[ieee 2009 international conference on engineering education (iceed) - kuala lumpur, malaysia...

6
2009 Inteational Conference on Engineering Education (lCEED 2009), December 7-8, 2009, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Joint Accreditation on Engineering Education for A Foreign University Campus in Malaysia Lau Hieng Ho Civil & Construction Engineering Department Curtin University of Technology, Sarawak Campus Miri, Malaysia [email protected] Abstracuality assurance and recognition play important roles in securing the market confidence to the education providers. Accreditation is also an important tool for global recognition within the global education industry that will facilitate mobility of students and professionals internationally especially in professional degree such as engineering education. Curtin University of Technology Sarawak campus (Curtin Sarawak) is one of the Australian foreign university campuses that have been operating in Malaysia for the last 10 years. As an Australian university operating in Malaysia, the university periodically undergoes accreditation process undertaken by both Engineering Accreditation Council of Malaysia (EAC) and also Engineers Australia (EA). An experience of Civil and Construction Engineering Department at Curtin University of Technology Sarawak campus (Curtin Sarawak) is presented as a case study looking into the accreditation conducted by EAC and EA. The paper presents Curtin Sarawak as a case study looking into the accreditation process in terms of methodology, planning, procedure in undertaking the joint accreditation of the engineering programs by EAC and EA. The paper presents an insight for EAC, EA and the Australian universities in Malaysia to upgrade the existing initiatives to achieve the common accreditation goals and the accreditation processes. Kor- engineeng programs; ecaon; accretaon; assessment; engineeng pfession I. INTRODUCTION Service industry is now contributing an important role to the growth of an economy, other than manufacturing sector. Within that service industry, education sector is emerging as a new industry propelling the economic growth other than the fmancial sector and tourism. Many countries including Malaysia are now experiencing fast growth in this sector with the growth of both local and foreign students in the tertiary education. For the education providers to remain competitive within the industry, it is important for them to have the competitive advantage in terms of quality of education and cost. By having world class universities that provide quality education to 978-1-4244-4844-9/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE 7 Ahmad bin Tamby Kadir Civil & Construction Engineering Department Curtin University of Technology, Sarawak Campus Miri, Malaysia mad.t@curtin.edu.my operate in Malaysia, Malaysia will have not only providing a quality education but at the same time able to provide cost competitiveness since the cost of living in Malaysia is lower th the developed countries. Accreditation on engineering education thus monitors educational programs that include curriculum, teaching and leing, equipmentllaborato facilities and student perfoance. The accreditation on engineering education facilitates global acceptance, mutual recognition and global mobility of engineers especially in view of the Washington Accord and the Sydney Accord. These inteational accords recognize the substantial equivalence of accreditation systems d accredited programs at the Professional Engineer and Engineering Technologist levels respectively. Accreditation of engineering education programs in Curtin University of Technology Sawak campus (Curtin Sarawak) is to ensure quality of education according to the Engineering Accreditation Council (EAC) of Board of Engineers Malaysia (BEM) and Engineers Australia (EA) criteria. Accreditation involves an evaluation and assessment of engineering programs offered by Curtin Sawak. The accreditation process is to veri the value-addition in transforming students admitted to the program to become competent engineers, having sound ndamental knowledge and acceptable level of professional skills. They would then be employable in the engineering industry. accredited engineering program requires satisfactory prepation of graduates eligible to be registered as graduate engineers d thereaſter eligible to be developed and admitted as registered professional engineers aſter a few years of job experiences. broader terms, accreditation ensures academic institutions consistently meet national d inteational benchmarks, and engineering graduates of an accredited program are assured membership with local and overseas professional bodies. It also provides a statement to goveents and education providers of the essential requirements and resources necessary for an engineering program.

