Peripheral Control Language
$8,666
1989-91
Governor's Office of Economic Development:
Development of a Virtual Memory System for IBM
Personal Computers and Compatibles
$226,911
1990
Governor's Office of Economic Development:
Development of a Multitrait Livestock Scanner
$61,943
1991
Governor's Office of Economic Development: Precast
Concrete Tile Batch Process Computer Control
$34,795
265

2009

5

6.

United States Department of Defense-Army Research
Laboratory . Michael Batchelder, Daniel Dolan (PI), Brian
Hemmelman, Elaine Linde, Vojislav Kalanovic, Wayne
Krause, Jeff McGough,and John Weiss
$350,000

Consulting:
Numerous projects with a variety of companies including robotics with
Universal Instruments of Binghamton New York, and embedded computer
control of pipe organs with Matters Brothers Organ Company.
States in which registered:
none

7.

Principal publications of last five years:
Phillip Jenkins (OAI, NASA GRC ), David Scheiman (OAI, NASA GRC), David
Wilt (NASA GRC), Ryne Raffaelle (RIT), Robert Button (NASA GRC), Thomas
Kerslake (NASA GRC), Michael Batchelder (South Dakota School of Mines and
Technology), Don Lefevre (Cynetics Corporation), ―
Results from the Advance
Power Technology Experiment on the Starshine 3 Satellite‖, 16th Annual
AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites
Dolan, Daniel F., Batchelder, Michael J., McReynolds, James, ―
Multidisciplinary
Teaming through Student Design Competitions‖, National Capstone Design
Conference, June 2007

8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Senior Member
Association for Computing Machinery
American Society for Engineering Education
Sigma XI Research Society

9.

Honors and awards:
Honorary Societies: Eta Kappa Nu, Phi Kappa Phi, Tau Beta Tau, Tau Beta Pi
Awards:
John A. Curtis Lecture Award, ASEE, 1983
Appeared in Esquire Magazine's 1984 Register: "Men and Women
Under 40 Who are Changing America"

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
Co-director Center for Advanced Manufacturing and Production
ECE Department Chair 2009-2010

11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program

266

100%

10%

1.

Name and Academic Rank: Ralph Grahek
Part Time – MSEE student teaching assistant

2.

Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
B.S. - 1986 South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (Electrical
Engineering)

3.

Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and
dates of advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 1 year;
Original Appointment Dates: August 2009

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational None
Industrial 1972-75
1976-77
1977-84
1984-85
1985-98
1998-99
2000-09

USAF, Avionics Inertial and Radar Navigation Systems
Technician
Magnetic Peripherals Inc., PC Board Test Technician
Magnetic Peripherals Inc., Test Engineering Technician
Magnetic Peripherals Inc., Test Engineer
Magnetic Peripherals Inc./SCI Systems, Materials Quality
Engineer
SCI Systems, Senior Engineer
Sanmina-SCI Corporation (formerly SCI Systems),
Supplier Quality Supervisor/Manager

Research and Development – none
5

Consulting: none

6.

States in which registered: none

7.

Principal publications of last five years:

8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Member

9.

Honors and awards:

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:

11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program

None

none

267

20%

none
80%

268

1.
2.

3.

4.

5
6.
7.

Name and Academic Rank:
Brian Hemmelman
Adjunct Associate Professor - Part Time
Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:

B.S. - 1992 South Dakota School of Mines & Technology (Electrical Engineering)
M.S. - 1996 South Dakota School of Mines & Technology (Electrical Engineering)
Ph.D. – 1998 South Dakota School of Mines & Technology (Materials Engineering and
Science)
Years of service on this faculty:
Years of Service: 16 years;
Adjunct Associate Professor - August 2009
Associate Professor - August 2004
Assistant Professor - August 1999
Instructor – September 1994
Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational 1991-92 South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, Research Assistant
1992-95
National Science Foundation Graduate Fellow
1996-97 South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, Research Assistant
Industrial 1990-91
Rockwell International, Cedar Rapid, IA, Co-op Intern
1996-98 Dakota Scientific Software, Rapid City, SD, Software Analyst
1996-2001
HEMO Research, Rapid City, SD, Consultant
Research and Development 2003
Imation Corporation, ―L
TO Data Cartridge RF Tags‖, B.
Hemmelman (PI) and K. Whites
$10,000
2004-09
Realtronics Inc., ―F
ield Programmable Array Optimizing of
WallVision‖, B. Hemmelman (PI)
$418,000
2005-2007
South Dakota Space Grant Consortium, ―
Intelligent and Fault
Tolerant Signal Processing for Space Systems‖, B. Hemmelman
(PI), L. Chen, N. Zhang
$15,000
2007
Army Research Laboratory, ―U
AV-Deployed Penetrating Radar for
Through-The-Wall Sensing‖, D. Dolan (PI), J. Weiss, B.
Hemmelman,
$690,000
2008
U.S. Department of Defense, Armament, Research, Development
and Engineering Center, ―
Ultra-Wideband Sensing for UGV‖, D.
Dolan (PI), J. Weiss, M. Batchelder, B. Hemmelman, E. Linde
$200,000 (addition
2008
Bamboo, LLC., ―AReal-Time Portable Non-Invasive Monitoring
System of Muscle Oxygen and pH in Trauma Patients‖
$30,000
2009
Army Research Laboratory, ―Sm
all Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
(UAVs) and Sensors‖ , D. Dolan (PI), J. Weiss, M. Batchelder, B.
Hemmelman, E. Linde
$350,000
2009
South Dakota NASA EPSCoR, ―F
ault-Tolerant Fuzzy Logic Chips
on Reconfigurable FPGA System‖, N. Zhang (PI) and B.
Hemmelman
$25,000
2009
Idaho National Laboratory ―
System Identification (SysID)
Research‖, B. Hemmelman (PI)
$32, 504
Consulting:
Consulted on an image processing project in the late 1990‘s under my consulting company
name, HEMO Research.
States in which registered: none
Principal publications of last five years:

269

D. Alsup, B. Hemmelman, ―Cl
assification of Electrocardiogram Arrhythmias Using Neural
Networks‖, Artificial Neural Networks In Engineering (ANNIE) Conference, St. Louis, MO,
2007.
E. Minnaert, B. Hemmelman, D. Dolan, ―I
nverted Pendulum Design with Hardware Fuzzy
Logic Controller‖, (Invited Paper), 11th World Multi-Conference On Systemics, Cybernetics,
and Informatics (WMSCI), Orlando, FL, 2007.
M. Pluimer, B. Hemmelman, ―F
uzzy Controller for Self-Centering Differentially Steered
Robot‖, (Invited Paper), 11th World Multi-Conference On Systemics, Cybernetics, and
Informatics (WMSCI), Orlando, FL, 2007.
K. Park, N. Zhang, B. Hemmelman, ―Behav
ior-Based Autonomous Robot Navigation on
Challenging Terrain: A Fuzzy Logic Approach‖, Artificial Neural Networks In Engineering
(ANNIE) Conference, St. Louis, MO, 2006.
Q. Ding, N. Zhang, B. Hemmelman, ―Cl
assification of Recorded Musical Instrument Sounds
Using Neural Network‖, Artificial Neural Networks In Engineering (ANNIE) Conference, St.
Louis, MO, 2006.
N. Zhang, B. Askildsen, B. Hemmelman, ―
Investigation of Adaptive Filtering for Noise ECG
Signals‖, 2006 IEEE Mountain Workshop on Adaptive and Learning Systems (SMCals
2006), Logan, UT, 2006.
L. Terum and B. Hemmelman, ―AOne GigaFLIPS Fuzzy Logic Control Chip Using Only
Combinational Logic and Field Programmable Gate Arrays‖, IEEE Region 5 Conference, San
Antonio , TX, 2006.

8.
9.
10.

11.
12.

M. Hoffman, P. Bauer, B. Hemmelman, A. Hasan, ―
Hardware Synthesis of Artificial Neural
Networks Using Field Programmable Gate Arrays and Fixed-Point Numbers‖, IEEE Region 5
Conference, San Antonio, TX, 2006.
Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Member
Honors and awards:
Honorary Societies: Eta Kappa Nu, Tau Beta Tau
Awards:
National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship 1992-95
Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
ECE Department Chair 2007-09, Multi-Cultural Program Council, Biomedical Engineering
Advisory Council, Materials Engineering and Science Advisory Council, Faculty Advisory
Council, University Curriculum Committee, Director of High Plains Regional Science and
Engineering Fair
Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:
0%
Percentage of time committed to the program
66.7%

270

1.

Name and Academic Rank: Randy C. Hoover
Assistant Professor - Full Time

2.

Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
B.S. - 2002: Idaho State University (Electrical Engineering)
M.S. - 2004: Idaho State University (Measurement and Control
Engineering)
Ph.D. - 2009: Colorado State University (Electrical Engineering)

3.

Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 1 year
Original Appointment Dates: August 2009-May 2010

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational 2002-03 Idaho State University, Teaching Assistant
2006-09 Colorado State University, Research Assistant
2005-06 ITT Tech. Institute, Denver, Instructor
Industrial s2004 Embedded Systems Design Engineer, Idaho State University, Pocatello,
Idaho
2003-04 Mixed Signal Test Engineer, American Microsystems Inc., Pocatello,
Idaho
Research and Development 2009 Nelson Research Grant: Developing Metrics for Analyzing
Low-dimensional Appearance Manifolds
$5,000

5

Consulting: none

6.

States in which registered: none

7.
Principal publications of last five years:
Randy C. Hoover, Anthony A. Maciejewski, and Rodney G. Roberts, "Fast Eigenspace
Decomposition for Illumination Invariant Pose Estimation'', accepted to appear in IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part B: Cybernetics, May. 2010.
Randy C. Hoover, Anthony A. Maciejewski, and Rodney G. Roberts, "Pose Estimation from
Images Correlated on S1, S2, and SO(3) Using Eigendecomposition in Conjunction with Spectral
Theory'', in IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Nov. 2009, Vol. 18, Issue 11.
Marco P. Schoen, Randy C. Hoover, Sinchai Chinvorarat, and Gerhard M. Schoen, "System
Identification and Robust Controller Design using Genetic Algorithms for Flexible Space
Structures'', Journal of Dynamical Systems, Measurement, and Control, May 2009, Vol. 131,
Issue 3.
Jeff McGough, Alan Christianson, and Randy C. Hoover, "Symbolic Computation of Lyapunov
Functions Using Evolutionary Algorithms'', accepted to appear in IASTED International
Conference on Control and Applications, July 2010.

271

Randy C. Hoover, Anthony A. Maciejewski, and Rodney G. Roberts, "Designing Eigenspace
Manifolds: With Application to Object Identification and Pose Estimation'', in IEEE International
Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), October 2009.
Randy C. Hoover, Anthony A. Maciejewski, Rodney G. Roberts, and Ryan P. Hoppal, "An
Illustration of Eigenspace Decomposition for Illumination Invariant Pose Estimation'', in IEEE
International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), October 2009.
Randy C. Hoover, Anthony A. Maciejewski, and Rodney G. Roberts, "Pose Detection of 3-D
Objects Using Images Sampled on SO(3), Spherical Harmonics, and Wigner-D Matrices'', in
IEEE Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), pp. 47-52, Washington DC,
Aug. 23-26, 2008.
Randy C. Hoover, Anthony A. Maciejewski, and Rodney G. Roberts, "Pose Detection of 3-D
Objects Using S2-Correlated Images and Discrete Spherical Harmonic Transforms'', in IEEE
International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 993-998, Pasadena, CA, May.
19-23, 2008.
8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Member
IEEE Robotics and Automation Society
Sigma XI Research Society

9.

Honors and awards:
Honorary Societies: Phi Kappa Phi, Tau Beta Pi
Awards:
-Perl Family Fellowship (2008)
-Colorado State University Graduate Fellowship (2006 & 2007)
-ASME Travel Grant to attend the International Mechanical Engineering Congress and
Exposition (IMECE) (2005)
-National Science Foundation Fellow (2004 - 2005)
-National Science Foundation - EPSCoR Student Enhancement Grant (2003)
-Infrastructure Grant - Idaho State University Office of Research, under the
Department of Defense (DoD) EPSCoR program (2003)
-Best Capstone Design Report Award (2002)

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
Mentor: Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Team (2009 - Present)
Mentor: IEEE Robotics Team (2009 - Present)
Judge: SDSM\&T Undergraduate Research Symposium (2010)
Serve on Several Graduate Student Committees

11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program 100%

272

30%

1.

Name and Academic Rank:

2.

Degrees with fields, institution, and date:
B.S. - 1989 Oklahoma State University (Mechanical Engineering)
M.S. - 1995
Colorado State University (Mechanical Engineering)
Ph.D. - ABD
Purdue University (Mechanical Engineering)

Elaine Linde, Instructor

3. Number of years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and
dates of advancement in rank:
2 ½ years; January 2002-date
4. Other related experience--teaching, industrial, etc.:
Educational 1997
Purdue University, Teaching Assistant
Industrial 1989-1993
Dow Chemical, Fresno, CA, Production Engineer
1999-2002
Sanmina-SCI, Rapid City, SD, Quality Engineer
5. Consulting, patents, etc.:
none
6. State(s) in which registered:
none
7.

Principal publications of last five years:
1. Linde, Elaine, Batchelder, Michael J., Dolan, Daniel F., ―
Mechatronics for
Multidisciplinary Teaming‖, American Society for Engineering Education Annual
Conference, Session 1526, June, 2003.

8. Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
none
9. Honors and awards:
Honorary Societies: Pi Tau Sigma, Tau Beta Pi
Awards:
DOE Integrated Manufacturing Fellowship, 1997-1999
Ingersoll Rand Fellowship, 1995
Colorado Fellowship, 1993-1995
10. Institutional and professional service in the last five years
Faculty Search Committee Member
Laboratory Committee Member
Assist with school chapter of the Society of Women Engineers
Assist with E-week Girls activities
Freshman Mentor
Member of Committee addressing female recruiting and retention
Leadership Hall of Fame Committee Member

273

11. Professional development activities in the last five years
TL9000 Implementation
ASEE Conference
Developed course for non-majors including laboratories

274

1. Name and Academic Rank: Thomas P. Montoya, Assistant Professor
[Associate Professor status pending]
2. Degrees with fields, institutions, and dates:
B.Sc., Physics, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 1987
B.Sc., Electrical Engineering, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, 1987
M.S., Electrical Engineering, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, 1992
Ph.D., Electrical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, June 1998
3. Number of years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and
dates of advancement in rank:
9 years of service at SDSM&T
August 2001- June 2003 Assistant Professor on Term Contract
July 2003- June 2010 Assistant Professor on Tenure Track
July 2010- present Associate Professor, Tenured (pending)
4. Other related experience- teaching, industrial, etc.:
1998-2001 Assistant Professor, The University of Tennessee Knoxville
1995-1998 Graduate Research Assistant, Georgia Institute of Technology
1991-1994 National Defense Science & Engineering Graduate Fellow and Georgia Tech
Presidential Fellow at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
1991-1996 Graduate Teaching Assistant, Georgia Institute of Technology
1988-1992 Graduate Student, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado
1988-1991 Electrical Design Engineer, Texas Instruments, Inc., Colorado Springs, Colorado
1987-1997 Commissioned Officer, United States Army Reserve. Honorably discharged.
1987 Officer Basic Course, Missile Maintenance Officer, Ordnance Corps US Army,
Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, Alabama.
5. Consulting, patents, etc.:
Consulted with JPL in the spring of 2004 on ground penetrating radar for uture Mars probe.
6. State(s) in which registered:

None

7. Principal publications of last five years:
1. T. P. Montoya and A. W. Downs, ―
Passive Microwave Devices made using Resistive
Loads Fabricated by Direct-Write Fabrication,‖ SD Academy of Science 95th Annual Meeting,
Spearfish, SD, April 9-10, 2010.
2. T. P. Montoya, ―
Resistive Loads and Loading Implemented by Direct-Write Fabrication,‖
Proceedings of the SD Academy of Science, vol. 88, pp. 57-66, 2009.
3. T. P. Montoya, ―
Direct-Write Fabrication of Antennas with Resistive Loading on Flexible
Substrates,‖ Proceedings of the SD Academy of Science, vol. 87, pp. 301-309, 2008.
4. A. W. Downs and T. P. Montoya, ―
Resistive Loading Implemented by Direct-Write
Fabrication,‖ 2009 IEEE APS International Symp., Charleston, SC, paper 311.2, June 1-5,
2009.

275

5. A. W. Downs and T. P. Montoya, ―
Antennas with Distributed Resistive Loading
Constructed by Direct-Write Fabrication,‖ USNC/URSI National Radio Science Meeting,
Charleston, SC, paper 503.2, June 1-5, 2009.
8. Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society
9. Honors and awards:
Honorary societies: Tau Beta Pi and Eta Kappa Nu.
1992 & 1993 Graduate Teaching Assistant Award, Ga. Tech EE Laboratory Committee
1991 Presidential Fellowship, Georgia Institute of Technology
1987 Distinguished Military Graduate, SDSM&T
1986 Hughes Memorial Scholarship, SDSM&T
1983-1985 Lipkie Scholarship, SDSM&T
1983-1985 Top Science Student, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology
1985 Leslie E. Boyd Award for Excellence in Technical Writing
1984, 1985 Homer Surbeck Physics Prize
1982 National Merit Scholar
10. Institutional and professional service in the last five years:
SDSM&T Faculty Senate
Chair of Academic Affairs Committee for Faculty Senate
ECE Department Curriculum Committee
College of Systems Engineering Curriculum Committee
University Curriculum Committee
Member of ECE Curriculum, Lab, Scholarship & Department Head Search Committees
Science Fair Committee
Eta Kappa Nu Faculty Advisor
Student Advising and Mentoring
Reviewer for IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation
Session Chair for "Microstrip Reflectarray Antennas and Manufacturing Techniques," at
2008 IEEE AP-S Int‘l Symp. on Antennas & Propag. and USNC/URSI Nat‘l Radio Science
Mtg
Session Chair for "Subgridding Methods in FDTD," at 2006 IEEE AP-S Int‘l Symp. on
Antennas & Propag. and USNC/URSI Nati‘l Radio Science Meeting
11. Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities12. Percentage of time committed to the program-

276

30%

100% of professional/work time

1.

Name and Academic Rank: Scott Rausch
Adjunct Instructor

2.

Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
B.S. - 1975
SD School of Mines and Technology (Electrical
Engineering)

3.

Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 4 years
Original Appointment Dates: January 2007

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Industrial 1997 - 99
AlliedSignal – Electronics and Avionics Systems,
Engineering Director
1996
Kaiser Electronics, Consultant
1994 - 96
Loral Information Display Systems - Division of Lockheed
Martin & L3 , Vice President - Engineering
1993 - 94
Rockwell/Collins - Advanced Technology & Engineering,
Engineering Department Head
Honeywell Air Transport Systems Division, Engineering
1986 - 93
Department Head, Engineering Program Manager,
Engineering Section Head
1977 - 86
Rockwell/Collins - Advanced Technology & Engineering,
Engineer, Project Engineer, Technical Director
1975 - 77
Union Carbide Corp - Process Control Department,
Engineer

5.

Consulting:

6.

States in which registered:
none

7.

Principal publications of last five years:
none

8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

9.

Honors and awards:
none

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
IEEE Black Hills Subsection Chair

2009 - 10

Dakota Power, Rapid City, SD. Switched reluctance motor
design, power electronics design

277

Piedmont, SD Park Board
South Dakota Poetry Society Board of Directors
South Dakota Humanities Council Board of Directors
South Dakota American Radio Relay League Section Manager
11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities: 100%

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program: 100%

278

1.
2.

3.

4.

5

6.
7.

Name and Academic Rank: Charles R. Tolle Associate Professor - Full Time
Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
B.S. – 1990
University of Utah (Electrical Engineering)
Arizona State University (Electrical Engineering)
M.S. – 1994
Ph.D. – 1998
Utah State University (Electrical Engineering)
Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 1.5 years;
Original Appointment Dates: January 2009
Associate Professor - January 2009
Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educ– 1989-1990
Univ. of Utah, ee Dept., Salt Lake City, UT, Teaching Assistant.
1999-2006
Utah State Univ., Dept. ECE, Adjunct Asst. Prof.
2006-2009
Idaho State Univ., Dept. Electrical Eng., Member of the
Graduate Faculty, Adjunct Prof.
2007-pres.
Utah State Univ., Dept. Physics, Adjunct Assoc. Prof.
2008-2009
Univ. of Idaho, Dept. of Mech. Eng. Affiliate Prof.
Indust- 2006-2009
Idaho National Lab (INL-DOE) – Battelle Energy Alliance
(BEA), LLC, Idaho Falls, ID. R&D Senior Staff Engineer/Group Leader
Research and Development PI: Automated Differential Equation-Based Identification, INL Laboratory Directed
Research and Development (LDRD), $450K; SDSMT subcontract, $270K
Co-PI: Exploration and Development of a Distributed Fuzzy‐C Means Clustering
Algorithm, INL LDRD, SDSMT subcontract: $30K
Co-PI:
Exploration
of
BLUEROSEof
Fiber-Optic
System,
INL LDRD,
$485K
Exploration
and
Development
Automated
Differential
Equation-Based
System
PI:
Mathematical
Characterization
and
SyntheticSensor
Generation
of Spatial
Structures
.......................
Identification,
INL
LDRD,
$375.6K
Across
Multiple
Scales
Using
Fractal Techniques, INL LDRD, $621K
Co-PI: Hybrid Friction Stir Welding, INL LDRD, $315K
PI: Friction Stir Welding, U.S. Army ARL/TACOM project, $120K
PI: Advanced Materials Processing, U.S. Army ARL/TACOM project $60K
PI: Friction Stir Welding, U.S. Army TACOM project $25K
Co-PI: Complex Intelligent Machines, DOE Office of Science (SC) Basic Energy
Science (BES) project $790K
PI: Friction Stir Welding Tool Development, INEEL LDRD sub-project $25K
PI/Co-PI: Automatic Flaw Detection and Identification for Coiled Tubing, DOE
Natural Gas and Oil Technology Partnership (NGOTP) $658K
Co-PI: Intelligent Control of Bioprocesses, DOE SC-BES project $400K
PI: CFD Model Based Control of Two-Phase Flow, INEEL LDRD project $262.5K
Co-PI: Friction Stir Welding of Lightweight Materials for Automotive and
Transportation Systems, INEEL LDRD project, $400K
Patents: Device and Method for Self-Verifying Temperature Measurement and Control, US
6,473,708 B1, Oct. 29, 2002; Device for Self-Verifying Temperature Measurement and
Control, US 6,772,085 B2, Aug. 3, 2004; Learning-Based Controller For Biotechnology
Processing, and Method of Using, US 6,792,336 B1, September 14, 2004; Friction Stir
Welding Tool, US 7,357,292 B2, April 15, 2008;
Method for Forming Materials, US
7,597,236 B2, Oct. 6, 2009.
States in which registered:
none
Principal publications of last five years:
1. H.B. Smartt, C.R. Tolle, and K.S. Miller, Rule-based Strategy for Event Decisions in an
Intelligent Machine, currently drafting, planned submission to IEEE Transactions on
Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2010.
2. C.R. Tolle and J.W. James. A Method for Finding Unknown Signals Using Reinforment

279

8.

9.

10.

11.
12.

FFT Differencing, Journal of the Idaho Academy Science, Dec., 2009.
3. K. S. Miller, C. R. Tolle, D. E. Clark, C. I. Nichol, T. R. McJunkin, and H. B. Smartt,
"Investigation into Interface Lifting Within FSW Lap Welds," Proceeding in Trends in
Welding Research 2008, Pine Mountain, GA, June 1-5, 2008.
4. C.R. Tolle, T.A. White, K.S. Miller, D.E. Clark, and H.B. Smartt, "Experimental
Investigation of Material Flows Within FSWs Using 3D Tomography Proceeding in
Trends in Welding Research 2008, Pine Mountain, GA, June 1-5, 2008.
5. H. B. Smartt, D. P. Pace, E. D. Larsen, T. R. McJunkin, C. I. Nichol, D. E. Clark, K. L.
Skinner, M. L. Clark, T. G. Kaser, and C. R. Tolle, "Robotic Welding and Inspection
System," Proceeding in Trends in Welding Research 2008, Pine Mountain, GA, 2008.
6. K.H. Warnick, C.R. Tolle, and J.W. James. Exploration of the Trajectory Method for
Reconstructing Nonlinear Differential Equations from Time Series, submitted to
Physica D for publication, Nov., 2007.
7. C.R. Tolle, and T.R. McJunkin, and D.J. Gorsich. An efficient implementation of the
gliding box lacunarity algorithm, Physica D, Vol. 237, No. 3, pp. 306-315, 2008.
8. T.R. McJunkin, K.S. Miller, C.R. Tolle, A.D. Watkins, and E.D. Larsen. Detection of
Coiled Tubing Defects Using Matched Filter Algorithm, revising for submission to
EURASIP Journal on Applied Signal Processing, Nov., 2006.
9. T. R. McJunkin, K.S. Miller, and C.R. Tolle. Observations on Characterization of
Defects in Coiled Tubing from Magnetic Flux Leakage Data, ICOTA: 2006 Coiled
Tubing Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, TX, April 4-5, 2006, [Online]
Available: (http://www.spe.org/elibinfo/eLibrary Papers/spe/2006/06CT/SPE-100121MS/SPE-100121-MS.htm), 2006.
Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Senior Member, Control Society,
Computer Society
1989-Present
American Welding Society (AWS) Member
1998-2009
Sigma Xi Full Lifetime Member
2004-Present
Idaho Section of the America Nuclear Society Lifetime Member
2005-Present
SIAM, Dynamical Systems Activity Group
2007-Present
Honors and awards:
Honorary Societies: Eta Kappa Nu, Tau Beta Tau, Golden Key, Eagle Scout
Awards
Intermountain Chapter of the Soc. of Tech. Comm. Award of Merit:
―Lac.Def. For Rand. Data Sets‖
Rocky Mountain NASA Space Grant Consortium Fellowship, Utah State Univ.
Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
ECE Faculty Senator, 2010-Present; Advisor: IEEE SDSMT student section, High
Plains – Black Hills Sub-Section, Robotics team, UAV team, AUV team, 2009-Present
Chairman, Tech. Advisory Board- Rocky Mt. Robotics Coalition, 2008-Present
Apple Cooperative Researcher, 2007-Present; Member of the Engineering Advisory
Council for the College of Trustee of the Rocky Mountain NASA Space Grant
Consortium (RMNSGC), 2002-Present; President, RMNSGC Fellows Association,
2000-Present
Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:
10%- during academic year
100%- during summer
Percentage of time committed to the program 100%

280

1. Name and Academic Rank: Keith W. Whites
Professor - Full Time
2.

Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
B.S. - 1986 South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (Electrical Engineering)
M.S. - 1988 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (Electrical Engineering)
Ph.D. - 1991 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (Electrical Engineering)

3.

Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 9 years;
Original Appointment Dates: August 2001-date
Professor - August 2001

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational - 1988-90
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Teaching
Assistant
1990-91
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Lecturer
Industrial s1986
Sandia National Laboratory. Graduate summer assistant.
1987-88
US Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory.
Champaign, IL. Research assistant.
Research and Development 2009 K. W. Whites (PI) and T. Amert (co-PI), BerrieHill Research Corporation. Contact
period: 5/1/09-8/31/10. Contract amount: $140,000.
2009 Anagnostou (PI), K.W. Whites (co-PI), and T. Montoya (co-PI), Department of the
Army, Army Research Office. Contract period: 4/15/09-4/14/10. Contract
amount: $224,000.
2008
K. W. Whites (PI), A. Amert (co-PI), and D. Anagnostou (co-PI), National
Science Foundation. Grant period: 10/1/08-8/30/11. Grant amount: $372,000.
J. Kellar (PI) and K. W. Whites (co-PI), South Dakota State University (prime:
2008
NSF EPSCoR). Grant period: 4/1/08-3/30/09. Grant amount: $463,582.
2007
J. Kellar (PI) and K. W. Whites (co-PI), South Dakota State University (prime:
NSF EPSCoR). Grant period: 4/1/08-3/30/09. Grant amount: $461,948.
2006 Steve Smith (PI), P. S. May (co-PI), A. G. Petukhov (co-PI), and K. W. Whites
(co-PI), National Science Foundation Major Research Instrumentation (MRI)
Program. Grant period: 10/1/06-9/30/10. Grant amount: $432,802.
2006
K. W. Whites, Department of the Army, Army Research Laboratory. Contract
period: 10/1/06-8/31/08. Contract amount: $190,000.
2006 J. Kellar (PI) and K. W. Whites (co-PI), South Dakota State University (prime:
NSF EPSCoR), Grant period: 4/1/06-3/30/07. Grant amount: $429,562.
2005 T. P. Montoya (PI), L. Simonson (co-PI), and K. W. Whites (co-PI), Rockwell
Collins Charitable Corporation, University Allocations Program. Grant period:
7/1/05-6/30/06. Grant amount: $19,522.

281

2005

K. W. Whites, Department of the Army, Army Research Laboratory. Contract
period: 4/1/05-3/31/06. Contract amount: $200,000.
2005 J. Sears (PI) and K. W. Whites (co-PI), Department of the Army, Army Research
Laboratory. Contract period: 4/1/05-3/31/06. Contract amount: $800,000.
5

Consulting:
Broadway Holdings, Inc., Sheridan, Wyoming. Energy Science Laboratories,
Inc., San Diego, California.

6.

States in which registered:
none

7.

Principal publications of last five years (plus 18 more):
A. K. Amert and K. W. Whites, ―
Miniaturization of the biconical antenna
1.
for ultrawideband applications,‖ IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 57,
no. 12, pp. 3728-3735, 2009.
2.
B. Glover, K. W. Whites, H. Hong, A. Mukherjee, and W. E. Billups,

Effective electrical conductivity of functional single-wall carbon nanotubes
in aqueous fluids,‖ Synthetic Metals, vol. 158, no. 12, pp. 506-508, 2008.
3. K. W. Whites, T. Amert, K. Kirschenmann, and S. M. Woessner,

Monolithic fabrication of multi-material artificial electromagnetic surfaces
and devices (invited paper),‖ Proceedings of Metamaterials 2007, Rome,
Italy, pp. 66-69, Oct. 22-26, 2007.

8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Senior Member
American Society for Engineering Education

9.

Honors and awards:
Honorary Societies: Eta Kappa Nu, Tau Beta Pi
Awards: R.W.P. King Prize Paper Award from the IEEE Antennas and
Propagation Society for the best Transactions paper by an author 35 years old
or younger. (1999)

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
Numerous SDSMT committees in the department and the university.
Co-chaired and co-organized numerous sessions at international conferences.

11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program

282

100%

50%

1.

Name and Academic Rank: Edward Corwin
Professor - Full Time

2.

Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
B.A. Mathematics, Lehigh University, 1974
M.S. Mathematics, Lehigh University, 1975
Ph.D. Mathematics, Lehigh University, 1977
M.S. Computer Science, Texas Tech University, 1992
Ph.D. Computer Science, Texas Tech University, 1995

3.

Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 29 years;
Original Appointment Date: August 1981
Professor: August 1987
Associate Professor: August 1981

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational 1977-78
Ursinus College, Instructor
1978-81
Indiana University Southeast, Assistant Professor
1988-89
University of Maryland, European Division, Instructor
1989-91
Texas Tech University, Instructor
Industrial 1977-78
s1984
1985-86
s1987
s2000-02

Computer Sciences Corporation at Naval Air Development
Center
ETA Systems
ETA Systems
ETA Systems
Comuniq

Research and Development 2005-present Center for Friction Stir Processing
5

Consulting:
2009-present

6.

States in which registered:
none

7.

Principal publications of last five years:
Enkhsaikhan Boldsaikhan, Edward Corwin, Antonette Logar, William Arbegast, and
Bharat Jasthi, ―A hPase Space Approach to Detecting Volumetric Defects in Friction Stir
Welding‖, TWI-2010

Severson and Associates

William Arbegast, Antonette Logar, and Edward Corwin, Multi-University I/UCRC
Management Tools – A Case Study, NSF 2008
Enkhsaikhan Boldsaikhan, Edward Corwin, Antonette Logar, Jeff McGough, and
William Arbegast, ―Ph
ase Space Analysis of Friction Stir Weld Quality‖, TMS 2007:

283

Linking Science and Technology for Global Solutions (annual meeting of The Minerals,
Metals, & Materials Society), Orlando, February, 2007.
Antonette Logar, Edward Corwin, Enkhsaikhan Boldsaikhan, Daniel Woodward, and
William Arbegast, ―Re
al-time Classification of Friction Stir Weld Quality‖, TMS 2007:
Linking Science and Technology for Global Solutions (annual meeting of The Minerals,
Metals, & Materials Society), Orlando, February, 2007.
Antonette Logar, Edward Corwin, Enkhsaikhan Boldsaikhan, Daniel Woodward, and
William Arbegast, ―App
lications of Artificial Intelligence to Friction Stir Welding‖,
National Conference on Recent Advancement in Information technology, Coimbatore,
India, February, 2007.
Edward Corwin, Antonette Logar, Troy McVay, and Nathan Sachs, ―
An Overview of
Satellite Image Processing Research at SDSM&T‖, National Conference on Recent
Advancement in Information technology, Coimbatore, India, February, 2007.
E. Boldsaikhan, E. Corwin, A. Logar, and W. Arbegast, ―Neur
al Network Evaluation of
Weld Quality using FSW Feedback Data‖, International Symposium on Friction Stir
Welding, TWI – the Welding Institute, Montreal, Canada, October, 2006.
8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Association for Computing Machinery

9.

Honors and awards:
Honorary Societies: Tau Beta Pi, Upsilon Pi Upsilon
Awards:
SDSM&T Presidential Award for Outstanding Professor, 2002

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
Institution Tenure and Promotion Committee, 2005-2007
ABET Program Evaluator

11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program 25%

284

15%

1.

Name and Academic Rank: Antonette Logar
Professor - Full Time

2.

Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
Ph.D. in Computer Science, Texas Tech University, 1992
Dissertation : Recurrent Neural Networks and Time Series Prediction
M.S. in Computer Science, University of Minnesota, 1986
B.S. in Computer Science, SDSM&T, 1985
J.D. in Law, University of Louisville, 1982
B.A. in Geological Sciences, Lehigh University, 1978

3.

Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 27 years;
Original Appointment Date: August 1983
Professor: August 2000
Associate Professor: August 1995

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational : 1988-89 : University of Maryland, European Division, Instructor
Industrial : 1985-1986 : Software Engineer, ETA Systems, St. Paul, MN
1986, 1987 summers at ETA Systems, St. Paul, MN
Research and Development : 2005-present
Center for Friction Stir Processing

5

Consulting/ Grants (2008-2010)
(1) ―I
NSPIRE: Integration of NASA Space Projects Into RIAS Education‘, Program
Initiation Grant, submitted to NASA Space Grant, November 10, 2008, $25,000. With
Ed Corwin and Jeff McGough.
(2) ―C
ollaborative Research: Supplement – Dynamic Web Based Methods and Tools for
Multi-University I/UCRC Management, Data Integration and Decision Support‖,
submitted to NSF, $200,000. ($100,000 to Virginia Tech, $100,000 to SDSM&T). With
Bill Arbegast. 2008-2010.
(3) ―
Evaluation of Friction-Stir Weld Quality using Acoustic Emissions‖, submitted to
Nelson Research Award Committee, $4,100. 2009.
(4) ―
Enhancement, Evaluation, and Dissemination of Multi-University I/UCRC
Management Tools‖, submitted to NSF. Summer support plus support for one graduate
student, $44,000. With Bill Arbegast and Ed Corwin. 2009.
(5) ―A rFamework for Developing Multi-Touch Applications to Enhance K-12
Education‖ with Jaelle Scheuerman, Robyn Krage, Lori Rebenitsch. $25,000.
Additional funding of $2,500 was obtained from a NASA Space Grant for this project.
2009-2010.
(6) ―Fr
iction Stir processing Industry/University Cooperative Research Center‖, Renewal
Grant. Funded by NSF ($205,590). 2009.
(7) ―C
ollaborative Proposal: Building and Sustaining the WyDak Research Garden‖,
submitted to NSF EPSCoRE, November 2009. co-PI with Jon Kellar, requested
$6,000,000 (collaborative with SDSU, USD, Univ. of Wyoming). Pending.

6.

States in which registered:

7.

Principal publications of last five years :

none

285

a) Refereed publications (articles)
Enkhsaikhan Boldsaikhan, Edward Corwin, Antonette Logar, William Arbegast, and
Bharat Jasthi, ―A hPase Space Approach to Detecting Volumetric Defects in Friction Stir
Welding‖, TWI-2010
Enkhsaikhan Boldsaikhan, Edward Corwin, Antonette Logar, Jeff McGough, and
William Arbegast, ―Ph
ase Space Analysis of Friction Stir Weld Quality‖, TMS 2007:
Linking Science and Technology for Global Solutions (annual meeting of The Minerals,
Metals, & Materials Society), Orlando, February, 2007.
Antonette Logar, Edward Corwin, Enkhsaikhan Boldsaikhan, Daniel Woodward, and
William Arbegast, ―
Real-time Classification of Friction Stir Weld Quality‖, TMS 2007:
Linking Science and Technology for Global Solutions (annual meeting of The Minerals,
Metals, & Materials Society), Orlando, February, 2007.
Antonette Logar, Edward Corwin, Enkhsaikhan Boldsaikhan, Daniel Woodward, and
William Arbegast, ―App
lications of Artificial Intelligence to Friction Stir Welding‖,
National Conference on Recent Advancement in Information technology, Coimbatore,
India, February, 2007.
Edward Corwin, Antonette Logar, Troy McVay, and Nathan Sachs, ―
An Overview of
Satellite Image Processing Research at SDSM&T‖, National Conference on Recent
Advancement in Information technology, Coimbatore, India, February, 2007.
E. Boldsaikhan, E. Corwin, A. Logar, and W. Arbegast, ―Neur
al Network Evaluation of
Weld Quality using FSW Feedback Data‖, International Symposium on Friction Stir
Welding, TWI – the Welding Institute, Montreal, Canada, October, 2006.
(b) Books
William Arbegast, Antonette Logar, and Edward Corwin, Multi-University I/UCRC
Management Tools – A Case Study, NSF 2008 (book)
E.Boldsaikhan, A.M.Logar, E.M.Corwin, ―Re
al-Time Quality Monitoring in Friction Stir
Welding: The Use of Feedback Forces for Nondestructive Evaluation of Friction Stir
Welding‖, Lambert Academic Publishing, 2010.
8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
IEEE, Neural Networks Society, Tau Beta Pi

9.

Honors and awards:
 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Fellow, 2009
 NASA Space Act Award, 2001
 Tau Beta Pi Eminent Engineer, 2000
 Leadership Rapid City, 1998
 Presidential Outstanding Professor Award, 1997
 Benard A. Ennenga Award for Excellence in Teaching, 1996

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
 Institution Tenure and Promotion Committee
 ABET Commissioner
 ABET Program Evaluator

11.
12.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:
Percentage of time committed to the program 30%

286

15%

1. Name, current academic rank, and tenure status:
Jeff Scot McGough, Associate Professor, Tenured
2. Date of original appointment to this faculty, followed by dates and ranks of
advancement:
Appointment: 8/98
Promotion: 8/04
3.

Degrees with fields, institutions, and dates

Degree

Field

Institution

Date

BS
BS
Ph.D.

Mathematics
Anthropology
Mathematics

University of Utah
University of Utah
University of Utah

1985
1985
1993

4. If you do not have a formal degree in computer science, describe any course work you
may have taken, or other ways in which you have achieved competence in computer
science; there is no necessity to repeat information here which is contained in later
sections of this document.
Postdoctoral Fellowship in Scientific Computing,
Center for Scientific Computing, University of Utah, 1993-94.
5. Other related computing experience including teaching, industrial, governmental, etc.
(Where, when, description and scope of duties):
MS Program Coordinator for RIAS – Robotics and Intelligent Autonomous Systems,
2009-present
SunTech Collaboration Member, SunTech: Sun Microsystems and SDSMT Department
of Mathematics and Computer Science Collaboration, 2000-2003
6. Consulting-list agencies and dates, and briefly describe each project:
Journey Museum – Rapid City, 2008-9, Robotics Education
Black Hills Fencing Club – 2007-2008, Wireless Scoring System
Sun Microsystems, 2000-2002, Parallel Computing Tools Development
7. Department, college, and/or university committees of which you are a member:
RIAS Curriculum Committee
Computer Science Curriculum Committee
CS, EE Search Committees
State Information Technology Committee
8. Principal publications of the last five years. Give in standard bibliographic format.
Symbolic Computation of Lyapunov Functions Using Evolutionary Algorithms, J. McGough,
R. Hoover, A. Christianson, IASTED International Conference on Control and Applications,
July, 2010, Banff, Alberta, Canada
Artificial Neural Network Evolutionary Algorithm (Anneva) T. Haugen & J. McGough, Midwest Instructional Computing Symposium in Rapid City - SD, April 2009
287

Detecting Wormholes in Friction Stir Welds from Welding Feedback Data A. Logar, E. Corwin, J. McGough, W. Arbegast & E. Boldsaikhan, Midwest Instructional Computing Symposium in Rapid City - SD, April 2009
Symbolic Computation using Grammatical Evolution Jeff McGough & Alan Christianson,
Invited Paper: NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RECENT ADVANCEMENT IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, India, Jan 2007.
Domain Geometry and the Pohozaev Identity, Jeff McGough, Jeff Mortensen, Gregg
Stubbendieck,
Chris Rickett; EJDE Vol. 2005, No. 32
Apriori Bounds for reaction-diffusion systems arising in chemical and biological kinetics, J.
McGough and K. Riley. Applied Mathematics & Computation 163 (2005) 1-16
Pattern formation in the Gray-Scott model, J. McGough and K. Riley. Nonlinear Analysis:
Real World Applications 5 (2004) 105-121
9 Other scholarly activity: grants, awards, sabbaticals, software development, etc.:
Idaho National Lab, Automated Differential Equation-Based Identification; PIs Lee
Shunn (INL), Charles Tolle (INL/SDSMT), co-PIs Jon Christophersen (INL) & Jeff McGough
(SDSMT); $450,000, 2010-2013
L3 Communications-West, Student Projects $6,000, 2010
L3 Communications-West, RIAS-Industry Collaboration $15,000, 2009-2010
L3 Communications-West, Student Projects $6,000, 2009
NASA SDSGC, co-Principle Investigator. INSIPRE $25,000, 2009-2010
NASA SDSGC, Principle Investigator. Senior Design $6,000, 2009-2010
United States Department of Defense-Army Research Laboratory . Michael Batchelder,
Daniel Dolan (PI), Brian Hemmelman, Elaine Linde, Vojislav Kalanovic, Wayne
Krause, Jeff McGough,and John Weiss $350,000, 2009
NASA SDSGC, Principle Investigator. IRI - Senior Design $6,000, 2008-2009
NASA SDSGC, Principle Investigator. IRI - Interdisciplinary Robotics Initiative
$15,000, 2007-2008
Sun MicroSystems Collaborative Research Award, $92,000, Advanced Scientific
Computing Tool Kit. Jan. 2003 – Dec. 2003
NSF Award: $22,238, DUE-9980687, A New On-Line Mathematics Testing,
Remediation and Assessment Strategy for Engineering Majors, March 1, 2000 - February 28,
2002.
10. Scientific, professional, and honor societies of which you are a member:
PSIA – Professional Ski Instructors of America 2006-2009

288

1 .Name:

Penaloza, Manuel L.

2. Academic Rank. (State whether full-time or part-time, and if part-time indicate non-academic
activity and percent of time devoted to it)
Professor of Mathematics and Computer Science
Full-time
3. Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
Ph.D.
Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, Computer Science, Dec. 1989.

4

M.S.

University of New Mexico, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, Dec. 1975.

B.S.

University of New Mexico, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1974.

Number of years of service:
20 years
Date of appointment: August 1989 – Assistant Professor
Associate professor – July 1993
Full Professor – July 2001

5. Other related experience, i.e., teaching , industrial, etc.:
2004

Currently supervising a team that is developing a software application for
Innovative Systems, Mitchell, SD.

2000 - 2001

Sabbatical at the Rapid City Regional Hospital, Rapid City, SD. Implementation
of a claims processing data warehouse for the hospital.

2000 Part of the Sun Microsystems Collaborative Research team for the Implementation of a
Software Testing Tool.
6. Consulting, patents, etc.:
2001 Enhancement of the Data Warehouse implemented for the Rapid City Regional Hospital.
1983

Restructuring of the Data Processing Center, Instituto de Seguridad Social.

1982

Responsible for the computerized election at Guayas, Ecuador.

1981

Head of a Committee to provide technical training to the Central Bank, Guayaquil,
Ecuador.
Development of a computer discipline, Vocational High School, Veintiocho de Mayo,
Guayaquil, Ecuador.

1981

7. Principal publications of last five years: (Give title and references)
- Gordon Standart, Manuel Penaloza and Ziliang Zong. ― Use fodata mining in the discovery of
spatial and temporal earthquake relationship.‖ Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Midwest
Instruction and Computer Symposium (MICS), Eau Claire, WI, April 16-17, 2010.
- Kelsey Stulken, Gordon Standart, Manuel Penaloza and Ziliang Zong. ―M
assive Global Spatial
rd
Data Visualization.‖ Proceedings of the 43 Annual Midwest Instruction and Computer
Symposium (MICS), Eau Claire, WI, April 16-17, 2010.
- Manuel Penaloza. ―At
tribute Discretization using a Seed Bit in a Genetic Algorithm. Invited
Paper to National Conference on Recent Advancements in Information Technology (NCRAIT
‗07), Coimbatore, India, February 9-10, 2007.

289

-

-

Shana Fliginger, James Tang and Manuel Penaloza. ―I
ntegrating Educational Resources and
Curricula through Interactive Software: A Community-based Case Study.‖ Proceedings of the
36th Annual Midwest Instruction and Computer Symposium (MICS), Duluth, MN, April 11-12,
2003.
Knut-Edvart Ellingsen and Manuel Penaloza. ―A G
enetic Algorithm Approach for Finding a
Good Course Schedule.‖ Proceedings of the 36th Annual Midwest Instruction and Computer
Symposium (MICS), Duluth, MN, April 11-12, 2003.

8. Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM).
The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE).
Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers (SHPE)
9. Honors and awards:
Scholarship from The Latin American Scholarship of American Universities (LASPAU)
Organization. Scholarship awarded in 1973 with the goal to complete the B.S degree and earn an
M.S. degree at University of New Mexico.
10. Institutional and professional service in the last five years
Member of a Search Committee in 2009 and 2008 for the Mathematics and Computer Science
Department
Member of the multicultural ―Cin
co de Mayo‖ committee – 2007-2010
Member of the multicultural International Expo committee – 2005-2010
Member of the West River Math Contest – 2005-2010
Member of the Midwest Instruction and Computing Symposium (MICS) Steering Committee –
2008-2010
Member of the Council of Graduate Education – 2008
Faculty advisor of the SHPE student chapter at SDSM&T – 2010
Member of the Cooperative Education committee – 2005-2010
Co-Op program coordinator of the Mathematics and Computer Science Department
11. Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities
10%
12. Percentage of time committed to the program
10%

290

1.

Name and Academic Rank
John Weiss, Professor (Computer Science)
2. Degrees with fields, institutions and dates
M.S. in Computer Science, Vanderbilt University, 1984
Ph.D. in Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University, 1980
B.A. in Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, 1974
3. Years of service on this faculty
Years of Service:
19
Original Appointment Date:
August 1991 (Associate Professor)
Promotion to Professor:
July 2006
4. Other related experience
8/84-5/91
Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Virginia Commonwealth University
5/84-8/84
Research Assistant for Software Development, Radiology Department,
Vanderbilt University
9/80-8/82
Postdoctoral Fellow, Anatomy Department, Vanderbilt University
5. Consulting
6/03-12/03
Consultant and software engineer on NSF SBIR grant: ―I
solating, Locating and Tracking
Target Anomalies in Ultra-Wideband (UWB) Sensor Data.‖
1/00-1/02
Project lead and software engineer on Raytheon/EROS Data Center/SDSM&T
collaboration (MODIS Reprojection Tool). Won NASA Space Act Award in 2001.
8/99-5/00
Participant in high-performance scientific software collaboration between Sun
Microsystems and SDSM&T (SunTech).
6. States in which professionally licensed: None (not applicable)
7. Principal publications of last five years
 J.Weiss and L.Jacobs, ―
QtImageLib: A Cross-Platform Image Processing Library‖, Proceedings of
the ISCA 25rd International Conference on Computers and Their Applications, Mar 2010.
 J.Weiss, ―Con
tinuous-Wave Stepped-Frequency Radar for Target Ranging and Motion Detection‖,
Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Midwest Instruction and Computing Symposium, April 2009 (online
proceedings at http://mics.sdsmt.edu).
 J.Weiss, ―Gene
tic Algorithms and Sudoku‖, Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Midwest Instruction and
Computing Symposium, April 2009 (online proceedings at http://mics.sdsmt.edu).
 J.Weiss, ―
Real-Time Feature Detection Using the Hough Transform‖, Proceedings of the ISCA 21st
International Conference on Computer Applications in Industry and Engineering, pp.168-173,
Nov 2008.
 J.Weiss, ―
Hierarchical Template Matching For Real-Time Symbol Detection‖, Proceedings of the
ISCA 23rd International Conference on Computers and Their Applications, pp.159-164, Apr 2008.
[Best Paper Award]
 J.Weiss, J. Devine, and A. Detwiler, ―Autom
ated Counting of Water Droplets in Cloud Chamber
Images‖, Proceedings of the ISCA 22th International Conference on Computers and Their
Applications, pp.207-212, Mar 2007.
 J.Weiss, ―One
-Day Workshop on Digital Image Processing‖, Sri Ramakrishna Engineering College,
Coimbatore India, Feb 2007.
 J.Weiss, ―
Recent Trends in Computer Science in the USA and SDSM&T: Education and Job
Prospects‖, keynote speech at the National Conference on Recent Advancements in Information
Technology (NCRAIT‘07), Sri Ramakrishna Engineering College, Coimbatore India, Feb 2007.
 J.Weiss, ―Ar
tificial Neural Network-Based Human Target Detection Using Penetrating Radar Data‖,
presentation at Sri Ramakrishna Institute of Technology, Coimbatore India, Feb 2007.

291

A.Gervasi, J.Weiss, B.Askildsen, and S.Thompson, ―
Advances In Human Target Detection Using
Opaque Material Penetrating Radar Data‖, Proceedings of the ISCA 20th International Conference on
Computers and Their Applications, pp.202-207, Mar 2005.
8. Scientific and professional societies:
Association for Computing Machinery, IEEE


9. Honors and awards






BME Program Funding: ―D
iabetic Retinopathy Screening Device‖. PI: J.Weiss. Funded for $5K in
FY2009 in support of two BME grad student projects.
U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL-DoD): ―UA
V-Deployed Penetrating Radar for Through-theWall Sensing‖. PI‘s: D.Dolan and J.Weiss. Funded for Jan 2006 – present (~$755K per year).
U.S. Army Armament Research Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC-DoD): ―Unm
anned
Aerial Vehicle‖. PI: D.Dolan. Funded for Jan 2006 – present (~$250K per year).
U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL-DoD): ―Unm
anned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Development‖.
PI‘s: D.Dolan and J.Weiss. Funded for Sep 2006 – Aug 2007 ($25K).
U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL-DoD): ―Adv
anced Materials and Processes for Future Combat
Systems‖. PI‘s: Pillay et al. Funded for 2005-2009 ($4.6M ).

10. Institution and Professional Service in the last five years

Computer Science Curriculum Committee in the Math-CS Department.

Computer Science Search Committee in the Math-CS Department.

Faculty advisor to student organizations: Student Chapter of the ACM, Linux Users Group,
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Team.

SDSM&T College of Engineering Curriculum Committee.

SDSM&T-USD Biomedical Engineering MS/PhD Advisory Council that developed the SDSMTUSD BME MS/PhD program.

Statewide committees commissioned by the Board of Regents to review entrance requirements
for the South Dakota University System, review statewide CLEP issues in Computer Science,
provide input on common course numbering issues, and consider new general education
proposals. Participated in CS/IT Discipline Council conference calls and videoconferences to
discuss a variety of topics.

International Program Committee for the ISCA International Conference on Computers and Their
Applications (CATA-2008 and CATA-09).

Chaired sessions at ISCA CATA, ISCA CAINE, and MICS conferences.

Program evaluator for CAC/ABET.
11. Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities: 15%
12. Percentage of time committed to the program:

292

100%

1.

Name and Academic Rank: Ziliang Zong
Assistant Professor - Full Time

2.

Degrees with fields, institutions and dates:
Auburn University, Alabama, USA
Shandong University, China
Shandong University, China

3.

Computer Science
Computer Science
Computer Science

Ph.D. 2008
M.S. 2005
B.S. 2002

Years of service on this faculty, including date of original appointment and dates of
advancement in rank:
Years of Service: 2 years;
Original Appointment Dates: August 2008-date
Assistant Professor - August 2008-date

4.

Other related experience, i.e. teaching, industrial, etc:
Educational 2005- 2007
2007-2008

New Mexico Tech, Research Assistant
Auburn University, Research Assistant

Research Grant
(PI) National Science Foundation (NSF) Computer Network and Systems Research
Award (CNS-0915762), ―F
astStor: Data-Mining-Based Multilayer Prefetching for
Hybrid Storage Systems‖, Duration: 9/2009 – 8/2012, $200,000.
2. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Nelson Research Grant, ―I
mprove
Online Satellite Images Distribution Services Via Data Mining Based Prefetching,‖
Duration: 7/2009 – 6/2010, $4,980.

1.

5

Consulting:
None

6.

States in which registered:
None

7.

Principal publications of last five years:
1. "Improve Energy-Efficiency of Computational Grids", Handbook of Research on P2P
and Grid Systems for Service-Oriented Computing: Models, Methodologies and
Applications. ISBN: 978-1-61520-686-5; 894 pp; January 2010.
2 ―EA
D and PEBD: Two Energy-Aware Duplication Scheduling Algorithms for Parallel
Tasks on Homogeneous Clusters‖, IEEE Transactions on Computers. (Accepted in Dec.
2009, to be appeared).
3. ―Ene
rgy-Efficient Scheduling for Parallel Applications on Mobile Clusters‖, Cluster
Computing: The Journal of Networks, Software Tools and Applications, vol.11, no. 1, pp.
91-113, March 2008.
4. ―St
ReD : A Quality of Security Framework for Storage Resources in Data Grids‖,
Future Generation Computer Systems: The Int'l Journal of Grid Computing, vol. 23, no.
6, pp. 816-824, Jul. 2007.

293

5. ―I
mproving Security of Real-Time Wireless Networks through Packet Scheduling,‖
IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol.7, no. 12, 2008.
6. ―Per
formance Evaluation of Energy-Efficient Parallel I/O Systems with Write Buffer
Disks,‖ the 38th Int'l Conf. on Parallel Processing (ICPP), Vienna, Austria, Sep. 2009.
7. ―Per
formance Evaluation of Energy-Efficient Parallel Systems with Write Buffer
Disks,‖ the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, Mar. 2009.
8. ―Sec
urity-Aware Cache Management for Cluster Storage Systems,‖ Proc. the 17th Int'l
Conf. Computer Communications and Networks (ICCCN), St. Thomas, Virgin Islands,
Aug. 2008.
9. ―Des
ign and Performance Analysis of Energy-Efficient Parallel Storage Systems‖, The
Commodity Cluster Symposium 2007 (CCS2007), Annapolis, Maryland, July 2007.
10. ―An E
nergy-Efficient Framework for Large-Scale Parallel Storage Systems‖, Proc.
IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS), March 2007.
11. ―A iSmulation Framework for Energy Efficient Data Grids‖, Winter Simulation
Conference 07, Washington, D.C. U.S. December 9-12, 2007.
12. ―Ene
rgy-Efficient Scheduling for Parallel Applications Running on Heterogeneous
Clusters‖, Proc. International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP), Xi'an, China,
September 2007.
13. ―I
ntegrating Security and Reliability in Real-Time Systems using Non-Uniform
Checkpoints‖, Proc. 16th International Conference on Computer Communications and
Networks (ICCCN 2007), Aug. 2007.
14. ―An E
nergy-Efficient Scheduling Algorithm Using Dynamic Voltage Scaling for
Parallel Applications on Clusters,‖ Proc. 16th IEEE Int'l Conference on Computer
Communications and Networks (ICCCN), Honolulu, Hawaii, Aug. 2007.
15. ―Ene
rgy-Efficient Duplication Strategies for Scheduling Precedence Constrained
Parallel Tasks on Clusters‖, Proc. International Conference on Cluster Computing
(Cluster'06), Sept. 2006.
16. ―An A
daptive Strategy for Secure Distributed Disk Systems‖, NASA/IEEE
Conference on Mass Storage Systems and Technologies, May 2006.
8.

Scientific and professional societies of which a member:
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Member
Association for Computing Machinery

9.

Honors and awards:
Honorary Societies: Phi Kappa Phi
Awards: Auburn University Distinguished Dissertation Award Nomination, 2009.
Best Paper Award Nomination, the 8th International Conference on Cluster
Computing
IEEE Technical Committee on Scalable Computing (TCSC) Travel Award

10.

Institution and Professional Service in the last five years:
SDSM&T Library Committee
CSC Department Curriculum Committee, RIAS Program Committee

11.

Percentage of time available for research or scholarly activities:

12.

Percentage of time committed to the program 100%

294

30%

APPENDIX C
LABORATORY EQUIPMENT

The ECE Department has a tradition of emphasizing the application of classroom theory in the
laboratory. Of the 21 regular undergraduate EE courses, 19 have lab credit, and of the 12
CENG courses, 10 have lab credit. In addition, of the 17 graduate courses that are available to
qualified seniors, 5 have lab credits. The 17 Electrical and Computer Engineering Laboratories
support 34 different courses that have specified laboratory credit. Table 6.1 shows the
laboratories and course utilization.
The EP building contains the classrooms 208, 251A, 251B, 252, 253, 254, and 255 as shown in
the floor plan of the Electrical Engineering / Physics building, Figures 6.1 a, b, and c. Although
some ECE classes are taught in other buildings, most are taught in these classrooms. In addition,
the instructional laboratories EP 336, 338, 341, and 342 are designed so that they can be used as
classrooms when needed.
The ECE Lab Plan with more detail of equipment, lab space, funding, and future plans is
available. The refurbishment of EP 127 as communications laboratory has been completed. The
countertops in EP 338 and EP341 have been replaced. Card access was piloted on EP127 and
EP241 several years ago and has now been expanded to most labs to provide students with more
access.
In addition to faculty and teaching assistants, the ECE Department has the services of a full-time
technician and a full-time graduate engineer called the Electronics Specialist. The technician
maintains, calibrates, and repairs the lab equipment as well as helping to set up the laboratories
on lab days (Tuesdays and Thursdays). The Electronics Specialist helps students and faculty
with their projects including circuit board design and prototype fabrication. The position is
shared by the ECE Department and the Center for Advanced Manufacturing and Production
(CAMP), which also supports a Manufacturing Specialist who works with students on
mechanical fabrication, machining, welding, and rapid prototyping for their projects. The
Electronics Specialist also helps faculty with their class and research projects. The support
personnel are provided the opportunity for training to keep up-to-date on the latest tools and
equipment.

295

Room

Lab Title

Courses

Notes

1

EP 127

Communications
Engineering
Applied Electromagnetics

2

EP 213

Faculty Research/LAEC North

3

EP 230

Miller Electromagnetics Research

4

EP 241

Embedded Systems

5

EP 244

Electronics Specialist

6

EP 307

PC Computer

Open

7

EP 336

General Teaching

EE 220, 221,
CENG 244, open

8

EP 338

Mechatronics

EE351

9

EP 339

Digital Systems/Communications

CENG 244, 342, 421

10 EP 340

Controls Lab

EE 311, 312, 451, 651

11 EP 341

Power Lab

EE 330, 431, 432

1

12 EP 342

General Teaching

EE 220, 221,
CENG 244, open

321, 1

and EE 322, EE 382, EE 3
421, 481, 482, 621, 622,
623
EE 483, EE 692 (Adv. 3
Antenna Eng.)
2
CENG 342, 420, 442,
447, EE 624, 641, 648
2
1
321, 1
1

Table C.1a
ECE Laboratories

Room

Lab Title

Notes

1 EP 238

Graduate Research

2,3

2 EP 334

K0VVY Ham Shack

2

3 EP 335

PCB fabrication/CAMP
Mechatronics

/

Robotics

Team

/

EE-ME

Table C.1b
ECE Student-operated Laboratories

Notes: 1

Designed for dual use for lectures

5 Not available as a general undergraduate lab
6 Under development

296

351 2

Introductory courses have a closed laboratory in which students work with the instructor and
teaching assistants at a scheduled weekly session. More advanced courses commonly use an
open laboratory approach in which student groups work at their own rate on their own schedule.
Closed labs are scheduled on Tuesdays and Thursdays leaving the rest of the week available for
open lab time. Some of the labs are designed so that lectures may be held as part of the lab or
occasionally using the lab as a classroom. Since the lab space is open until ten pm weekdays
(except Friday night) with additional hours available on weekends, adequate time is available for
all to complete their laboratory work.
Some of the laboratory space and equipment is shared with other departments to make the most
effective use of resources. The PC Lab in EP 307, formerly a department PC lab, is now
operated by the Instructional Technology Service (ITS) for the use of the entire campus although
the ECE Department has priority for scheduled use of the lab. ITS maintains and upgrades the
lab on a regular basis freeing ECE funds for other purposes. The Mechatronics Lab, EP338,
serves courses required for CENG, EE, and ME students. The Mechatronics class is jointly
taught by the ME and ECE Departments and both share in provisioning the lab. The Controls
Lab, EP340 is shared by students taking EE451/ME453 as well as research projects. The ECE
department works collaboratively with the CS RIAS (Robotics and Intelligent Autonomous
Systems) program in this laboratory and in the RIAS Lab, CB107. The are plans to establish
more RIAS lab space in the McLaury building.
Other areas of shared support include SolidWorks, a 3D CAD program which the ME
Department makes available, and MATLAB, for which the ECE Department shares a site license
with the rest of the campus. ITS makes available to the campus the Microsoft Academic
Alliance program which allows the campus plus individual faculty and students to use Project
Professional, Visio Professional, Visual Studio.Net, Windows CE, and many other Microsoft
tools. . The Center for Advanced Manufacturing and Production (CAMP) also shares in
expanding the ability to develop prototypes e.g. PCB CAD software, the circuit board milling
machine, microcontroller developments systems, and FPGA development systems.
The basic funding provided through the normal state university sources is barely adequate to
operate, maintain, and upgrade the ECE laboratories. However, we have been successful in
providing a good laboratory experience for our students by working to secure grants (e.g. NSF,
Agilent, Rockwell and EMCOS), alumni funding, vendor discounts (Zeland), on-campus centers
(CAMP, AMP, and the Composites Center) and occasional one-time funds available through the
state. Funding from student lab fees has been also used to systematically upgrade and improve
laboratories. Table 6.2 shows some the basic engineering tools available for students in their
courses and projects.

297

Tool

Courses

Basic Lab Equipment: DMM,
Function Generator, Power Supply

EE 220, 221, 321, 322, 351,
CENG 244

Arbitrary Waveform Generators

EE451, EE322

Digital Oscilloscopes

EE 220, 221, 321, 322, 351, 451
CENG 244

Digital Oscilloscopes with Logic
Analyzer Capability

CENG 244, CENG 342, EE451

TIMS EMONA communications
simulator

EE421

Matlab and toolboxes

EE 311, 312, 330, 431, 451

ADS

EE 322, 481, 483, 692

IE3D

EE 483, 692

PSpice, B2Spice, LTSpice

EE 220, EE 221, EE 321

Microwave Studio

EE 692

Mplab

CENG 442, 447

Arduino

EE 351

DXP / Protel

CENG 244, CENG 464, CENG
465, EE 464, EE 465

PowerWorld

EE 431

PCB Milling Machines

CENG 244, CENG 464, CENG
465, EE 464, EE 465, EE 481, EE
483, EE 692

4 sets of Basic machines, various
sizes of transformers and loads

EE 330, EE 431

Rapid Prototyping Machine

CENG 464, CENG 465, EE 464,
EE 465

Xilinx Tools

CENG 244, CENG 342, EE 647

FPGA Development Boards
Visual Studio and Visual
Studio.NET

CSC 150, CENG 444, EE 641

uC/OS-II

CENG 447

ARM Single Board Computers

CENG 447

Microchip In Circuit Debuggers
and Programmers

CENG 442, CENG 447

298

Analog Devices Sharc DSP
Boards

CENG 420

RF Network Analyzers

EE 381, EE 382, EE 480, EE 481,
EE 483, EE 692

Anechoic Chamber

EE 483, EE 692

Wire Shark Network Protocol
Network Analyzer

CENG 444

Microsoft Project

CENG 464, CENG 465, EE 464,
EE 465

175 MHz Universal Counter

EE322

AC/DC Fluke Current Probes

EE 330, 431, 432

50 MHz Fluke Scopemeter

EE 330, 431, 432

Fluke Power Quality Analyzer

EE 330, 431, 432

Wattmeters

EE221, 330, 431, 432

Fluke True PMS Multimeters

EE221, 330, 431, 432

Table C.2.

Engineering Tools used in the ECE Curriculum

COMPUTING FACILITIES
Within the ECE laboratories, three computing labs are available. EP 307, formerly an ECE
computer lab, has been shifted to ITS to become a campus-wide PC Lab.. The Embedded
Systems Lab contains seven new PCs and tools for single board computer, microcontroller and
FPGA development. In addition, EP 338, EP 339, EP 341, and EP 241 have PCs available.
These are connected to Digital Oscilloscopes and PAL/GAL/EPROM programmers but are
available for general use as well. PC and UNIX / LINUX labs are available in other buildings on
campus as well and all students are required to purchase a tablet computer. All machines are
connected to the campus network and the wireless network is available almost everywhere on
campus for students using mobile computers.
PROTOTYPING FACILITIES
Because of the departmental culture of project-based education and participation in the Center
for Advanced Manufacturing and Production (CAMP), facilities are readily available for student
and faculty prototype fabrication. The department, with the assistance of CAMP, has 20 licenses
for DXP / Protel, the CAD tool for schematic capture, simulation, and printed circuit board
layout with auto-routing. The Electronics Specialist gives short-courses for students using a
tutorial. Once the PCB has been designed and verified by the built-in rule checker, it can be
built on the circuit board milling machine. This machine has been so popular that a second
299

higher performance machine has been purchased. The department provides 152 reels of 5%
resistors in standard values along with various types of hookup wire in the student lounge. Other
components and parts are coordinated by the ECE technician who maintains a supply of common
parts and orders other parts as needed by specific courses.
If prototypes require mechanical components, the Manufacturing Specialist with ME / CAMP
provides assistance with the CAD program SolidWorks, designing for fabrication in the rapid
prototyping machine or CNC machining.
Many projects include microcontrollers. All ECE and ME students take a required course in
Mechatronics where the students use the Arduino open-source electronics prototyping platform
which uses the Atmel ATMEGA328 mircocontroller. The development software is open source
and has integrated well with the use of the student‘s tablet computers. One of the Mechatronics
team-based projects is designing a robot. Using the departments prototyping facilities, the teams
build their robot designs. One of the highlights of the class is the competition among the
Mechatronics robots.
Other prototyping systems include Xilinx FPGA development boards with the corresponding
development tools and the Sharc digital signal processing development boards with the Visual
DSP development software.
FACULTY FACILITIES
All faculty have adequate office space including regularly updated PCs. Adequate lab space is
available for specific courses and research. Staff support is excellent, including secretary,
technician, and electronics specialists. The Instructional Technology Services (ITS) and the
department technician provide excellent computer and networking support. The electronics
specialists supports faculty with class projects and research projects.
STUDENT FACILITIES
A student lounge is available with telephone, microwave oven, refrigerator, paper cutter, stapler,
copier, and network printer. Magazine racks with professional journals and trade journals as
well as hobby magazines are available in the student lounge area. In addition, labs EP 338 and
EP 341 are configured with tables and chairs to facilitate student teams and study groups.
Cabinets in EP 241, 338, and 341 are available for student teams to checkout to store materials
and prototypes as they develop their projects. Some specific labs are operated primarily by
student organizations, for example, the K0VVY Amateur Radio Club and the Robotics Team.
Students who are willing have their picture taken and placed on a display board opposite the
ECE Department office. This helps students and faculty know each other by name. Faculty
300

members donate to a fund that the departmental secretary uses to provide seasonal treats such as
hot chocolate, cake, brownies, etc and a Christmas party. Each semester the department hosts
graduates and their spouses / partners in a graduation dinner.

301

EP Building Floor Plans
note: areas given in ft2 are approximate

Communications
and Applied
Electromagnetics
Lab

Figure C.1(a) EP Building First Floor

302

LAEC
North Lab

Electronics
Specialist
Lab 312 ft2

Embedded
Systems Lab
635 ft2

Miller Lab
893 ft2

Graduate Student
Research Lab
600 ft2

Figure C.1 (b) EP Building Second Floor
303

Wall
removed
ITS
Computer
Lab

Controls
Lab

800 ft2

438 ft2

Power Lab

General
Instructional
Lab

893 ft2

1381 ft2
Mechatronics
Lab

General
Instructional
Lab

893 ft2

1381 ft2
CAD

Research
/CAMP
/Prototyping

/Digital
Lab
438 ft2

/Robotics Lab
800 ft2

Figure C.1 (c) EP Building Third Floor

304

Appendix D: Institutional Summary
A. The Institution
1. Name and Address of the Institution
2. Name and Title of Chief Executive Officer
B. Type of Control
C. History of Institution
D. Student Body
E. Regional or Institutional Accreditation
F. Personnel and Policies
1. Promotion and Tenure
2. The process used to determine faculty salaries
3. Faculty benefits
G. Educational Unit
H. Credit Unit
I. Instructional Modes
J. Grade Point Average
K. Academic Supporting Units
L. Non-Academic Supporting Units
1.
2.
3.
4.

Devereaux Library
Information Technology Services
Career Center
Student Services and the STEPS Program

M. Faculty Workload

305

N. Tables
Table D-1. All Programs Offered by the Educational Unit
Table D-2. Degrees Awarded and Transcript Designations for all Programs offered at the School
of Mines
Tables D-3. Support Expenditures
Table D-3.1.1, Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Chemical Engineering
Table D-3.1.2, Institutional Expenditures for Chemical Engineering
Table D-3.1.3, Foundation Support for Chemical Engineering
Table D-3.1.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Chemical Engineering
Table D-3.2.1, Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Civil and Environmental
Engineering
Table D-3.2.2, Institutional Expenditures for Civil and Environmental Engineering
Table D-3.2.3, Foundation Support for Civil and Environmental Engineering
Table D-3.2.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Civil and environmental
Engineering
Table D-3.3.1, Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Electrical and Computer
Engineering
Table D-3.3.2, Institutional Expenditures for Electrical and Computer Engineering
Table D-3.3.3, Foundation Support for Electrical and Computer Engineering
Table D-3.3.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Electrical and Computer
Engineering
Table D-3.4.1, Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Geology and Geological
Engineering
Table D-3.4.2, Institutional Expenditures for Geology and Geological Engineering
Table D-3.4.3, Foundation Support for Geology and Geological Engineering
Table D-3.4.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Geology and Geological
Engineering
Table D-3.5.1, Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Industrial Engineering
Table D-3.5.2, Institutional Expenditures for Industrial Engineering
Table D-3.5.3, Foundation Support for Industrial Engineering

306

Table D-3.5.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Industrial Engineering
Table D-3.6.1, Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Mechanical Engineering
Table D-3.6.2, Institutional Expenditures for Mechanical Engineering
Table D-3.6.3, Foundation Support for Mechanical Engineering
Table D-3.6.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Mechanical Engineering
Table D-3.7.1, Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Metallurgical Engineering
Table D-3.7.2, Institutional Expenditures for Metallurgical Engineering
Table D-3.7.3, Foundation Support for Metallurgical Engineering
Table D-3.7.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Metallurgical Engineering
Table D-3.8.1, Support Expenditures, All Sources, for all programs in the Educational
Unit
Table D-3.8.2, Institutional Expenditures for all programs in the Educational Unit
Table D-3.8.3, Foundation Support for all programs in the Educational Unit
Table D-3.8.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for all programs in the
Educational Unit
Tables D-4 Personnel and Students
Table D-4.1 Personnel and Students, all programs in the educational unit, 2009
Table D-4.2 Personnel and Students, Chemical Engineering, 2009
Table D-4.3 Personnel and Students, Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2009
Table D-4.4 Personnel and Students, Computer Engineering, 2009
Table D-4.5 Personnel and Students, Electrical Engineering, 2009
Table D-4.6 Personnel and Students, Geological Engineering, 2009
Table D-4.7 Personnel and Students, Industrial Engineering, 2009
Table D-4.8 Personnel and Students, Mechanical Engineering, 2009
Table D-4.9 Personnel and Students, Metallurgical Engineering, 2009
Tables D-5 Enrollment and Degree Data
Table D-5.1 Program Enrollment and Degree Data for all Students and all Programs in
the Educational Unit
Table D-5.2 Program Enrollment Data: All Students, All Programs
Table D-5.3 Program Enrollment Data for Programs in the Educational Unit
Table D-5.4 Transfer Students for Past Six Academic Years: All Students

307

Table D-5.5 Transfer Students for Past Six Academic Years: All Programs in the
Educational Unit
Tables D-6 Faculty Salary Data
Table D-6.1 Faculty Salary Data for all programs in the educational unit
Table D-6.2 Faculty Salary Data for Chemical Engineering
Table D-6.3 Faculty Salary Data for Civil and Environmental Engineering
Table D-6.4 Faculty Salary Data for Computer Engineering
Table D-6.5 Faculty Salary Data for Electrical Engineering
Table D-6.6 Faculty Salary Data for Geological Engineering
Table D-6.7 Faculty Salary Data for Industrial Engineering
Table D-6.8 Faculty Salary Data for Mechanical Engineering
Table D-6.9 Faculty Salary Data for Metallurgical Engineering

308

APPENDIX D – INSTITUTIONAL SUMMARY
A. The Institution
1. Name and Address of the Institution
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology
501 East Saint Joseph Street
Rapid City, SD 57701-3994
2. Name and Title of the Chief Executive Officer of the Institution
Dr. Robert A. Wharton, President

B. Type of Control
State public university, governed by the South Dakota Board of Regents

C. History of Institution
The South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (SDSM&T) is a public specialized science
and engineering university located in Rapid City at the eastern boundary of the Black Hills that
offers 16 B.S., 13 M.S., and 7 Ph.D. degree programs in science and engineering. Established in
1885 to provide instruction in mining engineering, it diversified as a science and engineering
school following World War I, and the name of the institution became the South Dakota School
of Mines and Technology in 1943.
The school is part of the South Dakota Board of Regents system of six state universities and one
cooperative university center located in Sioux Falls. A cooperative university center located in
Rapid City to serve the western part of the state is slated to open in fall 2010. All universities in
the Regents system are governed by a single Board of Regents the offices of which are located in
the middle of the state in Pierre. Institutions in the Regents system have common course
numbering and equivalencies, shared academic calendars and academic policies, uniform
personnel policies and contracts, and collaborative discipline councils. In addition, all contribute
to a system-wide Electronic University Consortium.
The campus currently includes 651,847 square feet of building space with 33,374 square feet
devoted to classrooms, 139,416 square feet devoted to instructional and research laboratories and
75,162 square feet devoted to offices and administration. Two building are now under
construction, The Paleontology Research Laboratory (33,000 square feet), and the Chemical and
Biological Engineering/Chemistry Building Addition (45,000 square feet). In addition, the Tech
Development Laboratory is located near campus, and the Black Hills Business Development

309

Center is located on campus but is run as a collaborative enterprise between SDSM&T and the
regional economic development entities.
Serving 1,912 undergraduate and 264 graduate students (2,177 total) at SDSM&T are 126 fulltime faculty members (excluding adjuncts), 100 full-time administrators, 91 full-time career
service and professional staff members.1 In July 2009, the administrative structure was flattened
through elimination of college divisions and two dean positions. Department head positions are
transitioning to 12-month contracts, and the scope of control and responsibility of the position
has been enlarged.
For fiscal year 2009, SDSM&T was awarded approximately $21 million in external funds for
research and, as such, plays the leadership role for the western half of the state in technology
transfer and economic development. On a per capita basis our faculty involvement in externally
funded research is the highest in the state.
In fall 2008, after becoming SDSM&T‘s‘ 18th president, Dr. Robert Wharton articulated four
strategic foci to guide planning and decision making:





Optimizing enrollment
Securing resources
Developing graduate programs and the research enterprise, including DUSEL (the Deep
Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory, a planned national lab to be located in
the former Homestake gold mine in Lead, SD)
Continuously improving quality

SDSM&T is a small, primarily undergraduate engineering and science institution, with a
relatively low cost of attendance and a dedicated faculty and staff. Graduates are highly valued
by employers for their training and their distinctively strong Midwestern work ethic. Because of
our relatively small size, our student to faculty ratio is small (i.e., less than 14 students per
faculty member), and there is a sense of community among faculty, students, and
alumni/alumnae. Given our strong reputation for academic excellence, we are particularly
pleased to have been ranked one of America‘s 100 Best College Buys for twelve consecutive
years. For more information on the 100 Best College Buys designation, see
<http://sdmines.sdsmt.edu/roi>.

D. Student Body
In fall 2009, the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology enrolled 2,177 students. Of
these, 1,338 were undergraduate engineering majors. The student body is composed primarily of
males (71.4%), Caucasians (at least 81.2%), and South Dakota residents (60.3%). American
Indian students comprise 3.2% of the student population. Students are not required to report
ethnicity, and 5.8 % refrained from doing so.
1

Numbers are from our IPEDS report for the 2009-2010 reporting year

310

The data tell us that our students are smart, focused, and have distinctive educational and
developmental needs. Results from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and
Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) results make clear that SDSM&T students are highly goal
and task oriented, technologically skilled, yet relatively homogeneous in their Western cultural
views. They place high importance on values and ethics but too seldom interact with people
from diverse and differing cultural and religious orientations. More of them work off campus and
have family or caregiver responsibilities than students at peer STEM institutions. And despite
the relatively modest cost of attending SDSM&T (i.e., $11,588/ year for residents; $12,996 for
non-residents) including tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, 47% receive
Federal financial aid.
SDSM&T students are generally well prepared academically. In 2008, the national average
composite ACT score for entering college freshmen was 22. Entering freshman at SDSM&T in
2009 entered with an average composite ACT score of 26.1 (with a mean 26.7 math score) and
an average high school GPA of 3.51. We are systematically raising our admission standards and
anticipate achieving our goal of having all students be calculus ready upon admission. Our
students outperform students within the Regents system. South Dakota is one of two states
nationwide that uses ACT and Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) scores
as bookend assessments of learning gains in the general education program and requires a
passing score for degree progression beyond the sophomore year. All regents‘ institutions have
conducted proficiency testing since 1998. Compared to national norms, South Dakota students
test higher than the national norms in all four testing areas (writing, mathematics, reading and
science reasoning), and SDSM&T students consistently score highest in the state.
The 6-year undergraduate completion rate for our IPEDS-defined Federal Cohort stood at 35.5
percent for the 2003 cohort with two percent still enrolled in fall 2009; our institutional goal is
65 percent. Freshmen-to-sophomore retention (fall 2008 to fall 2009) is 82.5 percent. Our
institutional goal is 80 percent. The most recent freshmen to junior retention rate stands at 61.1
percent (fall 2007 to fall 2009).
SDSM&T students fare well in the job market. More than 98% of the 2007-08 graduates were
placed in jobs in their career fields or graduate professional programs in 2008, and for those who
entered the workplace, the 2008 average starting salary was $56,000. They also need to be
prepared for a diverse, international job market, so gaining a global perspective even though the
undergraduate population is fairly homogenous in terms of race and age is one example of our
students‘ distinctive educational needs.

