Using content validity measures to evaluate the Biosystems Engineering Program at the University of Manitoba.
Saved in:
| Title: | Using content validity measures to evaluate the Biosystems Engineering Program at the University of Manitoba. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Cicek, Jillian Seniuk1 Jillian.SeniukCicek@umanitoba.ca, Renaud, Robert1,2, Mann, Danny3 |
| Source: | Canadian Biosystem Engineering Journal. 2020, Vol. 62, p1-16. 16p. |
| Subjects: | University of Manitoba, Test validity, Graduate education, Biological systems, Engineering, Communicative competence, Predictive validity |
| Abstract (English): | An exploratory case study was designed to determine the relative importance of the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) graduate attributes as perceived by University of Manitoba engineering stakeholders. Findings were used to examine the content validity of the Biosystems Engineering program. The overarching objective was to explore how graduate attribute emphasis in engineering programs reflect graduate attribute importance reported by key stakeholders. Problem Analysis, Investigation, Design, Communication Skills, Impact of Engineering on Society & the Environment, and Use of Engineering Tools had similar expected (mean relative importance) and observed (content and assessment program coverage) data percentages. The gap was wider for other graduate attributes, with the most surprising being Knowledge Base. Overall, the pattern of results suggests that various professional attributes (e.g., Professionalism, Ethics & Equity, and Lifelong Learning) should be more prominent in content and assessments within an engineering program. Recommendations to improve methods to assess content validity in engineering programs are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Abstract (French): | Une étude de cas exploratoire a été conçue pour déterminer l'importance relative des qualités requises des diplômés du Bureau canadien d'accréditation des programmes d'ingénierie (BCAPI) tels que perçus par les intervenants en génie de l'Université du Manitoba. Les résultats ont été utilisés pour examiner la validité du contenu du programme de génie des biosystèmes. L'objectif principal était d'explorer comment l'importance des qualités requises des diplômés dans les programmes d'ingénierie reflète l'importance de ces qualités signalée par les principales parties prenantes. L'analyse des problèmes, la recherche, la conception, les compétences en communication, l'impact de l'ingénierie sur la société et l'environnement ainsi que l'utilisation des outils d'ingénierie présentaient des pourcentages de données attendus (importance relative moyenne) et observés (contenu et couverture du programme d'évaluation) similaires. L'écart était plus important pour les autres qualités requises des diplômés, le plus surprenant étant la base de connaissances. Dans l'ensemble, la tendance des résultats suggère que divers qualités professionnels (p. ex., le professionnalisme, l'éthique et l'équité, et l'apprentissage continu) devraient occuper une place plus importante dans le contenu et les évaluations d'un programme de génie. Les recommandations visant à améliorer les méthodes d'évaluation de la validité du contenu des programmes d'ingénierie sont discutées. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Canadian Biosystem Engineering Journal is the property of Canadian Society for Bioengineering and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: egs DbLabel: Engineering Source An: 154918817 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Using content validity measures to evaluate the Biosystems Engineering Program at the University of Manitoba. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cicek%2C+Jillian+Seniuk%22">Cicek, Jillian Seniuk</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><i> Jillian.SeniukCicek@umanitoba.ca</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Renaud%2C+Robert%22">Renaud, Robert</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mann%2C+Danny%22">Mann, Danny</searchLink><relatesTo>3</relatesTo> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Canadian+Biosystem+Engineering+Journal%22">Canadian Biosystem Engineering Journal</searchLink>. 2020, Vol. 62, p1-16. 16p. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22University+of+Manitoba%22">University of Manitoba</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+validity%22">Test validity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Graduate+education%22">Graduate education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Biological+systems%22">Biological systems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Engineering%22">Engineering</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Communicative+competence%22">Communicative competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Predictive+validity%22">Predictive validity</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract (English) Group: Ab Data: An exploratory case study was designed to determine the relative importance of the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) graduate attributes as perceived by University of Manitoba engineering stakeholders. Findings were used to examine the content validity of the Biosystems Engineering program. The overarching objective was to explore how graduate attribute emphasis in engineering programs reflect graduate attribute importance reported by key stakeholders. Problem Analysis, Investigation, Design, Communication Skills, Impact of Engineering on Society & the Environment, and Use of Engineering Tools had similar expected (mean relative importance) and observed (content and assessment program coverage) data percentages. The gap was wider for other graduate attributes, with the most surprising being Knowledge Base. Overall, the pattern of results suggests that various professional attributes (e.g., Professionalism, Ethics & Equity, and Lifelong Learning) should be more prominent in content and assessments within an engineering program. Recommendations to improve methods to assess content validity in engineering programs are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract (French) Group: Ab Data: Une étude de cas exploratoire a été conçue pour déterminer l'importance relative des qualités requises des diplômés du Bureau canadien d'accréditation des programmes d'ingénierie (BCAPI) tels que perçus par les intervenants en génie de l'Université du Manitoba. Les résultats ont été utilisés pour examiner la validité du contenu du programme de génie des biosystèmes. L'objectif principal était d'explorer comment l'importance des qualités requises des diplômés dans les programmes d'ingénierie reflète l'importance de ces qualités signalée par les principales parties prenantes. L'analyse des problèmes, la recherche, la conception, les compétences en communication, l'impact de l'ingénierie sur la société et l'environnement ainsi que l'utilisation des outils d'ingénierie présentaient des pourcentages de données attendus (importance relative moyenne) et observés (contenu et couverture du programme d'évaluation) similaires. L'écart était plus important pour les autres qualités requises des diplômés, le plus surprenant étant la base de connaissances. Dans l'ensemble, la tendance des résultats suggère que divers qualités professionnels (p. ex., le professionnalisme, l'éthique et l'équité, et l'apprentissage continu) devraient occuper une place plus importante dans le contenu et les évaluations d'un programme de génie. Les recommandations visant à améliorer les méthodes d'évaluation de la validité du contenu des programmes d'ingénierie sont discutées. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Canadian Biosystem Engineering Journal is the property of Canadian Society for Bioengineering and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=154918817 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.7451/CBE.2020.62.9.1 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 16 StartPage: 1 Subjects: – SubjectFull: University of Manitoba Type: general – SubjectFull: Test validity Type: general – SubjectFull: Graduate education Type: general – SubjectFull: Biological systems Type: general – SubjectFull: Engineering Type: general – SubjectFull: Communicative competence Type: general – SubjectFull: Predictive validity Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Using content validity measures to evaluate the Biosystems Engineering Program at the University of Manitoba. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Cicek, Jillian Seniuk – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Renaud, Robert – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Mann, Danny IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Text: 2020 Type: published Y: 2020 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 14929058 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 62 Titles: – TitleFull: Canadian Biosystem Engineering Journal Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
