State Observer Training Engineering Accreditation Commission

Patsy Brackin, PhD, PE EAC Executive Committee 2016-17 Director, Engineering Design Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Michael K.J. Milligan, PhD, PE, CAE Executive Director & CEO

2

Synopsis

This session will help State Board members planning to observe an upcoming Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) of ABET campus visit. Session topics include an overview of the EAC criteria, the accreditation process, and the role and responsibilities of observers.

3

Learning Objectives

•  At the end of this session you will be able to •  Describe ABET’s role in accreditation •  Describe the EAC criteria and recent changes •  Identify the key steps in the ABET visit process •  Articulate your role as a State Board Observer on an

ABET visit team •  Make arrangements to observe an ABET visit

4

Agenda

No  part  of  this  presenta.on  may  be  reproduced  or  distributed  in  any  form  or  by  any  means  without  express  permission  from  

the  ABET  Accredita.on  Director,  410-­‐347-­‐7700  

5

Agenda

•  ABET Essentials •  Engineering Accreditation Criteria •  The Accreditation Process •  Code of Conduct •  Role of State Board Observer

ABET Essentials

7

ABET 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

8

ABET Value Proposition

Our approach, the criteria and processes we use, and the quality we guarantee inspire confidence in the programs we accredit, whose graduates are building a work that is safer, more efficient, more comfortable and more sustainable

9

Objectives of ABET Accreditation

•  Assure that graduates of an accredited program are adequately prepared to enter their profession

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

•  Identify accredited programs to the public

10

ABET Organizational Design •  Not-for-profit, founded in 1932 •  Programmatic Accreditor

•  Not institutions, degrees or courses •  Recognized by CHEA in US

•  Federation of 35 professional societies •  Peer review (Program Evaluators, Team Chairs) •  Develop program criteria •  Appoint Board of Delegates representatives

•  Over 2,200 volunteer experts •  100% accreditation decisions

•  Staff: ~ 33 full-time, 10 part-time

11

ABET’s 35 Member Societies

1.5 million practicing professionals

ABET’s Industry Partners

13

ABET is Volunteer-Driven 2,200+ Volunteers Board of Directors •  Nominated by

member societies •  Provide strategic

direction and plans

•  Decide policy and procedures

•  Approve criteria

4 Commissions •  ASAC, CAC, EAC, ETAC

•  Make decisions on accreditation status

• Implement accreditation policies

• Propose changes to criteria

Program Evaluators •  Visit campuses •  Evaluate individual

programs •  Make initial

accreditation recommendations

•  “Face of ABET”

ABET’s Global Engagement

15

Mutual Recognition Agreements •  Recognizes “substantial equivalency” of

accrediting systems •  Graduates of accredited programs are prepared

to practice at the entry level of the profession •  Engineer’s Canada •  Accords

•  Washington (Engineering, BS) •  Sydney (Engineering Technology, BS) •  Dublin (Engineering Technology, AS) •  Seoul (Computing, BS)

16

Washington Accord Engineering

• U.S. – ABET (1989) • Australia – IEAust (1989) • Canada – CEAB (1989) •  Ireland – IEI (1989) • New Zealand: – IPENZ (1989) • UK – EngC (1989) • Hong Kong China – HKIE

(1995) • South Africa – ECSA (1999) •  Japan – JABEE (2005)

• Singapore – IES (2006)

• Chinese Taipei – IEET (2007)

• South Korea – ABEEK (2007)

• Malaysia – BEM (2009)

•  Turkey – MUDEK (2011)

• Russia – AEER (2012)

•  India – NBA (2014)

• Sri Lanka – IESL (2014)

• China – CAST (2016)

17

Global View: Accreditation 3,569 Programs at 714 Institutions in 29 Countries

13%

87%

Outside  the  U.S.  

Inside  the  U.S.  

Within U.S.

Outside U.S.

Total

Programs 3,094 475 3,569 Institutions 619 95 714

Accredited Programs

18

•  Accredited programs by commission: ASAC: 81 CAC: 429 EAC: 2437 ETAC: 640

ABET Accreditation Statistics As of 1 October 2015 (3,569 Programs*)

Commission Domestic Non-Domestic

Programs Institutions Programs Institutions ASAC 80 62 1 1 CAC 377 296 52 35 EAC 2071 424 366 76 ETAC 581 204 59 12

*  Total  commission  programs:  3,587  due  to  overlap  of  commission  responsibility  

19

Global View: Accreditation Programs Outside the U.S. by Region

•  28 Countries: Bahrain, Chile, China, Colombia, Ecuador, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mexico, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, and Vietnam.

