Defining the outcomes: a framework for EC-2000

Author

Besterfield-Sacre, Mary ; Shuman, Larry J. ; Wolfe, Harvey ; Atman, Cynthia J. ; McGourty, Jack ; Miller, Ronald L. ; Olds, Barbara M. ; Rogers, Gloria M.

Author_Institution

Dept. of Ind. Eng., Pittsburgh Univ., PA, USA

Volume

43

Issue

2

fYear

2000

fDate

5/1/2000 12:00:00 AM

Firstpage

100

Lastpage

110

Abstract

The “new” Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology criteria, EC-2000, has caused engineering educators to focus on 11 intentionally undefined outcomes as a necessary step in the accreditation process. As part of a large study sponsored by the National Science Foundation, a framework, based on Bloom´s taxonomy, has been developed for better specifying these outcomes. Using this framework, each outcome has been expanded into a set of attributes that can then be used by engineering faculty in adapting the outcomes to their own program. Also discussed are two ways in which this characterization of outcomes can be used as part of an assessment and feedback process. These outcome definitions are considered to be in a dynamic state; i.e., they will continue to be modified and updated as more is learned about their specificity and use

Keywords

accreditation; engineering education; Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology; Bloom´s taxonomy; EC-2000; National Science Foundation; dynamic state; engineering educators; engineering faculty; feedback process; outcomes characterization; Accreditation; Continuous improvement; Documentation; Educational technology; Engineering education; Feedback; Industrial engineering; Lifting equipment; Taxonomy; Technological innovation;

fLanguage

English

Journal_Title

Education, IEEE Transactions on

Publisher

ieee

ISSN

0018-9359

Type

jour

DOI

10.1109/13.848060

Filename

848060