Syracuse

ABET - Self Study Report
for the Degree

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
Syracuse University
L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
151 Link Hall

Syracuse, New York 13244-1240
June 28, 2011
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 Syracuse University, except for
summary data not identifiable to a specific institution.
Syracuse University - Civil Engineering Program - ABET Self Study - Fall 2011 Review
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ....................................................................................................7
1.1 CONTACT INFORMATION ....................................................................................................................7
1.2 PROGRAM HISTORY ...........................................................................................................................7
1.3 OPTIONS .............................................................................................................................................8
1.4 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ..........................................................................................................8
1.5 PROGRAM DELIVERY MODES ...........................................................................................................11
1.6 PROGRAM LOCATIONS .....................................................................................................................11
1.7 ACTIONS TO CORRECT PREVIOUS SHORTCOMINGS ..........................................................................12
1.7.1 Review of 2005 Accreditation Report ....................................................................................12
1.7.2 Actions Taken to Address Concerns ......................................................................................12
1.8 JOINT ACCREDITATION ....................................................................................................................13

2 ACCREDITATION SUMMARY .....................................................................................................14
2.1 STUDENTS ........................................................................................................................................14
2.1.1 Student Admissions ................................................................................................................14
2.1.2 Evaluating Student Performance ...........................................................................................15
2.1.3 Transfer Students and Transfer Courses ...............................................................................15
2.1.4 Student Advising ....................................................................................................................16
2.1.5 Work in Lieu of Courses ........................................................................................................17
2.1.6 Graduation Requirements ......................................................................................................17
2.1.7 Transcripts of Recent Students...............................................................................................18
2.2 PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................19
2.2.1 Mission Statement ..................................................................................................................19
2.2.2 Program Educational Objectives ...........................................................................................20
2.2.3 Consistency of Objectives with Institutional Mission ............................................................21
2
2.2.4 Program Constituencies ........................................................................................................21
2.2.5 Process for Revision of the Program Educational Objectives ...............................................22
2.3 STUDENT OUTCOMES .......................................................................................................................27
2.3.1 Student Outcomes ..................................................................................................................27
2.3.2 Relationship between Student Outcomes and Program Educational Objectives ...................27
2.4 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ...........................................................................................................30
2.4.1 Background ............................................................................................................................30
2.4.2 Assessment of Program Educational Objectives....................................................................30
2.4.3 Assessment of Student Outcomes ...........................................................................................34
2.4.4 Summary and Analysis of Assessment Data for Student Outcomes .......................................37
2.4.5 Continuous Improvement .......................................................................................................49
2.4.6 Additional Information ..........................................................................................................57
2.5 CURRICULUM ...................................................................................................................................58
2.5.1 Program Curriculum .............................................................................................................58
2.5.2 Course Syllabi ........................................................................................................................75
2.6 FACULTY..........................................................................................................................................76
2.6.1 Faculty Qualifications ...........................................................................................................76
2.6.2 Faculty Workload ..................................................................................................................77
2.6.3 Faculty Size............................................................................................................................81
2.6.4 Professional Development .....................................................................................................81
2.6.5 Authority and Responsibility of Faculty.................................................................................81
2.7 FACILITIES .......................................................................................................................................83
2.7.1 Offices ....................................................................................................................................83
2.7.2 Classrooms ............................................................................................................................83
2.7.3 Laboratories ..........................................................................................................................83
2.7.4 Computing Resources ............................................................................................................86
2.7.5 Maintenance and Upgrading of Facilities .............................................................................87
3
2.7.6 Library Services .....................................................................................................................88
2.7.7 Overall Comments on Facilities ............................................................................................89
2.8 INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT .................................................................................................................90
2.8.1 Leadership .............................................................................................................................90
2.8.2 Program Budget and Financial Support................................................................................90
2.8.3 Staffing ...................................................................................................................................91
2.8.4 Faculty Hiring and Retention ................................................................................................91
2.8.5 Support for Faculty Professional Development .....................................................................92

3 PROGRAM CRITERIA ....................................................................................................................93
Signature Attesting to Compliance at the end of the report
4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Organizational chart for the management of the B.S. degree program in Civil
Engineering at Syracuse University. ..........................................................................................10
Figure 2 Assessment loop used to assess and revise program educational objectives. ..........24
Figure 3 Schematic relationship between program educational objectives, student

outcomes, and curriculum...........................................................................................................28
Figure 4 Attainment chart for student outcomes by student cohort (graduating year). ....38
Figure 5 Comparisons of DAC scores for two cohorts of students. ........................................43
Figure 6 Comparison of attainment results from Direct Assessment Charts (DAC) and
Engineering Exit Assessment conducted by Educational Benchmarking Inc. (EBI). ...........44
Figure 7 Comparison of attainment results from Direct Assessment Charts (DAC) and the
Engineering Exit Assessment conducted by Educational Benchmarking Inc. (EBI). ...........46
Figure 8 Percentage of seniors in civil and environmental engineering with GPA > 3.0 at
graduation. ...................................................................................................................................46
Figure 9 Average ratings for the quality of senior design presentations. ...............................47
Figure 10 Average ratings for the technical quality of senior design presentations. ............48
Figure 11 Example – Performance Indicators and Rubrics ....................................................55
Figure 12 Performance indicator results for three indicators applied in CIE 274................56
Figure 13 Flowchart of suggested plan for the B.S. Civil Engineering degree. .....................60
5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Timeline for assessment and revision of educational objectives................................26
Table 2 Relationships between program educational objectives and student outcomes.......29
Table 3 Attainment of program educational objectives in 2007-09. .....................................32
Table 4 Attainment of program educational objectives in January, 2011. ..........................34
Table 5 Student Outcome Assessment Scores from DAC evaluations for ECS 101. .............39
Table 6 Student Outcome Assessment Scores from DAC evaluations for CIE 272. .............40
Table 9 Plan of study for the B.S. degree in Civil Engineering. ..............................................59
Table 10 Social science and humanities course groups. ...........................................................62
Table 11 Relationship between program educational objectives and courses. ......................63
Table 12 Mapping of student outcomes to required courses and selected electives . ............66
Table 13 Curriculum chart for the B.S. Civil Engineering degree program. ........................69
Table 14 A summary of the credit hours of coursework. .........................................................73
Table 15 Profiles of full-time faculty. .........................................................................................74
Table 16 Profiles of adjunct faculty. ..........................................................................................77
Table 17 Faculty workload summary. .......................................................................................79
Table 18 Instructional laboratory space ...................................................................................84
Table 19 Instructional computer clusters .................................................................................86
6
Program Self-Study Report: Civil Engineering – 2011
1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1.1 Contact Information
The primary pre-visit contact person is:
Chris E. Johnson, Chair
151 Link Hall
Syracuse University
Syracuse, NY 13244-1190
Phone: 315-443-4425
Fax: 315-443-1243
E-mail: cejohns@syr.edu
1.2 Program History
Courses in what is now considered civil engineering were offered at Syracuse University in
1877 through the College of Liberal Arts. The L.C. Smith College of Applied Sciences was
founded in 1901, bringing together programs in civil, electrical and mechanical engineering.
In the 1940s the Department of Civil Engineering gained national prominence in the area of
photogrammetry and aerial mapping. In the 1970s, the Department was an early proponent of
incorporating planning concepts into the civil engineering curriculum. Since the 1980s the
civil engineering program’s four curricular focus areas have been geotechnical, structural,
environmental, and water resources engineering.
The Bachelors of Science in Civil Engineering degree program has been accredited by the
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) since 1936. The program
sought accreditation under the ABET2000 criteria in the 1999-2000 academic year. The
broad-based (“a-k”) program outcomes that form the core of those criteria prompted a
number of positive changes in the civil engineering curriculum. In particular, concepts
essential to professional behavior, such as ethics, life-long learning, and social awareness
were more explicitly covered. The freshman gateway course, ECS 101, was a particular
target for introducing these concepts at an early stage in the curriculum. Also, oral
communications were increasingly incorporated into courses throughout the curriculum. The
capstone senior design class (CIE 475) has incorporated activities throughout the semester to
prepare students for professional practice and life in the engineering workplace while
maintaining its core emphasis on a comprehensive technical design experience.
Further improvements to the civil engineering curriculum were made following our most
recent ABET accreditation visit in 2005. The number of credit hours required has been
increased by four. Also, the social science and humanities electives are now more structured
– students are now required to take at least three of their six social science and humanities
electives from groups covering economics and social issues, global affairs, and policy
studies. The Department has also incorporated sustainability concepts throughout the
curriculum in recognition both of the growing interest in this topic and its relevance to key
7
program outcomes. To further support this initiative, an endowed chair in the area of
sustainability was established and a new senior faculty member hired in 2010.
The Dubai Summer Internship Program (DSIP), initiated in May 2008, has had a major
impact on the academic programs in the department. Each year, six rising seniors are selected
for this five-week paid internship, in which they live, study and work in Dubai with six
Lebanese students. The construction-based internship is hosted by the Dubai Construction
Company and includes classroom instruction, on-site training, and cultural activities. The
DSIP has been a tremendous motivator for our sophomores and juniors, who aspire to
participate. The seniors who return come back as leaders, with skills in design, construction,
and management. The success of the DSIP has resulted in a new internship program focused
on water infrastructure in Bahrain and Abu Dhabi. This new program begins in 2011
(although unrest in Bahrain has caused this year’s program to be moved to Dubai).
In the Fall, 2009 semester, we initiated a one-credit Field Learning Experience for all seniors
in civil and environmental engineering. The centerpiece of this experience is a weekend field
trip to civil and environmental engineering sites in a major urban area. For the first two years,
the trip has been to Albany, NY. This program, which is run at no cost to the students, has
provided our seniors valuable practical experience that informs their senior design projects,
and their careers afterward.
The scope and strength of the civil engineering program has expanded in other areas as well.
A second endowed chair, in the area of sustainable infrastructure engineering, has been
established and filled in 2010. A new Professor of Practice with expertise in water resources
and environmental engineering has also joined the Department. At the time of this writing,
the Department consists of 11 full-time, tenured faculty, plus Dean Laura J. Steinberg, who
holds tenure in the Department, and one full-time Professor of Practice. In addition, six
adjunct faculty routinely teach courses in the Department. Searches are currently underway
for a junior-level position in treatment processes and a senior-level position in the broadly
defined area of water sciences.
1.3 Options
There are no formal options, tracks or concentrations in the Bachelor of Science degree
program in civil engineering. Students do have the opportunity to select “professional” and
“technical” electives to focus their studies in areas of personal interest, but these electives are
not organized in any formal manner. More details on curriculum are provided in section
II.5.A of this document.
1.4 Organizational Structure
The administrative structure for the Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering degree program
is depicted in Figure 1. The program is administered through the Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering (CIE), within the L.C. Smith College of Engineering and
Computer Science (LCS) at Syracuse University (SU). Chancellor Nancy Cantor and
Provost and Vice Chancellor Eric Spina oversee the administration of the College and
Department in their roles as the academic leaders of the university. Dean Laura Steinberg
works with the Chair of the Department to set and achieve academic and budgetary goals.
Dean Steinberg, along with three Associate Deans, works with the Chair on curricular and
pedagogical affairs.
8
The day-to-day administration of the program is the responsibility of the Department Chair
and a Program Director. The Department administers two programs – the Bachelor of
Science in Civil Engineering and the Bachelor of Science in Environmental Engineering.
The Department Chair also serves as the Program Director of one of these programs, while a
second faculty member serves as Program Director of the other program. Currently,
Professor Chris E. Johnson serves as Department Chair and Program Director of the
Environmental Engineering Program. Professor Dawit Negussey serves as the Program
Director of the Civil Engineering Program.
Because of the relatively small size of the faculty – 12 at present – the Department has no
standing committees. Most of the administrative work of the faculty can be done in regular
departmental faculty meetings. Ad hoc committees for undergraduate affairs and graduate
affairs are formed as needed. Committees for tenure and promotion are formed in years
when there is work for such a committee.
The Department benefits from the advice of two advisory boards. The Student Advisory
Council, which includes two students from each undergraduate year, advises the Department
on issues related to curriculum, pedagogy, student services, and program outcomes.
The CIE Advisory Board, composed of prominent civil and environmental engineering
professionals, many of whom are alumni of the Department, weighs in on curriculum,
program objectives and outcomes, and other matters. In particular the CIE Advisory Board
helps the Department keep abreast of trends in the profession outside academia. The current
(2011) membership of the Advisory Board consists of eight engineers from industry and
academia. They are:
Steve Anagnost – Senior Managing Engineer, O’Brien and Gere Companies
Al Labuz – Remediation Manager, Honeywell International
Orrin MacMurray – President and CEO, C&S Engineers
Joel Mooney – Senior Vice President & General Manager, Haley & Aldrich
James Nuss – Vice President, Arcadis
Paul Ossenbruggen - Professor Emeritus, University of New Hampshire
John Thonet – President, Thonet Associates
James Withiam – Principal, D’Appolonia Engineers
9
Figure 1 Organizational chart for the management of the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering at Syracuse University.
10
The composition of the Advisory Board changes periodically. New members provide us with
fresh ideas and new perspectives. In addition to giving us feedback on our educational
objectives and outcomes, the Advisory Board advises us on curricular and placement matters
such as:
• Future directions of the Department.
• New areas of emphases in our curricula.
• Opportunities for industry/academic collaboration..
• Comparison of SU graduates/capabilities and other engineering programs.
• Internship/co-op experience for our students.
Finally, three full-time and two part-time staff members serve the administrative needs of the
department. The full-time staff includes a budget/accounts administrator, a secretary
responsible for scheduling and graduate records, and a receptionist. The part-time staff
includes a machine shop employee and a laboratory supervisor. Undergraduate records are
managed centrally by staff who report to the Dean’s Office.
1.5 Program Delivery Modes
The Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering degree program is a day program that requires
students to complete at least 127/128 semester credits for graduation. The curriculum is
designed so that a student can complete all requirements in eight semesters. The majority of
undergraduate students in the civil engineering program are full-time. Table D-1 (Appendix
D) summarizes the enrollment and graduation data for the Civil Engineering program at
Syracuse University for the past five academic years.
The program currently does not offer courses in either distance-education or web-based
formats. A cooperative education option is offered, although at the moment very few of our
students choose this option.
Students enrolled in the program can participate in a year-long study abroad program in
London, England during the junior year. Civil engineering students have also participated in
semester-long programs in Australia, Chile, China, Hong Kong, and Ireland.
Experiential learning is emphasized in the program. In addition to course-based laboratory
and field-trip experiences, the senior class participates in an overnight field trip in the Fall
semester to project sites within a 300 mile radius of Syracuse. Students write a report on the
trip and receive one credit. Also, six students from the rising senior class are selected each
year to participate in a five-week summer internship program in Dubai under the guidance of
a full-time member of the faculty and an Adjunct Professor. A similar internship program in
Bahrain is under development. Students receive 3 credit hours for the Dubai and the planned
Bahrain internships.
1.6 Program Locations
The Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering degree program is offered only at the main
campus of Syracuse University.
11
1.7 Actions to Correct Previous Shortcomings

1.7.1 Review of 2005 Accreditation Report
In our previous (2005) ABET accreditation report no weaknesses or concerns were cited for
the institution. There were two concerns identified for the civil engineering program, both of
which were deemed to be resolved after the due process response. The two concerns
identified in the report were:
• Criterion 2: Program Education Objectives. The program objectives that
were in place at the time of the 2005 self-study and accreditation visit
were philosophically similar to program outcomes, “and as a result the
distinction between the objectives and the outcomes has blurred.” Also,
the report criticized the use of feedback from current students in the
assessment of program objectives, which should indicate the desired
characteristics of graduates some years after graduation.
• Criterion 3: Program Outcomes and Assessment. The accreditation report
identified a concern regarding program outcomes (c) and (h). The report
commented that “there is evidence that students perform cost estimation
during projects, but they then perform no further analysis based on the
cost against other constraints. Limited coverage of economic topics is
present, however there appear to be no stand-alone economics components
in the program.”
1.7.2 Actions Taken to Address Concerns
In the case of the concern regarding our program educational objectives, the faculty revised
the objectives to reflect the desired attributes that graduates of the civil engineering program
would have 3-5 years after graduation. The assessment process was also revised to collect
data from alumni and employers rather than current students. These changes were made
immediately after the ABET visit, and were judged to have been resolved in the due process
response phase. Results from assessment data collection carried out since the 2005
accreditation visit have been used in the intervening period to assess and revise the
educational objectives, as described in section II.2 of this self-study document.
The concern about the economics content of the civil engineering curriculum was partly the
result of poor documentation on the part of the Department. During the due process phase of
the accreditation review, we provided further documentation of instruction in economic
analysis throughout the curriculum. In addition, as part of our initiative to incorporate
sustainability concepts in the curriculum, we developed a new, required sophomore-level
course in Civil and Environmental Systems, which includes an engineering economics
module. This concern was also deemed to be resolved in the final accreditation report. The
social science and humanities requirements in the curriculum have been structured to require
students to select at least one course from each of three groups. One of these groups,
“Economics and Social Issues,” may be satisfied by taking ECN 203, an introductory course
in economics. In the classes of 2010 and 2011, 64% and 85% of graduates fulfilled this
requirement by taking ECN 203 or other economics classes (Appendix F).
12
1.8 Joint Accreditation

The Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering degree program is not jointly accredited with
any commission other than ABET.
13
2 ACCREDITATION SUMMARY
2.1 Students
2.1.1 Student Admissions
Vice President for Enrollment Management, Don Saleh, oversees Admissions and Financial
Aid for Syracuse University. The Dean of Undergraduate Admissions is Dr. Maurice Alvin
Harris. The Associate Vice President for Financial Aid programs is Youlonda M. Copeland-
Morgan. LCS enjoys an excellent working relationship with the leadership and staff of the
Office of Admissions. The Dean of LCS meets on a regular basis with the University’s
enrollment management leadership team to review enrollment targets, set admissions criteria,
and develop recruitment strategy. The staffs of the Admissions Office and the Financial Aid
Office implement these strategies in collaboration with Kathleen M. Joyce, the LCS Assistant
Dean for Student Recruitment. Our Assistant Dean provides an engineering-specific contact
to all prospective and admitted students, and is responsible for all College-specific recruiting
initiatives such as Fall and Spring Receptions for prospective applicants, an annual Open
House for admitted students, and an annual recruiting event to promote women in
engineering programs. While the LCS Assistant Dean and her staff meet regularly with the
Admissions Office staff and participate in the review of student applications, final
admissions decisions are made by the Admissions Office.
The general criteria for admission to the first-year class of the LCS in engineering programs
are as follows:
a) A strong college preparatory curriculum in secondary school including (but not
limited to):
• 4 years of mathematics including pre-calculus,
• 4 years of science including chemistry and physics,
• 4 years of English,
• 3 years of social studies, and
• 2 years of a language other than English.
b) Strong performance in secondary school with enriched, honors, or AP courses.
Generally, students perform with a “B+” average or better.
c) Completion of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT I) or the American College Test
(ACT). These standardized test scores are evaluated in conjunction with other
factors and are not a primary determinant of admission.
d) Recommendations from a secondary school guidance official and two teachers.
e) A personal statement.
f) A record of involvement in extracurricular activities, including evidence of
leadership potential.
g) A record of good citizenship.
Because all applicants are reviewed individually, there is natural variation in qualifications of
admitted students. In particular, the College and Admissions Office strive for a balanced
class that is diverse along many axes including gender, race, and geography. Admission to
14
the College is selective to ensure that all admitted students are prepared for the rigorous
demands of the academic programs.
Admission is granted directly to LCS without regard to program of study. While many
students (approximately 80%) do declare a specific LCS major before first-semester classes
begin, there is no requirement to do so until the end of the first year of study. There are no
special requirements for admission to upper-division courses beyond the natural progression
of prerequisites.
2.1.2 Evaluating Student Performance
Student performance in courses is evaluated according to an A-F system with plusses and
minuses: A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, D, F. The grade point average (GPA) is computed on
a four-point scale, with the following assignments:
A: 4.0 B+: 3.33 C+: 2.33 D: 1.0 F: 0.0
A-: 3.67 B: 3.0 C: 2.0
B-: 2.67 C-: 2.67
The GPA is computed as a weighted average, based on credit hours.
A one-page curriculum summary sheet, which outlines the degree requirements for the
program, is placed in each student’s academic folder. Each semester, students meet with their
advisors to go over their progress and plan their coursework for the following semester and
beyond. The advising meeting is enforced by placing an “advising hold,” which prevents the
student from registering for the following semester. The advising hold is removed after a
student meets with the advisor. Prerequisites for upcoming courses and the consequences of
not meeting the prerequisites are covered during the advising session. Student transcripts are
available online to students and their advisers. Also available are various tools such as a GPA
calculator that allows students/advisors to make “what-if” analyses. The university is
transitioning to electronic enforcement of course prerequisites, starting with math and
psychology courses. We expect other departments (including those in LCS) to follow as
problems encountered in the initial trial are corrected.
At the end of the semester, students who are not making good progress towards their degree
requirements are reviewed by an academic committee consisting of the senior associate dean
for academic affairs, the program director, and the director for student records. The academic
committee may place students on various levels of academic probation and give them
performance targets to meet in specific courses to be cleared of probation.
2.1.3 Transfer Students and Transfer Courses
Transfer students from other institutions are admitted under the following guidelines:
a) Courses must be taken in a resident program of an institution accredited by the
appropriate accrediting institution and/or ABET.
b) A cumulative grade-point average of 2.5/4.0 is required.
c) At least one year of calculus should have been completed.
d) One year of calculus-based physics or one semester each of physics and chemistry
should have been completed.
15
e) No grade less than “C” in the mathematics, science, and engineering courses
completed.
Transfer credit is approved by the Associate Dean for academic affairs of LCS in
consultation with departmental representatives. Only courses that meet curricular
requirements are transferred. Grades earned for courses do not transfer, only credit hours on
a one-to-one basis are transferable. Matriculated LCS students may also transfer credits from
other institutions (e.g., individual courses taken in the summer) under similar guidelines:
courses must be taken at an accredited institution; credit is granted only for courses
completed with a grade of “C” or higher; only the credit is transferred, not the grade; and the
course must be approved by the advisor and the Associate Dean in advance.
Syracuse University and LCS have relationships with a large number of community colleges
and two-year technical schools within and outside New York State. Articulation agreements
are in place with the engineering science programs in the following ten community colleges:
Corning, Georgia Perimeter (GA), Hudson Valley, Jamestown, Mohawk Valley, Monroe,
Onondaga, Queensborough, San Diego Mesa (CA), Oakton (IL). Students who complete the
articulated coursework in their community colleges can transfer to LCS as juniors, and
graduate in two years.
Intra-University transfers (“IUT's”) begin with a petition by a Syracuse University student to
transfer into LCS. The Associate Dean for academic affairs reviews each petition and the
petitioner's academic record at Syracuse University. The target SU grade-point average is
3.0, and the student must have successfully completed at least one calculus course and one
science course with grades of B or better to demonstrate that they can succeed in the rigorous
academic programs in LCS. Students on the borderline are often encouraged to take
additional math and science courses (before petitioning again) to clearly demonstrate their
capabilities.
2.1.4 Student Advising
Advising and career guidance takes place in a variety of formal and informal settings. The
most formal advising occurs each semester, when students meet with their advisors to go
over their progress and plan their coursework for the following semester and beyond. The
advising meeting is enforced by placing an “advising hold”, which disallows registering for
the following semester. The advising hold is removed after a student meets with the
academic advisor. While earlier advising meetings may concentrate on course work,
academic options, selecting a major (for undeclared students) and how to succeed
academically, as students progress in their curriculum more time is devoted to career
guidance.
First-year students in LCS are advised by two professional advisors. Once a student has
achieved sophomore standing, a faculty advisor is assigned from the chosen program of
study. Students attain sophomore standing upon the completion of 18 credit hours. Since
many LCS students enter with advanced placement credit or other college credits, a faculty
advisor is often assigned in the freshman year.
The director of LCS career services, Ms. Karen Davis, meets with students in classes, in
small group sessions, and individually, and provides career guidance, from summer
16
internship and coop opportunities, to fulltime placement advice. She, in collaboration with
the university-wide Career Services Center, also provides opportunities to students to
improve their job search and placement skills with workshops, resume critiques, and mock
interviews. Organized by Career Services, Mentor@SU matches SU alumni in the students
career field of interest for the purpose of networking and gathering information about careers.
2.1.5 Work in Lieu of Courses
With the exception of advanced placement (AP) and international baccalaureate (IB) courses
taken in high school, the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering does not
generally award credit in lieu of courses.
Students may receive credit for courses taken in the Advanced Placement (AP) Program of
the College Entrance Examination Board. The course must be listed in Table B of Syracuse
University’s Academic Rules and Regulations (which is included in the Supplemental
Materials) and the minimum score listed for that course must be earned on the AP
examination. Because of the importance of a sound mathematics and physics background for
engineering courses, additional restrictions are placed on the receipt of AP credit in these two
areas:
• No credit is given for AP Calculus until after the student has taken a Syracuse
University Mathematics Placement Examination. The results of this examination
(which includes sections on algebra, trigonometry, and calculus skills), the
mathematics SAT score, and the AP exam score (4 or better out of 5) are then
used to determine how much credit toward the calculus sequence is given. In all
cases, placement is done conservatively to ensure that students have the mastery
of Calculus necessary for success in engineering. A maximum of 4 credits may
be earned based upon the Calculus AB examination, and a maximum of 8 credits
may be earned based upon the Calculus BC examination. The Math Placement
Exam is administered to all incoming first-year LCS students, online during
summer and in addition during the opening weekend, before Fall-semester classes
begin.
• Credit is only given for the calculus-based physics examinations (Physics C) with
a score of 3 or better out of 5.
2.1.6 Graduation Requirements
The graduation requirements of the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering are as
follows:
• Completion of a minimum of 127-128 credit hours, following the curriculum
requirements outlined in section 2.5 of this document.
• Students must attain a minimum cumulative grade point average of 2.00/4.00 for
all courses.
• Students must also attain a 2.00/4.00 grade point average in all mathematics,
science, and engineering courses taken at Syracuse University.
17
Students are led through these requirements with the help of obligatory academic advising,
and the graduation requirements are enforced through a strict degree auditing process,
described in the following paragraphs.
Every semester student progress is monitored by academic advisors, and courses are
recommended for the following semester. Students are not allowed to register for classes
until they meet with their advisors and their “advising holds” are lifted.
A preliminary degree audit is completed prior to or during the first semester of each student's
senior year. The program director (or department chair) is responsible for performing the
degree audit, which indicates the specific courses that must be completed for fulfillment of
the academic program of study. The courses are typically categorized as “this semester” and
“next semester” on the audit so that the student understands what is required to graduate
within one academic year. The audit is done by comparing the student's academic record on
a case-by-case basis (including AP and transfer courses) with the appropriate curriculum
sheet for the student's program of study. A copy of the degree audit is sent to the student and
one is placed in the student's folder for advising and record-keeping purposes. (Copies of
blank and completed degree audit forms will be available for review at the time of the on-
campus evaluation.)
Following the final semester of study, the academic record of each candidate for the
baccalaureate degree is compared on a course by -course basis with the curriculum sheet in
force for that student by the Associate Dean. Only courses taken at Syracuse University,
transferred from acceptable institutions, or passed by means of advanced credit examinations
can be used to meet degree requirements. Any substitutions for required courses must have
an approved petition on file. The Associate Dean certifies completion of degree requirements
on a form remaining in the College files and also on a master record supplied by the Office of
the Registrar. It is from the latter record that actual diplomas are prepared and distributed.
2.1.7 Transcripts of Recent Students
Transcripts will be provided for ABET visitors upon request.
18
2.2 Program Educational Objectives

2.2.1 Mission Statement
Syracuse University’s mission is encapsulated in the following vision statement:
Syracuse University is driven by its vision, Scholarship in Action—a commitment to forging bold,
imaginative, reciprocal, and sustained engagements with our many constituent communities, local
as well as global. We construe SU as a public good, an anchor institution positioned to play an
integral role in today’s knowledge-based, global society by leveraging a precious commodity—
intellectual capital—with partners from all sectors of the economy: public, private, and non-profit.
Each partner brings its strengths to the table, where collectively we address the most pressing
problems facing our community. In doing so, we invariably find that the challenges we face
locally resonate globally.
We understand that this represents an expansive definition of the role of a university, but as the
Kellogg Commission has observed, it is incumbent upon universities today "to reshape our historic
agreement with the American people so that it fits the times that are emerging instead of the times
that have passed.” Today, in a world in which knowledge is paramount, we believe that we best
fulfill our role as an anchor institution in our community when:
• We educate fully informed and committed citizens;
• We provide access to opportunity;
• We strengthen democratic institutions;
• We create innovation that matters, and we share knowledge generously;
• We inform and engage public opinion and debate; and
• We cultivate and sustain public intellectuals.
Serving the public good in these ways pervades our daily decision making and connects us not just
with our immediate community, but with communities throughout the world. These connections
vividly demonstrate for our students, faculty, staff, and community members what it means to be
an educated, responsible citizen in the 21st century. However, we also know that our outward-
looking engagements yield new forms of scholarship and new scholarly arrangements, propelling
us forward as an academic institution. Thus, by stretching the boundaries of our campus, we not
only create innovations that matter, but we test our notions of who is a scholar and what
scholarship is, while preparing students for the world in the world.
The mission of the L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science (LCS) is:
“To promote learning in engineering and computer science through integrated activities in
teaching, research, scholarship, creative accomplishment and service.”
The mission of the Civil and Environmental Engineering (CIE) Department is:
“To promote learning and the creation, dissemination and application of knowledge in Civil and
Environmental Engineering through integration of teaching, scholarship and service.”
The CIE Department mission was drafted in 1998 to complement the University and the
College mission statements. All three mission statements emphasize the importance of
teaching, scholarship and service in the promotion of learning. The CIE Department mission
statement has undergone periodic review by the faculty, the Student Advisory Council, and
the CIE Advisory Board.
19
2.2.2 Program Educational Objectives

The civil engineering curriculum prepares students for lifetime careers as productive and
innovative engineers in a rapidly changing world. Our students learn the basics of problem-
solving in required mathematics, science, and engineering courses and learn the
fundamentals of civil engineering in upper level courses and technical electives. All students
have the opportunity to broaden their academic experience and strengthen their preparation
for life-long learning by taking courses from a broad spectrum of programs across the
university, including economics, public affairs, geography, management and many others.
Students enrolled in our programs become proficient in various computer software
applications, engage in structured oral and written communication, work in teams to
complete laboratory, field, and design assignments, and engage in laboratory and field data
acquisition and interpretation. We believe that these curricular elements and the associated
coursework prepare our students for successful engineering careers, graduate study in
engineering, or professional study in a variety of fields such as law, management, and public
administration.
Our program educational objectives are statements that define the characteristics that we
expect our graduates to display 3-5 years after graduation. While the educational experiences
our students have at Syracuse University lie at the heart of the attainment of these objectives,
their experiences after graduation solidify and build upon these traits that our graduates begin
to develop while they are enrolled in our programs. The educational objectives of the B.S.
degree program in Civil Engineering are to produce graduates who:
1. … apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills to
advance their careers.
2. … apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills to serve
their community, society, and profession.
3. …are prepared for engineering practice and advanced studies in
civil/environmental engineering.
4. … engage in life-long learning to keep themselves abreast of new
developments in their fields of practice or study.
5. …are capable of effective written and oral communication.
Program educational objectives were first developed by the CIE faculty in 1998 with input
from members of the College Advisory Board. They have been revised periodically in
response to assessment findings, and to incorporate feedback from alumni, employers, and
the CIE Advisory Board. Major modifications to the program educational objectives were
made in response to concerns expressed during the 2005 ABET accreditation process (see
section 1.7.2 above). More modest changes, made in 2011, are described in section 2.25.3
below.
The educational objectives of the B.S. in Civil Engineering degree program can be easily
reached by the public through the department’s web page. The direct link is:
http://lcs.syr.edu/media/documents/2011/5/CIE_MissionGoalObjectives_and_Outcomes.pdf
To reach this link from the department’s web page:
http://www.lcs.syr.edu/academic/civilenvironment_eng/index.aspx,
20
select ‘Undergraduate Programs’ from the list at the left side of the page. On the ensuing
page, there is a direct link to the mission, program educational objectives, and outcomes (see
screen shot below).
2.2.3 Consistency of Objectives with Institutional Mission

The mission of Syracuse University is captured in the theme of Scholarship in Action.
Scholarship in Action emphasizes the connections between campus and community, “not
just…our campus community, but…communities around the world.” An education in civil
engineering is, almost by definition, preparation for a life of Scholarship in Action. Civil
engineers use their knowledge and problem-solving skills to improve the quality of life in
communities ranging from local to global. The educational objectives of the B.S. degree
program in Civil Engineering are consistent with the Scholarship in Action vision. The Civil
Engineering program employs classroom teaching, experiential learning, design activities,
and optional service activities to develop life-long learners who have strong technical and
communications skills, key qualities of scholarship which our graduates place in action to
serve society.
2.2.4 Program Constituencies
The significant constituencies of the program have been identified as:
• Students (current and former).
• Employers.
21
Our students are our primary constituency. Our program is aimed toward providing our
students with knowledge and skills that enable them to embark upon successful engineering
careers, undertake graduate studies, or contribute to society in other ways. For this reason,
we consider both current and former students as part of the student constituency. On
average, about 80-85% of our students enter the workforce, and about 15-20% enroll in
graduate and professional schools after graduation. Considering the high percentage of our
graduates who enter the workforce, employers of our graduates are also an important
constituency.
The field of civil engineering is constantly evolving. New materials, new analysis and design
tools, as well as innovative construction methods are constantly being introduced. Students
must be prepared for this dynamic environment with sound fundamental knowledge and
skills, and with a commitment to life-long learning. Civil and environmental engineers,
perhaps more than other engineers, are called upon to present and defend design alternatives
in various forums ranging from internal reviews to public hearings and planning board
meetings. Good written and oral communications skills are therefore essential to success as a
civil or environmental engineer.
The educational objectives of the civil engineering program meet the needs of our student
constituents by addressing the need for solid technical knowledge and sound problem-solving
skills that will prepare them for professional practice or advanced study (Objectives 1, 2 and
3). Objective 2 specifically addresses the core professional value of service to society and
profession that we believe all civil engineers should embrace. Objective 4 expresses the need
for life-long learning, while objective 5 addresses the necessity for civil engineers to develop
effective communications skills.
The employers of our graduates need young engineers who are technically capable
(objectives 1 and 2), good problem solvers (objectives 1 and 2), committed to self-
improvement through life-long learning (objective 4), and capable of effective oral and
written communication (objective 5). Our educational objectives are consistent with all of
these key competencies.
2.2.5 Process for Revision of the Program Educational Objectives
2.2.5.1 Background
The process for setting and revising the program educational objectives is a continuous
process that involves our core constituencies. The original set of educational objectives was
developed in 1998 by the program faculty in consultation with the CIE Advisory Board to be
in line with the general and program-specific criteria in place at the time. In our last ABET
accreditation review (2005), the program educational objectives were deemed to be a concern
because they were philosophically similar to program outcomes, reflecting skills that students
were expected to learn while in the program rather than characteristics of graduates sometime
after graduation.
To address the concern raised in the 2005 ABET review, the faculty, in conjunction with the
CIE Advisory Board, developed new educational objectives for the B.S. degree programs in
civil and environmental engineering. The four new objectives were designed to reflect key
desired traits for graduates of the programs 3-5 years after graduation. In the following
22
sections, the processes used to establish and review the program educational objectives are
outlined, the results of assessment are discussed, and the changes made to the program
educational objectives since the last ABET visit are presented.
2.2.5.2 Assessment and Revision Process

The educational objectives of the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering are formally
established by majority vote of the full-time faculty of the Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering.
The assessment and revision of program educational objectives involves feedback from our
constituents in the form of surveys and formal meetings. The assessment loop is shown
below in Figure 2. On a cycle of approximately three years, an alumni survey is conducted to
assess the current educational objectives. In the survey, alumni are asked to rate their
attainment of the objectives.
The following attainment criterion has been established to assess whether or not program
educational objectives have been attained:
A program educational objective will be considered to have been attained if 80% or more
of alumni respondents select “moderate,” “high,” or “extremely high” attainment for that
objective.
The CIE Department Chair then discusses the survey results with the CIE Advisory Board,
which is composed primarily of practicing civil and environmental engineers who hold
leadership positions in their firms (see section I.D above). The CIE Advisory Board
represents the employer constituency in the assessment process. The Department has also
sent the survey instruments to employers to get direct feedback. However, the response rate
from employers was very low (N=4) in a survey administered in 2007-2009. The Advisory
Board is therefore the principal voice of the employer constituency.
After meeting with the Advisory Board, the Chair brings the survey results to the department
faculty, who discuss the results and determine (a) whether the program objectives need to be
revised; and (b) whether curricular changes are necessary to improve the attainment of the
objectives. After voting on these matters, and making any changes to the objectives, the
assessment loop is complete until the next survey cycle.
2.2.5.3 Results of Assessment since the 2005 ABET Accreditation

The educational objectives of the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering have been
modified twice in the period since the 2005 ABET accreditation review. Those changes are
reviewed below. A detailed examination of the assessment results that led to the changes is
included in section 2.4.2 (Continuous Improvement – Assessment of Program Educational
Objectives).
23
Figure 2 Assessment loop used to assess and revise program educational objectives. The N values are the
numbers of respondents for two alumni surveys and one employer survey. We received 72 alumni responses to
a survey administered using Survey Monkey in 2007-2009. Four employers responded to the same survey. A
later survey of alumni, administered by the LCS Dean’s Office in 2011, resulted in 38 respondents.
The objectives that were in place at the time of the 2005 accreditation review were skills-
based and philosophically similar to student outcomes. The final report from that
accreditation visit identified this as a concern (see section 1.7 above). In response to that
concern, the faculty, in consultation with the CIE Advisory Board, drafted a new set of four
program objectives:
The educational objectives of the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering are to graduate
students who:
1. …can apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills to advance their careers
and serve their communities.
2. …are prepared for engineering practice and advanced studies in civil/environmental
engineering.
3. …will engage in life-long learning to keep themselves abreast of new developments
in their fields of practice or study.
4. …are capable of effective written and oral communication.
With these new objectives in place, the Department used the results from two alumni surveys
and one employer survey to assess the attainment of the program educational objectives and
consider modifications. The first survey was administered from 2007-2009 to alumni and
employers by the Department using Survey Monkey, a survey web site.
A second alumni survey was conducted in January, 2011. This survey was organized by the
LCS Dean’s Office, with each department customizing its own questions. This survey
focused on alumni who graduated between 2006 and 2010, the cohort that the program
24
educational objectives are meant to characterize. The results of the alumni surveys were
discussed with the CIE Advisory Board as part of our assessment loop (Figure 2).
The Advisory Board concluded that the program educational objectives were attained by
alumni of both the civil and environmental engineering degree programs. The Advisory
Board also considered the effectiveness of the objectives themselves, with an eye towards
potential changes that might be worth considering. The Advisory Board felt that objectives 2,
3 and 4 were fine as currently written. However, they suggested that the use of the word
“community” in objective 1 was too narrow, and suggested using “society” to reflect
communities ranging from local to global. They also questioned whether the phrase
“advance their careers” was appropriate, since some graduates may not be motivated by
traditional career advancement goals. The Board suggested the revision of objective 1 to
read “…apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills in their professional lives and
in the service of society.”
The assessment results and the comments of the Advisory Board were brought to the faculty
for discussion. Minor wording changes were made to emphasize that the objectives apply to
graduates of the program. Furthermore, the faculty agreed with the Advisory Board that
objective 1 could be expanded beyond “serve the community.” Three service goals were
identified for our graduates – to serve their communities, to serve society, and to serve their
professions. The faculty voted to revise program educational objective 1 by splitting it into
two objectives (now objectives 1 and 2):
The educational objectives of the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering are to produce
graduates who:
1. … apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills to advance their careers.
2. … apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills to serve their community,
society, and profession.
A timeline depicting the processes and actions taken to assess and revise our program
educational objectives is shown in Table 1.
25
Table 1 Timeline for assessment and revision of educational objectives for the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering at Syracuse University.
Date Fall 2005 Spring 2006 Summer 2006 Spring 2007 – Fall 2010 Winter 2011 Spring 2011
Summer 2009
Process ABET Program ABET final Alumni and CIE Advisory Board Alumni survey CIE faculty revise
/ Action review educational report deems employer survey considers results conducted by LCS program educational
identifies objectives concern to be conducted through of alumni and Dean’s Office. objectives in light of
program rewritten to resolved. Survey Monkey employer surveys, assessment results
educationa emphasize and suggests and advice of Advisory
l objectives characteristics that changes to Board.
as a graduates are program
concern. expected to have educational
3-5 years after objectives.
graduation
26
2.3 Student Outcomes

In this Section, we describe the student outcomes for the B.S. degree program in Civil
Engineering and the relationship between the student outcomes and the program
educational objectives.
2.3.1 Student Outcomes
The student outcomes for the civil engineering program are the (a) through (k) outcomes
specified in the 2011-2012 Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs. The program
faculty have not added any additional outcomes.
At the time of their graduation, our students should have acquired:
(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 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, 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 student outcomes for the Civil Engineering degree program can be easily reached by
the public through the department’s web page. The direct link is:
http://lcs.syr.edu/media/documents/2011/5/CIE_MissionGoalObjectives_and_Outcomes.pdf
To reach this link from the department’s web page:
http://www.lcs.syr.edu/academic/civilenvironment_eng/index.aspx,
2.3.2 Relationship between Student Outcomes and Program Educational Objectives
select ‘Undergraduate Programs’ from the list at the left side of the page. On the ensuing page, select the
hyperlink ‘ABET Objectives and Outcomes’. (see screen shot on page 21).
The curriculum, program educational objectives and student outcomes are closely related.
This tripartite relationship is shown schematically in Figure 3.
27
Figure 3 Schematic relationship between program educational objectives, student outcomes, and curriculum.
Details regarding these relationships may be found in the tables referenced in the figure.
Table 2 illustrates the relationship between our program educational objectives and student
outcomes. Because each objective is related to more than one outcome, and each outcome is
mapped to various courses in the curriculum, satisfactory completion of the curriculum
should ensure the attainment of the student outcomes and position our graduates to attain the
objectives as well. Details of the assessment methods used to track the attainment of student
outcomes are found in section 2.4 (Continuous Improvement).
Objectives 1 and 2 are considered to be strongly related to program outcomes a, b, c, e, and
k. These objectives concern the ability of our graduates to apply their technical knowledge
and problem-solving abilities to advance their careers (objective 1) and serve their
communities, society, and professions (objective 2). Student outcomes a, b, c, e, and k are all
related to various aspects of engineering analysis and problem solving skills necessary for
our graduates to achieve these objectives.
Objectives 1 and 2 are moderately related to student outcome g. Effective communication
(outcome g) is a different type of skill than technical knowledge or problem-solving.
However, to advance their careers and serve the larger community, engineers need to be able
to effectively communicate their designs and the results of their analyses. Technical
knowledge and problem-solving ability are not sufficient, so outcome g supplements the
outcomes that are more strongly related to these objectives.
Objective 3 expresses the preparedness of our graduates for professional practice and
advanced study. Not surprisingly, this fundamental objective is related to all eleven of the
student outcomes. Outcomes a, b, d, e. f, g, h, and k are considered to be strongly related to
this objective. Outcomes a, b, e, and k together encompass the technical skill set necessary to
be an effective engineer – a knowledge of math, science and engineering; the ability to
conduct experiments and analyze data; problem-solving skills; and the ability to use modern
techniques and tools. Outcomes d, f, g, and h express the personal traits that engineers must
have to function in the workplace, or in graduate study – the ability to work in a team; ethical
28
responsibility; good communication skills; and an understanding of the broader contexts in

which their work is placed.
Table 2 Relationships between program educational objectives and student outcomes.
Student Outcomes
Program Educational Objectives
a b c d e f g h i j k
1. Apply technical knowledge and problem-

× × ×  ×
solving skills to advance their careers
2. Apply technical knowledge and problem-

solving skills to serve community, society and × × × ×  ×
profession
3. Prepared for engineering practice and

× ×  × × × × ×   ×
advanced study
4. Engage in life-long learning   × ×
5. Capable of effective oral and written

× ×
communication
Notation: × strongly related;  = moderately related
Outcome c – design ability – is clearly fundamental to engineering practice. However, not

all engineering graduates pursue careers in which design is central to their work. We
therefore consider this outcome to be moderately related to objective 3. Outcomes i and j are
also considered to be moderately related to objective 3 because they are not related to
preparedness for practice or advanced study, but rather to the maintenance of skills and
perspective over a career.
Objective 4 concerns the engagement of our graduates in life-long learning to keep
themselves up to date. Clearly this objective is most closely related to outcome i. We also
consider it to be closely related to outcome j because the knowledge of contemporary issues
(outcome j), including technical breakthroughs, changing social and professional norms, and
the political landscape, all influence the life-long learning needs of engineers.
Outcomes f and h are moderately related to objective 4 because life-long learning is an
important means by which engineers can keep informed about changing expectations
regarding professional and ethical behavior (outcome f), and how engineering practice is
shaped by economic, environmental and social factors (outcome h).
Finally, objective 5, which is focused on oral and written communication, is closely related
to outcomes b and g. The relation to outcome g – ability to communicate effectively – is
clear. Outcome b, which concerns the ability to analyze and interpret data, is closely related
to this objective because data analysis tools such as graphs, charts, and tables are crucial to
the effective communication of engineering work in both written and oral presentations.
29
2.4 Continuous Improvement

This section begins with background information on the development of assessment-based
continuous improvement in the program, followed by detailed discussions of assessment
processes and results for our program educational objectives and student outcomes.
2.4.1 Background
The philosophy of continuous improvement of academic programs using outcomes-based
assessment began at Syracuse University in 1991 under the leadership of Chancellor Kenneth
Shaw. In 1997, the Chancellor and Vice Chancellor charged the faculty to increase their
efforts in assessment and continuous improvement of academic programs. In response to this
charge, the All-University Student Learning Outcome Assessment Committee (AUSLOAC)
was established in 1997-1998. This committee, chaired by an LCS faculty member (Professor
Shiu-Kai Chin of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science)
facilitated the development of a formative, faculty-led assessment process.
In the summer of 1998, the L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science
established several task forces to study and develop assessment tools for student learning,
educational objectives and curricular outcomes. Each of these task forces consisted of
members from the different LCS departments and staff of the Center for the Support for
Teaching and Learning (now the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment). As a
result of these efforts, the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering has adopted a
variety of assessment tools to evaluate course outcomes, program objectives, and student
outcomes:
• Alumni surveys
• Employer surveys
• Senior exit surveys
• Direct assessment charts (DAC)
• Senior capstone design presentation critiques
• Course-based continuous quality improvement (CQI) documents
• Outcomes-based student course evaluations
The sections that follow review the processes by which program educational objectives and
student outcomes are assessed and evaluated. The results of those processes are also
described and analyzed.
2.4.2 Assessment of Program Educational Objectives
The process used to evaluate and revise the program educational objectives is described in
section 2.2.5, above. Data from alumni (and employer) surveys are used to assess the
attainment of the educational objectives. The alumni survey takes place on a cycle of
approximately three years. The following criterion has been established to assess whether or
not program educational objectives have been attained:
A program educational objective will be considered to have been attained if 80%
or more of alumni respondents select “moderate,” “high,” or “extremely high”
attainment for that objective.
30
The CIE Advisory Board also plays an important role in the assessment process. The results
of the surveys are discussed with the Board, who make recommendations to the faculty on
both the attainment of the objectives and possible revisions.
The results of the assessment process are documented in spreadsheets, minutes of faculty
meetings, and reports of CIE Advisory Board meetings. Electronic files are kept on an
administrative disk space accessible to the Chair and departmental staff members.
2.4.2.1 Summary and Analysis of Assessment Data for Program Educational Objectives
In the period since the last ABET accreditation review, the Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering has used the results from two alumni surveys and one employer
survey to assess the attainment of the program educational objectives and consider
modifications. The first survey was administered to alumni and employers by the Department
using Survey Monkey, a survey web site. The survey was open for responses from 2007-
2009. The survey form used is given in Appendix E.1.
Alumni participation in the survey was solicited by e-mails from the Chair. A hyperlink to
the survey was included in the e-mail, which went out to all alumni for whom we had e-mail
addresses.
Employer participation in the survey was solicited by asking the alumni to forward the link to
their direct supervisors.
Between March 15, 2007 and July 28, 2009, 72 alumni and four employers completed the
survey. Sixty-two of the alumni respondents were civil engineering alumni, while ten were
environmental engineering alumni.
The attainment results from this survey are shown in Table 3, below.
Using the attainment criterion of 80%, the results from this survey indicated that the B.S.
degree program in Civil Engineering was attaining its objectives.
An analysis of the results of the Survey Monkey survey revealed some shortcomings that
were addressed in the next survey. First, the wording of the response choices was less than
ideal. The question posed to the respondents was “How well do you think you have achieved
each of the indicated educational objectives?” To this question, the response options were
“strong,” “medium,” “fair,” “weak,” “none” and “unable to tell.” The wordings of the
responses did not conform grammatically or stylistically to the wording of the question.
Also, the first and fourth objectives include multiple parts. For example, objective 4 is
“…capable of effective written and oral communication.” How should a respondent reply if
he/she feels that he/she is an effective oral communicator but not a good writer? Despite
these shortcomings, the results generally indicated that the program educational objectives
were being met.
31
Table 3 Attainment of program educational objectives, as assessed by alumni survey conducted in 2007-09.
Values in the table are percentage of respondents that indicated “medium” or “strong” attainment of the stated
objectives. Each objective is considered to have been attained if at least 80% of respondents indicate “medium”
or “strong” attainment. Note that the objectives surveyed here are not our current program educational
objectives.
Objective Overall Civil Env.
Number of Respondents 72 62 10
1. Apply technical knowledge and
problem-solving skills to advance your 94.4% 96.7% 90.0%
career and serve the community.
2. Prepared for engineering practice

and advanced studies in civil or 88.9% 91.8% 80.0%
environmental engineering.
3. Engage in life-long learning to keep

yourself abreast of new developments 86.1% 86.9% 90.0%
in your fields of practice or study.
4. Capable of effective written and oral

84.7% 86.9% 80.0%
communications.
A disappointment of the Survey Monkey results was the low response rate among employers.
Some alumni may have been reluctant to forward the survey to their employers for one
reason or another. In discussing the low response rate with the Advisory Board, we learned
that many firms prohibit their staff from responding to such surveys. In talking to Chairs at
other departments, this seems to be a common problem elsewhere as well. While direct
survey input from employers would be useful, the CIE Advisory Board represents our
employer constituency effectively in the assessment process.
Another alumni survey was conducted in January, 2011. This survey was organized by the
LCS Dean’s Office, with each department customizing its own questions. For this survey, we
made the wording clearer by asking respondents to “Please rate your attainment of each
statement,” and modifying the response choices to “no attainment,” “some attainment,”
“moderate attainment,” “high attainment,” and “extremely high attainment.” We also
divided objectives 1 and 4 into two parts each to better assess the different elements of these
objectives. A printed version of the survey is included in Appendix E.2.
As with the previous survey, alumni were contacted by e-mail and given a link to the survey
web page. This survey was web-hosted by the College rather than Survey Monkey. The
survey also focused on alumni who graduated between 2006 and 2010, the cohort that the
32
program educational objectives are meant to characterize. Thirty-four civil engineering

graduates and four environmental engineering graduates responded to the survey.
The attainment results for the January, 2011 alumni survey are given in Table 4. Again using
the 80% attainment criterion, we concluded that the program educational objectives were
attained by our recent civil engineering graduates.
The results of the alumni surveys were discussed with the CIE Advisory Board as part of our
assessment loop (Figure 2). The Advisory Board concluded that the program educational
objectives were attained by alumni of both the civil and environmental engineering degree
programs.
The Advisory Board also considered the effectiveness of the objectives themselves, with an
eye towards potential changes that might be worth considering. With regard to our first
objective (“…apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills to advance their careers
and serve the community”) the Board questioned whether the word “community” was too
narrow, and suggested using “society” to reflect communities ranging from local to global.
They also questioned whether the phrase “advance their careers” was appropriate, since some
graduates may not be motivated by traditional career advancement goals. The Advisory
Board suggested that the faculty consider revising the objective to something like “…apply
technical knowledge and problem-solving skills in their professional lives and in the service
of society.”
The Advisory Board felt that objectives 2, 3 and 4 were fine as written at the time.
The assessment data and the comments of the Advisory Board were brought to the faculty for
discussion. The faculty agreed with the Advisory Board that objective 1 could be expanded
beyond “serve the community.” Three service goals were identified for our graduates – to
serve their communities, to serve society, and to serve their professions. The faculty voted to
revise program educational objective 1 by splitting it into two objectives (now objectives 1
and 2):
The educational objectives of the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering are to produce
graduates who:
… apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills to advance their careers.
… apply technical knowledge and problem-solving skills to serve their community, society,
and profession.
33
Table 4 Attainment of program educational objectives, as assessed by an alumni survey conducted in January,
2011. Values in the table are the percentage of respondents indicating that they had “moderate,” high” or
“extremely high” attainment of the stated objectives. Each objective is considered to have been attained if at
least 80% of respondents indicate “moderate,” “high” or “extremely high” attainment. Note that the objectives
surveyed here are not our current program educational objectives.
Objective ALL Civil Env.
Number of Respondents 38 34 4
1a. Apply technical knowledge to
advance your career and serve the 92.1% 91.2% 100.0%
community.
1b. Apply problem-solving skills to
advance your career and serve the 92.1% 91.2% 100.0%
community.
2. Prepared for engineering practice
and advanced studies in civil or 86.8% 88.2% 75.0%
environmental engineering.
3. Engage in life-long learning to keep
yourself abreast of new developments 89.5% 91.2% 75.0%
in your fields of practice or study.
4a. Capable of effective written
92.1% 91.2% 100.0%
communication.
4b. Capable of effective oral
92.1% 91.2% 100.0%
communication.
2.4.3 Assessment of Student Outcomes
The principal tools that have been used to assess the attainment of student outcomes are:
• Direct assessment charts (DAC)
• Capstone design presentation critiques
• Senior exit surveys
• Capstone design course evaluations
The details of these assessment tools are described in more detail in the following sub-
sections, followed by an analysis of the data collected since the last ABET review. The
department is also developing new outcomes assessment tools based on performance
indicators that are keyed to student work. This new approach, including data from trials
conducted in the 2010-2011 academic year, is described in section 2.4.5.2.
34
2.4.3.1 Direct Assessment Charts (DAC)

These charts, shown in Appendix E.3, are completed by the instructors of four key required
courses – ECS 101, CIE 272, CIE 341 and CIE 475 – at the completion of the semesters in
which these courses are taught. The instructor evaluates only those student outcomes that are
relevant to that particular course. These four courses were chosen because: (1) they
incorporate courses through all four years of the curriculum; and (2) together they cover all
of the student outcomes.
In completing the DACs, each student is given a numerical score of 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent)
for each outcome being assessed. The faculty completing the DAC forms use results from
homework assignments, examinations, laboratory exercises, course projects, and personal
observations to assess student attainment. For many of the outcomes, DAC scores can be
derived using quantitative analysis of student performance on various course assignments.
For some outcomes, a mixture of quantitative and observational assessment is required. For
example, in CIE 274 (Civil Engineering Measurements and Analysis), outcome (d) – ability
to function on multidisciplinary teams – is evaluated using a combination of scores attained
on (group-based) surveying exercises and the instructor’s observation of how effectively the
groups work in the field, and how each student contributes to the work of the team.
The data from the DAC forms are compiled by the department chair and program director,
and discussed by the faculty. The DACs are the primary tool used to judge the attainment of
student outcomes. They are also useful in tracking individual student progress in attaining
the outcomes.
The DAC forms are supposed to be completed every semester in which the four selected
courses are taught. However, for various reasons, we are missing data for a few cases.
2.4.3.2 Capstone Design Presentation Critiques

Students enrolled in the senior capstone design course (CIE 475) give formal presentations of
their designs to an audience of their peers, departmental faculty, and local engineers who
serve as external reviewers. These external reviewers provide written critiques for each
presentation. A copy of the evaluation form used is shown in Appendix E.4. The reviewers
rate the students on their presentation skills (program outcome g) and the technical content of
their designs (program outcomes c and e) on a scale of 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent).
The capstone design presentation critiques are carried out annually.
2.4.3.3 Senior Exit Surveys

Student outcomes have also been assessed through senior exit surveys. The Engineering Exit
Survey, conducted by Educational Benchmarking, Inc. (EBI), was conducted in the summer
of 2010. This survey was part of a national program involving universities across the
country. The EBI survey instrument is included in Appendix E.5. In the survey, students in
the class of 2010 were asked to rate “to what degree did your engineering education enhance
your ability to:”, which was followed by student outcomes (a) through (k). Outcomes with
multiple parts were parsed. For example, outcome (b) was parsed into three questions:
“…design experiments”, “…conduct experiments”, and “analyze and interpret data.” A
35
seven-point scale was used, in which 1 represented “not at all,” 4 represented “moderate,”
and 7 represented “extremely.”
The target population of the EBI survey is the set of current-year graduates, so the data from
this survey should be relevant for assessment of the student outcomes. Although we do not
use these data in our attainment criteria, they are a valuable supplement to the DACs. By
comparing student self-evaluations (through the exit survey) with direct assessment by
faculty (through the DACs), we can assess the consistency of the DAC approach.
The Department also conducts an annual senior exit survey. The form used for this survey is
included in Appendix E.6.
2.4.3.4 Capstone Design Course Evaluations

Since 2002, a special outcomes-based course evaluation form has been used for CIE 475 (the
capstone design course for the civil and environmental engineering programs). A copy of the
evaluation form is given in Appendix E.7. Students are asked to assess their perceived
abilities in regard to each student outcome on a 10-point scale in which “1” corresponds to
“Not at all” and “10” corresponds to “Absolutely”. Since the students in CIE 475 are almost
all seniors who are about to graduate, they represent the target population our student
outcomes are meant to characterize.
These evaluations take place annually in the Spring, at the end of CIE 475.
A significant concern with assessment data collected from polling students is that the
students may not answer the questions objectively. On the one hand, students may rate their
attainment of the outcomes as “high” because they think that answer will help the program.
On the other hand, a disaffected student might rate their attainment as low because of their
unhappiness with their experience in the program.
2.4.3.5 Other Possible Assessment Tools

Fundamentals of Engineering Examination – Some programs in the United States use the
Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam results as a measure of the degree to which their
students have achieved the program outcomes. We choose not to use the FE exam results as
an assessment tool for several reasons. First, it is difficult to establish direct correlations
between many of the student outcomes and the FE exam results. Second, we do not require
students to take the FE exam. Without such a requirement, it is difficult to interpret how the
performance of a subset of our students on the FE exam reflects the overall attainment of the
student outcomes by all of our graduates. This is especially true since the subset of students
who elect to take the FE exam during their senior year is probably not a representative
sample of the student population. However, we make every effort to convey the importance
of the FE exam and licensure to our students. We advise all of our students to take the FE
exam and a review of topics covered on the FE exam is included in CIE475 to ensure that
students are better prepared for the exam. In addition, the importance of continuing
education and life-long learning through licensure is emphasized.
Individual Course Continuous Quality Improvement Documents – Student performance in
individual courses and the Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) documents that faculty
36
produce for required courses also provide us with useful insight on how well our students are
achieving the student outcomes. The CQI documents are forms in which faculty reflect on
the degree to which course objectives and outcomes have been achieved in a particular
offering of the course. An example of a completed CQI form is included in Appendix E.8.
As illustrated in Figure 3 (page 23), there is a three-way relationship among educational
objectives, program coursework and student outcomes. Because of this relationship, the
course grade a student receives in a class and the CQI form the instructor completes for the
course can be used as resources to measure student outcomes. Such an analysis is necessarily
general since course outcomes and student outcomes are not perfectly matched. Nevertheless,
the course syllabi (Appendix A) indicate how student outcomes are related to course
outcomes.
2.4.4 Summary and Analysis of Assessment Data for Student Outcomes
In this section, data from the various assessment tools identified above are presented and
discussed. Formal assessment, using metric goals, is supplemented with the interpretation of
data from various sources
2.4.4.1 Metric Goals

The Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering has adopted the following metric
goals to measure attainment of our student outcomes:
An acceptable level is said to have been achieved if:
• 80% of our students at the time of graduation achieve a DAC score of at least 2 (on a
5-point scale) for each program outcome.
• A desirable level is said to have been achieved if:
• the majority (>50%) of our students at the time of graduation achieve a DAC score of
at least 4 (on a 5-point scale) for each program outcome, and
• the majority (>50%) of our graduates acquire a minimum cumulative GPA of 3.0 (out
of 4.0).
2.4.4.2 Assessment of Attainment of Student Outcomes

The metric goals used to assess attainment of our student outcomes rely primarily on the
results of the Direct Assessment Charts (DAC), which are completed by program faculty.
Tables 5-8 give the average DAC scores for each of the four key courses. Also given in the
tables are the percentage of students who received a score of 4 and above (in parentheses)
and the percent of students who received a score of 2 and above {in braces}.
The data from the DAC scores for CIE 475 (Table 8) indicate that student outcomes c, d, e, f,
g, i, j, and k are routinely attained at the “acceptable” level (80% of students achieving scores
of 2 or greater). In every year since 2005, more than 90% of our graduating seniors (the
population in CIE 475) have scored 2 or higher on these outcomes.
Student outcomes a, b, and h are not assessed in CIE 475. Therefore, the DAC scores from
the junior-year CIE 341 course must be used to determine attainment. Those data (Table 7)
37
suggest that an acceptable level of attainment was achieved for these outcomes in 2005 and
2007 (87.5-90.9% of students were rated 2 or greater for these outcomes), but not in 2009
(69.2% of students rated 2 or higher for each outcome).
These results are shown graphically in Figure 4. Taken as a whole, the data indicate that
outcomes a-k have been attained at an acceptable level in 2005-2010.
Figure 4 Attainment chart for student outcomes by student cohort (graduating year). Attainment is deemed
“acceptable” if at least 80% of graduating seniors score 2 or greater on direct assessment charts (DAC)
completed by course instructors. DAC scores from the junior year (CIE 341 – Introduction to Environmental
Engineering) are used for outcomes a, b, and h, as denoted by an asterisk (*).
38
Table 5 Student Outcome Assessment Scores from DAC evaluations for ECS 101. For each outcome and year, the first number is the average
score. The numbers in parentheses represent the percentage of students with a score of 4 and above. The numbers in braces {} represent the
percentage of students with a score of 2 and above. “N/A” indicates outcomes that are not assessed in this course.
Student Outcome (evaluated by instructor of ECS 101)

Fall of
year a b c d e f g h i j k
2005 N/A N/A 3.68 3.91 N/A 3.84 3.69 N/A 3.84 N/A N/A
N/A N/A (58.3%) (68.8%) N/A (68.8%) (58.3%) N/A (64.6%) N/A N/A
N/A N/A {95.8%} {97.9%} N/A {93.8%} {97.9%} N/A {91.7%} N/A N/A
2006 N/A N/A 3.06 3.43 N/A 3.10 3.12 N/A 3.08 N/A N/A
N/A N/A (33.4%) (46.4%) N/A (37.2%) (33.6%) N/A (34.8%) N/A N/A
N/A N/A {93.3%} {97.6%} N/A {88.8%} {90.4%} N/A {93.1%} N/A N/A
2007 N/A N/A 3.35 3.35 N/A 3.49 3.29 N/A 3.31 N/A N/A
N/A N/A (29.3%) (29.3%) N/A (25.3%) (24.0%) N/A (26.7%) N/A N/A
N/A N/A {66.7%} {66.7%} N/A {65.3%} {62.7%} N/A {62.7%} N/A N/A
2008 N/A N/A 3.20 3.20 N/A 3.60 3.28 N/A 3.29 N/A N/A
N/A N/A (20.0%) (20.0%) N/A (35.0%) (25.0%) N/A (23.8%) N/A N/A
N/A N/A {60.0%} {61.3%} N/A {61.3%} {58.8%} N/A {61.3%} N/A N/A
2009 N/A N/A 3.13 3.51 N/A 3.10 3.17 N/A 3.14 N/A N/A
N/A N/A (16.3%) (44.4%) N/A (24.2%) (31.0%) N/A (25.1%) N/A N/A
N/A N/A {95.3%} {97.1%} N/A {89.4%} {89.4%} N/A {90.4%} N/A N/A
2010 N/A N/A 3.13 3.35 N/A 3.18 3.14 N/A 3.23 N/A N/A
N/A N/A (17.6%) (32.1%) N/A (17.9%) (23.2%) N/A (19.9%) N/A N/A
N/A N/A {92.2%} {95.3%} N/A {92.8%} {91.8%} N/A {94.7%} N/A N/A
39
Table 6 Student Outcome Assessment Scores from DAC evaluations for CIE 272. For each outcome and year, the first number is the average
score. The numbers in parentheses represent the percentage of students with a score of 4 and above. The numbers in braces {} represent
percentage of students with a score of 2 and above. “N/A” indicates outcomes that were not assessed.
Student Outcome (evaluated by instructor of CIE 272)

Fall of
2005 3.19 3.26 N/A 3.63 3.20 N/A 3.14 N/A N/A N/A 3.21
(37.5%) (41.7%) N/A (58.3%) (35.4%) N/A (29.2%) N/A N/A N/A (41.7%)
{93.8%} {95.8%} N/A {97.9%} {81.3%} N/A {93.8%} N/A N/A N/A {95.8%}
2006 3.14 3.16 N/A 3.49 3.19 N/A 3.27 N/A N/A N/A 3.17
(34.0%) (34.0%) N/A (40.0%) (30.0%) N/A (34.0%) N/A N/A N/A (34.0%)
{88.0%} {90.0%} N/A {96.0%} {96.0%} N/A {80.0%} N/A N/A N/A {90.0%}
2007 3.12 3.52 N/A 3.36 3.19 N/A 3.23 N/A N/A N/A 3.17
(22.1%) (22.1%) N/A (25.0%) (22.1%) N/A (22.1%) N/A N/A N/A (20.6%)
{73.5%} {70.6%} N/A {73.5%} {69.1%} N/A {73.5%} N/A N/A N/A {69.1%}
2008 3.17 3.47 N/A 3.65 3.25 N/A 3.51 N/A N/A N/A 3.30
(17.3%) (29.6%) N/A (37.0%) (24.7%) N/A (32.1%) N/A N/A N/A (27.2%)
{55.6%} {55.6%} N/A {60.5%} {53.1%} N/A {60.5%} N/A N/A N/A {56.8%}
2009 3.47 3.80 N/A 3.84 3.55 N/A 3.82 N/A N/A N/A 3.75
(26.3%) (35.5%) N/A (47.4%) (28.9%) N/A (47.4%) N/A N/A N/A (38.2%)
{64.5%} {67.1%} N/A {67.1%} {61.8%} N/A {67.1%} N/A N/A N/A {56.8%}
2010 3.46 3.64 N/A 3.67 3.56 N/A 3.65 N/A N/A N/A 3.73
(22.9%) (27.1%) N/A (33.3%) (27.1%) N/A (31.3%) N/A N/A N/A (29.2%)
{47.9%} {50.0%} N/A {50.0%} {46.9%} N/A {53.1%} N/A N/A N/A {50.0%}
40
percentage of students with a score of 2 and above. No data exist for 2006, 2008, 2010.
Student Outcome (Evaluated by instructor of CIE 341)

Fall of
2005 3.29 3.28 3.29 4.54 3.30 4.08 3.26 3.31 3.30 3.39 3.28
(37.5%) (40.0%) (37.5%) (62.5%) (37.5%) (52.5%) (47.5%) (42.5%) (40.0%) (50.0%) (40.0%)
{87.5%} {87.5%} {87.5%} {85.0%} {87.5%} {82.5%} {87.5%} {87.5%} {87.5%} {87.5%} {87.5%}
2006
2007 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.36 3.45 3.45 3.27 3.48 3.48 3.48 3.45
(39.4%) (39.4%) (39.4%) (42.4%) (39.4%) (39.4%) (39.4%) (39.4%) (39.4%) (39.4%) (39.4%)
{87.9%} {87.9%} {87.9%} {81.8%} {87.9%} {90.9%} {87.9%} {90.9%} {90.9%} {90.9%} {87.9%}
2008
2009 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.38 3.46 3.44 3.38 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.46
(41.5%) (41.5%) (41.5%) (41.5%) (41.5%) (41.5%) (38.5%) (41.5%) (41.5%) (41.5%) (41.5%)
{69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%} {69.2%}
2010
41
percentage of students with a score of 2 and above. “N/A” indicates outcomes that are not assessed in this course.
Student Outcome (evaluated by instructor of CIE 475)

Spring
of year a b c d e f g h i j k
2005 N/A N/A 3.69 3.60 3.63 3.67 3.65 N/A 3.60 3.79 3.79
N/A N/A (62.5%) (68.8%) (68.8%) (75.0%) (56.3%) N/A (75.0%) (75.0%) (56.3%)
N/A N/A {100.0%} {93.8%} {93.8%} {93.8%} {93.8%} N/A {100.0%} {93.8%} {93.8%}
2006 N/A N/A 3.28 3.15 3.05 3.14 3.38 N/A 3.29 3.36 3.15
N/A N/A (36.7%) (40.0%) (30.0%) (30.0%) (46.7%) N/A (43.3%) (40.0%) (33.3%)
N/A N/A {100.0%} {100.0%} {93.3%} {96.7%} {90.0%} N/A {93.3%} {96.7%} {96.7%}
2007 N/A N/A 3.52 3.82 3.57 3.62 3.54 N/A 3.47 3.64 3.61
N/A N/A (39.5%) (60.5%) (42.1%) (42.1%) (42.1%) N/A (36.8%) (39.5%) (36.8%)
N/A N/A {94.7%} {94.7%} {100.0%} {97.4%} {97.4%} N/A {94.7%} {92.1%} {94.7%}
2008 N/A N/A 3.48 3.65 3.52 3.59 3.40 N/A 3.52 3.52 3.51
N/A N/A (45.0%) (57.5%) (45.0%) (50.0%) (45.0%) N/A (47.5%) (47.5%) (47.5%)
N/A N/A {97.5%} {97.5%} {97.5%} {97.5%} {100.0%} N/A {97.5%} {100.0%} {97.5%}
2009 N/A N/A 3.43 3.63 3.40 3.40 3.37 N/A 3.44 3.42 3.43
N/A N/A (36.1%) (47.2%) (36.1%) (36.1%) (33.3%) N/A (33.3%) (36.1%) (36.1%)
N/A N/A {97.2%} {97.2%} {100.0%} {100.0%} {100.0%} N/A {97.2%} {97.2%} {100.0%}
2010 N/A N/A 3.04 3.31 3.05 3.21 3.11 N/A 3.12 3.20 3.18
N/A N/A (11.5%) (30.8%) (19.2%) (23.1%) (25.0%) N/A (21.2%) (21.2%) (23.1%)
N/A N/A {94.2%} {94.2%} {92.3%} {98.1%} {90.4%} N/A {96.2%} {96.2%} {96.2%}
42
Figure 5 Comparisons of DAC scores from the junior year (CIE 341 – Introduction to Environmental
Engineering) and the senior year (CIE 475 – Senior Design) for two cohorts of students. Arrows indicate the
increase in the percentage of students scoring 2 or greater in CIE 475 as seniors, compared to scores of the same
population of students as juniors in CIE 341.
43
It is worth noting that the cohort of students who failed to meet the attainment criteria for
outcomes a, b, and h in CIE 341 in 2009 may have ultimately met the criteria by the time of
their graduation. An analysis of the DAC results for the 2005-06 and 2007-08 cohorts in CIE
341 and CIE 475 indicates that for those outcomes that were assessed in both courses, the
percentage of students rated at the level of 2 or greater increased by an average of 10% in
CIE 475, compared to CIE 341 (Figure 5). If we assume a similar increase for outcomes a, b,
and h in the cohort taking CIE 341 in 2009, the percentage rated 2 or higher at graduation
would have been at or near the 80% “acceptable” threshold for those outcomes.
Additional support for our interpretation of the assessment results comes from the
Engineering Exit Survey, conducted by Educational Benchmarking, Inc. (EBI). In this
survey, recent graduates are asked to assess the degree to which their engineering education
contributed to their attainment of the student outcomes. The scale for the EBI survey is
somewhat different than the DAC charts. Our criterion for “acceptable attainment” of the
student outcomes is based on the percentage of students scoring 2 or better on the DACs, a
score categorized as “Fair.” In the seven-point scale used in the EBI survey, a score of 4 is
“Moderate.” Therefore, we used the percentage of students providing a response of 4 or
greater on the EBI as an equivalent measure to a DAC score of 2 or greater. Figure 6 shows
the results from the DACs and the EBI self-assessments for the class of 2010.
Figure 6 Comparison of attainment results from Direct Assessment Charts (DAC) and Engineering Exit
Assessment conducted by Educational Benchmarking Inc. (EBI). All data are for the graduating class of 2010.
The scales used in the two data sets differ. A DAC score of 2 represents “fair”, whereas an EBI score of 4
represents “moderate.” DAC* represents scores reported for this cohort of students in CIE 341 during the
junior year.
44
More than 80% of the class of 2010 responded that their education enhanced their ability to
achieve the student outcomes at a moderate level or better. This was true for all eleven
outcomes. Furthermore, the percentage of students scoring 4 or greater on the EBI survey
was closely related to the percentage of students rated 2 or greater on the DACs for CIE 475
(compare the red and blue bars in Figure 6). For those outcomes that were not evaluated on
the DACs in CIE 475 (a, b, and h), the EBI data suggest that an acceptable level of
attainment was also achieved at the time of graduation.
The CIE faculty have established criteria for both an “acceptable” level of attainment, and a
“desirable” level of attainment of the student outcomes. Regarding the latter, our data suggest
that the civil and environmental engineering programs have not routinely achieved the two
criteria that define the “desirable” level of attainment of our student outcomes. The DAC
data for CIE 475 indicate that 50% or more of our graduating seniors scored 4 (very good) or
5 (excellent) for all outcomes evaluated in the course in 2005 (Table 8), indicating that the
desirable level of attainment was achieved in that cohort of students. In 2006-2010, this
criterion was only achieved for some outcomes in some years. In these years, we typically
observed that 35-50% of graduating seniors scored 4 or 5 on the outcomes in CIE 475,
suggesting that, overall, graduating seniors were near the desirable attainment level.
The EBI data for the class of 2010 are consistent with these observations (Figure 7).
Assuming that EBI scores of 6 and 7 (on the seven-point scale) are equivalent to DAC scores
of 4 and 5, the students generally rated themselves somewhat higher than the DAC
assessments. Still, even using the EBI ratings, the class of 2010 failed to reach the
“desirable” attainment level for six of the eleven student outcomes.
The second criterion for the “desirable” level of attainment is that 50% of our students
graduate with a GPA greater than 3.0. In the six years between 2005 and 2010, this criterion
was achieved by four of the six graduating classes in civil engineering and all of the
graduating classes in environmental engineering (Figure 8). For the 2009-2010 class, 48% of
the civil engineering graduates had GPAs greater than 3.0, just short of the target.
An additional, external perspective on the attainment of outcomes (c), (d), (e) and (g) can be
derived from the ratings of the senior design projects and the senior design project
presentations. Each year, professionals from the local community are invited to attend and
participate in the capstone design presentations made by the students at the end of CIE 475.
These professionals are invited to rate both the quality of the presentation and the technical
quality of the project on a ten-point scale, in which 10 is excellent and 1 is poor. The
evaluators are not aware that their evaluations are used for the purpose of outcomes
assessment.
45
Figure 7 Comparison of attainment results from Direct Assessment Charts (DAC) and the Engineering Exit
Assessment conducted by Educational Benchmarking Inc. (EBI). All data are for the graduating class of 2010.
The scales used in the two data sets differ. A DAC score of 4, on a five-point scale, represents “very good” and
5 is “excellent.” The EBI uses a seven-point scale in which 7 represents “extremely.” DAC* represents scores
reported for this cohort of students in CIE 341 during the junior year.
100%
90%
80%
Percent Graduating with GPA > 3.0
70%
60%
Desirable Attainment
50%
40%
30% Civil
20% Environmental
10%
0%
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
Figure 8 Percentage of seniors in civil and environmental engineering with GPA > 3.0 at graduation.
“Desirable” attainment is indicated by a value of 50% or greater.
46
The ratings of the quality of the presentation can be used as a direct assessment of student
outcome (g) – “ability to communicate effectively.” All of the members of the design team
must make part of the oral presentation. The presentations are accompanied by visual
materials, usually displayed via PowerPoint, that include maps, graphs, drawings, and text
made by the students. The average ratings for each individual design group from 2006-2011
are shown in Figure 9 (the 2008 data are missing). The data indicate that our students, at the
time of graduation, are proficient communicators. Among the 41 groups assessed, the lowest
average rating was 7.03 on a ten point scale. More than 75% of the groups had average
ratings greater than 8. Considering that one or two weak presenters could dramatically affect
the group rating, these data suggest that a large fraction of our students graduate with very
good communications skills.
Figure 9 Average ratings for the quality of senior design presentations. Each point represents one design group.
Ratings are made by external evaluators on a scale of 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent). The number of evaluators for
each data point generally varies between 7 and 23, although three groups in 2007 were evaluated by fewer than
five evaluators.
The external evaluator ratings of the technical quality of the senior design project
presentations may be used as a general indicator of attainment of outcomes (c) – “ability to
design a system, component, or process…” and (e) – “ability to identify, formulate, and solve
engineering problems.” The rating for technical content in 2006-2011 were also very good
(Figure 10), although slightly lower than the ratings for presentation quality. Sixty percent of
47
the design groups earned average ratings of 8 or higher for technical content, suggesting that
our graduates are capable of working with complex, open-ended design problems.
It is interesting to note the discrepancy between these relatively high ratings on technical
content from external evaluators and the relatively low DAC scores assigned by the
instructors of the senior design course (CIE 475). To some extent, the design groups may be
organizing their presentations to emphasize the most compelling and accomplished elements
of their designs, essentially “hiding” the weak parts from the audience. Perhaps more
importantly, this discrepancy may simply indicate that the faculty, who complete the DAC
forms, have higher expectations for these student outcomes than the external evaluators.
Simply put, we may be selling our students short when we do our DAC evaluations.
Finally, the external evaluations of the quality of the senior design presentations and their
technical content offer an indirect assessment of outcome (d) – “ability to function on multi-
disciplinary teams.” The uniformly high ratings our design groups have achieved suggest that
our students graduate with a good ability to function in team settings. It is certainly possible
for one student to carry a group, but it would be very difficult to do so and achieve a high
level of completion and technical quality in a project of the magnitude of a senior design
project. While there is no doubt that design groups in CIE 475 are composed of students of
varying overall ability, the feedback from our external evaluators suggest that, in general,
they do a good job of working together to achieve a quality result.
Figure 10 Average ratings for the technical quality of senior design presentations. Each point represents one
design group. Ratings are made by external evaluators on a scale of 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent). The number of
evaluators for each data point generally varies between 7 and 23, although three groups in 2007 were evaluated
by fewer than five evaluators.
48
2.4.4.3 Summary Comments

In summary, graduates from both the civil and environmental engineering programs appear
to be achieving all of the student outcomes at an acceptable level of attainment. The desirable
level of attainment has been more elusive. To some extent, this is to be expected. If a
program is reaching the desirable level of attainment every year, it should probably adjust its
criteria upward. Nevertheless, it is worth considering the factors that may help explain why
the civil and environmental degree programs are not quite reaching the desirable level of
attainment of student outcomes.
Rise in Enrollment. The period 2006-2011 has seen a sharp rise in enrollment in the civil and
environmental engineering programs (see Table D-1 in Appendix D). Larger class sizes leave
less time for faculty to mentor and interact informally with students. Taking attendance can
take up an inordinate amount of time in large classes, and it may be necessary to shorten lab
periods or increase the size of lab groups to accommodate the large numbers.
TA Resources. Budget pressures in the early part of this period resulted in a decrease in the
number of graduate teaching assistants (TAs), to a low of six in 2005-2007. This decrease in
teaching support decreased the opportunities for students to get help with their assignments
and test preparation.
Peer-to-Peer Behavior. With larger enrollments, we have observed an increasing self-
segregation of our students into academically homogeneous groups. This may decrease the
role of peer mentoring in helping students achieve the outcomes.
Intuitive Approach to Problem Solving. We have noticed that a large number of our students
depend on an intuitive approach in solving problems. These students resist structured
approaches and attempt to leap directly to a solution – for them, problem solving is simply a
matter of finding the right equation. This can work to some degree in calculus, physics and
chemistry, but when these students get to their junior and senior engineering classes, they
struggle with the complex problems that they are asked to solve. This has been a significant
contributing factor to outcomes (a) and (e) in particular.
Distraction. There is no question that it has become more and more difficult to create and
maintain a distraction-free environment in the classroom. Students are tempted to engage in
text messaging on their cell phones, and to browse the internet on their laptops.
The department, college, and university have taken a number of steps that we hope will
improve the attainment level of our student outcomes. These, along with other changes to the
curriculum, courses, and the program, are discussed in the next section.
2.4.5 Continuous Improvement
The processes used to assess and evaluate the program educational objectives and student
outcomes are part of the overall continuous improvement of the program and curriculum.
After obtaining feedback from our constituencies through formal instruments (course
evaluations, meetings with student representatives/advisory board members/recruiters,
completion of CQI forms; senior exit surveys; employer/alumni surveys, etc.) or informal
processes (student advising sessions, conversations with students and colleagues), the
program faculty discuss the relevant issues at regular faculty meetings, and at the annual
49
faculty retreat. Decisions made to improve the program are brought to students (via the
student advisory council) and the Department Advisory Board for additional comments. The
impacts of modifications made to our curriculum are monitored to evaluate their
effectiveness.
2.4.5.1 Changes That Have Been Implemented

In this section, we present the major changes in the curriculum, courses and program
administration that have been made since the last ABET visit or are planned, with comments
on the rationale for the changes and their effectiveness.
2.4.5.1.1 Institutional and Program Changes:
• Since 2005, the size of the faculty in the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering has increased from nine to twelve. This increase has alleviated some of
the enrollment pressure by allowing us to teach additional technical elective courses.
• In recognition of the increased enrollments in the civil and environmental engineering
programs, the number of TAs allocated to the CIE department has been increased
from six to eleven. Additional resources have been allocated for stipend supplements
for Ph.D. students who teach courses independently.
• After two consecutive years of record entering class sizes in the L.C. Smith College
of Engineering and Computer Science, fewer students were admitted in the 2010-
2011 admissions cycle. This reduction in admitted students occurred at the same time
as applications to the college increased. Therefore, the academic profile of admitted
students for the incoming freshman class in the Fall of 2011 is improved over
previous years.
• Since the last ABET evaluation, the geotechnical and structures/materials laboratories
have been moved from Hinds Hall to Link Hall. The new spaces are superior and
have improved the quality of the laboratory experience for our students.
• The department now solicits feedback from students on all applicable student
outcomes (a-k) on the course evaluation forms for all CIE courses taken by
undergraduate students, and all ECS courses taught by CIE faculty. This change was
instituted to help instructors: (1) decide which student outcomes should be mapped to
each class; and (2) consider pedagogical changes that might improve the attainment
of student outcomes that are mapped to each course. This change was made in
response to our outcomes assessment data, which indicated declining average DAC
scores starting in 2006.
• The department now performs its own alumni survey on the attainment of program
educational objectives and student outcomes using Survey Monkey. This survey is in
addition to surveys performed by the college. This change was made to ensure that
data on the attainment of the program educational objectives are collected in a regular
and timely fashion.
• The department faculty have begun the consideration of whether to develop and
implement standards of student classroom behavior, especially related to the use of
50
electronic devices during regular class meetings. This discussion, which has taken
place at regular faculty meetings, has been motivated by observations of increasing
inattentiveness in courses across the program and concerns about attainment levels of
student outcomes.
2.4.5.1.2 Curriculum Changes:
• A new required course in sustainability was added to the curriculum. CIE 274 (Civil
and Environmental Systems) covers concepts in chemistry, ecology, climate change,
sustainability and engineering economics. This sophomore-level course introduces
the crucial topics of sustainability and engineering economics early in the curriculum,
allowing instructors in junior and senior courses to easily incorporate them in their
courses. To accommodate this new course, the requirement of a second semester of
general chemistry was dropped from the civil engineering curriculum. This change
was the result of constituent feedback and analysis of our assessment data. Exit
survey data from our student constituents indicated that chemistry concepts taught in
CHE 106 and 107 were not preparing our students for chemistry-related topics in
their environmental engineering coursework. Instructor feedback from the faculty
teaching CIE 341 confirmed that student performance in chemistry-related
assignments was poor. This change allows CIE faculty to teach key chemistry
concepts in the semester before they are applied in CIE 341. This change is also the
result of the analysis of our assessment data. In response to declining DAC scores on
student outcomes, the faculty suggested that adding a CIE course in the second
semester of the sophomore year might improve attainment of student outcomes by
providing consistent contact between faculty and students throughout the sophomore
year.
• An earth science course (EAR 101 – Dynamic Earth or EAR 203 – Earth System
Science), with lab, is now required. This change was made to meet the requirement of
an additional area of basic science (besides physics and chemistry) in the civil
engineering program criteria. Coupled with related earth science topics covered in
CIE 274 (climate change, land use), CIE 337 (properties of rock and soil), and CIE
352 (hydrology and groundwater), the civil engineering curriculum now contains
substantial depth in this area. This change was the result of constituent feedback.
When the requirement of an additional basic science was instituted, the chair
consulted with the Advisory Board and with local employers of our graduates. The
consensus arose that adding a required earth science course, with lab, would better
prepare our graduates for the workforce. This change was discussed in regular faculty
meetings and passed by the faculty by majority vote.
• A four-credit course in treatment processes (CIE 442), with laboratory exercises, is
now required in the civil engineering curriculum. This change was made to introduce
additional depth in the focus area of environmental engineering. This change was
made partly in response to feedback from our employer constituents. Recruiters at our
annual job fair indicated to the chair that their firms were increasingly in need of civil
engineers with skills in water and wastewater treatment design. As a result of this
51
change, civil engineering majors now graduate with knowledge and design skills in
water and wastewater treatment.
• The net effect of the changes above has been to increase the total number of credits
required for the B.S. degree in Civil Engineering by four credits, to 127/128.
• One of two professional electives was changed to a free elective to allow students
more flexibility in choosing courses or working toward a minor not directly related to
civil engineering. This change was made in response to feedback from our student
constituents. Members of the Student Advisory Board reported to the chair that they
were having difficulty completing minors, especially in subjects that could not be
used as professional electives. This change was discussed in regular faculty meetings
and passed by the faculty by majority vote.
• The social science and humanities requirement was modified. Students are now
required to take at least three of their social science and humanities electives from
groups covering economics and social issues, global affairs, and policy studies. This
change was made to increase the understanding of the economic, social, political, and
global context in which civil and environmental engineers work. Input from ABET as
part of our last accreditation visit was crucial to making this change. Further details
on this requirement may be found in section II.5, below. An assessment of how
students have fulfilled this requirement may be found in Appendix F.
• Beginning in Fall 2011, formal instruction in structured problem-solving will be
incorporated into ECS 101. This instruction will include the importance of sketching,
defining knowns and unknowns, and laying out a method of solution. Students will be
held to account in CIE 272 and 274 in the sophomore year, with homework grades in
those classes being based in part on how the answers are set up. The motivation for
this change is to improve the problem-solving ability of our students when they get to
advanced courses in civil and environmental engineering. This change was made in
response to our assessment data, which indicated declining attainment of outcomes
(a) and (e) in CIE 272 and CIE 475 in particular. Feedback from faculty teaching
junior-year courses also indicated that many of our students struggled to set up
engineering problems properly. This ongoing issue has been discussed in regular
faculty meetings.
• To improve engagement and learning, the CIE faculty will work to increase the use of
active learning strategies throughout the curriculum. Active learning is already widely
used in the form of laboratory exercises, field exercises, and field trips. Our goal is to
bring more active learning strategies into the classroom, such as small-group
exercises, minute papers, and clicker responses. This ongoing issue has been
discussed in regular faculty meetings.
• Starting in 2011-2012, the faculty will look for ways to incorporate more quizzes in
CIE courses. The aims of this initiative are to improve attendance, increase
attentiveness in class, and to help students keep up with readings and assignments.
This ongoing issue has been discussed in regular faculty meetings.
52
2.4.5.1.3 Course Changes:

• Starting in 2011, the CIE department assumed responsibility for teaching the Spring
offering of ECS 326 (Engineering Materials – Properties and Processing). The course
has been modified to emphasize materials used in construction – steel, concrete,
wood, asphalt, and composite materials. Planning is underway to add a one-credit lab
that would include exercises in materials testing.
• The following new courses, taught by department faculty, have been developed as
professional and technical electives:
ARC/ECS 500 – Architecture of Shell Structures [Spring 2010, 3cr]
ECS 354 – Green Technology and Sustainability [Spring 2009, 3cr]
ECS 400 – Introduction to Sustainable Engineering [Fall 2011, 3cr]
CIE 400 – Construction Engineering and Project Management [Fall 2010, 3cr]
CIE 400 – Field Learning Experience [Fall 2010, 1cr]
• The names of these courses were revised to better reflect the course content:
Course Old Title New Title
Analysis of Structures and

CIE 331 Structures I
Materials
CIE 332 Structure II Design of Concrete Structures
Soil Mechanics and Introduction to Geotechnical
CIE 337
Foundations I Engineering
Soil Mechanics and
CIE 338 Foundation Engineering
Foundations II
Environmental Introduction to Environmental
CIE 341
Engineering I Engineering
2.4.5.2 Development of New Assessment Process for Student Outcomes

Our current approach for assessing student outcomes has been useful and effective. The DAC
scores that lie at the heart of the process are supplemented by exit survey data and
assessments made by external evaluators at our senior design presentations. The DAC
approach has worked well in part because it has been applied consistently throughout the
years, thanks to the continuous staffing of the courses by the same faculty. Our data also
suggest that the DAC process is taken seriously by the faculty involved. Indeed, the high
scores given to our seniors by external evaluators, compared to lower DAC scores for the
same students, suggest that the program faculty have high standards for outcomes attainment.
Finally, the use of DACs in all four years of the curriculum offers the opportunity to use
these assessments in individual student advising.
53
However, it is also true that there are some difficulties with the direct assessment approach.
Some of the outcomes are difficult to assess objectively through student work in courses,
making the assessment scores sensitive to the judgment of the faculty member completing
the DAC form. There is therefore the potential to observe a step change in DAC scores for a
course when the instructor of the course changes.
Recognizing this issue, the CIE faculty are testing a new approach to outcomes assessment
that is based on the concept of “performance indicators.” This approach incorporates the use
of regular class assignments to assess the attainment of student outcomes.
A hypothetical example of the development of performance indicators for outcome (h) is
shown in Figure 11. For each outcome, performance indicators are developed for multiple
courses in the curriculum, selected from the courses that are mapped to that outcome. In the
example in Figure 11, CIE 274 (Sustainability in Civil and Environmental Systems) and CIE
475 (Senior Design) have been selected for the development of performance indicators for
outcome (h). Next, a performance indicator is developed that describes what a student who
has attained the outcome should be able to demonstrate. An appropriate course assignment is
then selected for the assessment, and a rubric is developed. The rubric is a scoring system by
which the attainment of the outcome can be scored – in this case, a three-point system:
“unsatisfactory,” “developing,” and “satisfactory.” Finally, a performance criterion is
established for each indicator to define the level of performance at which the program faculty
judge the outcome to have been attained.
The assignments used for the assessment of performance indicators are normal class
assignments; homeworks, exams, quizzes and projects. These assignments are graded
normally, but they are also scored according to the established rubric. The main advantage of
the performance indicator approach is that it reduces some of the subjectivity associated with
the direct scoring of student attainment of the outcomes. It should be noted, however, that the
application of the rubrics in the performance indicator approach is not entirely objective. A
faculty member will still be making a judgment regarding the degree to which the rubric
guidelines are met in every student’s assignment.
Our philosophy in developing performance indicators is to diversify the outcomes assessment
process. We will do this by developing multiple indicators for each student outcome, drawn
from multiple courses at various stages in the curriculum. Ideally, the indicators for each
student outcome will span a range of mastery levels, according to Bloom’s Taxonomy for
learning. In Figure 11, for example, the level of mastery expected in the sophomore-level
CIE 274 course (“student identifies..”) is not as comprehensive as the level expected in the
senior-level CIE 475 course (“student can assess..”). We anticipate that CIE 475 (Senior
Design) will be used for the development of several performance indicators. As a
comprehensive design experience, the projects carried out in this course require the students
to demonstrate most of the student outcomes. Also, since this course takes place at the end of
the curriculum, it is perfectly situated for the assessment of outcomes.
54
Figure 11 Example – Performance Indicators and Rubrics
55
In the Spring, 2011 semester, we pilot tested the performance indicator approach in CIE 274.
Three performance indicators, applied to two course assignments, were developed. One of
the indicators concerned student outcome (f) – understanding of professional and ethical
responsibility. The other two examined outcome (h) – understanding the impact of
engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context. The
performance indicators, assessment instruments, rubrics, and performance criteria are shown
in Appendix E.7.
Students in CIE 274 showed a high level of attainment of the three performance indicators
we tested (Figure 12). The responses to the question on engineering ethics (outcome f)
indicated that 74 of the 78 respondents (94.9%) demonstrated satisfactory attainment of the
performance indicator – “student can evaluate the ethical dimensions of a civil or
environmental engineering design or decision.” The other four students demonstrated
attainment at the developing level. On the question examining social responsibility (outcome
h), 79 of 92 respondents (85.9%) demonstrated satisfactory attainment, with 12 students
showing developing attainment, and one student at the unsatisfactory level. On a question
concerning global awareness (outcome h), 73 of 90 students (81.1%) demonstrated
satisfactory attainment, while the remaining students showed developing attainment.
Figure 12 Performance indicator results for three indicators applied in CIE 274 (Sustainability in Civil and
Environmental Systems) in the Spring, 2011 semester. The text of the questions, the performance criteria, and
the rubrics may be found in Appendix E9. For each indicator, the performance criterion was 80% of students
demonstrating “satisfactory” attainment.
The performance indicator method of assessing student performance on the ABET outcomes
appears to have worked well in this trial implementation. The instructors reported that the
additional burden of assessing the student answers against the rubrics was not too great. The
most difficult task was developing the performance indicators and rubrics so that they would
be general enough to apply to new or revised questions from year to year, yet specific enough
that they could be assessed easily. We also noted that the assessment results may be sensitive
to the way the associated material is presented in class. If a class example similar to the
56
question used for the performance indicator assessment is discussed in class, a higher fraction
of students are likely to score well on the performance indicator. Similarly, the timing of the
material presented in class relative to the evaluation can influence the assessment. If the
material is presented at the beginning of the semester and the performance indicator
evaluation is much later in the semester, we expect that attainment scores would be lower.
Our trial data suggest that performance indicators should be applied to a mix of coursework –
homework assignments, examinations, lab exercises, and course projects.
Having successfully tested the performance indicator approach, we will extend their use to
additional courses and student outcomes over the next three semesters. We will focus initially
on the development of indicators for student outcomes (f) – (j), which have been the most
difficult to assess using the DAC approach. We will continue to use the DACs for at least
three years to ensure sufficient overlap as the new indicators and rubrics are refined.
2.4.6 Additional Information
The following materials will be available for review during the accreditation visit:
• Course syllabi, assignments, and sample student work of all required courses taught
in the department for academic year 2010-2011.
• Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) documents for the above courses.
• Direct Assessment Charts (DAC) for the four courses used for assessment: ECS101,
CIE272, CIE341 and CIE475.
• Minutes of faculty meetings.
• CIE 475 Course Evaluation results.
• Alumni (and Employer) Survey results.
• Educational Benchmarking (EBI) Survey results.
• Undergraduate Student Handbook.
57
2.5 Curriculum
2.5.1 Program Curriculum
2.5.1.1 Plan of Study

