Engineer Mobility, International Accreditation and FEIAP Engineering Education Guidelines

Ir. Prof. Dr. Chuah Hean Teik Immediate President Chairman, Standing Committee on Engineering Education Federation of Engineering Institutions of Asia and the Pacific (FEIAP) Summary of the Presentation

• Introduction • Mobility of Engineers and Mutual Recognition of Engineering Degrees • Mobility of Engineers & Technologists – ASEAN Engineers, APEC Engineers, IntPEng • International Accords: – – Sydney Accord – • FEIAP Engineering Education Guideline • Outcome-based Education: Accreditation Criteria and Processes • Concluding Remarks Global Mobility of Engineers • Movement of Globally Engineering Professionals who are capable of Independent Practices • Examples of Understanding/Agreements for Mobility of Engineering Professionals: ASEAN Chartered Professional Engineers Register International Professional Engineers Agreement (formerly EMF) APEC Engineers Register Member Economies in APEC, ASEAN and FEIAP Economy APEC ASEAN FEIAP √ √ Bangladesh √ Brunei √ √

Cambodia √ √ APEC: Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation ASEAN: Association of Chile √ South East Asian Nations China √ √ FEIAP: Federation of Engineering Institutions in Chinese Taipei √ √ Asia and the Pacific √ √ India √ Indonesia √ √ √ Japan √ √ Korea √ √ Laos √ √ √ √ Member Economies in APEC, ASEAN and FEIAP (Cont’d) Economy APEC ASEAN FEIAP Mexico √ Myanmar √ √ √ APEC: Asia Pacific Nigeria √ Economic Cooperation Papua New √ √ ASEAN: Association of Guinea South East Asian Nations FEIAP: Federation of Pakistan √ Engineering Institutions in Peru √ √ Asia and the Pacific Philippines √ √ √ Russia √ Singapore √ √ √ √ Thailand √ √ √ Timor Leste √ USA √ √ Vietnam √ √ 21 10 21 Engineer Register Your gateway to trade liberalisation and professional services Mobility Forums

The International Professional Engineers Agreement (formerly known as Engineers Mobility Forum - commenced 2001) is a multi- national agreement between engineering organisations in the member jurisdictions which creates the framework for the establishment of an international standard of competence for professional engineering, and then empowers each member organization to establish a section of the International Professional Engineers Register. Mobility Forums

The APEC Engineer Agreement is an agreement in place between a number of APEC countries for the purposes of recognising “substantial equivalence” of professional competence in engineering. APEC economies can apply to become members of the agreement by demonstrating that they have in place systems which allow the competence of engineers to be assessed to the agreed international standard set by the APEC Engineer agreement. Mobility Forums The International Agreement (formerly known as Engineering Technologist Mobility Forum - commenced 2001) establishes and maintains an IETA International Register of Engineering Technologists, and is intended to provide a framework for the recognition of experienced practising engineering technologists by the responsible bodies in each of the signatory economies. For Mobility, We need Mutual Recognition and thus Accreditation • International Benchmarking and External Recognition of Quality • For Further Improvement by Faculty • Give Assurance and Confidence to: Prospective students Graduates Prospective employers Graduate schools Licensing agencies Governments Global Development: Different Systems & Different Needs Around the World Major Engineering Accreditation Agreements

 Washington Accord (1989)  European Network for Accreditation of Engineering Education (ENAEE)  Regional Accreditation Activities: Union Panamericana de Associaciones de Ingenieros (UPADI) Federation of Engineering Institutions of Asia and the Pacific (FEIAP) Caribbean Accreditation Council for Engineering Technology (CACET) International Agreements

Other agreements covering mutual recognition in respect of tertiary-level qualifications in engineering:

• The Sydney Accord commenced in 2001 and recognises substantial equivalence in the accreditation of qualifications in engineering technology, normally of three years duration

• The Dublin Accord commenced in 2002 is an agreement for substantial equivalence in the accreditation of tertiary qualifications in technician engineering, normally of two years duration. It commenced in 2002. FEIAP Engineering Education Guidelines (30th December 2010)  Idea mooted during 16th FEAIP GA in 2008 in Bangkok, Thailand

 by FEIAP Engineering Education Work Group led by CIE/IEET, Taipei

 Incorporated an Accreditation System Model Framework adaptive to Needs of Member Economies FEIAP Engineering Education Guidelines (30th December 2010)  Two Phased Development Sequence:

(a) Graduate Capabilities appropriate to Nation Building (b) Graduate Capabilities compliant with education requirement of APEC Engineer, bench-marked against best international practices and standards as that of WA, EANEE etc FEIAP Engineering Education Guidelines 1. Glossary 2. Accreditation Criteria Template for Accreditation Agencies 3. The Accreditation System Model Framework 4. Mentoring System 5. Evaluation of Accreditation Agency 6. Periodic Monitoring of Accreditation Agency Accreditation Agency • Representatives of engineering community • Statutory Power or Recognised Professional Authority • Independent for Autonomous Responsibility for its Operation and Accreditation Decisions • Accreditation Criteria • Training of Assessors • Internal Quality Assurance Procedures • Mandatory Cyclical External Review (5-6 years) Accreditation Criteria

