Premium
Assessing Accreditation at the ASBMB: Surveying our Constituency
Author(s) -
Tansey John T.,
Carastro L. Michael,
Dean Diane M.,
Kennelly Peter,
Martin Debra,
Wolfson Adele J.,
Provost Joseph J.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.31.1_supplement.750.1
Subject(s) - accreditation , certification , medical education , curriculum , certification and accreditation , process (computing) , diversity (politics) , medicine , psychology , political science , pedagogy , computer science , law , operating system
The ASBMB recently began accrediting biochemistry and molecular biology degree programs and certifying the degrees of qualified graduates from those programs. Accreditation occurs in two stages. First, programs apply for accreditation through an evaluation process, for which a program must demonstrate satisfactory infrastructure, including instructional resources, professional development and commitment to diversity; breadth and depth of faculty expertise; and curriculum, including the four core concepts ‐ energy, structure and function, information storage, quantitative skills, and two underlying concepts: evolution and homeostasis ‐ at introductory and advanced levels, and a robust experiential learning component. The second component of accreditation is the ASBMB certification exam. The exam is predominately open‐ended problem solving questions designed to test deep understanding of the core concepts. Accredited programs may administer this examination to their students, and the degrees of those passing are designated ASBMB certified. To assess the efficacy of this combination of programmatic and individual assessment, we surveyed seven different groups: students in accredited programs, students not in accredited programs, schools that have not yet applied for accreditation, ASBMB‐accredited schools, schools that have applied and not received accreditation, graduate and professional schools, and potential employers in industry. Each group was asked a unique set of questions regarding their roles in the program and their perceptions of ASBMB accreditation. Topics queried included what respondents knew about the ASBMB accreditation program, their impressions of the process, how they used it in their program, company, or career. The results of the study varied widely depending on the group queried. Most respondents valued accreditation and the accreditation process and provided suggestions for improvement. However, there were differences in the reasons respondents valued accreditation and the aspects they found most beneficial. Both those schools that had received accreditation and those that had not found the application process helpful in that they had to acquire important information and discuss curriculum with colleagues. Initial findings also indicated that the ASBMB needs to improve program promotion to students, graduate programs, and employers. Collectively, these data indicated that the accreditation and credentialing process started strongly and provided several areas for which improvement can be made.