Search results

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Index by subjects, compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

Compiled by K.G.B. Bakewell covering the following journals published by MCB University Press: Facilities Volumes 8‐18; Journal of Property Investment & Finance Volumes 8‐18; Property Management Volumes 8‐18; Structural Survey Volumes 8‐18.

This study aims to propose a national frame of reference for the accreditation of engineering programs (EPs) in Tunisia. It uses as a benchmark the structure used by the world’s leading accreditation systems such as the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) and Commission des Titres d’Ingénieur. It provides a comprehensive framework for academic institutions to evaluate the performance of their programs. In addition, it suggests the procedures, steps and timeline for the application process and defines the required documents that should be submitted.

The study analyzes the standards applied by well-established accreditation agencies such as ABET, Commission Titre Ingenieur and European Accredited Engineer, studies the perceptions of academicians who participated in six workshops and uses the results of surveys and interviews to characterize their opinions about accreditation. A sample population of 146 faculty members, experts and policymakers from 23 different higher education institutions in Tunisia, who had participated in the workshops mentioned above, was solicited to participate in the survey. The opinions of 51 respondents who responded to the survey were analyzed. This methodology led to the establishment of a proposed national frame of reference for accreditation of EPs.

Analysis reveals that the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (MHESR) provides authorization (“habilitation”) to institutions allowing them to offer their educational program. However, it is inaccurate to consider this procedure as accreditation because it is more of a licensure process. In addition, the MHESR grants the “habilitation” to those institutions that successfully apply. The National Authority for Assessment, quality assurance and accreditation Instance Nationale de l’Evaluation, de l’Assurance Qualité et de l’Accréditation (IEAQA) is not involved in this process, which makes the latter’s role trivial.

This frame of reference will help the MHESR to evaluate the EPs based on a comprehensive analysis of well-established accreditation systems, to improve its “habilitation” process by splitting it into two parts as per international practice, namely, licensure and accreditation and to make the existence and role of the IEAQA much clearer.

This study is the foremost study to propose a comprehensive frame of reference for accrediting EPs in Tunisia.

Since the turn of the 21st century, various institutions of higher education have been established in the Gulf Cooperation Council region, several of which are branches of universities from North America, Europe, Australia, and other regions. Quality education is currently a required component in the models of collaboration between Universities; yet the literature suggests that challenges remain in how the quality education will be practiced in a region that lacked for long time private universities. In this paper, we present an exploratory investigation to determine what could be learned by studying the practicalities of collaboration and accreditation of a newly established institution in Oman, namely, Dhofar University. The case study focuses on the practicalities of DU’s external collaboration, national accreditation, and good practices University-wide and within the College of Engineering in particular. The paper aims to present and analyze challenges, good practices, faculty and staff experiences, and solutions that could be a useful pattern for similar institutions. The investigation builds on an internal University-wide self-study and an external review by an accreditation council.

The purpose of this paper is to report a literature review which was conducted to trace the quality journeys occurring in industrial and educational scenarios.

First, the literature was reviewed to trace the efforts made to implement quality models in industrial scenarios. Quality models include International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 9000 certification, Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA), Deming Prize and European Quality Award (EQA). Next, the literature was reviewed to trace the quality journey being undertaken in an engineering educational scenario.

Modern Engineering Educational Institutions (EEIs) are required to first accredit their programs by following Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)‐based stipulations. Then, these EEIs have to strive to implement quality models.

Because of the low volume of research conducted, relatively very few papers dealing with ABET and quality models could be reviewed. However, the exhaustive review of most of these papers has overcome this limitation.

First, modern EEIs should gain accreditation to ABET and then strive to obtain quality models. This endeavour would make fresh engineers employable in industrial scenarios.

It appears that no researcher has so far attempted to examine the implementation of quality models in an engineering educational scenario. In this context, the results of the literature review reported in this paper could be utilized while implementing quality models in EEIs via ABET‐based accredited programs.

This paper aims to present key findings from an inquiry into engineering accreditation and curricula renewal. The research attempted to ascertain conceptions of requisite sustainability themes among engineering academics and professionals. The paper also reflects on the potential role of professional engineering institutions (PEIs) in embedding sustainability through their programme accreditation guidelines and wider implications in terms of rapid curricula renewal.

