Introduction to Accreditation Seminar

Global Engineering Deans Council30 November 2015

Lincoln Wood, Engineers AustraliaLarry Jones, ABETMichael Milligan, ABET

At the end of this 1/2-day workshop, you will understand:• The value of accreditation• Basic concepts of accreditation• The requirements of ABET and Engineers

Australia accreditation process

Desired Workshop Outcomes

What is Accreditation?

• A review process to determine if educational programs meet defined standards of quality. • Once achieved, accreditation is not permanent—it is renewed periodically to ensure that the quality of the educational program is maintained.

• ABET accreditation provides assurance that a college or university program meets the quality standards of the profession for which that program prepares graduates.

The Value of Accreditation

Lawrence G. Jones, PhD2015-16 ABET President

30 November 2015

2

Why Accreditation?

• Accreditation is an essential element of a profession.

• Professions Australia defines a profession as

• A disciplined group of individuals who adhere to high ethical standards and uphold themselves to, and are accepted by, the public as possessing special knowledge and skills in a widely recognised, organised body of learning derived from educationand training at a high level, and who are prepared to exercise this knowledge and these skills in the interests of others.

3

Accreditation’s Role in Meeting the Obligations of a Profession• Education is at the headwaters of a

profession. • Thus, it behooves members of the

profession to• Establish standards for the specialized

knowledge• Ensure adherence to the standards

4

Who Conducts the Accreditation Process? • In the United States

• Non-governmental organization• Standards established by the professional

societies• Accreditation is voluntary

• However ABET accreditation is a required element of the engineering licensing process

• Fair and impartial peer review process• There may be different contexts in other

countries

5

Attitude Towards Accreditation Makes a Big Difference• Two different attitudes

• My program “must” be accredited, but I don’t see the value compared to other pressing needs.

• I get real value from the accreditation process.

• Educational institutions that comply grudgingly often miss out on many of the benefits.

• So, what are the benefits of accreditation?

6

Stakeholders for Accreditation• Students and parents• Institutions• Faculty• Industry / employers• Society

7

Table Discussion Exercise

• Identify recorders and reporters for each table. • For each of the five categories of stakeholders,

discuss and identify the value that group would receive from accreditation.

• We will rejoin and each table will report the results of their discussions.

• Please identify any relevant contextual information about accreditation in your countries.

• I will provide some “school” solutions as a summary.

8

Accreditation ValueStudents and Parents

• Helps students select quality programs• Shows institution is committed to improving the

educational experience• Helps students prepare

to enter “the profession”• Enhances employment

opportunities• Establishes eligibility for

financial aid and scholarships

9

Accreditation ValueInstitutions

• “Third-party” confirmation of quality of programs

• Prestige, recognition by “the profession”

• Attract the strongest students

• Acceptability of transfer credits

• Some external funding depends on accreditation status

10

Accreditation ValueFaculty

• Encourages “best practices” in education

• Structured mechanisms for self-improvement

• Institution is serious and committed to improving quality• Facilities, financial

resources, training, etc.

11

Accreditation ValueIndustry

• Ensures educational requirements to enter “the profession” are met

• Aids industry in recruiting• Ensures “baseline” of

educational experience

• Enhances mobility• Opportunity to help guide

the educational process• Program’s industrial advisory

groups• Professional, technical

societies

12

Accreditation ValueSociety

• Helps ensure public safety• Supports professional licensure, certification• Graduates ready for the profession

• Engages multiple constituents• Academe, industry, public

• Identifies programs for investment of public and private funds

• Some assurance to taxpayers• Funds for higher education are appropriately spent

Introduction to ABET Accreditation

Global Engineering Deans Council30 November 2015Michael KJ Milligan, PhD, PE, CAEExecutive Director & CEO

2

Topics

• Who is ABET?• Basics of ABET Accreditation• Outcomes-based Education• ABET’s Global Activities

3

Who is ABET ?

