Engineering Programs Evaluation: KFUPM Experience Dr. Samir Al-Baiyat

1. Engineering Programs Evaluation: KFUPM Experience Dr. Samir Al-Baiyat Dean College of Engineering Sciences and Acting Dean College of Applied Engineering King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals

2. Outline • Background • History of Assessment and Accreditation • Accreditation • Assessment • Conclusions

3. Background • The Colleges of Engineering Sciences and Applied Engineering were established in 1387 H (1966).

4. Background • There are six departments in the colleges . These are: • Aerospace Engineering • Chemical Engineering • Civil Engineering, • Electrical Engineering , • Mechanical Engineering, • Petroleum Engineering.

5. Background • Each department offers two programs one in Engineering Science and the other in Applied Engineering. • The colleges have 164 Professorial rank faculty members

6. Current Students Enrollment (2003-2004) • AE 71 • CHE 338 • CE 130 • EE 1071 • ME 771 • PETE 217

7. History of Assessment and Accreditation for the Colleges of Engineering • KFUPM for its Quest for Excellence opted for independent Assessment for its programs since its establishment. • In the early years KFUPM was associated with a Consortium( international body from USA universities) for its programs assessment.

8. In the early nineties ,the Colleges of Engineering sought international accreditation by Accreditation Board for Engineering & Technology (ABET). • Both Engineering Programs (ES & AE) are ABET Accredited (1993 and 2002). • Currently the Electrical and Mechanical Engineering Programs are going for Self-Assessment.

9. What is accreditation? • External review • Assessment of higher education institutions and/or programs • For quality assurance and continuous improvement

10. Accreditation Objectives • To meet national needs for well-educated engineers • To provide global recognition for professionals in the field • To enable international recognition of the credentials of professionals

11. AccreditationObjectives (Cont.) • To assure that graduates are adequately prepared to enter and continue the practice of engineering and applied sciences • To serve the public, industry and the professional by stimulating the development of improved engineering education • To assist in the development of educational models for the establishment of new programs

12. Substantial Equivalency Evaluation The engineering programs at KFUPM opted twice (1993 and 2001) for accreditations by ABET. Programs being accredited include: • College of Engineering Sciences Programs • College of Applied Engineering Programs • College of Computer Science andEngineering Programs • College of Environmental Design Programs.

13. Substantial Equivalency Evaluation The evaluation of a program by ABET includes assessment of both qualitative as well as quantitative factors in the process leading to an accreditation decision. This requires: • Self-Study Report • On-site Visit

14. ABET MAJOR FINDINGS • KFUPM engineering programs are of high quality, offered by a highly enthusiastic faculty, and supported with outstanding facilities. The students are well qualified, and anxious to learn, loyal to the institution, highly motivated articulate, and career-oriented. • All of the programs were judged to satisfy the ABET Engineering Accreditation Criteria and appropriate program criteria, and they were judged to be substantially equivalent to accredited programs of similar titles in the United States.

15. ABET MAJOR FINDINGS • KFUPM has excellent classrooms, laboratory and administrative facilities. Those programs that have experienced rapid growth in the recent past are bit short of offices and classrooms spaces. • The university library provides a rich variety of on-sight, on-line research & retrieval tools. • An excellent computing infrastructure is provided by the Information Technology Center. The external connection to the internet is limited to 512 kbits/seconds. As Internet usage grows the University may wish to consider upgrading this connection.

16. ABET MAJOR FINDINGS • The new Academic Development Center (ADC) is beginning to provide useful services to the teaching faculty. The role of the ADC will become even more important as university prepares for the next ABET visit which will be conducted under criteria 2000. • The university must ensure that it offers a total compensation package to faculty members that is competitive with other institutions in the Middle East. • The College of Engineering has established an advisory council at the college level. It would be important to move the advisory council activity to the program level. • All students have the major design experience. University is urged to ensure that every co-op student has such an experience.

17. ABET ACCREDITATION (Cont.) IMPLEMENTATION • Having written set of objectives for each program. • Developing of assessment procedures that demonstrate the achievement of the objectives. • Formation of departments industrial advisory committees. • Revision of the professional rank faculty members’ distribution in some departments.

18. ABET ACCREDITATION (Cont.) IMPLEMENTATION (Cont.) • Introduction of new course. • Strengthen the Design Components in all program. • Having written vision and mission for departments and colleges and post them in web pages.

19. Assessment Assessment is a systematic process of gathering, reviewing and using important quantitative and qualitative data and information from multiple and diverse sources about educational programs, for the purpose of improving student learning, and evaluating whether academic and learning standards are being met.

20. Self Assessment • Self assessment is an assessment conducted by the institution to assess whether programs meet their educational objectives and outcomes with the purpose to improve program’s quality and enhancing students learning.

21. The Elements of a Successful Assessment • Purpose identification • Outcomes identification • Measurements and evaluation design • Data collection • Analysis and evaluation • Decision-making regarding actions to be taken.

22. Self Assessment: Need • To be proactive than reactive. • Initiate improvements to achieve academic excellence. • Systematize the process of self assessment. • To be current and take a leadership role in the region.

23. To Meet Accreditation Bodies Requirements • At the core of ABET Engineering criteria 2000 is an outcome assessment component that requires each engineering program seeking accreditation or re-accreditation to establish its own internal assessment process which in turn will be assessed by ABET. (ABET 2000, Huband, 2001)

24. Current Practice who is doing it? • According to Campus Trends data, (1995), 94 percent of institutions in the United States had assessment activities under way and 90 percent had increased their activities compared to five years ago. Rather than depending on nationally available assessment instruments, most institutions (86 percent) reported using local measures and nearly 70 percent were developing their own portfolios (El-khwas, 1995, Palomba and Banta 1999).

