Implementation Plan
| Recommendation | Proposed follow-up and resource implications | Responsibility for leading follow-up | Timeline for addressing recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| CEAB Common Finding 1. Learning outcomes and graduate attribute indicators used interchangeably. There appeared to be some confusion between the differences between the two. |
Review Learning outcomes (LOs) and Graduate attributes (GAs) in Civ Eng program. Update where necessary. Also see CEAB Common Finding 3 |
Department Head and Curriculum Committee | Ongoing preliminary analysis on LOs and GAs performed in 2022-23. Further review and minor updates, where necessary, to be completed in 2023-24. |
| CEAB Common Finding 2. Insufficient indicators were used. In some cases, there was only a single measurement for an indicator or there was reliance on a single course and/or the indicator. For some graduate attributes not all indicators were used. Often, Introduced and Applied were identified, but no Developed. |
Review indicators in Civ Eng program and update where necessary. Also see CEAB Common Finding 3 |
Department Head and Curriculum Committee | Minor updates completed in 2021-22. Ongoing review continuing in 2023-24. |
|
CEAB Common Finding 3. Stakeholder engagement is limited mostly to internal representation. A broader set of external stakeholders including alumni (still in military and ex-military) should be engaged. Also, stakeholder roles in the improvement process is inadequately demonstrated. |
In response to CEAB Common Findings 1, 2 and 3, as well as certain programme-specific findings, the Dean of Engineering convened a committee with representatives from all programmes. The committee’s recommendations are being provided as a Faculty-wide directive on GA and CI. Implementation of the changes will impose significant additional work on all Engineering Departments as well as the Dean’s office, both during the transition and on an ongoing basis. It may be appropriate to re-create the position of Associate Dean (Accreditation and Programme) on an ongoing basis to provide oversight and support. |
Dean of Engineering |
Directive on GA and CI to be released June 2022. New processes to be implemented starting in September 2022. Review of process outcomes and revision of processes in June 2023. Prospective stakeholders have been contacted. Stakeholder meeting planned for fall 2023. |
| CEAB Civil Finding 1. The actions [taken to improve the programme] were a result of curriculum feedback unrelated to GAs and the CI process. A report was not completed, nor information provided. Results are presented with limited assessment of the results. |
Review actions taken and improve future decision making processes linking them to GAs and CI. Alo see CEAB Common Finding 3 |
Department Head | Complete |
| CEAB Civil Finding 2. The process of mark submission is not documented and may not be perceived as transparent. | The process of mark submission has been documented and briefed to all faculty members. |
Department Head |
Complete |
| CEAB Civil Finding 3a. The procedure of course allocation to faculty is not documented, nor open or transparent. | The process of course allocation to faculty in the Department has been made fully open and transparent in the years following the CEAB visit. |
Department Head |
Complete |
| CEAB Civil Finding 3b. Appropriate allocation [of Engineering Design] to [licensed Professional Engineers (PEng)] requires additional attention to ensure licensed engineers are teaching and given authority particularly in design related courses | The Department has put processes in place to ensure assignment of courses with Engineering Design content to appropriately-qualified instructors. Military faculty are now able to be reimbursed for PEng license expenses, which will lead to greater availability of PEng in the Department. |
Department Head |
Complete |
| CEAB Civil Finding 4. Courses are not fully offered for francophone students. | Staff three open faculty positions with appropriately-qualified instructors able to teach in French. | Department Head |
Two of three positions filled with bilingual profs. Third position to be filled in 2023-24 after anticipated retirement. |
| CEAB Civil Finding 5. Reaction to hiring academic staff and support staff is constrained by the hiring process. Funds are available but the process to hire and retain qualified staff including francophone staff is not efficient. | RMC has adopted a less-cumbersome process for hiring permanent faculty members. | Vice Principal Academic | Complete |
| ERC Recommendation 1. The comprehensive curriculum review planned to be conducted by the Department in 2019 needs to be fully documented and justified with reference to the Graduate Attributes. | This recommendation was fully addressed in the 2021 curriculum review. Future curriculum reviews will be made in accordance with the changes identified in CEAB Common Finding 3. | Department Head | Complete |
| ERC Recommendation 2. The department needs to use the full range of quality indicators to measure the quality of its program. The absence of an alumni survey was flagged as a deficiency. Other stakeholders, as in the field courses and engineering projects, should also be systematically surveyed. |
Review quality indicators in Civ Eng program and update where necessary. Create stakeholder committee and hold annual meetings for regular feedback Also see CEAB Common Finding 3 |
Department Head |
Quality indicators review and updates completed, where necessary in Prospective stakeholders have been contacted. Stakeholder meeting planned for fall 2023. |
| ERC Recommendation 3. Though the mark submission process for courses in which the final mark is determined by instructors who are not also the supervisors of the course work was clear to all but one faculty member, it needs to be documented for it to be clear to all members, and indeed also to external reviewers who can relate this perceived weakness to a quality criterion of an engineering program. | See CEAB Civil Finding 2 | Department Head | Complete |
| ERC Recommendation 4. Until all members of faculty, including the military, have their Professional Engineering Licenses, there will a high degree of risk that the accreditation of the program will be withdrawn, or else that Military Faculty without a license will have to be demoted to “teaching assistants.” | See CEAB Civil Finding 3.b. | Department Head | Complete |
| ERC Recommendation 5. Knowledge of international relations is a Degree Level Expectation (DLE) for engineering programs, but the course identified by the programme as meeting this learning objective is a basic course on Canadian History. Either the DLE should be removed or a course in International Relations, such as POE/POF116 Introduction to International Relations, should be added to the programme. |
After a review of the Committee report and extensive discussion, Senate has determined that there is no reasonable mechanism for meeting this DLE within the program constraints. No action will be taken. |
Dean of Engineering and Dean of Social Sciences and Humanities | Complete |