Journal of Engineering Education Research (공학교육연구)

Korean Society for Engineering Education (한국공학교육학회)
권호 표지

A Comparison of the CDIO Standards and ABEEK Criteria

CDIO 기준과 한국 공학교육 인증기준의 비교

  • Lee, Hee-Won (Department of Mechanical System Design Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology)
  • 이희원 (서울과학기술대학교 기계시스템디자인공학과)
  • Received : 2018.04.10
  • Accepted : 2018.05.25
  • Published : 2018.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The Conceiving-Designing-Implementing-Operating (CDIO) initiative is a worldwide organization with members from over 120 institutions for higher education, and it provides an innovative educational framework for producing the next generation of engineers. This paper compares the CDIO standards and syllabus to the accreditation criteria of Accreditation Board for Engineering Education of Korea, ABEEK to identify similarities and differences and to find points of improvement for ABEEK criteria. It is found that the basic concepts of ABEEK criteria correlates well with those of CDIO standards, while the CDIO standards and syllabus provide more detailed and well-defined guidelines for engineering programs. Finally, some discussions are presented on the differences between the two educational models, a voluntary-based CDIO model and an accreditation-based ABEEK model.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 서울과학기술대학교

References

  1. CDIO INITIATIVE, http://www.cdio.org/about
  2. CDIO INITIATIVE, http://www.cdio.org/knowledge-library
  3. (사)한국공학교육인증원, http://abeek.or.kr/program/total
  4. Edward F. Crawley, et al., The CDIO Syllabus v2.0 An Updated Statement of Goals for Engineering Education, Proceedings of the 7th International CDIO Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2011. http://www.cdio.org/knowledge-library.
  5. (사) 한국공학교육인증원(2018). 2018년 인증평가 적용 공학 교육인증기준 (KEC2015). http://abeek.or.kr/intro
  6. (사)한국공학교육인증원(2018). 2018년도 KEC2015 인증평가 판정가이드. 2018년 평가단 업무 매뉴얼
  7. (사)한국공학교육인증원(2018). 2018년 교육기관 자체평가보고서 양식(KEC2015). http://abeek.or.kr/appraisal/template
  8. 강상희, 송동주(2015), "2014년 인증평가 결과 분석: EAC 프로그램의 결함 판정 사유를 중심으로", 공학교육연구, 18(5), 32-41
  9. Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Brodeur, D. R, Ostlund, S. Rethinking Engineering Education: The CDIO Approach, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2007.
  10. Johan Malmqvist, A Comparison of the CDIO and EUR-ACE Quality Assurance System, Proceedings of the 5th International CDIO Conference, Singapore, 2009. http://www.cdio.org/knowledge-library
  11. Anastasia Rynearson, CDIO and Accreditation in Japan, 2011. http://www.cdio.org/knowledge-library