1. Accreditation of European Engineering Educational Programmes: EUR-ACE IMPLEMENTATION project; the EUR-ACE label; the ENAEE network Giuliano Augusti Coordinator, EUR-ACE-IMPLEMENTATION project President, ENAEE

2. The Bologna Process, started in 1998 and now involving 45 countries, aims at creating by 2010 the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) based on a system of easily readable and comparable degrees 2 The latest meeting of Higher Education Ministers (Bergen, 2005) approved two fundamental documents: 1: The so-called ENQA Standards: Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area; 2: A Framework for Qualifications in the European Higher Education Area that identifies three main cycles of HE (Bachelor, Master, Doctorate). Europe is a continent of many cultures: this variety, that I consider a great asset, reflects in the different organizations of education/formation in the different Nations…

3. Nevertheless, the readability of degrees, the assurance of quality based on the ENQA S&G, the definition of qualifications related to cycles (levels) of education in accord with the EQF, should essentially lead to a de facto recognition of Higher Education degrees for academic purposes. 3 The national HE Legislations within the EHEA are being renewed and adapted to the structure of the cycles and qualifications defined in these two documents (with many variants that, to be honest, sometimes risk to hinder the consistent structure envisaged as an aim of the Bologna Process….)

4. A process analogous to the Bologna process should develop also with regard to accreditation and recognition for professional purposes, but it is much slower and has not involved yet any change or coordination of national systems. Procedures for professional licensing still vary very much from one European country to the other: formal accreditation procedures of engineering degrees do exist, but only in a handful of countries. Thus, notwithstanding the EU Directives for Recognition of Professional Qualifications, there are still difficulties and confusions in the mutual recognition of academic degrees for professional purposes. 4

5. This was the motivation behind the EUR-ACE project (EURopean ACcredited Engineer) September 2004 – March 2006 5 Europe lacks an accreditation system of engineering education accepted on the continental scale. This fact, notwithstanding the prestige of many National systems and of some Academic titles, in a global job market puts the European engineer in a objectively weak position, when confronted with the several international recognition agreements, existing or on the making (Washington Accord, Engineers Mobility Forum,etc.) supported by the EC within SOCRATES and TEMPUS programmes

6. The EUR-ACE project proposed an European accreditation system that would ensure consistency between existing national engineering accreditation systems; exploit the wealth of good-practice experience they have accumulated; add an European quality label to accreditation; introduce accreditation in other countries; and thus improve quality of education facilitate trans-national recognition facilitate (physical and virtual) mobility 6

7. Accreditation of an Engineering Education Programme (according to EUR-ACE) Result of a process to ensure suitability of programme as entry route to the engineering profession Periodic assessment against accepted standards Peer review of written and oral information by trained and independent panels including academics and professionals Accreditation of programme, not of Department or University Accreditation of education, not of whole formation 7 Quality of education at all levels is a prerequisite of accreditation.

8. Partners in the EUR-ACE project 6 European Engineering Associations/Networks FEANI (Contracting Partner), SEFI, CESAER, EUROCADRES, ENQHEEI, UNIFI/TREE (+ CLAIU as Participating Organization) 8 National Associations/Agencies active in Engineering Accreditation ASIIN (Germany), CTI (France), EC (UK), IEI EngineersIreland, CoPI (Italy), OE (Portugal), UAICR (Romania), RAEE (Russia): TEMPUS partner 8 www.feani.orgwww.feani.org (EUR-ACE)

9. output documents A1) EUR-ACE Framework Standards for the Accreditation of Engineering Programmes (including a Template for Publishing Results) C1) Commentary on A1 A2) Organization and Management of the EUR-ACE Accreditation System: a proposal A3) Financial Plan to start the EUR-ACE system B1) Overview: Accreditation Procedures and Criteria for Engineering Programmes in Europe B2) Report on Trial Accreditations A1 & C1: translated in French, Italian, German, Russian All EUR-ACE documents available on the website www.feani.org (click on the EUR-ACE logo) 9

10. Programme Outcomes The EUR-ACE Framework Standards specify the Programme Outcomes that must be satisfied. They: Are valid for all branches of engineering and all profiles Distinguish between First and Second Cycle programmes, as defined in the European Qualification Framework Are applicable also to integrated programmes, i.e. programmes that are designed to progress directly to a Second Cycle degree Describe what is to be achieved but not how Can accommodate national differences of educational and accreditation practice 10

11. Six categories of Programme Outcomes Knowledge and Understanding Engineering Analysis Engineering Design Investigations Engineering Practice Transferable (personal) Skills 11 For each category, the EUR-ACE Framework Standards list the Outcomes of First Cycle and Second Cycle Graduates.

