Pub Date : 2012-04-01DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012040106
J. Kontio, J. Roslöf, K. Edström, Sara Naumann, P. Hussmann, K. Schrey-Niemenmaa, Markku Karhu
The main goal of the Nordic project Quality Assurance in Higher Education was to develop and implement a self-evaluation model in the participating Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) to support their quality as- surance work and continuous curriculum development. Furthermore, the project aimed at strengthening the cooperation of HEIs in quality assurance (QA) and disseminating good practices of QA. The framework of development is based on the CDIO approach and the CDIO self-evaluation process. The main results are a detailed definition of the self-evaluation process, well-documented self-evaluations of the participating degree programmes, and the identification of the main development areas and actions in each participating degree programme. Furthermore, the project has increased the partners’ understanding of other partners and their challenges. Finally, quality assurance has been enhanced in each participating programme and new ideas and support for quality assurance work in other higher education institutes have been produced.
{"title":"Improving Quality Assurance with CDIO Self-Evaluation: Experiences From a Nordic Project","authors":"J. Kontio, J. Roslöf, K. Edström, Sara Naumann, P. Hussmann, K. Schrey-Niemenmaa, Markku Karhu","doi":"10.4018/ijqaete.2012040106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012040106","url":null,"abstract":"The main goal of the Nordic project Quality Assurance in Higher Education was to develop and implement a self-evaluation model in the participating Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) to support their quality as- surance work and continuous curriculum development. Furthermore, the project aimed at strengthening the cooperation of HEIs in quality assurance (QA) and disseminating good practices of QA. The framework of development is based on the CDIO approach and the CDIO self-evaluation process. The main results are a detailed definition of the self-evaluation process, well-documented self-evaluations of the participating degree programmes, and the identification of the main development areas and actions in each participating degree programme. Furthermore, the project has increased the partners’ understanding of other partners and their challenges. Finally, quality assurance has been enhanced in each participating programme and new ideas and support for quality assurance work in other higher education institutes have been produced.","PeriodicalId":13684,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ.","volume":"56 1","pages":"55-66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74361306","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-04-01DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012040108
Siegfried Rouvrais, Vanea Chiprianov
On the one hand, no one international model for quality assurance evaluation of higher education has emerged. On the other hand, as a reference model rather than a prescription, the CDIO initiative proposes a mature integrated framework for creation or continuous improvement of engineering programs. However, institutions developing and managing educational programs have to juggle the expectation of various accreditation and evaluation bodies, which may create consistency and interoperability problems. A need exists to unambiguously specify relations among quality assurance concepts to enable more transparent and comparable descriptions of quality frameworks for educational programs. Following constructive alignment principles, this article creates structural models using some of the CDIO Standards. In doing so it lays the foundations of an architectural meta-model for describing complex educational systems, which will contribute to consistency and interoperability among quality frameworks.
{"title":"Architecting the CDIO Educational Framework Pursuant to Constructive Alignment Principles","authors":"Siegfried Rouvrais, Vanea Chiprianov","doi":"10.4018/ijqaete.2012040108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012040108","url":null,"abstract":"On the one hand, no one international model for quality assurance evaluation of higher education has emerged. On the other hand, as a reference model rather than a prescription, the CDIO initiative proposes a mature integrated framework for creation or continuous improvement of engineering programs. However, institutions developing and managing educational programs have to juggle the expectation of various accreditation and evaluation bodies, which may create consistency and interoperability problems. A need exists to unambiguously specify relations among quality assurance concepts to enable more transparent and comparable descriptions of quality frameworks for educational programs. Following constructive alignment principles, this article creates structural models using some of the CDIO Standards. In doing so it lays the foundations of an architectural meta-model for describing complex educational systems, which will contribute to consistency and interoperability among quality frameworks.","PeriodicalId":13684,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ.","volume":"23 1","pages":"80-92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89678457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-04-01DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012040102
J. Malmqvist
The CDIO approach intends to raise the quality of engineering education programs, world-wide. Thus, CDIO includes a number of quality assurance (QA) tools such as the CDIO Standards, Syllabus and self-evaluation model. CDIO programmes are also evaluated by external standards. Therefore, a CDIO programme needs a quality assurance system that fulfils external requirements and that is able to produce the necessary evidence and documentation with minimal additional effort above and beyond the CDIO QA components. Efficient execution of this task requires understanding the similarities and differences between the CDIO and external quality assurance systems, in this case, the European Accreditation of Engineering Programmes (EUR-ACE) system. This article compares and contrasts these two QA approaches, in particular the CDIO Syllabus and the EUR-ACE programme outcomes and the CDIO Standards and EUR-ACE accreditation criteria. Also considered are he pros and cons of a continuous improvement rating scale based system and a threshold-based accreditation model.
