Copyright © 2008 by ABET, Inc. 1 December 2, 2008 ABET Program Evaluator Re-Training – Materials...
76
Copyright © 2008 by ABET, Inc. 1 December 2, 2008 ABET Program Evaluator Re-Training – Materials Engineering
-
Upload
gerald-armstrong -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of Copyright © 2008 by ABET, Inc. 1 December 2, 2008 ABET Program Evaluator Re-Training – Materials...
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
1
December 2, 2008
ABETProgram Evaluator
Re-Training – Materials Engineering
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
2
December 2, 2008
Objectives of Accreditation
(1) Assure that graduates of an accredited program are adequately prepared to enter and continue the practice of engineering.
(2) Stimulate the improvement of engineering education.
(3) Encourage new and innovative approaches to engineering education and its assessment.
(4) Identify accredited programs to the public.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
3
December 2, 2008
Role of ABET Accreditation
The role of ABET accreditation is to provide periodic external assessment and evaluation in support of the continuous quality improvement program of the institution.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
4
December 2, 2008
Evaluator Role
Evaluators are selected by their professional society (TMS or NICE) to participate in
the accreditation of engineering programs.
In this capacity they:• Represent the Materials Community and ABET on campus visits.• Work with a team of colleagues from other
professional societies.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
5
December 2, 2008
Evaluators Provide
As an ABET team member evaluators provide knowledge concerning:
• Professional practice
• Professional preparation
• Continuous quality improvement
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
6
December 2, 2008
Evaluator Commitment
Commitment is critical to a successful visit.Exercise sound judgement.Base all decisions on the criteria.Do careful pre-visit preparation.Perform on-site visit thoroughly.Develop and communicate succinct conclusions.Participate in team decisions.Promptly submit all reports and forms.When in doubt or when a question arises,
use the team chair as a resource.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
7
December 2, 2008
What the Visit Team Produces
• Team submits a Visit Report– Basis for the Draft Statement to Institution– Criteria-based– All visit forms feed into this document– Includes statements of program strengths,
deficiencies, weaknesses, and concerns for each program based on documentation and observations from pre-visit and on-site
At the end of the visit…
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
8
December 2, 2008
Important Expectations• Evaluators represent TMS/NICE and the EAC of
ABET.• ABET accredits programs to the state and to the
public that they satisfy the criteria.• Team effort—team decisions.• Confidentiality• Conflict of interest—every visitor should have signed
a conflict-of-interest statement.• Observers
– no evaluative statements to the institution.– exit interview—thank-you only.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
9
December 2, 2008
Conflict of Interest
ABET representatives will:• Behave in an ethical and professional
manner.• Disclose real or perceived conflicts of
interest.• Recuse themselves from discussions or
decisions related to real or perceived conflicts of interest.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
10
December 2, 2008
Confidentiality• Do not discuss final conclusions with faculty,
students, and others• Keep all materials until the July EAC meeting. At
conclusion of accreditation process (August after visit) materials are to be destroyed
• Information specific to the institution is to remain confidential without time limit
• Institutional data are confidential except with written authorization of institution
• ABET materials only released by ABET staff
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
11
December 2, 2008
Communication
• Maintain open line of communication with the program head
• Identify deficiencies as soon as possible• Discuss all issues with the program head at the
debriefing • Do not discuss the recommended accreditation
action with anyone except team members
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
12
December 2, 2008
General Visit Outline
• Pre-visit – Communicate with Program Head.
• Try not to surprise the program. Let them know about issues as soon a possible.
• Give program opportunity to respond prior to visit.• Pose pre-visit questions in an appropriate manner. Clear
questions, not dictatorially or confrontationally.
– Keep the Team Chair in the loop on these communications.– Complete transcript analysis well before visit.– Complete curriculum analysis well before visit.– Create draft of exit statement before visit.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
13
December 2, 2008
General Visit Outline (cont.)• Sunday –
– Visit campus, review curriculum materials.– Evening: Share what was learned and plan for rest of visit.
