This paper discusses the issues involved with the accreditation of associate degree programs in Engineering Technology, and in particular looks at the concept of having differentiated criteria for such programs. The current Technology Accreditation Commission of ABET, Inc. criteria makes no distinction between associate degree and baccalaureate degree programs in the general criteria. The author would like to suggest some ways that the general criteria could be modified so as to have a different or modified set of criteria for associate degree programs as opposed to baccalaureate degree programs. This distinction becomes important in light of ABET being a signatory to the Sydney and Dublin accords which provide for the differences between and among technicians, technologists, and engineers.
The Technology Accreditation Commission (TAC) of ABET, Inc. is proposing some major changes to the General Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Technology Programs. In particular Criterion 3, the criterion dealing with Program Outcomes, has been split into two parts, one that addresses baccalaureate degree programs and the other specific to associate degree programs. To further clarify the differentiated criteria for the two different types of programs, Criterion 5 dealing with curriculum, has also been modified. There have also been some modifications to the other criteria in an attempt to increase the commonality among the criteria for all four commissions of ABET as well to clarify the language in the overall criteria. This paper discusses the major changes in the TAC criteria and in particular, how TAC has attempted to make the criteria for associate degree programs a better fit to such programs.
The issue of scholarship in Engineering Technology (ET) is becoming an important topic of discussion within the ET community due to the evolving missions of many institutions that host Engineering Technology programs. Many of these institutions now require some form of documented scholarship from their ET faculty for promotion and tenure purposes, and it is incumbent upon the ET community to support these faculty by defining not only the meaning of scholarship in ET, but also the yardstick by which such scholarship will be assessed. This issue is pertinent to ET because our programs are traditionally of an applied nature with a focus on practice-oriented education. It is therefore logical to expect that ET scholarship should take on an applied flavor and involve our constituencies (students and industry) in meaningful ways. To define ET scholarship from within the ET community and to develop an appropriate ET faculty workload model, the Engineering Technology Council (ETC) formed a Task Force on ET Scholarship at the ETLI Conference in October 2002 in Norfolk, Virginia. The group was charged to report back to the ETC by June of 2003 at the ASEE Annual Conference in Nashville. In this paper, the authors will discuss what ET scholarship involves, the importance and relevance of ET scholarship, appropriate Evaluation of ET scholarship, Faculty Workload (teaching, scholarship and service) Model(s), and the Challenges and Opportunities of ET scholarship. A web-based literature survey is carried out to determine the faculty workload policy that currently exists at various colleges and universities across the country, and this information is used in developing the proposed ET faculty workload model presented in this paper.
This paper attempts to take a broad look at post-tenure review by examining why institutions are doing post-tenure review, looking at some different approaches for such reviews and suggesting some different elements of the review process. It is hoped that in doing so, institutions currently doing post-tenure reviews might improve their processes and those who are planning on instituting post-tenure review would have the basic background necessary to develop an appropriate process.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.