MILOŠ NE D E LJ KOVIĆ 1 , MILAN MATI J E VIĆ 2 , Ž AR KO Ć O JBAŠ IĆ 3 , MILAN

RIS TANOVIĆ 1

1 M E C H A N I C A L E N G I N E E R I N G FA C U LT Y, U N I V E R S I T Y O F B E L G R A D E , B E L G R A D E , { M N E D E L J K O V I C , M R I S TA N O V I C } @ M A S . B G . A C . R S

2 FA C U LT Y O F E N G I N E E R I N G S C I E N C E S , U N I V E R S I T Y O F K R A G U J E VA C , K R A G U J E VA C , M AT I J E V I C @ K G . A C . R S

3 M E C H A N I C A L E N G I N E E R I N G FA C U LT Y, U N I V E R S I T Y O F N I Š , N I Š , Z C O J B A @ N I . A C . R S

REGIONAL CONFERENCE - QUALITY MATTERS: QUALITY ASSURANCE AT UNIVERSITIES IN THE REGION

International accreditation of engineering studies and its impact on quality assurance

systems of Serbian technical faculties

Introduction2

In this lecture some experiences from Tempus project »International Accreditation of Engineering Studies« are presented.

Project will be active for one more year (grant extension).

International Accreditation of Engineering Studies144856-TEMPUS-2008-RS-JPGR

3

Some basic data about IAES project

4

Overall Project Goal

The overall objective of IAES project is to enhance the quality and relevance of

higher education in engineering area in partner countries and

to reach the integration of partner country universities into the European university system by international accreditation of engineering studies.

144856-TEMPUS-2008-RS-JPGR: International Accreditation of Engineering Studies

5

Specific Project Goals

Specific project goals are to accomplish: Internal quality assurance and enhancement

mechanisms based on the best international practice A new model of flexible curriculum structure taking

into account emerging interdisciplinary engineering areas and enabling the recognition of new professional qualifications

Improvement of laboratory, library, learning and teaching facilities as well as development of partnership with enterprises

144856-TEMPUS-2008-RS-JPGR: International Accreditation of Engineering Studies

6

Specific Project Goals (cont.)

Specific project goals are also to accomplish: Improvement of administrative/student services

including logistic support for university internationalization

Indispensable curriculum corrections International accreditation of at least two study

programs with the relevant international accreditation agencies

144856-TEMPUS-2008-RS-JPGR: International Accreditation of Engineering Studies

7

IAES project partners

University of BelgradeMinistry of Education and

Science of Serbia (former Ministry of Education and Sports of Serbia)

University of KragujevacGerman University in CairoUniversity of NišASIIN Consult GmbHImperial College London

Technische Universität München

Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya

University Karlsruhe (KIT)Robotina d.o.o.Mihajlo Pupin InstituteInformatikaIvdam Process Control

d.o.o.144856-TEMPUS-2008-RS-JPGR: International Accreditation of Engineering Studies

8

Motivation and some problems

Motivation for IAES project 9

Project motivation: global society makes that it is very important to educate relevant engineering professionals, that can contribute most to making of the new values.

As basic measure of such relevance, accreditation and quality assessment could be taken, performed by the same agencies that accredit the best European engineering universities.

Such relevance also opens new prospective to our education, based on the internationalisation of programs.

Obvious question is what is necessary to be done so that our engineering programmes could withstand same quality assessment which is performed at, for example, Technical University of Munich, one of the IAES project partners.

Problems, problems, problems...10

Years of political and economic crisis, unanswered question whether knowledge is market good or public wealth, financing which favours administrative quality criteria, tolerance regarding “state in the field” have all led to development of “entrepreneur model” in education, which meets primarily short term expectations of clients (students and/or parents) and HE institutions themselves (with incomes depending of number of students) instead of fulfilling public society needs.

Not only that engineering education is not recognized as the best possibility for society recovery, but it has not even managed to explore new possibilities for interdisciplinary and more flexible organization at all levels of studies.

So at this moment Serbian engineering education it is not sufficiently compatible with relevant engineering education at the leading word universities.

11

ASIIN AND ABET CONCEPTS OF ACCREDITATION AND STUDY

PROGRAMS EVALUATION

ASIIN and ABET12

ASIIN (http://www.asiin-ev.de/) and ABET (http://www.abet.org/) are two worldwide known accreditation agencies for engineering studies, so analysis of their requirements and procedures for international accreditation could be considered as highly relevant.

Mutual characteristic of these agencies are mechanisms that should guarantee objectivity and independence from state and institutions which programs are being accredited.

ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology)

13

ABET is more relevant in the USA and checks whether HEI manages to prepare students in line with standards of quality that have been established for specific profession.

ABET is proud of decades long tradition and experience since it has been established in year 1932 by seven engineering societies, while international accreditation boards exist since 1989 with the task to evaluate existence of “significant equivalence” with international programs.

ABET is mostly interested in assessment of learning outcomes and assurance of competencies of former students entering professional practice.

14

ABET

Therefore, ABET considers accreditation of study programs that are already running, and initial condition for study program accreditation is that there exists at least one student that has finished program at least one year before accreditation of it.

Until January 31st accreditation requests can be submitted for accreditation of programs that start until fall same year.

Accreditation is granted for the period of maximally 6 years, and the procedure is that ABET commission after assessment of self evaluation report, on site visit and evaluation of processes and documentation, interviews with students, lecturers and administration, makes decision on program accreditation, with mandatory recommendations what improvements are necessary.

ABET15

Contents and form of the study program evaluation report, as well as criteria for quality assessment and accreditation of study program can be found at http://www.abet.org/forms.shtml.

