Evaluation Of Engineering Programs In Mexico
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract Session 2560 Evaluation of Engineering Programs in Mexico L.F. Borjón, F. Martín del Campo Division of Science and Engineering Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico city Abstract --- This work presents an overview of evaluation and accreditation for Engineering programs in Mexico under the conditions given by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). A new system known as the Council for the Accreditation of Engineering programs (CACEI) has been created in Mexico. This council is the first organization in Mexico for evaluation and accreditation of engineering programs from an outsiders point of view. The second part of this paper deals with the efforts toward evaluation that a private university in Mexico city, Universidad Iberoamericana (UIA) has been seeking to count with high quality engineering programs. An evaluation process, based on ABET criteria, has been implemented by UIA for seven engineering programs. INTRODUCTION NAFTA was signed on December 17, 1992 by the Presidents of Mexico, USA and the prime minister of Canada. It began operation on January 1, 1994. On chapter XII, 1210.5, aspects concerning professional services are treated, NAFTA establishes that each one of the parts should elaborate procedures in order to obtain temporary licenses to engineers to operate on 1996. Multiple reunions have taken place since June 1992 with the participation of professional engineering societies, authorities from the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), the National Council of Examiners and Surveying (NCEES) and ABET from the US. There has been participation from the Professional College of Civil Engineers of Mexico (CIC), Professional College of Mechanical Engineers in Mexico (CIME), National College of Chemical Engineers and Chemists in Mexico (CONIQ), and the Canadian Council of Professional Engineers. On April 21, 1993, the Professional bodies of Mexico signed and agreement to create the Mexican Committee for the International Practice of Engineering (COMPII). In this committee, the different professional colleges of Mexico participate. On June 1993, the first meeting regarding register and Practice of Engineering took place in Austin, TX. It was agreed that the creation of a Mexican accreditation system would represent an important factor for the increasing the quality of education in Mexico. The three countries signed a declaration establishing the objective of creating this system that could be similar to ABET or the Canadian system in order to count with the approval from these countries. The accreditation system implies the evaluation of engineering programs as well as educational institutions in order to guarantee that the evaluated engineering programs would comply with a set of minimum quality standards. 1996 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,015 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».