12. Main Features of EUR-ACE approach (1) 12 The Framework Standards are expressed in terms of accrediting FC & SC degree programmes, but can be used for the accreditation of Agencies that accredit (or intend to accredit) engineering programmes: their rules and Standards should be consistent with the Framework (meta-accreditation); alternatively, the Framework Standards can be used by new Agencies as a guideline for drafting their Standards and Procedures. The Framework Standards will not duplicate nor substitute existing Accreditation Standards

13. Main Features of EUR-ACE approach (2) 13 The outcome assessment approach allows the Framework Standards to be flexible: they regard the EHEA First Cycle-Second Cycle framework as the basic model, but allow the accreditation of integrated programmes (by definition, programmes leading directly to a second-cycle degree), which have to satisfy the learning outcomes at the Second Cycle level. In any case, the outcomes should be interpreted to reflect the specific demands of different branches, cycles and profiles

14. Main Features of EUR-ACE approach (3) Graduation from an accredited degree does not imply that engineering formation is complete: many national systems require e.g. a state exam and/or training periods. Hence, the Framework Standards do not use the term engineer ( engineering graduate) In the implementation of EUR-ACE the labels should be: 14 EUR-ACE Bachelor = European Accredited Engineering Bachelor EUR-ACE Master = … Engineering Master EUR-ACE has been copyrighted

15. How to run the EUR-ACE system ? Paris, 9 September 2000: the representatives of six Associations sign an Agreement intended to build confidence in systems of accreditation of engineering degree programmes within Europe […], […] to assist national agencies and other bodies in planning and developing such systems […] to facilitate systematic exchange of know-how in accreditation and permanent monitoring of the educational requirements in engineering formation…. 15 SOME HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

16. How to run the EUR-ACE system ? (2) 16 … and establish the European Standing Observatory for the Engineering Profession and Education: ESOEPE Founding members UK: EC FR: CTI DE: ASII (now ASIIN) PT: OE (Ordem...) IT: CoPI EU: E4 (now TREE) Later members EU: FEANI EU: SEFI RO: CNEAA RO: UAICR RU: RAEE IE: IEI

17. How to run the EUR-ACE system ? (3) April 2004: ESOEPE is instrumental in preparing and submitting the EUR-ACE project application 17 October 2005: It is decided to transform ESOEPE from an observatory into a non-profit Association The EUR-ACE accreditation system is being set up within ENAEE: it is monitored by an ad-hoc Working Group (EUR-ACE Label Committee).

18. 18 Official birth date: 8 February 2006 Founding members: New members: FEANI RAEE (RU) (admitted SEFICoPI (IT) 17 Nov. 2006) UNIFI/TREEIEI-EngineersIreland CLAIU EUROCADRESOE (Ordem...) (PT) MÜDEK (TR) EC (UK) UAICR (RO) CTI (FR) IDA (DK) ASIIN (DE) FOTEP/BBT (CH)

19. 19 Official birth date: 8 February 2006 First General Assembly: 30 March 2006 Second : 17 November 2006 Administrative Council: G.Augusti (IT, President), A.Chuchalin (RU), C.Forslund (SE), A.Pugh (UK), J.M.Siwak (FR), I.Wasser (DE), P.Wauters (BE, Treasurer)