4

ABET Mission• Accredits educational programs• Promotes quality and innovation in education• Assists in the development and advancement of

education worldwide• Anticipates and prepares for the changing

educational environment and the future needs of its constituents

• Manages its operations and resources in an effective and fiscally responsible manner

5

Brief ABET History1932 Engineers’ Council for Professional Development (ECPD)

established by ASCE, AIME, ASME, AIEE, AIChE, NCSBEE, SPEE – significant industry influence

1936 ECPD first evaluated engineering degree programs1980 Name changed to “Accreditation Board for Engineering and

Technology” (ABET)1980 Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) signed with Canada

(1st international agreement)1989 Washington Accord Agreement signed with Canada, UK,

Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand95-2000 Major criteria reform (Engineering Criteria 2000)2005 Name changed to “ABET” solely, no longer spelling out the

former name (merge with CSAB)2007 Accreditation of programs outside the U.S. began

6

What is Accreditation?• A review process to determine if educational

programs meet defined standards of quality. • Once achieved, accreditation is not permanent—it is

renewed periodically to ensure that the quality of the educational program is maintained.

• ABET accreditation provides assurance that a college or university program meets the quality standards of the profession for which that program prepares graduates.

7

AccreditationInstitutional vs Programmatic• Institutional

• Comprehensive review of all institutional functions• Each of an institution’s parts is contributing to the

achievement of the institution’s objectives, although not necessarily all at the same level of quality

• Programmatic (“Specialized”): ABET• Focuses on academic programs in a specific

discipline within an institution• Most require regional accreditation as a foundation for

their reviews and as assurance of the fiscal integrity and health of the institution

8

ABET Organizational Design• ABET is a federation of 35 professional and

technical societies• Represent “The Profession”• Over 1.5 million individual members

• ABET relies on the services of almost 2,200 Volunteer Experts from member societies• Program Evaluators and Team Chairs• Supported by approximately 40 full and part-time staff

at ABET HQ in Baltimore • HQ staff not involved in any accreditation decisions

ABET’s 35 Member Societies

10

ABET Commissions• Four Commissions

• Applied Science (ASAC)• Computing (CAC)• Engineering (EAC)• Engineering Technology (ETAC)

• Operational component of ABET• Lead teams (Team Chairs) of Program Evaluators (PEVs)• Make decisions on accreditation actions• Recommend changes in criteria, policies, processes

• “Commissioners” are members of ABET’s professional and technical societies

11

Basics of ABET Accreditation

12

ABET Accreditation ProcessObjectives• Assure that graduates of an accredited program

are adequately prepared to enter and continue the practice of applied science, computing, engineering, and engineering technology

• Stimulate the improvement of technical education

• Encourage new and innovative approaches to technical education and its assessment

13

Generally Accepted Accreditation Principles

• Accreditation is voluntary• Non-governmental organization• Fair and impartial peer review process• Requires self-assessment by the program• Continuous process (reviewed every 6 years)• Failure of single criterion results in loss of

accreditation• Deficiencies in one area CANNOT be compensated by

strengths in other areas.

14

• The process of accreditation is evidence-basedand should drive decision-making to ensure excellence and enhance innovation

• Evaluation centers on evidence provided that supports achievement of each of the criterion

• Majority of evidence collected through assessment of student learning

• Peer Review• Evaluation conducted by team of peer colleagues

• Industry, academe, government

• Approximately 2,200 “ABET Experts”

Underlying Principles

15

• Apply for ABET program review• Coordinated with national authority/accrediting agency

• Programs prepare Self-Study • Documents how the program meets criteria• Prepared for Program Evaluator and Team Chair

• Evaluation by team of peer colleagues• Review the Self-Study and conduct the site visit

• Follow-on activities • Respond to findings, if necessary

ABET Accreditation Process What does it involve?

16

• Provides program opportunity for self-reflection• Identify strengths & areas for improvement

• Presents the program to the evaluation team• Informs the visiting team of elements of the

program as they relate to the criteria• Gives an impression of the institution’s

preparation for the upcoming visit

Self-Study Basics and Context

17

Accreditation Timeline18-20 Month Process”

JanuaryInstitution requestsaccreditation for

programs

February – MayInstitution prepares

self-evaluation (Program Self-Study

Report)

