Visiting Programs

Transitioning
to C3 & C5

Patsy Brackin Rose-Hulman Institute of

Technology, EAC Criteria Committee Past Chair
Bopaya Bidanda University of Pittsburgh Chair,
EAC Training Committee
We want to have time to discuss your questions!

Help us to communicate with YOU.

• Please send Bopaya your questions via Zoom chat.
• A copy of the slides and this webinar will be made available.
• FAQs are posted on the ABET website:
• https://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/FAQs-for-
EAC-C3-C5-4-8-2019.pdf

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 2

Why did the EAC change the criteria?

2011: 2012:
2009: Task 2010: Surveyed
Identified Literature
force formed PEVs about C3
Stakeholders Review

2013: Task 2013: Criteria

2012: 2013: Feedback
Force presented Committee
Communicate from ABET IAC
findings to full began work on
to Constituents and AAC
EAC findings

2014: EAC 2014:

Presentations by 2015: Area
authorized 2015: Feedback
ABET Staff to Delegation
from ABET IAC
review prior to Professional performs first
and AAC
first reading Societies reading

2016: Area 2017: Area

2015: Comments Delegation Delegation
2019: You are
Received, performs first approves
here
Incorporated reading of new changes for
document 2019-20 Cycle

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 3

ABET EAC defines certain terms that are used in the criteria
for EAC programs.

Definitions
The Engineering Accreditation Commission of ABET recognizes that
its constituents may consider certain terms to have certain meanings;
however, it is necessary for the Engineering Accreditation
Commission to have consistent terminology. Thus, the Engineering
Accreditation Commission will use the following definitions in applying
the criteria:

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 4

Computer science is not considered a basic science.

Basic Science – Basic sciences are disciplines focused on

knowledge or understanding of the fundamental aspects of natural
phenomena. Basic sciences consist of chemistry and physics and
other natural sciences including life, earth, and space sciences.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 5

Pre-calculus and remedial math are not considered college-
level math.

College-Level Mathematics – College-level mathematics consists of

mathematics that requires a degree of mathematical sophistication at
least equivalent to that of introductory calculus. For illustrative
purposes, some examples of college-level mathematics include
calculus, differential equations, probability, statistics, linear algebra,
and discrete mathematics.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 6

Problem solving must address complex problems (SO#1)

Complex Engineering Problems – Complex engineering problems

include one or more of the following characteristics: involving wide-
ranging or conflicting technical issues, having no obvious solution,
addressing problems not encompassed by current standards and
codes, involving diverse groups of stakeholders, including many
component parts or sub-problems, involving multiple disciplines, or
having significant consequences in a range of contexts.
• Only one of the above characteristics is needed.
• Programs have freedom to choose where they assess and
evaluate complex problems.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 7

Considering risk has been added to the description of
design.
Engineering Design – Engineering design is a process of devising a
system, component, or process to meet desired needs and
specifications within constraints. It is an iterative, creative, decision-
making process in which the basic sciences, mathematics, and
engineering sciences are applied to convert resources into solutions.
Engineering design involves identifying opportunities, developing
requirements, performing analysis and synthesis, generating multiple
solutions, evaluating solutions against requirements, considering
risks, and making trade-offs, for the purpose of obtaining a high-
quality solution under the given circumstances.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 8

The phrase “for illustrative purposes only” lists examples.

For illustrative purposes only, examples of possible constraints

include accessibility, aesthetics, codes, constructability, cost,
ergonomics, extensibility, functionality, interoperability, legal
considerations, maintainability, manufacturability, marketability, policy,
regulations, schedule, standards, sustainability, or usability
• Examples are not mandatory
• Examples are not comprehensive

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 9

The definition of Engineering Science is essentially
unchanged.
Engineering Science – Engineering sciences are based on
mathematics and basic sciences but carry knowledge further toward
creative application needed to solve engineering problems. These
studies provide a bridge between mathematics and basic sciences on
the one hand and engineering practice on the other.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 10

Diversity in team definition should be understood in the
context of SO#5.
Team – A team consists of more than one person working toward a
common goal and should include individuals of diverse backgrounds,
skills, or perspectives.
• Indicates the importance of considering the team background, skills
and perspectives.
• C4 assessment and evaluation should address teams

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 11

SO#1 requires complex problems.

1. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve complex engineering problems

by applying principles of engineering, science, and mathematics
• Programs may not notice the addition of complex
• Programs do not need to include all elements of the definition of
complex problems – 1 is sufficient

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 12

SO#2 All factors must be considered.

2. an ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet

specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as
well as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors
• List of factors that must be considered – even if all factors do not
influence the specific design
• It is expected that at some point in the curriculum the phases of the
design process will be incorporated.
• All phases do NOT have to be present in the major design experience.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 13

SO#3 Programs have the freedom to determine the range of
audiences.
3. an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences
• Should have a minimum of 2 audiences in their range
• There are many possible audiences-
• Writing an article for a professional journal
• External clients (industry sponsors, doctors, nurses, venture capitalists)
• End users
• Faculty
• K-12 STEM Outreach
• Lay person (non-technical)
• ABET is not prescriptive

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 14

SO#4 Consideration of impacts is the key.