Intercollegiate athletics attracts 10% of the undergraduate population. Teams are
competitive in the NAIA Dakota Athletic Conference (DAC). For the fourth
consecutive year, SDSM&T was named the recipient of the Dakota Athletic
Conference Scholars Award. The award is presented annually to the school with the

311

highest percentage of athletes honored as DAC Scholar-Athletes. In all, more than
half of Hardrocker athletes were honored for their academic achievements.
Our goals for student earning and shaping the academic climate are focused on developing
informed and responsible scientists and engineers who behave ethically, value a global
perspective, and accept the duties and responsibilities of citizenship. Our curricula and cocurricular programming reflect our belief that engineers and scientists are crucial to the
advancement of society and that a well rounded education is part of preparing them to assume
leadership roles in engineering and science.
The STEPS (STudents Emerging as Professionals) program run by the Division of Student
Affairs is critical to student development in the technical, professional, and affective domains.
The STEPS program was designed to align with the student learning outcomes required of all
programs accredited by ABET. All our undergraduate programs covered by one or more of the
commissions of ABET, Inc. are accredited with the exception of mining engineering which is
awaiting the results of an initial accreditation visit that occurred in fall 2009.
The outcomes of STEPS were developed with help from alumni, business and industry partners,
and University Advisory Board (UAB) members. All input endorsed the need for graduates to
have technical competence and professional skills in order to contribute to society and advance
professionally. The following nine STEPS outcomes are sought for all students, regardless of
major:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

act with integrity
value diversity
respect self and others
communicate
lead and serve on teams
value a global perspective
apply technical understanding
serve the community
engage in life-long learning

To shape and educate well-rounded, professional, and technically competent scientists and
engineers, we emphasize hands-on education, promote undergraduate research, and require all
seniors to complete a design project. Multidisciplinary team projects and industry-based or
sponsored projects are encouraged in many majors and, although participation in a co-op or
internship is not mandatory, approximately 75% of graduates have one or more of these
experiences.
Teaming, design, and advanced problem-solving skills are fostered through the multidisciplinary
student teams fielded by our Center for Applied Manufacturing and Production (CAMP)
program. Students of all class levels can contribute to teams, such as those for the Concrete
Canoe, West Regional Mini Baja, IEEE Robotics, Human Powered Vehicle, SAE Aero Design,
and the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Student teams compete nationally and internationally.
312

E. Regional or Institutional Accreditation
Accreditation Unit

Date of Initial Accreditation

Date of Most Recent
Accreditation

Higher Learning Commission
of the North Central
Association

1925

2006

Engineering Accreditation
Commission of ABET, Inc.

1936

2009

American Chemical Society

1950

2007*

Computing Accreditation
Commission of ABET, Inc.

1992

2008

*The American Chemical Society ―a
pproves‖ programs in chemistry on a 5-year review cycle

F. Personnel and Policies
1.

The promotion and tenure system

To be eligible for promotion, the faculty member must meet the minimum rank qualifications set
forth in the Agreement between the South Dakota Board of Regents and the Council of Higher
Education, an affiliate of the South Dakota Education Association. These specify educational
experience and years of experience required for each rank. In addition to the minimum
promotion criteria, faculty must meet institutional and departmental standards for promotion and
tenure.
Faculty members who wish to be considered for promotion must notify their department head in
writing no later than October 5. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to prepare and
submit all favorable documentation that he or she wants considered in the decision and to submit
this with the request for consideration. This documentation, together with the recommendation of
the department head, is then forwarded to the Office of the Provost and Vice President for
Academic Affairs by November 5.
Faculty members are considered for tenure in their sixth year of tenure-track service, and must
have achieved the rank of Associate Professor to be granted tenure. The procedures for tenure
application are the same as those for promotion described above. Faculty who do not apply for or
who are not granted tenure must be given notice of non-renewal of their tenure-track contract.
The contract between the Board of Regents and the Council on Higher Education requires that
unsuccessful applicants for tenure be granted one additional term contract following the decision
not to award tenure.

313

The Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs then makes these materials
available to the institutional Promotion and Tenure Committee. By contract, the Promotion and
Tenure Committee must consist of equal numbers of members elected by the faculty and
members appointed by the President.
The Promotion and Tenure Committee reviews all materials and has access to the faculty
member‘s personnel file. The committee consults with the faculty member and other appropriate
individuals as it sees fit. By January 15, the committee forwards all information, together with
its recommendation, to the President who then forwards his recommendation for or against
promotion and/or tenure to the Board of Regents.
2.

The process used to determine faculty salaries

Distribution of salary monies appropriated by the Legislature is negotiated by the Board of
Regents and the Council on Higher Education. The allocation of salary increases is based on
market, performance and institutional priorities, with specific formulas for this allocation
specified in the negotiated agreement. Most recently, the market, performance, and priorities
factors were allocated 30%, 60%, and 10% of the salary pool respectively. During the annual
performance evaluation, department heads must indicate whether, in their estimation, the faculty
member has met, fallen short of, or exceeded expectations in teaching, in scholarship, and in
service.
There was no salary increase for fiscal year (FY) 2010 and will be none for FY 2011. However,
unlike many systems, the budget cuts we faced in FY 2010 were modest, and the cuts in state
funding for FY 2011 (i.e., $211,684) are being managed with careful planning. The FY11 cut in
state funding is 1.5% of the total general fund support we receive from the state (i.e., 1.5% of
$13,973,202). Average salary increases of 4.0% were awarded in FY07, FY08, and FY09.
3.

Faculty benefits

Benefits:
Faculty at SDSM&T must participate in the state retirement system. Six percent
of salary is deducted each month and matched with another six percent by the institution. The six
percent of deducted salary is not federally taxed; nor is the state contribution taxed. One must be
employed by the state for three years before being vested, but a percentage of contributions are
reimbursed to faculty members who leave prior to that time.
Health insurance, including major medical, is paid for each faculty member by the institution.
Faculty members can select from amongst deductible plans. The faculty member has the option

314

of paying for other members of his or her family as well as for supplemental dental, vision,
major injury protection, and hospital income protection plans.
Consulting: Under South Dakota Board of Regents Policy faculty members will not contract
to devote more than four (4) days per month on such activity if said activity requires the faculty
unit member's absence from duties. Such consultation and related activity privileges are
cumulative to a maximum of six (6) days, with all accumulated time to terminate with the end of
the faculty member's contract period. Such activity must promote state and local economic
development or must benefit the professional discipline and development of the individual. A
faculty member who wishes to engage in consulting must apply in writing to the president and
must limit such activity so that it will not interfere with assigned responsibilities. Consulting
activities develop the faculty member‘s expertise and help the faculty member bring relevant
experience to the classroom and so are encouraged.
Sabbaticals and Career Improvement Leave: Faculty members may apply for sabbatical leave
after six years of service at the university. Approval for sabbatical leave is contingent on the
faculty member presenting plans for formal study, research or other experiences that will
enhance the professional development of the individual. Sabbaticals may be taken for one
semester at full pay or for one year at half pay. The number of faculty members on sabbatical at
any one time is limited by Board policy to no more than five percent of the faculty.
Faculty members may be granted career improvement or career redirection leave after three (3)
consecutive years of full-time employment in the system. The faculty member applies to the
department head, Provost, President and the BOR, as in the case of sabbatical leave applications.
Career improvement or career redirection leave can be for up to 12 months in duration, and the
faculty member is paid 8% of the salary which would have been paid on full-time employment
for each full year of consecutive full-time service up to a maximum of fifty percent (50%) of
salary, or not more than six (6) consecutive months at sixteen percent (16%) of the salary which
would have been paid on full-time employment, for each full year of consecutive service up to a
maximum of one hundred percent (100%) of salary.
G. Educational Unit
On July 1, 2009, the college structure consisting of a College of Engineering and a College of
Science and Letters was disbanded. The administrative structure was flattened through the
elimination of the dean positions, and the academic program leadership was strengthened by
transitioning the 9-month chair positions to 12-month department head positions. Currently, five
of the eight departments offering programs under review by ABET, Inc. have department heads.
The remaining chair positions will be converted to head positions as budget and hiring allow.
Department heads and chairs report directly to the Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs and meet with him weekly in an Academic Leadership Council.

315

For the purposes of presenting tabular data in connection with self-study and accreditation
review under ABET, Inc., the ―
educational unit‖ is defined as all programs reviewed and/or
accredited by ABET., Inc. Included in tabular data citing the ―
educational unit‖ are the
following programs:
1. Chemical Engineering
2. Civil Engineering:

(housed in a single Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering)

3. Computer Engineering :

(housed in a single Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering)

4. Computer Science
5. Electrical Engineering

(housed in a single Department of Math and computer Science)
(housed in a single Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering)

6. Environmental Engineering

(housed in a single Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering)

7. Geological Engineering

(housed in a single Department of Geology and Geological
Engineering)

8.
9.
10.
11.

Industrial Engineering
Metallurgical Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Mining Engineering

When deemed to be of greater usefulness to the evaluation team, data for the institution as a whole (i.e.,
all academic programs) is given and clearly labeled as such. Current organizational charts for the
institution as a whole and for the division of Academic Affairs are included below.

316

317

318

H. Credit Unit
The South Dakota School of Mines and Technology operates on a semester credit hour basis.
Under South Dakota Board of Regents policy a semester shall consist of a minimum of fifteen
(15) weeks. The number of class days in a given semester shall be inclusive of those days set
aside for registration, assessment/performance testing and final examinations but exclusive of
holidays and days set aside for new student orientation. The final examination period typically is
five days.
A credit hour is three hours of in-class time and preparation combined per week for one
semester. A recitation or lecture is scheduled as one fifty-minute period plus two hours of
preparation for an average student per week per credit hour. Each credit hour of laboratory work
is scheduled as 110 to 170 minutes per week. Laboratories scheduled for two hours per credit
hour are expected to require one hour of work outside of the scheduled time per week per credit
hour.
I. Instructional Modes
Instruction in all programs is predominately in a classroom/laboratory format. SDSM&T
believes that experiential learning is a valuable way to enhance this instructional format and
numerous programs have incorporated such activities. Examples of these include internship/coops, participation in undergraduate research, local, regional, national, and international field
work, and participation in engineering contests.
In 2006 SDSM&T began a tablet PC program under which each entering freshman is issued a
tablet PC. The faculty is continuing to incorporate the use of the tablets into the curricula.
SDSM&T faculty members collaborate with colleagues at the other regental institutions by
providing instruction via streaming video, web-based courses, and hybrid courses. The MS in
Technology Management is delivered entirely asynchronously.
The Information Technology Services office provides support for the tablet PC program and all
other areas of technology usage in the classroom.
J. Grade-Point Average
An overall grade point average of 2.0 is required for graduation.
K. Academic Supporting Units
319

Foundational courses for all engineering programs at the South Dakota School of Mines and
Technology are provided by faculty in chemistry, physics, mathematics, humanities, and social
sciences. Additionally, mining engineering also shares some course offerings with geological
engineering.

All students complete a 30 credit hour system-wide general education core curriculum consisting
of 9 credits of written and oral communications, 6 credits of humanities, 6 credits of social
sciences, 6 credits of a science with laboratory, and 3 credits of mathematics. SDSM&T
engineering students take an additional 3 credits of humanities or social science at the upper
division level, as well as mathematics and science courses far in excess of that required for
meeting the general education requirements.
In addition, under board policy, each program has identified within the major requirements at
least one course that is ―
writing intensive‖ and one course that is ―g
lobal intensive.‖ In order to
better ensure integration of general education skills into the major and to reinforce key skills at
the junior and senior level, the engineering programs at SDSM&T all designated courses at the
300 level or above as the ―
writing-―and ―
global-intensive‖ courses students are required to take..
The purpose of a ―
writing-intensive‖ course at the 300-level or above is to ensure each student
exercises the skill of writing in the context of his or her discipline.
For the ―
writing-intensive‖ course(s) in the discipline, the following objective and outcome
statements are modified and included in the course objectives and outcomes:
OBJECTIVE: Students will write effectively and responsibly in accordance with the needs of
their own disciplines.
OUTCOMES: As a result of taking courses meeting this goal, students will:
1. Produce documents written for technical, professional, and general audiences within the
context of their disciplines.
2. Identify, evaluate, and use potential sources of information from within their disciplines
for writing assignments that require research and study.
3. Use instructor feedback throughout the semester to improve the quality of their writing.
Writing-intensive courses are designated as such in Board of Regents policy and must have the
following features:

320






The syllabus clearly articulates the goals, learning outcomes, and assessments related to
writing.
The student‘s writing is evaluated as part of the course.
Students have the opportunity to improve their writing skills during the course.
Performance on writing assignments contributes to the student‘s grade for the course.

The ―
writing-intensive‖ courses for the engineering program reviewed this cycle are as follows:

Major

Prefix

Course Title

Chemical Engineering

ChE 487

Global and Contemporary Issues in Chemical Engineering.

Civil Engineering

CEE 463

Engineering Professions

Computer Engineering

CENG 464

Computer Engineering Design I

Computer Engineering

CENG 465

Computer Engineering Design II

Electrical Engineering

EE 464

Electrical Engineering Design I

Electrical Engineering

EE 465

Electrical Engineering Design II

Environmental
Engineering

EnvE 327

Introductory Environmental Engineering Design

Environmental
Engineering

ATM 505

Air Quality

Geological Engineering

GEOE 461

Petroleum Production

Geological Engineering

GEOE 466

Engineering and Environmental Geology

Industrial Engineering

IENG 366

Management Processes

Mechanical Engineering

ME 481L

Adv. Product Development Lab I

Mechanical Engineering

ME 482L

Adv. Product Development Lab II

Metallurgical Engineering

MET 310

Aqueous Extraction, Concentration, and Recycling

Metallurgical Engineering

MET 321

High Temperature Extraction, Concentration, & Recycling

For the ―
global-intensive‖ course(s) in the discipline, the following objective and outcome
statements are modified and included in the course objectives and outcomes:
321

OBJECTIVE: Students will understand the implications of global issues for the human
community and for the practice of their disciplines.
OUTCOMES: As a result of taking courses meeting this goal, students will:
1. Identify and analyze global issues including how multiple perspectives impact such
issues;
2. Demonstrate a basic understanding of the impact of global issues on the practice of their
discipline.
Global-intensive courses are designated as such in Board of Regents policy and must have the
following features:




The syllabus clearly articulates the goals, learning outcomes, and assessments related to
global issues.
The student‘s understanding of the issues addressed in the course is evaluated through
graded assignments, reports, papers, tests, etc.
Performance on such assignments contributes to the student‘s grade for the course.

The ―
global-intensive‖ courses for the engineering program reviewed this cycle are as follows:

Major

Prefix

Course Title

Chemical Engineering

ChE 487

Global and Contemporary Issues in Chemical Engineering.

Chemical Engineering

ChE 464

Chemical Engineering Design I

Civil Engineering

CEE 464

Civil Engineering Capstone Design I

Civil Engineering

CEE 465

Civil Engineering Capstone Design II

Computer Engineering

CENG 464

Computer Engineering Design I

Computer Engineering

CENG 465

Computer Engineering Design II

Electrical Engineering

EE 464

Electrical Engineering Design I

Electrical Engineering

EE 465

Electrical Engineering Design II

Environmental
Engineering

EnvE 464

Environmental
Engineering

EnvE 465

Environmental Engineering Design I
Environmental Engineering Design II

322

Geological Engineering

GEOE 464

Geological Engineering Design Project I

Geological Engineering

GEOE 465

Geological Engineering Design Project II

Industrial Engineering

IENG 464

Senior Design Project I

Mechanical Engineering

ME 477

Mechanical Engineering Design I

Mechanical Engineering

ME 479

Mechanical Engineering Design II

Metallurgical Engineering

MET 310L

Aqueous Extraction, Concentration, and Recycling
Laboratory

Metallurgical Engineering

MET 465

Engineering Design IV

323

The following people provide leadership for the academic supporting units:
Department
2009-2010
Chemistry
Dr. Dan Heglund, Chair*
Geology and Geological Engineering
Dr. Maribeth Price, Chair*
Humanities
Dr. Sue Shirley, Head
Mathematics and Computer Science
Dr. Kyle Riley, Chair*
Physics
Dr. Andre Petukhov, Head
Social Sciences
Dr. Sue Shirley, Head
* department chair positions are being converted to 12-month head positions as quickly as budgets allow.

L. Non-Academic Supporting Units
Information Technology Services; Bryan Schumacher, Director
Information Technology Services (ITS) comprises two groups: Information Services and
Technology Services. The mission of Technology Services is to be proactive in providing
responsive, people-centered technology, training and support in the SDSM&T computing and
networking environment. The mission of Information Services is to create and develop software
campus-wide to support the efforts of all campus computing needs. The ITS Help Desk, located
in Library, operates as a single point of contact for all students, faculty, and staff, providing
technical assistance and scheduling services for equipment and facilities. The ITS Help Desk
works with faculty and staff not only in a technical assistance role, but also in supporting
classroom activity.
ITS supports all campus network facilities and connectivity, as well as centrally managed
computing facilities available for use by students (both local and remote), faculty, staff and
administrators. Special-purpose networks and computing facilities in academic departments are
usually managed by local system administrators, with support from the ITS group. ITS has
developed cooperative agreements with departments to ensure that distributed support personnel
receive appropriate training and professional development opportunities, and that their expertise
is available campus-wide.
ITS also provides technologies for the classroom, including computers, projection systems, video
capture and streaming, self-serve disc duplicating equipment; supports faculty using instructional
technologies, WWW, collaborative software, and smart classrooms; participates in faculty
development; and provides and coordinates services to distance education students.
Services available to assist faculty and students include:
1. ITS Help Desk facility, open hours during the academic year:



7:30 am to 9 pm, Monday-Thurs
7:30 am to 5 pm, Friday
324




2 pm to 10 pm, Sunday
Holiday and summer hours vary, based on needs.

2. Emergency pager service, 24 hours x 7 days. Any student, faculty or staff member may
report outages or malfunctions via the ITS pager service.
3. Shared peripherals, including page scanners, laser printer, color printer, a large-format
color plotter, media duplicating equipment, including video capture and streaming.
4. Introductory workshops, seminars and tours, informal training, and one-on-one training
and support for individual faculty.
5. Answers to many common questions, and additional information regarding computing
and networking is available through the ITS homepage, its.sdsmt.edu. Selected portions
of this information are also available in printed form.
6. In-depth consulting and assistance with software, hardware or other technologies
including repair and upgrade of desktop equipment, setup and configuration of
peripherals, and network connection of desktop PCs, UNIX workstations, and
departmental servers.
7. A fairly complete suite of Microsoft products, including Office 2007, is widely available
on campus. Several current programming languages and environments are available to
students and faculty. Solidworks and AutoCAD are available for student use, in addition
to other specialized software packages used mostly in upper-division mechanical and
civil engineering. ArcInfo and virtually the entire suite of ESRI products are available
through a statewide licensing agreement; these are now used in atmospheric sciences,
geology and geological engineering, and civil engineering. IDL/ENVI is site licensed for
the campus, and will be available for use in electrical engineering, physics and computer
engineering, as well as atmospheric sciences and geology and geological engineering,
where it is currently used. The MSDN program allows enrolled students to down load a
variety of Microsoft software products for use in academic pursuits
Access to central computing facilities or network connectivity for students is based on legitimate
enrolled status. Each student is assigned an account number and password and an email account.
In general, students have access to all computer labs whenever the buildings are open.
In Fall 06, the SDSMT Tablet PC Program was brought online with incoming freshmen. Each
semester thereafter new students were enrolled in the program, and as of fall 2010, all students
are now part of the Tablet Program. The students are issued a Tablet PC, and have wireless
capabilities covering the entire campus, including the dorms and sports arenas.
Currently all residence hall rooms are wired and active, and support approximately 450
connections. All dorms also have wireless access so students are not tied to their rooms for a
network connection. A volunteer-based group has been formed in the residence halls to provide
325

extended computing support to resident students. ITS provides training for student volunteers,
and supplies additional funding and coordination for publicity and organizational tasks.
The on-campus wired network is growing and SDSM&T‘s connectivity to Internet and other
national networks is near effective capacity. In the Fall of 2008, SDSMT was brought on board
the REED network, which is a 10GB link to other institutions and government agencies. Students
and faculty and the applications they require to pursue academic goals increasingly require 24
hr/7 days a week production-quality network and computing services. ITS personnel do an
excellent job in providing these critical services despite low fulltime staffing levels and intense
dependence on part-time student employees. ADA access to some computing facilities is
problematic due to building restrictions, although accommodations are always made.
The FY10 institutional budget for ITS is $1,247,069 and includes roughly equal amounts for
personnel and for operations and maintenance.
Significant technology expenditures are also made using non-ITS funds. ITS reviews such
expenditures by other campus entities, in an effort to consolidate purchases, determine when site
licensing or other options can be cost effective, and track and anticipate developing needs across
campus. Campus wide computing facilities supported by ITS include the following.
Instructional Computer Labs (Open for general use when not scheduled for classes)
Building and Room
Purpose of Lab,
Condition of lab
No of student
Number
Courses Taught
stations
Civil/Mechanical 227
Electrical
Engineering/ Physics
307
TOTAL

CEE284, GE117,
CEE117, CEE437,
ME 110, IENG 411
CHE250, CSC150,
Geog 211, MIS 205
(BH)

3.0 Ghz 1Gb Mem

40

2.8GHZ 1Gb Mem

23
63

Other SDSM&T Computer Laboratory Facilities
Building and Room
Purpose of Lab,
Condition of Lab
Number
Courses Taught
Library (dispursed
throughout building)
Surbeck Center 106
TOTAL

Number of student
stations

Open lab

2.8Ghz 1Gb Mem

20

Open lab

2.4Ghz 512 Mem

12
32

All PC lab machines are running Windows XP Pro with Office 2007 along with various other
software packages.
Every year, ITS solicits requests from each academic program regarding specialized software
that needs to be loaded on faculty member and/or lab computers for the program. Faculty
326

members are also asked about any software deemed useful to include in the ―
base image‖ used to
load a minimum standard of updated software on all computers campus wide.
The following is a list of software items in the ―
base image‖ as well as specialized software in all
programs reviewed by ABET, Inc.
Base Image
Office 2010
Symantec Antivirus
Adobe Reader
Macromedia Authorware Player
Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5
Adobe Shockwave Player
Java
Adobe Flash Player
Real Player
Windows Media Encoder
Windows Media Player
DVD Player Codec
Quicktime Player
Internet Explorer 8
Opera
Chrome
Firefox
Misc Software
CMD Here Powertoy for Windows
PuTTY
winspc416
7 ZIP 4.65
Tortiose SVN 1.5.6
VIM 7.2
GhostScript
MathType Fonts
Pidgin 2.5.3
Dyknow
Visual Studio 2005
Hummingbird
Turning Point Responseware

Specialized Software, by lab or program
CAD
Solid Works
Chemistry
Logger Pro 3.8
Chemical / Biological Engineering
Polymath 2009
EES
Loop-Pro (Control Station)
Aspen / SQL Server
MD Solid
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Visual Analysis 5.5
GeoStudio Slope 7.1.3
LPILE v5
VISSIM v5.1
Arc GIS 9.3.1 and Python
RAM and STAAD
Rocsience
HEC HMS/RAS/GeoHMS/GeoRAS
Computer Science
Microsoft Visual Studio 2008/SDK/SQL Server
Math
Maple 13
Math CAD/Ghostscript
MiniTab 15
Electrical Engineering
ADS 2009
B2 Spice AD v4 Lite
IE3D (Zeland Products)
Pspice
CST 2009
MatLab

327

Geology
ENVI+IDL 4.5
IDV 2.7
Industrial Engineering
Arena 12
Mechanical Engineering
ABAQUS
Fluent
Metallurgical Engineering
Thermocalc
Math CAD/Ghostscript

Devereaux Library, Patricia Andersen, Director
The Devereaux Library maintains a totally integrated collection and supports the instructional
and research activities of all programs. The engineering collections can be found using the
Library of Congress classification scheme.
Reference is available, in person or via phone at 394-2419, Monday through Friday 8:00 am to
5:00 pm. Reference is also available through instant message and email. Reference resources
can be accessed online at <http://library.sdsmt.edu/contact.htm>.
General information databases are available through the South Dakota Library Network (see
<http://www.sdln.net>) and from vendors such as EbscoHost, InfoTrac and ProQuest. Research
databases provided by the Devereaux Library and accessible only on-campus cover a variety of
disciplines. Titles such as: Engineering Village 2 (Engineering Index); SciFinder Scholar; Web
of Knowledge; Scitation; Applied Science & Technology Full-Text, Knovel and GeoRef are all
available.
Library hours during the academic year are as follows:
 Monday through Thursday 7:30 am - 12 midnight
 Friday 7:30 am - 5 pm
 Saturday 12 noon - 5 pm
 Sunday 12 noon - 12 midnight
Fewer hours of operation are observed during the summer and during breaks from classes.
Access to all books and other library materials are available all the hours the library is open. The
library seating capacity is 419.
Each department on campus has designated a library liaison to work with the library staff in
determining the best materials for the department. Each liaison works with his/her department to
determine how monies should be spent. The library maintains control of the budget and will
purchase only those items that align with the mission of the school.
328

SDSM&T library makes every effort to provide for the needs of engineering students despite the
escalating cost of journals and books. Keeping journal subscriptions current limits expansion of
the book collection. Journal costs have forced some cancellations of titles in the last few years.
Additions of online services through the Internet have helped address our limitations in the
general education undergraduate areas. Items for engineering majors past the first two years of
study are limited. Interlibrary loan is available and full-text databases help in some areas but is
cost prohibitive in others.

