Year: 2026
Type: article
Abstract: Curriculum reform is inevitable, and so too are the tensions and frustrations that arise as key stakeholders push for what they feel is most important for their area. The basis of individual positions can be informed by personal passions, tradition, politics and innumerable unknowable factors. In many ways this can be a positive; we benefit from multiple perspectives. However, this can also lead to conceptual drift as a development process goes through multiple iterations and is subject to considerable additional external influences. How then do we consider the validity of the finished article? One option is to use an external framework to gain a critical alternative perspective. The chosen framework would need to align with the initial curricular design brief and represent a widely accepted outline of knowledge and skills. Here I argue that the Tuning-AHELO Conceptual Framework of Expected Desired/Learning Outcomes in Engineering (OECD, 2011 ) is an excellent basis for a consideration of a draft second level engineering subject specification produced for the Irish educational system. The Tuning-AHELO framework offers a robust foundation for analysing engineering curricula as it was explicitly developed through an international comparative process that merged the core outcomes of the ABET criteria and the EUR-ACE standards (OECD, 2011 ). Both ABET and EUR-ACE represent leading regional frameworks for assuring engineering programme quality, yet they are tailored to specific contexts. ABET being US-centric with global reach, and EUR-ACE being directly aligned to the Bologna Process and European Higher Education Area (Augusti, 2010 ; ENAEE, 2015 ). While each has merit, their regional emphases make them less suited to comparative or globally contextualised analyses. By contrast, Tuning-AHELO synthesises these approaches and further incorporates perspectives from over thirty signatory nations and accreditation systems in countries such as the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK, making it a uniquely international benchmark (OECD, 2011 ). In addition, the framework’s categorisation of outcomes into Generic Skills, Basic and Engineering Sciences, Engineering Analysis, Engineering Design, and Engineering Practice provides a balanced structure that extends beyond technical knowledge to include transferable and professional competences.
Author: Jason Richard Power
Institution: University of Limerick
Language: English
Subfield: Media Technology
Field: Engineering
Domain: Physical Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: hybrid
Estimated APC paid: $3,390
OpenAlex ID: W7155201660