March – JuneTeam members assigned, dates set, Self-Study

Report submitted

September – DecemberVisits take place, draft statements written and

finalized following7-day response period

December – FebruaryDraft statements editedand sent to institutions

February – AprilInstitutions respondto draft statement

and return to ABET

May – JuneNecessary changes

to statement,if any, are made

JulyCommission meets to take final action

AugustInstitutions

notifiedof final action

Year 1 Year 2

OctoberAccreditation status publically released

* Readiness Review due in November, if applicable

18

ProgramEvaluator(PEV CE)

ProgramEvaluator

(PEV ChE)

ProgramEvaluator(PEV ME)

An ABET Accreditation Team

TeamLeader

(Commissioners)

EDITORS ABET

(Executive Committee)

ABET Commission

TeamLeader

(Commissioners)

ProgramEvaluator

ProgramEvaluator

Evaluation Team

19

EAC Consistency Committee: Final check

EAC Chair checks among all reports

Editors check among all reports they receive

Team chairs check among evaluators

Team Chair

Team Chair

Team Chair

Editor

EAC Chair

EAC Meeting

Team Team Team Team Team

Accreditation Staff checks higher level

consistency

Professional Societies

Consistency ChecksEAC Example

Team

PEVPEVPEV PEV PEVPEVPEV•• • PEV•• • •• ••

20

ABET CriteriaThe Guiding Principles of Accreditation Decisions

21

• The criteria are intended to:• Assure the quality of educational programs • Foster the systematic pursuit of quality improvement

in educational programs • Help develop educational programs that satisfy the

needs of constituencies in a dynamic and competitive environment

• Responsibility of the institution seeking accreditation to demonstrate clearly that the program meets the criteria

Overview of Criteria

22

1) Students2) Program Educational Objectives3) Student Outcomes4) Continuous Improvement5) Curriculum6) Faculty7) Facilities8) Institutional Support 9) Program Criteria

ABET Criteria

23

• Admissions/transfer policies• Awarding academic credit• Performance evaluated• Progress monitored• Advising• Graduation requirements

Criterion 1 Students

24

• Broad statements that describe what graduates are expected to attain within a few years after graduation

• Consistent with:• Institutional mission• Constituents’ needs

• Review Process• Documented• Systematically utilized

Criterion 2 Program Educational Objectives

25

Commission-specific statements of the knowledge, skills, behaviors, and attitudes that students should have by the time of graduation.

Criterion 3 Student Outcomes

26

• Assessment and evaluation processes for verifying the extent of outcomes’ attainment• Regularly used• Appropriate• Documented

• Results systemically utilized as input for continuous improvement

Criterion 4 Continuous Improvement

27

Commission-specific requirements for the content of an accredited program.

Criterion 5 Curriculum

28

Commission-specific requirements concerning the overall make-up of an accredited program’s faculty.

Criterion 6 Faculty

29

• Classrooms, offices, laboratories, equipment• Adequate to support outcomes’ attainment• Provide atmosphere conducive to learning• Modern and systematically maintained and upgraded

• Library services/computing & information infrastructure adequate for scholarly and professional activities

Criterion 7 Facilities

30

• Support and leadership adequate to ensure:• Program quality• Program continuity

• Resources available sufficient to:• Attract, retain, professionally develop qualified faculty

• Infrastructure, facilities, equipment acquired, maintained, operated

• Provide an environment in which outcomes can be attained

Criterion 8 Institutional Support

31

• Complement/Enhance elements of the general criteria

• For engineering, address curriculum (C5) and faculty (C6) only

Program Criteria

32

Outcomes-Based Education (OBE)

33

• Benefits• Student-centered learning

• what students learn vs what students are taught• Structure student’s educational experience to

meet learning outcomes• Increased student engagement in the learning

process• Constituent input: industry, academe• Assessment of student achievement• Increased focus on Continuous Improvement

Why Outcomes Based Education?

34

• What are Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)?• Statements that specify what students will know, be

able to do, or be able to demonstrate when they have completed or participated in a program, activity, course, or project

• Outcomes: preparation for professional practice• What are the characteristics of good SLOs?

• Usually expressed as knowledge, skills, attributes (or “attitudes” or “values”)

• SLOs specify an action by the student that must be observable, measurable and demonstrated!

Student Learning Outcomes

35

• Help understand how to better facilitate student learning

• Provide feedback • What skills are students learning? • Are these the skills we want them to learn? • Are these the skills we are teaching them?