Upload: ahmad

Post on 27-Feb-2017

215 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

2009 International Conference on Engineering Education (lCEED 2009), December 7-8, 2009, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Joint Accreditation on Engineering Education for A

Foreign University Campus in Malaysia

Lau Hieng Ho Civil & Construction Engineering Department

Curtin University of Technology, Sarawak Campus Miri, Malaysia

[email protected]

Abstracr---Quality assurance and recognition play important

roles in securing the market confidence to the education providers. Accreditation is also an important tool for global recognition within the global education industry that will facilitate mobility of students and professionals internationally especially in professional degree such as engineering education.

Curtin University of Technology Sarawak campus (Curtin Sarawak) is one of the Australian foreign university campuses that have been operating in Malaysia for the last 10 years. As an Australian university operating in Malaysia, the university periodically undergoes accreditation process undertaken by both Engineering Accreditation Council of Malaysia (EAC) and also Engineers Australia (EA).

An experience of Civil and Construction Engineering Department at Curtin University of Technology Sarawak campus (Curtin Sarawak) is presented as a case study looking into the accreditation conducted by EAC and EA. The paper presents Curtin Sarawak as a case study looking into the accreditation process in terms of methodology, planning, procedure in undertaking the joint accreditation of the engineering programs by EAC and EA. The paper presents an insight for EAC, EA and the Australian universities in Malaysia to upgrade the existing initiatives to achieve the common accreditation goals and the accreditation processes.

Keywords- engineering programs; education; accreditation; assessment; engineering profession

I. INTRODUCTION

Service industry is now contributing an important role to the growth of an economy, other than manufacturing sector. Within that service industry, education sector is emerging as a new industry propelling the economic growth other than the fmancial sector and tourism. Many countries including Malaysia are now experiencing fast growth in this sector with the growth of both local and foreign students in the tertiary education.

For the education providers to remain competitive within the industry, it is important for them to have the competitive advantage in terms of quality of education and cost. By having world class universities that provide quality education to

978-1-4244-4844-9/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE 7

Ahmad bin Tamby Kadir Civil & Construction Engineering Department

Curtin University of Technology, Sarawak Campus Miri, Malaysia

[email protected]

operate in Malaysia, Malaysia will have not only providing a quality education but at the same time able to provide cost competitiveness since the cost of living in Malaysia is lower than the developed countries.

Accreditation on engineering education thus monitors educational programs that include curriculum, teaching and learning, equipmentllaboratory facilities and student performance. The accreditation on engineering education facilitates global acceptance, mutual recognition and global mobility of engineers especially in view of the Washington Accord and the Sydney Accord. These international accords recognize the substantial equivalence of accreditation systems and accredited programs at the Professional Engineer and Engineering Technologist levels respectively.

Accreditation of engineering education programs in Curtin University of Technology Sarawak campus (Curtin Sarawak) is to ensure quality of education according to the Engineering Accreditation Council (EAC) of Board of Engineers Malaysia (BEM) and Engineers Australia (EA) criteria. Accreditation involves an evaluation and assessment of engineering programs offered by Curtin Sarawak. The accreditation process is to verify the value-addition in transforming students admitted to the program to become competent engineers, having sound fundamental knowledge and acceptable level of professional skills. They would then be employable in the engineering industry. An accredited engineering program requires satisfactory preparation of graduates eligible to be registered as graduate engineers and thereafter eligible to be developed and admitted as registered professional engineers after a few years of job experiences.

In broader terms, accreditation ensures academic institutions consistently meet national and international benchmarks, and engineering graduates of an accredited program are assured membership with local and overseas professional bodies. It also provides a statement to governments and education providers of the essential requirements and resources necessary for an engineering program.

2009 International Conference on Engineering Education (lCEED 2009), December 7-8, 2009, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

The paper highlights the experience of Curtin Sarawak in the joint accreditation by EAC and EA. The accredited program status is vital benchmarked reference for Curtin Sarawak, potential students, graduates and employers.

