Moshe Kam* and Michael Lightner** * Robert Quinn Professor and Head; Electrical and Computer Engineering, Drexel Univers

1. Engineering Accreditation: Challenges and Opportunities Moshe Kam* and Michael Lightner** *Robert Quinn Professor and Head; Electrical and Computer Engineering, Drexel University **Professor and Chair; Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering, University of Colorado, Boulder Members of ABET Board of Directors

2. Contact Information Moshe Kam Robert Quinn Professor and Head Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering 3141 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 kam@drexel.edu

3. Contact Information Michael Lightner Professor and Chair Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering College of Engineering and Applied Science UCB 425 Boulder, CO 80309 lightner@colorado.edu

4. DISCLAIMER • The issues examined in this talk have been discussed by the IEEE Educational Activities Board, but do not represent the views of IEEE or IEEE-EAB, but only those of the presenters • Material is provided for illustrative purposes only • Description of various rules and regulations are made in general descriptive terms and are not intended for operational or legal use • Material is not purported to represent the official policy of any accrediting body or any other governmental or non-governmental agency • These slides have been compiled to present a rather complete story. The talk at the conference will use a subset of these slides.

5. A Few Words about IEEE • IEEE is the largest multinational professional engineering association in the world • 380,000 members in 160 countries • A 501(c)3 organization in incorporated in New York • Originally concentrating on power engineering and communications, IEEE at present spans technical interests across the spectrum of technology • From nanotechnology to oceanic engineering • In many respects IEEE has become “the steward of Engineering” but especially the steward of all areas intersecting electrical, electronic, computer, communication, power and energy engineering

6. Early Presidents Alexander G. Bell Elihu Thomson Charles Steinmetz Frank Sprague

7. Why is IEEE interested in Accreditation? • Because it is in IEEE’s stated mission • Because accreditation has significant impact on the content of the curriculum in IEEE’s fields of interest • And hence on the future of the profession • Because IEEE’s involvement introduces the voice of the profession and its practitioners into the decision making process of educational institutions

8. Why is IEEE interested in Accreditation? • IEEE considers accreditation a strategic objective and supports accrediting bodies worldwide • The IEEE BoD allocates funds and human resources to accreditation on an annual basis • About 500 volunteers • >$2M/year in direct expenditures in 2008

9. University Degrees Let us begin with a exploration of what it means and does not mean to get a university degree in engineering – specifically electrical

10. What Does it Mean to Get a BSEE from a University? • First – it means you were accepted into the school • Around the world acceptance ranges from automatic to exceedingly difficult • Second – By the standards of the university you successfully completed the requirements for gaining a degree • Third – You will be associated with all the other graduates of the university and the reputation and accomplishments of the faculty and staff of the university

11. What Does it Not Mean to Get a BSEE from a University? • First – It does not necessarily mean that you are a good electrical engineer • Second – It does not necessarily mean that you will be good in design • Third – It does not necessarily mean you will be good in analysis • Fourth – It does not necessarily mean you will be a good employee • Fifth – It does not necessarily mean you are prepared for graduate education at any university other than that university – and it may not mean even that

12. “But Our University is a Great University!” • What can the previous slides mean? • We know our university is a great university and has a great electrical engineering department. • How do we know? • From the performance of graduates • From the reputation and research results of faculty and staff • We do not know it is great because of accreditation

13. Outline • Accreditation Myths • Accreditation in Engineering, Computing and Technology • Definition, aims, uses and misuses, models • Building new accrediting bodies in the early 21st Century

14. Accreditation Myths • Accredited Programs produced better graduates • NO, accreditation is, often, a statement of meeting minimum requirements • Accreditation does not, necessarily, address admission requirements • Accreditation is/should be voluntary and excellent programs may not choose to accredited

15. Accreditation Myths • Employers care whether a potential employee graduated from an accredited program • I have rarely had an employer tell me this was important or ask if the department was accredited. • Universities with great reputation rarely rely on accreditation as a credential

16. Accreditation Myths • Accreditation means that the program is ranked highly • There are 296 ABET accredited Electrical Engineering programs in the US • The ranking of programs and universities is entirely separate from the accreditation process – in most of the world

17. Accreditation myths • Faculty members are highly engaged in the accreditation process and are deeply honored by being part of an accredited program • Rarely true • Accreditation is often one more requirement on faculty time • While they may care deeply about education, innovation, better teaching and support for students, accreditation is an administrative activity – often with little perceived value • Accreditation has limited impact on faculty salary, research, promotion and tenure, publications, and professional reputation • Sometimes accreditation leads to more resources • But this is rare