How can SLOs help students and organizations?

http://www.canadacollege.edu/inside/research/slos/documents/STUDENT%20SERVICES%20SLO%20GUIDE%20BOOK.pdf

36

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

Example: ABET EAC Criterion 3

37

Outcomes-based Accreditation

38

• Outcomes-based Accreditation, based on …• Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)

• Systematic process: documented, repeatable• Assess performance against criteria• Input of constituencies• Outcomes and assessment linked to objectives• Ownership & Accountability at all levels

• Empower faculty and support personnel!

• Accreditation is a part of CQI• Verification of program meeting standards

Quality Assurance, Accountability

39

• The systematic collection, review, and use of information about educational programs undertaken for the purpose of improving student learning and development

• Integral to determining how well your program is meeting objectives

• Evidence collected through assessment used in:• Self-Study Report and • Continuous Improvement Process

Assessment of Adult Learning

40

• Effective assessment uses methods appropriate to the outcome being measured

• Methods for gathering data include• Direct vs Indirect• Formative vs Summative• Objective vs Subjective• Embedded vs Add-on• Quantitative vs Qualitative

Assessment of Adult Learning

41

ABET – Industry Partnership

42

• Industry must be a close partner• Critical constituent – they hire the graduates!

• Industrial Advisory Boards/Committees• Key component in the Continuous Quality

Improvement (CQI) process• Help drive innovation in engineering education

• Demand skills• Sponsor projects

Industry/Institute Collaboration

43

Long history of Industry support of ABET mission and activities ….

44

Aerospace CorporationAgilent TechnologiesAlcatel-LucentAllied SignalAmoco CorporationAT&TBAE SystemsBayerBechtel CorporationBell LaboratoriesBoeingBritish PetroleumBrookhaven National LabCaterpillar Cisco SystemsComputer SciencesConocoPhillipsDelphi CorporationDow ChemicalDuPontExxonMobil

Ford MotorGeneral DynamicsGeneral ElectricGeneral MotorsHarris CorporationHewlett PackardIBMLawrence LivermoreLockheed MartinLos Alamos National LabMicrosoftMIT Lincoln LaboratoryMITREMotorolaNASANational InstrumentsNIOSHNIHNSFNCR Northrop Grumman

Oak Ridge National LabOwens CorningPratt & WhitneyProcter & GambleRaytheonRockwell AutomationRockwell CollinsSandia National LaboratoriesShell OilSiemensSprintSoftware Engineering InstTektronixTexas InstrumentsTextron3MU.S. ArmyU.S. Air ForceU.S. NavyUnited Parcel Service

45

ABET’s Global Activities

46

ABET’s Global Engagement• Assistance

• MOUs with 16 accreditors• Mutual Recognition Agreements

• Canada, IEA, Seoul Accord • Global Organizations

• IFEES, GEDC, CIQG• Accreditation (Oct 2015)

• 3,569 programs at 714 institutions in 29 countries (475 programs at 95 institutions outside US)

47

International Engineering Alliance (IEA)• Washington Accord*• Sydney Accord*• Dublin Accord*• APEC Engineer Agreement• Engineers Mobility Forum• Engineering Technologist Forum• Engineering Technician Forum

* ABET is a signatory

48

Washington AccordGlobal Graduate Attributes• Engineering

Knowledge• Problem Analysis• Design/Development

of Solutions• Investigation &

Experimentation• Modern Tool Usage• The Engineer and

Society

• Environment and Sustainability

• Ethics• Individual and

Teamwork• Communication • Project Management

and Finance• Lifelong Learning

49

How We Can HelpTraining & Resources

Institute for the Development of Excellence in Assessment Leadership (IDEAL)

ABET Symposium• April of each year• Over 80 Sessions• Four educational tracks• Accreditation Track• Resource Room – Sample Self-Study Reports

Program Assessment Workshop• Intensive, Interactive 1-day Workshop• Introductory & Advanced• Offered multiple times & locations per year

50

• Intensive, interactive workshop• One day• Develop/refine assessment knowledge • Broaden understanding of CQI processes• Open enrollment with registration fee• Generally 1-3 years before evaluation visit• Multiple offerings each year, various locations