This research comprised an International Engineering Academic Workshop held during the 2010 International Symposium on Engineering Education in Ireland, on “accreditation and sustainable engineering”. This built on the findings of a literature review that was distributed prior to the workshop. Data collection included individual questionnaires administered during the workshop, and notes scribed by workshop participants.

The literature review highlighted a wide range of perspectives across and within engineering disciplines, regarding what sustainability/sustainable development (SD) themes should be incorporated into engineering curricula, and regarding language and terminology. This was also reflected in the workshop discussions. Notwithstanding this diversity, clusters of sustainability themes and priority considerations were distilled from the literature review and workshop. These related to resources, technology, values, ethics, inter‐ and intra‐generational equity, transdisciplinarity, and systems and complex thinking. Themes related to environmental and economic knowledge and skills received less attention by workshop participants than represented in the literature.

This paper provides an appreciation of the diversity of opinion regarding priority sustainability themes for engineering curricula, among a group of self‐selected engineering academics who have a common interest in education for SD. It also provides some insights and caveats on how these themes might be rapidly integrated into engineering curricula.

In current academia, as Fox points out in the opening chapter of this volume, knowledge fields are characterized by an implicit (and sometimes explicit) hierarchy, which posits a higher ranking for the “hard” and natural sciences as opposed to the social sciences and humanities. This has influenced education as well as other social arenas. Students in the social sciences have long benefited from the “exact” sciences and the technology they have produced. Numerous texts present “Statistics for the Social Sciences”; computer applications are developed particularly for social science use (e.g., SPSS); physics, chemistry, and math classes are offered for non-majors across college campuses. The texts, computer applications, and courses adapt the scientific discipline to the needs of non-science or non-math majors, broadening the impact of the respective disciplines to a wider audience, and allowing the way of thinking in one discipline to influence the others. But one would scarcely find “Sociology for the Uninitiated,” or “Social Science for Engineers.” Not that there are no social scientists eager to impart their insights to their STEM colleagues and students. In fact there is a whole movement of “public sociology,” which endeavors to share sociological insights with many types of lay audiences as well as engage sociology in public issues on many topics and levels (ASA Task Force, 2005; Burawoy, 2005). But in all too many campuses STEM students cannot fit an elective into their tight curriculum, designed to meet strict accreditation criteria, and social science winds up somewhere low on the list of priorities. To be fair, some accreditation bodies have recognized the need to introduce undergraduate students to societal contexts. For example, since their seminal EC (Engineering Criteria) 2000, ABET (the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology) has incorporated into the annually updated program outcomes required for accreditation that students have “the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental and societal context” (ABET, 2007: Criterion 3h). But sometimes this outcome requirement is wedged into an ethics section, often taking up less than a two-week stint in the total undergraduate education. For an example of a more extensive application, see my website, http://users.rowan.edu/∼hartman/SocStem/index.html, where an outline of social science concepts, bibliography, and teaching ideas are developed for introducing STEM students to social science. Common sociological concepts and perspectives are illustrated in STEM contexts or using research in or on STEM subject matter. There is much material here upon which to build bridges.

The purpose of this paper is to present observations of a EUR-ACE accreditation process in a Finnish university. The study demonstrates the effects (benefits, effort and resources required) of accreditation as seen by the university management and teaching staff.

The material of the study was gathered by conducting an interview and questionnaire survey after the accreditation processes of six degree programmes at Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland, in 2011.

Besides certain shared views, the survey reveals some differences in opinions between the university management and the teaching staff: The management at all levels of the university valued the significance of accreditations somewhat higher than the teaching staff. Most of the interviewees found that accreditations have had an important effect on the curriculum work and thereby on the development of teaching and education. However, the effects on single courses were considered less significant.

The study focuses on one university with a limited number of responses and one accreditation agency only (ASIIN, Germany).

The engineering degree programmes were the first ones to obtain a EUR-ACE accreditation both in Finland and in the Nordic countries. Thus, the results have a novelty value for Nordic universities and stakeholders in the education sector.