4. an ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities in

engineering situations and make informed judgments, which must consider the
impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and
societal contexts
• It is not necessary for every engineering situation to require that global,
economic, environmental, and societal contexts be major considerations.
• Consideration of the impact as the judgment is made is key.
• Document the consideration

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 15

SO#5 Teams consider function, environment, and project
management.
5. an ability to function effectively on a team whose members together
provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment,
establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives
• Shared leadership
• Tools and techniques (schedules, scrum, goal setting, decision
matrices)
• Inclusiveness and collaboration can be characterized in various ways

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 16

Possible techniques for assessing collaborative and
inclusive teams include:

1. Videotaping a team meeting and evaluating the team performance using a rubric.
2. Students write descriptions of their contributions and their team members'
contributions indicating how they collaborated and were inclusive. A rubric is often
used to evaluate the description.
3. External clients meet with students over a period of time and evaluate their
contributions and inclusiveness.
4. Use of web-based peer evaluations such as CATME.org or TEAMMATES. The
peer evaluations include specific questions about collaboration and inclusiveness.
5. Verbal feedback from course TAs or instructors about a team's collaboration and
inclusiveness. Students take notes and give evidence to support or refute the
feedback.
April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 17
SO#6 We removed the term “Design of Experiments”

6. an ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation,

analyze and interpret data, and use engineering judgment to draw
conclusions
• Design of Experiments is a term of art in some areas – ABET
never intended to require a specific technique
• Must show judgment in drawing conclusions

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 18

SO#7 Feedback from ABET’s IAC guided our changes.

7. an ability to acquire and apply new knowledge as needed, using

appropriate learning strategies.
• Students take initiative for their learning
• Appropriate learning strategies can include courses, research,
interviewing experts – whatever is appropriate for the task
• Meant to be broad – this can be approached in many ways

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 19

Should we use Student Outcomes 1-7 verbatim?
1. In the event that a program has not stated any student outcome verbatim as cited
in the Engineering Accreditation Criteria, all elements required by that outcome
must be retained.  Further, the program must not alter the intent or otherwise
diminish the meaning of that outcome.
2. Programs may add additional Student Outcomes.
3. Programs must publish all Student Outcomes in a consistent manner regardless
of the media in which they appear.  These Student Outcomes must be identical to
the ones presented to ABET in the program’s Self-Study Report.
4. All Student Outcomes adopted by the program must be assessed, evaluated, and
used as input to the program’s continuous improvement process.
5. Each program must independently assess all Student Outcomes; when programs
share courses, assessment data must be disaggregated by program in order to
ensure the individual program’s outcomes are being independently assessed.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 20

C5 clarifies the minimum number of semester credit hours.

(a) a minimum of 30 semester credit hours (or equivalent) of a

combination of college-level mathematics and basic sciences with
experimental experience appropriate to the program.

• All programs now have the same minimum credit hour

requirements for math-science topics.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 21

C5 clarifies engineering topics.

(b) a minimum of 45 semester credit hours (or equivalent) of

engineering topics appropriate to the program, consisting of
engineering and computer sciences and engineering design, and
utilizing modern engineering tools.
• Indicates that computer sciences are considered engineering
topics – does NOT require a course.
• Programs must indicate their use of modern engineering tools.
• All programs now have the same minimum credit hour
requirements for engineering topics.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 22

A semester credit hour is defined by 34 CFR Part 600.2
Except as provided in 34 CFR 668.8(k) and (l), a credit hour is an amount of work
represented in intended learning outcomes and verified by evidence of student
achievement that is an institutionally established equivalency that reasonably
approximates not less than—
(1) One hour of classroom or direct faculty instruction and a minimum of two
hours of out of class student work each week for approximately fifteen weeks for
one semester or trimester hour of credit, or ten to twelve weeks for one quarter
hour of credit, or the equivalent amount of work over a different
amount of time; or
(2) At least an equivalent amount of work as required in paragraph (1) of this
definition for other academic activities as established by the institution including
laboratory work, internships, practica, studio work, and other academic work
leading to the award of credit hours.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 23

C5 also clarified the culminating major design experience includes 1 and 2
below.

(d) a culminating major engineering design experience that 1)

incorporates appropriate engineering standards and multiple
constraints, and 2) is based on the knowledge and skills acquired in
earlier course work.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 24

When should a program transition? NOW!

• All general reviews conducted in the 2019 – 2020 accreditation

cycle and beyond will be evaluated using the revisions each
commission has made to its accreditation criteria. 
• ABET understands it may take a few years to fully implement
the transition of internal processes to reflect these new criteria.
• In these cases, it is important programs develop a transition plan
and be able to provide evidence the plan is being followed at the
time of their next general review.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 25

Please be patient with ABET in this transition.