For example, evaluation and On-Site visit with ABET evaluates: Auspices, control, and organization of the institution housing the program Educational programs offered and degrees conferred. Maturity and stability of the institution and of the individual educational programs. Basis of and requirements for admission of students. Number of students enrolled in both the college or division as a whole and in the individual

educational programs. Teaching staff and teaching loads. Physical facilities - the educational plant devoted to the educational program. Finances - investments, expenditures, sources of income. Curricular Content Representative samples of student work that reveal the spectrum of educational outcome. Records of employment of graduates Student support services appropriate to the educational and career needs of the students.

ABET accreditation process16

ABET17

Criteria fulfilment assessment is relative since boundaries of standards are pushed forward from year to year, but the essence is that it is the dynamical process that follows outcomes and methodology of the best engineering universities in USA.

In such highly competitive surrounding most of the HEIs are focused on the recommendations what should be improved within accreditation period.

Specification of expenses can be found at http://www.abet.org/request.shtml.

It’s worth mentioning that ABET in its wider goals counts: To identify to the public specific programs that meet minimum criteria

for accreditation. To provide guidance for the improvement of the existing and

development of future educational programs in applied science, computing, engineering, and technology areas.

To stimulate the improvement of applied science, computing, engineering, and technology education.

ASIIN (Accreditation Agency for Degree Programmes in Engineering, Informatics, the Natural Sciences and Mathematics)

18

ASIIN methodology of quality assessment is to somewhat larger extent based on administrative checking and evaluation of internal quality mechanisms compared to general and specific standards, where program which is subject to accreditation need not already be in realization.

Although with somewhat more modest tradition, since it has been established in year 1999, ASIIN represents referent institution not only for Germany, where it issues accreditations and ASIIN quality approvals, but also for whole Europe since it is member of important projects regarding quality of university education and important member of coordinating processes for European and world standards in the field of accreditation.

ASIIN’s approach to assessment – procedural workflow

19

ASIIN20

By the concept of ASIIN, essential characteristics of study program are not consequence of the best wishes or marketing campaign isolated from real resources and mechanisms that provide for program accomplishment.

Exactly exploration of these relations among resources, internal quality assurance mechanisms and characteristics and learning outcomes of study program is the essence of ASIIN quality assessment procedures.

Mechanism of accreditation and quality assessment is detailed by numerous documents presented at http://www.asiin-ev.de, while expenses are variable, as are with ABET.

Important aspect of the process is the way in which reviewers commission is assigned which evaluates fulfilment of the standards.

There is balance of the members from professional practice (1/3) and from academic (1/3) and professional (1/3) engineering universities, all with individual „veto“ right.

All members of all bodies are replaced every three years.

ASIIN and EUR-ACE label21

It is important to note that ASIIN is authorized by ENAEE (European Network for the Accreditation of Engineering Education) for issuing EUR-ACE® label to engineering study programs in the process of international accreditation.

That is a prerequisite for program acceptance in so called FEANI (The Fédération Européenne d’Association Nationales d’Ingénieurs) index.

22

Examples of different understanding on standards fulfilment in engineering

education

KAPK, ASIIN, ABET23

National Accreditation Commission as early as in 2006 has formed so called “blue book” with standards for accreditation and quality assessment of HE institutions and their study programs.

Similarity with relevant documents of foreign agencies such as ASIIN (http://www.asiin-ev.de/) and ABET (http://www.abet.org/) is obvious.

Main differences are in methodology of quality assessment and in recognition of standards fulfilment.

For example, standards concerning learning outcomes are dominantly evaluated as part of the text describing important characteristic of study program which is checked by the reviewers and KAPK to be in line with overall program logic.

Accreditation, labs, safety…24

In the case of international accreditation, question of fulfilment of these standards is evaluated with much narrower tolerance.

Starting point is what is asked from the student to pass the exam (which questions were asked at the exams, what lab exercises were necessary to be self performed, etc.) and on the basis of that obtained learning outcomes are discussed.

Learning methodology is based on problem oriented learning which assumes that student is facilitated with appropriate lab setup including place, hardware and software support and coaching.

Lab standards themselves with safety aspects (volatage levels up to 50V etc.) are tolerated in our system in which material aspect was always weak point.

25

Conclusion

Conclusion26

IAES Tempus project involved in its activities members of the National Accreditation Board, deans, members of the management and appropriate commissions of the faculties and universities in Serbia.

Those activities were in line with preparations for national external evaluation process of HE institutions in Serbia, so its wider influence to qualities of national engineering study programs is foreseen.

Mechanisms of quality assurance must guarantee continuous improvement of study programs and their relevance in global educational framework.

Result: two accredited programs27

Universities, direct IAES project users, have already internationaly accredited two study programs which involved improvement of quality assurance systems, improvement of curricula structures and contents and mostly rigorous self evaluation processes.

Significant financial and administrative effort was absolute necessity.

Appropriate lab conditions for students, selection of competent lecturers, fine tuning of curricula contents and efficient demonstration of functional quality assurance system were aspects that by our experience needed most attention.

Where from here?28

Important perspectives of Serbian society are in lifting of the overall educational level and in building knowledge society, which assumes highest possible standards of education.

Although it is useful that foreign agencies perform quality assessment and accreditation of engineering studies, in long terms the most important are: Successful build up of internal quality mechanisms of

our technical faculties, Attainment of necessary steps needed that National

Accreditation Commission (KAPK) ensures its international reputation.

29

Thank you for your attention.Questions and comments are welcome.