18. So Why Accreditation We know the many things that accreditation is not – why do we have accreditation and what is its value? Make no mistake, accreditation is valuable

19. Outline • Accreditation Myths • Accreditation in Engineering, Computing and Technology • Definition, aims, uses and misuses, models • Building a new accrediting body in the early 21st Century

20. A Broad Definition of Accreditation • Formal recognition of an educational program by an external body on the basis of an assessment of quality • An evaluation process in which an objective group (accrediting body) examines an educational program to ensure that it is meeting minimum standards established by experts in the field • The outcome of the process is binary: program is either accredited or not accredited

21. Value of Accreditation • Accreditation tells perspective students that a program meets minimum standards • Financial institutions may only choose to provide student loans for study at an accredited university • Students transferring between accredited programs can have some sense of equivalence – see Washington accord • Students with an accredited undergraduate degree from one country may/should receive better consideration in another country than a student from an unaccredited program • Accreditation provides/forces a periodic consideration of educational programs and provides outside benchmarks and evaluation

22. Professional Licensure • While accreditation concerns an educational program, licensure concerns the individual • Licensure may be a legal requirement in some engineering professions and in some countries/states • In many locales students who did not complete accredited programs face difficulties in getting licensed

23. Accreditation and Licensure • In the US, students graduating from an accredited program can immediately sit for the Fundamentals of Engineering exam – the first step to licensure • Without an accredited degree there are work/experience requirements before an individual can sit for the beginning licensure exam • This connection between accreditation and the beginning of the licensure process is of significant value in many areas of engineering. • A great motivation for obtaining accreditation and graduating from a accredited program in those areas

24. Operational Definition of Accreditation by CHEA*(US) * Council for Higher Education Accreditation Accreditation in higher education is defined as a collegial process based on self- and peer assessment for public accountability and improvement of academic quality [Peers =group of peer faculty and staff, professionals, and public members] Peers assess the quality of an institution or academic program and assist the faculty and staff in improvement

25. Three Major Activities The faculty, administrators, and staff of the institution or academic program conduct a self-study using the accrediting organization’s set of expectations about quality (standards, criteria) as their guide A team of peers, selected by the accrediting organization, reviews the evidence, visits the campus to interview the faculty and staff, and writes a report of its assessment, including a recommendation to the commission of the accrediting organization

26. The third step… • Guided by a set of expectations about quality and integrity, the commission • reviews the evidence and recommendation • makes a judgment • communicates the decision to the institution • and other constituencies if appropriate

27. Challenges to the Traditional Definition (1) • Should the accreditation be done by an “external body”? • Is it possible to conduct accreditation by peer groups • E.g., peer institutions • This is how accreditation first started • Should the result of accreditation be binary? • Some groups in Europe have called for providing evaluation in four categories with respect to every criterion • Fails to meet minimum requirements • Meets minimum requirements • Exceeds minimum requirements • Excels in meeting this criterion

28. Challenges to the Traditional Definition (2) • Should we strive to meet minimum standards rather than achieving continuous improvement and excellence? • Will the current system of accreditation be useful to industry in the long term? • The mobility of labor has challenged traditional credentials • The ECE industry had already rejected the licensing process • E.g., the industrial exemption in the United States -While in most states engineers in industry are exempt from licensing laws for work done for their industrial employers, the engineer and the engineer's company may still be liable for unethical, unsafe, or illegal activities.

29. Some Clarifications • In the US various professions have accrediting bodies – engineering, law, music, journalism, medicine • These professional accrediting bodies look at specific programs – e.g., different engineering departments – not the entire university • In the US there are regional accrediting bodies that accredit the entire university. • Typically at the undergraduate level, but increasingly at the graduate level • Often professional accreditation will require this regional/general university accreditation

30. Some Clarifications • While, in engineering, we discuss accrediting a specific engineering program this does involve other parts of the university • Teaching of mathematics, physics, chemistry, language, humanities, etc • Electives in other engineering and computer science departments • Availability of shared resources • Computing facilities, library facilities, labs, etc • As a result, where possible, engineering colleges like to have all their programs on the same accreditation cycle • Simply reduces the work required

31. Looking Forward: Traditions The trends we observe in accreditation will challenge traditional models It is unlikely that over-prescriptive accreditation models will survive It is unlikely that models that are based solely on minimum thresholds will survive

32. The Constituencies of an Educational Program Past, present and prospective students Prospective employers Other bodies of higher education Licensing bodies Government The public at large

33. The Various Functions of Accreditation (1) • Provide constituencies of the educational program with a guarantee that an educational program… • meets (minimum) standards • continues to evolve in order to incorporate best practices • Put a stamp of approval on graduates – they are ready to practice • Raises the issue of First Professional Degree in Engineering • Regardless of accreditation, this is a questionable statement to make

