Necesidad documentada Desarrollo económico y de capacidad; competencia global Programas tienen información necesaria pero no preparada para reportes requeridos.

Presentación del tema: "Necesidad documentada Desarrollo económico y de capacidad; competencia global Programas tienen información necesaria pero no preparada para reportes requeridos."— Transcripción de la presentación:

1 Necesidad documentada Desarrollo económico y de capacidad; competencia global Programas tienen información necesaria pero no preparada para reportes requeridos por agencias acreditadoras

2 Obstáculos para acreditación incluyen Lenguaje (Ingles) Aspectos culturales Costo Familiaridad con proceso y beneficios Como empezar? Selección de agencia acreditadora Proceso de preparación para acreditación

3 Ayudar en aumentar número de programas acreditados Ayudar en aumentar número de personas interesadas e involucradas en acreditación Mensaje: Mejora Continua Estándares Globales Colaborar con agencias acreditadoras y facilitar comunicación entre ellas

4 LACCEI no es ni aspira a ser agencia acreditadora Pares amigos tienen familiaridad con acreditación en general y conocimiento significativo sobre sistemas de acreditación específicos (pueden ser evaluadores de agencias acreditadoras) Pares amigos se comprometen a donar una (1) semana por año Programas incurren costos de viaje y estadía Pares amigos pueden trabajar directamente con programas (después de cumplir requerimiento de una (1) semana por año)

5 Colaboración con agencias acreditadoras es Clave Primer foro de agencias acreditadoras Latinoamericanas – 2012 LACCEI Aspectos fundamentales - LACCEI ( Módulo A) Aspectos específicos – agencias acreditadoras 2011 Conferencia LACCEI - ABET 2012 Conferencia LACCEI – Engineers Canada Talleres pre-conferencia en conferencias LACCEI– OEA/EftA

6 Fundamentos de acreditación Sistemas y aspectos culturales de acreditación (activity) Competencias y compromiso de Pares Amigos Fundamentos del auto-estudio (activity) Comunicación con agencias acreditadoras y visita del equipo de evaluadores

7

8 Accreditation Fundamentals Accreditation Systems and Cultural Aspects of Accreditation (activity) Competencies and Commitment of Pares Amigos Self-study Fundamentals (activity) Communication with Accrediting Agencies and Evaluation Team Visit

9 Accreditation Fundamentals

10 * Understand importance, benefits and costs of accreditation * Motivate and train faculty on aspects of accreditation * Select most appropriate accrediting agency for program * Navigate process of accreditation

11 * What is accredited? * What are the accrediting agencies in the Americas? * National vs. International vs. Multi-national accreditation * Each program has unique needs

12 * Review process to guarantee engineering program meets certain standards – not a ranking * Standardization and quality assurance * Enhance capacity building for faculty and students, and economic development for region * Increase competitiveness and mobility in global community * Required in growing number of countries

13 * NOT Free – accreditation process can be very expensive * NOT Just preparing for evaluation team site visit * NOT Very fast – time to prepare for visit (document processing, self- study preparation, materials collection) is key to successful accreditation outcome * NOT a ranking

14 * Demonstration that program has processes in place enabling evaluation of evidence of learning, and enabling decision making to improve program * Process required is thoughtful, systematic and sustainable over time * A means for quality assurance and continuous improvement

15 * Only programs are accredited - NOT institutions * Universities must be accredited by standard institution accrediting bodies * Program must have graduates to apply for accreditation

16 * INTERNATIONALLY-RECOGNIZED (Washington Accord) * ABET Inc. (US) * CEAB - Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board * UK-EC – United Kingdom Engineering Council REGIONALLY-RECOGNIZED (Acuerdo ALAI y MercoSur) * Central America: ACAAI - Agencia Centroamericana de Acreditación de Programas de Arquitectura e de Ingeniería * Greater Caribbean: GCREAS - Greater Caribbean Regional Engineering Accreditation System * MercoSur: ARCU-SUR – (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay) NATIONALLY-RECOGNIZED * Perú: ICACIT - Instituto de Calidad y Acreditación de Programas de Computación, Ingeniería y Tecnología (Perú) * México: CACEI - Consejo de Acreditación de la Enseñanza de la Ingeniería * Argentina: CONEAU – Comisión Nacional de Evaluación y Acreditación Universitaria

17 * ABET(US), CEAB (Canada), UK-EC (England) and EUR-ACE are most recognized accrediting systems * Relatively new accrediting agencies in the Americas have used best practices of ABET and CEAB * ABET, CEAB and UK-EC require all accreditation documentation and the accreditation in English * Agency and evaluation team may not be culturally sensitive * Pares Amigos will have expertise in specific accreditation systems. These will be listed on the Par Amigo Registry.

