Historically, accreditation of engineering programs has relied on the use of input-based assessment of a program by framing major categories and identifying accreditation unit totals for each category. Beginning in 2014, compliance with an outcomes-based assessment of program quality and implementation of a program improvement process is also required.The introduction of graduate attributes assessment at BCIT prompted faculty members to question the relationship between existing learning outcomes and indicators of graduate attributes. Since both outcomes and indicators are written to describe competencies, faculty hypothesized that correlation exists between them.Upon further investigation, faculty, staff, and administrators at BCIT came to understand that there is a relationship between learning outcomes and indicators of graduate attributes, but they are not synonymous. Indicators are required to build a normalizing bridge between outcomes and attributes. They provide a rational relationship between a curriculum’s individual course learning outcomes and the twelve graduate attributes mandated by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board.. This is especially important for subjective expectations of learning where there is not an obvious one-to-one relationship between learning outcomes and attributes
CITATION STYLE
Kennedy, D., Abercrombie, K., Bollo, M., & Jenness, J. (2015). RECONCILING GRADUATE ATTRIBUTE ASSESSMENT WITH EXISTING OUTCOME-BASED ASSESSMENT. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association. https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.v0i0.5865
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.