Introduction to ABET Accreditation & Brief Comparison to UTA-UEP Jamie Rogers, PhD, PE, IISE Fellow 2014-2015 ABET President 12 June, 2017
Topics Who is ABET? Value of ABET Accreditation Basics of ABET Accreditation Process Criteria Continuous Quality Improvement Comparison to UTA-UEP 2
ABET s Core Purpose With ABET accreditation, students, employers, and the society we serve can be confident that a program meets the quality standards that produce graduates prepared to enter a global workforce 3
Our Experts come from top universities and companies like HP, IBM and UPS 4
Experts that come from industry and academics To evaluate 3,709 programs at 752 universities in 30 countries 5
What Does ABET Accredit? An academic program leading to a specific degree in a specific discipline Misconceptions clarified: Not institutions Not schools, colleges, or departments Not facilities, courses, or faculty Not graduates Not degrees 6
ABET Organizational Design ABET is a federation of 35 professional and technical societies. Neither institutions nor individuals are members of ABET. ABET relies on the services of more than 2,200 volunteers supported by 33 full-time and 10 parttime staff. 7
ABET s 35 Member Societies 8
ABET Accreditation Statistics As of 1 October 2016 3,709 Programs Accredited programs by commission: ASAC: 87 CAC: 461 EAC: 2550 ETAC: 629 Commission Domestic Non-Domestic Programs Institutions Programs Institutions ASAC 82 64 5 3 CAC 391 307 70 47 EAC 2106 429 444 99 ETAC 571 206 58 19 9
Value of ABET Accreditation ABET-accredited programs recognized globally Commitment to quality education Outcomes-based approach What is learned vs. what is taught Emphasis on continuous quality improvement Criteria encourage innovation 10
ABET Value Students 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 11
ABET Value Institutions 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 12
ABET Value Faculty Encourages best practices in education Structured mechanisms for self-improvement Institution is serious and committed to improving quality Facilities, financial resources, training, etc. 13
ABET Value Industry 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 14
ABET Value Society 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 15
Generally Accepted Accreditation Principles Accreditation is voluntary Non-governmental organization Fair and impartial peer review process Requires self-assessment by the program/school Continuous process (reviewed every n years) Failure of single criterion results in loss of accreditation Deficiencies in one area CANNOT be compensated by strengths in other areas. 16
ABET Accreditation Process What Does It Involve? Criteria developed by member societies, practitioners, and educators Self-Study Report by the institution and program On-site evaluation by peers From education, government, and industry Publication of lists of accredited programs Periodic re-evaluation (maximum 6 years) 17
ABET Accreditation Process Objectives Assure that graduates of an accredited program are adequately prepared to enter and continue the practice of applied and natural science, computing, engineering, and engineering technology Stimulate the improvement of technical education Encourage new and innovative approaches to technical education and its assessment 18
Basic Requirements Programs must have graduates Institution must assess entire program Appropriate institutional accreditation or governmental approval U.S. Department of Education, or Regional accreditation agency, or National accreditation agency, or State authority Outside the U.S. Appropriate entity that authorizes/approves the offering of educational programs 19
20
Criteria: The Guiding Principles of Accreditation Decisions 21
22
Engineering Criteria 2000 EC 2000 Philosophy: Outcomes-Based Institutions and programs define mission and objectives to meet their constituents needs Outcomes: preparation for professional practice Demonstrate how criteria are being met Wide national and international acceptance Commitment to Continuous Improvement Process focus: outcomes and assessment linked to objectives; input from constituencies Student, faculty, facilities, institutional support, and financial resources linked to program objectives 23
Program Names Determines: Which ABET Accreditation Commission is responsible ANSAC, CAC, EAC, ETAC Which professional society is responsible Appropriate program evaluators Which criteria are applicable General Criteria for all programs Program Criteria for certain disciplines 24
General Criteria 1) Students 2) Program Educational Objectives 3) Student Outcomes 4) Continuous Improvement 5) Curriculum 6) Faculty 7) Facilities 8) Institutional Support Plus, Program Criteria 25
Harmonization of Criteria Criteria Common to All Commissions Criterion 1 (Students) Criterion 2 (PEO) Criterion 4 (CQI) Criterion 7 (Facilities) Criterion 8 (Support) Commission-Specific Criteria Criterion 3 (Outcomes) Criterion 5 (Curriculum) Criterion 6 (Faculty) Program Criteria 26
EAC Criteria Used as an example Applied and natural science, computing, and engineering technology criteria are fairly similar. 27
Criterion 1 Students The quality and performance of students and graduates is an important success factor. To determine success, the institution must evaluate, advise, and monitor students. Policies/procedures must be in place and enforced for acceptance of transfer students and validation of courses taken elsewhere. Assure that all students meet all program graduation requirements 28
Criterion 2 Program Educational Objectives The program must have published program educational objectives. Consistent with the mission of the institution, the needs of the program s various constituents, and the criteria There must be a documented and effective process, involving program constituents, for the periodic review and revision of these program educational objectives. 29
