ABEEK Rules on Accreditation

Section 1 General
Article 1 (General)

Pursuant to Article 2 of ABEEK Constitution, ABEEK shall conduct accreditation of programs in engineering in accordance with the following rules.

Section 2 Objectives of Accreditation
Article 2 (Definition of Accreditation)
  1. The program implies but just one of possible degree programs that an administrative unit for engineering education could operate. ABEEK-accreditation of engineering programs assures that graduates of accredited programs possess sufficient academic background for pursuing their professional career in engineering, computing and IT-related disciplines or engineering technology.
  2. ABEEK assesses whether engineering education programs and institutions satisfy the accreditation criteria.
  3. ABEEK promotes new and innovative methods in engineering education, provides guidelines and consultation for educational programs.
  4. ABEEK enables the public to recognize that ABEEK-accredited programs in engineering meet academic requirements for their respective professions.
Article 3 (Eligibility)

Undergraduate programs in engineering at or beyond associate degree level as certified by National Higher Education Codes are eligible for accreditation.

Article 4 (Unit of Accreditation, Accredited Program)

ABEEK accredits neither educational institutions nor administrative units but educational programs that operate independent degree granting programs of study which are referred to as accredited programs. Should an administrative unit offer plural programs in engineering with distinct educational objectives, such programs shall be accredited separately.

Article 5 (Meaning of Accreditation)

“ABEEK-accredited program” complies with the minimum requirements as stipulated in Section 3 Accreditation Criteria.

Section 3 Accreditation Criteria
Article 6 (Accreditation Criteria)
  1. ABEEK shall establish Accreditation Criteria (KEC2015, KCC2015, and KTC2015) and administer accreditation evaluation based on these criteria. The Accreditation Criteria shall be applied with due discretion to reflect the specialization and differentiation amongst programs in engineering.
  2. Accreditation Evaluation Guidelines based on respective Accreditation Criteria (KEC2015-Evaluation Guidelines, KCC2015-Evaluation Guidelines, KTC2015-Evaluation Guidelines) shall be provided for greater consistency in accreditation evaluation process.
  3. Accreditation Criteria shall be reviewed by the respective Accreditation Councils (Engineering Accreditation Council, Computing Accreditation Council, and Engineering Technology Accreditation Council) and ratified by the Board of Directors.
  4. Accreditation Evaluation Guidelines shall be reviewed and ratified by the respective Accreditation Council.
  5. Accreditation Committees (EAC, CAC, ETAC), Strategic Planning Committee, International Activities Committee, Korea Engineering Education Research Center, and Administrative Department may collaborate in proposing accreditation criteria or accreditation evaluation guidelines. Academic Societies may advise on Program Criteria in its respective field of specialization.
Article 7 (Provision of documents)
  1. Accreditation shall be granted if a program in engineering is deemed to satisfy both the General Criteria and the Program Criteria as described in Article 6.
  2. Accreditation shall not be granted unless the subject program in engineering education provides the necessary education for the development of fundamental competences for the practice of engineering. The practice of engineering refers to practice as engineers, engineering technologists or engineering technicians.
  3. The accreditation does not seek to needlessly homogenize engineering education through rigid application of Accreditation Criteria, but seeks to encourage innovation in engineering education. The accreditation seeks to accommodate diverse program delivery modes as long as they equip graduates with program learning outcomes stipulated in the Accreditation Criteria and competences required by engineering practice in respective fields of specialization.
  4. Qualitative factors as well as quantitative factors shall be considered during On-Site Evaluation visits and in rendering Accreditation Decision as described in Article 10.
Article 8 (Meeting)
  1. The degree title of an ABEEK-accredited program in engineering must properly reflect the content of the education provided including the field of specialization and must appear on all formal documentations (e.g. diplomas, transcript of records, certificate of graduation, certificate of enrollment, and others) as issued by the institution.
  2. The program and degree titles(s) of non-accredited program(s) operated by the same administrative unit must be clearly distinguishable from those of an accredited program.
  3. A student in an accredited program cannot transfer to a non-accredited program offered by the same administrative unit without due process.
  4. An educational institution that operates an accredited program seeking to change program/degree title must submit a written request and seek prior approval from ABEEK.
  5. Program(s) undergoing division(s) or fusion(s) may concurrently use program/degree title(s) during the agreed upon transition period. Once the transition is completed, only the final program/degree title(s) must be used.
Section 4 Accreditation Procedure and Accreditation Actions
Article 9 (Accreditation Procedure)

Procedure to be followed during accreditation evaluation by ABEEK and subject institution/program shall be provided in a separate Accreditation Procedure document.