II. ACCREDITATION OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION

A number of accreditation of engineering education initiatives had been undertaken. In the United States, the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) was incorporated in the year 1932. ABET had established Engineering Criteria (EC) 2000, the criteria on students outcomes and performances rather than only obtaining grades [1]. The outcome of the criterion is as below [2]:

(a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science and engineering;

(b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data;

(c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs;

(d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams;

(e) an ability to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems;

(I) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility;

(g) an ability to communicate effectively;

(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context;

(i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage, in life long learning;

G) a knowledge of contemporary issues;

(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills and modem engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.

Similar initiative in Europe was undertaken in 1951 by the European Federation of National Engineering (FEANI) besides the presence of many national accreditation systems [3].

Washington Accord was initiated by six engineering accreditation agencies in 1989 i.e. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, United States, Engineering Council United Kingdom, Institutional of Professional Engineers New Zealand, Engineers Ireland, Engineers Canada and Engineers Australia. The main objective of Washington Accord is to recognize the substantial equivalence and accreditation system of various organization and engineering education programs in the signatory countries [4]. Other

8

initiatives include Dublin Accord 2002, Sydney Accord 2001, FEANI!EUR-ACEIENAEE (Europe), NABEEA (Asia) and UPADI (Central & South America).

Historically the development of accreditation process in Malaysia started 1957 with the Public Services Department (PSD) being responsible for the admission to the Public Service and the quality of academic related matters for the purpose of admission into the Public Service. Then in 1959, Institution of Engineers Malaysia (lEM) initiated a model similar to UK and Australia. In 1967, the Board of Engineers Malaysia was established and formed joint accreditation with IEM. In 1996 LAN (National Accreditation Board) was established to ensure quality of private institution of higher learning. In 2000, Engineering Accreditation Council (EAC) was established comprising of Board of Engineers Malaysia (BEM), IEM, LAN and PSD. In 2007 Malaysia Qualification Agency (MQA) was established to replace LAN. In 2008, the membership of EAC includes BEM, IEM, MQA, PSD and industry representative. [5]

In 2009 Malaysia represented by Board of Engineers Malaysia received full signatory status. Like Engineers Australia, Malaysia through the Engineering Accreditation Council of Malaysia (EAC) has its own accreditation process and conduct of accreditation

III. ACCREDITATION AT CURTIN SARA W AK

Primarily, both EA and EAC are focused on Qualitative Policy as opposed to being quantitative in the process of accreditation. The Qualitative Policy focuses on engineering education content and level are maintained; outcome-based engineering education (OBE) programme; programme on Continual Quality Improvement (CQI) and Quality Management System (QMS).

Both EA and EAC view the importance of accreditation objective for the graduates of accredited programme to satisfy minimum requirement for registration with EA or BEM respectively.

A. Programme Objectives

EAC requires in the accreditation Programme Objectives (graduates to fulfil stakeholders' satisfaction) defined as specific goals describing expected achievements of graduates in their career and professional life few years after graduation. But Programme Objectives in the context of EA means educational objective for the program/s to be accredited. These include internal statements for the purposes of course planning and approval and for detailed curriculum development, and also for public statements to program constituents.

EAC also requires Programme Outcomes (students at graduation) which is defined as statements that describes what students are expected to know and be able to perform or attain by the time of graduation, and shall be related to the knowledge, skills, and behaviour/attitude that student acquire

2009 International Conference on Engineering Education (lCEED 2009), December 7-8, 2009, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

through the programme. EA has the equivalent Programme Outcomes of EAC. The EA and EAC Programme Outcomes in principle are similar. The EAC outlined the Programme Outcomes of engineering students are as shown below:

• Ability to acquire and apply knowledge of science and engineering fundamentals.

• Acquiring in-depth technical competence in a specific engineering discipline;

• Ability to undertake problem identification formulation and solution;

• Ability to utilize systems approach to design and evaluate operational performance;

• Understanding of the principles of sustainable development;

Understanding of professional and ethical responsibilities and commitment to them;

Ability to communicate effectively, not only with engineers but also with the community at large;

Ability to function effectively as an individual and in a group with the capacity to be a leader or manager;

Understanding of the social, cultural, global and environmental responsibilities of a professional engineer;

Recognizing the need to undertake life-long learning and possessing/acquiring he capacity to do so.

Programme Objective is not specifically required by EA but necessary by EAC. Though conceptually Programme Objectives and Programme Outcomes are different, on close scrutiny perhaps EAC may refine and clarify the tools for achieving that purposes.

Although Generic attribute of graduates required by EA is in principle similar but the generic attributes recognise the broad nature of professional engineering practice thus the accreditation process in EA does not prescribe detailed program objectives or content. Instead EA requires engineering education providers to have in place their own mechanisms for validating outcomes and continually improving quality.

In the case of accreditation of Civil & Construction Engineering degree course at Curtin Sarawak, both requirements have to be met. Thus the course learning outcomes is developed at Curtin Sarawak in line with the EA's generic attribute and EAC's Programme outcomes. Table 1

9

shows the Curtin's graduate attributes mapped to professional competencies [6].

Therefore, as compared to Engineers Australia, old EAC approach to accreditation was then 'over prescriptive' and quantitative in manner instead of the current practice of new EAC manual which is very qualitative in their assessment on program structure, program content, operating environment and quality process. In 2007, EAC had revised itself and removed 'detailed data' and quantitative scoring system form submission [7]. The EAC Manual Version 3, Revised manual introduced the qualitative evaluation with minor changes to the criteria making it becomes more subjective. Evaluators are expected to triangulate the information/evidence obtained before arriving at a decision. The Version 2 of the EAC Manual mentioned about Programme Outcomes and Programme Objectives but was not too clear in terms of assessment on the graduates abilities and attributes.

B. Course Content

Both EA and EAC gave emphasis on importance of engineering education content and level to be maintained, programme continual quality improvement and presence of quality management system.

It was also found that EAC gave strong emphasis towards an outcome-based education (OBE) in the process of accreditation. as compared to EA which had already shifted towards a more explicit outcome-based education.

Besides OBE, the input (teaching staff, curriculum, laboratories and other resources) and process (teaching and learning) are also being addressed which is equivalent to those used by the signatories to the Washington Accord. In principle, academic curriculum requirement, students requirements, academic and support staff requirement, facilities requirement and quality management systems requirement are similar.

As the course content of the degree has been scrutinized in a separate visit to the main campus at Perth, Australia, EA accreditation panels focus their visit on the operation, coordination, governance, laboratory facilities and local context of the engineering courses at Curtin Sarawak.

C. Industrial Training

Both EA and EAC assert the need for student exposure to professional engineering practice and for industry participation in defming program objectives and in quality systems for assuring graduate outcomes. Both recognize the strong requirement by the industry. In 2003, EAC included making industrial training compulsory with detailed guidelines whereas in the case of EA the industrial training guidelines were not detailed.

2009 International Conference on Engineering Education (lCEED 2009), December 7-8, 2009, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

In the case of accreditation of Civil & Construction Engineering degree course at Curtin Sarawak, the industrial training requirement is set at the higher standard as required by EAC and as recommended by EA. Thus the administration and monitoring of the industrial training for engineering students are facilitated by School of Engineering & Science with the assistant of the School's Industrial Relations Committee, and is managed by the respective Industrial Training Adviser for each engineering course. Although it is compulsory for all the engineering students, the industrial training remains as a non-credit hour's unit/subject in the engineering course at Curtin Sarawak as compared to some local universities in which industrial training is a credit hour subject in their 3rd or 4th year.

D. Documentations

On accreditation policy, accreditation is voluntary for both EAC and EA. As compared to EA, it was also found that EAC has a very detailed structured guideline for self evaluation and submission for accreditation which is of great help to young education providers for engineering education in Malaysia in their preparation of accreditation process. For the purpose of application for accreditation, the submission requirement by EAC is described in detailed in Section 8 of the Accreditation Manual 2007 pertaining to the accreditation documents required. EA does not specify the details. Thus, for the purpose of joint accreditation, preparation of the submission following the requirements of EAC will meet the needs of the necessary documents required by EA too.

