aeer queeca pb and mb meetings, 15/16 jan 2015, porto, pt association for engineering education of...

AEER QUEECA PB and MB meetings, 15/16 Jan 2015, Porto, PT

Association for Engineering Education of Russia

The Trial Accreditations in CA countries The Trial Accreditations in CA countries with international teams to test CAEASwith international teams to test CAEAS

Prof. Sergei Gerasimov,Director of Accreditation Centre of AEER


TaskMonths

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1 Study of the AC requirements to an educational programme (EP)

2 Selection of an EP for accreditation by an university

3 Organizational and administrative aspects

4 Collection of information on an university and a department that implement an EP

40 days

15 days

10 days

7 days

Model work plan of preparation for accreditationModel work plan of preparation for accreditation


TaskMonths

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

5 Analysis of the data on an university and a department that implement an EP

6 Making plans on EP improvement

7 EP improvement

8 Description of the analysis result in the AEER questionnaire format

20 days

10 days

February - November

20 days

Model work plan of preparation for accreditationModel work plan of preparation for accreditation


The Accreditation Center coordinates the process of accreditation : accepts and considers the applications for accreditation of engineering programs from the HEI, provides the HEI with self-study questionnaires, analyses the self-study report submitted by the HEI and makes the decision on an on-site visit, accepts and checks the reports of the Evaluation Team before sending them to the appropriate Accreditation Board.

AEER Accreditation Procedure


The duties of the Examination Teams include : assessment of the study programs and facilities during the on-site visit, meetings with the head of departments/university, academic and support staff, with students/graduates, with employers/industry representatives, preparation of the accreditation report and issuing recommendation on accreditation or non-accreditation to the Accreditation Center.

AEER Accreditation Procedure


AEER Accreditation Procedure. Steps.

AEER

Select & Announce

Selection of program evaluators

Review of self-study report

Visit report form

Preliminary review

Accreditation Centre Board of Directors

Accreditation Board decision

AEER Board of directors

Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review

Response within 3 weeks

Notify accreditation result

Appeal

Notify final result

The institution must submit a written application for accreditation of an engineering program to the Accreditation Center.



AEER

Select & Announce



Visit report form

Preliminary review




Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review



Appeal

Notify final result

The Accreditation Center considers the program’s eligibility for the accreditation procedure.



AEER

Select & Announce



Visit report form

Preliminary review




Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review



Appeal

Notify final result

The Accreditation Center provides the institution with self-study questionnaires.



AEER

Select & Announce



Visit report form

Preliminary review




Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review



Appeal

Notify final result

The Accreditation Center forms an evaluation team to carry out an auditing of the program.



AEER

Select & Announce



Visit report form

Preliminary review




Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review



Appeal

Notify final result

The Accreditation Center takes a decision on an on-site visit upon an evaluation of a self-study report.



AEER

Select & Announce



Visit report form

Preliminary review




Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review



Appeal

Notify final result

An on-site visit takes 3,5 days.



AEER

Select & Announce



Visit report form

Preliminary review




Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review



Appeal

Notify final result

Within the three weeks following the on-site visit the institution may send its complaints to the Accreditation Center.



AEER

Select & Announce



Visit report form

Preliminary review




Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review



Appeal

Notify final result

Upon the study of all the presented documents, the Accreditation Board issues a decision on accreditation or non-accreditation of the program. The decision of the Accreditation Board is approved by the AEER Board of Directors.



AEER

Select & Announce



Visit report form

Preliminary review




Final decision

Institution

Apply

Self-study report

Evaluation team

On-site review



Appeal

Notify final result

The AEER sends the institution an accreditation certificate signed by the President.


Evaluation descriptorsEvaluation descriptors: : Acceptable Acceptable with remarks Unacceptable«Acceptable» is given when the criteria are fully met even if

improvements are possible. «Acceptable with remarks» is given when the criteria are not

fully met but improvements can be reached during the reasonable period of time.

«Unacceptable» is given when the criteria are not partially or fully met, and improvements cannot be reached during the reasonable period of time

Evaluation of individual criteria Evaluation of individual criteria


Accreditation depends on fulfillment of all criteria to the programme under evaluation.

For the final evaluation of criteria achievement the following descriptors are useddescriptors are used:Accredited without remarksAccredited with remarksNot accredited

Accreditation without remarks, , with possible recommendations for programme improvement, is given to programmes with all criteria recognized as “acceptable”. In this case, accreditation is given for the full term.

Accreditation with remarks, indicating these remarks and the time period during which they must be corrected, is given to a programme with one or several criteria evaluated as “acceptable with remarks”. In this case accreditation must be given for a shorter term, after which corrections of these remarks must be checked.

If at least one of the above criteria failed, a programme is not accredited.

Evaluation of the Evaluation of the programmeprogramme under accreditation under accreditation


Binary scale •satisfactory •unsatisfactory

Three-level scale• below requirements • meets the requirements• exceeds the requirements

Four-level scaleО competence is not developed and the evaluator does not seek to develop itА competence development is required and possibleВ competence meets the standardС the evaluator shows better results than described in the standard

Scale of evaluator competence measurementScale of evaluator competence measurement

Note: For А it is necessary to explain the choice.


О А В С

1.Special evaluator training

1.1. Knowledge of the accreditation criteria

1.2. Knowledge of the accreditation procedure

1.3. Leadership

2. Communication efficiency

2.1. Information transfer

2.2. Final report

2.3. Interview

2.4. Suggestions

3. Interpersonal communication skills

3.1. Collaboration

3.2. Bias

3.3. Diplomacy

Example of evaluator competence assessment Example of evaluator competence assessment


О А В С

4.Oriented to teamwork 4.1. Willingness to listen

4.2. Willingness to help

4.3. Cooperation

5. Self-discipline 5.1. Before a visit

5.2. Time management ability

5.3. Responsiveness

5.4. Self-discipline

6.Professionalism 6.1. Respect

6.2. Behaviour

6.3. Ethics

6.4. Decision making

Example of evaluator competence assessment Example of evaluator competence assessment


Thank you for your attention!

Prof. Sergei Gerasimov, Director of the Accreditation Centre, AEER

[email protected]

aeer queeca pb and mb meetings, 15/16 jan 2015, porto, pt association for engineering education of...

Documents