• Train 300+ faculty per year

Program Assessment Workshops

51

• Identify key elements of functional assessment plan• Clarify the similarities and differences between course

and program assessment • Put objectives and outcomes to work by developing

measurable performance criteria• Develop scoring rubrics to assess student learning. • Understand the advantages and disadvantages of

various assessment methods• Utilize an assessment-planning matrix • Create clear and concise reports on assessment and

continuous improvement

Program Assessment WorkshopsOutcomes

52

• Institute for the Development of Excellence in Assessment Leadership (IDEAL)

• Focused on developing assessment leaders• Those responsible for leading their faculty in

development and implementation of a program assessment plan

• Not limited to ABET programs, but ABET representatives have priority for attendance

• Four days; offered twice per year

53

• Outcomes• Immersion in basic program assessment

principles (3 days)• Basic change management principles:

awareness of the challenges of leading change

• Facilitation skills – how to lead groups and manage the consensus building process

54

• Resources for programs• Criteria• Process & procedures• Help with assessment• Webinars

• PEV training• International activities• Newsletters• Publications• Accredited programs

ABET Websitewww.abet.org

55

• 90-minute webinars • Multiple offerings on a variety of topics

• Accreditation basics, assessment tools, etc.• Include on-screen presentations• Multiple viewers at one site• 550 “connections” this past year• Presented by ABET volunteers and staff

ABET Webinars

56

• Developing Program Educational Objectives• Choosing Assessment Methods • How to Develop a Survey• Defining Learning Outcomes• Developing Rubrics• Preparing the Self-Study • Preparing for the Site Visit• What the Accreditation Criteria Don’t Tell You • Completing the Institutional Appendix• Accreditation Visit: the PEV Perspective

Webinar Topics

57

• April 14 – 15, 2016, Fort Lauderdale, Florida• Four educational tracks

• Program Assessment• Preparing for Accreditation• Innovations in Technical Education• Program Evaluator Development

• Self-Study Room • Review sample Self-Study Reports

• Pre- and Post-Symposium Workshops

ABET Symposium

58

Global Engineering Deans Council

Program AccreditationThe Australian Context and Practice

Lincoln Wood PhD CPEng NERNational Manager, AccreditationProfessional Standards & Practice

30 November 2015

Overview • About Engineers Australia

– An introduction to the professional body• International Context

– EA’s international engagement • A Model of Engineering Practice

– The model defines the initial professional competency standards • A Function Model of Professional Education

– The function model explains where accreditation sits • Deploying the Education Design Approach

– How a coherent education design aids accreditation • Accreditation Process

– The four primary steps of EA’s accreditation process• Summary

2

About Engineers Australia

Engineers Australia (EA) is a member organisation constituted with a mission to advance the science and practice of engineering for the good of our 100,000+ members, the profession and our community

We represent all disciplines of the engineering profession

Engineers Australia

Our Staff

Our Members

The Community

The Profession

3

The purpose of Engineers Australia

4

International Context

5

International engineering agreements

6

A Model of Engineering Practice

7

What is engineering?

You see things; and you say ‘Why?’

But I dream things that never were; and I say ‘Why not?’

8

Engineering is …

Engineering is a creative process of synthesising and implementing the knowledge and experience of humanity … to enhance the welfare, health and safety of all members of the community … with due regard to the environment in which they live and to the sustainability of the resources employed

9

Duality of engineered systems

• Engineered systems are designed to perform certain functions, supporting intentional human action in a societal/community context

• Functions are delivered by physical systems - the technical realisation of solutions

Like two faces of the same coin, the practice of engineering has two distinct but inseparable aspects 

After Kroes et al

10

Engineering design

• Design is the distinctive, creative step of engineering, where human functional needs and the technical architecture are mapped

• It is a transformation from the human (social) domain to the technical (physical) domain

• Design connects and balances the two faces of the coin by creating practical solutions to aid living

Designs are hypotheses of how we live

11

A model of engineering practice

The creative feature of design distinguishes engineering from other STEM‐based professions

12

Professional attributes

The key professional attributes can be broadly recognised in the model of engineering practice:

• Human attributes – generating trust • Technical attributes – achieving comprehension• Design – creating solutions

13

The EA Competency Standards

The Engineers Australia initial professional competencies are:

• Professional and personal attributes– The human side of engineering practice

• Knowledge and skill base – The technical side of engineering practice

• Engineering application ability – The creative bridge of engineering practice

14

A Function Model of Professional Education

15

Why define a function model?

