IEEE Committee on Engineering
Accreditation Activities
(continued..)
Process
Appointment
of Consultants.In
accord with the Visit Assignment
process, two consultants will be
appointed by the Visit
Assignment Coordinator for each
Program Evaluator assigned to a
program visit, one of which will
be designed as the lead
consultant. A listing of these
assignments will be distributed
to all members of the CEAA at
the Fall meeting of the CEAA,
and updated as necessary during
the visit cycle.
Previsit
Correspondence with Evaluators.
Also in accord with the Visit
Assignment process, the Program
Evaluator Assignment Coordinator
shall correspond in the name of
the CEAA Chair with each
assigned program evaluator (1)
reminding him or her of the
deliverables, as listed in Appendix
C, to be provided to both
ABET and CEAA that result from
their visit; and (2) providing
the evaluator with names and
contact information of the Chair
of CEAA and two assigned CEAA
reviewer/consultants. The lead
consultant shall correspond with
the program evaluator prior to
the visit, offering assistance
with accreditation issues
arising during the visit process
and reminding the evaluator of
the reporting expectations,
including deadlines.
Exit-Time
Visit Report.
Copies of the complete exit-time
visit report submitted by the
evaluator to the Team Chair are
to be sent immediately to the
CEAA consultants and to the CEAA
Chair. The evaluator shall also
submit to the CEAA supplemental
information (to the extent that
it is not included in the visit
report) that might be necessary
in reviewing the visit report.
If the visit report has not been
received within 30 days of date
of the visit, the Chair of CEAA
shall request status of the
report from the evaluator.
Due
Process Activities of Evaluator.
ABET encourages the visited
programs to remedy shortcomings
at any time prior to the time
that the EAC determines and
adopts the accreditation action.
While due-process communications
from the program may be
submitted for consideration at
any time during the due-process
period, there are two primary
responses: the 14-day response,
immediately following the visit
and based on contents of the
exit interview and the Program
Audit Form and Explanation of
Shortcomings; and a 30-day
response based on the contents
of the Preliminary Statement to
the Institution. To the extent
that the evaluator is involved
in the due process activities,
the evaluator shall promptly
provide to the CEAA Chair and
each of the two consultants any
substantive revisions to the
exit-time visit report and other
materials previously submitted
to the CEAA. Substantive
revisions specifically include
any changes in the proposed
statement to the institution,
The Program Audit Form and
Explanation of Shortcomings
form, and the recommended
accreditation action. Submission
by email is preferred.
Post-visit Consultations. The
CEAA consultants/reviewers may
consult directly with the
evaluator and indirectly through
those CEAA members who are also
IEEE representatives to the EAC
with the Team Chair or with
other EAC members and staff to
clarify ambiguities in the
exit-time visit report, its
due-process revisions, the
statement to the institution,
and the recommended
accreditation action. Any such
consultation shall be fully
coordinated with the CEAA Chair.
Review.
Each consultant/reviewer will
produce a review of the
evaluator's report and
recommendations. The two CEAA
consultants/reviewers for a
program should consult with each
other, or any other CEAA member,
in the preparation of their
reviews. The review report shall
contain (1) the evaluator's
name; (2) the CEAA consultant's
name; (3) a very brief synopsis
of the exit-time state of the
program; (4) comments with
respect to the quality of the
exit-time visit report and
suggestions for improvement; (5)
comments with respect to any
changes induced by any due
process response and suggestions
for improvement; (6) a
discussion of the recommended
accreditation action by the
evaluator vis-a-vis the
recommendation of the
consultant/reviewer; (7) a
consultant-assigned grade on the
quality of the visit report as
amended by any changes induced
by any due process response; and
(8) comments to CEAA members
regarding accreditation issues
brought to light in the visit report.
The
Report Review CEAA form in
Appendix
A shall be used by each
reviewer/consultant in
making the visit report
review. Grades for visit
reports shall be assigned in
accord with the guidelines
of Appendix D.
Submission
and Distribution of Visit
Report Evaluations.
Each reviewer will submit (by
e-mail) each Visit Report
Evaluation to the CEAA
Chairperson within 7 days or as
soon thereafter as practicable
of receipt of the visit report
from the program evaluator. The
CEAA Chairperson will tabulate
results of the review of all
programs visited by IEEE
evaluators. The tabulated
information will be distributed
to the membership of the CEAA
for the purpose of (1) improving
the CEAA mentoring and review
processes, and (2) assisting the
EAC to ensure the correct
accreditation action is taken.
Following deliberations on this
information by the CEAA at its
winter meeting, concerns with
respect to specific programs
shall be provided to the senior
IEEE representative to the EAC
to be used at his or her
discretion in subsequent
deliberations by the EAC.
Feedback
to Program Evaluators.
Suggestions for improvement,
based on the Program Report
Evaluation and the subsequent
deliberations of the CEAA, shall
be distributed to each evaluator
by the Chair.
Provision
of Review Information to EAC.
Information pertaining to due
process responses gleaned by
CEAA from its correspondence
with evaluators may, at the sole
discretion of the Chair of CEAA
be communicated with members of
EAC. With respect to programs of
previous concern to the CEAA and
to other programs for which the
recommended action was changed,
the CEAA Chair shall provide the
due process commentaries to the
senior IEEE representative to
the EAC to be used at his or her
discretion in subsequent
deliberations by the EAC.