The B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering is designed as a four-year, semester-based
curriculum, requiring 127 or 128 credit hours of study (depending on the selection of an
engineering/science elective). The suggested sequence of courses is given in Table 9, below.
The prerequisite structure of the program is illustrated in Figure 13.
58
Table 9 Plan of study for the B.S. degree in Civil Engineering at Syracuse University.
First Year
MAT 295 Calculus I 4 MAT 296 Calculus II 4
CHE 106 General Chemistry I 3 PHY 211 General Physics I 3
CHE 107 Gen. Chem. Lab I 1 PHY 221 Gen. Physics Lab I 1
ECS 101 Intro to ECS 3 EAR 203 Earth System Science* 4 or
WRT 105 Writing Studio I 3 SS/HUM 3
SS/HUM 3 SS/HUM 3
Semester Credits 17 Semester Credits 14/15
Second Year
MAT 397 Calculus III 4 MAT 485 Diff Eq. / Mat Algebra 3
PHY 212 General Physics II 3 ECS 222 Dynamics** 3 or
PHY 222 Gen. Physics Lab II 1 ELE 231 Elec Eng. Fund** 3 or
ECS 221 Statics 3 MAE 251 Thermodynamics** or 4
CIE 272 CIE Measurements 3 ECS 325 Mech. of Solids 4
EAR 101 Dynamic Earth* 4 or CIE 274 Civ/Env. Systems 3
SS/HUM 3 WRT 205 Writing Studio II 3
Semester Credits 17/18 Semester Credits 16/17
Third Year
CIE 331 Analysis of Structures 3 CIE 332 Design of Concrete 3
& Materials. Structures
CIE 337 Intro. to Geo. Eng. 4 CIE 338 Foundation Eng. 3
CIE 341 Intro. to Env. Eng. 3 ECS 326 Engineering Materials 3
MAE 341 Fluid Mechanics 4 or CIE 352 Water Res. Eng. 4
CIE 327 Prin. of Fluid Mech. 4 WRT 307 Professional Writing 3
SS/HUM 3
Semester Credits 17 Semester Credits 16
Fourth Year
CIE 443 Transportation Eng. 3 CIE 475 Civ/Env. Eng. Design 4
CIE 442 Treatment 4 Professional Elective 3
Processes.
Technical Elective 1 3 Technical Elective 2 3
Free Elective 3 SS/HUM 3
SS/HUM 3
Semester Credits 16 Semester Credits 13
Total credit hours required = 127 or 128. Students must take one each from * and ** course groups.
59
Figure 13 Flowchart of the suggested plan for the B.S. Civil Engineering degree. Prerequisites are indicated by solid lines, co-requisites by dashed lines.
60
Students in the program have four types of electives and one “selected elective.” Technical
electives must be CIE-prefixed courses numbered 300 or above. These electives allow
students to pursue specific interests in civil engineering. Professional electives are courses
numbered 300 or above that allow students to advance their professional interests. A
professional elective can be an engineering course, but can also be in a variety of other
programs within the university:
College of Architecture: Any course numbered 300 or above.
College of Arts & Sciences: Astronomy, Biochemistry, Biology, Chemistry, Economics,
Geography, Earth Science, Government, Mathematics, Public Affairs, Physics.
College of Information Studies: Any course numbered 300 or above.
Whitman School of Management: Accounting, Business Administration, Entrepreneurship,
Finance, Investment Banking, Law and Public Policy, Marketing, Strategy and Human
Resources, Management.
Newhouse School of Public Communications: Communications
College of Visual and Performing Arts: Communications and Rhetorical Studies
State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry: Any course
numbered 300 or above.
Students also have a free elective, which can be any three-credit course at Syracuse
University, except physical education and remedial courses such as algebra (MAT 112) or
pre-calculus (MAT 194).
Students in the B.S. Civil Engineering program must take six social science and humanities
(SSH) electives. These courses are taken from the Humanities and Social Science lists that
are maintained by the College of Arts and Sciences. In addition to the courses on those lists,
students may count foreign language courses towards the SSH requirement, as long as the
language is not the student’s native language. Also, two courses offered by the L.C. Smith
College of Engineering and Computer Science may be used as SSH electives – ECS 391
(Ethical Aspects of Engineering and Computer Science) and ECS 392 (Legal Aspects of
Engineering and Computer Science).
To fulfill the SSH requirement, students must take at least one course from each of three
groups, shown in Table 10. This requirement helps to ensure that our students gain an
understanding of the economic, social, global, and political issues that may influence their
future lives as engineers. An assessment of how students in the class of 2010 satisfied this
group requirement is included in Appendix F.
Finally, civil engineering students have one selected elective in engineering science. For this
requirement, they may choose any of the following courses: Dynamics, Electrical
Engineering Fundamentals or Thermodynamics.
61
Table 10 Social science and humanities course groups for the B.S. degree in civil engineering. Students must take at least one course from each group.
Group 1: Group 2: Group 3:

Economics and Social Issues Global Affairs Public Policy and Policy Studies
ECN 203 – Economic Ideas and Issues GEO 103 – America and the Global GEO 203 – Society and the Politics of Nature
Environment
ECN 301 – Intermediate Microeconomics GEO 105 – World Geography GEO 314 – Hazardous Geographic
Environments
ECN 302 – Intermediate GEO 215 – Global Environmental Change PAF 101 – An Introduction to the Analysis of
Macroeconomics Public Policy
ECN 365 – The World Economy GEO 272 – World Geography PAF 409 – Intermediate Analysis of Public
Policy
SOC 101 – Introduction to Sociology GEO 273 – World Political Economy PAF 451 – Environmental Policy
SOC 102 – Social Problems MAX 123 – Critical Issues for the U.S. PSC 302 – Environmental Politics and Policy
SOC 363 – Urban Sociology MAX 132 – Global Community PSC 305 – Legislative Process and U.S.
Congress
STS/BPS 101 – Introduction to Science, PAF 351 – Global Social Problems PSC 308 – The Politics of U.S. Public Policy
Technology and Society
STS.HNR/ECS 318 – Technology: Past PSC 124/139 – International Relations PSC 312 – Urban Government and Politics
and Present
PSC 318 – Technology, Politics and

Environment
62
2.5.1.2 Alignment of Curriculum with Objectives and Outcomes

The program educational objectives represent traits that we expect our graduates to display 3-
5 years after graduation. One goal of our curricula, therefore, is to put our students on a path
that will lead to the attainment of these objectives after they graduate.
Table 11 provides a view of how courses in the Civil Engineering curriculum support the five
educational objectives. The first educational objective concerns the ability of our graduates
to apply their technical and problem-solving ability to advance their careers. Almost all of
the technical courses in the curriculum serve this objective by providing students with
technical knowledge and practice in problem-solving. The knowledge and skill-set that are
developed in the technical component of the curriculum provide the basis for our graduates’
success in a broad array of careers.
Our third objective addresses the preparedness of our graduates for engineering practice and
advanced study. Our curriculum serves this objective in two important ways. First, in courses
such as ECS 101 (Introduction to Engineering and Computer Science) and CIE 475 (Senior
Design), at the beginning and the end of the curriculum, we stress what it means to be a
“professional.” Discussion of ethics, professional standards, the practice of engineering, and
the importance of professional certification help prepare our students for practice and
advanced study. Second, laboratory exercises and assignments involving modern tools and
data analysis give our students practical skills that will serve them in the workplace and in
graduate study. Third, some of our students participate in the Dubai Summer Internship
Program (DSIP) under the supervision of a full-time faculty member. This internship
involves preparatory seminars in Syracuse as well as lectures and field visits to construction
sites in Dubai. The focus of the DSIP is on construction engineering, including professional
practice issues such as contracts, ethics, and communication. The interns also learn about
Middle Eastern cultural norms. Students in the DSIP earn three credits for CIE 470, which
can be used as a technical elective. A second summer internship program in Bahrain / Abu
Dhabi has been initiated in 2011.
All civil engineering seniors are encouraged to enroll in a one-credit field learning
experience in the Fall semester. For this experience, the senior civil and environmental
engineering classes take a two-day trip to visit large construction sites in the region, tour
major civil engineering plants and view completed projects under the guidance and
supervision of a full-time faculty member. This experience is done at no cost to the students,
and provides an invaluable practical experience to our senior class.
Objective four involves engagement in life-long learning. In discussing professional practice
in various courses (especially ECS 101 and CIE 475), the importance of life-long learning in
the form of continuing education is discussed. Skills for life-long learning are also developed
in courses such as CIE 332, 338 and 443 in which students locate, select, and use materials
from published works and new media to research related topics. Students present their
findings and engage in discussion forums online in the course Blackboard site.
Table 11 Relationship between program educational objectives and courses in the Civil Engineering
curriculum. The objectives are traits students are expected to have 3-5 years after graduation. Therefore, the
goal in these courses is to provide the educational background to help students develop these abilities.
63
Program Educational Objective Courses
1. [Graduates] apply technical ECS 101, 221, 325, 326

knowledge and problem-solving
skills to advance their careers. CIE 272, 274, 331, 332, 337, 338, 341, 352, 442,
443, 475
Technical Electives
2. [Graduates] apply technical ECS 101
knowledge and problem-solving
skills to serve their community, CIE 272, 274, 332, 338, 341, 352, 442, 475
society, and profession.
Technical Electives
Professional Elective
3. [Graduates] are prepared for ECS 101
engineering practice and
advanced studies in CIE 272, 274, 331, 332, 337, 338, 442, 443, 475
civil/environmental engineering.
Technical Electives
Professional Elective
4. [Graduates] engage in life-long ECS 101
learning to keep themselves
abreast of new developments in CIE 274, 338, 341, 443, 475
their fields of practice or study.
SSH Group Requirement
5. [Graduates] are capable of WRT 105, 205, 307
effective written and oral
communication. ECS 101
CIE 274, 337, 338, 341, 442, 443, 475
Skills for attaining objective five – effective oral and written communication – are developed
in three required writing courses in the freshman, sophomore and junior years (WRT 105,
205, 307). These skills are further developed in required technical courses that contain either
oral presentations, written work, or both. Students make oral presentations in ECS 101, CIE
274, CIE 332, CIE 341 and CIE 475. Students prepare written reports in ECS 101, CIE 274,
CIE 332, CIE 337, CIE 338, CIE 341, CIE 442, CIE 443 and CIE 475. In all of these courses,
students receive feedback on their written work. In some cases, students post their
presentation online to share their findings and engage in discussions with their classmates.
64
The relationship between student outcomes and courses in the civil engineering curriculum is
summarized in Table 12. All of the outcomes are addressed in multiple courses in the
curriculum, and at various stages in the curriculum. Here, we briefly summarize the manner
in which the curriculum addresses each of the student outcomes.
An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering. This ability is
developed in basic math and science courses, and applied to engineering situations in most of
the technical courses in the curriculum.
An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data. These
abilities are first developed in lab courses that range from basic science laboratories in
chemistry, physics, and earth science. Data analysis is covered as a formal topic in CIE 272
(Civil Engineering Measurements), but data analysis and interpretation also take place in
most of the junior- and senior-level courses in the curriculum. Required courses such as CIE
332, 337 and 443 include laboratory data acquisition or data field data collection and
analyses.
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. Students begin the design process in their first semester
in the program, in ECS 101. Further instruction in design takes place in several required
courses. Incorporation of constraints increases gradually, culminating in the senior design
project carried out in CIE 475.
An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams. Team-based exercises are incorporated in
some required classes. In some, students from different majors work together. For example,
CIE 272, 332, 337, 341, 352, 442, 443, 475 are courses that feature group assignments and
are either common to both civil and environmental majors or are also taken by students from
the adjacent campus of the State University of NY College of Environmental Science and
Forestry.
An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems. Engineering problem-
solving is fundamental to most of the courses in the curriculum. Formal training in the
identification, formulation and solution of engineering problems begins in ECS 101 in the
first semester.
65
Table 12 Mapping of student outcomes to required courses and selected electives (*) in the civil engineering
curriculum. Symbols: × denotes the outcome is addressed in the course; ○ denotes the outcome is indirectly
related to the course.
Civil Engineering Program Outcomes
Courses (Required and Selected Electives) a b c d e f g h i j k
MAT 295 – Calculus 1 × ×
MAT 485 – Diff. Eq. and Matrix Algebra × ×
WRT 105 – Studio 1 × ×
WRT 205 – Studio 2 × ×
WRT 307 – Professional Writing × ×
CHE 106 – General Chemistry 1 ×
CHE 107 – General Chemistry Lab 1 × × ×
PHY 211 – General Physics 1 ×
PHY 221 – General Physics Lab 1 × × ×
PHY 212 – General Physics 2 ×
PHY 222 – General Physics Lab 2 × × ×
EAR 101 – Dynamic Earth (*) × × × ×
EAR 203 – Earth System Science (*) × × × ×
ECS 101 – Intro to Engineering and Comp. Sci. × × × × × ×
ECS 221 – Statics × × ×
ECS 222 – Dynamics (*) × ×
ECS 325 – Mechanics of Solids × × × ×
ECS 326 – Engineering Materials × × × × ×
ELE 231 – Electrical Engineering Fund (*) × × × × × × ×
MAE 251 – Thermodynamics (*) × ×
CIE 272 – Civil Engineering Measurements × × × × ○ × ○ ×
CIE 274 – Civil and Environmental Systems × × × × × × × × × × ×
CIE 327/MAE 341 – Fluid Mechanics × × ×
CIE 331 – Analysis of Structures and Materials × × × × × ×
CIE 332 – Design of Concrete Structures × × × × × × × × ×
CIE 337 – Intro to Geotechnical Engineering × × × × × × ×
CIE 338 – Foundation Engineering × × × × ○ ○ ○ ×
CIE 341 – Intro to Environmental Engineering × × × × × × × × × × ×
CIE 352 – Water Resources Engineering × × × × × × × × × × ×
CIE 372 – Project Layout and Site Planning (*) × × × × × × ×
CIE 442 – Treatment Processes in Env Eng × × × × × × × ×
CIE 443 – Transportation Engineering × × × × × × ×
CIE 475 – Civil and Env Engineering Design × × × × × × × × ×
CIE 478 – Rehabilitation of Civil Infrastructure (*) × × × × × × × × ×
66
An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility. Professionalism, including

ethical responsibility, is directly addressed at the beginning and end of the curriculum in ECS
101 and CIE 475 (Senior Design). These experiences include discussions with practitioners.
Ethics is also discussed in a variety of specific contexts in other courses in the curriculum.
For example, environmental justice is covered in CIE 274 (Civil and Environmental
Systems) and CIE 341 (Introduction to Environmental Engineering).
An ability to communicate effectively. Practice in oral and written communication is
incorporated throughout the curriculum. Students are required to make oral presentations on
design and analysis projects in several classes. These are generally accompanied by the
preparation of written reports. In some laboratory courses, students are required to submit
narrative reports (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions).
The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global,
economic, environmental, and societal context. Students gain a broad education through the
use of professional electives, social science and humanities electives, and their free elective.
The curriculum specifically addresses global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts
in several ways. First, the incorporation of the group requirements for the social science and
humanities electives (Table 10) forces students to include some formal learning in public
affairs, global issues, sociology and economics. Second, the incorporation of sustainability in
the curriculum connects engineering analysis and design to environmental, economic, and
social issues. Finally, the capstone design experience incorporates these constraints in a
realistic design project.
A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning. The importance
of life-long learning as a component of professional life is discussed in various courses
(especially ECS 101 and CIE 475). Skills for life-long learning are developed in several
courses that incorporate independent research.
A knowledge of contemporary issues. Sustainability and security of civil engineering
infrastructure systems are major contemporary concerns both nationally and internationally.
Acquiring knowledge of contemporary issues is a trait of lifelong learning. Courses such as
CIE 338, 443 and 475 in which students search and locate information from technical
journals, use current standards and track online reports serve to promote awareness and
knowledge of contemporary issues.
An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice. This outcome is addressed in several ways in the curriculum. Most of
the laboratory courses and some field data collection assignments in the curriculum provide
hands-on instruction using modern equipment and data acquisition systems. Other courses
use Mathcad extensively and a Blackboard platform as supplementary content delivery as
well as other programs specific to the topic.
2.5.1.3 Meeting the General and Program-Specific Criteria

The manner in which the B.S. Civil Engineering curriculum meets the general criteria for
accreditation is illustrated in Table 13. Each course in the curriculum is listed, with the
number of credit hours attributable to the four major categories: Math & Basic Sciences,
Engineering Topics, General Education, and Other. Also included in Table 13 are the last
67
two semesters in which each course was offered and the average section enrollments for
those offerings, except for true electives.
The distribution of the required 127-128 credit hours depends on the student’s selection of an
engineering science elective. At a minimum, each graduate of the civil engineering program
takes 33 credit hours, 26% of the required total, of mathematics and basic sciences. This
exceeds the minimum requirement of 32 credit hours or 25%. To satisfy this requirement,
one credit hour of mathematics is claimed for CIE 272 (Civil Engineering Measurements).
Basic probability and statistics constitutes more than one-half of this class. Also, one credit
hour of basic science is claimed for CIE 274 (Civil and Environmental Systems), which
includes extensive coverage of ecological concepts and chemistry.
At a minimum, graduates from the civil engineering program earn 61 credit hours and 48% in
engineering topics. Both the number of credit hours and the percentage exceed the minimum
of 48 credit hours and 37.5% requirements.
General education and “other” courses account for no more than 30 and 3 credit hours,
respectively.
A detailed explanation as to how the B.S. Civil Engineering curriculum meets the program
criteria established by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) is included in
Section III of this self-study document. Table 14 includes a summary showing the number of
the credit hours of coursework ascribed to each of the major curricular categories described
in the program criteria. [Please note that the assignment of credit hours by category in Table
14 is often approximate, since many courses incorporate coverage of several categories.
Also, the categories overlap. For example, laboratory experiments may also represent
advanced principles and practice.]
68
B.S. Civil Engineering – Syracuse University

Table 13 Curriculum chart for the B.S. Civil Engineering degree program. Courses are listed in the order they are typically taken.
Curricular Area (Credit Hours)
Average Section Enrollment

was Offered: Semester/Year
Last Two Terms the Course
Required (R), Elective (E),
for the Last Two Terms the

or Selected Elective (SE).
Math & Basic Sciences
Significant Design (√)
Course was Offered1

Engineering Topics
General Education
Check if Contains
Course
Other
ECS 101 – Introduction to Engineering and Computer Science R 3 (√) F09, F10 50
MAT 295 – Calculus I R 4 F10, Sp11 29
CHE 106/107 – General Chemistry I (+Lab) R 4 F09, F10 265(lec)/27(rec)/26(lab)
WRT 105 – Writing Studio I R 3 F10, Sp11 17
SS/Hum Elective E 3 N/A N/A
MAT 296 – Calculus II R 4 F10, Sp11 29
PHY 211/221 – General Physics I (+Lab) R 4 F10, Sp11 223(lec)/22(rec)/19(lab)
ECS 221 - Statics R 3 F10, Sp11 76
CIE 272 – Civil Engineering Measurements R 1 2 F09, F10 80(lec)/18(lab)
MAT 397 – Calculus III R 4 F10, Sp11 32
PHY 212/222 – General Physics II (+Lab) R 4 F10, Sp11 211(lec)/19(rec)/19(lab)
EAR 101 – Dynamic Earth (includes lab) R 4 F09, F10 113(lec)/15(lab)
CIE 274 – Civil and Environmental Systems R 1 2 Sp10, Sp11 90.5
Table 13 (continued)
69
Course was Offered: Year

(E), or Selected Elective
Two Terms the Course

Enrollment for the Last
Required (R), Elective
Last Two Terms the

Engineering Topics
General Education
Check if Contains
Average Section
Course
Math & Basic
was Offered1
Semester
Sciences
(SE).2
Other
and
ECS 325 – Mechanics of Solids R 4 F10, Sp11 67(lec)/19(rec)
MAT 485 – Differential Equations and Matrix Algebra R 3 F10, Sp11 34
ECS 222 – Dynamics SE 3* Sp10, Sp11 153(lec)/26(rec)
ELE 231 – Electrical Engineering Fundamentals SE 3* F09, F10 61(lec)/14(lab)
MAE 251 – Thermodynamics SE 4* Sp10, Sp11 118(lec)/23(rec)
WRT 205 – Writing Studio II R 3 F10, Sp11 18
CIE 331 – Analysis of Structures and Materials R 3 F09, F10 58
CIE 337 – Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering R 4 F09, F10 60(lec)/24(lab)
CIE 341 – Introduction to Environmental Engineering R 3 F09, F10 68
CIE 327 / MAE 341 – Fluid Mechanics R 4 F09, F10 180(lec)/22(rec)
CIE 332 – Design of Concrete Structures R 3 (√) Sp10, Sp11 51
CIE 338 – Foundation Engineering R 3 (√) Sp10, Sp11 55
CIE 352 – Water Resources Engineering R 4 (√) Sp10, Sp11 43
ECS 326 – Engineering Materials R 3 F10, Sp11 119(lec)/33(rec)
WRT 307 – Professional Writing R 3 F10, Sp11 19
Table 13 (continued).
70
Average Section Enrollment

Last Two Terms the Course
Required (R), Elective (E),
for the Last Two Terms the

or Selected Elective (SE).2
Math & Basic Sciences
was Offered: Year and

Course was Offered1

Engineering Topics
General Education
Check if Contains
Course
Semester
Other
CIE 442 – Treatment Processes in Environmental Engineering R 4 (√) F10 (new) 46(lec)/23(lab)
CIE 443 – Transportation Engineering R 3 (√) F09, F10 44
Technical Elective E 3 N/A N/A
Free Elective E 3 N/A N/A
CIE 475 – Civil and Environmental Engineering Design R 4 (√) Sp10, Sp11 52
Professional Elective E 3 N/A N/A
Technical Elective E 3 N/A N/A
TOTALS: ABET BASIC-LEVEL REQUIREMENTS 33 61-62 30 3
OVERALL TOTAL CREDIT HOURS FOR THE DEGREE 127-128
PERCENT OF TOTAL 26% 48% 24% 2%
Total must satisfy either credit Minimum Semester Credit Hours 32 Hours 48 Hours
hours or percentage
Minimum Percentage 25% 37.5 %
71
2.5.1.4 Capstone Design Experience

Education in engineering design takes place in several courses in the civil engineering
curriculum (Table 13). Beginning in ECS 101 in the first semester of the program, students
are introduced to design concepts and undertake design exercises. Later, they perform design
calculations in several required courses such as; CIE 332, 337, 338, 352, 442 and 443, as
well as in CIE technical elective courses.
The culminating design experience in the civil engineering curriculum occurs in CIE 475 –
Civil and Environmental Engineering Design (“Senior Design”). Ideas for student projects
are solicited from a variety of friends of the department, practitioners working for
government agencies (e.g., NYSDOT), consulting firms, and utility companies. The projects
are vetted by the course instructors to ensure that they include multidisciplinary components,
incorporate appropriate complexity of design alternatives and constraints, and can be
completed with a realistic effort. Although not essential, we look for projects that are timely
and involve issues of current interest. The instructors ensure that all projects include both
elements that can be tackled using concepts and skills acquired in required courses that the
students have already taken, and elements that require new learning. Support for this new
learning is provided by appropriate CIE faculty.
The projects are normally carried out in teams of 4-6 students. Team leaders are selected by
the students. Although students are allowed to allocate design tasks among themselves, all
students are expected to be capable of explaining and defending design alternatives and
decisions. In addition to the course instructors, local practitioners advise the students
regularly on current standards of practice as they relate to the individual projects. These
practitioners also make presentations to the class on ethics, professional practice, the
importance of professional licensure, continuing education, and other important topics that
relate to our educational outcomes.
All capstone design projects must include a cost analysis and consideration of environmental
and social factors related to the design alternatives. Design teams prepare a detailed report
and give public presentations. Professional engineers, faculty and students attend the project
presentations. The presentations are judged by a panel and the top three teams receive special
recognition and monetary awards.
2.5.1.5 Cooperative Education

Students in all majors in the L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science,
including civil engineering, may participate in the cooperative education program. Activities
undertaken during cooperative work experiences may not be used to satisfy curricular
requirements.
72
Table 14 A summary of the credit hours of coursework used to satisfy program-specific criteria for the B.S.
degree in Civil Engineering. A narrative discussion of the program-specific criteria is provided in Section III of
this self-study document. Credit hours assigned to various categories in the table may overlap.
Courses (credit hours applicable Credit Hours

Category
to category) for Category
...mathematics through differential MAT 295(4), 296(4), 397(4), 485(3) 16
equations CIE 272(1)
…calculus-based physics, chemistry, and PHY211(4), 212(4)

at least one additional area of basic CHE106(4) 17
science EAR 101(4) [or EAR 203(4)]
CIE274(1)
……four technical areas appropriate to civil
engineering…
…structural engineering >9
CIE221(1) , 331(3), 332(2)
ECS 325(2), 326(1)
Technical electives
…geotechnical engineering
CIE 337(4), 338(3) >10
ECS 325(2), 326(1)
…environmental engineering Technical electives
CIE274(2), 341(3), 442(3) >8
...hydraulics/water resources engineering Technical electives
CIE 341(1), 352(4), 442(1) 10
MAE 341(4) [or CIE 327(4)]
…conduct civil engineering experiments and CIE272(1), 332(1), 337(2), 352(1), 7
analyze and interpret … data 442(1), 443(1)
…design a system, component, or process ECS101(1)
in more than one civil engineering context CIE475(3)
Technical electives
…structural engineering
CIE332(1) >11
…geotechnical engineering
…environmental engineering CIE338(1)
...hydraulics/water resources engineering CIE442(2)
...transportation engineering CIE352(2)
CIE443(1)
ECS101(1)
…explain basic concepts in management, CIE475(1)
business, public policy, leadership; Social Science Electives (Table 10): >11
importance of professional licensure. Group 1(3), Group 2(3), Group 3(3)
Professional Electives
73
Students may petition to use work done during an internship or cooperative placement for
technical elective credit if: (1) the work was unpaid; and (2) the student signs up for three
credit hours of Independent Study (CIE 490) and prepares a report under the supervision of a
full-time faculty member.
Table 15 Profiles of full-time faculty in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
Professional
Full-time Rank* Highest Degree Earned Area of
Registration
Faculty (Institution, Year) Expertise
(State)
Riyad S. Ph.D.
AP None Structural
Aboutaha (University of Texas – Austin, 1994)
Shobha K. Ph.D.
P None Geotechnical
Bhatia (University of British Columbia, 1981)
David G. Ph.D.
PoP None Water Resources
Chandler (Cornell University, 1998)
Samuel P. Ph.D. P.E.
P Geotechnical
Clemence (Georgia Institute of Tech., 1973) (NY,MO)
Andria M.
Ph.D.
Costello AP None Environmental
(California Inst. of Tech., 1999)
Staniec
Cliff I. Ph.D.
P None Environmental
Davidson (California Inst. of Tech., 1977)
Charles T. Ph.D. Environmental/
UP EIT (Maine)
Driscoll (Cornell University, 1980) Water Resources
Chris E. Ph.D. Environmental/
P None
Johnson (University of Pennsylvania, 1989) Water Resources
Raymond D. Ph.D. Environmental/
P P.E. (NY, IL)
Letterman (Northwestern University, 1972) Water Resources
Ph.D.
Eric. M. Lui AP EIT (Indiana) Structural
(Purdue University, 1985)
Dawit Ph.D. P. Eng. (BC, Geotechnical/
P
Negussey (University of British Columbia, 1985) Canada) Transportation
Ossama M.
Ph.D.
(Sam) P P.E. (OH) Construction
(University of Alberta, 1998)
Salem
*P – Professor, AP – Associate Professor, EP – Emeritus Professor, MP – Meredith Professor, PoP –
Professor of Practice, UP – University Professor
74
2.5.1.6 Materials Available for Review

Course syllabi, textbooks, student work, exams, laboratory exercises, and other educational
materials will be available for the ABET visitors. A copy of the undergraduate handbook
that all students receive upon matriculation and can also access online will also be available.
2.5.2 Course Syllabi
Syllabi for the courses used to satisfy the general and program-specific requirements are
provided in Appendix A and are ordered by course number, irrespective of prefix.
75
2.6 Faculty
2.6.1 Faculty Qualifications
The Civil and Environmental Engineering Department currently has 12 full-time faculty
members. A summary profile of each full-time faculty member is given in Table 15. More
detailed biographies are located in Appendix B. Also, the “Faculty Qualifications” table
requested in the ABET Self-Study Questionnaire is located at the beginning of Appendix B.
The full-time faculty in the department are highly qualified to teach in the civil and
environmental engineering degree programs. Some highlights of their qualifications include:
• All of the department faculty have earned Ph.D. degrees.
• The 12 faculty who are primarily responsible for the B.S. program in Civil
Engineering have a combined 295 years of full-time university-level teaching
experience.
• One faculty member (Charles Driscoll) is a member of the National Academy of
Engineering).
• Two members of the faculty hold endowed chairs. Sam Salem is the Abdallah H.
Yabroudi Professor of Sustainable Civil Infrastructures, and Cliff Davidson is the
Thomas and Colleen Wilmot Professor of Sustainable Engineering. These are two
of only three endowed professorships in the L.C. Smith College of Engineering
and Computer Science.
• One is a University Professor (Charles Driscoll), so named for his excellence in
scholarship. Professor Driscoll is one of eight University Professors at Syracuse
University.
• Three of the CIE faculty hold the title of Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith
Professor (Shobha Bhatia, Sam Clemence and Eric Lui). These appointments are
made by the University in recognition of excellence in teaching. No other
department at Syracuse University has more than two Meredith Professors.
• One faculty member was a NSF CAREER award recipient (Andria Costello).
• One was a Fulbright Scholar (Chris Johnson).
• Three have received the College’s Crouse Hinds Awards for Excellence in
Teaching (Sam Clemence, Shobha Bhatia and Eric Lui).
• One is an ASCE Fellow (Sam Clemence).
• One is an ACI Fellow (Riyad Aboutaha).
Table 16 provides profiles of the six currently active adjunct faculty in the Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering. More detailed biographical information for these
faculty members is also included in Appendix B. Dr. Kaczmar and Mr. Wazenkewitz are
qualified to teach by virtue of their extensive professional experience. Dr. Kaczmar is
Principle Scientist at O’Brien and Gere, a large civil/environmental engineering consulting
firm in Syracuse. He teaches courses in environmental health (CIE 500) and hazardous
waste management (CIE 555). Mr. Wazenkewitz recently retired from the New York State
76
Department of Environmental Conservation. He teaches our course in solid waste

management (CIE 558).
*CIH-Certified Industrial Hygienist, EP-Emeritus Professor.
Table 16 Profiles of adjunct faculty in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
Professional
Highest Degree Earned Area of
Adjunct Faculty Rank* Registration
(Institution, Year) Expertise
(State)
Joan V. M.S. Mechanics/
Adjunct P.E. (CT)
Dannenhoffer (U of Connecticut, 1997) Materials
Swiatoslav W. Ph.D.
Adjunct C.I.H.** (NY) Environmental
Kaczmar (Michigan State U, 1983)
Ph.D.
James A. Mandel EP P.E. (PA) Structural
(Syracuse U, 1967)
Environmental
Emmet M. Owens, M.S.
Adjunct P.E. (NY) /Water
Jr. (Colorado State U, 1974)
Resources
Ph.D.
Peter W. Plumley Adjunct None Geology
(UC Santa Cruz, 1984)
David S. B.S.
Adjunct P.E. (NY) Environmental
Wazenkewitz (Syracuse U, 1983)
The other four adjunct faculty all have extensive experience in full-time university-level
teaching. Dr. Mandel retired from the CIE faculty after nearly 40 years of service. Ms.
Dannenhoffer teaches physics and engineering technology at SUNY-Morrisville. Mr. Owens
was a member of the CIE faculty, teaching water resources engineering and fluid mechanics,
before joining the staff at Upstate Freshwater Institute in Syracuse. Finally, Dr. Plumley was
a full-time faculty member in the Department of Earth Sciences and an Assistant Dean in the
L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science at Syracuse University before
joining the staff at the Milton J. Rubenstein Museum of Science and Technology in Syracuse.
2.6.2 Faculty Workload
The faculty of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering are dedicated to
teaching, scholarly research, student advising and service. Data concerning the workloads of
the faculty in the 2010-2011 academic year are provided in Table 17.
Teaching one three- or four-credit course is nominally considered to account for 15% of an
academic-year appointment. With a normal service load of 10%, a full-time faculty member
teaching three courses per semester, or six courses per academic year, would therefore have a
workload of 90% teaching and 10% service. Full-time faculty with active research programs
are expected to teach four courses per year, for a distribution of 60% teaching, 30% research,
and 10% service. Faculty may further reduce their teaching loads by funding a portion of
their academic-year salaries from grant sources. Teaching loads are also reduced for faculty
77
who are assigned administrative duties and for the two endowed chairs in the
department. University Professors are free to select their own teaching loads.
All of the full-time faculty in the department are engaged in research that has led to
publications in peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings, monographs and engineering
handbooks. The research conducted by the faculty in the department encompasses
theoretical, computational, applied and experimental work. A list of selected publications for
each faculty member is included in their respective faculty CVs in Appendix B.
All CIE faculty serve as advisors to undergraduate students. At present, each full-time
faculty member advises an average of 25-35 undergraduate students. In this role, faculty help
students with course selection, planning for minors and double-majors, job and/or graduate
school searching, and general advice. Building personal advising and mentoring relationships
early in the curriculum helps our students secure knowledgeable recommendations for
scholarships, jobs and internships, and generally promotes a more customized academic
experience.
In addition to teaching and research, full-time faculty members are expected to serve on
Department, College and/or University Committees. On average, full-time faculty serve on
two committees per year. Our faculty also provide service to the profession by serving as
reviewers and editors of scientific and engineering journals, as chairs or members on national
committees in organizations such as ASCE, the Water Environment Federation,
Transportation Research Board and others, and as organizing committee members and
session organizers for professional and technical conferences.
Adjunct faculty members play an important supporting role in the department. They enhance
the quality of the program by increasing the breadth and number of course offerings in the
department. By bringing their practical experience and expertise into the classroom, they
give students valuable insight into current standards of practice and the nature of the
engineering workplace.
78
B.S. in Civil Engineering – Syracuse University

Table 17 Faculty workload summary for the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering.
Program Activity Distribution3 % of Time
FT or 2
Faculty Member Classes Taught (Credit Hrs.) – Term, Year Research or Devoted to
PT1 Teaching Other4
Scholarship the Program5
CIE 478/678 (3) – Fall, 2010
CIE 600 [Design of Structural Systems] (3) – Fall, 2010
Riyad S. Aboutaha FT 60 30 10 100
CIE 332 (3) – Spring, 2011
CIE 635 (3) – Spring, 2011
CIE 337 (4) – Fall, 2010 [Two sections]
Shobha K. Bhatia FT CIE 641 (3) – Spring, 2011 60 30 10 100
CIE 740 (3) – Spring, 2011
CIE 341 (3) – Fall, 2010
CIE 471/671 (3) – Fall, 2010
David G. Chandler FT 60 30 10 100
CIE 352 (4) – Spring, 2011
CIE 475 (4) – Spring, 2011
ECS 101 (3) – Fall, 2010 [Two sections]
CIE 400 [Field Learning Experience] (1) – Fall, 2010
Samuel P. Clemence FT 60 30 10 100
CIE 475 (4) – Spring, 2011
CIE 638 (3) – Spring, 2011
ECS 101 (3) – Fall, 2010
Andria M. Costello Staniec FT 30 30 40 50
CIE 472/672 (3) – Spring, 2011
CIE 274 (3) – Spring, 2011
Cliff I. Davidson FT 15 75 10 100
ECS 650 (3) – Spring, 2011
CIE 457/657 (3) – Fall, 2010
Charles T. Driscoll FT 30 50 20 100
CIE 274 (3) – Spring, 2011
1
FT or PT - Full Time or Part Time; 2For the 2010-2011 academic year, 3expressed as % of effort in the program, 4includes administration and leave of absence,
5
of total time effort at the institution.
Table 17 (continued below).
Table 17 (continued)
79
% of Time
FT or
Faculty Member Classes Taught (Credit Hrs.) – Term, Year2 Program Activity Distribution3 Devoted to
PT1
the Program5
CIE 272 (3) – Fall, 2010
Chris E. Johnson FT 30 30 40 100
CIE 400/600 [Env. Geostatistics] (3) – Spring, 2011
Raymond D. Letterman FT CIE 442 (4) – Fall, 2010 15 45 40 100
CIE 331 (3) – Fall, 2010
CIE 631 (3) – Fall, 2010
Eric M. Lui FT 60 30 10 100
CIE 535 (3) – Spring, 2011
ECS 354 (3) – Spring, 2011
CIE 443/643 (3) – Fall, 2010
CIE 637 (3) – Fall, 2010
Dawit Negussey FT 60 30 10 100
CIE 338 (3) – Spring, 2011
CIE 549 (3) – Spring, 2011
CIE 400/600 [Construction Engineering and Project
Osama M. (Sam) Salem FT Management (3) – Fall, 2010 30 60 10 100
CIE 600 [Sustainable Development and Infrastructure
Management] (3) – Spring, 2011
Joan V. Dannenhoffer PT ECS 326 (3) – Spring, 2011 100 0 0 100
Swiatoslav W. Kaczmar PT CIE 400/600 [Environmental Health] (3) – Spring, 2011 100 0 0 100
James A. Mandel PT ECS 325 (4) – Fall, 2010 100 0 0 100
Emmet M. Owens, Jr. PT CIE 400/600 [Water Quality Modeling] (3) – Fall, 2010 100 0 0 100
Peter W. Plumley PT ECS 101 (3) – Fall, 2010 80 20 0 100
David S. Wazenkewitz PT CIE 558 (3) – Spring, 2011 100 0 0 100
1 2 3 4
FT or PT - Full Time or Part Time; For the 2010-2011 academic year, expressed as % of effort in the program, includes administration and leave of absence,
5
of total time effort at the institution.
80
2.6.3 Faculty Size

The size of the CIE faculty is adequate to deliver the curriculum, while also allowing the
faculty time for research and service activities, professional development, and interactions
with industry and practitioners. In the last three years, increasing undergraduate enrollment,
especially in the civil engineering program, has resulted in an unusually high student:faculty
ratio of 25:1 in the department. With five faculty teaching reduced loads due to service and
research obligations, this has resulted in enrollments of 60-100 students in some required
sophomore- and junior-level CIE courses. It would be preferable to teach these courses in
smaller sections to improve the quality of faculty-student interaction. Our presently high
student:faculty ratio has also resulted in advising loads of 25-35 undergraduate advisees per
faculty member. Although manageable, a lower number would allow for a more personalized
advising experience for CIE students.
The sharp increase in undergraduate enrollment in our programs in the past 3-4 years is
exciting, but also is clearly stretching departmental resources. If this trend continues,
additional faculty resources will be necessary to continue to provide top-quality education to
our students. Three new faculty members have been hired in the past three years – two
endowed professors and one professor of practice. Searches are currently underway for two
faculty positions. One, in the area of treatment processes, will be a junior-level hire. The
second search is for a senior-level hire in the area of water science and technology. This is a
joint effort between the L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science and the
College of Arts & Sciences, and could result in an appointment in CIE, Earth Sciences, or a
joint position
2.6.4 Professional Development
Department faculty keep abreast of new developments in their fields in a variety of ways.
Syracuse University, through its library system, provides electronic access to all of the
leading scientific and engineering journals (and many, many others). The SU Library also
subscribes to Compendex, Web of Knowledge and Scopus, among others, providing faculty
the means to quickly identify a broad spectrum of relevant work. The Department and
College also provide funds to support faculty travel to technical conferences and specialty
workshops, as well as funds for speakers to come to Syracuse. All our faculty have attended
and presented papers at national and international conferences. Some have served as session
organizers or acted as keynote speakers in these conferences. Many have served as panel
reviewers of federal grant proposals, and all have served as reviewers of technical and
scientific journals in their areas of expertise. Some have been invited to serve on editorial
boards of archival journals. The majority of the faculty are also active in professional
organizations and/or technical/scientific committees. Details of these activities can be found
in the faculty CVs in Appendix B.
2.6.5 Authority and Responsibility of Faculty
Authority over all aspects of the civil and environmental engineering degree programs rests
primarily with the department faculty. With a relatively small faculty of 12, the department
faculty act as a “committee of the whole” to deliberate over and enact changes to curricula,
educational objectives, and student outcomes. While the department chair and program
81
director coordinate the collection and basic analysis of assessment data, evaluation and
assessment take place at regular faculty meetings with all faculty participating. Similarly,
individual faculty prepare continuous quality improvement (CQI) documents for their
courses, which are circulated to all faculty and discussed at faculty meetings and retreats.
Any faculty member may propose changes to curriculum, objectives, and outcomes. Such
changes require a majority vote of the faculty.
To make the “committee of the whole” system work, individual faculty are responsible for
attending faculty meetings, reviewing materials, preparing CQI forms for their courses in a
timely manner, and participating in assessment and evaluation activities. Faculty teaching
ECS 101, CIE 272, CIE 341, and CIE 475 are expected to complete DAC forms at the end of
each semester. As the department transitions to the use of performance indicators for
assessment of student outcomes, broad faculty participation will be necessary to implement
performance indicators and rubrics in a wide range of courses.
The department chair plays a leading role in the continuous improvement of the program by:
coordinating the collection and analysis of assessment data, setting the agenda of faculty
meetings to ensure timely assessment, working with college and university committees who
must consider and approve curricular changes, and coordinating the process of course
assessment using CQI forms.
The Dean and Senior Associate Dean coordinate preparations for the ABET accreditation
process and provide advice to chairs and program directors regarding accreditation-related
issues. The Senior Associate Dean is an ex officio member of the Committee on Academic
Affairs, which is responsible for course and curricular matters. The Dean and the Dean’s
Office also coordinate alumni surveys, which are essential for the assessment and evaluation
of program educational objectives.
82
2.7 Facilities
2.7.1 Offices
The administrative office of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering is
located in a suite on the first floor of Link Hall (151 Link). The office is equipped with a
high-capacity photocopy machine, color laser printer, and a fax machine. All department
faculty and staff have their own office computers and telephones. All desktop computers are
connected to the campus-wide network, allowing access to central records and the internet.
With funding from an alumnus, a renovated “CIE suite” was created and opened in 2009-
2010. In addition to upgrading the quality of the space and office furniture, this renovation
provided an opportunity to bring the faculty together, physically, for the first time in many
years. Ten of the 12 full-time faculty members now have their offices in 151 Link Hall. The
other two faculty have offices on the fourth floor, in the new “Link+” facility, which is the
on-campus home of the Syracuse Center of Excellence in Environmental and Energy
Systems. All offices are maintained regularly by a university custodian.
The renovation of the CIE Suite also provided for two adjunct/post-doc offices, new office
space for graduate assistants, a construction engineering computer lab, a student lounge, a
senior design space, and a CIE-dedicated multimedia classroom. The creation of a CIE suite
has had several beneficial effects on our programs. Faculty are now more accessible to
students. By having the faculty offices located together, the number of chance encounters
between faculty and students has increased. The new undergraduate lounge gives our
students a place to meet, study and collaborate. Since the lounge is part of the suite, students
can walk a few steps to consult with faculty and TAs to get help with assignments and
projects.
2.7.2 Classrooms
Classroom instruction in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department is carried out
in classrooms located primarily in Link Hall, but also in classrooms across the main campus
of Syracuse University. Although the university has a shortage of classrooms, necessitating
careful scheduling, the quality of the classroom facilities is adequate. All classrooms are
equipped with writing boards (chalk boards or white boards), screens, and overhead
projectors. Almost all are also equipped with advanced audio-visual equipment including
document cameras and computer projection. The tables and chairs in the classrooms are
generally in good shape. Most classrooms have windows and good lighting conditions.
2.7.3 Laboratories
Laboratory instruction takes place in Link Hall and out in the field. The Department and
College have invested heavily in hardware, software, equipment and instrumentation to
enhance instruction. A recent gift of $400,000 from an alumnus was used to purchase
equipment for the geotechnical, structural, environmental, and hydraulics laboratories.
Internal funds are also budgeted annually (currently $40,000) for repair, replacement, and
acquisition of new equipment and software. A summary of major equipment available for
instruction may be found in Appendix C.
83
Laboratories for surveying (CIE 272) and transportation engineering (CIE 443) take place
outdoors. The indoor instructional laboratories used for other courses are generally well-
maintained. Table 18 summarizes the laboratory facilities used for departmental instruction.
Table 18 is a summary of the Civil and Environmental Engineering undergraduate
laboratory space in Link Hall and the specific use for courses in the curriculum. A more
detailed description of each of the laboratories is given below.
Table 18 Instructional laboratory space used in the civil and environmental engineering curricula. Table does
not include computer cluster spaces, which are centrally controlled by the college.
Stations Area
Location Laboratory Use Condition Adequacy
(Students per Stations) (ft2)
Link 0002 Soil Mechanics (CIE 337) Very Good Very Good 5 (7) 3,366
Link 051 Hydraulics (CIE 352) Good Fair 4 (6) 680
Link+ Structures & Materials

Excellent Very Good N/A 1,856
High Bay (CIE 331, CIE 332)
Capstone Design/Project
Link 142 Very Good Very Good 5 (6) 329
(CIE 101, CIE 475)
Environmental Chemistry
Link 405 and Microbiology Excellent Very Good 8 (4) 1,003
(CIE 442, CIE 471)
2.7.3.1 Soil Mechanics Laboratory (Link 0002)

The undergraduate geotechnical teaching laboratories in the Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering are located in Link 0002, and are used for CIE 337 (Introduction
to Geotechnical Engineering). The undergraduate lab space has an open plan, with access to
several specialty/research labs. There are five instructional benches with sinks and stools. A
teaching station and projection screen are used to introduce each exercise. Students attend
eight three-hour lab sessions over the course of the semester. Each lab section is limited to a
maximum enrollment of 30 students, with no more than 6-7 students per group. Exercises
include soil and rock classification, grain size and Atterberg limits, compaction, hydraulic
conductivity, consolidation, direct shear, and triaxial tests. Some exercises utilize PC-based
data acquisition systems.
2.7.3.2 Structures & Materials Testing Laboratory (Link+ High Bay)

The structures and materials testing laboratory is located in the high bay area in the “Link+”
building. This facility is used in CIE 331 (Structural Analysis), CIE332 (Design of Concrete
Structures) and some technical electives in the structures area. The structures laboratory
contains a 3-D reaction frame on a strong floor. This high-capacity frame is capable of
84
supporting full-scale tests of a variety of structural components. Students in CIE 332 use the
frame to test a full-scale reinforced concrete beam.
The materials testing area of the lab houses three universal testing machines. These machines
are serviced and maintained periodically by a full-time ECS machinist (Mr. Richard Chave).
These systems are used in CIE 331 and CIE 332 for testing of concrete and steel specimens.
2.7.3.2.1 Environmental Engineering Laboratory (Link 405)
The teaching laboratory for environmental engineering is located in room 405 Link Hall, and
is part of the Center for Environmental Systems Engineering, which occupies the 4th floor of
Link Hall. The laboratory contains a white board, fume hoods, and appropriate equipment for
laboratory safety. The laboratory is connected to the deionized water system that supplies
the 4th floor complex. The laboratory also includes accommodations for students with
disabilities. The facility is used for most of the laboratories conducted in the following
undergraduate environmental engineering courses:
2.7.3.2.2 CIE 442 – Treatment Processes:
Bench-top experiments on flow-through reactors (tracer studies), kinetics of chlorine decay,
settling of biological sludge, oxygen uptake by bio-solids, flocculation in batch reactors, and
oxygen transfer at the air-water interface.
2.7.3.2.3 CIE 471 – Environmental Chemistry and Analysis:
Bench-top experiments on standardization and analytical precision, experimental estimation
of equilibrium constants, acid-base titrations, alkalinity and the carbonate system, and
determination of hardness.
2.7.3.2.4 CIE 472 – Applied Environmental Microbiology:
Bench-top experiments are conducted in the following areas: use of a light microscope,
microbial structure and Gram staining procedure, enumeration of bacteria (standard plate
count, total and fecal coliform), biochemical oxygen demand, and enzyme activity.
As necessary, other laboratory facilities and equipment on the 4th floor of Link Hall are used
for undergraduate teaching. For example, an autoclave, constant temperature rooms, ovens,
and incubators are all available for undergraduate instruction. Also, some unit operations
exercises have been carried out in Link 444, which has an open area with a floor drain
suitable for work with large tanks.
2.7.3.3 . Capstone Design/Project Lab (Link 162)

