San Antonio, Texas
June 10, 2012
June 10, 2012
June 13, 2012
Liberal Education/Engineering & Society
25.141.1 - 25.141.13
Aiding and ABETing: The Bankruptcy of Outcome-Based Education as a Change StrategyABET’s criteria 2000 were widely heralded among engineering education reformers as a harbinger ofchange. And while historians in the Liberal Education Division reminded us that calls for bettercommunication and consideration of social context were not new in engineering education, many of usdared to hope that things would be different this time. New engineering programs founded in this erapromised a clean slate from which to create models of new, balanced curricula. ABET’s bean countingformulas had so obviously constrained creativity and stifled reform efforts; surely this shift would provideboth flexibility and external incentive to engineering programs to make much needed changes.A decade later, with most programs having gone through two accreditation cycles under Criteria 2000, wehave seen at best incremental change. In retrospect, adopting outcome-based education (OBE) shouldhave raised red flags for more of us, as its problems have been well known to education scholars for sometime. Drawing on social theories of education that take a critical view of OBE, this paper will show howABET’s implementation across engineering education reproduces and reinforces a certain social order inthe profession and in society, one that continues to resist real change in educational structures,curriculum, and pedagogy.This more theoretical discussion will be supported by findings from my research developing,implementing, and assessing critical pedagogies in engineering education. Within the power structuresthat exist in my institution and across engineering education, ABET outcomes sometimes can be used tojustify broadening the curriculum when such efforts come under attack by self-appointed technical rigorpolice. However, just as often, it constrains what is possible in engineering classrooms through its drivefor (certain kinds of) evidence of achievement of (specific) outcomes, regardless of process. ABETsupports students’ focus on credentialing to the exclusion of intellectual curiosity, undermining its statedoutcome of lifelong learning. What’s missing from the defined outcomes is also telling; ABET’seducational outcomes reinforce the invisibility of underrepresented groups in engineering communitiesand devalues discussions of diversity altogether.The paper will close with some discussion of alternatives to outcomes-based education that might bettersupport change in engineering education.
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2012 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015