•  Top 4: Saudi Arabia (18%), Turkey (12%), Mexico (10%) and United Arab Emirates (10%).

13% 3%

63%

10%

11% [VALUE]%

Asia Europe Middle East/Greater Middle East North America South America South Africa

Accredited Programs Outside the U.S., by Region

20

*  Programs  with  Substan(al  Equivalence  Recogni.on  (before  accredita.on  outside  US)  

 *  

21

•  Identical Criteria & Processes •  All Reviews Conducted in English •  Readiness Review (if necessary) •  Request for Approval (RFA) •  Health & Security for Teams •  Significant Growth Anticipated

Non-U.S. Evaluations

Engineering Accreditation Criteria

23

We Evaluate Against •  EAC General Criteria for Baccalaureate

Programs •  EAC General Criteria for Masters Level

Programs •  EAC Program Criteria •  Accreditation Policies and Procedures (APPM)

24

Overview of Criteria Goals •  Ensure the quality of educational programs •  Foster the systematic pursuit of quality

improvement in educational programs •  Develop educational programs that satisfy the

needs of constituencies in a dynamic and competitive environment

25

Overview of Criteria •  Institutional program is responsible for

demonstrating that it clearly meets the Criteria and is in compliance with ABET's Accreditation Policies and Procedures

•  Must satisfy all Program Criteria implied by title of program

•  Program Evaluators (PEVs) are responsible for evaluating a program's compliance with the Criteria

26

General Criteria for Baccalaureate Programs 1.  Students: monitoring and evaluation of

student performance; advising; transfer students and credit; completion of degree requirements

2.  Program Educational Objectives: meet the needs of the program’s constituencies and the criteria; periodic review and revision

27

General Criteria for Baccalaureate Programs 3.  Student Outcomes: (a-k) plus additional outcomes defined by the

program a)  knowledge of math, engineering and science b)  design and conduct experiments; analyze and interpret data c)  design to meet realistic constraints d)  function on multi-disciplinary teams e)  identify, formulate and solve engineering problems f)  understand professional and ethical responsibility g)  communicate effectively h)  broad education i)  ability to engage in life-long learning j)  knowledge of contemporary issues k)  use modern tools in engineering practice

28

General Criteria for Baccalaureate Programs 4.  Continuous Improvement: assessing and

evaluating attainment of student outcomes; using data as input for continuous improvement

5.  Curriculum: math/basic science and engineering topics; general education; major design experience

29

General Criteria for Baccalaureate Programs 6.  Faculty: Sufficient number and competencies;

adequate levels of interaction and service; professional development; authority for program governance; qualifications and competence

7.  Facilities: Adequate to support attainment of student outcomes; systematically maintained; appropriate guidance; adequate library and IT

8.  Institutional Support: Adequate leadership; adequate resources to meet program needs; attract and retain faculty; acquire and maintain facilities and equipment

30

Program Criteria •  Each program must satisfy applicable Program

Criteria •  Curricular topics •  Faculty qualifications

•  Must satisfy all Program Criteria implied by title of program

31

Masters Level Criteria

•  PEOs and student outcomes •  Fulfillment of the baccalaureate level general criteria •  Fulfillment of program criteria appropriate to the

masters level specialization area, and one academic year of study beyond the baccalaureate level

•  Ability to apply masters level knowledge in a specialized area of engineering related to the program area

32

Some APPM Requirements

•  Program naming and consistency of use •  Are all pathways through a program

accreditable? •  Representation of ABET accreditation •  Publication of program characteristics

•  Objectives/outcomes, enrollment, graduates •  Safety •  Display materials

33

What Has Changed: Criteria •  Master’s Level Criteria has been expanded •  Program Criteria Changes

•  Civil Engineering •  Software Engineering

34

What Has Changed – APPM •  Changes to policies affecting public release of

information, Sections II.A.6 and II.A.7 •  Program must publically state educational

objectives and student outcomes •  Program must publically post annual student

enrollment and graduation data per program •  More detail addressing public disclosure of

accreditation status including denial or withdrawal of accreditation

35

Accreditation Process

36

37

The Team Who Is on Your Team? •  One team chair (TC) or, for large visits, one TC and a

co-chair •  Typically one program evaluator (PEV) for each program

being evaluated •  Possibly one or more observers •  Simultaneous or joint visits by more than one ABET

commission will have teams from each commission

38

The Team

Who are Team Chairs? •  Team chairs are experienced program evaluators •  They are

•  Nominated by and represent member societies of ABET •  Are elected by the EAC •  Approved by the ABET Board of Directors