• Monday – – AM: Dean’s overview, PEV’s in departments.– Lunch with institutional officials.– PM: Support areas, PEV’s in departments.– Evening: Share findings, discuss issues, tentative
conclusions; draft exit statements.• Tuesday –
– Tie up loose ends.– Draft exit statements by late morning.– Debrief department heads before lunch. Discuss all
issues.– Exit interview early afternoon. Read statement.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
14
December 2, 2008
Visit Report and Forms• Important forms – done by Tues AM
– Program Evaluator Report—soft copy to Team Chair • Transcript & curriculum analyses (in Evaluator Report)• Level of Implementation (in Evaluator Report)• Exit Statement (in Evaluator Report)
– Program Audit Form + Explanation of Shortcoming (two hard copies to Team Chair—one will be left with Dean—one soft copy to Team Chair)
– Program Evaluator Worksheet—soft copy to Team Chair
• Send copies of these forms to TMS or NICE
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
15
December 2, 2008
Program Evaluation:Campus Visit Details
• Consistency—things to look for– Evaluation of the extent to which objectives are
attained– Assessment process with results that
demonstrates and measures outcomes– Program improvement (closing the loop)– Curricular and program issues– Faculty and students
• As they relate to undergraduate education
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
16
December 2, 2008
Deliverables
• From each PEV, the team chair must have:– A recommended action relative to the program under
review that is consistent with the team’s conclusions (remember, it is a TEAM recommendation)
– A PAF that accurately reflects the team findings– An Exit Statement that will:
• Be read verbatim in the Exit Meeting• Be used as the basis for construction of the draft statement
to the institution
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
17
December 2, 2008
Program Audit Form (for GR or New)(We provide a copy to the institution at the Exit Meeting)
If heading doesn’t have the current visit year, you are using an old form!
Do not use old forms!!
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
18
December 2, 2008
Program Audit Form (for Interim Visit Evaluations)
We provide a copy to the institution at the Exit Meeting for IV only
If the heading does not say
INTERIM VISIT
do not use it for an IV evaluation
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
19
December 2, 2008
Working Definition of Key Terms
• Deficiency: assigned to any criterion, policy, or procedure that is totally or largely unmet.
• Weakness: criterion, policy, or procedure is met to some meaningful extent, but compliance is insufficient to fully satisfy requirements.
• Concern: criterion, policy, or procedure is fully met, but there is potential for non-compliance in the near future.
• Observation: general commentary possibly, but not necessarily, related to criteria.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
20
December 2, 2008
Limit Use of Key Terms• Use Key Term only in reference to overall
evaluation of each criterion.
• The Key Term (defined in the previous slides) is the overall assessment for the criterion as a whole, not the worst finding among the sub-areas on the worksheet. Do not, for example, give a deficiency to a program that lacks only a measurement for outcome 3(e).
Terms(Typically used by
ABET)
DefinitionSome other
terms for same concept
(could be used by programs)
ObjectivesBroad statements that describe the career and professional accomplishments that the program is preparing graduates to achieve.
Goals, outcomes, etc.
OutcomesStatements that describe what students are expected to know and 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.
Objectives, standards, etc.
AssessmentProcesses that identify, collect, use and prepare data that can be used to evaluate the achievement of program outcomes and educational objectives.
Evaluation
EvaluationProcesses for interpreting the data and evidence accumulated through assessment practices. Evaluation determines the extent to which program outcomes or program educational objectives are being achieved, and results in decisions and actions to improve the program.
Assessment
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
22
December 2, 2008
Criteria Emphasis• Practice of continuous improvement.
– Input of constituencies– Process focus– Outcomes and assessment linked to objectives
• Knowledge required for entry into the engineering profession.