34. The Various Functions of Accreditation (2) • Provide educational programs with opportunities for self-definition and self-reflection • and with feedback on program content and direction • Provide opportunities for continuous improvement of education programs

35. Misuse of Accreditation • Coercion • The process needs to be voluntary • Disciplinary action • Ranking and comparison of schools • Controlling the school • Serving the interests of one constituency on the expense of others • Homogenizing higher education • Control competition • Limit enrollments

36. Accreditation is not indispensable… • Industry can replace accreditation by other mechanisms of quality assessment • University rankings by academic bodies • University rankings by the popular press • Internal lists of “acceptable institutions” • This is common with major US technology companies • Entry exams and interviews of graduates • This is common in the US, exams can be formal or informal • If accreditation is to survive it should be • Pertinent • Transparent • Fair • Economical • Adaptive to the business climate

37. The Basic Structure of the Process: Accrediting Body • Accrediting body defines its accreditation philosophy and publishes criteria and process • Accrediting body identifies and trains program evaluators • Bodies that recognize accrediting bodies require proof of decision independence • The funding mechanism and accreditation decisions should be independent

38. A Word of Caution: Independence • In several instances, IEEE observed loss of independence of accrediting bodies • In all of these cases, the accrediting body was discredited • Schools preferred foreign accrediting bodies over the local one • It is not clear whether government controlled accrediting bodies will be recognized in the future by international accords

39. The Basic Structure of the Process: Program Program studies accrediting body literature Program collects required material and verifies presumption of accreditability Program requests an accreditation visit Program gets organized to provide information to accrediting body and visiting team Self study

40. Interaction Between Accrediting Body and Program • Mutual agreement on visiting team • Agreement on dates and logistics • Within published guidelines • Pre-visit communications • Accrediting visit and preliminary reporting • Post-visit communications • Report preparation and determination of outcome • Post-report communications – possible appeals

41. Two important caveats • The accreditation visit is supposed to provide “no surprises” • All concerns that program evaluators have on the basis of submitted data are supposed to be discussed ahead of the visit • On site visit focuses on the accreditation criteria and their implementation • This is not the time for ‘free advice’ or planning of the program future by the visiting group

42. Looking Forward: Implementation • At present most accreditation bodies operate on 5-7 year cycles • A series of “dramatic events” followed by long periods of low or no activity • Elaborate visits requiring significant preparation • It is possible to design a much simpler process that takes advantage of progress in information technology • Information is posted and updated continually • Visits are shorter • focus only on the few items that do not require face to face interaction

43. For additional details see www.Accreditation.org Selected accrediting bodies (1) Engineers Australia Engineers Ireland Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board of the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers France: Commission des Titres d'Ingénieur Germany: ASIIN Hong Kong Institution of Engineers

44. For additional details see www.Accreditation.org Selected accrediting bodies (2) Japan: Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering Education Korea: Accreditation Board for Engineering Education of Korea Malaysia: Board of Engineers Malaysia Mexico: Council of Accreditation of the Education of Engineering New Zealand: Institution of Professional Engineers of New Zealand

45. For additional details see www.Accreditation.org Selected accrediting bodies (3) Singapore: Institution of Engineers Singapore South Africa: Engineering Council of South Africa United Kingdom: Engineering Council United Kingdom United States: ABET China: Developing pilot accreditation aiming toward joining Washington Accord – organized through CAST

46. Characteristics of Accreditation (1) • Voluntary • Performed by an external agency • Based on the locale of the program • Uses representation of all major constituencies • Government inspection is not Accreditation • Based on clear published standards • Evaluative – not regulatory • It is not the place of the visiting team to provide the visited program with detailed prescriptions and methodology

47. Characteristics of Accreditation (2) • Requires continuous maintenance • Binary (at present, in most cases) • Cognizant of program objectives and goals • One size does not fit all • Accreditation is not meant to homogenize the education system

48. What are the Factors That May be Considered? • Content of the curriculum • Is there enough exposure to discrete mathematics? • Size and skill base of the faculty • Does a Computer Science program have individuals who are trained in Artificial Intelligence? • Morale and governance of the faculty

49. Potential Consideration Factors (2) • Facilities • Does the Microwave Laboratory in an EE program have a Spectrum Analyzer? • Admission criteria • Do the admission criteria ensure that incoming students have the basic skills required to attend the program?

50. Potential Consideration Factors (3) • Support services • Do the program’s computing facilities enjoy professional system administration? • Graduate placement • Do the majority of the program graduates find gainful professional employment within 6 months of graduation? • Budgets and expenditures