18 * Accreditation process in general - Program should not initiate accreditation process unless institution is fully committed * Accreditation agency selection * Cost of accreditation process and visit * Specifics of selected accreditation process including timeline * Information required from program and institution

19 * General criteria * Program criteria * Self-study document by the program * On-site evaluation by accreditation team * Periodic re-evaluation - It is much worse to lose accreditation than to never have it * Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)

20 * Accreditation processes vary but they all evaluate * Students (evaluated, advised, monitored) * Program Educational Objectives and Criteria * Student Outcomes * Continuous Improvement * Curriculum * Faculty * Facilities * Support

21 * Students - Evaluation - Advisement - Monitoring progress and success * Student Outcomes - Description of what students are expected to know and be able to do upon graduation

22 * Program Educational Objectives - Professional accomplishments alumni are expected to attain in first 3 – 5 years * Continuous Quality Improvement - Documented process with relevant data to improve program quality * Program Specific Criteria

23 * Curriculum - Program dependent * Faculty - Sufficient number and competence - Professional development

24 * Facilities - Adequate to (safely) accomplish educational objectives and attain outcomes * Support - Does the institution support the program?

25 * Pares amigos can guide programs in accreditation basics independent of accreditation agency selected * LACCEI Engineering Education Capability Maturity Model for Accreditation can organize accreditation process into five steps or levels * Optimized process means less time, less effort, less cost * Model structure and step by step checklist for each level follows

26 * Integrated model of process improvement * Based on model developed at Carnegie Mellon and used in industry * Objective: Enhance ability of engineering programs to obtain accreditation * Programs know what they need to do to reach accreditation readiness in organized and optimized manner * Five levels from initial to optimizing * Program does not advance to next level until all level requirements at current level and levels below are met

27 Level 1: Initial Level 2: Repeatable Level 3: Defined Level 4: Managed Level 5: Optimizing Disciplined process Standard, consistent process Predictable process Continuously improving process Project management Engineering management Quantitative management Change management The Capability Maturity Model The Capability Maturity Model Ready for Accreditation Visit At each level accreditation process evolves by the program applying increasingly sophisticated management techniques No established process

28 * Pares amigos should first ascertain the accreditation capability maturity level of the program * All programs start at level one, and proceed to complete all items in Level One checklist to move to next level. * Programs that have never been accredited and do not have sustainable assessment and/or reporting procedures may take longer to progress to higher levels. * Programs with established processes, assessment and management practices will proceed quickly through first 3 levels. * Programs can work on checklist items at any level but will remain at a level until all of the checklist items in that level and all lower levels are completed. Systematically advancing through the levels ensures accreditation preparation process is accomplished in optimized manner, minimizing efforts, and delays. * Once programs have completed Level 5, they are ready for accreditation

29 Educate and get faculty buy-in: Accreditation is good for students, faculty and the institution Selection of accrediting agency – best done by program committee - can be done by administration Form Program Accreditation Committee - elect/appoint chair - assign responsibilities with time table to members

30 Contact accrediting agency and obtain and familiarize with information resources- many resources are on-line - Choosing assessment methods - Defining student learning outcomes - Developing rubrics - Developing surveys - Attend appropriate workshops/webinars Identify peer institutions - Study website and general information

31 Work with Program Chair and Dean to form - Deans Advisory Committee - Programs Advisory Committee - Committees composition: industrial representatives, faculty, peer and more established institutions, government representatives Work with Dean and Provost to obtain clear understanding of the financial and personnel commitment involved

32 Committees formed - Program Accreditation - Deans Advisory - Programs Advisory Personnel established - Program accreditation committee chair - Deans office representative - Provosts office representative Accreditation Agency Selected Accreditation plan and timeline have been developed and documented Accreditation Committee has developed division of responsibilities Budget has been established Faculty fully committed

33 Program Accreditation Committee completes program mission statement, goals and objectives carefully reviews accreditation guidelines selects - student learning outcomes - assessment methods (teaching, learning) Develops rubrics, surveys, assessment methods and methodology Trains faculty on accreditation requirements including assessment and self-study(Pares amigos can be especially helpful with this) Develops communication with service departments (mathematics, sciences) to ascertain what is taught and explain service departments are part of engineering continuous quality improvement process and will participate in evaluation team site-visit Decides the accreditation criteria satisfied in each course (every course cannot satisfy every criteria)

34 Implementing assessment methods and rubrics in courses Formatting and collecting faculty resumes Collecting the required student work Sending surveys (alumni, employers and all stakeholders ) Surveying facilities and beginning any necessary upgrades Reviewing accreditation agency updates (staying current with changes) Training on self-study provided by accrediting agency Develop continuous quality improvement (feedback) mechanism

35 Applying continuous quality improvement mechanism Applying and analyzing all assessment methods Collecting and organizing required course and student data Completed analysis and upgrades of facilities (must sustainably support educational objectives) Identifying what needs improvement from analysis and assessment and changes to be made Holding regular meetings of advisory committees Training on accreditation team site visit provided by accrediting agency Self-study preparation and all documentation requirements understood (including appendices and updates)

36 Implement changes identified from analysis of assessment in Level Four Complete self-study Submit request for evaluation to accrediting agency Continue applying continuous quality improvement process Continue collecting and organizing required course and student data Training on site visit from evaluators perspective provided by accrediting agency Hold mock site-visit Complete all documentation required by evaluators during site visit Program is ready for accreditation process

37 Engineering Education Capability Maturity Model (based on Carnegie Mellon Universitys CMMI Model) provides framework for optimized accreditation preparation Path to application for accreditation clear and easy to follow Each program is unique Each accrediting agency has specific requirements Timely preparation is key

38 Sistemas de Acreditación y Aspectos Culturales de Acreditación

39 * Varios sistemas de acreditación en diferentes partes del mundo * Sistemas Latinoamericanos y Caribeños mayormente basados en sistemas de ABET(USA) y de CEAB (Canadá) * Modificaciones y cambios en procesos de acreditación – Monitorear y mantenerse corriente es obligación de programas

40 Australia The Institution of Engineers, Australia Bangladesh Institution of Engineers Bangladesh Canada The Canadian Council of Professional Engineers The Canadian Council of Technicians and Technologists France Conseil National des Ingenieurs et des Scientifiques de France Commission des Titres D'Ingenieur Germany Accreditation Agency for Study Programs in Engineering, Informatics, Natural Sciences, and Mathematics (ASIIN) Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (VDI) Verband der Elektrotechnik Elektronik Informationstechnik (VDE) Hong Kong- China The Hong Kong Institution of Engineers India National Board of Accreditation Institution of Engineers of India Indonesia The Institution of Engineers, Indonesia Ireland The Institution of Engineers of Ireland Italy Consiglio Nazionale Ingegneri Japan Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering Education Institution of Professional Engineers Japan Korea Korean Professional Engineers Association Korea Korean Professional Engineers Association Malaysia Board of Engineers Malaysia Institution of Engineers Malaysia New Zealand The Institution of Professional Engineers, New Zealand Pakistan Pakistan Engineering Council Russia Russian Association for Engineering Education Accreditation Board Singapore Institution of Engineers Singapore Professional Engineers Board South Africa The Engineering Council of South Africa Sri Lanka Institution of Engineers Sri Lanka Thailand Thai Professional Engineering Board United Kingdom Engineering Council of the United Kingdom (ECUK) USA The Accreditation Board for Engineering & Technology (ABET) National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES) United States Council for International Engineering Practice

41 OrganizaciónPaísComentarios Consejo de Acreditación de la Enseñanza de la Ingeniería (CACEI) Consejo Nacional de Acreditación en Informática y Computación (CONAIC) México Organizada en1994 no-gubernamental Agencia Centroamericana de Acreditación de Arquitectura e Ingeniería(ACAAI) América Central Organizada en 2006 participantes gubernamentales y privados Greater Caribbean Regional Engineering Accreditation System (GCREAS) / Sistema Regional de Acreditación en Ingenierías para el Gran Caribe (SRAIGC) Caribe Organizada en 2010 mínima influencia gubernamental Instituto de Calidad y Acreditación de Programas de Computación, Ingeniería y Tecnología (ICACIT) Perú Organizada en 2003 influencia gubernamental significativa

42 * Establecida por Engineers Canada en 1965 * Miembros (15)representan diferentes partes del país y carreras * Evalúa programas de ingeniería Canadiense para acreditación * Aconseja a universidades en el desarrollo de nuevos programas y carreras * Aconseja sobre la aceptabilidad de otros sistemas de acreditación y tiene poder para negociar con agencias acreditadoras internacionales * Formula y supervisa la implementación de acuerdos internacionales – equivalencia substancial * Trabaja con otros países para desarrollar y establecer programas de acreditación

43 * Base de conocimiento- Matemática, ciencias naturales, fundamentos de ingeniería, conocimiento apropiado para programa * Análisis- identificar, formular y resolver problemas de ingeniería complejos para llegar a conclusiones substanciales * Investigación – conducir investigaciones complejas usando métodos que incluyen experimentos apropiados, análisis e interpretación de datos y síntesis para llegar a conclusiones válidas * Diseño * Uso de herramientas de ingeniería – técnicas, recursos y comprensión de sus límites * Trabajo individual y en equipo, comunicación, profesionalismo, impacto de ingeniería en sociedad y ambiente, ética y equidad, economía y gestión de proyectos, aprendizaje continuo (life-long learning)

44 * Admisión – Procesos documentados incluyendo rendimiento académico y créditos transferidos * Promoción y graduación – Procesos documentados, verificación, consistencia con el currículo acreditado * Asesoramiento y orientación – procesos y suficiente recursos para asesorar estudiantes * Auditoría – Verificación que graduados han logrado todos los requerimientos del programa acreditado

45 * Unidad de Acreditación (AU) definidas en base de horas una hora de clase (50 min) = 1 AU una hora de laboratorio o tutorial = 0.5 AU * Medida equivalente K = AU en cursos mandatorios y básicos común unidades definida por universidad por mismos cursos AU de curso = K x (unidad institucional)

46 * Programa completo – mínimo 1950 AU Matemática – Min. 195 AU Ciencias Naturales 195 AU Combinación de Ciencias/Matemática 420 AU Ciencia de Ingeniería 225 AU Diseño 225 AU Combinación de Ciencias/Diseño 900 AU Estudios Complementarios 225 AU Laboratorios y Procedimientos de seguridad

47 * Culminar con experiencia de diseño significativa * Estudios complementarios – arte, humanidades, ciencias sociales, gestión, economía, comunicación * Programa tiene que incluir – economía de ingeniería, impacto de tecnología en sociedad, cuestiones centrales de ciencias sociales, comunicación escrita y oral, salud y seguridad, ética, equivalencia y leyes, sostenibilidad y cuidado del medio ambiente

48 * Calidad, moral y compromiso de estudiantes, docentes, personal de apoyo, administración * Calidad, sostenibilidad y accesibilidad de laboratorios, biblioteca, computación y otras instalaciones

49 * Suficiente docentes para cubrir todos aspectos del programa * Suficiente docentes de tiempo completo para proveer niveles adecuados de interacción con estudiantes y guía y participación en la administración y control del currículo * División apropiada entre enseñanza, investigación y desarrollo profesional

50 * Decano de ingeniería y cabeza del programa son responsables por el liderazgo del programa y deben ser respetado en la comunidad de ingeniería * Decano tiene responsabilidad general por todos los programas * Comité de currículo - docentes

51 * Nivel educativo * Diversidad de experiencias incluyendo aspectos no técnicos * Comunicación * Nivel de investigación, publicación * Participación en asociaciones profesionales * Interés y apoyo documentado del programa y su contenido * Apreciación de la importancia de autorregulación de la profesión

52 * Recursos deben ser suficiente para el empleo y la retención de personal académico y de apoyo y para el desarrollo continuo * Infraestructura, su mantenimiento y sustitución apropiada * Equipo, su mantenimiento y sustitución apropiada

53 * Acreditación de programas no instituciones * Autoevaluación, cuestionario y reporte * Evaluación de programa por equipo evaluador * Acreditación es por un máximo de seis años * Acreditación de término limitado * Cambios significativos deben ser reportado a CEAB

54 * Cabeza del equipo escogido por CEAB otros miembros seleccionado por cabeza y CEAB * Requisitos de documentación meses antes de visita * Documentación completa debe de ser recibida por CEAB por lo menos seis semanas antes de visita

55 * Tres días * Entrevistas: Administración (hasta Rector), Decano, Cabeza del Programa, docentes, estudiantes * Inspección de laboratorios, bibliotecas y laboratorios de computación * Reviso de exámenes, transcripciones y todo tipo de trabajo de estudiantes * Reporte preliminar con Decano y Cabeza de Programa

56 * Reporte escrito a institución (sin recomendación) * Institución revisa y comenta * Reporte final y recomendación

57 * Procedimiento similar a CEAB – autoevaluación y cuestionario, visita, reporte preliminar, reporte para revisar, reporte final y decisión * Mide resultados (outcomes) no créditos de acreditación * Máximo de seis años

58 * Estudiantes * Objetivos Educativos * Resultados (outcomes) de Programa * Mejora Continua * Currículo * Docentes * Instalaciones * Apoyo * Criterios de programa

59 * Evaluación de desempeño de estudiantes, transferencia de estudiantes, supervisar progreso de estudiantes * Objetivos educativos publicados y consistente con la misión de la institución * Proceso que periódicamente documenta y demuestra que objetivos son basados en las necesidades de los partidos interesados * Evaluación periódica que documenta y demuestra el logro de objetivos

60 a. aplicar matemática, ciencia e ingeniería b. diseñar y conducir experimentos y analizar e interpretar datos c. diseñar sistemas, componentes y procesos con especificaciones y límites realísticos como económicos, ambientales, sociales, políticos, éticos, salud y seguridad, fabricación y sostenibilidad d. funcionar en equipos multidisciplinarios e. identificar, formular y resolver problemas de ingeniería f. comprensión de responsabilidad profesional y ética g. comunicación efectiva h. educación amplia para comprender impacto de soluciones de ingeniería en contexto global, económico, ambiental y social i. reconocimiento de la necesidad y habilidad de aprender continuamente durante la vida j. conocimiento de cuestiones contemporáneas k. usar técnicas, habilidades y herramientas modernas necesarias en la práctica de ingeniería

61 * Curso: Mecánica de Fluidos - balance de energía - análisis dimensionales - Bernoulli - bombas - introducción a Navier-Stokes - fluidos compresibles - flujo supersónico

62 Diseño de bomba Cálculos de flujo en tubería Aspectos sociales Aspectos políticos Aspectos económicos www.cheresources.com me.queensu.ca Process Fluids Transport (PFT) - AGUA CORRIENTE PARA ALDEA Sustentabilidad y Responsabilidad Global

63 CursoCapacidadesCriterio ABETMétodo de Evaluación Docente Responsable PFT Diseño de bombasa,b,c,h,l,pexámenes encuestas con empleadores ZOG Flujo en tuberías - Bernoullia,b,e,k exámenes encuestas con empleadores ZOG Trabajar en equipod,f,gEvaluación por docente, autoevaluación y evaluación de estudiante, colegas ZOG

64 * Currículo – Habilidad de diseñar, desarrollar, implementar y mejorar sistemas integrados que incluyen personas, materiales, información, equipo y energía * Docentes – comprensión de práctica profesional, corriente. Docentes tienen que tener autoridad para definir, revisar, implementar y lograr los objetivos del programa

65 * Un año de matemáticas y ciencias ( algunas con laboratorios) apropiadas para la disciplina * Un año y medio de tópicos de ingeniería con ciencias de ingeniería y diseño * Componente de educación general que complementa el contenido técnico y es consistente con los objetivos del programa y la institución * Culminar en un proyecto de diseño

66 * Suficiente en número y diversidad * Interacción con estudiantes, guía, mejora continua del programa, * Competencias para desarrollar, implementar, evaluar y mejorar el programa * Educación, experiencia, eficacia en enseñanza, habilidad de comunicación, entusiasmo para mejora, nivel de investigaciones, participación en asociaciones profesionales, licencia

67 * Cuartos de clase, laboratorios y equipo asociado para enseñanza efectiva * Herramientas de ingeniería moderna y computación, espacio para estudiar y trabajar * Apoyo institucional, recursos financieros, liderazgo constructivo, personal de apoyo y servicios institucionales

68 * Similares en proceso * Miran a criterios similares * Formato de reportes * ABET y CEAB - apoyo institucional mas especificado * CEAB - calidad de estudiante entrante mas especificada * ABET evalúa resultados (outcomes) * CEAB se concentra en unidades de acreditación (AU) - después de 2012 usa resultados de aprendizaje (learning outcomes)

69 * Cultura es componente importante de la educación * Cultura afecta como estudiantes * aprenden * se relacionan con docentes * ven su lugar en la profesión y en el mundo * Programas acreditados por agencias extranjeras tienen la responsabilidad de integrar su cultura en el cumplimiento de criterios de acreditación

70 * Lengua * Agencia acreditadora extranjera requiere traducción de materiales (mas costo y tiempo) * Equipo evaluador debe incluir por lo menos un miembro familiar con la cultura y la lengua del programa * Programa debe explicar la demográfica de estudiantes y del programa (especialmente a evaluadores extranjeros)

71 Competencies and Commitment of Pares Amigos

72 * Experienced faculty/engineers * Knowledgeable in relevant accreditation process requirements * Ethical and diplomatic with a clear understanding of and respect for the confidentiality associated with accreditation functions * Good communicators * Sensitive to and familiar with cultural aspects of education and accreditation

73 * Professionals or academics * Academic experience * Hiring experience (employer) * Current in technology and applications * Current in hiring requirements

74 * Evaluator for accrediting agency * Significant experience in accreditation in own program * Successful completion of LACCEI Par Amigo Training * Must have knowledge/experience for all accreditation systems for which serves as Par Amigo

75 * Engineering Code of Ethics * Clear understanding of confidentiality * Diplomatic

76 * Excellent communication skills - written - oral * Knowledgeable of program language * Knowledgeable of accrediting agency language

77 * Sensitive to and familiar with program culture * Sensitive to student and program demographics * Sensitive of interactions between program and accrediting agency cultures

78 * One (1) week of assistance to programs/year without compensation * Travel and documentation costs assumed by program * Can consult with programs after one week commitment per year completed (independent of LACCEI) * Strongly encourage donation to LACCEI accreditation activities from possible consulting funds associated with Par Amigo training/initiative (10% or more recommended)

79 Self-Study Fundamentals

80 * Do not hide anything * Just answer questions and do not elaborate more than needed (providing too much information is common mistake) * Stay on point

81 * Each accrediting agency has its self-study format * All formats are similar and clearly outlined * Following example is ABET – comments added to highlight detail required

82 * Contact Information * Program History * Options List and describe any options, tracks, concentrations, etc. included in the program. * Organizational Structure

83 * Program Delivery Modes Describe delivery modes used by program, e.g., days, evenings, on-line * Program Locations * Deficiencies, Weaknesses or Concerns from Previous Evaluation(s) and the Actions Taken to Address Them Summarize deficiencies, weaknesses, or concerns remaining from most recent evaluation. Describe actions taken to address them, including effective dates of actions, if applicable. If this is an initial accreditation, it should be so indicated. This is very important! * Joint Accreditation

84 * CRITERION 1. - STUDENTS * Student Admissions * Evaluating Student Performance * Transfer Students and Transfer Courses * Advising and Career Guidance * Work in Lieu of Courses * Graduation Requirements * Transcripts of Recent Graduates

85 * CRITERION 2. - PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES * Mission Statement * Program Educational Objectives List program educational objectives and state where can be found by general public. * Consistency of Program Educational Objectives with Mission of Institution Describe how program educational objectives are consistent with the mission of the institution – * Program Constituencies

86 * Program Mission Statement and Objectives

87 Misión El programa de Ingeniería Civil se esfuerza por cumplir con la Facultad de Ingeniería en la misión de proporcionar una amplia base de enseñanza de la ingeniería civil a través de un riguroso plan de estudios, con experiencias de diseño y laboratorio integradas en la carrera. El programa está comprometido con la integración de la enseñanza, la investigación y el servicio dentro de un entorno educativo como parte de la preparación de estudiantes tanto como para la práctica de la ingeniería y el posgrado. El programa se esfuerza por producir graduados listos para comunicar y contribuir en una comunidad profesional diversa y multidisciplinaria.