• Student, faculty, facilities, institutional support, and financial resources linked to program objectives.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
23
December 2, 2008
Program Evaluation:Things to Look for
• Evaluation of the extent to which objectives are attained
• Assessment process with results that demonstrates and measures outcomes
• Program improvement (closing the loop)• Curricular and program issues• Faculty and students
– As they relate to undergraduate education
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
24
December 2, 2008
Programs with Shortcomings Prior to Due Process (2006/7)
Data reflect 260 programs involved in general reviews.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
25
December 2, 2008
Materials Programs Shortcomings Prior to Due Process (2003 to 2008)
0
10
20
30
40
C1-S
tudentsC
2-Objectives
C3-O
utcomes
C4-Im
provement
C5-C
urriculumC
6-FacultyC
7-FacilitiesC
8-Support
C9-P
rogramA
PP
M
Deficency
Weakness
Concern
Total
Criterion
Data reflect review of 86 programs over 6 years
Note: Improvement new criteria in 2008
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
26
December 2, 2008
Materials Programs Strengths (2003 to 2008)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Students
Objectives
Outcom
esIm
provement
Curriculum
Faculty
Facilities
Support
Program
Polices
Data reflect review of 86 programs over 6 years
Note: Improvement new criteria in 2008
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
27
December 2, 2008
Team Chair
Team Chair
Team Chair
Editor 1
Editor 2
EAC Meeting
Team Team Team Team Team
ABET HQ: Accreditation
Director
EAC Consistency Committee: Final
check
Editor 2 checks among all reports
received
Editor 1 checks among all reports
received
Director checks
higher-level consistency
Professional Societies
Consistency Checks
Team Chairs check among evaluators
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
28
December 2, 2008
What’s New in 2008
• Training process - PAVE (partnership to advance volunteer excellence) required for new evaluators
• No institutional shortcomings
• Dual level accreditation
• Criteria renumbering
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
29
December 2, 2008
Applicable Criteria
• In 2009-2010, the “Renumbered Criteria” apply – there are some differences from the Criteria that were applicable in 2007 -2008!
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
30
December 2, 2008
Criteria Renumbering2007-2008 2009-2010
# Criterion # Criterion
1 Students 1 Students
2 Program Educational Objectives 2 Program Educational Objectives
3 Program Outcomes 3 Program Outcomes
4 Continuous Improvement
4 Professional Component 5 Curriculum
5 Faculty 6 Faculty
6 Facilities 7 Facilities
7 Institutional Support 8 Support
8 Program Criteria 9 Program Criteria
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
31
December 2, 2008
Criterion 1: StudentsThe program must:• evaluate student performance, advise students,
and monitor students’ progress – no change• have and enforce policies for acceptance of
transfer students and validation of courses taken elsewhere – no change
• have and enforce procedures to assure that all students meet all program requirements – no change
The Criterion is effectively unchanged – in 2007-2008, it was the institution that had responsibility.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
32
December 2, 2008
Criterion 2: Program Educational Objectives
The program must have in place:• published PEO’s consistent with mission and
these Criteria – no change• process that periodically documents and
demonstrates that the PEO’s are based on the needs of the program’s constituencies – change here
• an assessment and evaluation process that periodically documents and demonstrates the extent to which these objectives are attained – change here
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
33
December 2, 2008
Applicable Criteria• Use Criteria for 2009-2010 Accreditation
Cycle. These are the same as the renumbered criteria used in 2008-2009
• If this is an interim visit, the criteria in effect at the time the prior shortcomings were identified should be used, unless it is to the program’s benefit to use the currently applicable ones, and it is the program’s choice.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
34
December 2, 2008
Application & Interpretation of Criteria
In 2008-09, EAC editors observed that:
• Issues arose related to the linkage between Criterion 2, Criterion 3, and Criterion 4
• Criterion 2 and new programs
• Criterion 4 and new programs
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
35
December 2, 2008
What Does Criterion 2 Say?
The program must have in place:• Published PEO’s consistent with mission and
these Criteria • Process that periodically documents and
demonstrates that the PEO’s are based on the needs of the program’s constituencies
• An assessment and evaluation process that periodically documents and demonstrates the extent to which these objectives are attained
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
36
December 2, 2008
Criterion 2 Highlights1. The process needs to document and
demonstrate that the PEO’s are based on constituent needs – NOT “a process based on the constituents needs in which PEO’s are determined and evaluated” (the old language)
2. Requirement for assessment and evaluation is the same, but there is no longer language in Criterion 2 that requires that the results of the assessment and evaluation process be used for program improvement. (Program improvement is now in Criterion 4.)
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
37
December 2, 2008
Consistency IssuesCriterion 2:
– Do the published PEO’s meet the definition?– Does the program convince the team that the PEO’s
are based on constituent needs?• Notice that there is no language that insists on constituent
approval or involvement! • The program does need to convince the team that it has a
way of determining what the needs of its constituencies are.
– Is there an assessment and evaluation process in place that gives info about the extent to which PEO’s are attained by grads
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
38
December 2, 2008
Criterion 2 Problem in 08-09• Several instances in which programs were being
required to show how results of C2 or C3 assessment and evaluation processes were being used to improve the program.
• This reflects application of old criteria.
• That's not in C2 or C3 any more. C4 refers to results of C2 and C3 processes as possible sources of information upon which continuous improvement could be based.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
39
December 2, 2008
Criterion 2 FAQ’s• What if the PEO’s really sound like outcomes
(instead of objectives?– If PEO’s are not PEO’s, there is a C2 shortcoming.
• What if PEO’s are ambiguous or reflect outcomes retooled to apply after graduation?– Team judgment – do they meet the intent of the
Criterion?• Is an assessment process for PEO’s that
considers predominately data based on accomplishments of current undergraduates adequate? – Probably not
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
40
December 2, 2008
What Does Criterion 3 Say?
• The program must demonstrate that (a) – (k) are attained
• Program outcomes are defined as (a) – (k) plus any additional ones articulated by the program
• Program outcomes must foster attainment of the PEO’s
• There must be an assessment and evaluation process that periodically documents and demonstrates the degree to which outcomes are attained
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
41
December 2, 2008
Important – for Criterion 3• The definition of program outcomes as being (a) – (k)
plus locally articulated ones– The program may not have its outcomes expressed as (a) – (k)
plus others. It may have just identified a set of outcomes. As long as the program has demonstrated attainment of (a) – (k) and its own outcomes, this element of the criterion is met.
• Requirement for assessment and evaluation is the same, but there is no language in Criterion 3 that results of the assessment process be applied to further development of the program. (Program improvement is now in Criterion 4.)
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
42
December 2, 2008
Criterion 3 Consistency Issues• Be sure to apply this criterion in a holistic sense• The process of assessment and evaluation needs to
demonstrate the degree to which outcomes are attained, but …– There is no language that says all outcomes must be
attained to the same degree– There is no language that says anything about a numeric
scale measuring degree of attainment– There is no language that says the outcomes must be
measured– There is nothing in Criterion 3 that says anything about
use of the assessment and evaluation information for program improvement
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
43
December 2, 2008
Criterion 3 FAQ’s
• What about assessment data? What is adequate data? – Does it all have to be objective/direct? (NO)– Can it be subjective? (Some of it may be; nothing
says it has to be)– Is the observation or conclusion of course instructor
adequate? (What was his or her basis for the observation?)
– Does evidence for each outcome have to be in the form of work the student has produced? (No, but the team needs to be convinced that outcome attainment has been demonstrated.)
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
44
December 2, 2008
What Does Criterion 4 Say?
• “Each program must show evidence of actions to improve the program. These actions should be based on available information, such as results from Criterion 2 and Criterion 3 processes.”
• The improvements can be based on any available information!
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
45
December 2, 2008
Consistency Issues• The language of Criterion 4 simply insists on
evidence of action to improve the program.– Such actions could be stimulated by results of the C2
and C3 assessment and evaluation processes– But they could also be stimulated by other information
• The language of this Criterion does not require that the C2 and C3 information be used as the basis for program improvement. It suggests use of the results of C2 and C3 processes as sources of information for program improvement.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
46
December 2, 2008
Exit Statement Format• INTRODUCTION—USEFUL
PROGRAM STATISTICS• PROGRAM:
– Strengths (special, unique or particularly conspicuous strengths)
1.
