초록
This paper deals with analyzing accreditation findings and the causes for the deficiencies in the review by the EAC(Engineering Accreditation Committee) of ABEEK in 2014. For this purpose Final Statements of the 266 engineering education programs reviewed by the EAC of ABEEK in 2014 were analyzed on the basis of the each criterion. However, Accreditation Criterion 8(Program Criterion) was excluded in the analysis of the causes for the deficiencies since the program-specific requirements within areas of specialization might vary with the program criteria. As results of accreditation review by the EAC of ABEEK, Deficiency findings were 81 cases which made up 3.81% of total findings, Weakness findings were 1,679 which made up 78.91% of total findings, Concern findings were 124 cases which made up 5.83% of total findings, and Satisfaction findings were 244 cases which made up 11.47% of total findings. Deficiency and Weakness findings against which the relevant program must take actions for the improvement were 82.71% in all. The findings on program accreditation are made on the basis of the Accreditation Actions Guide. Accordingly, in view of formal logic in the accreditation review, the accreditation findings should comply with the Accreditation Actions Guide consistently. In this respect, the Deficiency findings in the accreditation review can be justified. So it is useful for a program or an institution which prepares for the accreditation review to check over the causes for the Deficiency against the Accreditation Actions Guide. On the other hand changeover in the accreditation policy of the ABEEK may be necessary. If the quality of the engineering education is improved continuously through the accreditation review, accreditation fulfills its purpose. To gain this end it is important to place higher value on the 'bigger picture' than on the minor details. In other words, "holistic" evaluation of evidence should form the basis of accreditation review.
