Experiences with preparing an undergraduate biomedical engineering program for accreditation under EC2000

To many involved in engineering undergraduate education ABET's Engineering Criteria 2000 CEC2000) reform is both a welcome innovation and an unwelcome chore. Northwestern University's engineering programs face review by ABET in the 1999-2000 academic year and the authors' school has elected to be judged under the EC2000 guidelines. The authors' school was generally prepared for the transition from the ABET's rules preceding EC2000 to the current guidelines. They have been using survey instruments and other measures to assess the success of their programs for a number of decades. Even so the author's school has found many places where it has been possible to refine and improve these processes. Overall, the author is an advocate for the EC2000 initiative. He views it as a spring cleaning opportunity for his undergraduate program in biomedical engineering, providing him with a chance to create greater cohesiveness in his curriculum. It has forced the author's faculty to reflect upon what they are attempting to accomplish and how well they are doing at this. For an interdisciplinary and relatively new field like biomedical engineering, this is a very valuable exercise. This fall will be the author's second experience of an ABET review. His school was reviewed last in the fall of 1993, under the old ABET guidelines. The Self-Study document that he prepared at that time had perhaps one tenth of the narrative contained in the Self-Study document he prepared for review this year. Certainly, the new document provides a Program Evaluator with a richer view of the program. The same may be said for the array of supporting documentation that will be assembled for the Program Evaluator to sift through during his or her visit to the author's school this fall. This explosive growth in documentation will doubtless cause ABET to refine its review process, since the workload associated with Program Evaluation rises presumably in direct proportion to the magnitude of the materials to review. Hopefully, the commendable aspects of EC2000 will not get lost in a backlash against its record-keeping excesses.