Article 10 (Accreditation Evaluation)
  1. Accreditation Evaluation on individual criterion are enumerated as follows:
    1. S (Satisfaction): S indicates that the program currently satisfies a criterion in principle,
    2. C (Concern): C indicates that the program currently satisfies a criterion; there exists, however, a potential for the situation where such a criterion may not be satisfied in the near future,
    3. W (Weakness): W indicates that the degree to which a criterion is satisfied is low and the quality of program is not guaranteed. Improvement of shortcomings in a criterion must be made prior to the next general review, and
    4. D (Deficiency): D indicates that a criterion is not satisfied and the program needs immediate clearing of shortcomings to satisfy such a criterion.
    5. Accreditation Evaluations A, B, C, and D as described above may be deferred until the next review on those items for which the time for full evaluation has not yet arrived. Deferred items shall not be assigned any shortcoming such as “Weakness” and shall have no bearing on the accreditation decision.
  2. Accreditation Reviews are enumerated as follows:
    1. IPRv (Initial Program Review): IPRv is conducted on a program that is new to the accreditation process,
    2. GRv (General Review): GRv is an accreditation visit conducted at a 6-year interval,
    3. IRv (Interim Review): IRv is conducted between GRvs, and
    4. CARv (Conditional Accreditation Review): CARv follows the conditional accreditation decision.
  3. Accreditation Decision involves ABEEK making a determination on each of the subject program in engineering and are enumerated as follows:
    1. NGR (Next General Review): This decision indicates that accreditation is granted to the subject program for six years until the next general review. NGR is given to programs with no Deficiencies or Weaknesses.
    2. IR (Interim Report): This decision indicates that accreditation is granted to the subject program for three years. The program is required to submit an interim report before the expiration date verifying the improvements made on Weaknesses.
    3. IV (Interim Visit): This decision indicates that accreditation is granted to the subject program for three years. The program is required to submit an interim report before the expiration date and then subject to an interim visit verifying the improvements made on Weaknesses.
    4. CAR (Conditional Accreditation Report): This decision indicates that accreditation is granted to the subject program for three years. The program is required to submit an interim report before the end of two-year period verifying the improvements made on Deficiencies. If the program fails to improve on and clear the Deficiencies within those two years, the accreditation shall be terminated after the expiration date of three years.
    5. CAV (Conditional Accreditation Visit): This decision indicates that accreditation is granted to the subject program for three years. The program is required to submit an interim report before the end of two-year period and then subject to an on-site visit verifying the improvements made on Deficiencies. If the program fails to improve on and clear the Deficiencies within those two years, the accreditation shall be terminated after the expiration date of three years.
    6. RE (Report Extended): This decision applies to the program previously granted "IR (Interim Report)". If the program improves on all Weaknesses cited in the previous review, the accreditation shall remain valid until the next general review,
    7. VE (Visit Extended): This decision applies to the program previously granted "IV (Interim Visit)". If the program improves on all Weaknesses cited in the previous review, the accreditation shall remain valid until the next general review.
    8. CAS (Conditional Accreditation Settled): This decision applies to the program previously granted "CAR (Conditional Accreditation Report)" or "CAV (Conditional Accreditation Visit)". If the program clears all Deficiencies cited in the "CAR (Conditional Accreditation Report)" or "CAV (Conditional Accreditation Visit)", the accreditation shall remain valid until the expiration date of three years. The subject program is then subject to “IV(Interim Visit).”
    9. NA (Not to Accredit): This decision indicates that accreditation is not granted to the subject program.
    10. The period of accreditation stipulated above may be adjusted to accommodate overall accreditation scheduling of institutions.
Article 11 (Withdrawal)

For a program slated to receive "not-to-accredit" in its very first accreditation evaluation cycle1), the program may opt for “withdrawal of accreditation application” instead. All records related to accreditation evaluation shall then be deleted.

