Evolution of graduate attribute assessment and continuous program improvement in the Faculty of Engineering at McGill University
Open accessAbstract
Herein, we summarize the development and implementation of processes to meet the CEAB's graduate attributes and continuous program improvement criteria at McGill University's Faculty of Engineering. This involved determining roles and responsibilities, developing tools for measuring graduate attributes, conducting pilot projects, and refining our process. Like other institutions, we have encountered obstacles: changes to CEAB reporting requirements, resource constraints, resistance to change, and the challenge of finding a learning management system that is adaptable to our needs. We concluded that it was necessary to adopt processes that i) were initially rudimentary, but could then be scaled up, and ii) were flexible enough to respond to the changing reporting requirements. Pedagogical assistance provided by McGill University's Teaching and Learning Services was also beneficial in developing the new outcomes-based assessment procedures.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Learning Management Systems are not easily adaptable to the task of tracking multiple graduate attributes at the individual student level.
“Learning Management Systems (LMS) are not easily adaptable to the task of tracking multiple graduate attributes at the individual student level [4].”
From Examining longitudinal patterns and course-level correlations in CEAB graduate attributes (2026) · cites this paper as [4]
In §4, the authors say their LMS fell short of automatically calculating students’ performance across graduate attributes; §2.3 describes the work needed to map graded items to attributes. This supports the difficulty described, but the paper reports experience with McGill’s LMS, not a limitation of LMSs generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredWithout dedicated staff, coordinating graduate attribute assessment can be disrupted during changes in program leadership, making it essential to establish robust processes that remain consistent over time.
“Without dedicated staff, coordinating graduate attribute assessment can be disrupted during changes in program leadership, making it essential to establish robust processes that remain consistent over time [4].”
From Examining longitudinal patterns and course-level correlations in CEAB graduate attributes (2026) · cites this paper as [4]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Examining longitudinal patterns and course-level correlations in CEAB graduate attributes
Poitras, E. G., Poitras, G. J., & Ozyonum, E. (2026) · Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · doi:10.24908/pceea.2026.21655
- Authors
- Saunders, A. L., & Mydlarski, L. B.
- Affiliations
- McGill University (CA)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association
- Publisher
- Queen's University Library
- Published
- 2015-08-07
- ISSN
- 2371-5243 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1932761522
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 1.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Engineering Education and Curriculum Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Architecture › Engineering Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- engineering education, outcomes-based assessment, assessment instruments, virtual learning environments, resistance to change, pedagogical support
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