1. Academic Curriculum: Mission and Programme Objectives, Programme Outcomes and Teaching Processes 2. Students 3. Teaching Staff & Support Staff 4. Facilities 5. Quality Management System: Institutional Support, Operating Environment and Financial Resources; Quality Management & Planning; External Assessment & Advisory System; and Quality Assurance Continuous Quality Improvement

• Philosophy is not just to satisfy Accreditation BUT to continuously improve to train GREAT engineering graduates Outcome-Based Education

Term Definition Common Term Programme PEOs are statements that describe Goals, Objectives the expected achievements of graduates Programme (PEO) in their career and professional life a few Objectives years after graduation. Programme POs are statements that describe what Standards, Outcomes students are expected to know and be Graduate (PO) able to perform or do by the time of attributes graduation. These relate to the knowledge, skills and attitudes that students acquired through the programme. Course COs are statements that describe what Learning Outcomes students are expected to know and be Outcomes (CO) able to perform or do upon completion of a course. Stakeholders Involvement

Meetings with all stakeholders (Students, Staff, Industry Advisors, External Examiners, Employers, Alumni, Management) are important as this would give an indication of their involvement in the CQI process of the programme Process Map

Constituents requirements (Develop objectives)

Curriculum, Graduates Teaching & Staff & with Learning Facilities Outcomes

Constituents satisfaction (Achieving objectives)

Continual Improvement Accreditation Visit

• Visit is arranged by the Accreditation Agency • The Evaluation Panel normally consists of a Chairperson and two other members in the relevant engineering discipline. • Prior to the visit, members of the panel must read all the course documents and then consider the areas that the panel needs to perform closer examination/audit during visit • Visit normally lasts for 2 days Day One • Introductory Session Accredatation • Briefing by Faculty Visit • Discussion with Staff Members • Discussion with Students/Graduates • Discussion with Employers • Audit on Facilities

Day Two • Meeting of Evaluation Panel • Audit of Sample Exam Papers & Marked Scripts • Audit of Quality Assurance System • Audit / Discussion / Visit as Necessary • Exit Meeting Steps to be Taken • Set up Accreditation System for own Economy including Accreditation Agency

• Train Assessors (together with International Mentors)

• Test cases in own Economy (with Mentors)

• Analysis and Review of (1) - (3) (with Mentors)

• Get full compliance with FEIAP Education Guideline

• Open to all Universities (Accreditation Agency)

• Move towards International Accords Eg: UNESCO/FEIAP/ISTIC Collaboration Kuala Lumpur Declaration (2015) Kuala Lumpur Declaration (2015) (Cont’d) Kuala Lumpur Declaration (2015) (Cont’d) Mentoring System of FEIAP More established Member Economies are appointed as Mentors to help to: • Set up Accreditation System for Mentee Economy including Accreditation Agency

• Train Assessors

• Observers in Accreditation

• Advice on Improvement for Full Compliance

Example: Myanmar (Mentor), Pakistan (Reviewer) FEIAP Review of Accreditation System

Review of PEC Accreditation System in Sept 2015 Mentoring Programme in Myanmar (2012-2016) SETI Education for Public Good

 What is good for the Development of the Country?  What is good for the Industry in the Country?  What is good for one country/region may not be suitable for another country/region in terms of human resource requirement.  It is important that the Scientists, Engineers and Technologists must contribute towards economic growth of the country and be able to support the industry.

Be Trend Setters, Be Catalysts of Change Concluding Remarks 1/3

ACCREDITATION is for continuous IMPROVEMENT of DELIVERY of Education for producing HUMAN RESOURCE needed for national development Concluding Remarks 2/3 Challenges • Buy-in by University and all Stakeholders • Maintain Fundamentals while Encourage Inclusion of Latest Technology Advancement in the Curriculum • Allow Academic Innovation and Creativity • Avoid Side-tracked • Variety of Modes of Delivery Concluding Remarks 3/3 Challenges • The Process may appear to be Tedious, but certainly Rewarding • Continuous Improvement • Giving Confidence to the Education System • Moving towards International Recognition The Hare and the Tortoise Episode 1:

Slow and Steady Wins the Race The Hare and the Tortoise Episode 2:

Fast and Consistency will always beat Slow and Steady The Hare and the Tortoise Episode 3:

Identify our Core Competency or Strength and then Change the Playing Field to suit our core competency The Hare and the Tortoise Episode 4:

Even though we are Individually Brilliant and have our own Core Competencies, we would achieve Greater Performance if we are able to Pool Resources, Work in a Team and harness each other’s core competencies. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING