Engineering Programs Evaluation: KFUPM
Experience
Dr. Samir Al-Baiyat
Dean College of Engineering Sciences and
Acting Dean College of Applied Engineering
King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals
Outline

Background

History of Assessment and Accreditation



Accreditation
Assessment
Conclusions
Background
 The Colleges of Engineering Sciences
and
Applied
Engineering
were
established in 1387 H (1966).
Background
 There are six departments in the
colleges . These are:
 Aerospace Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Civil Engineering,
Electrical Engineering ,
Mechanical Engineering,
Petroleum Engineering.
Background
 Each department offers two programs
one in Engineering Science and the
other in Applied Engineering.
 The colleges have 164 Professorial
rank faculty members
Current Students Enrollment (2003-2004)
 AE
71
CHE
338
CE
130
EE
1071
ME
771
PETE
217
History of Assessment and Accreditation
for the Colleges of Engineering

KFUPM for its Quest for Excellence opted
for independent Assessment for its
programs since its establishment.
 In the early years KFUPM was associated
with a Consortium( international body from
USA universities) for its
programs
assessment.
 In the early nineties ,the Colleges of
Engineering
sought
international
accreditation by Accreditation Board for
Engineering & Technology (ABET).
 Both Engineering Programs (ES & AE)
are ABET Accredited (1993 and 2002).
 Currently the Electrical and Mechanical
Engineering Programs are going for
Self-Assessment.
What is accreditation?
 External review
 Assessment of higher education institutions
and/or programs
 For quality assurance and continuous
improvement
Accreditation Objectives
 To meet national needs for well-educated
engineers
 To provide global recognition for professionals
in the field
 To enable international recognition of the
credentials of professionals
Accreditation Objectives (Cont.)



To assure that graduates are adequately prepared to
enter and continue the practice of engineering and
applied sciences
To serve the public, industry and the professional by
stimulating the development of improved engineering
education
To assist in the development of educational models for
the establishment of new programs
Substantial Equivalency Evaluation
The engineering programs at KFUPM opted twice
(1993 and 2001) for accreditations by ABET.
Programs being accredited include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
College of Engineering Sciences Programs
College of Applied Engineering Programs
College of Computer Science and Engineering
Programs
College of Environmental Design Programs.
Substantial Equivalency Evaluation
The evaluation of a program by ABET
includes assessment of both qualitative as
well as quantitative factors in the process
leading to an accreditation decision. This
requires:
– Self-Study Report
– On-site Visit
ABET MAJOR FINDINGS
 KFUPM engineering programs are of high quality,
offered by a highly enthusiastic faculty, and supported
with outstanding facilities. The students are well qualified,
and anxious to learn, loyal to the institution, highly
motivated articulate, and career-oriented.
 All
of the programs were judged to satisfy the ABET
Engineering Accreditation Criteria and appropriate program
criteria, and they were judged to be substantially equivalent
to accredited programs of similar titles in the United States.
ABET MAJOR FINDINGS



KFUPM has excellent classrooms, laboratory and
administrative facilities. Those programs that have
experienced rapid growth in the recent past are bit
short of offices and classrooms spaces.
The university library provides a rich variety of onsight, on-line research & retrieval tools.
An excellent computing infrastructure is provided by
the Information Technology Center. The external
connection to the internet is limited to 512
kbits/seconds. As Internet usage grows the University
may wish to consider upgrading this connection.
ABET MAJOR FINDINGS




The new Academic Development Center (ADC) is beginning to provide
useful services to the teaching faculty. The role of the ADC will
become even more important as university prepares for the next ABET
visit which will be conducted under criteria 2000.
The university must ensure that it offers a total compensation package
to faculty members that is competitive with other institutions in the
Middle East.
The College of Engineering has established an advisory council at the
college level. It would be important to move the advisory council
activity to the program level.
All students have the major design experience. University is urged to
ensure that every co-op student has such an experience.
ABET ACCREDITATION (Cont.)
IMPLEMENTATION
 Having written set of objectives for each program.
 Developing of assessment procedures that
demonstrate the achievement of the objectives.
 Formation
of departments industrial advisory
committees.
 Revision
of the professional rank faculty
members’ distribution in some departments.
ABET ACCREDITATION (Cont.)
IMPLEMENTATION (Cont.)
 Introduction of new course.
 Strengthen the Design Components in all program.
 Having written vision and mission for departments
and colleges and post them in web pages.
Assessment
Assessment is a systematic process of gathering,
reviewing and using important quantitative and
qualitative data and information from multiple and
diverse sources about educational programs, for the
purpose of improving student learning, and
evaluating whether academic and learning standards
are being met.
Self Assessment
Self assessment is an assessment conducted by
the institution to assess whether programs meet
their educational objectives and outcomes with
the purpose to improve program’s quality and
enhancing students learning.
The Elements of a Successful Assessment