• For the 2019-20 and 2020-21 accreditation cycles, it

should be clear ABET does not expect a program’s transition to be
fully implemented.
• Please communicate this to your Program Evaluators preparing for
site visits in the Fall of 2019. 
• Materials that will highlight transition issues, and the necessary
and appropriate judgment for their evaluation, are being prepared
for team refresher training.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 26

One possible approach is to use a-k through the 2018-19
cycle and develop a plan moving forward.
Criteria/Performance Courses in which Assignment Assessment First assessment
Indicator assessed Instrument
1.1 XX 330 Problem Statement Rubrics for PS Spring 2020
1.1 XX 410 Response to Proposal Guidelines Fall 2021
Proposal
1.1 XX 470 Capstone Poster Under development Spring 2021
Presentation
1.2 XX 350 Thermodynamics Solution Rubric Spring 2020
Mini-Project
1.2 XX 370 Machine Design – Spring 2021
bolt load project
1.3 XX 470 Capstone Report Analysis Rubric Spring 2020
etc
etc

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 27

Another approach is to go ahead and make the switch.

Assume this is what a program has been doing since 2014 and you are visiting in 2020.

a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering

1. Chooses a mathematical model of a system or process appropriate for required accuracy
2. Applies mathematical principles to achieve analytical or numerical solution to model
equations
3. Examines approaches to solving an engineering problem in order to choose the more
effective approach
e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
4. Problem statement shows understanding of the problem
5. Solution procedure and methods are defined.
6. Problem solution is appropriate and within reasonable constraints

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 28

1. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve complex engineering
problems by applying principles of engineering, science, and mathematics

Assume this is what a program plans to transition to and began collecting the new data in
2019-20.

1.1 came from (e) 1. Problem statement shows understanding of the complex problem
1.2 came from (e) 3. Problem solution is appropriate and within reasonable constraints
1.3 came from (a) 2. Applies mathematical principles to achieve analytical or numerical
solution to model equations
1.4 is NEW Selects appropriate techniques and tools for a specific complex engineering
problem and compares results with results from alternative tools or techniques.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 29

 Degree of attainment of individual performance indicators
Criterion 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
a.1 80% 82% 86% 85% 86%
a.2 71% 69% 68% 67% 66%
a.3 80% 80% 80% 80% 80%
Our threshold for attainment is that all performance indicators must be greater than 70%. The degree of
attainment of Outcome a is not satisfactory – the department voted to make a change in course #350.

e.1 91% 90% 92% 89% 92%

e.2 78% 81% 85% 89% 90%
e.3 98% 99% 98% 99% 98%
The degree of attainment of Outcome e is satisfactory
In 2019-20 we changed to #1, results for 19-20 are as follows:
1.1 results were 92%
1.2 results were 98%
1.3 results were 82%
1.4 results were 55%
Outcome 1 is not attained. We are examining the assessment instrument
for 1.4 and will consider making a change.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 30

There are other possible acceptable approaches!!!

When thinking about C4, consider what a PEV would need to know:
• Can you tell me your level of attainment for each outcome?
(The answer doesn’t have to be a number to 4 decimal places.)
• How did you arrive at that conclusion?
• How are you using this for continuous improvement?
• Can you show me the evidence that what you just told me is true?

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 31

What if a program has an IR or IV that was received before 2019-20?

• Programs with an IR or an IV typically use the criteria in effect

when they received the IR or IV, but at the choice of the institution,
the IR or IV self-study reports may transition to the new criteria.
• Suppose your program wants to use the new criteria C5 credit-hour requirement for
math and basic science.
• This would require all affected programs at your Institution
switching to ALL of the new criteria.
• Which could require another program at your institution with
a C4 weakness to use the new C3 Student Outcomes.
• All programs at an institution that are responding to an IR or IV action
must use the same set of ABET criteria.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 32

How do these changes affect the Master’s programs?

For students who have graduated from a baccalaureate program

accredited by EAC of ABET, we presume that they have completed a
curriculum that supported the attainment of the then-current Criterion
3 student outcomes, whether those outcomes were (a)-(k) or (1)-(7).
For students who are not graduates from a baccalaureate program
accredited by EAC of ABET, the master’s program must ensure that
each student has completed the experiences required by the criteria
(http://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-
accrediting-engineering-programs- 2018-2019/#2):

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 33

The master's program must have and enforce procedures for verifying that
each student has completed a set of post-secondary educational and
professional experiences that:
(a) Supports the attainment of student outcomes of Criterion 3 of the general
criteria for baccalaureate level engineering programs, and
(b) Includes at least one year of math and basic science (basic science
includes the biological, chemical, and physical sciences), as well as at least
one-and-one-half years of engineering topics and a major design experience
that meets the requirements of Criterion 5 of the general criteria for
baccalaureate level engineering programs.
The student outcomes referenced in (a) and the curriculum requirements
referenced in (b) are those in effect at the time of the review; thus, outcomes
(1)-(7) are required for reviews in the 2019-20 review cycle and beyond.

April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 34

 Questions from the audience
April 26, 2019 April 26, 2019 | 35