Attributes reflect acceptable minimum standards
for “quality engineering education”.
How many Qualifying Requirements for
Accreditation?
The graduate attributes provide a point of
reference for jurisdictions to describe the
outcomes of substantially equivalent qualification
– prescribed in (e.g. Malaysia’s) BEM/EAC
Engineering Programme Accreditation Manual
[Version 2017], wherein seven criteria for
accreditation have been identified.
One could ask the question – are these
seven criteria all the necessary qualifying
requirements? What about a shared and/or
universal understanding on the implementation of
OBE? The author believes that an understanding
of WA’s OBE approach is important; indeed crucial,
for both sides of the accreditation equation, i.e.
the IHL, the owner of programme, on the one
hand, and on the other – the PRA’s Engineering
Education Accreditation Council (EEAC) nominated
Accreditation Panel that accredits the BEM/EAC
Engineering Programme. Therefore, PRAEEAC
should have eight qualifying requirements (made
up of a “demonstration of an understanding of
the WA-OBE approach” plus the BEM/EAC seven
criteria – as an example).
Understanding the WA-OBE approach puts
everyone on the same page – the datum, on
which every assessable outcome is gauged and
objectively measured. We cannot afford to have
more than one datum to come out with results of
PREEEAC (e.g. BEM/EAC) qualifying criteria.
Having said this, there is more than one way
of assessing outcomes, and no one can dictate
which is the correct way as long that a logical
mapping of the Programme Learning Outcomes
(PLOs) to the WA’s 12 POs has been developed.
Furthermore, it must be understood by all that the
process is always a work in progress as Continual
Quality Improvements (CQIs) will be initiated to
improve the BEM/EAC Engineering Programme to
better meet prevailing expectations at the time.
Having an “on the same page” understanding
of the OBE approach provides a datum line from
where assessments have a “common measure or
calibration”.
Programme assessment to gauge
attainment of Outcomes
The WA-OBE accreditation process is a peerto-peer
qualitative assessment or objective
measurement process to gauge attainments of
graduate attributes.
Though the process is important, it is the
outcome of the process that is assessed.
Assessment is NOT an audit.
The OBE Process is a qualitative framework
and is not an ISO Standard.
The Self-Assessment Report (SAR) was
developed by using OBE centric methods to
conform to PRAEEAC’s or (EAC’s) Qualifying
Requirements.
The SAR was subjected to a “desktop study”
before the Assessment Panel’s Visit. When the
visit was carried out, the SAR was deemed to be in
order, namely it had been developed in accordance
with the OBE approach and conformed to the
PRAEEAC’s seven criteria.
Assessments are based on the Panel’s
verifications, (or what it was able to obtain by way
of attestations, statements or commitments made
in the SAR) which are then used to arrive at the
Visit’s Elicited Findings report. This was based
on a “Big Picture” approach whereby there was a
triangulation of all verified and attested data that
the panel was able to gather during the course of
its visit.
Based on an “all-considered and balanced”
evaluation of findings of an assessment, the
panel makes a unanimous recommendation for
either an “A”, or a “P”, or a “D” or “F” award – with
considered justification. If there is a dissenting
view among the panel members so that they are
unable to reach a unanimous recommendation,
this has to be resolved before the “Exit Meeting”
with Programme Owner/IHL.
Good time keeping
An accreditation visit to an IHL takes a lot of
resources on the part of Programme Owner to
satisfy the needs of a Panel Visit. The schedule,
which is part of prescribed PRAEEAC’s procedures,
and is known to both IHL and the Panel, must be
adhered to in order to not disrupt unnecessarily
47