20. EUR-ACE IMPLEMENTATION A project within the SOCRATES programme to implement the EUR-ACE proposals in synergy with ENAEE (1 September 2006 / 31 July 2008) 20 Contracting Institution: UNIFI (C.Borri, Legal Representative) Partner Institutions: ENAEE (G.Augusti, Coord.) IEI: Engineers Ireland FEANI CoPI (IT) SEFICRUI (IT) EUROCADRESNVAO (NL) EUAOE (PT) IDA (DK)EC (UK) ASIIN(DE)UAICR (RO) AUA (USAEE)MUDEK (TR) C.T.I. (FR)RAEE (RU) ; OPET/BBT (CH)

21. In parallel to EUR-ACE IMPLEMENTATION, a project under the TEMPUS-TACIS programme: PROmotion and implementation of the EUR-ACE Standards [ PRO-EAST ] (1 September 2006 / 31 August 2007) Participating Institutions: UNIFI, RAEE, FEANI, CoPI, SEFI, TPU Project coordinator: Oleg Boev Deputy coordinator for EU: Giuliano Augusti External experts: Iring Wasser, Ian Freeston, etc. This project will include: dissemination of the EUR-ACE results the first EUR-ACE labels to accredited programmes in the Russian Federation 21

22. Contracting Inst.: FEANI (Philippe Wauters: Legal Repr.) Project coordinator: Haissam Ziade, Lebanese University Grant coordinator: Giuliano Augusti, La Sapienza Participating Instns. from EU: ASIIN, CTI, UNIFI, TUAachen Participating Institutions from Lebanon: - Ministry of Education, Directorate for HE - Orders of Architects and Engineers, Beirut & Tripoli - 4 Lebanese Universities ENAEE and the three projects are working in close collaboration. 22 Within the TEMPUS-MEDA Programme, another project aimed at applying the EUR-ACE Standards is starting in January 2007: LEPAC : Creation of a Lebanese Engineering Programs Accreditation Commission

23. IMPLEMENTING EUR-ACE (1) KEY POINTS of the EUR-ACE system:: NOT an European Directive NOT an European Accreditation Board A bottom-up agreement towards a decentralized accreditation system in which: Accreditation is awarded by (present and future) National (or Regional) Agencies. The EUR-ACE label is added to the national accreditation, thus giving it an added value, and is recognized by all participating Agencies 23

24. IMPLEMENTING EUR-ACE (2) For an Agency to be authorized to add the (copyrighted) EUR-ACE label in the accreditation certificates its accreditation Standards and procedures must be consistent with the EUR-ACE Framework Standards It must satisfy appropriate Quality requirements and a Code of Good Practice, in line with the ENQA Standards; 24

25. IMPLEMENTING EUR-ACE (3) EUR-ACE Label Committee: includes representatives of the six Agencies that already satisfy the requirements and will constitute the initial core of the EUR-ACE system: 1.ASIIN (DE) 2.EC (UK) 3.IEI-EngineersIreland 4.CTI (FR) 5.OE (PT) 6.RAEE (RU) 25

26. IMPLEMENTING EUR-ACE (4) 1.ASIIN (DE) 2.EC (UK) 3.IEI-EngineersIreland 4.CTI (FR) 5.OE (PT) 6.RAEE (RU A call will be soon issued towards Higher Educations Institutions in these six countries to apply for the EUR-ACE Label (in addition to National Accreditation). 26

27. IMPLEMENTING EUR-ACE (5) Three alternatives to enlarge the EUR- ACE system beyond the initial core of six Agencies/countries. a)Include other Agencies in the system, as soon as they fulfill the Framework Standards and associated requirements. b)In countries without any accreditation system, create a new Engineering Accreditation Agency. In the meantime, programmes accredited by an Agency already active in the system 27

28. IMPLEMENTING EUR-ACE (6) c) In countries with established general accreditation agencies, if they apply the EUR-ACE Standards when accrediting engineering programmes, they can be authorized to add the EUR-ACE label. ECA may give significant inputs towards applying alternative c) [e.g. by the results of the WG1 ANECA-CTI- OAQ-NVAO cooperation project] We are already working for some agreements in this direction. 28

29. IMPLEMENTING EUR-ACE (7) EUR-ACE Implementation project: Overall Timeline. 29 Stage 1: Sept.06/Jan.07 Preparation Stage 2: Feb./Aug.07 First round of EUR-ACE accreditations Stage 3: Sept./Oct.07 Overview of first round of accreditations Stage 4: Nov.07/May 08 Second round of EUR-ACE accreditations Stage 5: June/July 08: Project Conclusion

30. Many thanks for your attention from Giuliano Augusti President of ENAEE Coordinator, EUR-ACE IMPLEMENTATION giuliano.augusti@uniroma1.it eur-ace@unifi.it Tel. (+39)06.4458.5155 www.feani.orgwww.feani.org (EUR-ACE ; ENAEE)

31. Appendix EUR-ACE Framework Standards: Outcomes of First Cycle and Second Cycle Graduates

32. EUR-ACE Standards EUR-ACE Standards Knowledge and Understanding First cycle Knowledge and understanding of the scientific and mathematical principles underlying their branch of engineering. A systematic understanding of the key aspects and concepts of their branch of engineering. Coherent knowledge of their branch of engineering including some at the forefront of the branch. Awareness of the wider multidisciplinary context of engineering. Second cycle An in-depth knowledge and understanding of the principles of their branch of engineering; A critical awareness of the forefront of their branch. 32

33. EUR-ACE Standards Engineering Analysis First cycle The ability to apply their knowledge and understanding to to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems using established methods. to analyse engineering products, processes and methods. The ability to select and apply relevant analytic and modelling methods. Second cycle The ability to solve problems that are unfamiliar, incompletely defined, and have competing specifications. to formulate and solve problems in new and emerging areas of their specialization. to use their knowledge and understanding to conceptualise engineering models, systems and processes. to apply innovative methods in problem solving. 33

34. EUR-ACE Standards Engineering Design First cycle The ability to apply their engineering knowledge and understanding to develop and realize designs to meet defined and specified requirements. Understanding of design methodologies, and ability to use them. Second cycle An ability to use their engineering knowledge and understanding to design solutions to unfamiliar problems, possibly involving other disciplines. An ability to use creativity to develop new and original ideas and methods. An ability to use their engineering judgment to work with complexity, technical uncertainty and incomplete information. 34

35. EUR-ACE Standards Investigations …be able to use appropriate methods to pursue research or other detailed investigations of technical issues consiste with their level of knowledge and understanding… …be able to use appropriate methods to pursue research or other detailed investigations of technical issues consistent with their level of knowledge and understanding… First cycle The ability to conduct searches of literature, and to use data bases and other sources of information. The ability to design and conduct appropriate experiments, interpret the data and draw conclusions. Workshop and laboratory skills. Second cycle The ability to identify, locate and obtain required data. The ability to design and conduct analytic, modelling and experimental investigations. The ability to critically evaluate data and draw conclusions. The ability to investigate the application of new and emerging technologies in their branch of engineering. 35

36. EUR-ACE Standards Engineering Practice First cycle The ability to select and use appropriate equipment, tools and methods. The ability to combine theory and practice to solve engineering problems. An understanding of applicable techniques and methods, and of their limitations. An awareness of the non-technical (ethical, environmental, commercial and industrial) implications of engineering practice. Second cycle The ability to integrate knowledge from different branches, and handle complexity. A comprehensive understanding of applicable techniques and methods, and of their limitations. A knowledge of the non-technical implications of engineering practice. 36

37. EUR-ACE Standards Transferable (Personal) Skills First cycle Function effectively as an individual and as a member of a team. Use diverse methods to communicate effectively with the engineering community and with society at large. Demonstrate awareness of the health, safety and legal issues and responsibilities of engineering practice, the impact of engineering solutions in a societal and environmental context, and commit to professional ethics, responsibilities and norms of engineering practice. Demonstrate an awareness of project management and business practices, such as risk and change management, and understand their limitations. Recognize the need for, and have the ability to engage in independent, life- long learning. Second cycle Fulfill all the requirements of a First Cycle graduate at the more demanding level of Second Cycle. Function effectively as leader of a team that may be composed of different disciplines and levels. Work and communicate effectively in national and international contexts. 37