• A function model defines the actions and activities of a system

• It clearly distinguishes between: – Inputs/function/outputs (the transformation process)– Enablers (the means of delivering the process)– Controls (measurement and correction actions)

• Provides a common and precise language to conceptualise accreditation

Teaching (pedagogy) is the function of transforming a student into a graduate

16

Academic Operational Environment

Academic Quality System 

Student

Academic Program

Intended learning outcomes

GraduatePedagogy

Function model of education

Based on the IDEF0 function model

Controls

Enablers (means)

17

Assessment is pivotal to learning (Biggs) ‐ it is a critical evaluation point in accreditation

Academic Operational Environment

Academic Quality System 

Student

Academic Program

PedagogyGraduate

Intended learning outcomes

Assessment - critical to learning

18

The professional lifecycle

Stage 1 • Formation

Stage 2 • Established

Stage 3 • Developing others 

The professional lifecycle is usually conceptualised as three stages

19

Entering the professional lifecycle

GraduateInitial professional competencies 

Stage 1 • Formation

A graduate from the education function will enter the professional lifecycle at Stage 1

20

Initial professional competencies

• Initial professional competencies are defined in the form of graduate attributes

• These are deemed necessary for early career performance within the profession

• Engineers Australia defines 16 Stage 1 Competency Standards in three groups: – Professional and personal attributes – Knowledge and skill base – Engineering application ability

21

Accreditation for entry to practice

• Accreditation verifies that the education program provides outcomes suitable for entry to professional practice

• Education programs are conducted in the context of a national education environment – Australian Quality Framework (AQF) - a national system of

qualifications encompassing all post-compulsory education

• Programs are accredited for three occupational categories: – Professional Engineer (AQF levels 8/9)– Engineering Technologist (AQF level 7)– Engineering Associate (AQF level 6)

22

Accreditation

AccreditationInitial professional competencies

Accreditation evaluates the education function:  • from the perspective of 

professional practice • guided by the expected initial 

professional competencies 

23

Accreditation links professional practice to the education function

Academic Operational Environment

Academic Quality System 

Student

Academic Program

Pedagogy Accreditation

Interview graduates

24

Accreditation is ‘reverse engineering’ of the education design

Academic Operational Environment

Academic Quality System 

Student

Academic Program

Pedagogy

Accreditation evaluates the education design to understand: 

how the education function assesses initial professional competencies … and 

how the academic program sets out to develop the initial professional competencies 

25

Consistent with the principle of ‘constructive alignment’

Academic Operational Environment

Academic Quality System 

Student

Academic Program

Pedagogy‘Constructive 

alignment’ principle 

Reference: Biggs J B, Tang C (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. Open University Press/McGraw‐Hill Education 

26

Accreditation criteria

Academic Operational Environment

Academic Quality System 

Student

Academic Program

Pedagogy Accreditation

27

Deploying the Education Design Approach

28

Description of the education design• The approach to education design for each program should be

outlined, including education objectives/outcomes • Ideally, the approach will be consistent across all programs in a

Faculty/School – engineering is one profession • When applied to individual programs (engineering disciplines) the

design approach is tailored to take into account the technical context of each discipline

• The aim is to show how the education objectives are achieved –usually aided by mapping of education objectives to outcomes

29

From objectives to outcomes

30

ConceptAnalysis

SystemDefinition

Tier N

SubsystemDefinition

(tier 1)

SubsystemDefinition

(tier n)

SubsystemImplement

SystemInt & Valid

CustomerInt & Valid

SubsystemInt & Valid

(tier 1)

SubsystemInt & Valid

(tier n)

Generic design process

31

ProgramDesign

ProgramIntegration

Program design

Program design verification

OperationalEvaluation

Education design and development

EducationConcept

Stakeholder feedback (validation)