329

Expenditures for books and periodicals for the past four years are detailed below.
ACQUISTIONS DURNG LAST

CURRENT COLLECTION
RESOURCES

THREE (3) YEARS
Books

Periodicals

Books

Periodicals

4625

12950

110,126

105753

Engineering

247

0

20,012

672

Chemistry

1186

0

3425

77

Mathematics

0

0

2240

62

Physics

24

0

3266

139

Entire Institutional Library
In the following fields
(included above)

FY 2008

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011
(estimated)

Total Library Current Funds

$801,328

$722,221

$640,892

$640,892

Expenditures for the Engineering
Unit (Total) (ALL AREAS)

*

*

*

*

Books

$29,240

$28,863

$25,000

$

Periodicals

$334,111

$273,065

$192,903

$

The library has a very good collection of maps, most coming from the Library Program Service
through the Federal Government. Devereaux Library is a selective depository library, and
through this system we collect maps in geology and mining and topographic maps of South
Dakota and Wyoming. Our microfiche collection consists mostly of government information
and we have a microfilm collection of older journal titles. Audio, video, and DVD materials are
limited. These items come under the book budget and more emphasis is placed on scholarly
materials than recreational materials. Currently the Friends of the Devereaux Library, a group
which raises funds for the library through an annual film series, purchases movies and other noneducational materials.
The Career Center, Dr. Darrell Sawyer, Director
The Career Center informs, guides, and supports students as they plan their careers and search
for full-time, summer and co-op opportunities. Placement services are offered to alumni free of
charge. The Center assists students with their resumes, cover letters, interviewing skills and job
searches through a series of workshops offered throughout the academic year. The Center also
works with students on an individual basis. Professional development workshops are regularly
sponsored with the aim of helping students develop their social networking, business etiquette,
330

and cultural awareness skills. Career counseling and vocational interest inventories also are
available to all students.
The Career Center coordinates scheduling of interviews for the 150+ employers that typically
visit campus each year to recruit students for full-time, summer and co-op positions. Each
September and February the Career Center hosts a South Dakota School of Mines Engineering
and Science Career Fair. More than 150 employers from across the country participate in these
events and recruit South Dakota School of Mines students in a wide range of disciplines. These
career fairs provide students at all levels with opportunities to speak directly with employers and
discuss career possibilities. On the day following the Fair, many industry representatives conduct
interviews, speak to classes and student organizations, interact with faculty, and host evening
seminars. The Career Center also tracks placement and starting salary data for new graduates and
average wages for co-op/intern students. In addition, the Career Center manages an online job
posting system to assist students and alumni in applying for jobs with employers that do not visit
the campus.
SDSM&T‘s Cooperative Education (Co-op) Program is a partnership with business, industry and
government agencies that is administered by the Career Center. Students may earn academic
credit for their co-op experience with the approval of their department‘s Cooperative Education
Coordinator who is responsible for assessing the student‘s performance and assigning the grade
for the co-op credits earned. More than 75% of SDSM&T graduates have summer internship or
co-op experience upon graduation.
Student Services and the STEPS Program
In 2006, the STEPS (Students Emerging as Professionals <http://steps.sdsmt.edu/>.) program
was created to closely align Student Affairs programming with the achievement of key
outcomes. As of the creation of this self-study, 1,083 students have taken the STEPS preassessment. The STEPS outcomes align with and support the ABET (a) through (k) as follows:
STEPS Outcome

ABET Outcome supported by
STEPS assessments and
programming

1

Engage in lifelong learning

Outcome (i)

2

Apply technical understanding

Outcome (k)

3

Serve the community

Outcome (h)

4

Value a global perspective

Outcomes (h) and (j)

5

Lead and serve on teams

Outcome (d)

6

Communicate

Outcome (g)

7

Respect self and others

Outcome s(d) and (f)

8

Value diversity

Outcome (d) and (j)

9

Act with integrity

Outcome (f)

331

Student Affairs staff worked closely with engineering faculty members to identify the
dimensions of student development that can be advanced and reinforced through co-curricular
offerings and support services offered by student affairs.
All freshmen take an online assessment that introduces them to and measures their attainment of
the nine STEPS outcomes. The assessment is an individualized developmental snapshot in time
that the student can access and compare to results of his or her reassessments. Students are
encouraged to retake the assessment at key points in their academic career.
To reinforce and promote the attainment of the ten STEPS outcomes, students are given a
calendar of events that cross references the STEPS outcome the event will reinforce. (See the

calendar‖ link at <http://steps.sdsmt.edu/>.) The goal is to remind students of the importance to
their development as professionals of these outcomes, to give them opportunities to exercise and
develop these outcomes, and to make clear how highly valued these outcomes are by all aspects
of the campus community.
Also published by the STEPS program is information about resources germane to each outcome.
For example, links to the National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics and other
professional ethical creeds are given to support the ―
Act with Integrity‖ outcome. For the ―
Lead
and Serve on Teams‖ outcome, students are directed to the Leadership Development Team and
its programming, to CAMP, to the All-Campus Leadership retreat, and other resources.
An online database of STEPS assessment results is provided to faculty so they can track the
number and class level of students in the program who have taken the STEPS assessments.
While most of the results are currently for freshmen and sophomores, within a few years, the
engineering programs will have pre-test, formative-assessment, and post-test results for students
as they develop during their academic careers at SDSM&T.
A folder detailing the STEPS program and efforts by Student Affairs to reinforce and advance
the attainment of key ABET (a) through (k) outcomes will be available in the resource room at
the time of the visit.
M. Faculty Workload
A nominal full load for a faculty member is formally defined under the Agreement with the
Council on Higher Education. From faculty members whose primary responsibilities are
instructional, an effort equivalent to that needed to deliver thirty credit hours of undergraduate
instruction per academic year is expected. Faculty members whose primary responsibilities
involve instruction will be assigned reasonable time (typically six credit hours of undergraduate
instruction, or its equivalent, per academic year) to support active research, scholarship or
332

creative artistic activity or active discipline-related professional service. From faculty members
whose primary responsibilities are research, effort needed to maintain a research program
recognized nationally for its excellence is expected. Faculty members whose primary
responsibilities involve research or professional service are expected to engage in instructional
activities consistent with their primary assignments.
While these vary between programs, typical teaching loads amongst engineering faculty
members are two or three scheduled courses per semester plus independent study and projectguidance activity. If the faculty member is released for research, he or she is relieved for
teaching duties proportionately. If the faculty member is involved in guiding a significant
number of graduate students, teaching load is sometimes reduced. If a faculty member is
involved in developing new courses, a teaching load reduction may be made. If he/she is
involved in administration (such as being a department head), the teaching workload is
proportionately reduced. Graduate teaching assistant support is used to provide assistance in
laboratories and in grading.
Part-time faculty (adjuncts, part-time instructors, graduate teaching assistants, etc.) are
supervised relative to competence in teaching, course conduct and availability to students, by
their respective department heads and the lead faculty to whom they are assigned. Typically,
part-time instructors are used in the engineering programs to assist when a full-time faculty
member is on sabbatical leave and often are retired professors or individuals from local industry
with a long association with the institution. Graduate teaching assistants are most often used to
assist with laboratories and only in exceptional circumstances do they have full responsibility for
a course.
N. Tables

333

Table D-1. Programs Offered by the Educational Unit

Chemical Engineering

X

4

Dr. Robb Winter

Office of the Provost

Civil Engineering

X

4

Dr. Henry Mott

Office of the Provost

X
X

Computer Engineering

X

4

Dr. Michael Batchelder

Office of the Provost

X

Computer Science

X

4

Dr. Kyle Riley

Office of the Provost

Electrical Engineering

X

4

Dr. Michael Batchelder

Office of the Provost

X

Environmental Engineering

X

4

Dr. Henry Mott

Office of the Provost

X

Geological Engineering

X

4

Dr. Maribeth Price

Office of the Provost

X

Industrial Engineering and Engineering
Management1

X

4

Dr. Stuart Kellogg

Office of the Provost

X

Metallurgical Engineering

X

4

Dr. Jon Kellar

Office of the Provost

X

Mechanical Engineering

X

4

Dr. Michael Langerman

Office of the Provost

X

X

Office of the Provost
Mr. Shashi Kanth
Mining Engineering
X
4
1
Industrial Engineering is currently accredited; submitted for initial accreditation during this cycle is the Engineering Management component of the program

334

Not Now
Accredited

Offered, Not
Submitted
for
Evaluation
Now
Accredited

Not Now
Accredited

Administrative
Head

Administrative
Unit or Units
(e.g. Dept.)
Exercising
Budgetary
Control

Now
Accredited.

Nominal
Years to
Complete

Alternate
Mode

Off Campus

Cooperative
Education

Program Title

Day

Modes Offered

Submitted
for
Evaluation

X

Table D-2. Degrees Awarded and Transcript Designations for all Programs offered at SDSM&T
Program Title
Atmospheric Sciences MS
Atmospheric Sciences PhD
Biomedical Engineering MS
Biomedical Engineering PhD
Chemical and Biological Engineering PhD
Chemical Engineering BS
Chemical Engineering MS
Chemistry BS
Civil Engineering BS

Modes Offered
Off
Day Co-op Campus
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

Alt.
Mode

Name of Degree Awarded

Designation on Transcript

Master of Science
Doctor of Philosophy
Master of Science
Doctor of Philosophy
Doctor of Philosophy
Bachelor of Science
Master of Science
Bachelor of Science

Master of Science in Atmospheric Sciences
Doctor of Philosophy in Atmospheric Sciences
Master of Science in Biomedical Engineering
Doctor of Philosophy in Biomedical Engineering
Doctor of Philosophy in Chemical and Biological Engineering
Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering
Master of Science in Chemical Engineering
Bachelor of Science in Chemistry

Bachelor of Science

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering

Civil Engineering MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Civil Engineering
Computer Engineering BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering
Computer Science BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Computer Science
Construction Management MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Construction Management
Electrical Engineering BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Electrical Engineering
Environmental Engineering BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Environmental Engineering
Geological Engineering BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Geological Engineering
Geology and Geological Engineering MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Geology and Geological Engineering
Geology and Geological Engineering PhD
X
Doctor of Philosophy
Doctor of Philosophy in Geology and Geological Engineering
Geology BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Geology
Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Industrial Engineering1
BS
Interdisciplinary Sciences BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Interdisciplinary Sciences2
Materials Engineering and Science MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Materials Engineering and Science
Materials Engineering and Science PhD
X
Doctor of Philosophy
Doctor of Philosophy in Materials Engineering and Science
Mathematics (Applied and Computational) BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Mathematics (Applied and Computational)
Mechanical Engineering BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering
Mechanical Engineering MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering
Mechanical Engineering PhD
X
Doctor of Philosophy
Doctor of Philosophy in Mechanical Engineering
Metallurgical Engineering BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Metallurgical Engineering
Mining Engineering BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Mining Engineering
Nanoscience and Nanoengineering PhD
X
Doctor of Philosophy
Doctor of Philosophy in Nanoscience and Nanoengineering
Paleontology MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Paleontology
Physics BS
X
Bachelor of Science
Bachelor of Science in Physics
Physics MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Physics
Robotics and Intelligent Autonomous Systems MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Robotics and Intelligent Autonomous Systems
Technology Management MS
X
Master of Science
Master of Science in Technology Management
1
If program name change is approved for addition of the engineering management component, the designation on transcript will be as follows: ―Ba
chelor of Science in Industrial Engineering and
Engineering Management‖ 2 Specializations, the Associate of Arts, and non-degree programs are not listed

335

Tables D-3. Support Expenditures
Support expenditure information is presented below by providing four tables for each program
being reviewed:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Support expenditures, all sources, for the program
Institutional expenditures for the program
Foundation support for the program
Support for the program coming from external funding such as grants and contracts

Support expenditures for academic programs housed in tandem within a closely related program
are reported for both programs in combination. This is the case for civil and environmental
engineering, electrical and computer engineering, and geology and geological engineering.
Additionally, a single table aggregating all support expenditures for all eleven programs
reviewed by ABET, Inc. for each of these three sources of support is provided.
Updated tables will be available in the resource room at the time of the visit. The updated tables
will report actual FY10 expenditures, and the actual may be significantly higher than the

projected‖ for some programs because of the time lag involved in processing expenditure
records in the Banner database from which the figures are extracted.
Individual programs will provide evaluators with details on support expenditures when needed.

336

Table D-3.1.1 Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Chemical Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Equipment (Foundation/External / Grant
Funding Only)
Computer Equipment & Software
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

TOTALS

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

13,007.00
5,467.00
207,785.00
16,967.00
1,165.00
48,047.00
81,648.00
2,959.00

$
$
1,980.00
$ 185,638.00
$
$
48,169.00
$
1,200.00
$ 710,742.00
$ 1,324,774.00

FY10
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

4,204.00
7,220.00
45,266.00
17,000.00
2,181.00
113,198.00
74,447.00
3,000.00

$
$
$
69,828.00
$
$
55,000.00
$
12,000.00
$ 684,687.00
$ 1,088,031.00

FY11
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

50,000.00
4,127.00
6,632.00
30,138.00
17,000.00
1,360.00
86,039.00
69,480.00
2,000.00

$
$
50,000.00
$ 123,561.00
$
$
58,000.00
$
12,000.00
$ 701,398.00
$ 1,211,735.00

Table D-3.1.2, Institutional Expenditures for Chemical Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

7,580
2,585
16,778
16,967
20,922
18,149
2,959
48,169
1,200
588,902
724,212

337

FY10
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

4,000
3,000
21,000
17,000
32,000
22,000
3,000
55,000
12,000
551,000
720,000

FY11
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

4,000
4,000
15,000
17,000
31,000
23,000
2,000
58,000
12,000
558,000
724,000

Table D-3.1.3, Foundation Support for Chemical Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

-

$

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Software

$

-

$

-

$

-

Contractual Services

$

-

$

-

$

-

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

7,229

$

9,000

$

10,000

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$

9,062

$

10,000

$

10,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Equipment & Software

$

-

$

-

$

-

Equipment

$

-

$

-

$

50,000

Lab Equipment

$

980

$

-

$

80,0002

Office Furniture

$

-

$

-

$

-

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

-

$

-

$

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

-

$

-

$

-

Faculty Salaries

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

17,271

$

19,000

$

50,000

200,000

Table D-3.1.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Chemical Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

5,427
2,882
191,007
1,165
19,896
54,437

2

FY10
Projection
$

-

FY11
Projection
$

-

$204
$4,220
$24,266

$127
$2,632
$15,138

$2,181
$72,198
$42,447

$1,360
$45,039
$36,480

The new addition to the Chemistry and Chemical Engineering Building will be completed in 2011 and private
funds have been raised to outfit the new laboratories.

338

Equipment (External/Grant Funding Only)
Computer Equipment
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

1,980
184,658
121,840
583,292

$69,828

$43,561

$133,687
$304,031

$143,398
$189,662

Table D-3.2.1 Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Civil and Environmental
Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Equipment (Foundation/External / Grant
Funding Only)
Computer Equipment & Software
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

TOTALS

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

10,536.00
13,849.00
138,513.00
1,660.00
71,245.00
82,141.00
11,236.00

$
1,280.00
$
34,164.00
$
34,793.00
$
$
60,948.00
$
4,604.00
$ 980,867.00
$ 1,445,836.00

339

FY10
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

15,000.00
5,142.00
20,299.00
72,044.00
58,833.00
53,799.00
6,000.00

$
9,000.00
$
50,000.00
$
$
$
54,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 1,188,484.00
$ 1,537,601.00

FY11
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

5,093.00
15,362.00
47,751.00
44,429.00
47,661.00
5,000.00

$
5,000.00
$
30,000.00
$
$
$
57,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 1,209,608.00
$ 1,471,904.00

Table D-3.2.2, Institutional Expenditures for Civil and Environmental Engineering
FY09

FY10

FY11

Actual

Projection

Projection

Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements

$

Computer Hardware

$

Computer Software

-

$

-

$

-

10,536

$

5,000

$

5,000

$

8,708

$

3,000

$

4,000

Contractual Services

$

17,650

$

10,000

$

7,000

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

1,660

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

23,366

$

21,000

$

21,000

Travel

$

28,803

$

23,000

$

24,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

11,236

$

6,000

$

5,000

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

60,948

$

54,000

$

57,000

Part-Time Assistance

$

4,604

$

5,000

$

5,000

Faculty Salaries

$

882,690

$

969,000

$

981,000

$

1,050,200

$

1,096,000

$

1,109,000

340

Table D-3.2.3, Foundation Support for Civil and Environmental Engineering

FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

Computer Software

$

-

Contractual Services

$

Depreciation Expense

FY11
Projection
$

-

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

8,969

$

25,000

$

15,000

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$

18,378

$

10,000

$

10,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

Computer Equipment & Software

$

1,280

$

9,000

$

5,000

Equipment

$

34,164

$

50,000

$

30,000

Lab Equipment

$

3,011

$

-

$

-

Office Furniture

$

-

$

-

$

-

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

-

$

-

$

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

-

$

-

$

-

Faculty Salaries

$

-

$

100,000

$

100,000

$

209,000

$

160,000

-

$

65,802

341

$

15,000

-

$

-

Table D-3.2.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Civil and Environmental
Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (External / Grant Funding Only)
Computer Equipment
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

5,141
120,863
38,910
34,960

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

31,782
98,177
329,833

342

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

$
$
$
$

142.00
17,299.00
62,044.00

$
$
$
$

93.00
11,362.00
40,751.00

$
$

12,833.00
20,799.00

$
$

8,429.00
13,661.00

$
$

119,484.00
232,601.00

$
$

128,608.00
202,904.00

Table D-3.3.1 Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Electrical and Computer
Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Equipment (Foundation/External / Grant
Funding Only)
Computer Equipment & Software
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

TOTALS

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

$
$ 7,819.00
$ 4,589.00
$ 8,848.00
$ 1,886.00
$
$ 35,707.00
$ 24,791.00
$ 4,225.00

$
$ 4,080.00
$ 4,130.00
$ 114,921.00
$ 2,000.00
$
115.00
$ 34,372.00
$ 35,683.00
$ 18,000.00

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

$ 21,050.00
$
18.00
$ 8,402.00
$
$ 55,890.00
$ 32,658.00
$ 705,182.00
$ 911,065.00

$ 16,900.00
$
$
$
$ 49,000.00
$ 23,000.00
$ 676,474.00
$ 978,675.00

$ 20,000.00
$
$ 20,000.00
$
$ 52,000.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 698,299.00
$ 931,455.00

343

4,007.00
6,011.00
19,278.00
2,000.00
10.00
37,701.00
34,149.00
14,000.00

Table D-3.3.2, Institutional Expenditures for Electrical and Computer Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Hardware

$

7,819

$

4,000

$

4,000

Computer Software

$

4,589

$

4,000

$

6,000

Contractual Services

$

8,848

$

16,000

$

11,000

Depreciation Expense

$

1,886

$

2,000

$

2,000

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

20,212

$

22,000

$

22,000

Travel

$

4,983

$

2,000

$

2,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

4,225

$

18,000

$

14,000

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

55,890

$

49,000

$

52,000

Part-Time Assistance

$

25,695

$

23,000

$

23,000

Faculty Salaries

$

611,500

$

569,000

$

576,000

$

745,646

$

709,000

$

712,000

344

Table D-3.3.3, Foundation Support for Electrical and Computer Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Software

$

-

$

-

$

-

Contractual Services

$

-

$

-

$

-

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

14,117

$

4,000

$

15,000

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$

14,600

$

8,000

$

10,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

Computer Equipment & Software

$

21,050

$

Equipment

$

18

$

-

$

Lab Equipment

$

7,848

$

-

$

Office Furniture

$

-

$

-

$

-

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

-

$

-

$

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

6,963

$

-

$

1,000

Faculty Salaries

$

82,309

$

80,000

$

80,000

$

146,904

$

108,900

$

146,000

-

345

$

16,900

$
$

20,000
20,000

Table D-3.3.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Electrical and Computer
Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (External / Grant Funding Only)

$

80.00

$

7.00

$

130.00

$

11.00

$

98,921.00

$

8,278.00

$

115.00

$

10.00

$

1,378.00

$

8,372.00

$

701.00

$

5,208.00

$

25,683.00

$

22,149.00

$

554.00

$

11,373.00

$

27,474.00

$

42,299.00

$

18,513.00

$

160,775.00

$

73,455.00

Computer Equipment
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

346

Table D-3.4.1 Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Geology and Geological Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Equipment (Foundation/External / Grant
Funding Only)
Computer Equipment & Software
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

TOTALS

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

16,971.00
26,463.00
1,189.00
9,583.00
155.00
29,268.00
63,468.00
3,596.00

$ 1,017.00
$
155.00
$
$
$ 53,467.00
$
176.00
$ 715,186.00
$ 920,694.00

FY10
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

55,570.00
15,000.00
103,727.00
10,000.00
15,000.00
61,257.00
27,000.00

$
$
$
41,031.00
$
$
54,000.00
$
$ 727,710.00
$ 1,110,295.00

FY11
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

50,471.00
21,000.00
74,428.00
10,000.00
15,000.00
65,097.00
21,000.00

$
$
$
33,910.00
$
$
57,000.00
$
$ 740,033.00
$ 1,087,939.00

Table D-3.4.2, Institutional Expenditures for Geology and Geological Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

-

FY10
Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

Computer Hardware

$

16,711

$

55,000

$

50,000

Computer Software

$

26,463

$

15,000

$

21,000

Contractual Services

$

(2,470)

$

102,000

$

73,000

Depreciation Expense

$

9,583

$

10,000

$

10,000

Other Expenses

$

-

$

Supplies and Materials

$

17,158

$

13,000

$

13,000

Travel

$

12,669

$

16,000

$

17,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

3,596

$

27,000

$

21,000

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

53,467

$

54,000

$

57,000

347

$

-

FY11
Projection

-

$

$

-

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

176

$

Faculty Salaries

$

685,459

$

695,000

$

703,000

$

822,812

$

987,000

$

965,000

348

-

$

-

Table D-3.4.3, Foundation Support for Geology and Geological Engineering
FY09
Actual
Actual

FY10
Projection
Projection

FY11
Projection
Projection

Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Software

$

-

$

-

$

-

Contractual Services

$

-

$

-

$

-

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

7,141

$

2,000

$

2,000

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$

13,217

$

4,000

$

4,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

Computer Equipment & Software

$

Equipment

$

Lab Equipment

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Office Furniture

$

-

$

-

$

-

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

-

$

-

$

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

-

$

-

$

-

Faculty Salaries

$

-

$

-

$

-

1,017

$

21,376

$

6,000

$

6,000

Table D-3.4.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Geology and Geological
Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense

$

260.00

$

570.00

$

471.00

$

3,659.00

$

1,727.00

$

1,428.00

349

Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (External / Grant Funding Only)

$

155.00

$

4,969.00

$

37,582.00

$

155.00

$

41,257.00

$

44,097.00

$

41,031.00

$

33,910.00

Computer Equipment
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

$

29,727.00

$

32,710.00

$

37,033.00

$

76,507.00

$

117,295.00

$

116,939.00

Table D-3.5.1 Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Industrial Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Equipment (Foundation/External / Grant
Funding Only)
Computer Equipment & Software
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

TOTALS

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

$
$
$
251.00
$ 2,462.00
$
$
$ 12,117.00
$ 41,953.00
$
-

$
$ 1,000.00
$
$ 6,020.00
$
$
$ 19,159.00
$ 27,541.00
$ 2,000.00

$
$ 1,000.00
$
$ 3,569.00
$
$
$ 18,740.00
$ 29,818.00
$ 2,000.00

$
209.00
$
$
$
399.00
$ 9,094.00
$ 2,839.00
$ 463,357.00
$ 532,681.00

$
$
$
$
$ 6,000.00
$ 1,000.00
$ 441,525.00
$ 504,245.00

$
$
$
$
$ 6,000.00
$ 1,000.00
$ 443,393.00
$ 505,520.00

Table D-3.5.2, Institutional Expenditures for Industrial Engineering
FY09

350

FY10

FY11

Actual

Operations (not including staff):

Projection

Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

1,000

$

1,000

Computer Software

$

251

$

-

$

-

Contractual Services

$

2,462

$

2,000

$

1,000

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

8,983

$

11,000

$

11,000

Travel

$

5,241

$

5,000

$

5,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

-

$

2,000

$

2,000

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

9,094

$

6,000

$

6,000

Part-Time Assistance

$

2,839

$

1,000

$

1,000

Faculty Salaries

$

427,637

$

395,000

$

400,000

$

456,508

$

423,000

$

427,000

Table D-3.5.3, Foundation Support for Industrial Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Software

$

-

$

-

$

-

Contractual Services

$

-

$

-

$

-

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

2,625

$

7,000

$

7,000

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$

27,461

$

15,000

$

15,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Equipment & Software

$

209

$

-

$

-

Equipment

$

-

$

-

$

-

Lab Equipment

$

-

$

-

$

-

Office Furniture

$

399

$

-

$

-

351

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

-

$

-

$

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

-

$

-

$

-

Faculty Salaries

$

23,231

$

24,000

$

24,000

$

53,925

$

46,000

$

46,000

Table D-3.5.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Industrial Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (External / Grant Funding Only)
Computer Equipment
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

$

4,020.00

$

2,569.00

$
$

509.00
9,251.00

$
$

1,159.00
7,541.00

$
$

740.00
9,818.00

$
$

12,489.00
22,249.00

$
$

22,525.00
35,245.00

$
$

19,393.00
32,520.00

Table D-3.6.1 Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Mechanical Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

11,249.00
15,039.00
106,293.00
15,020.00
61.00
68,571.00

352

FY10
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

500.00
26,150.00
46,152.00
59,559.00
15,000.00
102,365.00

FY11
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

42,237.00
76,749.00
93,387.00
15,000.00
139,009.00

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Equipment (Foundation/External / Grant
Funding Only)
Computer Equipment & Software
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

TOTALS

$
$

43,677.00
1,611.00

$
$

$
129.00
$
417.00
$ 197,231.00
$
$
18,704.00
$
3,844.00
$ 939,709.00
$ 1,421,555.00

41,564.00
22,000.00

$
$

$
1,000.00
$
$
62,312.00
$
$
8,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 930,670.00
$ 1,320,272.00

63,609.00
17,000.00

$
1,500.00
$
5,000.00
$ 108,614.00
$
$
8,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 1,117,034.00
$ 1,692,139.00

Table D-3.6.2, Institutional Expenditures for Mechanical Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

