Preparing for Accreditation Under EC 2000: An Experience Report
Preparing for an accreditation evaluation under Engineering Criteria 2000 is a demanding task. For many programs, the most challenging requirements of the criteria have to do with establishing mechanisms to obtain input from various constituencies, formulating objectives on the basis of these inputs, formulating outcomes corresponding to each objective, establishing a range of assessment mechanisms to evaluate the program and outcomes, and establishing feedback mechanisms to use the results of the assessment to improve the program. This paper presents the experience of one program and some of the lessons learned.
EC 2000: The Georgia Tech Experience
Engineering Criteria 2000 (EC 2000) is changing dramatically the manner in which engineering programs assess their curricula, interact with their constituents, and seek ABET accreditation. The College of Engineering at Georgia Tech served as a pilot program for the new engineering accreditation criteria. This paper shares some of Georgia Tech's experiences in preparing for EC 2000, some observations about the accreditation process, and offers seven suggestions for those preparing for an EC 2000 visit.
Evaluating engineering programs under ABET EC2000 criteria: a perspective from ABET program visitors
Summary form only given. The authors served as the three electrical engineering program evaluators for ABET pilot visits during 1997, using the new EC2000 criteria for accrediting engineering programs. Under these new accreditation criteria, the changes in the program visitors' role are significant. In particular, the visitors must explore the processes institutions use for developing objectives and outcomes, and the evidence they offer as indicators of the success of their programs in achieving their objectives. The evaluator must consider whether the indicators chosen actually reflect the program status. Processes must be in place for setting objectives and outcomes, developing curricula from these objectives and outcomes, evaluating the results, and utilizing the information gained from the evaluation for appropriate refinement of the program. In each step the institution should show that they involved the significant constituents of the program. The evaluator's task is to consider if the educational objectives of the program are well articulated and accessible to constituents, and then determine if the program has provided evidence that it is achieving its objectives. The institution must provide evidence that the program's and ABET's student outcomes are also being achieved. The professional development criterion does not require that a program present materials on all courses. Instead, the program must show that it has sufficient indicators of the outcomes that exist and that it is effectively monitoring these indicators.