Approaches to Graduate Attributes and Continual Improvement Processes in Faculties of Engineering Across Canada: A Narrative Review of the Literature

Abstract

The CEAB accreditation requirement of graduate attributes and continual improvement processes (GACIP) has been a pervasive topic in the annual CEEA conference proceedings since 2010. The proceedings are a rich primary source of work being done in Canadian tertiary institutions. This narrative review of the literature consolidates and discusses the relevant CEEA papers for 2010-2017 in a manner that is useful to leadership and decision-makers at accredited faculties of Engineering nationwide.
 Four guiding research questions were asked of this literature: (1) What general frameworks are being implemented as accredited faculties of Engineering across Canada approach GACIP?; (2) What are the specific activities and methods of one or more of the GACIP steps?; (3) What are the roles and responsibilities of people involved?; and (4) What perspectives are taken in response to the CEAB accreditation criteria, including concerns, issues, and benefits? A qualitative content analysis was conducted on 106 papers meeting selection criteria. Emergent topics were used to form the discussion.

An Online Resource Hub for Engineering Faculty: Providing Practical Information and Support for Outcomes-Based Education

“…Development of the online OBE Resource Hub within the University of Alberta's Faculty of Engineering intranet is rooted in Bresciani's (2006) assertion that education and communication are key to addressing faculty resistance to OBE [5]. It is also guided by a thorough literature review that summarizes the extensive OBE discussion in the annual Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) conference proceedings over the 2010 to 2017 timeframe [15]. Themes and terminology drawn from this paper serve to provide the Resource Hub's organization of artifacts within topic and subtopic headings.…”

“…OBE in engineering has its roots in mutual recognition agreements between countries such as the Washington Accord, with Canada being among the first signatories in 1989 [15]. The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) introduced OBE into its accreditation criteria in 2009, whereby institutions must demonstrate that graduates of a program possess twelve specified attributes, and that data from assessment of these attributes is being used to inform continuous program improvement [6].…”

“…For example, a student may display an understanding of ethics for a particular classroom project, yet then move on to behave unethically in the field [8]. Engineering-specific concerns in the literature also question the intention and practicality of the CEAB mandate, taking issue with certain graduate attributes, including the Design and Investigation attributes [15]. Bresciani (2006) sorts reasons for faculty resistance toward OBE into two categorieslack of understanding and lack of resources [5].…”

“…In faculties of Engineering across Canada, outcomesbased education (OBE) takes the form of twelve graduate attributes integrated into the curriculum, with resulting student assessment data being used to inform continual program improvement [6]. The shift from inputs (what is taught) to outcomes (what is learned) has been in response to the nature of engineering work crossing geographical borders, necessitating uniform standards for professional skills, such as communication, teamwork, problem solving, and lifelong learning [15].…”

“…Despite this change in engineering education beginning two decades ago and now approaching global compliance, faculty resistance to OBE persists [15]. Concerns and issues raised are varied and entangled, primarily relating to OBE being an external mandate imposed upon faculty, thus threatening academic freedom, and its potentially negative impacts on teaching and learning [15].…”