2.
– Deficiencies (In order, only for those criteria where deficiencies exist)
1. XXX
2. etc.
– Weaknesses (In order, only for those criteria where weaknesses exist)
1. YYY
2. etc.
– Concerns (In order, where concerns exist)
1. ZZZ
2. etc.
– Observations (do not have to relate to criteria)
1. etc.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
47
December 2, 2008
Writing the Exit Statement• For each shortcoming – use the following
structure for your statement of finding:– What is required:
• Describe what criterion or policy is applicable.• Describe what that criterion or policy requires.
– What was observed:• Describe what was observed.• Describe how your finding differs criterion or policy.
– Negative impact:• Describe the negative impact it has on the students or the
program (for D or W) or the potential future impact on the students or program (C)
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
48
December 2, 2008
What does your TC need in the exit statement you write?
• The language must be clear:– “There is inadequate assessment of outcome 3(j).”
• How does the program know why its assessment of student knowledge of contemporary issues is inadequate?
– “There is incomplete evidence that students attain outcome 3(i).”• What is it that is incomplete about the evidence that students have a
recognition of the need for and the ability to engage in life-long learning.
– “It appears that outcome 3(h) is not fully assessed.”• Why did the team find that the broad education necessary to
understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context is not fully assessed? What does “full assessment” mean?
• The program has to understand what the shortcoming really is in order to fix it, the TC has to be able to explain the team recommendation, and later teams have to understand the issues
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
49
December 2, 2008
What Would Make it Clearer?• Instead of “There is inadequate assessment of outcome 3(j).”
– The only mechanism used for assessment of student knowledge of contemporary issues is through administration of a survey instrument asking students whether they have knowledge of contemporary issues. This mechanism does not provide adequate information for determining the degree to which this program outcome is attained.
• Instead of “There is incomplete evidence that students attain outcome 3(i).”– Although student grades in the “Introduction to the Profession” course
were claimed as documentation and demonstration that students have recognition of the need for and an ability to engage in life-long learning, no clear links between the student grades and this outcome were established.
• Instead of “It appears that outcome 3(h) is not fully assessed.”– Even though some anecdotal assessment of whether students do have
the requisite broad general education was described in the self-study report, evidence shows only preliminary plans for the development of a systematic process for assessment and evaluation of this program outcome.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
50
December 2, 2008
The language must support the team recommendation
• If it is a D, the words have to clearly say that the criterion is totally or largely unmet
• “there is no evidence that”• “there is no assessment and evaluation process”• “not all students are required to engage in a major
design experience”
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
51
December 2, 2008
The language must support the team recommendation
• If it is a W, the words have to clearly say that the criterion is met but that strength of compliance is lacking, and how it is lacking needs to be clear– “Assessment of outcomes 3(d), 3(f), 3(g), 3(h), and 3(i) appears
to be ad hoc. Systematic assessment and evaluation of these outcomes would strengthen compliance with this criterion.” [supporting a recommended citation of a Criterion 3 weakness relative to strength of assessment and evaluation process]
– “While the program has demonstrated that graduates are able to engage in most of the activities required by the Civil Engineering program criteria, the program has not clearly demonstrated that graduates are able to apply knowledge of physics, chemistry, and at least one additional area of science.” [supporting a recommended citation of a Criterion 9 weakness for a Civil program]
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
52
December 2, 2008
The language must support the team recommendation
• If it is a C, the words have to clearly say that the criterion is met and indicate exactly what leads to the concern about the potential for future noncompliance– “It is clear that all of the criterion 3 outcomes are being assessed,
but evaluation of some of the assessment data appears to be inconsistent. Unless evaluation of the extent to which outcomes are attained is carried out on a consistent basis, future compliance with this criterion may be jeopardized.” [supporting a recommended citation of a criterion 3 concern]
– “Although all of the transcripts examined provided evidence that students meet all graduation requirements, the processes by which graduation requirements are audited prior to graduation appears to be ad hoc. This leads to concern that future compliance with this criterion may be jeopardized.” [supporting a recommended citation of a criterion 1 concern]
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
53
December 2, 2008
The PEV Competency Modeland its Application