FY10
Projection

5,228
7,331
(8,510)
15,020
23,555
4,483
1,611
18,704
3,844
755,382
826,648

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

FY11
Projection

500
3,000
5,000
8,000
15,000
26,000
6,000
22,000
8,000
5,000
733,000
831,500

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

3,000
7,000
6,000
15,000
25,000
6,000
17,000
8,000
5,000
742,000
834,000

Table D-3.6.3, Foundation Support for Mechanical Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Software

$

-

$

-

$

-

353

Contractual Services

$

-

$

-

$

-

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

3,163

$

15,000

$

10,000

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$

9,187

$

6,000

$

7,500

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

-

$

Computer Equipment & Software

$

129

$

Equipment

$

-

$

Lab Equipment

$

Office Furniture

$

Graduate Teaching Assistants

-

-

$

1,500

-

$

5,000

$

-

$

3,000

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

$

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

-

$

-

$

-

Faculty Salaries

$

-

$

-

$

40,000

$

67,000

2,701

$

15,180

$

1,000

$

22,000

Table D-3.6.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Mechanical Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (External / Grant Funding Only)

$

6,021.00

$

23,150.00

$

39,237.00

$

7,708.00

$

41,152.00

$

69,749.00

$

114,803.00

$

51,559.00

$

87,387.00

$

61.00

$

41,853.00

$

61,365.00

$

104,009.00

$

30,007.00

$

29,564.00

$

50,109.00

$

417.00

$

194,530.00

$

62,312.00

$

105,614.00

Computer Equipment
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants

354

Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

$

184,327.00

$

197,670.00

$

335,034.00

$

579,727.00

$

466,772.00

$

791,139.00

Table D-3.7.1 Support Expenditures, All Sources, for Metallurgical Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Equipment (Foundation/External / Grant
Funding Only)
Computer Equipment & Software
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

TOTALS

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

10,080.00
7,640.00
69,027.00
11,532.00
384.00
84,254.00
70,528.00
18,786.00

$
110.00
$
$ 36,480.00
$
$ 10,516.00
$ 7,572.00
$ 648,596.00
$ 975,505.00

FY10
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

97,102.00
77,021.00
12,000.00
63,473.00
65,135.00
-

$
200.00
$
$ 206,444.00
$
$
5,000.00
$
11,500.00
$ 635,952.00
$ 1,173,827.00

FY11
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

117,047.00
92,050.00
12,000.00
77,103.00
74,341.00
-

$
200.00
$
$ 251,149.00
$
$
5,000.00
$
11,000.00
$ 746,402.00
$ 1,386,292.00

Table D-3.7.2, Institutional Expenditures for Metallurgical Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

162
3,680
14,476
11,532
12,198

355

FY10
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

5,000
3,000
12,000
13,000

FY11
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

5,000
2,000
12,000
13,000

Travel
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

$
$
$
$
$
$

4,230
18,786
10,516
4,670
398,144
478,394

$
$
$
$
$
$

2,000
5,000
8,000
425,000
473,000

$
$
$
$
$
$

2,000
5,000
8,000
430,000
477,000

Table D-3.7.3, Foundation Support for Metallurgical Engineering
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Software

$

-

$

-

$

-

Contractual Services

$

-

$

-

$

-

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

15,953

$

6,000

$

10,000

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$

14,974

$

16,000

$

15,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Equipment & Software

$

110

$

200

$

200

Equipment

$

-

$

-

$

-

Lab Equipment

$

521

$

-

$

-

Office Furniture

$

-

$

-

$

-

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

-

$

-

$

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

2,902

$

3,500

$

3,000

Faculty Salaries

$

151

$

600

$

500

$

34,610

$

26,300

$

28,700

Table D-3.7.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for Metallurgical Engineering
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):

356

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (External / Grant Funding Only)
Computer Equipment
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

$ 9,918.00
$ 3,960.00
$ 54,551.00

$ 92,102.00

$ 112,047.00

$ 74,021.00

$ 90,050.00

$
384.00
$ 56,103.00
$ 51,324.00

$ 44,473.00
$ 47,135.00

$ 54,103.00
$ 57,341.00

$ 35,959.00

$ 206,444.00

$ 251,149.00

$ 250,301.00
$ 462,500.00

$ 210,352.00
$ 674,527.00

$ 315,902.00
$ 880,592.00

Table D-3.8.1 Support Expenditures, All Sources, for all programs in the Educational
Unit 1
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (Institutional Funds)
Equipment (Foundation/External / Grant
Funding Only)
Computer Equipment & Software
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries

TOTALS

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

25,829.00
98,271.25
73,874.74
554,502.56
54,988.00
3,425.11
384,880.96
445,231.33
44,723.00

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

24,975.00
36,733.19
462,792.65
399.00
272,289.00
82,279.00
6,647,862.84
9,213,056.63

FY10
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

15,500.00
217,247.89
92,800.52
487,556.70
56,000.00
2,295.66
431,185.85
389,822.40
81,000.00

$
30,470.00
$
56,000.00
$ 379,615.33
$
$ 249,000.00
$
75,500.00
$ 6,827,762.85
$ 9,391,757.20

FY11
Projection
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

50,000.00
245,982.38
125,754.82
366,599.99
56,000.00
1,369.90
451,064.78
416,154.85
63,000.00

$
28,700.00
$
91,000.00
$ 537,233.27
$
$ 262,000.00
$
76,000.00
$ 7,219,167.49
$ 9,990,027.47

Table D-3.8.2, Institutional Expenditures for all programs in the Educational Unit 1
357

FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements

$

Computer Hardware

$

Computer Software

FY10
Projection

-

FY11
Projection

$

500

$

76,581

$

101,000

$

94,000

$

54,184

$

30,000

$

42,000

Contractual Services

$

69,621

$

171,000

$

121,000

Depreciation Expense

$

54,988

$

56,000

$

56,000

Other Expenses

$

1,660

$

Supplies and Materials

$

140,103

$

150,000

$

148,000

Travel

$

89,608

$

86,000

$

89,000

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

44,723

$

81,000

$

63,000

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

272,289

$

249,000

$

262,000

Part-Time Assistance

$

66,989

$

70,000

$

70,000

Faculty Salaries

$

5,815,033

$

5,850,000

$

5,921,000

$

6,685,778

$

6,844,500

$

6,866,000

-

$

-

-

1

Programs included are as follows: chemical, civil, electrical, computer, environmental, geological, industrial,
mechanical, metallurgical, and mining engineering and computer science

Table D-3.8.3, Foundation Support for all programs in the Educational Unit 1
FY09
Actual

Operations (not including staff):

FY10
Projection

25,829

Buildings and Improvements

$

Computer Hardware

$

-

$

-

$

-

Computer Software

$

-

$

-

$

-

Contractual Services

$

-

$

-

$

-

Depreciation Expense

$

-

$

-

$

-

Other Expenses

$

-

$

-

$

-

Supplies and Materials

$

78,126

$

75,000

$

83,000

Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals

$

132,855

$

87,800

$

90,500

Equipment (Institutional Funds)

$

Computer Equipment & Software

$

24,975

$

30,470

$

28,700

Equipment

$

34,182

$

56,000

$

91,000

-

358

$

FY11
Projection

$

15,000

-

$

$

50,000

-

Lab Equipment

$

15,310

$

-

$

103,000

Office Furniture

$

399

$

-

$

-

Graduate Teaching Assistants

$

-

$

-

$

-

Part-Time Assistance

$

15,290

$

5,500

$

6,000

Faculty Salaries

$

105,692

$

209,600

$

249,500

$

432,656

$

479,371

$

701,700

1

Programs included are as follows: chemical, civil, electrical, computer, environmental, geological, industrial,
mechanical, metallurgical, and mining engineering and computer science

Table D-3.8.4, Externally Funded Grants and Contracts for all programs in the Educational Unit 1
FY09
Actual
Operations (not including staff):
Buildings and Improvements
Computer Hardware
Computer Software
Contractual Services
Depreciation Expense
Other Expenses
Supplies and Materials
Travel, Conference, Registration, Meals
Equipment (External / Grant Funding Only)
Computer Equipment
Equipment
Lab Equipment
Office Furniture
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Part-Time Assistance
Faculty Salaries
1

FY10
Projection

FY11
Projection

$
$ 21,690.25
$ 19,690.74
$ 484,881.56
$
$ 1,765.11
$ 166,651.96
$ 222,768.33

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

116,247.89
62,800.52
316,556.70
2,295.66
206,185.85
216,022.40

$
$ 151,982.38
$ 83,754.82
$ 245,599.99
$
$
1,369.90
$ 220,064.78
$ 236,654.85

$
$ 2,551.19
$ 447,482.65
$
$
$
$ 727,137.84
$2,094,619.63

$
$
$ 379,615.33
$
$
$
$ 768,162.85
$ 2,067,887.20

$
$
$ 434,233.27
$
$
$
$ 1,048,667.49
$ 2,422,327.47

Programs included are as follows: chemical, civil, electrical, computer, environmental, geological, industrial,
mechanical, metallurgical, and mining engineering and computer science

359

Tables D-4 Personnel and Students
Table D-4.1 Personnel and Students, all programs in the educational unit,1 2009
FTE

HEAD
COUNT

1

Administrative 2
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
Other Faculty (excluding student
Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists 3
Office/Clerical Employees
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment

FT
11
54

PT
0
0

5.13
58.55

9
2
19
13
7

7
49
49
2
2

10.075
24.5925
44.971
12.8
8.206

1280
86

102
35

1340.77
76.75

RATIO
TO
FACULTY

0.358
0.655
0.187
0.120
21.9 4
1.9 4

The ―
educational unit‖ is defined as the 11 programs reviewed and/or accredited by ABET, Inc. at SDSM&T. See
Section G, Educational Unit, above for a listing
2

The department chairs and academic directors are counted under the administrative headcount although they are
also members of the teaching faculty. For this reason, the faculty FTE exceeds the faculty headcount.
3

Technicians/Specialists include - Technicians, Specialists, Research Scientists, Engineers and Coordinators.

4

Ratios are calculated using headcount of "faculty" plus "other faculty" as counted in rows two and three above

Table D-4.2 Personnel and Students, Chemical Engineering, 2009
HEAD
COUNT
FT
PT
1
8
2
1
8
3
5
3
1

Administrative *
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists **
Office/Clerical Employees
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment

126
14

7
2

FTE
0.5
8.5
0.835
2.554
6.253
3
0.75
133.93
11.75

RATIO TO
FACULTY

0.274
0.670
0.321
0.080
16.6
2

* The department chair is counted under the administrative headcount although he is also a member of the
teaching faculty. For this reason, the faculty FTE exceeds the faculty headcount.
** Technicians/Specialists include - Technicians, Specialists and Research Scientists.

360

Table D-4.3 Personnel and Students, Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2009
HEAD
FTE
RATIO TO
COUNT
FACULTY
FT PT
Administrative *
1
0.3
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
9
9.7
Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants)
2
2
Student Teaching Assistants
13
5.4
0.462
Student Research Assistants
2
11
8.13
0.695
Technicians/Specialists
1
1
1.4
0.120
Office/Clerical Employees
1
1
0.085
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
195
11
204.13
18.7 1
Graduate Student enrollment
26
6
22.33
2.9 1
* The department chair is counted under the administrative headcount although he/she is also a member of
the teaching faculty. For this reason, the faculty FTE exceeds the faculty headcount.
1

Ratios are calculated using headcount of "faculty" plus "other faculty" as counted in rows two and three
above

Table D-4.4 Personnel and Students, Computer Engineering, 2009
HEAD
COUNT
FT
PT
1
9
1
3
1

Administrative *
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists
Office/Clerical Employees
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment

1
68

1

FTE
0.3
9
0.1
1.5
0.24
1.29

3

69.4

RATIO TO
FACULTY

0.165
0.026
0.000
0.142
7.9

* The department chair is counted under the administrative headcount although he is also a member of the
teaching faculty for mathematics. For this reason, the administrative FTE is lower than the administrative
headcount.

361

Table D-4.5 Personnel and Students, Electrical Engineering, 2009
HEAD
COUNT
FT
PT
1
5
3
1
7
1
3
1

Administrative *
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists **
Office/Clerical Employees
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment

112
9

FTE
0.65
5.35
1.37
4.265
0.921
3
0.75

8
4

RATIO TO
FACULTY

0.635
0.137
0.446
0.112

114.23
8.17

24
2.6

* The department chair is counted under the administrative headcount although he is also a member of the
teaching faculty. For this reason, the faculty FTE exceeds the faculty headcount. Department chair FTE also
includes partial Center Director.
** Technicians/Specialists include - Specialists, Research Scientists and Engineers

Table D-4.6 Personnel and Students, Geological Engineering, 2009
HEAD
COUNT
FT
PT
2
5
2
9
6

Administrative *
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists **
Office/Clerical Employees
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment

1
38
16

3
4

FTE

RATIO TO
FACULTY

0.8
5.7
2.5
4.284
2.682

0.522
0.327

0.833

0.102

39.87
13.83

5.9 1
2.9 1

1

Ratios are calculated using headcount of "faculty" plus "other faculty" as counted in rows two and three
above
* The department chair is counted under the administrative headcount although she is also a member of the
teaching faculty. For this reason, the faculty FTE exceeds the faculty headcount.

362

Table D-4.7 Personnel and Students, Industrial Engineering, 2009

Administrative *
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists **
Office/Clerical Employees
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment

HEAD
COUNT
FT
PT
1
3.5
1
2
1
1
1

0.5
4.0
0.27
0.96
0.059
0.4
0.833

89
1

95.13
7.7

5
20

FTE

RATIO TO
FACULTY

0.225
0.013
0.094
0.195
22.3
1.8

* The department chair is counted under the administrative headcount although he is also a member
of the teaching faculty. For this reason, the faculty FTE exceeds the faculty headcount.
** Technicians/Specialists include - Coordinators

Table D-4.8 Personnel and Students, Mechanical Engineering, 2009
HEAD COUNT
Administrative *
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
Other Faculty (excluding student
Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists **
Office/Clerical Employees
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment

FT
2
8
3
4
3
1
363
9

1

PT

FTE
0.7
9.3
3
2.094
14.042
3
1

4
18

33
6

378.77
8.42

RATIO
TO
FACULTY

0.170
1.142
0.244
0.081
36
1.4

Ratios are calculated using headcount of "faculty" plus "other faculty" as counted in rows two and three
above
* The department chair and academic directors are counted under the administrative headcount
although they are also members of the teaching faculty. For this reason, the faculty FTE exceeds the
faculty headcount.
** Technicians/Specialists include - Technicians, Research Scientists and Engineers.

363

Table D-4.9 Personnel and Students, Metallurgical Engineering, 2009
HEAD
COUNT
FT
PT
1
4

Administrative *
Faculty (tenure-track) (Includes Tenure)
Other Faculty (excluding student Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants
Student Research Assistants
Technicians/Specialists **
Office/Clerical Employees
Others
Undergraduate Student enrollment
Graduate Student enrollment

10
2
74
11

3
6

FTE
0.5
4.5
1.416
12.645
2
0.375

1
4
9

RATIO TO
FACULTY

78.1
10.83

0.315
2.810
0.444
0.083
19.5
5

* The department chair is counted under the administrative headcount although he is also a member of the
teaching faculty. For this reason, the faculty FTE exceeds the faculty headcount.
** Technicians/Specialists include - Specialists and Research Scientists

364

Enrollment Year
Academic Year
Fall 2009
Fall 2008
Fall 2007
Fall 2006
Fall 2005
Fall 2004
1

FR

SO

JR

SR

5th

Undergrad
total

Table D-5.1 Program Enrollment and Degree Data for all Students and all Programs in the Educational Unit1
Degrees
Conferred
Bachelor

2

FT

425

261

228

348

1262

PT

22

16

19

44

101

FT

374

231

257

296

1158

PT

25

17

30

59

131

FT

380

253

227

304

1164

PT

14

27

26

53

120

FT

353

273

205

308

1139

PT

16

25

25

53

119

FT

399

258

236

324

1217

PT

24

27

20

39

110

FT

403

251

217

323

1194

PT

29

24

21

50

124

224
205
236
182
194
185

Programs included are as follows: chemical, civil, electrical, computer, environmental, geological, industrial, mechanical,
metallurgical, and mining engineering and computer science. The ―
educational unit‖ is defined as the 11 programs reviewed and/or
accredited by ABET, Inc. at SDSM&T.
2

24 students with dual Engineering and Science programs are included in this figure

365

Table D-5.2 Program Enrollment Data: All Students, All Programs
Year

Year

Year

Year

Year

Year

2004-2005

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

1

1

4

2

0

0

Full-time Students Fall

1540

1545

1372

1396

1389

1490

Full-time Students Spring

1405

1372

1264

1283

1255

1368

Part-time Students summer

374

417

427

315

313

351

Part-time Students Fall

393

331

368

316

317

359

Part-time Students Spring

367

393

347

333

384

424

102.3

116.9

124.6

83.5

85.6

91.9

1687.4

1678.1

1541.4

1550.1

1543.9

1663.2

1539.6

1543.0

1426.7

1434.9

1438.2

1574.3

244

245

229

236

267

274

Full-time Students Summer

Student FTE summer
Student FTE Fall

2

2
2

Student FTE Spring
Total BS Degrees

2

FTE= "Full time equivalent" and this means 15 credit hours per term

Table D-5.3 Program Enrollment Data for Programs in the Educational Unit3
Year
2004-2005

Year
2005-2006

Year
2006-2007

Year
2007-2008

Year
2008-2009

Year
2009-2010

0

1

2

0

0

0

Full-time Students Fall

1196

1220

1141

1164

1158

1262

Full-time Students Spring

1092

1093

1055

1070

1054

1137

Part-time Students summer

188

228

235

192

182

198

Part-time Students Fall

126

113

124

122

132

102

Part-time Students Spring

132

145

120

144

132

146

Student FTE summer2

53.9

65.5

70.7

54.3

51.9

59.5

1252.5

1268.2

1210.2

1239.5

1236.1

1323.5

1150.0

1168.9

1125.4

1144.6

1131.1

1217.8

Full-time Students Summer

Student FTE Fall2
2

Student FTE Spring
Degrees Awarded

185

194

182

177

205

2

FTE= "Full time equivalent" and this means 15 credit hours per term

3

Programs included are as follows: chemical, civil, electrical, computer, environmental, geological, industrial,
mechanical, metallurgical, and mining engineering and computer science. The ―
educational unit‖ is defined as
the 11 programs reviewed and/or accredited by ABET, Inc. at SDSM&T.

366

224

Table D-5.4 Transfer Students for Past Six Academic Years: All Students
Term

Number of Transfer
Students Enrolled

Fall 2009
Fall 2008

92

Fall 2007

100

Fall 2006
Fall 2005
Fall 2004

72
82
110
111

Table D-5.5 Transfer Students for Past Six Academic Years: All Programs in the
Educational Unit1
Term
Fall 2009
Fall 2008

68

Fall 2007

68

Fall 2006
Fall 2005
Fall 2004
1

Number of Transfer
Students Enrolled
48
62
70
60

Programs included are as follows: chemical, civil, electrical, computer, environmental, geological, industrial,
mechanical, metallurgical, and mining engineering and computer science. The ―
educational unit‖ is defined as
the 11 programs reviewed and/or accredited by ABET, Inc. at SDSM&T.

367

Table D-6.1 Faculty Salary Data for all programs in the educational unit1
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor*
32
$133,000
$99,263
$79,401

Associate
Professor
13
$84,988
$72,093
$58,000

Assistant
Professor
24
$75,459
$63,116
$33,306

Instructor**
9
$102,003
$38,849
$5,900

1

The ―
educational unit‖ is defined as the 11 programs reviewed and/or accredited by ABET, Inc. at
SDSM&T. See Section G, Educational Unit, above for a listing
*Professor includes Department Chair with a 10 month salary converted to a 9 month salary
**Instructor includes part-time instructors and one Department Chair 10 month salary converted to a 9
month salary

Table D-6.2 Faculty Salary Data for Chemical Engineering
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor**
3
$116,627
$103,297
$83,225

Associate
Professor
1
$84,988

Assistant
Professor
5
$72,804
$67,826
$56,230

Instructor*
2
$31,492
$18,696
$5,900

*Instructor includes part-time instructors
**Professor includes Department Chair with a 10 month salary converted to a 9 month salary

Table D-6.3 Faculty Salary Data for Civil and Environmental Engineering
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor
6
$133,000
$100,504
$87,185

Associate
Professor
2
$68,445
$67,828
$67,210

Assistant
Professor
4
$60,500
$57,033
$49,155

Instructor
0

Table D-6.4 Faculty Salary Data for Computer Engineering
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor
4
$111,283
$100,336
$88,649

Associate
Professor
1
$69,114

368

Assistant
Professor
2
$64,000
$66,000
$13,358

Instructor
1

Table D-6.5 Faculty Salary Data for Electrical Engineering
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor**
2
$114,388
$112,112
$109,837

Associate
Professor
1
$81,000

Assistant
Professor
3
$75,459
$72,114
$68,935

*Instructor includes part-time instructors
**Professor includes Department Chair and partial Center Director appointment

Instructor*
3
$56,808
$40,439
$13,138

Table D-6.6 Faculty Salary Data for Geological Engineering
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor
2
$101,090
$90,246
$79,401

Associate
Professor
3
$72,692
$72,225
$71,983

Assistant
Professor
4
$65,000
$54,066
$33,306

Instructor
0

Table D-6.7 Faculty Salary Data for Industrial Engineering
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor*
2
$107,146
$101,657
$96,168

Associate
Professor
1
$66,640

Assistant
Professor
2
$70,991
$67,973
$64,955

Instructor
1
$26,575

*Professor includes Department Chair with a 10 month salary converted to a 9 month salary and one 12
month professor

Table D-6.8 Faculty Salary Data for Mechanical Engineering
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor*
9
$108,415
$96,991
$82,640

Associate
Professor
1
$58,000

Assistant
Professor
2
$65,948
$61,474
$57,000

Instructor
1
$48,997

*Professor includes Department Chair with a 10 month salary converted to a 9 month salary

369

Table D-6.9 Faculty Salary Data for Metallurgical Engineering
Academic Year 09-10
Number
High
Mean
Low

Professor*
2
$104,656
$104,088
$103,519

Associate
Professor
2
$79,430
$78,321
$77,212

Assistant
Professor
1
$69,022

Instructor
0

*Professor includes Department Chair with a 10 month salary converted to a 9 month salary

370

Appendix E – ECE Assessment Information
A.

FE Exam Results
EE Math
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20

EE
National
Difference

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

Fall 08

CENG Math
80
60
40

65 CENG

20

70 National
3.4 Difference

0
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring Fall 08
06
07
08

-40

371

EE Prob & Stat
80
70
60
50
40

EE

30

National

20

Difference

10
0
-10
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

Fall 08

CENG Prob & Stat
100
80
60
40

CENG

20

National
Difference

0
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring Fall 08
06
07
08

-40
-60

EE Chemistry
80
70
60
50
40

EE

30

National

20

Difference

10
0
-10
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

372

Fall 08

CENG Chemistry
80
60
40

CENG

20

National
Difference

0
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

Fall 08

-40

EE Statics & Dynamics
80
70
60
50
40

EE

30

National

20

Difference

10
0
-10
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

Fall 08

CENG Statics & Dynamics
100
80
60
CENG

40

National
20

Difference

0
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring Fall 08
06
07
08

-40

373

EE Thermodynamics
70
60
50
40
30

EE

20

National

10

Difference

0
-10
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

Fall 08

-30

CENG Thermodynamics
70
60
50
40
30

CENG

20

National

10

Difference

0
-10
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

Fall 08

-30

EE Strength of Materials
60
50
40
EE

30

National

20

Difference

10
0
-10

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

374

Fall 08

CENG Strength of Materials
70
60
50
40

CENG

30

National

20

Difference

10
0
-10
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

Fall 08

CENG Digital Systems
100
80
60
EE
40

National

20

Difference

0
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring Fall 08
06
07
08

375

EE Circuits
80
70
60
50
40

EE

30

National

20

Difference

10
0
-10

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring
06
07
08

Fall 08

CENG Circuits
100
80
60
40

EE

20

National
Difference

0
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring Fall 08
06
07
08

-40
-60

376

EE Ethics
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10

EE
National
Difference

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring Fall 08
06
07
08

CENG Ethics
100
80
60
EE

40

National
20

Difference

0
-20

Fall 05 Spring Fall 06 Spring Fall 07 Spring Fall 08
06
07
08

-40

377

B.

Alumni Survey Results

Program Outcomes are defined here as the statements that “describe what students are
expected to know or be able to do by the time of graduation”.
Electrical and Computer
Engineering
Program Outcomes

a. an ability to apply knowledge of
mathematics, science and
engineering

b. an ability to design and conduct
experiments, as well as to analyze
and interpret data

c. an ability to design a system,
component, or process to meet
desired needs

d. an ability to function in multidisciplinary teams

Assessment of the
extent to which the
outcome was met
A=High

F=Low

A

C

B

D

Importance of
associated skills or
knowledge
5=High

1=Low

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

5

4

3

2

1

F

N.O.

A

B

C

D

F

N.O.

A

B

C

D

F

N.O.

A

B

C

D

F

N.O.

e. an ability to identify, formulate,
and solve engineering problems

A

B

C

D

F

N.O.

f. an understanding of professional
and ethical responsibility

A

B

C

D

F

N.O.

g. an ability to communicate
effectively

A

B

C

D

F

N.O.
h. the broad education necessary to
understand the impact of
engineering solutions in a global
and societal context
i. a recognition of the need for, and
an ability to engage in life-long
learning
j. a knowledge of contemporary
issues

A

B

C

D

F

N.O.

A

B

C

D

F

N.O.

A

B

C

378

D

F

N.O.
k. an ability to use the techniques,
skills, and modern engineering tools
necessary for engineering practice

A

B

C

D

F
5

4

3

2

1

N.O.

ECE Alumni Survey
Program Outcomes
(n=16)
6
5
4
Grade

3

Importance

2

Difference

1
0
-1

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

i

j

k

Note: for analysis purposes in comparing the Grade to the Importance: A = 5, B = 4, C = 3, D =
2, F = 1

379

C.

