June 16, 2002
June 16, 2002
June 19, 2002
7.328.1 - 7.328.8
Main Menu Session 3560
Controversial Aspects of the New ABET Criteria and its Implementation
Omid Ansary, Alireza Rahrooh, and Walter W. Buchanan Penn State University/University of Central Florida/Northeastern University
This paper will address the problems that are associated with the new ABET criteria. Specifically, it discusses the “a through k” assessment criteria, problems of creating a process and maintaining the infrastructure that is required to validate the outcomes, the cost issues related to the resources engaged in accommodating such a process, and how these issues are anticipated to influence the participation of universities/colleges in such unattractive activities. Moreover, the problem of assessing the assessors, lack of uniformity in evaluation of engineering programs across different colleges and universities (different evaluators may be influenced by their own philosophies of the assessment process, since many of the criteria are either vague and/or loosely stated), and questionable results, since in most cases only one evaluator makes the recommendations regarding the accreditation of a program (this may be caused either by non- availability of sufficient number of evaluators from ABET or lack of funds from institutions to support visitation of additional evaluators). The authors will explore their personal experiences, using examples that are associated with the foregoing issues.
The Engineering Criteria 2000 is an outcome assessment process that requires various criteria for institution seeking accreditation. These criteria include;
Criterion 1. Students Criterion 2. Program Educational Objectives Criterion 3. Program Outcomes and Assessment Criterion 4. Professional Component Criterion 5. Faculty Criterion 6. Facilities Criterion 7. Institutional Support and Financial Resources Criterion 8. Program Criteria
Although the process and criteria are designed to accredit quality-engineering programs, they have several weaknesses and their implementations demand enormous resources. These weaknesses and required burden on the institutions, which is unattractive economically and administratively, is causing engineering programs across the nation to question the affordability of seeking accreditation through ABET. Furthermore, the quality, quantity, and non-uniformity of the assessors/evaluators have also caused great concerns for institutions seeking accreditation.
Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition 1 Copyright ©2002, American Society for Engineering Education
Ansary, O., & Buchanan, W., & Rahrooh, A. (2002, June), Controversial Aspects Of The New Abet Criteria And Its Implementation Paper presented at 2002 Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada. 10.18260/1-2--10319
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: © 2002 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