A CDIO-based Comparisonof Engineering Curricula in the USA, Canada, Sweden and the UK

A CDIO-based Comparisonof Engineering Curricula in the USA, Canada, Sweden and the UK

P. Armstrong, J. Bankel, S. Gunnarsson, J. Keesee, P. Oosthuizen (2006).  A CDIO-based Comparisonof Engineering Curricula in the USA, Canada, Sweden and the UK. 15.

Having introduced the CDIO Syllabus and the CDIO Standards, the authors review some of the factors that have influenced the development of engineering education in the USA, Canada, Sweden and the UK. Representative engineering programmes from each country are then used to illustrate that there are national differences in engineering curricula. As a consequence it is necessary to examine the implications for meeting the requirements of the CDIO Syllabus. It is also important to determine if there is conflict between the CDIO Syllabus and national accreditation criteria. The authors discuss how national differences can be catered for, and argue that there is no conflict with current accreditation criteria. As a result it is suggested that the CDIO Syllabus, coupled with the CDIO Standards, can form the basis of international requirements for engineering education. Such requirements would be aspirational, and hence complementary to the minimum or threshold requirements that are emerging in the form of global accreditation criteria.

2nd International CDIO Conference, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, 13 to 14 June 2006

Authors (New): 
P. J. Armstrong
Johan Bankel
Svante Gunnarsson
J. Keesee
P. Oosthuizen
Pages: 
15
Affiliations: 
Queen's University Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada
Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
Keywords: 
CDIO Syllabus
CDIO standards
Engineering education
Year: 
2006-01-01 00:00:00
Reference: 
CDIO Initiative Website, www.cdio.org, 2006. : 
Bankel, J., Berggren, K-F., Blom, K., Crawley, E.F., Wiklund, I. and Östlund, S., ”The CDIO Syllabus: a Comparative Study of Expected Student Proficiency”, European J. of Engineering Education, Vol. 28 No. 3, 2003.: 
Grayson, L.P., “The Making of an Engineer: An Illustrated History of Engineering Education in the United States and Canada”, Wiley, 1993.: 
Seely, B.E., “European Contributions to American Engineering Education: Blending Old and New”, Quaderns D’Història de l’Enginyeria, Vol. III, 1999.: 
Prados, J.W., Peterson, G.D. and Lattuca, L.R., “Quality Assurance of Engineering Education through Accreditation. The Impact of Engineering Criteria 2000 and its Global Influence”, Proc. ASEE Ann. Conf. & Exposition, 2003.: 
Terman, F.E., “A Brief History of Electrical Engineering Education”, Proc. of the IEEE, Vol. 86, No. 8, 1998.: 
ABET, “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs”, www.abet.org/forms.shtml, 2006. : 
Engineering Council, “UK-SPEC: The Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes”, www.engc.org.uki/UKSPEC/, 2006. : 
CEAB, “Accreditation Criteria and Procedures (2005 CEAB Report)”, www.ccpe.ca/e/prog_publicatons_3.cfm, 2006. : 
Sadurskis, A., “Quality Assurance of Engineering Education in Sweden”, 1st Ann. CDIO Conf., Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada, 2005. : 
Malmqvist, J., Edström, K., Gunnarson, S. and Östlund, S. ”Use of CDIO Standards in Swedish National Evaluation of Engineering Educational Programs”, 1st Ann. CDIO Conf., Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada, 2005. : 
Akinmusuru, J.O., “The Washington Accord: Exclusion by Design?”, Proc. ASEE Ann. Conf. & Exposition, 2003. : 
EUR-ACE, “Framework Standards for the Accreditation of Engineering Programmes”, www.feani.org/EUR_ACE/reports_accrstand.html, 2006.: 
Bullen, F. and Silverstein, J. “Linking Local Attributes to Global Accreditation”, Proc. 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conf., 2005. : 
Go to top