• Your performance as a PEV will be evaluated against the PEV Competency Model. You are expected to be:– Technically current– Effective at communicating– Interpersonally skilled– Team-oriented– Professional– Organized
• The evaluation forms are found on the ABET web sitehttp://www.abet.org/pev.shtml
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
54
December 2, 2008
Last Words
• Remember – this team is “the face of ABET”
• The 4 big C’s go a long way in promoting a productive evaluation:– Courtesy – Consistency– Clarity– Confidentiality
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
55
December 2, 2008
Appendix A
Program Criteria for Materials, Ceramic, Metallurgical and
Similarly Named Engineering Programs
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
56
December 2, 2008
Program Criterion 9• Each program must satisfy applicable
Program Criteria– Curricular topics– Faculty qualifications
• Current Program Criteria are on the ABET server (www.abet.org)
• Must satisfy all Program Criteria implied by title of program
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
57
December 2, 2008
Program Criteria for Materials, etc.
• Criteria for– Materials engineering– Metallurgical engineering– Similarly named engineering programs
• Same criteria for – Ceramics engineering
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
58
December 2, 2008
Materials Curriculum• Graduates have:
– ability to apply advanced science and engineering to materials systems implied by program modifier (ceramics, metals, polymers, composite materials, etc.)
– integrated understanding of structure, properties, processing and performance of materials systems
– ability to solve materials selection and design problems
– ability to utilize experimental, statistical and computational methods consistent with program educational objectives.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
59
December 2, 2008
Materials Faculty
• Faculty:– expertise must encompass the four major
elements of the field – structure, properties, processing and performance.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
60
December 2, 2008
Appendix B
Engineering Design for Materials Engineers
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
61
December 2, 2008
ABET "Design" Requirements• Criterion 3 (b) "… design and conduct
experiments …"• Criterion 3 (c) "… design a system,
component or process …"• Criterion 5 "… curriculum culminating in a
major design experience …"• Materials Criterion 9 "… graduates have the
ability to solve materials selection and design problems …"
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
62
December 2, 2008
ABET Definition of Design
• Criterion 5(b)– Engineering design is the process of devising a
system, component, or process to meet desired needs. It is a decision-making process (often iterative), in which the basic sciences, mathematics, and the engineering sciences are applied to convert resources optimally to meet the stated needs.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
63
December 2, 2008
White Paper on "Design"• Developed by University Materials Council
(UMC) and TMS and NICE Accreditation Committees.
• Provides guidance for consistent and constructive interpretation of materials design.
• Available on TMS Accreditation web site.• Provides clarification and examples, does NOT
supersede ABET criteria.• Programs have flexibility in specifying design
experience, but must demonstrate that ABET criteria are met.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
64
December 2, 2008
Materials Programs
• Materials programs are very diverse• Materials graduates have diverse career goals• Materials design
– "design of"– "design with" materials
• Breadth and flexibility needed in interpreting ABET design requirements for materials programs
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
65
December 2, 2008
"Design" for Materials Programs
May include:– design and evaluation of a material for a specific application; – reverse engineering and design of improvements involving
materials; – design and evaluation or optimization of a materials processing
method; – design of a method for determining, controlling, or selecting
materials characteristics or properties; – performance of a series of documented and evaluated
design/research activities throughout a student’s undergraduate program and continuing into the senior year with a culminating design experience;
– other activities that would satisfy requirements for “design” in ABET Criteria 3 and 5.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
66
December 2, 2008
"Realistic Constraints" in Materials Design
• Realistic constraints can include:– Performance with cost/weight/environmental
restrictions– Accuracy/precision in determining properties– Economic trade-offs– Health and safety concerns
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
67
December 2, 2008
Examples of Materials Design Activities
• Design of method for determining materials process
• Design of experimental equipment or characterization method
• Design of materials fabrication or synthesis process
• Computational design of materials• Reverse engineering design for material
improvement
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
68
December 2, 2008
Research and Design• Opportunities for leveraging undergraduate
research activity– Student research CAN be used for a design project.– Senior thesis CAN be adapted for a design project.
