1 / 14

Where is the Forefront in Accredited Engineering Education?

Where is the Forefront in Accredited Engineering Education?. Ian Freeston ifreeston@engc.org.uk. How is level of accredited engineering programmes specified? How is the specification implemented? Can the value of accreditation be increased?. Level of accreditation affects three groups:

dewey
Download Presentation

Where is the Forefront in Accredited Engineering Education?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Where is the Forefront in Accredited Engineering Education? Ian Freeston ifreeston@engc.org.uk Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  2. How is level of accredited engineering programmes specified? • How is the specification implemented? • Can the value of accreditation be increased? Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  3. Level of accreditation affects three groups: • Programme developers and teachers • Accreditation agencies and accrediting panels • Over-arching organisations that assess agency standards Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  4. Focus is on accrediting panel assessing a particular programme. • ENAEE Accreditation Standard (EAFS) to illustrate reasoning. • EAFS intended to assess agencies, but does not affect argument. • Avoids using standards of a particular agency Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  5. Accreditation process evaluates: • Content of programme; • Level of programme; • Infrastructure to support programme. Content and Infrastructure relatively straightforward to specify. Level is more difficult; how does ENAEE do it? Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  6. Evaluation of accreditation agency standards: • Content of programme: • Level of programme; • Infrastructure to support programme; • Decision process of agency. Content, Infrastructure and Decision process are straightforward to specify, assess and correct (if necessary). Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  7. Programme Outcomes in EAFS are specified as ‘consistent with their level of knowledge and understanding’. Programme Outcomes for Knowledge and Understanding include: • First Cycle: coherent knowledge of their branch of engineering including some at the forefront of the branch. • Second Cycle: a critical awareness of the forefront of their branch. Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  8. Dublin Descriptors specify: • First Cycle: ‘…includes some aspects that will be informed by knowledge of the forefront of their field of study’. • Second Cycle: ‘have demonstrated knowledge and understanding that is founded upon and extends and/or enhances that typically associated with first cycle…’. Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  9. Forefront is defined in EUGENE project as: • Forefront of a branch of engineering or specialization is the knowledge of recent developments in practice and research. In a field of study that combines knowledge from different branches, the forefront is interpreted as that of the combination and not of the individual branches. Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  10. Two fundamental methods to assess Forefront: • Top Down: Agency specifies rules and tests. Consistency of judgements, but slow response to change. • Bottom Up. No rules, but accreditation panel makes judgement based on evidence. Responsive to change, but judgements inconsistent. Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  11. TD and BU have different approaches, but may have similar features. • TD may be relevant to programmes for specific employment. • Initial purpose of accreditation is to ensure standards. • Accreditation also supports programme development. Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  12. Reasons for preferring Bottom Up: • Responsive to developments in engineering; • Accommodates changes in teaching methods; • Every accreditation visit is a discussion of Forefront; • Every accreditation report is a statement about Forefront by experts. Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  13. Two consequences for agencies (and for over-arching organisations such as ENAEE). • Agencies should explain that evidence needed of Forefront in programme and in student achievement. • Agencies will need to train accreditors to make judgements about Forefront. Two questions in assessing programme: • How is Forefront incorporated into the programme? • What are the criteria for assessing Forefront in student achievment? Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

  14. Is accreditation important? Accreditation of engineering programmes supports • Standard of engineering education which determines • Quality of engineering professionals which is • Central to the effectiveness of technical input to solution of global problems. • International networks of accreditation agencies are ideally structured to provide a forum for determining standards and procedures, and have a mechanism for implementing them. Ian Freeston. ENAEE Conference, Porto, 12 and 13 November 2012

More Related