•  New team chairs are trained and mentored by experienced team chairs

39

The Team

Who are PEVs? •  PEVs are selected and assigned by whichever

professional society has responsibility for the program to which they are assigned

•  They have been trained either by ABET or by one of the professional societies; each year they are evaluated against the ABET Competency Model

40

The Team

Who are Observers? •  Observers may be assigned to the team:

•  Some professional societies require newly trained PEVs to participate in an observer visit before being assigned as a PEV on a team

•  The state board often assigns an observer •  Sometimes international groups ask to observe

•  Observers have no “vote” in the recommended action •  An observer will normally “shadow” a PEV •  The institution may decline observers

41

The Team

•  Visit team members are expected meet ABET Competencies: •  Technically current

•  Effective communicators

•  Professional

•  Interpersonally skilled

•  Team-oriented

•  Organized

42

Pre-Visit Activities •  Team Chair (TC) assigned •  TC sets visit dates •  TC requests team members

•  Supporting societies assign PEVs for their program •  TC submits nominees to institution •  Institutions approve PEVs •  TC notifies PEV of assignment

•  Institution submits Self-Study to TC and PEVs •  Team prepares for visit

43

Pre-Visit Activities Pre-Visit Review •  Understand the program through the Self-Study Report •  Analyze sample transcripts •  Begin to establish relationship with program chair •  Communicate issues to program chair •  Seek answers to questions and additional data as

needed

44

Pre-Visit Activities By the Time of the Campus Visit … •  The programs and dean should know of all concerns that

the PEVs have based upon their review of the self-study materials •  Results in “no surprises”

•  Gives the program a chance to present additional information to the PEV during the visit

45

Campus Visit Objectives of the Campus Visit •  Review factors that cannot be documented in a written

questionnaire •  Conduct a detailed examination of the materials

compiled by the institution •  Provide the institution with a preliminary assessment of

its strengths and shortcomings •  Assist the institution and its programs in quality

improvement efforts

46

Campus Visit Day 0 (Usually Sunday) •  Team meeting: Initial briefing •  Tour of facilities: laboratories, computer rooms,

classrooms, etc. •  PEVs with program chairs •  TC with dean or with one of the program chairs

•  Review display materials: •  Course materials •  Assessment data •  Minutes of meetings, etc. for review of assessment data

•  Team meeting (to review findings) and dinner

47

Campus Visit Day 1 (Usually Monday)

•  Team meets with engineering administration •  PEVs meet with program heads, faculty, students and

staff; TC with dean •  TC meets with institutional/college officials, dean and

associate dean, president, provost, registrar, finance, admissions, placement, assessment

•  Optional institutional luncheon for team: often with members of advisory boards, alumni, etc.

•  Team members meet with representatives of support departments

•  Institutional/college/program meetings continue •  ABET team meeting and dinner

48

Campus Visit Day 2 (Usually Tuesday) •  Follow-up meetings with faculty and staff as needed •  Private team meeting to finalize findings •  TC briefs dean and PEVs brief program chairs on

findings •  Private team meeting (working lunch)

•  Team finalizes exit statements, visit forms and documents

•  Team conducts exit meeting •  The institution CEO should be present for this meeting •  Institution CEO (or dean) determines who is present

49

Campus Visit Exit Meeting •  Purpose: Report team findings to the institution CEO

and answer clarifying questions •  Team chair makes introductory remarks and invites

PEVs to read their exit statements •  Statements includes strengths, deficiencies,

weaknesses, concerns and observations (suggestions for improvement)

•  Program Audit Form (PAF), which documents the team findings, is left with the dean

50

Post-Visit Process •  Seven-day responses from institutions

•  Correct errors of fact only •  Other responses will be not be considered until due process

•  Editing cycle •  TCs prepare draft statements •  Two levels of editing by members of EAC Executive Committee

(Editor 1 and Editor 2) •  EAC adjunct edits all statements

•  Draft statements are sent to institutions, typically the beginning of January

51

Post-Visit Process

•  30-day due-process response from institution •  This is due 30 days after draft statement is received •  Dean and TC keep communicating during due process

•  Editing cycle •  TC prepares draft of final statement •  Review by two EAC ExCom members and EAC adjunct

•  EAC takes final accreditation action at summer meeting

•  ABET sends final statement and accreditation letter to institution

52

Post-Visit Process Summer Commission Meeting •  Institution may submit supplemental material within a

reasonable time prior to the annual EAC meeting •  Programs are encouraged to solve problems •  Final statement is considered by the commission (EAC),

which makes the final decision on accreditation

53

Accreditation Terms and Actions •  Terms apply to programs •  There are five keywords:

