Investigating the Relative Importance of the Ceab Graduate Attributes: Study Design and Initial Findings

Cicek, Jillian Seniuk; Ingram, Sandra; Mann, Danny; Renaud, Robert

doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.10404

Cited by 7 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The twelve attributes are: a knowledge base for engineering, problem analysis, investigation, design, use of engineering tools, individual and team work, communication skills, professionalism, impact of engineering on society and the environment, ethics and equity, economics and project management, and life-long learning [18]. These attributes are not always well understood by all stakeholders in the university [19].…”

Section: Institution Definitions Of Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Students’ Definitions of Success: A Review of the Literature

Ullrich

Strong

2019

PCEEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term “success” has many different meanings for students and stakeholders in the academic environment [1]. The most common measure of student success employed by researchers and institutions is performance-based measures such as grades and graduation rates. The remainder of the definitions are inconsistent among the various stakeholders in the academic environment. Understanding the importance of the criteria used by students to define their success in Canadian undergraduate engineering programs, as well as the degree to which students are motivated to engage in each criterion with a mastery-based approach, could be useful for reconciling the differences between the student group and the other stakeholders in the academic environment and assist in designing teaching strategies that align with these criteria and thus promote a masterybased view of success. This paper summarizes three achievement motivation frameworks and contributes a synthesis of the literature regarding student and other stakeholder definitions of student success to identify opportunities and methodologies in preparation for a research study on this topic as it applies to success in the context of Canadian undergraduate engineering students.

show abstract

Section: Institution Definitions Of Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Students’ Definitions of Success: A Review of the Literature

Ullrich

Strong

2019

PCEEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A closed-ended rating survey was designed to determine the relative importance and the dependencies of the CEAB graduate attributes as perceived by engineering stakeholders at the University of Manitoba. The relative importance was calculated as follows: Data were collected on the perceived frequency of a graduate attribute for an Engineer-in-Training (EIT) in engineering practice (i.e., how often an EIT at the beginning of his/her career will perform a task that clearly requires a graduate attribute), and the perceived criticality of a graduate attribute (i.e., the potential effect on workplace performance for an EIT at the beginning of his/her career if he/she does not have a sufficient level of competency for this graduate attribute) each on a five-point scale (see [6] for a detailed account of survey development). The mean perceived absolute importance of each graduate attribute for each stakeholder was calculated by multiplying the frequency and the criticality data, i.e., I i = F i C i [7] [8].…”

Section: Index Of Relative Importancementioning

confidence: 99%

Determining the Content Validity of a Biosystems Engineering Program

Cicek¹,

Renaud²,

Mann³

et al. 2018

PCEEA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed as an exploratorycase study to determine the relative importance anddependencies of the CEAB graduate attributes asperceived by engineering stakeholders of the University ofManitoba. The findings were used to examine the contentvalidity of the Biosystems Engineering program. Theoverarching objective was to explore how well theemphasis on graduate attributes development in theFaculty of Engineering at the University of Manitobareflect the graduate attribute importance reported by keystakeholders. Findings showed that all stakeholdersranked Individual and Teamwork and CommunicationsSkills as the top engineering competencies, and all CEABgraduate attributes were perceived to between 6.1% and10.9% relatively important. This was in sharp contrast tothe Biosystems Engineering program, which is comprisedof approximately 50% of the graduate attribute, AKnowledge Base for Engineering. In this paper, themethods and findings in the determination of the contentvalidity of an engineering program are presented anddiscussed.

show abstract

“…Over the past 20 years, engineering accreditation boards across the world have embraced outcomesbased assessment as part of their accreditation requirements 1 . Accredited engineering programs have to demonstrate that their graduating students have competencies in a variety of knowledge, skill, attitude, value and behaviour capacities.…”

Section: Introduction and Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Canada, the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) governs accredited engineering programs. Twelve graduate attributes have been identified by CEAB in which engineering students must be proficient: As with other accreditation boards, such as ABET, it is the engineering program seeking accreditation that must devise the outcomes-based teaching and assessment measures to facilitate students' learning in these areas 1 . To some extent, thus far in Canada, due to the pressures of accreditation, approaches to this problem could be generalized as efforts to teach and assess the CEAB graduate attributes by individually and equitably attending to each attribute on the list, despite acknowledgment by the Washington Accord that whilst all attributes are important, they should not necessarily be appointed equal weight 2 .…”

Section: Introduction and Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…on your experience, please indicate on a percentage scale that ranges from 100% = total dependency to 0% = no dependency (see [scale] below), the degree to which you feel that the attribute listed on the left is dependent on, or requires, the attribute listed on the right for an Engineer-in-Training (EIT) at the beginning of his/her career. 1For example, in the first pair, you should think about the degree to which an Engineer-in-Training (EIT) at the beginning of his/her career who is doing something that involves A Knowledge Base forEngineering depends on, or requires, Problem Analysis 1. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation