Self-Assessing Readiness for ABET ECEDHA Annual Meeting—Phoenix, AZ Tuesday, March 15, 2011 Panel Discussion with Dr. Mark JT Smith, Purdue University

Lewis F. Brown, Ph.D., Dean of Engineering South Dakota State University

Content:  My ABET background/experience  How are we doing with ABET EC 2000 preparations?  How can we do better?!

 Self assessment example  Q&A

My ABET Background/Experience    

1993—2001 2001— 2001— 2008—2011

EE Department Head Dean of Engineering EAC EE Program Evaluator Member, IEEE Committee on Engin. Accreditation Activities (CEAA)     

 2009—  2011—

Appoint, train, mentor, evaluate PEVs Training Subcommittee Criteria Subcommittee Mentor for dozens of EE/CpE PEVs Reviewed hundreds of PEV reports

ABET PEV Training Mentor EAC member (Team Chair)

Who I’m Not  I’ve had extensive experience with ABET but I’m not here representing ABET  I’ve had extensive experience with IEEE in education and accreditation but I’m not here representing IEEE

 I’m speaking on my own behalf (ABET and IEEE already speak well on this topic but not enough of us are listening)!

Question: How are we doing with EC 2000? Answer: Let’s look at the ABET shortcomings statistics… (publically available on ABET website)

A view of initial (draft) shortcomings in 2003-2004 Percentage of Programs with Shortcoming Prior to Due Process (2003-04) 60 Deficiency Weakness Concern Total

50

Percent

40 30 20 10 Total Concern Weakness Deficiency

0 1

2

3

4

Criterion

5

Provided by ABET, March 2011

6

7

8

Shortcoming

A view of initial (draft) shortcomings in 2008-2009

http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Presentations/10EAC%20Institutional%20Reps.pdf

How can we do better?  Pay attention to the criteria, especially for Criteria 2, 3, and 5—they have changed only slightly and are easy to satisfy if you pay attention  Pay attention to ABET website—lots of under-utilized resources available: www.abet.org  Send someone (you or your ABET assessment coordinator) to ABET conferences and workshops and stay abreast of changes  Conduct an annual assessment of whether you are still in compliance 

Example: A 10-Minute Assessment L.F. Brown, “10-Minute Assessment Questions for Every EAC-ABET Accredited Program Chair and Dean,” 2010. Criterion 2: Program Educational Objectives (PEOs)  Most Criterion 2 shortcomings are for wording—PEOs that read like outcomes instead of meeting ABET definition. Examples… Easy to comply!!  PEOs are attained after graduation so your assessment should take place a few years after graduation not before or at time of graduation. Easy to comply!!

…more 10-Minute Assessment Criterion 3: Student Outcomes (SOs) [formerly POs]  Most Criterion 3 shortcomings are for improper assessment of achievement—Student Outcomes have to be achieved by time of graduation so why would you assess after graduation? That information is of no real value—so, why do it? Easy to comply!!

 Does your assessment plan rely on opinion surveys and/or course grades? (Detroit example) If so, expect “troubles” with ABET. There are many ABET resources on valid PO assessment course rubrics. Easy to comply!!

…more 10-Minute Assessment Criterion 5: Curriculum

Too many Criterion 5 shortcomings involve open-ended major design experiences!  Criterion 5 requires a major design experience that incorporates, “appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints.”

 Why not put “appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints” in the course description, syllabus, website, etc. and enforce?! Easy to comply!!

Are you ready for these changes for 2011-2012 visits? The 2011-2012 Criteria are posted on ABET website:

 C2: PEOs have slight change in definition, broader now  C3: “Student Outcomes” instead of “Program Outcomes”  C4: Continuous Improvement--must use C2 and C3 assessment results for continuous improvement  Other subtle wording changes in C5-C8—little change

Summary  A high number of shortcomings remains for C2, C3 and C5. While these shortcomings are fairly easy to address during “Due Process” period, why go through the stress and anxiety?

 There are numerous ABET resources to adequately prepare programs and avoid all shortcomings  Meeting the ABET requirements for C2, C3 and C5 is relatively easy—why not assess your compliance annually and avoid all shortcomings?

Lewis “Lew” Brown, Dean South Dakota State University [email protected]

Questions?