25. Objectives of KFUPM Self Assessment • Improve and maintain academic standards • Enhance students’ learning. • Verify that the existing programs meet their objectives and institutional goals. • Provide feedback for quality assurance of academic programs.

26. Assessment Model Input Output Faculty Curriculum Laboratories computing Facilities Processing & Delivery Graduates that Perform Outcomes that Achieve Educational Objectives Processes Institutional Facilities Assessment/Feedback Institutional Support

27. Component of the Internal Assessment Process • Criteria: Eight Criteria for Self Assessment. • Procedure: Specifies the process of Initiating, conducting, and implementing the assessment.

28. Criteria • Each criterion has an intent: A statement of requirements to be met. • Each criterion has several standards: They describe how the intents are minimally met.

29. Criteria and Standards • Program Mission, Objectives and Outcomes (3 standards). • Curriculum design and Organization (6). • Laboratories and Computing Facilities (2) • Student Support and guidance (3).

30. Criteria and Standards • Process Control (5) • Faculty (2) • Institutional Facilities (2) • Institutional Support (3)

31. Criterion 1: Program Mission, • Objectives and Outcomes • Intent: Each program must have a mission, quantifiable measurable objectives and expected outcomes for graduates. Outcomes include competency and tasks graduates are expected to perform after completing the program. A strategic plan must be in place to achieve the program objectives. The extent to which these objectives are achieved through continuous assessment and improvements must be demonstrated.

32. Criterion 1: Standards • Standard 1-1: The program must have documented measurable objectives that support college and institution mission statements.

33. Meeting Standard 1-1 • Document institution, college and program mission statements. • State program objectives. • Describe how each objective is aligned with program, college and institution mission statements. • Outline the main elements of the strategic plan to achieve the program mission and objectives. • Provide for each objective how it was measured, when it was measured and improvements identified and made.

34. Criterion 1: Standards • Standard 1-2: The program must have documented outcomes for graduating students. It must be demonstrated that the outcomes support the program objectives and that graduating students are capable of performing these outcomes.

35. Meeting standard 1-2 • Describe the means for assessing the extent to which graduates are performing the stated program outcomes/learning objectives. • 1. Conducting a survey of graduating seniors every semester. • 2. Conduct a survey of alumni every two years. • 3. Conduct a survey of employers every two years.

36. Meeting standard 1-2 1. Carefully designed questions asked during co-op and capstone design projects presentations. 2. Outcome assessment exams.

37. Criterion 1 Standards • Standard 1-3: The results of program’s assessment and the extent to which they are used to improve the program must be documented.

38. Meeting Standard 1-3 • Describe the actions taken based on the results of periodic assessments. • Describe major future program improvements plans based on recent assessments.

39. Criterion 6: Faculty • Intent: Faculty members must be current and active in their discipline and have the necessary technical depth and breadth to support the program. There must be enough faculty members to provide continuity and stability, to cover the curriculum adequately and effectively, and to allow for scholarly activities. To meet this criterion the standards in this section must be satisfied.

40. Standard 6-1 • There must be enough full time faculty who are committed to the program to provide adequate coverage of the program areas/courses, continuity and stability. The interests and qualifications of all faculty members must be sufficient to teach all courses, plan, modify and update courses and curricula. All faculty members must have a level of competence that would normally be obtained through graduate work in the discipline. The majority of the faculty must hold a Ph.d. in the discipline.

42. Standard 6-2 • All faculty members must remain current in the discipline and sufficient time must be provided for scholarly activities and professional development. Also, effective programs for faculty development must be in place.

43. Meeting Standard 6-2 • State criteria for faculty to be deemed current in the discipline and, based on theses criteria and information in the faculty member’s resumes, what percentage of the faculty members are current. The criteria should be developed by the department. • Describe the means for ensuring that full time faculty members have sufficient time for scholarly and professional development.

44. Meeting Standard 6-2 • Describe existing faculty development programs at the departmental and programs at the departmental and university level. Demonstrate their effectiveness in achieving faculty development. • Indicate how frequently faculty programs are evaluated and if the evaluation results are used for improvement.

45. INTERNAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE ADC initiates IA one semester prior to the Assessment through the college dean Department forms PT that will be Responsible for preparing SAR ADC reviews the Documentation with one month Is SAR SI Complete VRAA forms AT in consultation with the dean based on the recommendations of ADC

46. ADC plans and fixes AT visit AT conducts assessment and presents its findings To VRAA, Dean, ADC, PT and dept. faculty VRAA submits an executive summary to H.E. the Rector Department prepares implementation plan. As in Table A.2 Follow-up of the implementation plan by ADC

47. Concluding Remarks • The self-assessment and accreditation experiences were essential and very valuable to maintain a world class quality Engineering Programs. • Each engineering college should develop an appropriate assessment program using the ABET Engineering Criteria 2000 or others in conjunction with criteria specific to the individual college and program goals. 

48. The faculty of individual engineering colleges should be actively involved in the development and implementation stages. • The departments’ industrial advisory committee provided invaluable guidance and support to the engineering programs. • The development of a nationally formed (standard) examination as a measure of engineering programs learning outcomes assessment is called for.

49. ACCREDITATION •Recognition of the awarded degrees by international Bodies. • Students potential in transferring to other institutions. • Graduates being admitted to graduate programs in other international institutions. • Increase the graduates potentials in job market

50. ABET ACCREDITATION (Cont.) GRADUATE CHARECTERISTICS • A strong foundation in basic sciences, mathematics and engineering fundamentals. • A capacity to apply these fundamentals to a variety of problems. • Knowledge and experience in experimental methods. • Knowledge and skills in the fundamentals of engineering practice. • Advanced knowledge of selected professional level technologies.