Career Fair Survey of Employers

EE Overall 07-08

EE Communication 0708

n=41
0.7

n=41

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0

0.4
0.3
0.2

0.3

0.1

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.7

0.1

0.2

0.0

0.0

2007-2008 Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and Communication
Skills

CENG Overall 07-08

CENG Comunication
07-08

n=9
0.7

n=9

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.5

0.6

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0

0.7

0.5
0.4
0.3

0.2
0.1

0.0

0.0

0.2
0.1

0.2
0.1

0.0

0.0

Fair

Poor

0.0
Excellent Good Average

2007-2008 Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills

380

EE Overall 08-09

EE Communications 0809

n=21
0.6
0.5

n=21
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00

0.5

0.4
0.4

0.3
0.2
0.1

0.1

0.0

0.0

Fair

Poor

0.76

0.05

0.14

0.00

0.00

0.0
Excellent Good Average

2008-2009 Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and Communication
Skills

CENG Overall 08-09

CENG Communication
08-09

n=9
0.6

n=9
0.6

0.5

1.0

0.4
0.3

0.8

0.2
0.1

0.8

0.6

0.3

0.4
0.1

0.2
0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.2

0.0

0.0

Fair

Poor

0.0
Excellent Good Average

Fair

Poor

Excellent Good Average

2008-2009 Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and
Communication Skills

381

EE Overall Fall 09

EE Communication Fall
09

n=28
0.70

n=28

0.60
0.50

0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00

0.57

0.40
0.30

0.39

0.20
0.10

0.04

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.57

0.21

0.21

0.00

0.00

Career Fair Survey of EE Students: Overall Impression and Communication Skills

CENG Overall Fall 09

CENG Communication
Fall 09

n=9
0.7

n=9

0.7

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.5

0.4

0.4

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.2
0.1

0.6
0.4

0.2
0.0

0.0

0.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Fair

Poor

0.0
Excellent Good Average

Fair

Poor

Excellent Good Average

Career Fair Survey of CENG Students: Overall Impression and Communication Skills

382

D.

Sample Exit Interview of Graduating Students
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department
Student Assessment (Graduating Seniors)

Fall 2007
Department: EE (2) or CENG (2) NONE SPECIFIED(2)
Department Questions:
1. From your perspective, what does the department do well?
Higher level coursework provides both entertaining and educational material. Also ____ in the
education the faculty and students develop great relationships
Promotes student learning in an open environment, allows students to ask questions often.
Provide Faculty with through knowledge of subject matter. Provide physical resources that are
needed. Communicate well.
They provide help outside of the classroom.
Create a structure environment for learning. Take the time to help students understand the theory
and applications of the courses.
Teachers are always willing to help even if you are not taking a class from them.
2. From your perspective, in what areas does the department need to improve?
Lower level coursework is impersonal.
Scheduling of classes with teachers.
Some professors need to be watched more closely and complaints that I have brought forward in
CSC & CENG departments aren't ever addressed by Dean or department chairs.
I know it would be hard but to increase the number of electives that are offered.
Help with non-traditional students. Understanding that they may have homework requirements
that might make them miss a few days of class.
In the last year to year 1/2 seems that I have had a lot of inexperienced teachers.

383

3. Individual faculty members use a variety of teaching methods or techniques.
a. Describe the teaching methods that you find to be most effective.
Hands on lab experience.
Powerpoint demonstrations at times, example problems saying exactly what was on homeworks,
hands on work.
Powerpoint with additional info supplied in class, and powerpoint online.
Relative methods of teaching by relating or demonstrating similar ways that we've learned in
previous classes.
b. Describe the teaching methods that you find to be least effective.
Lecture
Reading from the book, all theory with no lab.
Reading from powerpoint! Requiring over 50% knowledge from text reading….too detailed.
Too much memorization on tests when unnecessary.
Just talking about the theory of something.
Straight from the book approach.
Giving homework of things before it is taught in class.
4. Did prerequisite courses prepare you adequately for the next course in the sequence?
Explain.
Yes. In fact, I believe that same co-requisites would be better suited as pre-requisities.
Some did, some did not.
Yes.
Yes, Signals helped with DSP.
Yes, although some classes were better at preparation for the next class which I believe had a lot
to do with the instructors experience of layout of the class.
Yes.
5. In what general area of your field do you expect to find employment?
Engineering

384

Programming
Computer Programming
Software Engineering
Design
6. What is your assessment of the department courses?
a. Introductory courses (sophomore level).
i. Most useful? Why?
Circuits I & II and CSC 150 These courses lay the foundation upon which our education is built.
Circuits 220: Basic fundamentals
CSC 150: Good code start
CSC 150
Circuits, it gave a background understanding.
Circuits I: Building block for rest of college career.
ii. Least useful? Why?
Physics: I seldom ___________ studied this course and received an A. I have used this material
little since.
Humanities
Chemistry - high school repeat
Humanities, it is dumb, all it is is common sense.
b. Core courses (junior-level).
i. Most useful? Why?
Technical writing. Communication skills are VERY important.
Mechatronics: good mix of courses.
Control Systems: very interesting and intensive hands on wow!
CSC 300: Fundamental coding skills brought together.
Systems

385

Radio: a lot learned in a short amount of time.
ii. Least useful? Why?
Electronics I: I believe Instructor selection rendered this course useless for me.
Electronics I: Vague, won't ever be used, should be an elective.
Statics and Dynamics: Easy to forget detailed material only applicable in certain area.
d. Elective courses (senior Level).
i. Most useful part? Why?
Microprocessor based system design: I can't believe this is an elective! This is a fundamental
concept of CENG.
Microcontrollers - just like it.
Intro Digital Image Processing: Adapting coding skills in unique way.
Real-time Embedded Systems, enjoyed the class.
Communications: excellent, interest and exciting, primarily to ________ of class.
Communication systems.
ii. Least useful? Why?
Why would you choose a useless elective?
Upper level humanities.
Computer Networks: Instructor taught nothing.
Microwave: awful instruction, directly from book, no feedback.
d. Senior Design.
i. Most useful part? Why?
The challenge and design process learning
Prototyping and problem solving.
Stepping through design from start to finish.
Design work for project.

386

Team based work: This requirement helped learn to rely on other people to get their tasks
completed and it was nice experience to meet the deliverables that were responsible for.
Planning with team.
ii. Least useful? Why?
The ability to choose an overly simple project.
Gant Chart doesn't work with only two people.
Could have provided powerpoints to class for reference, rather than just reading 1 time.
7. What is your assessment of the availability of department elective course offerings?
I wish I had more time.
Kind of slim actually.
Poor: seem to be struggling to find number of good instructors.
It would be nice to have more courses.
Could use more but understand the professor constraints.
A lot of interesting classes are not offered every year.
8. What is your assessment of department laboratory facilities?
a. For introductory courses (sophomore level).
Aren't they all the same? I wish we had more exposure to the Mechanical Engineering Labs.
Example: Process Control
Good
Good
They provide the proper equipment to design.
Excellent
b. For core courses (junior level).
Good

387

Good
Needs to be open later. Sometime a project is due and the lab is closed.
Great
c. For elective courses (senior level).
Good
Good
Same as core courses.
Excellent
9. Do you feel that your program of study has prepared you reasonably well in the
fundamentals of your major (EE or CENG)?
Yes No
If no, why not?
X
X
X
Needs more checking on student progress, more choices of elective for students perhaps in Junior year.
Teamwork: punish individuals that don't contribute.
X
X
10. Would you recommend the EE or CENG BS program at SDSM&T to an incoming
student who is interested in majoring in EE or CENG?
Yes
X
X
X
X
X

No

If no, why not?
(I have.)

388

E.

Student Advisory Board Report 2009 – available on-site
Student Advisory Board 2010 – available on-site

389

F.

2006 Advisory Board Report

Industrial Advisory Board Meeting
Highlights from 24-April-2006

Advisory Board Members for 2006
Don Wehrkamp [email protected]
Scott Rausch [email protected]
Sankaran Menon [email protected] (Participation by Phone)
Wilfred Martis [email protected]
Bob Case [email protected]

Meeting Agenda
7:30 AM Breakfast with Dr. Hasan & Dr. Batchelder
8:30 AM Briefing by Dr. Batchelder & Dr. Hasan
10:00 AM Tour of ECE Laboratories Dr. Whites
10:30 AM Meet with graduate students
11:00 AM Meet with EE Faculty
11:30 AM Meet with CENG Faculty
12:15 AM Lunch ECE faculty
1:30 PM Meet with Undergraduate students
2:30 PM Meet with Dr. Karen Whitehead, Vice President Academic Affairs
3:00 PM Meet with Dr. Charles Ruch, President
3:30 PM Board meets to consider report to Department
4:00 PM Meet with faculty to discuss recommendations

Materials Provided for Board Members at Meeting
a) Electrical & Computer Engineering Fact Sheet as of 04/24/2006
b) Electrical Engineering Progressive Curriculum (Sept 2004)
c) Computer Engineering Progressive Curriculum (Feb 2005)
d) May & August 2006 Graduates List
e) Demographics of ECE BS Graduates (Living Alumni by State)
f) Fundamentals of Engineering – Test Results Oct 2000 through Oct 2005
g) ECE Faculty Pictures (Spring 2006)
h) ECE Department Fundraising & Endowments – Goals and Planning
i) EE 299 Sophomore Design – Experimental Course Notification
j) ECE Strategic Plan Brochure – July 2005 Draft Copy

390

k) SDSM&T Strategic Agenda 2005-2006
l) SDSM&T Facts Brochure 2005-2006
m) SDSM&T Academic Affairs Organization Chart – Dec 2005
n) SDSM&T Institutional Self-Study 2006
o) SDSM&T Presidents Report 2005
p) SDSM&T 2005-2006 Undergraduate and Graduate Course Catalog
q) Industrial Advisory Board Minutes from 04-April-2005
r) Student Advisory Board Comments from April 2006

391

Synopsis
The ECE core faculty at SDSM&T is doing a fine job of educating and preparing Electrical and Computer
Engineers. This faculty is greatly appreciated by students who have a mature understanding of the
challenges facing the ECE faculty and the university as a whole. Macro trends, including the declining
number of SD high school graduates and international students, are putting pressure on department
enrollment. The declining enrollment is subsequently putting many technical focus areas at risk. While
department faculty members are actively involved in recruiting efforts such as the Science Fair, Youth
Engineering Adventure and extensive one-on-one communication with prospects, there is a level of
dissatisfaction with the intensity and effectiveness of the university-level recruiting and admissions
processes.

Venn Diagram of Perceived Relationships
A. The SDSM&T University system is set up as a mutual dependence among all three groups.
B. The greater the interaction and trust between the groups, the more will be accomplished.
C. There are enough interactions between the Faculty and Administration to show well, but not enough to
do well.
D. This is not a new situation.
E. Introduction of full-time Deans of Engineering and Science & Letters should help, as long as it does
not result in significant additional administrative tasks for the department.
F. There exists an opportunity for the ECE Faculty to take the lead in issue identification, analysis and
proposed solutions toward the SDSM&T Administration.

Issues & Opportunities
• Use best instructors on the introductory ECE classes to help with retention.
• Find out from ―l
ost‖ students, why they transferred to other departments.
• Break down the barriers to getting fired-up SDSM&T students to pass on that enthusiasm to middle
school and high school students.
• Integrate ―Fundam
entals of Engineering‖ into all curriculums to improve pass rates.
• Creatively map needed early engineering content into required Humanities credit hours.
• Determine and develop incentives for BS graduates to stay at (or come to) SDSM&T for graduate
studies, regardless of the job market. Research & Teaching opportunities?
• Provide training/development/mentoring for TA‘s to help them better contribute to the undergraduate
learning experience, and to plant the seeds of becoming an educator.

ECE Faculty
Administration
Students
Success!
Weak!

392

• GES115 needs to take into consideration higher admission standards and be challenging enough to
provide the adrenaline boost to set the engineering & science hook for four more years.
• Technical Communications needs to be standardized, and focused on real engineering technical
communications; and ideally tie into early design project work.
• The Administration‘s stated view is that the Departments are empowered by Administration to take the
initiative on recruiting and department enhancements – Administration just wants to see the plan.
Sounds similar to the business world and the worker bee‘s relationship with management.

Minutes of Meetings throughout April 24th
Briefing by Dr. Batchelder & Dr. Hasan:
Fewer students and graduates in ECE, but no agreement whether this matches national trends. Recent trek
up M-Hill brought back memories of 40-50 EE graduates per year back as far as the mid-70‘s and as
recently as the early-90‘s. Yet 100% placement within nine months for recent grads. Losing students to
other departments in Sophomore year – not clear whether students are being drawn away to departments
that are more appealing, or whether students are running away out of fear of failure in ECE. Experimental
classes for early circuit presentation (Dr. Simonson) and Sophomore Design (Dr. Batchelder) appear to be
good attempts to address.
Overall interest in engineering fields, especially in our regional area is a problem. Robotics presentations
at Middle School and High School level is well received. 400-500 participants in on campus Science Fair.
YEA program is very well done. Yet out of 350 Stevens HS graduates, only two have expressed an
interest in attending SDSM&T. Geo-Political changes are keeping the numbers of international students
down… problems in getting visas, and demand for engineering increasing in sourcing countries.
Obtaining ECE scholarship money has been a priority in recent years, and that effort is paying off. Have
hopes that success with the DUSEL effort at Homestake will generate regional engineering opportunities,
which encourage more interest in SDSM&T.
The ECE department is getting the faculty members that they want.
The Fundamentals of Engineering ―pa
ss rate‖ is a broadly used metric by college Administrations to
highlight and compare their engineering programs to others. SDSM&T students have not had much of an
incentive to take this test or try to do well in the past. Now offering 50% reimbursement for attending
training and passing – don‘t have the money to pay more. Students are now required to take - but
perception is that this is for the university‘s benefit, not for the students.
Want to fit in more engineering classes, but no room to place them. Tried to squeeze out a credit hour out
of the 16 required for humanities, but they are typically three hour classes, so 16 credits really ends up
being 18. Declining graduate enrollment raises red flags for program viability – if economy is good, BS
students want to go directly to work force to start paying off bills.
Currently have 12 full-time Teaching Assistants (TA‘s). Using them in place of faculty with hope that
they work out. Any grad student who is willing to be a TA can get the position. Distance-Learning
programs have not caught on well; requires lots of extra

SDSM&T Industrial Advisory Board Page 3 Meeting of 24-Apr-2006 for ECE

393

faculty effort. Trying to work distance learning with SDSU, but not much interest. Difficult to manage
beyond SD borders.
Dr. Batchelder indicated some are considering dropping ―St
atics and Dynamics‖ from the required list of
courses to complete ECE degrees, and solicited the advisory board‘s opinion. General board view , and
reinforced by some student comments was that Statics has general merit, but the time spent with
Dynamics could be better spent in more direct course work.

Lab Tours by Dr. Whites:
Received a walk-through of Rm 229 Antenna‘s lab and the power lab in Rm 109. Some security &
student safety concerns with off-hour access due to lack of monitoring. Administration wants to take over
Rm 109, which may cause it to move to Rm 129.
$6.8M NFS multi-university grant will be used at SDSM&T for direct-write fabrication flexible
microwave applications. A fourth faculty position for microwave studies was written into the grant, which
will be retained when the grant expires. A faculty of four is considered the critical mass for a particular
research activity. Research is considered vital to the growth of the microwave department, which is
becoming a focus within the EE department.

Talks with Graduate Students:
Spoke with two graduate students.
Concerns on behalf the undergrad students regarding 220/221 professor stability. Comments that
professors are different each semester. Also shared perception that the Tablet PC program could be a
distraction in the class room.
Lots of demand for good test equipment. Would like to have better signal generator and 0scilloscope.
Seems like issue is more ease of access rather than existence.
Grad students worry about what classes will be offered for them next semester. Often are taking
undergraduate classes just to fill their schedule.
Teachers are great – excellent personal attention – readily available for help.
Feel that the opportunity is missed during the Senior Design project, to plant the seed of graduate studies
in undergraduates.

Talks with ECE Faculty:
Spoke with four faculty.
Talked about HS Science Fair as representative of engineering student recruitment challenges. High
School Seniors are not as involved in the Science Fair because they are so overloaded. Both Rapid City
public High Schools have dropped out of the

SDSM&T Industrial Advisory Board Page 4 Meeting of 24-Apr-2006 for ECE

394

program. Steven‘s HS teachers are required to handle six classes, which cuts down their focus and
interaction time with prospective engineering students. The larger class load, compounded with the
emphasis on ―No C
hild Left Behind‖, makes it difficult for HS teachers to focus on advanced students
which may be interested in engineering. Someone noted only
The Tablet PC program is considered a done deal. Believe that the focus will be as a phase-in on some
classes for Freshman. The experimental 211/212 course being taught by Dr. Simonson will incorporate
the Tablet PC, but without making it a requirement. EE department budgets $10K/year for software
licenses.
Frustration or misunderstanding of Admissions Director position and activities (or lack of). Noted the
recruiting office turnover is unacceptable. 4 people in the prior two years…Director of Admissions fired
twice last year. Restructuring of this office impacting performance.
• Comment that scholarships for existing students have still not been issued as of late April, for the
next school year.
• Little visible recruitment advertising (even towards children of faculty).
• What is the plan for getting more students to attend SDSM&T? At a minimum, there appears to be a
communications gap between administration and the department faculty.
Acknowledgement that that declining department enrollment (from 400 to 250 currently), and will have
an impact on overall operations. Perception is that the situation shows few signs of getting better, and
there is not a plan within the department.
Desire to get current students more involved in recruiting, even at the K-12 level.
Belief that SDSM&T has a tremendous product to sell, but university Administrators don‘t talk to the
faculty; so they don‘t know what to sell. Clearly a disconnect between the ECE Faculty and
Administration.
Dr. Menon requests that the VLSI program be rejuvenated (from the standpoint of learning how to use
software tools) at SDSM&T.
Consideration being given to consolidating the Electrical and Computer Engineering programs into a
single degree. Benefit would be increased enrollment numbers to offset the declining enrollment in
Computer Engineering.

Talks with Undergraduate Students:
Spoke with eight students.
Freshman classes were too much like High School, did not produce the anticipated challenge of college;
and then things ramped up really fast in Sophomore year, which prompted some students to panic and bail
out to other engineering majors or out of the college completely.

SDSM&T Industrial Advisory Board Page 5 Meeting of 24-Apr-2006 for ECE

395

GES115 considered very ineffective overall, and in part because variety and instability of instructors. But
the core ECE curriculum is considered very good. Request for more exposure to circuit design, and more
hands-on/lab experience earlier in the program. The more experienced instructors, who can provide a
sense of a continuum in the education, should present the early curriculum courses. Statics & Dynamics
may be inappropriate for EE‘s?
Knowing that more classes would be available at the grad level would be an incentive to consider
graduate school.
Technical Communications is viewed as an important part of the engineering education, but is considered
watered down and not technically oriented. Students really want to know how to do technical writing, and
properly work with log books. Benefit from having a consistent log book policy/expectations for all ECE
courses. Apparently five different instructors are presenting the material, and not a lot of consistency
among them.
Suggestion from one student to have projects start in the later half of the class which ties in concepts
learned throughout the class. Belief of students that projects are appreciated by prospective employers. I
would agree with this observation of one of the students.
Appreciate a lab where you could check out test equipment within the building.
Student/faculty ratio was again reiterated as a very positive aspect of SDSM&T.

Talk with VP of Academic Affairs – Dr. Karen Whitehead:
Survey of ―s
tudent engagement‖ indicates that Freshmen are less engaged. There were faculty sessions in
the summer of 2005.
In the first year of working with a consulting firm on enrollment levels; it will take time. Focus on Denver
and Chicago areas because of road system. Actual enrollment numbers not available from VP, but told
that registrations from SD are down, but are up 800% in non-traditional areas. Enrollments to Engineering
are up, but Science is down.
Smaller engineering departments have become more engaged directly in recruiting. The IE department is
considered the ―
most welcoming‖ toward students, and provides a team environment – something that
other departments could try to match.
Drivers for excitement need to come from the department faculty (don‘t wait for Administration to do it).
Administration determined that the university could not afford to ―no
t‖ switch to Tablet PC‘s. Also, ―ou
t
of space‖, cannot create any more computer labs; this is another driver for the tablet PC.

SDSM&T Industrial Advisory Board Page 6 Meeting of 24-Apr-2006 for ECE

396

Talk with SDSM&T President – Dr. Charles Ruch:
New Engineering Dean should be able to cut across all engineering departments to identify best practices.
The fact that they are full-time Deans should help.
Based upon current recruiting focus, the total applicant pool is increasing, but not from SD. In SD, the 1824 age group is going away, except on the reservations.
Questioned whether the identified challenges in ECE department are ones that the Faculty can solve on
their own. Expects each department to define their own focus, including possibly fewer courses; but
would like to see plans two years in advance, not the month before desired. How to put the best
instructors on the front-end classes is an issue that can be addressed by the Dean.
All campus faculty meetings are held three times per year. A May planning meeting drives the budget for
the fall.
The state-level expectations are to increase graduation rates and to make SDSM&T a major player in
commercialization.

SDSM&T Industrial Advisory Board Page 7 Meeting of 24-Apr-2006 for ECE

397

Industrial Advisory Board Report 2007
MEMORANDUM
TO:

Dr. Abul Hasan

FROM:

Corbin Latham

DATE:

22 April 2007

SUBJECT:

ECE Industrial Advisory Board pre-meeting with ECE Students

Introduction
This memo contains the discussion amongst Chris Baird, Bryce TeBeest, Evan Hyatt, Corbin
Latham, Steve Malsam and Dr. Abul Hasan regarding how to improve the ECE department.
This discussion took place Tuesday April 17th at 12:00pm in EE309.

GES 115 opt out
a. Good idea, students weren‘t getting much from GES 115
b. Topics to be covered in a potential GES 115 replacement course
 Matlab
 Excel
 Multimeters
 Soldering skills
 SolidWorks
 TI-89
 Exposure to all engineering disciplines
i. Help make better choice on major
 H-drive/F-drive/School network basics
 VPN, FTP, more ways to access SDSM&T network resources

CSC 150 Robot Section
a. Great idea
 Gives hands on visual aids for programming
 Lets kids see what code is doing

Laboratory Equipment to Purchase
 Agilent Digital Function Generators
398

 Multimeters
Department Strengths and Weaknesses / Strengths









Trusting the students
Faculty available to students
Open building/labs
Awesome secretary!!!
Professors with prior work experience
Professors teaching within their niche
Professor involvement and support of projects and organizations
Multi-disciplinary courses and teams

Weaknesses



Shifting professors around between classes and away from their specialties
Occasional language barriers between professors and students

Preparedness
There was little discussion in this area. It can be inferred that we feel students are well prepared
from one level to the next. There are no large gaps between grade levels and overlap of course
material is minimal.

General Overall Suggestions










Explain principals visually
Require more datasheets ( i.e. interpreting/usage )
Require more programming for EE students
24 hour lab access ( keyed or otherwise )
24 hour computer lab
Teach transmission lines to CENGs
More design work, less spoon-fed homework problems and labs
Don‘t allow weak performance to slip through the cracks in Senior Design
Maintain ECE priority of building resources ( ask Mr. Bryce TeBeest for details )

Conclusion
This memo has addressed the specific questions presented by Dr. Abul Hasan as well as general
concerns voiced by the aforementioned cross-section of ECE students.

399

Please contact the students involved in this meeting for any clarificatons.
Chris Baird [email protected]
Bryce TeBeest [email protected]
Evan Hyatt [email protected]
Corbin Latham [email protected]
Steve Malsam [email protected]

400

Industrial Advisory Board Report 2008
The EE/CEng. Industrial Advisory Board for the FY 2008 evaluation met at SDSMT on April
28, 2008. Board members were Robert Case, Sankaran Menon (by teleconference), and Larry
Meiners. The board met with faculty, graduate students, undergraduate students, the Engineering
Dean, Duane Abata, and the President, Charles Ruch.
The Board comments on the following 5 items.
1. The students interviewed felt that the instruction they were receiving was excellent, and the
faculty received high marks for their accessibility. A common thread was that students
especially liked courses that had a ―
hands-on‖ component. This included Mechatronics , and
the use of MATLAB in EE311/312. The structure imposed on the students in senior design
was considered to be helpful. Students were very enthusiastic about being able to participate
in CAMP projects.
2. The graduate students were uniformly concerned about the lack of courses available in the
EE department and their need to take courses in other departments just to finish their course
requirements. Some important courses in EE were only offered every two years which
sometimes made it especially difficult for students that arrived in the Spring semester. The
foreign students thought that this problem had a significant impact on the ability of the
program to recruit students that obtained their B.S. degrees at TECH. There used to be a core
of courses taken by all graduate students. Is it time to reconsider this concept?
3. The Department is at a critical point in the replacement of faculty. At the time that the Board
met it appeared that two senior faculty members would not be returning. There is a strong
need for the Department to reach a consensus on the specialty area(s) for the new faculty that
will hired. In order for the hiring of replacements to have the full support of the
Administration, it will be necessary for the Department to prepare a well documented plan
which clearly maps the strategy. Demonstration of industrial linkage, both in-state and outof –state, would be very helpful in obtaining political support for the hiring. Outside
relationships need to be developed. With the current enrollment situation, it seems as if the
best approach would be to aspire to do a few things well, rather than being spread thin.
4. Faculty stability seems to be a critical issue and item 3 needs to be addressed with this in
mind.
5. The drop in undergraduate and graduate enrollments is alarming. Is seems that efforts spent
in evaluating the recruitment process would be worthwhile. Imagine that you are a high school
junior or senior. How do you get information about the program, what form is in? Is the
message being presented in the way that you want it to be? Would you be convinced to come?
401

Are the faculty taking time to meet with students and parents when they come on campus for
interviews?

Respectfully submitted,
Larry Meiners
Robert Case
Sankaron Menon

402

Industrial Advisory Board Report - 2009
SDSM&T Electrical & Computer Engineering
Industrial Advisory Board
Conducted:

04-May-2009

Participants:

Sankaran Menon (via phone) - Intel
Don Wehrkamp (via phone) - Rockwell Collins
Herschel Smartt (via phone) - Idaho National Laboratory
Bob Case – Black Hills Power

I.

Logistics

The Advisory Board interviews took place in the EE Physics building, starting at 9:00am. The
opening 90-minute session was with department Chair, Dr. Brian Hemmelman. This was
followed by a one-hour session with eight EE/CEng students representing both the undergraduate
and masters level. The afternoon session began with a one-hour session with three of the nine
current faculty: Mr. Scott Rausch, Dr. Tom Montoya, and Dr. Mike Batchelder. This was
followed by a 30-minute discussion with outgoing Provost Dr. Karen Whitehead, and incoming
Provost Dr. Duane Hrncir.
The wrap-up session to review the key summary points that follow took place with Dr. Brian
Hemmelman and Instructor Elaine Linde. Our thanks to Dr. Hemmelman for making the effort
to organize this advisory board meeting; the advisory board members for donating their time and
insights to help improve the EE/CEng experience at SDSM&T; and to all of the faculty, students,
and administration representatives for their candor and inputs throughout the day.

