Introduction to ABET Accreditation Michael K. J. Milligan, Ph.D., P.E. Executive Director, ABET October 15th, 2012

Topics Who is ABET? ABET’s Global Activities Basics of ABET Accreditation Criteria: The Guiding Principles of Accreditation Decisions Continuous Quality Improvement Future Challenges

Who is ABET? ABET Essentials

Brief ABET History 1932 Engineers Council for Professional Development (ECPD) established 1936 ECPD first evaluated engineering degree programs 1980 Name changed to “Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology” (ABET) 1980 Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) signed with Canada (1st international agreement) 1989 Washington Accord Agreement signed with Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand 1994 Policies and Procedures for Substantial Equivalency evaluations (evaluations outside the US) approved 1995-2000 Major criteria reform (Engineering Criteria 2000) 2006 Substantial Equivalency discontinued 2007 Accreditation of Programs outside the US began 2011 IFEES, GEDC Membership

ABET Vision Applied Science Computing Engineering, and Provide world leadership in assuring quality and in stimulating innovation in Applied Science Computing Engineering, and Engineering Technology Education

ABET Mission ABET serves the public globally through the promotion and advancement of education in applied science, computing, engineering, and engineering technology. Accredits educational programs. Promotes quality and innovation in education. Communicates and collaborates with its constituents and the public. Consults and assists in the development and advancement of education worldwide. Anticipates and prepares for the changing educational environment and the future needs of its constituents. Manages its operations and resources in an effective and fiscally responsible manner. Similarly, ABET’s mission extends outside the borders of the U.S. Our stakeholders and constituents have global operations and look to ABET to assure the graduates they hire from around the world are receiving a high quality education. Our mission requires us to do that through our accreditation activities and assisting others in the development and advancement of education world wide.

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 encourages innovation

ABET Value Students & 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

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

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.

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

ABET Value Society Helps ensure public safety Supports professional licensure, certification Graduates are 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

ABET is a Program Accreditor Also called “Specialized” Accreditor Evaluates programs Not Institutions Not degrees, diplomas, courses Relevant, technically strong Professional skills Graduates ready to enter “the profession” AS, BS, MS levels Peer review process Recognized by CHEA in U.S.

ABET’s 31 Member Societies Board Orientation - March 2011

Member Societies Represent “the Profession” Develop Program Criteria Over 1.5 million individual members Develop Program Criteria Appoint Board Representatives Nominate Commissioners Recruit and Assign Program Evaluators

ABET: a Leader in Assessment Educational Research, Professional Development Assessment methods; measuring professional skills Partners with faculty and industry Professional Development Institute for the Development of Excellence in Assessment (IDEAL) Program Assessment Workshop Webinars ABET Symposium 4 Tracks; example Self-Studies Accreditation, Program Assessment, Innovations in Technical Education, and Program Evaluation Updates

ABET Organizational Structure Volunteer-Driven: 2,000+ 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” 100% of accreditation decisions are made by volunteers ABET Headquarters (Baltimore): ~38 full, part time staff

ABET Organizational Structure Board of Directors Committees Accreditation Council Industry Advisory Council Academic Advisory Council Global Council Applied Science Accreditation Commission 71 accredited programs at 54 institutions Computing Accreditation Commission 381 accredited programs at 299 institutions Engineering Accreditation Commission 2,209 accredited programs at 456 institutions 633 accredited programs at 213 institutions Engineering Technology Accreditation Commission Curricular areas for each commission listed in ABET Yearbook.

ABET Board of Directors 5 Officers President, Pres-Elect, Past Pres, Secretary, Treasurer 1-year terms, except for Treasurer who serves for 2 years 39 Directors 1 to 3 Directors from each member society 3-year term, renewable for additional term 5 Public Directors Right to vote; no affiliation with member societies 2 Associate Member Representatives Privilege of the floor, but no vote

ABET’s Global Activities Global Engagement

ABET is Engaged Globally Consistent with ABET’s Mission & Vision Accredit Programs outside the U.S. Assistance: MOUs with 15 national agencies Mutual Recognition Agreements Engineers Canada International Engineering Alliance (IEA) Seoul Accord Membership in Global Organizations Global Engineering Deans Council (GEDC) Intl Federation of Engr Education Societies (IFEES)

Global Accreditation Activities As of 1 Oct 2012 Accredited 3,205 programs at 659 colleges & universities in 24 countries Non-U.S. Programs Accredited 324 programs at 64 institutions in 23 countries Uniform accreditation criteria, policies and procedures used for all visits, regardless of location

Mutual Recognition Agreements International agreement Between bodies responsible for accrediting engineering degree programs Recognizes “substantial equivalency” of accrediting systems Graduates of accredited programs are prepared to practice engineering at the entry level to the profession

International Engineering Alliance Washington Accord* Engineering Sydney Accord* Engineering Technology Dublin Accord** Engineering Technician APEC Engineer Agreement Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Engineers Mobility Forum Professional Engineers Register Engineering Technologist Forum * Full signatory; **provisional membership

Washington Accord Engineering ABET: U.S. (1989) IEAust: Australia (1989) CEAB: Canada (1989) IEI: Ireland (1989) IPENZ: New Zealand (1989) EngC: UK (1989) HKIE: Hong Kong (1995) ECSA: South Africa (1999) JABEE: Japan (2005) IES: Singapore (2006) IEET: Chinese Taipei (2007) ABEEK: South Korea (2007) BEM: Malaysia (2009) MUDEK: Turkey (2011) AEER: Russia (2012)

Mutual Recognition Agreements Washington Accord Periodic review of assessment processes Every 6th year Self study + observer teams Campus evaluations, decision meetings Signatories’ website lists programs Graduate attributes

Washington Accord Global Graduate Attributes Engineering Knowledge Environment and Sustainability Problem Analysis Ethics Design/Development of Solutions Individual and Teamwork Investigation & Experimentation Communication Modern Tool Usage Project Management and Finance The Engineer and Society Lifelong Learning

Mutual Recognition Agreements Sydney Accord (Engineering Technologist) Australia - IEAust Canada - CEAB Hong Kong China - HKIE Ireland - IEI New Zealand - IPENZ South Africa - ECSA United Kingdom - EngC United States – ABET

Basics of ABET Accreditation

Generally Accepted Accreditation Principles Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes April 2010 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 Copyright 2010

What Programs does ABET Accredit? Academic program leading to a specific degree in a specific discipline Assigned Commission depends on program name Applied Sciences (ASAC): AS, BS, MS Examples: Health Physics, Industrial Hygiene, Industrial & Quality Management, Safety Sciences, Surveying and Mapping Computing (CAC): BS Comp Science, Info Systems, Info Technology Engineering (EAC): BS, MS Engineering Technology (ETAC): AS, BS

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)

ABET Accreditation Process Objectives Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes April 2010 ABET Accreditation Process Objectives Assure that graduates of an accredited program are adequately prepared to enter and continue the practice of applied science, computing, engineering, and technology Stimulate the improvement of technical education Encourage new and innovative approaches to engineering education and its assessment Copyright 2010

Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes April 2010 Basic Requirements Programs must have graduates Institution must asses 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.A. Appropriate entity that authorizes/approves the offering of educational programs (e.g., CONEAU) Copyright 2010

ABET Accreditation Process Peer Review 4/16/2017 ABET Accreditation Process Peer Review Programs prepare Self-Study for evaluation team Documents how the program meets criteria Program review conducted by team of peer colleagues Faculty, industry and government professionals, and administrators in the profession. Review the Self-Study and conduct the site visit ABET Program Evaluators (PEVs) Approximately 2,200 faculty, industry, and government representatives (from ABET member societies)

Review Team Membership One Team Chair For large teams: Team Chair and Co-Chair Typically one Program Evaluator for each program being evaluated Minimum of 3 team members for single program Possibly one or more observers International partners, US State licensing boards, new program evaluators, ABET staff Team members are volunteers and not compensated for their work

On-Site Visit Direct observations Complements the Self-Study 4/16/2017 On-Site Visit Direct observations Program facilities Student work, materials Interview faculty, students, administrators, and other professional supporting personnel Complements the Self-Study Provides direct, observable evidence that cannot be obtained from the Self-Study

Accreditation Timeline 18 month process 4/16/2017 Accreditation Timeline 18 month process March - June Team members assigned, dates set, Self-Study submitted May - June Necessary changes to statement, if any, are made January Institution requests accreditation for programs December - February Draft statements edited and sent to institutions August Institutions notified of final action Year 1 Year 2 September - December Visits take place, draft statements written and finalized following 7-day response period July Commission meets to take final action February - May Institution prepares self-evaluation (Program Self-Study) February - April Institutions respond to draft statement and return to ABET October Accreditation status publically released

Governing Documents Accreditation Process Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes April 2010 Governing Documents Accreditation Process ABET Criteria for Accrediting Programs in [ASAC, CAC, EAC, ETAC] Program Management Assessment Curriculum Resources and Support ABET Accreditation Policy and Procedure Manual [APPM] Eligibility for Accreditation Conduct of Evaluations Public Release of Information Appeals Copyright 2010

The Guiding Principles of Accreditation Decisions Criteria

Overview of Criteria Goals Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes April 2010 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 constituents in a dynamic and competitive environment Copyright 2010