As part of the recent development of the CIE Suite, Link 162 was purpose-built as a design
space for ECS 101 (Introduction to Engineering and Computer Science) in the Fall semester,
and CIE 475 (Senior Design) in the Spring semester. This lab contains moveable tables,
bookshelves, a white board, and a flat-screen TV/monitor. Students can access the lab in the
evenings and weekends using a combination lock.
2.7.3.4 Hydraulics Laboratory (051 Link)

Room 051 in Link Hall is used primarily for laboratory instruction in Water Resources
Engineering (CIE 352). Some experiments in CIE 442 (Treatment Processes) are also carried
85
out in this facility. The lab houses a white board, countertop and cabinets, and four tables for
students. Exercises carried out in this facility include flow in open channels, hydraulic
jumps, pipe networks, pump rating curves, and aeration.
2.7.4 Computing Resources
The L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science maintains four computer
clusters in Link Hall. [Additional LCS computer clusters are located in the Center for
Science and Technology, but those facilities are rarely used by civil and environmental
engineering students.] All computers are connected to the internet. A variety of general
purpose (e.g., Microsoft Office, AutoCAD, Adobe, MathCAD, Maple, Matlab) and
discipline-specific (e.g., FLAC, RISA3D, ANSYS, Civil 3D) programs are installed for
student use. Each of the labs has a high-capacity laser printer. The computing equipment is
maintained by staff of the college’s Computing and Information Technology (CIT) group,
and all software is updated periodically. Hardware is replaced on a cycle of 3-4 years. Table
19 provides information on the capacity and condition of the computer clusters in Link Hall.
Table 19 Instructional computer clusters used in the civil and environmental engineering curricula.
Number of Student Condition of

Laboratory Adequacy for Instruction
Stations Laboratory
Link 011 31 Fair Good
Link 201 19 Very Good Very Good
Link 202 34 Good Good
Link 274 36 Very Good Very Good
All four computer clusters in Link Hall are available for teaching. They all contain projection
systems and white boards for instructional purposes. Each lab is closed for maintenance on a
different night of the week, leaving at least three open at all times.
In addition to the labs in Link Hall, all Syracuse University students have access to computer
clusters located in academic and residential buildings across the campus. These are used by
our students primarily for general computing such as word processing, e-mail, internet
research, and spreadsheet applications. Because of licensing restrictions, engineering-specific
software packages are only accessible in LCS facilities.
Upon matriculation into the university, each student is allocated 1 GB of virtual disk space
on which they can save their work. Additional disk space may be requested. LCS students
are given a print quota of 600 pages per semester. A per-page printing charge of $0.04 is
assessed for printing in excess of this quota.
Syracuse University operates and maintains a campus-wide wireless network called Air
OrangeX, through which students can access their accounts. This network is accessible 24
hours a day in all academic, residential, and administrative buildings.
86
The computing facilities and resources in the college are adequate to meet the educational,
scholarly, and administrative needs of the students, staff and faculty in the department. Each
semester, faculty are asked to request software that they wish to use for instructional
purposes. If the requested software will be used by departments across the college, CIT will
acquire the software. If only one or two departments will use the software, the department(s)
purchase(s) the software from their budgets and CIT installs the software in the laboratories.
Where licensing permits, faculty and students can “borrow” licenses so that they can use the
software on their laptop computers. The use of the teaching laboratories in Link Hall for
instructional activities has grown over the years. As a result, there are times during the week
when it can be difficult for students to access LCS computers. At present, this is more of a
nuisance than a problem.
Starting in 2010, the CIE department instituted a three-year cycle for the replacement of staff
and faculty computers. Each year, one-third of the faculty and staff are allocated $1,200 for
their discretionary use for the purchase of computing equipment.
2.7.4.1.1 Guidance
All undergraduate laboratory exercises are supervised by faculty and/or teaching assistants
knowledgeable about the use of the relevant equipment or computing resources. As much as
possible, students are encouraged to operate laboratory equipment for themselves. Most
laboratory exercises begin with demonstration/training in the use of the experimental
apparatus(es) by faculty or teaching assistants. During the exercises, faculty and/or teaching
assistants monitor students as they use the laboratory equipment.
Training in the use of computer software occurs as part of laboratory exercises in several
classes. This training is supervised by faculty and teaching assistants of those courses. The
CIT group staffs a help center on the second floor of Link Hall, near three of the computer
clusters, where students can get help during normal business hours (8:30 AM – 5:00 PM).
2.7.5 Maintenance and Upgrading of Facilities
The university’s Physical Plant department is responsible for the basic maintenance of the
infrastructure serving laboratory and computing facilities – water, power, custodial care,
lighting, etc. Maintenance of laboratory equipment is carried out by staff, faculty, and
graduate students. The college has four full-time “shop” employees, including two
machinists and an electronics technician, who service and repair equipment in the labs. They
also fabricate materials and devices for instructional purposes. A lab manager in the Center
for Environmental Systems Engineering is responsible for maintaining equipment in the
environmental engineering laboratories, including the teaching lab. Maintenance costs are
borne by departments as part of their normal budgets.
The purchase and/or upgrading of equipment is the responsibility of each department. The
CIE department budget includes an annual allocation, currently $40,000, for purchasing new
equipment and software and for repair costs for existing equipment.
Major facilities renovations are coordinated by the Office of Design and Construction, in
consultation with the Dean and the Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Affairs.
87
Computer facilities and equipment are maintained and upgraded by the CIT group in the
college. The budget for the CIT group comes from the Dean’s Office. The CIT group installs
and maintains hardware and software in the college’s computer clusters. The CIT group also
services computers in faculty and staff offices, as well as classrooms controlled by the
college and its departments. The cost of licenses for software programs that are used across
the college (e.g., Microsoft Office, Matlab, Mathcad, Autocad, etc.) is borne by CIT. Funds
for software used by only one or two departments come from department budgets.
2.7.6 Library Services
Library resources are provided centrally by the University. The main library for LCS is the
Science and Technology Library located in the Carnegie Building on the main campus, a
short walk from Link Hall. The library maintains an extensive print collection in the areas of
civil and environmental engineering, and employs a full-time librarian for its engineering
collection and services. It is also a federal repository library, providing the university
community access to technical reports and documents from federal agencies.
The library maintains electronic subscriptions to all major journal publishers, including
Springer and Elsevier, as well as journals published by professional societies. These are
accessible from any computer on the Syracuse University campus and computers logged into
Air Orange. Faculty and staff can access electronic journals at home through a proxy system.
The library also subscribes to research tools such as Web of Science and Scopus, and offers a
campus license for RefWorks, a bibliographic software package.
Syracuse University’s Bird Library houses an up-to-date map collection, which includes a
complete collection of USGS topographic quadrangle maps for the United States, as well as
numerous geological, hydrological, and historical maps. Across the hall is the library’s GIS
lab, where students can use GIS systems for academic or research work. [The Geography
Department also maintains a GIS lab for instructional and research purposes, which our
students use when taking GEO 383 (Geographic Information Systems).]
The Syracuse University library participates in regional interlibrary loan (ILL) and document
delivery services. Requests are placed electronically through a web portal, and are typically
fulfilled within two weeks, often faster. Faculty may also request delivery of books and other
print materials directly to their offices.
Faculty and staff may request books and subscriptions at any time by contacting the subject
librarian for engineering. These requests, generally made by e-mail, are almost always
fulfilled. In the case of journal subscriptions, it is sometimes necessary to wait until the end
of the current subscription agreement. Book requests are almost always fulfilled
immediately.
Over the past three years, the subject-matter librarians have developed an innovative set of
“subject guides” for the various departments on campus. The guide for civil and
environmental engineering may be found at: http://researchguides.library.syr.edu/CIE. These
guides provide students and faculty easy access to e-books, journals, and other resources
specifically selected for the civil and environmental engineering audience. These have been
incorporated into CIE classes. In CIE 272 (Civil and Environmental Measurements), for
example, the assigned surveying textbook is an e-book that the students can access through
88
the subject guide. In CIE 338 (Foundation Engineering), students use the portal to find
research papers for course assignments.
2.7.7 Overall Comments on Facilities
To ensure that our students have a safe environment to work in, all students are required to
follow appropriate safety protocols whenever they are in a lab performing lab experiments or
using lab equipment for a class or for research. Safety procedures appropriate to each
exercise are discussed at the beginning of the lab period. Students who are unfamiliar with
the operation of any piece of lab equipment or the use of any chemicals are carefully
supervised by experienced lab instructors and/or graduate assistants. First aid kits, safety eye
wash fountains, showers, and telephones are located in the labs in case of emergency. In
addition, hazardous materials are inventoried periodically and they are always placed in safe
storage. All our labs conform to OSHA standards. Because of the vigilance of our faculty
and lab staff, our safety record has been extraordinary. The Department has not experienced
any student injuries in many years.
89
2.8 Institutional Support

2.8.1 Leadership
Direct leadership of the program rests in the hands of the department chair and a program
director, both of whom are full-time faculty members. The Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering administers ABET-accredited programs in both civil and
environmental engineering. The department chair normally serves as program director for
one of the programs. The current chair, Chris Johnson, also serves as program director for the
environmental engineering program. Professor Dawit Negussey serves as program director
for the civil engineering program.
The department chairs in the L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science serve
as a “cabinet” for the Dean. Meetings of the Deans and chairs are held monthly, and each
chair has regular one-on-one meetings with the Dean. At these meetings, the program
leadership has the opportunity to influence decisions affecting their programs.
The leadership structure has been adequate to ensure the continuity and quality of the
program, as evidenced by the increasing enrollments and the success of our graduates in
recent years.
2.8.2 Program Budget and Financial Support
Each spring and early summer, the Dean works with the Director of Fiscal Operations of the
College, the associate deans, and the department chairs to rationalize the budget and allocate
portions for each department and the set of college-wide programs. Department budget
allocations are made after open discussion among the college leadership based upon:
• The resource needs of departments to deliver academic programs as expressed by
their chairs.
• The overall “level of activity” in a department, taking into account undergraduate
teaching, graduate teaching, and research expenditures.
• The base needs of any department that the College wants to maintain.
This general approach has been in use since July 2006, when the university transitioned to
“responsibility center management” (RCM), and provided budgets that allowed the
departments to successfully deliver their academic programs. Each of the four departments
has more than one ABET-accredited undergraduate program, The multiple programs within
each department have created environments in which faculty and students benefit from the
highly synergistic nature of the programs, but also have depth of study and interaction within
their individual discipline. The great majority of the expenditures in each of the four
departments benefit all of the programs (and students) in that department. This is certainly
true for faculty, staff, and teaching assistants, all of whom may have a specialty but they also
provide support to all of the students in the department. The leadership of each department is
set up so that each program has an identifiable leader — sometimes it is the department chair
and sometimes a program director who works closely with the chair. The program director in
each case is responsible for working with the program faculty and advocating on behalf of
the program to the chair during internal budget discussions.
90
Teaching assistants support education by helping course instructors in lab, recitation and
discussion sections. Teaching assistant allocations to the departments are made by the Dean,
in collaboration with department chairs. Enrollment in courses, and number of lab, recitation,
and discussion sections are factors that affect TA allocations. Teaching assistants are selected
by the program among qualified graduate students and go through an orientation provided by
the university-wide TA Program. If additional grading help is needed, graders are appointed
by departments.
Each full-time undergraduate student in the college pays a $300 lab fee per semester. This
revenue is allocated for undergraduate lab and equipment funds in the students’ departments.
Each department then decides the appropriate uses for these funds.
The resources described in this section are adequate to enable the students in the program to
attain the student outcomes. The Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering has
been able to teach required courses at a frequency that permits any student to complete their
B.S. degree program in four years. Sufficient elective courses are offered to complete the
technical elective requirements for the degrees as well. Discretionary funds (from gifts to the
department) are also available, and have been used to support enrichment activities, including
student activities, undergraduate travel, and undergraduate research.
2.8.3 Staffing
The administrative, instructional and technical staff, and the institutional services provided to
the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering are adequate to enable the students
in the civil and environmental engineering programs to attain the student outcomes. The staff
include two departmental secretaries, one administrative assistant, and shared shop staff.
Partial support is also provided for a lab technician.
The university’s Human Resources department offers a broad range of training programs on
general skills and for specialized tools and programs staff uses. In addition, Syracuse
University has remitted tuition benefits, which allow full-time and part-time staff members to
take courses free of charge, either towards a degree or in a non-matriculated fashion. Annual
staff performance reviews are performed to collaboratively set annual goals, and assess their
progress towards their goals.
2.8.4 Faculty Hiring and Retention
The department leadership makes to the Dean the case for a new faculty position. The Dean
then secures the Provost’s approval for a search. The department chair establishes a search
committee and develops a search plan, which must be approved by the Department of Human
Resources. Once the search plan is approved, advertisements are placed in appropriate media
outlets.
The search committee also works pro-actively to encourage outstanding scholars from
diverse backgrounds to apply for the position. The search committee reviews the
applications, and invites promising candidates to an on-campus interview. Each candidate
meets the academic leadership, department faculty members, and students, and gives a
seminar. The search committee collects input from all stakeholder groups and reports to the
department faculty. An acceptability ballot is circulated to the department faculty and the
results are tabulated. The department chair and the Dean, in consultation with the Provost,
91
then select the candidate who will be offered the position. The department chair negotiates
with the candidate and sends an offer letter. In the event that the offer is declined, the
department chair and Dean consult to decide whether to pursue another candidate from the
pool of interviewees.
Syracuse University has a strong tradition of faculty governance, starting at the program
level. Faculty empowerment through ownership of programs and governance helps establish
a collegial and collaborative environment, and plays a large role in the retention of qualified
faculty. Bylaws at the department and college level, and any changes in them, are maintained
and approved by the appropriate faculty. The faculty “own” the academic programs, and
through the program, department, and college committees make any changes necessary to
assure that their quality is continuously improved and accreditation criteria are met. The
faculty also has the sole authority to approve new programs. At the university level, the
university senate (which is composed of mostly faculty, and also staff, students and
administrators) and its various committees are the bodies of governance.
The Dean provides $50,000 annually for faculty excellence awards annually towards special
teaching projects. Projects in recent years included support sections for math courses,
development of a new course in sustainable manufacturing, and traveling to Ghana to
identify and solve bioengineering problems. Funding for these projects is provided in part by
alumni donations.
In order to encourage faculty to pursue and obtain support for their scholarship, a portion of
the faculty salaries charged to funded research projects are returned to the faculty members.
Faculty members then can use those funds for professional expenses such as conference
travel and student support. Institutional support for scholarly activities is another way of
encouraging the engagement of qualified faculty. The office of sponsored programs provides
outstanding support for faculty to identify external funding sources for their scholarship in
education and/or research, prepare compelling proposals, and establish relationships with
funding agencies.
2.8.5 Support for Faculty Professional Development
Faculty members may apply for a sabbatical leave once every seven years. Application
deadlines, procedures, and requirements are described in the university’s faculty manual. The
Dean, in consultation with department leadership, makes her recommendation to the provost.
Faculty leaves and their support are included in the regular budget process.
Faculty development is supported by internal and external funds. The Dean encourages
faculty members to attend and organize technical meetings, by providing travel and seed
funding with appropriate proposals.
92
3 PROGRAM CRITERIA
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has established a set of Civil Engineering
Program Criteria. According to the ASCE criteria, the program must prepare graduates to:
…apply knowledge of mathematics through differential equations, calculus-based
physics, chemistry, and at least one additional area of basic science, consistent with the
program educational objectives;
All undergraduate civil engineering majors are required to complete 12 credits of calculus
and analytical geometry (MAT295, MAT296, MAT397) and 3 credits of differential
equations and linear algebra (MAT485). In addition, basic principles and applications of
probability and statistics are covered in CIE272 (Civil and Environmental Engineering
Measurements). Additional topics in probability and statistics are incorporated in CIE352
(Water Resources Engineering) and CIE443 (Transportation Engineering). Only 1 credit hour
of mathematics is claimed from CIE272 for coverage of probability and statistics. Civil
engineering undergraduate students are also required to take 8 credits of calculus-based
physics (PHY211/221, PHY212/222) and 4 credits of general chemistry (CHE106/107). All
three physics and chemistry courses devote 1 credit hour to laboratory work. All civil
engineering majors also take either EAR101 – Dynamic Earth or EAR203 – Earth Systems
Science for 4 credits. The choice of Earth Science / Geology as the main additional area of
basic science is consistent with the program educational objectives 2 and 3 and both courses
include lecture and laboratory instruction. One credit hour of basic science is claimed from
CIE274 for coverage of biological science relevant to environmental engineering. Students
complete the mathematics and basic science courses at the end of the sophomore year and
concentrate on civil engineering courses thereafter. Some students take two additional upper-
level mathematics courses to graduate with a mathematics minor.
A college-wide program of Academic Excellence Workshops (AEW) was established in
1995 to enhance students understanding of calculus and analytical geometry. Each of
MAT295, MAT296 and MAT397 has corresponding sections of ECS105 – Supplemental
Math Workshop. All ECS students enrolled in any of these three mathematics courses are
invited to register in ECS105 for 1 credit. Students with low SAT math scores (below 590)
and students who are having trouble in calculus and analytical geometry courses are
especially encouraged to enroll in ECS105. These AEW sections have helped to improve the
math skills of participating students through group learning and peer mentoring.
…apply knowledge of four technical areas appropriate to civil engineering;
The curriculum of the civil engineering program emphasizes structural engineering,
geotechnical engineering, environmental engineering and hydraulics/water resources
engineering as its four major technical areas. Students are required to take at least 6 credits in
structures (CIE331-Analysis of Structures and Materials, and CIE332-Design of Concrete
Structures), 7 credits in geotechnical (CIE337-Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, and
CIE338-Foundation Engineering), 6 credits in environmental engineering (CIE341-
Introduction to Environmental Engineering and CIE442-Treatement Processes in
Environmental Engineering), and 8 credits in hydraulics/water resources engineering
(CIE327 or MAE341-Principles of Fluid Mechanics and CIE352-Water Recourses
93
Engineering). In addition, surveying/data analysis (CIE272-Civil and Environmental

Engineering Measurements), engineering materials (ECS326-Engineering Materials,
Properties and Processing) and transportation engineering (CIE443-Transportation
Engineering) comprise an additional required 9 credits. All students are required to take at
least 6 credits of upper-level civil engineering electives. A three-credit elective in
construction engineering (CIE400-Construction Engineering and Project Management) has
been offered since 2010. CIE 372 (Project Layout and Site Planning) combines elements of
surveying, construction, transportation, and geotechnical engineering. Taking advantage of
long-established course exchange arrangements with SUNY-ESF; civil engineering students
have taken courses such as CME335 (Cost Estimating), CME342 (Light Construction),
CME453 (Construction Planning and Scheduling), and ERE551 (GIS for Engineers) as
electives or to fulfill requirements for a construction management minor.
…conduct civil engineering experiments and analyze and interpret the resulting data;
Students conduct laboratory experiments or field exercises in several required civil
engineering courses:
• CIE272: Surveying exercises and data analysis laboratory exercises.
• CIE332: Forming, loading to failure, rehabilitating and testing reinforced concrete
beams.
• CIE337: Laboratory exercises on characterization and engineering properties of soils.
• CIE352: Laboratory exercises on hydraulics, including open-channel flow, pipe flow,
and pump ratings.
• CIE442: Laboratory exercises on unit operations and processes for water and
wastewater treatment.
• CIE443: Traffic counts, intersection control, delay and speed studies.
Although the amounts of lab and field experience vary from course to course, the common
objective is to teach students how to conduct experiments as well as to acquire and interpret
data. Students work in teams to complete lab and field assignments and prepare written
reports and/or presentations to deliver in class or post on Blackboard for discussion and
comment.
…design a system, component, or process in more than one civil engineering context;
A number of the required civil engineering courses offered in the junior and senior year have
design content (see Table 13). These include courses in structural (CIE 332), geotechnical
(CIE 338), and environmental engineering (CIE 442). The choice of technical electives is
restricted to upper-level civil engineering courses to provide opportunity for additional
design experience. The collective design experience in the civil engineering curriculum
culminates in the senior capstone design course (CIE475). In the capstone course, students
are grouped in teams to work on “real life” civil engineering projects. They develop an
understanding of the project objectives, review available information to characterize the site
conditions, establish design parameters, explore alternative options and perform detailed
designs.
94
…explain basic concepts in management, business, public policy, and leadership; and
explain the importance of professional licensure.
Civil engineering undergraduates first learn about professional behavior and ethics in the
college gateway course ECS101 (Introduction to Engineering and Computer Science). Civil
and environmental engineering majors are enrolled in sections of ECS101 separate from
other majors, and civil and environmental engineering faculty teach these sections of the
course.
All undergraduate civil engineering majors are required to select at least one three-credit
course from each of three clusters: “Economics and Social Issues”, “Global Affairs” and
“Public Policy and Policy Studies.” Courses in these three clusters are listed in Table 10 and
were selected to introduce students to basic concepts relevant to management, business and
public policy.
Practicing engineers deliver lectures in the senior capstone design course (CIE475) and cover
topics on leadership, management, business principles, professional ethics and social
responsibility. One of these presenters is Mr. Orrin MacMurray, CEO of C&S Engineers,
who discusses business, management, and leadership aspects of engineering. Mr. Lance
Ketcham, from Parsons Engineering, works with the students in the Senior Design course
throughout the semester, mentoring them on professional considerations as well as technical
matters related to their projects.
Information about professional licensure and how to become a professional engineer as well
as Code of Ethics for Engineers and Engineer’s Creed is provided in the Undergraduate
Student Handbook. Commentary by the National Society of Professional Engineers on
bidding for professional services and legal precedents is also provided in the student
handbook. The student handbook, which is distributed to every student upon matriculation,
also lists dates for the FE exams. The handbook is also available online at:
http://www.ecs.syr.edu/academic/civilenvironment_eng/undergrad_programs.aspx
Practicing engineers deliver lectures in the senior capstone design course (CIE475) and cover
topics on professional ethics and social responsibility. Representatives of NYSSPE (NY State
Society of Professional Engineers) give a seminar every spring to all seniors in the College
on requirements and procedures for acquiring a professional engineer status. Although
neither taking nor passing the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam is a degree
requirement, all seniors in the civil engineering program are reminded and encouraged to
take the FE exam. Review sessions are given as part of the senior capstone design course.
The ASCE student chapter provides copies of the FE review books to the senior class at
discounted prices.
95
Appendices
Appendix_A – Course Syllabi
Appendix_B – Faculty Vitae
Appendix_C - Equipment
Appendix_D – Institutional Summary
Appendix_E – Survey and Assessment Forms
Appendix_F – Fulfillment of SSH Distributional Requirement
[A-1]
Appendix_ A - Course Syllabi
Organizational Note:
The syllabi are ordered by course number, irrespective of the departmental prefix.
[A-2]
EAR 101 – Dynamic Earth
Credit Hours: 4
Contact Hours: Lecture: 2.75 hours per week. Laboratory: 2.75 hours per week.
Instructor: Suzanne Baldwin
Textbooks and Other Materials:
Required: Exploring Geology, 2nd Edition, Reynolds, Johnson, Morin, Kelly, and Carter.
McGraw-Hill. 2010.
GEOS, a custom lab manual for Syracuse University. Prentice-Hall (custom
publishing).
Catalog Description: Chemical, physical, and biological processes and principles affecting the
history and development of the earth. Lectures, laboratory, and field trips.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: None.
Course Role in Curriculum: Option for Earth Sciences Requirement
Student Outcomes:
[The text below was supplied by the Earth Science Department.]
We will begin with a discussion of how geologists study the Earth and the unifying theory of
plate tectonics. We will then investigate what the Earth is made of (minerals and rocks), and
how they form. We will journey to the center of the Earth to learn about the Earth’s internal
processes, and along the way, we will learn how and why rocks deform. We will then cover
processes at work on the Earth’s surface where we live.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, h, j]
Course Topics:
Solving geologic problems
Plate tectonics
Mineral properties and uses
Igneous rocks
Sedimentary rocks (and ancient environments)
Metamorphic rocks
Rock deformation
Ages of minerals, rocks and planet Earth
Seafloor, continents, mountains and basins
Earthquakes
Fluvial geomorphology
Glacial geomorphology
Water resources
Mineral and energy resources
[A-3]
ECS 101 – Introduction to Engineering and Computer Science
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture – 4.00 hours per week.
Instructor: Samuel P. Clemence

Required: AutoCAD 2011 Tutorial First Level: 2D Fundamentals by R.H. Shih and
J. Zecher, SDC Publications, Mission, KS (includes 180-day license AutoCAD
2011)
Additional Material Provided During Semester
Catalog Description: Gateway Course: Discussion of disciplines within college, technical

communication, presentation of technical results, professional behavior and ethics, modeling and
data analysis. Laboratory topics: Computers, computer language, and software packages.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites:
1. Knowledge of basic math including algebra and trigonometry
2. Basic computer knowledge
Course Role in Curriculum: Required Course
Course Objectives:
• Introduction to the engineering professions and computer science
• Develop an ability to communicate effectively
• Gain an understanding of the engineering design process
• Develop the ability to work on a team to accomplish a design project
• Develop an understanding of the professional and ethical issues encountered in
engineering and computer science
• Develop the ability to analyze and present data
Course Outcomes:
At the completion of the course, each student should be able to:
1. Understand and demonstrate knowledge of the various engineering

disciplines and computer science.
2.
2.1 Understand the steps involved in the design process.
2.2 Develop plans and specifications for a shopping center including site layout and
space plan utilization.
2.3 Understand the process for designing and constructing a large-scale model bridge
to support a specific load or environmental design
[Student Outcomes: c]
3.
3.1 Understand the concepts involved in working in a multidisciplinary team through
exercises involving research through the discovery process.
[A-4]
3.2 Understand the requirements for working on teams through projects involving
elementary structural/environmental design
[Student Outcomes: d]
4.
4.1 Understand the steps involved in developing an engineering report.
4.2 Understand and demonstrate the process of developing three, team-oriented
technical presentations utilizing Power Point technology.
[Student Outcomes: g]
5.
5.1 Understand the professional and ethical issues involved in design and construction
in civil and environmental engineering and their impact on the profession.
5.2 Understand and demonstrate knowledge of the code of ethics and their application
in practical situations through case histories and forensic study of engineering
failures.
[Student Outcomes: f]
6.
6.1 Understand the registration process and steps to professional licensure.
6.2 Understand the need for continuous learning throughout one's career through
example and case histories.
[Student Outcomes: i]
7.
7.1 Understand and demonstrate competence in word processing, AutoCAD and
PowerPoint through preparation of a resume, completion of drawings and design
presentations.
[Student Outcomes: g, k]
Course Topics:
Time management and goal setting
History of Engineering and Computer Science
Introduction to Engineering Disciplines and Computer Science
Presentation of Technical Data
Teamwork strategies
Computer applications –software packages
Introduction to design process
Engineering problem solving
Communications -written and oral
Professional issues
Ethics and licensing of engineers
[A-5]
WRT 105 – Practices of Academic Writing
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture: 2.75 hours per week.
Instructor: Various (This syllabus is from Anne Fitzsimmons)
Required: Writing: A Manual for the Digital Age, David Blakesly and Jeffrey Hoogeveen.
Critical Encounters with Texts: Finding a Place to Stand, 6th Edition, Margaret
Himley and Anne Fitzsimmons.
Writing Analytically, 5th Edition, David Rosenwasser and Jill Stephen.
Intertext. A collection of student writing.
Catalog Description: Study and practice of writing processes, including critical reading,
collaboration, revision, editing, and the use of technologies. Focuses on the aims, strategies, and
conventions of academic prose, especially analysis and argumentation.
Course Outcomes:
At the end of this course the student will be able to:
• compose a variety of texts in a process (inventing, drafting, revising, editing) that takes
place over time, that requires thinking and rethinking ideas, and that addresses diverse
audiences and rhetorical contexts.
• critically analyze and create arguments for or against textual materials.
• apply critical techniques of reading through engagement with texts that raise issues of
diversity and community and encourage students to make connections across difference.
• incorporate critical research in their composing processes.
[Student Outcomes: g, k]
Course Topics: Not provided by teaching department.
[A-6]
CHE 106 – General Chemistry Lecture (I)
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture: 2.75 hours per week. Recitation: 55 minutes per week.
Instructor: Tim Korter
Required: Chemistry, the Central Science, 11th Edition. Brown, LeMay, Bursten, and
Murphy. Pearson/Prentice-Hall. 2009.
Student Guide to Chemistry, the Central Science, 11th Edition. Hill.
Pearson/Prentice-Hall. 2009
Online: Mastering Chemistry web portal.
Catalog Description: Fundamental principles and laws underlying chemical action, states of
matter, atomic and molecular structure, chemical bonding, stoichiometry, properties of solutions,
chemical equilibrium, and introductory thermodynamics. Descriptive chemistry in relation to
theoretical principles.
Course Outcomes:
[None provided by the Department of Chemistry.]
[Student Outcomes: a]
Course Topics:
Measurement
Atomic theory and the periodic table
Molecules, ions, compounds
Chemical formulas, reactions, stoichiometry
Limiting reactants
Precipitation and acid-base reactions
Oxidation-reduction reactions
Thermochemistry
Quantum mechanics
Electron configurations
Metals, non-metals and metalloids
Chemical bonding
Gas laws
[A-7]
CHE 107 – General Chemistry Laboratory (I)
Credit Hours: 1
Contact Hours: Laboratory: 2.75 hours per week.
Instructor: Philip Borer
Required: General Chemistry Laboratory & Notebook Using Biochemical Tools. Custom
published for the Department of Chemistry.
Catalog Description: Experimental study of basic principles and techniques of chemistry. States
of matter, determination of formulas and molecular weights, simple volumetric and gravimetric
analysis, heats of reaction. Equilibrium, rates of reactions, and qualitative analysis.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: CHE 106 or 109.
Course Outcomes:
[Not provided by the Department of Chemistry.]
[Student Outcomes: a, b, g]
Course Topics (Exercises):

Safety practices in the chemistry laboratory
Volume and mass measurements
Dimensional analysis and stoichiometry
Chemical formulas and reactions
Verifying the empirical formula of a compound
Acid-base titrations
Enthalpy of neutralization
Issues in water quality
Atomic and molecular structure
[A-8]
EAR 203 –Earth System Science
Credit Hours: 4
Contact Hours: Lecture: 2.75 hours per week. Laboratory: 2.75 hours per week.
Instructor: Gregory D. Hoke
Required: The Earth System, 3rd Edition, L.R. Kump, J.F. Kastings, and R. G. Crane.
Prentice-Hall. 2009.
Course lab manual.
Catalog Description: An integrated view of interactions among earth's systems (lithosphere,

biosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere) and the timescales over which they operate. Topics covered
in this course include: plate tectonics, atmospheric circulation, oceanic circulation, the
greenhouse effect, the carbon cycle, the origin of the earth and life, and climate.
Course Role in Curriculum: Option for Earth Sciences Requirement
Course Outcomes:
[The text below was supplied by the Earth Science Department.]
Students taking this course will learn how the basic elements of the earth interact through
various linkages and feedbacks that operate over timescales of millions of years to years. A
major goal of this course will be supplying students with the basic, yet comprehensive, view
earth system necessary for evaluating information and making decisions about relevant
environmental issues.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, h, j]
Course Topics:
• Global change over different timescales
• An introduction to systems
• Global energy balance and the Earth’s greenhouse
• Atmospheric circulation
• Ocean circulation
• Circulation of the solid earth
• Continential landforms
• Nutrient cycling
• The origin of the Earth and life
• Long-term climate regulation
• Global change over the last 2.5 Ma-present
[A-9]
WRT 205 – Critical Research and Writing
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Various (This syllabus is from Chris Feikes)
Required: Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the All-American Meal, Eric Schlosser.
Don’t Eat This Book, Morgan Spurlock.
Writing: A Manual for the Digital Age, Brief Edition, David Blakesly and Jeffrey
Hoogeoveen.
A coursepack of miscellaneous readings.
Catalog Description: Study and practice of critical, research-based writing, including research
methods, presentation genres, source evaluation, audience analysis, and library/online research.
Students complete at least one sustained research project.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: WRT 105.
Course Outcomes:
• investigate a shared topic of inquiry and develop research questions that engage the
complexities (social, political, ideological, economic, historical) of and current debates
about that topic.
• apply multiple research strategies, including primary research and use of library
databases in order to identify sources appropriate to their research questions.
• evaluate the validity of research sources in the context of their research questions.
• read research sources rhetorically, considering authors’ positions in relation to audiences,
recognizing points of congruence and difference among texts, and establishing a genuine
dialogue with others’ ideas.
• recognize the role of genres, sources, styles, and media in communicating with particular
audiences and for specific purposes.
• articulate ways in which digital media shape all stages of the research and writing
process—invention, composing, revision, delivery—and will understand how the effects
of digital media vary according to audience, genre, context and purpose.
• produce analysis, argument, synthesis, and summary as central components of their
research writing.
• incorporate the research of others into their own texts in a variety of ways (including
summary, paraphrase, quotation), providing textual evidence of where, how and why
sources are being used.
• produce texts that demonstrate a nuanced understanding of and an ethical relationship
with source texts and research participant.
• demonstrate how their dialogue with sources has broadened and enhanced their own
thinking about an issue.
• apply revision and editing strategies for organization, prose style, and technical control.
[Student Outcomes: g, (f), k]
Course Topics: Not provided by teaching department.
[A-10]
PHY 211 – General Physics I
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Tomasz Skwarnicki
Required: University Physics, Volume 1, 12th Edition. Young and Freedman.
Student Access Kit to Mastering Physics.
Catalog Description: First half of a two semester introduction to classical physics including
mechanics and thermal physics. Uses calculus. Knowledge of plane trigonometry required.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: PHY 212 (co-req), MAT 295 (co-req).
Course Outcomes:
[None provided by the Department of Physics.]

Forces
Motion of objects
Friction
Laws of Thermodynamics
[A-11]
PHY 212 – General Physics II
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Matthew LaHaye
Required: Physics for Scientists and Engineers: A Strategic Approach, Volume IV, 2nd
Edition. Randall D. Knight. Pearson/Addison-Wesley. 2008.
Student Workbook for Physics for Scientists and Engineers: A Strategic
Approach, Volume IV. Randall D. Knight. Pearson/Addison-Wesley. 2008.
Catalog Description: Second half of a two semester introduction to classical physics including
electricity, magnetism and light.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: MAT 295, PHY 211, 221. PHY 212, MAT 296 (co-reqs).
Course Outcomes:
[The following text was provided by the Department of Physics.]
During the semester, you will start to explore the nature of electric charge. You will learn
some of the basic rules and concepts that we use to describe the behavior of charge and
account for a wide range of electric and magnetic phenomena. From these studies, you will
develop a solid foundation from which to begin to understand the electromagnetic world in
which we live.

Electric charge and electric forces
Electric fields
Gauss’ Law
Electric potential
Electric cicuits
Magnetic fields and forces
Induction and Faraday’s Law
Electromagnetic waves
Interference and light
[A-12]
ECS 221 – Statics
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture – 2.75 hours per week. Recitation – 0.92 hours per week
Instructor: Sinead Mac Namara
Required: Vector Mechanics for Engineers-Statics by F.P. Beer, E.R. Johnston and E.R.
Eisenberg, McGraw-Hill, 9th Edition,
Catalog Description:
Fundamentals of static equilibrium. Vector algebra. Forces, moments, equivalent force systems.
Free body diagrams, equilibrium in two and three dimensions. Analysis of structures and
machines. Centroids and moments of inertia.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: MAT 296 and PHY 211
Course Objectives:
• To learn the fundamentals of static equilibrium.
• To understand how forces, moments, and moment couples impact rigid bodies.
• To gain an ability to represent a rigid body, a simple structure or a machine as a free body
diagram or series of free body diagrams that demonstrate all the forces acting on the body
and solve for internal forces and moments.
• To learn the primary properties of shape that influence structural performance of rigid
bodies.
Course Outcomes:
1. Vector Algebra
1.1 add and subtract vectors (using the parallelogram law) and multiply vectors by
scalars.
1.2 resolve vectors into components
1.3 perform basic operations on vectors using rectangular components in two and three
dimensions
1.4 understand and compute the vector and scalar product of two vectors
[Student Outcomes: a and e]
2. Forces and Moments
2.1 relate physical forces to their mathematical representation as vectors.
2.2 understand the physical meaning of moments (about a point or a line) and compute
these quantities in two and three dimensions.
2.3 compute moments of couples
2.4 resolve forces into forces and moments, and reduce systems of forces
[Student Outcomes: a and e]
3. Elementary Mechanical Systems
3.1 draw free body diagrams of particles, rigid bodies and systems
3.2 model connections and supports
[A-13]
3.3 apply Newton’s 3rd law to a mechanical system
3.4 write equilibrium equations in two and three dimensions
3.5 solve equilibrium equations and physically interpret solutions
[Program Objectives a and e]
4. Dry Friction and Elementary Structural Applications
4.1 understand dry friction
4.2 solve elementary statics problems involving dry friction
4.3 recognize simple structures and mechanisms such as trusses, frames and simple
machines
4.4 draw shear and bending moment diagrams
[Program Objectives a, c and e]
5. Properties of Area and Volume
5.1 compute centroids and centers of gravity for lines, areas and solids of revolution
5.2 compute moments of inertia, products of inertia and the polar moments of inertia of
areas and solids of revolution
5.3 apply the parallel axis theorem, compute principle axes and principal moments of
inertia.
[Program Objectives a, c and e]
Course Topics:
Vectors
Addition of vectors
Equilibrium
Equlibirum in 3D
Equivalent Systems of Forces
Moments and Rigid Bodies
Force Couples and Moments
Equivalent Force Couple Systems
Equilibrium of Rigid Bodies (2D and 3D)
2 and 3 Force Systems
Properties of Area – Centroids
Centers of Volume and Gravity
Structural Analysis of Trusses (Meothd of Sections)
Structural Analysis of Trusses (Meothd of Joints)
Structural Analysis of Frames
Structural Analysis of Machines
Simple Friction
Friction – Bearing and Wedges
Friction – Belts
Moments of Inertia
Product of Inertia
Shear Force Diagrams
Bending Moment Diagrams
[A-14]
PHY 221 – General Physics Laboratory I
Credit Hours: 1
Instructor: Kenneth Foster (Course Supervisor)
Required: Lab manual provided by department.
Catalog Description: Techniques of laboratory work: treatment of random errors, graphical

representation of data. Experimental demonstration of principles of mechanics, thermodynamics,
and waves (of vector forces, conservation of momentum and energy, thermal properties of
gases).
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: PHY 211 or PHY 215 (co-req).
Course Outcomes:

Position, displacement, velocity
Acceleration and uniform motion
Motion in one and two dimensions
Forces and springs
F = ma and friction
Work and energy
Linear momentum and collisions
Torque, moment of inertia, and rotational dynamics
Moment of inertia, angular momentum and its conservation
Conservation of energy
Behavior of gases
[A-15]
ECS 222 – Dynamics
Credits: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture: 2.7 hours/wk. Recitation: 0.92 hours/wk.
Instructor: Harish J. Palanthandalam-Madapusi
Textbook and Other Materials:
Required: Vector Mechanics for Engineers – Dynamics, 9th Edition. F. P. Beer, E. R. Johnston,
and W. E. Clausen, McGraw-Hill. 2009
Catalog Description: Dynamics of a particle. Newton’s law and D’Alembert’s principle. Plane
motion. Cartesian, polar, and local coordinates. Energy and momentum methods. Motion of a
rigid body. Review of vector algebra and moments of inertia.
Prerequisites: MAT 296, ECS 221
Course Role in Curriculum: Option to Satisfy Engineering Science Requirement.

Course Outcomes:
At the end of the course the student will be able to:
• Develop intuition about three dimensional motion, forces, and moments
[Student Outcome: e]
• Connect related topics in dynamics to arrive at a solution
• Indentify the concepts that are applicable to a specific problem in dynamics
[Student Outcome: a]
• Apply knowledge of calculus and vectors to solve problems in dynamics
• Apply fundamentals and known concepts to a variety of dynamics problems [Student
outcome: a]
Course Topics:
• Kinematics of particles
• Dynamics of particles
• Energy and momentum methods for particles
• Impact of particles
• Dynamics of systems of particles
• Kinematics of rigid bodies
• Dynamics of rigid bodies
• Energy and momentum methods for rigid bodies
• Impact of rigid bodies
• Understand forced and natural responses.
[A-16]
PHY 222 – General Physics Laboratory II
Credit Hours: 1
Instructor: Kenneth Foster (Course Supervisor)
Required: Lab manual provided by department.
Catalog Description: Experimental study of principles of electromagnetism and their

application in electrical circuits. Use of electronic instruments, such as the oscilloscope.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: PHY 212 or PHY 216 (co-req).
Course Outcomes:

Electric Charges
Electrical Potential and Electrostatic Fields
Ohm’s Law
DC Circuits
RC Circuits
Gauss’s Law and Electrostatic Fields
Magnetic Fields
Motion of Electrons in Electric and Magnetic Fields
Ampere’s Law
Faraday’s Law
Interference and Diffraction of Light
[A-17]
ELE 231 – Electrical Engineering Fundamentals I
Credits: 3 (4 with lab)
Contact Hours: Lecture: 2.7 hours/wk. Recitation: 0.92 hours/wk. (Lab: 2.7 hours/wk.)
Instructor: Duane Marcy
Required: Fundamentals of Electric Circuits, 4th Ed., Charles K. Alexander and Matthew
N.O. Sadiku, McGraw-Hill, 2009.
Catalog Description: Principles and methods of analysis of electric circuits with both direct and
time varying sources in the steady state. KCL, KVL, mesh, and nodal techniques. Network
theorems are developed and applied to the analysis of networks. Energy storage elements. First
order and second order circuits with forced and natural responses. Sinusoidal analysis, complex
numbers, phasor diagrams. Power: average, effective, and complex power in single phase
systems.
Prerequisites: MAT 295, PHY 212
Course Outcomes:
• …recall the following information:
o Thevenin’s Theorem and its application in electrical instrumentation and
measurement.
o Introductory concepts of operational amplifiers and their use.
o The nature and effects of sources and loads.
o Introductory concepts of AC signals
[Student Outcomes: a, e]
• …apply the following knowledge and skills:
o Make ammeters and voltmeters.
o Measure frequency response of an RC circuit.
o Conduct transient analysis of an RC circuit.
o Design and evaluate voltage and current divider circuits.
o Build and use first order filter circuits and applied op-amp circuits.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, c, e, f, g, k]
Course Topics:
• Understand the difference between current and voltage.
• Be able to calculate electrical power and energy.
• Know how to use KVL, KCL, and Ohm’s Law.
• Be able to apply mesh and nodal analysis to electric circuits.
• Know how to write constraint equations for dependent variables.
• Know and be able to apply the ideal op-amp assumptions.
• Understand and know how to find a Thevenin equivalent circuit.
[A-18]
• Know the current-voltage relationship for a capacitor and an inductor.
• Be able to derive first and second order differential equations from a circuit.
• Understand and be able to use complex numbers.
• Understand forced and natural responses.
• Be able to apply phasor analysis to a sinusoidal steady state circuit.
[A-19]
MAE 251 – Thermodynamics
Credits: 4
Contact Hours: Lecture: 3.7 hours per week. Recitation: 0.92 hours per week.
Instructor: Jacques Lewalle
Required: Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics by Moran, Shapiro, Boettner and
Bailey, John Wiley.
Catalog Description: Basic concepts in engineering thermodynamics. Thermodynamic
properties of solids, liquids and gases. First and second laws of thermodynamics. Reversible and
irreversible processes. Entropy equation. Energy analysis of basic cycles.
Prerequisites: PHY 212
Course Outcomes:
• Apply analytical concepts, knowledge, and mathematical tools to solve problems
associated with:
o The fundamental laws of thermodynamics and thermodynamic properties (using
calculus)
o Analytical formulation of steady flow processes, cycles, closed-system processes,
etc.
o Different roles of fundamental laws, of process relations and of material
properties.
o Introductory applications to power and refrigeration cycles.
• Formulate and methodically solve engineering problems
o What to do when you don’t know what to do: method, method!
Course Topics:
Concepts of piston work, energy, heat transfer
First Law of thermodynamics for closed systems, thermal efficiency, cycles
Material properties and relations between them, thermodynamic coefficients
Open systems: reformulation of the First Law, steady flow processes
Modeling of real machinery as an abstract process equation
Irreversibility, Second Law of thermodynamics, entropy
Basic power and refrigeration cycles
Available energy, energy analysis, Second Law efficiency
[A-20]
CIE 272 – Civil Engineering Measurements and Analysis
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture – 2.75 hours per week. Lab – 2.75 hours per week
Instructor: Chris Johnson
Required: Engineering Statistics, 4th Ed. D.C. Montgomery, G.C. Runger, and N.F.
Hubele, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. 2007.
Recommended: Engineering Surveying, 6th Ed. W. Schofield and M. Breach, Butterworth-
Heinemann, Oxford, UK. 2007. (Available electronically through the SU
Library)
Catalog Description: Skills for civil and environmental engineering. Map reading and theory of
measurement. Numerical analysis and methods. Problem solving using computers.
1. Knowledge of differential and integral calculus: MAT 295; MAT 296 may be taken
concurrently).
2. Basic facility with computers and the World Wide Web: ECS 101.
Course Objectives:
• To learn the fundamentals of plane surveying theory and practice.
• To build skills in data analysis.
• To begin to develop an understanding of the care involved in making high-quality
measurements.
• To build teamwork skills through group laboratory assignments.
Course Outcomes:
At the completion of this course, the student should be able to:
1. Generate, analyze, and portray plane surveying data.
1.1. Measure distances by taping.
1.2. Use a total station for measuring angles, elevations, and horizontal distances.
1.3. Use global positioning systems (GPS) equipment to determine the positions of
points on the ground.
1.4. Determine angles, distances, elevations, postions, areas, and volumes from
surveying data.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,e,k]
2. Create high-quality graphical displays of data.
2.1. Determine the most appropriate graph type for the graphical display of data.
2.2. Create high-quality graphs by hand and using computer software.
2.3. Develop quantitative relationships from bivariate graphs.
[Student Outcomes: a,e,(f),g,k]
3. Carry out appropriate statistical analyses of univariate and bivariate data.
3.1. Compute summary statistics (mean, median, variance, etc.)
3.2. Plot and use histograms and cumulative frequency plots.
[A-21]
3.3. Compute confidence intervals and carry out hypothesis tests on a single
variable.
3.4. Carry out hypothesis tests comparing the means or variances of two variables.
3.5. Perform regression analysis on two variables, including the computation of
correlation and hypothesis testing of slopes and intercepts.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,e,(f),g,(j),k]
4. Work in teams to collect, analyze, and report data.
4.1. Prepare a joint report for a group project.
4.2. Negotiate with colleagues to reach consensus decisions.
4.3. Present engineering calculations in a clear, effective manner.
[Student Outcomes: b,d,g,k]
Course Topics:
Types of surveying
Methods of distance measurement
Errors in distance measurement
Leveling
Errors in leveling
Angle measurement
Bearing and azimuth
Errors in angle measurement
Closed-loop traverse
Open traverse (route surveying)
Global positioning systems
Using coordinates in surveying
Latitudes and departures
Compass and map work
Summary statistics
Graphical display of data
Graphical analysis and model-building
Probability fundamentals
Discrete and continuous data
Populations vs. samples
Normal (Gaussian) distribution
Confidence intervals
Correlation
Linear regression
Coefficient of determination
(Easy) non-linear regression
Hypotheses
Hypothesis tests on a single mean
Hypothesis tests comparing two means (paired and unpaired samples)
Confidence and prediction intervals in regression
[A-22]
CIE 274 - Sustainability of Civil and Environmental Systems
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture – 2.75 hours per week
Instructor: Charles T. Driscoll and Cliff I. Davidson

Required: Introduction to Environmental Engineerign and Science, by Gilbert M. Masters
and Wendell P. Ela, Pearson Prentice Hall, 3rd Edition, 2008.
Catalog Description: Introduction to systems theory and concepts applied to natural and built
environments. Sustainability, ecosystems mass and energy balances, chemical transformation
and reactions. Basic principles for civil and environmental engineering design and decision
making.
1. Knowledge of differential and integral calculus; MAT 295.
2. CHE 106
Course Objectives:
The primary objectives of this course are to:
• introduce principles of sustainability and systems as applied to the natural and built
environments;
• provide skills necessary for quantitative assessments of civil and environmental
engineering problems;
• use principles developed in class to evaluate and solve complex open-ended
environmental problems and communicate the results of the analysis.
Course Outcomes:
At the completion of the class, each student should be able to:
1.
1.1. define and describe sustainability as it pertains to the local and global
environment.
1.2. describe the difference between natural and built environments and the
sustainability issues of each.
1.3. summarize major environmental legislation and policy.
[Student Outcomes: e, h, j]
2.
2.1. perform calculations relating to mass and energy balances.
2.2. calculate growth within populations using various growth models.
2.3. understand the assumptions inherent in population growth models.
2.4. use GIS data sets.
2.5. use US Census data sets.
2.6. make engineering economic calculations.
[A-23]
2.7. calculate current and projected water consumption rates.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, c, e, g, h, j, k]
3.
3.1 utilize regional US data sets to evaluate current and projected future (2050)
changes in population growth, energy production/consumption, land cover, water
resources, and air quality.
3.2 understand the assumptions used in complex calculations and data analysis.
3.3 work in teams to organize an oral presentation and written report pertaining to
the analysis of the regional data sets.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k]
Course Topics:
Sustainable Engineering
Human Development
Population and Resource Consumption
Mass and Energy Transfer
Calls to Action for Sustainability
Water Pollution and Control
Air Quality
Global Change
Engineering Economics
Industrial Ecology and Metrics of Sustainability
Materials
Green Buildings
[A-24]
MAT 295 – Calculus I
Credit Hours: 4
Instructor: Professor Terry McConnell (Course Supervisor)
Required: Calculus: Early Transcendentals, James Stewart, 6th Edition.
Brooks/Cole,Thomson.
Software: Enhanced WebAssign, an online homework system. (Purchased as a bundle from
the bookstore.)
Catalog Description: Analytic Geometry, limits, derivatives, maxima-minima, related rates,

graphs, differentials, exponential and logarithmic functions, mean-value theorem, integration.
For science majors.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: MAT 194 (with a grade of C- or better) or its equivalent. A
calculus readiness test, administered on the first day of class, will be used to determine readiness
for MAT 295.
Learning Outcomes:
[Supplied by the Mathematics Department, these outcomes apply to all
Mathematics courses.]
• Understanding the nature and role of deductive reasoning in mathematics
• Ability to use and understand the usage of mathematical notation
• Ability to follow proofs and other mathematical discourse
• Ability to write simple proofs in the major proof formats (direct, indirect, inductive),
and, more generally, to engage in mathematical discourse
• Ability to select an appropriate mathematical model for a given real world problem
• Ability to apprehend and enunciate the limitations of conclusions drawn from
mathematical models
• Ability to do hand calculations accurately and appropriately
• Ability to do calculations with the aid of appropriate hardware and/or software
• Having a basic knowledge of the contributions and significance of important historical
figures in mathematics
• Having a basic knowledge of the major modern theories of analysis, abstract algebra,
geometry, and applied mathematics
• Ability to effectively use mathematical word processing software
• Having a basic understanding of career options available to mathematics majors
• Ability to locate and use sources and tools that aid mathematical scholarship
[Student Outcomes: a, k]
[A-25]
MAT 296 – Calculus II
Credit Hours: 4
Instructor: Professor Dan Zacharia (Course Supervisor)
Required: Calculus: Early Transcendentals, James Stewart, 6th Edition. 2008.
the bookstore.)
Catalog Description: Integration: the definite integral and applications; trigonometric functions,
methods of integration, improper integrals, L'Hospital's rule, infinite series, elementary
differential equations, parametric equations, polar coordinates.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: MAT 295 (with a grade of C- or better).
Learning Outcomes:
mathematical models
[A-26]
WRT 307 – Professional Writing
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Various (This syllabus is from Krista Kennedy)
Required: Technical Communication: A Reader-Centered Approach, 7th Edition, Paul V.
Anderson. Wadsworth, 2010.
A box of Lego bricks.
Catalog Description: Professional communication through the study of audience, purpose, and
ethics. Rhetorical problem-solving principles applied to diverse professional writing tasks and
situations.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: WRT 105, 205. Junior standing.
Course Outcomes:
• Analyze audiences and situations
• Manage a sustained, multiple product project
• Work collaboratively
• Design and produce texts and graphics
• Conduct basic usability testing
• Develop effective oral presentations
[Student Outcomes: (d), g, (f), k]
Course Topics:
Policies and Procedures
Rhetorical Terms & Concepts
Rhetorical Analysis of Prospective Employers
Expectations of You as a Writer
Workplace Writing Conventions
Intro to Superstructures and Other Genres
Style/Tone
Document Design Basics
Expectations of You as an Employee
Collaboration and Teamwork
Designing Instructions
Writing for the Web
User-Centered Design
Usability Testing
Working With Graphic Elements
Revision Process
Managing Client-Centered Projects
[A-27]
Persuasion
Working with Multi-Level Documents
Conducting Workplace Research
Creating Effective Reports
Ethics
Effective Presentations: Delivery, Visual Design
[A-28]
ECS 325 – Mechanics of Solids
Credit Hours: 4
Contact Hours: Lecture – 3.58 hours per week. Recitation/Lab – 55 minutes per week
Instructor: Fares Jnaid
Required: Mechanics of Materials, 8th Ed. R. C. Hibbeler, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2011.
Recommended: Ranking Tasks for Mechanics of Materials, Shane Brown, Cara Poor,
Pearson Prentice Hall, 2011.
Catalog Description: Theory of deformation, stress, stress resultants, transformation. Elastic
and inelastic constitutive behavior. Equilibrium. Tension and torsion of bars, flexure and shear
of beams, pressure vessels. Thermoelasticity. Elastic and inelastic stability. Energy methods.
1. Statics (ECS221)
2. Calculus (MAT295, MAT296)
Course Objectives:
1. to introduce the concepts of stresses and strains in deformable bodies.
2. to discuss the relationship between stresses and strains, stress and stress resultants,
and strains and deformations.
3. to introduce analysis methods for simple statically determinate and statically
indeterminate engineering systems.
4. To understand the behavior of deformable bodies under externally applied and
temperature loads.
Course Outcomes:
1.
1.1 understand the different types of stresses that are present in a deformable
body under a given loading.
1.2 understand the different types of strains that are present in a deformable body
under a given loading.
[Student Outcomes: a,e]
2.
2.1 use Hooke’s Law and Generalized Hooke’s Law to compute stresses from
strains, and vice versa.
2.2 learn the difference among uniaxial, biaxial and triaxial stress and strain
states.
2.3 understand the difference between plane stress and plane strain idealizations.
2.4 calculate internal stresses and strains in a deformation body under a given
loading condition.
2.5 perform stress (and strain) analysis using stress (or strain) transformation
equations and Mohr Circle.
[Student Outcomes: a,e,k]
3.
[A-29]
3.1 draw free body diagrams and calculate internal forces and moments using
equilibrium equations.
3.2 write shear and bending moment equations and draw shear and bending
moment diagrams for beams.
3.3 understand the difference between statically determinate and statically
indeterminate systems.
3.4 understand the concept of consistent displacements and write compatibility
equations for statically indeterminate systems.
3.5 apply energy principles to solve statically determinate and statically
indeterminate truss and beam problems.
4.
4.1 understand system behavior under externally applied loads and temperature
loading.
4.2 Compute thermal stresses and strain for statically determinate and statically
indeterminate systems.
[Student Outcomes: a,c,e]
Course Topics:
Stress-Strain Concept, Stress on an Oblique Plane under Axial Loading
Hooke's Law and Poisson's Ratio
Elastic versus Plastic Behavior
Analysis of Statically Determinate Axially-Loaded Members
Analysis of Statically Indeterminate Axially-Loaded Members
Effect of Temperature Loading
Analysis of Statically Determinate & Indeterminate Torsion Members
Torsion of Noncircular and Thin-walled hollow Members
Analysis of Flexural Members (V and M equations/diagrams)
Analysis of Statically Determinate Flexural Members
Non-homogeneous Sections
Shear Stress in Beams, Shear Flow and Built-up Beams
Stress Analysis, and Thin-Walled Pressure Vessels
Combined Loadings
Strain Analysis, Strain Rosette, & Generalized Hooke's Law
Beam Rotations and Deflections by Double Integration
Analysis of Statically Indeterminate Beams by Method of Superposition
Energy Methods (Conservation of Energy)
Castigliano’s Theorem Theorem of Least Work
Column Analysis
[A-30]
ECS 326 - Engineering Materials, Properties and Processing
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture – 2.75 hours per week. Recitation – 1 hour per week
Instructor: Joan Dannenhoffer

Required: Mamlouk, M.S. and Zaniewski, J.P., Materials for Civil and Construction
Engineers, 3rd Ed, Pearson, 2011.
Catalog Description: Introduction to the properties and applications of engineering materials

with emphasis on structure-property-processing relationships; fundamentals of structure,
properties, and processing; materials selection for design; case studies of specific engineering
applications.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: none
Course Objectives: As a first course in engineering materials for students with no previous
background in the subject, the primary objective of this course is to link the physical and
mechanical properties of materials to the design of devices and structures, and to relate the
processing of materials and their subsequent properties through their structure. Specifically the
objectives are:
• Introduce all of the classes of engineering materials, their structure and properties.
• Relate the properties of materials to their structure and explain how processing affects
properties through structure.
• Introduce the concept of materials selection as part of the design process through
presentation of case studies and failure analyses.
Course Outcomes:
At the completion of the course the student should:
1. Understand the types of materials: metal and alloys, ceramics, polymers, composites
and semiconductors.
2. Appreciate how material structures, e.g., electronic-, molecular-, crystal-, grain-,
macro-structure are affected by processing and influence properties.
3. Understand the physical (e.g., thermal, optical, electrical) and mechanical (e.g.,
strength, modulus, ductility, fracture toughness, fatigue) properties of materials.
4. Carryout appropriate calculations related to (3) including statistical analysis of
samples
5. Understand failure modes of materials.
6. Understand materials selection to meet design needs and manufacturing requirements.
7. Students should know the vocabulary, concepts, types of problems that can be solved,
and be able to summarize main concepts.
8. Students should be able to recognize the environmental and societal impact of
material processing and manufacturing.
[A-31]
9. Students should recognize current events and contemporary issues that either effect
material availability, processing, or new uses.
[Student Outcomes: a, e, h, j, k]
Course Topics:
Material Concepts
Nature of Materials
Material Selection
Steel
Aluminum
Aggregates
Cement
Masonry
Asphalt
Wood
Composites
[A-32]
CIE 331 – Analysis of Structures and Materials
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Eric Lui
Required: Structural Analysis, 4th edition, A. Kassimali, Cengage Learning, Stamford, CT,
2010
Software: Kassimali Computer Software for StructuralAnalysis
Catalog Description: Analysis of statically determinate and indeterminate trusses, beams and
frames by traditional and computer-based methods. Physical, mechanical and thermal properties
of conventional and environmental friendly construction materials.
Mechanics of Solids (ECS 325).
Calculus I (MAT 295), Calculus II (MAT 296) may be taken concurrently.
Ability to use a computer.
Course Objectives:
A. To introduce the concepts of geometrical stability, determinacy, equilibrium and
compatibility of structures.
B. To discuss various analysis methods for determining forces and deformations in
structures.
C. To learn the behavior of structures under stationary and moving loads.
D. To address issues related to computer structural modeling.
E. To introduce computer-aided analysis of statically determinate and indeterminate
structures.
F. To discuss computer result interpretation.
G. To introduce commonly used materials used in construction.
H. To address sustainability issues related to finite material resources and the impact
of material utilization and disposal on the environment.
Course Outcomes:
A.
1. determine whether a structure is stable, unstable, statically determinate or statically
indeterminate.
2. construct free body diagrams and calculate reactions and internal forces for statically
determinate structures using simple equilibrium equations.
[Student Outcomes a,e]
B.
1. use the method of joints and method of sections for truss analysis.
2. use the slope-deflection and moment distribution methods for beam analysis.
3. use the slope-deflection method for frame analysis.
4. use the virtual work method to compute displacements.
5. understand the concepts of superposition and compatibility.
[A-33]
[Student Outcomes a,e,k]
C.
1. draw shear and bending moment diagrams.
2. construct influence lines and understand their importance.
3. use influence lines to determine the worst loading condition for purpose of design.
4. calculate the maximum axial force in trusses, and the maximum shear and moment in
beams for a given set of moving loads.
D.
1. understand the meaning of joints, elements and degrees-of-freedom.
2. develop a structural model for computer-aided analysis.
E.
1. use a structural analysis software to perform structural analysis.
2. determine and prepare the necessary input data for computer analysis.
F.
1. interpret the meaning of the computer results.
2. verify the validity of the computer solution.
[Student Outcomes b,k]
G.
1. understand the physical, mechanical and thermal properties of some commonly used
construction materials such as concrete, steel, wood, and other novel materials such
as structural plastics and fiber-reinforced polymers (FRP).
2. select the right material(s) for use in a given design.
H.
1. appreciate the environmental impact associated with the use of a construction
material.
2. understand the issue of sustainability in construction.
[Student Outcomes h,j]
Course Topics:
Loads on Structures, Statics Review
Geometrical Instability, Statical Determinacy and Indeterminacy
Plane and Space Truss Analysis, Shear and Bending Moment for Beams and Frames
Beam Deflection by Direct Integration and Superposition
Virtual Work Method applied to Trusses, Beams and Frames
Influence Lines – Quantitative and Qualitative Methods, Applications
Analysis of Statically Indeterminate Structures by Method of Consistent Displacements,
Slope Deflection Method and Moment Distribution
Sustainability, Green Buildings, LEED Standards and Certification
Construction Materials – Concrete, Steel, Wood and Structural Plastics
[A-34]
CIE 332 – Design of Concrete Structures
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Riyad Aboutaha
Required: “Design of Concrete Structures”,CIE 332, Spring 2010. Selected chapterss from
“Reinforced Concrete – Mechanics and Design” Fifth Edition by James Wight,
and James MacGregor.
“Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08) and
Commentary), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan.
Catalog Description: Analysis and design of environmentally reinforced concrete structures
subjected to flexural, shear, and axial loads. Analysis of stresses and deformations and
their relation to codes and specifications.
Analysis of Structures and Materials (CIE 331).
Course Objectives:
1. To introduce the concrete as a construction material, building codes, purpose of codes,
structural safety, durability, and serviceability and ultimate limit states.
2. To learn the flexural analysis and design of reinforced concrete beam section reinforced with
tension rebars with/without compression rebars, for both rectangular and T-sections.
3. To learn the shear analysis and design of concrete beams, slabs, and columns.
4. To examine serviceability requirements according to the ACI318 Code.
5. To introduce computer software for the analysis and deisgn of continuous beam and columns.
6. To learn detailing of concrete members and structures.
7. To learn the analysis and design of tied and spiral short columns.
8. To address sustainability issues related to concrete structures, e.g. use of non-metallic rebars
in corrosive environments, and green concrete.
9. To learn how analyze and design a reinforced concrete structure in a team environment.
Prepare and present a design project.
Course Outcomes:
1.
1.1 Understand role of building codes, public safety, and structural safety.
1.2 Calculate internal forces in structures due to external loads.
1.3 Analyze concrete sections using simple constitutive laws, compatibility and equilibrium
equations.
[Student Outcomes: a,e,f,h]
2.
2.1 Analyze concrete members and identify critical sections.
2.2 Determine the dimensions of concrete section, and the amount of flexural reinforcement
(beams and one-way slab system).
2.3 Determine the amount of shrinkage and temperature reinforcement in a one-way slab
[A-35]
system.
2.4 Examine if concrete sections and members meet the code requirements.
2.5 Understand the impact of various flexural design parameters.
3.
3.1 Analyze and design concrete members in shear, determine the amount of shear
reinforcement.
3.2 Examine if a concrete sections and members meet the code requirements.
3.3 Understand the impact of various shear design parameters
4.
4.1 Analyze a concrete flexural member under service loads.
4.2 Determine the stresses in concrete and steel under service loads.
4.3 Calculate deformations in flexural member and examine code compliance.
5.
5.1 Analysis and design of short concrete columns
5.2 Construction of the full P-M diagram for columns using computer software.
6.
6.1 Detail concrete sections, members, and structures.
6.2 Calculate the development length of rebars, cut-off locations, and lap splicing.
7.
7.1 Construct, analyze, and test a full-scale reinforced concrete beam.
7.2 Conduct non-destructive tests on fresh concrete.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,e]
8.
8.1 Analyse and design a concrete structures subjected to various loads.
8.2 Work on a design team.
8.3 Prepare and present a design project.
[Student Outcomes: a,c,d,e,g,f,k]
Course Topics:
Development, Design Process, ACI Building Code.
Types of Concrete, Concrete Properties, Reinforcing Bars.
Flexural Strength of Beams - Analysis and Design
Shear Strength of Beams and Beam-Columns
Development, Splicing and Anchorage of Reinforcing Bars
Serviceability - Deflection and Cracking
Continuous Beams and One-Way Slabs
Columns and Beam-Columns (Combined Axial Load and Bending)
Introduction to the Design of GFRP Reinforced Concrete Structures
[A-36]
CIE 337 – Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering
Credit Hours: 4
Instructor: Shobha K.Bhatia

Required: Geotechnical Engineering- Principles and Practices, Donald P. Coduto
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458, ISBN 0-13-576380-0
Recommended: Experimental Soil Mechanics, by Bardet, Prentice-Hall, 1997.

An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, by Robert D. Holtz and William
D. Kovacs, Prentice Hall, 1981.
Catalog Description: Nature and composition of soils. Formation and classification of natural
soils and man-made construction materials. Compaction, permeability and seepage,
consolidation and settlement, shear behavior and strength.
Prerequisites:
Mechanics of Solids (ECS 325).
Ability to use a computer and working knowledge of a spreadsheet program(e.g. EXCEL)
Course Objectives:
• To learn the history and evolution of Geotechnical Engineering.
• To learn soil formation and its influence on soil behavior.
• To learn soil classification and engineering properties of soils and man-made
construction materials.
• To measure the engineering properties through conducting experiments.
• To learn the contemporary issues related to Geotechnical engineering including
sustainability.
Course Outcomes:
1. Development of Working Knowledge.

1.1 Appreciate the interconnectivity between various elements of soil behavior, which
lend themselves to solutions of practical soil problems.
1.2. Develop a “feel” for soil and man-made construction material behavior through
laboratory experience.
1.3. Develop engineering judgment through a combination of theory and practice.
1.4. Understand sustainability principles and fundamentals of geotechnical
engineering and their role in real-world geotechnical engineering design
problems.
[Student Outcomes: b, e]
[A-37]
2. Communication Skills.
2.1 Produce technical reports in which information is presented clearly and concisely
3. Team Work and Ethical Responsibilities

3.1 Work in a team wherein tasks such as collecting, analyzing and reporting data are
distributed evenly and every student does his/her fair share of work.
3.2 Prepare a joint report where each student gets an opportunity to author the report
and thus take the leadership role.
3.3 Work with a sense of individual responsibility towards his/her partners and refrain
from dubious methods such as cheating, copying, faking results, or anything that
hampers the pursuit of knowledge.
[Student Outcomes: d, f]
4. Life-Long Learning
4.1. Develop and sustain curiosity and interest, achieve learning success/ satisfaction
resulting in a desire to continue learning, as emphasized by the guest speakers
invited to address the role of Geotechnical engineering in current problems.
4.2. Develop an awareness of various ongoing projects dealing with various economic,
social and environmental issues.
[Student Outcomes: i, j]
Course Topics:
Soils and other Man-made Construction materials,
Sustainability Principles in Geotechnical Engineering
Engineering Geology and Soil Formation
Index Properties and Soil Classification
Construction Methods, Equipments and compaction
Ground Water, Flow through Soils
Flow Nets, Uplift Pressures and Filters
Geostatic Stresses
Compressibility of Soil and other Man-made Construction materials
Consolidation Process
Consolidation Settlement Prediction
Rate of Consolidation Accuracy of Settlement Prediction
Shear Failure in Soils
Shear Strength of Saturated Clays and Silts
Shear Strength of saturated Sands and Gravels
Shear Strength Measurements
Contemporary issues related to Geotechnical Engineering
[A-38]
CIE 338 – Foundation Engineering
Credit Hours: 3 (offered every year in Spring Semester)
Contact: 2 hours 40 minutes for two lectures per week
Instructor: Dawit Negussey
Required: Foundation Design by D.P. Coduto. Prentice Hall Inc., 2001.
Reference: Geotechnical Engineering by D.P. Coduto. Prentice Hall Inc., (used in CIE337)
2010.
Supplemental Materials and Web Links: as provided at the course Blackboard site
Catalog Description: Site investigation, bearing capacity, design of shallow and deep
foundations, lateral earth pressure and design of retaining structures, slope stability analysis and
design, introduction to geotechnical CAD.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: CIE 337, familiarity with MathCad and Blackboard
Course Objectives:
1. Introduce site investigation methods.
2. Teach bearing capacity and shallow foundation design.
3. Introduce types and design of deep foundations.
4. Teach lateral earth theory and design of retaining walls.
5. Introduce analyses and design of slopes
Course Outcomes:
1. Use field investigation results to
1.1 Classify soil types
1.2 Determine design parameters
1.3 Develop representative design sections
[Student Outcomes: a, b, k]
2. Establish ASD/LRFD design loads
2.1 Determine shallow foundation bearing pressures
2.2 Calculate bearing capacities of footings
2.3 Design shallow foundations
[Student Outcomes: a, c, e, k (f, g, i)]
3. Identify deep foundation types and design
3.1 Estimate pile capacities from insitu tests, load tests, soil strengths, driving energies.
3.2 Assess the structural capacities of piles
3.3 Evaluate pile group efficiencies and capacities
4. Understand earth pressure theories
4.1 Estimate lateral earth pressure coefficients
[A-39]
4.2 Calculate active, at rest and passive earth pressures
4.3 Proportion, analyze and design cantilever walls
5. Recognize different modes of slope instabilities
5.1 Perform block mode failure analyses
5.2 Evaluate safety factors for simple circular failures
5.3 Use a computer program for limit equilibrium analyses and design of slopes
Course Topics:
Introduction to foundations
Review MathCad and soil properties
Design loads by ASD and LRFD
Settlements and serviceability criteria
Site investigation and insitu testing
Shallow foundation bearing pressures and bearing capacity
Effective stress profiles, induced stress incremets and settlements
Design of shallow foundations
Deep foundations, pile types and shafts
Structural capacity of piles and shafts
Pile capacities by load tests, insitu tests, soil strengths and from driving records
Lateral earth pressures and design of retaining walls
Stability analysis and design of slopes
Notes:
Students contribute news articles, reports and participate in discussion on Blackboard on
various topics related to the course throughout the semester.
A librarian gives a demonstration on searching and acquiring full text journal articles.
Each student selects 4 articles from each of ASCE, Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
Geotechnique (UK), and Soils and Foundations (Japan) on topics covered in class.
Each student then prepares a review report on an approved article from among the four.
Reports are posted on Blackboard for review and discussion by the class.
These activities are to introduce students to archival resources and life long learning.
[A-40]
CIE 341 – Introduction to Environmental Engineering
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture – 3 hours per week. Recitation – 1 hour per week
Instructor: David Chandler

Required: Principles of Environmental Engineering and Science, 2nd Ed. M.L. Davis,
and S.J. Masten, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. 2009.
Catalog Description: Fundamental principles of environmental processes, pollution, and

pollution control, including mass transfer, water chemistry and microbiology, water and air
pollution, and solid- and hazardous-waste management.
1. Knowledge of chemistry principles: CHE 106/107.
2. Knowledge of integral claculus: MAT 295 through MAT 485.
3. Knowledge of basic principles for civil and environmental engineering design: CIE 274
Course Objectives:
• To learn principles of environmental engineering and science.
• To build skills the skills to quantitative assess environmental problems.
• To solve complex open-ended environmental problems.
• To build teamwork skills communicate the results of complex analysis.
Course Outcomes:
1. Understand and apply basic concepts of environmental engineering.
1.1 Demonstrate proficiency in environmental engineering though knowledge of
important terms related to physical, chemical and biological phenomena.
1.2 Conduct mass and energy balances.
1.3 Apply simple water qulity models.
[Student Outcomes: a,c,f,h,i,j,k]
2. Perform environmental analysis through appropriate calculations.
2.1 Make reasoned, appropriate assumptions for complex engineering problems.
2.2 Present detailed calculations in a clear, logical manner.
2.3 Explain and defend the results of analysis.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,c,e,h,i,j,k]
3. Apply engineering science knowledge to the analysis of real problems.
3.1 Manage and perform basic quality control on real environmental data.
3.2 Make complex calculations and appropriate assumptions to use environmental
data.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,e,j,k]
[A-41]
4.1 Prepare a joint report for a group project.
4.2 Present detailed analysis through appropriate use of charts and figures.
4.3 Defend project approach and results to an audience.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,d,g,k]
Course Topics:
Sustainability
Environmental Measurements
General Chemistry/Stoichiometry
Redox Reactions/ Chemical Equilibria
Alkalinity
Materials/Energy Balances
Reactor Analysis
Lake Ecosystems/Phosphorus Model
Oxygen Demand
Oxygen Sag Model
Wetlands/Low Impact Development
Groundwater/Well Hydraulics
Surface Water/Land Subsidence
Water and Wastewater Treatment
Municipal Wastewater Systems
Management, Reduction, Collection
Sanitary Landfills
Legislation
Treatment Technologies/Remediation
Comparison of Alternatives
Buildings/Materials
Rightsizing Buildings/Energy Efficiency
Perception, Assessment, Management
[A-42]
MAE 341 – Fluid Mechanics
Credit Hours: 4
Contact hours: Lecture: 3.7 hours per week. Recitation: 0.92 hours per week.
Instructor: Jacques Lewalle
Required: Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics by Munson, Young, Okiishi and Huebsch. John
Wiley and Sons.
Catalog Description: Hydrostatics. Control volume analysis. Basic equations in differential

form. Inviscid incompressible flow. Viscous flows in pipes and ducts. Estimation of head losses
in fluid systems. Analysis of boundary layers by integral equations. Dimensional analysis.
Prerequisites: MAT 397, PHY 211, ECS 221 (pending)
Course Role in Curriculum: Required Course.
Course Outcomes:
At the end of this course, the student should be able to:
1. solve fluid-static problems
2. solve fluid-dynamic problems
3. apply differential and control-volume analysis techniques
4. use dimensional analysis to solve fluids problems
5. solve viscous internal and external flow problems
6. demonstrate an awareness of the complexity of real flows
[Student Outcomes: a, e, k]
Course Topics:
A. General concepts: pressure, viscosity, etc.
B. Dimensional analysis: Pi-theorem, similarity
C. Hydrostatics, forces on surfaces
D. Bernoulli's equation
E. Kinematics of fluid motion
F. Control volume analysis
G. Differential formulation, stresses, potential flows
H. Viscous pipe flows: Poiseuille, losses, empirical formulae.
[A-43]
CIE 352 – Water Resources Engineering
Credit Hours: 4
Contact Hours: Lecture – 3 hours per week. Lab/Recitation – 1 hour per week

Required: Fundamentals of Hydraulic Engineering Systems, 4th Ed., R.J. Houghtalen,
A.O. Akan and N.H.C. Hwang, Prentice Hall, 2010.
Recommended: Physical Hydrology, 2nd Ed., S.L. Dingman, Prentice Hall, 2002.
Catalog Description: Analysis and design of hydraulic facilities including pipe systems, open
channels, pumps and turbines, and ground water wells. Analysis of rainfall and river flow;
surface and subsurface water storage
1. Knowledge of fluid mechanics: CIE 327 OR MAE 341.
Course Objectives:
• To learn the fundamentals of of hydraulics and hydrology.
• To understand how to solve engineering design problems using hydraulic and
hydrologic principles and methods.
• To understand societal needs and implications for engineered water systems.
• To improve computer skills through use of software to solve hydraulics and
hydrology problems.
Course Outcomes:
1. Understand how to use the continuity, momentum and energy equations to solve
hydraulics problems including flow in closed conduits, flow in open channels, pumps,
and flow in the subsurface environment.
[Student Outcomes: a,c,e,k]
2. Understand the components and processes of the hydrologic cycle.

3. Understand the methods used to make, analyze and report hydraulic and hydrologic
measurements.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,d,g,]
4. Understand how to derive and use relationships between rainfall and runoff.
[Student Outcomes: a,k]
5. Understand how to use statistics and probability theory to characterize and present
hydrologic data.
[A-44]
[Student Outcomes: a,g,k]
6. Understand how to do engineering design calculations using hydrologic and hydraulic
principles and calculation techniques.
[Student Outcomes: a,i,k]
7. Understand contemporary social issues related to water and water resources

[Student Outcomes: f,h,j]
Course Topics:
Pressure head and manometers
Energy equation
Reynolds Number
Friction losses
Minor loses
Equivalent pipes
Pipes in series and parallel pipes
Flow between reservoirs
Branching pipes
Pipe networks,
Water hammer and surge relief
Pump selection,
Cavitation and NPSH
Pumps in series and parallel
Pump systems and operating points
Open channel flow classes
Normal flow and specific energy
Hydraulic jumps
Earth channel design
Natural channel morphology
Buffers for development and watershed protection
Water balance components
Rainfall-runoff
Unit hydrograph
Drainage networks, flow routing,
Flow generation,
Water quality and hazards
SCS TR-55
Storage routing
Stormwater collection design
Hydrologic measurements
[A-45]
CIE 372 – Project Layout and Site Planning
Credits: 3
Instructor: Chris Johnson

Required: Geomatics. Barry F. Kavanagh. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
2003.
Recommended: Harnessing AutoCAD Civil 3D 2010. Phillip J. Zimmerman. Autodesk
Press/Delmar CENGAGE Learning, Clifton Park, NY. 2009.
Catalog Description: Construction surveying; cut and fill calculations; route surveying; GPS
methods; site planning and layout issues. Project-oriented course includes CAD applications in
civil engineering and field work with modern surveying equipment and software.
Prerequisites: CIE 272, MAT 295
Course Role in Curriculum: Elective Course
Course Objectives:
• To learn the fundamentals of route surveying and construction surveying.
• To apply concepts of planning to a real-world design project.
• To learn how to use GPS for surveying data collection.
• To combine field and office work in a realistic engineering project.
Course Outcomes:
1. Generate and analyze surveying data.
1.1. Use a total station or measuring angles, elevations, and horizontal distances.
1.2. Use global positioning systems (GPS) equipment to determine the positions of
points on the ground.
1.3. Compute the geometry of horizontal and vertical curves.
1.4. Estimate land areas and cross-sectional areas.
1.5. Determine volumes for cut-and fill calculations.
1.6. Stake out points from an engineering design on the ground.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,e,k]
2. Use Autocad and Civil 3D to portray surveying data and create a design for a land
development application.
2.1. Import field data for use in Autocad/Civil 3D.
2.2. Create high-quality maps in Autocad/Civil 3D.
2.3 Develop cross-sections of land surfaces.
2.4 Implement a land-development design using Autocad/Civil 3D.
2.5 Export data from Autocad/Civil 3D for use in the field.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,c,e,g,k]
[A-46]
3.1. Work with others to collect surveying data.
3.2. Delegate and accept responsibility for components of a design project.
3.3. Negotiate with colleagues to reach consensus decisions on design alternatives.
3.4. Present engineering calculations in a clear, effective manner.
[Student Outcomes: b,d,g,k]
Course Topics:
Topographic Surveys
Profiles and Cross-Sections
Cut and Fill Calculations
Global Positioning
GPS Surveying
Coordinate Systems
Control Surveys
Curve Geometry
Curve Layout
Compound Curves
Spiral Curves
Vertical Curves
Use of Autodesk Civil 3D
[A-47]
MAT 397 – Calculus III
Credit Hours: 4
Instructor: Professor Andrew Vogel (Course Supervisor)
Required: Calculus: Early Transcendentals, James Stewart, 6th Edition. 2008.
the bookstore.)
Catalog Description: Analytic geometry and vectors; functions of more than one variable,
multiple integrals, partial differentiation, physical applications.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: MAT 296 (with a grade of C- or better).
Learning Outcomes:
mathematical models
[A-48]
CIE 400 - Environmental Geostatistics
Credits: 3
Instructor: Chris E. Johnson
Required: Geostatistics for Environmental Scientists. 2nd ed. Richard Webster and Margaret
A. Oliver. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 2007.
Catalog Description: Statistical analysis of spatial patterns in environmental data. Exploratory

data analysis; estimation, modeling, and interpretation of variograms; prediction using kriging.
Applications in engineering, geography, earth science, environmental science and ecology. Use
of geostatistical software.
Prerequisites: MAT 296, CIE 272
Course Objectives:
The principle objectives of this course are to:
• Assist students in developing skills in exploratory data analysis.
• Examine techniques for the characterization, display, and modeling of spatial variation in
environmental data.
• Understand the principles of kriging and the estimation of environmental properties at
unsampled locations.
Course Outcomes:
At the end of this course, the student is expected to be able to perform the following tasks with
little or no review:
o Compute and interpret descriptive statistics for a single variable (including box-and-
whisker plots, histograms, etc.).
o Evaluate the fit of a distribution to a set of data and evaluate possible normalizing
transformations.
o Identify outlying samples in a set of data.
o Compute measures of bivariate association (correlation, Q-Q plots, histograms, etc.).
o Compute and plot measures of spatial dependence (spatial covariance, semivariance,
madogram, etc.).
o Interpret the meaning of experimental semivariograms.
o Fit semivariogram models to experimental data.
o Use ordinary kriging to estimate the value of a property at an unsampled point.
o Use block kriging to estimate the value of a property at an unsampled point.
o Create maps using ordinary or block kriging.
o Evaluate the quality of kriging results through cross-validation.
o Compute indicator values and analyze their spatial patterns.
[A-49]
o Use kriging techniques with indicator variables for risk assessment.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, g, k]
Course Topics:
Exploratory Data Analysis
Regression for Spatial Data
Variogram Estimation
Spatial Analysis with SGeMS
Random Functions
Principles of Interpolation
Ordinary Kriging
Kriging for Mapping
Cross-Validation
Indicator Kriging
Cross-Correlation and Co-Kriging
[A-50]
CIE 400 – Principles of Environmental Health
Credits: 3
Instructor: Swiatoslav W. Kaczmar
Required: Environmental Health: from global to local. Howard Frumkin, editor. 2nd Ed.
Jossey-Bass. 2005.
Other readings/materials as indicated on Blackboard and/or provided by the
instructor. (i.e. handouts, journal articles, e-readings)
Catalog Description: Scientific and engineering approaches to the characterization and

management of environmental health risks. Physiological mechanisms by which exposure to
environmental chemicals and biological agents impact human health. Risk of population
exposure to environmental hazards. Common environmentally related diseases and their causes.
Engineering and regulatory approaches for the prevention of health impacts caused by chemicals
and biological agents in potable water, food, and consumer products, and by the uncontrolled
disposal of sanitary, municipal and industrial waste.
Prerequisites: None
Course Outcomes:
At the end of this course, the student will be able to:
• …describe the direct and indirect human, ecological and safety effects of major
environmental and occupational agents.
• …describe genetic, physiologic and psychosocial factors that affect susceptibility to
adverse health outcomes following exposure to environmental hazards.
• …describe federal and state regulatory programs, guidelines and authorities that control
environmental health issues.
• …articulate how biological, chemical and physical agents affect human health.
• …specify current environmental risk assessment methods.
• …specify approaches for assessing, preventing and controlling environmental hazards
that pose risks to human health and safety.
• …explain the general mechanisms of toxicity in eliciting a toxic response to various
environmental exposures.
• …discuss various risk management and risk communication approaches in relation to
issues of environmental justice and equity.
• …draw appropriate environmental health inferences from epidemiologic data.
• …describe the role of social and community factors in both the onset and solution of
environmental health problems.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, f, h, j]
[A-51]
Course Topics:
Introduction to Environmental and Public Health
Risk perception, cost of protection and the concepts of “zero risk” and “sustainability”
Responsibilities and ethical duties of environmental health professionals
Review of Environmental Chemistry
Review of Human Physiology
Toxicology Concepts
Routes of exposure
Agents and mechanisms of action
Radiation
Risk Assessment
Source and hazard assessment
Exposure and risk characterization
Epidemiology and risk assessment
Terms and objectives
Statistics and risk
Tracking time and populations
Causation vs. association
Applying and communicating epidemiological information
Risk management
Risk Communication
Communicable diseases – agents and vectors
Health and Safety in the Workplace
Worker exposure monitoring
Exposure standards and criteria
Hazard Communication and Training
Worker Protection
Food Safety
Product Safety
Drinking Water
Sewage and wastewater
Solid Waste Disposal
Air Quality
[A-52]
CIE 442 – Treatment Processes in Environmental Engineering
Credit Hours: 4
Instructor: Raymond D. Letterman

Required: Water and wastewater engineering: design principles and practice, Davis, M.
L., McGraw-Hill, NY, 2010.
Catalog Description: Fundamental engineering concepts and principles used for the design and
operation of water and wastewater treatment systems. Estimating water demand and wastewater
flows in the urban water use cycle. Significance of government regulations and standards.
Knowledge of differential and integral calculus (MAT 295, MAT 296).
2. Fundamentals of fluid mechanics (MAE 341).
3. An introductory course in environmental engineering (CIE 341).
4. An introductory course in water resources engineering (CIE 352).
Course Objectives:
1. Understand how individual treatment processes work and know how to determine
the magnitude of the more important process design and operational parameters
using laboratory measurements and scientific and engineering principles, and,
2. Know the basic process configurations used in water and wastewater treatment
systems in the urban water use cycle and the form and purpose of the component
processes.
Course Outcomes:
1. Understand the urban water cycle and be able to estimate quantities and quality of
water at critical points in the cycle.
2. Understand the types of processes used to treat water and wastewater.
3. Understand how processes are configured in treatment systems.
4. Understand the fundamental engineering and science principles that are used to
design and operate the processes used in treatment systems.
5. Learn how to use laboratory procedures and measurements to determine the
magnitude of certain design and operational parameters of treatment processes.
6. Understand how government regulations and design standards affect how engineers
design and operate water and wastewater treatment systems.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, c, e, g, i, j & k]
Course Topics:
• Introduction – The Urban Water Cycle – Treatment Systems
• Water Use and Wastewater Generation
• Water Distribution and Wastewater Collection
[A-53]
• Process Design Concepts (Unit Operations)
• Chemical Treatment Processes
• Physical Treatment Processes
• Biological Treatment Processes
• Processing of sludges
• Advanced Treatment Processes and Water Reuse
[A-54]
CIE 443 – Transportation Engineering
Credit Hours: 3 (offered every year in Fall Semester)
Contact: 2 hours 40 minutes for two lectures per week, one extra time field work assignment
Instructor: Dawit Negussey
Required: Traffic and Highway Engineering, 4th Ed., N. Garber and L. Hoel, Brooks/Cole, 2009.
Supplemental Materials and Web Links: as provided at the course Blackboard site
Catalog Description: Transportation systems, modes and significance. Traffic engineering

fundamental relationships and field studies. Intersection design and
control. Geometric design of road alignments. Introduction to
transportation planning.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: MAT 296, PHY 211, CIE 272 use of MathCad and Blackboard
Course Objectives:
1. Introduce to transportation engineering.
2. Teach traffic engineering.
3. Introduce transportation planning.
4. Teach geometric design of highways
Course Outcomes:
1.0 Gain a broad understanding of transportation engineering
1.1 Transportation systems and organizations
1.2 Driver, vehicle, pedestrian and road characteristics.
1.3 Contemporary issues and developments.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, e, j]
2.0 Develop an ability to assess and improve road traffic
2.1 Conduct traffic engineering studies
2.2 Design and control of intersections
2.3 Evaluate highway capacity and level of service
[Student Outcomes: a, b, c, g, k]
3.0 Understand transportation planning
3.1 Transportation planning process.
3.2 Sustainability considerations
3.3 Evaluation of alternatives.
[Student Outcomes: a, e, h, j]
4.0 Design highway alignments
4.1 Classification of highways and design standards
4.2 Criteria for and design of vertical alignments
[A-55]
4.3 Criteria for and design of horizontal alignments
[Student Outcomes: a, c, e, k]
Course Topics:
Introduction to transportation modes and fieldwork

Drivers and pedestrians
Vehicles, speeds and volume studies
Delays and parking
Traffic flow and density
Traffic modeling
Shockwaves, gaps and ques
Intersection control and timing
Capacity and LOS of highways
Capacity and LOS of intersections
Planning process and evaluation of alternatives
Sustainability and environment considerations
Geometric design standards
Design of vertical and horizontal alignments
Transitions and super elevations
Notes:
• Students contribute news articles, reports and participate in discussion fora on
Blackboard on current topics related to the course throughout the semester.
• Each student participates in a fieldwork assignment in a group of 3 students.
• Each student looks after set tasks in the group and contributes to the group report.
• Each group has a virtual work space for information exchange and project handling.
• Project reports are posted on Blackboard for review and discussion by the class.
• These activities are to introduce students to group work and collaboration.
[A-56]
CIE 457 – Biogeochemistry
Credit Hours: 3
Instructors: Charles T. Driscoll and Myron J. Mitchell (SUNY-ESF)
Required: Biogeochemistry: an Analysis of Global Change, 2nd Edition. W. H. Schlesinger.
Academic Press, 1997
Other: Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast. NECIA. UCS Publications, 2 Brattle
Square, Cambridge,MA 02238-9105. 2006.
Catalog Description: Biogeochemical relationships as a unifying concept for ecological

systems, including importance of biogeochemical relationships in ecosystems and global cycles.
The interface between abiotic and biotic components of ecosystems is explained.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: None
Course Objectives:
1. To explain the principles of biogeochemical cycling in ecological systems.
2. To acquaint the student with the methodology needed to carry out research in
biogeochemistry.
Course Outcomes:
At the end of this course, students should be able to:
• Outline the major components of the global carbon and nitrogen cycles.
• Identify the key fluxes and pools of nutrients in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
• Perform mass balance calculations related to the cycling of nutrients in terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems.
• Identify sources in the primary literature related to biogeochemical issues.
• Synthesize the results from multiple primary sources, related to a topic in
biogeochemistry.
• Work in teams to prepare a presentation on a topic in biogeochemistry.
[Student Outcomes: a, b, d, h, j]
Course Topics:
Cycles in Biogeochemistry.
Atmospheric Composition.
Biogeochemical Reactions in the Atmosphere.
Atmospheric Deposition.
Rock Weathering.
Soil Chemical Reactions and Soil Development.
The Carbon Cycle of Terrestrial Ecosystems:
Photosynthesis. Respiration.
Net Primary Production and Global Change.
[A-57]
The Fate of Net Primary Production.
Humus Formation and Soil Organic Matter.
Biogeochemical Cycling on Land:
Nutrient Allocations and Cycling in Land Vegetation.
Biogeochemical Cycling in the Soil.
Calculating Landscape Mass-Balance and Responses to Global Change.
Biogeochemistry in Freshwater Systems:
Primary Production and Nutrient Cycling in Lakes.
Lake Budgets.
Wetlands, Rivers and Estuaries
Stream Hydrology.
The Oceans:
Ocean Circulation.
The Composition of Seawater.
Net Primary Production in the Oceans.
Nutrient Cycling in the Ocean.
Global Cycles:
The Global Water Cycle
The Global Carbon Cycle
The Global Nitrogen Cycle.
The Global Phosphorous.
The Global Sulfur Cycle.
[A-58]
CIE 471 – Environmental Chemistry and Analysis
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture – 3 hours per week. Lab – 3 hours, alternating with lecture
Required: Chemistry for Environmental Engineering and Science. 5th ed. C.N. Sawyer,
P.L. McCarty, and G.F. Parkin. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 2003.
Recommended: Water Chemistry. M.M. Benjamin. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 2002.
Water Chemistry. V.L. Snoeyink and D. Jenkins. John Wiley & Sons, New
York, NY, 1980.
Catalog Description: An introduction to chemical principles in natural and engineered
environmental systems. T hermodynamics and kinetics of reactions; acid-base chemistry;
environmental organic chemistry; treatment process design applications. Includes
selected laboratory exercises.
1. Knowledge of differential and integral calculus (MAT 295; MAT 296).
One year of general chemistry (CHE 106, 116).
Ability to use computers to manipulate and graph data.
A one-semester introductory course in environmental engineering (CIE 341) is helpful,
but not required.
Course Role in Curriculum: Required Course for environmental engineering
Technical, Design Elective Course for other engineering programs
Course Objectives:
• To apply fundamental concepts of chemistry to environmental situations.
• To understand the errors and uncertainty inherent in laboratory chemical analyses.
• To develop the ability to solve complex problems in environmental chemistry,
involving multiple phases and/or components.
• To build computer skills, particularly in data display and analysis.
Course Outcomes:
1. Apply chemical concepts qualitatively and quantitatively to a broad range of
environmental problems.
1.1. Solve complex problems involving equilibrium chemical concepts.
1.2. Use chemical kinetics to solve complex problems.
1.3. To judge when to use equilibrium concepts and when to use kinetics to
solve problems.
1.4. To determine the pH and alkalinity of simple and complex acid-base
mixtures.
1.5. Devise chemical treatment strategies water and waste water applications.
[A-59]
1.6. Understand the importance of chemical structure to enviromental behavior
of organic chemicals.
1.7. Demonstrate an ability to make reasoned qualitative judgments about the
likely effects of chemical additions to environmental systems.
[Student Outcomes: a,c,e]
2. Critically evaluate and analyze laboratory data for environmental chemistry.
2.1. Understand the errors and uncertainties in various types of laboratory
analyses.
2.2. Use computer skills to manage laboratory data.
2.3. Use computer skills to create high-quality charts of laboratory data.
2.4. Hypothesize why experimental data deviate from theoretical results.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,g,k]
3. Use appropriate techniques in the analysis and reporting of their findings.
3.1. Make high-quality graphs of chemical data and relationships.
3.2. Determine chemical constants and parameters through graphical analysis.
3.3. Organize and compose a technical report in an appropriate format.
3.4. Use word processing software to create technical documents.
[Student Outcomes: a,b,e,g,k]
4. Work in teams to collect and analyze data.
4.1. Divide responsibilities in collecting laboratory data.
4.2. Negotiate with colleagues to reach consensus on methods and data quality.
[Student Outcomes: b,d,(f)] †
Course Topics:
Electrons, chemical bonding, and environmental behavior
Stoichiometry and the expression of concentration
Classification of organic chemicals
Thermodynamics of reactions
Thermodynamic basis of chemical equilibrium
Chemical activity
Equilibrium calculations
“Partition” reactions
Kinetics of chemical reactions
Kinetic basis of chemical equilibrium
Dissociation of acids and bases
pH as “master variable”
Proton Balances
LogC-pH diagrams
Acid-base mixtures / titration problems
Multi-protic acids and bases
Organic acids and partitioning
pH buffering
Alkalinity and acidity: measurement and theory
[A-60]
CIE 472 – Applied Environmental Microbiology
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture – 2.67 hours per week. Lab – 4 per semester during lecture period.
Instructor: Andria Costello Staniec

Required: None.
Recommended: Brock Biology of Microorganisms, 12th edition, Madigan, Martinko,
Dunlap and Clark. 2009. ISBN: 0-132-32460-1. (Available for 2 hour
loan through the SU Library).
Catalog Description: General principles and applications of environmental microbiology and
microbial processes. Role of microbes in water pollution control, environmental health, and
element cycling in the environment.
1. One year introductory chemistry
2. Mathematics through differential equations
3. Introductory Environmental Engineering (CIE 341)
Course Role in Curriculum: Required Course for environmental engineering

Technical, Design Elective Course for other programs
Course Objectives:
• Introduce the principles of applied environmental microbiology and the relationship
of this field to environmental engineering;
• provide the skills necessary for qualitative and quantitative assessments of problems
in applied environmental microbiology;
• use the principles developed in class to explain the role of different groups of
microorganisms in the environment.
Course Outcomes:
At the completion of the class, each student should be able to:
1.
1.1 identify the principles of basic microbiology, microbial phenomena, and processes in
the environment;
1.2 explain the basics of microbiology, microbial genetics, environmental health,
biochemistry, microbial processes, energetics, and kinetics; and
1.3 solve problems related to microbial processes.
[Student Outcomes a, h, i, j]
2.
2.1 Calculate coliform die-off, phosphatase activity, and biochemical oxygen demand;
2.2 evaluate and interpret data related to applied microbiology in the environment;
2.3 perform laboratory measurements including standard plate count and coliform tests,
biochemical oxygen demand, and enzyme activity;
2.4 explain detailed calculations in a clear, logical manner;
2.5 explain the assumptions used in the analysis of data; and
[A-61]
2.6 evaluate and justify the results of your analysis to peers.
[Student Outcomes a, b, d, f, g, i, j]
3.
3.1 Explain your ideas and thoughts in written and oral communications;
3.2 evaluate and solve complex open-ended environmental microbiology problems;
3.3 formulate reasoned, appropriate assumptions for complex engineering problems;
3.4 analyze the environmental relevance and applications of microorganisms from water
samples taken from Onondaga Lake and surrounding tributaries;
3.5 work effectively in a team; and
3.6 develop written and oral presentations pertaining to microorganisms and their role in
the environment.
[Student Outcomes a, d, f, g, h, i, j]
Course Topics:
Evolution of microorganisms
Microorganisms and their natural environments
Historical roots of microbiology
Microbial diversity
Cell structure and function
Nutrition and culture of microorganisms
Energetics and enzymes
Oxidation-reduction and energy-rich compounds
Essentials of catabolism
Essentials of anabolism
Growth of bacterial populations
Measuring microbial growth
Environmental factors affecting growth
Wastewater microbiology and water purification
Biochemical oxygen demand
Waterborne microbial diseases
Industrial microorganisms and product formation
Nutrient cycles (carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, sulfur, iron)
Microbial bioremediation
Phytoremediation
Antibiotics and resistance
Energy production/alternative energy
Microbial genetics/biotechnology
[A-62]
CIE 475 – Civil and Environmental Engineering Design
Credit Hours: 4
Contact Hours: Lecture – 9 hours per week.
Instructors: David Chandler and Samuel Clemence
Textbooks and Other Materials: No text. Design project material and handouts will be
provided throughout the semester
Course Description: Principles from the fundamental areas of civil and environmental
engineering applied in open-ended design projects. Economics, safety, reliability, management,
business, leadership and social considerations
1. Basic knowledge of mathematics, basic engineering, and sciences.
2. Knowledge of the following Civil/Environmental Engineering areas:
a. Environmental
b. Geotechnical
c. Structural
d. Transportation
e. Water Resources
3. Advanced Computing Skills
Course Objectives:
• Develop the ability to formulate and design Civil/Environmental engineering
• project to meet specific needs.
• Develop the ability to work on a team to accomplish a design project.
• Develop the ability to communicate effectively.
• Develop an understanding of the professional, leadership, management, business
economical and ethical issues encountered in engineering.
• Recognize the importance of lifelong learning.
Course Outcomes:
At the completion of the course, each student should have:
1. Ability to design system, component or process to meet needs.
[Student Outcomes: c]
2. Ability to function on multidisciplinary terms.
[Student Outcomes: d]
3. Ability to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems.
[Student Outcomes: e]
4. Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility.
[Student Outcomes: f]
5. Ability to communicate effectively.
[A-63]
6. Recognition of need for, and an ability to engage in lifelong learning.
[Student Outcomes: i]
7. A knowledge of contemporary issues.
[Student Outcomes: j]
8. An ability to use techniques, skills and modern engineering tools necessary for
engineering practice.
[Student Outcomes: k]
Course Topics:
Definition of Design
Teamwork and leadership Skills
Design/Construction Process
Cost Estimation of Construction Projects
Engineering Economics
Professionalism in Civil/Environmental Engineering
Ethics
Effective Communication
Professional Registration/Lifelong Learning
[A-64]
CIE 478 – Rehabilitation of Civil Infrastructure
Credit Hours: 3

Required: Class Notes.
Catalog Description: Deterioration of concrete materials. Evaluation, non-destructive testing,

and rehabilitation of existing structures. Properties and application of repair materials. Seismic
retrofit of bridges. Analysis and design of structural members retrofitted with carbon fiber
reinforced polymer composites.
Mechanics of Materials ( ECS325).
Reinforced Concrete Design (CIE 332).
Course Role in Curriculum: Elective
Course Objectives:
5. To discuss the deterioration of civil infrastructure, and consequences of
delayed/poor maintenance and/or doing nothing.
6. To discuss the deterioration of concrete materials and structures.
7. To introduce the non-destructive testing (NDT) methods.
8. To introduce non-destructive evaluation (NDE).
9. To introduce the analysis and design of CFRP retrofitted concrete members.
10. To discuss seismic evaluation and retrofit.
Course Outcomes:
A.
1. understand the service life of civil infrastructure components.
2. recognize the value of durability of structures.
3. understand the deterioration mechanisms.
4. recognize the advantages of good maintenance.
5. understand the consequences of delayed/poor maintenance.
[Student Outcomes a,e,f,h]
B.
1. understand the behavior of concrete structures in various environments.
2. identify the various failure modes of failure, damage, and deterioration.
3. understand the relationship between deterioration and strength.
C.
1. understand various techniques used for non-destructive testing of concrete structures.
[A-65]
2. evaluate existing structures based on the visual inspection, non-destructive test data, and
available documentations.
[Student Outcomes a,b,e]
D.
1. design a retrofit system for concrete structures.
2. understand applications and advantages & limitations of various repair materials and
retrofit systems.
3. identify seismic deficiencies in concrete structures.
4. analyze and design CFRP retrofit system for concrete members.
[Student Outcomes a,c,e,k]
E.
1. investigate deterioration of existing civil infrastructure component, write a report, and
present it.
2. work on a design team, evaluate existing structure, deign a retrofit system, prepare a
comprehensive report, and present the project.
[Student Outcomes a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,k]
Course Topics:
o Motivation for rehabilitation of civil infrastructure.
o Deterioration Mechanisms: Corrosion, carbonation, alkali-silica reaction, freezing and
thawing.
o Behavior of existing structures.
o Rehabilitation process.
o Nondestructive Testing: rebound hammer, ultra sonic, penetration test, pull-out test,
magnetic/electric methods, short-pulse radar techniques, stress wave propagation
methods, acoustic emissions.
o Non-destructive evaluation: visual inspection, NDT, documentations, history.
o Repair materials and systems
o Rehabilitation methods and application: surface preparation, patches, overlays, shotcrete,
epoxy injection, FRP installation
o Rehabilitation of structures with carbon fiber reinforced polymer composites
o Seismic evaluation and retrofit of structures.
[A-66]
MAT 485 – Differential Equations and Matrix Algebra
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Vincent Fatica (Course Supervisor)
Required: Differential Equations and Linear Algebra, 2nd Edition. J. Farlow, J. Hall, J.
McDill, and B. West. 2007. Pearson.
Catalog Description: Solution of ordinary differential equations, including series methods.

Vector spaces, matrix algebra, rank, linear systems, eigenvalues and eigenvectors.
Prerequisites/Co-Requisites: MAT 397.
Learning Outcomes:
mathematical models
Course Topics:
First-order ordinary differential equations (ODE)
Separable equations
Second order ODEs
Higher order linear ODEs
Systems of ODEs
Determinants
Linear systems
Inverse of a matrix
Eigenvalues & eigenvectors.
[A-67]
CIE 535 – Structural Steel Design
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Eric Lui

Required: Steel Construction Manual, 13th edition, American Institute of Steel Construction,
Chicago, IL, 2005.
Software: RISA-3D
Catalog Description: Design of structures using load and resistance factor design concept.
Limit states design of columns, beams, beam-columns, frames, connections, plate girders, and
composite sections. Computer applications to design.
Ability to use a computer.

Course Objectives:
1. To discuss the behavior of steel under stress and strain.
2. To address the philosophy behind limit state design.
3. To explain the basic theory and design practice of steel building structures.
4. To introduce the use of computer for design.
Course Outcomes:
A.
1. understand how steel behaves under stress and strain.
2. recognize the advantages and disadvantages of using steel as a construction
material.
B.
1. define the meaning of strength and serviceability limit states.
2. identify the various failure modes that are associated with the different types
of structural members.
3. understand the importance of safety factors and redundancy.
[Student Outcomes a,e,f]
C.
1. understand the relationship between analysis and design.
2. comprehend the terminology used in the design of steel structures.
3. determine how loads are carried in a steel building frame.
4. identify the failure mechanisms of various types of structural members.
5. design different types of structural members to withstand the applied loads.
[Student Outcomes a,c,e]
[A-68]
D.
1. appreciate the role computer plays in analysis and design.
2. construct a valid computer model for analysis and design.
3. prepare pertinent data for program input.
4. interpret the computer output.
5. present the design in a written report.
[Student Outcomes a,b,d,e,g,k]
Course Topics:
Steel as a Construction Material (Compositions, Properties and Usage, Commonly-Used
Steel Shapes, Fireproofing and Corrosion Protection of Steel, Structural Fasteners – Bolts
and Welds)
Design Philosophy and Design Formats (ASD, PD, LRFD)
Design of Tension Members (Yielding in Gross Section, Fracture in Effective Net Section,
Block Shear Failure, Shear Lag Effect,Threaded Rods and Eyebars)
Design of Compression Members (Flexural, Torsional, and Flexural-Torsional Buckling of
Columns, Effective Length: Concept and Computation, Inelastic Buckling of Columns,
AISC Column Curves and Column Tables, Design of Rolled and Built-up Columns,
Design of Column Base Plates)
Design of Flexural Members (Compact, Noncompact, and Slender Sections, Laterally
Supported and Laterally Unsupported Beams, Effect of Moment Gradient, AISC Beam
Curves and Beam Tables, Design of Beams for Flexure, Design of Beams for Shear,
Design of Beams for Torsion, Design of Beams for Deflection, Design Criteria for
Concentrated Loads, Design of Beam Bearing Plates,Design of Continuous Beams)
Design of Members for Combined Forces (Member Instability Effect, Frame Instability
Effect, Effect of Moment Gradient)
Design of Frames (Braced and Unbraced Frames, Effective Length Factor Approach, Direct
Analysis Approach)
Design of Plate Girders (Post-buckling behavior and Tension Field Action, Design for
flexure and shear, Design of stiffeners)
If time permits, the following topics will also be covered:

Design of Composite Sections (Composite Action, Shored and Unshored Constructions,
Computations of Section Properties and Stresses, Shear Transfer Mechanisms, Design of
Composite Floor with Formed Steel Deck, Design of Composite Columns and Beam-
Columns)
Design of Connections (Connection Classification, Bolted Connections, Welded
Connections, Design of Shear Connections, Design of Moment Connections)
[A-69]
CIE 536 – Prestressed Concrete Design
Credit Hours: 3

Required: "Prestressed Concrete - A Fundamental Approach," by Edward G. Nawy, Fifth
Edition, Prentice Hall, 2003, New York, (ISBN 0-13-149759-6)
"Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08) and

Commentary, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan, 2008.
Catalog Description: Analysis and design of prestressed concrete members for flexure, shear,
torsion, and compression. Basic concept of prestressing. Stress computation and
prestress loss estimation. Deflection and crack control.
Course Objectives:
1. To address the philosophy behind concrete prestressing.
2. To explain the behavior of prestressed concrete members (PCM).
3. To explain the theory and design of prestressed concrete structures.
4. To introduce the building code requirements.
Course Outcomes:
A.
1. understand the behavior PCM under various loading condition.
2. identify the advantages of prestressing.
3. understand the advantages of precast concrete.
4. design PCM at different limit states, e.g. serviceability and strength limit states.
B.
1. identify the effect of material properties on the behavior of PCM.
2. understand and calculate the prestress losses.
3. estimate the stresses in PCM at various construction and service stages.
4. apply the building code for design of PCM.
[A-70]
C.
1. understand relationship between construction and design of PCM.
2. detail PCM according to the building code.
3. construct the moment-curvature for PCM.
D.
1. design a prestress concrete structure.
2. work on a design team, and write a design report.
3. present the design in a written report and oral presentation.
[Student Outcomes a,c,d,e,g,k]
Course Topics:
Introduction
Why prestressing? Advantages and disadvantages
Materials used in Prestressed Construction
Types of Prestressing steel, Stress-Strain Properties of Prestressing Steel, Types of
Concrete, Properties of concrete
Prestressed Concrete Construction
Cast-in-place, Precast, and Composite
Computation of Prestress Losses
Elastic shortening, Anchorage, Relaxation of steel, Creep, Shrinkage, Friction
Flexure Analysis
Elastic Flexural Analysis, Allowable stresses under service loads, Cracking loads, Partial
Prestressing, Ultimate Flexural Analysis, and ACI Code Requirements
Flexural Design for Service and Ultimate Limit States:
Selection of cross section, Standard Sections, ACI Code Requirements, Partial
Prestressing, Design Examples
Development of Prestressing Steel:
Bond stress, Transfer Length, and Development Length, Design of Anchorage Zone
Shear and Torsion
Diagonal shear cracking, Web Reinforcement, ACI Code Requirements, Torsion in
Concrete Structures, Introduction to Compression Field Theory for Shear and Torsion,
Design Examples
Camber and Deflection
Computation of Camber and Deflection, Partially Prestressed Beams, Composite
Members, Allowable Deflections
Continuous Beams
Continuity of Prestressing, Linear Transformation, Tendon Concordance, Moment
redistribution and Limit Analysis, Load-balance design techniques
Prestressed Slab Systems
One-Way Slab System, Two-Way Slab System, Flexural Strength of Two-Way Slab
System, Prestressed Flat Plates, Shear in Flat Plates
[A-71]
CIE 555 – Hazardous Waste Management
Credits: 3
Instructor: Swiatoslav W. Kaczmar
Required: Hazardous Waste Management, 2nd edition. Michael D. LaGrega, Philip L.
Buckingham and Jeffrey C. Evans. McGraw-Hill. 2001.
Catalog Description: Regulations that address management of hazardous wastes. Practices and
technologies commonly used in meeting regulations. Investigative and diagnostic techniques.
Prerequisites: None
Course Outcomes:
At the end of this course, the student will be able to:
• …identify key physical and chemical properties of hazardous chemicals.
• …compare chemicals based on the processes and factors that influence their transport and
fate in the environment.
• …understand the modes of action of major categories of environmental toxicants.
• …summarize major environmental laws and regulations, with an emphasis on Superfund
and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Acts, and outline their major regulatory
provisions.
• …design a field investigation plan for a waste site.
• …perform basic risk assessment calculations.
• …develop and evaluate alternatives for the remediation of a hazardous waste site.
• …perform design calculations relevant to key physical-chemical and biological treatment
processes used for hazardous waste remediation.
• …discuss key issues related to corporate environmental management and compliance.
[Student Outcomes: a, c, e, f, h, j]
Course Topics:
1. Environmental Management and Ethics
2. Organic Chemistry: Physical Chemical Properties
3. Toxicology
4. Summary and History of Environmental Regulations
5. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act: Waste ID and Listing
6. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act: Waste Management
7. Superfund: Act, Regulation and Objectives
8. Superfund: RI/FS and Remedy Process
9. Site Investigation: Analytical Chemistry/ Sampling Approaches
[A-72]
10. Site Investigation: Remedial Investigation Planning and Execution
11. Site Investigation: Fate and Transport Considerations
12. Human Health Risk Assessment
13. Ecological Risk Assessment
14. Feasibility Studies: Remedial Alternatives Analysis
15. Physical-Chemical Treatment Processes
16. Biological Treatment
17. Stabilization/Solidification
18. Thermal Treatment
19. Land Disposal
20. Environmental Compliance Auditing/Due Diligence
21. Environmental Management Systems: ISO 14000
[A-73]
CIE 558 – Solid Wastes: Collection, Resource Recovery and Disposal
Credit Hours: 3
Contact Hours: Lecture: 2.75 hours per week
Instructor: David Wazenkewitz

Required: None. Selections from the following sources will be assigned:
The Practical Handbook of Compost Engineering, Roger T. Haug. Lewis
Publishers, 1993.
Solid Waste Landfill Engineering and Design, Edward A. McBean, Frank A.
Rovers and Grahame J. Farquhar. Prentice-Hall, 1994.
6NYCRR Part 360 Regulations - Solid Waste Management Facilites. New York
State, 2003.
Catalog Description: Composition of refuse. Quantity and quality of waste materials produced
by individuals, commercial facilities and industries. Collection, processing equipment, methods,
and associated costs. Solid waste processing, treatment and disposal problems and solutions,
design standards and regulations for landfills, resource recovery, recycling, composting and
beneficial reuse technologies.
Prerequisites: None
Course Objectives:
1. To provide broad knowledge of solid waste management systems.
2. To introduce students to current regulatory and design standards as related to solid waste
management.
3. To provide the opportunity to perform engineering analysis and design for various
systems.
4. To develop teamwork skills and provide opportunity to exercise professional judgment.
Course Outcomes:
Upon completion of the course the student should be able to:
• Demonstrate and understanding of today's solid waste issues and management systems,
including waste characterization, waste reduction, reuse, recycling, resource recovery and
landfilling.
[Student Outcomes:- b, c, d, e, f, g, i, j]
• Evaluate and solve engineering problems related to solid wastes from a multi-media
perspective
[Student Outcomes: a, b, c, d, f, k, h]
• Perform engineering calculations and use good engineering judgment necessary to meet
project goals, meet applicable standards and provide a successfully completed project.
[A-74]
[Student Outcomes: d, e, i, j, k]
• Work within groups and present technical information
[Student Outcomes: c, d, e, f, g, j]
Course Topics:
Solid Waste Management (Past, Present and Future)
Solid Waste Types and Characteristics
Legislation and Policy Related to Solid Wastes
Sewage Sludge/Organic Residue: Reuse and Disposal (Land Application, Heat Drying,
Composting & Landfilling)
Sanitary Landfill Design: Site Selection, Engineering Design, Operation, Closure,
Remediation & Special Wastes
Resource Recovery: Incineration, Pyrolysis, RDF, Energy Recovery, Air Pollution Control
Reuse & Recycling: Potential, Techniques & Processes
Collection, Hauling & Transfer
[A-75]
CIE 584 – Designing with Geosynthetics
Credit Hours: 3
Instructor: Shobha K. Bhatia
Textbooks:
Recommended: Geosynthetic Engineering, R.D. Holtz, B. R. Christopher & R. R. Berg,
Bi Tech Publishers Ltd., Richmond, British Columbia, Canada, 1997
Designing With Geosynthetics, 5th or 4th Edition, R. M. Koerner, Prentice

Hall. Englewood Cliff, NH, 1997, 2005.
Catalog Description: Engineering Properties of Geosynthetics (geotextiles, geogrids,

geomembranes, and geocomposites). Design of filters using geotextiles, retaining structure using
geosynthetics, design of liquid impoundment, and solid waste containment facilities.
To succeed in this course, students should possess the following knowledge and skills:
a. Mechanics of Solids (ECS 325).
b. Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering (CIE 337) and Foundation Engieering(CIE
338)
c. Ability to use computers and working knowledge of a spreadsheet program (e.g. EXCEL)
Course Objectives:
• To understand the history and evolution of Geosynthetics products.
• To learn the role of different Geosynthetic products in a variety of Civil and
Environmental applications.
• To learn design concept and methods using different Geosynthics products.
• To address contemporary issues related to Geosynthics Engineering.
Course Outcomes:
1. Development of Working Knowledge
1.1 Appreciate the interconnectivity between various elements of Civil,
Environmental, and Geosynthetics Engineering, which lend themselves to
solutions of practical problems.
1.2 Understand and apply the fundamentals of Geosynthetics in real-world
engineering design problems.
[Student Outcomes: e]
2. Team Work and Ethical Responsibilities

2.1 Work in a team wherein tasks are distributed evenly and every student does
his/her fair share of work.
[A-76]
2.2 Work with a sense of individual responsibility towards the team members.
[Student Outcomes: d and f]
3. Life-Long Learning
3.1 Develop and sustain curiosity and interest, achieve learning success/satisfaction
resulting in a desire to continue learning, as emphasized by the guest
speakersinvited from time to time to address the role of Geosynthetics in current
problems.
3.2 Develop an awareness of various ongoing projects dealing with various
geosynthetic, civil and environmental issues addressed by guest speakers.
[Student Outcomes: i and j]
Course Topics:
Types of Geosynthetic products and their application
Types of Polymers and their properties
Properties of Geosynthetic Products
Designing with Geosynthetics - Subsurface Drainage System
Designing with Geotxtiles -Riprap Revetments
Designing with Geosynthetics -Roadways
Designing with Geosynthetics - Embankments on Soft Foundations
Designing with Geogrids - Soil Retaining Walls and Abutments
Designing with Geomembrane -Liquid Containment Facility
Landfill Element Design-Anchor Trench Design, Slopes
Designing with Geocomposits - Temporary Runoff and Sediment Control
Case Histories
[A-77]
Appendix_ B - Faculty Vitae
Full-Time Faculty:
Riyad S. Aboutaha
Shobha K. Bhatia
David G. Chandler
Samuel P. Clemence
Andria M. Costello Staniec
Cliff I. Davidson
Charles T. Driscoll, Jr.
Chris E. Johnson
Raymond D. Letterman
Eric M. Lui
Dawit Negussey
Ossama M. Salem
Adjunct Faculty:
Joan V. Dannenhoffer
Swiatoslav V. Kaczmar
James A. Mandel
Emmet M. Owens, Jr.
Peter W. Plumley
David S. Wazenkewitz
[A-78]
B.S. Civil Engineering – Syracuse University
Level of Activity
Earned- Field and Year

Years of Experience H, M, or L
Type of Academic
FT or PT
Organizations
Highest Degree
summer work
Rank 1
Appointment2
Development
Faculty Name
Registration/
Certification
Professional
Professional
Consulting/
Professional
T, TT, NTT
in industry
Institution
Govt./Ind.
Teaching
Practice
This
Riyad S. Aboutaha Ph.D. – 1994 ASC T FT 8 17 13 M M L
Shobha K. Bhatia Ph.D. – 1981 P T FT 2.5 31 31 H H L
David G. Chandler Ph.D. – 1998 O NTT FT 3 10 1 M L L
Samuel P. Clemence Ph.D. – 1973 P T FT 7 38 34 P.E. M M H
Andria M. Costello Staniec Ph.D. – 1999 ASC T FT 0 12 12 L M L
Cliff I. Davidson Ph.D. – 1977 P T FT 0 34 1 H H L
Charles T. Driscoll Ph.D. – 1980 P T FT 1 32 32 E.I.T. H L M
Chris E. Johnson Ph.D. – 1989 P T FT 1 21 21 L M L
Raymond D. Letterman Ph.D. – 1972 P T FT 0 34 28 P.E. M L L
Eric M. Lui Ph.D. – 1985 ASC T FT 0 26 25.5 E.I.T. M M L
Dawit Negussey Ph.D. – 1985 P T FT 9 26 23 P.Eng. M M M
P.E., CPC,
Ossama M. (Sam) Salem Ph.D. – 1998 P T FT 8 14 1.5 M M M
LEED AP
Table B-1. Faculty qualifications summary for the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering. Footnote explanations are as follows:
1. P = Professor ASC = Associate Professor AST = Assistant Professor I = Instructor A = Adjunct O = Other
2. TT = Tenure Track T = Tenured NTT = Non Tenure Track
3. The level of activity: high, medium , low, is self-reported and reflects an average over three academic years: 2008-2011.
[A-79]
Years of Level of Activity
Experience H, M, or L
Type of Academic
Highest Degree
FT or PT
Rank 1
Appointment2
Organizations
Development
Faculty Name Earned- Field
summer work
Registration/
Certification
Professional
Professional
Professional
Consulting/
T, TT, NTT
in industry
Institution
Govt./Ind.
and Year
Teaching
Practice
This
Joan V. Dannenhoffer M.S. – 1983 A NTT PT 14 19 0.5 P.E. H M L
Swiatoslav W. Kaczmar Ph.D. – 1983 A NTT PT 28 30 26 C.I.H. M M H
James A. Mandel Ph.D. – 1967 O NTT PT 12 30 43 P.E. L L H
Emmet M. Owens, Jr. M.S. – 1974 A NTT PT 33 21 21 P.E. L L H
Peter W. Plumley Ph.D. – 1984 A NTT PT 5 11 26 M M L
David S. Wazenkewitz B.S. – 1983 A NTT PT 35 25 25 P.E. L M L
Table B-1 (continued). Faculty qualifications summary for the B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering. Footnote explanations are as follows:
1. P = Professor ASC = Associate Professor AST = Assistant Professor I = Instructor A = Adjunct O = Other
2. TT = Tenure Track T = Tenured NTT = Non Tenure Track
3. The level of activity: high, medium , low, is self-reported and reflects an average over three academic years: 2008-2011.
[A-80]
Riyad S. Aboutaha
Associate Professor
Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244-1190.
Phone: 315-443-3347, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: rsabouta@syr.edu
Education: Ph.D. Structures, University of Texas at Austin, 1994

M.S. Structures, University of Texas at Austin, 1990
B.E. Civil Engineering, Beirut Arab University, 1981
Academic Experience:
Associate Professor, Syracuse University, 1998-present, Full-time.
Assistant Professor, Georgia Tech, 1994-1998. Full-time.
Related Academic Experience:

None
Non-Academic Experience:
Engineering Corps, Abu Dhabi, UAE. Project Engineer, 1981-1989. Full-time.
Construction of various concrete and steel structures, pavements.
Certifications and Professional Registrations:

None
Scientific and Professional Societies of which a member:

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Fellow of the American Concrete Institute
(ACI), Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI), International Concrete Repair
Institute (ICRI).
Honors and Awards:

Teaching Excellence and Innovation Award, School of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Georgia Tech, 1996; 1996 Outstanding Faculty of the Year, American
Society of Civil Engineers-Georgia Tech Student, 1996; Tau Beta Pi and Chi Epsilon.
Institutional and Professional Service in the Last Five Years:

Institutional: Member, Department Chair Search Committee 2009-2010, Member, Graduate
Committee 2006-present, Chair of the L.C. Smith ECS Faculty Council 2006-2009, Member of
the L.C. Smith ECS Faculty Council 2010-present, Member of L.C. Smith ECS Tenure &
promotion Committee 2006-2009.
Professional: Associate Member of ACI Committee on Composites and Hybrid Structures 2002-
present. Reviewer for numerous journal publications. Steering Committee Member
“Transportation Infrastructure Research Consortium” 2001-2008. Board Member of University
Transportation Research Center (UTRC).
Selected Publications of Last Five Years:
[A-81]
Wattanadechachan, P., Aboutaha, R.S., Hag-Elsafi, O., and Alampalli, S., “Thermal
Compatibility and Durability of Wearing Surfaces on FRP Bridge Decks,” ASCE Journal
of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 11, No. 4, New York, 2006.
Park SangDon, and Aboutaha, R.S., “Finite Element Methodologies for FRP Strengthened RC
Members,” Journal of Computers and Concrete, Korea, October-November issue, 2006.
Tapan, Mucip, and Aboutaha, R.S., “Structural Evaluation of Deteriorated RC Bridge Piers,”
ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering, New York, NY, Vol. 13, No. 3, May/June 2008,
pp. 226-236.
Park SangDon, and Aboutaha, R.S., “Analysis of CFRP Strengthened Bridge Piers Using the
STM Approach,” ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, New York, NY, Vol. 135,
No. 6, June 2009, pp. 632-643.
Tapan, Mucip, and Aboutaha, R.S., “Load carrying Capacity of Deteriorated Reinforced
Concrete Columns,” Journal of Computers and Concrete, Vol. 6, No. 6, December 2009,
pp. 473-490.
Huang, Jianwei, and Aboutaha, R.S., “Durability Design of GFRP Bar Reinforced Concrete
Members,” ASCE Journal of Composites for Construction, Volume 14, Issue 5,
September/October 2010pp. 479-486.
Tapan, M., and Aboutaha, R.S., “Effect of Steel Corrosion and Loss of Concrete Cover on
Strength of Deteriorated RC Columns,” Elsevier Journal of Construction & Building
Materials.
Tapan, M., and Aboutaha, R.S “Evaluation of Ultimate Capacity of Deteriorated Reinforced
Concrete Bridge Columns,“ Fourth International Conference on Bridge Maintenance,
Safety and Management, IABMAS'08, Sheraton Grande Walkerhill Hotel in Seoul,
Korea, July 13-17, 2008.
Huang, Jianwei, and Aboutaha, R.S., “Durability Related Design of GFRP Bar Reinforced
Concrete Structures,” Eleventh East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering
& Construction (EASEC-11) “Building a Sustainable Environment,” November 19-21,
2008, Taipei, Taiwan.
Huang, Jianwei, and Aboutaha, R.S., “Durability Design Approache for GFRP Bar Reinforced
Concrete (RC) Members,” FRPRCS-10, April 2-4, 2011, Tampa, Florida
Professional Development Activities in the Last Five Years:

SU-CSTL “Cross-Disciplinary Teaching” SU Campus, March 01, 2006; SU-CSTL
“Student Feedback in the Learning Process” SU Campus, April 06, 2006; PCA 2010
Professor’s Seminar on “Teaching the Materials Science, Engineering, and Field Aspects
of Concrete,” Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois, July 15-16, 2010.
[A-82]
Shobha K. Bhatia
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor and Professor
Phone: (315) 443-3352, Fax: (315) 443-1243, Email: skbhatia@syr.edu
Education:
Ph.D. Civil Engineering, Commonwealth Scholar, University of British Columbia, Canada,
1980
M.S.C.E. Geotechnical Engineering, Gold Medalist, Roorkee University, India, 1973
B.E. Civil Engineering, First Class, Roorkee University, India, 1971
Professor, Syracuse University, 1997-present, Full-time.
Associate Professor, Syracuse University, 1984-1997, Full-time.
Assistant Professor, Syracuse University, 1980-1984, Full-time.
Department Chair, Syracuse University, 1996-2001
Research Assistant, University of British Columbia, Canada, 1976-1980
Lecturer, Earthquake Engineering, Roorkee University, India, 1974-1976
Non- Academic Experience:
Have served as consultant to: Blasland and Bouck Engineering, Honeywell Corporation, Niagara
Mohawk Power Corporation, O’Brien & Gere Engineers, Reemay, Inc., SAGEOS, Stopen
Engineers, Van der Horst Engineering, Woodward Clyde Consultants. Assistant Engineer, Uttar
Pradesh Irrigation Department, India, 1973-1974.
Certification and Professional Registrations:
None
American Society of Civil Engineers, American Society of Testing Materials, American Society
of Engineering Education , International Geosynthetic Society, International Society of Soil
Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, International Erosion Control Association, Indian
Geotechnical Society, North American Geosynthetic Society.
Honors and Awards:
Chancellor Faculty Excellence and Scholarly Distinction, Syracuse University, 2009; Excellence
in Graduate Education Faculty Recognition Award, Syracuse University, 2008; Recipient of the
College Technology Educator of the Year award , Technology Alliance of Central New York,
2004; Recipient of the International Network for Engineering Education and Research (iNEER)
Award for Excellence in Fostering Sustained and Unique Collaborations in International
Research and Education, 2003; Recipient of the Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor of
Teaching Excellence, Syracuse University, 2000; Recipient of the Crouse Hinds Award for
Teaching in Engineering Education from the L.C. Smith College of Engineering, Syracuse
University, 1996; Shamsher Prakash Research Award, for excellence in Geosynthetics and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, 1993; Faculty Achievement Award for Women, for excellence in
research and leadership in training future engineers, from NSF, 1991-1997.
Institutional: Member, Chancellor Citation Selection Committee,2010; Chair, Meredith Professor
Selection Committee,2010; Member, Teaching Recognition Award Commiitte,2010-2011; Member,
Syracuse Scholar Selection Commiittee,2008-2010; Member, Teaching Mentor Selection
Committee,2009-2010;Member and Chair, ECS Tenure and Reappointment Committee, , 2009-2011; Co-
[A-83]
Director of the Women in Science and Engineering (WISE) 1997-present.
Professional: Co-Editor, Scour and Erosion, Geotechnical, Special Publication No. 210,ASCE,2010;
Member, Technical Coordination Council (TCC), Geo-Institute, Division of the American Society of
Civil Engineers, 2005-2011; Member, International Activities Council, Geo-Institute, Division of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, 2009-2011; Member, Geotechnics of Soil Erosion and
Geosynthetics Committee, Geo-Institute, the American Society of Civil Engineers, 2008-2010; Member
of the Technical Committee , Sixth International Congress of Environmental Geotechnics, New Delhi,
India. November 8-10, 2010; Advisory Board Member for the National Science Foundation (NSF)
Funded Gender Equity Project, Hunter College, New York.2002-2007.
Khachan, M.M., Bader, R.A., Bhatia, S.K., and Maurer, B.W.,” Comparative dewatering performance of
slurries conditioned with synthetic polymers vs. eco-friendly polymers”. Geotechnical Special
Publication 211, Geo-Frontiers 2011, Dallas, TX, pp 3050-3058.
Burns, S.E., Bhatia, S.K., Avila, C.M.C., and Hunt, B.E., “Scour and Erosion”, Geotechnical Special
Publication No. 210, American Society of Civil Engineering Publication, 2010.
Bhatia, S.K. and Amati, J.P., “If These Can Do It, I Can Do It Too”: Building Women Engineering
Leadership Through Graduate Peer Mentoring”, Leadership and Management in Engineering, ASCE
Publication, 2010. Volume 10(4), 174-184.
Smith, J.L. and Bhatia, S.K. (2009) “Bioimprovement of Soils for Highway Applications Using Rolled
Erosion Control Products,” Transportation Research Record No. 2108, Transportation Research
Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 117-126.
Satyamurthy, R. and Bhatia, S.K., “Effect of Polymer Conditioning on Dewatering Characteristics of Fine
Sediment Slurries Using Geotextiles”, Geosynthetics International, 2009, Volume 16, 2, 83-96.
Satyamurthy, R. and Bhatia, S.K., “Experimental Evaluation of Geotextile Dewatering Performance”,
Geosynthetics 2009, February 25-27, Salt Lake City, Utah, 464-474.
Bhatia, S.K. and Smith, J. L. Bridging the Gap between Engineering and the Global World: A Case
Study of the Coconut (Coir) Fiber Industry in Kerala India, Synthesis Lectures on Engineering,
Technology, and Society #6, Morgan and Claypool Publishers, ISBN 159829623X, June 2008, 58.
Zoli, C., Bhatia, S. K., Davidson, V., and Rusch, K., Engineering- Women and Leadership, Synthesis
Lectures on Engineering, Technology, and Society #6, Morgan and Claypool Publishers, ISBN
9781598296686, June 2008,110.
Smith, J.L., Bhatia, S.K., and Satyamurthy, R. “An Overview of Geosynthetics Rolled Erosion Control
Products”, Paper published in “Geosynthetics – Recent Developments, In Commemoration of Two
Decades of Geosynthetics in India”, Publication No. 298, Edited by G.V. Rao, pp. 303-327, 2006.
Chen, Y., Bhatia, S.K., Buchanan, J., DeKoskie, D., and VanSchaack, R.,“Effectiveness of Stream
Restoration in Reducing Stream Bank Erosion: The Case of Batavia Kill Stream Restoration Projects,
New York”, Watershed 2005, The American Society of Civil Engineering, Williamsburg, Virginia,
July 19-22, 2005, 1-15.
Geo Institute, ASCE annual meetings, 2006-2011; participated in the First US-India Workshop on
Global Geoenvironmental Engineering Challenges ,New Delhi, 2010;Fifth International
Conference on Scour and Erosion ,2010; Women in Engineering and Leadership, Auburn
University, 2010.
[A-84]
David G. Chandler
Professor of Practice
Phone: 315-443-8706, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: dgchandl@syr.edu
Education: Ph.D. Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Cornell University, 1998

M.S. Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Cornell University, 1995
B.A. Chemistry, University of Vermont, 1984
Professor of Practice, Syracuse University, 2010-present, Full-time.
Associate Professor, Kansas State University, 2006-2010. Full-time.
Assistant Professor, Utah State University, 2001-2006. Full-time.
Post-Doctoral Research Associate, Boise State University, 2000-2001. Full-time.
Post-Doctoral Research Associate, USDA-ARS, 1997-2000. Full-time.

Adjunct Professor, Geosciences, Boise State University 2001- present
Ecology Center, Utah State University, 2001-2006
Watershed Science Program, Utah State University, 2001-2006
Adjunct Professor, Engineering, Utah State University, 2001- present
Science Teacher, St. Johnsbury Academy, 1986-1987. Full Time
Ski Instructor, various resorts, 1985, 1986, 1988
English as Second Language Teacher, Taiwan, 1990
Certifications and Professional Registrations: none

Soil Science Society of America, American Geophysical Union
Honors and Awards: none

Institutional: Kansas State University: Open House Advisor Departmental Awards Committee (member)
Energy Task Force (member), International Programs (member). Utah State University President’s Task
Force on Water, 2002
Professional: Consortium of Universities for the Advancement of Hydrologic Science Incorporated
(CUAHSI) Alternate Board Member, USU and KSU, 2001-2010; CUAHSI Biennial Colloquium
Committee, 2009-present; CUAHSI Standing Watershed Observatory Committee, 2008-2009; CUAHSI
Standing Committee on Observations, Chair, 2010- present; USDA NRI Soils Processes review panel,
2007, 2008. Reviewer for numerous environmental science publications and grant agencies.
[A-85]
Madsen M. D., D.L. Zvirzdin, S.Petersen, and D.G. Chandler. 2011 (in press) Post-fire soil water
repellency within a Piñon-Juniper ecosystem: Assessment of the Milford Flat wildfire. Soil
Science Society of America Journal.
Nayak, A., D. Marks, D.G. Chandler, M. Seyfried. 2010. Long-term snow, climate, and streamflow
trends at the Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed, Owyhee Mountains, Idaho, United States,
Water Resources Research, 46, W06519.
Kelleners, T.J., D.G. Chandler, J.P. McNamara, M.M. Gribb, M.S. Seyfried. 2010. Modeling runoff
generation in a small snow-dominated mountainous catchment. Vadose Zone Journal
doi:10.2136/vzj2009.0033.
Tesfa, T. K., D. G. Tarboton, D. G. Chandler, and J. P. McNamara. 2009. Modeling soil depth from
topographic and land cover attributes, Water Resources Research, 45, W10438,
doi:10.1029/2008WR007474.
Kelleners, T.J., D.G. Chandler, J.P. McNamara, M.M. Gribb, M.S. Seyfried. 2009. Modeling the water
and energy balance of vegetated areas subject to snow accumulation. Vadose Zone Journal,
doi:10.2136/vzj2008.0183.
Gribb, M.M., I. Forkutsa, A. Hansen, D.G. Chandler and J.P. McNamara. 2009. The effect of various soil
hydraulic property estimates on soil moisture simulations. Vadose Zone Journal 8:321-331,
doi:10.2136/vzj2008.0088
Williams, C. J., McNamara, J.P., and Chandler, D.G. 2009. Controls on the temporal and spatial
variability of soil moisture in a mountainous landscape: the signature of snow and complex
terrain, Hydrology and Earth Systems Science, 13, 1325-1336.
Madsen, M.D., D.G. Chandler and J. Belnap. 2008. Spatial gradients in ecohydrologic properties within a
Pinyon-Juniper ecosystem. Ecohydrology, 1 349-360.
Nayak, A., D.G. Chandler, D. Marks, J.P. McNamara, and M. Seyfried. 2008. Correction of electronic
record for weighing bucket type precipitation gauge measurements, Water Resources Research,
44, W00D11.
Madsen, M.D., D.G. Chandler, and W.D. Reynolds. 2008. Accounting for bias and boundary condition
effects on measurements of saturated core hydraulic conductivity, Soil Science Society of America
Journal 72:750-757.
Madsen, M.D. and D.G. Chandler. 2007. Automation and use of Mini-Disk Infiltrometers. Soil Science
Society of America Journal 71: 1469-1472.
Lebron, I., M.D. Madsen, D.G. Chandler, D.A. Robinson, O. Wendroth, and J. Belnap. 2007.
Ecohydrological controls on soil moisture and hydraulic conductivity within Pinyon-Juniper
woodland. Water Resources Research, 43, W08422.
Chandler, D.G. 2006. Reversibility of forest conversion impacts on water budgets in tropical karst
terrain. Forest Ecology & Management, 224:95–103.
Soil Science Society of America annual meetings, 2005, 2006, 2009; American Geophysical
Union annual meetings 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008; European Geosciences Union general assembly
2005, Third Interagency Conference on Research in the Watersheds, 2007; Utah State University
Spring Runoff Conference, 2005; INRA Environmental and Subsurface Science Symposium,
2005; CUAHSI Biennial Colloquium, 2008, 2010; AGU Ecohydrological Chapman Conference,
2009
[A-86]
Samuel P. Clemence
Laura J. and Douglas Meredith Professor for Teaching Excellence
Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244-1190
Phone: (315) 443-25544, Fax: (315) 443-1243, Email: spclemen@syr.edu
Education: Ph.D. Civil Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1973

M.S. Civil Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1964
B.S Civil Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1962
Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, Syracuse University, 1977-1983
Chairman of Civil Engineering Department, Syracuse University, 1982-1991
Professor of Civil Engineering, Syracuse University, 1983-Present
Senior Associate Dean, College of Engineering and Computer Science, Syracuse
University, 1991-1996
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor for Teaching Excellence, 1996-Present

Graduate Assistant (Research and Teaching) Georgia Institute of Technology, 1969-1973
Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Missouri at Rolla, Rolla,
Missouri, 1973-1977
Serve as Senior Design Consultant for O'Brien and Gere Engineers, Inc., Syracuse, NY.
Consultant to Dames and Moore for evaluation of slope stability for nuclear power plant
site
Consultant for: Golder Associates, US Army Corps of Engineers, Parratt-Wolff Inc.,
Crucible Steel, Navy Civil Engineering Laboratory, Black and Veatch, Mobil Oil
Company, O'Brien and Gere, Blasland, Bouck and Lee Engineers, and NOVA Gas
Transmission Ltd., Alberta, Canada.
Served as Expert Witness for Civil Suit Trials in Syracuse, Utica Binghamton, NY and
Colorado Springs, CO
Officer, US Navy, Civil Engineer Corps; supervised construction in Vietnam, Thailand
and Spain, 1964-1969.

Professional Engineer, New York #055324, Missouri

Fellow, American Society of Civil Engineers; Member, Transmission Structures
Foundation Design Standard Committee; U.S. Universities Council for Geotechnical
Engineering Research; International Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering; Society of American Military Engineers; American Society for Engineering
Education; Chi Epsilon; The Society of Sigma Xi; Tau Beta Pi
Honors and Awards:
Elected to Tau Beta Pi as an Eminent Engineer, 1977; Recipient, Outstanding Teacher
[A-87]
Award in Civil and Environmental Engineering; Department, Syracuse University, 1988-
1989; Recipient, Outstanding Teacher Award in the L.C. Smith College of Engineering,
Syracuse University, 1988-1989; Selected 1990 Syracuse University Scholar/Teacher of
the Year; Selected as Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor of Teaching
Excellence, 1996; Received for Engineering Education, 1998Outstanding Educator
Award from the St. Lawrence Section of American Society; Received Lifetime
Achievement Award for furthering the goals of technology education in Central New
York, Central New York Technology Club, 2000; Bronze Award for Industrial Designers
Society of America (IDSA) in 2003 IDEA Competition for Synergy Laboratory Design
for enhancement of the Carrier Dome, 2003 Conferred Life Member of the American
Society of Civil Engineers, January 1,2004; Designated Chapter Honor Member by
National Chi Epsilon Civil Engineering Honor Society October 12, 2008.

Institutional:
Dean of Architecture Search Committee 2000-2006; University: Syracuse Scholars Committee
2004-2005; Departmental Tenure and Promotion committee 2000-2005; Chair, Search
Committee for the Yabroudi Endowed Professor of Civil Engineering 2009.
Professional:
Member, Soil Properties Committee of Geotechnical Institute, ASCE; Member Helical
Foundations and Tieback Committee, Deep Foundations Institute Member Advisory Board for
Construction Management and Wood Products Engineering Department, SUNY, College of
Environmental Science and Forestry, 2007 to 2010; Program Evaluator, Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology, (ABET). Member, ASCE Committee on Curriculum and
Accreditation, 1998-2000; Board of Directors, Civil Engineering Division, ASEE, 1997-2003;
Commission Member, Engineering Accreditation Commission, ABET, 1999-2003; Director of
DCC SU Internship Program –Internship for 5 to 6 weeks in Dubai UAE May 2008 to present.
Principal Publications of Last Five Years:
Keynote Speaker at the Deep Foundations Institute Seminar on Helical Foundations and
Tiebacks at the University of Southern California. Title of presentation “Review of
Helical Foundations over the Past Twenty Years and Compressive Behavior of Grouted
Helical Foundations”, November 7, 2008
A.H.Yabroudi, E.M. Lui and S.P. Clemence “Engineering for a Better World - A Cross-Cultural
Internship Experience for US and Middle Eastern Students” 1st Annual International
Conference on Construction, 20-23 June 2011, Athens, Greece

Attendance of various national and Syracuse Section ASCE conferences and meetings
[A-88]
Andria Costello Staniec
Associate Professor
Phone: 315-443-1057, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: costello@syr.edu
Education:
Ph.D. Environmental Engineering Science, California Institute of Technology, 1999
M.S. Environmental Engineering Science, California Institute of Technology, 1995
B.S. Applied Biology (with Highest Honors) Georgia Institute of Technology,
1992
Associate Professor, Syracuse University, 2010-present. Three-quarter-time.
Associate Professor, Syracuse University, 2005-2010. Full-time.
Assistant Professor, Syracuse University, 1999-2005. Full-time.

Associate Dean for Student Affairs, 2010-present. Quarter-time.
Non-Academic Experience: None.
Certifications and Professional Registrations: None.

American Society of Microbiology, American Society for Engineering Education,
Society of Women Engineers.
Honors and Awards:

NSF Career Awardee, 2001-2006.

Institutional: Microbiological Safety Committee, 2001-present; Faculty Advisor, Society of
Women Engineers, 2001-present; LC Smith Tenure and Promotions Committee, 2006-2008,
2010-present; CIE Undergraduate Committee, 2006-2008; Faculty Advisor, Women in Science
and Engineering (WiSE) Learning Community, 2008-present; LC Smith Graduate Convocation
Host, 2008-2009, 2011; LC Smith Faculty Council, 2008-2010; CIE Department Chair Search
Committee, 2008-2009; Yabroudi Search Committee (recorder), 2008-2009; CIE Faculty Search
Committee (Chair), 2010-present; University Prestigious Scholarship Committee, 2010-present;
Faculty Advisor, Engineering and Computer Science Learning Community, 2010-present;
University Undergraduate Retention Committee, 2010-present; University Retention Information
System Project-Core Team, 2010-present; University Academic Coordinating Committee, 2010-
present; Engineers Week Coordinating Committee, 2011.
Professional: Panelist, National Science Foundation, Environmental Engineering, 2008;
Panelist, National Science Foundation, Engineering Research Center, 2009; Mail Reviewer,
[A-89]
Environmental Protection Agency EPA Graduate Fellowship (STAR), 2010; Reviewer for
numerous environmental science and engineering publications and grant agencies.

Fisk, M.C., T.J. Fahey, J.H. Sobieraj, A.Costello Staniec, T.O. Crist. 2011. Rhizosphere
disturbance influences fungal colonization and community development on dead fine
roots. Plant Soil. 341:279-293.
Lindner, A.S., A. Pacheco, H.C. Aldrich, A. Costello Staniec, I. Uz, A.V. Ogram, and D.J.
Hodson. 2007. Methylocystis hirsuta sp. nov., a novel methanotroph isolated from a
groundwater aquifer. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology
57:1891-1900.
Costello, A.M. 2006. Molecular methods used for evaluating subsurface remediation. In C. Clark
and A. Lindner (eds) Innovative Approaches for the Remediation of Subsurface-
Contaminated Hazardous Waste Sites: Bridging Flask and Field Scales. American
Chemical Society.
Todorova, S.G.* and A.M. Costello. 2006. Detection of Shewanella oneidensis-like iron reducing
microorganisms in a minerotrophic wetland. Environmental Microbiology 8(3):426-432.
American Society of Microbiology annual meeting, 2010; Faculty Workshop on
Sustainable Assessment Processes, 2010; Women Administrators in Higher Education
Conference, 2010; American Society for Engineering Education annual meeting, 2011.
[A-90]
Cliff I. Davidson
Thomas C. and Colleen L. Wilmot Professor
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and
Syracuse Center of Excellence in Environmental and Energy Systems
Phone: 315-443-4287, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: davidson@syr.edu
Education:
Ph.D. Environmental Engineering Science, California Institute of Tech., 1977
M.S. Environmental Engineering Science, California Institute of Tech., 1973
B.S. Electrical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, 1972
Professor, Syracuse Univ. & Syracuse Center of Excellence, 2010-present, Full-time.
Professor, Carnegie Mellon University, 1986-2010, Full-time.
Associate Professor, Carnegie Mellon University, 1982-1986, Full time.
Assistant Professor, Carnegie Mellon University, 1977-1982. Full-time.

Director, Center for Sustainable Engineering, Syracuse University, 2010-present
Director, Center for Sustainable Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, 2005-2010
Director, Environmental Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, 1993-2003
Jubilee Chair Professorship, Chalmers University, Gothenburg, Sweden, 1997-1998
Non-Academic Experience: None
Certifications and Professional Registrations: None

American Association for Aerosol Research, American Society of Civil Engineers, Air &
Waste Management Association, Association of Environmental Engineering & Science
Professors; International Society on Industrial Ecology
Honors and Awards:

William H. and Frances M. Ryan Award for Meritorious Teaching, Carnegie Mellon
University, 2009; Outstanding Paper Award, Literati Network Awards for Excellence,
Emerald Group Publishing, 2009; Outstanding Educator Award, AEESP, 2007; Charles
Beyer Distinguished Lecturer, Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
Houston, 2006; Service Award for serving as Co-Chair of an International Conference,
AAAR, 2003; other awards prior to 2000.

Institutional: Chair, Transportation Subcommittee of the CMU Green Practices Committee,
2006-2009; Member, CMU Green Practices Committee, 2006-2009; Member, University
Disciplinary Council and Academic Review Board, CMU, 2006; Member, Awards Committee,
Carnegie Institute of Technology (CIT), CMU, 2006-2009; Chair, CIT Faculty, 2006; Member,
Ad Hoc Tenure & Promotion Review Committee, CIT, 2006; Chair, Review Committee,
[A-91]
Environ. Energy Technology Division, Lawrence Berkeley Nat. Laboratory, 2006; Chair,
Industry Advisory Board, Chemical and Environ. Eng. Dept., U of Arizona, Tucson, 2007-2009;
Member, Science Advisory Board, NSF Center for Environmental Sustainability in Arid Coastal
Areas, Texas A&M Kingsville, 2009-present.
Professional: EPA Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee for Lead, 2010-present; National
Academy of Sciences, Member of Committee for Review of State of Ohio Sustainability
Proposals, 2008; Green Government Task Force, City of Pittsburgh, 2006-2009; United Jewish
Federation, Pittsburgh Office, Committee on the Environment, 2006-2009; American Society of
Civil Engineers, Committee on Sustainability, 2009-present; Editorial Advisory Board of the
following journals: Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2006-present; Aerosol Science
and Technology, 2006-present; Environmental Engineering Science, 2006-present;
Sustainability, the Journal of Record, 2008-present; Panelist, National Science Foundation
panels; Reviewer, numerous environmental science publications and grant agencies.
Chu, Nanjun, Joseph B. Kadane, and Cliff I. Davidson, “Using Statistical Regressions to Identify
Factors Influencing PM2.5 Concentrations: The Pittsburgh Supersite as a Case Study,”
Aerosol Science and Technology, 2011 (in press).
Miller, Jeffrey F., Cliff I. Davidson, and Deborah A. Lange, “Brownfields and Environmental
Justice: Income, Education, and Race,” Environmental Justice, 2011 (in press).
Attari, Shahzeen Z., Michael L. DeKay, Cliff I. Davidson, and Wändi Bruine de Bruin, “Reply to
Frederick et al.: Anchoring Effects on Energy Perceptions (Letter to the editor),”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2011 (in press).
Davidson, Cliff I., Chris T. Hendrickson, H. Scott Matthews, Michael W. Bridges, David T.
Allen, Cynthia F. Murphy, Braden R. Allenby, John C. Crittenden, and Sharon Austin,
“Preparing Future Engineers for the Challenges of the 21st Century: Sustainable
Engineering,” J. Cleaner Production, Vol. 18, pages 698-701, 2010.
Attari, Shahzeen Z., Michael L. DeKay, Cliff I. Davidson, and Wändi Bruine de Bruin, “Public
Perceptions of Energy Consumption,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
Vol. 107, pages 16054-16059, 2010.
Attari, Shahzeen Z., Michael L. DeKay, Cliff I. Davidson, and Wändi Bruine de Bruin,
“Changing Household Behaviors to Curb Climate Change: How Hard Can It be?,”
Sustainability, The Journal of Record, Vol. 4, pp. 9-11, 2011.
Presented talks at national and international conferences: 2006 (5 conferences), 2007
(10), 2008 (5), 2009 (7), 2010 (5). Attended several additional conferences. Organized
and ran Center for Sustainable Engineering workshops for faculty development in 2006,
2007, 2008, and 2009.
[A-92]
Charles T. Driscoll, Jr., NAE
Professor and CESE Director
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13244,
Phone: (315) 443-3434, Fax: (315) 443-1243, E-mail: ctdrisco@syr.edu.
Education:
B.S. University of Maine, Civil Engineering, 1974
M.S. Cornell University, Environmental Engineering, 1976
Ph.D. Cornell University, Environmental Engineering, 1980
University Professor of Environmental Systems Engineering, 2001; Interim Chair, Department of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Syracuse University, 2001-2003; Director, Center for
Environmental Systems Engineering (CESE), Syracuse University, 1999-present
Professor of Biology (courtesy appointment), Department of Biology, Syracuse University 2001-
present;
Distinguished Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Syracuse University 1993 – 2001;
Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Syracuse University 1985 – 1993;
Director, Hydrogeology Program, Syracuse University 1986 – 1996;
Professor of Chemistry (courtesy), Department of Chemistry, Syracuse University 1993-present;
Professor of Earth Sciences (courtesy appointment).
Board of Directors, Upstate Freshwater Institute, 1981-Present; Board of Directors, Hubbard Brook
Research Foundation, 1993-present; Consultant: U.S. Department of Justice; New York Attorney
General; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; State of North Carolina; New
York City Department of Environmental Protection.
EIT, Maine.
American Chemical Society; Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors;
American Geophysical Union; National Academy of Engineering.
Honors and Awards:
Presidential Young Investigator Award, 1984; Syracuse University Chancellor's Citation for
Academic Achievement, 1985; Syracuse University, College of Engineering, Anaren Microwave
Award for Excellence in Engineering Scholarship, 1989; IBM Corporation Environmental Research
Program Award, 1993; Institute of Scientific Information, Highly Cited Researcher for Engineering
and Environmental Science, 2003-present; National Academy of Engineering, 2007-present; Syracuse
University Excellence in Graduate Education Faculty Recognition Award, March 2007.
Institutional: College awards committee, chair: 1983 – present; University President’s Climate
Commitment, committee member: 2008-present; University sustainability curriculum committee: 2009-
2010; LCS Deans search committee 2007-2008; Faculty search committee for the Department of Earth
Sciences: 2009; Faculty search committee chair for senior water position 2010-current.
Professional: Board of Directors, Upstate Freshwater Institute, 1981-Present; Board of Directors,
Hubbard Brook Research Foundation, 1993-present; Member, National Research Council Committee on
Everglades Restoration, 2006-present; Member, National Mercury Monitoring Steering Committee for
[A-93]
Building a National Mercury Monitoring Network (MercNet), Multi-Federal Agency Initiative, 2006-
present; Member, Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 2007-present; Member, Ecotrends Committee, Long-Term Ecological Research Network, 2007-
2010; Member, U.S. National Committee for Soil Science, The National Academies, 2008-2010;
Member, Advisory Committee on Mercury Pollution, New York State, 2009-present; Member Critical
Zone Advisory Committee National Science Foundation, 2009-present.; Member, Oil Sands Water
Monitoring Review Committee 2010-2011.
Selected Publications From Last Five Years (out of 86 from 2005-2010):
Driscoll, C. T., K. M. Driscoll, K. M. Roy and J. Dukett. 2007. Changes in the chemistry of lakes in the
Adirondack region of New York following declines in acidic deposition. Appl. Geochem. 22: 1181-
88.
Driscoll, C. T., Y-J. Han, C. Y. Chen, D. C. Evers, K. F. Lambert, T. M. Holsen, N. C. Kamman, and R.
K. Munson. 2007. Mercury contamination in forest and freshwater ecosystems in the Northeastern
United States. BioScience 57:17-28.
Evers, D.C., Y.-J. Han, C.T. Driscoll, N.C. Kamman, W.M. Goodale, K.F. Lambert, T.M. Holsen, C.Y.
Chen, T.A. Clair, T.J. Butler. 2007. Biological mercury hotspots in the Northeastern United States
and Southeastern Canada. BioScience 57:1-15.
Selvendiran, P., C.T. Driscoll, M.R. Montesdeoca, and J.T. Bushey. 2008. Inputs, storage and transport of
total and methyl mercury in two temperate forest wetlands. Journal of Geophysical Research
113:G00C01, doi:10.1029/2008JG000739.
Zhai, J., C.T. Driscoll, T.J. Sullivan, and B.J. Cosby. 2008. Regional application of the PnET-BGC model
to assess historical acidification of Adirondack lakes. Water Resour. Res. 44,
W01421:doi:10.1029/2006WR005532.
Campbell, J. L., L. E. Rustad, E. W. Boyer, S. F. Christopher, C. T. Driscoll, I. J. Fernandez, P. M.
Groffman, D. Houle, J. Kiekbusch, A. H. Magill, M. J. Mitchell, and S. V. Ollinger. 2009.
Consequences of climate change for biogeochemical cycling in forests of northeastern North
America. Can. J. For. Res. 39:264-284.
Cho, Y., C. T. Driscoll, C. E. Johnson, and T. G. Siccama. 2009. Chemical changes in soil and soil
solution after calcium silicate addition to a northern hardwood forest. Biogeochemistry:DOI
10:1007/s10533-10009-19397-10536.
Todorova, S. G., C. T. Driscoll, D. A. Matthews, S. W. Effler, M. E. Hines, and E. A. Henry. 2009.
Evidence for regulation of monomethyl mercury by nitrate in a seasonally stratified, eutrophic lake.
Environmental Science and Technology 43:6572-6578.
Driscoll, C.T., E. B. Cowling, P. Grennfelt, J. Galloway, and R. Dennis. 2010. Integrated assessment of
ecosystem effects of atmospheric deposition: Lessons available to be learned. EM. Nov. 2010:6-13.
Wu, W. and C.T. Driscoll. 2010. Impact of climate change on three-dimensional dynamic critical load
functions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44:720-726.
Attended American Geophysical Union annual meeting December 2009. Attended the National
Atmospheric Deposition Program meetings in October 2009 (Saratoga Springs) and 2010 (Lake
Tahoe, CA) and participated in meeting workshops on critical loads of air pollutants. Attended
the Cary Conference on Science Communication May 2009, Millbrook, NY.
[A-94]
Chris E. Johnson
Professor and Chair
Phone: 315-443-4425, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: cejohns@syr.edu
Education: Ph.D. Geology, University of Pennsylvania, 1989

M.A. Statistics, University of Pennsylvania, 1988
B.S.E. Civil and Urban Engineering, University of Pennsylvania, 1983
Professor, Syracuse University, 2007-present, Full-time.
Post-Doctoral Research Associate, Syracuse University, 1989-1990. Full-time.

Chair, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2010-present
Interim Chair, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2009-2010
Program Director, Environmental Engineering, 2003-present
Adjunct Professor, Griffith University (Australia), 2005-present
Visiting Research Professor, Griffith University (Australia), 2004
Visiting Associate Professor, Charles University (Czech Rep.), 1994
Non-Academic Experience: None
Certifications and Professional Registrations: None

Soil Science Society of America, British Society of Soil Science, New York Academy of
Sciences, Sigma Xi.
Honors and Awards:

Fulbright Scholar, Czech Republic, 1994; Member of Honor Societies Tau Beta Pi and
Phi Beta Kappa; Graduated summa cum laude, 1983.

Institutional: Interim Chair/Chair, 2009-present; Program Director, Environmental Engineering,
2003-present; Core Faculty, Renee Crown Honors Program, 2005-present; Vice Chancellor’s
Task Force on Faculty Salary Disparities, 2011-present; University Senate, 2011-present; Chair,
Syracuse University Parking Advisory Committee, 2002-present; Director of Academic Integrity
Search Committee, 2008-09; Associate Faculty Member, Statistics Program, 1991-present
Professional: EPA Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee for Lead, 2010-present;
Submissions Editor, Journal of Soils and Sediments, 2009-present; Associate Editor, Soil Science
Society of America Journal, 2001-2006; Co-Chair, Forest Soils Working Group, International
Union of Soil Science, 2004-present; Panelist, National Science Foundation, Course, Curriculum
[A-95]
and Laboratory Improvement Program, 2006, 2008; Panelist, Northeastern States Research
Cooperative, 2009; Reviewer for numerous environmental science publications and grant
agencies.

Ussiri, D.A. and C.E. Johnson. 2007. Forest harvesting effects on soil organic matter
composition in a northern hardwood ecosystem. Forest Ecology and Management.
240:131-142.
Siccama, T.G., T.J. Fahey, C.E. Johnson, T. Sherry, E.G. Denny, E.B. Girdler, G.E. Likens, and
P.A. Schwartz. 2007. Population and biomass dynamics of trees in a northern hardwood
forest at Hubbard Brook. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 37:737-749.
Conley, D.J., G.E. Likens, D.C. Buso, L. Saccone, S.W. Bailey, and C.E. Johnson. 2008.
Deforestation accelerates the land-ocean flux of dissolved silicate. Global Change
Biology. 14:2548-2554.
Saccone, L., D.J. Conley, G.E. Likens, S.W. Bailey, D.C. Buso, and C.E. Johnson. 2008. Factors
that control the range and variability of amorphous silica in soils of the Hubbard Brook
Experimental Forest. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 72:1637-1644.
Warby, R.A.F., C.E. Johnson, and C.T. Driscoll. 2008. Changes in aluminum concentrations and
speciation in surface waters across the northeastern U.S.A. following reductions in acidic
deposition: 1986 – 2001. Environmental Science and Technology. 42:8668-8674.
Warby, R.A.F., C.E. Johnson, and C.T. Driscoll. 2009. Continuing acidification of organic soils
across the northeastern U.S.A.: 1984-2001. Soil Science Society of America Journal.
73:274-284.
Balaria, A., C. E. Johnson, and Z. Xu. 2009. Spectral and elemental characterization of hot-water
extractable organic matter in a forest soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal
73:812-821.
Cho, Y., C.T. Driscoll, C.E. Johnson, and T.G. Siccama. 2010. Changes in soil and soil solution
in response to calcium silicate manipulation of a northern hardwood forest.
Biogeochemistry. 100:3-20.
Fuss, C. B., C.T. Driscoll, C.E. Johnson, R.J. Petras, and T.J Fahey. [In Press]. Dynamics of
oxidized and reduced iron in a northern hardwood forest. Biogeochemistry.

Soil Science Society of America annual meetings, 2007, 2008; World Congress of Soil
Science, 2006, 2010; GPS Training Course, 2008; MIT Short Course in Academic
Leadership, 2010.
[A-96]
Raymond D. Letterman
Professor
Phone: 315-443-3307, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: rdletter@syr.edu
Education:
B.A. Arts and Science, Lehigh University, 1966
B.S. Civil Engineering, Lehigh University, 1967
M.S. Civil Engineering, Northwestern University, 1968
Ph.D. Civil Engineering, Northwestern University, 1972
Professor, Syracuse University, 1983 - present. Full-time.
Professor, Department of Biomedical and Chemical Engineering, Syracuse University,
2008 – present. Courtesy appointment.
Assistant Professor, Illinois Institute of Technology, 1971-1977. Full-time.

Chair, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 1991-1996.
Interim Chair, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2009-2010
Program Director, Environmental Engineering, 1986-1991
Co-chair, Environmental Engineering Program, Syracuse University, 1980-1986
Technical advisor and expert witness on water treatment and waste management
problems for water utilities, consulting engineering firms, filter equipment and chemical
manufacturing companies, research institutes, non-profit testing organizations, the United
States Department of Justice, and national laboratories.

P.E. - New York and Illinois

Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors, American Water
Works Association, American Society of Civil Engineers, American Chemical Society,
Sigma Xi, American Association of University Professors, American Association for the
Advancement of Science
Honors and Awards:

Graduated Cum Laude, Lehigh University, Chi Epsilon (Civil Engineering Honorary
Society), Tau Beta Pi (Engineering Honorary Society), American Water Works
Association Best Thesis/Dissertation Award, 1976, American Association for the
Advancement of Science, Environmental Science and Engineering Fellow, 1986.
[A-97]
Institutional: University Senate, Committee on Budget and Fiscal Affairs, 2009 – present.
Member and chair of numerous College and Departmental Committees.
Professional: Editorial Advisory Board of the Journal of the American Water Works
Association, 2001 – 2007, Chairman, Joint Task Group Committee on Turbidity, Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1988 – 2010, Metropolitan
Development Association of Syracuse and Central New York, Vision 2010, Subcommittee on
Environmental Systems, 1998 – 2007, Chair and member, Standards Committee on
Polyelectrolytes, American Water Works Association, 1980 – present. Reviewer for numerous
environmental engineering and science publications and grant agencies.
Anand, G. ,Singh, A. Sriram, and R. D. Letterman. 2006. Dissolution of Wollastonite in a

Packed-Bed Contactor", Journal of Environmental Engineering, American Society of
Civil Engineers, 132:4:460-467.
Scardina, P., M. Edwards, and R. D. Letterman. 2006. Particle Count and On-line Turbidity
Interference from Bubble Formation, Jour. Am. Water Works Assoc., 98:7:97-109.
Letterman, R. D. and S. Yiacoumi. 2010. Chapter 8, Coagulation and Flocculation in Water
Quality and Treatment, 6th edition, McGraw-Hill Inc., NY.
Letterman, R. D. and P. Delphos. In-press. Chapter 7, Mixing, Coagulation and Flocculation,
Water Treatment Principles and Design, 5th Edition, ASCE/AWWA, McGraw-Hill, NY.

One-week NSF Summer Workshop titled “How to Engineer Engineering Education” at
Bucknell University, 2006.
[A-98]
Eric M. Lui
Meredith/Associate Professor
Phone: 315-443-3394, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: emlui@syr.edu
Education: Ph.D. (Structural Engineering), Purdue University, 1985

M.S.C.E. (Structural Engineering), Purdue University, 1982
B.S.C.E. (High honors), University of Wisconsin, 1980
Meredith Professor, Syracuse University, 2008-present, Full-time.
Associate Professor, Syracuse University, 1993-present, Full-time.

Chair, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2003-2009
Post-Doctoral Research Assistant, Purdue University, 1985
Research Assistant, Purdue University, 1983-1985
Teaching Assistant, Purdue University, 1981-1982
Laboratory Technician, U. of Wisconsin-Madison, 1978-1980
Have served as consultants to various local consulting engineering firms.

E.I.T. Indiana

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), American Concrete Institute (ACI), American
Society of Engineering Education (ASEE), American Academy of Mechanics (AAM), Structural
Stability Research Council (SSRC), Sigma Xi.
Honors and Awards:

LCS Faculty Excellence Award (2009), TACNY College Educator of the Year Award (2007),
ASCE Faculty Adviser Reward Recipient (2000, 2001, 2002), ASCE Committee on Student
Services Certificate for Exemplary Service (2000), Crouse Hinds Award for Excellence in
Education (1997), Coauthor of an AISC Higgins Award paper (1985), Nellie Munsion Award for
Outstanding TA (1982), David Ross Fellowship (1982, 1983), Bates and Rogers Foundation
Scholarship (1980), Bleyer Scholarship (1979), Member of Honor Societies Tau Beta Pi, Phi
Kappa Phi, Sigma Xi and Chi Epsilon, Listing in 10 biographical references.

Institutional: Graduate School Outstanding TA Selection Committee (2010, 2011), Office of the Vice
Chancellor and Provost Meredith Teaching Recognition Award Selection Committee (2010, 2011),
Department Chair (2003-2009), LCS Faculty Excellence Award Selection Committee (2008).
Professional: Editorial Board, International Journal of Advanced Steel Construction (2005-Present);
Panelist, National Science Foundation, NEESR (2010, 2011); International Reviewer, Research Grants
Council of Hong Kong (2008, 2010), Advisory Board Member, Faculty of Environmental Resources and
Forest Engineering, SUNY-ESF (2006-2009). Reviewer of: Engineering Structures, Journal of Bridge
Engineering, Journal of Construction Steel Research, Journal of Smart Structures and System, Journal of
[A-99]
Structural Engineering, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Structural Engineering and Mechanics.

Oguzmert, M. and Lui, E.M., “Seismic design of inelastic structures using equivalent linear system
parameters: Part 1 – derivation and comparison,” The IES Journal Part A – Civil & Structural
Engineering, 4(2), May 2011, to appear.
Oguzmert, M. and Lui, E.M., “Seismic design of inelastic structures using equivalent linear system
parameters: Part 2 – application and verification,” The IES Journal Part A – Civil & Structural
Engineering, 4(2), May 2011, to appear.
Lui, E.M. and Zhang, Z., “Effects of Semi-rigid Connections on Structural Members and Frames,” in
Semi-Rigid Connections Handbook, W.F. Chen, N. Kishi, M. Komuro (Editors), J. Ross
Publishing, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 2011.
Khanse, A.C. and Lui, E.M., “Pulse extraction and displacement response evaluation for long-period
ground motions,” The IES Journal Part A – Civil & Structural Engineering, 3(4), November
2010, 211-223.
Ge, M., Lui, E.M., and Khanse, A.C., “Non-Proportional Damage Identification in Steel Frames,”
Engineering Structures, 32(2), 2010, 523-533.
Lui, E.M., “Structural Stability,” Structural and Geotechnical Engineering (S.K. Kunnath, Ed.),
Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), Oxford, UK, 2009.
(http://www.eolss.net/outlinecomponents/Structural-Engineering-Geomechanics.aspx)
Lui, E.M., “Structural Steel Analysis and Design: Fundamentals,” Structural and Geotechnical
Engineering (S.K. Kunnath, Ed.), Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), Oxford, UK,
2009. (http://www.eolss.net/outlinecomponents/Structural-Engineering-Geomechanics.aspx)
Khanse, A.C. and Lui, E.M. “Pulse-like Near-fault Ground Motion Effects on the Ductility Requirement
of Bridge Bents,” Lifeline Earthquake Engineering in a Multihazard Environment, TCLEE 2009,
ASCE, Oakland, CA, June 28-July 1, 2009.
Lui, E.M. and Khanse, A.C., “Behavior and Design of Laterally Braced Inelastic Compression Members,”
Advanced Steel Construction, 4(4), 2008, 260-283.
Khanse, A.C. and Lui, E.M., “Study of Pulse Effects of NFGM on the Dynamic Response of
Bridge Structures,” Proceedings, 6th National Seismic Conference on Bridges and Highways
(6NSC), Charleston, South Carolina, July 27-30, 2008.
Khanse, A.C. and Lui, E.M., “Identification and Analysis of Pulse Effects in Near-Fault Ground
Motions,” Proceedings, 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (14WCEE), Beijing,
China, Oct. 12-17, 2008.

Webinar – the Long Road to Solar Power (2010), Computer Workshop on Staad.Pro (2010),
Computer Workshop on RISA-3D (2009), Computer training on using BiSpec (2008).
[A-100]
Dawit Negussey
Professor and Civil Engineering Program Director
Phone: 315-443-3304, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: negussey@syr.edu
Education: Ph.D. University of British Columbia, 1985

M.S. University of Minnesota, 1973
B.S.E. Southern Illinois University, 1971
Professor, Syracuse University, 2006-present
Associate Professor, Syracuse University, 1988-2006.

Program Director, Civil Engineering, 2011- present.
Airways Engineering Corporation, Washington, DC.
Staff Civil Engineer, 1973-1975. Full-time.
Geometric design of airports, pavements and drainage systems.
Golder Associates, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Project Engineer, 1977-1980. Full-time.
Senior Engineer, 1985-1988. Concurrent appointment as NSERC Fellow
Geotechnical engineer, site investigation, laboratory testing,
foundation design, analysis and design of slopes and
embankments, field testing and monitoring.
Professional Registrations and Patents:

P.Eng. British Columbia (Inactive)
US Patent No: 7289691; Lithium-Niobate fiber optic sensor and system.

American Association of Engineering Societies
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society for Engineering Education
American Society for Testing and Materials
Transportation Research Board
Honors and Awards:

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada, Industrial
Research Fellow, University of British Columbia, 1985-1988.

Institutional: Program Director, Civil Engineering, 2010-present; CIE Department Chair Search
[A-101]
Committee, Chi Epsilon, Faculty Advisor, LCS Tenure and Promotions Committee, Chair;
Center for Graduate Preparation and Achievement (CGPA), McNair Scholars Program
(MSP), Minority Graduate Student Orientation Program (MGSOP)
Professional: Transportation Research Board (TRB) University Representative. American
Association of Engineering Societies (AAES) – International Activities Committee, World
Federation of Engineering Organizations (WFEO) – Committee on Capacity Building.
Higher education capacity building and technology transfer to developing countries in
Africa. Review technical papers and proposals. EPS2011 member of the international
organizing committee.
Xiaoodng, H. and Negussey, D, EPS Geofoam Design Parameters for Pavement Structures,
Proceedings of Geo-Frontiers, Dallas, 2011.
Bansal, M., Negussey, D., Drake, R., Flattery, J., Mandel, J. and Kornreich, P., Gold Cylinder
Fiber Bio Sensor, Photonics North, Niagara Falls, ON, 2010.
Clinton, D., Cleland, A., Sanio, M., Botha, D., Wall, K., Negussey, D., Lewis, S. and Day, P.,
Guidebook for Capacity Building in the Engineering Environment, World Federation of
Engineering Organizations (WFEO), Paris, 2010.
Farnsworth, C., Bartlett, S., Negussey, D. and Stuedlein, A. Rapid Construction and Settlement
Behavior of Embankment Systems on Soft Foundation Soils. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, Volume 134, No. 3, American Society of Civil Engineers,
2008.
Kornreich, P., Bansal, M., Negussey, D., Drake, R., Lai, Z-X, Flattery, J. and Mandel, J. Lithium
Niobate Cylinder Fiber Strain Sensor and Sonar Detector, SPIE Photonics North, Montreal,
2008.
Negussey, D., Design Parameters for EPS Geofoam, Soils and Foundation, Journal of the
Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundations, Tokyo, 2007.
Xiaodong, H. and Negussey, D., Resilient Modulus for EPS Geofoam, Proceedings of ASCE
GeoDenver, 2007.
Negussey, D. and Huang, X. Modulus of Subgrade Reaction for EPS Geofoam, Proceeding of
GeoShanghai, American Society of Civil Engineers, 2006.
Understanding Laser-Based Sensors and their Unique Applications in Science, Technology and
Medicine. MIT Professional Institute, Cambridge, MA, 2006; 5th PDCA Professors’ Driven
Pile Institute, Utah State University, 2009; US-China Workshop on Optical Fiber Sensor
Research, Development and Applications, Wuhan, China, 2009; George E. Brown, Jr.
Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) Large Scale Lifelines Testing
Facility Workshop, July Cornell University, 2009.
[A-102]
Ossama (Sam) Salem
Yabroudi Chair Professor of Sustainable Civil Infrastructures
Professor, Construction Engineering and Management
Phone: 315-443-3401, Fax: 315-443-1243, Email: omsalem@syr.edu
Education: Ph.D. Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Alberta, 1998

M.S. Construction Management, Clemson University, 1992
B.S. Civil Engineering, Alexandria University, 1988
Abdallah H. Yabroudi Professor, Syracuse University, 2010-present, Full-time.
Associate Professor, University of Cincinnati, 2005-2009
Assistant Professor, University of Cincinnati, 2002-2005
Assistant Professor, North Dakota State University, 1998-2002
Director, Infrastructure Systems and Management, University of Cincinnati, 2002-2009
Director, Graduate Studies, University of Cincinnati, 2005-2009
Alberta Ministry of Infrastructure, Edmonton, Project Engineer, 1995 – 1998. Full-time.
Golder Associates, Atlanta, GA, Construction Manager, 1992-1995. Full-time.
Mediterranean Sea Construction, Alexandria, Project Engineer, 1988 – 1990. Full-time.
Professional Engineer – Alberta, Canada and Ohio; Certified Professional Constructor; LEED
Accredited Professional
American Society of Civil Engineers; National Society of Professional Engineers; International
Society for Maintenance And Rehabilitation of Transport Infrastructures (iSMARTi); American
Institute of Constructors; Project Management Institute, US Green Building Council; Sigma
Lambda Chi (Construction Leaders Honor Society).
Honors and Awards:
Distinguished Engineering Researcher, 2009; Researcher of the Year, 2007; Young Researcher of
the Year, 2001; Excellence in Teaching and Learning Award, 1998; Member of Honor Society
Sigma Lambda Chi (Construction Honor Society), 1991.
Institutional: Engineering Faculty Council, 2011-present; Construction Engineering Program
Development Committee, 2011-present; Middle Eastern Studies Program, 2010-present; Director,
Infrastructure Systems and Management Program, 2002-2009; Director, Graduate Studies, 2005-2009;
Curriculum and Assessment Committees, 2006-2009; MBA/Engineering Program College Committee,
2006 – 2009; University Research Council, 2005-2008.
Professional: Chair, Asset Management Committee, iSMARTi, 2007-present; Editorial Board, ASCE
Construction Research Council, 1999-present; Several ASCE and Transportation Research Board
Committees, 1999-present; ASCE Journal of Management in Engineering, 2004-present; Editorial Board,
ASCE Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 2002-2008; Editorial Board, Lean Construction Journal, 2006-
present; Panelist, National Science Foundation, 2000 - 2008; Reviewer for numerous civil and
construction engineering publications and grant agencies.
[A-103]
Salem, O., Deshpande, A., Genaidy, A., and Geara, T., “User Costs in Pavement Construction and
Rehabilitation Alternative Evaluation”. Taylor and Francis Group, Journal of Structure and
Infrastructure Engineering, January (2011).
Hegab, M. and Salem, O., “Ranking of the Factors affecting Productivity of Microtunneling Projects”,
ASCE Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering, 1 (1) 42-52 (2010).
Salem, O., Salman, B., Najafi, M., and Moawad, A., “Use of Trenchless Technologies for a
Comprehensive Asset Management of Culverts and Drainage Structures”, ASCE Conference on
Pipeline Engineering and Construction, Keystone, Colorado, (2010).
Sobeih, T., Salem, O., Genaidy, A., Abdelhamid, T., and Shell, R., “Psychosocial Factors and
Musculoskeletal Disorders in the Construction Industry”, ASCE Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, April (2009).
Salem, O. and Sameer, M., “Project Management Practices and Information Technology Research”,
ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134 (7) 501-508 (2008).
Abu Hammad, A., Salem, O., Hastak, M. and Syal, M., “Development of a Decision Support System for
Planning of Manufactured Housing Production Processes”, ASCE Journal of Architectural
Engineering, 4 (2) 36-46 (2008).
Dabke, S., Salem, O., Genaidy A., and Daraiseh, N., “Job Satisfaction of Women in Construction
Trades”, ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134 (3) 205-216 (2008).
Salem, O., Shahin, A., and Khalifa, Y., “Minimizing Cutting Wastes of Reinforcement Steel Bars Using
Genetic Algorithms and Integer Programming Models”, ASCE Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 133 (12) 982-992 (2007).
Salem, O., Miller, R., Deshpande, A., and Arurkar, T., "Accelerated Construction of Bridges: The Path
Towards a Holistic Decision Making System", Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C.,
(86) 07-1681 (2007).
Hegab, M., Smith, G., and Salem, O., “Soil Penetration Modeling in Microtunneling Projects”, ASCE
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132 (6) 598-605 (2006).
Salem, O., Basu, B., Miller, R., Randall, J., and Swanson, J., “Accelerating the Construction of a
Highway Bridge in Ohio”, ASCE Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 11
(2) 98-104 (2006).
Salem, O., Solomon, J., Genaidy, A., and Minkarrah, I., “Lean Construction: From Theory to
Implementation”, ASCE Journal of Management in Engineering, 22 (4) 168-175 (2006).
Transportation Research Board annual meetings, 1999-2011; Harvard Workshop on Sustainable
Infrastructures, 2010; ASCE Workshop on Sustainable Civil Infrastructures, 2010; Lean
Construction International Conference, 2007, 2008; International Conference on Transport
Infrastructures, 2007, 2009; Green Buildings Training Course, 2008; Advanced Blackboard
Tools, 2007.
[A-104]
Joan V. Dannenhoffer
Adjunct Associate Professor
Phone: 315-443-4230, Fax: 315-443-1234, Email: jvdannen@syr.edu
Education:
M.S. University of Connecticut, 1995, Environmental Engineering
MBA Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1985, engineering operations
B.S. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1977, Civil Engineering,
Adjunct Associate Professor, Civil Engineering, Syracuse University, Jan. 2011 – present
Associate Professor of Physics, tenured (2006), SUNY Morrisville, 2001 – Dec. 2010
Adjunct Instructor, Electrical Engineering Technology, Onondaga Comm.Coll. 1999 – 2000
Assistant Professor, University of Hartford, Ward College of Technology, 1995 – 1997
Research and Teaching Assistant, Univ. of Connecticut, Environmental Eng., 1992 – 1995
Physics Program Coordinator, SUNY Morrisville, 2004 – Dec. 2010
Physics Program External Review Coordinator, SUNY Morrisville, 2003
Southern New England Telephone Company, 1979 - 1991
Outside Plant Engineer (‘87 – ‘91) - Planned, designed, and scheduled construction for
telecommunications facilities, coordinated introduction of new construction scheduling
system.
Technical Project Manager - Engineering Finance (‘81 – ‘87), Developed capital
recovery strategies for two billion dollars in assets, lead a group of engineers and
technicians in the development of equipment lifecycle analysis, technical expert on the
company negotiation team at the Federal Communications Commission proceedings.
Staff Engineer (‘79 – ‘81), Designed material management systems.
Keyes Associates, Wethersfield, CT 1978 – 1979,
Engineer – Designed sewer systems and highways
Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania, 1977 – 1978,
Engineer – Designed material management systems
Dow Chemical Company, 1976,
Summer intern – research on latex modified concretes
Certification and Professional Registrations:
Professional Engineer, State of Connecticut – License #PEN.0013038
Scientific and Professional Organization Membership:
American Society for Engineering Education 1995 – present
Society of Women Engineers 1977 – present
Honors and Awards:
ASEE St. Lawrence Section Outstanding Educator Award, 2010
Phi Theta Kappa Honor Society, Honorary Member, May 2009
Morrisville Student Government Organization Outstanding Faculty Award, May 2008
[A-105]
ASEE Zone 1 Commendation, West Point Conference Student Paper Chair, March 2008
Syracuse Society of Women Engineers, Distinguished Member Service Award, May
2004
Institutional and Professional Service in the last five years:
Institutional: Physics Program Coordinator, Morrisville State College (MSC), 2003 – 2010, MSC
Institutional Diversity Committee, 2010 – 2011, MSC Faculty Congress, 2010, MSC Awards
Committee member, 2008 – 2010, MSC Judicial Board Committee member, 2005 – 2008, MSC
Institutional Review Board member, 2002 – 2009, MSC CSTEP Committee member, 2007 –
2009, MSC Science and Technology Seminar Series Director, 2008 – 2009, MSC Teacher
Education Transfer Program Speaker, 2008
Professional: ASEE Paper Reviewer/Session Coordinator, 2001 – 2010, ASEE St. Lawrence
Section Chairperson 2007 – 2010, ASEE Physics Division Chairperson 2004 – 2007, Society of
Women Engineers Syracuse Section Officer, 1998 – present.
Publications:
J.F. Dannenhoffer and J.V. Dannenhoffer, “Development of an Online System to Help Students
Successfully Solve Statics Problems,” American Society for Engineering Education Annual
Conference Proceedings, Session 1555, June 2009.
J.V. Dannenhoffer and N. Loock, “Using a Study Seminar Course to Increase Student Retention
in Introductory Math and Physics Courses,” American Society for Engineering Education
Annual Conference Proceedings, Session 2480, June 2003. (Nominated for best paper)
H. A. Canistraro, P. Katz, J. Girouard, A. Lankford, and J. V. Dannenhoffer, “ A New Approach
to the Introduction to Technology Course At a Four Year College of Engineering
Technology,” American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference Proceedings,
Session 3247, June 1999.
J. V. Dannenhoffer and R. J. Radin, “Using Multiple Intelligence Theory in the Mathematics
Classroom,” American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference Proceedings,
Session 1265, June 1997.
J. V. Dannenhoffer, “The Effect of Spatial Variability of Hydraulic Conductivity on the
Robustness of Optimal Hydraulic Control Pumping Strategies,” Master’s thesis, University
of Connecticut, July 1995
D. P. Ahlfeld and J.V. Dannenhoffer, “Reliability Under Uncertainty of Optimal Hydraulic
Control Solutions,” ASCE Annual Conference Proceedings of the Water Resources Planning
and Management Division, May 1995.
J. V. Dannenhoffer, “The Impact of Corporate Culture on Job Sharing and Other Alternative
Work Schedules,” Society of Women Engineers National Convention Proceedings, Vol. 1,
1991.
Reaching and Teaching Across Generations, MatecNetworks, 2009, Lean Six-Sigma
training, Jan 2011, Building and Facility Security Design, 2005, ASEE annual/section
conferences 2001 – 2010.
[A-106]
Swiatoslav W. Kaczmar
Adjunct Professor
Phone: 315-345-4545, Email: swkaczma@syr.edi
Education: Ph.D. 1983. Michigan State University. Environmental Toxicology
M.S. 1980. Michigan State University. Chemical Limnology
B.S. 1976. Northern Michigan Univ. Chemistry, Biology, Water Science.
Adjunct Professor, Syracuse University, 1984 -present, Part-time.
Adjunct Professor, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Dept. of
Environmental Resource Engineering .
Teaching Associate Professor, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Masters of Public
Health Program.
Non -Academic Experience:
O’Brien and Gere Engineers, Inc. (1983-present)
Vice President, Chief Scientist. Syracuse NY office.
Litigation support: technical support to legal teams in the form of document review and
site inspection, provided written opinion and affidavit, and provided testimony in two
trials as an expert in toxicology, environmental chemistry, hazardous waste management,
and workplace/community exposures.
Certification and Professional Registration:
Certified Industrial Hygienist, American Board of Industrial Hygiene. 1986 – present.
Scientific and Professional Organizations:
Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Society for Risks Analysis
Honors and Awards: none
Insititutional: Departmental liaison to joint S.U. – SUNY-Upstate Masters of Public Health
Program. Developed Principles of Environmental Health course (cross-listed as CIE
400/600 at Syracuse University).
Professional: President of the Upstate New York Chapter of the Society for Risk Analysis
(2009-2010). Currently member of the governing board of that chapter. Advisory Board –
Department of Environmental Resource Engineering, SUNY College of Environmental
Science and Forestry.
Selected Publications of the Last Five Years:
Kaczmar, S.W. Risk and exposure assessment of nanotechnology . Spring Meeting of the
Upstate Chapter Air and Waste Management Association. March, 2011, Syracuse, NY.
[A-107]
C. Mecalfe, E.Bennett, M. Chappell, J. Steevens, M. Depledge, G. Goss, S. Goudey, S.
Kaczmar, N. O’Brien A. Picado, A.B. Ramadan. SMARTEN: Strategic Management and
Assessment of Risks and Toxicity of Engineered Nanomaterials. In Nanomaterials: Risks
and Benefits. Igor Linkov, Jeff Steevens eds. Spinger, 2009
Kaczmar, S.W. and Danzeisen, R. Development and Validation of Methodologies for
Workplace Exposure Sampling to Nanoparticles. Poster presentation to NATO Advanced
Research Workshop, Faro, Portugal. April 26- April 28, 2008.
Kaczmar, S.W. Regulatory Considerations of PCBs in Caulk and Bulk Product Waste. Spring
Meeting of the Upstate Chapter Air and Waste Management Association. March, 2008,
Syracuse, NY.
Kaczmar, S.W. and Schew. W.A. Integration of habitat creation and enhancement into a
hazardous waste site restoration program. Platform presentation at the 27th Annual meeting
of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. November 5-9, 2006.
Montreal,
Kaczmar, S.W. Environmental and Professional Ethics in a Post Modern World: Integrated
Problem Solving and Onondaga Lake Eight Annual Onondaga Lake Scientific Forum, held
on 17 November 2006
Kaczmar, S.W , Environmental and Professional Ethics: The Issue of Sustainability.. Invited
presentation at the Spring Meeting of the New York Water Environment Association, May
5, 2006. Skaneateles, NY.
Kaczmar, S.W. Professional Ethics and Regulatory Compliance. Platform presentation at the
Spring Meeting of the Chemistry Council of New Jersey. Atlantic City, NJ. May 2, 2006.
Kaczmar, S.W. Environmental and Professional Ethics: The Issue of Sustainability.
Presentation at the Annual Meeting of the New York Water Environment Association,
February 8, 2006. New York, NY
Kaczmar, S.W. Environmental and Professional Ethics in a Post-Modern World. Platform
presentation at the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry. November, 2005. Baltimore, MD.
Banikowski, J.E., Kaczmar, S.W., Hunt, J. Field Validation of Helium as a Tracer Gas During
Soil Vapor Sample Collection. Platform presentation by Swiatoslav Kaczmar and Jeff
Banikowski at the 2005 International Conference on Soils, Sediments and Water.
University of Massachusetts, Amherst. October 20, 2005.
Professional Development Activities in Last Five Years:
Completed PPA 600:” Multi-Party Environmental Conflict Resolution” at Syracuse
University (1 cr.). Completed course in “Art and Science of Sustainable Design” at SUNY-
ESF (2 cr.). Completed course in “Onondaga Land Rights” at SUNY-ESF (3 cr.). Completed
course in “Introduction to Eco- Phenomenology” at SUNY-ESF (1 cr.). Attended NATO
Advanced Research Workshop on the Health and Environmental Effects of Engineered
Nanoparticles (2008).
[A-108]
James A. Mandel
Professor Emeritus, Adjunct Professor
Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y. 13244-1190
Phone: (315) 656 -2283, Email: jmandel@twcny.rr.com
Education:
B.S. 1956 Civil Engineering Carnegie Institute of Technology
M.S. 1962 Civil Engineering Carnegie Institute of Technology
Ph.D. 1967 Civil Engineering Syracuse University
1966-1967 Instructor, Civil Engineering, Syracuse University
1967-1970 Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering, Syracuse University
1970-1978 Associate Professor, Civil Engineering, Syracuse University
1978-1996 Professor, Civil Engineering, Syracuse University
1996-Present Professor Emeritus, Civil Engineering, Syracuse University
Adjunct Professor, Civil Engineering, Syracuse University
Research Professor, Civil Engineering, Syracuse University
1956-1961 Design Engineering, Richardson, Gordon and Associates, Pittsburgh, PA
1955 Bureau of Ships, U.S. Navy (Summer)
1961-1962 Swindler Dressler Corporation, Part-time
1962-1964 Senior Stress Engineer, Goodyear Aerospace Corp. Akron, Ohio
2004-2006 Dept. of Radiology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, N.Y.
(Developed algorithms for nonrigid MRI to Pet breast-image registration.
These algorithms utilized the Finite Element Method. Patient studies were
successful.)
2006-Present Managing Partner, Fanasys Inc (A new technology Company)

Registered Professional Engineer (Pennsylvania)

Honors and Awards:

Invited lecturer to Nanjing Institute of Technology, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples Republic
of China, June 1985. Sponsored by the Ministry of Education of the Peoples Republic of
China and the National Science Foundation of the United States of America.
The Dr. James A. Mandel Prize for Achievement in Civil and Environmental Engineering
was established in April 2006 to be given annually to an outstanding Civil Engineering
[A-109]
graduate who is a member of the National Society of Black Engineers. This endowment
was established at Syracuse University by five of my former students.
Institutional and Professional Service in the Last Five Years: None
Selected publications of Last Five Years:

Krol, A, Unlu, M, Baum, K, Mandel, J, Lee, W Coman, I, Lipson,E, Feighlin, D, “MRI/PET
Nonrigid Breast Registration Using Fiducial Skin Markers”, Physica Medica
(European Journal of Medical Physics), Vol XXI, Supplement 1, 31-35, 2006
Krol, A, Unlu, M, Baum, K, Mandel, J, Lee, W Coman, I, Lipson,E, Feighlin, D, “MRI/PET
Nonrigid Breast Registration Using Fiducial Skin Markers”, Physica Medica
(European Journal of Medical Physics), Vol XXI, Supplement 1, 31-35, 2006
Lipson, E, Krol,A, Unlu, M, Coman, I, Mandel, J, Lee, W, Feighlin, D, “Development of
Deformable Model for 3D Nonrigid Breast Image Registration for Improved Breast
Cancer Diagnosis”, Int. J. Sci. Res., 16:291-296, 2006
Krol, A, Unlu, M Z, Magri, A W, Lipson, E D, Coman, I L, Mandel, J A, Baum, K G,
Feiglin, D H, “Interactive Finite Element Method for Nonrigid Coregistration of
Multimodal Breast Images”, Biomedical Imaging: Macro to Nano, 2006. 3rd IEEE
International Symposium on Imaging , pp. 852 -856, 2006
Unlu, M Z, Krol, A, Magri, A, Mandel, J A, Lee, W, Baum, K G, Lipson, E D, Coman I L,
Feiglin, D H, “ Computerized Method for Nonrigid MR-Pet Breast Image
Registration”, Computers in Biology and Medicine, 40 pp. 37 -53, 2010
Bansol, M, Kornreich, P, Negussey, D, Flattery, J, Mandel, J, Drake, R, “Strain and Sonar
Detection with Lithium Niobate Coated Core fiber”, Defense, Security, and SPIE
Conference, Orlando, Florida, April 2010
Bansal, M, Gandhi, R, Negussey, D, Drake, R, Flattery, J, Mandel, J, Kornreich, P, “Gold
Cylinder Fiber Biosensor”, Photonics North, Niagara Falls, N.Y, June 2010
Professional Development Activities in Last Five Years: None
[A-110]
Emmet M. Owens, Jr.
Adjunct Professor
Phone: 315-263-3669, Email: emowens@syr.edu
Education: B.S.C.E., Cornell University, Civil Engineering, 1975

M.S.C.E., Colorado State University, Civil Engineering, 1977
Ph.D. program, Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, Civil Engineering, 1986-90
Adjunct Professor, Syracuse University, 1999 -present.
Assistant Professor, Syracuse University, 1990-1998.
Related Academic Experience: None.

Research Engineer, Upstate Freshwater Institute, Syracuse, NY, 2004-present.
Research Assistant, MIT, 1986-1989
Stearns & Wheler Consulting Engineers, Cazenovia NY, 1977-86.

Professional Engineer, New York State

Honors and Awards: None.
Institutional and Professional Service in the Last Five Years: None
Selected Publications of the Last Five Years:

Owens, E. M., R. K. Gelda, S. W. Effler, P. J. Rusello, E. C. Cowen, and D. C. Pierson
(2011). Modeling Resuspension in a Dynamic Water Supply Reservoir. Journal of
Environmental Engineering (in press, to appear July 2011).
O’Donnell, S. M., D. M. O’Donnell, E. M. Owens, S. W. Effler, A. R. Prestigiacomo, and D.
M. Baker (2010). Variations in the stratification regime of Onondaga Lake: Patterns,
Modeling, and Implications. Fundamental and Applied Limnology, Archives of
Hydrobiology 176(1):11-27.
Tomlinson, L. M., M. T. Auer, H. A. Bootsma, and E. M. Owens, (2010). The Great Lakes
Cladophora Model: Development, Testing, and Application to Lake Michigan. Journal
of Great Lakes Research 36:287-297.
Owens, E. M., R. Bookman, S. W. Effler, C. T. Driscoll, D. A. Matthews and A. J. P. Effler.
(2009). Resuspension of mercury contaminated sediments from an in-lake industrial
waste deposit. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 135(7):526-534, July 2009.
[A-111]
Effler, S. W., S. M. O’Donnell, A. R. Prestigiacomo, D. M. O’Donnell, D. A. Matthews, E.
M. Owens, and A. J. P. Effler (2009). Tributary plunging in an urban lake (Onondaga
Lake): drivers, signatures, and implications. Journal of the American Waterworks Assoc.
45(5):1127-1141.
Gelda, R. K., S. W. Effler, F. Peng, E. M. Owens, and D. C. Pierson (2009). Turbidity
Model for Ashokan Reservoir, New York: Case Study. Journal of Environmental
Engineering 135(9):885-895.
Effler, S. W., E. M. Owens, D. A. Matthews, S. M. O'Donnell and J. M. Hassett. (2009).
Effects of discharge of spent cooling water from an oligotrophic lake to a polluted
eutrophic lake. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 135(2):96-106
March/April 2009.
Owens, E. M. (2009) Observation and Simulation of Surface Waves in Two Water Supply
Reservoirs, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 135(8):663-670, August 2009.
Professional Development Activities in Last Five Years: None
[A-112]
Peter W. Plumley
Research Associate Professor
Phone: 315-425-9068 ext. 2163, Fax: 315-425-9072 , Email: pplumley@syr.edu
Education: Ph.D. Earth Science, University of CA, Santa Cruz, 1984

M.S. Geology, Western Washington University, 1980
B.S. Geology, State University of New York at Albany, 1974
A.S. Mathematics and Science, Hudson Valley Community College, 1972
Research Associate Professor, Syracuse University, 2002-present
Professor, Syracuse Summer College, 2010-present
Assistant Dean for Information Systems and Services, Syracuse University, 2000-2003.
Post-Doctoral Research Associate, University of CA, Santa Cruz, 1984-1985. Full-time.
Teaching/Research Assistant, University of CA, Santa Cruz, 1980-1984
Teaching/Research Assistant, University of Western Washington, 1975-1978

Director of K-12 Outreach Programs, College of Engineering and Computer Science,
Syracuse University, 2003-2005
Director of Computer and Information Technologies Syracuse University 1998-2000
Manager of Faculty Support Center, Academic Computing, Syracuse University 1992-
1998
Exhibits Project Manager, Milton J. Rubenstein Museum of Science and Technology,
2009-present

EDUCAUSE Management Institute, Boulder Colorado, 1992

American Geophysical Union, 1974-present
Honors and Awards:

Post Standard Achievement Award, Syracuse NY 2011; SU Gear Up Award, Partners for
Education and Business, 2008; College Educator of the Year, Technology Alliance of
Central New York, 2003.
Scientific Inventions:
[A-113]
Super-sensitive Horizontal Translation Beam Curie Point Balance
Professional Service in the Last Five Years:

NYS NASA Space Grand, Sounding Rocket Payload Project, 2008-2009; Space Alliance
Technology Outreach Program (SATOP), 2003-2008
Selected Publications of Last Five Years: none
Professional and Community Activities in the Last Five Years:

Board of Trustees, Museum of Science and Technology, 2005-2006;
Director CNY Rocket Team Challenge, 2003-present;
Director Bridge Build‘Em and Bust‘Em, 2000-present;
Board of Directors, Technology Alliance of Central New York, 2003-2008.
Director, Greater Syracuse Scholastic Science Fair, 2009-present.
[A-114]
David S. Wazenkewitz
Adjunct Professor
Phone: 315-458-6885, Fax: 315-458-6885, Email: wazenkewi@aol.com
Education: B.S. Syracuse University, Civil and Environmental Engineering, 1983
Adjunct Professor, Syracuse University, 1987 -present, Part-time.
Related Academic Experience: None.

Contract employee - NYSDEC - Employee Training, 2007-2008
Environmental Engineer 2 - NYSDEC Solid and Hazardous Materials Region 7, 1991-
2007.
Directed Solid Waste Planning, Waste Reduction and Recycling, Organics &
Residuals Management and Disposal, Beneficial Use and Pollution Prevention
Programs for Permitting, Compliance, Technical Outreach,
Environmental Engineer 1&2 -NYSDEC Solid and Hazardous Waste Materials Region 7,
1982-1991.
Engineering Project Manager for Permitting and Compliance of Solid Waste
Management Facilities and Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Site Investigation
& Remediation 1982 -1991
Principal Engineering Technician - NYSDEC Divisions of Solid Waste, Water & Air
Resources, 1972-1982.
Permitting, Compliance Inspection, Monitoring and Stationary Source Sampling,
1972 -1982

New York State Professional Engineering -License #064011-1

New York State Association for Solid Waste Management thru 2009; New York State
Association of Reduction, Reuse, Recycling thru 2007.
Honors and Awards: None.

Professional:
New York State Association for Reduction, Reuse & Recycling; Organics Management
Committee; New York State Association for Reduction, Reuse & Recycling NYSDEC regional
Coordinator.
[A-115]
Selected Publications of the Last Five Years: None.
Professional Development Activities in Last Five Years:

Drainage Design Methodologies & Application of Geocomposite Drainage Systems in
Landfills; Landfill Design Technology Transfer Seminar Surfactant Flushing of
Petroleum Seminar; Planning and Promoting of Ecological Reuse of Remediated Sites,
Derivation of Site; Specific Arsenic Background in Soil, Electrical Resistance Heating
Remediation of a PCE Source Area; Water Quality Assessments: How We Evaluate EQ
and Designate Impaired Waters; Biological Nitrogen Removal & Combined Sewer
Overflow Control, 2006; We Don’t Make Paint, But We Make It Cleaner, Blueprint for
the Generation of Environmental Data Used by Decision Makers, A Multi - Disciplined
Study of NYC Croton Reservoir/Turkey Mountain Watershed, 2007; The New York
State Association for Solid Waste Management -Composting Seminar, 2009.
[A-116]
Appendix_ C - Equipment
Appendix C.1 Environmental Engineering Laboratory
Appendix C.2 Hydraulics Laboratory
Appendix C.3 Soil Mechanics Laboratories
Appendix C.4 Structures & Material Testing Laboratory
Appendix C.5 Surveying Laboratory
Appendix C.6 Transportation Laboratory
[A-117]
Environmental Engineering Laboratory (405 Link)
The undergraduate environmental engineering teaching lab is equipped with basic environmental
measurement equipment, including pH/mV meters, UV/VIS spectrometer, electrodes, magnetic
stirrers, microscopes, baths, and assorted labware. As necessary, other laboratory facilities and
equipment of the Center for Environmental Systems Engineering (CESE), co-located on the 4th
floor of Link Hall, are used for undergraduate teaching. For example, an autoclave, constant
temperature rooms, ovens, and incubators are all available for undergraduate instruction. Also,
some unit operations exercises have been carried out in Link 444, which has an open area with a
floor drain suitable for work with large tanks.
Other major equipment for environmental engineering instruction includes:
• Armfield aeration apparatus.
• Stirred tank reactors in series.
• Fluid mixing experimental unit.
[A-118]
Hydraulics Laboratory (051 Link)
Major equipment for undergraduate instruction in hydraulics includes:
• Armfield hydraulics bench (for pump testing).
• Five-meter multi-purpose flume.
• Pipe network apparatus.
[A-119]
Soil Mechanics Laboratories (002 and 002A Link)
The undergraduate soil mechanics laboratories are equipped to accommodate at least five groups
of five students in each lab session. Soil, rock and light weight fill sample sets for visual
identification and rock core boxes for RQD designation are available. The labs have at least 5
modules for each of the following exercises:
• Sieve sets and hydrometer test fixtures for grain size distribution exercises.
• Liquid limit test devices and Plastic limit set up for clayey soil index properties.
• Compaction molds, manual and mechanical compactors for compaction tests.
• Permeameters, constant head and falling head hydraulic conductivity testing units.
• Geojac frames, 2000# load cell, 3in displacement sensors, 2.5in consolidation cells.
• Digishear direct shear testing system with 500# load cell, 3in sensors, 2.5in retainers.
• Vanes, penetrometers, triaxial cells for shear tests, UC and UU testing.
• ArcGIS and laptops for GIS exercises.
The laboratories have a complement of soil test supplies, ovens, electronic balances,
microscopes, vibrating table, mechanical compactor, a jaw crusher, sieve shakers, power
supplies, data acquisition modules, computers, load, displacement and pressure transducers of
suitable range and capacity to perform a series of undergraduate laboratory exercises.
[A-120]
Structures & Material Testing Laboratory (Ground Floor Link+)
The main component of the Structures Laboratory is a 3-D reaction frame on a strong floor. The
high-capacity frame is capable of supporting full-scale tests of a variety of structural
components. Auxiliary equipment for full-scale testing includes an assortment of hydraulic
rams, dual action actuators, load cells, strain gauges, LVDTs, and a multi-channel data
acquisition system.
The Structures Lab also has an Armfield demonstration frame and an array of truss, beam and
frame models.
The Materials Laboratory houses three universal testing machines:
• A 30-ton capacity Baldwin testing machine, upgraded in 2009 with an Extend data-
acquisition instrumentation package.
• A 150-ton capacity Riehl testing machine.
• A high-capacity (1,500 kN) Instron Model 5595 materials testing system.
• In addition, there is a beam tester fitted with a Power Team 10-ton capacity hydraulic ram.
The Materials Lab also has a variety of concrete and steel testing apparatus, including a hardness
tester, a torsion tester, a bending tester, a Charpy V-notched impact tester, a Poisson’s tester, a
K-tester, a Schmidt Hammer, and a Strawberry data acquisition system.
The Department also shares with the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering the
use of an MTS axial-torsional Mini Bionix universal testing machine. This system is capable of
doing static or fatigue axial, torsional, or axial-torsional testing.
[A-121]
Surveying Laboratory (Outdoor Use)
Major equipment for undergraduate instruction in surveying includes:
• 5 Trimble System 5600 total stations, with 3-5 sec angular precision and 0.001 ft. linear
precision. Plus one equivalent Geodimeter total station.
• 6 Trimble System 5700 dual-frequency global positioning system (GPS) receivers, plus
antennas, controllers, and software. Allows for 1 base and 5 rovers in use during labs.
• 6 Topcon theodolites, plus one Topcon electronic distance measurement (EDM) system
for use with the theodolites.
• 5 Leica electronic levels.
• Tripods, steel tapes, rods, range poles, chaining pins and plumb bobs necessary for 5
working groups.
•
[A-122]
Transportation Laboratory (Outdoor Use)
In addition to the equipment described above, the following traffic-counting equipment is used
by students enrolled in the Transportation Engineering (CIE443) course:
• TRAX raw data solar counter
• TRAXPRO software
• TDC-12 Kit with Petra Windows Software
[A-123]
Appendix_ D - Institutional Summary
1. The Institution
a. Name and address of the institution
Syracuse University
Syracuse, NY 13244-1240
b. Name and title of the chief executive officer of the institution
Dr. Nancy Cantor
Chancellor and President
c. Name and title of the person submitting the self-study report.
Dr. Laura J. Steinberg, Dean
L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer Science
d. Name the organizations by which the institution is now accredited and the dates of the
initial and most recent accreditation evaluations.
Syracuse University is accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and
Secondary Schools. Initial accreditation was granted in 1922 and is subject to decennial
review. The most recent self-study, review, and re-accreditation occurred in 2008.
2. Type of Control
Syracuse University is a private, non-profit institution.
3. Educational Unit
The program is located in the department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
chaired by Dr. Chris E. Johnson.
The department is located in the L.C. Smith College of Engineering and Computer
Science, led by Dr. Laura J. Steinberg, Dean.
The Dean reports to Dr. Eric F. Spina, Vice Chancellor and Provost.
The Provost reports to Dr. Nancy Cantor, Chancellor and President.
4. Academic Support Units

Department of Biology, John M. Russell, Chair
Department of Chemistry, Karin Ruhlandt, Chair
Department of Mathematics, Eugene Poletsky, Chair
Department of Physics, Peter Saulson, Chair
Writing Program, Eileen Schell, Chair
[A-124]
5. Non-academic Support Units
The University Library, Suzanne E. Thorin, Dean
Information Technology and Services, Christopher M Sedore, VP for Information
Technology & Chief Information Officer
The Honors Program, James T. Spencer, Interim Director
SU Study Abroad, Jon Booth, Executive Director
Division of Student Affairs, Thomas V. Wolfe, Thomas V. Wolfe, Senior VP and Dean
Center for Career Services, Michael T. Cahill, Director
Counseling Center, Cory Wallack, Director
Office of Disability Services, Stephen H. Simon, Director
Department of Recreation Services, Joseph Lore, Director
6. Credit Unit
One credit hour represents one class hour or three laboratory hours per week. One
academic year represents at least 28 weeks of classes, exclusive of final examinations.
7. Tables (following pages)
Table D-1. Civil Engineering Enrollment and Graduation Data for 2006-2011
Table D-2. Personnel Contributing to the Civil Engineering Program, Fall 2010
[A-125]
Table D-1 Civil Engineering Enrollment and Graduation Data for 2006-2011.
Civil Engineering – Syracuse University
Undergrad
Academic Enrollment Year Degrees Awarded
Year
Total
Total
Grad
1st 2nd 3rd 4th Associates Bachelors Masters Doctorates
2010-2011 FT 78 82 56 48 264 55
N/A 39† 14† 0
PT 0 0 0 4 4 7
2009-2010 FT 83 66 47 49 245 49
N/A 45 6 3
PT 0 0 1 4 5 5
2008-2009 FT 68 61 53 35 217 38
N/A 34 5 2
PT 0 1 1 0 2 3
2007-2008 FT 63 68 37 44 232 38
N/A 46 8 3
PT 0 0 1 2 3 5
2006-2007 FT 69 37 43 45 194 31
N/A 37 4 4
PT 0 1 0 2 3 5
† Pending official confirmation upon completion of degree audits.
[A-126]
Table D-2 Personnel Contributing to the Civil Engineering Program, Fall 2010
Civil Engineering – Syracuse University

Semester: Fall, 2010
HEAD COUNT
FTE1
FT PT
Administrative 2 0 0.75
Faculty (tenure-track) 11 0 10.25
Other Faculty (excluding student
1 6 1.9
Assistants)
Student Teaching Assistants 7 0 7
Student Research Assistants 8 0 8
Technicians/Specialists 2 0 1.4
Office/Clerical Employees 3 0 3
Others 0 0 0
1
FTE values for persons holding joint administrative/faculty positions are allocated to
each category according to the fraction of the appointment assigned to that category.
[A-127]
Appendix_ E - Survey and Assessment Forms
Appendix E.1 Alumni Survey Form (Survey Monkey 2007-2009)
Appendix E.2 Alumni Survey Form (LCS 2011)
Appendix E.3 Direct Assessment Charts (DAC)
Appendix E.4 External Reviewers’ Critique Form
Appendix E.5 Senior Exit Survey Form – Educational Benchmarking Inc.
Appendix E.6 Senior Design Course Evaluation Form – Departmental
Appendix E.7 Senior Design Course Evaluation Form
Appendix E.8 Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Document
Appendix E.9 Performance Indicators Used in CIE 274
[A-128]
Appendix E.1 Alumni Survey Form (Survey Monkey 2007-2009)
[A-129]
[A-130]
[A-131]
[A-132]
[A-133]
Appendix E.2 Alumni Survey Form (LCS 2011)
[A-134]
[A-135]
[A-136]
[A-137]
[A-138]
[A-139]
[A-140]
Appendix E.3 Direct Assessment Charts (DAC)
[A-141]
[A-142]
Appendix E.4 External Reviewers’ Critique Form
External Reviewers’ Critique Form for Senior Design
CIE 475 SENIOR DESIGN
FINAL PRESENTATION EVALUATION SHEET
Group:
Members:
1. Quality and clarity of the presentation, including response to questions.
1 poor 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 excellent 10
Comments:
2. Technical content of the presentation and answers to questions.
1 poor 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 excellent 10
Comments:
3. Overall evaluation.
1 poor 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 excellent 10
Overall Comments:
Evaluator: __________________________________________________________
[A-143]
Appendix E.5 Senior Exit Survey Form - Educational Benchmarking, Inc.
[A-144]
[A-145]
[A-146]
Appendix E.6 Senior Exit Survey Form - Departmental
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

Syracuse University
Class of _____
Program (please circle): Civil Environmental
1. Do you feel that your curriculum helped you attain the objectives listed below?
Not At All Absolutely

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
a. ability to apply knowledge of math,
science, and engineering
b. ability to design and conduct
experiments,, analyze and interpret data
c. ability to design a system, component,
or process to meet desired needs
d. ability to function on multidisciplinary
teams
e. ability to identify, formulate, and solve
engineering problems
f. understanding of professional and
ethical responsibility
g. ability to communicate effectively
h. understanding of the impact of

engineering solutions in a global and
societal context
i. desire and ability to engage in life-long
learning
j. knowledge of contemporary issues
k. ability to use techniques, skills, and
modern engineering tools
[A-147]
2. Can you give us some general thoughts on your overall academic experience?
3. What do you consider to be the strengths and weaknesses of the program?
4. Do you feel your own educational objectives have been fulfilled?
5. Did you actively participate in any student organizations, such as ASCE, Chi Epsilon,
SWE, NSBE, SHPE, etc. (Please specify which)? What were some of the activities you
participated in that you felt were beneficial to your professional growth? What other
activities would you like to see carried out?
6. Were you satisfied in your interaction with faculty and staff and other students? How
could these interactions be improved?
Do you have any additional comments or suggestions?
[A-148]
Appendix E.7 Senior Design Course Evaluation Form
(click on the page to open the embedded file.)
[A-149]
[A-150]
Appendix E.8 Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Document
Continuous Quality Improvement Document – Blank and Completed
L.C. SMITH COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER SCIENCE

SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Document

Purpose: This document is part of the regular course, curriculum, and program review process. The primary instructor for a course
should complete the CQI form within one month of the end of the semester. When completed, the CQI document will be a starting
point for consideration of modifications the next time the course is offered, and will also provide valuable information prerequisites,
course sequencing, and curriculum effectiveness.
Course Name/Number: Semester/Year Offered:

Instructor: Number of Students:
First Time Taught: Most recent semester taught: Date CQI Completed:
Please attach the course syllabus to the completed document.
Course Learning Objectives Instructional Methods Used to Achieve Objectives Assessment Tools
[A-151]
Assessment results (a summary of major results of all assessment):
A.
B.
C.
D.
Suggested Changes:
1. Course Content
2. Curricular Changes
[A-152]
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Document

Purpose: This document is part of the regular course, curriculum, and program review process. The primary instructor for a course
should complete the CQI form within one month of the end of the semester. When completed, the CQI document will be a starting
point for consideration of modifications the next time the course is offered, and will also provide valuable information prerequisites,
course sequencing, and curriculum effectiveness.
Course Name/Number CIE 272 Semester/Year Offered Fall 2009

Instructor Chris Johnson Number of Students 76
First Time Taught Spring 1995 Most recent semester taught Fall 2008 Date CQI Completed May 18, 2010
Please attach the course syllabus to the completed document.
Course Learning Objectives Instructional Methods Used to Achieve Objectives Assessment Tools
A. To learn the fundamentals of plane 1. Lectures on surveying theory and problem- i. Graded homework exercises.
surveying theory and practice. solving. ii. Written examinations.
2. Hands-on laboratory exercises. iii. Performance on submitted laboratory
exercises.
B. To build skills in data analysis. 1. Lectures on probability and statistics i. Graded homework exercises.
concepts and methods. ii. Written examinations.
2. Emphasis on practical application of data iii. Performance on submitted laboratory
analysis to civil & environmental exercises.
engineering.
3. Laboratory exercises in data analysis and
graphics.
C. To begin to develop an 1. Surveying laboratory exercises include i. Performance on submitted laboratory
understanding of the care involved quality checks to help students understand work.
in making high-quality
[A-153]
measurements. this.
D. To build teamwork skills through 1. Six of the ten laboratory exercises are done i. Performance on submitted laboratory
group laboratory assignments. in groups, and must be turned in by the work.
group. ii. Observation by instructor during
laboratory sessions.
Assessment results (a summary of major results of all assessment):

A. Student performance in the surveying portion of CIE 272 this year improved over 2008, but was still below what I would consider
to be a reasonable standard. The median score on the surveying examination was 74.5, compared to 71.5 in 2008. Since different
questions were used in the two examinations, the difference may just be the result of a somewhat easier test this year. Eighteen
out of the 76 students who took the surveying examination scored below 60, suggesting that a substantial minority of the students
did not meet this objective. Grades on the surveying homework exercises averaged 84.1%, which is satisfactory. The average
scores for the surveying laboratory exercises was 87.6%, which also indicates a reasonable level of mastery of the concepts of
surveying. These homework and lab scores were a substantial improvement on the 2008 class, which averaged 71.3% on the
surveying homeworks and 81.3% on the surveying labs.
B. Student performance in the data analysis section of CIE 272 was better than their performance in the surveying section of the
course. The median scores for the second and third exams, which cover data analysis, were 83 and 84, respectively. Seven
students scored below 60 on the second test and only one scored below 60 on the third test. These results are generally in line with
data from 1997-2003, when I taught the course. Homework and laboratory performance in the data analysis section of the course
was similar to the surveying portion of the course. Students averaged 85.9% on five homework assignments and 87.8% on five
data analysis labs.
One change I made in the class this year was to institute weekly homework help sessions. For three hours on Wednesday evening
and three hours on Thursday afternoon, teaching assistants were available in the senior design lab to help students with their
assignments. Mostly this focused on the homeworks, which were due on Fridays, but help was also available for the labs. These
sessions were very well attended, especially as the semester wore on. I believe that they are responsible for the high turn-in rate of
the homework assignments as well as the mid-80s average scores. Whether they facilitated learning is another question. To some
extent, I am sure that they were group copying sessions, but when I attended I did observe real discussion among groups of
students. This sort of help session is probably going to continue to be cruicial as long as the enrollments in our courses remain
high. With a class of 76, I could not have helped even a fraction of these students during office hours and other times.
[A-154]
C. This is a difficult objective to assess because it involves student attitudes as much as knowledge. In several of the surveying
laboratory exercises, students compute misclosure as an estimate of error. The final surveying lab is the development of a
topographic map for a gently sloping area. In all of these exercises, students must reconcile their measurements, either with theory
(misclosures should equal zero) or with their own knowledge (i.e., whether their map “looks” like the area they surveyed).
Students often comment to me on their surprise at the magnitude of their errors considering how careful they thought they were in
making their measurements. This is exactly what I am striving for in this objective. In the past I have been distressed by the
number of submitted topographic maps that bore little or no resemblance to the field area in which the measurements were made.
I am happy to say that over the years this has improved. All but a couple of this year’s topographic maps (out of 20 lab groups)
were reasonable depictions of the area surveyed. Similarly, the vast majority of the lab groups were able to produce reasonable
map and profile views of the Crouse College steps.
On the other hand, I see a distressing trend in our students to trust the results of computers and calculators unquestioningly. In one
of the surveying labs the students are asked to make the measurements necessary to compute the height of Hendricks Chapel. The
answer is about 100 ft. This year’s submitted values included 313 ft (a 25-story building) and -30 ft! In both cases, there was no
acknowledgment on the part of the students that they understood that their result was not reasonable. This indicates either a lack
of interest in obtaining a reasonable result, or an inability to detect errors in their measurements and/or analysis.
D. For the most part, the students in CIE 272 adapt well to their lab group partners, who they often do not know. In the surveying lab
sessions, I have observed that the student groups work together effectively to collect the data. They generally interact comfortably
and share responsibilities well. However, based on the submitted work, I believe that there is a growing tendency within the lab
groups to assign the work for each of the team labs to one member of the group to do alone. Evidence of this exists in the high
degree of variability in scores on these labs. One lab group, for example, recorded the following scores on the five surveying labs:
92, 55, 93, 89, 87.5. The recorder on the second lab eventually earned a D in the course, whereas the other group members earned
A, A-, and B grades.
Suggested Changes:
a. Course Content and Conduct
I believe that CIE 272 is generally meeting its objectives. This 3-credit course requires a lot of work, with 10 lab exercises,
about 10 homework assignments, and three exams. The work is not particularly difficult, however, requiring more attention to
detail than deep study. Expanding the course content is not feasible, as I have not covered the entire curriculum in either of the
last two years. This year I failed to cover hypothesis testing for regression and GPS surveying.
One of the real challenges in the course is the size. For years I taught CIE 272 to groups of 30-50 students. The last two years
have been greater than 70, and that trend appears to be continuing for at least the next two years. Lecturing is less effective in
[A-155]
large groups, and much more time is taken up is unproductive activities like handing out assignments and returning graded
work. I am reluctant to use powerpoint as a mode of instruction, but I need to figure out some way of making better use of
time in the lecture sessions.
The content of the labs is generally good. The surveying labs have been revised for the use of modern total stations, and they
have a good mixture of difficulty. As discussed above, the surveying labs offer an opportunity to assess student awareness of
error and precision. The data analysis labs need a little bit of work. I added a basic Excel lab this year because for some of our
students this is their first exposure to Excel. For the later data analysis labs I have been considering teaching them the basics
of Minitab so that they have at least a little exposure to a mainstream statistical package. I would be interested in the opinion
of the rest of the CIE faculty.
The weekly help sessions were a valuable addition to the course this year. I was surprised at how well attended they were. My
only worry with the help sessions is that the TAs may be tempted to give out answers rather than working with the students to
help them solve the problems on their own. The only thing that can be done about that is to train the TAs at the beginning of
the course.
2. Curricular Changes
In its current form, CIE 272 serves three purposes: (1) it covers the basics of surveying measurements; (2) It provides
an introduction to data analysis techniques; (3) it develops skills with Excel. Because of these multiple objectives, the
course has always been in danger of becoming superficial.
I believe that we need to consider what computational skills we want our students to have after two years, and ensure
that they attain those skills. Currently, they learn the elements of Autocad in ECS 101. They learn some Excel in CIE
272. Several CIE 272 students in this year’s class, as well as the TAs for the course (all CIE juniors and seniors)
indicated that they think that a course like ECS 104 should be required for all CIE undergraduates. Having taught ECS
104, this was a little surprising, since students were not particularly enamored of that course when we did teach it.
Nevertheless, a freshman-level course devoted to Excel and Mathcad would improve our students problem-solving
ability, it would keep us connected to them in the Spring semester of their freshman year, and it would allow me to
teach data analysis using Minitab in CIE 272.
[A-156]
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
Civil Engineering Measurements and Analysis
CIE 272
Fall 2009
Catalog Description:
Skills for civil and environmental engineering. Map reading and theory of measurement.
Numerical analysis and methods. Problem solving using computers.
Instructor’s Description:
There are two major emphases in this course: plane surveying and data analysis. These topics
represent fundamental tools in civil and environmental engineering. We will build on the
experiences of ECS 101 to refine students’ problem-solving abilities, and continue the
development of logical thinking. Both surveying and data analysis require disciplined, organized
approaches to problem solving.
The course includes lectures and weekly laboratory sessions. The first 6-7 weeks of the course
will be devoted to the study of surveying. Students will gain hands-on experience with modern
surveying equipment. All of the surveying laboratories will be conducted outdoors, rain or
shine.
The final 7-8 weeks of the course will be devoted to data analysis. We will revisit some ideas
from ECS 101 and freshman mathematics, and develop the techniques by which data are
summarized, uncertainties are expressed, functional relationships are derived, and hypotheses are
tested. In many respects, these are some of the most important concepts you will learn at
Syracuse University.
Instructor Information:
Chris Johnson
462C Link+
cejohns@syr.edu
443-4425
Office Hours: MWF 8:30 - 10:00 AM
Teaching Assistant Information:

Tyson Bry ttbry@syr.edu Thomas Maxner tamaxner@syr.edu
Stacy Ingersoll slingers@syr.edu Michael McColgan mtmccolg@syr.edu
Zhuang Lin zlin@syr.edu Melody Miller mlmill08@syr.edu
The TA’s are available for assistance with homework and laboratory assignments. E-mail them
individually for appointments, or see them during lab to set up an appointment.
[A-157]
Course Web Address:
http://lcs.syr.edu/faculty/johnson/cie272/index.htm
Textbooks:
Required: “MRH”: Engineering Statistics, 4th Ed. D.C. Montgomery, G.C. Runger, and N.F.
Hubele, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. 2007.
Recommended: “SB”: Engineering Surveying, 6th Ed. W. Schofield and M. Breach,
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK. 2007. (Available electronicall through the SU Library
web page)
Grading:
Examinations (3) 45 %
Homework 20 %
Laboratory Exercises 35 %
Attendance Policy:
I will not take attendance at lectures, though I think attendance is critical. If you miss class, it is
your responsibility for getting materials for the missed classes. I do not share my notes. I may
refuse to help people who are regularly absent. Lab attendance is mandatory. If you miss a lab,
you will receive a zero grade for that exercise.
Academic Integrity
Complete academic honesty is expected of all students. Any incidence of academic dishonesty,
as defined by the SU Academic Integrity Policy, will result in both course sanctions and formal
notification of the College of Engineering and Computer Science and the Syracuse Unversity
Office of Academic Integrity. A link to the policy can be found on the electronic version of this
syllabus on the course web page. In this course, students are allowed and strongly encouraged to
study together and to consult each other concerning the homework and laboratory assignments.
No collaboration of any kind is allowed during examinations.
Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities:
Students who are in need of disability-related academic accommodations must provide a current
Accommodation Authorization Letter from the Office of Disability Services (ODS) to the
instructor. This letter is obtained by registering with ODS, 804 University Avenue, Room 309,
315-443-4498. The instructor will review, in advance, all disability-related accommodations.
Academic accommodations will not be provided retroactively; therefore, planning for
accommodations as early as possible is necessary.
Prerequisites by Topic:
Students enrolled in this course should enter with these abilities:
1. Knowledge of differential and integral calculus (MAT 295; MAT 296 may be taken
concurrently).
2. Basic facility with computers and the World Wide Web (ECS 101).
Course Objectives:
[A-158]
• To learn the fundamentals of plane surveying theory and practice.
• To build skills in data analysis.
• To begin to develop an understanding of the care involved in making high-quality
measurements.
Course Topics:
Types of surveying
Methods of distance measurement
Errors in distance measurement
Leveling
Errors in leveling
Angle measurement
Bearing and azimuth
Errors in angle measurement
Closed-loop traverse
Open traverse (route surveying)
Global positioning systems
Using coordinates in surveying
Latitudes and departures
Compass and map work
Summary statistics
Graphical display of data
Graphical analysis and model-building
Probability fundamentals
Discrete and continuous data
Populations vs. samples
Normal (Gaussian) distribution
Confidence intervals
Correlation
Linear regression
Coefficient of determination
(Easy) non-linear regression
Hypotheses
Hypothesis tests on a single mean
Hypothesis tests comparing two means (paired and unpaired samples)
Confidence and prediction intervals in regression
Hypothesis testing on regression parameters
[A-159]
Course Outcomes:
1. Generate, analyze, and portray plane surveying data.
1.1 Measure distances by taping.
1.2 Use a total station for measuring angles, elevations, and horizontal distances.
1.3 Use global positioning systems (GPS) equipment to determine the positions of points on
the ground.
1.4 Determine angles, distances, elevations, postions, areas, and volumes from surveying
data.
[Program Objectives a,b,e,k]†
2. Create high-quality graphical displays of data.
2.1 Determine the most appropriate graph type for the graphical display of data.
2.2 Create high-quality graphs by hand and using computer software.
2.3 Develop quantitative relationships from bivariate graphs.
[Program Objectives a,e,(f),g,k] †
3. Carry out appropriate statistical analyses of univariate and bivariate data.
3.1 Compute summary statistics (mean, median, variance, etc.)
3.2 Plot and use histograms and cumulative frequency plots.
3.3 Compute confidence intervals and carry out hypothesis tests on a single variable.
3.4 Carry out hypothesis tests comparing the means or variances of two variables.
3.5 Perform regression analysis on two variables, including the computation of correlation
and hypothesis testing of slopes and intercepts.
[Program Objectives a,b,e,(f),g,(j),k] †
4.1 Prepare a joint report for a group project.
4.2 Negotiate with colleagues to reach consensus decisions.
4.3 Present engineering calculations in a clear, effective manner.
[Program Objectives b,d,g,k] †
†
The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), which accredits engineering programs in the U.S., has
established the following objectives for undergraduate engineering programs:
“Engineering programs must demonstrate that their graduates have:
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. Ability to learn / engineering presentation.
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.”
[A-160]
CIE 272
Civil Engineering Measurements and Analysis
Week of: Lecture Topics Lab Readings
8/31 Introduction, Surveying Surveying SB: 1.1-1.5, 4.1-4.6

Concepts, Distance Instruments
9/7 M: Labor Day (No Class) Distance SB: 3.1-3.10
Bench Marks, Levelling Measurement
9/14 Angles, Bearings, Leveling SB: 5.1, 5.2, 5.4-5.6
Latitude and Departure
9/21 M: Eid-Ul-Fitr (No Class) Angles SB: 6.1, 6.2
Traverses
9/28 M: Yom Kippur (No Class) Trigonometric SB: 6.1, 11.1
Coordinates, Areas Leveling
10/5 Global Positioning Systems Topographic SB: 9.1-9.3, 9.8
Surveying
10/12 Topographic Maps
Data Analysis
10/19 Exam I
Summary Statistics Excel Basics MRH: Chapters 1,2
10/26 Probability, Engineering MRH: 3-1 to 3-7
Discrete and Continuous Data Graphics
11/2 Normal Distribution Frequency MRH: 4-1, 4-2
Confidence Intervals Data
11/9 Correlation Graphical MRH: 6-1, 6-2
Regression Models
11/16 Exam II Correlation &
“Testing” Hypotheses, Regression MRH: 4-3
11/23 Testing a Single Mean MRH: 4-4 to 4-5
W,F: Thanksgiving Break
11/30 Paired T-test Hypothesis MRH: 5-1 to 5-5
Two-Sample T-test Testing
12/7 Satterthwaite Test
Philosophical Issues
12/14 Testing in Regression
Exam III - Monday, December 21, 7:15 – 9:15 PM
[A-161]
Appendix E.9 Performance Indicators Used in CIE 274
Outcome
(f) - Ethics
Assessed
Performance Student can evaluate the ethical dimensions of a civil or environmental

Indicator engineering design or decision.
Homework Question: TNS Principle 4 asks us to reduce conditions that

undermine people’s ability to meet their basic needs. As one way of reducing
these conditions, some developing countries have received payment for
Assessment
accepting toxic industrial waste from wealthier countries. Does this solve the
Instrument
problem referred to in Principle 4? If so, describe how the problem is solved. If
not, describe what is wrong with this solution. Your answer should be computer
generated and less than 100 words.
This does not solve the problem, and in fact makes it worse. Industrial waste
may contain toxic materials that can contaminate air, water, or soil. Ensuring
that such contamination does not occur is expensive and requires vigilant
Desirable monitoring. It is unlikely that the developing country accepting the waste will
Answer pay to contain the waste and conduct necessary monitoring; doing so would be
more costly than the payment they received for accepting the waste. Thus the
waste is likely to cause environmental damage in the developing country which
is much more costly over the long-term than proper treatment of the waste.
1 – “Unsatisfactory”: student fails to identify key ethical issues relevant to the

proposed design or decision and/or provides wrong, misleading, or confused
descriptions of ethical dimensions.
Rubric 2 – “Developing”: Student identifies key ethical issues of the proposed design
or decision, but reasoning of ethical dimensions of the situation lacks depth.
3 – “Satisfactory”: Student identifies key ethical issues and effectively
articulates reasoning.
Performance
80% of students should be “satisfactory”.
Criterion
Unsatisfactory: 0 (0.0%)
Assessment
Developing: 4 (5.1%)
Results
Satisfactory: 74 (94.9%)
[A-162]
Outcome
(h) – Social Responsibility
Assessed
Performance Student understands the importance of considering social responsibility in

Indicator making engineering decisions.
Homework Question: Assume you are asked to choose between two materials
with similar properties. One material is inexpensive but it is produced by only
one company, and it is discovered that this company illegally employs child
Assessment
labor. The other material is more expensive but the company satisfies all laws
Instrument
with regard to its employees. Under what conditions would it be acceptable
from a sustainability perspective to use material from the first company?
Discuss in one or two sentences.
From a sustainability perspective, there are no conditions under which it would

be acceptable to use material produced by the first company since child labor is
Desirable
not socially sustainable. The company would have to bring in adults, pay them
Answer
fair wages, and provide good working conditions for it to acceptable to
purchase material from this company.
1 – “Unsatisfactory”: Student fails to recognize social responsibility as a factor

in engineering decision making.
2 – “Developing”: Student shows some awareness that supporting socially
Rubric responsible behavior is important, but does not articulate the connection to
engineering decision making.
3 – “Satisfactory”: Student is capable of articulating how supporting social
responsibility is a key component of engineering decision making.
Performance
Criterion
Assessment
Results
[A-163]
Outcome
(h) – International Relations/ Global Awareness
Assessed
Performance Student understands the importance of making engineering decisions that

Indicator minimize risk associated with uncertain international relations.
Homework Question: Assume you are designing a hybrid vehicle that requires
a battery of substantial size. You are trying to choose between a nickel metal
Assessment
hydride battery and a lithium ion battery. Based on information presented in
Instrument
lecture, what is the risk of choosing a nickel metal hydride battery if the
decision must be made at the current time? Discuss in one or two sentences.
Nickel metal hydride batteries require rare earth elements, and virtually the
entire global production of rare earth elements is currently in China. If we
design a hybrid vehicle using nickel metal hydride batteries which will be
Desirable
manufactured today, we will be required to purchase rare earth elements from
Answer
China no matter what stipulations or price they charge. The risk is that we may
not be able to obtain the needed rare earth elements, and thus cannot complete
production of the vehicles.
1 – “Unsatisfactory”: Student fails to recognize the risks associated with

international relations in making engineering decisions.
2 – “Developing”: Student shows some ability to articulate the risks associated
Rubric with international relations, but does not account for those risks in making
engineering decisions.
3 – “Satisfactory”: Student makes engineering decisions that take into account
the risks associated with international relations.
Performance
Criterion
Assessment
Results
[A-164]
Appendix_ F - Fulfillment of SSH Distributional Requirement
Fulfillment Patterns for the Social Science and Humanities Requirement of the B.S. Degrees in
Civil and Environmental Engineering: Classes of 2010 and 2011.
Starting with the matriculating cohort of 2006, the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering (CIE) instituted a distributional requirement for the selection of social science and
humanities electives for the B.S. degrees in civil engineering and environmental engineering. To
meet the requirement (see Appendix) students must take at least one course in each of three
groups. This requirement was aimed at ensuring that ABET requirements regarding economics
and social issues (Group 1), global affairs (Group 2), and public policy (Group 3) would be met
by all of our graduating students.
Most of the cohort of students that enrolled at Syracuse University in 2006 graduated in May,
2010. Therefore, we have our first opportunity to assess the choices that our students made in
fulfilling their Group requirement. As part of the degree certification process, each student
folder was examined, and the courses taken to satisfy the Group requirement were noted. Data
for 38 students were collected (Table F-1). This is a smaller sample size than our graduating
class because some students petitioned to graduate under the 2005 curricula.
In Group 1, the majority (64%) of the 2010 graduates took ECN 203, an introductory course in
economics. Two other students also satisfied this requirement with courses in economics. The
remaining 12 students completed the Group 1 requirement with introductory sociology courses.
Group 2 showed the greatest diversity in student choice, with four courses selected by at least 5
students. One student fulfilled this requirement with a course on Spanish politics taken in
Madrid on her semester abroad. The logic behind approving this petition is that a course on
regional politics, taken while studying abroad in that region, is a satisfactory substitute for a
course in the “global affairs” area. As we look to increase the number of our students who
engage in study abroad, this is likely to happen more often.
The majority (58%) of the Class of 2010 fulfilled their Group 3 requirement by taking GEO
203, a course in the politics of nature. Twelve students took courses in public affairs to meet this
requirement.
Overall, students adhered to the group requirement well. Only six out of the 115 courses taken
by Class of 2010 students to fulfill the requirement required a petition. Knowledge of economics
is crucial for our graduates, so the high percentage of students taking ECN 203 is encouraging.
It is worth examining the selection patterns for Groups 2 and 3 to evaluate whether we should
change our advising approach. For example, global climate change touches upon the working
life of many of our graduates, yet only one student elected to take GEO 315. Another issue for
the Chair is that the 38 students in this sample took a total of 56 courses (168 credit hours) in
Geography. With CIE enrollments increasing, CIE students may soon be taking more than 300
credit hours per year of Geography courses. While these are spread across several courses, it
[A-165]
might be a good idea for the CIE Chair to meet with the GEO Chair to discuss scheduling and
capacity issues.
Data for the class of 2011 confirm the patterns observed in the class of 2010 (Table F-2). More
than 80% of the 2011 graduates took at least one Economics course to satisfy the Group 1
requirement. There were wider distributions for the other two groups, with GEO 103 (America
and the Global Environment) and GEO 203 (Society and the Politics of Nature) the most
commonly used courses in Groups 2 and 3, respectively
[A-166]
Table F-1. Course selections of CIE students fulfilling the social science and humanities group
requirements in the Class of 2010.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3
ECN 203: Economics GEO 173/273: World GEO 203: Society and
Ideas and Issues 25 Political Economy 13 the Politics of Nature 22
SOC 101: Introduction PAF 101: Introduction

GEO 103: America and
10 10 to the Analysis of 5
to Sociology the Global Environment
Public Policy
SOC 102: Social GEO 272: World PAF 451:

Problems 2 Cultures 5 Environmental Policy 5
ECN 101: Introductory PSC 305: Legislative

P GEO 105: World
1 5 Process and US 3
Microeconomics Geography
Congress
PAF 475: National

ECN 102: Introductory MAX 123: Critical Issues
1P 3 Security Forces/ Public 2P
Macroeconomics for the U.S.
Policy
PSC 121: American

GEO 315: Global
1 National Government 1P
Environmental Change
& Politics
PSC 404: Government

and Politics in Spain 1P
P
Course approved by petition – usually deriving from AP credit, transfer credit, ROTC
coursework, or study abroad.
[A-167]
Table F-2. Course selections of CIE students fulfilling the social science and humanities group
requirements in the Class of 2011.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3
ECN 203: Economics GEO 103: America and GEO 203: Society and
Ideas and Issues 30 the Global Environment 18 the Politics of Nature 17
SOC 101: Introduction PAF 101: Introduction

GEO 173/273: World
6 6 to the Analysis of 10
to Sociology Political Economy
Public Policy
GEO 314: Hazardous

ECN 102: Introductory GEO 272: World
4P 4 Geographic 7
Macroeconomics Cultures
Environments
ECN 101: Introductory MAX 132: Global PAF 451:

Microeconomics 1P Community 4 Environmental Policy 4
PSC 318: Technology,

SOC 102: Social GEO 105: World
0 3 Politics and 2
Problems Geography
Environment
PSC 302:
GEO 315: Global Environmental Politics
Environmental Change 2 1
and Policy
PSC 305: Legislative

MAX 123: Critical Issues
1 Process and US 0
for the U.S.
Congress
PAF 351: Global Social

Problems 1
GEO 171: Human

Geographies 1P
IRP 300.1: Latin

American Politics 1P
P
Course approved by petition – usually deriving from AP credit, transfer credit, ROTC
coursework, or study abroad.
[A-168]
Signature Attesting to Compliance
By signing below, I attest to the following:
That the Civil Engineering program has conducted an honest assessment of compliance
and has provided a complete and accurate disclosure of timely information regarding
compliance with ABET’s Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs to include the
General Criteria and any applicable Program Criteria, and the ABET Accreditation Policy
and Procedure Manual.
Laura J. Steinberg
Dean’s Name (As indicated on the RFE)
June 28, 2011

________________________________ _______________________
Signature Date

Syracuse

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Syracuse

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

ABET - Self Study Report

for the Degree

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

151 Link Hall

June 28, 2011

1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ....................................................................................................7

1.1 CONTACT INFORMATION ....................................................................................................................7

1.2 PROGRAM HISTORY ...........................................................................................................................7

1.3 OPTIONS .............................................................................................................................................8

1.4 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ..........................................................................................................8

1.5 PROGRAM DELIVERY MODES ...........................................................................................................11

1.6 PROGRAM LOCATIONS .....................................................................................................................11

1.7 ACTIONS TO CORRECT PREVIOUS SHORTCOMINGS ..........................................................................12

1.7.1 Review of 2005 Accreditation Report ....................................................................................12

1.7.2 Actions Taken to Address Concerns ......................................................................................12

1.8 JOINT ACCREDITATION ....................................................................................................................13

2.1 STUDENTS ........................................................................................................................................14

2.1.1 Student Admissions ................................................................................................................14

2.1.2 Evaluating Student Performance ...........................................................................................15

2.1.3 Transfer Students and Transfer Courses ...............................................................................15

2.1.4 Student Advising ....................................................................................................................16

2.1.5 Work in Lieu of Courses ........................................................................................................17

2.1.6 Graduation Requirements ......................................................................................................17

2.1.7 Transcripts of Recent Students...............................................................................................18

2.2 PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................19

2.2.1 Mission Statement ..................................................................................................................19

2.2.2 Program Educational Objectives ...........................................................................................20

2.2.3 Consistency of Objectives with Institutional Mission ............................................................21

2.2.4 Program Constituencies ........................................................................................................21

2.2.5 Process for Revision of the Program Educational Objectives ...............................................22

2.3 STUDENT OUTCOMES .......................................................................................................................27

2.3.1 Student Outcomes ..................................................................................................................27

2.4 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ...........................................................................................................30

2.4.1 Background ............................................................................................................................30

2.4.2 Assessment of Program Educational Objectives....................................................................30

2.4.3 Assessment of Student Outcomes ...........................................................................................34

2.4.5 Continuous Improvement .......................................................................................................49

2.4.6 Additional Information ..........................................................................................................57

2.5 CURRICULUM ...................................................................................................................................58

2.5.1 Program Curriculum .............................................................................................................58

2.5.2 Course Syllabi ........................................................................................................................75

2.6.1 Faculty Qualifications ...........................................................................................................76

2.6.2 Faculty Workload ..................................................................................................................77

2.6.3 Faculty Size............................................................................................................................81

2.6.4 Professional Development .....................................................................................................81

2.6.5 Authority and Responsibility of Faculty.................................................................................81

2.7 FACILITIES .......................................................................................................................................83

2.7.1 Offices ....................................................................................................................................83

2.7.2 Classrooms ............................................................................................................................83

2.7.3 Laboratories ..........................................................................................................................83

2.7.4 Computing Resources ............................................................................................................86

2.7.5 Maintenance and Upgrading of Facilities .............................................................................87

2.7.6 Library Services .....................................................................................................................88

2.7.7 Overall Comments on Facilities ............................................................................................89

2.8 INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT .................................................................................................................90

2.8.1 Leadership .............................................................................................................................90

2.8.2 Program Budget and Financial Support................................................................................90

2.8.3 Staffing ...................................................................................................................................91

2.8.4 Faculty Hiring and Retention ................................................................................................91

2.8.5 Support for Faculty Professional Development .....................................................................92

Signature Attesting to Compliance at the end of the report

Figure 3 Schematic relationship between program educational objectives, student

Figure 5 Comparisons of DAC scores for two cohorts of students. ........................................43

Figure 11 Example – Performance Indicators and Rubrics ....................................................55