II.

Advance Materials Provided

On 01May2009, the following background materials were provided to each of the advisory board
members:





Proposed Agenda
Department Chair Briefing Points and Overview
EE/CEng Enrollment History Back to 1995
EE/CEng Curricula Flowchart
403




EE/CEng Student Advisory Council Report from 20Dec2008
Industrial Advisory Board Report for 2008 by Larry Meiners

A summary of key points, observations, and recommendations from the 04May2009 meetings
follows:

III. EE/CEng Business Plan
The overarching observation from this year‘s advisory board assessment is that the EE/CEng
department lacks a cohesive business plan. It is believed that having a documented plan will
facilitate communications with the Administration, provide a known starting point for the new
Department Head (new year-round position) expected to be in place by Spring 2010, and aid in
accurate communication with prospective students as described in Section VI.
This ‗business plan‘ needs to clearly define the ‗business‘ i.e. vision and mission of the EE/CEng
department; identify the resources available to address the ‗business‘, and an assessment of ROI
for the business plan elements for priority setting. This plan needs to look out at least 4-6 years
to span the academic period of incoming students. The business plan needs to be reasonably
well documented prior to the start of the new Department Head.

IV.

Fit of Power Engineering at SDSM&T

As part of the above business plan, the EE/CEng department is encouraged to determine to what
degree Power Engineering is a fit at Tech. Considerations should include current and future
student needs, availability of qualified faculty, and an informed understanding of likely Board of
Regents funding relative to SDSU‘s EE Power Program.

V.
Communication Improvements with Existing EE/CEng
Students
There are three areas where some changes are suggested:
1.

Expectations for faculty office hours should be agreed upon, and communicated to
faculty and students.

2.

Expectations for basic teaching approach should be defined and communicated to
faculty members. It was clear from the student advisory council report and Dr.
Hemmelman that at least one teacher needs significant improvement in their teaching
skills. Improvements to include preparation and understanding of course materials,
involvement in lab activities, and relation of course work to real world situations. An
additional cautionary note – one member of the faculty has apparently discovered
404

evidence of plagiarism (working from solution books) in homework assignments. This
is another opportunity to „set the bar‟ for acceptable behavior in class work, and could
be presented as a “code of conduct” element which is common in the modern
workplace.
3.

In visiting with the students, some requested more hands on experience in the lab to
better prepare them for the industrial environment they will experience upon
graduation. To paraphrase one student, ―
I want to make my mistakes here in the lab
where the cost and consequences are minor, compared to the potential safety and
financial impact I might cause at my employer‖.

VI. Communication Improvements with Prospective EE/CEng
Students
As noted in Section III, a clear and commonly understood business plan will put the EE/CEng
faculty and administration on the same page. Equally important, such a plan provides a clear
foundation for accurately communicating department focus areas to prospective students. This
was an issue to international grad students who selected SDSM&T because of perceived course
offerings based upon the college catalog; only to find out that not all of these courses were
actually offered during their enrollment. Although the student recruitment effort will fall heavily
on the new Department Head, the current faculty needs to take steps towards the identification of
honest and accurate department focus areas now.
The department business plan with its stated academic focus areas should be summarized in the
department web site, and should be supplemented with multi-media representations of how
existing students are experiencing these focus areas. The improved web site can then be
leveraged to provide more accurate information for existing students to take with them to their
home towns for recruitment of additional students. It is believed that the sooner the EE/CEng
faculty can engage with prospective and new students (Freshmen), the better.

VII. Relate Real-World Experience in Teaching Methods
Related to Section V is the need for faculty to extend their teaching beyond the material just
contained in the text books. Many of the faculty naturally do this, but the students expect it from
all faculty. One aspect would be in labs, where in addition to just following the instructions and
obtaining the desired results, variations are introduced to show what works, what doesn‘t work,
and impart an understanding of why things turned out the way they did.
Another aspect is for the faculty, along with the new Department Head, to actively solicit
internships, co-op programs, and relevant industry part time work assignments to expose students
to the ups and downs of real-life work in engineering, prior to their completion of studies.

405

VIII. Understanding Enrollment Drops
The information on EE/CEng enrollment history was limited and resulted in speculation
regarding trends and events. The peak in the Fall of 2001 is assumed to be related to the dot.com
bust and 911 events. But many questions related to trends among peers, whether in other
departments or geographic regions, still exist. It is believed that answers to these questions can
be provided by the SDSM&T Administration, and that the resulting data would be worth having
for business plan analysis by the faculty.

IX.

Change from Department Chairs to Department Heads

The ad hoc university committee recommendation to return to a flattened management structure
and the establishment of year-round Department Head positions is welcomed. Because of the
expected departure of Dr. Hemmelman as the current Department Chair, it is expected that the
EE/CEng department will have an early opportunity to realize this leadership change. Despite
this early adopter position, the implementation of the EE/CEng Department Head could still be
one year away. The EE/CEng faculty is strongly encouraged to not wait to see who gets this
position and what they will do with it, but rather start working on the recommendations now.
The faculty is encouraged to aggressively work towards creating an initial business plan as
described in Section III and have it ready for use during the EE/CEng Department Head
recruiting process. Similarly, any opportunities for the EE/CEng department to engage the
Administration with their planning initiatives should be embraced, in order to demonstrate the
EE/CEng faculty commitment to growth and self-determination. All of the department faculty
are expected to be engaged.

In conclusion, this summary report is focusing on areas of improvement. That is not to say that
good things are lacking in the EE/CEng department. The overall response of the students is that
their academic experience has been good. The purpose of this report is to help maintain that
belief, and further improve the department where possible.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bob Case (on behalf of all 2009 Advisory Board Members)

406

Industrial Advisory Board Report - 2010
South Dakota School of Mines & Technology
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department
Industrial Advisory Board
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Present: Robert Case, Rapid City, SD
Herschel B. Smartt, Ph.D. Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID
Jonathan Titus, Ph.D., Herriman, UT
Board Recommendations:
1. Continue on the present course of hiring to fill open positions and keep academic
recruitment efforts active. The present department areas of focus:
Applied Microwave Antennas
Intelligent Control Systems
Power Systems
Embedded Systems
Robotics and Industrial Applications
seem appropriate for a solid electrical-engineering or computer-engineering bachelor'sdegree program.
2. Increase and improve activities to reach high-school students and attract them to
SDSMT and the ECE Department. The department Web site needs improvements that
could include more of a "marketing" approach and more information about campus life,
local climate, recreational activities, and so on, in addition to the usual academic
benefits, coursework, and projects. The board strongly recommends having students
produce a short (2- to 4-minute) video in which they describe their design projects, what
they learned, some of the technologies and devices they used, and a short conclusion.
The ECE Department could include these videos on its Web site.
The board also encourages the department and SDSMT to continue a program that
rewards students who make a presentation at their high school that promotes SDSMT
and the ECE program. The board suggests the department provide a brief outline of
key objectives for interested students so they have a framework for their presentation
and so they can emphasize key points about attendance at SDSMT, academic life,
projects, and so on. Students could also present their short project video.
3. The board understands the importance of its role as an advisory group that can take
a neutral position that helps the department assess its strengths and weaknesses and
offer guidance based on members' experiences and careers. To that end, the board
members recommend formalizing the board's structure so that it includes permanent
407

members, possibly rotating positions, and two meetings each year at SDSMT, probably
during the Spring and Fall.
4. The board emphasizes the need for regular maintenance of the ECE department
facilities, to include general upkeep, refurbishing some labs, student areas, and
classrooms. During our visit we observed areas that needed new paint, stained or
missing ceiling tiles, broken desks and chairs, and other problems. The board noted the
lack of maintenance can tarnish first-time impressions of prospective students and their
parents. People in the ECE department noted the money for building refurbishing and
upkeep comes out of their budget. Board members feel this approach penalizes
departments in older buildings and that the SDSMT administration should assume the
responsibility for building upkeep and continuing efforts to make the campus attractive,
fully functional, and up to date for faculty, staff, students, and visitors.
==================================
Meeting Highlights
The board meeting started with an overview of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Department activities by Dr. Michael Batchelder, acting department head. Dr.
Batchelder presented a briefing for the board that emphasized five Strategic Initiatives
developed in 2007 as part of the department's Strategic Plan. The board also learned
about the demographics of undergraduate and graduate students. Although enrollment
had shown a decrease over the last four semesters, Dr. Batchelder explained that
enrollment increased slightly for the Fall 2009 and Spring 2010 semesters; perhaps the
start of an upward trend.
Dr. Batchelder also explained the need to hire faculty and to find a new department
chair or head. Although the department has openings, it has had difficulty attracting
people with the proper background and skills.
We board members learned about raised admission requirements and about the
increase in numbers of non-traditional students such as older people and ex-military
people. The board discussed the possibility of connecting students with online mentors
who could help students with general questions and with technical questions. These
mentors would give students an opportunity to work with an outside person who works-or has worked--in industry.
The board members attended a Design Fair held in the Surbeck Center and talked with
students about their projects. After the Design Fair, we had lunch with members of the
local IEEE section.
The afternoon included a tour of the ECE Department labs and opportunities to talk with
students about continuing projects that included radio transceivers, small-scale robotic
vehicles, and applications of sensors.

408

The board members met with students Logan Loeb, Claudette Cote, Christopher
Jacques, Jeffery(?) Olsen, and ///any others?///, who made the following points:
1. The faculty is generally available for office hours and to help with problems.
2. Students want more power-electronics courses. (During the morning discussion, Dr.
Batchelder noted the difficulty in finding Ph.D.-level people with the proper experience
and the ability to have attracted, or who could attract, research grants.)
3. Students want help deciding on a career, but they lack of information about what
engineers do in their careers. They feel a need for more career-related information so
they can make intelligent choices about whether to pursue an engineering career and
what individual engineering programs to choose.
4. Students would like more access to department labs after hours.
5. When asked what they would recommend the department change, students said
better building maintenance, keeping the building clean and neat to present a better
appearance to everyone, broken seats and desks in lecture rooms, damaged, stained,
and missing ceiling tiles, and the need for fellow students to take better care of
equipment.
6. Students recognized some weakness with mathematical skills. One student
explained he thought he was good at match until he got into engineering courses.
Another student said one of his math professors stressed practical applications of
differential equations and not just math "theory." All students the board met had taken
Advanced Placement calculus in high school.
Next, the board met with ECE Department faculty: Dr. Scott Rausch, Dr. Keith Whites,
Dr. Michael Batchelder, Dr. Dimitris Anagnostou, Ms. Eliane Linde, ///who else?/// The
faculty discussed many topics already covered, and noted in particular:
1. The importance of power-electronics in the curriculum and the difficulty finding the
right person who has or can develop a research program.
2. The positive attitude of faculty, stabilized enrollment, appropriate class sizes, the
benefits of semi-annual advisory board meetings, and the need to better connect with
high-school students.

The board extends special thanks to Ms. Deborah Tompkins, secretary for the ECE
Department. We appreciate her efforts on the board's and the department's behalf to
keep our agenda up to date, to create needed background presentations, and for her
delicious home-made breakfast.
-----end----409

G. STEPS (Students Emerging as Professionals) Survey

CENG STEPS Survey 2007-2010
n=52
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

410

EE STEPS Survey 2007-2010
n=69
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

411

H.

Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency CAAP Exam Results

History of CAAP scores for Electrical Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort since 2004
Term
student
enrolled1

School of Mines Students

System-All Students2

In Electrical Engineering
Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Fall 20093

Nat'l Four-Year Public
Sophomores
Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

58.8

62.8

62.0

64.2

Fall 2008

66.3

65.8

66.6

66.9

58.9

62.7

62.4

64.2

57.8

61.8

58.7

63.1

Fall 2007

66.8

66.9

67.5

67.0

58.7

63.7

62.8

64.4

58.5

62.8

61.7

64.2

Fall 20064

65.7

63.0

64.1

65.9

58.8

63.0

62.6

64.4

Fall 2005

65.5

65.8

65.9

66.3

58.9

62.9

62.7

64.5

Fall 2004

64.9

65.3

66.3

67.1

58.5

63.8

62.8

64.5

1

Includes all students in the Federal IPEDS cohort of first-time, full-time students enrolled in a degree program
School of Mines students are included in the calculation of system-wide mean scores
3
No scores are given for students enrolling in fall 2009 as these students have not yet completed 48 hours and have
not taken the CAAP test.
4
National mean scores for 2004-2006 are not available
2

History of CAAP scores for Computer Engineering students in IPEDS Cohort since 2004
Term
student
enrolled1

School of Mines Students

System-All Students2

In Computer Engineering
Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Math

Read

Sci
Reas

Writ

Fall 20093

Nat'l Four-Year Public
Sophomores
Math

Read

Sci
Reas

58.8

62.8

62.0

64.2

Writ

Fall 2008

66.4

67.8

67.8

68.0

58.9

62.7

62.4

64.2

57.8

61.8

58.7

63.1

Fall 2007

66.5

66.6

68.0

68.0

58.7

63.7

62.8

64.4

58.5

62.8

61.7

64.2

Fall 20064

64.1

64.6

66.2

67.1

58.8

63.0

62.6

64.4

Fall 2005

66.1

65.8

68.0

66.1

58.9

62.9

62.7

64.5

Fall 2004

64.1

66.8

67.7

67.0

58.5

63.8

62.8

64.5

1

Includes all students in the Federal IPEDS cohort of first-time, full-time students enrolled in a degree program
School of Mines students are included in the calculation of system-wide mean scores
3
No scores are given for students enrolling in fall 2009 as these students have not yet completed 48 hours and have
not taken the CAAP test.
4
National mean scores for 2004-2006 are not available
2

412

I.

IEEE Student Branch Activities
IEEE Student Branch and Associated Organizations
2009-2010 School Year Meetings and Activities
IEEE monthly membership meetings are open
to all SDSM&T IEEE Students

October 2009 6th
Meeting 4:00pm CB206-E
22nd

Agenda

Meeting 5:00pm EEP-252

Agenda

November 2009 3rd
Meeting 5:00pm EEP-252

Agenda

7th
17th

Student Organization Fair 11:30-2:00 Ballroom
Meeting 5:00pm EEP-253

Agenda

December 2009 1st
Meeting 6:30pm EEP -252
Agenda
Followed by ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs
8th

ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm in the ECE Labs

15th

Meeting CANCELED for Finals Week

January 2010 19th Meeting 6:30pm EEP-252
Agenda
Followed by ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs
21st Student Organization Fair in the Ballroom
From 11:00am-2:00pm
23rd SOAP Presentation in SALC at 9:00am-1:00pm
February 2010 2nd Meeting 6:30pm EEP-252
Agenda
Followed by ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs
413

16th Meeting 6:30pm EEP-252
Agenda
Followed by ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs
23rd IEEE and Circle K are co-hosting a Humane Society
Volunteer Training Session at 6:30pm in EEP-252.
EVERYONE ON CAMPUS IS INVITED!
March 2010 2nd Meeting 6:30pm EEP-252
Agenda
Followed by ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs
16th

2010-2011 Executive Council Nominations
Meeting 6:30pm EEP-252 Agenda
Followed by ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs

30th

2010-2011 Executive Council Elections and Results
Meeting 6:30pm EEP-251A Agenda
Followed by ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs

April 2010 13th Meeting 6:30pm EEP-252 Agenda
Followed by ECEActivity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs
20th
27th

Dr. Jon Titus speaking about technical communication
4:00pm in EEP-252
Meeting 6:30pm EEP-252 Agenda
Followed by ECE Activity Night at 7:00pm
in the ECE Labs

414

J.

Capstone Design

PRELIMINARY/CRITICAL DESIGN REVIEW EVALUATION FORM

PROJECT TITLE:

________________________________________________________

MENTOR/SPONSOR:
________________________________________________________
GROUP MEMBERS: ________________________________________________________
EVALUATOR:
________________________________________________________

EVALUATION AREAS (Please place comments in the space provided or on the back)
1. Project Introduction: What and Why
2. Project Goals/Objectives/Specifications/Constraints
3. Review of Solution Concept
4. Detailed design of candidate solution: Quality of Problem Analysis
5. Detailed design of candidate solution: Risk Analysis and Mitigation Plan
6. Detailed design of candidate solution: Implementation/Test/Verification Matrix
7. Detailed design of candidate solution: Compliance with Original Requirements
8. Project Budget and Deliverables
9. Project Plan and Execution: On Time or Lagging?
10. Overall Design Review Effort
TOTAL SCORE (out of 100)
* EVALUATION RATING SCALE: 0 (LOWEST) TO 10 (HIGHEST) EACH AREA

415

SCORE*

J. (Cont.) Relation of Capstone Design Student Performance
to Program Outcomes Spring 2010
CDR

a Knowledge

Proj
Diff

Essays and
Reports

Selfrvu

8.7

b Experiment
c Design

8.7

9.1

d Teaming

Final
Oral
Rpt

Final
Written
Rpt
(+
global)

Log

Proj
Outcome

Evaluation
Grade

8.3

15.8

82

8.3

15.8

80

8.3

15.8

84

9.5

e Solve

9.1

f Ethics
g
Communicate

Mentor
Eval

95
8.3

15.8

18.1
8.7

83
90

18.1

4.7

h Global

9.7

4.5

91

9.7

97

i Life-long

15.8

j Issues

9.7

k Tools

79
97

8.3

15.8

80

Weight

10

10

20

10

10

5

10

5

20

100

Average Score
Spring 2010

8.7

9.1

18.1

9.5

8.3

4.7

9.7

4.5

15.8

88.4

416

APPENDIX F
Center for Advanced Manufacturing and Production (CAMP)
TEAMING ACTIVITIES IN DESIGN (2004-2010)
During a time of downsizing state operations in the mid-1990s the universities in South Dakota
were given the chance to forgo the financial cuts seen in other state-supported areas if they
would reinvest this money in substantive changes in education and in Centers of Excellence.
These centers were to be revolutionary in their approaches to education.
In 1997—with these reinvestment funds—SDSM&T established the Center of Excellence for
Advanced Manufacturing and Production (CAMP) where students, faculty and industry partners
developed an approach to engineering education which addressed the explicit needs of industry
and academia through the use of multidisciplinary enterprise teams, electronic communications
and a focus on manufacturing.
CAMP provides a program that addresses many of the issues of student success. It is now
focused on engineering competition teams. Students may join at any level, but students are
encouraged to join a team as a freshman. CAMP engineering competition teams are not unlike
athletic teams. The excitement of an engineering competition resembles that of collegiate
athletic events. The necessary teamwork is similar to that required in a good athletic team, but
students are involved in a competition helping them prepare for careers in engineering and
science. Students spend significant time outside of the classroom on design, construction and
testing and, of course, at the competition event itself. Faculty advisors spend significant time
with the students outside of class. Students discuss designs and finished vehicles, but they also
learn a great deal about the type of work they could expect to do after graduation. The team
becomes an incredible support group.
CAMP provides an opportunity for students to apply their knowledge and skills in a friendly,
realistic engineering and/or scientific environment. Students work on difficult and realistic
problems in CAMP, but do so with considerable enjoyment. They see application of the difficult
theory they must learn in classes. They also learn that applying their knowledge and skills to
difficult problems can be rewarding. They commit to the difficult disciplines of computer
science, mathematics and engineering.
CAMP strongly encourages student-student mentoring. Mentoring of first and second year
students has proven extremely beneficial in the CAMP. Underclass involvement in the first three
years helps to develop the basic understanding and continuity necessary for advanced projects.
The sophisticated knowledge necessary to design and build a UAV or Formula SAE vehicle
417

cannot be learned in the senior year. Several years of mentoring prepare a student to handle this
project in his/her final year.
CAMP activities are primarily co-curricular activities for the students, though many seniors do
receive credit for senior design and some students receive special investigation credit for parts of
the projects. The program is now supported formally not only by the academic affairs side of the
university but also by the student affairs side. Involvement is voluntary and unpaid except for a
few leaders who are paid to work in the CAMP manufacturing labs.
Many engineering societies and other organizations have developed regional, national and
international competitions for students. At SDSM&T these competitions serve to raise the
visibility of the societies as well as to stimulate project-based education and to make engineering
exciting. Preparing for these competitions provides students with opportunities to solve real
world problems of their own making and have fun doing it.
Competitions such as the AIChE ChemE Car, ASCE Concrete Canoe, ASCE Steel Bridge,
ASME Human Powered Vehicle, IEEE Robotics, SAE Aero Design, SAE Baja SAE, SAE
Formula SAE, SAE Supermileage, and the SAE Clean Snowmobile Challenge are designed to
teach students elements of modern design methodology; multidisciplinary organization,
planning, and teamwork; manufacturing; and competition in multidisciplinary teams. The Baja
SAE team serves as a good example of the type of activity in a CAMP project. At the beginning
of the fall semester, approximately sixty students expressed interest in this team. The senior
design students have a weekly meeting with their advisor. The entire sixty-member team with
advisors meets weekly. Small sub-teams may have other meetings with or without their advisor
outside of the regular weekly meetings. These meetings may involve in-depth discussion of
technical problems, but they often involve discussions on teaming and leadership issues like
conflict resolution, time management, financial management, ethics, and general discussions on
the field of engineering as a career. During the fall semester they design a complete vehicle,
often using proven parts from previous years, but designing new parts and assemblies where they
believe improvements can be made. They test extensively in the fall and spring. During the
spring semester they build the vehicle and in May travel to the International SAE Baja SAE
Competition. Younger members are given the car from the previous year and are responsible for
reworking it for competition. They are allowed to compete as well. The entire team has a
budget of about $20,000 to build the cars and travel to the competition. Base funding is provided
through a competitive proposal process for student activity fees. CAMP provides equipment
and supplies, and remaining funds must be raised by various fundraising techniques. This year,
they placed second overall among 100 teams with the car designed by the senior design members
and they placed ninth with the underclass car.
Now in its fourteenth year, CAMP is thriving and respected on campus and in the community. It
received the 2000 Boeing Outstanding Educator Award and the 2001 NSF Corporate and
Foundation Alliance Award. Companies that hire our graduates are pleased with this
educational program. Several of the CAMP students have started at salaries well above the
418

national average, and some have even received signing bonuses. Caterpillar donated the funding
for the Caterpillar Student Excellence Center (CAT lab), the main CAMP student lab.
When CAMP was formed, it was decided a team of professors would lead by example in a center
that would teach multi-disciplinary teaming. A psychology professor has joined the CAMP
leadership team. His presence has improved the understanding and implementation of teams. He
brought in and has helped us implement values-based teaming and leadership. Students are
asked to consciously evaluate their values and to align with a set of values found to lead to
success (trust, respect, skill, understanding, proper use of power and influence, proper use and
appreciation of goods and services, well-being, and responsibility). CAMP students hold weekly
meetings to discuss project issues or attend a seminar on teaming or leadership.
The teams receive 30 to 50% from appropriations from student fees and must secure the rest.
Students learn to live within a budget as well. CAMP funds the purchase and maintenance of all
capital equipment.
Many of the CAMP seminars deal with the ―
soft skills‖ needed by engineers. Topics such as
communication, cultural diversity, gender issues, and social psychology of teaming are covered.
SDSM&T has challenged significantly larger and more prestigious university teams in regional
and national competitions, for instance:






The SAE Aero team placed first in the Regular Class division in the SAE Aero Design West
competitions in both 2005 and 2006. They placed third in 2008 and received the Best Paper
Award in 2010.
In 2010, the SDSM&T Baja SAE team placed 2nd and 9th out of 100 entries in the Baja SAE
Washington event. They have placed in the top ten in each of the last five years.
In the 2007 International Formula SAE West competition, SDSM&T finished sixth overall.
In 2010 the SDSM&T Human Powered Vehicle placed 2nd overall in the ASME HPV
Challenge, West Coast division.
In 2006, the SDSM&T UAV team was the highest scoring team at the AUVSI International
Aerial Robotics Competition at Ft. Benning, Georgia. In 2009, the team received the Best
Presentation Award, and it received the Best Technical Paper Award in 2006, 2007, and
2008.

419

A summary of CAMP/ECE/ME competition/capstone design projects is given in the table below.
Year of

External

Project
2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Sponsor

Project

Advisor

SAE Aero Design

SAE

Dolan

Human Powered Vehicle

ASME

Jenkins

Mini-Baja

SAE

Dolan

Formula SAE

SAE

Dolan

UAV

Army, AUVSI

Dolan/Batchelder

Robotics Competition

IEEE

Batchelder

SAE Aero Design

SAE

Dolan

Human Powered Vehicle

ASME

Matejcik/Dolan

Mini-Baja

SAE

Dolan

Formula SAE

SAE

Dolan

UAV

Army, AUVSI

Dolan/Batchelder

Robotics Competition

IEEE

Batchelder

SAE Aero Design

SAE

Dolan

Human Powered Vehicle

ASME

Matejcik/Dolan

Baja SAE

SAE

Dolan

Formula SAE

SAE

Dolan

SAE Clean Snowmobile

SAE

Batchelder/Dolan

UAV

Army, AUVSI

Dolan/Batchelder

Robotics Competition

IEEE

Batchelder

SAE Aero Design

SAE

Dolan

Human Powered Vehicle

ASME

Matejcik/Dolan

Baja SAE

SAE

Dolan

Formula SAE

SAE

Dolan

SAE Clean Snowmobile

SAE

Batchelder/Dolan

UAV

Army, AUVSI

Dolan/Batchelder

Robotics Competition

IEEE

Batchelder

SAE Aero Design

SAE

Dolan

Human Powered Vehicle

ASME

Matejcik/Osberg/Dolan

420

2010

Baja SAE

SAE

Dolan

Formula SAE

SAE

Dolan

SAE Clean Snowmobile

SAE

Batchelder/Dolan

SAE Supermileage

SAE

Medlin/Dolan

UAV

Army, AUVSI

Dolan/Batchelder

Robotics Competition

IEEE

Batchelder

SAE Aero Design

SAE

Dolan

Human Powered Vehicle

ASME

Matejcik/Osberg/Dolan

Baja SAE

SAE

Dolan

Formula SAE

SAE

Dolan

SAE Clean Snowmobile

SAE

Batchelder/Dolan

SAE Supermileage

SAE

Medlin/Dolan

UAV

Army, AUVSI

Dolan/Batchelder

Robotics Competition

IEEE

Tolle/Batchelder

421

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close