April 2010

Engineering Criteria 2000 “EC 2000” Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes April 2010 Engineering Criteria 2000 “EC 2000” Philosophy: “Outcomes-based” Institutions and programs define mission and objectives to meet needs of their constituents Provides for program differentiation Outcomes: preparation for professional practice Demonstrate how criteria are being met Wide national & international acceptance Commitment to Continuous Improvement Process focus: outcomes & assessment linked to objectives; input from constituencies Student, faculty, facilities, institutional support, and financial resources linked to Program Objectives Copyright 2010

Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes April 2010 Program Names Determines: Which ABET Commission is responsible ASAC, 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 Copyright 2010

Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes Criteria April 2010 Students Program Educational Objectives Student Outcomes Continuous Improvement Curriculum Faculty Facilities Institutional Support Copyright 2010

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.

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.

Criterion 3: Student Outcomes 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.

Criterion 3: Student Outcomes The program must demonstrate that their students attain the following outcomes: An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data 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.

Criterion 3: Student Outcomes An ability to function on multidisciplinary teams An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility An ability to communicate effectively The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context

Criterion 3: Student Outcomes A recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning A knowledge of contemporary issues An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice Plus any outcomes specific to field of study

Criterion 4: Continuous Improvement U of Cincinnati - S Schall & G Rogers Criterion 4: Continuous Improvement The program must use a documented process incorporating relevant data to regularly assess its program educational objectives and student outcomes, and to evaluate the extent to which they are being met. The results of these evaluations of program educational objectives and program outcomes must be used to effect continuous improvement of the program through a documented plan.

Criterion 5: Curriculum (1/2) U of Cincinnati - S Schall & G Rogers Criterion 5: Curriculum (1/2) 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

Criterion 5: Curriculum (2/2) U of Cincinnati - S Schall & G Rogers Criterion 5: Curriculum (2/2) 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

U of Cincinnati - S Schall & G Rogers 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

Criterion 7: Facilities U of Cincinnati - S Schall & G Rogers 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 & professional activities; and provide opportunities to use modern engineering tools. What: Classrooms, laboratories and associated equipment, office space, library, etc.

Criterion 8: Institutional Support U of Cincinnati - S Schall & G Rogers 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.

Program Criteria Each program must satisfy applicable Program Criteria which may, depending upon the commission, amplify: Objectives Outcomes Curricular topics Faculty qualifications

Masters Level Programs Criteria Fulfillment of baccalaureate level general criteria One academic year of study beyond the baccalaureate level Ability to apply masters level knowledge in a specialized area related to program area Fulfillment of program criteria appropriate to masters specialization area Develop, publish, and periodically review, educational objectives and student outcomes

Continuous Quality Improvement

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

Continuous Quality Improvement CQI Process Faculty Workshop on Accreditation Processes April 2010 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) Copyright 2010

Assessment: How are we doing? Establish Purpose and Set Goals Define/Refine Objectives and Outcomes Design and Conduct Assessments Evaluate Assessment Findings Use Results for Decision Making Institutional support Student Advising Faculty Curriculum Program goals Customers How students learn What students learn

Resources Program Assessment Workshop Institute for the Development of Excellence in Assessment Leadership (IDEAL) Intensive, Interactive 1-day Workshop Program Assessment Workshop Various topics Multiple offerings No cost Spring of each year Over 80 Sessions Four educational tracks Accreditation Track Resource Room – example Self-Studies Website: www.abet.org

ABET Initiatives with CQI Processes Since 2006 2,278 participants in one-day Program Assessment Workshops 495 graduates from the four day-long Institute for Development of Excellence in Assessment Leaders (IDEAL) 6,104 ABET Webinar views (680 per month)

Future Challenges

Education is Changing Non-traditional students Students are changing: Gen X, Gen Y, Gen Z Diversity of student population Explosion of distance learning: online education Globalization of the workforce The Internet: a tool for learning “Density” of academic programs

Students are Changing Digital Natives (Gen Z) Lifelong users of Born between mid-1990s and end of 2000s Lifelong users of Internet Instant messaging and text messaging MP3 players Cell phones/smart phones Electronic tablets YouTube, Facebook, etc. Educational experience: what is their expectation?

Why a Global Focus? Education Global Business International Students Global Institutions Distance Learning Transcends geographical borders Explosive Growth Global Business Global technical professionals Work anywhere, with anyone Appreciation for, and ability to function, in a multicultural environment

Students are Global and Mobile! Studying and Working Abroad  Learning Online  International Experiences

85,000 students graduate from ABET accredited programs each year!

Questions?

Michael K. J. Milligan, Ph.D., P.E. Thank You! Michael K. J. Milligan, Ph.D., P.E. ABET Executive Director executive-director@abet.org +1.410.347.7700 www.abet.org