•  Strength •  Deficiency •  Weakness •  Concern •  Observation — “friendly advice”

Terms indicating shortcomings

54

Accreditation Terms and Actions •  Deficiency: A criterion, policy or procedure is NOT

satisfied

•  Weakness: A program lacks the strength of compliance with a criterion, policy or procedure to ensure that the quality of the program will not be compromised

•  Concern: A program currently satisfies a criterion, policy or procedure; however, the potential exists for the situation to change such that the criterion, policy or procedure may not be satisfied

55

NGR Next General Review IR Interim Report IV Interim Visit SCV Show Cause – Visit SCR Show Cause – Report RE Report Extended VE Visit Extended SE Show Cause Extended NA Not to Accredit T Terminate

Accreditation Actions

Interim evaluation only

Only for programs being phased out

56

57

58

Consistency

Many accreditation decisions are not simple: •  Each institutional context is unique •  The EAC tries very hard to ensure consistency •  The overriding goal is to achieve an end result in which

programs with similar observed shortcomings are accorded the same actions

59

Consistency Checks

Role of State Board Observer

61

Historical Background

•  State Boards validate educational credentials of applicants to registration process

•  Graduates of ABET accredited programs meet basic requirements for entry into the engineering profession

•  State Boards of Professional Registration rely on accreditation process as a means of assuring the quality of engineering graduates

62

Role of State Board Observer

•  Gain first-hand information about how ABET’s accreditation process functions

•  Provide information to your State Board related to the accreditation process

63

Your Commitment •  Behave in an ethical and professional manner •  Do the pre-visit preparation •  Communicate with the team chair in a timely

fashion •  Participate in the onsite visit •  Keep all information and discussion confidential

64

State Board Observer Assignments

•  Institution’s prerogative to permit observers •  ABET notifies State Board of upcoming visits once Team

Chair has been assigned •  ABET provides State Board with Team Chair contact

information •  The State Board and Team Chair communicate directly

concerning inclusion of an observer on a visit •  Observer assignments must be approved by ABET HQ,

the Team Chair and the institution

65

Conflict of Interest Expectations for ABET Representatives •  Behave in an ethical and professional manner •  Disclose real or perceived conflicts of interest •  Recuse yourself from discussions or decisions

related to real or perceived conflicts of interest

66

Conflict of Interest

•  For State Board Observers… •  COI interpreted in less restrictive way

However

•  Graduates of institution are NOT acceptable if…. •  Active in alumni groups or other functions that might affect

objectivity or inhibit interaction

•  Questions on COI contact Accreditation Director at accreditation@abet.org

67

Observer Expenses •  All expenses are the responsibility of the

sponsoring organization providing the observer

68

What Do I Do Before the Visit ?

•  Coordinate with Team Chair •  Make travel plans •  Receive materials from Team Chair and

Institution •  Review all materials prior to visit

69

Pre-Visit Communications •  All communications to the institution must be

made through ABET’s agent, the Team Chair

70

Confidentiality •  Information supplied by institution and derived

from the visit is for confidential use of ABET and its commissions

•  ABET has specifically authorized Professional Societies to participate in the accreditation process

•  General information about ABET and the Commissions is available on the ABET Web Site at http://www.abet.org

71

Remember …..

•  The accreditation visit is carried out by ABET at the invitation of the institution

•  All communications to the institution must be made through ABET’s agent, the Team Chair

•  You may NOT relate information about any specific accreditation issues or recommended actions to anyone other than team members

72

Guidelines •  You do not have the authority to act as an official

program evaluator •  Refrain from giving any interpretations of the

accreditation criteria •  Participate in all meetings and discussions, to

ask questions and to make comments when appropriate

73

Guidelines

•  Become familiar with the applicable accreditation criteria

•  Arrange to stay for the entire period of the visit •  Do not carry out any personal business or any

business on behalf of your organization while observing the visit

74

Guidelines

•  You are encouraged to submit a report on your observations to the Team Chair following the visit

•  You should provide ABET HQ a copy of any report to the Team Chair or your organization

75

Important DO’s and DON’Ts •  DO your homework thoroughly prior to the visit—you

will be very busy while on campus •  Do stay up-to-date •  Do check ABET web site before preparing for the

visit •  Do depend on Team Chair for most current

information and instructions •  DON’T interview anyone prior to campus visit •  REMEMBER: all communication must go through

the Team Chair

76

Reference Materials •  Available at www.abet.org

•  Accreditation Policy and Procedures Manual (APPM)

•  2016-17 Criteria •  Observer Workbook •  Self-Study Questionnaire

Questions?

78