88 Objetivos Los graduados seran ingenieros con conocimientos, versado en varias áreas de la profesión de ingeniería civil, que siguen en curso durante sus carreras profesionales Hábiles para resolver problemas, que pueden recoger y utilizar la información necesaria para llegar a soluciones creativas y realistas a problemas de ingeniería Ingenieros bien redondeado que entienden a sus responsabilidades profesionales, mundiales y sociales y trabajan bien en grupos multidisciplinarios y diversos, Comunicadores, que sean capaces de difundir información a profesionales y todo tipo de audiencia

89 * CRITERION 2. PROGRAM EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES * Process for Revision of the Program Educational Objectives Describe process to periodically review and revise, as necessary, program educational objectives including * involvement of programs various constituencies * include results of process and provide description of any changes made to program educational objectives and timeline since last general review.

90 * CRITERION 3. - STUDENT OUTCOMES * Student Outcomes List student outcomes for program and indicate where student outcomes are documented. * Relationship of Student Outcomes to Program Educational Objectives Describe how student outcomes prepare graduates to attain the program educational objectives.

91 * CRITERION 4. - CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT * Document processes for regularly assessing and evaluating the extent to which program educational objectives and student outcomes are being attained. * Document the extent to which program educational objectives and student outcomes are being attained * Describe how results of these processes are being utilized to effect program continuous improvement of the program

92 * CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT * Program Educational Objectives (1) * A table should be used to present this information * Listing and description of assessment processes used to gather data for evaluation of program educational objectives * Examples of data collection processes include but are not limited to * employer surveys * graduate surveys * focus groups * industrial advisory committee meetings * other processes that are relevant and appropriate to the program

93 * CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT * Program Educational Objectives (2) * Frequency associated with assessment processes * Expected level of attainment for each of the program educational objectives * Summaries of results of evaluation processes and analysis of extent to which program educational objectives are being attained * Documentation and maintenance of assessment results

94 * CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT * Student Outcomes(1) * Listing and description of assessment processes to gather data for evaluation of student outcomes * Frequency associated with assessment processes * Expected level of attainment for each student outcome

95 * CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT * Student Outcomes (2) * Summaries of results of evaluation process and analysis of extent to which each student outcome is being attained * Documentation and maintenance of assessment results

96 * CRITERION 4. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT * Description of how results of evaluation processes for program educational objectives and student outcomes, and any other available information have been used as input in continuous improvement of program. * Identify and explain any significant future program improvement plans based on recent evaluations * Provide brief rationale for each of planned changes

97 * CRITERION 5. CURRICULUM * Program Curriculum * Detailed and in-depth analysis of program * Course Syllabi * Include syllabus for each required course satisfying mathematics, science, and discipline-specific requirements of Criterion 5 or any applicable program criteria

98 * CRITERION 6. FACULTY (1) * Faculty Qualifications * Faculty Workload * Faculty Size * Describe * adequacy faculty * extent and quality of faculty involvement in interactions with students, student advising and counseling * university service activities * professional development * interactions with industrial and professional practitioners including employers

99 * CRITERION 6. FACULTY (2) * Professional Development * Describe all professional development activities * Authority and Responsibility of Faculty * Describe role of faculty in * guidance of program * development and implementation of program evaluation, assessment, and continuing improvement processes, including program educational objectives and student outcomes

100 * CRITERION 7. FACILITIES * Offices, Classrooms and Laboratories * Computing Resources * Guidance * Maintenance and Upgrading of Facilities * Library Services * Overall general comments on facilities

