Home⇛Journal of Education, Management, and Development Studies⇛vol. 2 no. 4 (2022)

Compliance of Engineering Programs to CDIO Standards: A Case of a State College in the Philippines

Harold Jan Terano | Francia H. Tomenio | Keith Marlon R. Tabal

Discipline: Engineering

 

Abstract:

CDIO (Conceive, Design, Implement, and Operate) emphasizes new approaches in engineering education, and provides students better learning experiences which will prepare them into the real-world of engineering works. This CDIO approach has been adopted by several universities around the world. In the Philippines, this approach has been introduced to several universities and colleges more specifically to engineering programs. Engineering programs at Camarines Sur Polytechnic has been in its third-year since its introduction of CDIO in 2017. This study was developed to evaluate the current state of the engineering programs on how well it lines up with the 12 CDIO standards using the CDIO’s 6-level self-evaluation rubric. Results showed that there are improvements on the ratings in 2020 as compared in 2017 where CDIO framework was first introduced in engineering programs. Standards 4, 5, 9, 10 and 11 were rated 4 which confirmed that the engineering program complies with the standards. Standards 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 and 12 were rated 3 which confirmed that further development and improvement in these standards are sought. Compliance and alignment of CDIO standards to Commission on Higher Education (CHED) standards and quality assurance systems including Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities in the Philippines (AACCUP) and Philippine Technological Council (PTC) has been presented and found that CDIO standards conforms with the various quality assurance systems. Plans of action were developed for continuous improvement processes.



References:

  1. Armstrong Perry, B., Bankel, J., Gunnarsson, S., Keesee, J., & Oosthuizen, P. (2006). Meeting the CDIO requirements: An international comparison of engineering curricula. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 5(2), 263–266.
  2. Brodeur, D., & Crawley, E. (2009, July). CDIO and quality assurance: Using the standards for continuous program improvement. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Education (pp. 211–222). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0555-0_17
  3. Campbell, D., Dawes, L., Beck, H., Wallace, S., Boman, M., & Reidsema, C. (2009). Graduate attribute mapping with the extended CDIO framework. In Proceedings of the 20th Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference. Citeseer.
  4. The CDIO method. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cdio.org/framework-benefits/teaching-learning-reform
  5. CDIO standards. (2004). Retrieved from http://www.cdio.org/
  6. CDIO standards 2.0. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cdio.org/implementing-cdio/standards/12-cdio-standards
  7. CDIO standards 2.0. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.cdio.org/implementing-cdio/standards/12-cdio-standards
  8. Choo, K., Tan, D., Chong, J., & Wee, K. (2015, June). CDIO and ABET accreditation: The Nanyang Polytechnic experience.
  9. Chuchalin, P., Petrovskaya, T., Kulyukina, E., & Tayurskaya, M. (2012, July). Benchmarking of TPU academic standard and CDIO standards in engineering education.
  10. Crawley, E. F., & Brodeur, D. (2005, June). Program evaluation aligned with the CDIO standards. In 2005 Annual Conference Proceedings (pp. 10.1028.1–10.1028.18). ASEE Conferences. Retrieved from http://peer.asee.org/15474 https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--15474
  11. Education at a glance: OECD indicators 2002. (2011). Washington: Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development.
  12. Gray, P. J. (2012). CDIO standards and quality assurance: From application to accreditation. International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education, 2(2), 1–8.
  13. Kontio, J., Roslöf, J., Edström, K., Naumann, S., Hussmann, P., Schrey, K., & Karhu, M. (2012, August). Improving quality assurance with CDIO self-evaluation: Experiences from a Nordic project. International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education, 2, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012040106
  14. Kristensen, B. (2010, July). Has external quality assurance actually improved quality in higher education over the course of 20 years of the ‘quality revolution’? Quality in Higher Education, 16(2), 153–157. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13538322.2010.485732  https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2010.485732
  15. Marr, B. (2016, June). What everyone must know about Industry 4.0. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2016/06/20/what-everyone-must-know-about-industry-4-0/#511dab77795f
  16. Nhi, N., Thai, T., Pham, H., & Nguyen, G. (2020, September). CDIO approach in developing teacher training program to meet requirement of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 in Vietnam. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15, 108. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i18.15517
  17. Norinpel, E., Gonchigsumlaa, K., Tungalag, U., & Purevdorj, U. (2018, October). CDIO based curriculum design and development of undergraduate program.
  18. Onwuegbuzie, A., & Weinbaum, R. (2017, February). A framework for using qualitative comparative analysis for the review of the literature. The Qualitative Report, 22, 359–372. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2017.2175
  19. Patil, A. S., & Gray, P. (Eds.). (2009). Engineering education quality assurance: A global perspective. Dordrecht; New York: Springer.
  20. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  21. Personal and professional skills & attributes. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cdio.org/participate/instructor-resource-materials/personal-and-professional-skills-attributes
  22. Platanitis, G., & Pop-Iliev, R. (2011, June). Self-evaluation for compliance with the 12 CDIO standards. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association. https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3596
  23. Self-evaluation by the CDIO standards (template) | Worldwide CDIO Initiative. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cdio.org/node/6011
  24. Sotto, R. J., Barandon, S., Bustamante, J., Luzon, A., Pontillas, M., & Terano, H. J. (2021, September). Possible scenarios on the future of Polytechnic State University of Bicol (PSUB) – Research culture by 2030 using Jim Dator’s archetypes of alternative futures. Journal of Education, Management and Development Studies, 1(2), 40–51. Retrieved from https://journals.cspc.edu.ph/index.php/jemds/article/view/26 https://doi.org/10.52631/jemds.v1i2.26
  25. Terano, H. J. R. (2018, November). Development and effectiveness of the simplified textbook in advanced mathematics for engineering programs in one state college in the Philippines. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 23(1-3). Retrieved from http://krepublishers.com/02-Journals/IJES/IJES-23-0-000-18-Web/IJES-23-0-000-18-Contents/IJES-23-0-000-18-Contents.htm https://doi.org/10.31901/24566322.2018/23.1-3.1069
  26. Terano, H. J. R. (2019). Development of integrated curricula for the master of engineering programs using the CDIO framework. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 9(3), 44–55.

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic