What Is Abet

King Abdulaziz University College of Engineering

Introduction to ABET EC 2000 A Road Map Proposal AAU AAU

Academic Accreditation Unit http://engg.kaau.edu.sa/AAU

Workshop for Excel in Engineering Education Prof. Ali M. Albahi . Prof. Reda M. Abdulaal October 11, 2005

What is ABET?  







Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology Accredit degree programs in applied science, engineering, and technology A federation of 31 professional and technical societies representing these fields Since 1932, ABET has provided quality assurance of education through accreditation Accredits 2,500 programs at over 550 colleges and universities in the U.S 1

Why is ABET accreditation important for students? 







The accreditation criteria help to define what the degree should provide the student The accreditation process helps the department to continually analyze and improve its courses and curriculum The accreditation process requires that the student’s voice be heard in evaluating the program An Engineering degree must be from an ABET-accredited program to meet requirements for professional licensure (Engineer In Training, Professional Engineer) 2

How does a degree program get accredited?    



A panel of ABET experts evaluates the program: courses, curriculum, people, and facilities The degree program must meet General Criteria that apply to all engineering degrees The program must also meet Program Criteria The department must demonstrate that it uses a continual process of evaluating the courses and curriculum, and makes changes when needed The department must even show that it examines and improves its own evaluation process 3

What is EC 2000?  

Set of criteria by which the program is evaluated ABET old EC: content based – Focused on what the students were taught



ABET EC 2000: outcomes based – Focuses on what the students have learned or what actually they can do.

4

What is EC 2000? 

ABET EC 2000 requires engineering programs to: – Define their own objectives and outcomes in consultation with their constituencies. – Measure their performance.: – Introduce program improvement where appropriate.

5

Terminology    



Objectives: Statement that describe the expected accomplishments of graduates during the first few years after graduation Outcomes: Statements that describe what students are expected to know and able to do by the time of graduation. Assessment: Processes that identify, collect, use, and prepare data that can be used to evaluate achievements. Evaluation: A process of reviewing the result of data collection and analysis and making a determination of the value of findings and action to be taken. Performance Criteria: Specific, measurable, statements identifying the performances required to meet the outcome; confirmable through evidence. 6

EC 2000 General Criteria 

An engineering program must demonstrate that the program meets the following criteria: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Students Program Education objectives. Program Outcomes and Assessment. Professional Component (curriculum). Faculty. Facilities. Institutional Support and Financial Resources. Program Criteria. 7

EC 2000 General Criteria 

Criterion 1. Students – Part1: sets requirements for evaluating, advising and monitoring students to determine success in meeting program objectives: 1. 2.

Evaluation through appropriate grading standards. Advising through faculty advisers.

– Part2: requires institutions to set and enforce: 1. 2.

Policies for evaluating transfer courses. Procedures to verify that each student met all program requirements. 8

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 2. Program Educational Objectives – Each engineering program must have in place: a)

Educational objectives that are: 1. consistent with the institution mission. 2. consistent with ABET criteria.

b)

c)

d)

A process for establishing and maintaining the objectives based on the needs of the program’s constituencies. A curriculum and processes to ensure the achievement of the objectives. A system of ongoing evaluation to demonstrate achievement of these objectives and use the results to identify and introduce improvement where appropriate. 9

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 3. Program Outcomes and Assessment –

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) an ability to communicate effectively h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning j) a knowledge of contemporary issues 10 k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 3. Program Outcomes and Assessment (continued) – Each engineering program must have an ASSESSMENT PROCESS with DOCUMENTED RESULTS: 1. 2.

To demonstrate that outcomes are being achieved. And to use the results for further development and improvement of the program where achievement is weaker than desired.

11

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 3. Program Outcomes and Assessment (continued)



Does a program need to demonstrate that each and every graduating student has achieved each and every element listed in (a) through (k)? 1. Programs must have a curriculum and other requirements that provide students opportunities to learn, practice and demonstrate each element in (a) through (k). 2. Programs must show, even by appropriate sampling, that there is convincing evidence to assume that all students by graduation time have demonstrated achievement, to a level acceptable to the program, of every item listed in (a) through (k). 3. The assessment process should include direct and indirect measures and does not rely only on self-report surveys and evidence that the material is “covered” in the curriculum. Student self assessment , opinion surveys, and course grades are not by themselves or collectively, acceptable methods for demonstrating achievement of outcomes. 12

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 3. Program Outcomes and Assessment (continued) 

ABET Guidelines on Interpreting and Meeting Standards Set Forth in Criterion 3

13

Required Features of Criterion 3 Demonstration of Student Outcomes

 Outcomes linked to the curriculum Assessment Process

Possible Evidence

Generally not acceptable

Evidence must be directly linked to the specific outcome being assessed. A limited set of performance indicators have been developed that define each of the outcomes to be assessed. Data collection methods are focused on the indicators and can include such things as: student portfolios; subject content examinations; performance evaluation of work/study, intern or co-ops; and/or performance observations. Surveys and other indirect measures provide secondary evidence and should be used in conjunction with direct measures such as those above. Map of outcomes to the curriculum or associated program activities (student professional groups); course syllabi that indicate the desired program learning outcomes that are ‘covered’ in the course. Schematic drawing of the assessment process with a timeline that reflects systematic processes. Documentation of how the process is being sustained and what multiple assessment methods are being used to assess the various outcomes.

Student learning outcomes that have not been defined (e.g., What is “effective communication skills?” How will you know “effective communication skills” when you see it?) Student self-assessments and surveys are used as the only evidence of student outcomes. Using course mapping as an indicator of student learning.

Making the assumption that students achieve all outcomes by merely completing the curriculum.

Collecting information that is not used to evaluate outcomes.; inappropriate use of assessment methods; no direct measures of student learning, overuse of surveys; data collection is irregular; inefficient process; inordinate faculty program assessment load; faculty not involved in the decision making process.

14

 With documented results  Results applied for program improvement

 Measurement of outcomes

Outcomes related to Program Educational Objectives

Summary of results are available that reflects evidence of systematic outcomes assessment. Summaries, evaluation of results and action taken is presented outcome by outcome. Data must be evaluated by the faculty or a group of faculty and recommendations for action documented. For those institutions that have had multiple cycles of assessment, documentation should reflect the results of previous improvements.

Documentation that does not focus directly on the process; presentation of raw data or charts of raw data instead of brief summaries of findings and action taken (i.e., “data dump”). Ad hoc consideration of program improvement; “traditional” course evaluations & student “satisfaction” surveys used as basis for improvements. Failure to document how the changes that are made relate to the evaluation of the assessment data

Outcomes are measurable, in that there are performance indicators for each outcome, which enable direct measurement.

Faculty not involved in decisions about assessment; assessment is done by external parties; use of methods that do not align with program’s own definition of its outcomes

Clear linkages between the after graduation program objectives and student learning outcomes.

No clear distinction between objectives and outcomes. Terms are used interchangeably throughout the document, and it is not clear that a distinction has been made between how they are assessed and evaluated. 15

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued)

 Criterion 3. Program Outcomes and Assessment (continued)

 Courses has to be redesigned to address and assess the achievement of the outcomes (a) through (k).  Course-files have to be reformatted and student’s portfolios are to become mandatory to prove achievement of program outcomes by each student.  Attention must be given to non-technical outcomes (6 out of 11).  Teamwork has to be Multi-disciplinary to satisfy outcome (d).  To satisfy outcome (b), courses involving experimental work should be reorganized such that students learn and practice how to design experiments instead of only learning how to perform an experiment.

16

Evaluation and Assessment Loops (Criteria 2 & 3)

Determine educational objectives

Determine Outcomes Required to Achieve Objectives

Outer Loop

Determine How Outcomes will be Achieved

Evaluate/Assess

Inner Loop Input from Constituencies

Determine How Outcomes will be Assessed

Formal Instruction Student Activities

Course evaluations and other surveys

Establish Indicators that Objectives are Being Achieved

17

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 4. Professional Component (Curriculum) –

The curriculum must include: 1.

2.

3.

–

One year of a combination of college level mathematics and basic sciences (some with experimental experience) appropriate to the discipline. One and one-half years of engineering topics , consisting of engineering sciences and engineering design appropriate to the student's field of study. A general education component that complements the technical content of the curriculum and is consistent with the program and institution objectives.

Students must be prepared for engineering practice through a major design experience. (Capstone Design Project) 18

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Capstone Design Project: The engineering design must include most of the following features – – – – – – – – – –

Development of student creativity. Use of open-ended problems. Development and use of design theory and methodology. Formulation of design problem statements and specifications. Consideration of alternative solutions. Feasibility considerations. Production processes. Concurrent engineering design. Detailed system descriptions. It is essential to include a variety of realistic constraints, such as economic factors, safety, reliability, aesthetics, ethics and social impact. 19

EC 2000 General Criteria: (continued) 

Capstone Design Project: (continued) 

A capstone design experience should better involve, in addition to the "establishment of objectives and criteria, synthesis, and analysis", a room for "construction, testing, and evaluation."



Currently our B.Sc. projects are designs on papers and does not involve any construction, testing, or evaluation.



MIT and other leading institutions are following now a new widely spreading approach to satisfy ABET Design requirement.



The approach is based on asserting that graduating engineers are able to: Conceive, Design, Implement & Operate (CDIO) complex value-added engineering systems in a modern team-based environment. 20

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 5. Faculty – The program faculty: 1.

2.

3.

must be of sufficient number to accommodate adequate levels of student-faculty interaction, student advising ,… e tc. must have the competencies to cover all of the curricular areas of the program. must have appropriate qualifications and sufficient authority to: – –

ensure the proper guidance of the program to develop and implement processes for the evaluation, assessment, and continuing improvement of the program, its educational objectives and outcomes.

21

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 6. Facilities –

Classrooms, laboratories, and associated equipment must be adequate to:  

–

Appropriate facilities must be available to:  

– –

accomplish the program objectives provide an atmosphere conducive to learning. foster faculty-student interaction. create a climate that encourages professional development and professional activities.

Programs must provide opportunities for students to learn the use of modern engineering tools. Computing and information infrastructures must be in place to support the scholarly activities of the students and faculty and the educational objectives of the program and institution. 22

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 7. Institutional Support and Financial Resources –

– – –

Institutional support, financial resources, and constructive leadership must be adequate to assure the quality and continuity of the engineering program. Resources must be sufficient to attract, retain, and provide for the continued professional development of a well-qualified faculty. Resources also must be sufficient to acquire, maintain, and operate facilities and equipment appropriate for the engineering program. In addition, support personnel and institutional services must be adequate to meet program needs.

23

EC 2000 General Criteria (continued) 

Criterion 8. Program Criteria – –

Each program must satisfy applicable Program Criteria derived from the requirements set forth by the corresponding professional societies (e.g. AIAA, IEEE, ASME, ……) For example the Criteria for Aeronautical Engineering Programs include: 1.

2.

Curriculum : Aeronautical engineering programs must demonstrate that graduates have a knowledge of aerodynamics, aerospace materials, structures, propulsion, flight mechanics, and stability and control. Programs must also demonstrate that graduates have design competence that includes integration of aeronautical topics. Faculty: Program faculty must have responsibility and sufficient authority to define, revise, implement, and achieve program objectives. The program must demonstrate that faculty teaching upper-division courses have an understanding of current professional practice in the aerospace industry. 24

Some Urgent tasks 

Preparing a roadmap with a timeline for the self-study process



Setting up a web site for ABET-related activities in the department.



Preparing course-level documentations



Preparing program-level documentations

25

Keys to successful implementation of ABET EC 200O

 

Well-laid-out process Involvement of the entire faculty in the process

26

Proposed Plan 

COURSE ASSESSMENT FLOW CHART



OUTCOME ASSESSMENT FLOW CHART

27

28

29

Proposed Departmental Plan        

ABET and Senior Project Committee Alumni Committee Educational Improvement & Development Committee Student’s Advising Committee Workshops & Labs Committee Outcome Champions (one for a set of outcomes a-k) Courses Coordinator (one for each discipline) Meetings are to be documented (agendas & minutes or minutes summaries in English)

30

Some Concluding Points 1. There is no unique way to satisfy ABET EC2000 requirements. 2. Creativity is essential for such open- ended or DESIGN project. – The project brief is: “to Conceive, Design, Implement, & Operate a learning based education system to satisfy ABET EC2000.” – Our customers are: 1. ABET Evaluators

2. Our Students

3. Our Society.

– Our design specifications are: “ABET EC2000.” – Existing similar products: A limited number of products exists on the market (ABET accredited programs), satisfying the requirements in different ways and to different extends. – Constraints: include not only time limits (3 years and 2 cycles) but also new challenging competitive products implemented by top ranked international 31 universities.

Some Concluding Points (continued) 3. ABET does not accredit colleges or universities, it accredits programs. Each program is evaluated by a separate ABET body. 4. The relation between ABET and a program is a direct one. 5. The College has to support different programs but does not have to do their work. 6. Each program could have its unique approach, unique solution and even, to some extend, unique format. 7. Academic Accreditation Unit is the ”guide at the side” not the “sage on the stage.” 32

Conclusion 

To get the accreditation we need to demonstrate to ABET evaluators that: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

WE KNOW WHAT WE DO. WE KNOW WHY WE DO IT. WE KNOW HOW TO DO IT. WE DO IT WELL. WE CAN PROVE IT. WE RECEIVE INPUT AND FEEDBCAK. WE HAVE A PROCESS TO MAKE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENTS.

33

ROAD MAP

34

35

Important Links • ABET WEB SITE : http://abet.org AAU WEB SITE : http://engg.kau.edu.sa/aau AAU E-MAIL

: [email protected]

36

Q&A

37