All existing academic programmes at RMC are subject to review on a cyclical basis. The cyclical review of a programme is initiated by the Vice-Principal (Academic) based on an established university-wide schedule; however, IQAP reviews of all Engineering Programmes will be conducted in conjunction with the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) evaluation of Engineering Programmes. Deliverables from the IQAP review process include the Executive Summary and Final Assessment Report and Implementation Plan
Accreditation/Cyclical Review Background
All Engineering Programmes in Canada are accredited by the CEAB for a period of up to six years. The standard CEAB review process followed at RMC is outlined below:
- For each programme, the accreditation involves the preparation of a so-called questionnaire. Information required by the IQAP but not required for CEAB are found in an appendix to the questionnaire.
- The CEAB visiting team is made up of one external visitor for each programme, a visit chair, co-chair and a representative from the provincial engineering licensing body (in our case Professional Engineers of Ontario or PEO).
- The CEAB visit to RMC will occur during a planned two or three day period and after the visit the CEAB will issue a visit report to the Dean of Engineering. The report will include observations made by all members of the CEAB visiting team on the Faculty of Engineering and its six programmes. The Dean of Engineering will seek input from each of the Engineering Departments and then respond to the CEAB visit report. The CEAB visit chair will then comment on the Dean's response. Shortly thereafter, the Accreditation Board will make its decisions known to RMC regarding the accreditation of the six engineering programmes. RMC will be given a chance to respond to any deficiencies noted in the CEAB report and depending on the response from the Dean of Engineering, the CEAB may agree to review its findings related to any particular programme.
The RMC QA manual states "The RMC IQAP has been created to meet the requirements of the Quality Council. It provides the framework and templates to assist faculties as they conduct comprehensive, constructive, and meaningful reviews of their existing programmes". The RMC IQAP Manual allows RMC to use the CEAB review process to partially fulfill its IQAP cyclical review requirements. However, there are two important elements required for RMC's IQAP that are not part of the CEAB review process. They are:
- The External Review Committee (ERC) will include one external and one internal reviewer. Each must be at arm’s length to the programme being reviewed. The presence of reviewers from the institution presented a problem for the CEAB as this was not part of their standard operating procedure. A compromise solution was brokered by the Dean of Engineering in which the external/internal reviewers reviewed all available CEAB documentation; accompanied the CEAB programme visitors during their time at RMC; but were NOT part of the in-camera CEAB meetings; and were NOT asked to contribute to the visiting team report. The CEAB visiting team report was shared with the six external/internal reviewers by the Dean and each of external/internal reviewers wrote a separate IQAP report on the programme visited.
- The RMC IQAP Manual requires that programmes demonstrate that each of its graduates has developed a series of so-called Degree-Level Expectations (DLEs). Appendix 3 of the Manual outlines 6 broad DLEs each one broken into a series of indicators. This approach is not unlike that required by the CEAB. With the exception of 4 indicators, all twelve CEAB DLEs could be mapped to those of the IQAP. The mapping process is outlined in each of the programme Questionnaires. The four RMC-specific IQAP indicators are discussed in the appendix of the programme Questionnaires.
Final Assessment Report and Implementation Plan
- Aeronautical Engineering
- Chemical Engineering
- Civil Engineering
- Computer Engineering
- Electrical Engineering
- Mechanical Engineering