{"title":"A Comparison of the CDIO and EUR-ACE Quality Assurance Systems","authors":"J. Malmqvist","doi":"10.4018/ijqaete.2012040102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012040102","url":null,"abstract":"The CDIO approach intends to raise the quality of engineering education programs, world-wide. Thus, CDIO includes a number of quality assurance (QA) tools such as the CDIO Standards, Syllabus and self-evaluation model. CDIO programmes are also evaluated by external standards. Therefore, a CDIO programme needs a quality assurance system that fulfils external requirements and that is able to produce the necessary evidence and documentation with minimal additional effort above and beyond the CDIO QA components. Efficient execution of this task requires understanding the similarities and differences between the CDIO and external quality assurance systems, in this case, the European Accreditation of Engineering Programmes (EUR-ACE) system. This article compares and contrasts these two QA approaches, in particular the CDIO Syllabus and the EUR-ACE programme outcomes and the CDIO Standards and EUR-ACE accreditation criteria. Also considered are he pros and cons of a continuous improvement rating scale based system and a threshold-based accreditation model.","PeriodicalId":13684,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ.","volume":"2 1","pages":"9-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85188320","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-04-01DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012040109
P. Goodhew
In many countries engineering degree programmes can be submitted for accreditation by a professional body and/or graduate engineers can be certified or registered. Where this is available most academic institutions feel that they must offer accredited engineering programmes. I suggest that these processes are at best ineffective (they do not achieve their aims) and at worst they are destructive of creativity, innovation and confidence in the academic community. I wish to argue that such processes (including any internal certification within CDIO) should be abandoned completely. I will propose alternative ways of maintaining the quality of engineering design and manufacture, which place the responsibility where it properly lies – with the manufacturer or contractor.
{"title":"Why Get Your Engineering Programme Accredited?","authors":"P. Goodhew","doi":"10.4018/ijqaete.2012040109","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012040109","url":null,"abstract":"In many countries engineering degree programmes can be submitted for\u0000accreditation by a professional body and/or graduate engineers can be certified\u0000or registered. Where this is available most academic institutions feel that\u0000they must offer accredited engineering programmes. I suggest that these\u0000processes are at best ineffective (they do not achieve their aims) and at worst\u0000they are destructive of creativity, innovation and confidence in the academic\u0000community. I wish to argue that such processes (including any internal\u0000certification within CDIO) should be abandoned completely. I will propose\u0000alternative ways of maintaining the quality of engineering design and\u0000manufacture, which place the responsibility where it properly lies – with the\u0000manufacturer or contractor.","PeriodicalId":13684,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ.","volume":"67 1","pages":"93-95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89032969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-01-01DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012010104
M. Mai, L. Halim, Ruhizan Mohammed Yaseen, T. Meera
{"title":"The Ranking of Science, Technology and Society (STS) Issues by Students and Physics Teachers in Secondary School, Yemen","authors":"M. Mai, L. Halim, Ruhizan Mohammed Yaseen, T. Meera","doi":"10.4018/ijqaete.2012010104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012010104","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13684,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ.","volume":"115 1","pages":"46-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84275994","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-01-01DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012010103
A. Berglund
Student learning is built on native ability, prior preparation and experiences but also by the compatibility of his or her learning style and the instructor’s teaching style. Past research (Kolb, 1 ...
{"title":"Moving Beyond Traditions: Bachelor Thesis Redesign","authors":"A. Berglund","doi":"10.4018/ijqaete.2012010103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012010103","url":null,"abstract":"Student learning is built on native ability, prior preparation and experiences but also by the compatibility of his or her learning style and the instructor’s teaching style. Past research (Kolb, 1 ...","PeriodicalId":13684,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ.","volume":"53 1","pages":"31-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91078506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-01-01DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012010107
M. Lahkim, A. Draganova
{"title":"Leadership Development in Technology Education","authors":"M. Lahkim, A. Draganova","doi":"10.4018/ijqaete.2012010107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012010107","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13684,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ.","volume":"39 1","pages":"86-98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84008184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-01-01DOI: 10.4018/ijqaete.2012010101
A. Blicblau, David Richards
{"title":"Development of \"Real World\" Project Skills for Engineering Students","authors":"A. Blicblau, David Richards","doi":"10.4018/ijqaete.2012010101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012010101","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13684,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Qual. Assur. Eng. Technol. Educ.","volume":"59 1","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85623231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：