Program delivery

Objectives Outcomes

Design

Implement

IntegrateDesign

Implement

IntegrateDesign

Implement

IntegrateCourseDesign

Create

Integrate

Sub-system layers (courses)

Verification

CourseDesign

Create

IntegrateVerification

Course design and development

32

Course design and development

CourseDesign

Create

IntegrateVerification

Analysis of course objectives

Design loop

Objectives loop

Verification

Design analysis & control (balance)

Allocation to course elements

Synthesis

Input objectives from program tier

33

Design analysis and control

CourseDesign

Create

IntegrateVerification

Course Design Description• Generate and manage course profile/description - course details, syllabus, pre-/co-requisites, assumed knowledge, delivery modes, etc• Align student assessment tasks with learning objectives – very important!• Manage interfaces with other coursesOperational environment • Staff, facilities, equipment, IT, LMS, etc Quality systems• Measurement and feedback systemsGenerate mappings to course objectives, including EA Stage 1 competencies

Review course design – is it balanced?

34

Course design descriptionCourse Design

Description document

Sta

ff

Faci

litie

s

Equ

ipm

ent

IT &

SW

Analyse design description to identify needs placed on the Quality System and the Operating Environment

… etc

Quality System Operating EnvironmentAcademic Program

Assemble CDDs

Accreditation Criteria

35

Mapping of course objectives

Level of achievement 0: Not developed 1: Initial 2: Developed 3: Strong 4: Very strong

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16# Objectives Course element How outcome will be assessed 2 3 0 3 4 4 4 1 3 4 4 4 2 4 4 4

1 evaluate sustainable project management theories and frameworks and apply them to 'real worldprojects' Project management frameworks Major group project, final examination x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

2 identify and evaluate problems relating to initiating, planning, executing, monitoring and controllingprojects and choose appropriate frameworks and theories to solve them Project risk management Major group project, final examination x x x x x x x x x x x

3 understand how to align projects with organisational goals and recognise the strategic significance ofsuccessful project portfolio selection Project planning strategy Major group project, final examination x x x x x x x x x x x

4 identify key project stakeholders and propose effective response strategies to manage stakeholder pressure in both local and global projects Stakeholder management Major group project, final examination x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

5 formulate effective communication strategies (both written and oral) to correspond successfully with awide range of project stakeholders Communication of project plans Major group project, group presentation,

final examination x x x x x x x x x x x x x

6 recommend how to manage and lead a team throughout the various phases of a project, and proposestrategies to actively solve conflict among team members Project team leadership Major group project, group presentation,

final examination x x x x x x x x x

7 evaluate the main normative ethical theories and apply them to specific 'real-world projects' Project evaluation Major group project, final examination x x x x x x x x x x x

Element of Competency (1-16) : Level of achievement (0-4)Course Number ENG xxx Project Management

36

From objectives to outcomes

37

Accreditation visits to education providers by independent panels

38

Accreditation Process

39

Step 1: Self-evaluation by the Education Provider

• The Education Provider requests accreditation of its programs, and prepares a self-evaluation of its own education design for each program

• Engineers Australia establishes an evaluation panel of peers to respond to the request

• The self-evaluation report by the education provider is submitted to the panel for independent evaluation by that panel

40

Steps 2 – 4: Independent evaluation by peers

2. Pre-visit teleconference between panel members• Panel considers the education provider self-evaluation

submission in detail prior to the teleconference• Five weeks prior to the accreditation visit

3. Accreditation visit – panel visits the campus of the education provider to assess objective evidence

• Panel prepares a report for the Accreditation Board with recommendations for accreditation for each program under consideration

4. Accreditation Board – considers the panel’s report• The Board may modify the Panel’s recommendations

41

Decision process

• Accreditation Board meetings scheduled every two months

• Independent Chair• Members are peers from

industry and academe • Conflict of interest policy applies • Reports annually to EA

Management Board Decide

outcome

Evaluate report

Moderate report

Update web listing

Interim report

Advise outcome

42

SummaryAccreditation is: • An assessment of the preparedness of graduates for

entry to professional practice• A standards-setting, outcomes-based process• Evidence-based, external evaluation of compliance -

by peers - against those standards• A remediation or improvement process following the

evaluation • A process contributing to continuous improvement • Voluntary

43