• Research experience can be used to provide an appropriate design experience, BUT must be adapted to satisfy the ABET design criterion.
• Examples:– The design of an experimental apparatus for a
research project.– Stating the research objectives and presenting results
in terms of realistic constraints.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
69
December 2, 2008
Appendix C
PEV Competency Model and Evaluation Rubrics
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
70
December 2, 2008
The Competency Model:What is it?
• The ABET PEV Competency Model is based on competency in six dimensions, requiring that PEV’s be:– Technically current– Effective at communicating– Interpersonally skilled– Team-oriented– Professional– Organized
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
71
December 2, 2008
Competency 1: Technically current• The desired proficiency -
– Demonstrates the required technical credentials for the position
– Engaged in lifelong learning and current in his or her field
• Is applied during the campus visit –– Able to apply technical knowledge to ascertain the
level of conformance to program accreditation requirements
– Remains current in accreditation procedures and requirements
• Assessed by TC, Team Colleagues, Dept Head
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
72
December 2, 2008
Competency 2: Effective at Communicating
• The desired proficiency -– Easily conducts face-to-face interviews– Writes clearly and succinctly– Presents focused, concise oral briefings
• Is applied during the campus visit –– Interviews personnel to understand program operations– Writes succinct, criterion-centered statements of program
strengths and weaknesses– Develops succinct findings for exit interview– Keeps team chair informed prior to and during the visit
• Assessed by TC, Team Colleagues, Dept Head
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
73
December 2, 2008
Competency 3: Interpersonally skilled• The desired proficiency -
– Friendly and sets others at ease– Listens and places input into context– Open-minded and avoids personal bias– Forthright, doesn’t hold back what needs to be said– Adept at pointing out strengths and weaknesses in a non-
confrontational manner
• Is applied during the campus visit –– Interviews and readily obtains input from faculty, administration,
industry advisors, and students– Evaluates program against criteria within the context of the
institution– Evaluates and constructively conveys program strengths and
weaknesses
• Assessed by TC, Team Colleagues, Dept Head
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
74
December 2, 2008
Competency 4: Team-oriented• The desired proficiency -
– Readily accepts input from team members– Works with team members to reach consensus– Values team success over personal success
• Is applied during the campus visit –– Compares program findings with those of other
visitation team members to improve consistency– Looks for and listens to common issues across
programs– Assists other team members as needed during the visit
• Assessed by TC and Team Colleagues only
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
75
December 2, 2008
Competency 5: Professional • The desired proficiency -
– Conveys professional appearance and demeanor– Committed to contributing and adding value to the evaluation
process– Considered a person with high integrity and ethical standards
• Is applied during the campus visit –– Represents ABET and responsible technical society as a
practicing professional– Willing to make observations to stimulate innovation and further
the program’s efforts toward continuous improvement– Shows professional respect for institution faculty and staff– Upholds ABET’s code of conduct at all times
• Assessed by TC, Team Colleagues, Dept Head
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8 by
AB
ET
, In
c.
76
December 2, 2008
Competency 6: Organized • The desired proficiency -
– Focuses on meeting deadlines– Focuses on critical issues and avoids minutia– Displays take-charge attitude– Takes responsibility and works under minimum supervision
• Is applied during the campus visit –– Formulates preliminary program strength and weakness
assessment based upon review of materials provided prior to the visit
– Focuses on critical findings, effectively cites supportive observations, relates to appropriate criteria, and suggests possible avenues to resolution
– Submits high quality documentation to team chair on time– Makes difficult recommendations when appropriate
• Assessed by TC, Team Colleagues, Dept Head