Purpose identification
Outcomes identification
Measurements and evaluation design
Data collection
Analysis and evaluation
Decision-making regarding actions to be
taken.
Self Assessment: Need
• To be proactive than reactive.
• Initiate improvements to achieve academic
excellence.
• Systematize the process of self assessment.
• To be current and take a leadership role in
the region.
To Meet Accreditation Bodies
Requirements
• At the core of ABET Engineering criteria
2000 is an outcome assessment component
that requires each engineering program
seeking accreditation or re-accreditation to
establish its own internal assessment
process which in turn will be assessed by
ABET. (ABET 2000, Huband, 2001)
Current Practice who is doing it?
• According to Campus Trends data, (1995), 94
percent of institutions in the United States had
assessment activities under way and 90 percent
had increased their activities compared to five
years ago. Rather than depending on nationally
available assessment instruments, most
institutions (86 percent) reported using local
measures and nearly 70 percent were
developing their own portfolios (El-khwas,
1995, Palomba and Banta 1999).
Objectives of KFUPM Self Assessment
• Improve and maintain academic standards
• Enhance students’ learning.
• Verify that the existing programs meet their
objectives and institutional goals.
• Provide feedback for quality assurance of
academic programs.
Assessment Model
Input
Output
Faculty
Curriculum
Laboratories
computing
Facilities
Processes
Processing
&
Delivery
Institutional
Facilities
Assessment/Feedback
Institutional
Support
Graduates that
Perform Outcomes that
Achieve Educational
Objectives
Component of the Internal Assessment
Process
• Criteria: Eight Criteria for Self Assessment.
• Procedure: Specifies the process of Initiating,
conducting, and implementing the assessment.
Criteria
• Each criterion has an intent: A statement of
requirements to be met.
• Each criterion has several standards: They
describe how the intents are minimally met.
Criteria and Standards
• Program Mission, Objectives and Outcomes (3
standards).
• Curriculum design and Organization (6).
• Laboratories and Computing Facilities (2)
• Student Support and guidance (3).
Criteria and Standards
• Process Control (5)
• Faculty (2)
• Institutional Facilities (2)
• Institutional Support (3)
Criterion 1: Program Mission,
Objectives and Outcomes
• Intent:
Each program must have a mission,
quantifiable measurable objectives and expected
outcomes for graduates. Outcomes include competency
and tasks graduates are expected to perform after
completing the program. A strategic plan must be in
place to achieve the program objectives. The extent to
which these objectives are achieved through continuous
assessment and improvements must be demonstrated.
Criterion 1: Standards
• Standard 1-1: The program must have documented
measurable objectives that support college and
institution mission statements.
Meeting Standard 1-1
• Document institution, college and program mission
statements.
• State program objectives.
• Describe how each objective is aligned with program,
college and institution mission statements.
• Outline the main elements of the strategic plan to
achieve the program mission and objectives.
• Provide for each objective how it was measured, when
it was measured and improvements identified and
made.
Criterion 1: Standards
• Standard 1-2: The program must have documented
outcomes for graduating students.
It must be
demonstrated that the outcomes support the program
objectives and that graduating students are capable of
performing these outcomes.
Meeting standard 1-2
•
Describe the means for assessing the extent to which
graduates are performing the stated program
outcomes/learning objectives.
1. Conducting a survey of graduating seniors every
semester.
2. Conduct a survey of alumni every two years.
3. Conduct a survey of employers every two years.
Meeting standard 1-2
1. Carefully designed questions asked during co-op and
capstone design projects presentations.
2. Outcome assessment exams.
Criterion 1 Standards
•
Standard 1-3: The results of program’s assessment
and the extent to which they are used to improve the
program must be documented.
Meeting Standard 1-3
•
Describe the actions taken based on the results of
periodic assessments.
•
Describe major future program improvements plans
based on recent assessments.
Criterion 6: Faculty
•
Intent: Faculty members must be current and active in
their discipline and have the necessary technical depth
and breadth to support the program. There must be
enough faculty members to provide continuity and
stability, to cover the curriculum adequately and
effectively, and to allow for scholarly activities. To
meet this criterion the standards in this section must
be satisfied.
Standard 6-1
•
There must be enough full time faculty who are
committed to the program to provide adequate
coverage of the program areas/courses, continuity and
stability. The interests and qualifications of all faculty
members must be sufficient to teach all courses, plan,
modify and update courses and curricula. All faculty
members must have a level of competence that would
normally be obtained through graduate work in the
discipline. The majority of the faculty must hold a
Ph.d. in the discipline.
Program
areas
Area 1
Area 2
Area 3
Area 4
Total
Courses in the
area and average
number of
sections per year
Number of
faculty
members in
each area
Number of
faculty with
Ph.D.
Standard 6-2
•
All faculty members must remain current in the
discipline and sufficient time must be provided for
scholarly activities and professional development.
Also, effective programs for faculty development
must be in place.
Meeting Standard 6-2
•
State criteria for faculty to be deemed current in
the discipline and, based on theses criteria and
information in the faculty member’s resumes,
what percentage of the faculty members are
current. The criteria should be developed by the
department.
•
Describe the means for ensuring that full time
faculty members have sufficient time for scholarly
and professional development.
Meeting Standard 6-2
•
Describe existing faculty development programs at
the departmental and programs at the departmental
and university level.
Demonstrate their
effectiveness in achieving faculty development.
•
Indicate how frequently faculty programs are
evaluated and if the evaluation results are used for
improvement.
INTERNAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
ADC initiates IA one semester prior to the
Assessment through the college dean
Department forms PT that will be
Responsible for preparing SAR
ADC reviews the Documentation with one
month
Is SAR
SI
Complete
VRAA forms AT in consultation with the dean based on the
recommendations of ADC
ADC plans and fixes AT visit
AT conducts assessment and presents its findings
To VRAA, Dean, ADC, PT and dept. faculty
VRAA submits an executive summary to H.E. the Rector
Department prepares implementation plan. As in Table A.2
Follow-up of the implementation plan by ADC
Concluding Remarks
 The
self-assessment
and
accreditation
experiences were essential and very valuable to
maintain a world class quality Engineering
Programs.
 Each
engineering college should develop an
appropriate assessment program using the
ABET Engineering Criteria 2000 or others in
conjunction with criteria specific to the
individual college and program goals.



