IJEE GUEST EDITORIAL
[Introduction to a special issue of the International Journal of Engineering Education, edited by Russel C. Jones; 11 papers on quality assurance; published as volume 16, number 2, 2000]
Engineering education has become an international
enterprise, following the major internationalization trend in engineering
practice itself over recent decades. Graduates of an engineering program in any
given country may practice across national borders in a variety of ways – by
taking employment in another country, by working for a firm with cross-border
practice, or by employment with a major multinational company. This
international mobility of engineering graduates has enhanced interest in the credentialing
of the institutions and programs, which educate them. Employers, graduate
schools, and licensing boards all have a keen interest in the quality of
education received by engineering graduates who aspire to be internationally
mobile.
In parts of the engineering profession where professional
licensure is typically required for engineering practice, the credentials of
engineering graduates who aspire to practice engineering in a country other than
their home country become extremely important. The engineering education which
such engineers have obtained is subject to scrutiny by foreign licensure boards,
and any assurance that the school or education system from which the foreign
engineer has graduated has been subjected to a quality assurance system such as
accreditation makes acceptance of the foreign education credential much more
likely.
Quality
assurance mechanisms for engineering education vary considerably from country to
country – ranging from strong peer run accreditation programs to large
government bureaucracies. As a past president of the US Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology, I am personally a strong believer in and proponent
of engineering profession operated, peer review oriented, accreditation systems.
In
inviting papers for this special issue of the International Journal of
Engineering Education, I have tried to obtain coverage of a broad spectrum of
quality assurance methodologies for engineering education, and also to get
perspectives from diverse geographical areas. I am pleased with the variety of
approaches that are described in the papers in this special issue, and I believe
that any engineer or educator interested in quality assurance in engineering
education will find stimulating and useful new ideas is several of these papers.
The
paper by Natarajan sets the stage for the following discussion of quality
assurance in engineering education. He reviews the foundations of quality
assurance in broad, general terms, describes various approaches to quality
control, and then focuses down to engineering education.
The
US Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) is perhaps
currently the best-developed and most well respected system for the
accreditation of engineering education in the world. It has over 60 years of
experience, and has a solid track record for the enhancement of engineering
education in the United States. As described in the paper by Phillips, Peterson
and Aberle, however, ABET has recently undergone major changes. It is moving
form a prescriptive to an outcomes based criterion for the engineering programs
that it evaluates, hoping to stimulate more flexibility and diversity in
programs from different institutions. It is also much more involved in
international matters: the evaluation of programs in foreign countries against
ABET criteria; review of credentials of graduates from foreign programs for
‘substantial equivalency’ with ABET programs, for state licensing boards;
addressing issues of education equivalency as a base for cross-border practice
of engineering; and assisting other countries in the development of
accreditation systems.
The
two papers from the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers (CCPE) provide an
in-depth review of activities in Canada similar to those of ABET in the US. The
paper by Mathur and Venter describes in illustrative detail the operation of the
accreditation system operated by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board,
including the difficult issues raised when universities develop new programs and
directions. The companion paper by Ryan-Bacon and Delisle covers CCPE activities
on the broad international arena, including major efforts at promoting
cross-border practice credentialing with accredited engineering education as a
base. CCPE has the unique advantage of having education accreditation, practice
licensing, and professional practice concerns all within one organization.
Three
papers from Europe present a dynamic snapshot of engineering education and its
quality assurance there. The paper by Heitmann describes efforts at developing
quality assurance systems for education within the European Union, where
national borders currently provide little obstacle to the mobility of practicing
engineers. He also analyzes how quality assurance in engineering education is
dramatically changing in Germany, at least partially in response to
international interactions. The paper by Jensen provides a view of quality
assurance from the Scandinavian perspective, and gives valuable insights on the
internal quality control mechanisms in his own institution. The third of these
European papers, by Levy, describes another system in great flux—the United
Kingdom as it begins to implement the recommendations of a major profession wide
study that will bring engineering education in the UK to a longer program of
study than previously was standard. Levy also describes major changes in the
structure of the government supported education system for engineers in the UK,
and how quality assurance is applied currently.
Two
papers from the Pacific Rim illustrate engineering education and accreditation
developments in that region of the world. Webster describes a major restudy of
engineering education and the practice for which it prepares graduates in
Australia, and how it is changing the shape of education there. He also covers
in useful depth the system of accreditation for engineering programs operated by
the profession of engineering. Kwok reviews the status of engineering education
in Hong Kong, and describes the quality assurance system in place there. He also
indicates the increasing role of international interaction among engineering
organizations, and the mutual recognition agreements that are necessary for
mobility of graduates.
The
final two papers provide insights on engineering education and its quality
assurance in developing countries in very different parts of the world. Issa
describes experience in Jordan with the rapid growth in the number of private,
for-profit, universities offering engineering programs – due to the inability
of public universities to fund expansion to meet increased demand. He reviews a
system of accreditation which has been established to assure that such
for-profit institutions provide at
least a minimum of quality education for their students. In the final paper,
Ocampo describes the development of a new engineering education accreditation
system in Mexico, necessitated by the need to assure the quality of graduates
given the opportunity for cross-border practice due to international free-trade
agreements.
In
all, I believe that the reader of this special issue of IJEE will obtain an
in-depth and balanced perspective on engineering education around the world
today, and how its quality and improvement are insured. Granted that this is a
snapshot in time in a dynamic world, it provides a good base for understanding
current status and for following future trends in engineering education and its
quality assurance.
Russel C. Jones, Ph.D., PE
Russel
Jones is a private consultant, working through World Expertise LLC. to offer
services to a select clientele. Until recently he served as Executive Director
of the National Society of Professional Engineers in the US. Dr. Jones received
his education at Carnegie Institute of Technology, earning degrees in civil
engineering and materials science. Prior to returning to Carnegie for his
doctoral study, he worked as a practicing civil engineer. He has spent much of
his career as an educator, starting with engineering education and broadening to
higher education as a whole. After completing his doctoral degree in 1963, he
taught for eight years on the faculty of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. He then served in a succession of administrative posts in higher
education, for several years each: Chairman of Civil Engineering at Ohio State
University, Dean of Engineering at the University of Massachusetts, Academic
Vice President at Boston University, and President and University Research
Professor at the University of Delaware. He has many publications, honors and
awards, and professional offices and activities to his credit.