Criterion 3 Student Outcomes (slide 1) The program must have documented student outcomes that prepare graduates to attain the program educational objectives. Narrow statements that describe what students are expected to know and be able to do by the time of graduation These relate to the skills, knowledge, and behaviors that students acquire in their matriculation through the program. 30
Criterion 3 Student Outcomes (slide 2) The program must demonstrate that their students attain the following 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 31
Criterion 3 Student Outcomes (slide 3) 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 32
Criterion 3 Student Outcomes (slide 4) i) A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in, lifelong learning j) A knowledge of contemporary issues k) An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice Plus any outcomes specific to field of study 33
Criterion 4 Continuous Improvement The program must regularly use appropriate, documented processes for assessing and evaluating the extent to which the student outcomes are being attained. The results of these evaluations must be systematically utilized as input for the continuous improvement of the program through a documented plan. Other available information may also be used to assist in the continuous improvement of the program. 34
Criterion 5 Curriculum (slide 1) Faculty must assure that the curriculum devotes adequate attention and time to each component, consistent with objectives of the program and institution. One year of a combination of college-level mathematics and basic sciences 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 35
Criterion 5 Curriculum (slide 2) General education component that complements technical content and is consistent with program and institutional objectives Students prepared for engineering practice through curriculum culminating in a major design experience Based on knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work Incorporates appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints 36
Criterion 6 Faculty Sufficient number to achieve program objectives Competent to cover all curricular areas of program Authority for creation, delivery, evaluation, modification, and continuous improvement of the program 37
Criterion 7 Facilities Adequate to (safely) accomplish educational objectives and outcomes of the program CAC: Computing resources are available, accessible, systematically maintained and upgraded, and supported. EAC: Foster faculty-student interaction; encourages professional development and professional activities; and provide opportunities to use modern engineering tools. 38
Criterion 8 Institutional Support Sufficient to attract, retain, and provide for continued professional development of faculty Sufficient to acquire, maintain, and operate facilities and equipment appropriate for the program 39
Program Criteria Each program must satisfy applicable program criteria that may, depending upon the commission, amplify: Objectives Outcomes Curricular topics Faculty qualifications 40
Continuous Quality Improvement 41
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) ABET criteria have been developed on the principles of continuous quality improvement. On-going process at institution to improve quality of student s educational experience Systematic process: documented, repeatable Assess performance against criteria Take actions to improve program Accreditation is a part of CQI. Verification that program meets certain level of quality, and CQI is part of the quality process. 42
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI Process) CQI process includes a clear understanding of: Mission (your purpose) Constituents (your customers) Objectives (what one is trying to achieve) Outcomes (learning that takes place to meet objectives) Processes (internal practices to achieve the outcome) Facts (data collection) Evaluation (interpretation of facts) Action (change, improvement) 43
Assessment How Well Are We Doing? Institutional support Establish Purpose and Set Goals Define/Refine Objectives and Outcomes Student advising Program goals Curriculum Faculty Design and Conduct Assessments Evaluate Assessment Findings Customers How students learn What students learn Use Results for Decision Making 44
Assessment Common Issues (slide 1) Faculty and/or staff fail to put adequate attention to what data need to be gathered to assess and evaluate, especially for student outcomes. Common mistake: gathering much more data than needed Failure to logically evaluate data prevents reasonable conclusion that an objective or outcome is being attained 45
Assessment Common Issues (slide 2) Many large programs hand off all assessment activities to a staff person (some qualified, some not). Program evaluators look for faculty knowledge of processes and results. Experience shows that most (preferably all) faculty members must be involved for the requirements of Criterion 4 (Continuous Improvement) to be fully met. 46
Resources Institute for the Development of Excellence in Assessment Leadership (IDEAL) Program Assessment Workshops Intensive, Interactive Daylong Workshops Website: www.abet.org ABET Symposium April of each year Over 70 sessions Four educational tracks Accreditation track Self-Study Reports ABET Accreditation ISO 9001:2008 certified 47
ABET and UTA-UEP For the BSIE program, we use the ABET model for the UTA-UEP so that we do not have to reinvent the wheel. For graduate programs in the Industrial, Manufacturing, and Systems Engineering Department, we use a very similar model. College of Engineering representatives from each program have been meeting on a regular basis to share ABET best practices and plans for our upcoming visits in 2018. This task force is expertly led by Senior Associate Dean, Lynn Peterson. 48
T H A N K Y O U 49
50