1) Accreditation cycle is a reserved terminology used synonymously with accreditation duration in

Section 5 Maintenance and Record Keeping
Article 12 (Duration of Validity)
  1. ABEEK Accreditation is valid from March 1st of the year in which accreditation is granted to February 28th of the final year of accreditation period corresponding to each accreditation decision as described in Article 10. For a newly accredited program, accreditation is valid from January 1st of the year in which evaluated students first graduate to February 28th of the final year of accreditation period corresponding to each accreditation decision, provided that all graduates have completed educational courses in compliance with accreditation requirements and attained satisfactory level of program outcomes.
  2. An educational institution wishing to operate accredited-program(s) until the expiration date granted in the previous accreditation review needs to submit a written request and obtain approval of ABEEK. The institution must annually submit report until the expiration date.
Article 13 (Termination of Accreditation)

Under the following conditions, ABEEK may notify a program of its decision to suspend accreditation decision previously granted, and accreditation for the program shall be terminated upon such notification. The program is not granted a chance for appeal in response to “termination of accreditation”.

  1. Program notifies ABEEK of its decision to terminate accreditation status,
  2. Program fails to submit written documents such as an annual report or a self-study report which demonstrates the program’s continued compliance
  3. Program fails to prepare for on-site evaluation
  4. Institution notifies ABEEK of the intention to terminate accreditation status for reasons other than those stipulated above.
Article 14 (Revocation of Accreditation)

ABEEK shall engage in continuous monitoring to assure that accredited program is in compliance with the accreditation criteria during the period of accreditation. For this purpose, ABEEK may require a program to submit an annual report and if a program no longer complies with the accreditation criteria, the program will be notified of it. If remedial actions taken by the program prove inadequate, ABEEK reserves the right to revoke accreditation by notifying the program. An on-site visit may be required to evaluate actions taken by the program. The revocation of accreditation will take effect immediately after its decision. This revocation procedure is akin to a "not-to-accredit" action and can be appealed. Accreditation shall remain effective until the appeal procedure has been completed.

Article 15 (Retroactive Granting of the Ministry of Education Recognition)

The effect of recognition of the Ministry of Education on ABEEK-accredited engineering, computing and IT-related disciplines or engineering technology programs before the date of recognition of ABEEK by the Ministry of Education shall be retroactively granted upon completion of a prescribed procedure. The procedure for retroactive granting shall be provided in a separate “ABEEK Guideline on Recognition of the Ministry of Education for ABEEK-Accredited Programs”.

Section 6 Public Release
Article 16 (Confidentiality of Information)
  1. Evaluation reports produced following an on-site visit will be made available for review by relevant Accreditation Committee and the program/institution.
  2. ABEEK shall publish a list of accredited programs only and make the list accessible to ABEEK members and the general public.
  3. Information supplied by the institution for accreditation purpose will be confidential and will not be disclosed unless authorized by the institution in writing.
Article 17 (Release of Accreditation Information by the Institution/Program)
  1. Institution/Program shall neither disclose nor imply to any third party the accreditation duration. Public disclosure of accreditation is limited only to the names of the accredited programs.
  2. Institutions/Program shall not quote any part of the evaluation report filed by ABEEK. All correspondences and reports as exchanged between ABEEK and the institution/program are confidential, and their disclosures are restricted to only authorized staff of the institution/program.
  3. Institution shall not imply that all its programs in engineering are accredited when only a portion of its programs in engineering are accredited. For an administrative unit offering plural programs, no implication should be made that ABEEK accreditation applies to the administrative unit as a whole when ABEEK accreditation has not been granted to all its programs comprising that administrative unit.
  4. Institution/Program shall provide sufficient information about an accredited program to students, their parents, industries and the general public to enable them to ascertain that the accredited program is in compliance with the accreditation criteria.
ajax-loader