Section 7 of EAC Manual specifies Qualifying Requirements meant to screen out programmes that do not meet the core requirements of the assessment criteria. The qualifying requirements are as follows:

• Minimum 120 credit hours of which 80 credit hours must be engineering courses normally offered over a four-year period;

• Final Year Project;

• Industrial training;

• Minimum of 8 full-time academic staff;

• Staff:student ratio is 1.:25 or better;

• External examiner's report;

• Programme Objectives; and

• Programme Outcomes.

Although the assessment criteria are similar for both EA and EAC however the details of qualifying requirements may vary due to the operational practices of the foreign campuses. As for example, the Civil & Construction Engineering degree

10

course at Curtin Sarawak is a four-year course with 800 credit hours. It is two semester system with 12 weeks of teaching in each semester. EAC definition of 1 credit hour is equivalent to 1 hour of lecture each week for 14 week in a semester. Thus the modified calculation of credit hours is required to convert the EAC's credit hour calculation.

In the case of accreditation of Civil & Construction Engineering degree course at Curtin Sarawak, external examiner [8] reported that the degree course records a total of 150 credit hours based on the EAC credit hours calculation. This met the minimum requirement of 120 credit hours by EAC.

EAC in the 3rd Edition of the Manual specify the accreditation criteria as follows:

Criterion 1: Academic Curriculum;

Criterion 2: Students;

Criterion 3: Academic and Support Staff;

Criterion 4: Facilities;

Criterion 5: Quality Management Systems

EAC requires accreditation document to include Self Assessment Report, supporting material document and institutional documents. The Self Assessment Report includes the plan, implementation, assessment and evaluation of the programme conducted. Other supporting material document includes External Examiner's Report with assessments on programme curriculum, staff quality, staff-student ratio and examination assessment.

EAC approaches in accreditation seek objective evidence. Evidence that exists such as facts or information used to prove or disprove a proposition. EA approaches use more of triangulation approach with the stakeholders that include Outcomes, Curriculum, Staff, Students, Facilities and Quality Management System in the process of assessment. [9]

2009 International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED 2009), December 7-8, 2009, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

TABLE I. CURTIN'S GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES MAPPED TO PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCIES

Engineers Australia Graduate Engineering Accreditation Curtin University Graduate Course Learning

Attributes Council Malaysia Attributes Outcomes

PE1 Knowledge Base EACM1. Ability to acquire and CGA1 Apply discipline knowledge, Integrate knowledge from PE1.1 Knowledge of science and apply knowledge of principles and concepts all Civil and Construction

engineering fundamentals science and engineering Apply discipline knowledge, Engineering sub-disciplines PE1.2 In-depth technical fundamentals understand its theoretical to design and construct civil

competence in at least one underpinnings, and ways of thinking; engineering works. engineering discipline Extend the boundaries of knowledge

PE1.3 Techniques and resources through research. PE1.4 General Knowledge EACM2.Acquired in-depth CGA2 Think critically, creatively Integrate learning with

technical competence in and reflectively client requirements to

a specific engineering Apply logical and rational processes produce feasible practical, discipline to analyse the components of an sustainable solutions.

issue; Think creatively to generate innovative solutions

PE2 Engineering Ability EACM3.Ability to undertake CGA3 Access, evaluate and Acquire and evaluate PE2.1 Ability to undertake problem problem identification, synthesise information information to facilitate

identification, formulation, and formulation and solution Decide what information is needed design and construction of solution and where it might be found using civil engineering works.

PE2.2Understanding of social, appropriate technologies; Make valid cultural, global, and judgements and synthesise

environmental responsibilities information from a ranqe of sources. and the need to employ EACM4.Ability to utilise systems CGA4 Communicate effectively Communicate effectively principles of sustainable approach to design and Communicate in ways appropriate to with plans and reports to all

development evaluate operational the discipline, audience and purpose stakeholders. PE2.3 Ability to utilise a systems performance

approach to complex EACMS. Understanding of the CGAS Use technologies Identify and use suitable problems and to design and principles of design for appropriately technologies to complete

operational performance sustainable Use appropriate technologies civil engineering works PE2.4 Proficiency in engineering development recognising their advantages and successfully.

design limitations PE2.S Ability to conduct an EACM6. Understanding of CGA6 Utilise lifelong learning Continually extend and

engineering project professional and ethical skills build on professional PE2.6 Understanding of the responsibilities and Use a range of learning strategies; understanding and skills

business environment commitment to them Take responsibility for one's own acquired during the learning and development; Sustain undergraduate learning. intellectual curiosity; know how to

continue to learn as a graduate. PE3 Professional Attributes EACM7.Ability to communicate CGA7 International perspective Practice civil engineering PE3.1 Ability to communicate effectively, not only with Think globally and consider issues with a global perspective

effectively, with the engineers but also with from a variety of perspectives; Apply and appropriate engineering team and with the the community at large international standards and practices international standards.

community at large within a discipline or professional PE3.2 Ability to manage information area.

and documentation EACM8.Ability to function CGA8 Cultural understanding Recognize the impact of PE3.3 Capacity for creativity and effectively as an Respect individual human rights; cultural and environmental

innovation individual and in a group Recognise the importance of cultural diversity in implementation PE3.4 Understanding of with the capacity to be a diversity particularly the perspective civil engineering works.

professional and ethical leader or manager of indigenous Australians; Value responsibilities, and diversity of language commitment to them EACM9. Understanding of the CGA9 Apply professional skills Demonstrate leadership

PE3.S Ability to function effectively social, cultural, global Work independently and in teams; professional behavior and as an individual and in and environmental Demonstrate leadership, ethical practice in the

multidisciplinary and responsibilities of a professional behaviour and ethical context of civil engineering multicultural teams, as a team professional engineer practices projects leader or manager as well as EACM10.Recognising the need to

an effective team member undertake life-long PE3.6 Capacity for lifelong learning learning, and

and professional development possessing/acquiring PE3.7 Professional Attitudes the capacity to do so.

Note The attributes columns are not equivalent when read from left to right. For example PE2 i: EACM2 i: CGA2

11

2009 International Conference on Engineering Education (lCEED 2009), December 7-8, 2009, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

IV. CONCLUSION

Accreditation is a useful tool towards the achievement of best practices in engineering education. This case study can be effectively utilized for the awareness to get into analysis of accreditation to formulate strategic initiatives towards keeping pace with changing scenario of the world. The experience of Curtin Sarawak in the joint accreditation by EA and EAC can provide an excellent platform for closer cooperation and consultation between all the stakeholders for the continual quality improvement in the engineering education. It thus will further strengthen the presence of Curtin Sarawak contributing towards the economic growth of Malaysia and the development of the education industry in the region.

12

REFERENCES

[I] Lance Schachterle , "Outcomes Assessment and Accreditation in US Engineering Formation", European Journal of Engineering Education, 1999, vol. 24 (2), pp.121-31.

[2] ABET, Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, http://www.abet.org

[3] European Journal of Engineering Education 32, (6), 639-6SI.

[4] Washington Accord, http://www.washingtonaccord.org/Washington­Accordlsignatories·cfin.

[S] Megat Johari Megat Mohd Noor, "Accreditation of Engineering Programmes" 2009, pp.3

[6] C2010, Bachelor of Engineering (Civil Construction Engineering) Comprehensive Course Review: Curriculurn Map , 2009, pp.2

[7] Engineering Accreditation Counci,1 Malaysia. Engineering Programme Accreditation Manual, 2007

[8] Ng, C.K ," EctemalExaminer's Report on Bachelor of Engineering (Civil & Construction Engineering) Programme", 200S, pp.2

[9] Engineering Australia, http://www.engineersaustraliaorg.au/shadornx/apps/finS/finsdownload.c fin?file uuid=OFE48F9S-AFOS-766A-SF6B-39S26AI126F4&siteName=ieaust