Accreditation of science faculties and evaluation of science curricula
Abstract
The title of this conference is "Teaching of Science at Universities:
Present Status and Future Challenges." The contributors to each of the six themes (محاور) were requested to deal
with the theme assigned to them
"… from the perspective of describing current practice and
prescribing how to improve upon it …" (this is a non-literal translation
from the letter, written in Arabic, and sent to the contributors by the Secretary
General of the Lebanese National Commission for UNESCO.
"
من منظور توصيف الواقع و كيفية
النهوض به..."
This
presentation is on theme 4: Accreditation
of science faculties and evaluation of science curricula.
I shall
deal with this subject in the following manner:
I begin
explaining the concept of accreditation, and the accrediting process, as
developed and practiced at the level of institutions of higher education in the
United States of America. At the
core of accreditation in the American tradition are two basic concepts: self-study
and peer evaluation. I
explain these concepts and draw upon our recent experience at the American
University of Beirut as we sought, and obtained, institutional accreditation
from the Middle States Commission on Higher Education.
Accreditation
could be of an institution. It
could also be of a faculty or a program.
However, the accreditation process is basically the same regardless of
what is being accredited. The
process goes through several stages, the most important of which is the self-study
stage. The institution must
address three basic questions: (1) what is my mission and what are my
objectives? (2) What are the means that I use to obtain these objectives and
(3) how do I know the extent to which I have succeeded, if at all, in realizing
these objectives? Upon the conclusion
of the self-study, the institution submits a self-study report to a team
(selected for this occasion, by the accrediting association) consisting of
academicians and professional educators from peer universities. The peer evaluation team, after careful
study of what the institution reported about itself, and after conducting
numerous evaluation meetings, interviews, and inspections, writes its report
and makes its recommendations to accrediting commission or agency.
When a program
(rather than an institution) is being accredited it is almost always
'scientific' or technical in nature.
Even within a faculty or school (such as Engineering or Dentistry), accreditation
is of specific programs leading to a profession such as Civil Engineering,
Electrical Engineering, Aerospace Engineering; or Pediatric Dentistry, Oral
Pathology, Orthodontic and Dento-facial Orthopedics.
What
may 'distinguish' science programs is a greater degree of emphasis on the integration
of technology into teaching and learning. Professors of Engineering, for
example, are more likely to use technological tools provided by academic
computing (such as WebCT) to assist them in planning and teaching their
courses. Documenting what one
does as a teacher and a researcher makes the satisfaction of the 'third
accreditation question' (how do I know, and how can I prove, that I am
realizing the learning outcomes of the courses I teach?) far easier than
otherwise.
It is safe to assume that by "current
practice", the Lebanese National Commission for UNESCO (through its
Secretary General) was referring to Lebanon and the Arab world. To what extent and in what manner
does our describing the American accreditation practice shed light on current
practice in Lebanon and the Arab world? Only by way of contrast, I am sorry to say. By developing a highly efficient and
reliable system of self-regulation, the sector of higher education in
the USA succeeded not only in improving the quality of the education it
provides but also safeguarded its autonomy
and freedom from external, non-academic, powers and interests. This is what we very badly need, but do not have in the Arab world. It is easy to prescribe self-regulation
(through self-study and peer-evaluation) as the best means for institutions of
higher education in our part of the world to attain and protect their autonomy
and integrity. But I must admit
that I have no specific, implementable recommendations to make. How does one lift the heavy hand of government
and society to bring about the needed reforms, without the help of
government and society?!
Waddah
Nasr
American
University of Beirut