Tc2 K–Lessons Learned From Evaluation Visits

The author has participated in two Technology Criteria 2000 (TC2K) accreditation visits and has found a general lack of understanding about how to prepare for a TC2K visit. This paper provides some insights into the TC2K requirements, focusing on the revised 2004 criteria, and suggestions that may help with developing a program for a department. Suggestions include ideas for development of the Educational Objectives and Program Outcomes, preparation of the self-study report, course outlines, the assessment process , and arrangement of the display materials. The opinions expressed in this paper are solely those of the author and should not be considered to represent an official ABET position. Introduction With the adoption of TC2K for accreditation the Technology Accreditation Commission (TAC) of ABET requires accredited programs to define objectives and outcomes and to prove to the visitor that they are being met and that the program is being continually improved. TAC conducted TC2K pilot visits in 2001, which were followed by a two-year phase in for the new criteria. Institutions were able to choose to be accredited with the old or new criteria in 2002 and 2003; however, all accreditation visits by TAC will use TC2K beginning in 2004. In addition, the TC2K have been reorganized and modified for 2004. The new TC2K includes eight criteria: 1. Program Educational Objectives 2. Program Outcomes 3. Assessment and Evaluation 4. Program Characteristics 5. Faculty 6. Facilities 7. Institutional and External Support 8. Program Criteria The Self-Study instructions provide guidance as to what must be included in the Self-Study report and the display materials, but experience from two visits has provided a number of lessons. In the next sections, we’ll consider the criteria and offer some suggestions to help make your visit go more smoothly. Criteria 1 to 3 Criteria 1, 2, and 3 are closely related and form the heart of the continuous improvement process with P ge 9.153.1 “Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2004, American Society for Engineering Education” respect to the curriculum. Figure 1 shows the well-known ABET “Two-Loop” diagram, which encompasses the first three criteria. The left loop shows what ABET calls the Educational Objectives and is the “slow” loop, while the right loop shows the Program Outcomes and is the “fast” loop. ABET defines the terms Educational Objectives and Program Outcomes both in the criteria and in the selfstudy instructions. Recognizing that some schools have practiced continuous improvement for some time using their own terms, ABET allows you to use terms of your choosing. As a result, I highly recommend that at the beginning of your self study report you include a paragraph of definitions, indicating the terms you have chosen to use, even if you are using ABET’s terminology. This will make it clear to the evaluator what your terms mean. In both visits in which I participated, the Educational Objectives (EOs) were not clearly defined, indicating that this might be an area of misunderstanding. One way to think of the EOs is that Educational Objectives are the reasons your program exists. They are how you represent your program to your constituents. Thus, ABET requires that the EOs be developed with input from your constituents. As shown in Figure 1, constituents could include employers, students, alumni, the faculty, the school administration, and the institutional mission. It is essential that you have documentation of how your EOs were developed and the inputs that were considered. Your display materials should include minutes of meetings with your Industrial Advisory Board that show the EOs were presented and discussed as well as evidence of input from your other constituents. The EOs should follow from the institution’s mission and thus may be very different for two-year programs and four-year programs or community colleges versus R1 universities. For example, as part of its mission, a two-year community college might include workforce development to support of local industries. An R1 university, on the other hand, might have as part of its mission to develop the state’s economy and to contribute to the welfare and advancement of human societies throughout the world. In either case, the self-study should include the institutional mission and an explanation of how the EOs are derived from them. If possible, it might be desirable to make a matrix of the objectives expressed Figure 1: ABET Two-Loop Assessment/Evaluation Process