The faculty of individual engineering colleges
should be actively involved in the development
and implementation stages.
The departments’ industrial advisory committee
provided invaluable guidance and support to
the engineering programs.
The development of a nationally formed
(standard) examination as a measure of
engineering programs learning outcomes
assessment is called for.
ACCREDITATION
• Recognition of the awarded degrees by international
Bodies.
• Students potential in transferring to other institutions.
• Graduates being admitted to graduate programs in
other international institutions.
• Increase the graduates potentials in job market
ABET ACCREDITATION (Cont.)
GRADUATE CHARECTERISTICS
•
A strong foundation in basic sciences, mathematics and engineering
fundamentals.
•
A capacity to apply these fundamentals to a variety of problems.
•
Knowledge and experience in experimental methods.
•
Knowledge and skills in the fundamentals of engineering practice.
•
Advanced knowledge of selected professional level technologies.
ABET ACCREDITATION (Cont.)
GRADUATE CHARECTERISTICS
•
Strong oral and written communication skills.
•
A sense of corporate and business basics.
•
A sense of social, ethical, political and human responsibility.
•
A historical and social perspective of the impact of technology.
•
A unifying and interdisciplinary broad view.
•
A culture for life-long learning and a creative and intellectual spirit, a
capacity for critical judgment and enthusiasm for learning.
Current Practice who is doing it?
• A sample of this universities include: MIT,
University of Michigan, University of Illinois at
Urbana, University of Wisconsin at Madison,
Texas A & M University, University of Texas
at Austin, Purdue University, University of
Tennessee, Knoxville, Al Ain University at UAE
and many others.