101 * CRITERION 8. INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT * Leadership * Program Budget and Financial Support * Staffing * Faculty Hiring and Retention * Support of Faculty Professional Development

102 * APPENDICES * Appendix A – Course Syllabi * Appendix B – Faculty Vitae * Appendix C – Equipment * Appendix D – Institutional Summary

103 * Worth repeating * just clearly answer what is asked * Do not explain more than needed * If more is needed, agency will ask * Also applies to evaluation visit

104 Communication with Accrediting Agencies and Evaluation Visit

105 * Programs seeking accreditation must request visit from accrediting agencies * Accrediting agencies appoint evaluation team chair * Team chair contacts Dean responsible for program seeking accreditation

106 * Accrediting agencies have annual meetings - important for Dean and/or Associate Dean and chairperson of program seeking accreditation attend and meet with Evaluation Team Chair * All communication regarding evaluation process must be through Team Chair * Clear and direct communication with Team Chair is key to successful evaluation outcome

107 * Evaluation Team Chair communicates with Dean to select Program Evaluator. For some accreditation agencies, programs can reject evaluators without providing explanation * Once evaluator is assigned, Program Chair can contact Evaluator to begin planning and ask questions * Program Chairs should copy Dean and Evaluation Team Chair on all communication with Evaluator

108 * Dean communicates with Team Chair regarding institutional and more global accreditation matters related to visit * Number of required copies of self-study mailed to Team Chair - Hard- copies usually required ( cost to institution) * Generally, questions arise regarding submitted self-study report. Program Evaluator communicates with Program Chair and Evaluation Team Chair communicates Dean. * This communication process minimizes miscommunication between the institution/program and accrediting agency.

109 * Dean may suggest accommodations and travel arrangements, and decides with Team Chair, the handling of accommodations and reservations * Team Chair submits agenda for visit to program.

110 * Program Team Chair should meet Program Evaluator (s) and accompany to hotel. * Dean should meet Team Chair and accompany to hotel. * College should arrange all transportation during visit. * Visit commonly starts on Sunday afternoon and ends on Tuesday afternoon.

111 * Best for materials to be in one room(conference room) or easily accessed * Portfolio for each course with syllabus, sample hand-outs, homework, tests, projects (excellent, average and poor quality samples) * Course and teaching assessments * Student transcripts * Selected students, staff, faculty * Evaluators can request to meet with any appropriate program stake holder on campus

112 * Sunday Afternoon 13:00 – 18:00 Program evaluators visit Programs laboratories & review course notes and assessments. Team Chair meets with Deans to discuss college and institutional topics (space, budgets, University support etc.)

113 * Monday 0800 – 0900 * Official Welcome (Dean and Chairpersons –no need for other University officials). * Deans presentation includes overview of University and College/Programs past and present and the vision for the future.

114 * Monday 0900 – 1200 * Program evaluator begins Program evaluation * Team Chair meets Dean * Typically meetings with faculty, students, staff, and Program Chair * Additional visits to laboratories * Discussion of courses and course assessments

115 * Monday 1215 – 1330 * Lunch ($) - Evaluators - Deans and Chairs - Faculty from service units (Math, Chemistry, Physics, English, Social Sciences, Computer Services, Library, Placement, etc.).

116 * Monday 1400 – 1500 * Evaluators meet with support departments (service units) 1530 – 1700 * Evaluator meets with Program * Team Chair meets with Dean

117 * Tuesday 0800 – 1100 * Evaluator meets with Program * Team Chair meets with Dean 11:15 – 13:00 * Lunch ($) Evaluators only Computers and printers should be provided. Evaluators discuss report to Program, Dean, and other University officials

118 * Tuesday 1430 – 1600 * Team Chair and Evaluator(s) report findings to President, Provost, Dean, and Chair 1615 * Visit ends – transport to airport/hotel

119 * At end of visit or shortly thereafter, Team Chair provides Dean copy of program audit (e.g. Program Audit Form, PAF, for ABET ) for each program reviewed * Program has seven-day period to provide Team Chair with corrections to any errors of fact

120 * Note: No invitation for dinner. Evaluating Team meets Sunday and Monday evenings to discuss findings and organize report * Program(s) should carefully review audit to prepare for final report * Programs should meet and begin planning for next visit