Asee peer logo

Epistecybernetics And The Accreditation Process

Download Paper |

Conference

2002 Annual Conference

Location

Montreal, Canada

Publication Date

June 16, 2002

Start Date

June 16, 2002

End Date

June 19, 2002

ISSN

2153-5965

Conference Session

Course Assessment in ET

Page Count

14

Page Numbers

7.525.1 - 7.525.14

Permanent URL

https://peer.asee.org/11231

Download Count

79

Request a correction

Paper Authors

author page

Oliver Hensley

author page

Marjorie Donovan

author page

Christopher Ibeh

author page

James Otter

Download Paper |

Abstract
NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

Main Menu Session 2647

Epistecybernetics and the Accreditation Process

Christopher C. Ibeh, Marjorie E. Donovan, Oliver D. Hensley, James L. Otter Pittsburg State University, Pittsburg, Kansas 66762

Abstract

The current trend in accreditation vis-à-vis ABET and others is for the accreditation seeking “institution” to demonstrate that its program(s) meet the (TC2K) required criteria. The institution must clearly demonstrate continuous program(s) improvement, enhanced student learning and satisfaction among others. These required demonstrations entail systematized documentation of program(s) activities and are not part of academia’s regular or traditional routine. Epistecybernetics, a term aptly coined by Hensley (1) et al and simply defined as the governance and stewardship of knowledge provides the framework for meeting the requirement of systematized documentation of program(s) activities. The CUES (Consortium for Upgrading Educational Standards) protocol, one of the core components of the epistecybernetic system, when successfully implemented, can be a useful assessment tool for program(s) activities and enhanced student learning.

1. Introduction

Institutions, programs, accreditation agencies such as ABET and NCATE, and governing bodies such as KBR (Kansas Board of Regents) and others rely extensively on the themes of enhanced student learning, successful course delivery methods, continuous improvement, life long learning, faculty professional development and others as criteria for institutional and program viability assessment and determination. Also of relevance and importance is the fact that accreditation agencies and governing boards operate on the basis that it is the responsibility of the institution or program to clearly demonstrate that its activities and curricula meet the required criteria. Demonstration of institutional and program compliance entail systematic documentation of activities that are not part of academia’s traditional or regular routines (1)(2)(3)(4). Institutional and program professional standards, accreditation and governance imply quality assurance and accountability, administrative accountability, instructional accountability and student accountability. Students are expected to learn and acquire knowledge and become productive members of the work force and society, faculty are expected to implement instructional practices and methodologies that enhance student learning and creativity, and administration is expected to implement policies, curricula and collegial environment that facilitate faculty and student activities.

Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2002, American Society for Engineering Education

Main Menu

Hensley, O., & Donovan, M., & Ibeh, C., & Otter, J. (2002, June), Epistecybernetics And The Accreditation Process Paper presented at 2002 Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada. https://peer.asee.org/11231

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